NT verses about who Jesus was/is

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by BCsenior

Jesus, the Son of God,
was obviously part man and part God (John 1 and 1 John 1).

For da God part of Jesus ... NO
For da man part of Jesus ... YES

You are not an orthodox trinitarian.

[BCsenior]

Originally Posted by Esaias

You are not an orthodox trinitarian.

Yeah, could be ... but the Holy Spirit has revealed
all kinds of different spiritual Truths to me.

I only believe what I get out of the NT
with the Spirit's help, of course!

To me, what the NT teaches us is obvious!
IMO, that's what spiritual revelation is all about.
It's the olde ... I know that I know that I know, etc.

I've proven here that some of you absolutely
refuse to believe what John 1 says!

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by BCsenior

Yeah, could be ... but the Holy Spirit has revealed
all kinds of different spiritual Truths to me.

I only believe what I get out of the NT
with the Spirit's help, of course!

To me, what the NT teaches us is obvious!
IMO, that's what spiritual revelation is all about.
It's the olde ... I know that I know that I know, etc.

I've proven here that some of you absolutely
refuse to believe what John 1 says!

John 1 says, among other things, that whoever or whatever the Word was with, the Word also was.

[BCsenior]

Originally Posted by Esaias

John 1 says, among other things,
that whoever or whatever the Word was with,
the Word also was.

Yes, you know it says ...
the Word was with GOD,
and the Word was GOD,
and the Word was with GOD in the beginning!

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Esaias

You are not an orthodox trinitarian.

Me thinks we have a someone playing us.

[BCsenior]

I just solved your problem ...

All you need to do is change your denomination's name to:
Old Testament Oneness.
Then, you will be more believable.

[Costeon]

Originally Posted by BCsenior

I just solved your problem ...

All you need to do is change your denomination's name to:
Old Testament Oneness.
Then, you will be more believable.

In Scripture, Jews never believed in a multipersonal God. The Old Testament does not teach that God is a trinity of divine persons. If God is a trinity, none of God’s people before the Christian era understood this. None of the prophets understood this. Abraham, Moses, David were all ignorant of God’s basic nature.

It’s inconceivable that a new revelation about, of all things, the nature of God would not be explicitly stated in the NT. Jesus could say things like “you have heard it said . . . but I say to you.” Paul is very plain in explaining the differences in the new covenant regarding the marks of the old covenant, like circumcision, sabbath, and food laws. What is new is explained. Yet no one gives a simple unambiguous statement to the effect, “God’s people worshiped a unipersonal God in the past; but now it has been revealed that he is multipersonal.”

Short of an explicit statement to the contrary, we should assume that the Jews did in fact understand the nature of the one God, and so all teaching about the the nature of God and the person of Christ have to begin with and harmonize with the OT revelation of the one God.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Costeon

In Scripture, Jews never believed in a multipersonal God. The Old Testament does not teach that God is a trinity of divine persons. If God is a trinity, none of God’s people before the Christian era understood this. None of the prophets understood this. Abraham, Moses, David were all ignorant of God’s basic nature.

It’s inconceivable that a new revelation about, of all things, the nature of God would not be explicitly stated in the NT. Jesus could say things like “you have heard it said . . . but I say to you.” Paul is very plain in explaining the differences in the new covenant regarding the marks of the old covenant, like circumcision, sabbath, and food laws. What is new is explained. Yet no one gives a simple unambiguous statement to the effect, “God’s people worshiped a unipersonal God in the past; but now it has been revealed that he is multipersonal.”

Short of an explicit statement to the contrary, we should assume that the Jews did in fact understand the nature of the one God, and so all teaching about the the nature of God and the person of Christ have to begin with and harmonize with the OT revelation of the one God.

Very good post.

[BCsenior]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Very good post.

Simply an excuse for not believing in the NEW covenant.

[Costeon]

Originally Posted by BCsenior

Simply an excuse for not believing in the NEW covenant.

He obviously believes in the New Covenant. We all do. We obviously disagree on the nature of God. It's fine to argue about that, but why throw out something like this when it serves no purpose in furthering the debate but is really just making things personal? Instead of just dismissing someone, you could explain why the post he said was good was in fact in error when it was asserted that we should assume the Jews correctly understood the nature of God and so the New Covenant revelation of Christ harmonizes with, and is not radically different from, the Old Covenant conception of the one God.