Trinity Debate – Hebrews 1:10

Subject:  Hebrews 1:10 proves the Trinity Doctrine
Date: Mar. 24 2007
Debaters:  Is 1: 18 & t8


Is 1:18

Hi t8, 

Here is my first proof text. I selected Hebrews 1:10 as I think it establishes Yeshua as THE Creator, as well as this it’s also got a fishhook in it for those of a henotheistic persuasion (more on that later). Here is the verse in the context of the entire Chapter:

Hebrews 1
1God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, 2in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world. 3And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power When He had made purification of sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, 4having become as much better than the angels, as He has inherited a more excellent name than they. 5For to which of the angels did He ever say, “YOU ARE MY SON, TODAY I HAVE BEGOTTEN YOU”? And again, ” I WILL BE A FATHER TO HIM AND HE SHALL BE A SON TO ME”? 6And when He again brings the firstborn into the world, He says, “AND LET ALL THE ANGELS OF GOD WORSHIP HIM.” 7And of the angels He says,” WHO MAKES HIS ANGELS WINDS, AND HIS MINISTERS A FLAME OF FIRE.” 8But of the Son He says, “YOUR THRONE, O GOD, IS FOREVER AND EVER, AND THE RIGHTEOUS SCEPTER IS THE SCEPTER OF HIS KINGDOM. 9″ YOU HAVE LOVED RIGHTEOUSNESS AND HATED LAWLESSNESS; THEREFORE GOD, YOUR GOD, HASANOINTED YOU WITH THE OIL OF GLADNESS ABOVE YOUR COMPANIONS.” 10And, “YOU, LORD, IN THE BEGINNING LAID THE FOUNDATION OF THE EARTH, AND THE HEAVENS ARE THE WORKS OF YOUR HANDS; 11THEY WILL PERISH, BUT YOU REMAIN;AND THEY ALL WILL BECOME OLD LIKE A GARMENT, 12AND LIKE A MANTLE YOU WILL ROLL THEM UP;LIKE A GARMENT THEY WILL ALSO BE CHANGED BUT YOU ARE THE SAME,AND YOUR YEARS WILL NOT COME TO AN END.” 13But to which of the angels has He ever said, “SIT AT MY RIGHT HAND, UNTIL I MAKE YOUR ENEMIES A FOOTSTOOL FOR YOUR FEET”? 14Are they not all ministering spirits, sent out to render service for the sake of those who will inherit salvation?

This verse comes from a chapter in Hebrews where the writer’s obvious premise was to demonstrate the absolute supremacy of the Son to his Jewish readers. It’s an apologetic work where the Hebrew OT texts are heavily drawn upon. This NT writer, like others, appeared to have no hesitancy at all applying to Yeshua OT quotations that exclusively reference YHWH. The OT quotations undoubtedly would have shocked the monotheistic Jews to the core, verses 10-12 especially so. It really is a christological tour de force, which reaches its climax in verses 8-12. It’s interesting to annotate the writer’s conveyances leading up to and immediately following verse 10. Here is a quick summary:

 

  • The “world” was made through Him (v 2)
  • He is said to be the radiance of the Father’s glory [Gr. doxa] (v 3)
  • He is the exact representation of the Father’s “hypostasis” [nature/substance] (v 3)
  • He “upholds [sustains] all things by the word of His power” (v 3)
  • The angels are commanded to worship Him [a sole prerogative of YHWH] (v 6)
  • He is called “God” (with the definite article) by the Father (v 8)
  • He is contrasted from false gods (v 11)
  • Is said to be immutable [an sole attribute of YHWH – e.g. Malachi 3:6] (v 12)

….and in amongst all these, what must have been startling affirmations (to the intended readers), we read this:

And,”YOU, LORD, IN THE BEGINNING LAID THE FOUNDATION OF THE EARTH, AND THE HEAVENS ARE THE WORKS OF YOUR HANDS;

The writer of Hebrews was quoting Psalms 102:25 which was, of course, written about the Most High God, YHWH, as the context of the Psalm unmistakably bears out:

Psalm 102:19-27
19For He looked down from His holy height; From heaven the LORD gazed upon the earth, 20To hear the groaning of the prisoner, To set free those who were doomed to death, 21That men may tell of the name ofthe LORD in Zion And His praise in Jerusalem, 22When the peoples are gathered together, And the kingdoms, to serve the LORD. 23He has weakened my strength in the way; He has shortened my days. 24I say, “O my God, do not take me away in the midst of my days, Your years are throughout all generations. 25″Of old You founded the earth, And the heavens are the work of Your hands. 26″Even they will perish, but You endure; And all of them will wear out like a garment; Like clothing You will change them and they will be changed. 27″But You are the same, And Your years will not come to an end. 28″The children of Your servants will continue, And their descendants will be established before You.”

Psalm 102:25 is a verse quite obviously written about YHWH, but according to the Hebrews’ writer it was, in reality, an utterance spoken by the Father to the Son. The Hebrew’s writer affirms that it was the Father Himself Who personally addresses His Son as THE Creator of the Universe! So here we have a clear elucidation of the Son’s exact role in the creation. To me this shows that the descriptive language in the OT dealing with YHWH’s act of Creation is, in the mind of the author, perfectly APPLICABLE TO the Logos.

Q) In what sense was Yeshua the Creator of the Heavens and Earth?

A) In the sense that was attributed to YHWH in Psalms 102:25!

Hebrews 1:10 shows that the pre-incarnate Jesus was the actual executor of all creation.

In anticipation of this objection (which I’ll paraphrase):

‘he was ascribed an attribute of YHWH, and therefore a passage outlining that attribute, on account of his role as agent’

…I answer:-

Would this not be a grossly misleading and irresponsible thing for the writer to do? He was no doubt schooled up on the laws governing blasphemy, and applying a verse that spoke of YHWH to a lesser being would certainly cross that line. Lesser beings are to be strongly segregated from the One true God, and no sound-thinking and scripturally-literate NT writer would, in writing an apologetic work about a lesser being, submit an OT verse that (even) ostensibly supports Him being YHWH. Unless of course He was YHWH, then it would be quite understandable. I would also say that IF the law of agency was being invoked here, and the verse simply shows that the Son is credited for having acted in the role of YHWH, then we should have other examples of this occurring with characters other than Yeshua. But can we find one t8? Who else in the Bible is ascribed an OT “YHWH” verse as a function of their agency? Maybe you can show me one…..

So, to legitimately extend this objection you will need to explain the writer’s rationale in applying this verse to Yeshua, even though He would have known He would be overtly misleading His Jewish readers about the identity of Yeshua and YHWH, and why he would risk contravening the laws governing blasphemy. You will also need to produce evidence showing that personages other than Yeshua, who likewise acted in the role of ‘agent’, have also ascribed to them passages from the OT that exclusively reference YHWH. Otherwise you are using a ‘law by exception’ as the very foundation of your refutation.

Just to briefly background the scriptural association between Yeshua and Creation, the fact that the pre-incarnate Logos was involved, in some capacity, in the creation of “all things” is a well established biblical precept. John 1:3, 10; 1 Corinthians 8:6; Colossians 1:16; Hebrews 1:2 clearly bear this out. For example, in John 1:3 we read:

John 1:3
All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

The statement “All things were made by him” is an astonishingly high statement to make of the Logos. And just to underscore this sentiment there is a exclusionist reiteration in the second part of the verse. There was nothing in the created order that was not made through Him. John could not have made a stronger distinction between the Creator and the “things” that He “made”

Paul concurs, writing an even more emphatic statement:

Colossians 1:16
For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him

The language here is unambiguous, according to Paul the Logos created all things, this is an unqualifiedstatement that details precisely what the things were:- “things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities”. Moreover, they were made For Him (Yeshua). Here’s something interesting though, Proverbs 16:4 says that YHWH did it for Himself:

Proverbs 16:4
The LORD hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.

If the NT reveals that Christ did it for Himself and the OT reveals that YHWH did it for Himself then, so that basis alone, the logical conclusion is that Yeshua IS Creator YHWH, or else we have a blatant contradiction. And here’s another to consider, in Isaiah 44:24 YHWH declares that He did it “alone”. Job reiterated this in Job 9:8. Does the language in these passages leave any room for the possibility of two independent beings creating “all things”? I don’t think it does. It’s yet another logical dilemma for those that propose that Yeshua is not YHWH, but a lesser being.

At this point I anticipate you will likely be making this objection, which I’ll also paraphrase:

‘The word “dia” is rightly rendered ‘through’, and this word infers that the Logos was not the first cause of Creation but an agent that His father used to bring it into existence (but the Father is the ultimate power behind it).’

This rationale, of course, relegates the Logos to the status of a puppet, used in an instrumental way to achieve the creation. If this were true, and “dia” does connote that, then Romans 11:36 and Hebrews 2:10 challenge this dogma. The same language used in John 1:3 and Colossians 1:16 is also used of “God” in Romans 11:36 and Hebrews 2:10.

Romans 11:32-35
32For God has shut up all in disobedience so that He may show mercy to all. 33Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and unfathomable His ways! 34For WHO HAS KNOWN THE MIND OF THE LORD, OR WHO BECAME HIS COUNSELOR? 35Or WHO HAS FIRST GIVEN TO HIM THAT IT MIGHT BE PAID BACK TO HIM AGAIN? 36For from Him and through (Gr. dia) Himand to Him are all things To Him be the glory forever. Amen.

cf.

Hebrews 2:10
For it was fitting for Him, for whom are all things, and through (Gr. dia) whom are all things, in bringing many sons to glory, to perfect the author of their salvation through sufferings.

So to be consistent, you must also accept that “God” in the above two scriptures is not credited for doing the aforementioned things in the active and primary senses (i.e. He was not the ‘efficient cause’), but was rather an intermediary between the real first cause and the recipient, which is clearly ludicrous. So, given this, if this language in Romans 11:36 and Hebrews 2:10 is applicable to “God”, and still denotes that He is the ‘primary cause’ then on what grounds can you apply a different rule to Yeshua when “dia” is used in reference to Him? You can’t have it both ways.

Anyway, moving on. So we have clear scriptural witness attesting, at the very least, to Yeshua’s involvement in bringing about creation, but Hebrews 1:10 elucidates the capacity to which He was involved – according to this verse, and in the opinion of the Father, He was the executor of Creation in the exact sense that YHWH was described as being in Psalms 102:25, “His hands” laid the foundation of the Earth……what would His Jewish readers have made of this? Certainly the writer’s conclusion that Yeshua was YHWH is difficult to escape, especially so when all the data in Hebrews Chapter 1 is considered. Verses 10-12 would have left them with no doubt at all.

Okay now for the “fish hook” I alluded to in the beginning of this post.

Hebrews 1:10
And,”YOU, LORD, IN THE BEGINNING LAID THE FOUNDATION OF THE EARTH, AND THE HEAVENS ARE THE WORKS OF YOUR HANDS;

Please note the highlighted word. Remembering that the texts from vs 5-12 are, according to the writer of Hebrews, attestations made by the Father to the Son (“But of the Son He says” –  vs 8), it’s evident that the Father actually addressed the Son as “Lord.” The Greek word “kurios” is used in most LXX manuscripts to render the Divine Name, YHWH. That’s well known. But also, when used in the NT as an honorific (“lord”) it signifies that the one addressed is superior in rank or station to the addresser. The slave addresses his mater as “lord”, not the other way around. This is principal is exceptionless.

So there are two possible scenarios here:

1) The Father was addressing the Son in a way that denoted His subservience, or inferiority in rank, to Yeshua. Or,

2) He was addressing the Son as YHWH.

I assert that #1 cannot be legitimate in light of the many NT verses where the Father is spoken as being “greater than” (i.e. superior in office) to the Son. So that leave only one possibility – The Father addresses the Son as YHWH. This would align perfectly with the context of Hebrews Ch 1 as a whole, which is about the absolute supremacy of the Son. It also fits precisely within the context of verses 10-12, which are OT quotations that manifestly reference YHWH…..

In summary, Hebrews 1:10 is a verse that cannot be overlooked by you t8. According to the writer of Hebrews this quotation from Psalms 102:25, was uttered by the Father to the Son. Yet when we examine the Psalm carefully it’s evident that it speaks exclusively of YHWH. Would a NT writer apply a verse that manifestly references YHWH to the Son if He were not YHWH? I say no. It’s inconceivable that he would do this, as it would grossly mislead the recipients of his letter about the identity of the Son, if He were not YHWH. Nor would he risk the consequence of overt blasphemy by audaciously elevating a lesser being to the status of Most High God, if He were not that God. And let’s bear in mind the context that this verse was placed into:

  • The “world” was made through Him (v 2)
  • He is said to be the radiance of the Father’s glory [Gr. doxa] (v 3)
  • He is the exact representation of the Father’s “hypostasis” [nature/substance] (v 3)
  • He “upholds [sustains] all things by the word of His power” (v 3)
  • The angels are commanded to worship Him [a sole prerogative of YHWH] (v 6)
  • He is called “God” (with the definite article) by the Father (v 8)
  • He is contrasted from false gods (v 11)
  • Is said to be immutable [an attribute of YHWH – e.g. Malachi 3:6] (v 12)

The writer in writing Hebrews Chapter 1 had a single overarching motive, to apologetically convey the absolute supremacy of the Son, Yeshua, to his Jewish readers. The chapter is a tour de force that climaxes in the declarations in vss 10-12 that establish Yeshua as THE immutable Creator of the Universe. So this verse has not been ripped out of context, it perfectly fits within the context of the Chapter in perfect harmony.

Okay, now for my questions relating to Hebrews 1:10.

Q1) Does Psalms 102:25 speak of the Father or Son?

Q2) Did the Father address the Son in Psalms 102:25 as the Creator of Earth and the Heavens? And if not please explain how and why your opinion differs from that of the writer of Hebrews.

Q3) Does the Father address the Son with the appellative “kurios” because He was speaking as the subservient, or because He (the Son) is YHWH, or is it because of another reason? [note: if you have a third scenario please produce evidence that the word “kurios” can legitimately be used that way in the NT]

I look forward to reading your answers…..

Blessings t8




t8

Hebrews 1:1-13

1 God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways,

2 in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world.

3 And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power When He had made purification of sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,

4 having become as much better than the angels, as He has inherited a more excellent name than they.

5 For to which of the angels did He ever say,
“YOU ARE MY SON,
TODAY I HAVE BEGOTTEN YOU”?
And again,
“I WILL BE A FATHER TO HIM
AND HE SHALL BE A SON TO ME”?

6 And when He again brings the firstborn into the world, He says,
“AND LET ALL THE ANGELS OF GOD WORSHIP HIM.”

7 And of the angels He says,
“WHO MAKES HIS ANGELS WINDS,
AND HIS MINISTERS A FLAME OF FIRE.”

8 But of the Son He says,
“YOUR THRONE, O GOD, IS FOREVER AND EVER,
AND THE RIGHTEOUS SCEPTER IS THE SCEPTER OF HIS KINGDOM.
9 “YOU HAVE LOVED RIGHTEOUSNESS AND HATED LAWLESSNESS;
THEREFORE GOD, YOUR GOD, HAS ANOINTED YOU
WITH THE OIL OF GLADNESS ABOVE YOUR COMPANIONS.”

10 And,
“YOU, LORD, IN THE BEGINNING LAID THE FOUNDATION OF THE EARTH,
AND THE HEAVENS ARE THE WORKS OF YOUR HANDS;
11 THEY WILL PERISH, BUT YOU REMAIN;
AND THEY ALL WILL BECOME OLD LIKE A GARMENT,
12 AND LIKE A MANTLE YOU WILL ROLL THEM UP;
LIKE A GARMENT THEY WILL ALSO BE CHANGED
BUT YOU ARE THE SAME,
AND YOUR YEARS WILL NOT COME TO AN END.”

13 But to which of the angels has He ever said,
“SIT AT MY RIGHT HAND,
UNTIL I MAKE YOUR ENEMIES
A FOOTSTOOL FOR YOUR FEET”?

The first thing that has to be said about this verse is that it doesn’t teach a Trinity just as you will find that no scripture does. Yet if there was even one scripture that taught the Trinity doctrine, I would assume that you would have quoted that one as your first one. Yet you choose this one which doesn’t teach the Trinity. If there was a biblical text that specifically taught the Trinity, then you could have blown me out of the water in your first post had you quoted it. I take it that you didn’t quote such a verse because it doesn’t exist.

In any case you use Hebrews to try and prove that Jesus is Yahweh and you say that Jesus is the actual creator. So lets think about that for a moment. If he is the actual creator, then one would have to assume that the Father wasn’t. But then you also say that all things were created through him. So even at this early stage in my rebuttal I provide proof that shows you are double minded on this issue. Which is it? Did he create everything, or was he the one whom God created through? I can’t see both as working, i.e., that Jesus who is God made everything through himself. It stands to reason that the Father made all things through the son does it not?

Now your choice of scripture is an interesting one because verse one starts off with “God” and talks about the son from God’s perspective.

So it is primarily focussed on two identities.

1. God
2. the son.

And it is focussed on what God says and thinks about the son.

Verse 8 & 9 appear to me that God is talking about the son, or what Paul is saying about what David is saying about what God is saying about the son.

8 But of the Son He says, “YOUR THRONE, O GOD, IS FOREVER AND EVER, AND THE RIGHTEOUS SCEPTER IS THE SCEPTER OF HIS KINGDOM.
9 “YOU HAVE LOVED RIGHTEOUSNESS AND HATED LAWLESSNESS; THEREFORE GOD, YOUR GOD, HAS ANOINTED YOU WITH THE OIL OF GLADNESS ABOVE YOUR COMPANIONS.” 

He in the above verse must be God, or possibly the author. (I don’t have time to check this as my reply is delayed enough as it is.)

First thing to note though, is the son has a God and yet the Trinity doctrine tries to teach us that they both and another make up one God.

Anyway, verse 10 seems to be talking about the LORD and how he (&/or the author) sees the son. Not only is this evident from the fact that verse one starts off with the word “God” and then speaks about the son as another, followed by what He or the author says about the son in verses 8, but it is then obvious that it is God who is the HE in verse 13 because it says:

“But to which of the angels has He ever said, “SIT AT MY RIGHT HAND, UNTIL I MAKE YOUR ENEMIES A FOOTSTOOL FOR YOUR FEET”?”

So He is obviously the one spoken of in the immediate preceeding verses, ie., verse 10 – “YOU, LORD, IN THE BEGINNING LAID THE FOUNDATION OF THE EARTH, AND THE HEAVENS ARE THE WORKS OF YOUR HANDS; which then means it is a verse about the LORD, not the son.

Think about it, the LORD/God says of his son, “sit at his right hand”. So He in verse 10 cannot be the son because if it was, then He in verse 13 would also be the son and that would then break verse 13 completely and render it as a verse that makes no sense.

So not only is it actually logical that the LORD who said to his son “sit at my right hand”, is the same LORD who laid the foundations for the earth and the heavens, but there are other witness scriptures to prove that the LORD and his son are 2 beings or identities.

Hebrews 1:3 (already quoted)
The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven.

Hebrews 8:1
The point of what we are saying is this: We do have such a high priest, who sat down at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven, 

Acts 7:55
But Stephen, full of the Holy Spirit, looked up to heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God

Let’s face it, Jesus isn’t standing at the right hand of himself, rather the Majesty in Heaven who is God. Stephen saw Jesus at HIS (the Majesty) right hand. He didn’t see a Trinity did he? I wonder if you were there Isaiah if you would have believed Stephen’s witness as to seeing Jesus at HIS right hand, and not a Trinity being that I think you yourself would expect to see.

Anyway, to say that Jesus is actually the LORD, you would then be forced into rendering verse 13 as saying “JESUS says sit at my right hand”. Or if you say that LORD is the Trinity, then it says ‘The Father, Son, Spirit’ said to Jesus “Sit at my right hand”. Neither works does it? The only 2 possibilities that I can see are that the author (Paul) said that (David) said that God said “Sit at my right hand” or that he is just simply saying that God said it to the son”. Either way, it cannot be the son who says “Sits at my right hand”, therefore it cannot be the son who laid the foundations, for the LORD is the one who laid the foundations and He is the one who says “Sit at my right hand”.

I base this rebuttal on the translations as they were presented to me. I didn’t have the time to look deeply into the Greek and so there is also a possibility that a translation issue could add, edit, or correct what I have said above.

So to make this clearer, if my point hasn’t been made obvious thus far:
Try reading verse 10 to 13. It talks about the LORD and how he laid the foundations of creation, and then it talks about the LORD who says of his son, “Sit at my right hand”. Therefore this LORD cannot be Jesus because he is told to sit at the right hand of the LORD. It is verse 8 that seems to throw some off this, yet even before verse 8 it speaks of God and then his son followed by a description of the son, followed again by focusing back on what God said or thinks of his son. In other words you need to look carefully at when it is talking of God or the son. If there is an overlap, you then could confuse Jesus for God couldn’t you?

So to conclude, the person whom this whole perspective is being viewed through is God/LORD/YHWH (or possibly the original one who penned the scripture), and it is about how He (God) sees the/his son and what the LORD says about him. Hebrews even starts with the word God and then moves on to say how he has sent many (prophets) to speak on his behalf and yet who in their right mind would say that any of these prophets are God? Then it is written that he finally sent his son, and who in their right mind would say that the son is God? Well it appears that a certain doctrine that was devised centuries after the Book of Revelation was written causes some (including yourself) to believe this very thing.

From there it is all about what the LORD says and thinks of his son. At times the LORD is spoken of directly and other times he is quoted such as “SIT AT MY RIGHT HAND, UNTIL I MAKE YOUR ENEMIES A FOOTSTOOL FOR YOUR FEET”, when he is speaking of the son.

I leave you with the following verses and wonder how it is possible that you could believe them as they seem to contradict you view:

John 1:10
He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him. 

John 1:3
Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 

So now to your three questions:

Q1) Does Psalms 102:25 speak of the Father or Son?

I would say that it is the Father. In Hebrews it actually says “I will be a Father to him”. Who will be a Father to him? Well it is God/LORD who will be a Father to him.

Q2) Did the Father address the Son in Psalms 102:25 as the Creator of Earth and the Heavens? And if not please explain how and why your opinion differs from that of the writer of Hebrews.

It appears to me that it is David (the writer of that Psalm) who is addressing God.

Q3) Does the Father address the Son with the appellative “kurios” because He was speaking as the subservient, or because He (the Son) is YHWH, or is it because of another reason? [note: if you have a third scenario please produce evidence that the word “kurios” can legitimately be used that way in the NT]

I don’t think it is the Father addressing the son at all, if you are talking of Hebrews 1:10 “YOU, LORD..,”.

OK I have given my rebuttal. Now even though I took my time in replying I would have liked more time to check out the original language to see if what I am saying is so. I do not claim that all I say is true, but that I am a human who struggles with his sinful nature who desires to be perfect and so to that end, I am open to learning what others have to say and of course I am open to changing my mind. My only interest here is that the truth wins. I care less that I win and I am more than willing to change when truth is presented to me. So far your argument that Jesus is the LORD/YHWH/GOD hasn’t even got close to convincing me, but has only made me look deeper into that which I do believe.


  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 20 posts - 41 through 60 (of 442 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #49509
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi W,
    You say
    “See to them when the scripures seem to indicate that it is the Word/God, YHWH, Yeshua that did something proving he is God, then the only thing they can resort to is Yeshua is just a puppet on a string or an empty vessel or a funnel “through” which the Father poured his power, because to them Yeshua has no substance or essence of his own.”

    You divert from Athanasius here.
    He says
    “30. Now the right faith is, that we believe and confess, that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and Man.
    31. God, of the substance of the Father, begotten before the worlds: and Man, of the substance of His mother, born in the world.”

    So are you now saying Athanasius was wrong and Jesus had substance of his own?

    #49522

    Quote (Nick Hassan @ April 19 2007,09:29)
    Hi W,
    You say
    “See to them when the scripures seem to indicate that it is the Word/God, YHWH, Yeshua that did something proving he is God, then the only thing they can resort to is Yeshua is just a puppet on a string or an empty vessel or a funnel “through” which the Father poured his power, because to them Yeshua has no substance or essence of his own.”

    You divert from Athanasius here.
    He says
    “30. Now the right faith is, that we believe and confess, that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and Man.
    31. God, of the substance of the Father, begotten before the worlds: and Man, of the substance of His mother, born in the world.”

    So are you now saying Athanasius was wrong and Jesus had substance of his own?


    NH and t8

    Both of you have it wrong.

    My point is exactly as I stated.

    Can you see how that when you resort to Jesus is just a vessel and that when you imply that the Father does it all through him as if to say he is just a funnel and he dosnt do anything then you are missing the truth of who Yeshua is?

    You say Yeshua is not the creator, right?

    You say that only the Father is the creator who created all things through him right?

    Since as CB has so beautifully pointed out the scriptures say that only God created all things by himself, then that means that if Yeshua had no part in the creation but that the Father just did everything through him as you say, then that would make him just a funnel or vessel through which God worked through.

    Which still violates God being the only being involved in the creation.

    Because if he is not the very essence and substance of God by which all things are created and by which all things consist and by which all things are upheld by that Word of “Yeshua's” power, then he would have to be a funnel or a vessel or a seperate god with a seperate essence and substance by which God made all things through.

    So you have a problem t8 and NH.

    1. If Yeshua is the exact representation of Gods substance and all things were made by him, and only one God made all things, then Yeshua is the creator and true God.

    or

    2. Yeshua is a god a being by himself with a different substance than God and all things were made through him meaning God had another agent involved in the creation but only God created everything through him making him just a funnel or a vessel which scriptures are totally against.

    t8

    You say…

    Quote

    Regarding the first part of your quote have you not read:

    John 5:19
    Jesus gave them this answer: “I tell you the truth, the Son can do nothing by himself; *he can do* only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does.

    The first part of the verse does not negate the second part t8…

    *because whatever the Father does the Son also does*

    Again the son does nothing without the Father, and the Father does nothing without the Son.

    Because they are one God.

    :)

    #49524
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi W,
    You quote
    “because whatever the Father does the Son also does”
    So two are working together?

    #49528

    Quote (t8 @ April 19 2007,09:17)

    Quote (Is 1:18 @ April 19 2007,14:07)
    t8 was making all those excuses about the lack of time he had in doing his research, when less than a week beforehand I told him he could “take all the time he needed” to submit his rebuttal:


    Maybe you didn't read WorshippingJesus post(s) but he was throwing accusations at me regarding this time issue. I was simply pointing out the truth that some things in life have a greater priority than debating here.

    But he kept right on with it. This is why I spoke about it. Otherwise I wouldn't waste my time with such trivia.


    t8

    Do me a favour and show me where I was…

    Quote
    “throwing accusations at you regarding this time issue”.

    And especially where I…

    Quote

    But he kept right on with it. This is why I spoke about it. Otherwise I wouldn't waste my time with such trivia.

    ???

    #49535

    Quote (t8 @ April 19 2007,09:17)

    Quote (Is 1:18 @ April 19 2007,14:07)
    t8 was making all those excuses about the lack of time he had in doing his research, when less than a week beforehand I told him he could “take all the time he needed” to submit his rebuttal:


    Maybe you didn't read WorshippingJesus post(s) but he was throwing accusations at me regarding this time issue. I was simply pointing out the truth that some things in life have a greater priority than debating here.

    But he kept right on with it. This is why I spoke about it. Otherwise I wouldn't waste my time with such trivia.


    t8

    I descided to see if what you say is true..

    Posted: April 02 2007,16:44  Page 24 t8s proof text # 1 I said…

    Quote
    You agreed to a three day time period.

    You posted and Is 1:18 replied.

    Then he posted and about 5 days later you say…

    Is 1:18 is willing to give you extra time to reply and then you come back to your proof text rebutting the the rebuttal totally ignoring his proof text and diverting attention back to yours.

    I was under the impression as well as others I think, that you were to rebutt Isaiahs proof text. That was what the extended time was about!

    Was'nt it?

    Posted: April 03 2007,03:14 page 27 t8s proof text #1 I said…

    Quote
    t8

    I dont care about the three days and Im not saying that you have sinned.

    What bothers me is that you took the time and then went back to your proof text, totally ignoring his.

    Can you see how I would get upset?

    Posted: April 07 2007,05:00 page 29  t8s proof text #1 I said…

    Quote

    T8, no one even cares about the 3 days. Isaiah was willing to give you all the time you needed.


    Posted: April 08 2007,04:21 page 32 t8s proof text #1 I said…

    Quote

    In fact here is the last thing I said to you on this…

    Here is my last word to you on this.

    I wish you the very best in your walk with God and pray that God will bless you and yours abundantly with his truth and Love.

    I sincerely pray that everyone on this board will see and know more truth including my self.

    Someday we will all come together in unity even if its on the other side.

    Does this match what you say…

    Quote
    Maybe you didn't read WorshippingJesus post(s) but he was throwing accusations at me regarding this time issue. I was simply pointing out the truth that some things in life have a greater priority than debating here.

    But he kept right on with it. This is why I spoke about it. Otherwise I wouldn't waste my time with such trivia.

    Not true t8 and you know it.  :O

    #49543
    Cult Buster
    Participant

    t8

    Quote
    Regarding the first part of your quote have you not read:

    John 5:19
    Jesus gave them this answer: “I tell you the truth, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does.

    When Christ was to leave heaven and was to take the form of a man He did not cease to be God. He simply put aside His own divine power and was dependent on God for power. This makes Him our example to follow because we too are to depend totally on God.

    This is the truth t8 and others are dancing around. They focus on Christ's incarnation as a man, yet they ignore the overwhelming evidence of His deity.

    Heb 2:14  Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;

    Heb 2:16  For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.
    Heb 2:17  Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.
    Heb 2:18  For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted.

    Heb 2:9  But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.

    Christ had to overcome Satan while living as a man. Christ did not come to earth to show what a God can do, but what  man can do when he depends on God for power. He succeeded where Adam failed.

    ]1Ti 3:16  And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

    Isa 9:6  For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace

    There are many instances in the scripture where Jesus calls the Father..His God and says the Father is greater than I.

    In these instances Jesus was encumbered with humanity or within the context of Him being the  Messiah.  Don’t forget that Christ is still ministering for us right now as our High Priest in the heavenly sanctuary.  So His mission is not yet over.

    Even within the Godhead each Divine Person recognise and have reverence for the other as God.

    ]Heb 1:8  But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom

    The phrase “O God” is a worshipful phrase indicating the reverence each Person of the Godhead have one for another. Each recognises the other as their God. Each are willing to submit one to the other.

    . Within the Godhead a plan was made for the salvation of man. It is evident that each divine  Person within the Godhead takes on a different office or role. It is a pity that we too cannot learn the character and humility of God.

    There has on this forum been much twisting of scripture regarding Christ’s mission or “office” as Messiah and that of His substance which is The Eternal God.

    ]Joh 10:30  I and my Father are one.
    Joh 10:31  Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.

    Joh 10:33  The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God

    The Pharasee understood that Jesus was claiming deity and equality with God, that is why they tried to stone Him.

    Jesus could have told them that they misunderstood Him, but He didn't. Jesus knew that the Pharasees understood His assertion of deity and did not correct them.

    It seems that the Pharisees had better understanding of Jesus' words than the JWs and other Arians on this forum.

    Joh 1:1  In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
    Joh 1:14  And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us,

    Jn 1:1 says, “and the word was God”. However, before the incarnation, Jesus made a choice to submit to the Father as His head. He had to live in His humanity as a man depending on God for power. Jesus did not give up being God, He was subject to and obeying  the Father while living as a man.

    The Father would maintain the head position and He would become the central One to pray to. He does not minister to us in the direct way of the Son and Holy Spirit. He would not have the central focus to save mankind and to eventually be as highly exalted as the Saviour. He is self effacing in this respect.

    Each member of the Godhead took on a position that was selfless to the extreme and thus revealing the character of God.

    MICAH 5:2 But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, {though} thou be little among the thousands of Judah, {yet} out of thee shall he come forth unto me {that is} to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth {have been} from of old, from everlasting.

    JOHN 5:23 That all {men} should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father.

    JOHN 20:28 And Thomas answered and said unto him,  My Lord and my God.

    #49544
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi CB,
    You say
    “When Christ was to leave heaven and was to take the form of a man He did not cease to be God.”

    OK so in your opinion God came

    ” He simply put aside His own divine power and was dependent on God for power.”

    Whoa nellie.
    You just said he is God.
    Now he is dependant on himself?
    Or is not God after all?
    Or perhaps the Son of God?

    “This makes Him our example to follow because we too are to depend totally on God.”

    Which God do you mean now?

    #49548
    Cult Buster
    Participant

    Nick.

    Your Arian  mindset  refuses to acknowlege that there are Three.

    Jehovah the Father
    Christ Jehovah
    Jehovah the Holy Spirit.

    Instead of playing word games read what the Bible says.

    JOHN 20:28 And Thomas answered and said unto him,   My Lord and my God.

    #49549
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi CB,
    Where is it written that God is three?
    God is one.

    #49573
    Proclaimer
    Participant

    Quote (WorshippingJesus @ April 20 2007,06:15)
    You say that only the Father is the creator who created all things through him right?

    Since as CB has so beautifully pointed out the scriptures say that only God created all things by himself, then that means that if Yeshua had no part in the creation but that the Father just did everything through him as you say, then that would make him just a funnel or vessel through which God worked through.


    WorshippingJesus and CultB.

    Scripture says that God created all things through Christ. I only repeat it.

    1 Corinthians 8:6
    yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.

    John 1:3
    Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.

    So it is safe to conclude that there was no other God that created everything. We can also assume from that, that no other God was involved in creating the cosmos through Christ.

    It's quite simple. You either believe scripture or not. No amount of philosophy or speculation can change truth. You either accept it or reject it. There are no other options.

    #49582

    Quote (t8 @ April 19 2007,16:48)

    Quote (WorshippingJesus @ April 20 2007,06:15)
    You say that only the Father is the creator who created all things through him right?

    Since as CB has so beautifully pointed out the scriptures say that only God created all things by himself, then that means that if Yeshua had no part in the creation but that the Father just did everything through him as you say, then that would make him just a funnel or vessel through which God worked through.


    WorshippingJesus and CultB.

    Scripture says that God created all things through Christ. I only repeat it.

    1 Corinthians 8:6
    yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.

    John 1:3
    Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.

    So it is safe to conclude that there was no other God that created everything. We can also assume from that, that no other God was involved in creating the cosmos through Christ.

    It's quite simple. You either believe scripture or not. No amount of philosophy or speculation can change truth. You either accept it or reject it. There are no other options.


    t8

    Isa 45:12
    I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, [even] my hands, have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded.

    There is nothing in this verse that says the Father made the earth through another agent. In fact it says by “Hiis hands” he stretched out the heavens.

    Isa 45:18
    For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; *God himself that formed the earth and made it*; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and *there is none else*.

    This verse says “God himself”, there is “None else”. There is no agent found here.

    You do believe this is scripture dont you t8. So if we believe as you say then we have a contradiction.

    What part did Jesus have t8. Was he a builder or not.

    Did the writers of the New Testament mention him if they didnt believe he is the Creator. They knew the above scriptures.

    Its starting to sound like the funnel thing again.

    ???

    #49608
    Is 1:18
    Participant

    Quote (t8 @ April 19 2007,09:17)

    Quote (Is 1:18 @ April 19 2007,14:07)
    t8 was making all those excuses about the lack of time he had in doing his research, when less than a week beforehand I told him he could “take all the time he needed” to submit his rebuttal:


    Maybe you didn't read WorshippingJesus post(s) but he was throwing accusations at me regarding this time issue. I was simply pointing out the truth that some things in life have a greater priority than debating here.

    But he kept right on with it. This is why I spoke about it. Otherwise I wouldn't waste my time with such trivia.


    Hi t8,
    I was referencing your comments in your rebuttal:

    Quote
    I base this rebuttal on the translations as they were presented to me. I didn't have the time to look deeply into the Greek and so there is also a possibility that a translation issue could add, edit, or correct what I have said above.

    Quote
    OK I have given my rebuttal. Now even though I took my time in replying I would have liked more time to check out the original language to see if what I am saying is so.

    I gave you all the time you wanted, that's why I wrote “feel free to take all the time you need to post you rebuttal”, so I fail to see what you were complaining about. Maybe you were just making excuses for your lack of a good explanation for the Hebrews 1:10 text.

    Another thing I wanted to clear up is this:

    Quote
    The first thing that has to be said about this verse is that it doesn't teach a Trinity just as you will find that no scripture does. Yet if there was even one scripture that taught the Trinity doctrine, I would assume that you would have quoted that one as your first one. Yet you choose this one which doesn't teach the Trinity. If there was a biblical text that specifically taught the Trinity, then you could have blown me out of the water in your first post had you quoted it. I take it that you didn't quote such a verse because it doesn't exist.


    Now t8 I have told you no less than three times in the trinity thread that my objective in submitting proof texts is not to prove the veracity of the trinity doctrine, it's to challenge your henotheistic position. So now I'm telling you for the forth time. I hope you get it now.

    Blessings
    :)

    #49976
    Cult Buster
    Participant

    t8

    Quote
    WorshippingJesus and CultB.

    Scripture says that God created all things through Christ. I only repeat it.

    t8, I also only repeat the following.

    Gen 1:1  In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

    Joh 1:1  In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
    Joh 1:2  The same was in the beginning with God.
    Joh 1:3  All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

    Joh 1:10  He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.

    For by him (Jesus) were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
    And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
    (Col 1:16-17)

    Christ was the principal agency within the Godhead responsible for creation.

    “All things came into being through Him, and without Him not even one thing came into being that has come into being.”
    (John 1:3)

    “You, Lord, have laid the foundation of the earth in the beginning, and the heavens are the works of Your hands.”
    (Heb 1:10)

    – – “By the Word of God were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of His mouth.”
    (Psa 33:6)


    Who was this Word of God, the Creator?

    Joh 1:1  In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
    Joh 1:3  All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
    Joh 1:14  And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us,

    The Word of God is Jesus. Jesus is Jehovah God!

    “A Prayer of Moses, the man of God. Lord, You have been our dwelling-place in all generations. Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever You had formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting You are God. Psalm 90:2”

    Jehovah alone created the universe.
    See the following.

    Isa 44:24  Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, am the LORD (Jehovah) that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;  

    Yes, Jehovah created everything by Himself. God did not use angels or other instrumentalities outside of the Godhead. It's very clear.

    (God)
    Job 9:8  Which alone spreadeth out the heavens, and treadeth upon the waves of the sea.

    Heb 3:4  For every house is builded by some man; but he that built all things is God.

    The above verses qualify that only God by Himself created the universe.   Jesus is the Creator God Jehovah.

    The fact is that only Jehovah God was involved in creation. Christ was the Creator so therefore He is Jehovah God. This is consistent with a multitude of scripture that establishes the deity of Christ.

    Mat 23:24  Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.    :O

    #49982

    CB

    A huge AMEN!

    :)

    #49988
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi CB,
    You say
    “Christ was the principal agency within the Godhead responsible for creation.”

    So was he an agent for God or God?

    #50125
    Proclaimer
    Participant

    Quote (Cult Buster @ April 17 2007,19:20)
    Hi t8. We could argue over Bible translations or play word games, but the scripture tells us that only God was involved in creation.


    Hi CultB.

    So like I said, you do not believe that God made all things THROUGH Christ. Is that correct?

    #50127
    Proclaimer
    Participant

    Quote (Cult Buster @ April 22 2007,19:35)
    t8, I also only repeat the following.

    Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

    Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
    Joh 1:2 The same was in the beginning with God.
    Joh 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

    Joh 1:10 He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.

    For by him (Jesus) were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
    And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.


    Yes and I repeat those scriptures too.

    It is not the scriptures you quote but the conclusion you come to.

    A triune God is your conclusion.

    But the LORD GOD is one God, not a triune God.

    #50131
    Cult Buster
    Participant

    t8

    Quote

    Quote (Cult Buster @ April 22 2007,19:35)
    t8, I also only repeat the following.

    Gen 1:1  In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

    Joh 1:1  In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
    Joh 1:2  The same was in the beginning with God.
    Joh 1:3  All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

    Joh 1:10  He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.

    For by him (Jesus) were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
    And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.


    Yes and I repeat those scriptures too.

    It is not the scriptures you quote but the conclusion you come to.

    A triune God is your conclusion.

    But the LORD GOD is one God, not a triune God.

    Look again t8!

    Mat 28:19  Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

    Here are all the three Divine Persons of the Godhead in one verse.
    Now let's confirm their deity from scripture .

    Joh 1:1  In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
    Joh 1:14  And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us,

    Here is Christ (the Word) identified as God. This verse states that there are at least two who are God. This confounds the Arian doctrine.

    Heb 1:8  But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.

    Here Christ is also identified as God. And since the Father is speaking, here is more conclusive proof of a Godhead with two of its three Persons mentioned. Another stumper for the Arian cause.

    Evidence of Their Deity.

    1.     The Father is Jehovah.      Not even the Arians will argue this.

    2.      Christ is Jehovah.       See the above John 1:1 and Hebrews 1:8. Also

    Jer 23:5-6  Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch (Jesus), and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth.
    In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: and this is his name whereby he shall be called, THE LORD
    (Jehovah) OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS.

    3.    Jehovah the Holy Spirit

    II Cor 3:17
    Now Jehovah is the Spirit; and where the spirit of Jehovah is, there is freedom.  (NWT)
      (From the Arian's own bible)

    2 Timothy 4:3   For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;  
     4:4   And they shall turn away [their] ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.  
      :O

    #50133
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi CB,
    So You cannot find even three single scriptures to tie together to form your proposition?
    If not then would it not be sensible to abandon this heathen project and come back to the one true God?
    We do not worship a godhead.

    #50169

    Quote (t8 @ April 22 2007,21:22)

    Quote (Cult Buster @ April 22 2007,19:35)
    t8, I also only repeat the following.

    Gen 1:1  In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

    Joh 1:1  In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
    Joh 1:2  The same was in the beginning with God.
    Joh 1:3  All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

    Joh 1:10  He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.

    For by him (Jesus) were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
    And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.


    Yes and I repeat those scriptures too.

    It is not the scriptures you quote but the conclusion you come to.

    A triune God is your conclusion.

    But the LORD GOD is one God, not a triune God.


    t8

    So how should the second word  'Theos' (“God”), in Jn 1:1 be interpreted?

    Go ahead t8. You have the floor. We are listening for your truth.

    Tell us.

     ???

Viewing 20 posts - 41 through 60 (of 442 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

© 1999 - 2024 Heaven Net

Navigation

© 1999 - 2023 - Heaven Net
or

Log in with your credentials

or    

Forgot your details?

or

Create Account