- This topic has 25,959 replies, 116 voices, and was last updated 2 days, 9 hours ago by
.
- Posts
Danny: Mike,
You said that Jesus was created.
You are wrong.
Jesus was not created but begotten.A synonym of “beget” is “procreate”, Danny. Understand? By bringing a living being into existence (procreating, begetting, birthing, etc) you are creating a new life that didn’t previously exist.
So if Jesus is begotten, then Jesus is a new creation that didn’t previously exist. And that would explain why he called himself the beginning of the creation by God, and why Paul called him the firstborn of every creature.
Berean: Mike
Michah 5:2 Say
But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.
Now go look up what the word you show as “everlasting” really means. I’ll do it for you. From the 25 Trinitarian translators of the NET Bible…
5 tn Heb “from the past, from the days of antiquity.” Elsewhere both phrases refer to the early periods in the history of the world or of the nation of Israel. For מִקֶּדֶם (miqqedem, “from the past”) see Neh 12:46; Pss 74:12; 77:11; Isa 45:21; 46:10. For מִימֵי עוֹלָם (mimey ’olam, “from the days of antiquity”) see Isa 63:9, 11; Amos 9:11; Mic 7:14; Mal 3:4. In Neh 12:46 and Amos 9:11 the Davidic era is in view.
Now look up those scriptures they list where the same phrases are used, and tell me which of them has a meaning of “from eternity”.
Gene: Mike……you mistranslated the text, it says this…..” whosoever is “born’” of God sins not, but whosoever is “begotten” of God “keeps” himself, and the evil one touches him not.
I didn’t translate anything. I copied and pasted the English Standard Version. But the point is that all of the words are the same exact Greek word, Gene. We can translate them as “begotten” or “born”, or even “brought forth into existence”.
Carmel: Mike, Can you see from the above scriptures what Jesus meant?
The Father and the Son never glorify themselves,
But each other.
I don’t see the Father or the Son posting on this site on your behalf, do you? And since they aren’t glorifying you, then you glorifying yourself as some “spirit-enlightened” person who has a better understanding of scriptural things means nothing to us.
Like I said, stick to what the scriptures actually say – and leave out your comments about how we have “carnal knowledge” while you have “spiritual knowledge” direct from Jesus himself or whatever.
And also try sticking to just one or two scriptures in your posts. Then we can get down to the nitty gritty and see if those scriptures say what you think they do, or what I think they do.
Mike
I know from the letter to the Colossians that the Son of God IS BEFORE ALL THINGS …. THIS MEANS ETERNITY ….. AND THIS IS ENOUGH FOR ME. I BELIEVE.😐
Carmel: Proverbs 8:22 The Lord possessed me in the beginning of his ways,
before he made anything from the beginning.Your version confirms that Jesus is a possession of his God – as are we all. So I can live with it. But if you want to get right on this verse, here’s a little education for you – from 25 TRINITARIAN scholars…
NET © The Lord created 1 me as the beginning 2 of his works, 3 before his deeds of long ago.
NET © Notes
1 tn There are two roots קָנָה (qanah) in Hebrew, one meaning “to possess,” and the other meaning “to create.” The earlier English versions did not know of the second root, but suspected in certain places that a meaning like that was necessary (e.g., Gen 4:1; 14:19; Deut 32:6). Ugaritic confirmed that it was indeed another root. The older versions have the translation “possess” because otherwise it sounds like God lacked wisdom and therefore created it at the beginning. They wanted to avoid saying that wisdom was not eternal. Arius liked the idea of Christ as the wisdom of God and so chose the translation “create.” Athanasius translated it, “constituted me as the head of creation.” The verb occurs twelve times in Proverbs with the meaning of “to acquire”; but the Greek and the Syriac versions have the meaning “create.” Although the idea is that wisdom existed before creation, the parallel ideas in these verses (“appointed,” “given birth”) argue for the translation of “create” or “establish” (R. N. Whybray, “Proverbs 8:22-31 and Its Supposed Prototypes,” VT 15 [1965]: 504-14; and W. A. Irwin, “Where Will Wisdom Be Found?” JBL 80 [1961]: 133-42).It is the last bolded part that speaks the loudest to me. Considering that Jesus also says he was “born” and “given birth” in the following verses, “create” is the best translation of the word in this case. But I’m also okay with our God owning Jesus as He owns us – since like us, Jesus is a servant of his and our God, YHWH.
Berean: 2 Timothy 2:16
And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: GOD (the divine Son of God) WAS MANIFESTED IN THE FLESH, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.Let’s let those same 25 TRINITARIAN scholars enlighten us on your verse too…
NET © And we all agree, 1 our religion contains amazing revelation: 2 He 3 was revealed in the flesh, vindicated by the Spirit, 4 seen by angels, proclaimed among Gentiles, believed on in the world, taken up in glory.
NET © Notes
3 tc The Byzantine text along with a few other witnesses (אc Ac C2 D2 Ψ [88 pc] 1739 1881 Ï vgms) read θεός (qeos, “God”) for ὅς (Jos, “who”). Most significant among these witnesses is 1739; the second correctors of some of the other mss tend to conform to the medieval standard, the Byzantine text, and add no independent voice to the discussion. A few mss have ὁ θεός (so 88 pc), a reading that is a correction on the anarthrous θεός. On the other side, the masculine relative pronoun ὅς is strongly supported by א* A* C* F G 33 365 pc Did Epiph. Significantly, D* and virtually the entire Latin tradition read the neuter relative pronoun, ὅ (Jo, “which”), a reading that indirectly supports ὅς since it could not easily have been generated if θεός had been in the text. Thus, externally, there is no question as to what should be considered original: The Alexandrian and Western traditions are decidedly in favor of ὅς. Internally, the evidence is even stronger. What scribe would change θεός to ὅς intentionally? “Who” is not only a theologically pale reading by comparison; it also is much harder (since the relative pronoun has no obvious antecedent, probably the reason for the neuter pronoun of the Western tradition). Intrinsically, the rest of 3:16, beginning with ὅς, appears to form a six-strophed hymn. As such, it is a text that is seemingly incorporated into the letter without syntactical connection. Hence, not only should we not look for an antecedent for ὅς (as is often done by commentators), but the relative pronoun thus is not too hard a reading (or impossible, as Dean Burgon believed). Once the genre is taken into account, the relative pronoun fits neatly into the author’s style (cf. also Col 1:15; Phil 2:6 for other places in which the relative pronoun begins a hymn, as was often the case in poetry of the day). On the other hand, with θεός written as a nomen sacrum, it would have looked very much like the relative pronoun: q-=s vs. os. Thus, it may have been easy to confuse one for the other. This, of course, does not solve which direction the scribes would go, although given their generally high Christology and the bland and ambiguous relative pronoun, it is doubtful that they would have replaced θεός with ὅς. How then should we account for θεός? It appears that sometime after the 2nd century the θεός reading came into existence, either via confusion with ὅς or as an intentional alteration to magnify Christ and clear up the syntax at the same time. Once it got in, this theologically rich reading was easily able to influence all the rest of the mss it came in contact with (including mss already written, such as א A C D). That this reading did not arise until after the 2nd century is evident from the Western reading, ὅ. The neuter relative pronoun is certainly a “correction” of ὅς, conforming the gender to that of the neuter μυστήριον (musthrion, “mystery”). What is significant in this reading is (1) since virtually all the Western witnesses have either the masculine or neuter relative pronoun, the θεός reading was apparently unknown to them in the 2nd century (when the “Western” text seems to have originated, though its place of origination was most likely in the east); they thus supply strong indirect evidence of ὅς outside of Egypt in the 2nd century; (2) even 2nd century scribes were liable to misunderstand the genre, feeling compelled to alter the masculine relative pronoun because it appeared to them to be too harsh. The evidence, therefore, for ὅς is quite compelling, both externally and internally. As TCGNT 574 notes, “no uncial (in the first hand) earlier than the eighth or ninth century (Ψ) supports θεός; all ancient versions presuppose ὅς or ὅ; and no patristic writer prior to the last third of the fourth century testifies to the reading θεός.” Thus, the cries of certain groups that θεός has to be original must be seen as special pleading in this case. To argue that heretics tampered with the text here is self-defeating, for most of the Western fathers who quoted the verse with the relative pronoun were quite orthodox, strongly affirming the deity of Christ. They would have dearly loved such a reading as θεός. Further, had heretics introduced a variant to θεός, a far more natural choice would have been Χριστός (Cristos, “Christ”) or κύριος (kurios, “Lord”), since the text is self-evidently about Christ, but it is not self-evidently a proclamation of his deity. (See ExSyn 341-42, for a summary discussion on this issue and additional bibliographic references.)
My main takeaways are that “who” is the most supported translation – and even the important manuscripts that have “theos” have it as anarthrous (without the definite article “THE”).
So even if you were to insist that the correct mss are the ones that have “god”, it would just say that “A god was manifest in the flesh” – which is absolutely scriptural. 😉
But most modern translation are produced by Trinitarians, and they all have “who”, “he” or “Christ”, in that verse – not “god”.
Hi Mike,
Rev 1:1… The revelation from Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show his servants what must soon take place.
Mike, Jesus Christ, above is GLORIFIED GODMAN and He possesses all God’s things as His!
including the title of
GOD AND FATHER OF ALL SPIRITS AND FLESH! Read:
John17:10 And all my things (HUMAN’S) are thine,
and thine (GOD’S) are mine;
and I am glorified in them.
BOTH GOD’S AND HUMAN’S;
GODMAN
OK, Mike?
JESUS CHRIST IN Rev. 1:1 ABOVE IS
THE HIGHEST AS ONLY HIM POSSESSES A
UNIQUE GLORIFIED BODY BOTH SPIRIT AND FLESH.
I REPEAT FLESH,
SPIRITUAL FLESH,
THE ONLY FLESH WHICH IS IN HEAVEN POSSESSED ONLY BY
JESUS CHRIST
GODMAN!
1 John 3:2Dearly beloved, we are now the sons of God;
and it hath not yet appeared what we shall be. ( AS JESUS CHRIST IS)
We know, that, when he shall appear, (IN FLESH )
we shall be LIKE TO HIM: (IN SPIRITUAL FLESH, THE NEW JERUSALEM)
because we shall see him as HE IS. (GODMAN)
John14:7 If you had known me, you would, without doubt,
have known MY (unique glorified GODMAN personal) Father also:
and from henceforth you shall know him,
and you have seen him.
1Peter 1:3 Blessed be THE God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,
Mike, JESUS CHRIST POSSESSES THE UNIQUE TITLE OF
THE GOD AND FATHER of our Lord Jesus Christ!
The above title belongs ONLY TO JESUS CHRIST,
GODMAN! THE HIGHEST!
God the Father is only the Father of spirits; INVISIBLE!
JESUS CHRIST IS BOTH GOD AND FATHER OF ALL GLORIFIED SPIRITUAL FLESH
BEINGS CHILDREN OF GOD.
VISIBLE BEINGS!
THE KINGDOM OF THE SON, THE KINGDOM OF GOD! READ AND ACCEPT THE TRUTH!
John 20:17 ….But go to my brethren, and say to them: I ascend to (THE GLORIFIED STATE OF) MY(PERSONAL) Father and to your Father, to MY (PERSONAL) God and your God.
FOR THE GLORY OF GOD THE FATHER! on the last day of the Lord: JESUS CHRIST!
Cont. 1Peter 1:3 ….who according to his great mercy hath REGENERATED US unto a lively hope, by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,
4Unto an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that can not fade,
RESERVED in heaven for YOU, (THE GLORIFIED SPIRITUAL FLESH OWNED ONLY BY JESUS CHRIST GODMAN)
5Who, by the power of God, are kept by faith unto salvation,
ready to be revealed in the last time.
Now read again:
Rev 1:1… The revelation from Jesus Christ,
which God gave him…..
In the above PHRASE:
WHICH GOD GAVE HIM means
THE TITLE OF
THE GOD AND FATHER OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST,
THE ONLY BEING EMPOWERED BOTH WITH
ALL GOD’S THINGS AND ALL HUMAN THINGS,
GODMAN!
GAVE HIM, JESUS CHRIST, ALL AUTHORITIES AND POWERS…..
You: Was Jesus a spirit being in heaven when John wrote this? Yes – according to scripture, because flesh cannot enter, see, or inherit God’s kingdom.
WRONG Mike! FLESH AND BLOOD CANNOT ENTER OR INHERIT GOD’S KINGDOM!
BUT JESUS CHRIST POSSESSES
THE UNIQUE GLORIFIED SPIRITUAL FLESH!
SATAN’S DREAM!
Peace and love in Jesus Christ
Berean: Mike
I know from the letter to the Colossians that the Son of God IS BEFORE ALL THINGS …. THIS MEANS ETERNITY ….. AND THIS IS ENOUGH FOR ME.
The phrase “before all things” doesn’t mean “eternity”. Not in Colossians, and not ever.
Hi Mike,
You; Your version confirms that Jesus is a possession of his God –
JESUS Mike, IS
both ONE SUBSTANCE WITH THE FATHER AND DISTINCT!
You: as are we all.
WRONG Mike!
WE ARE ALL IN JESUS CHRIST!
NOT IN GOD THE FATHER
THE FACT THAT GOD ESTABLISHED
THE GOD AND FATHER OF BOTH SPIRITS AND FLESH BEINGS IN JESUS CHRIST
GODMAN!
JESUS IS THE ONLY SPIRIT/MEDIATOR BETWEEN GOD AND HIS CREATURES, THE FIRST ONE
LUCIFER THE BEGINNING!
Colossians 1:15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: 16For in him were all things created in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones, or dominations, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him and in him. 17And he is before all, and by him all things consist……
19Because in him, it hath well pleased the Father,
that all fullness should dwell;
20And through him to reconcile all things unto himself, making peace through the blood of his cross, both as to the things that are on earth, and the things that are in heaven.
You: NET © The Lord created 1 me as the beginning 2 of his works, 3 before his deeds of long ago.
ME:The Lord created 1 me as the beginning…
Mike Jesus WAS NOT CREATED IN THE ABOVE AS SUCH!
JESUS AS “THE WORD” SPOKEN OF GOD, A SPIRIT WAS EMBODIED, AS ETERNAL LIFE, IN
THE HEART OF LUCIFER, THE ACTUAL BEGINNING,
THE FIRST-EVER CREATURE OF LIGHT/WISDOM!
THE PRIMORDIAL LIGHT! THE FEMALE ASPECT OF GOD!
LUCIFER WAS CREATED
NOT JESUS! Mr. Mike!
JESUS IS THE FIRSTBORN OF LUCIFER!
IN THE BEGINNING (LUCIFER) WAS “THE WORD”……
Peace and love in Jesus Christ
That is Hulk Hogan and his offspring. As the offspring of a human being, she is equally human. She likely even has many qualities of the one who begot her. But being Hogan’s offspring doesn’t mean she is automatically as strong as him, and can pick up grown men and throw them across the room. So you need to drop the idea that Jesus MUST be absolutely everything his own Father is. It’s nonsense.
True. It is a ridiculous idea to think that Jesus is God because he was begotten by God. You can say he is divine or shares attributes of his Father. But he is not equal to the Father.
“You heard me say, ‘I am going away and I am coming back to you.’ If you loved me, you would be glad that I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I.
Mike
I know from the letter to the Colossians that the Son of God IS BEFORE ALL THINGS …. THIS MEANS ETERNITY ….. AND THIS IS ENOUGH FOR ME. I BELIEVE.
It means he is before the cosmos and all creation.
It doesn’t mean that he was before or at the same time as God.
It means that he was with God before all things.
The words Father and Son have a clue for you Berean.
Well done, Gene.
1 John 5 American Standard Version
1 Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is begotten of God: and whosoever loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him.4 For whosoever is begotten of God overcometh the world…
18 We know that whosoever is begotten of God sinneth not; but he that was begotten of God keepeth himself, and the evil one toucheth him not.
Oh my… it turns out that those of us who accept Jesus as the christ (anointed one) of God are just as much begotten of God as Jesus is!
So Kathi, am I every bit a YHVH as YHVH the Father now?
Berean, am I omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent now?
Good point. However, the other point here is he is begotten not created.
Mike says
If a living thing is born, isn’t it also a new creation that didn’t exist before it was born? Can you think of an exception?
All five of my children were born about nine months AFTER they first existed.
It is not birth that causes an offspring to exist, it’s conception. Mike has been through this Biology lesson many times now and should know better.
Two different Fathers:
- the Father that has an only begotten literal son.
- the father that has no literal son, only non-literal sons.
I believe the Son is the only begotten literal son of God. I have been saying that for 28+ years. Jesus is begotten, not created. A created son would not be a literal son.
It seems like Berean, Danny, Proclaimer, and I believe that here.
Proclaimer, Mike,
SINCE Christ IS BEFORE ALL THINGS, IT IS TO SAY ALL CREATION, IT IS THAT HIMSELF IS NOT A CREATURE, HE IS A BEGOTTEN BEING, THE REFLECTION OF THE GLORY OF THE FATHER AND THE EVEN FOOTPRINT OF HIS PERSON, HE IS EQUAL TO THE FATHER.
SINCE Christ IS BEFORE ALL THINGS, IT IS TO SAY ALL CREATION, IT IS THAT HIMSELF IS NOT A CREATURE, HE IS A BEGOTTEN BEING, THE REFLECTION OF THE GLORY OF THE FATHER AND THE EVEN FOOTPRINT OF HIS PERSON, HE IS EQUAL TO THE FATHER.
THERE IS NOTHING LOWER THAN THE FATHER, IF IT HAD A BEGINNING, WHEN THE FATHER HAD NO BEGINNING, HE ALWAYS EXISTED …..THERE IS NOTHING LOWER THAN THE FATHER, IF IT HAD A BEGINNING, WHEN THE FATHER HAD NO BEGINNING, HE ALWAYS EXISTED …..
And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
Not only is Jesus—God—responsible for creating all things, He is also the reason all things continue to exist. AMEN!
If you believe that Jesus is the God spoken of in the Bible, then you must be wilfully blind.
All things were made by God and through him, (logos, Son of God, Jesus Christ).
Jesus is not the creator. God is.
And Jesus who some claim to be God is actually the Son of God.
Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and everyone who loves the father loves his child as well. This is how we know that we love the children of God: by loving God and carrying out his commands. In fact, this is love for God: to keep his commands. And his commands are not burdensome, for everyone born of God overcomes the world. This is the victory that has overcome the world, even our faith. Who is it that overcomes the world? Only the one who believes that Jesus is the Son of God.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
