- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote Ok, thanks for that. From what I've read you can't give me 'yes or no' answers to my questions due to a percieved lack of information and unwillingness to speculate. Is that correct?
Don't want to be pushy about this, but I do need you to give me a 'yes or no' answer to this question, so I can better understand your take on the equality issue. Thanks NH.Hi Is 1.18.
Yes.
“Do not add to His words” of Deut 4.2, Prov 30.6 and similar in Rev 22,18 is a warning none who discuss the Word of God should forget.
Theologians show no fear of God in their analyses and assumptions and we must not follow them.The word “hypostasis” is actually at the heart of this co-equality issue, the topic of this thread. We both acknowledge there is a positional/functional inequality between the Father and Son. He is greater in position. That is not in dispute. But where we disagree is the substance/essence/nature of their beings, their ontologies. I just wanted you to SHOW me why it is that you believe the Logos is a lesser being than the Father. Is He, to you, a biblically-undescribed intermediate being in his nature between the Father and angels?
What is the basis for your belief that the Father and Son are not co-equal?
Why won't you give me this answer?
As I said I will faithfully answer your post and let you test me on my answers, but you have to let me do the same. That is how message boards work.
Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 14 2006,07:32) Hi Is 1.18.
Yes.
“Do not add to His words” of Deut 4.2, Prov 30.6 and similar in Rev 22,18 is a warning none who discuss the Word of God should forget.
Theologians show no fear of God in their analyses and assumptions and we must not follow them.
I don't think ive added anything, or quoted any scholars.Hi Is 1.18,
Then why speak their language and not just scripture wherever possible? No one else here seems to find them necessary?
Heb 1.3
“..the exact representation of His nature” [5287]5287 hupostasis from 5259[by, under]and 2476[to make to stand, to stand]
=a support, substance, steadiness.
translated as assurance[2], confidence[2], nature[1]It seems to speak of foundational support and strength rather than divine 'physiology and biochemistry' as we might understand 'nature' when speaking of beings in the natural world..
Quote Then why speak their language and not just scripture wherever possible? No one else here seems to find them necessary?
I quote scripture whenever possible and then give my interpretation of it based on the grammer, context and other scriptural verses relevant to it. What is wrong with that?Quote It seems to speak of foundational support and strength
5287 hupostasis from 5259[by, under]and 2476[to make to stand, to stand]=a support, substance, steadiness.
translated as assurance[2], confidence[2], nature[1Hebrews 1:3 NASB
3And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His [foundational support]….I don't think it fits.
Quote rather than divine 'physiology and biochemistry' as we might understand 'nature' when speaking of beings in the natural world..
I don't think “nature”, in the context of Heb 1:3, has anything to do with 'physiology and biochemistry'.Gotta get on with Malcolm's post.
One more thing. I think this verse captures the essence of what the author was trying to convey in Heb 1:3:
Hebrews 11:1
Now faith is the substance [Gr. hypostasis] of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.Do you see what I mean?
Quote (Is 1:18 @ May 14 2006,08:11) The word “hypostasis” is actually at the heart of this co-equality issue, the topic of this thread. We both acknowledge there is a positional/functional inequality between the Father and Son. He is greater in position. That is not in dispute. But where we disagree is the substance/essence/nature of their beings, their ontologies. I just wanted you to SHOW me why it is that you believe the Logos is a lesser being than the Father. Is He, to you, a biblically-undescribed intermediate being in his nature between the Father and angels? What is the basis for your belief that the Father and Son are not co-equal?
Why won't you give me this answer?
As I said I will faithfully answer your post and let you test me on my answers, but you have to let me do the same. That is how message boards work.
Hi Is 1.18,
Short answer .Yes,
God is not eternally two, or is it three? If not three why not?You cannot concentrate on the Logos and ignore the Spirit if you are to remain true to your foundational base because you tell us three are equal.In 1Cor 15.27 it says of Jesus
“…But when it says '
'all things are put in subjection'
it is evident that HE is excepted who put all things in subjection to him”So God put all things under Christ but he is over Christ which fits with 1 Chr 11.3.
” ..the head of Christ is God”Again in 1Cor 15.28
it say that “The Son himself will be subjected to the One who subjected all things to him”
So at the end there is still the order of authority;Father over Son.
It is ridiculous to imagine that our Creator God would allow equality with any being. He did not tolerate it with Satan and Phil 2 tells us Christ chose not to challenge the Father for it.
God shares His glory with no one.Is 42.8
” I will not give My glory to another..”Here in the same chapter of Isaiah concerning the servant son, here God states he does not share His Glory. Heaven is his throne and earth His footstool so why should God be less than God? He does give all authority to the Son, but that shows the Son did not have that authority before it was given surely?
If there is not equality in authority then what equality is there?
Quote (Is 1:18 @ May 14 2006,09:20) Quote Then why speak their language and not just scripture wherever possible? No one else here seems to find them necessary?
I quote scripture whenever possible and then give my interpretation of it based on the grammer, context and other scriptural verses relevant to it. What is wrong with that?Quote It seems to speak of foundational support and strength
5287 hupostasis from 5259[by, under]and 2476[to make to stand, to stand]=a support, substance, steadiness.
translated as assurance[2], confidence[2], nature[1Hebrews 1:3 NASB
3And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His [foundational support]….I don't think it fits.
Quote rather than divine 'physiology and biochemistry' as we might understand 'nature' when speaking of beings in the natural world..
I don't think “nature”, in the context of Heb 1:3, has anything to do with 'physiology and biochemistry'.Gotta get on with Malcolm's post.
Fair enough,
But can you get my drift? We have few hints from the greek to work on here so it is not easy to clarify.Quote (Is 1:18 @ May 14 2006,09:31) One more thing. I think this verse captures the essence of what the author was trying to convey in Heb 1:3: Hebrews 11:1
Now faith is the substance [Gr. hypostasis] of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.Do you see what I mean?
Hi,
How about “underpinning”?Certainly “substance ” here has nothing to with “spiritual matter” which is the implication you offer from Heb 1.
Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 14 2006,09:35) Quote (Is 1:18 @ May 14 2006,08:11) The word “hypostasis” is actually at the heart of this co-equality issue, the topic of this thread. We both acknowledge there is a positional/functional inequality between the Father and Son. He is greater in position. That is not in dispute. But where we disagree is the substance/essence/nature of their beings, their ontologies. I just wanted you to SHOW me why it is that you believe the Logos is a lesser being than the Father. Is He, to you, a biblically-undescribed intermediate being in his nature between the Father and angels? What is the basis for your belief that the Father and Son are not co-equal?
Why won't you give me this answer?
As I said I will faithfully answer your post and let you test me on my answers, but you have to let me do the same. That is how message boards work.
Hi Is 1.18,
Short answer .Yes,
God is not eternally two, or is it three? If not three why not?You cannot concentrate on the Logos and ignore the Spirit if you are to remain true to your foundational base because you tell us three are equal.In 1Cor 15.27 it says of Jesus
“…But when it says '
'all things are put in subjection'
it is evident that HE is excepted who put all things in subjection to him”So God put all things under Christ but he is over Christ which fits with 1 Chr 11.3.
” ..the head of Christ is God”Again in 1Cor 15.28
it say that “The Son himself will be subjected to the One who subjected all things to him”
So at the end there is still the order of authority;Father over Son.
It is ridiculous to imagine that our Creator God would allow equality with any being. He did not tolerate it with Satan and Phil 2 tells us Christ chose not to challenge the Father for it.
God shares His glory with no one.Is 42.8
” I will not give My glory to another..”Here in the same chapter of Isaiah concerning the servant son, here God states he does not share His Glory. Heaven is his throne and earth His footstool so why should God be less than God? He does give all authority to the Son, but that shows the Son did not have that authority before it was given surely?
If there is not equality in authority then what equality is there?
I've already made it clear that a positional/functional inequality is not in dispute, so i'm confused as to why you have you quoted me all those verses that speak of that. I mean one human can have authority over another – but nevertheless they are they both are ontologically human, have human nature.You have to SHOW my from scripture why you believe The Logos is a lesser being 'in His nature' than His Father. When you have done that, then our discussion can advance.
Edited for clarity:
I've already made it clear that a positional/functional inequality is not in dispute, so i'm confused as to why you have you quoted me all those verses that speak of that. I mean one human can have authority over another – but nevertheless they are both are ontologically human, have human nature. There is no disparity in what 'kind' they are.You have to SHOW me from scripture why you believe The Logos is a lesser being 'in His nature' than His Father. When you have done that, then our discussion can advance.
In answer to this post:
Quote Fair enough,
But can you get my drift? We have few hints from the greek to work on here so it is not easy to clarify.
Yes I do understand that it's not as 'tightly defined' as some Greek words, but I think the proper conveyance is obvious. The translators (of the creditable versions) rendering of the verse is a good pointer usually, check a few translations. We also have the views of the experts of biblical Greek, but i'm reluctant to use that material, useful that it is, given your overt dislike for anything that smells like 'biblical lexicography'.Hi Is 1.18,
We have no knowledge of divine being nature.
The Monogenes Son had no low human taint in his original form.
He was higher than the angels, being only made lower for a time.
He was not the Creator, but all creation came through him.
He was not the builder but God is.
He was given life in Himself so was not the giver of that life.Nothing in scripture says he originated anything but all origins are in the Father and happen through him.
If there has functional superiority who arranged this state?
Is God a triune democracy or is God in command over all , including the Son. That is what scripture says.Authority is given from the Father and thus inequality is the natural way in all things between the Father and the Son? It seems so.
So if what you want to hold on to is that all divine nature is by definition the same then you cannot prove or disprove that statement from scripture. To make any statement would be to speculate.
But that is not the statement that offends God from trinity. It is the fact that you must deny the Father was ever, in any real way, the Father of the Son of God.
One thing that scripture does state about God is that He gets angry with those who, as in Romans 1.25
“…exchanged the truth of God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever”Whether or not Jesus was created or begotten he, as a son, is after the Father and less than the Father. God demands that He alone is worshiped and served ahead of all.
“You have to SHOW my from scripture why you believe The Logos is a lesser being 'in His nature' than His Father. When you have done that, then our discussion can advance.”
I hope it will. But you first need to SHOW me from scripture WHY you believe The Logos is a lesser being in his nature. What is the biblical foundation of this doctrine of yours?
Hi Is 1.18,
We cannot dialogue because you do not accept the God of the Old Testament. The One God whom they knew without question as the source of all life and all things. You have become confused by finding fascinating New Testament hints of a God of a different nature and have based your faith on this dangerous false premise, thus destroying the simplest concept and disconnecting the Old from the New.We simply no longer have an agreed basis of discussion.
Old Testament Scripture tells us of God and the New fully reveals the Son of God.
But no verse tells us this Son is also the Father, or is not a son of that Father and building on such sand, or even comparing mutual plans to do so, is wasted effort. The Foundation is not solid.
If you are unhappy with my gleanings from the precious Word then I cannot show you truth.
Only God can.
Hi NH,
Hope your week has started well.Quote You have become confused by finding fascinating New Testament hints of a God of a different nature
– A different nature to 'what'?
– Confused how? If I can show you what I believe from scripture, how is it that I am the one who is “confused”?
– You call them “hints”, I call it 'evidence'. My Faith is the evidence (Gr. elegchos) of things not seen (Heb 11:1).Something to think about:
Do we actually know that every reference to YHWH in the OT was actually a reference to The Father? I don't think this could be true. Especially considering there are numerous occasions where YHWH spoke to men, was seen by them and even ate with them. Yet Jesus and Paul wrote:
John 5:37
“And the Father who sent Me, He has testified of Me. You have neither heard His voice at any time nor seen His form“1 Timothy 6:15-16
15which He will bring about at the proper time–He who is the blessed and only Sovereign, the King of kings and Lord of lords, 16who alone possesses immortality and dwells in unapproachable light, whom no man has seen or can see To Him be honor and eternal dominion! Amen.Doesn't add up to me.
Quote and have based your faith on this dangerous false premise, thus destroying the simplest concept and disconnecting the Old from the New.
I see the NT as an expansion of the OT. The NT is in the OT 'concealed', The OT is in the NT 'revealed'…..isn't that how the saying goes?Quote We simply no longer have an agreed basis of discussion.
Too bad. That's disappointing. I hope, in future, we can learn to discuss these tings and still get along.Quote Old Testament Scripture tells us of God and the New fully reveals the Son of God.
I agree.Quote But no verse tells us this Son is also the Father, or is not a son of that Father and building on such sand, or even comparing mutual plans to do so, is wasted effort. The Foundation is not solid.
Have I ONCE written that the “Son is also the Father”? If so, kindly produce the quote.Quote If you are unhappy with my gleanings from the precious Word then I cannot show you truth.
I'm willing to learn something from anyone who can cite scripture to support their doctrines. If you can produce scripture that prove:1. The Father begot a Son before before the incarnation.
2. The Logos is an inferior being to the Father.Then we'll actually have something to examine. Until this happans I'll maintain that they're both patently unscriptural and assumptions based on a preconcieved notion. In asking that you produce the scriptural evidence, I haven't asked you to do something that you yourself haven't demanded of others, countless times. Shouldn't we apply the same standards to ourselves that we expect of others?
Some of the things you teach concern me:
James 3:1 (NIV)
“Not many of you should presume to be teachers, my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly.I worry for you NH.
Quote Only God can.
I agree. But that applies to both of us.Hi Is 1.18,
There are many times in the OT when visions, or dreams or visible and aural manifestations of God were seen and heard. But no one saw God. God is spirit and is invisible. God is in heaven.You cannot accept eveidence from others because you have already accepted evidence for yourself that you regard as valid before all others it seems. If you too neither can find acceptable specific written evidence that God is two or three, and all versions are equal, that Jesus is seen in the Old Testament then you too will have to regard your imaginings as speculative too.
You cannot apply one rule to yourself and another to others.
Hi ,
The whole folly of this discussion is that it is based on a false premise.
That false premise is that God is a trinity.
If God is not a trinity then the question would not even arise because God would be recognised as God, to whom none are equal.
And the Son of God is recognised for himself as the Son of God.It is up to those who promote trinity to show it written and not inferred, not to believers in simplicity to prove it is not true. Anyone who has already assembled a structure on such sand will not accept advice anyway.
Ask me to prove to you from scripture that any other being, is not God and because the name of that other being does not appear there I may have trouble convincing you. We work from what is clearly revealed, not what fascinating inferences men may find.
Only those who would try to build on such sand are interested in the ongoing effects of such a faith basis and this question is one of them.
When trinity was first proclaimed it did not arise but later as men got used to the idea and such thoughts became orthodoxy then down this murky path they trod.
Hi Is1:18
Quote That’s certainly an interesting take on it Malcolm. But it does raise some questions for me.
The apostles, and indeed ALL Christians, also had God in them:True the rebirth gives us that. But we are told that the fullness of Godhead dwelt in him, we have the same Spirit by measure that he had without measure.
Quote But there is not one verse in scripture where an apostle or any spirit-filled Christian was given the titles “first and last”, or any title attributed to YHWH for that matter. David was called the King of Israel – who is the King of Israel? Isn't that a title of God also?
Quote Also, are you suggesting that when Jesus spoke it was in fact the Father’s word’s being vocalized? We know this cannot always apply, since He prayed to His Father, asked Him for the cup to be removed, cried out on the cross “My God, My God…..”. In these instances it’s clearly the Son’s volition and vocalizations coming through. Maybe you mean that sometimes it’s the Father’s vocalizations? How can you tell when Yahshua is actually speaking about himself? I mean if, when He spoke of Himself, it was in fact the person of His Father speaking, then He really said NOTHING about Himself in scripture. When Jesus said 'destroy this temple and I will raise it up again', who was speaking? Who raised Jesus from the grave? My bible tells me it was God who did! Yet Jesus said 'I'…
This is a good question how do you tell when it was God and when it was Jesus? Well considering that Jesus aligned his will to God's in such perfection, I just assume it is God unless it states otherwise.Quote When God spoke through someone, as in a prophecy, the context bears this out. But when Jesus said “I am” there is nothing in the passage to indicate that this was His Father speaking through Him. Moreover, when you examine the context of the passage it’s plainly evident that the subject of the ‘discussion’ between Jesus and the Pharisees was Yahshua Himself.:
John 8:56-58
56″Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad.”
57So the Jews said to Him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?”
58Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am.”He was speaking about Himself. Why would the Father suddenly interject and make a statement about His eternal origin in the narrative? I find that hard to swallow Malcolm.
Another problem I see with your explanation is John 19:37.This is referring to Melchizedek – who is said to have no beginning of days or ending of life, therefore it is God and not the Son as sons have beginnings. When Jesus spoke he made it pretty clear he was saying what the Father showed him to say.
Obviously when we see him saying things like 'forgive them Father' or 'Father glorify me with the glory I had with you …' we can see it is the son speaking in these instances.Quote John 19:36-37
For these things were done, that the scripture should be fulfilled, A bone of him shall not be broken.
And again another scripture saith, They shall look on him whom they pierced.Here John records that Jesus Christ literally fulfilled an OT prophecy at His crucifixion; This specific prophecy was made in Zech 12:10
Zechariah 12:10
And I[YHWH, vs 1] will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me [YHWH] whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.Only YHWH could fulfill this prophecy, because it was made specifically OF YHWH. John unequivocally tells us that Jesus fulfilled it at Calvary. And He did this when? AFTER He had died and the Holy Spirit had departed. It was just His lifeless body hanging on the cross – and He was STILL attributed the name YHWH.
You only need to consider Jesus' own words when he explains about the great white throne judgement – in which he explained that when the one approaching the throne had visited one of the saints that was sick they had done it to him (Jesus) why? Because we are his body. Jesus was the body for God, we are told God died for us, God cannot die, He is eternal, yet Jesus was the blood of God, the one in whom God was well pleased (to dwell in).
God is our saviour, how? Through Jesus Christ.Quote Quote
The difference? the form He was in.Yahshua is also given these titles after His incarnation (in Revelation) when as well.
God BlessJesus was the channel through which God created all things. God chose to do it this way.
Jesus was the channel through which God saved His creation. God chose to do it this way.
He changes not, at the end of the bible we find that a new heavens and a new earth are established in which God sits on a throne to rule it all. The throne of God and the Lamb. And His servants see him (not them – God is invisible). And worship him. Every knee bows and every tongue confesses that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God that Father. So it is not too dissimilar to what Jesus said when asked by his disciples to show them the Father…Quote me:
Quote Something to think about: Do we actually know that every reference to YHWH in the OT was actually a reference to The Father? I don't think this could be true. Especially considering there are numerous occasions where YHWH spoke to men, was seen by them and even ate with them. Yet Jesus and Paul wrote:
John 5:37
“And the Father who sent Me, He has testified of Me. You have neither heard His voice at any time nor seen His form”1 Timothy 6:15-16
15which He will bring about at the proper time–He who is the blessed and only Sovereign, the King of kings and Lord of lords, 16who alone possesses immortality and dwells in unapproachable light, whom no man has seen or can see To Him be honor and eternal dominion! Amen.Doesn't add up to me.
Quote NH:
Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 15 2006,04:24) There are many times in the OT when visions, or dreams or visible and aural manifestations of God were seen and heard. But no one saw God. God is spirit and is invisible. God is in heaven.
GENESIS 3:8-11
8 And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden 9 And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou? 10 And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself 11 And he said, Who told thee that thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat?GENESIS 17:1
1 And when Abram was ninety years old and nine, the LORD appeared to Abram, and said unto him, I am the Almighty God; walk before me, and be thou perfect.GENESIS 18:1, 8, 13, 17, 26
1 And the LORD appeared unto him in the plains of Mamre: and he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day…..13 And the LORD said unto Abraham, Wherefore did Sarah laugh, saying, Shall I of a surety bear a child, which am old?…..8 And he took butter, and milk, and the calf which he had dressed, and set it before them; and he stood by them under the tree, and they did eat……..17And the LORD said, Shall I hide from Abraham that thing which I do…..26 And the LORD said, If I find in Sodom fifty righteous within the city, then I will spare all the place for their sakes.EXODUS. 6:2-3
2 God spoke further to Moses and said to him, “I am the LORD;3 and I appeared to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as God Almighty, but by My name LORD I did not make myself known to them.”EXODUS 24:9-11
9Then Moses went up with Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel, and they saw the God of Israel;10 and under His feet there appeared to be a pavement of sapphire, as clear as the sky itself. 11 Yet He did not stretch out His hand against the nobles of the sons of Israel; and they beheld God, and they ate and drank.”EXODUS 33:11
Thus the LORD used to speak to Moses face to face, just as a man speaks to his friend…”NUMBERS 12:6-8
6 He [God] said, “Hear now My words: If there is a prophet among you, I, the LORD, shall make Myself known to him in a vision. I shall speak with him in a dream. 7 Not so, with My servant Moses, He is faithful in all My household; 8 with him I speak mouth to mouth, even openly, and not in dark sayings, and he beholds the form of the LORD . . . “ACTS 7:2
“And he [Stephen] said, “Hear me, brethren and fathers! The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham when he was in Mesopotamia, before he lived in Haran . . . “Doesn't add up.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
