- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
@divegeester saidNo. I Amen the Scripture because I have seen the sad result of what inadequate tamperings with God's word do from prideful unbelief.
That’s because you have been brainwashed into accepting whatever your church cult tells you the Bible is revealing.
Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him.
(Prov. 30:5 King James Bible)
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
@divegeester saidAnd God's word still says " . . . and the Word was with God, and the Word was God".
I’ve demonstrated how nonsensical the trinity doctrine is.
@sonship saidIf you were as interested in what it doesn’t say as much as what it does say you wouldn’t be in the pinch you are in now.
And God's word still says " . . . and the Word was with God, and the Word was God".
It’s doesn’t say:
- God is a trinity of three distinct persons
- these persons are co-equal
- the son is eternal
It DOES say “the son will HAND OVER the Kingdom to the father”.
Have another read through my “confused yet” post with an open mind and think about one person, one entity being revealed in different ways.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
If you were as interested in what it doesn’t say as much as what it does say you wouldn’t be in the pinch you are in now.
The "pinch" you boast of is pretty much the "pinch" the Jews were in when this Man came to them demonstrating that He was the Son of God. He told them that He was the "I am" at that moment who was before Abraham existed. This intolerable "pinch" drove them to pick up stones to execute Jesus for blasphemy.
I have no doubt God was manifested there as two persons [to borrow the word]. But it was two persons [to borrow "persons"] at one time.
" Jesus therefore said to them, When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am, and that I can do nothing from Myself, but as My Father has taught Me, I speak these things. And He who sent Me is with Me; He has not left Me alone, for I always do the things that are pleasing to Him. As He spoke these things, many believed into Him." (John 8:28-30)
Some believed. I believe. The Son of Man was sent by His Father and spoke the things taught to Him of His Father. And His Father was pleased with Him and was with Him. The two __________ are present in this moment in time.
"Jesus said to them, If God were your Father, you would love Me; for I came forth out from God and have come from Him; for I have not come of Myself, but He sent Me. Why do you not understand My speaking? It is because you cannot hear My word." (vs.42,43)
The two _________ are distinct and are present in the same moment in this chapter.
"But I do not seek My glory; there is One who seeks glory for Me and judges." (v.50)
"Jesus answered, If I glorify Myself, My glory is nothing; it is My Father who glorifies Me, of whom you say He is your God. Yet you have not known Him, but I know Him. If I say that I do not know Him, I will be like you, a liar; but I do know Him and I keep His word." (v.54)
Compare "you have not KNOWN Him" to "but I KNOW Him".
The God whom they have not known is at that moment known by the Son.
The two _______________ are presently existing at that moment.
Finally the last straw is had when Jesus says of Himself "Truly, truly, I say to you, Before Abraham came into being, I am." (v.59)
They were in your "pinch" of having before them a Man speaking of His Father being with Him, yet He Himself is the great "I am" of Exodus 3:14.
You see both He and His Father co-exist, were co-equal, and were distinct and presently existing at the same moment.
"He who sent Me is with Me; He has not left Me alone. . ." (v.29)
This is two distinct [persons] present at the same time.
It’s doesn’t say:
- God is a trinity of three distinct persons
- these persons are co-equal
- the son is eternal
Dive, the "I am" was the Son and the Father who sent Him and was with Him. Two distinct _______________. Jesus didn't say " I was ". He said "I AM" the same as God spoke to Moses in Exodus 3:14 in the burning bush incident.
It DOES say “the son will HAND OVER the Kingdom to the father”.
I noticed that a few English translations do render that passage as "hand over".
But this post is long enough at this point.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Have another read through my “confused yet” post with an open mind and think about one person, one entity being revealed in different ways.
I agree that God is manifested in different ways. But it should be obvious that it still alludes the limitations of our mind. He is manifested as distinct persons [borrowed] at the same time.
Near the time of His betrayal and execution He said:
"Behold, an hour is coming, and has come, that you will be scattered each to his own place and will leave Me alone; yet I am not alone, because the Father is with Me." (John 16:32)
This is the Father and the Son as two distinct persons in existence at one moment.
Right?
So for the Son to deliver up the kingdom to His God and Father at the close of the millennial age cannot mean that the Son's scepter, throne, and kingdom are not forever according to many places including (Hebrews 1:8). Otherwise it would have said His throne is not "forever and ever".
If there was co-equality and co-existence while He was on earth in John's Gospel why do you insist He cannot be so on earth in the age after the "delivering up" of His kingdom?
You must see competition where I see none. Concerning eternity it says in Revelation 7 -
"For the Lamb who is in the midst of the throne will shepherd them and guide them to springs of waters of life; and God will wipe away every tear from their eyes." (Rev. 7:17)
I see unspeakable coordination of the three of the Triune God and not competition. The triune God operates to dispense divine life into the saved as springs of waters of life.
@sonship saidA son cannot be king of kingdom he has “handed over” to his father.
Have another read through my “confused yet” post with an open mind and think about one person, one entity being revealed in different ways.
I agree that God is manifested in different ways. But it should be obvious that it still alludes the limitations of our mind. He is manifested as distinct persons [borrowed] at the same time.
Near the time of H ...[text shortened]... tition. The triune God operates to dispense divine life into the saved as springs of waters of life.
Period.
@sonship saidAhh, I wondered when you would need to downshift into “translations”. Ok go on then which ones don’t?
@divegeester
It DOES say “the son will HAND OVER the Kingdom to the father”.
I noticed that a few English translations do render that passage as "hand over".
Handed over” has suited you fine up until now, hasn’t it.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
@divegeester saidRelax.
Ahh, I wondered when you would need to downshift into “translations”. Ok go on then which ones don’t?
Handed over” has suited you fine up until now, hasn’t it.
Your sense of real time and what is timed in cyberspace activity are not always the same.
Over 24 hours ago I checked Biblehub and noticed a good number of English translations that read "hand over". I could have informed the discussion board of that the previous day.
I even saw "surrender". Weymouth - "surrender the Kingdom to God"
One reason for delay is my desire to study the matter. And this is not the first time in 10 years we discussed this very passage.
I may be mistaken. But I recall, I think, someone saying that the word deliver is the same as used when Paul delivered the gospel to the Corinthians. I think I remember the commentator saying that this did not mean that Paul was no longer in possession of what he delivered to them.
But I cannot find now where I think I read that.
If you want to enjoy the point that "hand over" has been found in a number of Bibles on 1 Cor. 15:24 go right ahead.
NIV - "hand over"
NLT - "turn the Kingdom over"
BSB - "hands over the kingdom"
BLB - "hand over the kingdom"
I also see
KJV - "delivered up"
NKJV - " delivers the kingdom"
NASB - "delivers up the kingdom"
ASV - "deliver up the kingdom"
CEV - "give the kingdom"
DRB - "delivered up the kingdom"
There is quite a spread of examples.
The interpretation that this dissolves the Son of God as the Son of God in any way is wrong.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
You cannot reasonably take this one verse and nullify so many others speaking of the Son of God as reigning forever.
Even during the millennial kingdom it is called "the kingdom of their Father."
"Then the righteous will shine forth like the sun in the kingdom of their Father." (Matt. 13:43a)
So how can I make an issue that it was NOT the kingdom of the Father even before He delivers up the kingdom to His God and Father?
Can't you see? Before the time of the end of the millennial kingdom Jesus said it will be the Father's kingdom.
First Corinthians 15:24 can't be unitarian ammunition against the three-oneness of God.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
In any translation this alleged eternal son isn't king in his own kingdom.
The trinity is a nonsense doctrine.
You said that the Father and the Son are one God - one Person.
I agree.
So how can it ever not be the Son's kingdom?
There is the other side of the mystery. The Father and the Son are two _________.
You see it is a great mystery. If I must bear ridicule for believing the One God is Father and Son and Holy Spirit - three persons, I am just willing to bear that criticism.
I cannot force anyone to see this. It is seen by revelation.
"All things have been delivered to Me by My Father; and no one knows who the Son is except the Father, and who the Father is except the Son and him to whom the Son wills to reveal Him." (Luke 10:22)
So I say it is best to simply amen the word of God and taste the living God in receiving Jesus Christ as Lord, as Savior, as the mystery of God.
I would have it no other way then what the word says - that He the Son delivers up the kingdom to His God and Father. I would not have it any different.
It is so peaceful to trust whatever God has told us.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
If He is the Father (which I believe He is) then both the Son and the Father must also be in existence at the same time for the Son to "deliver up the kingdom to His God and Father".
It is good to simply believe His word even though I be accused of being brainwashed by a cult FOR believing and trusting what God has said.
You inched closer to saying the Son hands over the kingdom to the Father and is demoted to being a prince. Did you read Daniel 7:9-14 ?
To Him "One like a Son of Man" was given by "the Ancient of Days" a kingdom and dominion. "which will not pass away".
So Who delivers the kingdom to Who?
You say the Son hands over the kingdom to the Father and His God.
But the Ancient of Days also gives to the Son of Man a kingdom which is eternal.
"I watched in the night visions,
And there with the clouds of heaven One like a Son of Man was coming; And He came to the Ancient of Days, And they brought Him near before Him,
And to Him was given dominion, glory, and a kingdom,
That all peoples, nations, and languages might serve Him.
His dominion is an eternal dominion, which will not pass away;
And His kingdom is one that will not be destroyed." (Dan. 7:13-15)
This is Christ the Son of God, the Son of Man coming with the clouds to heaven to appear before the Father and receive His kingdom. This vision pertains to Christ's ascension and inauguration following His death and resurrection.
The Son of Man's dominion and kingdom are "an eternal dominion".
Though the Son of God delivers up the kingdom after 1,000 years it is still the
Son of Man's eternal dominion, glory, and kingdom.
The brothers in the Christian church of old were justified to come up with the phrase "Triune God". That's what I believe.