- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 23 2009,12:41) Hi TT,
Where in hebrews does it SAY Jesus is the creator?
Deja vuthinker
Quote (thethinker @ June 22 2009,17:50) Lightenup said: Quote I do not agree that there was no Son before the incarnation. Kathi,
Please give your biblical evidence. There is no word of a Son until Psalm 2:7.thinker
Thinker,
I have shown you. The NT explains the OT. You can find it in Hebrews chapter 1.Kathi
Quote (Lightenup @ June 23 2009,15:07) Quote (thethinker @ June 22 2009,17:50) Lightenup said: Quote I do not agree that there was no Son before the incarnation. Kathi,
Please give your biblical evidence. There is no word of a Son until Psalm 2:7.thinker
Thinker,
I have shown you. The NT explains the OT. You can find it in Hebrews chapter 1.Kathi
Yes the New testament explains the old. And it says that the Word was in the beginning. There is no word of a Son until Psalm 2:7 and Hebrews 1 says that He was begotten as Son at His exaltation. I fail to see how you think Hebrews 1 supports your theory.thinker
Thinker,
Hebrews 1 does not say that He was begotten as a Son at His exaltation, it says that in the past, He was told “today, I have begotten you” but it doesn't tell us when.Hebrews 1 said that the one who He was exalting (the Son/Lord) laid the foundation of the earth and that the heavens are the works of His hands (note that it says hands here and not words).
Heb 1:8-10
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;
NASUThere is nothing said here about speaking words in order to lay the foundation or establishing the heavens. The Most High spoke the words, the Son carried out the command with actions. IMO
Kathi
Quote (Lightenup @ June 24 2009,05:58) Thinker,
Hebrews 1 does not say that He was begotten as a Son at His exaltation, it says that in the past, He was told “today, I have begotten you” but it doesn't tell us when.Hebrews 1 said that the one who He was exalting (the Son/Lord) laid the foundation of the earth and that the heavens are the works of His hands (note that it says hands here and not words).
Heb 1:8-10
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;
NASUThere is nothing said here about speaking words in order to lay the foundation or establishing the heavens. The Most High spoke the words, the Son carried out the command with actions. IMO
Kathi
If all things were made through Jesus, how was Jesus made?Lightenup said:
Quote Hebrews 1 does not say that He was begotten as a Son at His exaltation, it says that in the past, He was told “today, I have begotten you” but it doesn't tell us when. Kathi,
You need to take a closer look at Hebrews 1. It does say that Jesus was begotten at His exaltation. Acts 13 certainly leaves no doubt about it,Quote God had fulfilled this for us their children, in that He has raised up Jesus. As it is also written in the second Psalm: “You are My Son, TODAY I have begotten You (Acts 13:33)
There is no doubt that Jesus was begotten at His resurrection and subsequent exaltation.
Lightenup said:
Quote Hebrews 1 said that the one who He was exalting (the Son/Lord) laid the foundation of the earth and that the heavens are the works of His hands (note that it says hands here and not words). The Genesis account says that all came into being by the speaking of a word. I hope you don't take the “hands” metaphor literally.
Lightenup said:
Quote There is nothing said here about speaking words in order to lay the foundation or establishing the heavens. The Most High spoke the words, the Son carried out the command with actions. There was no Son before the incarnation and exaltation of Jesus. It was the Word who was in the beginning with God. The eternal Word became Son in redemptive history. The begetting of a Son was prophesied in Psalm 2:7 and it was fulfilled in the resurrection of Jesus as I have shown from Acts 13. Hebrews 1 says nothing about the “Most High” speaking the words and the Son carrying them out.
thinker
Thinker,
The main reason that He was begotten was so that He could be raised that is why the two concepts are spoken of together. The resurrection was the fulfillment of the purpose of which He was begotten.There is no such concept in the Bible of an “eternal word” no where in any unambiguous form.
Kathi
Lightenup said:
Quote Thinker,
The main reason that He was begotten was so that He could be raised that is why the two concepts are spoken of together. The resurrection was the fulfillment of the purpose of which He was begotten.Kathi,
You have it backwards. Jesus was raised from the dead so that He could be begotten. This is the natural reading of Acts 13.Lightenup said:
Quote There is no such concept in the Bible of an “eternal word” no where in any unambiguous form. The concept of a pre-incarnate Son is no less unambiguous.
thinker
Quote (Lightenup @ June 23 2009,14:54) Thinker,
The main reason that He was begotten was so that He could be raised that is why the two concepts are spoken of together. The resurrection was the fulfillment of the purpose of which He was begotten.There is no such concept in the Bible of an “eternal word” no where in any unambiguous form.
Kathi
Hi Kathi“The Word was God”, or “God was the Word”, if God is “eternal” then the Word is “eternal”!
That is unambiguous!
Blessings WJ
WorshippingJesus said:
Quote Hi Kathi “The Word was God”, or “God was the Word”, if God is “eternal” then the Word is “eternal”!
That is unambiguous!
WJ,
You're absolutely correct. It is unambiguous!thinker
Hi TT,
No it is a typical example of admixing human wisdom with the divine to extrude a false doctrine.Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 24 2009,15:33) Hi TT,
No it is a typical example of admixing human wisdom with the divine to extrude a false doctrine.
Hi NHAnd what you just said is typical of not simply believing what the Word of God says!
WJ
Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 23 2009,18:00) Hi WJ,
WAS or WAS ALWAYS?
HI NHWhats the difference “Was”, “Was always”? God cannot change can he? Then the Word cannot change either for the Word was/is God. God is Spirit! The Word is Spirit. The Spirit of Jesus that took on the likeness of sinful flesh, always was and always will be!
Jesus is the same yesterday, today and forever!
WJ
Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 24 2009,15:59) Hi WJ,
Again adding human logic to decipher scripture is not wise.
Hi NHAnd again what you just said is typical of not simply believing what the Word of God says!
WJ
Quote (thethinker @ June 25 2009,05:53) WorshippingJesus said: Quote Hi Kathi “The Word was God”, or “God was the Word”, if God is “eternal” then the Word is “eternal”!
That is unambiguous!
WJ,
You're absolutely correct. It is unambiguous!thinker
Give me a minute………Nah…!!! I don't think so.
Contradicts John.
Rev 3:12 Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.
I will write upon him my onoma kainon.
kainos adj acc neut sing
[UBS] kainos, new; of new quality; unused; unknown, unheard of; ti kaino,teron the latest thing (Ac 17.21)
Acts 17:21 For all the Athenians and strangers which were there spent their time in nothing else, but either to tell, or to hear some [kainos] new thing.
Certainly not from eternity if it was “new” in 69 a.d.
.
Quote (Paladin @ June 24 2009,16:36) Quote (thethinker @ June 25 2009,05:53) WorshippingJesus said: Quote Hi Kathi “The Word was God”, or “God was the Word”, if God is “eternal” then the Word is “eternal”!
That is unambiguous!
WJ,
You're absolutely correct. It is unambiguous!thinker
Give me a minute………Nah…!!! I don't think so.
Contradicts John.
Rev 3:12 Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.
I will write upon him my onoma kainon.
kainos adj acc neut sing
[UBS] kainos, new; of new quality; unused; unknown, unheard of; ti kaino,teron the latest thing (Ac 17.21)
Acts 17:21 For all the Athenians and strangers which were there spent their time in nothing else, but either to tell, or to hear some [kainos] new thing.
Certainly not from eternity if it was “new” in 69 a.d.
.
Hi PDDoes John 1:1 read…
In the beginning was the “Word of God” and the “Word of God” was with God and the “Word of God” was God?
Didnt think so!
All the inference and theological reading into the text will not change the fact that John made no distiction between the Word and God except the Word was with God and was God and not “Of God”. Hence the Trinitarian view.
WJ
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
