- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 28 2011,23:19)
Well, that and John 1:18.
So, from one word “theos”, and a scripture that clearly lists Jesus as a lessor god that was begotten and that people CAN see, you find some kind of “equality” between Jesus and his God?
Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 28 2011,23:19)
God the Father must be self-sufficient by definition. He must contain the ability to create and relate to creation, also to save if need be without needing to make another being. Those things must not be impossible for Him to do, so therefore, the Son and Spirit must have been from eternity. The Son could exist from eternity before He was begotten in a comparable way, though not exact, as my son existed within me and part of me before I beget/gave birth to him as a separate person. Also, for the Son to be truly of the same nature as the Father, He would have to have always existed because that is paramount to being a true God.
In other words, you have no solid foundation, or scriptural support for your theory. You just “think it, therefore it is”?Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 28 2011,23:19)
He only died according to the flesh. His spirit from ancient times did not die.
Not only did he die the same exact way every single human has died in the past, but death had “power over him”. Has death EVER had power over God? Paul doesn't distinguish between a “flesh death” or “spirit death” concerning Jesus. He simply says that since THE BEING Jesus died, THE BEING Jesus cannot die again, for God raised him from death. He aslo says THE BEING Jesus tasted death, while some will be changed in the twinkling of an eye and never taste death at all.Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 28 2011,23:19)
2) the ruler of all
And who's the “Ruler of all”? Jesus is the ruler of all………….EXCEPT for his own God. His own God, as the head of Christ, is the only One who is truly the “Ruler of ALL”, including Jesus.Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 28 2011,23:19)
I believe they are equally the most powerful in terms as it would befit the Unbegotten and as it would befit the Begotten.
No. One is more powerful than the other. Think it out. Which one places the other's enemies at his feet? Which one GAVE power to the other one? Which sits at the right hand OF the one in power? Which is the HEAD of the other?Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 28 2011,23:19)
Ahhhh…not in the capital 'G' sense.
Really? So because YOU like to cap the “G” in reference to Jesus, he is all of a sudden on the same level as the God who begot him? What else ya got? The word is theos, and it was used WITHOUT caps in reference to God, Satan, Jesus, men, idols, and angels.Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 28 2011,23:19)
GOD'S WORD
Heb 5:9
After he had finished his work, he became the source of eternal salvation for everyone who obeys him.
Heb 7:28
Moses' Teachings designated mortals as chief priests even though they had weaknesses. But God's promise, which came after Moses' Teachings, designated the Son who forever accomplished everything that God required.He is the subject in this translation too.
Wrong. You again are changing the subject of Jesus, who was made perfect, into “his works”. But “his works” are not the subject in question, and therefore not the thing that was perfected, or finished. Jesus himself is the subject, and therefore the thing that was perfected, or finished.Kathi, let's stick to one point.
Please tell me how you know Jesus is on the same level as his God from 1:1c, and 1:18.
I'll start: 1:1c refers to Jesus as “god”. It is a simple word that was used of many, so no clue there. 1:18 distinguishes Jesus FROM the Unbegotten God that no one has ever seen, for Jesus is begotten BY that God, and he CAN be seen. Again, I see nothing even coming close to implying a level playing field, let alone screaming or insisting upon one.
Please walk me through this. And please let the other stuff go, so we can deal only with how Jesus ends up “equal” to his God in your eyes.
mike
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Mar. 29 2011,12:13) Why would you always assume the word “elohim” always means “a god” or any one definition, when you would not always translate it as “The One True God” or God?
I don't, Keith. I assert that the word always means “ruler”, remember? And the “ruler” mentioned could be Satan, Jesus, God Almighty, or even a piece of wood that is imagined to be a ruler over someone.You didn't want to join in the first part of this discussion. Did you read the quote from the Greek dude who said 1:1 isn't even Trinitarian ammo in Greece, because it's a no-brainer that John was calling the Word “a god”? Then I posted the thoughts of Jason BeDuhn who seems convinced that the Trinitarians must slant 1:1 because “their truth” isn't evident enough from a FAITHFUL translation of the scriptures. I have come to the solid conclusion that “a god” is what John referred to in 1:1c.
But now Kathi and I are discussing the anarthrous translation, just to keep the discussion well rounded. And I have posed one question, (which she for some reason didn't answer):
As an anarthrous theos in 1:1c, could it simply mean the Word was “mighty”, like in Gen 23? If not, then why?
mike
Mike,
Quote So, from one word “theos”, and a scripture that clearly lists Jesus as a lessor god that was begotten and that people CAN see, you find some kind of “equality” between Jesus and his God? “Lessor” is not at all clearly listed in John 1:18. Is your son lessor human than you because he was begotten. The Father is greater by the fact that He is the Father, not because He is mightier. He is also the Son's God because He is His Father and because He is God, not because He is mightier or wiser. The Son has everything the Father has including might.
Quote In other words, you have no solid foundation, or scriptural support for your theory. You just “think it, therefore it is”? Well, show me what you disagree with in what I said and I will see if I can back it up with scripture. Not everything can be proven in scripture, like Jesus had 10 toes, that you can't find in scripture but I would believe that He had 10 toes, wouldn't you? Some things are obvious.
Quote Not only did he die the same exact way every single human has died in the past, but death had “power over him”. Has death EVER had power over God? Paul doesn't distinguish between a “flesh death” or “spirit death” concerning Jesus. He simply says that since THE BEING Jesus died, THE BEING Jesus cannot die again, for God raised him from death. He aslo says THE BEING Jesus tasted death, while some will be changed in the twinkling of an eye and never taste death at all. This is what died, the part of Him that wasn't a part of Him when he pre-existed. If He could pre-exist without flesh, then He can continue to exist when the flesh dies. Jesus did taste death. He felt every whip and nail and emotion of great agony and life left His body. That is because of the flesh that He was limited to as far as the physical pain. He put aside the ability to save Himself from the crucifixion not because He wasn't mighty enough according to His spiritual side, but because He wanted to go through with the crucifixion so that He could gain the victory over sin.
Quote And who's the “Ruler of all”? Jesus is the ruler of all………….EXCEPT for his own God. His own God, as the head of Christ, is the only One who is truly the “Ruler of ALL”, including Jesus. His own God is His own God because He is the Father of Him, that's why, not because He is mightier. He has all that the Father has.
Quote
No. One is more powerful than the other. Think it out. Which one places the other's enemies at his feet? Which one GAVE power to the other one? Which sits at the right hand OF the one in power? Which is the HEAD of the other?One is not more powerful than the other, they perfectly work within the structure of the Father/Son relationship. It isn't a power trip between the two. It is the Father and the Son being perfect in who they truly are that causes one to give all that He has to the Son and for one to sit at the right hand of the other. You wouldn't expect the Son to be the giver of authority to the Father would you? It is natural for the one who is Father to be the giver and the Son to be the receiver.
Quote Really? So because YOU like to cap the “G” in reference to Jesus, he is all of a sudden on the same level as the God who begot him? What else ya got? The word is theos, and it was used WITHOUT caps in reference to God, Satan, Jesus, men, idols, and angels. See, the capital letter makes a difference. I know they didn't capitalize anything in the Greek, but they do in the English and I am speaking of the English translation. The capital letter in English makes a difference and separates those/that which are true deity nature from those who are not deity by nature. The Father and the Son are the same nature.
Quote Wrong. You again are changing the subject of Jesus, who was made perfect, into “his works”. But “his works” are not the subject in question, and therefore not the thing that was perfected, or finished. Jesus himself is the subject, and therefore the thing that was perfected, or finished. Well, chalk up another scripture that we understand differently.
Quote Please tell me how you know Jesus is on the same level as his God from 1:1c, and 1:18. The begotten God would be like the God who beget Him, not less than His nature. The nature of God would be always existent, almighty, otherwise that nature would not be God nature.
Quote Please walk me through this. And please let the other stuff go, so we can deal only with how Jesus ends up “equal” to his God in your eyes. Ok, Mike, I am trying. He is equal in nature. The nature of humans insists that they are not eternally existent. If they were eternally existent then they would be God, right? See how being eternally existent would be within the nature of God? So if the Father and Son share the same nature, they are both eternally existent by definition of being of God nature.
Your friend,
Sleepy KathiQuote (Lightenup @ Mar. 30 2011,17:50) Hi Karamarie, It is clear that JA misunderstood what I said and is interested in debating the matter. Presently I have too much going on with the members here to take him on also. Please understand. I answered his questions but I am not interested in debating him at this time. Maybe someone else is interested.
Thanks,
Kathi
No problem Kathi.Apparently I put it in the wrong thread anyway!
Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 30 2011,00:04) The begotten God would be like the God who beget Him, not less than His nature. The nature of God would be always existent, almighty, otherwise that nature would not be God nature. Quote The begotten God would be like the God who beget Him
Agreed. Jesus is much like his God.Quote The nature of God would be always existent, almighty, otherwise that nature would not be God nature.
Okay, first let's deal with the “almighty” business once and for all. Christ is NEVER called “almighty” anywhere in scripture, so for you to just claim this without any scriptural support makes your claim unworthy of a response from anyone discussing the actual SCRIPTURES. But because you are my friend, I will remind you of a couple scriptural truths.There can only be ONE “Almighty God”. The word in and of itself precludes more than one holding this title. The One holding this title would also be:
1. The head OF Christ.
2. The God OF gods.
3. The God OF Christ.
4. One who is GREATER than Christ.
5. One who is GREATER than all.
6. One who HAS NO EQUAL.
7. One who is worshipped BY Christ.
8. One who has EXALTED Christ and set him above his companions.
9. One whom Christ SERVES.
10. One whom death has NEVER had power over.
11. One who can place Christ's enemies as his footstool.
12. One who will be God to Jesus' “Prince”.
13. One in whom's name and strength Jesus will rule.
14. And the One who's zeal will accomplish this.
15. And most importantly, this One will actually be CALLED “God Almighty” in the scriptures.Kathi, these are just a FEW of the SCRIPTURALLY SUPPORTED claims to the title of “God Almighty”. And these all describe the ONLY One who even has a claim to this title. Now if you would, please show me the SCRIPTURE where Jesus is called “God Almighty”, or “A God Almighty”, or “Begotten God Almighty”, or anything at all with “almighty” in the title. Or any scripture that clearly teaches us Jesus is as mighty as his own God. Let's put scripture up against scripture, and see who's understanding comes out on top. In fact, let's start doing that with everything we discuss, okay?
Now, on to your “always existent” point. Jesus is:
1. The BEGOTTEN Son of God.
2. The FIRSTBORN Son of God.
3. The beginning of the CREATION of God.
4. God BROUGHT HIM FORTH as the first of His works.
5. And his ORIGIN was from days of antiquity.Which one of these implies that Jesus DIDN'T have a beginning? Again, if you don't mind, please show me your SCRIPTURAL support that Jesus “existed within God before he was begotten”.
peace and love,
mikeMike,
To be begotten as an offspring is one who was within the parent before the begetting. His begetting was a beginning of sorts for the Son as a separate person. When I begat/gave birth to my son, that is when he began his life as his own person, distinct from me, although he existed as my son already.Kathi
Mike,
Quote Okay, first let's deal with the “almighty” business once and for all. Christ is NEVER called “almighty” anywhere in scripture, so for you to just claim this without any scriptural support makes your claim unworthy of a response from anyone discussing the actual SCRIPTURES. But because you are my friend, I will remind you of a couple scriptural truths. There can only be ONE “Almighty God”. The word in and of itself precludes more than one holding this title. The One holding this title would also be:
1. The head OF Christ.
2. The God OF gods.
3. The God OF Christ.
4. One who is GREATER than Christ.
5. One who is GREATER than all.
6. One who HAS NO EQUAL.
7. One who is worshipped BY Christ.
8. One who has EXALTED Christ and set him above his companions.
9. One whom Christ SERVES.
10. One whom death has NEVER had power over.
11. One who can place Christ's enemies as his footstool.
12. One who will be God to Jesus' “Prince”.
13. One in whom's name and strength Jesus will rule.
14. And the One who's zeal will accomplish this.
15. And most importantly, this One will actually be CALLED “God Almighty” in the scriptures.All those things in that list belong to the Father because He is the Father and not the Son, not because He is mightier than the Son. They are both almighty in their given condition as God, one as the Father and one as the Son. The Father is not the almighty Son and the Son is not the almighty Father.
Kathi
Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 31 2011,14:38) Mike,
To be begotten as an offspring is one who was within the parent before the begetting. His begetting was a beginning of sorts for the Son as a separate person. When I begat/gave birth to my son, that is when he began his life as his own person, distinct from me, although he existed as my son already.Kathi
KathiSo he was a Son who was not a person before he was born from the Father?
WJ
Keith,
My son was a person before he was born/begotten from me…the Son of God was a person before He was born/begotten from His Father.When I was expecting my son to be born/begotten, I was driving alone in my car although he was inside of me, I was still considered alone, I couldn't drive in the carpool lane, in other words. After he was born/begotten from me, then he became a passenger in the car and I could drive in the carpool lane. See the difference.
KathiQuote (Lightenup @ Mar. 31 2011,16:18) Keith,
My son was a person before he was born/begotten from me…the Son of God was a person before He was born/begotten from His Father.When I was expecting my son to be born/begotten, I was driving alone in my car although he was inside of me, I was still considered alone, I couldn't drive in the carpool lane, in other words. After he was born/begotten from me, then he became a passenger in the car and I could drive in the carpool lane. See the difference.
Kathi
No I don't! Sorry.First off God is not a female. Secondly that would mean that God was pregnant with another infinite God? I am not trying to be funny, I just can't see where you find this logic in scriptures.
Thirdly, it would mean the unchangeable eternal essence of God changed into being a Son.
WJ
Keith,
So a woman is greater than God because she can literally beget an offspring and He can't? I think that God can do anything and is not a specific gender. If the eternal essence was always Father with the eternal Son within Him then nobody changes into God.
God can create the universe but can't have a literal Son…hmmm…sorry, I can't see the logic in that. You limit God. He called His Son the only begotten Son who is the only begotten God. Logic tells us that He beget another like Himself. I have seen you argue that point…like begets like…God begets God. Why do you deny it now? Now you say one that is not a High Priest begets a High Priest. Is that logical? A High Priest is an office, not someone begotten.Kathi
Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 31 2011,17:20) You limit God.
No you limit God because you say he can reproduce himself meaning he can become greater than infinite.An infinite God brings birth to an infinite God meaning we now have 2 infinite Gods making God doubly infinite.
Nah, I don't buy it Kathi and neither do the Forefathers who said it is anathema to “divide” the substance or to say there is 3 Gods or in your case 2 Gods.
WJ
Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 31 2011,17:20) Logic tells us that He beget another like Himself. I have seen you argue that point…like begets like…God begets God. Why do you deny it now?
I don't. I only use that logic for those who say God brings literral birth to a Son to show them if it was so then he would have to be equally God in nature.WJ
Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 30 2011,11:04) “Lessor” is not at all clearly listed in John 1:18. Is your son lessor human than you because he was begotten. The Father is greater by the fact that He is the Father, not because He is mightier. He is also the Son's God because He is His Father and because He is God, not because He is mightier or wiser. The Son has everything the Father has including might.
Hi Kathi,
I liked your Explaintion here.Though you and I are closer in belief in many ways, I have to ask though.
Do you believe that Jesus and God are seperate Identities, persons or One God?
Kathi, I agree with your statments of an Unbeggoten God bring forth a Begotten one, in the same sense i understand that the Unknowable God makes himself known through his Image which is knowable.
I believe logically, God cant be viewed as a Human, he only demonstrates himself by EVERY title known to existence.
he is our Everything.
Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 31 2011,13:38) Mike,
To be begotten as an offspring is one who was within the parent before the begetting. His begetting was a beginning of sorts for the Son as a separate person. When I begat/gave birth to my son, that is when he began his life as his own person, distinct from me, although he existed as my son already.Kathi
I disagree. And until you have any scriptural support that Jesus existed within God until God chose to beget him, then it's really not worth my time to discuss it. For all we are discussing is your imagination, and nothing more.No offense.
mike
Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 31 2011,13:41) Mike, Quote Okay, first let's deal with the “almighty” business once and for all. Christ is NEVER called “almighty” anywhere in scripture, so for you to just claim this without any scriptural support makes your claim unworthy of a response from anyone discussing the actual SCRIPTURES. But because you are my friend, I will remind you of a couple scriptural truths. There can only be ONE “Almighty God”. The word in and of itself precludes more than one holding this title. The One holding this title would also be:
1. The head OF Christ.
2. The God OF gods.
3. The God OF Christ.
4. One who is GREATER than Christ.
5. One who is GREATER than all.
6. One who HAS NO EQUAL.
7. One who is worshipped BY Christ.
8. One who has EXALTED Christ and set him above his companions.
9. One whom Christ SERVES.
10. One whom death has NEVER had power over.
11. One who can place Christ's enemies as his footstool.
12. One who will be God to Jesus' “Prince”.
13. One in whom's name and strength Jesus will rule.
14. And the One who's zeal will accomplish this.
15. And most importantly, this One will actually be CALLED “God Almighty” in the scriptures.All those things in that list belong to the Father because He is the Father and not the Son, not because He is mightier than the Son. They are both almighty in their given condition as God, one as the Father and one as the Son. The Father is not the almighty Son and the Son is not the almighty Father.
Kathi
Hi Kathi,#1 – So being the HEAD OF Christ doesn't imply that God is the mightier of the two?
#3 – Being the GOD OF Christ doesn't imply that God is mightier of the two?
#4 – Jesus saying God is greater than him doesn't imply that God is mightier of the two?
#5 – Jesus saying that God is greater than ALL doesn't imply that God is mightier of the two?
#6 – The fact that God Almighty has no equal doesn't imply that God is mightier of the two?
#7 – The fact that Jesus worships God Almighty as his own God doesn't imply that God is mightier of the two?
#8 – The fact that One has the power to EXALT the other doesn't imply that God is mightier of the two?
#9 – The fact that God is Master to Jesus' Servant doesn't imply that God is mightier of the two?
#10 – The fact that death held power over only one of them doesn't imply that God is mightier of the two?
#11 – The fact that God places Jesus' enemies at Jesus' feet doesn't imply that God is mightier of the two?
#12 – The fact that God will be “their God” while Jesus is “their Prince” doesn't imply that God is mightier of the two?
#13 – The fact that Jesus rules in the Name and Strength of his God, and not in his own name and strength doesn't imply that God is mightier of the two?
#15 – The fact that God is the ONLY One ever called “Almighty” doesn't imply that God is mightier of the two?
Kathi, Jesus will be called “mighty god”. Jesus is never called “almighty god”. Only One holds that title. And He holds that title alone for one reason: Because He is the Mightiest of all and over everyone else, including Jesus………and NO ONE is His equal.
These are all based on actual scriptures, Kathi. Will you show me the SCRIPTURE that implies Jesus is as “almighty” as his own God whom he serves?
peace and love,
mikeQuote (SimplyForgiven @ Mar. 31 2011,17:04) Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 30 2011,11:04) “Lessor” is not at all clearly listed in John 1:18. Is your son lessor human than you because he was begotten. The Father is greater by the fact that He is the Father, not because He is mightier. He is also the Son's God because He is His Father and because He is God, not because He is mightier or wiser. The Son has everything the Father has including might.
Hi Kathi,
I liked your Explaintion here.Though you and I are closer in belief in many ways, I have to ask though.
Hey,When either one of you bring forth a child who is immediately as strong, smart, wise, experienced, and powerful as you are, let me know.
Until that time, just accept the fact that a father is ALWAYS “mightier” than any son he begets. In name, title, stature, knowledge, experience, strength, etc.
It is ONLY the process of human aging that eventually turns the tables. And human aging does not apply to the case of God and His begotten Son.
mike
Quote (mikeboll64 @ April 01 2011,05:28) Quote (SimplyForgiven @ Mar. 31 2011,17:04) Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 30 2011,11:04) “Lessor” is not at all clearly listed in John 1:18. Is your son lessor human than you because he was begotten. The Father is greater by the fact that He is the Father, not because He is mightier. He is also the Son's God because He is His Father and because He is God, not because He is mightier or wiser. The Son has everything the Father has including might.
Hi Kathi,
I liked your Explaintion here.Though you and I are closer in belief in many ways, I have to ask though.
Hey,When either one of you bring forth a child who is immediately as strong, smart, wise, experienced, and powerful as you are, let me know.
Until that time, just accept the fact that a father is ALWAYS “mightier” than any son he begets. In name, title, stature, knowledge, experience, strength, etc.
It is ONLY the process of human aging that eventually turns the tables. And human aging does not apply to the case of God and His begotten Son.
mike
Than your Statement makes no SENSE.So its UNTRUE that the Father is always mightier than the Son becuase of human aging. So its only for a moment.
And in a human sense all of what the Father has is passed down to the Son who inherits it ALL.If human aging does not apply to God, than you cant apply the same example to God either.
Hello D-Linquent,
Solomon was the richest and wisest king in history. Were any of his children as rich and wise as him? Cyrus was the most powerful king of his time, taking down Nebuchadnezzar, who was called by Daniel the “King of kings”. Were any of Cyrus' children ever as powerful as he was?
The father ALWAYS starts off wiser and more powerful than his children. If God and Jesus don't suffer the human aging that eventually makes human sons more powerful than their fathers, then it would stand to reason that Jesus' God started off wiser and more powerful, and stayed that way.
But enough of our human reasoning. I have a new policy on HN………….SHOW ME SCRIPTURALLY, AND I'LL BELIEVE.
Show me scripturally that God Almighty has an equal, or that the begotten god is equally “almighty” as his own God who begot him. Then we can take your “beginning and end” scripture, and put it up against the 15 scriptural points I listed for Kathi, and see whose understanding best matches ALL of the scriptures, okay?
mike
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
