₦airaland Forum

Truthseeker10:
Oga John said no one has seen 'God'. What 'God' identity was he referred to?

He was referring to the identity of God that could not be seen.

Because he told us the Word, Jesus was God, and was seen.

Nachmonides:
Who is He? - He is God
Who is He? - He is the Son
Who is He? - He is the Word

.I said describe 'God' not 'He'.

Nachmonides:
He was referring to the identity of God that could not be seen.

Because he told us the Word, Jesus was God, and was seen.

But you said here that Jesus and God share the same essence or identity. So why the contradiction?

Truthseeker10:
.I said describe 'God' not 'He'.

God is a person.

Who is this person - He is God
Who is this person - He is the word
Who is this person - He is the son

Nachmonides:
God is a person.

Who is this person - He is God
Who is this person - He is the word
Who is this person - He is the son

So God is no longer an identity that two persons are linked to?🤣🤣🤣 na wa for this man oo.

Oga describe God not person.

Truthseeker10:
But you said here that Jesus and God share the same essence or identity. So why the contradiction?

Yes, his essence is his identity of what he is ( He is God)

Truthseeker10:
So God is no longer an identity that two persons are linked to?🤣🤣🤣 na wa for this man oo.

Oga describe God not person.

I thought we were talking about Jesus as is the focus of John 1:1

Oh, let me add to it.

Who is this person? - He is the Father

Nachmonides:
Yes, his essence is his identity of what he is ( He is God)

But you also said that Jesus and God do not have the same identity but they have the same essence. Why the contradiction?

Truthseeker10:
But you also said that Jesus and God do not have the same identity but they have the same essence. Why the contradiction?

You lack an understanding of identity


Identity encompasses essence and personhood.

Identity answers both the question: "What are you?" (essence) and "Who are you?" (personhood).

Nachmonides:
I thought we were talking about Jesus as is the focus of John 1:1

Oh, let me add to it.

Who is this person? - He is the Father

Oga is father not a person? I said describe God.

Nachmonides:
You lack an understanding of identity


Identity encompasses essence and personhood.

Identity answers both the question: "What are you?" (essence) and "Who are you?" (personhood).

So I can choose to use identity only for essence, or personhood.

Or I can use it for both.

Nachmonides:
You lack an understanding of identity


Identity encompasses essence and personhood.

Identity answers both the question: "What are you?" (essence) and "Who are you?" (personhood).

If identity encompasses essence and person, why did you say that Jesus does not have the same identity as God the Father but the same essence? Is that not a contradiction?

Truthseeker10:
Oga is father not a person? I said describe God.

God is a person

Who is this person? - He is the father
Who is this person? - He is the son
Who is this person? - He is the word
Who is this person? - He is Jesus

Nachmonides:
So I can choose to use identity only for essence, or personhood.

Or I can use it for both.

Here I answered your question Truthseeker10

Nachmonides:
God is a person

Who is this person? - He is the father
Who is this person? - He is the son
Who is this person? - He is the word
Who is this person? - He is Jesus

Oga you said person is different from God(identity) so describe God.

Nachmonides:
Here I answered your question Truthseeker10

You've not oga

Truthseeker10:
Oga you said person is different from God(identity) so describe God.

You're not following.

Identity can be understood in essence, can be in person

Are you asking for his essence?

I have described his person: The father and the son.

Nachmonides:
You're not following.

Identity can be understood in essence, can be in person

Are you asking for his essence?

I have described his person: The father and the son.

You are a liar for what you wrote in bold. You have given clear distinction to the three terms.
You said Jesus and God the father do not have the same identity but the same essence.
You also said that persons(son and father) are linked to God(identity).

Truthseeker10:
You are a liar for what you wrote in bold. You have given clear distinction to the three terms.
You said Jesus and God the father do not have the same identity but the same essence.
You also said that persons(God and father) are linked to God(identity).

Go and play, you have nothing to say.
I have said "I thought I was speaking to one who understands what identity means", I have also said "I can say 1 identity to mean - God, 2 identities to mean - God the father, God the Son"

I have clarified what the confusion in identity was, for you.

What I did not tell you was that identity can be understood in person and essence.

Nachmonides:
Go and play, you have nothing to say.
I have said "I thought I was speaking to one who understands what identity means", I have also said "I can say 1 identity to mean - God, 2 identities to mean - God the father, God the Son"

I have clarified what the confusion in identity was, for you.

Oga you are contradicting yourself. You said identity means God which is different from 2 persons(father and son) in John 1:1 and that two persons are linked to the God identity.

You also claimed that Jesus and God the father do not share the same identity but essence.

Later you said that Father and Son share same essence or identity.

so why are you playing smart by causing confusion with your terms. Can't you see how funny you are?

Truthseeker10:
Oga you are contradicting yourself. You said identity means God which is different from 2 persons(father and son) in John 1:1 and that two persons are linked to the God identity.

You also claimed that Jesus and God the father do not share the same identity but essence.

Later you said that Father and Son share same essence or identity.

so why are you playing smart by causing confusion with your terms. Can't you see how funny you are?

Then if you understood the meaning of identity, you could have asked, identity is broad and it encompasses the person and essence.

Modified:
Then if you understood the meaning of identity, you could have asked why I would say identity is different from person knowing identity is broad and it encompasses the person and essence.

Nachmonides:
Then if you understood the meaning of identity, you could have asked, identity is broad and it encompasses the person and essence.

Modified:
Then if you understood the meaning of identity, you could have asked why I would say identity is different from person knowing identity is broad and it encompasses the person and essence.

You are trying to play smart. You clearly said that God is the identity of which two persons(father and son) are linked to in John 1:1. So why should I ask about what identity means again?

later you claimed there is a difference between identity and essence.

You said Jesus(person) does not have the identity(God) of God(identity) the father(person)

Can you see your confusion?

Truthseeker10:
You are trying to play smart. You clearly said that God is the identity of which two persons(father ansld son) are linked to in John 1:1. So why should I ask about what identity means again?

later you claimed there is a difference between identity and essence.

You said Jesus(person) does not have the identity(God) of God(identity) the father(person)

Can you see your confusion?

It's you that misunderstood it. It was clear to me who understands that identity encompasses both essence and person. Since you highlighted it, I began to clarify it. I would not have clarified it if you hadn't highlighted it.

Why would you just take what I'm saying, I expect you to do your findings and bring your argument if you disagree.

Nachmonides:
It's you that misunderstood it. It was clear to me who understands that identity encompasses both essence and person. Since you highlighted it, I began to clarify it. I would not have clarified it if you hadn't highlighted it.

Why would you just take what I'm saying, I expect you to do your findings and bring your argument if you disagree.

If context is to be noted, from the beginning of this thread, my take has always been that God is both Jesus the Son and God the Father.

I never strayed from this.

Nachmonides:
It's you that misunderstood it. It was clear to me who understands that identity encompasses both essence and person. Since you highlighted it, I began to clarify it. I would not have clarified it if you hadn't highlighted it.

Why would you just take what I'm saying, I expect you to do your findings and bring your argument if you disagree.

Oga what exactly is your identity? Is 'God' no longer the identity?

If identity encompasses essence and persons, why did you say that Jesus(person) does not have the identity(God) of God(identity) the father(person) but the essence.

Nachmonides:
.

Daniel 7:13-14 shows a prophetic vision of the Messiah, as the "Son of Man" approaching God, the Father (the Ancient of Days) to receive eternal authority, glory, and a kingdom. His reign is universal, inclusive of all nations and languages, and everlasting.
.
We know Daniel 7:13-14 refers to a messianic figure, not just a human being, for several reasons:

1. The "Son of Man" is given everlasting dominion, glory, and a universal kingdom—attributes that go beyond any human ruler and are reserved for a divine figure (see Psalm 145:13).



2. In Jewish thought, coming "with the clouds of heaven" symbolizes divine presence and authority (Exodus 19:9; Psalm 104:3). This imagery aligns the "Son of Man" with God’s heavenly power.



3. Jesus explicitly identified Himself as the "Son of Man" (e.g., Matthew 24:30, Mark 14:62), claiming this passage as a prophecy about His divine mission and kingdom. His audience recognized this as a messianic claim. The Pharisees and Jewish leaders literally wanted to kill him for claiming to be the Son of man, accusing him of blasphemy.

But commonsense-wise, "Son of man" means man, UNLESS "man" has a different meaning here (God)

Nachmonides:
The phrase "a man of war" referring to God appears once in the Bible, specifically in Exodus 15:3 (KJV), and the context was that of the Israelites' deliverance from Pharaoh's army at the Red Sea.

More than once. See below. And nowhere is He called "Man of peace". But in the NT He is totally about peace. Makes you suspect God of OT is a bit different from God of NT

DaddyCoool:
More than once. See below. And nowhere is He called "Man of peace". But in the NT He is totally about peace. Makes you suspect God of OT is a bit different from God of NT

I thought you meant the phrase "man of war"


That only appears once.

Your argument about peace is a logical fallacy.

Modified:

It appears twice

Truthseeker10:
Oga what exactly is your identity? Is 'God' no longer the identity?

If identity encompasses essence and persons, why did you say that Jesus(person) does not have the identity(God) of God(identity) the father(person) but the essence.

Go back and read the whole thread. I have answered this question. You're still asking the same thing.

Nachmonides:
Go back and read the whole thread. I have answered this question. You're still asking the same thing.

You are a confused individual filled with contradictions. No one should take you serious on your teaching of trinity.

DaddyCoool:
More than once. See below. And nowhere is He called "Man of peace". But in the NT He is totally about peace. Makes you suspect God of OT is a bit different from God of NT

What do you have to say about this:

Isaiah 9:6, the prophecy about the coming Messiah refers to Him as the "Prince of Peace." (Alright you may argue that he's talking about the coming Messiah)


What about

Psalm 29:11 says, "The Lord gives strength to his people; the Lord blesses his people with peace."

Numbers 6:26 contains the famous blessing: "The Lord turn his face toward you and give you peace."