Results 1 - 12 of 12
|
|
|||||
Results from: Notes Author: Andy S. Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | die in your sins | John 8:24 | Andy S. | 234576 | ||
Hey EdB, Good to hear from you again. That is a great question. It's probably the best question I've received since being on this forum. Tim is saying that because Jesus is saying "I am" in John 8:24 that one must believe that Jesus is Jehovah or they will "die in their sins". Tim, like most "orthodox" Christians, is saying that Jesus is claiming the Divine Title found in Exodus 3:14 ("I am"). So the verse would loosly read, "...unless you believe that I am Yahweh, you shall die in your sins." I have found this verse to be extremely controversial within the Christian Community. If you read this entire thread you will see that I am challenging Tim's claim that this "I am" statement is a verb and not a Title. The other thread to read concerning this topic is entitled "I am who I am". I think you know of this thread because I tried to answer one of your questions. Some of his best evidence is the way the Jews reacted in John 8:58 when he again said "I am". This is the only verse in the whole Bible that makes it a requirement to believe that Jesus is actually Jehovah. In other words, according to Tim's interpretation, people must believe that Jesus is the Son of God and God. To answer your question, I would say nothing is different from John 8:24 to the two "I am's" in John 8:23. Tim has a different opinion which he does a good job explaining his position in this thread. When I started questioning this verse I had the exact question as you. I think Tim is reading waaaay too much into these "I am" statements. The debate is really over if this "I am" statement is just a verb or a title. There is really no easy answer and all Tim and I really have is circumstantial evidence. This verse either adds to the doctrine of salvation or subtracts from the doctrine of salvation depending on how you interpret it. I had a problem with this verse in my Christian walk because I wasn't saved under the impression that Jesus was the Son of God and God. I had no idea what the definition of Trinity was. 6 months after I was saved I found out from my pastor that I would "die in my sins" if I didn't believe Jesus was also God. I was only under the impression that God sent his Son and Jesus loved and obeyed His Father and that is why He was the perfect atonement for my sins. I was not under the impression that God loved and obeyed Himself that He sacrificed Himself to Himself to atone for the sins of the world. My former pastor told me that if I didn't accept that Yahweh and Jesus were co-eternal, co-equal, and con-substantial then I would "die in my sins" according to his interpretation of John 8:24. I hope this helps a little. I would encourage you to keep an eye on this thread. Tim and I have laid a foundation for a great debate. He seems very intelligent. God Bless, Andy |
||||||
2 | Interpret John 8:24 | John 8:24 | Andy S. | 234556 | ||
Hey Tim, It looks like I'm not the only one who thinks you are dodging this question. Servetus is right. I never said my former pastor said I had to UNDERSTAND how Jesus is Yahweh, he said I just have to BELIEVE Jesus is Yahweh. These are two totally different things. Tim, if someone could truly understand every aspect of how the Son of God can actually be the Supreme God himself, the person could make millions of dollars writing books about this. I said I agree with you that our finite minds cannot fully comprehend God. So I repeat: My pastor did not say I have to UNDERSTAND any of this. He only said I have to BELIEVE it. I remember him even referencing the Samson story and saying you don't have to understand how Samson's hair gives him strength, you only have to believe it. So back to the same wording in the hypothetical scenario in the coffee shop I gave you. I really don't see how you would have any disagreement. My former pastor is talking to you and says, "People will 'die in their sins' if they don't BELIEVE Jesus is co-equal, co-eternal and con-substantial (one being) with the person of Jehovah. If Jesus is claiming to be Jehovah then He is obviously claiming to be the "being" of Jehovah". So Tim, sorry for the misunderstanding. But knowing that my former pastor said nothing about the requirement of having to UNDERSTAND a binity, what is your response to his statement. Finish this conversation. Do you say I agree... or do you say I disagree because.... I can't move on if you are not honest with this. I'm not the only one who thinks you might be dodging this question. Servetus even said he didn't remember my pastor saying one must understand this. And then you completed the sentence in his post and said I disagree because one does not have to fully UNDERSTAND the nature of Jesus. You have not answered my question as "directly" as you can. I need to first establish the truth to your gospel and then I will let you know about all my presuppositions. I would love to discuss all the scripture you gave me especially the comparison of Mar. 13:6 and Mat. 24:5. I definitely think you are reading waaaaay to much into these "I am" statements. I look forward to our continued discussion on the truth to the gospel message. I hope you had a great Thanksgiving. God Bless, Andy |
||||||
3 | One thread? | John 8:24 | Andy S. | 234540 | ||
THIS THREAD HAS MOVED TO THE FEED ENTITLED "DIE IN YOUR SINS". THIS DISCUSSION HAS OVERLAPPED AND THIS 2 DIMENSIONED DIALOGUE HAS BECOME 1 DIMENSIONED. THESE ISSUES WILL BE DISCUSSED MORE IN THE THREAD ENTITLED "DIE IN YOUR SINS". | ||||||
4 | Was the blind man God? | John 8:24 | Andy S. | 234521 | ||
BradK, 1. I didn't say you agreed with Tim. I said, "IF you believe Tim on this issue". I want to make you happy Brad so I posed the question to Tim entitled "Do you believe in a binity?" He hasn't answered yet. If he doesn't answer that He does believe in a binity according to my definition given to him then I would question him being "well-rounded". If Jesus is claiming to be Jehovah then He is obviously claiming to be "one being" with Jehovah. 2. You say you are not aware that Orthodoxy holds or requires a belief in the Trinity to be saved. You missed my point to this post. The fact you had to know my credentials first clouded your comprehension of my post. My point is that Trinitarian Protestant "Orthodoxy" doesn't even know what "Orthodoxy" is concerning the requirement of belief needed for salvation. One leading Pastor who requires a belief in the Trinity is John MacArthur. If you have access to I-tunes I just listened to one of his question and answer shows last week. You can download this for free on I-tunes and it's the 9/5/11 show and he talks about the Trinity being a requirement of belief 23 minutes into this podcast. 3. What do I mean by Trinitarian Protestant Religion? Well, I know you like me to source the Bible but the words "Trinitarian", "Protestant" or "Religion" are not in the Bible. So Dictionary.com will be my source. 1. Trinitarian: The belief in the doctrine of the Trinity. 2. Protestant: An adherent of any of those Christian bodies that separated from the Church of Rome during the reformation. 3. Religion: A specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects. So put together I would say that it is a group of people who believe in the doctrine of the Trinity that separated themselves from the Church of Rome who generally agree on a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices. My point is that this religion cannot be true because people within this religion do not generally agree on a one specific fundamental belief needed for salvation. 4. You said you don't want to "waste your time" in dialoging with someone you know nothing about. I'm sorry but I don't think Jesus would agree with you. The Pharisees were the ones with the "credentials" and He was not concerned about their credentials? Did the Bereans ask for Paul's resume before they heard him out. No! They searched the scriptures daily before they accepted or rejected his claims. Brad, we definitely do not see eye to eye on this. The way people gain credibility with me is not by showing me their degrees. I could care less. The way trust is built in my eyes is testing the truthfulness of their claims in light of scripture. Brad, I don't remember ever asking you to dialogue with me. This last question, "was the blind man God?" wasn't even directed to you. It was directed to Tim. I could care less if you don't want to dialogue with me. Trust me, my feelings aren't hurt. You have added nothing to this topic. I'll be blunt. I'm a high school drop-out but at least I'm smart enough to google "Trinitarian Protestant Religion". Do I have an agenda? Yes! It is learning from others and proclaiming the truth to the gospel that I have come to know and love. Please do not chime in anymore. You are only slowing down this process. Tim seems much more passionate about the truth to the gospel and I'd much rather dialogue with him about the gospel and not about credentials. |
||||||
5 | Was the blind man God? | John 8:24 | Andy S. | 234519 | ||
BradK, 1. I didn't say you agreed with Tim. I said, "IF you believe Tim on this issue". I want to make you happy Brad so I posed the question to Tim entitled "Do you believe in a binity?" He hasn't answered yet. If he doesn't answer that He does believe in a binity according to my definition given to him then I would question him being "well-rounded". If Jesus is claiming to be Jehovah then He is obviously claiming to be "one being" with Jehovah. 2. You say you are not aware that Orthodoxy holds or requires a belief in the Trinity to be saved. You missed my point to this post. The fact you had to know my credentials first clouded your comprehension of my post. My point is that Trinitarian Protestant "Orthodoxy" doesn't even know what "Orthodoxy" is concerning the requirement of belief needed for salvation. One leading Pastor who requires a belief in the Trinity is John MacArthur. If you have access to I-tunes I just listened to one of his question and answer shows last week. You can download this for free on I-tunes and it's the 9/5/11 show and he talks about the Trinity being a requirement of belief 23 minutes into this podcast. 3. What do I mean by Trinitarian Protestant Religion? Well, I know you like me to source the Bible but the words "Trinitarian", "Protestant" or "Religion" are not in the Bible. So Dictionary.com will be my source. 1. Trinitarian: The belief in the doctrine of the Trinity. 2. Protestant: An adherent of any of those Christian bodies that separated from the Church of Rome during the reformation. 3. Religion: A specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects. So put together I would say that it is a group of people who believe in the doctrine of the Trinity that separated themselves from the Church of Rome who generally agree on a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices. My point is that this religion cannot be true because people within this religion do not generally agree on a one specific fundamental belief needed for salvation. 4. You said you don't want to "waste your time" in dialoging with someone you know nothing about. I'm sorry but I don't think Jesus would agree with you. The Pharisees were the ones with the "credentials" and He was not concerned about their credentials? Did the Bereans ask for Paul's resume before they heard him out. No! They searched the scriptures daily before they accepted or rejected his claims. Brad, we definitely do not see eye to eye on this. The way people gain credibility with me is not by showing me their degrees. I could care less. The way trust is built in my eyes is testing the truthfulness of their claims in light of scripture. Brad, I don't remember ever asking you to dialogue with me. This last question, "was the blind man God?" wasn't even directed to you. It was directed to Tim. I could care less if you don't want to dialogue with me. Trust me, my feelings aren't hurt. You have added nothing to this topic. I'll be blunt. I'm a high school drop-out but at least I'm smart enough to google "Trinitarian Protestant Religion". Do I have an agenda? Yes! It is learning from others and proclaiming the truth to the gospel that I have come to know and love. Please do not chime in anymore. You are only slowing down this process. Tim seems much more passionate about the truth to the gospel and I'd much rather dialogue with him about the gospel and not about credentials. |
||||||
6 | I am Who I am in New Testament | John 8:24 | Andy S. | 234510 | ||
Hey EdB, That's a good question. I think I accept the Tetragrammaton as THE Divine Name only because I think the Jews did. "A taboo on saying the name (Yahweh) aloud developed in Judaism, and rather than pronounce the written name, other titles were substituted, including Lord" (source: Wikepedia - Tetragrammaton). I've never heard anyone call God by the name of "the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob". I have always thought this was a title like the President of the United States. Your question was interesting so I checked if any website might agree with you that this is God's name and not a title and I couldn't find any. If you google "Names of God" I found the BlueLetterBible to give the best explanation of all the names of God. God Bless, Andy |
||||||
7 | Is your religion a true religion? | John 8:24 | Andy S. | 234499 | ||
Hey DPMartin, That was beautiful! When ever I feel that I'm clothed in Christ I feel like I'm doing everything in my power to obey His will. Your post reminded me of something C.H. Spurgeon said, "If you simply take the name of Christ upon you and call yourself His servant, yet do not obey Him, but follow your own whim, or your own hereditary prejudice, or the custom of some erroneous church - you are no servant of Christ. If you really are a servant of Christ, your first duty is to obey Him." God Bless, Andy |
||||||
8 | Was the blind man God? | John 8:24 | Andy S. | 234498 | ||
Brad, I have no authority. The word of God is my authority. I claim to only be a Berean. You shouldn't trust what I say! I wouldn't accept or reject anything I say until you test it in light of scripture. I have included Bible references to support all my claims. Can you give me an example of where I didn't? I have even given you my online sources. I'm sorry Brad, but if you agree with Tim on this issue then I feel that you are in direct violation of #2. If you believe the gospel requires a person to believe in a Binity to be saved then this belief is a personal attack on the authority of the Bible. We as Christians need to feed off one another to fully understand the absolute truth to the gospel. If you have read my other posts then you know how passionate I am about the gospel I have come to know and love. As you probably know, there are differing views concerning the requirement of belief needed for salvation. Some people believe you need to believe in the Trinity to be saved. Many people such as Tim believe that you need to believe in a Binity to be saved. And others like myself don't believe one has to believe in any aspect of the Trinity to be saved. If people disagree within the Trinitarian Protestant religion on the requirement of belief needed for salvation then the religion can't be entirely true. What you are left with then is trying to figure out what the truth to the gospel really is. As you know, adhering to the truth of the gospel is very important. In fact Paul wishes that anyone who perverts the gospel to be accursed (Gal. 1:6-9). So Brad, do you want to "waste your time" talking about credentials or do you want to join me in trying to figure out the truth to the gospel? God Bless, Andy |
||||||
9 | Did I answer your question BradK? | John 8:24 | Andy S. | 234497 | ||
Hey Brad, The reason I said look at john 8:24 in the Good News Bible was an example of how humanity can twist scripture to fit their bias. I think this is also the case for translating the meaning of the Tetragrammaton in Exodus 3:14 to "I am that I am". I responded to Tim (post ID 234494) if you want to read my response. I know you said that Tim has already given a "well-rounded" answer but I would strongly disagree. If you think that the verb "hayah" should be translated "I AM" then so be it. Your taking a 1 in 72 chance. And this 1 in 72 chance is connecting Exodus 3:14 to John 8:24 and perverting the gospel I have come to know. I know you say his answer is "well-rounded" but I don't see how. It boggles my mind if you agree with him. I love how you end your posts: Speaking the Truth in Love. That's what I'm doing. The truth to the gospel is sooooo important! Please Brad, don't take Tim's word for it and check into this stuff. There are so many great online Bible tools! God Bless, Andy |
||||||
10 | I am Who I am in New Testament | John 8:24 | Andy S. | 234495 | ||
Hey EdB, That's why I said the MEANING to the Tetragrammaton! The MEANING to the Tetragrammaton is said to be "I am who I am" which I think is a poor translation. I have had a problem with people calling God "I AM" as well. Look at my other posts for an explanation. You're right, the Tetragrammaton isn't found until verse 15 and 16 translated LORD (all caps) in our Bibles. I would have to respectfully disagree with you that God's name is 'The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob' as I believe this to be a Title. I think the Tetragrammaton (YHWH - Yahweh) translated LORD in our Old Testaments over 6,000 times is actually the name of God. Isaiah 42:8 makes this pretty clear. I hope this helps! God Bless, Andy |
||||||
11 | I am Who I am in New Testament | John 8:24 | Andy S. | 234494 | ||
Hey Tim, I don't understand your logic. Titles and participial forms don't mix. Let's start over. You said that "I AM" (ego eimi in the greek) is the Divine Title of Yahweh. Let's look at Exodus 3:14 in the Septuagint. "And God said to Moses, I AM THE BEING (ego eimi ho on); and He said, "Thus you shall say to the sons of Isreal, THE BEING (Ho on) has sent me to you." It is a HUGE stretch to connect John 8:24 to Ex. 3:14. If Jesus was "clearly making that connection Himself" John 8:24 would read "...for unless you believe that THE BEING (HO ON), you shall die in your sins". Titles to names use the exact words and not participial forms. So the title using the Septuagint is THE BEING (HO ON). We definitely disagree on this as you say "God uses it in a unique way in Ex. 3:14. I don't think so. I believe this connection was made by our biased translators. In fact, I believe that this connection perverts the gospel as it adds to the doctrine of salvation making it a requirement to believe that Jesus is Yahweh (John 8:24). Finally, I can't tell you what to believe. If you think the verb "hayah" should be translated as "I am" that's your choice. But I think it is very suspicious that it is only translated as "I am" in 1 verse out of 72 (Ex. 3:14). My source for that is BlueLetterBible. The evidence is clear. Knowledge is increasing because of the internet. I thank God I can check into this stuff through the use of incredible online Bible tools. God Bless, Andy |
||||||
12 | I am Who I am in New Testament | John 8:24 | Andy S. | 234465 | ||
The Tetragrammaton (YHWH - Yahweh) is the Divine name of God. The words translated "I am who I am" in our Bibles is the MEANING of the Divine name Yahweh. Just look up Tetragrammaton on Wikipedia. The reason I said it is poorly translated as "I am who I am" is that it is a reach to translate the transliterated word hayah to "I am". Just go to BlueLetterBible.org and look up strongs #H1961. Out of 72 verses the transliterated word hayah is only translated as "I am" in 1 verse (Exodus 3:14). If you research the Tetragrammaton on the internet you will find that the MEANING of Yahweh found in Ex. 3:14 has been variously interpreted. Some interpretations : "He Brings Into existence whatever exists"; "I will be that which I now am"; "I will be that I will be"; "I will become whatsoever I please"; "I am the existing One"; "I shall prove to be what I shall prove to be". The Septuagint (Greek translation of Old Testament) translates the meaning as I am the Being (ego eimi ho on). The only reason I believe that our Bibles today translate the MEANING of Yahweh as "I am who I am" is because they want you to make a connection to Jesus' "I am" statements in John chapter 8. Just look at the Good News Bible translation at John 8:24 if you don't believe me. I believe this is a perfect example of translational bias. The study of the Divine Name of God (Yahweh) is a fascinating study. God Bless, Andy | ||||||