Featured Pro-KJV but not a KJO

Not in His attributes and nature, but God did become human, brand new experience

 

Jesus is God.....

 

We disagree on God never changing.

 

Because He the Son of God became Jesus the Christ. As God He did not change to do this. But He changed how He was with God, John 1:2-3.

 

The Second person of God became Human, is that not changing?

 

Still was Yahweh. so being God, how did their relationship changed?

 

As Yahweh there was never any change.
And you seem to refuse to hear. What are we told twice about the Son being the Word, John 1:1-2? ". . . προς τον θεον." With the God.

 

John 17:5, ". . .And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was. . . ."

 

The Word was also 'the God"

 

Yes. As I understand this, it was a change of how He was "with the God." Not a change of Him being Yehwah, John 3:13, "And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven." KJV!

 

Still was the same God the Son though!

 

He changed from being "Just God", to now being both fully God and man!

 

No the Greek has ". . . και θεος ην ο λογος," and the Word was God." And as such that did not change when the Word change how He was witb the God, John 1:2, ". . . προς τον θεον." John 1:14, and the Son being the Word was the sole cause, John 1:2-3.

 

But He did not change being God, He changed how He was the Son, John 1:14, Luke 1:35, John 1:2-3.

 

This is one is mostly aggreeable

 

I agree.

" For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one."

That's why I love the AV.
I can get all that in one passage.

 

Your answer fails to acknowledge He was not "Just God," hut was also someone else being "with the God," . . . προς τον θεον, John 1:1 and John 1:2. Being the Son, John 1:18 (KJV) who appeared being Yehwah, Genesis 12:7, John 8:56.

 

Ok. Just for the record, I am unable to believe the words, "in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth," to be God's word there.

What I would like to know from you is how and why you come to believe those words are undeniably without a doubt orginal. This is important, Luke 4:4.

 

I'm having to confess my confusion as to why you don't believe that those are actually God's words.

1) To me, they fit the context of the passage perfectly.
Otherwise, it's like someone simply set a "speedbump in the road" regarding the flow of the text.

2) It places into one statement all the other references in His word that make mention of the Godhead ( the "Trinity" )...Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

Colossians 2:9.
Genesis 1:26.
John 15:26.
Ephesians 1:17.
2 Corinthians 13:14.
Matthew 28:18-20.
1 Peter 1:2.



Something inside me says, "Something's not right" when I see a translation that doesn't have it.
For example, in the NASB, it says, "For there are three that testify".
What are those three?
It tells me the Spirit, the water and the blood.

In the Av, I see a fuller reading of two distinct statements...
Three that bear record ( or "testify" ) in Heaven, and three that bear record in earth.
But when I read the NASB, I see only the ones that are bearing record in earth.



That's part of why I believe that they are God's words...
Because to me, something's missing in most of the newer translations in this area.
However, at the end of the day, you're free to believe whatever you wish.

I wish you well, as always.

 

Yet another thread being derailed by Y1 posting absurdity after absurdity. No wonder we cannot have edifying discussions of biblical doctrine.

God is immutable, meaning His core attributes and attitudes never change. He is the same yesterday, today and forever.
But if Christ's flesh was God and Christ was born a baby and grew into a man, then God changed. Hogwash from Y1.