10
Hosea 11:9 says "I am God and not a man." But it says neither "I am God and cannot become a man" nor "I am God and cannot be a man", which the OP has put in the title of the question.
7
There are two or three passages in the Old Testament which declare something similar (Numbers 23:19 and 1 Samuel 15:29). In each case God is distinguishing himself against sinful humanity. The point is that it is his actions which are different from a man's.
At the same time, Jesus himself said "God is Spirit" (John 4:24). The Bible consistently ...
4
First, let me answer your question near the end of your comments, and then I will be able to give a swift, simple answer to your question in the heading. You asked near the end, “Why do the Jehovah Witnesses quote Professor William Barclay saying "it is difficult to be sure who is the actual speaker?"
The first point to make is that establishing ...
4
The New World Translation does away with any need for Jehovah’s Witnesses to answer the question you raise by employing the simple expedience of altering the words in these Bible verses:
Colossians 1:26-28 NWT: “the sacred secret that was hidden from the past system of things and from the past generations. But now it has been made manifest to his holy ones,...
4
Let's take these one by one.
Argument #1
This is indeed a tricky scripture for Trinitarians (the only one of the 16 that is), but scripture is not absolutely clear that it means the Father is the only true God. Among other interpretations are that 3 things are listed - the Father, the one true God (the Trinity), and Jesus.
Argument #2
Scriptures referring to ...
4
These are easy to answer, specifically because they depend on logical or linguistic fallacies.
Argument 1
"The Father is the only true God"
"The only true" simply modifies "God," and as such, "God" and "the only true" are interchangable; "You are the only true God" and "Only you are the true ...
3
God was manifested in flesh [TR - KJV : 1 Timothy 3:16]
Jesus Christ is come in the flesh [1 John 4:2 KJV]
That God is manifested in flesh and that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not at all the same as to say that 'God is a man'.
The scripture, in the original Greek, is exceeding careful in this aspect and although I support the KJV yet still I have ...
3
I will give my own "syllogistic" argument that proves the divinity of Jesus Christ and the divinity of the Person of the Holy Spirit. Obviously we already know the Person of God the Father is God. First I would like to define a "syllogism."
A syllogism in logic is a form of reasoning in which a conclusion is drawn from two given premises, ...
3
The maxim “in essentials unity; in non-essentials liberty; and in all things charity” is widely embraced by many Protestant churches (Church of England/Anglican, Methodist, Evangelical Presbyterian, Moravian, etc.). The phrase in its current form is found in Pope John XXIII's encyclical Ad Petri Cathedram of 29 June 1959, where he uses it favorably. In the ...
3
Background information regarding the state of humanity prior to the flood: The depravity and ungodly lifestyles of the entire world at that time were enough to cause the Lord to “regret that He had made man” (Genesis 6:1-6).
Now the earth was corrupt in God’s sight, and the earth was filled with violence. And God saw the earth, and behold, it was corrupt, ...
2
I believe that it is pointing to the prophecies regarding "The branch" (Especially as it is stated in Isaiah 11:1) but also something more for people to just study out of interest. IT could be pointing to "The seed of the women". instead of looking at Nun-Tsion-Resh as a single word in the Hebrew there are two instances where this appears ...
2
It is true that Jesus tells his disciples that they are branches in him, the vine. However, he nowhere says that all the branches in the vine are his disciples.
He nowhere says that any disciples “will be taken away and burned.”
Then who are the branches that will be taken away? Why are they removed?
They don’t bear fruit.
Why don’t they bear fruit?
...
2
How do Christians who adhere to the maxim “in essentials unity; in non-essentials liberty; and in all things charity” determine what is essential?
I would like to go to the origins as far as possible and try to understand what the presumed author meant by this diction.
The authorship has recently been traced to Rupertus Meldenius, an orthodox Lutheran, and ...
2
A Biblical Unitarian understanding is based on there being one God - the Father, and His human son Jesus. The spirit is the presence and power of God for good in all things.
Jesus replied, "Anyone who loves me will obey my teaching. My Father will love them, and we (the Father and Jesus) will come to them and make our home with them.
How does Jesus ...
2
[...] if Jesus Christ is not God how is it He can fellowship with billions
of other peoples scattered throughout time and space?
The Apostle Paul answers your question here (emphasis ours):
Gal 4:6 NKJV
6And because you are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying out, "Abba, Father!"(Holy Bible: New King James ...
1
[First] In the very direct comparison of John 3:31-32, How is it that 3rd
person singular can refer to person-hood in "he who is from the earth"
but not person-hood in "he who is from above"?
In the Greek text, "he who is from above" is not expresse with the Indicative Present (as in English) but with the Present Participle (ho ...
1
The argument seems to be based on grammar of the target translation language, not on that of the source text. The original Greek of John 3 does not echo this "two distinct He" mentioned in the question:
In all cases the Greek Ὁ is the same inflection: "he" is not represented by a 3rd person singular pronoun, but by first person singular ...
1
See also the Athanasian Creed (consider consulting one or more denominations' resources for better translations), which addresses some of these, and attempts, generally, to address the Trinity. I say "attempts" because at least some denominations believe it is impossible to perfectly understand the Trinity.
The Trinity is weird. Jesus is God (John ...
1
God, including Jesus, was in no way human at the time the Old Testament was written. It was only after the incarnation that Jesus took on flesh. However, in Old Testament times there were theophanies/Christophanies, where God/Christ appeared as a burning bush, an angel, or a man. But though those things were visible, Christ did not take on human nature at ...
1
Creeds & Councils
The answer is: creeds and councils. The creeds were formulated in order to give a summation and symbol of the faith for the early Christian communities, and the early (ecumenical) councils came together to mete out significant points of doctrine, often relating to the nature of Christ or the nature of the Trinity. Most all Christians ...
1
These verses need to be understood in the greater context of the New Testament. In isolation, they could be misconstrued as denigrating marriage, which they certainly do not.
Best modern exegesis on 1 Cor. 7:32-33:
Ernest Bernard Allo, O.P. (1873-1945), Saint Paul: Première épître aux Corinthiens (1934), pp. 181-83.
"is divided"
The Greek verb ...
1
I can't tell if this answer is too late or not, but.
I've always read this verse and wondering why it was necessary to show that the Son of Man has power to forgive sins "on earth", specifically. You see? He wasn't showing them that he had the power to forgive sins, but to forgive sins specifically on earth.
This never made sense to me until I read ...
Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible
