- This topic has 1,500 replies, 28 voices, and was last updated 3 years, 2 months ago by
.
- Posts
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 16 2010,22:36) Quote (JustAskin @ Aug. 16 2010,10:45) Believe what you like, lu. Check you understanding of things.
But think in the spiritual. Then you will see.
What kind of remark is that JA?Kathi just quoted Col 1:16 for you, and instead of defending your “begotten is a title” and “Satan came first” beliefs, you just say “believe what you like”?
Wow. Seems to me that she is believing scripture. Do you? Or is your “fractal” theory, the invention of the mind of a mere man, overriding the authority of what the scriptures say?
mike
I agree Mike,Look at his remarks.
The way I saw them he was calling Kathi, “Stupid” (check your understanding) and told her to go “F” herself and die (think in the “spirit”). Whereas in another post he said we are only flesh and can produce only flesh….God only produces spirit. Thus to think in the spirit there is only one way to do that, DIE!
She quoted Scripture and got no response Scripturally, AGAIN.
The spirit of God is unity:
Eph 4:13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:
Eph 4:14 That we [henceforth] be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, [and] cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;
I have posted hundreds of posts with numerous Scriptures but no one rebutts them, they attack me or in this case Kathi. And never addressing what she is talking about.
It seems that cleaning house would be advantageous and bringing in those that seek to follow the Bible and encourage growth in the Bible and how to apply the information in our daily lives.
Yes, Kathi, please keep believing in the Bible and then the spirit of God will be able to open your eyes to see the truth that God wants; and will no longer be a child as Eph 4:14 above said.
The Professor
Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 14 2010,18:49) Keith,
In another thread, you said that you totally agree with the Athanasian Creed that states this:Quote Furthermore it is necessary to everlasting salvation; that he also believe faithfully the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ. For the right Faith is, that we believe and confess; that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and Man; God, of the Essence of the Father; begotten before the worlds; and Man, of the Essence of his Mother, born in the world. you said:
Quote I believe everything in the creed to be scriptual. from here: https://heavennet.net/cgi-bin….1;st=10
I'm wondering what scripture/scriptures you use to support the part that I have bolded.
Bump for KeithQuote (davidbfun @ Aug. 17 2010,00:31) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 16 2010,22:36) Quote (JustAskin @ Aug. 16 2010,10:45) Believe what you like, lu. Check you understanding of things.
But think in the spiritual. Then you will see.
What kind of remark is that JA?Kathi just quoted Col 1:16 for you, and instead of defending your “begotten is a title” and “Satan came first” beliefs, you just say “believe what you like”?
Wow. Seems to me that she is believing scripture. Do you? Or is your “fractal” theory, the invention of the mind of a mere man, overriding the authority of what the scriptures say?
mike
I agree Mike,Look at his remarks.
The way I saw them he was calling Kathi, “Stupid” (check your understanding) and told her to go “F” herself and die (think in the “spirit”). Whereas in another post he said we are only flesh and can produce only flesh….God only produces spirit. Thus to think in the spirit there is only one way to do that, DIE!
She quoted Scripture and got no response Scripturally, AGAIN.
The spirit of God is unity:
Eph 4:13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:
Eph 4:14 That we [henceforth] be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, [and] cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;
I have posted hundreds of posts with numerous Scriptures but no one rebutts them, they attack me or in this case Kathi. And never addressing what she is talking about.
It seems that cleaning house would be advantageous and bringing in those that seek to follow the Bible and encourage growth in the Bible and how to apply the information in our daily lives.
Yes, Kathi, please keep believing in the Bible and then the spirit of God will be able to open your eyes to see the truth that God wants; and will no longer be a child as Eph 4:14 above said.
The Professor
David,Mike and Kathi have been corrected on these matters. They just don't want to hear it. See the opening post to a thread I started a while back:
https://heavennet.net/cgi-bin….;t=3247
the Roo
Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 16 2010,11:40) Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 14 2010,18:49) Keith,
In another thread, you said that you totally agree with the Athanasian Creed that states this:Quote Furthermore it is necessary to everlasting salvation; that he also believe faithfully the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ. For the right Faith is, that we believe and confess; that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and Man; God, of the Essence of the Father; begotten before the worlds; and Man, of the Essence of his Mother, born in the world. you said:
Quote I believe everything in the creed to be scriptual. from here: https://heavennet.net/cgi-bin….1;st=10
I'm wondering what scripture/scriptures you use to support the part that I have bolded.
Bump for Keith
KathiWhy don't you show me what scriptures they used to support your interpretation of your quote?
In context they believed…
So likewise the Father is almighty, the Son almighty, and the Holy Ghost almighty. And yet they are not three Almighties, but one Almighty. So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God. **AND YET THEY ARE NOT THREE GODS, BUT ONE GOD**.
So please tell me how they believed what you believe that “begotten” here has the meaning that God beget another God from himself, co-equal and co-eternal as a different being or another God?
Again, they believed that the begetting was from eternity for he always existed with the Father, and that could not mean a begetting by procreation could it?
WJ
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Aug. 17 2010,07:12) Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 16 2010,11:40) Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 14 2010,18:49) Keith,
In another thread, you said that you totally agree with the Athanasian Creed that states this:Quote Furthermore it is necessary to everlasting salvation; that he also believe faithfully the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ. For the right Faith is, that we believe and confess; that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and Man; God, of the Essence of the Father; begotten before the worlds; and Man, of the Essence of his Mother, born in the world. you said:
Quote I believe everything in the creed to be scriptual. from here: https://heavennet.net/cgi-bin….1;st=10
I'm wondering what scripture/scriptures you use to support the part that I have bolded.
Bump for Keith
KathiWhy don't you show me what scriptures they used to support your interpretation of your quote?
In context they believed…
So likewise the Father is almighty, the Son almighty, and the Holy Ghost almighty. And yet they are not three Almighties, but one Almighty. So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God. **AND YET THEY ARE NOT THREE GODS, BUT ONE GOD**.
So please tell me how they believed what you believe that “begotten” here has the meaning that God beget another God from himself, co-equal and co-eternal as a different being or another God?
Again, they believed that the begetting was from eternity for he always existed with the Father, and that could not mean a begetting by procreation could it?
WJ
the Roo
Satan is running rife in this forum.
Dbf and Mikebolle,
You have both been mislead by the spirit of dillusion.You have completely misinterpreted what I wrote.
And dbf, i didn't respond to eerything you wrote, ha! That is your expectation. You cannot order me to respond to you. I write things and no one responds, not just me, though. So what, boohoo! There may be a whole load of other things going on why the poster did not respond. I wrote quite a bit and got fed up and just ended writing. No sweat.Kathi has got me wrong, and it is kathi who is saying, die in the flesh. I'm saying, one doesn't have to die in the flesh to acquire a spiritual body, spiritualness.
I started writing back to kathi and it was late, really late and i switched off, so i just said, 'whatever, think as you like but try thinking spiritual and everything will be clear'. This is how Jesus presented his arguments, always with a spiritual bend. Lay off the flesh and put on the spiritual.
Spirits do not procreate. What is the problem? Why would a spirit procreate?
Only God can give life, even if it through Jesus. Only the Father creates another.Why then does Jesus not have 'Children', Sons, if he created the Angels?
Any life (that is, Spirit), that God puts into a directly created being makes that being a 'Son of God'.
Jesus and Adam were two such. The Angels, also. Therefore, they are ALL 'Sons of God'.Now, man procreates. Therefore the life is given indirectly…hence 'Son of Man'.
Jesus is …ALSO 'Son of Man'…because he came from a woman…from another of flesh and blood.Adam did not come from another of flesh and blood.
Put off the earthbased thoughts and acquire a spiritual mind.
Dismiss the ways of earthly man and think how Jesus would think.
Reach into a higher dimension and you will see things in a completely different light.
The frustration will be in trying to converse with anyone else who is still earthbound…they will claim that you are mad….hey, isn't that what you saying about JA?
Dbf, no scripture verses? Do you need to see them? You still toying with reading hence you can't see where where they are written.
Still struggling to understand basic concepts like a child just learning Euclidean theory…what your teacher says to you seems like gibberish to your immature mind.Mike
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Aug. 15 2010,06:58) And so was days, so how does that fit into your theology? WJ
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 14 2010,21:53)
Hi WJ,Can YOU tell me which “this day” it was? Like maybe the actual date? Of course not.
So could it just be a matter of God wording it in a way we would understand without getting all metaphysical about it and talking about “inside time” or “outside of space” and what not? Yes, of course.
Not at all Mike. You are showing desperation in trying to spin out of existence that the Son was begotten in time on a day.I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; “THIS DAY have I begotten thee. Pss 2:7
You say you are here for the truth, but it is obvious that you will do anything to deny this truth.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 14 2010,21:53)
Could it be that Jesus was caused to exist at the crack of that very first day that they then both created? Maybe……why not?And yes, this is conjecture, but what about your theory?
So now you admit it is conjecture that is exactly right. So what happened to your claim you are going to prove that Jesus had a beginning using scriptures Mike? It’s just like your claim that “Monogenes” applied to Jesus before the worlds though you have admitted it is not found in scriptures.And as far as “my theory’ you call it, I am just taking scriptures at face value and comparing.
Facts…
- Jesus was begotten on a day!
- Days were not found in scripture until day one which was after the light, the earth, and the waters. Genesis 1:1-3
- Jesus was there with the Father in the beginning and before all things and by him all things came into being and without him nothing came into being including the days. John 1:1-3 – 1 John 1:1-3
No theory just biblical facts.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 14 2010,21:53)
Does scripture ever actually say Jesus was appointed to a position of begotten Son of God? Of course not.
The scriptures say he was “begotten’ after his resurrection. Acts 13:33 – Heb 1:5 – Heb 5:5Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 14 2010,21:53)
In fact there is nothing at all in scripture to imply that begotten referring to Jesus doesn't mean “caused to exist” or “fathered” – just like all the other times begotten is mentioned.
But all the times “begotten” does not mean procreation.Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 14 2010,21:53)
In fact, the only reason anyone would have to purposely blind themselves to what the scriptures say like this is because they have an ulterior motive. You just don't WANT Jesus to have been begotten literally, so you are willing to grasp at any little thing to avoid that fact.
And you don’t have an ulterior motive?
You are so desperate you have to explain away a simple text stating he was begotten on a certain day.Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 14 2010,21:53) Sorry WJ, this doesn't have so much to do with the unimportant word “today” as it does with the fact that scriptures don't even come close to implying some mystical “begetting” of Jesus.
The word “today” has everything to do with it because it blows away your theory that Jesus was procreated by God bringing birth to him from his own body before the ages or time.Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 14 2010,21:53) They say Jesus was begotten by his God, that he is the ONLY one who came to exist this way, and that afterwards, God made everything through and for His Son.
He created everything INCLUDING THE DAYS.Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 14 2010,21:53) Do you see that last word WJ? SON! How does a son normally come to be?
By a man and a woman having sex and bringing birth to a Son or daughter, this is what we call procreation. Did the Father do this? No, only in Greek mythology!Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 14 2010,21:53) Isn't he “fathered” by his father?
Yes, you can read about it when he was 12 years old and was called the Son of God and was about doing his Fathers business.Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 14 2010,21:53) Yet you would have the good thinking people on HN believe that “Father and Son” were just the names our plural God chose to distinguish between one equal partner and the other in the Godhead. Really?
Are you saying you cannot be equal to your Father in every way?Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 14 2010,21:53) Can you just imagine equal God Jesus saying, “Okay Mr. 1/3 of God, You can be the “Father” this time, but next time, I want to be the General to your Major, kay?” 
You must be talking to a “Modalist” and your statement sounds desperate!You see mike you would have the good thinking people here believe that God brought birth to a being that is not God, but is some kind of creature that is not of his own kind or nature as God, but some kind of freak of nature that God calls his son, a demi-god or something like
that.WJ
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Aug. 16 2010,15:12) Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 16 2010,11:40) Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 14 2010,18:49) Keith,
In another thread, you said that you totally agree with the Athanasian Creed that states this:Quote Furthermore it is necessary to everlasting salvation; that he also believe faithfully the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ. For the right Faith is, that we believe and confess; that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and Man; God, of the Essence of the Father; begotten before the worlds; and Man, of the Essence of his Mother, born in the world. you said:
Quote I believe everything in the creed to be scriptual. from here: https://heavennet.net/cgi-bin….1;st=10
I'm wondering what scripture/scriptures you use to support the part that I have bolded.
Bump for Keith
KathiWhy don't you show me what scriptures they used to support your interpretation of your quote?
In context they believed…
So likewise the Father is almighty, the Son almighty, and the Holy Ghost almighty. And yet they are not three Almighties, but one Almighty. So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God. **AND YET THEY ARE NOT THREE GODS, BUT ONE GOD**.
So please tell me how they believed what you believe that “begotten” here has the meaning that God beget another God from himself, co-equal and co-eternal as a different being or another God?
Again, they believed that the begetting was from eternity for he always existed with the Father, and that could not mean a begetting by procreation could it?
WJ
WJ,
I asked you first.Quote (JustAskin @ Aug. 16 2010,16:09) Satan is running rife in this forum. Dbf and Mikebolle,
You have both been mislead by the spirit of dillusion.You have completely misinterpreted what I wrote.
And dbf, i didn't respond to eerything you wrote, ha! That is your expectation. You cannot order me to respond to you. I write things and no one responds, not just me, though. So what, boohoo! There may be a whole load of other things going on why the poster did not respond. I wrote quite a bit and got fed up and just ended writing. No sweat.Kathi has got me wrong, and it is kathi who is saying, die in the flesh. I'm saying, one doesn't have to die in the flesh to acquire a spiritual body, spiritualness.
I started writing back to kathi and it was late, really late and i switched off, so i just said, 'whatever, think as you like but try thinking spiritual and everything will be clear'. This is how Jesus presented his arguments, always with a spiritual bend. Lay off the flesh and put on the spiritual.
Spirits do not procreate. What is the problem? Why would a spirit procreate?
Only God can give life, even if it through Jesus. Only the Father creates another.Why then does Jesus not have 'Children', Sons, if he created the Angels?
Any life (that is, Spirit), that God puts into a directly created being makes that being a 'Son of God'.
Jesus and Adam were two such. The Angels, also. Therefore, they are ALL 'Sons of God'.Now, man procreates. Therefore the life is given indirectly…hence 'Son of Man'.
Jesus is …ALSO 'Son of Man'…because he came from a woman…from another of flesh and blood.Adam did not come from another of flesh and blood.
Put off the earthbased thoughts and acquire a spiritual mind.
Dismiss the ways of earthly man and think how Jesus would think.
Reach into a higher dimension and you will see things in a completely different light.
The frustration will be in trying to converse with anyone else who is still earthbound…they will claim that you are mad….hey, isn't that what you saying about JA?
Dbf, no scripture verses? Do you need to see them? You still toying with reading hence you can't see where where they are written.
Still struggling to understand basic concepts like a child just learning Euclidean theory…what your teacher says to you seems like gibberish to your immature mind.
JA,you said:
Quote Kathi has got me wrong, and it is kathi who is saying, die in the flesh. Show me where I said that? or apologize.
Mikeboll said to WJ:
Quote Do you see that last word WJ? SON! How does a son normally come to be?
Jesus came to be God's son in the same way as His father david which was by appointment.Quote 20 I have found David my servant;
with my sacred oil I have anointed him.21 My hand will sustain him;
surely my arm will strengthen him.22 No enemy will subject him to tribute;
no wicked man will oppress him.23 I will crush his foes before him
and strike down his adversaries.24 My faithful love will be with him,
and through my name his horn [a] will be exalted.25 I will set his hand over the sea,
his right hand over the rivers.26 He will call out to me, 'You are my Father,
my God, the Rock my Savior.'27 I will also APPOINT him my firstborn,
the most exalted of the kings of the earth. Pss. 89″20-27Jesus became the Son of God in the same way as His father David. Hebrews 1 says that He was “appointed” heir (firstborn) of all things.
the Roo
Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 16 2010,16:45) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Aug. 16 2010,15:12) Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 16 2010,11:40) Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 14 2010,18:49) Keith,
In another thread, you said that you totally agree with the Athanasian Creed that states this:Quote Furthermore it is necessary to everlasting salvation; that he also believe faithfully the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ. For the right Faith is, that we believe and confess; that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and Man; God, of the Essence of the Father; begotten before the worlds; and Man, of the Essence of his Mother, born in the world. you said:
Quote I believe everything in the creed to be scriptual. from here: https://heavennet.net/cgi-bin….1;st=10
I'm wondering what scripture/scriptures you use to support the part that I have bolded.
Bump for Keith
KathiWhy don't you show me what scriptures they used to support your interpretation of your quote?
In context they believed…
So likewise the Father is almighty, the Son almighty, and the Holy Ghost almighty. And yet they are not three Almighties, but one Almighty. So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God. **AND YET THEY ARE NOT THREE GODS, BUT ONE GOD**.
So please tell me how they believed what you believe that “begotten” here has the meaning that God beget another God from himself, co-equal and co-eternal as a different being or another God?
Again, they believed that the begetting was from eternity for he always existed with the Father, and that could not mean a begetting by procreation could it?
WJ
WJ,
I asked you first.
KathiThere are none, and thats my point. WJ
Hey Mike,
I might post this more than once…
Did you watch the 'Godfather' film?
Did you notice the 'theme'?
“Michael” is the LAST Son of the GOD-father.
“Sonny” is the FIRST Son of the GOD-father.
Sonny is handsome, brash, haughty, lofty in spirit, tall, powerful, a natural leader, feared by all (but stupid and rash).
Michael is dutiful, mildmannered, just the right side of manly, short, standbackish, is not rash nor stupid and does not seek the leadership (Even though he was a Corleone, he did not seek equality with the family of the Corleone but lowered himself to become dutiful to the law, foresaking the safety of his family name and willingly gave himself as a sacrifice to the law, which demanded that he give his life for his country. Ok. So he survived…). The most loved by the GOD-father.Well, what happened. The firstborn of the GOD-father sinned…he got mad with his enemy and got caught…he sinned and got caught and became no more a son of the father (He was 'dead' to the father)
Sonny was actin 'as the GOD-father and abused his position. He though he was so feared no one could hurt him and so he died for his sin.And guess what…? The most beloved of the GOD-Father becomes … The GOD-fathers 'begotten firstborn' by rank and acquires the inheritence of the position and title of 'GOD-father' in-waiting, the Senior Son, the one set apart from from AND over his older brethren, Fredo.
So, you laughing right now. But think about it. Mario Puzo sketch that book on that thread and deliberately used the name 'Michael' (as many people believe that ArchAngel Michael is preJesus…which only goes to state that PreJesus was an Angel, albeit, Principal Angel, yeah, a Prince!)
The dutiful, most beloved son becomes the 'firstborn' inheriting the position of the father, in essence, at least and in reality in the film.
And does so, over his older, and even firstborn by birth, brethren.
And, no, I didn't get the idea from there, I had it already before I remembered the film analogy.
You could also sketch it from the Tolkien's 'Silmarillian', the precursor to 'the Hobbit' and 'Lord of the Rings'.Hey, no sweat, not saying it's gospel. Just saying that the thread is out there already and it's not just JustAskin that thinks that it is possible.
I'm coming at it from the Scriptural fractals where the firstborn by birth always sins and another, often ….the last….becomes …the first…born by rank.
Ok, now slate me without even thinking about what I'm suggesting….
TO ALL:
A Jehovah's Witness concurs that Jesus could not have always been the “only begotten Son”
“If Jesus was always the 'only begotten son' he would have “always” been better than the other angels and his name would “always” have been better than thiers.”
The JW even uses my argument from Psalm 89 regarding king David:
“Also, King David prefigures Jesus in the pre-eminence of his Kingship as regards to Jehovah God. David was neither the first King in Israel, nor was he even the first male born in his family ( I think he was actually the last). Yet Jehovah covenanted to David that he would have a kingship that would last forever. Even more than that he stated at Psalms 89:20,27“
<a href="http://e-jehovahs-witnesses.com/forum/showthread.php?3797-How-was-Jesus-quot-the-Firstborn-quot-and-the-quot-only-begotten-Son-q
uot” target=”_blank”>http://e-jehovahs-witnesses.com/forum….on-quotNot all JW's are wrong all of the time.
It is self evident that if Jesus had always been the only begotten Son, then He always would have been superior to the angels. But He CLEARLY was lower than the angels in the days of His flesh.Hebrews 2:9 NWT:
” 9 but we behold Jesus, who has been made a little lower than angels, crowned with glory and honor for having suffered death, that he by God’s undeserved kindness might taste death for every [man].”
Therefore, the name “begotten Son” in reference to Jesus cannot mean that Jesus is the first to “come into being.” Mikeboll and Kathi just won't accept the truth on this point.
the Roo
Roo,
It only serves to prove that an untruthful line will always get broken sooner or later. The truth will out. The liar will speak the truth…but who will then believe him?Hi Keith (and maybe Kathi)
YOU said:
So likewise the Father is almighty, the Son almighty, and the Holy Ghost almighty. And yet they are not three Almighties, but one Almighty. So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God. **AND YET THEY ARE NOT THREE GODS, BUT ONE GOD**.
So please tell me how they believed what you believe that “begotten” here has the meaning that God beget another God from himself, co-equal and co-eternal as a different being or another God?
Again, they believed that the begetting was from eternity for he always existed with the Father, and that could not mean a begetting by procreation could it?
WJ
Where is any Scripture that says Jesus is “Almighty”? Or that he is co-equal and co-eternal?
How about Jesus claiming to be God?
Part of your statement is true: Father always existed…Begetting couldn't have alwasy been occurring. lol
What staying power!Since God begat His son, the son exists in a point in time AFTER the Father. Why is this hard to see or understand?
Change the word “God” back to YHWH and say that YHWH begat a son “Jesus” and that way you can't get confused over using the word “God”. YHWH begat Jesus and Jesus isn't YHWH as your sentence indicates.
Because you misuse the identity of YHWH you say that God (YHWH) begat God. YHWH begat a son, the firstborn of all creation, His only begotten son.
Sorry that this confusion keeps getting brought up.
If you can get the foundation straight it'll help to see the other Scripture.
In the case of “Jesus” calling himself God, I haven't seen one verse, yet.
The Professor
davidbfun said:
Quote Again, they believed that the begetting was from eternity for he always existed with the Father, and that could not mean a begetting by procreation could it?
dbf,They were wrong! There is no such thing as eternal generation and WJ does not believe in it. He is just saying that this is what the fathers meant. Jesus was begotten AT HIS RESURRECTION (Ps. 2:6-7; Acts 13:13; Hebrews 1 & 5 and Colossians 1:18).
Jesus was raised up from the womb of hades. Did God have relations with hades?
the Roo
Quote (davidbfun @ Aug. 16 2010,18:03) In the case of “Jesus” calling himself God, I haven't seen one verse, yet.
How about the Prophet Isaiah (Isa 9:6) and the Apostle John (John 1:1) and the Angel (Matt 1:23) and Thomas (John 20:28) and the Father (Heb 1:8) all calling him God, is that enough?WJ
Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ Aug. 16 2010,16:52) Mikeboll said to WJ: Quote Do you see that last word WJ? SON! How does a son normally come to be?
Jesus came to be God's son in the same way as His father david which was by appointment.Quote 20 I have found David my servant;
with my sacred oil I have anointed him.21 My hand will sustain him;
surely my arm will strengthen him.22 No enemy will subject him to tribute;
no wicked man will oppress him.23 I will crush his foes before him
and strike down his adversaries.24 My faithful love will be with him,
and through my name his horn [a] will be exalted.25 I will set his hand over the sea,
his right hand over the rivers.26 He will call out to me, 'You are my Father,
my God, the Rock my Savior.'27 I will also APPOINT him my firstborn,
the most exalted of the kings of the earth. Pss. 89″20-27Jesus became the Son of God in the same way as His father David. Hebrews 1 says that He was “appointed” heir (firstborn) of all things.
the Roo
JackExactly!
WJ
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Aug. 16 2010,17:23) Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 16 2010,16:45) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Aug. 16 2010,15:12) Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 16 2010,11:40) Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 14 2010,18:49) Keith,
In another thread, you said that you totally agree with the Athanasian Creed that states this:Quote Furthermore it is necessary to everlasting salvation; that he also believe faithfully the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ. For the right Faith is, that we believe and confess; that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and Man; God, of the Essence of the Father; begotten before the worlds; and Man, of the Essence of his Mother, born in the world. you said:
Quote I believe everything in the creed to be scriptual. from here: https://heavennet.net/cgi-bin….1;st=10
I'm wondering what scripture/scriptures you use to support the part that I have bolded.
Bump for Keith
KathiWhy don't you show me what scriptures they used to support your interpretation of your quote?
In context they believed…
So likewise the Father is almighty, the Son almighty, and the Holy Ghost almighty. And yet they are not three Almighties, but one Almighty. So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God. **AND YET THEY ARE NOT THREE GODS, BUT ONE GOD**.
So please tell me how they believed what you believe that “begotten” here has the meaning that God beget another God from himself, co-equal and co-eternal as a different being or another God?
Again, they believed that the begetting was from eternity for he always existed with the Father, and that could not mean a begetting by procreation could it?
WJ
WJ,
I asked you first.
KathiThere are none, and thats my point. WJ
Keith,
So, are you going to agree with the Athanasian Creed even though you don't see that phrase as supported in scripture?Quote (davidbfun @ Aug. 16 2010,18:03) Hi Keith (and maybe Kathi) YOU said:
So likewise the Father is almighty, the Son almighty, and the Holy Ghost almighty. And yet they are not three Almighties, but one Almighty. So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God. **AND YET THEY ARE NOT THREE GODS, BUT ONE GOD**.
So please tell me how they believed what you believe that “begotten” here has the meaning that God beget another God from himself, co-equal and co-eternal as a different being or another God?
Again, they believed that the begetting was from eternity for he always existed with the Father, and that could not mean a begetting by procreation could it?
WJ
Where is any Scripture that says Jesus is “Almighty”? Or that he is co-equal and co-eternal?
How about Jesus claiming to be God?
Part of your statement is true: Father always existed…Begetting couldn't have alwasy been occurring. lol
What staying power!Since God begat His son, the son exists in a point in time AFTER the Father. Why is this hard to see or understand?
Change the word “God” back to YHWH and say that YHWH begat a son “Jesus” and that way you can't get confused over using the word “God”. YHWH begat Jesus and Jesus isn't YHWH as your sentence indicates.
Because you misuse the identity of YHWH you say that God (YHWH) begat God. YHWH begat a son, the firstborn of all creation, His only begotten son.
Sorry that this confusion keeps getting brought up.
If you can get the foundation straight it'll help to see the other Scripture.
In the case of “Jesus” calling himself God, I haven't seen one verse, yet.
The Professor
David,
When someone begats a son, that son is no less than the one that begat him. Just younger. Perfect doesn't begat less perfect. See?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
