Is the Holy Spirit just an aspect of God?

[polonius]

In Catholic dogma, when did the Holy Spirit become a "person" of the Trinity such as the Father and Son?

[Claire Evans]

Actually Jesus Himself said He was divine.



John 8:56–59

56 Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad.�

57 “You are not yet fifty years old,� they said to him, “and you have seen Abraham!�

58 “Very truly I tell you,� Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!� 59 At this, they picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus hid himself, slipping away from the temple grounds.

IMPORTANT DISTINCTION: The writer we call John wrote what he CLAIMED Jesus said. This was 65 years after the event. If these claims have no substantiation in Matthew, Mark, or Luke (even though they were writing long after the fact also), John's story can be disregarded as just a "story."

Other than John, where else do you find "I am" sayings?

And doesn't John disagree with the earlier evangelists and have Jesus crucified on the Day of Preparation rather than the Passover?

What does that tell us about facts and "Jesus sayings" not contained in earlier writings?

There is no disagreement. They all state that Jesus was was crucified on the Day of Preparation.

Matthew 27:

62 The next day, that is, after the day of Preparation, the chief priests and the Pharisees gathered before Pilate

Mark 15:

42 And when evening had come, since it was the day of Preparation, that is, the day before the Sabbath,

Luke 23:

54 It was the day of Preparation, and the Sabbath was beginning.

John 19

14 Now it was the day of Preparation of the Passover. It was about the sixth hour. He said to the Jews, “Behold your King!�

[Claire Evans]

[Replying to post 17 by Claire Evans]


tigger2 wrote:

This old attempt at proof for Jesus 'divinity' has almost nothing going for it and should have been abandoned ages ago.

1. It is admitted even by some Trinitarian scholars and translators that the present tense ego eimi ('I am') can be rendered "I was" or "I have been." This would be preferable when we understand that Jesus is being asked how a man of his age could have seen Abraham. After all, in English we would understand that a man trying to say he was that old would say, 'Before Abraham came into existence, I was (or 'I existed,' 'have been,' etc.)

Claire wrote:

It has to do with context regarding what meaning of "ego [e]imi" is in a particular sentence and how it is appropriate when translated.

"An example of this is John 14:9 where Jesus says, "Have I been so long with you, and yet you have not come to know Me . . . " In this verse, "Have I been" is originally the Greek present tense 'ego eimi'; but here, Jesus was answering the statement in verse 8, "Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us." Since in English it is awkward to say, "I am with you so long, and you still don't know me . . . ,?" it is then rendered as, "Have I been with you so long, and you have not come to know me . . . ?" The translation of the Greek present into the English perfect tense is perfectly justifiable here because it doesn't make sense in English..."

Tigger 2: [[ 'I am' makes less sense in 8:58. Jesus was not Identifying himself here and therefore was not using a name, title, or definition of a name. He was simply explaining (since that is what he had been asked) that he existed even before Abraham was born!




For such an often-used 'proof,' we would not expect any trinitarian scholar to use anything but "I Am" at John 8:58. And yet,

These translations (most by trinitarians) render ego eimi at John 8:58 as:

(1) “I HAVE BEEN�[4] - alternate reading in 1960 thru 1973 reference editions of NASB
(2) “I HAVE BEEN� - The New Testament, G. R. Noyes
(3) “I HAVE BEEN� - “The Four Gospels� According to the Sinaitic Palimpsest, A. S. Lewis
(4) “I HAVE ALREADY BEEN� - The Unvarnished New Testament
(5) “I HAVE EXISTED� - The Bible, A New Translation, Dr. James Moffatt
(6) “I EXISTED� - The New Testament in the Language of Today, 1964 ed., Beck
(7) “I EXISTED� - An American Translation, Goodspeed
(8) “I EXISTED� - The New Testament in the Language of the People, Williams
(9) “I EXISTED� - New Simplified Bible
(10) “I WAS IN EXISTENCE� - Living Bible
(11) “I WAS ALIVE� - The Simple English Bible
(12)“I WAS� - Holy Bible - From the Ancient Eastern Text, Lamsa
(13)“I WAS� - Young’s Literal Translation of the Holy Bible, 1st ed. (Also see Young’s Concise Critical Commentary, p. 61 of “The New Covenant.�).
(14) “I WAS� - The Syriac New Testament, Jas. Murdock
(15) “I WAS� - H. T. Anderson
(16) “I WAS� - Twentieth Century New Testament

(Partial list above is from my study link for 'I Am' which you obviously ignored. That's OK, I'm ignoring your link also.) ]]

How could He have existed before Abraham was born if He was not God?

John 1:1 corroborates this:

New International Version


In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.


I AM the Bread of Life (John 6:35, 41, 48, 51); I AM the Light of the World (John 8:12); I AM the Door of the Sheep (John 10:7, 9); I AM the Good Shepherd (John 10:11,14); I AM the Resurrection and the Life (John 11:25); I AM the Way, the Truth and the Life (John 14:6); and I AM the True Vine (John 15:1, 5).


Quotes from your site:

to be Jehovah when he used those two words because they immediately took up stones to kill him. [1]
But these Jews of Judea had already decided beforehand to kill Jesus! (John 7:1, 25) They needed no further incentives. Nothing that Jesus said or did at this point would have made any difference to them.

If the Jews had really understood the phrase "I AM" (ego eimi) to mean the speaker was claiming to be Jehovah and that they should therefore kill him, they would have immediately stoned Jesus at John 8:24 or :28. (The actual Greek in the ancient Bible manuscripts is identical to John 8:58, ego eimi, but many English Bible translations properly add "he" so that it can be understood as "I am he" in English.)

They did want to kill Him because of His claims that He was the Son of God but there would have been one further incentive and that is to claim He is also God Himself. That is the ultimate blasphemy.

We see that in John 10:33, the Jews gave the explanation of why they were going to stone Him:

"We are not stoning you for any good work," they replied, "but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God."

Jesus did not deny it.

It is clear that Jesus was claiming that He is both the Son and God as well which explains your contention when you wrote:

"'Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?' 'I AM [ego eimi],' said Jesus." - Mark 14:61-62. Again the 'absolute' ego eimi ("I am") as used by Jesus means "I am the Christ" and spurs the Jews to condemn him to die!"

As mentioned above, Jesus used "I am" in such a way that He equates Himself with God.

I am the light of the world

I am the way, the truth, and the life

Surely these can only be attributed to God?

And

“But about the Son he says, ‘Your throne, O God, will last forever and ever, and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom.’�

Whether one wants to translates ego eimi as "was" or "has been" or "am", it doesn't change the fact that this infuriated the Jews and they told Him why. It was because He claimed to be God as mentioned in the scriptures I posted above.

You ask a question that causes me to wonder if you have even read the Bible. You ask, "How could Jesus have existed before Abraham if he was not God?." What??? Haven't even ANGELS existed before Abraham? Are any of them God?

The angels were created supposedly before Jesus. We don't have any mention of Jesus in Genesis. Therefore He could not have existed before Abraham if one doesn't believe Jesus is God.

We have discussed John 1:1 ad nauseum, but I guess you have missed it. John did not write that "the Word was God." He wrote that "the Word was a god," or, "the Word was divine." ("Divine" does not mean "God.") A god to the first century population merely meant an important, powerful individual, such as even judges, governors, kings. You have not apprised yourself of the meanings of "god" or the use of articles in translating Greek into English.

Consult the Greek interlinear translation. This is was it says:

In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with (the) God and God was the Word. He was in (the) beginning with (the) God.

He did say God has the Word.

http://biblehub.com/interlinear/john/1.htm

We know that a power person cannot be with God right from the beginning.

And another thing, the greek word "logos" is used.

Both gentiles and Jews were familiar with the context of "word" and it was part of Greek philosophy and the thought of Jews back then. The "word" was known as the execution of God's will.

Psalm 33

6 By the word of the Lord the heavens were made,
and by the breath of his mouth all their host.

" And in Greek philosophy, the term Logos was used to describe the intermediate agency by which God created material things and communicated with them. In the Greek worldview, the Logos was thought of as a bridge between the transcendent God and the material universe. Therefore, for his Greek readers the use of the term Logos would have likely brought forth the idea of a mediating principle between God and the world."

https://www.gotquestions.org/Jesus-Word-God.html

All those "I am" statements are meaningless in trying to prove Jesus was saying that he was "I Am." Every person in the Bible uses that phrase constantly, every day. The blind man that Jesus healed used the same exact words (John 9:9), so is he God?

I am the light of the world

I am the way, the truth, and the life

If Jesus is all those things, then what is God? Is not Jesus taking all the credit for Himself? Is not God the light of this world?

Yes, anything Jesus said or did would be used by the Pharisees to try to kill him. They were always looking for ways to do away with him (John 7:1). They would jump on anything he said or did as an excuse. He never said he was God, and they knew it, but they twisted anything he said.

He DID deny that he was God! How can you trinitarians keep saying that he didn't??? At John 10:34-36 Jesus elegantly refuted their accusation!

He said "I am" hundreds of times, but so did other people! That must mean that there are MANY GODS out there equal to the one true God. Jesus did not claim to be God. Your Bible teacher should be dismissed.

If you are interested in the truth, check out these links:




Many Bible versions that do not translate John 8:58 as "I Am":

http://robertangle.com/ruminations/2012 ... -say-i-am/


http://robertangle.com/ruminations/2012 ... ighty-god/


.

You said that Jesus denied He was God in John 10:34

Jesus answered them, "Is it not written in your Law, 'I have said you are "gods"'?

What He was saying is why are they so uptight that He is calling Himself God when they give themselves the title of gods?

What made them get the impression Jesus was claiming to be God?

Jesus clearly claimed to be God and the Son. He claimed that He and the Father are one.

[polonius]

Claire Evans posted:

Jesus clearly claimed to be God and the Son. He claimed that He and the Father are one.

RESPONSE:
Were you there when he said that or did you just read it somewhere?

One of the places you could have read that claim was in the New Testament which was written 35 -65 years after the events described by non-witnesses.

Perhaps you will also have read the following passages that demonstrate that Jesus did not claim to be God.

“If you loved Me, you would have rejoiced, because I go to the Father; for the Father is greater than I.'" (John 14:28).

But of that day and hour knoweth no one, not even the angels of heaven, neither the Son, but the Father only.� (Matthew 24:36).

Actually, God and I are one also, at least we agree on most things. But when He is wrong I correct him!

[tigger2]

Claire wrote:

Jesus clearly claimed to be God and the Son. He claimed that He and the Father are one.

John 17:11 (cf. 17:21, 22) - "And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are." - KJV.

".... Holy Father, keep them in Your name, the name which You have given Me, that they may be one even as We are. - NASB.

[2timothy316]

Claire wrote:

Jesus clearly claimed to be God and the Son. He claimed that He and the Father are one.

John 17:11 (cf. 17:21, 22) - "And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are." - KJV.

".... Holy Father, keep them in Your name, the name which You have given Me, that they may be one even as We are. - NASB.

I guess we are all part of some sort of trinity?! Does then mean I'm one with all Christian world leaders? So, that means I rule the world right?

Funny, I don't feel schizophrenic.

[onewithhim]

[Replying to post 61 by Claire Evans]

You didn't answer the question. You said that Jesus had to have been God to have existed before Abraham. I said WHY? Angels existed before Abraham and none of them are God. So why would Jesus have to be God to have existed before Abraham?

[onewithhim]

[Replying to post 61 by Claire Evans]

John 1:1 is translated like this in the Emphatic Diaglott and in centuries-old Coptic versions:

"In a beginning was the word and the word was with the god and a god was the word."




No connection with Jehovah's Witnesses when they were written.

[onewithhim]

[Replying to post 61 by Claire Evans]

You completely ignored my reference to the blind man at John 9:9 who used the same words Jesus used at 8:58----"ego eimi."

If that man said the exact words Jesus used a few verses before, then shouldn't the blind man be God as well?

[onewithhim]

[Replying to post 61 by Claire Evans]

No, Jesus wasn't taking credit for himself when he said things like "I am the way, the truth and the life." He was saying just what his Father told him to say.

"I have not spoken out of my own impulse, but the Father who sent me has given me a commandment as to what to tell and what to speak....The things I speak, just as the Father has told me, so I speak." (John 12:49,50)


So when Jesus said, "I am the way, the truth and the life," he was doing so on his Father's orders. It was true, also, that Jesus was the means by which the Father saved the world of mankind, so he could rightly say that he was the way to be saved. The Father had supplied NO OTHER way to be saved.

[onewithhim]

[Replying to post 61 by Claire Evans]

I don't agree with your version of John 10:34-36. He was saying that God had called human judges "gods," so why were the Pharisees so uptight because he merely said that he was God's SON? They were obviously up to something. They looked for ANY excuse---fabricated or not---to accuse him of blasphemy (and when that ultimately didn't work, they accused him of being a traitor to Caesar).

He never said that he and the Father were the same individual. "I and the Father are one" simply means that he and the Father were like-minded. They agreed on everything. Have you noticed that Jesus asked his Father to watch over his disciples and sanctify them, because he was sending them forth into the world, and that they might "all be one, just as you, Father, are in union with me and I am in union with you, that they may also be in union with us....I have given them the glory that you have given me, in order that they may be one just as we are one." (John 17:18-22)

It's pretty clear from that what Jesus meant by being "one" with somebody. If we go by your version, then the disciples are also God, because they could be "one" with God and Jesus.

No, Jesus was not claiming to be God.

If he is, then the blind man is God and so are the disciples.