The TRUTH About "The Logos Of God"

Mitchell

The Greek Lexeme λόγον and λόγιον do appear in the Masoretic text or the Hebrew Bible at all.

There is a mistype: I meant to type 'do not appear...at all' . I left out 'not' .

Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus Contrast is John 17:24 where Jesus prayed to πάτερ (God The Father): ὅτι ἠγάπησάς με πρὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου (because You loved me before foundation of world).

@Wolfgang No contrast there at all ... Jesus spoke these words when he was about 30 years old and obviously had learned that he was that Messiah whom God had in Hisp lan from even before the world was. Jesus DID NOT SPEAK these words before the world was. Are you saying Jesus already prayed this prayer before the world was and not in the garden when he was about 30 years old?

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus If Jesus knew his existence began to fulfill God's plan, why did Jesus pray to πάτερ (God The Father): ὅτι ἠγάπησάς με πρὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου (because You loved me before foundation of world) instead of the human example in Psalms 138:13 (LXX) ὅτι σὺ ἐκτήσω τοὺς νεφρούς μου, Κύριε, ἀντελάβου μου ἐκ γαστρὸς μητρός μου (because you created kidneys my, Lord, from womb mother my) ? (kidneys are an innermost part)

@Wolfgang Jesus fulfillment of God's plan did not begin before the foundation of the world, God's plan existed from before the foundation of the world. Jesus' life as a living being did not begin until "when the time was fulfilled and he was born of a woman" (cp. Gal 4:4).

@Wolfgang Psa 138:13 has absolutely NOTHING to do with this matter .... CONTEXT, dear @Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus, is what provides the fundamental key to understanding correctly the meaning of words, statements, etc. ... irrelevant of the language (English, Greek, German, Spanish, Latin, etc.

Human author of Psalm 138:13 (LXX) matches description of being in God's Plan when the world was created, but the human was not alive until conceived in the womb (earliest time for that human to experience God). Jesus is different than other humans in God's Plan because Jesus existed before the foundation (creation) of the world so was already alive during God's planning for creation (having God's Glory & Love).

Galatians 4:4 (SBLGNT) ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ χρόνου, ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ, γενόμενον ἐκ γυναικός, γενόμενον ὑπὸ νόμον,  has verbs:

• ἦλθεν aorist, active, indicative, third person, singular of verb ἔρχομαι (to come)
• ἐξαπέστειλεν aorist, active, indicative, third person, singular of verb ἐξαποστέλλω (to send out)
• γενόμενον aorist, middle, participle, singular, accusative, masculine of γίνομαι (to be born)

Verb ἐξαποστέλλω is two prepositions ἐξ (out) & απο (from) prefixed to στέλλω (to send [on an expedition]). Related noun is Apostle: e.g. the Apostle Paul, who was a human chosen by One God to take the gospel (good news) message about Jesus The Messiah (Christ) to the Gentiles.

ἐξαποστέλλω, I send away out, I send forth (a person qualified for a task). One sent is an ambassador OR representative of the One sending. What kind of ambassador did ὁ θεὸς (The God) send to represent God in Galatians 4:4 ? One God is Spirit, who can dwell inside a Holy Human body according to One God's Plan for The Father (The Will) to be in Holy Heaven while The Son (The Word) is in a Holy Human body on earth, which is reflected in the words prayed by Jesus in John 17:5 & John 17:24 because Jesus was having God's Glory & Love before foundation of the world.

Keep Smiling 😊

[Deleted User]

Jesus is different than other humans in God's Plan because Jesus existed before the foundation (creation) of the world so was already alive during God's planning for creation (having God's Glory & Love).

Well, if Jesus was DIFFERENT from other humans, he could not qualify as the savior and sacrifice for sin. That would leave man as yet unredeemed and without hope, as faith in Jesus as Messiah would be a false illusion.

Keep it up, @Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus , and keep smiling in your ideas ....

Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus Jesus is different than other humans in God's Plan because Jesus existed before the foundation (creation) of the world so was already alive during God's planning for creation (having God's Glory & Love).

@Wolfgang Well, if Jesus was DIFFERENT from other humans, he could not qualify as the savior and sacrifice for sin. That would leave man as yet unredeemed and without hope, as faith in Jesus as Messiah would be a false illusion.

Why would Jesus (The Word) having a portion of eternal God's Spirit inside a physical human body disqualify Jesus from being The Savior ?

John 10:1-21 about the Good Shepherd includes Jesus saying “I am the good shepherd, and I know my own, and my own know me, just as the Father knows me and I know the Father, and I lay down my life for the sheep. And I have other sheep which are not from this fold. I must bring these also, and they will hear my voice, and they will become one flock—one shepherd. Because of this the Father loves me, because I lay down my life so that I may take possession of it again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down ⌊voluntarily⌋. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take possession of it again. This commandment I received from my Father.” 

Other humans do not have Godly authority to cause their human body to be physically resurrected after their death, but the man Jesus is Alive (after being crucified). The Word (eternally God) became flesh (σαρξ = a human body in John 1:14) to become a Holy Sacrifice for sin. Jesus is being both eternally God and Human. One God's commUnity of Love has three voices: The Will (Father), The Word (Son), Breath The Holy.

Keep Smiling 😊

[Deleted User]

Other humans do not have Godly authority to cause their human body to be physically resurrected after their death, but the man Jesus is Alive (after being crucified).

Neither did Jesus raise himself to life from the grave .... God (Who is Jesus' Father) raised Jesus from the dead (cp. Acts 2:22-24  " Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know: him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain: whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it.)

The Word (eternally God) became flesh (σαρξ = a human body in John 1:14) to become a Holy Sacrifice for sin. Jesus is being both eternally God and Human. One God's commUnity of Love has three voices: The Will (Father), The Word (Son), Breath The Holy.

Repeating your Trinity fantasies which seem based on not reading correctly what Scripture overall teaches concerning God and concerning God's only begotten Son, the man Jesus of Nazareth does not make your claims any better than the first time you proposed them

Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus Other humans do not have Godly authority to cause their human body to be physically resurrected after their death, but the man Jesus is Alive (after being crucified).

@Wolfgang Neither did Jesus raise himself to life from the grave .... God (Who is Jesus' Father) raised Jesus from the dead (cp. Acts 2:22-24 

My faith believes One God's commUnity of Love raised Jesus from the dead so words in John 10:1-21 and Acts 2:14-36 are Truthfully coherent.

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus The Word (eternally God) became flesh (σαρξ = a human body in John 1:14) to become a Holy Sacrifice for sin. Jesus is being both eternally God and Human. One God's commUnity of Love has three voices: The Will (Father), The Word (Son), Breath The Holy.

@Wolfgang Repeating your Trinity fantasies which seem based on not reading correctly what Scripture overall teaches concerning God and concerning God's only begotten Son, the man Jesus of Nazareth does not make your claims any better than the first time you proposed them

According to your overall view of Scripture, how many lie(s) did Jesus say ?

Your faith belief "Neither did Jesus raise himself to life from the grave..." asserts Jesus lied in John 10:1-21 about Godly authority in Jesus.

My faith believes every word of Jesus is True (while humanly lack complete depth of God's Truthful understanding while am growing in God's Love). Humanly have been corrected a number of times by Breath The Holy using God's Word, but never have found one lie in God's Word.

Keep Smiling 😊

Bill_Coley

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus posted:

My faith believes One God's commUnity of Love raised Jesus from the dead so words in John 10:1-21 and Acts 2:14-36 are Truthfully coherent.

The challenge to your point of view is that no text says "One God's commUnity of Love raised Jesus from the dead." Hence, the John 10 and Acts 2 passages can be "Truthfully coherent" only because you have imposed on them your non-Scriptural faith belief about a "commUnity of Love."

However, twelve texts -- Acts 2.32; Acts 3.15,26; Acts 4.10; Acts 10.40; Acts 13.30, 37; Romans 8.11; Romans 10.9; 1 Corinthians 15.15; 1 Thessalonians 1.10; 1 Peter 1.3 -- say "God raised" Jesus from the dead. In my view, both your and my views of who raised Jesus from the dead should "Truthfully" cohere to those twelve texts; I'm confident mine do.

Your faith belief "Neither did Jesus raise himself to life from the grave..." asserts Jesus lied in John 10:1-21 about Godly authority in Jesus.

Your claim is false because in the John 10 passage Jesus does NOT say he raised himself from the grave. He says God has given him the authority to "take...back" his life after his death (John 10.17). I read that to be a prediction of his resurrection. But from whose hands will that resurrection come?

• Matthew 16.21 - Jesus tells his disciples that in the course of coming events, he will go to Jerusalem where he will suffer many things, be killed, "but on the third day he would be raised from the dead." Jesus understands himself to be the object of resurrection, not its author.
• Matthew 17.9 - Jesus instructs Peter, James, and John not to tell anyone about the transfiguration scene they have just witnessed "until the Son of Man has been raised from the dead." The Son of Man will be the object of resurrection, not its cause.
• Matthew 17.23 - Jesus tells his disciples that he will be killed, "but on the third day he will be raised from the dead." Again Jesus understands himself to be the object, not the cause, of resurrection.
• Matthew 20.19 - Jesus tells his disciples that the Son of Man will be crucified, "[but] on the third day he will be raised from the dead." Again Jesus understands himself to be the object, not the cause, of resurrection.
• Matthew 26.32 (cf Mark 14.28) - Jesus tells his disciples that he will go ahead of them to Galilee "after I have been raised from the dead." Again Jesus understands himself to be the object, not the cause, of resurrection.
• Luke 9.22 - Jesus predicts the Son of Man will suffer "terrible things," will be killed, "but on the third day will be raised again." The Son of Man is once again the object of resurrection, not its cause.
• John 2.22 - John the Gospel writer (not Jesus in this case) reports Jesus' disciples later understood his reference to a rebuilt temple to refer to his own resurrection. John says the disciples understood this "after [Jesus] was raised from the dead." John the Gospel writer understands Jesus to have been the object, not the cause, of resurrection.
• John 14.19-20 - Jesus tells his disciples that "when I am raised to life again" they will know that he is in the Father, that they are in him, and that he is in them. Jesus understands himself to be the object, not the cause, of resurrection.

Jesus' resurrection will come NOT from his own hands says Jesus and John, but from God's. In my view, your and my views about the cause of Jesus' resurrection should "Truthfully" cohere to these eight passages as well; once again I'm confident mine do.

I've cited twenty passages in this post, ALL OF WHICH say the exact same thing: Jesus is the object, not the cause, of his resurrection. Jesus said it. John the Gospel writer said it. And if I cited texts in Acts and Romans, both Peter and Paul would say it, as well. My view of who raised Jesus coheres completely with those twenty texts because my view simply repeats those twenty texts: God raised Jesus. Jesus believed he would be raised. Jesus said the Son of Man would be raised. In EVERY instance, Jesus is the object, not the cause of resurrection. That is PRECISELY AND COMPLETELY my view. Please explain how your view "Truthfully coheres" with those twenty texts.

[Deleted User]

According to your overall view of Scripture, how many lie(s) did Jesus say ?

According to my understanding of Scripture overall and in particular, Jesus did not lie ... However, according to YOUR "keep smiling view" he must have lied regarding his resurrection and who raised who from the dead 😀

Your faith belief "Neither did Jesus raise himself to life from the grave..." asserts Jesus lied in John 10:1-21 about Godly authority in Jesus.

Not at all ... Jesus told the truth, it is 😀 YOU with your non-scriptural fantasy who actually makes Jesus a liar in all his other statements where he plainly, clearly and repeatedly stated that his heavenly Father, his God, would raise him from the dead (cp. the listing of passages in Bill's post above.)

My faith believes every word of Jesus is True (while humanly lack complete depth of God's Truthful understanding while am growing in God's Love).

No, your faith believes rejects all the clear statements of Jesus where he affirmed that not he himself, nor he together with others, but his Father, the true God, alone would raise him from the dead. You flat out do not believe every word of Jesus to be true.

And your sneaky excuse ("while humanly lack ....") is only self-deception ... in order to "cover up" the real problem (that is, your recognition that something im your idea is not quite correct).

Humanly have been corrected a number of times by Breath The Holy using God's Word, but never have found one lie in God's Word.

No need to speak of "Breath the Holy", just use the simple and plain term "holy spirit" ...

Indeed, the lie is not in God's Word, it is in YOUR 😀 fantasy interpretation of numerous passages in Scripture by which you try to make sense of the completely non-sensical fantasy commonly known as "the holy trinity". "The Holy Trinity" fantasy is THE LIE ... the question is, will you allow Scripture to humanly correct you?

Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus posted:

My faith believes One God's commUnity of Love raised Jesus from the dead so words in John 10:1-21 and Acts 2:14-36 are Truthfully coherent.

@Bill_Coley The challenge to your point of view is that no text says "One God's commUnity of Love raised Jesus from the dead." Hence, the John 10 and Acts 2 passages can be "Truthfully coherent" only because you have imposed on them your non-Scriptural faith belief about a "commUnity of Love."

@Bill_Coley However, twelve texts -- Acts 2.32; Acts 3.15,26; Acts 4.10; Acts 10.40; Acts 13.30, 37; Romans 8.11; Romans 10.9; 1 Corinthians 15.15; 1 Thessalonians 1.10; 1 Peter 1.3 -- say "God raised" Jesus from the dead. In my view, both your and my views of who raised Jesus from the dead should "Truthfully" cohere to those twelve texts; I'm confident mine do.

Could twelve texts be eisegetical examples of "God (The Father) raised" Jesus, which shows belief The Father and Jesus are not being One God ?

Should Peter have said "Father" instead of "God" in Acts 2:32 "God raised up" ? (Peter said "Father" in Acts 2:33 "from the Father")

According to John 17:5 and 17:24, Jesus was having God's Glory and Loved by Father (God) before the foundation (creation) of the world. Hence, One God's commUnity of Love existed before the world was (and subsequently humans). All of One God: The Will (Father), The Word (Son), Breath The Holy, raised Jesus from the dead, which is Truthfully consistent with twelve "God raised" texts. Priestly prayer of Jesus in John 17 is Truthfully consistent with the begining of John's Gospel (first two words in Greek repeat Greek LXX prepositional phrase that begins Genesis 1:1 "In beginning"). Before Light, One God already existed, which included The Word (ὁ λόγος) was being. The quality of The Word (ὁ λόγος) was being eternal God in beginning. Grammar shows God (θεος) was more than The Word. John 10:30 spoken by Jesus: "I and the Father are One" meaning God, which is consistent with Priestly prayer of Jesus having God's Glory and being Loved by Father (God) before Light was created plus consistent with Isaiah 43:10-13 (no human can pluck out of God's Hands: The Father and Jesus). Nature of God's Love allows humans to willfully leave God's Hands by choosing to sin (like our spiritual adversary, who was created as the most beautiful creature with free will, in Isaiah 14:12-23).

Humam mystery is what was God's Glory and Love like before Light was created by One God. Life in One God created Light as part of God's plan.

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus posted:

Your faith belief "Neither did Jesus raise himself to life from the grave..." asserts Jesus lied in John 10:1-21 about Godly authority in Jesus.

@Bill_Coley Your claim is false because in the John 10 passage Jesus does NOT say he raised himself from the grave. He says God has given him the authority to "take...back" his life after his death (John 10.17). I read that to be a prediction of his resurrection. But from whose hands will that resurrection come?

@Bill_Coley Jesus' resurrection will come NOT from his own hands says Jesus and John, but from God's. In my view, your and my views about the cause of Jesus' resurrection should "Truthfully" cohere to these eight passages as well; once again I'm confident mine do.

Could NOT texts be more eisegetical examples of belief: The Father and Jesus are NOT being One God ? further that Jesus did NOT exist during architectural planning phase in God before the world was (so Jesus NOT author/cause). Matthew 16:21-23 includes ...be raised on the third day ... things of God. (Jesus began to show his disciples that One God would raise Jesus up => Jesus was part, but not sole cause for being resurrected).

When reading Scripture, we see "God" by our faith beliefs: The Father (only) OR One commUnity of Love (The Father, The Son, Breath The Holy). Which qualification of "God" is Truly consistent with Jesus prayer in John 17 that includes Jesus was having God's Glory and Loved by God before creation (foundation) of the world ? Consistent with other verses about diety of Jesus ? (more than merely acknowledging verse existence)

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus According to your overall view of Scripture, how many lie(s) did Jesus say ?

@Wolfgang According to my understanding of Scripture overall and in particular, Jesus did not lie 

What did Jesus say about who Jesus is when Jesus prayed that He was having God's Glory and Loved by Father (God) before the foundation (creation) of the world ? When was the beginning of existence for Jesus ?

Human mystery for me is not knowing/experiencing One God before the world was (so humanly do not know if God's architectural planning ever had an early phase where Jesus did not exist). In beginning creation, when אֱלֹהִ֑ים (plural God) said "Let there be Light!" was being Three Voices in One God's commUnity of Love. Are you ready to meet The Messiah Jesus, God's Priestly King of Righteousness, personally ?

During a drought in Israel, someone asked Rabbi Kook when the Kinneret (Sea of Galilee) will be full. Rabbi Kook said, "When the Messiah arrives, the Kinneret will be full." Today, Lake Kinneret is 0.09 meters (about 3.5") from being completely full (in 2004, Lake Kinneret was 2" from being full with dam previously open in 1993). Humanly not know when The Messiah is coming. Thankful for God abundantly sending rain to Israel recently.

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus Humanly have been corrected a number of times by Breath The Holy using God's Word, but never have found one lie in God's Word.

@Wolfgang No need to speak of "Breath the Holy", just use the simple and plain term "holy spirit" ...

One God has One Heart, One Soul, One Spirit intimately shared by Three Voices: The Will (Father), The Word (Son), Breath The Holy. The term "Holy Spirit" is found in theological writings about the Tri-Unity of God (Trinity is a short form) so my CD comments avoid use of Trinity terms. Ruach HaKodesh translation is Breath (Wind) The Holy, which is truly consistent with John 3:8 and my experience with Breath The Holy (God).

Keep Smiling 😊

[Deleted User]

@Wolfgang According to my understanding of Scripture overall and in particular, Jesus did not lie 

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus What did Jesus say about who Jesus is when Jesus prayed that He was having God's Glory and Loved by Father (God) before the foundation (creation) of the world ? When was the beginning of existence for Jesus ?

What Jesus said just happens to NOT be what YOU THINK (and subsequently make out) Jesus said. Reason why? Because your idea ("God = Community of THREE") is unbiblical fantasy.

@Wolfgang No need to speak of "Breath the Holy", just use the simple and plain term "holy spirit" ...

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus One God has One Heart, One Soul, One Spirit intimately shared by Three Voices: The Will (Father), The Word (Son), Breath The Holy. The term "Holy Spirit" is found in theological writings about the Tri-Unity of God (Trinity is a short form) so my CD comments avoid use of Trinity terms. Ruach HaKodesh translation is Breath (Wind) The Holy, which is truly consistent with John 3:8 and my experience with Breath The Holy (God).

What does your hot air talk have to do with my comment about just using plain commonly used English words? Throwing in some Hebrew words doesn't make it any better ... and claiming to not wanting to use Trinity terms while at the same time propagating that very Trinity with your "private interpretation wording" is rather ludicrous.

Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus

@Wolfgang According to my understanding of Scripture overall and in particular, Jesus did not lie 

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus What did Jesus say about who Jesus is when Jesus prayed that He was having God's Glory and Loved by Father (God) before the foundation (creation) of the world ? When was the beginning of existence for Jesus ?

@Wolfgang What Jesus said just happens to NOT be what YOU THINK (and subsequently make out) Jesus said. Reason why? Because your idea ("God = Community of THREE") is unbiblical fantasy.

What did the person Jesus (The Word) express about commUnity in One God before any humans existed (in John 17:5 and John 15:24) ?

Thought about "Huh?" when reading "unbiblical fantasy that does not have any verses nor proof so seems to be a variant of "Yea, hath God say ?"

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus One God has One Heart, One Soul, One Spirit intimately shared by Three Voices: The Will (Father), The Word (Son), Breath The Holy. The term "Holy Spirit" is found in theological writings about the Tri-Unity of God (Trinity is a short form) so my CD comments avoid use of Trinity terms. Ruach HaKodesh translation is Breath (Wind) The Holy, which is truly consistent with John 3:8 and my experience with Breath The Holy (God).

@Wolfgang What does your hot air talk have to do with my comment about just using plain commonly used English words? Throwing in some Hebrew words doesn't make it any better ... and claiming to not wanting to use Trinity terms while at the same time propagating that very Trinity with your "private interpretation wording" is rather ludicrous.

My private awe and wonder in God's Love (using a commUnity of Three Diety Voices for intimate expression that cannot be fully described using human words) has found some articles about Plural Unified God having content (including Scripture verses) worth prayerfully considering. My faith belief includes all Scripture is True and consistent (with portions like Daniel 12:8-13 so prayerfully ask God to help me see His plan fulfilled).

Keep Smiling 😊

[Deleted User]

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus posted

What did the person Jesus (The Word) express about commUnity in One God before any humans existed (in John 17:5 and John 15:24) ?

Nothing

Thought about "Huh?" when reading "unbiblical fantasy that does not have any verses nor proof so seems to be a variant of "Yea, hath God say ?"

More fantasy?

My private awe and wonder in God's Love (using a commUnity of Three Diety Voices for intimate expression that cannot be fully described using human words) has found some articles about Plural Unified God having content (including Scripture verses) worth prayerfully considering. My faith belief includes all Scripture is True and consistent (with portions like Daniel 12:8-13 so prayerfully ask God to help me see His plan fulfilled).

Sweet sounding fantasy ... there is NO "Plural Unified God" in the Bible, there is NO "commUnity of Three Deity Voices" in the Bible.

What you imagine is NOT what God hath said anywhere.

Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus posted

What did the person Jesus (The Word) express about commUnity in One God before any humans existed (in John 17:5 and John 15:24) ?

@Wolfgang Nothing

How does "Nothing" explain Jesus having God's Glory (John 17:5) and being Loved by Father (God - John 17:24) before the world was ?

Thankful for "Nothing" reply coinciding with my Bible reading of John 12:37-43 that includes Isaiah 53:10 & Isaiah 6:10 prophetic fulfillment. Possibly "Nothing" simply expresses your unshakable, firm faith that Jesus (The Word) cannot be eternally in One God's commUnity of Love, which is consistent with your previous belief declaration that Jesus began to exist at the time of Holy conception inside Mary.

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus My private awe and wonder in God's Love (using a commUnity of Three Diety Voices for intimate expression that cannot be fully described using human words) has found some articles about Plural Unified God having content (including Scripture verses) worth prayerfully considering. My faith belief includes all Scripture is True and consistent (with portions like Daniel 12:8-13 so prayerfully ask God to help me see His plan fulfilled).

@Wolfgang Sweet sounding fantasy ... there is NO "Plural Unified God" in the Bible, there is NO "commUnity of Three Deity Voices" in the Bible.

If was Truthfully correct about 'there is NO "Plural Unified God" in the Bible', then all Biblical words referring to One God would be singular, but Hebrew has a mixture of singular and plural words referring to One God: Ge 1.26 (let us make man in our image), Ge 3.22 (as one of us), Ge 11:7 (let us go down and confuse), Dt 6.4 (Hear Israel, Yahweh our God is unique), Is 43.9 (to us), Is 54.5 (For your husband is your maker, his name is Yahweh of hosts; and your redeemer is the holy one of Israel, he is called the God of all of the earth), Je 30:5 (Yahweh says, We have heard), Ps 58.12 (Elohim judges), Job 35.10 (Where is God my Maker).

Sometimes Hebrew has אֱל֣וֹהַ (Elohe singular) for One God (Dt 32.15, Dt 32.17 instead of אֱלֹהִ֖ים (Elohim plural) for One God. Dt 32.17 is an example use of אֱלֹהִ֖ים referring to gods (whom they had not known). Psalm 82 includes אֱלֹהִ֖ים referring to One God (in the divine assembly) plus later אֱלֹהִ֖ים referring to mortals (appointed by One God to be judges and magistrates). 2 Ch 31.15 "Do not put trust in him, for no god of any nation and kingdom has been able to save his people from my hand and from the hand of my ancestors." boast by Sennacherib uses elohe for god.

Appears "Nothing" faith does not want to acknowledge nor believe that Jesus (The Word) was eternally being God along with The Father being God and Breath The Holy being God (all Three Diety Voices being at the same time intimately intertwined in The Invisible Spirit of One God).

Keep Smiling 😊

[Deleted User]

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus Appears "Nothing" faith does not want to acknowledge nor believe that Jesus (The Word) was eternally being God along with The Father being God and Breath The Holy being God (all Three Diety Voices being at the same time intimately intertwined in The Invisible Spirit of One God).

You ave clarified that you hold a polytheistic (= more than one person/voice/being/etc each are "God") faith belief. You interpret the true God revealed in the biblical Scriptures as a polytheistic group / community / team.

Enjoy your fantasy ... but please don't claim that it is biblically based.

Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus Appears "Nothing" faith does not want to acknowledge nor believe that Jesus (The Word) was eternally being God along with The Father being God and Breath The Holy being God (all Three Diety Voices being at the same time intimately intertwined in The Invisible Spirit of One God).

@Wolfgang You ave clarified that you hold a polytheistic (= more than one person/voice/being/etc each are "God") faith belief. You interpret the true God revealed in the biblical Scriptures as a polytheistic group / community / team.

Enjoy your fantasy ... but please don't claim that it is biblically based.

One God (monotheistic) is polyphonic: e.g. Jesus having God's Glory (John 17:5) and Loved by Father God (John 17:24) before the world was so my faith belief has a Biblical Scriptural basis for polyphonic (Three Diety Voices) in The Monotheistic God. True God is One. polyphonic <> polytheistic

Humans can be incredibly stubborn: e.g. don't believe it so can't see it. Hence my faith in One God's commUnity of Love appears heretical & unbelievable to someone believing the fantasy of Jesus (the Word) not being eternal God (contrary to Scripture declaring One polyphonic God).

How many woe pronouncements did Jesus say to the Scribes and Pharisees ? (Matthew 23) What was the loving purpose of the woes ? (Ezekiel 18)

What did the Sanhedrin order Peter & John to stop doing in Acts 5 ?

Keep Smiling 😊

[Deleted User]

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus One God (monotheistic) is polyphonic: e.g. Jesus having God's Glory (John 17:5) and Loved by Father God (John 17:24) before the world was so my faith belief has a Biblical Scriptural basis for polyphonic (Three Diety Voices) in The Monotheistic God. True God is One. polyphonic <> polytheistic

With every attempt at "clarifying" your fantasy, things get more and more muddied ... introducing "voices" instead of "persons" and "polyphonic" does NOT change the fact that you have a polytheistic community of THREE GODS.

Humans can be incredibly stubborn: e.g. don't believe it so can't see it.

You provide a most excellent example of this !

What did the Sanhedrin order Peter & John to stop doing in Acts 5 ?

Why don't you ask what Peter and John told the Sanhedrin?

Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus One God (monotheistic) is polyphonic: e.g. Jesus having God's Glory (John 17:5) and Loved by Father God (John 17:24) before the world was so my faith belief has a Biblical Scriptural basis for polyphonic (Three Diety Voices) in The Monotheistic God. True God is One. polyphonic <> polytheistic

@Wolfgang With every attempt at "clarifying" your fantasy, things get more and more muddied ... introducing "voices" instead of "persons" and "polyphonic" does NOT change the fact that you have a polytheistic community of THREE GODS.

Fantasy faith assumption is The Monotheistic God having only one voice (monophonic), which is contrary to Hebrew scripture using a mixture of singular (one) and plural words referring to One God. Polytheistic is different than One polyphonic God. A polytheistic community of three gods is different than my faith belief in One God's commUnity of Love having Three Diety Voices: The Will (Father), The Word (Son), Breath The Holy , who intimately interconnect/share in God's One SPIRIT (also intimately share One Heart and One Soul). When Jesus (The Word) physically died as the Holy human, sinless sacrifice for all humans, then Father (God) and Breath The Holy (God) experienced pain too. Resurrection of Jesus by all of One God included immense JOY for all. Spiritual adversary knew Jesus could transfigure human body into Light (as shown to Peter, James, and John in Matthew 17:1-13). Human theory for Shroud of Turin is dark forces pushing hard against cloth in an attempt to keep resurrection from happening, but God's transfiguration into Light went out in all directions, which left a three dimensional negative image in Jewish burial cloth.

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus Humans can be incredibly stubborn: e.g. don't believe it so can't see it.

@Wolfgang You provide a most excellent example of this !

Suspect this human wisdom "Humans can be incredibly stubborn: e.g. don't believe it so can't see it." applies to all humans. Corollary is humanly hard to love what the mind rejects (intellectually or by belief). Colossians 3:16 "Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly ..." is hampered by not believing who Jesus is. If believe Jesus is God, then word of Christ dwelling inside includes richness of One God (beyond human word description).

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus What did the Sanhedrin order Peter & John to stop doing in Acts 5 ?

@Wolfgang Why don't you ask what Peter and John told the Sanhedrin?

A number of Sadducees and Pharisees in the Sanhedrin did not believe Jesus was The Messiah, eternal God in human flesh (even though they could physically examine the tomb where the human body of Jesus had been). The Messiah did not fulfill Zechariah 9:10-13 (after Triumphant entry into Jerusalem fulfilled Zechariah 9:9). The unbelieving Jewish leaders issued the charge to not teach in the name of Jesus (and earlier had ordered the death of Jesus for blasphemy as they understood truthful Diety claims spoken by Jesus, but refused to believe in Jesus as Lord God).

Keep Smiling 😊

Bill_Coley

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus posted:

Could twelve texts be eisegetical examples of "God (The Father) raised" Jesus, which shows belief The Father and Jesus are not being One God ?

No. As I've tried to make clear to you on numerous occasions in our exchanges, in my engagement with Scripture, the text speaks before I do. In the case of the twelve texts I cited in a previous post, the fact that the texts say God raised Jesus leads me to claim God raised Jesus. Once in possession of that text-based conclusion, my understanding of language and grammar leads me to conclude that God - the one who the texts say did the raising - is different from Jesus - the one whom the texts say God raised. In this instance, your argument is not with my purported eisegesis, but rather with the content of the twelve texts.

• If those twelve texts said Jesus raised himself, I would say so. But the texts don't say Jesus raised himself; they say "God" raised him.
• If those twelve texts said Jesus was God, I would say so. But the texts don't say Jesus was God; they say one called "God" raised one called "Jesus," in my view, drawing a clear distinction between God and Jesus.

Please address this question directly and precisely: Who do those twelve texts say raised Jesus?

Should Peter have said "Father" instead of "God" in Acts 2:32 "God raised up" ? (Peter said "Father" in Acts 2:33 "from the Father")

1. Peter didn't say "Father" instead of God.
2. The text and context of Acts 2.33 make clear that for Peter "the Father" is a synonym for "God." Here's the fuller context of the verse (emphases in all Bible quotations are mine):

29 “Brothers, I may say to you with confidence about the patriarch David that he both died and was buried, and his tomb is with us to this day. 30 Being therefore a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that he would set one of his descendants on his throne, 31 he foresaw and spoke about the resurrection of the Christ, that he was not abandoned to Hades, nor did his flesh see corruption. 32 This Jesus God raised up, and of that we all are witnesses. 33 Being therefore exalted at the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he has poured out this that you yourselves are seeing and hearing. 34 For David did not ascend into the heavens, but he himself says, “ ‘The Lord said to my Lord, “Sit at my right hand, 35 until I make your enemies your footstool.” ’ 36 Let all the house of Israel therefore know for certain that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified.”

• In v.32 Peter says God raised Jesus.
• In the first clause of v.33 Peter says the raised-up Jesus is exalted at God's right hand; in the second clause of that verse Peter says the exalted Jesus at God's right hand has received the promise of the Holy Spirit from "the Father." Grammatically, "the Father" is the same one at whose right hand the exalted Jesus sits... who of course is God.
• In v.35 Peter AGAIN draws a clear distinction between "God" and the Jesus whom God has made both "Lord and Christ."

Please address these questions directly and precisely: If Peter wanted his hearers to believe Jesus was God, why didn't he say so directly? Why did he choose words whose most obvious and common sense meaning - no eisegesis necessary - was that God is different from both the Jesus God raised and the Jesus God made Lord and Christ?

According to John 17:5 and 17:24, Jesus was having God's Glory and Loved by Father (God) before the foundation (creation) of the world. Hence, One God's commUnity of Love existed before the world was (and subsequently humans). All of One God: The Will (Father), The Word (Son), Breath The Holy, raised Jesus from the dead, which is Truthfully consistent with twelve "God raised" texts.

The context of John 17.5 is telling, specifically John 17.3: "And this is eternal life, that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent." That's a perfect occasion for Jesus to claim divinity along with the one he calls "God." BUT HE DOESN'T! Instead, he refers to the one he calls "Father" as "the only true God." That is: For Jesus, "Father" is a synonym - another name - for God. "Father" is NOT for Jesus one part of a trinitarian-sounding "CommUnity of Love." (That, too, is NOT eisegesis. That's reading and accepting what the text says.)

Please address these questions directly and precisely: Do you accept that Jesus referred to his "Father" as "the only true God"? If you do, then how could Jesus have considered himself to be God if his "Father" was the only true God?

Priestly prayer of Jesus in John 17 is Truthfully consistent with the begining of John's Gospel (first two words in Greek repeat Greek LXX prepositional phrase that begins Genesis 1:1 "In beginning"). Before Light, One God already existed, which included The Word (ὁ λόγος) was being. The quality of The Word (ὁ λόγος) was being eternal God in beginning. Grammar shows God (θεος) was more than The Word. John 10:30 spoken by Jesus: "I and the Father are One" meaning God, which is consistent with Priestly prayer of Jesus having God's Glory and being Loved by Father (God) before Light was created plus consistent with Isaiah 43:10-13 (no human can pluck out of God's Hands: The Father and Jesus). Nature of God's Love allows humans to willfully leave God's Hands by choosing to sin (like our spiritual adversary, who was created as the most beautiful creature with free will, in Isaiah 14:12-23).

I don't have time to address each component of this paragraph, but I do have time to address what I believe is its central claim and, in my view, most consequential mistake:

What does Jesus mean when in John 10.30 he says he and the one he calls "the Father" are one?

• He makes that claim in response to a crowd request that he tell them plainly if he is the Messiah (John 10.24), NOT to a request to speak plainly if he considers himself to be God.
• In John 10.25 he in effect tells the crowd that he is the Messiah, but they don't believe him. What is the proof that he is the Messiah? The works he does in his Father's (recall that for Jesus, "Father" is another name for God) name.
• In John 10.29 Jesus says his Father (God) is "greater than all," suggesting strongly that he believes God is greater than him - which would not be true if Jesus believed himself to be God. So whatever "one" means in John 10.30, it can't mean equality.
• Jesus uses similar imagery in John 14.19-20:

19 Yet a little while and the world will see me no more, but you will see me. Because I live, you also will live. 

20 In that day you will know that I am in my Father, and you in me, and I in you.

• To a comparable result, Jesus also uses the "in" and "one" images in John 17.21-26 (ESV):

20 “I do not ask for these only, but also for those who will believe in me through their word, 

21 that they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me. 

22 The glory that you have given me I have given to them, that they may be one even as we are one, 

23 I in them and you in me, that they may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that you sent me and loved them even as you loved me. 

24 Father, I desire that they also, whom you have given me, may be with me where I am, to see my glory that you have given me because you loved me before the foundation of the world. 

25 O righteous Father, even though the world does not know you, I know you, and these know that you have sent me. 

26 I made known to them your name, and I will continue to make it known, that the love with which you have loved me may be in them, and I in them.”

In my view, for Jesus, to be "one" is to be profoundly close to, to be deeply rooted in; it does NOT means equality with. He wants his followers to be as deeply connected to each other as he is connected to God. As he is "in" the Father, he will be "in" them, and they will be "in" him. The oneness Jesus experiences with God is a oneness Jesus seeks for those who believe in him, hence being "one" cannot mean sameness, or part of a multi-dimensional identity.

Please address these questions directly and precisely: What does Jesus mean when he prays that his followers will be "one just as" he and his Father are "one"? What does he mean when he prays for his followers to be "in" him and his Father "just as" he is in his Father and his Father is in him?

Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus Could twelve texts be eisegetical examples of "God (The Father) raised" Jesus, which shows belief The Father and Jesus are not being One God ?

@Bill_Coley No. As I've tried to make clear to you on numerous occasions in our exchanges, in my engagement with Scripture, the text speaks before I do.

Thus far the "text speaking" before you do reflects your faith belief that lacks the depth of Gd's richness. Later in your reply has my eisegetical example point proven by you clearly stating '"the Father" is a synonym for "God."' that expresses your faith belief, which includes every writer of the New Testament must have meant the same word understanding as you, amplifying my eisegetical example point: your "common sense" interpretation of Scripture is really your own so what you see in Scripture must be "correct" for everyone to believe (crafty persuasion tactic).

@Bill_Coley In the case of the twelve texts I cited in a previous post, the fact that the texts say God raised Jesus leads me to claim God raised Jesus. Once in possession of that text-based conclusion, my understanding of language and grammar leads me to conclude that God - the one who the texts say did the raising - is different from Jesus - the one whom the texts say God raised. 

Reading texts with eisegetical faith filter '"the Father" is a synonym for "God."' causes transformation of the twelve texts into "The Father (God) raised Jesus", which reflects your belief that The Word (Jesus) cannot be eternally Gd (contradicts primary story of Gd's Love in Scripture).

@Bill_Coley Please address this question directly and precisely: Who do those twelve texts say raised Jesus?

Gd. The One Gd who existed before creation that includes Jesus, who was having Gd's Glory (John 17:5) and Loved by Father (John 17:24) before the world was (when no humans existed, Jesus was already alive in One Gd). God includes Father, Jesus (The Word), Breath The Holy. In beginning Gd (plural) said: "Let there be Light". Hebrew has singular, dual, and plural nouns. Elohim (Gd) is plural, which is a miminum of three. My previous answer also expanded on who Gd is, which was unbelievable per your eisegetical '"the Father" is a synonym for "God."' faith filter.

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus According to John 17:5 and 17:24, Jesus was having God's Glory and Loved by Father (God) before the foundation (creation) of the world. Hence, One God's commUnity of Love existed before the world was (and subsequently humans). All of One God: The Will (Father), The Word (Son), Breath The Holy, raised Jesus from the dead, which is Truthfully consistent with twelve "God raised" texts.

@Bill_Coley The context of John 17.5 is telling, specifically John 17.3: "And this is eternal life, that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent." That's a perfect occasion for Jesus to claim divinity along with the one he calls "God." BUT HE DOESN'T! Instead, he refers to the one he calls "Father" as "the only true God." That is: For Jesus, "Father" is a synonym - another name - for God. "Father" is NOT for Jesus one part of a trinitarian-sounding "CommUnity of Love." (That, too, is NOT eisegesis. That's reading and accepting what the text says.)

Curious which culture for perfect occasion timing ? Gd's timing is perfect, which can be quite different than human desires.

Another eisegetical faith example 'For Jesus, "Father" is a synonym - another name - for God' imposes your belief about Gd on Jesus (while your words do not have Gdly authority as the words of Jesus do) so John 17:3 appears to you as "that they know you, the only true Father (God)". Truthfully this Scripture text does not say what you really want the text to say. Implied assumption is a monotheistic Gd only having one voice, which is contrary to Hebrew scripture using a mixture of singular (one) and plural words referring to One Gd along with contradicting first person expression by Jesus in John 17:5 (having Gd's Glory) and John 17:24 (Loved by Father, who is Gd) before the world was created. Exegesis of John 17:24 is part of my Scripture basis for One Gd's commUnity of Love (since Love in One Gd happened with Glory before "Let there be Light!").

Thankful for several Syntax Search resources in my Logos library, which includes four Syntactic Greek New Testaments that visually show Greek clause and sentence boundaries along with word relationships (plus Interlinear option for literal translation). Chapter and verse numbers added to Bibles ~500 years ago have a number of alignment issues with Greek discourse thoughts. For example, John 17:2 is in the middle of a Greek sentence. Recent Syntactic Greek NT resource shows John 17:4 and 17:5 as one sentence (while older ones show John 17:4 and John 17:5 having one sentence per verse). Noticed prayer by Jesus in John 17:1-3 began with third person references to Jesus: Son, Him, He, which changes to first person in John 17:4. Authority in John 17:2 reminds me of Matthew 28:18-20 after resurrection. John 17:3 reminds me of John 14 (know + more).

@Bill_Coley Please address these questions directly and precisely: Do you accept that Jesus referred to his "Father" as "the only true God"? If you do, then how could Jesus have considered himself to be God if his "Father" was the only true God?

The Only True Gd includes Jesus too; this text does not deny the Diety of Jesus (human flesh with portion of One Gd's SPIRIT inside - only begotten since SPIRIT of Holy Gd inside Jesus is different than spiritual descendent from Adam's sin stained breath of life from One Gd).

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus Should Peter have said "Father" instead of "God" in Acts 2:32 "God raised up" ? (Peter said "Father" in Acts 2:33 "from the Father")

@Bill_Coley@Bill_Coley 1. Peter didn't say "Father" instead of God.

Different words were intentionally spoken by Peter.

@Bill_Coley 2. The text and context of Acts 2.33 make clear that for Peter "the Father" is a synonym for "God." Here's the fuller context of the verse (emphases in all Bible quotations are mine):

Another eisegetical example shows in synonym assertion for two different words: Gd and Father (they are not identically the same: all of Father is being Gd while Gd is more than The Father). Peter knew word meaning difference from Rabbinical teaching of Jesus (John 17:6-19).

@Bill_Coley Please address these questions directly and precisely: If Peter wanted his hearers to believe Jesus was God, why didn't he say so directly? Why did he choose words whose most obvious and common sense meaning - no eisegesis necessary - was that God is different from both the Jesus God raised and the Jesus God made Lord and Christ?

American education has a vastly different approach than Jewish Rabbinical discipleship so puzzled by modern American expectation (direct) for an ancient Jewish fisherman disciple of Jesus, who is speaking to ancient Jews gathered in Jerusalem for Shavuot. Noticed eisegetical assumption that Gd does not include Jesus. Context includes the Christ, which is The Messiah, who is Gd in human flesh, which puzzled a number of Jews because Zechariah 9:9 prophecy was fulfilled when Jesus triumphantly entered Jerusalem, but Zechariah 9:10-13 is yet to be fulfilled (Gd ruling).

When is Shavout this year ? What is the Biblical basis for Shavuot ? According to Jewish tradition, what was given on Shavuot ?

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus Priestly prayer of Jesus in John 17 is Truthfully consistent with the begining of John's Gospel (first two words in Greek repeat Greek LXX prepositional phrase that begins Genesis 1:1 "In beginning"). Before Light, One God already existed, which included The Word (ὁ λόγος) was being. The quality of The Word (ὁ λόγος) was being eternal God in beginning. Grammar shows God (θεος) was more than The Word. John 10:30 spoken by Jesus: "I and the Father are One" meaning God, which is consistent with Priestly prayer of Jesus having God's Glory and being Loved by Father (God) before Light was created plus consistent with Isaiah 43:10-13 (no human can pluck out of God's Hands: The Father and Jesus). Nature of God's Love allows humans to willfully leave God's Hands by choosing to sin (like our spiritual adversary, who was created as the most beautiful creature with free will, in Isaiah 14:12-23).

@Bill_Coley I don't have time to address each component of this paragraph, but I do have time to address what I believe is its central claim and, in my view, most consequential mistake:

@Bill_Coley What does Jesus mean when in John 10.30 he says he and the one he calls "the Father" are one ?

@Bill_Coley In my view, for Jesus, to be "one" is to be profoundly close to, to be deeply rooted in; it does NOT means equality with. He wants his followers to be as deeply connected to each other as he is connected to God. As he is "in" the Father, he will be "in" them, and they will be "in" him. The oneness Jesus experiences with God is a oneness Jesus seeks for those who believe in him, hence being "one" cannot mean sameness, or part of a multi-dimensional identity.

John 10:30 analysis affirms eisegetical faith filter '"the Father" is a synonym for "God."' firmly in place so concludes "I and The Father are One" cannot be One Gd, which intensely understates Love relationship in One Gd's commUnity of Love (more intimate & awesome than your view).

@Bill_Coley Please address these questions directly and precisely: What does Jesus mean when he prays that his followers will be "one just as" he and his Father are "one"? What does he mean when he prays for his followers to be "in" him and his Father "just as" he is in his Father and his Father is in him?

What actions show in any human who chooses to Love Gd first with everything the human is ? Would that human be in Love "in" Gd ?

If I saw you in person, I could look you in the eyes and say: "I see the Image of Gd in you. You're Special. Gd Loves You. Does Gd like our sins ? No. Gd Loves us." Praying for every believer (Jew & Gentile) in the One True Gd (HaShem) to see the Image of Gd in them, so can love themselves as Gd Loves so Gd's Love can freely flow into them and out to everyone around 😍Praying for Holy Righteous Fruit to be abundant in every believer everywhere: Love, Joy, Peace, Patience, Kindness, Goodness, Faithfulness, Humility, Self-control that includes connecting families together 😍

Keep Smiling

[Deleted User]

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus ... are you introducing another God here? Is Gd perhaps the 4th voice of your "Community of Deities"?

Bill_Coley

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus posted:

Thus far the "text speaking" before you do reflects your faith belief that lacks the depth of Gd's richness. Later in your reply has my eisegetical example point proven by you clearly stating '"the Father" is a synonym for "God."' that expresses your faith belief, which includes every writer of the New Testament must have meant the same word understanding as you, amplifying my eisegetical example point: your "common sense" interpretation of Scripture is really your own so what you see in Scripture must be "correct" for everyone to believe (crafty persuasion tactic).

1. Your analysis COMPLETELY MISSES THE POINT, both of of my previous post and the many posts before that one in which I made the same point: My "faith beliefs" - which I acknowledge having, as I'm sure you acknowledging having some of your own - COME AFTER AND AS AN OUTCOME OF MY ENGAGEMENT WITH SCRIPTURE. YES, I contend that for Jesus and others in the New Testament, "Father" is a synonym for God. I make that contention BECAUSE IN MY VIEW, JESUS TELLS US THAT "FATHER" IS A SYNONYM FOR GOD. I didn't create that claim on the fly, or out of the proverbial blue. I created it because the text led me to create it. You have every right to disagree with my interpretation of texts, but PLEASE STOP asserting that my "faith claims" decide my interpretations. My faith claims COME FROM - they are the product of - my engagement with the biblical text. As I reported in my previous post, but your reply COMPLETELY misconstrued: In my engagement with Scripture, the text speaks before I do.
2. I DON'T CLAIM that "every writer of the New Testament must have meant the same word understanding as (I do)." I claim that every writer of the New Testament indeed understands "Father" as a synonym for "God," as I do, HOWEVER IT IS THEIR WRITINGS, not my "faith beliefs," that lead me to say that. Again, you have every right to disagree with my interpretation of Bible texts, but PLEASE STOP asserting the falsehood that my faith claims decide my interpretations. As I reported in my previous post, but your reply COMPLETELY misconstrued: In my engagement with Scripture, the text speaks before I do.
3. Yes, my interpretation of Scripture is my own, but that's pretty much how it has to be, isn't it? Do your claim that your interpretation of Scripture is not your own?
4. Do you or anyone else have to agree with my interpretation of Scripture? Of course not.

Reading texts with eisegetical faith filter '"the Father" is a synonym for "God."' causes transformation of the twelve texts into "The Father (God) raised Jesus", which reflects your belief that The Word (Jesus) cannot be eternally Gd (contradicts primary story of Gd's Love in Scripture).

No. The fact that the texts themselves say "God" raised "Jesus" tells me that God raised Jesus, and that God - the one who did the raising - and Jesus - the one God raised - are not the same. Peter could have said, "God raised Jesus, who of course was also God." BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT PETER SAID!!! Peter NEVER gave such a message. EVER AND ALWAYS his message was "God" raised "Jesus," the plain meaning of which is Jesus is not God.

Please respond to this request directly and precisely: Provide me a sentence of the form "Person X did something...anything... to person Y" whose plain meaning is Person X and person Y are the same. I contend such a sentence does not, cannot, exist. Prove me wrong.

Gd. The One Gd who existed before creation that includes Jesus, who was having Gd's Glory (John 17:5) and Loved by Father (John 17:24) before the world was (when no humans existed, Jesus was already alive in One Gd). God includes Father, Jesus (The Word), Breath The Holy. In beginning Gd (plural) said: "Let there be Light". Hebrew has singular, dual, and plural nouns. Elohim (Gd) is plural, which is a miminum of three. My previous answer also expanded on who Gd is, which was unbelievable per your eisegetical '"the Father" is a synonym for "God."' faith filter.

I respect but disagree with your view of God, and with your understanding of the meaning of the plural Hebrew words for God in the Old Testament (which is an issue we have engaged multiple times in our discussions, so I feel no need to revisit it here).

Do you acknowledge that for you, "Father, Jesus (The Word), Breath The Holy" is a "faith filter"?

Another eisegetical faith example 'For Jesus, "Father" is a synonym - another name - for God' imposes your belief about Gd on Jesus (while your words do not have Gdly authority as the words of Jesus do) so John 17:3 appears to you as "that they know you, the only true Father (God)". Truthfully this Scripture text does not say what you really want the text to say. Implied assumption is a monotheistic Gd only having one voice, which is contrary to Hebrew scripture using a mixture of singular (one) and plural words referring to One Gd along with contradicting first person expression by Jesus in John 17:5 (having Gd's Glory) and John 17:24 (Loved by Father, who is Gd) before the world was created. Exegesis of John 17:24 is part of my Scripture basis for One Gd's commUnity of Love (since Love in One Gd happened with Glory before "Let there be Light!").

You and I disagree as to the meaning of the plural words for God in the Old Testament.

The EXPLICIT presumption of my previous response was that Jesus meant what he said when he defined eternal life as knowing his Father, whom he called "the only true God," AND knowing Jesus Christ, whom, Jesus says, "the only true God" sent. THAT'S WHAT JESUS SAID. Grammatically, his words can have only one meaning: His Father is "the only true God," and he (Jesus) is someone other than "the only true God." That's not a faith filter or eisegesis. That what the text says. Does it contradict with 17.5 or 17.24? I don't think so (I think John 17.3 is the foundational text, and so his references to pre-existent glory must have some other meaning), but the subject raises an interesting corrective: Why do you ask a one-way contradiction question? Why don't you ALSO ask: Do John 17.5 and John 17.24 contradict John 17.3?

Thankful for several Syntax Search resources in my Logos library, which includes four Syntactic Greek New Testaments that visually show Greek clause and sentence boundaries along with word relationships (plus Interlinear option for literal translation). Chapter and verse numbers added to Bibles ~500 years ago have a number of alignment issues with Greek discourse thoughts. For example, John 17:2 is in the middle of a Greek sentence. Recent Syntactic Greek NT resource shows John 17:4 and 17:5 as one sentence (while older ones show John 17:4 and John 17:5 having one sentence per verse). Noticed prayer by Jesus in John 17:1-3 began with third person references to Jesus: Son, Him, He, which changes to first person in John 17:4. Authority in John 17:2 reminds me of Matthew 28:18-20 after resurrection. John 17:3 reminds me of John 14 (know + more).

None of this changes the fact that Jesus called his Father "the only true God," and then made an obviously separate and distinct reference to himself as "Jesus Christ whom (the only true God had) sent."

The Only True Gd includes Jesus too; this text does not deny the Diety of Jesus (human flesh with portion of One Gd's SPIRIT inside - only begotten since SPIRIT of Holy Gd inside Jesus is different than spiritual descendent from Adam's sin stained breath of life from One Gd).

I respect but disagree with your view of the meaning and composition of "the only true God."

Different words were intentionally spoken by Peter.

Yes. I assume Peter said "God raised Jesus" because he wanted people to know that God raised Jesus.

Another eisegetical example shows in synonym assertion for two different words: Gd and Father (they are not identically the same: all of Father is being Gd while Gd is more than The Father). Peter knew word meaning difference from Rabbinical teaching of Jesus (John 17:6-19).

There is NO indication in ANY of Peter's preaching or writings that he believes Jesus is God. None. It's not there. That sounds like a BIG thing NOT ever to say if he believed it.

Which is a fundamental point I've made before, but is worth a repeat: If Jesus was God, that was a BIG, BOLD, WORLD-CHANGING claim. Why then does NO ONE, including Jesus himself, ever just say it directly: "Jesus is God"? That seems like the least likely candidate EVER for a theological claim that would be believed but left out of EVERY NT character's sermons, teachings, and writings. I contend no one ever says it because no one ever believed it. Bible writers say all kinds of things about God directly and without the possibility of misinterpretation, but they overlooked saying directly "Jesus was God"?

American education has a vastly different approach than Jewish Rabbinical discipleship so puzzled by modern American expectation (direct) for an ancient Jewish fisherman disciple of Jesus, who is speaking to ancient Jews gathered in Jerusalem for Shavuot. Noticed eisegetical assumption that Gd does not include Jesus. Context includes the Christ, which is The Messiah, who is Gd in human flesh, which puzzled a number of Jews because Zechariah 9:9 prophecy was fulfilled when Jesus triumphantly entered Jerusalem, but Zechariah 9:10-13 is yet to be fulfilled (Gd ruling).

So your claim is Peter didn't directly say Jesus was God because... he was a fisher disciple of Jesus speaking to ancient Jews for Shavout? How does that explain anything? The very same Peter who you say couldn't directly tell those ancient Jews that Jesus was God ALSO said the following to them? (emphases are mine)

22 “Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man attested to you by God with mighty works and wonders and signs that God did through him in your midst, as you yourselves know— 23 this Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men.  24 God raised him up, loosing the pangs of death, because it was not possible for him to be held by it. Acts 2:22–24 (ESV)

Peter was willing to tell them directly that they had killed Jesus and that God had raised Jesus from the death they caused, but he wasn't willing to tell them that Jesus was God?

When is Shavout this year ? What is the Biblical basis for Shavuot ? According to Jewish tradition, what was given on Shavuot ?

I don't see how this year's Shavout date is relevant to our discussion of Peter's words to the Jerusalem audience.

John 10:30 analysis affirms eisegetical faith filter '"the Father" is a synonym for "God."' firmly in place so concludes "I and The Father are One" cannot be One Gd, which intensely understates Love relationship in One Gd's commUnity of Love (more intimate & awesome than your view).

I conclude Jesus and his Father cannot be one God BECAUSE THE TEXT MAKES THAT CLEAR.

I know that WHATEVER Jesus meant by his being "one" with his Father, he wanted and God to be "one" with us in the same way. Unless you claim that Jesus wanted US to be God also, then his words rule out his believing himself to be God.

What actions show in any human who chooses to Love Gd first with everything the human is ? Would that human be in Love "in" Gd ?

If I saw you in person, I could look you in the eyes and say: "I see the Image of Gd in you. You're Special. Gd Loves You. Does Gd like our sins ? No. Gd Loves us." Praying for every believer (Jew & Gentile) in the One True Gd (HaShem) to see the Image of Gd in them, so can love themselves as Gd Loves so Gd's Love can freely flow into them and out to everyone around 😍Praying for Holy Righteous Fruit to be abundant in every believer everywhere: Love, Joy, Peace, Patience, Kindness, Goodness, Faithfulness, Humility, Self-control that includes connecting families together 😍

In my view, this response misses the central thrust of Jesus' message to which I directed your attention. He prayed that we would be "one" "just as" he and God were one. So WHATEVER he meant by his being "one" with his Father, he wanted the same for his followers. Did that mean Jesus wanted his followers to be God? Of course not.

He said he wanted his followers to be "in" him and himself to be "in" his followers "just as" he was "in" his Father and his Father was "in" him. WHATEVER Jesus meant by his being "in" his Father, he wanted the same for his followers' relationship with him. Again, did that mean he wanted his followers to be God? Of course not.

By "one" and "in" Jesus could NOT have meant deity since he wanted the same kind of relationship between his followers and himself. Hence, in my view, "one" and "in" could only have referred to intimacy and depth of connection.

Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus

@Wolfgang ... are you introducing another God here? Is Gd perhaps the 4th voice of your "Community of Deities"?

Jewish writing convention is Gd (or G _ d) that leaves out the vowel "o" (so used Gd in my reply as my Prayers specifically include Jews).

Another Jewish convention is saying Adonai (Lord) when reading Gd's most Holy name during Synagogue readings. In casual conversations, HaShem (The Name) is used for Gd.

@Bill_Coley Please respond to this request directly and precisely: Provide me a sentence of the form "Person X did something...anything... to person Y" whose plain meaning is Person X and person Y are the same. I contend such a sentence does not, cannot, exist. Prove me wrong.

Looking in the mirror, Mr Bill smiled at Mr Coley as he rejoiced in seeing the Image of Gd 😍

@Bill_Coley Do you acknowledge that for you, "Father, Jesus (The Word), Breath The Holy" is a "faith filter"?

Yes, which allows me to experience incredible Love daily in One Gd's commUnity of Love; sometimes my Thanks is directed to one Divine Voice while other times has my heart singing Joyful Praise to All of One Gd 😍(in a few days will be the second anniversary of my wife transitioning from her human tent to Gd's Holy Heaven, which included a vision from Gd to her relative confirming eternal destination on the morning after she passed away when my eyes were full of tears. Thankful for Gd providing a sympathy floral arrangement surprise where an order of all white flowers was modified by local florist, who did not know me, to include a dozen flowers matching what that my wife had chosen for our wedding) Physically am home alone a lot (Covid-19) while Spiritually never alone. Like true stories of those who have experienced Heaven, human words cannot convey immensity of Gd's wondrous Love, Joy, Peace, &c. Plaque on my wall reads: "Seid stille und erkennet, daß ich Gott bin!" Ps 46:10

What prevented many miraculous works of Gd from being done in the human home town of Jesus ?

@Bill_Coley The EXPLICIT presumption of my previous response was that Jesus meant what he said when he defined eternal life as knowing his Father, whom he called "the only true God," AND knowing Jesus Christ, whom, Jesus says, "the only true God" sent. THAT'S WHAT JESUS SAID. Grammatically, his words can have only one meaning: His Father is "the only true God," and he (Jesus) is someone other than "the only true God." That's not a faith filter or eisegesis. That what the text says. Does it contradict with 17.5 or 17.24? I don't think so (I think John 17.3 is the foundational text, and so his references to pre-existent glory must have some other meaning), but the subject raises an interesting corrective: Why do you ask a one-way contradiction question? Why don't you ALSO ask: Do John 17.5 and John 17.24 contradict John 17.3?

Observation is grammatical assumption of human limitation (with faith filter). Gd who created Adam is being more than a human so my faith filter views John 17:3 being Truthfully consistent with John 17:5 and John 17:24 along with writer of Hebrews 12:2 being Truthful that Jesus (The Word) is the Originator (Author, Founder, initiator) and Perfector (Finisher, Completer) of Faith. Our text interpretations include/express our faith filters.

If the text speaks before you do, am puzzled by 'so his references to pre-existent glory must have some other meaning' concerning John 17:5

What kind of results are anticipated/expected from studies having flawed assumption(s) and/or method(s) ?

Nature of Gd's Love allows every human to choose what to Believe & Love most. Per John 10:10, what does our spiritual adversary want to do ?

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus When is Shavuot this year ? What is the Biblical basis for Shavuot ? According to Jewish tradition, what was given on Shavuot ?

@Bill_Coley I don't see how this year's Shavuot date is relevant to our discussion of Peter's words to the Jerusalem audience.

What cultural understanding is important for interpreting Scripture text ? What happened on Shavuot in Acts ? Current Jewish custom includes a count culminating in Shavuot so what is the spiritual count purpose ? (heard about count for years, but today learned why)

@Bill_Coley In my view, this response misses the central thrust of Jesus' message to which I directed your attention. He prayed that we would be "one" "just as" he and God were one. So WHATEVER he meant by his being "one" with his Father, he wanted the same for his followers. Did that mean Jesus wanted his followers to be God? Of course not.

@Bill_Coley He said he wanted his followers to be "in" him and himself to be "in" his followers "just as" he was "in" his Father and his Father was "in" him. WHATEVER Jesus meant by his being "in" his Father, he wanted the same for his followers' relationship with him. Again, did that mean he wanted his followers to be God? Of course not.

Inside the human body of Jesus was a portion of One Gd's SPIRIT, which can commune in One Gd's commUnity of Love. Every human who believes Gd raised Jesus from the dead and confesses Jesus is Lord Gd receives Breath The Holy as a deposit of Gd's Love. On earth, believers have spiritual battle between sin tainted breath of Life inheritance from Adam and Breath The Holy. Humanly can choose what to Love most so focusing my thoughts on Gd's Holiness gives wonderful Praise, Prayers, & Presence beyond what my words can describe 😍

Keep Smiling 😊

[Deleted User]

Jewish writing convention is Gd (or G _ d) that leaves out the vowel "o" (so used Gd in my reply as my Prayers specifically include Jews).

What kind of silly rubbish is this? You are writing in ENGLISH, so stick to English conventions. Or else write in Hebrew ....

Another Jewish convention is saying Adonai (Lord) when reading Gd's most Holy name during Synagogue readings. In casual conversations, HaShem (The Name) is used for Gd.

See above ... furthermore, why are using vowels in your "Adonai" and in your "HaShem" type of talk? Who do you want to impress with your "Jewish conventions"?

Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus Jewish writing convention is Gd (or G _ d) that leaves out the vowel "o" (so used Gd in my reply as my Prayers specifically include Jews).

@Wolfgang What kind of silly rubbish is this? You are writing in ENGLISH, so stick to English conventions. Or else write in Hebrew ....

Jewish web sites in English use Gd (or use a line between G and d while leaving out the vowel "o").

@Wolfgang See above ... furthermore, why are using vowels in your "Adonai" and in your "HaShem" type of talk? Who do you want to impress with your "Jewish conventions"?

How Jewish is the Rabbi Jesus ? How Jewish are Scripture authors ? What culture is vital for understanding & interpreting Scripture text ?

While have some personal disagreement with Dr. John Gill's high Calvinist theology, am finding his volumious insight valuable to consider:

viii. The famous name of God is Jehovah; this is a name he takes to himself, and claims it, Exod. 6:3, Isa. 42:8, and is peculiar to him; his name alone is Jehovah, and incommunicable to another, Psalm 83:18, because this name is predicated of God, as a necessary and self-existent being, as a learned Jew observes, which no other is; for though it is sometimes spoken of another, yet not singly and properly, but with relation to him. So the church is called Jehovah-shammah, because of his presence with her, Ezek. 48:35. The Jews, from a superstitious abuse of it, assert it to be ineffable, and not to be pronounced, and even not to be read and written, and therefore they substitute other names instead of it, as Adonai, and Elohim. This might arise, originally, from their very great awe and reverence of this name, according to Deut. 28:58, but every name of God is reverend, and not to be taken in vain, nor used in common, nor with any degree of levity, Psalm 111:9: it is written with four letters only; hence the Jews called it tetragrammaton, and is very probably the τετρακτυς of the Pythagoreans, by which they swore; and it is remarkable, that the word for God is so written in almost all languages; denoting, it may be, that he is the God of the whole world; and ought to be served and worshipped, and his name to be great and had in reverence in the four quarters of it; it takes in all tenses, past, present, and to come: the words of the evangelist John are a proper periphrasis of it; which is, and which was, and which is to come, Rev. 1:4, or, shall be, as in chap. 16:5: it comes from the root היה or הוה, which signify, to be, and is expressive of the essence of God; of his necessary and self existence, for God naturally and necessarily exists; which cannot be said of any other: creatures owe their being to the arbitrary will of God; and so might be, and might not be as he pleased; but God exists in and of himself, he is a self-existent and independent Being, as he must needs be, since he is before all creatures, and therefore cannot have his being from them; and he is the cause of theirs, and therefore must be independent of them; and yet, when we say he is self-existent, it must not be understood as if he made himself; for though he exists, he is not made. He is the Being of beings; all creatures have their beings from him and in him, “the heavens, earth, and sea, and all that is in them;” he is the former and maker of all things; he is eminently the Being, and all in comparison of him are mere non-entities; all nations and the inhabitants of them are as nothing before him; yea, less than nothing, and vanity, Isa. 40:17.

 John Gill, A Complete Body of Doctrinal and Practical Divinity: Or A System of Evangelical Truths, Deduced from the Sacred Scriptures, New Edition., vol. 1 (Tegg & Company, 1839), 41–42.

Having proved the unity of the divine Being, and explained the sense in which it is to be understood, my next work will be to prove that there is a plurality in the Godhead; or, that there are more persons than one, and that these are neither more nor fewer than three; or, that there is a Trinity of Persons in the unity of the divine essence. Some except to these terms, because not literally and syllabically expressed in Scripture; as Essence, Unity, Trinity, and Person; of which see the introduction. I shall,

I. Prove that there is a plurality of persons in the one God; or, that there are more than one. The Hebrew word פניﬦ which answers to the Greek word προσωπα, is used of the divine persons, פנו My persons shall go with thee, Exod. 33:14; and if פניד thy persons go not with me, 15; and he brought thee out בפגיו by his persons, Deut. 4:37. The word is used three times in Psalm 27:8, 9, and in each clause the Septuagint has the word προσωπον, and which, as Suidas observes, is expressive of the sacred Trinity. That there is such a plurality of persons, will appear more clearly,

i. From the plural names and epithets of God. His great and incommunicable name Jehovah, is always in the singular number, and is never used plurally; the reason of which is, because it is expressive of his essence, which is but one; it is the same with I AM that I AM; but the first name of God we meet with in Scripture, and that in the first verse of it, is plural; In the beginning God (Elohim) created the heaven and the earth, Gen. 1:1, and, therefore, must design more than one, at least two, and yet not precisely two, or two only; then it would have been dual; but it is plural: and as the Jews themselves say, cannot design fewer than three. Now Moses might have made use of other names of God, in his account of the creation; as his name Jehovah, by which he made himself known to him, and to the people of Israel; or Eloah, the singular of Elohim, which is used by him, Deut. 32:15, 16, and in the book of Job frequently; so that it was not want of singular names of God, nor the barrenness of the Hebrew language, which obliged him to use a plural word; it was no doubt of choice, and with design; and which will be more evident when it is observed, that one end of the writings of Moses, is to extirpate the polytheism of the heathens, and to prevent the people of Israel from going into it; and therefore it may seem strange, that he should begin his history with a plural name of God; he must have some design in it, which could not be to inculcate a plurality of gods, for that would be directly contrary to what he had in view in writing, and to what he asserts, Deut. 6:4, Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord: nor a plurality of mere names and characters, to which creative powers cannot be ascribed; but a plurality of persons, for so the words may be rendered, distributively, according to the idiom of the Hebrew language; “In the beginning every one, or each of the divine persons, created the heaven and the earth.” And then the historian goes on to make mention of them; who, besides the Father, included in this name, are the Spirit of God, that moved upon the face of the waters, and the Word of God, verse 3, which said, Let there be light, and there was light; and which spoke that and all things out of nothing; see John 1:1–3. And it may be further observed, that this plural word Elohim, is in this passage, in construction with a verb singular Bara, rendered created; which some have thought is designed to point out a plurality of persons, in the unity of the divine essence; but if this is not judged sufficient to build it upon, let it be further observed, that the word Elohim is sometimes in construction with a verb plural, as in Gen. 20:13 and 35:7, 2 Sam. 7:23, where Elohim, the Gods, or divine persons, are said to cause Abraham to wander from his father’s house, to appear to Jacob, and to go forth to redeem Israel; all which are personal actions: and likewise it is in construction with adjectives and participles plural, Deut. 4:7 and 5:26, Josh. 24:19, 1 Sam. 17:26, 36, Psalm 58:11, Prov. 30:3, Jer. 10:10; in which places Elohim, Gods, or the divine persons, are said to be nigh to the people of Israel; to be living, holy, and to judge the earth; characters which belong to persons; and now, as a learned man well observes, “that however the construction of a noun plural with a verb singular, may render it doubtful to some whether these words express a plurality or no, yet certainly there can be no doubt in those places, where a verb or adjective plural are joined with the word Elohim.” No such stress is laid on this word, as if it was the clearest and strongest proof of a plurality in the Deity; it is only mentioned, and mentioned first, because it is the most usual name of God, being used of him many hundreds of times in Scripture; and what stress is laid upon it, is not merely because it is plural, but because it appears often in an unusual form of construction; it is used of others, but not in such a form; as has been observed. It is used of angels, Psalm 8:6, they being not only many, but are often messengers of God, of the divine Persons in the Godhead, represent them, and speak in their name. And it is used of civil magistrates, Psalm 82:6, and so of Moses, as a god to Pharaoh, Exod. 7:1, as they well may be called, since they are the vicegerents and representatives of the Elohim, the divine Persons, the Trine-une God: nor need it be wondered at that it should be sometimes used of a single Person in the Deity, it being common to them all; and since each of them possesses the whole divine nature and essence undivided, Psalm 45:6, 7. The ancient Jews not only concluded a plurality, but even a Trinity, from the word Elohim. With respect to the passage in Numb. 15:16, they say, “There is no judgment less than three;” and that three persons sitting in judgment, the divine Majesty is with them, they conclude from Psalm 82:1, he judgeth among the gods, אלהיﬦ. Hence they further observe, that “no sanhedrim, or court of judicature, is called אלהיﬦ unless it consists of three.” From whence it is manifest, that the ancient Jews believed that this name not only inferred a plurality of persons, but such a plurality which consisted of three at least.

 John Gill, A Complete Body of Doctrinal and Practical Divinity: Or A System of Evangelical Truths, Deduced from the Sacred Scriptures, New Edition., vol. 1 (Tegg & Company, 1839), 187–189.

Note: reading a Shakespeare comedy in English while lacking cultural understanding of audience misses many humorous play on words.

Keep Smiling 😊

Bill_Coley

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus posted:

Looking in the mirror, Mr Bill smiled at Mr Coley as he rejoiced in seeing the Image of Gd 😍

This is not an example of the kind of sentence I requested. A person looking in a mirror is not engaging or taking action toward another person because there is only one person present in the example. "Mr. Bill," Person X, is viewing a mirror-reflected image of himself. There is no Person Y in your example. So again I ask you to offer a sentence in which Person X does something... anything... to/for Person Y where the plain meaning of the sentence is that Person X and Person Y are the same.

Yes, which allows me to experience incredible Love daily in One Gd's commUnity of Love; sometimes my Thanks is directed to one Divine Voice while other times has my heart singing Joyful Praise to All of One Gd 😍(in a few days will be the second anniversary of my wife transitioning from her human tent to Gd's Holy Heaven, which included a vision from Gd to her relative confirming eternal destination on the morning after she passed away when my eyes were full of tears. Thankful for Gd providing a sympathy floral arrangement surprise where an order of all white flowers was modified by local florist, who did not know me, to include a dozen flowers matching what that my wife had chosen for our wedding) Physically am home alone a lot (Covid-19) while Spiritually never alone. Like true stories of those who have experienced Heaven, human words cannot convey immensity of Gd's wondrous Love, Joy, Peace, &c. Plaque on my wall reads: "Seid stille und erkennet, daß ich Gott bin!" Ps 46:10

The point of my question was simply to ask for an acknowledgement that you, too, have "faith filters." Mission accomplished.

What prevented many miraculous works of Gd from being done in the human home town of Jesus ?

I'm not sure how this question fits into our discussion, but in the Gospel story it is unbelief that limits the works Jesus does in his hometown (Mark 6.4-6).

Observation is grammatical assumption of human limitation (with faith filter). Gd who created Adam is being more than a human so my faith filter views John 17:3 being Truthfully consistent with John 17:5 and John 17:24 along with writer of Hebrews 12:2 being Truthful that Jesus (The Word) is the Originator (Author, Founder, initiator) and Perfector (Finisher, Completer) of Faith. Our text interpretations include/express our faith filters.

My observation is that it is your faith filter, NOT the John 17 text, that produces truthful consistency between your interpretation of the three cited verses. In John 17.3 Jesus calls his Father "the only true God." The word "only" leaves no room for additional components of a godhead. [BTW, that's grammar, not human limitation, reaching that conclusion.] Only a definition of the word "only" that doesn't actually mean "only" could make those verses "truthfully" consistent.

If the text speaks before you do, am puzzled by 'so his references to pre-existent glory must have some other meaning' concerning John 17:5

Don't confuse my hermeneutic with biblical literalism. That I allow the text to speak before I speak does NOT mean I perform no exegetical and theological inquiry. It simply means that my first engagement with the text comes when I read the text, not, as you often seem to allege, when I decide in advance of said reading what the text means. AND, I engage the WHOLE of Scripture, not isolated verses or passages. My view of Jesus' identity, for example, is not determined by any particular verse, but rather the whole of Scripture. From that WHOLE, not specific verses such as those in which Jesus speaks of his pre-existence, I draw the conclusions I draw. In all candor, I find the pre-existence verses challenging, and I'm not sure what they mean or how they fit into my broader Christology. I experience no shame from acknowledging that my understanding of Scripture is incomplete.

What kind of results are anticipated/expected from studies having flawed assumption(s) and/or method(s) ?

You ask questions that are a) difficult to tie to our discussion, and b) ones to which you seemingly have an answer. Why not just make your claims rather than asking me to make them for you?

Nature of Gd's Love allows every human to choose what to Believe & Love most. Per John 10:10, what does our spiritual adversary want to do ?

See my previous response.

What cultural understanding is important for interpreting Scripture text ? What happened on Shavuot in Acts ? Current Jewish custom includes a count culminating in Shavuot so what is the spiritual count purpose ? (heard about count for years, but today learned why)

I have no clue as to what you're asking or why you think it matters to our discussion.

Inside the human body of Jesus was a portion of One Gd's SPIRIT, which can commune in One Gd's commUnity of Love. Every human who believes Gd raised Jesus from the dead and confesses Jesus is Lord Gd receives Breath The Holy as a deposit of Gd's Love. On earth, believers have spiritual battle between sin tainted breath of Life inheritance from Adam and Breath The Holy. Humanly can choose what to Love most so focusing my thoughts on Gd's Holiness gives wonderful Praise, Prayers, & Presence beyond what my words can describe 😍

I respect your take on the theme, but in it I don't find a clear assessment of the meaning of the words "just as" in Jesus' prayer:

• He wants to be "in" is followers and his followers to be "in" him and his Father "just as" he is in his Father and his Father is in him (John 17.21).
• He wants his followers to be "one" "just as" he and his Father are "one" (John 17.21).
• He intends to send his disciples into the world "just as" his Father had sent him into the world (John 17.18).

When Jesus prays for us to have connections with him and God "just as" he has a connection with God, and when he declares his sending of his followers into the world will be "just as" God had sent him into the world, what do the words "just as" mean?

[Deleted User]

Jewish web sites in English use Gd (or use a line between G and d while leaving out the vowel "o").

So what ... why can't they keep to English conventions when writing in English?

How Jewish is the Rabbi Jesus ?

What do you call "Jewish"? Gig he keep "Jewish" traditions or propagate God's commandments (cp. Mat 15) ?

How Jewish are Scripture authors ?

See above ... did they invent their own linguistic conventions to impose on other languages?

What culture is vital for understanding & interpreting Scripture text ?#

It is essential or vital to a correct understanding of Scripture to understand the respective culture of the day and time and people which are spoken of etc ... which only in part may have reference to "Jewish". Was Abraham a Jew?

[Deleted User]

@Bill_Coley asked @Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus

When Jesus prays for us to have connections with him and God "just as" he has a connection with God, and when he declares his sending of his followers into the world will be "just as" God had sent him into the world, what do the words "just as" mean?

IF in the case of Jesus and the Father it would mean "Jesus IS God", then it would mean the same in regards to the disciples and Jesus then the disciples would be God just as Jesus.

But then, that would sort of bust the "three voice commUnity of Love" . . . I keep 😀

Bill_Coley

@Wolfgang posted:

IF in the case of Jesus and the Father it would mean "Jesus IS God", then it would mean the same in regards to the disciples and Jesus then the disciples would be God just as Jesus.

I agree with your take on the impact of the words "just as" in the John 17 verses I cited, Wolfgang. In my view, Jesus therefore must mean something other than "I'm also God" when he asserts that he is "in" the Father with whom he is "one." I think he uses those two words to declare his profound spiritual intimacy with God, and when he prays that we be "in" him just as he is "in" his Father," and "one" with each other just as he is "one" with his Father, he prays that we experience similarly profound spiritual intimacy with God and with each other. I don't know what else the words "just as" could mean... unless they don't actually mean "just as."

Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus

@Bill_Coley Please respond to this request directly and precisely: Provide me a sentence of the form "Person X did something...anything... to person Y" whose plain meaning is Person X and person Y are the same. I contend such a sentence does not, cannot, exist. Prove me wrong.

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus Looking in the mirror, Mr Bill smiled at Mr Coley as he rejoiced in seeing the Image of Gd 😍

@Bill_Coley This is not an example of the kind of sentence I requested. A person looking in a mirror is not engaging or taking action toward another person because there is only one person present in the example. "Mr. Bill," Person X, is viewing a mirror-reflected image of himself. There is no Person Y in your example. So again I ask you to offer a sentence in which Person X does something... anything... to/for Person Y where the plain meaning of the sentence is that Person X and Person Y are the same.

Sending and receiving Smile is human action (to share Love). Conversely, actions and words can prove a person is their own worst enemy.

Thankful mirror reflects the Image of Gd in me so my Smile helps me Love myself as Gd Loves me, which helps me Love my neighbor as Gd does. My Smile reflects literal obedience to Philippians 4:4 command: to be Rejoicing in the Lord always (tears can flow while Smiling as Joy transcends what's happening). Thankful can feel my cheeks Smiling while laying & praying in bed, being cuddled in One Gd's commUnity of Love 😍(while knowing am still a human who has been adopted by Gd in a wonderful Loving way so Thankfully Loving Gd with living, learning, and doing)

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus What prevented many miraculous works of Gd from being done in the human home town of Jesus ?

@Bill_Coley I'm not sure how this question fits into our discussion, but in the Gospel story it is unbelief that limits the works Jesus does in his hometown (Mark 6.4-6).

Unbelief about who Jesus is hinders understanding of who Gd is. John 17:19 echos The Word (eternally being Gd) willful choice to be Holy sacrifice for those who believe in Jesus (Priestly prayer in John 17 includes believe three times in two phrases: "believe you sent me" and "believe in me"). Looking at John 17 (NLT) shows Father spoken six times with many personal pronouns for Father while God appears once and καθὼς eight times.

After saying all these things, Jesus looked up to heaven and said, “Father, the hour has come. Glorify your Son so he can give glory back to you. For you have given him authority over everyone. He gives eternal life to each one you have given him. And this is the way to have eternal life—to know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, the one you sent to earth. I brought glory to you here on earth by completing the work you gave me to do. Now, Father, bring me into the glory we shared before the world began. 

“I have revealed you to the ones you gave me from this world. They were always yours. You gave them to me, and they have kept your word. Now they know that everything I have is a gift from you, for I have passed on to them the message you gave me. They accepted it and know that I came from you, and they believe you sent me. 

“My prayer is not for the world, but for those you have given me, because they belong to you. All who are mine belong to you, and you have given them to me, so they bring me glory. Now I am departing from the world; they are staying in this world, but I am coming to you. Holy Father, you have given me your name; now protect them by the power of your name so that they will be united just as we are. During my time here, I protected them by the power of the name you gave me. I guarded them so that not one was lost, except the one headed for destruction, as the Scriptures foretold. 

“Now I am coming to you. I told them many things while I was with them in this world so they would be filled with my joy. I have given them your word. And the world hates them because they do not belong to the world, just as I do not belong to the world. I’m not asking you to take them out of the world, but to keep them safe from the evil one. They do not belong to this world any more than I do. Make them holy by your truth; teach them your word, which is truth. Just as you sent me into the world, I am sending them into the world. And I give myself as a holy sacrifice for them so they can be made holy by your truth. 

“I am praying not only for these disciples but also for all who will ever believe in me through their message. I pray that they will all be one, just as you and I are one—as you are in me, Father, and I am in you. And may they be in us so that the world will believe you sent me. 

“I have given them the glory you gave me, so they may be one as we are one. I am in them and you are in me. May they experience such perfect unity that the world will know that you sent me and that you love them as much as you love me. Father, I want these whom you have given me to be with me where I am. Then they can see all the glory you gave me because you loved me even before the world began! 

“O righteous Father, the world doesn’t know you, but I do; and these disciples know you sent me. I have revealed you to them, and I will continue to do so. Then your love for me will be in them, and I will be in them.” 

Hebrew Holy Name יהוה YHVH <Lemma = lbs/he/יהוה> was translated into the Septuagint, LXX Swete, as κυριος Lord (6076) or θεος God (247). Could God in John 17:3 be truly consistent with John 17:11 Holy Father, you have given me your name; (with John 10:30 meaning "I and The Father are One" Gd having One Name) ? If Jesus is not Gd (only a special man), how could Jesus truly know the only True Gd before the world began ?

How could Jesus pray "believe in me" (not believe in Father nor believe in Gd) while knowing the Ten Commandents begins with Exodus 20:2-3 (NLT) “I am the Lord your God, who rescued you from the land of Egypt, the place of your slavery. “You must not have any other god but me. & Isaiah 43:10 (NLT) “But you are my witnesses, O Israel!” says the Lord. “You are my servant. You have been chosen to know me, believe in me, and understand that I alone am God. There is no other God—there never has been, and there never will be. 

@Bill_Coley When Jesus prays for us to have connections with him and God "just as" he has a connection with God, and when he declares his sending of his followers into the world will be "just as" God had sent him into the world, what do the words "just as" mean?

Greek καθὼς combines two words: κατα (according to: preposition) & ως (as, like) into a comparative conjunction: "just as", "for", "any more than", "as", "as much as", "even as" (καθὼς search finds 17:2, 11, 14, 16, 18, 21, 22, 23). While walking on earth, Jesus repeated His dependence on Gd to do Gd's Will as an example for human believers in יהוה YHVH to be "just as" Jesus (יהוה YHVH) in depending on Gd to do Gd's Will along with being "just as" Jesus (יהוה YHVH) abiding in Gd's commUnity of Love while longing to worship Gd in Heaven (to Live is Christ, to die is gain).

Human believers in יהוה YHVH are spiritual children of One Gd (יהוה YHVH) who are much loved by Gd (believing in Gd and Loving Gd does not change a human into Gd). 1 John 3:1 (NLT) See how very much our Father loves us, for he calls us his children, and that is what we are!

The Will of Gd has work plans, consistent with Ephesians 2:8-10 Gd's free gift of Grace followed by good works prepared by Gd to do with Gd.

@Bill_Coley In all candor, I find the pre-existence verses challenging, and I'm not sure what they mean or how they fit into my broader Christology. I experience no shame from acknowledging that my understanding of Scripture is incomplete.

Appreciate candor. Believing what Jesus said about Himself would change broader Christology, Theology, humility &c. (possibly in a dramatic manner). Personally wonder what The Word choose to set aside when leaving the Glorious splendor of Holy Heaven to be born in a human body.

Concur my understanding of Scripture is incomplete. Appreciate Point III in "The Holy Spirit-The Great Teacher (No. 50)" sermon by C.H.Spurgeon

This is none other than God, and this God is none other than a person. This person is “he, the Spirit,” the “Spirit of truth;” not an influence or an emanation, but actually a person. “When the Spirit of truth is come, he shall guide you into all truth.” Now, we wish you to look at this guide, to consider how adapted he is to us.

In the first place, he is infallible; he knows everything and cannot lead us astray. If I pin my sleeve to another man’s coat, he may lead me part of the way rightly, but by-and-bye he will go wrong himself, and I shall be led astray with him. But if I give myself to the Holy Ghost and ask his guidance, there is no fear of my wandering.

Again, we rejoice in this Spirit because he is ever-present. We fall into a difficulty sometimes; we say, “Oh, if I could take this to my minister, he would explain it; but I live so far off, and am not able to see him.” That perplexes us, and we turn the text round and round and cannot make anything out of it. We look at the commentators. We take down pious Thomas Scott, and, as usual, he says nothing about it if it be a dark passage. Then we go to holy Matthew Henry, and if it is an easy Scripture, he is sure to explain it; but if it is a text hard to be understood, it is likely enough, of course, left in his own gloom. And even Dr. Gill himself, the most consistent of commentators, when he comes to a hard passage, manifestly avoids it in some degree. But when we have no commentator or minister, we have still the Holy Spirit. And let me tell you a little secret: whenever you cannot understand a text, open your Bible, bend your knee, and pray over that text; and if it does not split into atoms and open itself, try again. If prayer does not explain it, it is one of the things God did not intend you to know, and you may be content to be ignorant of it. Prayer is the key that openeth the cabinets of mystery. Prayer and faith are sacred picklocks that can open secrets, and obtain great treasures. There is no college for holy education like that of the blessed Spirit, for he is an ever-present tutor, to whom we have only to bend the knee, and he is at our side, the great expositor of truth.

Humanly anticipate complete and useful study results seldom (if ever) come out of a study having flawed assumption(s) and/or method(s), which is a variation of phrase: "Garbage In, Garbage Out" (and reminder to me about being very careful handling Gd's Word in Holy Way). Faith belief filters are difficult to modify. Some of my prayers include asking Gd to search my heart with purpose for me changing to become like Gd, which can be done with Gd's Loving direction and assistance. Thankful for Gd forgiving me of my past sins with me believing/trusting Gd, which has resulted in Holy healing so desiring Gd to help me deal/cleanse more of my past hurts & sins. Gd chooses appropriate cleansing time along with helping me express Thanks for transformation in my life, which Gd is using to help others too. Thankful can sing new songs of Praise daily.

Our spiritual adversary wants to disrupt every human's Love relationship in One True Gd in any way possible (adversary has thousands of years experience suggesting human thoughts to stumble in a variety of ways). Words of Father and Son for Gd can be a stumbling block because human father is always older than son. Yet Jesus prayer expresses Gd's Glory & Love pre-existing before world was created by One True Gd.

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus What cultural understanding is important for interpreting Scripture text ? What happened on Shavuot in Acts ? Current Jewish custom includes a count culminating in Shavuot so what is the spiritual count purpose ? (heard about count for years, but today learned why)

@Bill_Coley I have no clue as to what you're asking or why you think it matters to our discussion.

Shavuot is the Jewish name (Leviticus 23:15-22) for Pentecost setting of Acts 2 message by Peter (May 29-30). Counting Omer between Pesach (Passover) and Shavuot (Pentecost) for 49 days includes daily personal reflection for changing one negative trait into a positive one (step at a time for throwing off the old sinful nature and putting on the new Holy nature from Gd) in preparation for the giving of Torah (Teaching) on Shavuot. Yearly reminder that human sin nature (heart) is incredibly deceitful/corrupt (Jeremiah 17:9-10) with need for ongoing transformation on earth.

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus Jewish web sites in English use Gd (or use a line between G and d while leaving out the vowel "o").

@Wolfgang So what ... why can't they keep to English conventions when writing in English?

Some ancient Jewish customs have contemporary idiom.

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus How Jewish is the Rabbi Jesus ?

@Wolfgang What do you call "Jewish"? Gig he keep "Jewish" traditions or propagate God's commandments (cp. Mat 15) ?

My "Jewish" answer is whoever calls themself Jewish, including Messianic Jewish (currently am not testing nor challenging Jewish identification). Am testing/comparing Jewish written materials with Scripture: many are growing my Love relationship in Gd while some are a stumbling block: e.g. Jewish yearly reading (Parashot) of TaNaKh (Old Covenant) leaves out Isaiah 52:13-53:12 that is worth considering with John 17 Priestly Prayer.

Many religious groups have restrictions on who can talk to their group, which includes Jewish synagogues. Personally wonder about Jewish Rabbi reputation of Jesus, which allowed Luke 4:15 "And he taught in their synagogues, being glorified of all." to simply be true, which implies Jesus was living & teaching in a Jewish cultural way so when Jesus stood up in a Jewish synagogue (signaling desire to teach as a visiting Rabbi) was followed by local synagogue leader having scroll taken to Jesus for reading scripture portion and commenting/teaching.

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus How Jewish are Scripture authors ?

@Wolfgang See above ... did they invent their own linguistic conventions to impose on other languages?

Looking at Scripture authors, noticed all of them had Jewish cultural experience (and most, if not all, were Jewish descendants of Abraham).

Sermon on the Mount uses Jewish style of expression, including rebukes of Jewish traditions that fell short of Loving Gd: e.g. Matthew 5:17-20 is one of the saddest sections in Scripture (compares with Matthew 15:1-9) as some scribes and Pharisees set out to study Scripture intently while somewhere along the way failing to guard their heart to truly Love Gd so they transformed into looking righteous while not being righteous. Literally they knew the letter of the law from memorizing Torah (along with memorizing Jewish oral law and traditions). Hebrew letter Jod corresponds to Greek iota (smallest letter of each alphabet). Stroke or tittle corresponds to Chirek κεραια, the smallest Hebrew vowel point, a dot.

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus What culture is vital for understanding & interpreting Scripture text ?#

@Wolfgang It is essential or vital to a correct understanding of Scripture to understand the respective culture of the day and time and people which are spoken of etc ... which only in part may have reference to "Jewish". Was Abraham a Jew?

Yes while remembering Abraham's faith was counted as Righteousness by Gd (Genesis 15:6 & Romans 4) so faith preceded Gd's promise and circumcision (Genesis 17). Paul's writings show Jewish style (and learning: e.g. Galatians 5:4 (CJB) 'For the whole of the Torah is summed up in this one sentence: “Love your neighbor as yourself”', which assumes Jewish reciting of The Shema: Deuteronomy 6:4-9, Deuteronomy 11:13–21, Numbers 15:37–41 twice daily). Sadly some scribes and Pharisees said The Shema words twice daily while their hearts went astray from One Gd.

Keep Smiling 😊

[Deleted User]

@Keep_Smiling_4_Jesus Unbelief about who Jesus is hinders understanding of who Gd is.

Exactly ... such unbelief is major reason for people to worship THREE as God instead of just One.