achduke
Active member
John 17:21 "that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me.
Jesus is God
- Thread starter Bright Raven
- Start date
John 17:21 "that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me.
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
We are all one in Spirit when joined to the Lord
We are all one in Spirit when joined to the Lord
Yet as shared previously Jesus also prayed that we would be one, as he and the Father are one, including all in that 'community' (I in you, you in me, we in Him, etc.). So, it looks like you cant use this verse to claim some kind of exclusive property of Jesus oneness with the Father (shared by no other), unless you can show in the original language that this word for 'one' is used differently in Jesus case than in his inclusion of all being 'one' with him and the Father in other verses
It could be argued of course that Jesus also speaks of some kind of originality or priority of 'oneness' with the Father due to his nature as the Son of God, BUT he still includes all of us in a joined community of Spirit.
With such versatility of language and the fluidity of Spirit, its all 'figurative' anyways.
"he who is joined unto the Lord is one spirit with him" - (I do quote Paul when fitting )
pj
We are all one in Spirit when joined to the Lord
Yet as shared previously Jesus also prayed that we would be one, as he and the Father are one, including all in that 'community' (I in you, you in me, we in Him, etc.). So, it looks like you cant use this verse to claim some kind of exclusive property of Jesus oneness with the Father (shared by no other), unless you can show in the original language that this word for 'one' is used differently in Jesus case than in his inclusion of all being 'one' with him and the Father in other verses
It could be argued of course that Jesus also speaks of some kind of originality or priority of 'oneness' with the Father due to his nature as the Son of God, BUT he still includes all of us in a joined community of Spirit.
With such versatility of language and the fluidity of Spirit, its all 'figurative' anyways.
"he who is joined unto the Lord is one spirit with him" - (I do quote Paul when fitting
)pj
John 10:30
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
yes. and the Father IS greater than the Son while Jesus was on earth Doing His Father's Will. now they are equal. but Jesus Christ can never be the Father -
John 14:28 KJV -
That's right. It takes three different personalities to make up the Godhead, all three being God
1 John 5:7 Modern English Version (MEV)
7 There are three who testify in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and the three are one.
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
Expanding our Christology...........
Expanding our Christology...........
See previous addresses.
Note that it is mainly the gospel of John making reference to Jesus identifying with or claiming to be 'one' with 'God'. On certain points there is no other synoptic gospel attestation for this.
From a UB perspective:
If we contextualize it within a heirarchy,...The Universal Father is the Father of all fathers...being the cosmic Grand-Father of all. If we are children of our local Creator-Son (Christ-Jesus), who is of an order of divine Sons being the offspring of the Father, then grandchildren we are of The Universal, Original Father. All traces back of course to the One and Only Original Father of all (The First Source and Center), whatever the hierarchal order of divine Creators are under this One Universal Father.
pj
Expanding our Christology...........
See previous addresses.
Note that it is mainly the gospel of John making reference to Jesus identifying with or claiming to be 'one' with 'God'. On certain points there is no other synoptic gospel attestation for this.
From a UB perspective:
If we contextualize it within a heirarchy,...The Universal Father is the Father of all fathers...being the cosmic Grand-Father of all. If we are children of our local Creator-Son (Christ-Jesus), who is of an order of divine Sons being the offspring of the Father, then grandchildren we are of The Universal, Original Father. All traces back of course to the One and Only Original Father of all (The First Source and Center), whatever the hierarchal order of divine Creators are under this One Universal Father.
pj
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
Spare the patronizing............
Spare the patronizing............
There are more readers and open-minded people than you realize, who recognize truth existing outside a narrow dogmatic conservative traditional-orthodox Christian demographic.
You don't have a monopoly on 'God'. No mortal finite being does.
pj
Spare the patronizing............
There are more readers and open-minded people than you realize, who recognize truth existing outside a narrow dogmatic conservative traditional-orthodox Christian demographic.
You don't have a monopoly on 'God'. No mortal finite being does.
pj
Remember that John wrote his gospel after realizing that some important material was omitted from the other 3 books.
Really... Thank you for admitting your wrong... It took guts for you to suck it up like you did... Glad your being a man about it! :thumb:
I AM... glad to be of service to you and... Your welcome,
:roses:
Paul
Really, so where in the heavens is this Holy Spirit.... HE has No throne and He has no prayers to be prayed too?
In fact it is well documented that 1 John 5:7 was added by men like you... 1200 years after john wrote his book! Yep even Trinitarians agree... your an idiot for quoting 1 John 5:7 as a support verse!!!
Bible Research > Textual Criticism > Johannine Comma
________________________________________
The Johannine Comma
(1 John 5:7-8)
The so-called Johannine Comma (also called the Comma Johanneum) is a sequence of extra words which appear in 1 John 5:7-8 in some early printed editions of the Greek New Testament. In these editions the verses appear thus (we put backets around the extra words):
ὅτι τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ μαρτυροῦντες [ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ, ὁ Πατήρ, ὁ Λόγος, καὶ τὸ Ἅγιον Πνεῦμα· καὶ οὗτοι οἱ τρεῖς ἔν εἰσι. 8 καὶ τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ μαρτυροῦντες ἐν τῇ γῇ] τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ τὸ ὕδωρ καὶ τὸ αἷμα, καὶ οἱ τρεῖς εἰς τὸ ἕν εἰσιν.
The King James Version, which was based upon these editions, gives the following translation:
For there are three that bear record [in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. 8 And there are three that bear witness in earth], the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.
These extra words are generally absent from the Greek manuscripts. In fact, they only appear in the text of four late medieval manuscripts. They seem to have originated as a marginal note added to certain Latin manuscripts during the middle ages, which was eventually incorporated into the text of most of the later Vulgate manuscripts. In the Clementine edition of the Vulgate the verses were printed thus:
Quoniam tres sunt, qui testimonium dant [in caelo: Pater, Verbum, et Spiritus Sanctus: et hi tres unum sunt. 8 Et tres sunt, qui testimonium dant in terra:] spiritus, et aqua, et sanguis: et hi tres unum sunt.
From the Vulgate, then, it seems that the Comma was translated into Greek and inserted into some printed editions of the Greek text, and in a handful of late Greek manuscripts. All scholars consider it to be spurious, and it is not included in modern critical editions of the Greek text, or in the English versions based upon them. For example, the English Standard Version reads: For there are three that testify: 8 the Spirit and the water and the blood; and these three agree.
We give below the comments of Dr. Bruce M. Metzger on 1 John 5:7-8, from his book, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 2nd ed. (Stuttgart, 1993).
________________________________________
After μαρτυροῦντες the Textus Receptus adds the following: ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ, ὁ Πατήρ, ὁ Λόγος, καὶ τὸ Ἅγιον Πνεῦμα· καὶ οὗτοι οἱ τρεῖς ἔν εἰσι. 8 καὶ τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ μαρτυροῦντες ἐν τῇ γῇ. That these words are spurious and have no right to stand in the New Testament is certain in the light of the following considerations.
(A) External Evidence.
(1) The passage is absent from every known Greek manuscript except eight, and these contain the passage in what appears to be a translation from a late recension of the Latin Vulgate. Four of the eight manuscripts contain the passage as a variant reading written in the margin as a later addition to the manuscript. The eight manuscripts are as follows:
• 61: codex Montfortianus, dating from the early sixteenth century.
• 88: a variant reading in a sixteenth century hand, added to the fourteenth-century codex Regius of Naples.
• 221: a variant reading added to a tenth-century manuscript in the Bodleian Library at Oxford.
• 429: a variant reading added to a sixteenth-century manuscript at Wolfenbüttel.
• 629: a fourteenth or fifteenth century manuscript in the Vatican.
• 636: a variant reading added to a sixteenth-century manuscript at Naples.
• 918: a sixteenth-century manuscript at the Escorial, Spain.
• 2318: an eighteenth-century manuscript, influenced by the Clementine Vulgate, at Bucharest, Rumania.
(2) The passage is quoted by none of the Greek Fathers, who, had they known it, would most certainly have employed it in the Trinitarian controversies (Sabellian and Arian). Its first appearance in Greek is in a Greek version of the (Latin) Acts of the Lateran Council in 1215.
(3) The passage is absent from the manuscripts of all ancient versions (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Ethiopic, Arabic, Slavonic), except the Latin; and it is not found (a) in the Old Latin in its early form (Tertullian Cyprian Augustine), or in the Vulgate (b) as issued by Jerome (codex Fuldensis [copied a.d. 541-46] and codex Amiatinus [copied before a.d. 716]) or (c) as revised by Alcuin (first hand of codex Vallicellianus [ninth century]).
The earliest instance of the passage being quoted as a part of the actual text of the Epistle is in a fourth century Latin treatise entitled Liber Apologeticus (chap. 4), attributed either to the Spanish heretic Priscillian (died about 385) or to his follower Bishop Instantius. Apparently the gloss arose when the original passage was understood to symbolize the Trinity (through the mention of three witnesses: the Spirit, the water, and the blood), an interpretation that may have been written first as a marginal note that afterwards found its way into the text. In the fifth century the gloss was quoted by Latin Fathers in North Africa and Italy as part of the text of the Epistle, and from the sixth century onwards it is found more and more frequently in manuscripts of the Old Latin and of the Vulgate. In these various witnesses the wording of the passage differs in several particulars. (For examples of other intrusions into the Latin text of 1 John, see 2.17; 4.3; 5.6, and 20.)
(B) Internal Probabilities.
(1) As regards transcriptional probability, if the passage were original, no good reason can be found to account for its omission, either accidentally or intentionally, by copyists of hundreds of Greek manuscripts, and by translators of ancient versions.
(2) As regards intrinsic probability, the passage makes an awkward break in the sense.
For the story of how the spurious words came to be included in the Textus Receptus, see any critical commentary on 1 John, or Metzger, The Text of the New Testament, pp. 101 f.; cf. also Ezra Abbot, "I. John v. 7 and Luther's German Bible," in The Authorship of the Fourth Gospel and Other Critical Essays (Boston, 1888), pp. 458-463.
Suxs too be you!
:carryon:
Paul
God's Truth
New member
It doesn't sound as if you care to much about the truth.
keypurr
Well-known member
RevTestament
New member
Not even after this world?
What does Isaiah 9:6 mean then when it says He shall be called the Everlasting Father?
You mean it sounds like you have been owned... BY ME! USING your very own scholars!!! :banana:
Stop being a baby... and accept the truth! There are no teachings of men here... I follow no man, men, or church!
:roses:
Paul
"All power and authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me."
"I have other sheep, which are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will hear My voice; and they will become one flock with one shepherd."
Another Idiot who can't read!!
Paul wrote:
Col 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.16 For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions
or rulers or authorities--all things were created through him and for him.17 And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together. 18 And he is the head of the body, the church. He is
the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in everything he might be preeminent. 19 For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell,
We must carefully examine both the overall context and the particular phrases before rushing to the conclusion that the apostle is teaching that Jesus the son of God created the heavens and the earth, and that he is therefore coequal with God the Father, the second member of the Trinity.
Everything we have looked at so far would indicate that Paul has not suddenly done a back flip from his clearly stated belief that there is "one God, the Father… and one Lord, Jesus the
Messiah" (1 Cor. 8:6; Eph. 4:5-6, etc.).
The overall context must be clearly borne in mind. Observe in Colossians 1 that "all things" created are not "the heavens and the earth" as per Genesis 1:1, but rather "all things in the heavens and
RevTestament
New member
From your link:
I actually agree.... it seems to me that orthodox Christianity has made itself an enemy to Christ as they are fighting against His inheritance as our Father since their creed says the Son cannot change, and therefore cannot become our Father.
Not quite sure I agree with that translation, but I agree with it nonetheless. It is a prophecy because that is His inheritance from the Father. Orthodoxy just completely misses the many verbs regarding Christ like "being made perfect," inheriting His name, and being made so much higher than the angels....
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
Being fair in our discussions...............
Being fair in our discussions...............
Being fair in our discussions...............