- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 12 2010,15:18) Mike,
1. We know that Jesus emptied Himself and humbled Himself so that 'greater than' could mean as when 'in the flesh.'2. Or it could mean that the one that begat before the ages would naturally be greater in that sense than the one that was begotten.
3. Aside from that, after the Son was given all things that the Father had and seated at His right hand I can see a sense of equality.
4. I also see a sense of equality from before the ages because of being the same nature…equal in nature. So, I can see both…a sense of equality and also in another sense, an inequality, context helps.
Hi Kathi,1. You say maybe Jesus was less than God “in the flesh”. But wasn't he in this fleshly state when you also assert the disciples and others “worshipped” him with the same type of worship they gave to their God? Either he was less than God because of the flesh, and therefore the “worship” of him must mean “obeisance”…….OR he was worshipped the same as God while he was in the flesh and therefore he lied when he said the Father was greater than him. Pick a side of the fence and stick with it so I know which one I'm refuting.
2. In what sense? The “begetting” sense? The One who caused to exist is naturally greater in EVERY sense than the one who was caused to exist.
3. Being given the right hand postition of someone does not mean “equality” Kathi. While it is an esteemed postition, the right hand postition is given by one who is greater than the one who was granted that postition.
4. But it is not a “nature” we are worshipping when we worship God. Take the 2 Sam 1:2 situation – both King David and the man who bowed to him had the same exact human nature…….but only one was bowed down to and the other was doing the obeisance. It is God the person who holds the highest title in the world that we worship, not His “nature”. The man in 2 Sam did not bow down to every human being in existence because they all shared the same “nature” as King David just as we should not worship everyone who has the “nature” of God. He bowed down to David because he alone was the king of Israel just like we worship only God because He alone is God.
Isaiah 40:25 NIV
“To whom will you compare me? Or who is my equal?” says the Holy One.mike
Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 12 2010,15:41) Hi Mike,
You assume that the term 'firstborn of all creation' is implying that the Son is created. If I said that so and so was the 'Lord of all creation,' you wouldn't assume that implies that the 'Lord' is created would you?
Kathi,“Firstborn of all creation”:
1. The one born first of all creation
2. Has nothing to do with being “born” at all, but means Jesus is preeminent over all creation.I say it is #1……just like the words say – why add something to it that's not there?
You are suggesting maybe it's #2, to which I say: God is preeminent over Jesus AND all creation. Why would Jesus be the one who is “preeminent” over and above his own God? “Supreme” and “peerless” are synonyms for “preeminent”, so it doesn't allow for the possibility of “one of the ones who is in a high position” – it implies the ONLY one who is in the HIGHEST postition. So if anyone is “preeminent over all creation”, it is God. At the very least, it would say “THEY are preeminent over all creation”.
I don't see how #2 can work unless you place Jesus ABOVE his own God.
mike
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Sep. 12 2010,10:16) Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 12 2010,15:41) Hi Mike,
You assume that the term 'firstborn of all creation' is implying that the Son is created. If I said that so and so was the 'Lord of all creation,' you wouldn't assume that implies that the 'Lord' is created would you?
Kathi,“Firstborn of all creation”:
1. The one born first of all creation
2. Has nothing to do with being “born” at all, but means Jesus is preeminent over all creation.I say it is #1……just like the words say – why add something to it that's not there?
You are suggesting maybe it's #2, to which I say: God is preeminent over Jesus AND all creation. Why would Jesus be the one who is “preeminent” over and above his own God? “Supreme” and “peerless” are synonyms for “preeminent”, so it doesn't allow for the possibility of “one of the ones who is in a high position” – it implies the ONLY one who is in the HIGHEST postition. So if anyone is “preeminent over all creation”, it is God. At the very least, it would say “THEY are preeminent over all creation”.
I don't see how #2 can work unless you place Jesus ABOVE his own God.
mike
Mike,
How about choice #3#3 The one born of God first who is the only begotten true son of God Himself, not created nor made but begotten before the ages and all things were created through Him and apart from Him, nothing was created that was created. He is the only firstborn that has preeminence over all of that which He Himself was used to create. He is not the only person preeminent over creation since He and His Father accomplished that together.
That is my choice.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Sep. 12 2010,09:57) Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 12 2010,15:18) Mike,
1. We know that Jesus emptied Himself and humbled Himself so that 'greater than' could mean as when 'in the flesh.'2. Or it could mean that the one that begat before the ages would naturally be greater in that sense than the one that was begotten.
3. Aside from that, after the Son was given all things that the Father had and seated at His right hand I can see a sense of equality.
4. I also see a sense of equality from before the ages because of being the same nature…equal in nature. So, I can see both…a sense of equality and also in another sense, an inequality, context helps.
Hi Kathi,1. You say maybe Jesus was less than God “in the flesh”. But wasn't he in this fleshly state when you also assert the disciples and others “worshipped” him with the same type of worship they gave to their God? Either he was less than God because of the flesh, and therefore the “worship” of him must mean “obeisance”…….OR he was worshipped the same as God while he was in the flesh and therefore he lied when he said the Father was greater than him. Pick a side of the fence and stick with it so I know which one I'm refuting.
2. In what sense? The “begetting” sense? The One who caused to exist is naturally greater in EVERY sense than the one who was caused to exist.
3. Being given the right hand postition of someone does not mean “equality” Kathi. While it is an esteemed postition, the right hand postition is given by one who is greater than the one who was granted that postition.
4. But it is not a “nature” we are worshipping when we worship God. Take the 2 Sam 1:2 situation – both King David and the man who bowed to him had the same exact human nature…….but only one was bowed down to and the other was doing the obeisance. It is God the person who holds the highest title in the world that we worship, not His “nature”. The man in 2 Sam did not bow down to every human being in existence because they all shared the same “nature” as King David just as we should not worship everyone who has the “nature” of God. He bowed down to David because he alone was the king of Israel just like we worship only God because He alone is God.
Isaiah 40:25 NIV
“To whom will you compare me? Or who is my equal?” says the Holy One.mike
Mike,
I didn't say that He was less than “God,” I said less than the Father (as God). Jesus said, “the Father is greater than me.” Jesus didn't say that “God is greater than me.”Jesus was the begotten God before He came in the flesh and while He was in the flesh and after He was resurrected. He never stopped being the begotten God, He just limited that to become a man.
You say that the One who caused to exist is naturally greater in EVERY sense than the one who was caused to exist.
Not if the one that was caused to exist has the same identical nature, image, and form. In these ways they are the same…both perfect.
Having the right hand position is an expression of equality in power.
I have to go to a b-day party…more later.
Kathi
how do you know that what you say is true??;Not if the one that was caused to exist has the same identical nature, image, and form. In these ways they are the same…both perfect.
and more how you figure that one out;Having the right hand position is an expression of equality in power.
this is new ;i use to be the right hand of my boss ,but he was always the guy i had to report to ,this never make me equal to him in any thing,only to the others in the company and outside of it ,and this if only he wanted that way.
Pierre
Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 13 2010,04:57) Mike,
How about choice #3#3 The one born of God first who is the only begotten true son of God Himself, not created nor made but begotten before the ages and all things were created through Him and apart from Him, nothing was created that was created. He is the only firstborn that has preeminence over all of that which He Himself was used to create. He is not the only person preeminent over creation since He and His Father accomplished that together.
That is my choice.
But that's not one of the choices Kathi. “Preeminent” = “Almighty”. There cannot be two who are equally #1. Jesus is either the highest being in existence or he isn't.So if “firstborn of all creation” means Jesus is the HIGHEST over creation, then God is NOT the HIGHEST over all creation.
Therefore, doesn't it make better logical sense that “firstborn of all creation” just means what it says: That Jesus is the one who was created before anything else was created?
mike
Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 13 2010,05:04) Mike,
I didn't say that He was less than “God,” I said less than the Father (as God). Jesus said, “the Father is greater than me.” Jesus didn't say that “God is greater than me.”Jesus was the begotten God before He came in the flesh and while He was in the flesh and after He was resurrected. He never stopped being the begotten God, He just limited that to become a man.
You say that the One who caused to exist is naturally greater in EVERY sense than the one who was caused to exist.
Not if the one that was caused to exist has the same identical nature, image, and form. In these ways they are the same…both perfect.
Having the right hand position is an expression of equality in power.
I have to go to a b-day party…more later.
Hi Kathi,Although Pierre has already said exactly what I was thinking when I read your post, I will still reply.
Kathi:
Quote Not if the one that was caused to exist has the same identical nature, image, and form. In these ways they are the same…both perfect.
But what about David? He had the “same identical nature, image, and form” as the man who bowed to him in 2 Sam. Hmmmm…..two beings with the same nature, but only one of them is “worshipped”.Kathi:
Quote I didn't say that He was less than “God,” I said less than the Father (as God). Jesus said, “the Father is greater than me.” Jesus didn't say that “God is greater than me.”
Now you are just playing with words Kathi. We know that “the Father” is the same person as the one Jesus said was “my God”. If Jesus said “the Father is greater”, then he was equally saying, “my God is greater”. And not only just “our God and his God”, but “the ONLY true God”. So yes, he was saying, “God is greater than I”.Kathi:
Quote Having the right hand position is an expression of equality in power.
NEVER! Jesus will rule IN the power and authority of his God just as King David ruled in the power and authority of his God. That does NOT mean “equality” Kathi. Name one time in the history of the world where a “right hand man” was equal to the one who put him in that postion in the first place.Have fun at the birthday party – another year older beats the alternative, right?
mike
Quote (terraricca @ Sep. 12 2010,13:16) Kathi how do you know that what you say is true??;Not if the one that was caused to exist has the same identical nature, image, and form. In these ways they are the same…both perfect.
and more how you figure that one out;Having the right hand position is an expression of equality in power.
this is new ;i use to be the right hand of my boss ,but he was always the guy i had to report to ,this never make me equal to him in any thing,only to the others in the company and outside of it ,and this if only he wanted that way.
Pierre
Pierre,
Do you doubt that the Son is the image of God? or form of God? or nature of God? Read this:2 Cor 4:4
4 in whose case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.
NASUCol 1:15
15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.
NASUPhil 2:6
6 who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped,
NASUHeb 1:3
3 And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power.
NASUSee, Pierre, God's word says that the Son is the image, the form, and the nature of God. Could you say that something that was the image of man, the form of man, and the nature of man was therefore…man. Doesn't that make perfect sense to you? Isn't that reasonable? Not to mention that the son is called God over and over. He is the begotten God, not the unbegotten God. He still is second to the Father, the unbegotten God, but being put at the right hand of His Father, this demonstrates an equal dignity.
Read this from St.Chrysostom:
Quote “He sat” (saith he) “on the right hand of the Majesty on high.” What is this “on high”? Doth he enclose God in place? Away with such a thought! but just as, when he saith, “on the right hand,” he did not describe Him as having figure, but showed His equal dignity with the Father; so, in saying “on high,” he did not enclose Him there, but expressed the being higher than all things, and having ascended up above all things. That is, He attained even unto the very throne of the Father: as therefore the Father is on high, so also is He. For the “sitting together” implies nothing else than equal dignity. But if they say, that He said, “Sit Thou,” we may ask them, What then? did He speak to Him standing? Moreover, he said not that He commanded, not that He enjoined, but that “He said”: for no other reason, than that thou mightest not think Him without origin and without cause. For that this is why he said it, is evident from the place of His sitting. For had he intended to signify inferiority, he would not have said, “on the right hand,” but on the left hand. Quote (JustAskin @ Sep. 12 2010,20:56) Shimmer,
thanks for the Bump.All these elementary questions – it is no wonder that there is so much misunderstanding….
The Testimony of Christ… What is the problem with comprehending this : Jesus is telling WHAT IS TO COME – What is to Be – What Will Be. I fail to see what there is to query.
Did the poster think there was another answer? Some great chunk of revelation that JA was going to choke on?
And Shimmer, The “Is there all there is to God” is directed at “God is CONTAINER of ALL THINGS” therefore “NO ONE can be ALL that God is”;
The Power contained by within another cannot be greater than Power that contains it.
The Force contained by within another cannot be greater than Force that contains it.
The Authority contained by within another cannot be greater than Authority that contains it.
The Truth contained by within another cannot be greater than Truth that contains it.However:
The Lie contained by within another can be (and often is) greater than Lie that contains it.
The retribution that you inflict on another can often be greater than the infliction that was caused to you by the other.
Ok, thank you JA, it's just that verse “The testimony of Jesus is the Spirit of Prophecy” I think it was when I went to an Adventist church, I cant remember what they said, something about those who are more in the truth have gifts such as prophecy or something? Or the ability to understand it more. That's why I asked.When I was more in tune with what I believed, I saw thing's to do with prophecy, I don't get things like that anymore, I wonder why ? Maybe I'm going wrong somewhere, I don't know. (when I say more in tune, what I mean is, thinking about too many things seems to cloud things like prophecy for some reason)
Sorry this has nothing to do with the subject of the thread, but thanks.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Sep. 12 2010,13:22) Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 13 2010,04:57) Mike,
How about choice #3#3 The one born of God first who is the only begotten true son of God Himself, not created nor made but begotten before the ages and all things were created through Him and apart from Him, nothing was created that was created. He is the only firstborn that has preeminence over all of that which He Himself was used to create. He is not the only person preeminent over creation since He and His Father accomplished that together.
That is my choice.
But that's not one of the choices Kathi. “Preeminent” = “Almighty”. There cannot be two who are equally #1. Jesus is either the highest being in existence or he isn't.So if “firstborn of all creation” means Jesus is the HIGHEST over creation, then God is NOT the HIGHEST over all creation.
Therefore, doesn't it make better logical sense that “firstborn of all creation” just means what it says: That Jesus is the one who was created before anything else was created?
mike
Mike,
I don't care if it wasn't one of the choices. So what!
The Father and the Son are not #1 and #1 over all creation, they are #1 and #2 over all creation. The Father is not the Firstborn of all creation but His Son is. The Father is the unbegotten God of all creation and the Son is the begotten God of all creation. They are both pre-eminent over all creation. If pre-eminent means almighty, ok, the Father did give the Son all that He has, so the Son wouldn't be less than that which the Father has given Him, hence all His might-almighty.When you read 'the firstborn of all creation' it might help you understand if you say 'the unbegotten God of all creation.' It doesn't have to be that hard to understand.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Sep. 12 2010,13:46) Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 13 2010,05:04) Mike,
I didn't say that He was less than “God,” I said less than the Father (as God). Jesus said, “the Father is greater than me.” Jesus didn't say that “God is greater than me.”Jesus was the begotten God before He came in the flesh and while He was in the flesh and after He was resurrected. He never stopped being the begotten God, He just limited that to become a man.
You say that the One who caused to exist is naturally greater in EVERY sense than the one who was caused to exist.
Not if the one that was caused to exist has the same identical nature, image, and form. In these ways they are the same…both perfect.
Having the right hand position is an expression of equality in power.
I have to go to a b-day party…more later.
Hi Kathi,Although Pierre has already said exactly what I was thinking when I read your post, I will still reply.
Kathi:
Quote Not if the one that was caused to exist has the same identical nature, image, and form. In these ways they are the same…both perfect.
But what about David? He had the “same identical nature, image, and form” as the man who bowed to him in 2 Sam. Hmmmm…..two beings with the same nature, but only one of them is “worshipped”.Kathi:
Quote I didn't say that He was less than “God,” I said less than the Father (as God). Jesus said, “the Father is greater than me.” Jesus didn't say that “God is greater than me.”
Now you are just playing with words Kathi. We know that “the Father” is the same person as the one Jesus said was “my God”. If Jesus said “the Father is greater”, then he was equally saying, “my God is greater”. And not only just “our God and his God”, but “the ONLY true God”. So yes, he was saying, “God is greater than I”.Kathi:
Quote Having the right hand position is an expression of equality in power.
NEVER! Jesus will rule IN the power and authority of his God just as King David ruled in the power and authority of his God. That does NOT mean “equality” Kathi. Name one time in the history of the world where a “right hand man” was equal to the one who put him in that postion in the first place.Have fun at the birthday party – another year older beats the alternative, right?
mike
Mike,And what about David…he had a son that became a king and was given the same honor as his father did he not? Don't you think that there is a difference between a common subject within the kingdom and the king's son, the rightful heir of the throne who will achieve the equal authority which his father had?
David was a type of Christ but was not THE only true Christ. Whatever David was of honor, Christ is much more being that He is divine. Here is what Eusebius says about those that were 'types of Christ:'
Quote 8. And we have been told also that certain of the prophets themselves became, by the act of anointing, Christs in type, so that all these have reference to the true Christ, the divinely inspired and heavenly Word, who is the only high priest of all, and the only King of every creature, and the Father’s only supreme prophet of prophets.
9. And a proof of this is that no one of those who were of old symbolically anointed, whether priests, or kings, or prophets, possessed so great a power of inspired virtue as was exhibited by our Saviour and Lord Jesus, the true and only Christ.
10. None of them at least, however superior in dignity and honor they may have been for many generations among their own people, ever gave to their followers the name of Christians from their own typical name of Christ. Neither was divine honor ever rendered to any one of them by their subjects; nor after their death was the disposition of their followers such that they were ready to die for the one whom they honored. And never did so great a commotion arise among all the nations of the earth in respect to any one of that age; for the mere symbol could not act with such power among them as the truth itself which was exhibited by our Saviour.
11. He, although he received no symbols and types of high priesthood from any one, although he was not born of a race of priests, although he was not elevated to a kingdom by military guards, although he was not a prophet like those of old, although he obtained no honor nor pre-eminence among the Jews, nevertheless was adorned by the Father with all, if not with the symbols, yet with the truth itself.
12. And therefore, although he did not possess like honors with those whom we have mentioned, he is called Christ more than all of them. And as himself the true and only Christ of God, he has filled the whole earth with the truly august and sacred name of Christians, committing to his followers no longer types and images, but the uncovered virtues themselves, and a heavenly life in the very doctrines of truth.
13. And he was not anointed with oil prepared from material substances, but, as befits divinity, with the divine Spirit himself, by participation in the unbegotten deity of the Father. And this is taught also again by Isaiah, who exclaims, as if in the person of Christ himself, “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me; therefore hath he anointed me. He hath sent me to preach the Gospel to the poor, to proclaim deliverance to captives, and recovery of sight to the blind.”
14. And not only Isaiah, but also David addresses him, saying, “Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever. A scepter of equity is the scepter of thy kingdom. Thou hast loved righteousness and hast hated iniquity. Therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.” Here the Scripture calls him God in the first verse, in the second it honors him with a royal scepter.
15. Then a little farther on, after the divine and royal power, it represents him in the third place as having become Christ, being anointed not with oil made of material substances, but with the divine oil of gladness. It thus indicates his especial honor, far superior to and different from that of those who, as types, were of old anointed in a more material way.Mike,
Christ is the power of God so how could he be less powerful than God?1 Cor 1:24
24 but to those who are the called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.
NASUQuote (SimplyForgiven @ Sep. 12 2010,01:26) Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 12 2010,09:41) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Sep. 11 2010,22:18) Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 12 2010,13:43) No God could be God that wasn't of the divine nature always and besides that God would have to be the creator and not the created.
And this is an important point you bring up Kathi. Jesus IS “the created”. Jesus said so and so did Paul. And scripture doesn't say that Jesus is “the creator”, does it? It says all things are FROM the Creator, Jehovah; and all things came THROUGH the Creator's Son, Jesus.Jesus is the created…….NOT the Creator.
mike
Hi Mike,
You assume that the term 'firstborn of all creation' is implying that the Son is created. If I said that so and so was the 'Lord of all creation,' you wouldn't assume that implies that the 'Lord' is created would you?Also in Revelations, I suppose you refer to 'the beginning of creation' as to implying that the Son is part of the creation as the first created. Beginning can be translated in other ways like principle, chief, origin, source, etc. So, I don't think you have two die hard verses as proof of your 'Jesus is a created being' theory. I really don't think that the Father would have the angels worshipping a created being but He does tell them to worship the Son.
man i totaly agree.
I was trying to say the same thing, and you have spoken perfectly, you worded it better than me.
Hi Dennison,
Thanks for the encouragement! I'm so glad we are in agreementQuote (JustAskin @ Sep. 12 2010,01:29) LU, As you stress your definition of “Worship” by Angels of Jesus – does it also occur to you that the Term “Worship” can also be translated as “Obeisance”.
Check also that “Kings” are given obeisance by their subjects. And what is Jesus in Heaven – A King – and who are his Subjects.
Also, Worship – ONLY GOD should be “Worshipped” (Given Sacred Service) – Where in Heaven is Jesus being given Sacred Service by the angels – and also – Why not by Mankind? Why is Mankind not included in the Sacred Service if Angels are?
Clearly then it is Obeisance that Jesus is being offered by the Angels – They are HIS to command as King – That is why Mankind is not included: Mankind is in the image of God and will be “Brothers with him, Sons of God and therefore Heirs of God Himself”.
LU, Jesus doesn't COMMAND his Brothers – they are his Equal in status as Sons of God – “One does not Command ones equals” (UK Queen's English!).
Also, Jesus DOES NOT have ALL that the Father has: “ALL” does not Always (!) mean “ALL” – you need to check the context.
Can your Father give you EVERYTHING (ALL) that he has? You say “Yes, of course”. Really, Lu? Can he give you ALL his Knowledge, his Wisdom, his Might, his Power, Energy? Still you say “Yes, even all of them?”
LU, when you say this then I know you are dishonest to yourself… Clearly, your Father cannot give you ALL His WISDOM, ALL His KNOWLEDGE, Might, Power, Energy… If he did he would cease to exist because You would become Your Own Father – You would become HIM – and You (as LU) would cease to exist!
Does God cease to exist when Jesus is given “[All] Power and authority”… and check this; Is that all there is to God; Just Power and Authority such that Jesus inherits it all – What about the SEAT of Power – Jesus is still ONLY an HEIR to the Throne of God – A Prince (“Prince” of Peace – Not “KING” of Peace).
Does a Steward own the throne when his King (See – His King!) goes away – No!
Even Solomon bemoaned the fact that he could not pass on his Wisdom to his children. Solomon's Power and Might waned when he passed “what he could” to his children.
Scripture has Fractals to help us understand God's Kingdom and his word: Two places (maybe more) Scriptures shows us what is to be: Pharoah and Joseph, and Ahesereus and Haman/Mordecai.
Both events relate the giving of “[ALL] Power and Authority” over the Kings Kingdom – Yet…At No Time Was The One Given The '[All] Power and Authority' Ever Given The Seat Of Power – The Throne..in fact, Pharoah (Scriptures) say, 'Except for the Throne, All power and authority is given to so no one may raise a foot or place a foot in my kingdom without your say so!”.For goodness sake, LU;
For Righteous Truth Sake, LU;
For God's sake, LU – Why do you think that the “Throne” was excepted..? Pretty obvious it should be imagined.Could Joseph sleep with the women in Pharoah's hareem – No! So Joseph DOES NOT own ALL that Pharoah owns.
Could Joseph sleep with Pharoah's Wife – No! So Joseph DOES NOT own ALL that Pharoah owns.
Could Joseph Depose Pharoah – No! So Joseph DOES NOT own ALL that Pharoah owns.
Could Joseph give away Pharoah's Kingdom – Yes and No! Yes But NO – it would be illegal. Pharoah could give away His Kingdom though!
If another nation were to come and invade Egypt and say “Where is your King” who would be brought to them Joseph or Pharoah?
JA,
Yes I know that the Greek word for worship can be translated as obeisance. You believe that the Son is the created angel and so therefore you cannot worship a created being. I see Him as begotten of the Father before the ages and the one which created the angels so it is not surprising that we cannot come to an agreement on the whole topic of worship. I do not see your teaching in the Bible or the early church father's writings and in fact they would call what you believe as heresy. I choose to follow what I believe the Bible to teach and I am finding agreement with the early church fathers and you are not, imo.Jesus is God, the begotten God. Worship God.
Also, mankind is included in the worshipping of the Son:
Phil 2:9-11
9 For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name,
10 so that at the name of Jesus EVERY KNEE WILL BOW, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11 and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
NASUAlso, you say Jesus doesn't command his brothers yet we know that the brothers are servants of Christ. The brothers are not equal in status with Jesus. They are not sons of God as He is. He is the only begotten Son of God, not one of the many begotten Sons of God.
As far as what my father can give me, he is only a type of the heavenly Father and we are not to say the the heavenly Father is limited to what an earthly father is limited to, do we? Goodness no!
Also, the Son is a king and His kingdom will have no end.
kathy
i do not think that you understand what Paul is saying;Phil 2:9-11
9 For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name,
10 so that at the name of Jesus EVERY KNEE WILL BOW, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11 and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
NASUi would like to know what it is you understand
Pierre
Pierre,
I understand that all praise and worship that we give the Son as the Son of God, gives glory to the Father.Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 13 2010,17:55) Pierre,
I understand that all praise and worship that we give the Son as the Son of God, gives glory to the Father.
Kathyall what Paul explains is ;that it is God will for the son to do what he did,and all worship has to go to God ,because nothing would have been done if it was not for the father.
now Christ received his glory from the father for the obedience he as to him,and so he has received the second glory what is above all creation,
and anyone who as not obeyed him will not received live,because God as made him a door trough which all who want s to live will go trough.so what you say is not quit right,God is very jealous he will not give his glory to any other not even the son,and the son will not accept glory /worship what is not his.
you are looking to corrupt men to give Christ what he do not ask ,request,or desire,
i would feel very unsafe in that position of your.Pierre
Kathi:
Quote The Father and the Son are not #1 and #1 over all creation, they are #1 and #2 over all creation.
Very good.Kathi:
Quote They are both pre-eminent over all creation. If pre-eminent means almighty, ok,
Not so good. Your second statement contradicts your first here. “Almighty” means “the MIGHTIEST of the mighty”, so there can only be one of them. We know Jehovah is called the “God of gods” and we know that Jehovah is Jesus' God, so which ONE of them is the “Almighty”?Preeminent means “peerless” or in other words “WITHOUT a peer”, so again, there can only be one. They can both be OVER mankind, but they cannot both be PREEMINENT OVER mankind…….only ONE of them can have the title “preeminent”. So by eliminating the possibility that two separate beings can both be preeminent at the same time, we also eliminate your third choice……so like I said, “That is NOT one of the choices.” WJ would be glad to point out that there really IS a 3rd choice: The Father and Son are the same being so they can both be preeminent at the same time. But you know better than that, don't you?
So once again, the only two choices I see are either it means “preeminent over all creation” – which leaves the Father high and dry, or it means just what it says: Jesus is the one born first out of all created things.
Kathi:
Quote When you read 'the firstborn of all creation' it might help you understand if you say 'the unbegotten God of all creation.' It doesn't have to be that hard to understand.
Why don't you just read it as the one who was created first? You know God begot His Son before the worlds, right? A begotten Son is a new creation Kathi. When I begot my son, with the help of God I created a new life. When God begot His Son, He created a new life where there wasn't one before.You are so hip to what the early church fathers say but you ignore Eusebius?
We believe in One God, the Father Almighty, the Maker of all things visible and invisible. And in One Lord Jesus Christ, the Word of God, God from God, Light from Light, Life from Life, Son Only-begotten, first-born of every creature, before all the ages, begotten from the Father,
How could it mean that Jesus was “preeminent over creation” when there wasn't any creation to be preeminent over BEFORE ALL THE AGES?
mike
Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 13 2010,09:16) Mike, And what about David…he had a son that became a king and was given the same honor as his father did he not?
Yes Kathi,Solomon recieved the honor of being King of Israel after David had died. Did Jehovah die?
Besides, the point you were arguing was “same nature – same honor”. David and the man who honored him had the same nature, but only one received the honor. Like I said, we don't worship the “nature” of God but the Person of God. Do you agree?
And I agree with everything Eusebius said in what you quoted, but I would still like the link from earlier where he said to “worship Jesus AS GOD”. That seems to go against all else Eusebius taught, so it has me wondering.
mike
Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 13 2010,09:20) Mike,
Christ is the power of God so how could he be less powerful than God?1 Cor 1:24
24 but to those who are the called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.
NASU
Well I don't know Kathi…….the power Jesus does have was given him from his God. The scriptures say that even after Jesus was given that power he was to sit at God's right hand until GOD placed his enemies as a footstool for his feet. I take that to mean that Jesus' God is still more powerful than Jesus.Could it possibly mean that Christ represents all the power and wisdom of his God? It can't literally mean that Christ IS the power of his God. That sounds alot like Christ is the one that provides his God power when needed……so that can't be right, can it? Kind of like when people say God is their strength and their rod and what not. It means God is their power, not the other way around. Okay, I'm going to look it up………………………………………………Now I understand! It must be taken in context with verse 18, which says:
1 Cor 1:18 NET
For the message about the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.Do you see it? It doesn't mean Christ is as powerful as God any more than it means “the message about the cross” is as powerful as God Himself. It means that the message about Christ SHOWS the power of God at work. It means that Christ himself showed the power of his God at work. Phew! I feel better now…….how about you?
mike
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
