- This topic has 523 replies, 20 voices, and was last updated 17 years, 9 months ago by
.
- Posts
Quote (Cult Buster @ Dec. 10 2006,06:31) I hope that you are not willfully blind NH. Open your eyes this time around.
Gen 1:1 In the beginning God (Elohiym-plural) created the heaven and the earth.
Gen 1:26 And God (Elohiym-plural) said, Let US make man in OUR image, after OUR likeness:H430
אלהים
'ĕlôhîym
el-o-heem'
Plural of H433; gods in the ordinary sense; but specifically used (in the plural thus, especially with the article) of the supreme God;Deu 6:4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD (Y'hovah) our God (Elohiym-plural) is one LORD (Y'hovah):
Zec 7:11 But they refused to hearken, and pulled away the shoulder, and stopped their ears, that they should not hear.
Hi Cult Buster,How did God create man in His Image?
26 Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness;
THEN:
21And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;
22And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.
23And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.
AND
2Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.
Concerning Jesus – The Word of God:
John 8:42
Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me.John 16:27
For the Father himself loveth you, because ye have loved me, and have believed that I came out from God.# John 17:8
For I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came out from thee, and they have believed that thou didst send me.The Son came out and proceeds from the Father.
The Father is the source.
TAKEN FROM HEAVEN.NET TRINITY ARTICLE:
Hippolytus (ca. 230 A.D)
The first and Only, both Creator and Lord of all, had nothing coeval with Himself… He was One, Alone in Himself…. this Solitary and Supreme Deity, by an act of reflection, brought forth the Word first, not the Word in the sense of being expressed by voice, but as a Reason of the cosmos, conceived and residing in the Divine mind. Him alone He produced from existing things, for the Father Himself constituted existence, and the being born from Him was the cause of all things that are produced. The Word was in the Father Himself, bearing the will of his Progenitor, and not being unacquainted with the mind of the Father. For simultaneously with his procession from His Progenitor, inasmuch as he is this Progenitor's firstborn]/B], he has, as a voice in himself, the concepts conceived in the Father. And so it was, that when the Father ordered the world to come into existence, the Word one by one completed each object of creation, thus pleasing God…. God, who is the source of all authority, wished that the Word might render assistance in accomplishing a production of this kind…. The Word alone of this God is from God himself, wherefore also the Logos is God [that is, “deity,” in the sense of nature of substance], being the substance of God…. Now the Word of God controls all these, the first begotten child of the Father, the voice of the Dawn antecedent to the Morning Star…. This Word, the Father in the latter days sent forth, no longer to speak by a prophet, and not wishing that the Word, being obscurely proclaimed, should be made the subject of mere conjecture, but that He should be manifested, so that we could see Him with our own eyes. This Word, I say, the Father sent forth…. This Word we know to have received a body from a virgin, and to have refashioned the old man by a new creation…. This Man we know to have been made out of the compound of our humanity…. He did not protest against his Passion, but became obedient unto death, and manifested his resurrection. Now in all these acts He offered up, as the first-fruits, his own manhood, in order that you, when you are in tribulation, maye not be disheartened, but, confessing yourself to be a man, may dwell in expectation of also receiving what the Father has granted unto this Son. (Against all Heresies, 10).
As it is written, “For just as from one torch many fires are lighted, but the light of the first torch is not lessened by the kindling of many torches, so the Word, coming forth from the Word-Power of the Father, has not divested of the Word-Power Him who begat Him”.
Come out of the Watchtower and be free from this cult.
Joh 8:36 If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.
Heb 1:8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.
Hi CB,
Are you safe in the Son of God?
Do you abide in his words?
He is the only way to the Father.
There is salvation in no other name under heaven..Quote Come out of the Watchtower and be free from this cult. Joh 8:36 If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.
Heb 1:8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.
As I've seen this now about 4 times in various threads, I'm going to call this Busters theme. It seems to be the theme and reason he's on this forum.
What's interesting is that his theme or this statment he keeps repeating is based on a false belief that he has. He falsely believes that many on here are JW's. He is wrong in this. He has let himself be deceived or simply can't accept the truth, because this is the truth and a couple of people on here have told him this. So what are we to think? Which is it?
Above Buster seems to like to point out the plurality of the word Elohim.
Isn't it interesting that this word is used in the same way for individual pagan divinities, such as Dagon (1 Samuel 5:7) and Marduk (Daniel 1:2), who were not triune gods?
Ins't that interesting?
Commenting on this, Oxford scholar R. B. Girdlestone writes in his Synonyms of the Old Testament: “Many critics, however, of unimpeachable [Trinitarian] orthodoxy, think it wiser to rest where such divines as Cajetan [a theologian] in the Church of Rome and Calvin among Protestants were content to stand, and to take the plural form as a plural of majesty.”
Such Trinitarian theologians doubtless realized that if they took ‘Elo·him′ as a numerical plural (gods), they would become polytheists.Quote (Nick Hassan @ Dec. 10 2006,07:22) Hi CB,
Are you safe in the Son of God?
Do you abide in his words?
He is the only way to the Father.
There is salvation in no other name under heaven..
Nick,
Do you believe that Jesus physically rose from the dead?Do you believe that Jesus existed before He was born of Mary?
Quote (Cult Buster @ Dec. 10 2006,06:31) I hope that you are not willfully blind NH. Open your eyes this time around.
Gen 1:1 In the beginning God (Elohiym-plural) created the heaven and the earth.
Gen 1:26 And God (Elohiym-plural) said, Let US make man in OUR image, after OUR likeness:H430
??
'elôhîym
el-o-heem'
Plural of H433; gods in the ordinary sense; but specifically used (in the plural thus, especially with the article) of the supreme God;Deu 6:4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD (Y'hovah) our God (Elohiym-plural) is one LORD (Y'hovah):
Zec 7:11 But they refused to hearken, and pulled away the shoulder, and stopped their ears, that they should not hear.
There is an old proverb that states that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. This is unfortunately very true when it comes to scripture. Many Christians read scripture as if Paul wrote in the old English of the King James Bible. Even many who have the integrety to attempt to dig deeper only go as far as needed to prove their preconcieved ideas of doctrine. They attempt to understand the Hebrew language with concepts derived from a culture that is much different then Hebrew culture. They read the word Elohiym see it has a plural connotation and imediately derive a triune or plural persons of God.Gen 1:1 In the beginning God (Elohiym-plural) created the heaven and the earth.
Is the Hebrew word for God in the plural meaning more than one?
The Hebrew word translated as “God” is elohiym. It is the plural form of elo'ah. While elohiym is plural. this does not mean that it is more than one. In Hebrew, a plural word may indicate quality as well as quantity. As an example, the Hebrew word ets is a tree. If there are two trees this would be written as etsiym meaning trees, qualitatively large. A large tree such as a Redwood could also be written etsiym, qualitatively large. As elohiym is plural, it can be translated as “gods” (quantity) or a very large and powerful “god” (quality). The creator of the heavens and the earth is far above any other god and is therefore elohiym, not just an eloah. The context the word is used will help to determine if the plural is qualitative or quantitative. If the plural noun is the subject of a verb, the verb will indicate if the subject is singular or more than one. For instance in Genesis 1:1 the verb bara (created) identifies the subject of the verb as masculine singular. The next word is elohiym (the subject of the verb) and is understood as a singular qualitatively large noun, God and not gods.
Ancient Hebrew Research Center
http://www.ancient-hebrew.org/1_faqs.html#god1Since Strongs does not deal with principles of Hermaneutics they do not expand to proper translation principles but only propose using imediate context of the singular verse to determine plural or singular meaning. Those that are honest with scripture understand that no translation can contradict very clear scripture or general context of scripture.
Gen 1:26 And God (Elohiym-plural) said, Let US make man in OUR image, after OUR likeness:
In this verse the meaning is determined by the following verse.
And God created man in His (singular) own imageH430
??
'elôhîym
el-o-heem'
Plural of H433; gods in the ordinary sense; but specifically used (in the plural thus, especially with the article) of the supreme God;This deffinition is not very clear but also indicates that the plural sence is predicated upon the Supremecy or quality of God not the quanity of persons in God.
Deu 6:4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD (Y'hovah) our God (Elohiym-plural) is one LORD (Y'hovah):
In this verse the word “one” dictates whether Elohiym is singular or plural. Obviously it is singular as one means singular. This is a plural of majesty denoting supremecy of the one true God over other Gods.
Quote (music4two @ Dec. 10 2006,15:44) Quote (Nick Hassan @ Dec. 10 2006,07:22) Hi CB,
Are you safe in the Son of God?
Do you abide in his words?
He is the only way to the Father.
There is salvation in no other name under heaven..
Nick,
Do you believe that Jesus physically rose from the dead?Do you believe that Jesus existed before He was born of Mary?
Hi M42,
The Word, the monogenes Son, was with God in the beginning, emptied himself and partook of flesh coming to earth from heaven at the bidding of God.He was raised by God through the Spirit abiding in him into the same damaged perishable body in which he died as the firstborn from the dead.
Then as flesh cannot inherit eternal life when he was taken up his imperishable body was given to him in the same way as happens with those who are alive at his return. We follow him as sons of the resurrection.
Quote (Cult Buster @ Dec. 10 2006,06:58) Come out of the Watchtower and be free from this cult. Joh 8:36 If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.
Heb 1:8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.
Is that what you say when you don't have a rebuttle or cannot refute scripture? Sounds kinda canned.If you can explain the scriptures I posted then I would be glad to listen to you. If you can only ignore the scriptures posted and quote other scriptures then you might as well just go talk to a wall.
This is what I find happens when people cannot explain scriptures that seem to contradict what they believe is true. Instead of searching it out they just quote some other “proof text” to back up their doctrine. It's debating at such an immature level that I would hardly call it debating or dialog. It's rather fruitless.
I find that too.
They simply ignore scriptures that do not fit their theology.
So they only cater for that which their itching ears want to hear.
A true student of scripture takes ALL scripture seriously.
To Cult buster.
Quote (Cult Buster @ Dec. 11 2006,01:58) Come out of the Watchtower and be free from this cult. Joh 8:36 If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.
Heb 1:8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.
Very weak indeed.I think you need to bust out of the cult you are in before you can even think about freeing others.
Quote (Nick Hassan @ Dec. 10 2006,17:46) Quote (music4two @ Dec. 10 2006,15:44) Quote (Nick Hassan @ Dec. 10 2006,07:22) Hi CB,
Are you safe in the Son of God?
Do you abide in his words?
He is the only way to the Father.
There is salvation in no other name under heaven..
Nick,
Do you believe that Jesus physically rose from the dead?Do you believe that Jesus existed before He was born of Mary?
Hi M42,
The Word, the monogenes Son, was with God in the beginning, emptied himself and partook of flesh coming to earth from heaven at the bidding of God.He was raised by God through the Spirit abiding in him into the same damaged perishable body in which he died as the firstborn from the dead.
Then as flesh cannot inherit eternal life when he was taken up his imperishable body was given to him in the same way as happens with those who are alive at his return. We follow him as sons of the resurrection.
The Word, the monogenes Son, was with God in the beginning, emptied himself and partook of flesh coming to earth from heaven at the bidding of God.I am in agreement with you on some things, however the concept that Jesus was with God from the beginning is not scriptural.
The problem starts with the translation of “Word” in John.
Two verses in particular are hard to understand from a Greek thinking perspective.
Verse 1 – In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Verse 14 – And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.
Is the term “Word” used here literally refering to the person of Jesus Christ? Yes and no! I will explain in a bit.
From the beginning Yahweh had a plan to redeem mankind. This description of God’s idea or plan was expressed as the Greek word Logos which was then translated into the term “word” in John Chapter 1. The actual definition of word, according to Vines Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words is…. ( a word) as encompassing an idea, a statement, a speech, not the mere name of an object….. In there treatise on the subject they list dozens of scriptures where Logos is used in the above mentioned way. Then as a secondary meaning they use the scriptures in John 1/1 thru 18 and form a completely different meaning then all the rest of scripture. Is that honest? Where did that come from? It was simply made up. An illusion, a myth, promoted to make up evidence to support a false doctrine.
The New Bible Dictionary, which has a clear trinitarian bias, defines Logos as… “a meaningfull discourse, declaration, discourse, subject matter, doctrine, affair, reason , cause, sake and respect. As a gramatical term it means a finite sentence., in logic a factual statement, definition or judgement, in rhetoric a correctly constructed piece of oratory.” Even Trinitarian sources cannot get away from the history of the Trinity and the true meaning of Logos. They even admit that the Logos = Christ doctrine came sometime after the gospels were pened and that scholars have varrying views of the meaning of Logos in this context. Granted this is a difficult scriptural passage to understand, but the definition of Logos is very clear and without doubt. We cannot ignor the definition in order to maintain a traditional meaning for this passage.
Perhaps the best way to describe Logos is as the motives or intentions of God. Jesus was what God intended to create with Adam. Think of the Logos as the blueprint and Jesus as the building. God’s heart, character, motives and intentions are all sumed up in Jesus. In verse 1 The blueprint was with God. That is simple enough. God had an intention and motive for that intention from the beginning. And the intention or motive was God. This too when seen from Hebrew thinking makes sence.
The word logos is used in many scriptures and always means the same, as example; Luke 7/7 …for this reason I did not even consider myself worthy to come to you, but just say the word (your intention, logos) and my servant will be healed……..
Further understanding is made in Revelation 1/2 and again in 1/9 John shows a distinction between The Word of God and the Testimony of Jesus. ….. who bore witness of the word ( motive or intention, Logos) of God AND to the testimony of Jesus Christ….. John lists them separately showing a clear distinction between them. This is the same author who wrote the book of John. It seems he is making clear what he wrote in John 1. In other words John says he bore witness to God’s motive and intention for the Messiah and (in addition to) bore witness to the life and testimony of the messiah/Jesus himself. The literal Greek says, “who bore witness of the word of the God and the witness of Jesus Christ.”
The reality of the human, Jesus, fulfilled the motive and intention (logos) for the messiah, but the motive or intention, (logos) is not literally Jesus. A spoken message or expressed idea cannot be a literal person.
What is God’s motive? Love. “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten son, that whosoever believes in Him shall not parish but have eternal life.” There is the perfect discription of God’s Logos. His motive is love. His intention is to bring all to eternal life thru His son Jesus Christ. To produce and mature sons like Himself.
So is the term “Word” refering to Jesus?
YES – In that Jesus is the expression of God’s motive (love) and intentions (to make sons). Jesus fullfilled God’s intention to create sons and has within Him the character of God motivated by Love.
NO – In that the expression of God’s motives or intention cannot be literally a person.Quote As it is written, “For just as from one torch many fires are lighted, but the light of the first torch is not lessened by the kindling of many torches, so the Word, coming forth from the Word-Power of the Father, has not divested of the Word-Power Him who begat Him”. Hi Sscott
Where is this written?
Quote find that too. They simply ignore scriptures that do not fit their theology.
So they only cater for that which their itching ears want to hear.
A true student of scripture takes ALL scripture seriously.
————–
Hi t8
Thats funny. Thats exactly what all the trinitarians say of those who hold an Arian view.
Hi m42,
You say
“Perhaps the best way to describe Logos is as the motives or intentions of God. “We have seen many telling us Jesus is the plan or thought of God but it detracts from the meaning of WORD
The WORD was WITH God appears three times in scripture.
It is a fact.A thought or plan is within a being.
A WORD is spoken from or expressed from a being.
In the same way the Spirit proceeds from God
but Jesus has proceeded from God.The Word is shown as Christ in Rev 19.
Quote (Nick Hassan @ Dec. 11 2006,00:29) Hi m42,
You say
“Perhaps the best way to describe Logos is as the motives or intentions of God. “We have seen many telling us Jesus is the plan or thought of God but it detracts from the meaning of WORD
The WORD was WITH God appears three times in scripture.
It is a fact.A thought or plan is within a being.
A WORD is spoken from or expressed from a being.
In the same way the Spirit proceeds from God
but Jesus has proceeded from God.The Word is shown as Christ in Rev 19.
Rev 19 verse 13 is no proof of Jesus being from the beginning. I can interpret is as His name is the revelation of the intentions and motives of God. No problem. The very word Begotten means began. To believe in an eternal Jesus follows some of the same mistakes as the trinitarians.
So the Logos was with God from the beginning. So God had a plan and His motives and intentions were with him and never changed from the beginning.
You cannot literally interchange Logos with Jesus just because it supports your doctrine. It must also fit the general tenor of scripture and basic hermaneutics. It is not honest to have a completely different definition of Logos in John then all the rest of scripture.Hi m42,
You say
“Rev 19 verse 13 is no proof of Jesus being from the beginning. I can interpret is as His name is the revelation of the intentions and motives of God. No problem. The very word Begotten means began. To believe in an eternal Jesus follows some of the same mistakes as the trinitarians.
So the Logos was with God from the beginning. So God had a plan and His motives and intentions were with him and never changed from the beginning.”The Word was with God in the beginning.
That does not say the Word had no beginning.
Scripture shows he did have a beginning as all sons do[ps2].
Since he is the Monogenes Son who was sent into the world[1Jn 4], and he is the Christ that came in the flesh[ 2Jn, 1Jn4] the terms are interchangeable.
Rev 19
” 11And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.12His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.
13And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God. “
Is this not King Jesus, the Word at the beginning and at the endtimes?
God spoke His Son, the Word, into existence.
Words are spoken and do not remain within the speaker.
To WorshippingJesus.
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Dec. 11 2006,19:25) Quote find that too. They simply ignore scriptures that do not fit their theology.
So they only cater for that which their itching ears want to hear.
A true student of scripture takes ALL scripture seriously.
————–
Hi t8
Thats funny. Thats exactly what all the trinitarians say of those who hold an Arian view.
Maybe so, but who is defending the Arian view?If Arius said that Jesus was a creature, then I do not agree.
If he said that he was begotten then I agree.Quote Maybe so, but who is defending the Arian view? If Arius said that Jesus was a creature, then I do not agree.
If he said that he was begotten then I agree.t8
No but Arius because he believed Jesus was a creature meant that he wasnt God.
So I still see this as a dirivation of the Arias views.
Creator or created.
So you admit that your template is Greek thinking.
Created and non-created.
No wonder you force Jesus as God.
Paul knowing the pride of the Greeks and their philosophy preached Jesus crucified, an offence to them.
So it is that I say unto you, Jesus Christ of Nazareth died for your sins and was raised up to the right hand of God. He now interceeds for us to God. He is our High Priest.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
