What does it mean ...

[BibleShockers]

>>>Do you believe that Jesus existed before He was born as a human?

No.

>>>What do you believe John 8: 58 has reference to?

Note that it does NOT say that Jesus saw Abraham's birthday but that Abraham looked FORWARD to Jesus' birthday, saw it and was glad. It should read:

"I am [present verb] before Abraham comes to be."

"Comes to be" is that aorist infinitive and often refers to yet future events.

>>>Do you believe in Ellen White's writings at all?

As I tell my sons, I don't believe in anything that you have to ask "Do you believe in...?" To the degree that evidence supports her understandings I accept them, but no further.

>>>Are you are Seventh-day Adventist? Have you studied what Seventh-day Adventist believe, and if so, what is your general impression of those beliefs?

My experiences on the personal level with SDAs is that they are, for the most part, exemplary in their sincerity and dedication. I am not one myself.

>>>Are there some you are in complete agreement with?

I know of no one on the planet with whom I am complete agreement, myself included.

>>>The divine nature of Christ was not tempted, true.

Is there any scripture on which you base this or does it just flow out of Trinitarian assumptions?

>>>But Jesus was also fully human, and as a man Jesus was tempted in all points just as you and I are. Heb. 4: 15.

With the exception of not having to contend with sinful flesh.

Bill Ross

[John317]

John3:17-- >>>Rule I.

When the copulative kai connects two nouns of the same case, [viz. nouns (either substantive or adjective, or participles) of personal description respecting office, dignity, affinity, or connection, and attributes, properties...

Quote:

BILL ROSS-- My point is that it is not joining two nouns but rather a noun and a phrase:

"the great God"

and

"our savior, Jesus Christ"

What kind of phrase it it? Is it a prepositional phrase? A verbal phrase? Adjective phrase? Appositive phrase? A participial phrase? A gerund phrase? An infinite phrase? No, is not any of the above.

Here's the definition of a phrase: "A phrase is a group of related words that is used as single part of speech and DOES NOT contain a verb and its subject." (English Grammar and Composition, p. 69.)

"The great God" does not qualify as a phrase at all, and therefore it is not a phrase of any kind.

It is a definite article and an adjective ("the great") together with noun it qualifies (God).

Both "our Savior, Jesus Christ" and "the great God" are nouns of personal description. They are of the same case, and are separated by the word "and". Therefore, by the rules of Greek grammar, they refer to the same person.

Here is the rule as stated in a Greek grammar text used in universities where Greek grammar is taught by the best experts in Koine Greek:

"With nouns connected by kai. The following rule by Granville Sharp of a century back still proves to be true: 'When the copulative kai connects two nouns of the same case, if the article ho or any of its cases precedes the first of the said nouns or participles, and is not repeated before the second noun or participle, the latter always relates to the same person that is expressed or described by the first noun or participle; i.e., it denotes a farther description of the first-named person.'

tou kuriou kai soteeros Ieesou Christou

Of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. 2 Peter 2:20

The article here indicates that Jesus is both Lord and Savior. So in 2 Peter 1: 1 tou theou hmov kai soteeros Ieesou christou mean that Jesus is our God and Savior. After the same manner Titus 2: 13, tou megalou theou kai soteeros Ieesou Christou, asserts that Jesus in the great God and Savior.'" (A Manual Grammar Of the Greek New Testament, Dana and Mantey, p. 147.)

Similar statements with regard to 2 Peter 1:1 and Titus 2: 13 may be found in numerous texts on Greek grammer.

[John317]

>>>Do you believe that Jesus existed before He was born as a human?

No.

Am I understanding you correctly to mean that you do not believe the person we know as Jesus Christ ever existed at all until He was born in Bethlehem?

He had no pre-existence at all-- no consciousness of any sort prior the first century?

I am thinking you may be speaking of Jesus of Nazareth and see him as different from the Christ, the Messiah. That is why I ask and want to be sure I understand you.

If you do not believe that Jesus Christ existed in any way before being born as a human, what do you do with such texts as John 17: 5; 16: 28; 1: 2, 10; Phil. 2: 5-8; Col. 1: 16; and Hebrews 1: 2?

[John317]

>>>Do you believe that Jesus existed before He was born as a human?

No.

>>>What do you believe John 8: 58 has reference to?

Note that it does NOT say that Jesus saw Abraham's birthday but that Abraham looked FORWARD to Jesus' birthday, saw it and was glad.

It says nothing about Jesus' birthday. It says, "Ego eimi," which words are translated as "I am," in John 6: 48 as "I AM the bread of life." In John 6: 51, as "I AM the living bread." Also used in "I AM the living water," and "I AM the door of the sheep," "I AM the light of the world," etc.

In John 8: 58, Jesus actually and literally said, "Before Abraham was, I AM."

And the next verse says his hearers picked up stone to kill him. Why? Did they want to kill Jesus simply because he was merely claiming Abraham looked forward to His time?

No, they knew perfectly well what those words meant-- they reminded them of Exodus 3: 14. They knew Jesus was claiming to be equal with God.

[BibleShockers]

>>>What kind of phrase it it? Is it a prepositional phrase? A verbal phrase? Adjective phrase? Appositive phrase? A participial phrase? A gerund phrase? An infinite phrase? No, is not any of the above.

It is a divine title. Per:

Ezr 5:8 Be it known to the king, that we went into the land of Judea, to the house of the great God; and it is building with choice stones, and they are laying timbers in the walls, and that work is prospering, and goes on favorably in their hands.

Ne 8:6 And Esdras blessed the Lord, the great God: and all the people answered, and said, Amen, lifting up their hands: and they bowed down and worshipped the Lord {1} with their face to the ground. {1) Gr. on}

Da 2:45 Whereas thou sawest that a stone was cut out of a mountain without hands, and it beat to pieces the earthenware, the iron, the brass, the silver, the gold; the great God has made known to the king what must happen hereafter: and the dream is true, and the interpretation thereof sure.

Tit 2:13

Re 19:17

>>>Here's the definition of a phrase: "A phrase is a group of related words that is used as single part of speech and DOES NOT contain a verb and its subject." (English Grammar and Composition, p. 69.)

"The great God" does not qualify as a phrase at all, and therefore it is not a phrase of any kind.

Yes it does. The words are related by tradition and form a single substantive.

>>>It is a definite article and an adjective ("the great") together with noun it qualifies (God).

Related? Yes. Has the verb? No.

>>>Both "our Savior, Jesus Christ" and "the great God" are nouns of personal description.

"The great God" is a substantive but NOT A NOUN.

>>They are of the same case, and are separated by the word "and". Therefore, by the rules of Greek grammar, they refer to the same person.

But the phrase is a substantive not a noun.

>>>Here is the rule as stated in a Greek grammar text used in universities where Greek grammar is taught by the best experts in Koine Greek:

"With nouns connected by kai. The following rule by Granville Sharp of a century back still proves to be true: 'When the copulative kai connects two nouns of the same case, if the article ho or any of its cases precedes the first of the said nouns or participles, and is not repeated before the second noun or participle, the latter always relates to the same person that is expressed or described by the first noun or participle; i.e., it denotes a farther description of the first-named person.'

tou kuriou kai soteeros Ieesou Christou

Of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. 2 Peter 2:20

Personally, I object to the word "rule." That is a governmental term not applicable to language. Granville-Sharpe is an observation.

Nor is it unique to Greek. It is strikingly similar to how English is commonly spoken:

"To my dad and friend."

>>>The article here indicates that Jesus is both Lord and Savior. So in 2 Peter 1: 1 tou theou hmov kai soteeros Ieesou christou mean that Jesus is our God and Savior.

I'm glad you brought this up. Notice that this sentence also uses a technical term: "the righteousness of God":

1 ¶ Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ:

So it is speaking of the faith (the righteousness of God) and our savior. Two distinct things.

A phrase (substantive) + a noun is NOT the same thing as a noun + a noun.

>>After the same manner Titus 2: 13, tou megalou theou kai soteeros Ieesou Christou, asserts that Jesus in the great God and Savior.'" (A Manual Grammar Of the Greek New Testament, Dana and Mantey, p. 147.)

Similar statements with regard to 2 Peter 1:1 and Titus 2: 13 may be found in numerous texts on Greek grammer.

Texts produced by Trinitarians, no doubt?

Bill Ross

[John317]

>>>What do you believe John 8: 58 has reference to?

Note that it does NOT say that Jesus saw Abraham's birthday but that Abraham looked FORWARD to Jesus' birthday, saw it and was glad. It should read:

"I am [present verb] before Abraham comes to be."

"Comes to be" is that aorist infinitive and often refers to yet future events.

Here's part of the evidence:

1) Young's Literal, "Jesus said to them, `Verily, verily, I say to you, Before Abraham's coming -- I am.'"

2) John Darby's Translation: Jesus said to them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.

3) New American Standard: Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am."

4) Amplified Version: Jesus replied, I assure you, most solemnly I tell you, before Abraham was born, I AM.

5) New King James Version: Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.”

6) New English Standard Version: Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am."

7) New International Version: "I tell you the truth," Jesus answered, "before Abraham was born, I am!"

[John317]

>>>What kind of phrase it it? Is it a prepositional phrase? A verbal phrase? Adjective phrase? Appositive phrase? A participial phrase? A gerund phrase? An infinite phrase? No, is not any of the above.

It is a divine title.

At first you said it is a phrase. Now there is a desire to say it is a title. Title or not, it is a personal name or noun referring to God. So let us say for the sake of the discussion that you are right and that it is a title. How does that change anything?

Savior is also a divine title.

What needs to be realized is that whether it is a title or not doesn't change the fact that it is a personal noun. According to the rules of Greek grammar, it is in reference to the same person as Savior is in reference to: Jesus Christ.

So, again, how does that change anything? Can you show me from any grammar text in which it says the fact that it is a title changes the rule in regard to Titus 2: 3 or any other verse where the rule applies?

If you cannot, then the point is meaningless. It is not relevant to the significance of the text.

[BibleShockers]

>>>Am I understanding you correctly to mean that you do not believe the person we know as Jesus Christ ever existed at all until He was born in Bethlehem?

Correct. He was (we are told at great length) born in Bethlehem about 3 BCE.

>>>He had no pre-existence at all-- no consciousness of any sort prior the first century?

None. He was a human being.

>>>I am thinking you may be speaking of Jesus of Nazareth and see him as different from the Christ, the Messiah. That is why I ask and want to be sure I understand you.

I think you understand me.

>>>If you do not believe that Jesus Christ existed in any way before being born as a human, what do you do with such texts as John 17: 5; 16: 28; 1: 2, 10; Phil. 2: 5-8; Col. 1: 16; and Hebrews 1: 2?

John 17:5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.

This says that God had a glory laid up before the world.

John 16:28 ¶ I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world: again, I leave the world, and go to the Father.

The "world" is the lost community. Jesus was sent to the lost community.

John 1:2 The same was in the beginning with God.

Speaks of the word, not of Jesus. (The word that was in the beginning: "Let there be...")

John 1:10:

10 He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.

There are two basic usages of the word KOSMOS:

* the sky/land environment

* the lost community

Since John says "they knew him not" he is CLEARLY referring to the lost community and NOT saying Jesus made the sky/land environment. Ok?

Phil 2:

5 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:

6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:

7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:

8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

The key here is that "form of God" refers to the "attitude of God" (and the form of a servant refers to the attitude of a servant). This is an LXX expression.

I covered Col 1:16 and Hebrews 1:2 elsewhere.

Your turn... what do you make of this?:

Mt 1:16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

Bill Ross

[BibleShockers]

>>>It says nothing about Jesus' birthday.

One's "day" was one's birthday. For example:

Job 3:

1 ¶ After this opened Job his mouth, and ***cursed his day***.

2 And Job spake, and said,

3 Let ***the day perish wherein I was born***, and the night in which it was said, There is a man child conceived.

4 Let **that day** be darkness; let not God regard it from above, neither let the light shine upon it.

5 Let darkness and the shadow of death stain it [my day]; let a cloud dwell upon it; let the blackness of the day terrify it.

6 As for that night, let darkness seize upon it; let it not be joined unto the days of the year, let it not come into the number of the months.

7 Lo, let that night be solitary, let no joyful voice come therein.

8 Let them curse it that curse the day, who are ready to raise up their mourning.

9 Let the stars of the twilight thereof be dark; let it look for light, but have none; neither let it see the dawning of the day:

10 Because it shut not up the doors of my mother’s womb, nor hid sorrow from mine eyes.

What day of Jesus did you think Abraham looked forward to and saw?

>>>It says, "Ego eimi," which words are translated as "I am,"

An EXTREMELY common Greek construction.

>>>in John 6: 48 as "I AM the bread of life." In John 6: 51, as "I AM the living bread." Also used in "I AM the living water," and "I AM the door of the sheep," "I AM the light of the world," etc.

Yes, very, very common.

>>>In John 8: 58, Jesus actually and literally said, "Before Abraham was, I AM."

Um, no. He spoke in Greek. What the Greek translates to is "I am before Abraham comes to be." Or, "I am before Abraham's birth."

Don't get too convinced by multiple Protestant Bibles. Look at the Greek yourself. You read Greek. In Greek, as opposed to English, by putting "I am" at the end of the sentence it is DE-EMPHASIZED. It would read more like "I am BEFORE Abraham comes to be." That is the more correct rendering of the emphasis.

>>>And the next verse says his hearers picked up stone to kill him. Why? Did they want to kill Jesus simply because he was merely claiming Abraham looked forward to His time?

Because he suggested that Abraham had to be born over - in the future.

>>>No, they knew perfectly well what those words meant-- they reminded them of Exodus 3: 14. They knew Jesus was claiming to be equal with God.

Nah, they didn't know Hebrew. In the LXX, Ex 3:14 would read "I am the being one." (hO WN).

Besides, why didn't they stone the man born blind when he said the same thing in the previous chapter?:

Joh 9:9 Some said, This is he: others said, He is like him: but he said, I am he. (EGW EIMI)

Or Paul?

1Co 15:10 But by the grace of God I am what I am (EIMI hO EIMI): and his grace which was bestowed upon me was not in vain; but I laboured more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me.

So if they didn't stone the man born blind or Paul they won't stone Jesus for using a sacred phrase - the VERY COMMON "I am."

Heck, I am. Aren't you?

Bill Ross

[John317]

>>>Am I understanding you correctly to mean that you do not believe the person we know as Jesus Christ ever existed at all until He was born in Bethlehem?

Correct. He was (we are told at great length) born in Bethlehem about 3 BCE.

>>>He had no pre-existence at all-- no consciousness of any sort prior the first century?

None. He was a human being.

>>>I am thinking you may be speaking of Jesus of Nazareth and see him as different from the Christ, the Messiah. That is why I ask and want to be sure I understand you.

I think you understand me.

Yes, I certainly do understand you now, for sure. I didn't earlier. Many people see a difference between Jesus and Christ. I don't but many do.

Boy would we have fun talking in person. I enjoy the topic very much. Some of your views on this and your answers are just like my good friends-- and I mean that-- the Jehovah's Witnesses.

So let us take this subject seriously and slow it down. I think you are going over some things too quickly.

[BibleShockers]

>>>Here's part of the evidence:

1) Young's Literal, "Jesus said to them, `Verily, verily, I say to you, Before Abraham's coming -- I am.'"...

John, I think you know Greek. I think you know that word order is not supposed to be brought forward into the target language. It denotes EMPHASIS. If these stupid translators would repeat this word order trick for every sentence, what kind of fiasco would ensue?

This is special pleading. There is NO LEGITIMATE REASON to put "I am" at the end of the English sentence.

YOU KNOW THAT.

Bill Ross

[BibleShockers]

Only a single word can be a noun.

Bill

[BibleShockers]

I'll try not to get heated.

Thanks,

Bill

[John317]

JOHN3:17-- >>After the same manner Titus 2: 13, tou megalou theou kai soteeros Ieesou Christou, asserts that Jesus in the great God and Savior.'" (A Manual Grammar Of the Greek New Testament, Dana and Mantey, p. 147.)

Similar statements with regard to 2 Peter 1:1 and Titus 2: 13 may be found in numerous texts on Greek grammer.

Quote:

BILL ROSS-- Texts produced by Trinitarians, no doubt?

Do you not accept anything that "Trinitarians" say? Do you reject all of their evidence?

Do you expect me to throw out all evidence by you since you are not a Trinitarian? Should I stop listening to you and considering what you say because you are not a Trinitarian? What if I were to judge everything by whether it is from a Trinitarian or Arian? I don't do that.

Therefore, why would you not accept something simply because it is produced by someone who believes in the doctrine of the Trinity?

To reject something on the basis that it is written by someone who does not agree with us is not a valid reason. We would be forgetting that people who disagree with us may be right.

The fact is we are talking about people who are professional translators of the Koine Greek.

Have you ever heard of Richmond Lattimore? He is probably the world's greatest and foremost translator of Greek texts. He has translated most of the great classics, including the Odyssey and the Iliad and the plays of the Greek tragedians. He taught Greek for many years at various prestigious universities. He is not a "Trinitarian".

He translates 2 Peter 1: 1-- ".... the righteousness of our God and savior Jesus Christ."

He translates John 1: 1: "In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God. He was in the beginning, with God."

[BibleShockers]

>>>...He translates 2 Peter 1: 1-- ".... the righteousness of our God and savior Jesus Christ."

I would love to talk to him. Of course, I can't prove my position (proofs are something you do in mathematics) but that is my reading. If I am wrong, then it is just another inconsistency in the text. Jesus is the "son of God" and such all throughout the text. Why would Peter all of a sudden drop this out of context? It is a goofy way to instruct.

The "righteousness of God" links "God" to "righteousness" which breaks the link to "our savior." It certainly makes the sentence *meaningful* but I can't prove it - Greek is as controversial as English!

But, given the whole body of the texts, Jesus is certainly presented as someone other than the father, and the father is presented as the one true God.

Bill Ross

[John317]

>>>Both "our Savior, Jesus Christ" and "the great God" are nouns of personal description.

"The great God" is a substantive but NOT A NOUN.

>>They are of the same case, and are separated by the word "and". Therefore, by the rules of Greek grammar, they refer to the same person.

But the phrase is a substantive not a noun.

In Titus 2:13, what part of speech is "God"?

What part of speech are "savior" and "Jesus Christ"?

[John317]

JOHN3:17-->>>...He translates 2 Peter 1: 1-- ".... the righteousness of our God and savior Jesus Christ."

But, given the whole body of the texts, Jesus is certainly presented as someone other than the father, and the father is presented as the one true God.

Bill Ross

Of course Jesus is NOT the Father nor is the Father Jesus Christ. Some do believe this, but the Bible does not teach it.

If you stay with this exchange I can prove to you from the Bible that Jesus Christ existed prior to His coming to this earth as a baby, and also show that Jesus Christ is God, yet not the Father.

So stay with us here. Come back often to this thread.

[BibleShockers]

>>>In Titus 2:13, what part of speech is "God"?

What part of speech are "savior" and "Jesus Christ"?

I don't want to argue this. I've stated my position, given my reasons. If I am wrong, then I will strike it up as an inconsistency in the NT - something that is consistent with my understanding of the bigger picture.

Bill

[BibleShockers]

>>>...If you stay with this exchange I can prove to you from the Bible that Jesus Christ existed prior to His coming to this earth as a baby, and also show that Jesus Christ is God, yet not the Father. So stay with us here. Come back often to this thread.

I can point to two verses that seem to say that Jesus pre-existed that I don't have satisfactory explanations for (maybe I can save you some trouble):

Joh 1:15 John bare witness of him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom I spake, He that cometh after me is preferred before me: for he was before me.

Joh 1:30 This is he of whom I said, After me cometh a man which is preferred before me: for he was before me.

And also:

Joh 3:13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.

I find that these verses read most naturally to suggest pre-existence. I find, though, that the plain sense of every other verse indicates that Jesus was born around 3 BCE (or is it 3 CE?)

Personally, I can live with not quite having a grasp on these verses for the time being and going with what I see to be the main body, main teaching of the text. I could be wrong - since these verses cloud my sky.

Bill

[John317]

JOHN3:17--

>>>Here is the rule as stated in a Greek grammar text used in universities where Greek grammar is taught by the best experts in Koine Greek:

"With nouns connected by kai. The following rule by Granville Sharp of a century back still proves to be true: 'When the copulative kai connects two nouns of the same case, if the article ho or any of its cases precedes the first of the said nouns or participles, and is not repeated before the second noun or participle, the latter always relates to the same person that is expressed or described by the first noun or participle; i.e., it denotes a farther description of the first-named person.'

tou kuriou kai soteeros Ieesou Christou

Of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. 2 Peter 2:20

Quote:

BILL ROSS-- Personally, I object to the word "rule." That is a governmental term not applicable to language. Granville-Sharpe is an observation.

Nor is it unique to Greek. It is strikingly similar to how English is commonly spoken:

"To my dad and friend."

"Rule" here just means the way language is used. The way it works, you might say.

Wouldn't you agree that there are rules of grammar in English and in Spanish or in Latin?

Here is how my old Greek text book, Essentials Of New Testament Greek, written by Ray Summers reads-- a standard in the teaching of Koine Greek--

Special use of the Greek article:

1. With the conjuntion kai

When two nouns are joined by the conjunction kai:

a) If both nouns have the definite article, they refer to different persons (or things), ho apostolos kai ho matheetees... These are two people.

If the first of the two nouns has the article and the second does not, the two are one person (or thing) ho apostolos kai matheetees. This is one person.

p. 130 of The Essentials of Greek Grammar.

If you look at every text in the NT, you will not find any that do not follow that rule.

Have you studied Koine Greek formally at a university?

Some of the things you are saying cause me to think you are probably self-taught.

Do you know of any text book in Koine Greek which teaches what you have said here, specifically regarding "rules" and Titus 2: 13, and also in respect to your idea that the Granville Sharp's rule does not apply to "God" because it is a title?

[John317]

>>>In Titus 2:13, what part of speech is "God"?

What part of speech are "savior" and "Jesus Christ"?

I don't want to argue this. I've stated my position, given my reasons. If I am wrong, then I will strike it up as an inconsistency in the NT - something that is consistent with my understanding of the bigger picture.

Bill

OK, but you said it was not a noun-- yet it is a fact that "God" is a noun there, as is also "Savior" and "Jesus Christ."

Can you give me the name of Greek text book that says it does not apply in this verse? I can give you four that state that it does and even gives Titus 2: 3 and 2 Peter 1:1 as examples of it.

[John317]

Well, we are having just a good talk about something we both have a great interest in. I am not here to say YOU ARE WRONG.

Really I am here only to exchange ideas and views with you.

I leave the conclusions up to you.

All I will say at this point is that we have to be open to the way the weight of evidence leads us and not be so attached to a view that we are unable to change if the weight of Bible evidence is calling us in that direction.

I direct that remark as much to myself as to anyone.

[John317]

>>>Here's part of the evidence:

1) Young's Literal, "Jesus said to them, `Verily, verily, I say to you, Before Abraham's coming -- I am.'"...

John, I think you know Greek. I think you know that word order is not supposed to be brought forward into the target language. It denotes EMPHASIS. If these stupid translators would repeat this word order trick for every sentence, what kind of fiasco would ensue?

This is special pleading. There is NO LEGITIMATE REASON to put "I am" at the end of the English sentence.

YOU KNOW THAT.

Bill Ross

OK, let's try that and see if it makes any difference in the meaning,

I AM before Abraham's coming.

I AM before Abraham was.

I AM before Abraham was born.

Any significant difference? I fail to see it. If you see it, please point it out.

Three questions:

1) Why did the Jews pick up rocks to stone Jesus if all he was meaning was that Abraham looked forward to Jesus' time?

2) Did not the Jews claim that they wanted to kill Jesus because he was claiming to be equal with God?

3) Do you not see a connection between the "I AM" of John 5: 58 and Exodus 3: 14. (See LXX at Exodus 3: 14 and compare with Greek of NT.)

[BibleShockers]

>>>...I am not here to say YOU ARE WRONG....

I presume I am wrong at least some percentage of the time. I'm pretty sure I'm right a good percentage of the time, even when I have a hard time finding someone to agree with me!

But the whole Trinity thing - I mean - it isn't even taught ONCE in the Bible in any explicit way so I'm not worried if some of the texts don't seem to be crsply explainable to my satisfaction. I have a reading I can live with.

I CAN"T live with Trinity as it flies headlong into the whole of the Bible, where God's name is Yehovah, not Jesus! Jesus is consistently the son of Yehovah - he is said to be "the God" of Jesus!

Bill

[John317]

>>>...If you stay with this exchange I can prove to you from the Bible that Jesus Christ existed prior to His coming to this earth as a baby, and also show that Jesus Christ is God, yet not the Father. So stay with us here. Come back often to this thread.

I can point to two verses that seem to say that Jesus pre-existed that I don't have satisfactory explanations for (maybe I can save you some trouble):

Joh 1:15 John bare witness of him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom I spake, He that cometh after me is preferred before me: for he was before me.

Joh 1:30 This is he of whom I said, After me cometh a man which is preferred before me: for he was before me.

And also:

Joh 3:13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.

I find that these verses read most naturally to suggest pre-existence. I find, though, that the plain sense of every other verse indicates that Jesus was born around 3 BCE (or is it 3 CE?)

Personally, I can live with not quite having a grasp on these verses for the time being and going with what I see to be the main body, main teaching of the text. I could be wrong - since these verses cloud my sky.

Bill

OK, yes, those are good verses, but I think I can give you several dozen more like them, proving without question that he lived before He was born as a human.

1) Why do you think this baby did not have a human father but had the Holy Spirit as His father? Mary was a virgin-- never having had sexual intercourse with a man.

2) What does Luke 1: 43 mean when Elizabeth calls Mary the "mother of my Lord"?

3) Why is the baby called "Christ the Lord" from birth? (Luke 2: 11)

4) If He is not really the Lord and if He did not know from experience what God was like before coming to this world, how do you know He knows what God is like? What if "God" is only telling Jesus something that is not true?

5) If God only sent a proxy and someone made for dying, how does that show us that God Himself is loving?