Firstborn of/over all creation

This topic contains 3,654 replies, has 33 voices, and was last updated by  t8 11 hours, 59 minutes ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #265263
     WorshippingJesus 
    Participant
    • Topics started 50
    • Total replies 12,316

    Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 20 2010,15:58)

    Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Aug. 20 2010,11:24)

    Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 20 2010,11:05)

    Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Aug. 20 2010,10:51)

    Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 20 2010,09:21)

    Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Aug. 20 2010,00:27)
    Here is one…

    Hippolytus: Dogmatical and Historical Fragments

    http://ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-05/anf05-18.htm#P3712_1172813

    These things then, brethren, are declared by the Scriptures. And the blessed John, in the testimony of his Gospel, gives us an account of this economy (disposition) and acknowledges this Word as God, when he says, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” If, then, the Word was with God, and was also God, what follows? Would one say that he speaks of two Gods? I shall not indeed speak of two Gods, but of one; of two Persons however, and of a third economy (disposition), viz., the grace of the Holy Ghost. For the Father indeed is One, but there are two Persons, because there is also the Son; and then there is the third, the Holy Spirit. The Father decrees, the Word executes, and the Son is manifested, through whom the Father is believed on. The economy of harmony is led back to one God; for God is One.

    Again no “firstborn” or begotten God who had a beginning as another being.

    WJ


    Regarding Hippolytus and firstborn:

    Quote
    At the end of the four empires according to Dan 7:17-18 the heavenly reign will start
    (IV:10). Christ is the firstborn, the Son of God, to whom everything on earth and in
    heaven has been subordinated, the firstborn “before the angels” and the first born “from
    the dead” (IV,11).18

    http://www.sbl-site.org/assets/pdfs/Oegema_Daniel.pdf

    Hippolytus says that He was firstborn before the angels here.


    Thank you Kathi

    You have once again proved that they do not believe that Jesus is a God who was born from God as a seperate God!

    Do you think they were confused when they said the Father, Son and Holy Spirit is “One God”

    “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” IF, THEN, THE WORD WAS WITH GOD, AND WAS ALSO GOD, WHAT FOLLOWS? WOULD ONE SAY THAT HE SPEAKS OF TWO GODS? I SHALL NOT INDEED SPEAK OF TWO GODS, BUT OF ONE; of two Persons however, and of a third economy (disposition), viz., the grace of the Holy Ghost. For the Father indeed is One, but there are two Persons, because there is also the Son; and then there is the third, the Holy Spirit.

    (IV:10). Christ is the firstborn, the Son of God, TO WHOM EVERYTHING ON EARTH AND IN HEAVEN HAS BEEN SUBORDINATED,

    Get it, firstborn meaning everything in earth and in heaven has been subordinated to him because the term firstborn in eastern culture did not always mean first in time but spoke of one having preeminence.

    Their use of the word was in line with the prophesy of Jesus…

    Also I will make him my firstborn, higher than the kings of the earth. Pss 89:27

    WJ


    Keith,
    The firstborn “before the angels” shows a sequence.

    Also, I am not saying that there is more than one unbegotten God.


    No Firstborn “Over” all creation means all creation is subordinate to him including the Angels that were created.

    AND HE IS BEFORE ALL THINGS, and by him all things consist. Col 1:17

    WJ


    Keith,
    The Son is over all things and is before all things aside from the unbegotten God that begat Him.


    Polytheism and its roots is in Greek Mythology!

    WJ

    #265264
     Lightenup 
    Participant
    • Topics started 63
    • Total replies 10,307

    Polytheism would be those without the true nature of God.

    #265265
     WorshippingJesus 
    Participant
    • Topics started 50
    • Total replies 12,316

    Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 20 2010,17:19)
    Polytheism would be those without the true nature of God.


    Kathi

    Polytheism is the belief in and worship of other gods.

    Worshipping two divine beings is Polytheism.

    WJ

    #265266
     Lightenup 
    Participant
    • Topics started 63
    • Total replies 10,307

    Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Aug. 20 2010,18:03)

    Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 20 2010,17:19)
    Polytheism would be those without the true nature of God.


    Kathi

    Polytheism is the belief in and worship of other gods.

    Worshipping two divine beings is Polytheism.

    WJ


    Keith,
    What is it called when you worship the begotten God as if He were the unbegotten God and the only true God?

    #265267
     WorshippingJesus 
    Participant
    • Topics started 50
    • Total replies 12,316

    Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 20 2010,18:08)

    Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Aug. 20 2010,18:03)

    Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 20 2010,17:19)
    Polytheism would be those without the true nature of God.


    Kathi

    Polytheism is the belief in and worship of other gods.

    Worshipping two divine beings is Polytheism.

    WJ


    Keith,
    What is it called when you worship the begotten God as if He were the unbegotten God and the only true God?


    Kathi

    I believe there is “One True God, one divine being who consist of three persons, the Father Son and Holy Spirit.

    WJ

    #265268
     Lightenup 
    Participant
    • Topics started 63
    • Total replies 10,307

    Well, Keith, I could ask you to tell me how many minds and wills the one divine being has and what the name of that one divine being is but I think we are getting off topic. I'm more interested in filling this thread with quotes about what the ante-nicene church father's understood about the name, 'Firstborn of/over all creation.'

    #265247
     t8 
    Participant
    • Topics started 895
    • Total replies 18,419

    Quote
    “There was; then, a Word importing an unbeginning eternity; as
    also the Word itself, that is, the Son of God, who being, by equality
    of substance, one with the Father, is eternal and uncreate.”


    These early church fathers often speak of the logos as an attribute of
    God and also as the Word himself, Christ.

    So it could just be a lack of understanding on your part WJ, as to
    what that sentence is saying.

    e.g.,

    God begat before all creatures a Beginning, a certain
    Reasonable Power from Himself, who is called by the Holy Spirit, now
    the Glory of the Lord, now the Son, again Wisdom, again an Angel, then
    God, and then Lord and Logos; and on another occasion He calls himself
    Captain, when He appeared in human form to Joshua the son of Nave. For
    he can be called by all those names, since he ministers to the will of
    the Father, and since he was begotten out of the Father by an act of
    will, just as we see happening among ourselves: for when we give out
    some word, we beget the word, yet not by abscission, so as to lessen
    the word in us, when we give it out, and just as we see also happening
    in the case of a fire, which is not lessened when it has kindled, but
    remains the same, and that which has been kindled by it likewise
    appears to exist by itself, not diminishing that from which it was
    kindled. The Word of Wisdom, who is himself this God begotten of the
    Father of all things, and Word, and Wisdom, and Power, and the Glory
    of the Begetter.

    Second Apology – Justin Martyr (ca. 150 A.D)

    #265236
     t8 
    Participant
    • Topics started 895
    • Total replies 18,419

    This whole idea about God, begatting another God would mean that the second God was not the only true one by reason of that position already being filled. The LORD thy God is one God.

    However, the word 'theos' can be used to not only identify, but qualify or talk of ones nature or office.

    So God could well begat another who has the nature of God. i.e., the Divine begats a being of divine nature. What other nature would the first have anyway?

    We know that Eve came from Adam, so is it wrong to say that from Adam came another adam (man/kind). No that is scriptural as it says that God made adam both male and female.

    Is it wrong then to say that from Adam came another Adam? Yes that is wrong, because Adam identifies the first man, and adam is the word for man(kind), and Eve was not Adam. No 2 different people.

    So Eve was not Adam, but she was adam.
    Similarly, Jesus is not the Divine, but he is divine.

    Just a difference in the way the word is used. Identity or qualitative. Most Trinitarians do not understand this, although a number of their scholars do, but still remain adamant that even though the Word was divine, that this still makes him God by their definition.

    Also, because Trinitarians on the whole have no concept of how the word 'theos' can be used to identify or to qualify, they also read the Early Fathers work as supporting their view due to this same ignorance.

    #265269
     JustAskin 
    Member
    • Topics started 3
    • Total replies 3,045

    WJ,

    But you do not believe so by your own thought but by the indoctrination of the abomination.

    #265270
     terraricca 
    Participant
    • Topics started 67
    • Total replies 28,224

    Quote (JustAskin @ Aug. 22 2010,06:29)
    WJ,

    But you do not believe so by your own thought but by the indoctrination of the abomination.


    JA

    you just bring things to the truth and see not answer.

    Pierre

    #265271
     WorshippingJesus 
    Participant
    • Topics started 50
    • Total replies 12,316

    Quote (t8 @ Aug. 21 2010,03:50)

    Quote
    “There was; then, a Word importing an unbeginning eternity; as
    also the Word itself, that is, the Son of God, who being, by equality
    of substance, one with the Father, is eternal and uncreate.”


    These early church fathers often speak of the logos as an attribute of
    God and also as the Word himself, Christ.

    So it could just be a lack of understanding on your part WJ, as to
    what that sentence is saying.

    e.g.,

    God begat before all creatures a Beginning, a certain
    Reasonable Power from Himself, who is called by the Holy Spirit, now
    the Glory of the Lord, now the Son, again Wisdom, again an Angel, then
    God, and then Lord and Logos; and on another occasion He calls himself
    Captain, when He appeared in human form to Joshua the son of Nave. For
    he can be called by all those names, since he ministers to the will of
    the Father, and since he was begotten out of the Father by an act of
    will, just as we see happening among ourselves: for when we give out
    some word, we beget the word, yet not by abscission, so as to lessen
    the word in us, when we give it out, and just as we see also happening
    in the case of a fire, which is not lessened when it has kindled, but
    remains the same, and that which has been kindled by it likewise
    appears to exist by itself, not diminishing that from which it was
    kindled. The Word of Wisdom, who is himself this God begotten of the
    Father of all things, and Word, and Wisdom, and Power, and the Glory
    of the Begetter.

    Second Apology – Justin Martyr (ca. 150 A.D)


    t8

    Justin Martyr also wrote these quotes…

  • 150 AD Justin Martyr “The Father of the universe has a Son, who also being the first begotten Word of God, “is even God.” (Justin Martyr, First Apology, ch 63)

    He didn't replace the word “thoes” God with “divine” did he?

  • 150 AD Justin Martyr “Christ is called both God and Lord of hosts.” (Dialogue with Trypho, ch, 36)

    Here he says he is both “God and Lord of hosts”, and we know that the “Lord of hosts” is YHWH.

  • 150 AD Justin Martyr “Therefore these words testify explicitly that He [Christ] is witnessed to by Him who established these things, “as deserving to be worshipped, as God and as Christ.” – Dialogue with Trypho, ch. 63.

    Again, we see here he didn't replace the word “theos”, God with the word “divine” and infact says that he worships him as God. Was he a Polytheist?

  • 150 AD Justin Martyr “And Trypho said, “You endeavor to prove an incredible and well-nigh impossible thing;[namely], that God endured to be born and become man…some Scriptures which we mention, and which expressly prove that Christ was to suffer, “to be worshipped, and to be called God“, and which I have already recited to you, do refer indeed to Christ.” (Dialogue with Trypho, ch 68)

    Again, worshipping him and calling him God and not divine.

  • Notice what else Justin says: “Worship God alone.” (Justin Martyr, First Apology, ch 16) “Whence to God alone we render worship.” (Justin Martyr, First Apology, ch 17)

    Here we see Justin saying worship “God alone” yet he worships Jesus as God. How do you explain this?

    So it appears that maybe you misunderstand the Forefathers for without any equivocation at all they affirm that Jesus is their God that they worship as God and yet they claim their is only “One True God”.

    BTW Mike, he never calls Jesus “a god” either.

    WJ

#265272
 Lightenup 
Participant
  • Topics started 63
  • Total replies 10,307

Here we have Tatian who writes about the Logos coming into being and is the first-begotten work of the Father.  He didn't think that the logos was always a separate person but that it came into being.  I have said that I believe the firstborn of all creation was the first fruit of the Father.  This affirms that calling the Logos the 'first-begotten work.'

Quote
CHAPTER V.—THE DOCTRINE OF THE CHRISTIANS AS TO THE CREATION OF THE WORLD.
God was in the beginning; but the beginning, we have been taught, is the power of the Logos. For the Lord of the universe, who is Himself the necessary ground (ὑπόστασις) of all being, inasmuch as no creature was yet in existence, was alone; but inasmuch as He was all power, Himself the necessary ground of things visible and invisible, with Him were all things; with Him, by Logos-power (διὰ λογικῆς δυνάμεως), the Logos Himself also, who was in Him, subsists.433433    [See Kaye’s Justin Martyr, p. 161, note; and observe his stricture on Bull and Waterland.] And by His simple will the Logos springs forth; and the Logos, not coming forth in vain, becomes the first-begotten work of the Father. Him (the Logos) we know to be the beginning of the world. But He came into being by participation,434434    κατὰ μερισμόν. Some translate, “by division,” but the above is preferable. The sense, according to Otto, is that the Logos, having received a peculiar nature, shares in the rational power of the Father as a lighted torch partakes of the light of the torch from which it is kindled. Comp. Just. Mar., Dial. c. T., chap. lxi. not by abscission; for what is cut off is separated from the original substance, but that which comes by participation, making its choice of function,435435    οἰκονομίας τὴν αἲρεσιν προσλαβόν. The above seems the simplest rendering of this difficult passage, but several others have been proposed. [See note 4, cap. ix., infra, p. 69.] does not render him deficient from whom it is taken. For just as from one torch many fires are lighted, but the light of the first torch is not lessened by the kindling of many torches, so the Logos, coming forth from the Logos-power of the Father, has not divested of the Logos-power Him who begat Him. I myself, for instance, talk, and you hear; yet, certainly, I who converse do not become destitute of speech (λόγος) by the transmission of speech, but by the utterance of my voice I endeavour to reduce to order the unarranged matter in your minds. And as the Logos,436436    [Matter not eternal. He seems to have understood Gen. i. 1, of the creation of matter; and verse 2, as beginning the history of our planet and the visible universe.] begotten in the beginning, begat in turn our world, having first created for Himself the necessary matter, so also I, in imitation of the Logos, being begotten again,437437    [Supposed to be a personal reference to his conversion and baptism. As to “confused matter,” it should be kindred matter, and must be set over “kindred spirit.” See p. 71, cap. xiii., infra.] and having become possessed of the truth, am trying to reduce to order the confused matter which is kindred with myself. For matter is not, like God, without beginning, nor, as having no beginning, is of equal power with God; it is begotten, and not produced by any other being, but brought into existence by the Framer of all things alone.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf02.iii.ii.v.htm

#265273
 Lightenup 
Participant
  • Topics started 63
  • Total replies 10,307

Justin Martyr states that the Word is the firstborn of God, produced without sexual union.

Quote
And when we say also that the Word, who is the first-birth (i.e., first-born.) of God, was produced without sexual union, and that He, Jesus Christ, our Teacher, was crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven, we propound nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem sons of Jupiter.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.viii.ii.xxi.html

#265274
 JustAskin 
Member
  • Topics started 3
  • Total replies 3,045

t8,
Your post was spot on.

Terra,
WJ does see the truth but is afraid to accept it because it would mean alienation from his peers. Simple as!

LU,
As can be seen from the numerous quotes: Many people had many ideas about 'Jesus' but yet there is only one answer, one true answer.

Start by asking, 'What is [a] God?'

Then ask, 'Is it possible for there to be more than one God?'

Also ask, 'Can [a] God become 'not' [a] God?'

Try, 'What is the name of God?'

More, 'What is the name of the Father?',
And, What is the name of the Son?,
And, What is the name of the Holy Spirit?'

And also ask, 'Why is the Son called 'the word' of God if he IS God?'

And finally, but not final, 'How, can God [as the Son] die, and be raised up again to a MORE glorious position, IF he were already God before he emptied himself and became flesh. To what 'more glorious' position could he have been raised to….and yet….still be subordinate to the Father, as God…and in what relation to the Holy Spirit?'

#265275
 Lightenup 
Participant
  • Topics started 63
  • Total replies 10,307

Quote (t8 @ Aug. 21 2010,05:56)
This whole idea about God, begatting another God would mean that the second God was not the only true one by reason of that position already being filled. The LORD thy God is one God.

However, the word 'theos' can be used to not only identify, but qualify or talk of ones nature or office.

So God could well begat another who has the nature of God. i.e., the Divine begats a being of divine nature. What other nature would the first have anyway?

We know that Eve came from Adam, so is it wrong to say that from Adam came another adam (man/kind). No that is scriptural as it says that God made adam both male and female.

Is it wrong then to say that from Adam came another Adam? Yes that is wrong, because Adam identifies the first man, and adam is the word for man(kind), and Eve was not Adam. No 2 different people.

So Eve was not Adam, but she was adam.
Similarly, Jesus is not the Divine, but he is divine.

Just a difference in the way the word is used. Identity or qualitative. Most Trinitarians do not understand this, although a number of their scholars do, but still remain adamant that even though the Word was divine, that this still makes him God by their definition.

Also, because Trinitarians on the whole have no concept of how the word 'theos' can be used to identify or to qualify, they also read the Early Fathers work as supporting their view due to this same ignorance.


t8 and all,
What would be wrong with saying that the begotten was the true begotten God and not the true UNbegotten God? You still have only ONE true unbegotten God and Jesus is still a true God, just the ONLY begotten one.

Our God comes as a package deal…The Father together with the Spirit OF Him and Son OF Him. The Son is the exact image of the Father's nature and character and has all things the Father has, with the only difference being the Son was begotten and given all things; the Father was not begotten and was the source of all things.

If I think of the Spirit and the Son as much a part of the Father as His own attributes and always having been as much a part of the Father, whether yet to be begotten or proceeding forth or after being begotten (the Son) and proceeding forth (the Spirit); then I can see how the one true God, the Father, in His fullness includes the Spirit and the Son who are never separated from the Father. Where you have one…you also have what is IN Him and OF Him.

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 3,655 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

© 1999 - 2018 Heaven Net

or

Log in with your credentials

or    

Forgot your details?

or

Create Account