Well, that's part of "working". Preaching is still "working". Preachers are "workers". Christians have "works" to do - to spread the good news to all nations. That's why our ministers are also called "workers". They don't take a rest in spreading GOOD news to all people.
But Israel were commanded to do no work on Sabbath. That's why they questioned Jesus.
🙂
You're answers are in the bible.........look it up....What was Jesus doing?
For one not working, and cooking would be working...everything had to be done a day earlier........even when Jesus was in the tomb....the women left when the sabbath was starting...they had to come back with spices and such after the sabbath was over...
Ok im just going to jump in here. Deb asked the question "should Jesus be worshipped?" and you (Jury) previously stated that he should.
I showed you the scripture about twice already but you haven't answered. Isaih 42:8. God says he will not give his glory to another. I conclude from this scripture that God he will not give what is his to someone else. Wouldn't that also mean Jesus Christ. Is he not also getting glory? God the Father would be the one who allowed Jesus to do all that he did, would it not be his glory? He gave the power and it was because of the Father Jesus was able to do what he did?
Also I have another simple question I would like you to clarify.
John said in the beginning of the book of John,
"In the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the word was God" (John 1:1).
John later goes on to say the word was made flesh. So if the Word is GOD. And then the word was made FLESH doesn't that make Jesus God?
What do you conclude from that?
I showed this scripture previously on this thread but the answer I got was "the question is what does fully really mean?". I felt that was kind of lame so maybe you can explain that for me.
Colossians 2:9 says "For in Him (Jesus) dwelleth the fulness of the Godhead bodily"
It also goes on to say in 2:10 that he is the head of all principality and power. That sounds like pretty strong words for a person who according to you isn't God. Wouldn't God the Father be the head of all principality and power?
I also want to know why Jesus said to Philip "he who hath seen me hath seen the Father.†You didn't answer my question originally but just stated the following scriptures which i'll get into later. Phillip said to Jesus to show them the Father and why did Jesus say that he that hath seen him had seen the Father if that wasn't true? Basically reminding Phillip in puzzlement and he said that he had been with him for so long and he couldn't even recognize what was right in front of his eyes.
Also I would like you to clarify some of your views. Do you believe that the Holy Spirit is the Father or the Son or another person? Im still having a hard time understand what exactly you believe. Also, do you believe Jesus is divine in anyway? Im still having a hard time understanding what you believe.
Originally posted by Jury
So He is partly human and partly God? Why can't you just answer the question?
* i just answered the question... nope, Christ is NOT half-God and half-man... He is a God manifested in the flesh... what was human was His body...
Originally posted by Jury
Cite a Biblical verse that says "before Christ came to the world He does not have a human body". Or else, it will appear as your own opinion.
* i just gave it...
"Wherefore when he cometh into the world , he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me :"
Hebrews 10:5
* a body had been prepared when Christ came into the world...
Originally posted by Jury
Again, the verse is saying: we are in him [the Father] who is [b]true ... even in his [the Father] Son Jesus Christ [ever notice of the pronouns "him" and "his" who is considered "true"?] And who is this "true"? This is the true God and eternal life. The pronouns in this verse peejayd is consistent.[/B]
* and i just refuted YOUR claim... the eternal life who was with the Father is Christ...
Originally posted by Jury
Okay, prove to me that Jesus is the "God manifested in the flesh".
* The Word was God and The Word was made flesh... John 1:1, 14...
Originally posted by Jury
You didn't get the point peejayd. You were saying that the Father and Jesus are both true Gods. Now, there are two true Gods according to you, right? When you were asked to prove that Jesus is also a true God, you cited [b]John 10:30 which says "I and my Father are one". The verse is not saying that Jesus is the true God. Now, why are you referring to John 10:30?The use of pronoun "they" is simply saying that they are two in number. But not "two Gods". I am not saying that they are one in number. But why is it the verse is telling us that "I and My Father are one"? And you use to prove that there are two true Gods? Where is the connection of your "two true Gods" and Jesus' statement "I and My Father are one"?
That's what I am asking from you.
So, the Jews were both correct and wrong at the same instance? The Jews believed in one God. One in number. Not uniplural and 3-in-1 as Oneness and Trinitarians insist, respectively. They heard Jesus saying "I and my Father are one". This statement is a conclusion to His previous statements. But did the Jews understood what He said? You said, they understood Jesus. But no, peejayd, they did not. By that statement, they thought Jesus was claiming to be God. But no. Jesus was simply saying "I and my Father are one".
The statement can only have two meanings, peejayd. It is either:
1. Jesus is saying He is the God Himself, or
2. Jesus and His Father are one in purpose.The Jews reaction were natural, peejayd. But it's not necessarily that they understood what Jesus said. Since, they believe that the Father alone is the true God, they thought that Jesus is claiming to be the Father Himself. Thus, "I and my Father are one".
But the real reason is what Jesus had just stated earlier before He concluded "I and my Father are one." If you read the preceding verses, the Godship of Christ is not the topic there nor the Godship of the Father. Jesus is saying that He and His Father has one purpose of taking care of the flock [John 10:28-29]. They are one in accord.
But the Jews understood this? No. What did the Jews thought of Him? They thought that Jesus was claiming to be the Father Himself. Thus, "being a man, you make yourself God?". The Jews are thinking of one God - the Father. That's why they didn't say: "you make yourself also God?"
Now, didn't Jesus refute them?
Jesus answered them, "Is it not written in your law, 'I said, " You are gods" '? If He called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken), "do you say of Him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, 'You are blaspheming,' because I said, 'I am the Son of God'?
John 10:34-36
New King James VersionVery true, peejayd. Everyone who has power and authority is worthy to be called "god" and this is common to the language of the Jews, but they are not thinking of this as similar to God's Godship. Yes, Jesus is worthy to be called "god" and "lord" as kings of the world because He Himself is a King. But is Jesus claiming to be God like what the Jews are thinking? No. Did Jesus refute them as "Why are you accusing me of blasphemy when I said, 'I am God'?" . Wouldn't it be the perfect situation to tell them the truth if Jesus was indeed God? Why not He answered them directly that He was God if He was really so? But, no. Jesus is not claiming to be God in the entire Bible. What He was claiming was that He is the 'Son of God'.[/B]
* the fact that the Jews tried to stone Christ because of blasphemy, that is, in the perception of the Jews, Christ is only a mere human and is pretending to be a God... and the fact remains that by claiming "He and the Father are one" and "He is the Son of God" is tantamount of saying that Christ really is a God...
* funny how you see the word "existed" not literal while being a God because Christ is the Only Begotten Son of God is very hard for you to swallow...
Originally posted by Jury
A proverb [saying] is also LOGOS.Wrong. I am not saying that the Word [LOGOS] has nothing to do with Christ. If I did, quote me on that, or else, you're just accusing me.
* i didn't say you were...
Originally posted by Jury
EN GAR TOUTW [B]O [COLOR=red]LOGOV ESTIN ALHQINOV OTI ALLOV ESTIN O SPEIRWN KAI ALLOV O QERIZWN[/COLOR]
John 4:37Ever notice of the definite article O there? So what if there is a definite article in every LOGOS found in the Scriptures? It doesn't prove it means Jesus Christ Himself.
"For in this the [COLOR=red]saying is true:
'One sows and another reaps.'[/COLOR]
John 4:37
NKJVGet the point, peejayd? What I am trying to say is that the LOGOS in John 1:1 can't be directly mean Jesus Christ Himself as a person. What we have there is an abstract LOGOS. The real meaning of LOGOS. Again, not Jesus Christ Himself. The LOGOS there is an abstract word which has something to do with Christ.
See the difference? I am not saying that the LOGOS there has nothing to do with Christ. What I am saying is that the LOGOS is NOT Jesus Christ Himself.[/B]
* The Word manifested in the flesh...