- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 25 2012,18:47) Quote (Lightenup @ June 25 2012,11:41) BD,
If you see that LORD=Jehovah/YHVH
and
if you see that YHVH=the God of gods and the Lord of lords
and
if you see that for us there is one God (Father) and one Lord (Son)
and
if you see that the Father and Son are one…it all comes together.
Really? You're STILL going to continue using this theory to force your point, knowing full well that the Father ALONE is called “our Lord and God” in Revelation?Hmmmm…………….
Actually I used scripture to defend my point. Here is another:Rev 19:16 On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written: KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS.
Rev 17:14 “These will wage war against the Lamb, and the Lamb will overcome them, because He is Lord of lords and King of kings, and those who are with Him are the called and chosen and faithful.”
Also, the Father is not the only one called our Lord and our God.
More scripture:
John 20:26 Jesus came, the doors having been shut, and stood in their midst and said, “Peace be with you.” 27Then He said to Thomas, “Reach here with your finger, and see My hands; and reach here your hand and put it into My side; and do not be unbelieving, but believing.” 28Thomas answered and said to Him, “My Lord and my God!” 29Jesus said to him, “Because you have seen Me, have you believed? Blessed are they who did not see, and yet believed.”Quote (Lightenup @ June 26 2012,16:02) BD,
Within the unity there are two persons, one is greater in authority than the other, so? I have never said anything different. I have never said that they have equal authority…one is the Father and has greater authority over the Son. This is typically the case within a Father/Son relationship. Still they are a unity. A unity can have members that differ in authority yet still be a unity. Having greater authority does not mean He has greater nature.The Most High is the Most High because of the unity, not apart from the unity.
BTW, no one can snatch believers out of the Son's hand either.
Who put them in the son's hand?So you agree that The Father has the greater Authority OVER the son, which means you agree that THE FATHER is a HIGHER Authority so High in fact that Jesus says
Matthew 20:23
And he saith unto them, Ye shall drink indeed of my cup, and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with: but to sit on my right hand, and on my left, is not mine to give, but it shall be given to them for whom it is prepared of my Father.You see Jesus cannot even choose who will be on his left or right hand but the Father Can.
Mark 13:32
But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.Jesus does not know again here but God does know and God does choose whatever he wants.
So tell me how could this co-Unity work as you explain it when according to you God cam choose and “God” cannot choose and God can know the hour while “God” cannot know the hour.
Plus you are saying tha “God” cried out to God to be saved, saying take this cup from me but then saying let it be God's will although “God” wasn't willing.
Then you assert that “God” says to GOD, “My God My God, why have you forsaken me?How can a unity forsake itself?
Quote (Lightenup @ June 26 2012,16:10) Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 25 2012,18:47) Quote (Lightenup @ June 25 2012,11:41) BD,
If you see that LORD=Jehovah/YHVH
and
if you see that YHVH=the God of gods and the Lord of lords
and
if you see that for us there is one God (Father) and one Lord (Son)
and
if you see that the Father and Son are one…it all comes together.
Really? You're STILL going to continue using this theory to force your point, knowing full well that the Father ALONE is called “our Lord and God” in Revelation?Hmmmm…………….
Actually I used scripture to defend my point. Here is another:Rev 19:16 On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written: KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS.
Rev 17:14 “These will wage war against the Lamb, and the Lamb will overcome them, because He is Lord of lords and King of kings, and those who are with Him are the called and chosen and faithful.”
Also, the Father is not the only one called our Lord and our God.
More scripture:
John 20:26 Jesus came, the doors having been shut, and stood in their midst and said, “Peace be with you.” 27Then He said to Thomas, “Reach here with your finger, and see My hands; and reach here your hand and put it into My side; and do not be unbelieving, but believing.” 28Thomas answered and said to Him, “My Lord and my God!” 29Jesus said to him, “Because you have seen Me, have you believed? Blessed are they who did not see, and yet believed.”
Thomas is misunderstood in verse John 20:28:The context of the verse talks about an unbelieving Thomas being surprised when Jesus offers him evidence.
The exclamation, “My God,” on his part was just astonishment. We use such exclamations everyday while talking to people. This doesn't mean that the person we are talking to is God. For example, I see John cutting his wrist with a Rambo knife. I say: “My God, John what are you doing?” Do I mean that John is God? Of course not.Thomas says: “My God, my Lord.” He was not claiming that Jesus was his (1) God and (2) Lord. If he did then your whole point is destroyed Because claiming that Jesus is Lord and God is a violation of Christian doctrine, which asserts that there is One God, the Father and One Lord, Jesus. Jesus can't be God and Lord. “…yet for us there is but one God, the Father…and one Lord, Jesus Christ …(I Corinthians 8:6)”.
Now you are stuck with a mess here.
IS Jesus your One Lord and One God?
BTW,
I have to be more clear with you there is a difference between a Unity and a Number count. If there is ONE God it does not mean there is one group or type it means. How many? Count 1 stop. To say me and my father is one is a statement of Unity to say that my Father is the ONLY True God is a statement of number quantity. “ONLY”
So I will ask you right now right here in front of God and men is The Father THE ONLY TRUE GOD as Jesus declared?
Hi BD, you have asked me a lot of good questions. Here goes:
Quote Who put them in the son's hand? So you agree that The Father has the greater Authority OVER the son, which means you agree that THE FATHER is a HIGHER Authority so High in fact that Jesus says
Matthew 20:23
And he saith unto them, Ye shall drink indeed of my cup, and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with: but to sit on my right hand, and on my left, is not mine to give, but it shall be given to them for whom it is prepared of my Father.The Father has greater authority and has given the Son all things that He also has, including those in the Father's and Son's hand. Again, there are two in the unity, one with greater authority over the other as typical in a Father/Son relationship. This does not make them unequally god-natured just because one has greater authority over the other and gives all things to the other…Both would be typical since they are literally Father and Son.
Quote You see Jesus cannot even choose who will be on his left or right hand but the Father Can. Well, no where does it say that He couldn't even choose, it just says it is not for Him to do the choosing. It wasn't for the Father to come as a man, it wasn't for the Father to be the faithful High Priest, it wasn't for the Father to give the church authority over the nations. You see, some things was for the Father to do and some things was for the Son to do. Like a pilot and a co-pilot working in unity, some things are for the pilot to do and somethings are for the co-pilot to do yet they are still both pilots and together they are controlling the plane. What you see with the Father and the Son is a perfect unity working together for their purpose.
I will be back to answer more later.
Quote (Lightenup @ June 25 2012,23:04) Mike,
you said:Quote I don't believe your letter was written in the first century, and I definitely KNOW it was not written by Simon, the one Jesus named Cephas. If you definitely know these things, where is your proof?
I eliminate it as a fraud the same way those who compiled the canon eliminated many other letters as frauds – by comparing the things Peter supposedly said in the letter you posted with the things Peter said in the canonized scriptures. (Of course, they also used other criteria as well.)Remember that this is the Peter who received from God Almighty the revelation that Jesus was, not God, but the SON OF the living God.
The same Peter who wrote, “Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! In his great mercy he has given us new birth into a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead…….”
The same Peter who prayed in Acts 4 to the God who created the heavens and the earth through that God's “Holy Servant Jesus Christ”.
But why do you ask ME for proof of a negative? Surely, since YOU are the one posting the letter, YOU have proof of it's authenticity, right?
Quote (Lightenup @ June 25 2012,23:10) Actually I used scripture to defend my point. Here is another: Rev 19:16 On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written: KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS.
Yes Kathi, Jesus is called the King of kings. So is his God. And so is King Nebuchadnezzar. God is called “good”. Does that mean YOU are God if I called you “good”? Abraham was called “lord”. Does that mean he is Jesus or God?Now, back to the point: YOU said that in 1 Cor 8:6, Paul was listing for us the TWO members of the “God unity”, one of whom is our only God, and the other of whom is our only Lord. It was your understanding that the one God and the one Lord TOGETHER make up “God Almighty”, right?
I have led you to scriptures that shed light for you on that flawed understanding. Whether or not you accept those scriptures will, as always, remain up to you.
Quote (bodhitharta @ June 26 2012,09:01) Then you assert that “God” says to GOD, “My God My God, why have you forsaken me?How can a unity forsake itself?
You have posted many good, scriptural points, Asana.Quote (Lightenup @ June 25 2012,23:02) The Most High is the Most High because of the unity, not apart from the unity.
Mark 5:7
He shouted at the top of his voice, “What do you want with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God?”Luke 1:32
He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High.Unless Jesus is his own Son, it seems the Most High God is someone OTHER THAN Jesus.
Surely you don't think Jesus is the Son of the unity of Jesus and the Father, right?
Kathi,
1. How could Jesus have “BECOME as much superior to the angels as the name he has INHERITED is superior to theirs”?
2. The one and only “Most High God” has a Son named Jesus.
Does Jesus have a Son named Jesus?
BD,
you asked:Quote Mark 13:32
But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.Jesus does not know again here but God does know and God does choose whatever he wants.
So tell me how could this co-Unity work as you explain it when according to you God cam choose and “God” cannot choose and God can know the hour while “God” cannot know the hour.
Plus you are saying tha “God” cried out to God to be saved, saying take this cup from me but then saying let it be God's will although “God” wasn't willing.
Then you assert that “God” says to GOD, “My God My God, why have you forsaken me?How can a unity forsake itself?
Again, there are two persons within the unity. It will help you understand if you call the Father 'God' and the Son 'Lord' or the Father 'the Begetter God' and the other 'the only Begotten God' instead of calling them both 'God,' even though they both are. It is like calling the two pilots on the plane captain and co-pilot even though they are both pilots. It is for clarification purposes. Both persons fly the plane.
Both have the ability to 'choose' who will be on the right or the left but both do not have the role to do so.
When Jesus said 'not my will but thine be done' demonstrates that Jesus always chooses to do the Father's will even when tempted according to the flesh to do His supernatural thing to satisfy His flesh. It also shows that they each have a will. He didn't want to not die for mankind, He just didn't want to have to go through the torture. He knew that He came to die. This is my understanding.
One can forsake the other because there were two, and because it was necessary for their purpose to save mankind from their sins.
Jesus did not know the time of His coming because it was for His Father to know and not for Him to know. There must be a good reason for this information to be withheld. We aren't told what it is.
Quote (bodhitharta @ June 26 2012,10:10) Quote (Lightenup @ June 26 2012,16:10) Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 25 2012,18:47) Quote (Lightenup @ June 25 2012,11:41) BD,
If you see that LORD=Jehovah/YHVH
and
if you see that YHVH=the God of gods and the Lord of lords
and
if you see that for us there is one God (Father) and one Lord (Son)
and
if you see that the Father and Son are one…it all comes together.
Really? You're STILL going to continue using this theory to force your point, knowing full well that the Father ALONE is called “our Lord and God” in Revelation?Hmmmm…………….
Actually I used scripture to defend my point. Here is another:Rev 19:16 On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written: KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS.
Rev 17:14 “These will wage war against the Lamb, and the Lamb will overcome them, because He is Lord of lords and King of kings, and those who are with Him are the called and chosen and faithful.”
Also, the Father is not the only one called our Lord and our God.
More scripture:
John 20:26 Jesus came, the doors having been shut, and stood in their midst and said, “Peace be with you.” 27Then He said to Thomas, “Reach here with your finger, and see My hands; and reach here your hand and put it into My side; and do not be unbelieving, but believing.” 28Thomas answered and said to Him, “My Lord and my God!” 29Jesus said to him, “Because you have seen Me, have you believed? Blessed are they who did not see, and yet believed.”
Thomas is misunderstood in verse John 20:28:The context of the verse talks about an unbelieving Thomas being surprised when Jesus offers him evidence.
The exclamation, “My God,” on his part was just astonishment. We use such exclamations everyday while talking to people. This doesn't mean that the person we are talking to is God. For example, I see John cutting his wrist with a Rambo knife. I say: “My God, John what are you doing?” Do I mean that John is God? Of course not.Thomas says: “My God, my Lord.” He was not claiming that Jesus was his (1) God and (2) Lord. If he did then your whole point is destroyed Because claiming that Jesus is Lord and God is a violation of Christian doctrine, which asserts that there is One God, the Father and One Lord, Jesus. Jesus can't be God and Lord. “…yet for us there is but one God, the Father…and one Lord, Jesus Christ …(I Corinthians 8:6)”.
Now you are stuck with a mess here.
IS Jesus your One Lord and One God?
BD,
you said:Quote
Thomas is misunderstood in verse John 20:28:The context of the verse talks about an unbelieving Thomas being surprised when Jesus offers him evidence.
The exclamation, “My God,” on his part was just astonishment. We use such exclamations everyday while talking to people. This doesn't mean that the person we are talking to is God. For example, I see John cutting his wrist with a Rambo knife. I say: “My God, John what are you doing?” Do I mean that John is God? Of course not.Well, that is a big assumption on your part. If what Thomas said was spoken like you suggest, he would have taken God's name in vain. I do not see that anywhere among the disciples. I certainly don't think that Thomas took God's name in vain. Although, if you do and you think that is ok, you should reconsider this.
Exodus 20:7
“You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain, for the LORD will not leave him unpunished who takes His name in vain.Quote (bodhitharta @ June 26 2012,10:16) BTW, I have to be more clear with you there is a difference between a Unity and a Number count. If there is ONE God it does not mean there is one group or type it means. How many? Count 1 stop. To say me and my father is one is a statement of Unity to say that my Father is the ONLY True God is a statement of number quantity. “ONLY”
So I will ask you right now right here in front of God and men is The Father THE ONLY TRUE GOD as Jesus declared?
It is written:1 Cor 8:6 yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all things and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we exist through Him.
To say that there is only one true God and that is the Father, and then leave it at that would be like leaving off the second half of the statement that Paul made above.
Jehovah is both God AND Lord.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 26 2012,18:43) Quote (Lightenup @ June 25 2012,23:04) Mike,
you said:Quote I don't believe your letter was written in the first century, and I definitely KNOW it was not written by Simon, the one Jesus named Cephas. If you definitely know these things, where is your proof?
I eliminate it as a fraud the same way those who compiled the canon eliminated many other letters as frauds – by comparing the things Peter supposedly said in the letter you posted with the things Peter said in the canonized scriptures. (Of course, they also used other criteria as well.)Remember that this is the Peter who received from God Almighty the revelation that Jesus was, not God, but the SON OF the living God.
The same Peter who wrote, “Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! In his great mercy he has given us new birth into a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead…….”
The same Peter who prayed in Acts 4 to the God who created the heavens and the earth through that God's “Holy Servant Jesus Christ”.
But why do you ask ME for proof of a negative? Surely, since YOU are the one posting the letter, YOU have proof of it's authenticity, right?
Mike,
you said:Quote I eliminate it as a fraud the same way those who compiled the canon eliminated many other letters as frauds – by comparing the things Peter supposedly said in the letter you posted with the things Peter said in the canonized scriptures. (Of course, they also used other criteria as well.) Remember that this is the Peter who received from God Almighty the revelation that Jesus was, not God, but the SON OF the living God.
Peter never said that the Son of God is not therefore also God. Ask BD what the literal son of God would be. Maybe I will just quote him for you:
Quote If any of you believe that Jesus is the literal son of God then you will have to agree that Jesus is GOD because each kind according to its kind is the rule of Procreation and if this is the case then you should all be Catholic and believe as they do What does Peter say in the canonized scripture that goes against what is said in this historical document, in your opinion? None of what you wrote goes against this document. There are two acknowledged there, a Father and a Son.
I have no reason to doubt it. I believe that other historical documents support what is said in the full document as well as the Bible. I don't find any disagreement. Also, what I believe, agrees with this and I base my belief on scripture.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 26 2012,18:47) Quote (Lightenup @ June 25 2012,23:10) Actually I used scripture to defend my point. Here is another: Rev 19:16 On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written: KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS.
Yes Kathi, Jesus is called the King of kings. So is his God. And so is King Nebuchadnezzar. God is called “good”. Does that mean YOU are God if I called you “good”? Abraham was called “lord”. Does that mean he is Jesus or God?Now, back to the point: YOU said that in 1 Cor 8:6, Paul was listing for us the TWO members of the “God unity”, one of whom is our only God, and the other of whom is our only Lord. It was your understanding that the one God and the one Lord TOGETHER make up “God Almighty”, right?
I have led you to scriptures that shed light for you on that flawed understanding. Whether or not you accept those scriptures will, as always, remain up to you.
Mike,
Are you having trouble with thinking that Neb or Abe pre-existed their flesh existence too? Or do you think that they also were involved in creation? Did either one of them have an everlasting kingdom or lordship? Do either one of them search the heart and mind of men or have dominion over all creation?I assume that you understand that they did not pre-exist their flesh, they were not involved in creation, do not have an everlasting kingdom or lordship, and neither of them have the ability to search the heart and mind of men, nor do either of them have dominion over all creation.
Given that assumption to be true, don't waste my time with going down a rabbit trail that you know yourself is not even a likely comparison but, at most, a type of Lord and King.
There are very many acts, names, etc. that apply to Christ that are unique to the God of the OT. I have already listed many of these but off the top of my head:
Both are involved in creation
Both are involved in the act required for salvation of all mankind
Both are called Lord of lords
Both are called the First and the Last
Both are in the beginning
Both are on the highest throne
Both are necessary to know for salvation
etc.Quote Now, back to the point: YOU said that in 1 Cor 8:6, Paul was listing for us the TWO members of the “God unity”, one of whom is our only God, and the other of whom is our only Lord. It was your understanding that the one God and the one Lord TOGETHER make up “God Almighty”, right? Jehovah is the God of gods and the Lord of lords. Jehovah is the God Almighty. God Almighty is both:
God of gods
and
Lord of lordsThe God of gods
and
the Lord of lords
are both
Jehovah.They are always a unity.
Any scriptures you have used does not disprove this fact. Jehovah the Son is the son of Jehovah the Father. Two different persons are involved here, one as the God of gods and one as the Lord of lords.
Quote (Lightenup @ June 26 2012,19:30) What does Peter say in the canonized scripture that goes against what is said in this historical document, in your opinion? None of what you wrote goes against this document. There are two acknowledged there, a Father and a Son.
First of all, “God” is not a species that produces like offspring. Jehovah, on the other hand, is a Spirit Being, who brought into existence many other sons who were spirit beings – the first of whom was Jesus.Now, Jehovah is definitely A god, right? In fact, He is the Most High God of all the gods. He is the God OF the other gods, right? So as A god and A spirit being, I suppose He would beget A god and A spirit being. And since Jesus is A god and A spirit being, like begot like, right?
But when you use “THE God” as an identification of ONE, then obviously He can't possibly beget what He already is the only one of. For example, Satan is called “THE god of this world”. So Satan could beget A DIFFERENT god of this world, but he, being THE god of this world, could not possibly beget THE god of this world.
THE King could not beget THE King, although he could beget a DIFFERENT king.
THE President could not beget THE President, although he could beget a DIFFERENT president.
So when you say “like begets like”, remember that it always involves a species in which there is more than one. A caribou would beget a DIFFERENT caribou. But if there was only ONE caribou in existence, who was personally IDENTIFIED as THE Caribou, then it would be impossible for him to beget THE Caribou, although he could beget a DIFFERENT caribou. And if the caribou begotten is personally IDENTIFIED as “The Son of THE Caribou”, there is no way he could actually be THE Caribou who begot him in the first place.
Are you soaking this in, Kathi? A god will beget A god. But the first, only, original “THE God” can only beget a DIFFERENT god. He cannot beget Himself. The One and Only Omniscient Creator of the Universe could not possibly beget The One and Only Omniscient Creator of the Universe.
Now, about Peter: You say none of what I wrote goes against your document. I say you are purposely wearing blinders. If Peter prays to THE God who created all things, and prays to Him through His servant Jesus Christ, then it is obvious to me that Peter knows exactly who created, and through whom that creating was done. And it is clear that he doesn't think they are the same being, unity, or whatever, because one of them is the SERVANT of the other.
If Peter thanks the God OF our Lord Jesus Christ, then it is quite clear that he doesn't think Jesus is God Almighty. Obviously, God Almighty would not have a God of His own.
And finally, if Peter received a revelation FROM GOD, telling him that Jesus is the SON OF God, then obviously Peter wouldn't think the Son OF God could be the very God he is the Son OF – like some people.
I understand that you like that letter. Like I said before, it tickles your itching ears. But without authentication, let's just leave things like that out of our SCRIPTURAL discussion, okay?
Quote (Lightenup @ June 26 2012,19:53) don't waste my time with going down a rabbit trail
And don't waste mine with silly comparison like “Jesus is called good, and God is called good, therefore Jesus must BE God.”You do realize that we can distinguish God from His SERVANT Jesus the same way you distinguished Jesus from Neb and Abe, right?
Both are involved in creation
I was involved in the creation of my son. God created him THROUGH me, just as God created all things THROUGH His Servant Jesus. It doesn't mean Jesus is the God who brought him forth anymore than it means I'm the God who brought me forth.
Both are involved in the act required for salvation of all mankind
So are we. WE must believe in order to be saved, right? Plus, many others have been saviors that God SENT to save others. Are they all God? Or just Jesus?
Both are called Lord of lords
That's probably because they are both Lords who are the lord of other lords. I'm sure there are many other Lords of lords too. King David was the Lord of Joab, who was called “lord” by his soldiers. That makes David also a “Lord of lords”, right? Is David God Almighty?
Both are called the First and the Last
They both are the first and the last in certain respects. Adam was the first and the last “original man created”.
Both are in the beginning
But only one of them is said to not even have a beginning, while the other's beginning is from ancient times.
Both are on the highest throne
No, the Highest One GRANTS for the less high one to sit on HIS throne for a little while. That less high one has a lower throne of his own that some will be GRANTED to sit on with him also. It won't make those ones BE him, so why would it make Jesus BE the God whose throne it was GRANTED for him to sit on?
Both are necessary to know for salvation
And apparently so is the Apostle John. Without his book, we wouldn't even KNOW that it is necessary to know both of them. And I guess we could say the same about those who translated John's gospel throughout the ages into different languages. But is John God Almighty? Neither is Jesus.
Kathi, can you not even see that our ONE God Almighty SENT His servant Jesus as His sacrificial Lamb?
Mike,
Jehovah the Father has only one begotten Son who is Jehovah the Son. He did not beget other sons, He created other sons. His only begotten Son is the same kind as Jehovah the Father. No other sons are the same kind as Jehovah the Father because they were not begotten in regards to their primary existence.
Presidents/kings don't beget presidents/kings, they beget human sons or daughters that may or may not become presidents/kings by a process other than begetting.
Please don't act like you are clueless here, Mike.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 26 2012,21:55) Quote (Lightenup @ June 26 2012,19:53) don't waste my time with going down a rabbit trail
And don't waste mine with silly comparison like “Jesus is called good, and God is called good, therefore Jesus must BE God.”You do realize that we can distinguish God from His SERVANT Jesus the same way you distinguished Jesus from Neb and Abe, right?
Mike,Quote And don't waste mine with silly comparison like “Jesus is called good, and God is called good, therefore Jesus must BE God.” I haven't ever said that so that comment was unnecessary.
Quote You do realize that we can distinguish God from His SERVANT Jesus the same way you distinguished Jesus from Neb and Abe, right? No you can't.
Both were involved in creation.
Both were involved in the act of salvation.
Both were called 'the First and the Last.'
Both were in the beginning.
Both sit on the highest throne.
Both have a wrath that will be poured out on the day of the Lord.
Both have dominion over all creation.
Both can search the hearts and minds of people.
Both are unseen yet served.
Etc.We can though, distinguish between the relationship of one as Father and one as Son.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
