- This topic is empty.
- Posts
It seems a lot of the trouble on this site comes from poor assumption about what propositions are mutually exclusive.
Many here think that being the Son of God is mutually exclusive with being God. Or that being a prophet, servant, etc. is mutually exclusive with being God.
The problem with this inference is that it imposes limitations on God which are not ascribed to Him in Scripture. Scripture does not assert that God is only one person. It does not prohibit God from becoming man. And it does not prohibit someone who is God and man from serving God and being God.
Tim
Hi Tim2,
So if anything is possible we can use our imaginations to work out the rest.
God is not a man.
Numbers 23:19
God is not a man, that he should lie;…
1Sam 15
29″Also the Glory of Israel will not lie or change His mind; for He is not a man that He should change His mind.”“You yourself argues that the word “Theos” and “Elohim” can mean rulers and judges and angels. Which are no gods at all.
Do you think that Yeshua would be calling men gods and putting them in the same class as the Father and Yeshua?“
In the God (Elohim) thread, WJ said the above.
Just as human fathers can be called “father,” so is Jehovah. It doesnt' mean that human fathers are Jehovah.
Yet, when we use this same logic with the word “god,” somehow false reasoning appears. The human judges, angels, etc were powerful ones, and hence could rightly be called gods, yet that term is not exlusive to Jehovah, obviously.Even though he is the only true God, because he is above all in power and might, there are others that are relatively powerful.
I too have found your arguement used, but in reverse, I think. Just because two are called by the same word “god” or “lord” or “father” or whatever, does not mean they are the same!
Or at least, this is what the reverse of your argument would seem to indicate I believe.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
