- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Paladin said:
Quote Don't ever again accuse me of “dragging WJ into” our discussion. Paladin,
Would you please try to act more your age?Paladin said:
Quote Verses 3 and 10 both use egeneto, which, though the Lexicographers will tell you means “create” It is NEVER so translated in the New Testament, because it is a reference to “becoming through change.” Egeneto is the Aorist 2 indicative of ginomai which means “to come to be” or “to become.” John clearly says that the world that rejected Jesus came into being through Him. This was NOT the new creation. It's all about context!
thinker
Quote (bodhitharta @ June 25 2009,12:43) Quote (thethinker @ June 26 2009,04:31) Lightenup said: Quote Thinker,
He literally was begotten of the Father.Kathi,
How can you say that Christ was literally begotten seeing that God is spirit?Lightenup said:
Quote The Son's resurrection was proof that the Son accomplished the main purpose of His being begotten in the first place. The resurrection didn't cause Him to be begotten “officially” or “unofficially.” Peter disagrees with you,
Quote God has fulfilled this for us their children, in that He raised up Jesus. As it is also written in the second Psalm: “You are My Son, Today I have begotten you (Acts 13:33)
Christ was begotten at His resurrection and exaltation. Christ's Sonship has to do with His office as Mediator. It simply means that He is the head of the covenantal family. God is spirit and spirits do not literally beget.
thinker
You see what happens when people start believing that God literally begot Jesus?That is why the Quran straightens out the confusion by saying:
(5) And they say: “((Allah)) Most Gracious has begotten offspring.” Glory to Him! they are (but) servants raised to honour.
( سورة الأنبياء , Al-Anbiya, Chapter #21, Verse #26)(1) They say: “(Allah) hath begotten a son” :Glory be to Him.-Nay, to Him belongs all that is in the heavens and on earth: everything renders worship to Him.
( سورة البقرة , Al-Baqara, Chapter #2, Verse #116)First Jesus is begotten and the next logical step is he is God because his Father is God which would make sense if he was literally begotten but he was not. He was “got” with the Word “be”
(1) She said: “O my Lord! How shall I have a son when no man hath touched me?” He said: “Even so: Allah createth what He willeth: When He hath decreed a plan, He but saith to it, 'Be,' and it is!
( سورة آل عمران , Aal-e-Imran, Chapter #3, Verse #47)but as Far as God Almighty:
(8) He begetteth not, nor is He begotten;
( سورة الإخلاص , Al-Ikhlas, Chapter #112, Verse #3)
Hi Bo,
I am so thankful that the Quran disagrees with me. Thank you for pointing that out
KathiQuote (SEEKING @ June 26 2009,04:48) Quote (thethinker @ June 19 2009,01:27) Please explain how YHWH can refer to Himself as “US” if He is not a plural entity.[/b] So far nobody here has explained anything.
thinker
Thinker,Help me grasp your train of thought here. If I, with my buddy Joe present, say to you, “Thinker, join US at the ball game”how does that make ME a “plural entity? Plurality seems formed only as Joe and I (individually) join to form the US referred to.
But, Joe and I remain seperate beings not at all one.
Blessings,
Seeking
Hey Seeking,
Good to see you back! I was thinking about you just today. God was the King of Israel. Christ was the King of Israel. Either confess that Israel had two kings or that she had one king in two persons. If Israel had one king in two persons this would be plural unity. It's not that difficult really.thinker
thethinker said to Lightenup:
Quote Christ was begotten at His resurrection and exaltation. Christ's Sonship has to do with His office as Mediator. It simply means that He is the head of the covenantal family. God is spirit and spirits do not literally beget. thinker
bodhitharta replied:
Quote You see what happens when people start believing that God literally begot Jesus? Hey bd,
We agree on something. I would only add that Kathi's view has its roots in Greek mythology.thinker
WorshipingJesus said to Kathi:
Quote Hi Kathi So you think that invalidates John 1:1-3?
Your argument is a red herring and leaves out the fact that Jesus who was in very nature God left his place of Glory and submitted to the Father by becoming a servant through taking on the likeness of sinful flesh and being found in fashion as a man declared the Father to be his God. Phil 2
WJ,
Yes! Philippians 2 is the key to understanding.thinker
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 25 2009,11:38) Quote (Lightenup @ June 25 2009,11:10) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 25 2009,02:09) Quote (Lightenup @ June 24 2009,21:14) Keith and Bo, Who is the “I” in this passage. If it is the Son and the Son is God replace the I with “God” and continue to read.
Rev 3:12
12 'He who overcomes, I will make him a pillar in the temple of My God, and he will not go out from it anymore; and I will write on him the name of My God, and the name of the city of My God, the new Jerusalem, which comes down out of heaven from My God, and My new name.
NASUFirst of all, only the names of His God, the city of His God and His name are written on those who overcome. What happened to their supposed equality, WJ? And to Bo, why isn't Mohammed written on them also? And WJ, why isn't there the name of a third person?
Who is the one referred to as “my God” Keith? And who is the one calling Him “my God?”
Is the writer of Rev. the same as John 1? It seems like both books are written by the same John. If that is so, then John understands that one God has another for His God.
Kathi
Hi KathiSo you think that invalidates John 1:1-3?
Your argument is a red herring and leaves out the fact that Jesus who was in very nature God left his place of Glory and submitted to the Father by becoming a servant through taking on the likeness of sinful flesh and being found in fashion as a man declared the Father to be his God. Phil 2
But the Word that was with God and was God is till God for God cannot change. The Word/Spirit of Jesus did not change and could not change but took on the “Form” of a servant and being found in fashion as a man humbled himself, even as the scriptures clearly reveal that YHWH can take on different forms and still yet be God.
The Father also calls Jesus God as well as the Apostles and the Angels are commanded to worship him and there is no difference in the honor and worship that is given to Jesus than to the Father and the Holy Spirit in the NT, for Jesus uses the same Greek word for worship “proskyneō” for true worship to the Father that was practiced on him.
In fact there is no difference in their eternal attributes or nature.
If you see Jesus who is the “Visible Image of God” as less than God then you have created a false image of God and therefore worship a false God.
Jesus said you can only serve One master. Jesus is our only Lord and master.
For certain men whose condemnation was written about* long ago have secretly slipped in among you. They are godless men, who change the grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny “JESUS CHRIST OUR ONLY SOVEREIGN AND LORD“. Jude 1:4
To hold another being in such high esteem, worship, and honour to a Hebrew Monotheist would have been a violation of the Shema if he were not God!
Jesus demanded that men should die for him. No anointed prophet or mere man could make such demands on another mans life unless he was God.
No other being in the NT is ascribed the word “Theos” by an Apostle or follower of Jesus. That word is exclusively used for the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit by the believers.
I believe the words of the Apostles without all of the inferences, and special pleadings to make the Apostles say what they didn’t say.
Paul said…
while we wait for the blessed hope-the glorious appearing of our “GREAT GOD AND SAVIOR, JESUS CHRIST”, who gave himself for us to redeem us from all wickedness and to purify for himself a people that are his very own, eager to do what is good. Titus 2:13
And Paul was not contradicting himself when he said…
So then, about eating food sacrificed to idols: We know that an idol is nothing at all in the world and that “THERE IS NO GOD BUT ONE”. For even if there are “SO-CALLED GODS”, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”), 1 Cor 8:4,5
This is my confession and there is nothing in the scriptures that tells me Jesus who is “the visible image of the invisible God” should be seen as anything less than the Father no more than I am less than my Father in nature.
I serve One Divine Being Kathi, the Father, Son and Holy Spirit who are “ONE GOD”. I Have “One Spirit”, how many do you have?
When God speaks to you is it the Father, the Son or the Holy Spirit? Can you tell? If you cannot tell, then why can’t you tell?
If Jesus spoke to you and you say God spoke to you through Jesus, then why don't you say they Spoke to me?
You say you serve 2, The Father GOD and Jesus the Begotten God!
Whose theology is closer to John 1:1, “And God was the Word”?
As men seek to make Jesus into something less than the Father they dishonour the Father who has given him a name above all names including his own!
Blessings WJ
Keith,
You didn't say who the “I” was in the Rev. passage. Who is the “I” Keith?
Hi KathiJesus of course!
I thought I explained that.
Who is the “He” in this verse….?
But about the Son 'he” says, “Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever, and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom. Heb 1:8
So what does your text prove?
The Father didn’t take on the role of a servant did he?
Instead of evading the issue that John 1:1 says “And God was the Word”, why don't you explain why John writes it this way?
Was John contradicting his own words?
When he witnessed Thomas calling Jesus his “Lord and God” and Jesus acknowledging what should have been a blasphemous statement by saying…
…”“BECAUSE YOU HAVE SEEN ME, YOU HAVE BELIEVED”; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.” John 20:29
Are you blessed for believing what Thomas believed?
John didn’t rebuke or correct Thomas either, did he?
After all it was John who wrote John 1:1 and John 1:18 wasn’t it?
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, AND THE WORD WAS GOD. John 1:1
No one has ever seen God, “but God the One and Only“,*who is at the Father's side, has made him known. John 1:18
There is only “ONE TRUE GOD” Kathi.
Henotheism is a lie!
Blessings WJ
Keith,
You said:Quote As men seek to make Jesus into something less than the Father they di
shonour the Father who has given him a name above all names including his own!So aren't you adding to scripture here. It seems that by that statement you worship someone who has a name that is above the name of the Father. That does not express equality. That places the Son above the Father.
You have placed the Son who claims another as “His God” above His own God. IMO
WOW! Not a good idea!
As far as most of the rest of your post…where do I say that the Son is not God? I have only said that He is not the most high God.
In hebrews don't forget “Oh God, thy God has exalted thee.” The Son is the God that has a GOD before He became a man, while He was a man, and after He was exalted. He did not change.
KathiQuote (Paladin @ June 25 2009,10:53) Quote (thethinker @ June 25 2009,20:06) Worshipingjesus said to Paladin: Quote Hi PD BTW, the word “kainos” is not mentioned anywhere near the text in John 1.
In other words John also didnt say “the “kainos” creation was made by him and for him and without him nothing in the “kainos” creation was made.
Your theology won't cut it here!
WJ,
Right on! I would like to add verse 10,
Quote He was in the world, and the world was made by Him, and the world did not know Him The world He created was that to which He came and that which rejected Him. It was NOT the new creation. John 1 is soooo clear about things.
thinker
Don't ever again accuse me of “dragging WJ into” our discussion.(TT)
Worshipingjesus said to Paladin:Quote Hi PD BTW, the word “kainos” is not mentioned anywhere near the text in John 1.
In other words John also didnt say “the “kainos” creation was made by him and for him and without him nothing in the “kainos” creation was made.
Your theology won't cut it here!
Quote (Paladin @ June 25 2009,10:53)
I see as usual you do not address what I actually said, but you have to rearrange the issue in order to rebutt it.I said NOTHING about “kainos” being in John 1. I said the “new name – logos of God” referenced in REVELATION, in 69 a.d. showed it could NOT have been an issue in 33 a.d. among the disciples. John did not write his gospel until 96 a.d.
and his reference to the logos reflected his use of it in the apokalypse, in which it was “new, and unknown.”
Hi PDHave you forgotten what your reply was to?
I highlighted it for you.
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.
You response was to John 1:1, “the Word was God” or “God was the Word”, being eternal, was it not?
Why are you always flipping things around and accusing me for misquoting you?
Are you not implying that John 1:1 is “the “kainos” name, and John 1:3 is the “kainos” creation, isnt that what you believe?
If so then how am I “rearranging the issue in order to rebutt it”?
My point again is that you are making a huge leap with your assumption or inference that the “Word that was God” is the “Word of God” or new name as you say, for John did not even use the word “kainos” in the Prologue!
Besides even if what you say is true, it still does not change the fact that John 1:1 reads “And God was the Word”, not “and “The Word of God” was God!
Therefore the Word is eternal because God is eternal!
WJ
Quote (thethinker @ June 25 2009,09:59) Quote (SEEKING @ June 26 2009,04:48) Quote (thethinker @ June 19 2009,01:27) Please explain how YHWH can refer to Himself as “US” if He is not a plural entity.[/b] So far nobody here has explained anything.
thinker
Thinker,Help me grasp your train of thought here. If I, with my buddy Joe present, say to you, “Thinker, join US at the ball game”how does that make ME a “plural entity? Plurality seems formed only as Joe and I (individually) join to form the US referred to.
But, Joe and I remain seperate beings not at all one.
Blessings,
Seeking
Hey Seeking,
Good to see you back! I was thinking about you just today. God was the King of Israel. Christ was the King of Israel. Either confess that Israel had two kings or that she had one king in two persons. If Israel had one king in two persons this would be plural unity. It's not that difficult really.thinker
George Bush was president and Obama is president. I confess they served as president at different times, but, that does not seem to add up to plural unity.I do not see how your explanation addresses the “US” issue and its meaning either.
Seeking
Quote (thethinker @ June 25 2009,13:06) WorshipingJesus said to Kathi: Quote Hi Kathi So you think that invalidates John 1:1-3?
Your argument is a red herring and leaves out the fact that Jesus who was in very nature God left his place of Glory and submitted to the Father by becoming a servant through taking on the likeness of sinful flesh and being found in fashion as a man declared the Father to be his God. Phil 2
WJ,
Yes! Philippians 2 is the key to understanding.thinker
Thinker and WJ,
And I thought that you guys say that the “word” submitted to the Father and became a servant. You say that it was an “eternal word” that existed before it became flesh.But that would make no sense since a word cannot submit or not submit, it is just an expression of a thought.
BTW, the Son declared the Father to be His God while in the flesh and while He was exalted and given the name above all names. See Rev. 3:12.
Kathi
Quote (Lightenup @ June 25 2009,13:09) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 25 2009,11:38) Quote (Lightenup @ June 25 2009,11:10) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 25 2009,02:09) Quote (Lightenup @ June 24 2009,21:14) Keith and Bo, Who is the “I” in this passage. If it is the Son and the Son is God replace the I with “God” and continue to read.
Rev 3:12
12 'He who overcomes, I will make him a pillar in the temple of My God, and he will not go out from it anymore; and I will write on him the name of My God, and the name of the city of My God, the new Jerusalem, which comes down out of heaven from My God, and My new name.
NASUFirst of all, only the names of His God, the city of His God and His name are written on those who overcome. What happened to their supposed equality, WJ? And to Bo, why isn't Mohammed written on them also? And WJ, why isn't there the name of a third person?
Who is the one referred to as “my God” Keith? And who is the one calling Him “my God?”
Is the writer of Rev. the same as John 1? It seems like both books are written by the same John. If that is so, then John understands that one God has another for His God.
Kathi
Hi KathiSo you think that invalidates John 1:1-3?
Your argument is a red herring and leaves out the fact that Jesus who was in very nature God left his place of Glory and submitted to the Father by becoming a servant through taking on the likeness of sinful flesh and being found in fashion as a man declared the Father to be his God. Phil 2
But the Word that was with God and was God is till God for God cannot change. The Word/Spirit of Jesus did not change and could not change but took on the “Form” of a servant and being found in fashion as a man humbled himself, even as the scriptures clearly reveal that YHWH can take on different forms and still yet be God.
The Father also calls Jesus God as well as the Apostles and the Angels are commanded to worship him and there is no difference in the honor and worship that is given to Jesus than to the Father and the Holy Spirit in the NT, for Jesus uses the same Greek word for worship “proskyneō” for true worship to the Father that was practiced on him.
In fact there is no difference in their eternal attributes or nature.
If you see Jesus who is the “Visible Image of God” as less than God then you have created a false image of God and therefore worship a false God.
Jesus said you can only serve One master. Jesus is our only Lord and master.
For certain men whose condemnation was written about* long ago have secretly slipped in among you. They are godless men, who change the grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny “JESUS CHRIST OUR ONLY SOVEREIGN AND LORD“. Jude 1:4
To hold another being in such high esteem, worship, and honour to a Hebrew Monotheist would have been a violation of the Shema if he were not God!
Jesus demanded that men should die for him. No anointed prophet or mere man could make such demands on another mans life unless he was God.
No other being in the NT is ascribed the word “Theos” by an Apostle or follower of Jesus. That word is exclusively used for the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit by the believers.
I believe the words of the Apostles without all of the inferences, and special pleadings to make the Apostles say what they didn’t say.
Paul said…
while we wait for the blessed hope-the glorious appearing of our “GREAT GOD AND SAVIOR, JESUS CHRIST”, who gave himself for us to redeem us from all wickedness and to purify for himself a people that are his very own, eager to do what is good. Titus 2:13
And Paul was not contradicting himself when he said…
So then, about eating food sacrificed to idols: We know that an idol is nothing at all in the world and that “THERE IS NO GOD BUT ONE”. For even if there are “SO-CALLED GODS”, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”), 1 Cor 8:4,5
This is my confession and there is nothing in the scriptures that tells me Jesus who is “the visible image of the invisible God” should be seen as anything less than the Father no more than I am less than my Father in nature.
I serve One Divine Being Kathi, the Father, Son and Holy Spirit who are “ONE GOD”. I Have “One Spirit”, how many do you have?
When God speaks to you is it the Father, the Son or the Holy Spirit? Can you tell? If you cannot tell, then why can’t you tell?
If Jesus spoke to you and you say God spoke to you through Jesus, then why don't you say they Spoke to me?
You say you serve 2, The Father GOD and Jesus the Begotten God!
Whose theology is closer to John 1:1, “And God was the Word”?
As men seek to make Jesus into something less than the Father they dishonour the Father who has given him a name above all names including his own!
Blessings WJ
Keith,
You didn't say who the “I” was in the Rev. passage. Who is the “I” Keith?
Hi KathiJesus of course!
I thought I explained that.
Who is the “He” in this verse….?
But about the Son 'he” says, “Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever, and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom. Heb 1:8
So what does your text prove?
The Father didn’t take on the role of a servant did he?
Instead of evading the issue that John 1:1 says “And God was the Word”, why don't you explain why John writes it this way?
Was John contradicting his own words?
When he witnessed Thomas calling Jesus his “Lord and God” and Jesus acknowledging what should have been a blasphemous statement by saying…
…”“BECAUSE YOU HAVE SEEN ME, YOU HAVE BELIEVED”; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.” John 20:29
Are you blessed for believing what Thomas believed?
John didn’t rebuke or correct Thomas either, did he?
After all it was John who wrote John 1:1 and John 1:18 wasn’t it?
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, AND THE WORD WAS GOD. John 1:1
No one has ever seen God, “but God the One and Only“,*who is at the Father's side, has made him known. John 1:18
There is only “ONE TRUE GOD” Kathi.
Henotheism is a lie!
Blessings WJ
Keith,
You said:Quote As men seek to make Jesus into something less than the Father they dishonour the Father who has given him a name above all names including his own! So aren't you adding to scripture here. It seems that by that statement you worship someone who has a name that is above the name of the Father. That does not express equality. That places the Son above the Father.
You have placed the Son who claims another as “His God” above His own God. IMO
WOW! Not a good idea!
As far as most of the rest of your post…where do I say that the Son is not God? I have only said that He is not the most high God.
In hebrews don't forget “Oh God, thy God has exalted thee.” The Son is the God that has a GOD before He became a man, while He was a man, and after He was exalted. He did not change.
Kathi
Hi KathiPlease try real hard not to read into the scriptures with your Henotheistic glasses on please.
I will worship toward thy holy temple, and praise thy name for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth: for “thou hast magnified thy word ABOVE ALL THY NAME“.
Does this mean that the Word of God is above God?
Now, who is the Word by name?
And what has Paul said that the Father has done with his name?
”FAR ABOVE ALL” principality, and power, and might, and dominion, “and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come”: Eph 1:21
Therefore God exalted him “TO THE HIGHEST PLACE”” and gave him “THE NAME THAT IS ABOVE EVERY NAME”, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. Phil 2:9-11
Now compare this with this…
Turn to me and be saved, all you ends of the earth; for I am God, and “THERE IS NO OTHER. By myself I have sworn, my mouth has uttered in all integrity a word that will not be revoked: “BEFORE ME EVERY KNEE WILL BOW; BY ME EVERY TONGUE WILL SWEAR” They will say of me, 'In the Lord (YHWH) alone are righteousness and strength.' ” All who have raged against him will come to him and be put to shame.Isa 45:22-24
Who do you think Paul had in mind when he said “that at the name of Jesus “every knee should bow”, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, “and every tongue confess” that Jesus Christ is Lord….
Was Paul mad by saying this knowing that YHWH had plainly said “By **MYSELF** I Have sworn that “BEFORE ME EVERY KNEE WILL BOW; BY ME EVERY TONGUE WILL SWEAR” and that YHYW said he was God and no other?
Yet this same Paul writes again…
For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord (YHWH) “EVERY KNEE SHALL BOW TO ME, AND EVERY TONGUE SHALL CONFESS TO GOD”. Rom 14:11
Was Paul confused? This same Paul said there is “No other God but One”, 1 Cor 8:4, 5
Why would Paul draw from Isa 45 and apply that to Jesus if he did not believe Jesus was YHWH?
Paul calls Jesus his “Great God and Saviour”. Either Jesus is God in the fullest sense of the word or according to Paul’s own words he is not God at all!
Right now Jesus has a name above every name and has all authority and Power and sits at the right hand of the Father, not below him nor above him, and in fact according to scripture is the Fathers equal because he has not yet subjected himself to the Father until all things are put under his feet at which time he wll subject himself back to the Father that God may be all in all yet he will rule and reign with the Father for ever and ever, for the increase of his kingdom will have no end! 1 Cor 15:28
Remember, it brings Glory to the Father to confess that Jesus Christ is Lord and has “The” name above all names!
Blessings WJ
Quote (SEEKING @ June 26 2009,05:10) Quote (thethinker @ June 25 2009,09:59) Quote (SEEKING @ June 26 2009,04:48) Quote (thethinker @ June 19 2009,01:27) Please explain how YHWH can refer to Himself as “US” if He is not a plural entity.[/b] So far nobody here has explained anything.
thinker
Thinker,Help me grasp your train of thought here. If I, with my buddy Joe present, say to you, “Thinker, join US at the ball game”how does that make ME a “plural entity? Plurality seems formed only as Joe and I (individually) join to form the US referred to.
But, Joe and I remain seperate beings not at all one.
Blessings,
Seeking
Hey Seeking,
Good to see you back! I was thinking about you just today. God was the King of Israel. Christ was the King of Israel. Either confess that Israel had two kings or that she had one king in two persons. If Israel had one king in two persons this would be plural unity. It's not that difficult really.thinker
George Bush was president and Obama is president. I confess they served as president at different times, but, that does not seem to add up to plural unity.I do not see how your explanation addresses the “US” issue and its meaning either.
Seeking
Seeking,
Revelation 22 says that the water of life proceeds from the throne of God and of the Lamb. I see one Kingship in two persons reigning SIMULTANEOUSLY and not in succession as Bush and Obama. I see a plural unity. If you don't that 's fine with me.How have you been dude? I hope ill health did not keep you away.
thinker
WorshippingJesus said to Paladin:
Quote Why are you always flipping things around and accusing me for misquoting you? WJ,
I have noticed this too. Paladin does not own up to the implications that follow from what he says. So he accuses others of misrepresenting him.
thinkerWorshippingJesus said to Kathi:
Quote Please try real hard not to read into the scriptures with your Henotheistic glasses on please. “Henotheism
Henotheists recognize a single deity, and view other Gods and Goddesses as manifestations or aspects of that supreme God. They choose one aspect to worship without denying the existence of other aspects or forms of the Supreme Being. Many Hindu and Neopagan traditions are henotheistic. “Hén” is the Greek word for 'one'. The term was coined in 1860 by (Friedrich) Max Müller (1823-1900), professor of comparative philology at Oxford.”http://www.ladywindsong.com/craft/vocab.html#heno
Kathi's treatment of the word “begotten” makes Christ “another aspect or form of the Supreme Being.”
thinker
WorshippingJesus said to kathi:
Quote Now compare this with this… Turn to me and be saved, all you ends of the earth; for I am God, and “THERE IS NO OTHER. By myself I have sworn, my mouth has uttered in all integrity a word that will not be revoked: “BEFORE ME EVERY KNEE WILL BOW; BY ME EVERY TONGUE WILL SWEAR” They will say of me, 'In the Lord (YHWH) alone are righteousness and strength.' ” All who have raged against him will come to him and be put to shame.Isa 45:22-24
Who do you think Paul had in mind when he said “that at the name of Jesus “every knee should bow”, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, “and every tongue confess” that Jesus Christ is Lord….
Was Paul mad by saying this knowing that YHWH had plainly said “By **MYSELF** I Have sworn that “BEFORE ME EVERY KNEE WILL BOW; BY ME EVERY TONGUE WILL SWEAR” and that YHYW said he was God and no other?
Yet this same Paul writes again…
For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord (YHWH) “EVERY KNEE SHALL BOW TO ME, AND EVERY TONGUE SHALL CONFESS TO GOD”. Rom 14:11
Was Paul confused? This same Paul said there is “No other God but One”, 1 Cor 8:4, 5
Why would Paul draw from Isa 45 and apply that to Jesus if he did not believe Jesus was YHWH?
Paul calls Jesus his “Great God and Saviour”. Either Jesus is God in the fullest sense of the word or according to Paul’s own words he is not God at all!
Right now Jesus has a name above every name and has all authority and Power and sits at the right hand of the Father, not below him nor above him, and in fact according to scripture is the Fathers equal because he has not yet subjected himself to the Father until all things are put under his feet at which time he wll subject himself back to the Father that God may be all in all yet he will rule and reign with the Father for ever and ever, for the increase of his kingdom will have no end! 1 Cor 15:28
Remember, it brings Glory to the Father to confess that Jesus Christ is Lord and has “The” name above all names!
Blessings WJ
Amen Brother Keith! Paul applied the sayings of Isaiah 45 to Jesus just as John applied Isaiah's vision of Adoney to Jesus (Is. 6:1-10 w/John 12:37-41)
thinker
Quote (Lightenup @ June 25 2009,13:17) Quote (thethinker @ June 25 2009,13:06) WorshipingJesus said to Kathi: Quote Hi Kathi So you think that invalidates John 1:1-3?
Your argument is a red herring and leaves out the fact that Jesus who was in very nature God left his place of Glory and submitted to the Father by becoming a servant through taking on the likeness of sinful flesh and being found in fashion as a man declared the Father to be his God. Phil 2
WJ,
Yes! Philippians 2 is the key to understanding.thinker
Thinker and WJ,
And I thought that you guys say that the “word” submitted to the Father and became a servant. You say that it was an “eternal word” that existed before it became flesh.But that would make no sense since a word cannot submit or not submit, it is just an expression of a thought.
BTW, the Son declared the Father to be His God while in the flesh and while He was exalted and given the name above all names. See Rev. 3:12.
Kathi
Hi LUPlease stop with the misrepresentations.
When has Jack or myself ever refered to the Word as it? You know better than this!
Jesus is the “Word that was with God and was God” and God is not an it!
Read Phil 2 with an open mind! He was in very nature God, just as the Father is in very nature God!
Notice he was not in very nature a begotten god or a begotten son.
Blessings WJ
Quote (thethinker @ June 25 2009,15:47) WorshippingJesus said to Kathi: Quote Please try real hard not to read into the scriptures with your Henotheistic glasses on please. “Henotheism
Henotheists recognize a single deity, and view other Gods and Goddesses as manifestations or aspects of that supreme God. They choose one aspect to worship without denying the existence of other aspects or forms of the Supreme Being. Many Hindu and Neopagan traditions are henotheistic. “Hén” is the Greek word for 'one'. The term was coined in 1860 by (Friedrich) Max Müller (1823-1900), professor of comparative philology at Oxford.”http://www.ladywindsong.com/craft/vocab.html#heno
Kathi's treatment of the word “begotten” makes Christ “another aspect or form of the Supreme Being.”
thinker
Thinker,
FYI, you supply a link to a new age website. Is that your source for truth these days? You will notice that the trinity fits nicely with the henotheism definition.Henotheism
Henotheists recognize a single deity, and view other Gods and Goddesses as manifestations or aspects of that supreme God. They choose one aspect to worship without denying the existence of other aspects or forms of the Supreme Being. Many Hindu and Neopagan traditions are henotheistic. “Hén” is the Greek word for 'one'. The term was coined in 1860 by (Friedrich) Max Müller (1823-1900), professor of comparative philology at Oxford.Monotheism
In monotheism, there is only one personality of God. Some monotheistic gods, such as Allah and Yahweh, have various temperaments and moods, but they are nevertheless considered one being. A notable exception to this is the Three-in-One doctrine of Christianity; Father, Son (Jesus) and Spirit are aspects of God with differing purposes in creation, life management, and judgement.Kathi
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 25 2009,16:31) Quote (Lightenup @ June 25 2009,13:17) Quote (thethinker @ June 25 2009,13:06) WorshipingJesus said to Kathi: Quote Hi Kathi So you think that invalidates John 1:1-3?
Your argument is a red herring and leaves out the fact that Jesus who was in very nature God left his place of Glory and submitted to the Father by becoming a servant through taking on the likeness of sinful flesh and being found in fashion as a man declared the Father to be his God. Phil 2
WJ,
Yes! Philippians 2 is the key to understanding.thinker
Thinker and WJ,
And I thought that you guys say that the “word” submitted to the Father and became a servant. You say that it was an “eternal word” that existed before it became flesh.But that would make no sense since a word cannot submit or not submit, it is just an expression of a thought.
BTW, the Son declared the Father to be His God while in the flesh and while He was exalted and given the name above all names. See Rev. 3:12.
Kathi
Hi LUPlease stop with the misrepresentations.
When has Jack or myself ever refered to the Word as it? You know better than this!
Jesus is the “Word that was with God and was God” and God is not an it!
Read Phil 2 with an open mind! He was in very nature God, just as the Father is in very nature God!
Notice he was not in very nature a begotten god or a begotten son.
Blessings WJ
Keith,
By making what was meant to be an “it”, you have made it into a god.In the above sentence I have written 16 words. That is what a word is, or do you see 16 gods?
You worship a word. I worship what is meant by the word.
Kathi
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
