JOHN 1:1 who is the WORD?

[Worshipping Jesus]

Hi t8

Quote (t8 @ Oct. 09 2008,15:50)

What does that prove? It proves that the God in scripture is not a Trinity, therefore the Trinity is a derived understanding and not taught in scripture. Interestingly enough, if you believe that God the Father is the Most High God, then substituting God with Father doesn't break the verses like the word Trinity does. So at least from a scriptural standpoint, God is the Father as we have been saying all along.

This is so silly.

Here lets play “change the scriptures” …

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 (Father), The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Isa 9:6

So the Father was born?

But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O (Father), is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom. Heb 1:8

So the Father said to his Father?

And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my (Father).

So Thomas called Yahshua his Father? We have no record of any of the 12 before Yahshuas crucifixtion calling God their Father.

So it does break the verse unlike the untruth you just stated.

You can make the scriptures say what you want t8, and it is evidence you do by denying obvious scriptures claiming Yahshua to be “True God”

WJ

[Worshipping Jesus]

Hi E

Quote (epistemaniac @ Oct. 08 2008,11:17)

as soon as you can tell me how Jesus is god, but not the true God, and yet not therefore a false God… perhaps I will read your verses.

I agree!

I have been waiting for those verses also!

Blessings. WJ

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (epistemaniac @ Oct. 08 2008,13:25)

have studied theology extensively, and since I am disabled, I have more time on my hands than the average person, I therefore study the bible and theology (which includes historical theology) far more than the average person. Further, aside from my extensive individual studies, I have a degree in Biblical Counseling with a Double Minor in Apologetics and Systematic Theology from Grace College and Seminary in Winona Lake, with 1 year accomplished towards my Master's Degree in Biblical Counseling, which, in God's providence, I was unable to finish due to multiple back operations. So, the point is, I know very well both what I believe and why, and you should not assume that just because I disagree with you and you with me, that I am somehow uninformed or have failed to study my bible. Whenever one assumes anything, trouble and misunderstanding is sure to follow.

Hi Ken

I am praying for your back and for full recovery. Good for you on your studies and degrees.

But, I think you will find that many here put their own understanding above the Greek and Hebrew translators or commentators, even when it denies true hermeneutics and Greek or Hebrew rules of interpretation. Many have even dedicated their entire lives to bring us the purist form of scriptures, and yet there is apologist everywhere to deny the scriptures as they are written.

Blessings

WJ

[Worshipping Jesus]

Hi MF

You say…

Quote (malcolm ferris @ Oct. 07 2008,01:11)

Omnipotence – Jesus does not have omnipotence of himself – he was given it by GOD

Then you say…

Quote (malcolm ferris @ Oct. 07 2008,15:57)

1 – I did not say 2 separate beings were omnipotent. That is the point – Jesus can hardly be called omnipotent if he needed to have all authority handed to him…

Do you always change talking points in the middle of the debate?

Which is it? Does he have Omnipotence because the Father gave it to him or is it that he can't be Omnipotant because all authority was given to him?

If he has “all authority” then your statement is a contradiction of terms.

If God gave Yahshua “all Authority” or “Omnipotence” then that would mean he is “all Powerful” right?

Or would you say that Yahshua is not “all Powerful”?

If he is not “all Powerful”, then how is it that by him “all things consist”? Col 1:17

Keep in mind we are talking about the creation of the Universe which is infinite.

If he is not “all Powerful”, then how could he uphold “all things” by the Word of “his power”? Heb 1:3

Just look out into space and see what kind of power that is.

Now logic would tell you or anyone else that if he has this kind of “power” or “authority” then he would have to have “all knowledge”. Col 2:3

And if he is able to sustain and uphold all things having all knowledge and power, then he would have to be everywhere. Eph 1:23,

So if as you say the Father Gave Yeshua “Omnipotence”, “Omniscience”, and “Omnipresence” then that would still mean that he is  “Omnipotent”, “Omniscient”, and “Omnipresent”!

Then my question still stands…

Can you name one attribute scripturally that the Father has of which Yeshua who is the “image of the invisible God”, does not have?”.

If he has these attributes now then you haven’t answered the question.

WJ

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (t8 @ Oct. 09 2008,15:34)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Oct. 07 2008,07:31) I am Glad that you admit the Father who is Spirit is invisible and Yahshua is the “visible image of God”. What? You have got to be kidding. I have been preaching this since the beginning and repeatedly. You are either not listening or you just come up with phrases like that to make me look bad to paint yourself in a better light. Reading that just puts me off reading the rest of your post. TIP: If you are going to say something, make sure you research your facts. This probably goes some way to explaining why you appear to not understand what we say. I think you are not even reading what you are replying to in the first place. Or perhaps you have a very bad memory. If that is the case then that is not your fault and that is OK.

t8

Not kidding at all t8. It seems that you do not hear a lot of things that I have preached either.

So I will post it again so everyone can see it again, and maybe you will answer the question this time.

I kind of doubt you will since it blows a hole in your theology about God being invisible but yet John saw God in Revelation.

Here it is again with a little more emphasis…

t8

Quote (t8 @ Oct. 06 2008,21:31)

Jesus is the IMAGE of the invisible God. If Jesus were God, then according to Paul, Jesus would be invisible and no one could see him or has seen him.

I am Glad that you admit the Father who is Spirit is invisible and Yahshua is the “visible image of God”.

Since you believe that Yahshua being the “visible image of God” does not mean he is God then maybe you can explain these scriptures and who it is that is sitting on the throne and how John was able to see him…

And immediately I was in the spirit: and, behold, a throne was set in heaven, and one sat on the throne. And he that sat **was to look upon like** a jasper and a sardine stone: and there was a rainbow round about the throne, in sight like unto an emerald. ….And the four beasts had each of them six wings about him; and they were full of eyes within: and they rest not day and night, saying, Holy, holy, holy, **Lord God Almighty**, which was, and is, and is to come. And when those beasts give glory and honour and thanks “to him that sat on the throne”, who liveth for ever and ever, “The four and twenty elders fall down before him that sat on the throne”, and worship him that liveth for ever and ever, and cast their crowns before the throne, saying, Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created. Rev 4:2, 3 and 4:8-11

Compare “…for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure* they are and were created”. with…

For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether [they be] thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: “all things were created *by him, and for him*“: Col 1:16

Quote (t8 @ Oct. 06 2008,21:31)

Wake up WJ, it is time for you to put away this folly. It is silly to teach that the invisible God is visible.

I think it is silly to teach that God has not made himself visible!

Quote (t8 @ Oct. 06 2008,21:31)

I think you can see that it is a is a blatant contradiction. At least be honest with yourself if you can't admit it publicly.

The blatant contradiction is with your theology t8, for it is you who believes that more than one divine being exist and that more than one “theos” created all things. It is you that teaches men that the “image of the invisible God” is less than God therfore causing men to create a false image of God.

O LORD of hosts, God of Israel, that dwellest between the cherubims, (not gods) thou art the God, even “thou alone“, of all the kingdoms of the earth: thou hast made heaven and earth. Isa 37:16

Which “alone” spreadeth out the heavens, and treadeth upon the waves of the sea. Job 9:8

Who did John see t8?

Who were they worshipping?

WJ

[NickHassan]

Hi WJ,
Can hermeneutics find a trinity in scripture if it is not written there?
If so why is it useful?

[theodorej]

Quote (malcolm ferris @ Oct. 07 2008,22:40)

Quote As far as the whole Jesus had a father,  Jesus was a Son thing…. I have one word for you: hermeneutics. Learn to study the Scriptures!!! Learn what metaphors, what figures of speech are for goodness sake. The Scripture also says that Jesus is the door, the rock, the gate, etc…. what is important is what these figures of speech convey about the nature of Christ, not that he is literally a door, or a gate or a rock….. so too when we see the scripture refer to Jesus as “the Son” or that He was “begotten” it does not mean that Jesus is a son in the same way a typical human son is a son, nor is John trying to give us  lesson on basic human conception or procreation. What? Sine Jesus was “begotten” by the Holy Spirit are we to suppose that God had sex with Mary and that was how Jesus was conceived? Your overly simplistic superficial approach to interpreting scripture would lead to such far fetched blasphemous conclusions. Or are you a Mormon or something? Nope not a Mormon The Scripture also says that Jesus is the door, the rock, the gate, etc…. what is important is what these figures of speech convey about the nature of Christ, not that he is literally a door, or a gate or a rock….. That's right and these illustrations used by Jesus to show us his role – as a gateway an accessway , a portal, as the source of revelation regarding GOD (rock). Tell me did Jesus use these metaphors constantly to refer to himself? Or did others? Did his disciples say 'hey look here comes the door, here comes the gate' or 'hello rock'? As you say these illustrate the role. But when questioned as to who they thought he was (not what he represented) it was a statement of a dual revelation: The CHRIST the Son of the Living GOD. (Father and Son) As for Jesus not being an actual Son of GOD in any sense than illustratively – sorry have to disagree on that one. re the whole sex with Mary idea – you never heard that from me GOD does not need to resort to sexual reproduction to produce a son, how do you think the first Adam was formed? as ever imo and most likely contrary to yours 😉

Greetings Malcolm…….I can't help notice your agility with respect to debating and making a point…I agree that one must be able to sort out the symbolic references from the literal ones so as to learn from scripture…

[Lightenup]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Oct. 09 2008,04:45)

Hi David Quote (david @ Oct. 09 2008,11:52) IT IS FALSE LOGIC AND JUST WRONG THINKING TO ASSUME THAT BECAUSE THERE IS “ONLY ONE TRUE GOD” THAT EVERYONE ELSE THAT IS CALLED GOD IS EITHER A PART OF THAT GODHEAD OR FALSE. Ok, but I have asked you and t8 to present your unambiguous scriptural evidence for this statement without any reply. Here Ill post it again… Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Oct. 07 2008,13:14) Can you tell me where this definition for “theos” comes from? Since t8 believes the same as the JWs here then maybe you can list some scriptures to prove these statements. t8 only list John 10 which can be read as a derogatory statement about evil and wicked kings. Ambiguous. I would like to see how you come to this opinion using scriptures. Thanks! WJ Please spare me of pages of apologetics and just give me some scriptures. Thanks WJ

WJ and all,
A definition of Theos on a trinitarian site is below (note the part about whatever can in any respect be likened unto God, or resemble him in any way
God's representative or viceregent
of magistrates and judges ):

Strong's Number: 2316 qeo/v
Original Word Word Origin
qeo/v of uncertain affinity
Transliterated Word Phonetic Spelling
Theos theh'-os
Parts of Speech TDNT
a deity, especially (with 3588) the supreme Divinity
Definition
a god or goddess, a general name of deities or divinities
the Godhead, trinity
God the Father, the first person in the trinity
Christ, the second person of the trinity
Holy Spirit, the third person in the trinity
spoken of the only and true God
refers to the things of God
his counsels, interests, things due to him
whatever can in any respect be likened unto God, or resemble him in any way
God's representative or viceregent
of magistrates and judges

Translated Words
KJV (1343) – God, 1320; God-ward + (4214), 2; god, 13; godly, 3; misc, 5;
NAS (1312) – God, 1267; God's, 27; God-fearing, 1; Lord, 1; divinely, 1; god, 6; godly, 1; gods, 8;

LU

[epistemaniac]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Oct. 09 2008,21:33)

Quote (epistemaniac @ Oct. 08 2008,13:25) have studied theology extensively, and since I am disabled, I have more time on my hands than the average person, I therefore study the bible and theology (which includes historical theology) far more than the average person. Further, aside from my extensive individual studies, I have a degree in Biblical Counseling with a Double Minor in Apologetics and Systematic Theology from Grace College and Seminary in Winona Lake, with 1 year accomplished towards my Master's Degree in Biblical Counseling, which, in God's providence, I was unable to finish due to multiple back operations. So, the point is, I know very well both what I believe and why, and you should not assume that just because I disagree with you and you with me, that I am somehow uninformed or have failed to study my bible. Whenever one assumes anything, trouble and misunderstanding is sure to follow. Hi Ken I am praying for your back and for full recovery. Good for you on your studies and degrees. But, I think you will find that many here put their own understanding above the Greek and Hebrew translators or commentators, even when it denies true hermeneutics and Greek or Hebrew rules of interpretation. Many have even dedicated their entire lives to bring us the purist form of scriptures, and yet there is apologist everywhere to deny the scriptures as they are written. Blessings WJ

Thank you for your prayers!! Much appreciated! As far as a full recovery goes, I am open to that, but currently, I am permanently and totally disabled, having had 19 various back operations, including a double low back fusion (eg a fusion in 1996, a re-injury, resulting in a “decompression”, taking the previous fusion apart, removing the bots and other hardware, then an extension of the previous fusion to go down into the coccyx and further up into my mid-back), 3 vertebra in my neck being fused. multiple lamenectomies, various outpatient injection series, not the least of which was a near fatal staph infection contracted after my 3rd lamenectomy, the staph really hammered my spine area as well as being rampant throughout my blood stream, and as a result, weakened it/making it more prone to injury….. and most recently had a morphine pump permanently implanted which releases morphine in low doses throughout the day directly onto the low back area which has suffered the most damage, this had led to my being more active of late and has really helped more than anything else I have tried to help me try and deal with the high levels of chronic pain I live with, all the time, every day…. but, as I said, things are definitely better and for that I praise God!! I have children and it is good to have been a little more active, able to go to their school functions etc. Enough of that stuff though The point being that while I am open to a miracle, I have been struggling with this stuff since 88, and so far the Lord has not seen fit to heal me by miraculous means, though I do believe He saved me from death as far as the staph infection goes… not too many people are able to walk out of that situation, but, as Paul prayed 3 times to have the thorn removed… and yet the Lord didn't do it… but said instead that “My strength is sufficient for you”… and that has been true and the story of my life as He has been with me and sustained me and my family (4 kids and 2 grand kids now )in so many ways throughout my life.

As far as the degree stuff goes…. I only brought that up because an assumption…. well a HUGE assumption…. was made about my background, as you no doubt noticed…. it may seem to some that I am bragging or something mentioning the degree, but I definitely am not…. I do count it as a huge privilege and blessing to have had the opportunity and experience of being able to have gone to a secular school (Indiana Univ. at South Bend), a Liberal “Christian” school (Goshen College), where I had to debate with the teachers every day in class as I was ridiculed for my conservative beliefs), and then finally graduating from a solid conservative evangelical school, Grace College…….. but, all that being said, I know there are people brighter and more godly than I who have not gone to school for various reasons, were unable to afford it, family issues, all sorts of reasons, and I know there are people far far brighter AND more educated that I, so while being able to go to school is important on a few different levels, it definitely doe snot make me any better than anyone else….. but given all this, the fact is that I HAVE studied the historical issues surrounding the doctrine of the Trinity, and it is frankly insulting for someone to say that just because I am presenting a position that they disagree with, and seemingly just BECAUSE I DO disagree with them, that supposedly I must not have “really” studied the issues. The fact is, I do not come from a Christian home, so I have no cultural/family baggage such that I “must” be an Evangelical Christian because my father and mother were, and their fathers and mothers before etc. In fact, later on in my mom's life she “returned home” to the Roman Catholic Church, as her family is/was strongly rooted in the Roman Catholic population in South Bend, and encouraged me to join her, but by that time I had done some extensive studying concerning justification and had come down on the side of the Reformers and thus was as far from Rome as you can be on those issues, at any rate…. I was free to begin my research into religion in my early 20's, in whichever direction I wanted to, as I sought out finding the truth as best as I could. As a matter of fact I started out studying with the Jehovah's Witnesses while I lived in Clearwater FLA, and later attended several of their Halls in the Goshen/Elkhart Indiana area, and I went to a Mormon church for awhile as well, the point being I did not dismiss any of the the larger expressions of Christianity (though of course by now I do not believe these are really expressions of the Christian church at all, but are rather anti-Christ driven cults) in a casual manner…. I realized pretty quickly that everything hinged on Jesus, and so early on, I began to do nothing but to research the various positions/beliefs about Him. I happened to come out on the side that the stronger biblical proof was for Jesus being the second person of the Trinity, God of God, the God-Man…. but i did not come to those conclusions lightly, or without a GREAT deal of thought and prayer. So I came by my beliefs the hard way, I did not just accept anything just because someone else said it or because someone else believed it, I study to show myself approved as best as I can, making use of the brilliatn and godly men and women who have gone before

Anyway… just wanted to say thanks again for your support, and I hope that God continues to use you to contend for the faith once for all delivered to the saints in regard to the essential nature of God…

blessings to you WJ,
Ken

[Tiffany]

Ken Sorry that you have to live with chronic pain. Sometimes it is good to hear from others how much pain they are in. Even tho we can never put our self into another persons position, we can however sympathies with them.
Knowing chronic pain, I certainly understand that. I too am disabled. It started with Asthma at the age of 21 ( I am 70 now) After I turned 38-40 I was diagnosed with Lupus. Since the Doctors had given me some Steroids for my Asthma I did not want to take it on a regular basis for my Lupus. I struggled to the point that I ended up in a Wheelchair. Could not even feed myself the Lupus took away all function of my muscles.
At that point I gave up, and have been taking a small amount of Steroid. From all the side affect of the Steroid, my Skin is very tender and my bones have become brittle. I now have also Osteoporosis and Rheumatory Arthritis. I have shrunk 2 1/2 inches. Have been in out of the Hospital a lot. Asthma now is C.O. P. D. and I am on Oxygen 24 hrs. a day. If that was not enough I now have Diabetes full blown. Have to take Insulin daily. Also have nerve damage in my feet and it is very painful to walk.
Chronic pain is my friend. If I did not have God on my side I have no idea, if I would have been able to tolerate all of this. We have 4 children and 7 GRANDCHILDREEN. The oldest is married and teaches High School Math and is Baseball Coach. His Wife has Her Doctrine in Physiology. Our youngest Grandson just turned 7. Our only Granddaughter is in Her second year of High School, while the rest all are going to diffrent colleges in the Cincinnati area.
Please excuse me this is a testimony and it should be in a diffrent tread. But I am replying to Ken's post.

Peace and Love Irene

[Proclaimer]

Quote (david @ Oct. 09 2008,11:52)

IT IS FALSE LOGIC AND JUST WRONG THINKING TO ASSUME THAT BECAUSE THERE IS “ONLY ONE TRUE GOD” THAT EVERYONE ELSE THAT IS CALLED GOD IS EITHER A PART OF THAT GODHEAD OR FALSE.

Agreed.

[epistemaniac]

Quote (david @ Oct. 09 2008,11:28)

Quote The important thing to ask is: is the principle [of the trinity] taught in Scripture, even if the word is not? Nope.

wow.. profound…I will definitely have to change my views now…. LOL

as far as your definition of the word “God” goes, nope…. and more than just saying “nope”, I can tell you that its not found in any of the standard lexicons or dictionaries. Perhaps it is a Jehovah's Witness definition…. but then again…. I had always thought it was the Mormons who were the real polytheists….. at least the Mormons believe that only good Mormon members, eg men, can be gods, and those wives the Mormon men choose to resurrect….  now I see that according to your definition

Quote

It is a word that means “strong one” or “powerful one.”

why…. now just everyone and anyone can be a god!!! lol…. Since being a “strong one” or a “powerful one” are fairly subjective terms, relatively speaking, my 9 year old is a “strong one” when compared to, say, a 5 year old, and the 5 year old is a strong one when compared to my 4 month old granddaughter, and on it goes….. but no…. Jesus is not merely a “strong one”, merely one more god among many other gods, any more than Jehovah is…. but I can see that this is where your Jehovah's Witness theology must lead you to, a denigration  of the God before whom one day, every knee will bow and every tongue confess that Jesus is Lord, the one who will judge all creatures, the one in whom there is salvation to be found, and this, in no other, the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end.

While I know that it is convenient to concoct such a weak unbiblical definition in order to be able to try and refute others views, unfortunately however, according to your definition, there must be literally millions of gods… and you still have a problem of the Bible saying that there is only one true God, and yet Jesus is merely “a god”…. now if He is not God in the way Jehovah is God, then Jesus is not the true God, for Jehovah is the one true God, and therefore Jesus a false God. Its not logic twisting, its simply the application of good logic to the situation. For example, if P is the proposition:
Jehovah is the one true God
then the law of excluded middle holds that the logical disjunction:
all other gods are false gods
is true by virtue of its form alone. That is, the “middle” position, that Jesus (or any other so-called god) is both god and a true god, is excluded by logic, since the claim is made that there is only 1 true God, namely Jehovah, and therefore either the first possibility (Jehovah is the one true God) or its negation (all other gods are false gods) must be true.

blessings,
Ken

[epistemaniac]

Quote (Tiffany @ Oct. 10 2008,10:22)

Ken Sorry that you have to live with chronic pain. Sometimes it is good to hear from others how much pain they are in. Even tho we can never put our self into another persons position, we can however sympathies with them. Knowing chronic pain, I certainly understand that. I too am disabled. It started with Asthma at the age of 21 ( I am 70 now) After I turned 38-40 I was diagnosed with Lupus. Since the Doctors had given me some Steroids for my Asthma I did not want to take it on a regular basis for my Lupus. I struggled to the point that I ended up in a Wheelchair. Could not even feed myself the Lupus took away all function of my muscles. At that point I gave up, and have been taking a small amount of Steroid. From all the side affect of the Steroid, my Skin is very tender and my bones have become brittle. I now have also Osteoporosis and Rheumatory Arthritis.  I have shrunk 2 1/2 inches. Have been in out of the Hospital a lot. Asthma now is C.O. P. D. and I am on Oxygen 24 hrs. a day. If that was not enough I now have Diabetes full blown. Have to take Insulin daily. Also have nerve damage in my feet and it is very painful to walk. Chronic pain is my friend. If I did not have God on my side I have no idea, if I would have been able to tolerate all of this. We have 4 children and 7 GRANDCHILDREEN. The oldest is married and teaches High School Math and is Baseball Coach. His Wife has Her Doctrine in Physiology. Our youngest Grandson just turned 7. Our only Granddaughter is in Her second year of High School, while the rest all are going to diffrent colleges in the Cincinnati area. Please excuse me this is a testimony and it should be in a diffrent tread. But I am replying to Ken's post. Peace and Love Irene

my prayers are with you….. my you be blessed and know joy….. not happiness which is a fickle emotion… but true joy, which can withstand any of the ails the world, the flesh, and the devil can throw at us….

blessings,
Ken

[epistemaniac]

Quote (malcolm ferris @ Oct. 07 2008,22:40)

Quote As far as the whole Jesus had a father,  Jesus was a Son thing…. I have one word for you: hermeneutics. Learn to study the Scriptures!!! Learn what metaphors, what figures of speech are for goodness sake. The Scripture also says that Jesus is the door, the rock, the gate, etc…. what is important is what these figures of speech convey about the nature of Christ, not that he is literally a door, or a gate or a rock….. so too when we see the scripture refer to Jesus as “the Son” or that He was “begotten” it does not mean that Jesus is a son in the same way a typical human son is a son, nor is John trying to give us  lesson on basic human conception or procreation. What? Sine Jesus was “begotten” by the Holy Spirit are we to suppose that God had sex with Mary and that was how Jesus was conceived? Your overly simplistic superficial approach to interpreting scripture would lead to such far fetched blasphemous conclusions. Or are you a Mormon or something? Nope not a Mormon The Scripture also says that Jesus is the door, the rock, the gate, etc…. what is important is what these figures of speech convey about the nature of Christ, not that he is literally a door, or a gate or a rock….. That's right and these illustrations used by Jesus to show us his role – as a gateway an accessway , a portal, as the source of revelation regarding GOD (rock). Tell me did Jesus use these metaphors constantly to refer to himself? Or did others? Did his disciples say 'hey look here comes the door, here comes the gate' or 'hello rock'? As you say these illustrate the role. But when questioned as to who they thought he was (not what he represented) it was a statement of a dual revelation: The CHRIST the Son of the Living GOD. (Father and Son) As for Jesus not being an actual Son of GOD in any sense than illustratively – sorry have to disagree on that one. re the whole sex with Mary idea – you never heard that from me GOD does not need to resort to sexual reproduction to produce a son, how do you think the first Adam was formed? as ever imo and most likely contrary to yours 😉

listen carefully to what I am saying…..and equally carefully to what I am not saying… I am NOT saying that Jesus is not the Son of God…. I am saying that He is NOT the Son of God 1) in the same we any other human is called a son or daughter of the most high and 2) that He is not the Son in the same way a human has a Son….. so when we use this word “Son” to refer to Jesus, we cannot say/prove that He is not co-eternal with the Father, or that He is a created being, or that He is a lesser god, etc etc etc simply by importing our ideas of what we know a (human) son to be, and therefore, based on that, start making all kinds of assumptions about what Jesus MUST be, simply because He is called “the Son”, and therefore, by the same token, when God called “father” He is not a father 1) to us in the same way He is to Jesus, and 2) that just because He is called the Father, or Jesus refers to Him as a Father, that He is a Father in the same way that a human father/son relationship is to be thought of…. while they may seem obvious, people seem to wrongly think that this language being used of God, of the Father, of the Son, etc. is some kind of profound point in proving that Jesus is a lesser ontological being than the Father….. end of this particular point.

blessings,
Ken

[Lightenup]

Hi E,
So sorry about all you have to deal with in this physical state. Have you read the book “90 Minutes in Heaven”? You might like to check it out, it is by Don Piper. It is a remarkable story and you might like it particularly because it is from a trinitarian point of view.

Anyway, you say that the Son of God is “God of God” and I agree with that. I think that this distinction helps when we say God#1 and God #2. God #2 is of God #1. God #2 came from God #1 since He (God #2) is “of” Him (God #1) hence, God #1 existed before God #2. Now since God #1 existed first, He is the Father and God #2 is the Son. Also since God #1 existed before God #2, God #1 is greater and the source of God #2. Since God #1 is greater and the source of God #2, God #1 is the true God in the fullest sense of the idea of always existing and being the source of all things. Since God #2 is of God #1, God #2 would be the same nature as the One He is of/from.

I think that God #1 is the Light and God #2 is the receiver and reflector of that light. God #1 is the source of light, God #2 is not the source of light but God #2 received that light on day one of creation and in that light was life which gives us the firstborn of all creation, the Son of God, the true Light (as a receiver and reflector) that comes into the world. The Father is also the true light (as the source) but does not come into the world like His Son did.

Well, anyways this seems simple to me and please don't let your bias tie you up on this, think on this with an open mind.

[Proclaimer]

Quote (epistemaniac @ Oct. 10 2008,10:51)

Quote (david @ Oct. 09 2008,11:28) Quote The important thing to ask is: is the principle [of the trinity] taught in Scripture, even if the word is not? Nope. wow.. profound…I will definitely have to change my views now…. LOL

Mohammed is not mentioned in scripture either, so it would be right to question the principle as we do with the Trinity.

Not profound but common sense stuff that should be the norm .

[malcolm ferris]

Hi WJ

Quote

Hi MF You say… Quote (malcolm ferris @ Oct. 07 2008,01:11) Omnipotence – Jesus does not have omnipotence of himself – he was given it by GOD Then you say… Quote (malcolm ferris @ Oct. 07 2008,15:57) 1 – I did not say 2 separate beings were omnipotent. That is the point – Jesus can hardly be called omnipotent if he needed to have all authority handed to him… Do you always change talking points in the middle of the debate? Which is it? Does he have Omnipotence because the Father gave it to him or is it that he can't be Omnipotant because all authority was given to him? If he has “all authority” then your statement is a contradiction of terms.

Thanks for pointing out that MISTAKE – I must have been tired when I wrote this, don’t have as much time as I would like to spend on this forum, so forgive me if I make a slight mistake from time to time.
Let me clear up my position regarding this. Firstly here are my comments you referred to…

Quote

Omnipotence – Jesus does not have omnipotence of himself – he was given it by GOD – after he rose from the grave. If it was an intrinsic part of himself he could not have it then not have it then have it again… Also he said himself that his Father was greater than him (Mt 14:28) Omniscience – Jesus did not know everything that the Father did (Mk 13:32) Now as with the previous point – he cannot have omniscience then lose it then gain it again…

I quess my real point here is that omnipotence, omniscience are intrinsic essential attributes of GOD. I believe that they are also unique to HIM.
If we consider omnipotence for instance, it must be possessed by one alone to truly be omnipotence. (imo)
If it is shared then how is it omnipotence? How can more than one be said to be: the Almighty One Alone?
Omnipotent – as I understand it – means all powerful – in other words powerful above all other things.
If two or more (three) are said to be all-powerful  in  a degree above all other things this meaning is lost when the persons in question use “I, me and my” instead of “we, us and our”.
To maintain purity of meaning you would have to say of any of these shared rulers – that they are part of the Almighty.
If any of them (Father, Son or Holy Spirit) were to say they alone were the Almighty – then there is internal conflict, one is now claiming a greater degree of omnipotence than the others.
To be correct they would have to say “we are the Almighty and none else”
However I do not see it stated in this way in scriptures.

[malcolm ferris]

Quote

If God gave Yahshua “all Authority” or “Omnipotence” then that would mean he is “all Powerful” right? Or would you say that Yahshua is not “all Powerful”?

I would say the power is OF GOD. The giving is FROM GOD. The delivery is through Son(s).
Elijah is quoted in scripture as saying ‘Not one drop of rain shall fall until I call for it’.
GOD told Moses to stop crying out to HIM and speak what he wanted done.
Joshua once commanded the sun to stand still for an hour.
All of these are suitable illustrations of how GOD is well pleased to exercise HIS power through HIS creation. (imo)
Jesus himself said if YOU tell this mountain to be moved and do not doubt in your heart – it shall be done.
What was he getting at? That if GOD put it in your heart to be done then YOU could speak and it would happen.
Why? Because you spoke? because of your abilities? Because of your omnipotence?
No, because GOD put the faith in you to do it, and HE is well pleased to do it in and through you.

Quote

If he is not “all Powerful”, then how is it that by him “all things consist”? Col 1:17

how? At the pleasure of GOD who was pleased to dwell in HIM.
If it pleased the Father (GOD – the one and only GOD) that in the Son should dwell all fullness
Then firstly- what is all fullness? Which is an imperfectly formed question and should be WHO is all fullness?
The answer quite simply put is GOD!
So what is being said here is that GOD was pleased to dwell in the Son.
A sentiment HE echoes on Jordan when the tabernacle of HIS Son had now been transformed from a form of GOD (Spirit) to that of flesh. (imo)

Quote

If he is not “all Powerful”, then how could he uphold “all things” by the Word of “his power”? Heb 1:3

HEBREWS 1:1-3
God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
Hath in these last days spoken unto us by [his] Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
Who being the brightness of [his] glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;

Good question
Verse 3:
Jesus is the brightness of HIS (who? GOD’s) glory Jesus is the express image of HIS (who? GOD’s) person
and Jesus upholds all things by the Word of HIS (who?…) POWER.
There is a pattern here or 3 uses of the word HIS all in the context of Jesus and GOD.
Who does this ‘his’ here refer to?
Whose Word of Power was Jesus representing?
His own or that of his Father?
For that matter whose blood are we saved by? GOD’s!
How? Through the sacrifice of the son of God.
Notice verse two tells us that God made the worlds. How?
By this same son who He (God) spoke to men.
As I have said in the past it is the principle of “God in Christ” of “Father in Son” that reveals the mystery of God.
And when that mystery is revealed we see the unchanging God

and that He changes not in the manner in which He deals with men (i.e through son(s) – to the fathers: in prophets – in this day: in Son.)
I do not believe that this Father and Son disclosure of God began on earth,
it began in Heaven but remained a mystery until it was manifest on earth,
and in the world to come will be known to all. (imo)

[malcolm ferris]

Quote

Now logic would tell you or anyone else that if he has this kind of “power” or “authority” then he would have to have “all knowledge”. Col 2:3

Logic is not much of an asset of itself – any knowledge we have can either trip us up or assist us in coming closer to an understanding of Truth. So as you will no doubt agree it must be tempered with the Word and the Spirit. There is not a person on here who could with logic and reason alone explain to satisfaction these things. Even with the help of the Spirit of God and a skillful use of scripture one cannot hope with mere words to satisfactorily explain God.

COLOSSIANS 2:2-3
That their hearts might be comforted, being knit together in love, and unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding, to the acknowledgement of the mystery of God, and of the Father, and of Christ;
In whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.

Col 2:3 says they (all the treasures of Wisdom and Knowledge) are hid or veiled – masked in Christ, they are also revealed via him. The Wisdom and Knowledge is a shared attribute from GOD, we also are able to partake of it in our measure – we have this treasure in earthen vessels – so it is hidden in us also – why? So that the Excellency might be of GOD! – Just as Jesus who only declared His Fathers’ life and will and purpose.
Notice also it is the mystery of GOD: namely of the Father and the Son that is hidden and revealed in Christ who is the mystery of GOD revealed. (imo)

Quote

And if he is able to sustain and uphold all things having all knowledge and power, then he would have to be everywhere. Eph 1:23,

EPHESIANS 1:22-3
And hath put all [things] under his feet, and gave him [to be] the head over all [things] to the church,
Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all.

As I understand it this is saying that Jesus is the head of the church, which is his body.
The church which is his body is then said to be the fullness of him.
By that logic we would have to be the fullness of GOD also – we would be omnipresent also if this verse proves Jesus is omnipresent – for it also says we are his fullness. Like I say logic is not always a friend – the wisdom of man is foolishness to HIM and vice versa.

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (Lightenup @ Oct. 10 2008,08:41)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Oct. 09 2008,04:45) Hi David Quote (david @ Oct. 09 2008,11:52) IT IS FALSE LOGIC AND JUST WRONG THINKING TO ASSUME THAT BECAUSE THERE IS “ONLY ONE TRUE GOD” THAT EVERYONE ELSE THAT IS CALLED GOD IS EITHER A PART OF THAT GODHEAD OR FALSE. Ok, but I have asked you and t8 to present your unambiguous scriptural evidence for this statement without any reply. Here Ill post it again… Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Oct. 07 2008,13:14) Can you tell me where this definition for “theos” comes from? Since t8 believes the same as the JWs here then maybe you can list some scriptures to prove these statements. t8 only list John 10 which can be read as a derogatory statement about evil and wicked kings. Ambiguous. I would like to see how you come to this opinion using scriptures. Thanks! WJ Please spare me of pages of apologetics and just give me some scriptures. Thanks WJ WJ and all, A definition of Theos on a trinitarian site is below (note the part about whatever can in any respect be likened unto God, or resemble him in any way God's representative or viceregent of magistrates and judges ): Strong's Number:  2316 qeo/v Original Word Word Origin  qeo/v   of uncertain affinity Transliterated Word Phonetic Spelling  Theos   theh'-os     Parts of Speech TDNT     a deity, especially (with 3588) the supreme Divinity Definition  a god or goddess, a general name of deities or divinities the Godhead, trinity God the Father, the first person in the trinity Christ, the second person of the trinity Holy Spirit, the third person in the trinity spoken of the only and true God refers to the things of God his counsels, interests, things due to him whatever can in any respect be likened unto God, or resemble him in any way God's representative or viceregent of magistrates and judges Translated Words KJV (1343) – God, 1320; God-ward + (4214), 2; god, 13; godly, 3; misc, 5; NAS (1312) – God, 1267; God's, 27; God-fearing, 1; Lord, 1; divinely, 1; god, 6; godly, 1; gods, 8; LU

Hi LU

So in other words then there are millions of “true gods”.

Do you think the scholar was contradicting himself when he says “theos” means “the only and true God” and then infers that there are other “true Gods”?

No I think the scholar has in mind an example of the word being used like this…

He will speak to the people for you, and it will be as if he were your mouth and “as if you were God to him“. Exo 4:16

Moses was as a “God” to Pharoah, but Moses was not called God here by YHWH.

There are many lords and many gods but there is only “One True God”, all the rest are not gods at all or are false.

Why is it you would take that meaning of the word over the use of the word defining the Trinity? Nevermind, I know the answer.

Now lets see if you can find the word “theos” ascribed to any other being with qualities of God or his attributes with the definite article.

You will find only Yahshua is.

WJ

[Author]

Posts