- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 07 2006,10:52) Hi Is 1.18,
If you do not believe Son means Son then it is likely you will not see evidence of when he became a son, and the Father became a father.
Hi NH
Okay. Provide me with some scriptural evidence that The Logos had a beginning and we'll examine it…..Good night.
Hi Is 1.18,
Are Christ and his Father not made one for eternity with the Spirit of God never leaving him? If so then how can Christ return without God still being in him as it was when He was “In Christ reconciling the world to Himself”
The fullness of deity was IN Christ, not AS Christ.[Coll 1.19]Did Thomas address Jesus as God?
No he said
“My Lord[Jesus] and my God[YHWH]”That is a statement I agree with.
Quote (Is 1:18 @ May 07 2006,10:15) Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 07 2006,08:04) Michael is called a prince in Daniel [and there are other princes], and an archangel elsewhere. Since the other sons of God in Genesis are known to be angelic from the punishment angels are said to have suffered for such misdemeanours [2Peter 2.4, Heb 2.3 and as you say Jude 6] then it seems likely that the three terms are interchangeable.[and I wonder about the elders shown in Revelation] The nature of archangels is not divine but is greater than human. Jesus, the firstborn Son of God was always higher than the angels, being involved in their creation, till he humbled himself and came as man, thus “for a little time lower than the angels”Heb 2.9.
Okay, I understand you now – and I agree with you; “sons of God” (Heb: bene elohim) and “angels” are interchangable. For a while there I thought you were proposing that The Father begat a large number of progeny 'in the beginning'. And that The Logos had brothers!Glad we're on the same wavelength on this one.
Hi Is 1.18,
Satan is called the “prince of this world” He was with the sons of God in Jb 1-2. Could that be evidence he is an archangel?Hi guys
I think it's easy to miss the forest for the trees here – by the far the plainest reading of the gospels is that Jesus began to exist when he was born in 4BC. The stories of the birth of Jesus in Matthew, Mark and Luke never mention anything even remotely approaching any kind of incarnation.
—————–
Evidence that Jesus had a beginning:
“Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:” (1 Col 1:15)
Jesus was a creature, which means that he was created – that's not ambiguous. And it's only possible to be the image of something if that something already existed; therefore God must have existed before Jesus.
—————–
“I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.” (Psa 2:7)
In what sense could Jesus ever have been 'begotten' if he had eternally been God Himself?
—————–
“And when thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom.” (2 Sam 7:12)
Jesus was going to “proceed out of the bowels” of David – this would be an extremely odd way to describe God becoming man. How can you “proceed out of the bowels” of someone you pre-date?
—————–
So I believe that Jesus began to exist when he was born in 4BC – that's by far the most natural reading of scripture.
Generally speaking, most of the verses that sound like they're endorsing pre-existence are explained by 1 Pet 1:20 –
“Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you” (1 Pet 1:20)
Yes, Jesus has been in the plan of God since the dawn of time – but he didn't actually exist until he was born, same as everyone else.
God bless
Yes sammo,
That is what I would expect you to say as the official Christadelphian view.
Is Jesus the firstborn son of God, the beginning of the creation of God, through whom all things were made??Hi Nick
“And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.” (Col 1 :18)
There are two types of creation – the literal creation in Genesis 1, and a figurative 'new' creation that comes from being 'born again'. The reason that Jesus is the firstborn of the creation of God is that he was the firstborn from the dead, as the above quote plainly shows. It's not saying that he was created sometime during or before Genesis 1.
Colossians 1 is not talking the creation in Genesis 1 – it's talking about the spiritual new creation that began when Jesus was raised as the firstborn from the dead. Other passages that back up this theme:
“Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.” (2 Cor 5:17)
“Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures.” (James 1:18)
“Ye must be born again” (John 3:7)
Again, by far the plainest reading of the gospels is that Jesus started to exist when he was born in 4BC, and that's as tricky as we need to make it.
Hi sammo,
Indeed he is the firstborn from the dead, the first fruits, the first be be resurrected. But scripoture also says about him in Heb 1 that God made the world through him. Did the world come into being when Jesus was raised from the dead?
“through whom also He made the world”The Greek word for “world” in Hebrews 1:2 is “aion”, which usually means a period of time (this has even made it into modern English). For instance, see Hebrews 9:26, where the same word clearly means a period of time.
So I read Hebrews 1:2 as saying that the ages (aions) of mankind are based around the life of Jesus, not that Jesus was instrumental in the Genesis creation.
Don't you find the concept of a pre-existent Jesus being born as a helpless, experienceless child a little hard to swallow?
Hi Sammo,
I have a lot I want to discuss with you on this topic, maybe we could start here:Collosians 1:16
For by him all things were created [G2936]: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created [G2936] by him and for himCreated: Gr. ktizō
Probably akin to G2932 (through the idea of the proprietorship of the manufacturer); to fabricate, that is, found (form originally): – create, Creator, make.Can a “plan” do this?
Is 1:18 I will get back to you on your last post, I am just looking at some things relative to it at the moment.
Hi Isa 1:18
Well, I don't think Jesus is the “word”; I believe Jesus is the “word made flesh”, which is quite different.
Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 08 2006,04:02) Hi Sammo,
Not if the glorious golden vessel emptied himself.
Below is what my Online Bible has about the word “humbled” in Phil 2:8. Are you sure that this verse is saying that a pre-existent Jesus “emptied” himself of his power, knowledge and character? None of the definitions below say anything at all like that. It sounds to me simply like Jesus humbled himself by acting like a servant.5013 tapeinow tapeinoo tap-i-no’-o
from 5011; TDNT-8:1,1152; v
AV-humble 6, abase 5, humble (one’s) self 2, bring low 1; 14
1) to make low, bring low
1a) to level, reduce to a plain
1b) metaph. to bring into a humble condition, reduce to meaner circumstances
1b1) to assign a lower rank or place to
1b2) to abase
1b3) to be ranked below others who are honoured or rewarded
1b4) to humble or abase myself by humble living
1c) to lower, depress
1c1) of one’s soul bring down one’s pride
1c2) to have a modest opinion of one’s self
1c3) to behave in an unassuming manner
1c4) devoid of all haughtinessThe Word is the seed of God. (Luk 8:11)
A seed produces an expression of the life it contains in a body which is an image of the life.
Seed is also another expression for offspring, which is why in another parable Jesus interprets the seed as the children of the Kingdom.Quote (Sammo @ May 08 2006,04:45) Hi Isa 1:18 Well, I don't think Jesus is the “word”; I believe Jesus is the “word made flesh”, which is quite different.
Sammo,
Was that post for me? I didn't write the word “word” in my post to you. Although He is given this designation several times in the NT (Joh 1:1 & 14, 1 Joh 1:1, Rev 19:13).What do you percieve “Logos” to mean? It's my understanding that it was borrowed by John from Greek philosophy, but that he greatly modified its connotation. In Greek thinking the logos made sense of the order they saw in the universe, but John’s application, although it still retained some of the Greek’s inherent meaning, appears very much more personal in nature.
Malcolm,
OK thanks, look forward to reading it.Quote (Sammo @ May 08 2006,05:00) Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 08 2006,04:02) Hi Sammo,
Not if the glorious golden vessel emptied himself.
Below is what my Online Bible has about the word “humbled” in Phil 2:8. Are you sure that this verse is saying that a pre-existent Jesus “emptied” himself of his power, knowledge and character? None of the definitions below say anything at all like that. It sounds to me simply like Jesus humbled himself by acting like a servant.5013 tapeinow tapeinoo tap-i-no’-o
from 5011; TDNT-8:1,1152; v
AV-humble 6, abase 5, humble (one’s) self 2, bring low 1; 14
1) to make low, bring low
1a) to level, reduce to a plain
1b) metaph. to bring into a humble condition, reduce to meaner circumstances
1b1) to assign a lower rank or place to
1b2) to abase
1b3) to be ranked below others who are honoured or rewarded
1b4) to humble or abase myself by humble living
1c) to lower, depress
1c1) of one’s soul bring down one’s pride
1c2) to have a modest opinion of one’s self
1c3) to behave in an unassuming manner
1c4) devoid of all haughtiness
Hi again Sammo,
I think NH was referencing the “emptied” in Phil 2:7:“but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men.” (NASB)
G2758
kenoō
From G2756; to make empty, that is, (figuratively) to abase, neutralize, falsify: – make (of none effect, of no reputation, void), be in vain.Is 1:18
Re you last post to me:
The finite limitation that sons proceed from their fathers is a logical one.
So my point in this is we are not to confine God to logical limitations.
Does that therefore imply the outcome is illogical? Perhaps – faith is not bound by logic.
Illogical no – foolishness to men but not to GOD? A paradox? Sure!Quoting Einstein as the absolute authority of things natural is interesting, but what use is it to quote a natural authority who had no answers concerning the supernatural except (very wisely) to quote Heb 11:1 when asked how the universe came to be…
The answers we seek concerning such matters are more readily found in the writers of the new covenant. Who had and held and earnestly contended for this faith.
We cannot make any absolute and all knowing statements about the origins of time and matter. We were not there to know how matter came to be or time came to begin, when it occurred or what event heralded it? All we know is that by faith the worlds were made by the word of God so that things which are seen were not made of things that do not appear.
In other words visible things were made by the invisible God how? By the Word (LOGOS).
When did time in fact begin? How many beginnings are there, what is the beginning of beginnings?At some point God created the angels or are they a part of the eternal GOD? If so then He is not Three in One but Many in ONE…
It would stand to reason that GOD created the angels as he also created Hell for Lucifer and the fallen angels…SO that is one beginning, the beginning of the creation of Heaven.
Then there is the beginning of the creation of earth.
Then you have the beginning of time as we would know it, for we measure time by a system based on cycles of the universe….
God demanded of Job where were you when I laid the foundations of the world, tell me if you know all about it… of course Job was wise – he admitted he did not know.Logic is a human extention of a GOD given truth. GOD reveals HIMSELF by HIS WORD (LOGOS)
Man tries to figure HIM out by their word (logic)
God is not known by the human mind alone, though it can be useful in the process but we are told to cast down imagination, reason, memory, conscience, affections and anything that seeks to put some other idea above the Word of God.I prefer the word discussion as it suggests a conversation – a two way dialogue and not just a series of monologues…
1 – Is Yahshua my brother? Yes, but that doesn't make us ontological contempories.As I understand it he is a brother made like unto us in every way that we might be made like unto him in every way. I had to look up the word ontological and I still don't really know what it means, anyway he was made sin for us that we might be made the righteousness of God.
2 – Are we called THE Son of God? Adam was! We are sons with eternal life. Jesus is said to be the image of the invisible God, an image is not the original and is made after the original. For Jesus to be in any way begotten means he came from a parent that existed before him. When the bible says he was begotten of God without any further qualification on the idea of begotten then we must logically assume there is no difference between this application of the word and any other king of begetting.
3 – It's interesting to me that Yahshua said He would ascent to “My God” and “your God”, but He did not say 'OUR' God (Joh 20:17). I think that's significan. Is it? Hebrews 2 tells me he is not ashamed to call us brethren – once again no qualification on the term brethren so I logically assume it is meaning we are kinfolk to him. BTW, when Yahshua died and rose again he remains a man perpetually….. A true human being – the full development of the Human being as God had originally intended in Eden, one that lives forever. The one mediator between (fallen) men and God – the MAN – Christ Jesus – Not the SPIRIT Christ Jesus….
4 – I believe that any life that the son is – God is – and we are.
5 – redeemed – means to buy back or to restore to a former position or status (intended or realized)
6 – where did the life that son had in himself come from?
Does a seed have life in itself – to produce a multiplicity of itself?
Did GOD pattern the natural creation after Himself?I too am enjoying this dialogue, I hope we both can learn from it…and don't worry no offenses are taken
Quote (Sammo @ May 08 2006,04:45) Hi Isa 1:18 Well, I don't think Jesus is the “word”; I believe Jesus is the “word made flesh”, which is quite different.
Hi sammo,
So is it the flesh that makes us who we are and is our person?
Why does scrpture say that Jesus Christ “came in the flesh”?Does that not suggest, like Paul in 2 Cor 5, that the flesh is just a tent that you and I live in?
And does it not mean that the Word was a being who partook [Phil 2.5f]of flesh?
Quote (Is 1:18 @ May 08 2006,05:29) Quote (Sammo @ May 08 2006,04:45) Hi Isa 1:18 Well, I don't think Jesus is the “word”; I believe Jesus is the “word made flesh”, which is quite different.
Sammo,
Was that post for me? I didn't write the word “word” in my post to you. Although He is given this designation several times in the NT (Joh 1:1 & 14, 1 Joh 1:1, Rev 19:13).What do you percieve “Logos” to mean? It's my understanding that it was borrowed by John from Greek philosophy, but that he greatly modified its connotation. In Greek thinking the logos made sense of the order they saw in the universe, but John’s application, although it still retained some of the Greek’s inherent meaning, appears very much more personal in nature.
Malcolm,
OK thanks, look forward to reading it.
Hi,
If John borrowed from greek philosophy does that mean he was not inspired in each and every word that he wrote by the Holy Spirit of God?
If so does this apply to all the bible too?
Is the bible just a collection of the thoughts of men and we have to take it with a grain of salt?
Do we have to remove certain parts of the bible because we feel it is tainted by cultural influences?Does that make us a judge of the work of God?
The word is truth Jesus told us . We should believe him.
Quote (Sammo @ May 07 2006,23:20) Hi guys I think it's easy to miss the forest for the trees here – by the far the plainest reading of the gospels is that Jesus began to exist when he was born in 4BC. The stories of the birth of Jesus in Matthew, Mark and Luke never mention anything even remotely approaching any kind of incarnation.
—————–
Evidence that Jesus had a beginning:
“Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:” (1 Col 1:15)
Jesus was a creature, which means that he was created – that's not ambiguous. And it's only possible to be the image of something if that something already existed; therefore God must have existed before Jesus.
—————–
“I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.” (Psa 2:7)
In what sense could Jesus ever have been 'begotten' if he had eternally been God Himself?
—————–
“And when thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom.” (2 Sam 7:12)
Jesus was going to “proceed out of the bowels” of David – this would be an extremely odd way to describe God becoming man. How can you “proceed out of the bowels” of someone you pre-date?
—————–
So I believe that Jesus began to exist when he was born in 4BC – that's by far the most natural reading of scripture.
Generally speaking, most of the verses that sound like they're endorsing pre-existence are explained by 1 Pet 1:20 –
“Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you” (1 Pet 1:20)
Yes, Jesus has been in the plan of God since the dawn of time – but he didn't actually exist until he was born, same as everyone else.
God bless
Hi sammo,
It is ok to speak of Jesus “according to the flesh” as scripture does. He had human origins too and many OT scripture relate to that aspect of him as Son of Man.But that is not all he is, and in fact is the least important aspect of his nature, being just an earthly tent for his person, the glorious Son of God.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
