- This topic is empty.
- Posts
I CORINTHIANS 2:7-8
But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory:
Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.If they had known who Jesus was they would not have crucified him Paul says, but it was hidden in a mystery who he was, not to be revealed until he came.
Jesus makes it pretty clear that he had knowledge of the Father in a previous state, before the world began.
He was conscious in this state or it would not have been a glory that he HAD
He would have to have said:Glorify me with the glory I was to have with you …
But it doesn't say this. The fact is that is was a revelation that Peter recieved that Jesus was the son of the Living GOD. It still takes a revelation to see it, even though the scriptures plainly declare it.
If Jesus was in fact a concious being before he took on a form of flesh, and he says he was, then he was either eternal, in which case you now have more than one person co-existing co-eternally in co-equality in what we call GOD.
Or you have a son, who had a beginning, who is not GOD but is the son of GOD,
who is not God the Eternal Son
but rather
the Son of God with Eternal Life.Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 05 2006,08:37) Do you no longer believe all creation came through him?
What have I written that prompts you to ask me this question?Quote (malcolm ferris @ May 05 2006,08:57) I CORINTHIANS 2:7-8
But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory:
Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.If they had known who Jesus was they would not have crucified him Paul says, but it was hidden in a mystery who he was, not to be revealed until he came.
Jesus makes it pretty clear that he had knowledge of the Father in a previous state, before the world began.
He was conscious in this state or it would not have been a glory that he HAD
He would have to have said:Glorify me with the glory I was to have with you …
But it doesn't say this. The fact is that is was a revelation that Peter recieved that Jesus was the son of the Living GOD. It still takes a revelation to see it, even though the scriptures plainly declare it.
If Jesus was in fact a concious being before he took on a form of flesh, and he says he was, then he was either eternal, in which case you now have more than one person co-existing co-eternally in co-equality in what we call GOD.
Or you have a son, who had a beginning, who is not GOD but is the son of GOD,
who is not God the Eternal Son
but rather
the Son of God with Eternal Life.
Hi Malcolm,
You write that Jesus had a beginning, meaning (I assume) that at some point He came into existence. Please give me scripture to verify the pre-incarnationbirth event. This is not an unreasonable request Malcolm.Here are a couple that attest to eternality of the Word:
MICAH 5
But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.The exact same word (from everlasting; H4480, H5769) is used to denote ‘God’s’ eternality in Psalm 93:2 and Isaiah 63:16
HEBREWS 7:3
Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continuallyOf course given that The Logos existed “in the beginning” and was in fact the Creator of ALL THINGS, including time (which cannot exist without space and matter), its going to be difficult to convince me that He had a beginning IN TIME.
Quote (Is 1:18 @ May 06 2006,00:55) So you're saying that because humans can only be one person it automatically follows that all higher beings must also be the same? Why? By doing so aren't you, in some sense, making God in our own image? I would expect a universe-creating being to be a little more complex than a human being, and I don't think we should sieve all biblical information through an anthropic filter…..
Oh yeah!
Stop it Is 1:18 I did my back in today and it hurts when I laugh!
Making God into an image? What do you think you are arguing for? Is not a tiangle divided into 3 parts an idol. Can God really be like a triangle with 3 equal parts, or does that concept come from the mind and hand of man. Did God reveal to his people that he was similar in concept to a triangle?
Your last comment was also a classic. So you expect God to be a little more complex than a human, but isn't a triangle very simple compared to a human?
And what about that stuff about an anthropic filter. The filter we use around here is scripture, not some man-made creed that talks about ontology or prideology.
Don't give up your day job.
Here is a snapshot of the God you promote and teach about.
nick wrote:[/quote]
Quote If you are determined not to see something no man can make you see it.
I am determined not to believe things that are patently unscriptural. The eternal begettal is one of these. Where is it written??Quote When scripture says he proceeded from AND came from God they refer surely to different events because scripture is absolutely concise. The first event was the 'proceeding forth' and the second the 'coming from God'.
There is not grammatical evidence to lead me to the conclusion that the “proceeding forth” and the “coming from God” denote two different events seperated by at least 4000yrs!! Do you really believe the writer meant to convey this?Quote (t8 @ May 05 2006,10:26) Quote (Is 1:18 @ May 06 2006,00:55) So you're saying that because humans can only be one person it automatically follows that all higher beings must also be the same? Why? By doing so aren't you, in some sense, making God in our own image? I would expect a universe-creating being to be a little more complex than a human being, and I don't think we should sieve all biblical information through an anthropic filter…..
Oh yeah! Stop it Is 1:18 I did my back in today and it hurts when I laugh!
Making God into an image? What do you think you are arguing for? Is not a tiangle divided into 3 parts an idol. Can God really be like a triangle with 3 equal parts, or does that concept come from the mind and hand of man. Did God reveal to his people that he was similar in concept to a triangle?
Your last comment was also a classic. So you expect God to be a little more complex than a human, but isn't a triangle very simple compared to a human?
And what about that stuff about an anthropic filter. The filter we use around here is scripture, not some man-made creed that talks about ontology or prideology.
Don't give up your day job.
Here is a snapshot of the God you promote and teach about.
Ephesians 4:15 t8. Try to be nice.
Quote (Is 1:18 @ May 05 2006,09:55) Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 05 2006,08:37) Do you no longer believe all creation came through him?
What have I written that prompts you to ask me this question?
Hi Is 1.18,
If you do not accept that the Son was begotten from the Father in the beginning then how can creation have come through him, if he was still in God? Surely instead you would say creation came from God full stop?Quote If you do not accept that the Son was begotten from the Father in the beginning
No, I don't accept that. It's not scriptural. BTW, I understand that the 'eternal begettal' is actually a tenet of the nicene creed.Quote then how can creation have come through him, if he was still in God? Surely instead you would say creation came from God full stop?
I have literally written you thousands of words explaining, in detail, my position on Creation event . I have not changed my mind.Hi Is 1.18,
You cannot accept Jesus is the Son of God-really, truly, literally?I take no note who relegate the sonship of Jesus and the Fatherhood of God to purely titles.
That denies the Father and the Son.
Is the sonship of Jesus not the most basic message of salvation?
For what reason was/is Yahshua called the Son of God?
LUKE 1:35 (NASB)
The angel answered and said to her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; and for that reason the holy Child shall be called the Son of God.That's a rock-solid biblical answer.
Quote (Is 1:18 @ May 05 2006,11:23) For what reason was/is Yahshua called the Son of God? LUKE 1:35 (NASB)
The angel answered and said to her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; and for that reason the holy Child shall be called the Son of God.That's a rock-solid biblical answer.
Hi Is 1.18,
So you do accept the man Jesus Christ is the son of God. God is the Father and Mary the mother. I agree.But scripture also says in 1 Jn.4.9
“By this we know the love of God was manifested in us, that God has sent His only begotten Son into the world so that we might live through him”So who was sent into the world? The Son of God.
So what was he in heaven before he was sent? The only begotten Son of God.He was the unique divine being derived completely from the Father alone, the image of the Father Himself, separate from the Father, such that he was with the Father in the beginning, before even the world and all creation was made.
That creation included the other sons of God since all creation came through him and these sons can be seen before the foundations of the world were laid in Jb 38.7
Hi Is 1.18,
Is God greater than you in any and all senses?
Is God greater than the Son of God Jesus Christ.
Jesus said he was.
That excludes them sharing the same being, God as surely God could not have unequal parts?So where is the equality?
Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 05 2006,18:47) Hi Is 1.18,
Is God greater than you in any and all senses?
Is God greater than the Son of God Jesus Christ.
Jesus said he was.
That excludes them sharing the same being, God as surely God could not have unequal parts?So where is the equality?
The”equality” exists only in the imaginations of the “trinitarians.”Nick…you said above: “But scripture also says in 1 Jn.4.9
“By this we know the love of God was manifested in us, that God has sent His only begotten Son into the world so that we might live through him”I understand your take on this, and many believe that Yashuah existed before birth to Mary. I have a question, though…since “begotten” means (literally) “born of,” he can't BE “begotten” until he is BORN….how do you get around that?
If you have a son, your only son, born of your wife, and you send him into the world, you are sending “your only begotten son into the world.” That does not mean he existed BEFORE being conceived.Quote (truebelief4u @ May 05 2006,18:32) Nick…you said above: “But scripture also says in 1 Jn.4.9
“By this we know the love of God was manifested in us, that God has sent His only begotten Son into the world so that we might live through him”I understand your take on this, and many believe that Yashuah existed before birth to Mary. I have a question, though…since “begotten” means (literally) “born of,” he can't BE “begotten” until he is BORN….how do you get around that?
If you have a son, your only son, born of your wife, and you send him into the world, you are sending “your only begotten son into the world.” That does not mean he existed BEFORE being conceived.
Hi tbfu,
“Begotten” or “born” is an entirely different word in greek from “only begotten”-monogenes.
One thing it certainly does not mean is simply physically 'born' and it deserves deep study on it's own.Sending the son into the world means surely he was a son, but he was not in the world, and he was then sent there. There is no record of God sending His physical son out into the world while he was on earth.
Phil 2.5f shows the process as being from heaven. The parable of the vinegrower also shows the son was a being who was sent into the vineyard to claim God's rightful share of the crop.
Quote (Is 1:18 @ May 05 2006,11:23) For what reason was/is Yahshua called the Son of God? LUKE 1:35 (NASB)
The angel answered and said to her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; and for that reason the holy Child shall be called the Son of God.That's a rock-solid biblical answer.
Hi Is 1.18,
Is this truly what you believe? The only word consistent with what you have said you believe in this verse is the word “called”.
Your [catholic in origin] trinitarian faith states that there are three persons in the one God.Again the [catholic in origin]doctrine that you have espoused here of 'incarnation' states that 'God came in flesh' as a man.
So you must believe surely that Jesus is not the Son of God but is only “called” the Son of God. It must only be a title to you because you do not believe he was ever separate from God as an individual being with life in himself, before, during or after he was on earth.
Such a view runs contrary to scripture in many ways.
First Jn 5 says the Son has been given to have life in himself. He has a will and a spirit of his own according to scripture and those things designate one as a separate being.Scripture clearly teaches that Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit. That is no problem to non trinitarian believers but trintarians must accept surely that the Father is not the physical father of Jesus but the third person of the trinity is.
Scripture also teaches that Jesus Christ, and not God Himself, came in the flesh. This is in fact shown in 1Jn as the litmus test for antichrist belief so that should cause some alarm.
So if the Father is not the Father of Jesus Christ physically or in the beginning and Jesus is not truly the Son of God such beliefs have denied the Father and the Son.
1Jn 5.5
“Who is the one who overcomes the world, but he who believes that JESUS IS THE SON OF GOD?”1Jn 5.9
'If we receive the testimony of men, the testimony of God is greater; for the testimony of God is this, that He has testified concerning His Son. The one who BELIEVES IN THE SON has the testimony in himself; the one who does not believe God has made Him a liar, because he has not believed in the testimony that God has given concerning HIS SON. And the testimony is this, that God has given us eternal life, and this life is in HIS SON. He who has the SON HAS LIFE; he who does not have the SON DOES NOT HAVE LIFE”
1Jn 5.20f
” And we know that the SON OF GOD has come, and has given us understanding so that we may know Him who is true, and we are in Him who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life. Little children, guard yourselves from idols”God is a Father
Jesus is the Son of God.If you have not seen that message in scripture then you have yet to find the key to full life in God.
Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 05 2006,11:47) Hi Is 1.18,
Is God greater than you in any and all senses?
Is God greater than the Son of God Jesus Christ.
Jesus said he was.
That excludes them sharing the same being, God as surely God could not have unequal parts?So where is the equality?
Is your father greater than you in senses?Does he have a superior nature to you?
Is he of a higher ontological class?
By your own admission “”Greater” is not an theological or ontological word.” (pg 3), so why are you now now argueing that Yahshua's father is greater than him “in all senses”?
Quote He was the unique divine being derived completely from the Father alone
Where does it scripture tell us that the Logos was ” derived completely from the Father alone”?Quote (Is 1:18 @ May 05 2006,19:45) Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 05 2006,11:47) Hi Is 1.18,
Is God greater than you in any and all senses?
Is God greater than the Son of God Jesus Christ.
Jesus said he was.
That excludes them sharing the same being, God as surely God could not have unequal parts?So where is the equality?
Is your father greater than you in senses?Does he have a superior nature to you?
Is he of a higher ontological class?
By your own admission “”Greater” is not an theological or ontological word.” (pg 3), so why are you now now argueing that Yahshua's father is greater than him “in all senses”?
Hi Is 1.18,
I hate theologolcal jargon like “ontological'
God is greater than His Son.
His Son was his obedient servant
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
