Firstborn of/over all creation

Blocked

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Sep. 04 2010,06:31)

Mike

The scriptures says Jesus is the “Son of God”.

Since God is three persons, the Father, Son and Holy Spirit then Jesus incarnation involved the three. Luke 1:35, Job 33:4, Heb 10:5, Phil 2:6-8

The Holy Spirit came upon Mary and caused her to concieve his body, (Job 33:4, Heb 10:5) in that moment the power of the Highest overshadowed her and Jesus took on the likeness of sinful flesh (John 1:1, 14, Phil 2:6-8)

And the Angel anounced that he Jesus would be called the Son of God”.

Now the question is right back to you…

If the Holy Spirit is not a person as you say but an “it”, and Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit in Mary, then according to you an “it” is the Father of Jesus, is that right?

Keith,

This is just more word play by you that doesn't add up when scrutinized. The holy spirit is OF God. God Himself caused Mary to be impregnated THROUGH the “it” of His Holy Spirit. That is why Jehovah is the Father of Jesus, NOT His Holy Spirit.

You said:

Quote

The scriptures says Jesus is the “Son of God”.

Since God is three persons, the Father, Son and Holy Spirit

Keith, by that distorted reasoning, then the Father is Jesus' Father, the Holy Spirit is Jesus' Father, AND JESUS IS JESUS' FATHER. Not only that, but as I've seen t8 point out to you, Jesus would not only be his own Father, but his own Son.

Is this the nonsensical crap you would like us to buy in to?

mike

September 5, 2010 at 2:12 am#265309

Blocked

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Sep. 04 2010,08:42)

Ha Ha

You think the Fathers name is 4 Hebrew consonants called the tetragammation.

You still havn't shown us where the Apostles called the Father by name have you?

What is the Fathers name if you know it? What is (Keith's) name, ah yes “KTH”?

Really Keith?

That's your defense? First of all, you have no more proof that the discipes DIDN'T use Yahweh than we have proof that they did.

What we DO have is a scripture where Jesus said he made God's NAME known and glorified it.

We DO have fragments from the earliest known LXX that has the tetragrammaton printed in Hebrew letters within the Greek text.

And we DO have the scriptures where God gave His name to Moses at the burning bush. The God that gave Moses His divine name said He was ONE, not THREE.

mike

September 5, 2010 at 3:49 am#265310

Participant

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Sep. 05 2010,20:12)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Sep. 04 2010,08:42)

Ha Ha

You think the Fathers name is 4 Hebrew consonants called the tetragammation.

You still havn't shown us where the Apostles called the Father by name have you?

What is the Fathers name if you know it? What is (Keith's) name, ah yes “KTH”?

Really Keith?

That's your defense? First of all, you have no more proof that the discipes DIDN'T use Yahweh than we have proof that they did.

What we DO have is a scripture where Jesus said he made God's NAME known and glorified it.

We DO have fragments from the earliest known LXX that has the tetragrammaton printed in Hebrew letters within the Greek text.

And we DO have the scriptures where God gave His name to Moses at the burning bush. The God that gave Moses His divine name said He was ONE, not THREE.

mike

hi Mike

do you remember months ago i told you that WJ and KJ are non believers but deceivers ,

you still enjoy your little whatever ??

Pierre

September 5, 2010 at 4:10 am#265311

Blocked

Hi Pierre,

I learn so much more about scripture because of people who DON'T believe like I do than I do because of people here that do.

For example, I agree with your understanding of scripture on every post of yours I've read. But if I said, “Pierre, do you think Jesus pre-existed?” and you say, “Yes”, then what is left? Will we then test each other to study and find other scriptures that support Jesus' pre-existence? Probably not. Same with the trinity……you and I don't believe it, so a post from you will not cause me to research or delve deeper into scripture.

The stuff the trinitarians and non-preexisters say causes me to study the Greek and Hebrew words, the verse in greater context, and look for supporting verses to defend my beliefs and rebut theirs.

It is a learning process for me Peirre, and I love it.

peace and love,
mike

September 5, 2010 at 4:14 am#265312

Blocked

Hi WJ,

I forgot that we also have a scripture where Jesus tells us to start our prayers with “hallowed be your name”. What “name” do you think Jesus meant?

mike

September 6, 2010 at 4:45 pm#265313

Participant

OK, a new author for today…Theophilus. He has captured my attention and is easier to read than some early Christian fathers. Following is an excerpt about God creating through a helper…His Word which was begotten before the ages.

Quote

CHAPTER X.—THE WORLD CREATED BY GOD THROUGH THE WORD.
And first, they taught us with one consent that God made all things out of nothing; for nothing was coeval with God: but He being His own place, and wanting nothing, and existing before the ages, willed to make man by whom He might be known; for him, therefore, He prepared the world. For he that is created is also needy; but he that is uncreated stands in need of nothing. God, then, having His own Word internal within His own bowels, begat Him, emitting Him along with His own wisdom before all things. He had this Word as a helper in the things that were created by Him, and by Him He made all things. He is called “governing principle” [ἁρκή], because He rules, and is Lord of all things fashioned by Him. He, then, being Spirit of God, and governing principle, and wisdom, and power of the highest, came down upon the prophets, and through them spoke of the creation of the world and of all other things. For the prophets were not when the world came into existence, but the wisdom of God which was in Him, and His holy Word which was always present with Him. Wherefore He speaks thus by the prophet Solomon: “When He prepared the heavens I was there, and when He appointed the foundations of the earth I was by Him as one brought up with Him.”568568 Prov. viii. 27. Theophilus reads with the Septuagint, “I was with Him, putting things into order,” instead of “I was by Him as one brought up with Him.” [Here the Logos is the σοφία as with the Fathers generally; e.g. Cyprian, Advs. Judæos, book ii. 2. But see cap. xv. p. 101, infra.] And Moses, who lived many years before Solomon, or, rather, the Word of God by him as by an instrument, says, “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.” First he named the “beginning,”569569 That is, the first principle, whom he has just shown to be the Word. and “creation,”570570 In the Greek version of Gen. i. 1, the word “created” stands before “God.” then he thus introduced God; for not lightly and on slight occasion is it right to name God. For the divine wisdom foreknew that some would trifle and name a multitude of gods that do not exist. In order, therefore, that the living God might be known by His works, and that [it might be known that] by His Word God created the heavens and the earth, and all that is therein, he said, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.”

from: http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf02.iv.ii.ii.x.html

This stood out to me about this excerpt:
“God, then, having His own Word internal within His own bowels, begat Him, emitting Him along with His own wisdom before all things. He had this Word as a helper in the things that were created by Him, and by Him He made all things.”

This is not indicating that the Word has always been beside God, but within God and was begotten with God's own wisdom before all things.

(edited to add the source)

September 6, 2010 at 5:53 pm#265314

Baker

Participant

Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 07 2010,03:45)

Quote

This is not indicating that the Word has always been beside God, but within God and was begotten with God's own wisdom before all things.

Hi Kathi! The Word of God in John 1:1 it says In the beginning, so who's beginning was it? I believe that goes nicely with Col. 1:15 being the firstborn of all creation and also Rev. 3:14 The beginning of the creation of God, it shows that Jesus had a beginning. And through Him all was made it says in verse 3 of John 1. Also it just struck me since He is the Son of God, He is younger and came forth from God, and had to have a beginning. Just like our Sons are……
Plain and simple…..Peace Irene

September 6, 2010 at 6:38 pm#265315

Participant

Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 07 2010,10:45)

Quote

This is not indicating that the Word has always been beside God, but within God and was begotten with God's own wisdom before all things.

katty

with your view about the word' that he was in God before he was created is right,but then all of creation was in there at the same time is it not ?

Pierre

September 6, 2010 at 7:57 pm#265316

Participant

The Word was always in the 'bowels' of the one God and at some point, emitted from the bowels of the one God before the ages. This is my understanding of what he is saying anyway. Theophilus also calls the Word “God”

I forgot to put up the source of the quoted excerpt above, it is:
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf02.iv.ii.ii.x.html

I will go add it after I post this.

You can read this excerpt to see that Theophilus makes a distinction between the Word being generated and not created.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf02.iv.ii.ii.xxii.html
I will quote this in my next post.

you asked:

Quote

with your view about the word' that he was in God before he was created is right,but then all of creation was in there at the same time is it not?

I do not think that saying all creation was 'in' God along with the Word is an accurate understanding. I know that I paraphrased your question but I wrote it in a way that I understand what you might have meant by your question. If all creation was always 'in' God, then all of creation would be God also since it always existed 'in' God as you purpose. That which always exists must be equal to God and creation is not equal to God but creation is a new work of God made from nothing and with a beginning.

Anyway, it is interesting to read of these early church father's opinions.

September 6, 2010 at 8:05 pm#265317

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf02.iv.ii.ii.xxii.html

Participant

Here Theophilus speaks about the begetting of the Word, the firstborn, and the notes clarify that the Word was generated, not created, also that the Word was at first internal in God and that God was not 'with' God until He generated this Word, the firstborn of all creation.

Quote

CHAPTER XXII.—WHY GOD IS SAID TO HAVE WALKED.
You will say, then, to me: “You said that God ought not to be contained in a place, and how do you now say that He walked in Paradise?” Hear what I say. The God and Father, indeed, of all cannot be contained, and is not found in a place, for there is no place of His rest; but His Word, through whom He made all things, being His power and His wisdom, assuming the person594594 The annotators here warn us against supposing that “person” is used as it was afterwards employed in discussing the doctrine of the Trinity, and show that the word is used in its original meaning, and with reference to an actor taking up a mask and personating a character. of the Father and Lord of all, went to the garden in the person of God, and conversed with Adam. For the divine writing itself teaches us that Adam said that he had heard the voice. But what else is this voice but the Word of God, who is also His Son? Not as the poets and writers of myths talk of the sons of gods begotten from intercourse [with women], but as truth expounds, the Word, that always exists, residing within the heart of God. For before anything came into being He had Him as a counsellor, being His own mind and thought. But when God wished to make all that He determined on, He begot this Word, uttered,595595 Προφορικός, the term used of the Logos as manifested; the Word as uttered by the Father, in distinction from the Word immanent in Him. [Theophilus is the first author who distinguishes between the Logos ἐνδιάθετος (cap. x, supra) and the Logos προφορικός; the Word internal, and the Word emitted. Kaye’s Justin, p. 171.] the first-born of all creation, not Himself being emptied of the Word [Reason], but having begotten Reason, and always conversing with His Reason. And hence the holy writings teach us, and all the spirit-bearing [inspired] men, one of whom, John, says, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God,”596596 John i. 1. showing that at first God was alone, and the Word in Him. Then he says, “The Word was God; all things came into existence through Him; and apart from Him not one thing came into existence.” The Word, then, being God, and being naturally597597 That is, being produced by generation, not by creation. produced from God, whenever the Father of the universe wills, He sends Him to any place; and He, coming, is both heard and seen, being sent by Him, and is found in a place.

This is easier to read at the webpage because the notes are set apart whereas here the notes are mixed in the writing.

September 6, 2010 at 9:56 pm#265318

Participant

Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 07 2010,13:57)

Hi Pierre,
Theophilus, whom I am reading today, says the Word was generated and NOT created. Those things that were created came from nothing but the thought of God and made by the Word of God who had first been internal, within the heart of God, and then begotten, becoming the Word emitted from God. So first, God was alone with the Word within Him, then he uses the terms: He uttered the Word, begot the Word, and generated the Word to all mean that now He was not alone but His Word was God with Him.

The Word was always in the 'bowels' of the one God and at some point, emitted from the bowels of the one God before the ages. This is my understanding of what he is saying anyway. Theophilus also calls the Word “God”

I forgot to put up the source of the quoted excerpt above, it is:
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf02.iv.ii.ii.x.html

I will go add it after I post this.

You can read this excerpt to see that Theophilus makes a distinction between the Word being generated and not created.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf02.iv.ii.ii.xxii.html
I will quote this in my next post.

you asked:

Quote

with your view about the word' that he was in God before he was created is right,but then all of creation was in there at the same time is it not?

Anyway, it is interesting to read of these early church father's opinions.

Katty

no this is not totally right of what i say;

what i try to say is that all men seed where in Adam even you and I, how that sounds?

so that if Christ creation (i do not argue over words)is the beginning ,it is obvious that he came out of God ,no argument there right?
now scriptures say that all other creation came trough Christ so out of Christ ,no argument there right??

there is no such a thing coming out of nothing ,only nothing comes out of nothing.

Pierre

September 6, 2010 at 10:02 pm#265319

Participant

Katty

I forget,i have read most of that stuff long time ago and found it of little use ,those are only opinions just like most of the people today here and in all churches,

the scriptures are the true word of God.no one will never be able to deny that.and not be called a liar.

Pierre

September 7, 2010 at 1:07 am#265320

Participant

Pierre,
I find the writings fascinating. For instance, if you were a child of a veteran of WWll, you would have been brought up with stories from first handed veterans about the war and you could somewhat understand the important facts of WWll because it happened close to your lifetime and directly affected people that were close to you. Now compare the American Revolutionary War…it was hundreds of years ago and you would not directly know anyone involved. Which war would you be able to explain better?

In comparison, I would rather read writings from someone that lived as close to the time of Christ as possible and get their perspective. The Bible is of course the most important writing but Jesus told the disciples to go into the world and make disciples, teaching them all the things which He had taught them. Don't you think that they obeyed that and don't you think that those teachings would reflect basic things like if Jesus was pre-existent or not? That shouldn't be a confusing truth. I am finding in the writings that the Son did pre-exist before the ages and most often referred to as the Word of God that was begotten before the ages and is the firstborn of all creation, not as part of creation but as the foundation of that which would be created through Him. And He is the God of God, and that there is one true unbegotten God and His only begotten Son and His Spirit which are both of the one true God, the Father.

I see the early church fathers as ones that would know what the basic truths are better than anyone here because of their more direct influences that they had and that many of them died for what they believed about Christ.

The Father, Son and Spirit are often spoken of together but it doesn't seem the same as the current trinity mindset. The Father is always spoken of as the one true God and the Son and the Spirit are purposely 'of' Him (and beforehand were 'within' Him) to create His creation and to manifest who He is to His creation as well as to redeem His creation.

I suggest that you study the scriptures first with the help of the Holy Spirit and then see if the early Christians were teaching the same basic thing. If not, I would think that you are on the ground of new and likely false teaching and very susceptible to being wrong.

Also, if something is black but you tell me that it is white because you don't argue over words, you are just being deceptive unless you are convinced that it really is white and not black. If so, you ought to be easily able to prove it. If you can't, you ought to stick with the early disciples say as being most likely.

Further more, you make statements that there is no such a thing coming out of nothing. If that were true the scriptures would tell us that and matter would be another God of different natures than the one true God.:;):

God bless you,
Kathi (not Katty) :;):

September 7, 2010 at 1:48 am#265321

Blocked

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 20 2010,15:56)

What did the ante-nicene church fathers say about the Son as the firstborn of/over all creation? Do they indicate that the Son was the first to come forth from God and then through Him all things came into being? Or did they indicate something else by calling him the firstborn of/over all creation (Col 1)?

Hi Kathi,

The word “all/every” is genetive. That means in English we add the word “of” in front of it, not “over”. The “over” is added in trinitarian sponsored translations that don't like any scripture that implies that Jesus had a beginning, and therefore had to get rid of that pesky word “of”.

So it either reads, “firstborn OF every creature”, or “firstborn OF all creation”. Either way, the word “over” does not apply.

mike

September 7, 2010 at 1:56 am#265322

Participant

Mike,
We have already discussed this and looked at the explanation of the NET Bible. I don't think that either word makes a difference since I believe both words to be true. He was the first one begotten of God of all creation and He is over all creation, not inferior to it.

September 7, 2010 at 2:09 am#265323

Blocked

Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 07 2010,12:56)

Yeah, I saw that explanation myself. They call it a “genetive of subordination”.

First, how do they come to the conclusion that the scripture means Jesus is “over” the rest of creation?

Second, they list no other scriptures where they use “over” for the genetive form of “pas”.

Third, if they want you to think Jesus is “preeminent over creation”, then aren't they forgetting someone else? Jehovah is preeminent over Jesus, and He would therefore be the preeminent One over creation also, not His “second in command”.

Fourth, both Eusebius and (I think) Ignatius say Jesus was the “firstborn of every creature” BEFORE THE AGES, or BEFORE THE WORLDS. What “creation” was there for him to be “preeminent over” BEFORE THE AGES?

Too many holes in that one Kathi. Best to just take the words to mean what the words actually mean instead of guessing they mean something else and then making up new rules of Greek grammar to support your “guess”.

mike

September 7, 2010 at 2:15 am#265324

Participant

Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 07 2010,19:07)

God bless you,
Kathi (not Katty) :;):

Kathi

i do not know where you get your wisdom,

how is it that someone closer to Jesus time would more truthful than the scriptures today ,
do you believe that the problem of society lays not in how closer we are to each other but how honestly and truthful a person his.

since there is men after sin nothing is any good,and the good there is is quickly disposed of one way or another.

so now you do not believe me when i say there is nothing coming out of nothing ?

show me where it is that something comes out nothing??

i am now curious.

Pierre

September 7, 2010 at 2:18 am#265325