- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Oct. 10 2010,13:46) Mike So your answer to the question…
“Is the Father in the “Form of God”? is no?
So your answer to the question…
“Does the Father have a form? is no?
Keith,I have already given you a long answer to whether God has a form…….remember?
And I have answered that it is not logical for someone to say one is “in the form” of themselves.
Keith cannot be said to be “in the form” of Keith, right? Why? Because Keith already IS Keith. Someone other than Keith can be said to be “in the form” of Keith, but not Keith himself.
Do you understand this logic? Can you refute it using any evidence from the history of the world where it is stated that any person was siad to be “in the form” of themselves? If you can't refute it, then stop playing word games.
mike
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 09 2010,22:58) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Oct. 10 2010,13:46) Mike So your answer to the question…
“Is the Father in the “Form of God”? is no?
So your answer to the question…
“Does the Father have a form? is no?
Keith,I have already given you a long answer to whether God has a form…….remember?
And I have answered that it is not logical for someone to say one is “in the form” of themselves.
Keith cannot be said to be “in the form” of Keith, right? Why? Because Keith already IS Keith. Someone other than Keith can be said to be “in the form” of Keith, but not Keith himself.
Do you understand this logic? Can you refute it using any evidence from the history of the world where it is stated that any person was siad to be “in the form” of themselves? If you can't refute it, then stop playing word games.
mike
MikeAnd my reply was Keith is a proper name. God is not, but is a title that describes a class of being.
Keith and Mike is in the “form of humanity”. The Father and Jesus is in the “Form of God”!
The Father has a form and Jesus has the same form and that is the “form of God”. You do understand that logic don't you Mike.
Is there any other that is in the “Form of God”?
WJ
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Oct. 10 2010,14:47) Do you agree with NETNotes on this one? Do you agree that Ezekiel 34:24 is a Messianic prophecy that clearly lists God's SERVANT Jesus as merely a “prince” in contrast to “God Himself”?
I asked:Quote Do you agree with NETNotes on this one? Do you agree that Ezekiel 34:24 is a Messianic prophecy that clearly lists God's SERVANT Jesus as merely a “prince” in contrast to “God Himself”?
You answered:Quote Yes mike!
Very good Keith…….we are slowly making progress.
Now Ezekiel 34:24 says Jehovah will be “Elohim”, and Jesus will be SOMEONE OTHER THAN “Elohim”. It is very clearly stated that Jesus will be a SERVANT of “Elohim”. That follows right along with the rest of scripture which has Jesus refered to as a “SERVANT” of his God……..even after he has been raised back to heaven.
Now, just add that knowledge to Micah 5:4, which says Jesus will rule in the power and majesty of Jehovah HIS GOD, and you'll be well on your way to the truth!
peace and love,
mikeQuote (WorshippingJesus @ Oct. 10 2010,14:55) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 09 2010,22:46) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Oct. 10 2010,13:13) Mike Check AT Robertson and the Net on Titus 2 :13 and see if they agree with you.
I don't have to Keith. I already checked the actual Greek text. And it shows the word “kai” directly preceding the genetive form of “savior”.So it means “of the great God…….AND………of the Savior of us…….”
mike
MikeWhat is your source for that Mike?
In other words you think you understand the Greek better than AT Robertson and the NET?
Isn't that what you said was arrogance to JA?
WJ
More diversions Keith! Instead of throwing trinitarians in my face, why not just refute the point itself? You DO know how the genetive form of the Greek words work, right? Go and read the Greek for yourself and see the “kai” preceeding the genetive “savior”.And if you're still not convinced, read Titus 1:4,
1:4 NET
To Titus, my genuine son in a common faith. Grace and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Savior!The only difference between 1:4 and 2:13 is that Paul added the word “Father” in 1:4. If he had used the word “Father” in 2:13 also, we wouldn't even be having this conversation.
mike
WJ, Id like to apologise to you for argueing like I did in your thread.
JA, I'm sorry.
LU, I should never have fought back and should have dropped it. So I apologise for not doing so. And if in the future I do the things you say I do, please remind me I'm doing it, that's all I need. A friendly reminder. I will try harder from now on, and I mean it.
Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 10 2010,13:14) shimmer what it really means is ;that there is only one true God,
that there never was any other one and that there never be any other one,so all the so called gods are impersonators,
but God can if he wants to call gods anyone he likes ,it never would change his status,just like he did with Moses at the burning bush,
if Christ is called god it would be in the same manner,even men are called gods in relation to the earthly creation,did not God give to Adam the powers over all living creatures? did he not became god like Moses to the rest of the world he would have if he would not have sinned,but he was for a moment he instructed Eve about the will of God ,
god is only a power position;and because of corruption we have now copy cats type of gods.
today we call them elites,presidents,kings,emperors ect.but they are no gods, they are only men in a dream.
Pierre
Hi Terrarica, I understand. JA told me the same thing a while back and I get it, thankyou.Keith:
Quote For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, “The mighty God“, The everlasting Father, “The Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and peace THERE SHALL BE NO END, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. “The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this“. Isa 9:6, 7
It's interesting to note how the LXX, as translated by your boy Sir Lancelot Brenton, renders this passage: For a child is born to us, and a son is given to us, whose government is upon his shoulder: and his name is called the Messenger of great counsel: for I will bring peace upon the princes, and health to him. His government shall be great, and of his peace there is no end: [it shall be] upon the throne of David, and [upon] his kingdom, to establish it, and to support [it] with judgement and with righteousness, from henceforth and forever. The seal of the Lord of hosts shall perform this.Yet speaking of THE Mighty God, the LXX has 10:21 as,
And the remnant of Jacob shall [trust] on the mighty God.
I wonder why that is?
Plus, I wasn't able to find the word “Father” in the Hebrew at all. How do we get “Everlasting Father” if “Father” is not even in the Hebrew?The LXX is what the NT writers considered “Scripture” Keith. It is the translation the early church fathers used to settle scriptural disputes. And even NET admits that “mighty god” in Is 9:6 could mean “God is mighty” or “God is a warrior”.
At the very least, it shows that you shouldn't hang all your trinity hopes on a few word phrases. After all, Artaxerxes and Nebuchadnezzar were also called the “King of kings”.
peace and love,
mikeQuote (WorshippingJesus @ Oct. 10 2010,15:08) Mike And my reply was Keith is a proper name. God is not, but is a title that describes a class of being.
Ah, but you gave away that claim by agreeing it was not the “species of god” that Paul referred to, but the PERSONAL, singular being of God.Take this totally fabricated sentence:
My sister Joan was existing in the form of Mom. But then emptied herself of her female parts, took on male parts, and was made in the likeness of Dad.
Now “Mom” is just a title…..like “God”. But in this context, I don't refer to just any old “mom” or the “species of mom-kind”, but to the very personal singular being of “MY MOM”. And by me saying that my sister was “in the form” of Mom, I make it very clear that my sister is one being who is NOT “Mom”, but exists with similar likeness, qualities and attributes as the SEPARATE being of “Mom”.
That's why you will never hear anyone say “Mom was in the form of Mom”. It would make no sense at all, because “Mom” already IS “Mom”. Likewise, you will never hear it said that “the Father is in the form of God”, because the Father already IS God.
Besides Keith, you must think it through completely. If Jesus was “in the form of God” – and that means that he WAS God, then when he emptied himself and was made as a human being, he was no longer “in the form of God” – and was therefore no longer “God”.
peace and love,
mikeQuote (Lightenup @ Oct. 10 2010,14:57) Mike,
Read what I put up for JA on this page. You will be interested in that too.
Hi Kathi,I DID read it and agree with the part that says “I have begotten you” was said in secret.
I've told JA before that I believe it to be the first words the newborn Son of God ever heard in his life……..long before God created the universe and everything in it through that Son.
peace and love,
mikeMike,
'The first words The Newborn Jesus heard in his life'…
Where in Scriptures does it say that?Who does Scriptures say is a Son of God?
Does it say that Angels are sons of God?
Yes, it does. Every living being (Men or Angels) who has the Holy Spirit of God in them, is a Son of God.
Adam was a Son of God before he sinned. Then he was not a son of God after he sinned.
Jesus was a Son of God before he died…then when he was raised up again…he became the 'Begotten Son of God' because he was then, once more, in the Spirit.
So, yes, 'when He again brought His Son into the world…'
Mike, why is it that it was only AFTER Jesus was brought back into the world that the Angels were told to do obeisance to him?
What changed from before he was in the world the first time to the time after he was brought into the world again?
Was it not that God fulfilled the promise made to David, through Jesus…that Jesus fully completed the commission set to him and God raised him up above his brethren, made him preEminent, first among his Sons.
And what better way to do that than restate the declaration spoken in the Psalms, 'You are my Son, Today I have begotten you'
See Mike, it is a declaration…i have posted this before in rhyme.
Should i write it again, one more time?Mike, I think you mistake the term, 'Son of God'…
'Son of God', someone who waljsin the way of God.
Was David, a Son of God?
You only half believe 'fractals'…
When Joseph was 'figuratively brought back into the world' in Egypt after being 'figuratively dead in the spirit in the dry well and in slaveship', did not the 'sons of his father, his brethren' bow down and do obesience to him?
So likewise, when Jesus was brought back into the world, his brethren, over whom he was raised, did obeisance to him…Mike, it seems so wierd that God should say to an 'unproved' entity, 'You are my Son'… Mike, Jesus was 'More loved' than the others BECAUSE he loved righteousness and hated iniquiry, 'More than the others'!
Mike, 'More than the others'. Mike, what does this imply?
Mike, if Jesus was 'BEGOTTEN SON' above all his brethren before he did anything to prove himself so, because he was created first and the only one, when were the others created and why was Jesus accorded a better position than they?
Mike, i think that if you somehow manage to get passed first base then you may find it hard to reconcile your belief at base two and beyond.
And it is because JustAskin has passed these bases already why i look back and try to show you the path to take so you don't fall in the traps and pits awaiting you on the way.
Shimmer,
I'm not sure why you are apologising to me.I don't see what you did or said that was worthy of an apology, or did I miss a post?
Either way, then, 'Thank you' for apologising for whatever it was.
Quote (shimmer @ Oct. 10 2010,06:49) WJ, Id like to apologise to you for argueing like I did in your thread. JA, I'm sorry.
LU, I should never have fought back and should have dropped it. So I apologise for not doing so. And if in the future I do the things you say I do, please remind me I'm doing it, that's all I need. A friendly reminder. I will try harder from now on, and I mean it.
Thank you Shimmer!Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 10 2010,13:01) Quote (Lightenup @ Oct. 10 2010,14:57) Mike,
Read what I put up for JA on this page. You will be interested in that too.
Hi Kathi,I DID read it and agree with the part that says “I have begotten you” was said in secret.
I've told JA before that I believe it to be the first words the newborn Son of God ever heard in his life……..long before God created the universe and everything in it through that Son.
peace and love,
mike
Mike,
Certainly when that was said would be on the day He was begotten and as we agree with the majority of early church leaders on this, it was before the ages. We can't find the actually place in scriptures where it was said to the Son directly because scriptures do not enlighten us to much as to what was going on before the heaven and earth were created.I'm sure the Father and the Son have conversations all the time and we don't read them anywhere between Genesis and Revelations. They speak privately
Quote (JustAskin @ Oct. 11 2010,10:38) Shimmer,
I'm not sure why you are apologising to me.I don't see what you did or said that was worthy of an apology, or did I miss a post?
Either way, then, 'Thank you' for apologising for whatever it was.
JA, I got involved with something which was not my business, you dont need me to 'defend you' so sorry about that is what I meant.Quote (Lightenup @ Oct. 11 2010,10:40) Quote (shimmer @ Oct. 10 2010,06:49) WJ, Id like to apologise to you for argueing like I did in your thread. JA, I'm sorry.
LU, I should never have fought back and should have dropped it. So I apologise for not doing so. And if in the future I do the things you say I do, please remind me I'm doing it, that's all I need. A friendly reminder. I will try harder from now on, and I mean it.
Thank you Shimmer!
LU, thanks.LU,
With reference to your quoted passage:
Why would someone make a decree in secret?
What would be the point?
A decree is to be SHOUTED OUT so everyone can hear it.So this is why your man claims it is in secret…because there was NO ONE else to hear it.
I put this point out already but it seems that 'Wisdom' made everyone ignore it.
So here it is again, 'Why would a decree be made in private?', 'Who was there to here the decree, such a wonderful decree:thou art my Son?'
Do you remember the quip i made to Mike, Jesus, 'Daddy, who am i?'. God, 'you are my son, today i begot you (became your father)'
So then, who, or what, was 'Jesus' before he was begotten, before he was begotten, before God became his father and the father possessed him as Son?
Does God Procreate?
Does Scriptures say it?
Don't fall in the trap or go for the ba-it
WJ asked the question and then left it
Mikeboll took it on
Now it's back to 'the Son'
Such a tiresome post, don't you just hate it?Let's get back to the thread
To what the topic title said
Till it can be put to bed
Directly from God…meaning 'procreated'.Quote (JustAskin @ Oct. 11 2010,09:28) Mike, if Jesus was 'BEGOTTEN SON' above all his brethren before he did anything to prove himself so, because he was created first and the only one, when were the others created and why was Jesus accorded a better position than they?
Hi JA,Everything you said hindges on your one point above. The answers are “AFTER God's only begotten Son” and “because Jesus is God's ONLY begotten Son”. How do we know that Jesus came first? Because scripture tells us that everything else in existence came into existence THROUGH him.
John 1:3 NIV
3Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.Angels were “made”, weren't they?
Col 1:15-16 NWT
15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation; 16 because by means of him all [other] things were created in the heavens and upon the earth, the things visible and the things invisible, no matter whether they are thrones or lordships or governments or authorities. All [other] things have been created through him and for him.This includes the angels JA. Do you agree? It is also just one of many scriptures that show that Jesus was something more than the rest of creation long before he was sent to earth. And just for a kicker,
Hebrews 1:5 NASB
For to which of the angels did He ever say, “YOU ARE MY SON, TODAY I HAVE BEGOTTEN YOU”?Isn't it clear that it was to no angel that God said those words, but to the one through whom He created the angels? And doesn't it further indicate that only Jesus, as opposed to any mere angel, was said to be “the begotten Son of God”? And I like that word “ever”. Paul says, “to which of the angels did God EVER say…..”
Here's what it means……from WetNanny:
pote
1) once i.e. formerly, aforetime, at some timeAnd just like that, one more little piece of the puzzle falls into place for me.
It means, “to which of the angels did God AT SOME TIME say 'Today I have begotten you.'” In other words, like I've been saying all along, Paul was never trying to say the day that Jesus was raised was the “Today” that was mentioned in the Psalm.peace and love,
mikeQuote (Lightenup @ Oct. 11 2010,09:47) Mike,
Certainly when that was said would be on the day He was begotten and as we agree with the majority of early church leaders on this, it was before the ages.
Hi Kathi,Just so you don't miss it, I just researched this little tidbit:
Heb 1:5 has the word “ever” in it. Here's the scoop as related to JA:
pote
1) once i.e. formerly, aforetime, at some timeAnd just like that, one more little piece of the puzzle falls into place for me. It means, “to which of the angels did God AT SOME TIME say 'Today I have begotten you.'” In other words, like I've been saying all along, Paul was never trying to say the day that Jesus was raised was the “Today” that was mentioned in the Psalm.
You like that one?
peace and love,
mikeJA:
Quote Why would someone make a decree in secret?
What would be the point?
A decree is to be SHOUTED OUT so everyone can hear it.
You misunderstand the words, I think. A decree is a judicial law or order that can be whispered, written or just spoken. A declaration is the shouting and letting everyone know about something. And the Psalm says that Jesus will DECLARE the DECREE God gave him.JA:
Quote So here it is again, 'Why would a decree be made in private?', 'Who was there to here the decree, such a wonderful decree:thou art my Son?'
Just to make sure you understand: Decrees are most often made in private. It is the declaration OF those decrees that are shouted from the rooftops. And Jesus was the only one there to hear the decree, but he later declared it for all of our benefits.JA:
Quote Do you remember the quip i made to Mike, Jesus, 'Daddy, who am i?'. God, 'you are my son, today i begot you (became your father)'
And do you remember me asking what other words should have been God's first words to His newborn Son? What words would you choose were it you?JA:
Quote So then, who, or what, was 'Jesus' before he was begotten, before he was begotten, before God became his father and the father possessed him as Son?
That's a silly question IMO. What were the angels before they were created? What were you before you were created? Apply those answers to Jesus also.peace and love,
mikeP.S. Sorry Kathi, but when I'm brought into it, I feel the need to respond. (Even sometimes when I'm not brought into it.
)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
