- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 04 2009,12:09) Hi TT,
We should not side with the opinions of his enemies.
So the apostle John is now an enemy of Christ. You anti-trinitarians stop at nothing.thinker
Quote (thethinker @ June 04 2009,03:56)
Paladin said:Quote Sonship actually establishes order of geneology, not equality. (thinker) Not in Jewish thought. The Son was seated at the right hand of the Father which was a position of equality in Hebrew culture. Christ is the Son of God BY NAME ONLY and not by generation.
I think you are confusing “logos” and “Jesus Christ.” His NAME was Jesus, who was called Christ. He was GIVEN A NAME which is “the logos of God.”
He was “logos of God” in name only, and you quibble that that is who he is. He was the son of God and you quibble that it was just a name.
(thinker)
Quote Jesus EARNED the name “Son of God.” (P) Scripture please.
Quote (thinker) Furthermore, Christ preceded David though he was the son of David, I am the ROOT and offspring of David (Rev. 22:16)
(P) Evidently you don';t know what “root” means. It is a reference to a shoot, or similar to a graft from one plant to another; it has nothing to do with being an ancester. It is a reference to offspring.
Quote (thinker) You are imposing your Western ideas into the Hebrew culture. If Sonship simply referred to “order of geneaology” as you say then the Jews would not have accused Jesus of blasphemy when he claimed He was the Son of God. The Jews would have tried to kill Jesus no matter what he said. They were already trying to kill him before he said “my Father works…”
Do you actuallyread what you post?
Paladin………Amen brother, you have presented it right brother. And remember Jesus said (no) MAN has see GOD at (ANY) time. If he, a SON of MAN made that statement, and they all could see him, then He could not be a GOD, by his own words. IMO
peace and love to you and yours………………..gene
Quote (thethinker @ June 04 2009,12:33) Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 04 2009,12:09) Hi TT,
We should not side with the opinions of his enemies.
So the apostle John is now an enemy of Christ. You anti-trinitarians stop at nothing.thinker
Hi tt,
Do show us how John showed he shared their opinion.Hi and welcome P,
Please show us how root means the same as what grows from it like a branch.
Isaiah 11:1
And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots:Quote (thethinker @ June 04 2009,12:33) Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 04 2009,12:09) Hi TT,
We should not side with the opinions of his enemies.
So the apostle John is now an enemy of Christ. You anti-trinitarians stop at nothing.thinker
Hi thethinker:The Apostle John was writing what transpired between the Pharisees and Jesus, not making a statement that he thought that Jesus was saying that he was equal with God.
And the way that I am understanding this, is that the Pharisees thought that he was claiming equality with God because Jesus stated that he was working on the Sabbath because His Father was working on the Sabbath.
As Paladin stated, the Pharisees had also claimed that God was their Father, and so, that did not make them equal with God and neither did it or does it make “The Only Begotten Son of God” equal with God.
He is “equal with God” as His representative to humanity, but Jesus was and is submitted to God in all that he does, even in his position as head of the church.
Quote 1Cr 11:3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman [is] the man; and the head of Christ [is] God. “THE HEAD OF CHRIST IS GOD”
Quote Eph 4:6 ONE GOD and Father of all, WHO [is] ABOVE, ALL(including Jesus) and through all, and in you all. Thinker, how much plainer can it get. There is not such thing as “God in three persons”. There is “Only One God”.
Love in Christ,
Martythethinker said:
Quote Jesus EARNED the name “Son of God.” Paladin replied:
Quote Scripture please. thethinker supplies Scriptures,
Hebrews 1:3-5:
Quote After He had purged our sins, sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, having become so much better than the angels, as he has by inheritance OBTAINED a more excellent name than they. For to which of the angels did he ever say: “You are my Son, TODAY I have begotten you”
Acts 13:33:
Quote God has fulfilled this for us their children, in that He raised up Jesus. As it is also written in the second Psalm: “You are my Son, TODAY I have begotten you
There it is! Hebrews 1 says that Jesus “obtained” the name “begotten Son” AFTER He had purged our sins. And Peter says that Jesus was “begotten” as Son when God raised him up from the dead. See also Hebrews chaps 4-5 where it says that Jesus became both Son and High priest when He passed through the heavens.
Paladin said:
Quote Evidently you don';t know what “root” means. It is a reference to a shoot, or similar to a graft from one plant to another; it has nothing to do with being an ancester. It is a reference to offspring. The word “root” means “source” (Rom. 11:18). Jesus is both the source and offspring of David.
thinker
Marty said:
Quote The Apostle John was writing what transpired between the Pharisees and Jesus, not making a statement that he thought that Jesus was saying that he was equal with God. And the way that I am understanding this, is that the Pharisees thought that he was claiming equality with God because Jesus stated that he was working on the Sabbath because His Father was working on the Sabbath.
Marty,
You forget that John was a Jew also. To the Jew the claim to be the Son of God was blasphemous,Quote The Jews answered him [Pilate], “We have a law, and according to our law He ought to die, because He made Himself the Son of God” (John 19:7) John did NOT say that the Jews “thought” that Jesus made Himself equal with God because His Father was working on the sabbath. It is John Himself who said that Jesus made Himself equal with God because He called God His own Father,
Quote Therefore, the Jews sought all the more to kill Him, because He not only broke the sabbath, but also said that God was His own Father, making Himself equal with God (5:18) It's as clear as a bell!
thinker
Hi TT,
You sayActs 13:33:
Quote
God has fulfilled this for us their children, in that He raised up Jesus. As it is also written in the second Psalm:“You are my Son, TODAY I have begotten you
There it is! Hebrews 1 says that Jesus “obtained” the name “begotten Son” AFTER He had purged our sins. And Peter says that Jesus was “begotten” as Son when God raised him up from the dead. See also Hebrews chaps 4-5 where it says that Jesus became both Son and High priest when He passed through the heavens.”
You add too much presumption.
Quote (Guest @ June 03 2009,03:49) Quote (Tim Kraft @ June 02 2009,22:25) To all a thought: The word Ocean describes a huge body of water with a definite molecular makeup. One drop of the Ocean has the complete makeup as the entire Ocean. There are trillions of drops of the Ocean yet the drops and the Ocean are ONE together. I believe there is ONE God, ONE Spirit, trillions of aspects of the ONE! All from ONE! I believe ONE all encompassing Spirit could not experience itself for there was no reflection of itself to experience. One must become two to experience or know ONE. God chose to dwell in mankind for the ability to experience himself seemingly separate from himself. By Adam chosing to experience Evil this was accomplished. There was no evil in Truth but mankind chose to believe there was, therby creating the allusion of evil. There never was sin in Gods eyes. Man created the idea of sin, being a mistake or error that brought on punishment. Adam never sinned. There was no law. God did warn Adam that if he chose to experience evil it would be unto death. Yet no hell or punishment or sin for the choice. That is all man created religion. God never left man, man fell away from God by creating his own sins! Jesus came with the Truth to take away sin. Blessings to all, TK
I conclude from your post you do not believe God inspired the bible to be written. The concept of “sin” is found throughout the scripture, and if it did not come from God it must have come from amn, which is what you suggest. If you do not believe in the teachings of the scripture, you do not believe in God. Do I understand correctly that this is true?
If in the beginning there was God! We will use this term to describe the indescribable. God is all that was, all that is and all that ever will be. From this energy field of all that is came forth all that is. We came from God. Actually God is within us and without us and in-between us. God is Spirit, Life,Air, Love,Light et.al.! There is no way to separate man from God in Truth. Yet if a man with free will choice chooses to believe a lie or untruth that said he was apart from God or in sin then in his mind he would be separated from God. Not in Truth, because God is everwhere where would he go? But, as a man believeth in his heart, so he is. As near as I can tell, God and man have had the exact same relationship from the beginning. Man moved away from God believing in sin or error. This was man created religion. The more ideas that separated man from union with God the further from God we fell. This is the creation of the Religious order that had lost its way to God. The union was broken in their thoughts. The lost sheep needing a guide or shepherd to get back to union with God. They were drunk with error/sin. The created doctrines, rituals,sacrifices,tithes etc. over the years trying to mend or repair or appease God. They needed a saviour from their error/sin.Jesus was the end of that world order. Jesus came, taught them to wash away the old religion, take on the Gospel which is the original God dwelling in each person.The Kindoom of God is within.(Luke 17:21) Always was always will be. Now we are the Church which is his body, we are the Temple, we have been made Kings and Priests, we are cleansed by the washing of the word of God from Jesus. Jesus prayed that we would accept ONENESS with the Father,Son,& whole Spirit. If we partake of this truth from Jesus is raises up our minds and hearts unto union with God. This is my Truth so far it grows daily. Blessing and peace to you. TKQuote (Nick Hassan @ June 04 2009,13:44) Hi and welcome P,
Please show us how root means the same as what grows from it like a branch.Isaiah 11:1
And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots:Quote (P)
(P) Evidently you don';t know what “root” means. It is a reference to a shoot, or similar to a graft from one plant to another; it has nothing to do with being an ancester. It is a reference to offspring.(NickH)
Please show us how root means the same as what grows from it like a branch.Well, how about
Quote Isaiah 11:1
And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots:If you don't understand Isaiah's comment, I can't help you.
Thank you for the welcome.
Quote (thethinker @ June 04 2009,20:22)
thethinker said:Quote Jesus EARNED the name “Son of God.” Paladin replied:
Quote Scripture please. thethinker supplies Scriptures,
Hebrews 1:3-5:
Quote After He had purged our sins, sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, having become so much better than the angels, as he has by inheritance OBTAINED a more excellent name than they. For to which of the angels did he ever say: “You are my Son, TODAY I have begotten you”
Acts 13:33:
Quote God has fulfilled this for us their children, in that He raised up Jesus. As it is also written in the second Psalm: “You are my Son, TODAY I have begotten you
There it is! Hebrews 1 says that Jesus “obtained” the name “begotten Son” AFTER He had purged our sins. And Peter says that Jesus was “begotten” as Son when God raised him up from the dead. See also Hebrews chaps 4-5 where it says that Jesus became both Son and High priest when He passed through the heavens.[/quote]
I think we may be closer on this one than previous posts, The problem remains, if you walk through the desert and stumble upon a sack of Gold, and pick it up, you have “obtained” it, but you have not “earned” it.
Jesus “obtained” alright, but not by earning it. He obtained it by “inheritance.” People who obtain something by inheritance, do not “earn” it, they “inherit” it. Their Father or Mother
“earned” it.In this particular case, it was already part of the logos of God, the blueprint by which God intended to save mankind.
God gave it to Jesus upon completion of his ministry. While I agree with you, what Jesus accomplished would have
“earned” him prestigous awards among men, with God, he only did what he was sent to do, and inherited it.Paladin said:
Quote Evidently you don't know what “root” means. It is a reference to a shoot, or similar to a graft from one plant to another; it has nothing to do with being an ancester. It is a reference to offspring. (thinker) The word “root” means “source” (Rom. 11:18). Jesus is both the source and offspring of David.
(P) Romans 11:18 Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee.
Strong's 4491 rhiza
Meaning: 1) a root 2) that which like a root springs from a root, a sprout, shoot 3) metaph. offspring, progenyPaladin said:
Quote I think we may be closer on this one than previous posts, The problem remains, if you walk through the desert and stumble upon a sack of Gold, and pick it up, you have “obtained” it, but you have not “earned” it. Jesus “obtained” alright, but not by earning it. He obtained it by “inheritance.” People who obtain something by inheritance, do not “earn” it, they “inherit” it. Their Father or Mother
“earned” it.What! Jesus “stumbled” upon His name like a sack of gold? Paul clearly contradicts you,
Quote And being found in fashion as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. Therefore, God also has highly exalted Him and given Him a name that is above every name…. (Philippians 2:8-9) Paul clearly said that God rewarded Jesus' obedience with a name that is “above every name.” According to Hebrews 1:1-8 that name is “begotten Son”, “firstborn” and “God.” And Hebrews 5:5-10 says that He obtained His name as “high priest” and “begotten Son” BY LEARNING OBEDIENCE THROUGH SUFFERING.
But you expect us to believe that He “stumbled” upon His name like a man would stumble upon a bag of gold. What a grotesque misrepresentation of God's truth!
thinker
Quote (thethinker @ June 05 2009,02:50)
Paladin said:Quote I think we may be closer on this one than previous posts, The problem remains, if you walk through the desert and stumble upon a sack of Gold, and pick it up, you have “obtained” it, but you have not “earned” it. Jesus “obtained” alright, but not by earning it. He obtained it by “inheritance.” People who obtain something by inheritance, do not “earn” it, they “inherit” it. Their Father or Mother
“earned” it.(thinker) What! Jesus “stumbled” upon His name like a sack of gold? Paul clearly contradicts you,
Are yoou unable to read? Or is it that you just have poor comprehension? I said nothing about Jesus stumbling upon his name. If this is the way you respond to a post, you will hear no more from me.
Quote (Paladin @ June 04 2009,23:43) Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 04 2009,13:44) Hi and welcome P,
Please show us how root means the same as what grows from it like a branch.Isaiah 11:1
And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots:Quote (P)
(P) Evidently you don';t know what “root” means. It is a reference to a shoot, or similar to a graft from one plant to another; it has nothing to do with being an ancester. It is a reference to offspring.(NickH)
Please show us how root means the same as what grows from it like a branch.Well, how about
Quote Isaiah 11:1
And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots:If you don't understand Isaiah's comment, I can't help you.
Thank you for the welcome.
Paladin,
There you go with your “pretexting” again. The Greek word for “root” in Revelation is NOT equivalent to the term in Isaiah 11. The Greek word for “root” means SOURCE.Quote RHIZA of cause, origin, source….(Vine's Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words, p., 304) When Jesus said that He was the “root” and offspring of David He meant that He was the SOURCE and offspring of David,
Quote Therefore, David himself calls Him [Christ] 'Lord'; how is He then his [David's] son? (Mark 12:37) Paladin's assumes that the Hebrew word for “root” in Isaiah is equivalent to Christ's use of the Greek word in the Revelation. Paladin's assumption is not valid.
thinker
Paladin said:
Quote Are yoou unable to read? Or is it that you just have poor comprehension? I said nothing about Jesus stumbling upon his name. If this is the way you respond to a post, you will hear no more from me. I am able to read fine. You are not able to own up to what you said. You used “stumbling on a bag of gold” as an analogy. Do you think people are stupid here?
thinker
Quote (Paladin @ June 04 2009,23:43) Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 04 2009,13:44) Hi and welcome P,
Please show us how root means the same as what grows from it like a branch.Isaiah 11:1
And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots:Quote (P)
(P) Evidently you don';t know what “root” means. It is a reference to a shoot, or similar to a graft from one plant to another; it has nothing to do with being an ancester. It is a reference to offspring.(NickH)
Please show us how root means the same as what grows from it like a branch.Well, how about
Quote Isaiah 11:1
And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots:If you don't understand Isaiah's comment, I can't help you.
Thank you for the welcome.
Hi P,
So a rod and a branch, [Jesus] grows from that root.
The root precedes it.What else needs understanding?
Quote (thethinker @ June 05 2009,05:26) Quote (thinker)
Paladin,
There you go with your “pretexting” again. The Greek word for “root” in Revelation is NOT equivalent to the term in Isaiah 11. The Greek word for “root” means SOURCE.RHIZA of cause, origin, source….(Vine's Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words, p., 304)
When Jesus said that He was the “root” and offspring of David He meant that He was the SOURCE and offspring of David,
Quote Therefore, David himself calls Him [Christ] 'Lord'; how is He then his [David's] son? (Mark 12:37) Paladin's assumes that the Hebrew word for “root” in Isaiah is equivalent to Christ's use of the Greek word in the Revelation. Paladin's assumption is not valid.
thinker
Paladin assumes no such thing. Isaiah 11:1 is not the only place Isaiah addresses the issue of the root of Jesse.If Jesus is the source of Jesse, as thinker suggests, then David would be the prophesied “branch” which is the Messiah to come. David was never the messiah. Isiah does not say that Jesse will grow from the root, but the root will grow, or “come forth from” which means David, because it was David who came forth from Jesse. And Jesus the Messiah,. is the promised branch. [logic 101?]
Isaiah 11:1 And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his [rizees = n gen.fem.s] roots: [possessive case]
As for thinker's statement
Quote
Paladin's assumes that the Hebrew word for “root” in Isaiah is equivalent to Christ's use of the Greek word in the Revelation. Paladin's assumption is not valid.Paladin assumes no such thing, because Paladin is not working with the Hebrew but the Greek, and the word is the same; the form of the word is the same; the case of the word is the same in Isaiah as is found in revelation and in Romans, both of which reference the Isaiah 11:10 version, not 11:1. It should be understood from 11:1, but since it is not, then 11:10 certainly should clear up any doubts. And it should also be clear that Paladin “assumed” nothing from the Hebrew, but proved his case from the Greek.
Isaiah 11:10 And in that day there shall be a [riza n nom.fem.s] root of Jesse, which shall stand for an ensign of the people; to it shall the Gentiles seek: and his rest shall be glorious.[Nominative case]
Romans 15:12 And again, Esaias saith, There shall be a [riza n-nom.fem.-s] root of Jesse, and he that shall rise to reign over the Gentiles; in him shall the Gentiles trust.[nominative case]
Revelation 5:5 And one of the elders saith unto me, Weep not: behold, the Lion of the tribe of Juda, the [riza n-nom.fem.-s ] Root of David, hath prevailed to open the book, and to loose the seven seals thereof.[Nominative case]
Revelation 22:16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the [riza n-nom.fem.-s ] root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.[Nominative case]
Strong's 4491 riza
Meaning: 1) a root 2) that which like a root springs from a root, a sprout, shoot 3) metaph. offspring, progenyPaladin said:
Quote If Jesus is the source of Jesse, as thinker suggests, then David would be the prophesied “branch” which is the Messiah to come. David was never the messiah. Isiah does not say that Jesse will grow from the root, but the root will grow, or “come forth from” which means David, because it was David who came forth from Jesse. And Jesus the Messiah,. is the promised branch. [logic 101?] Paladin,
Isaiah 11 and what Jesus said in Revelation 22 are not a reference to the same thing. In Isaiah the idea is that the Messiah would be the “root-branch” that grows from a decayed tree. The ancient family of David had fallen into decay and Christ was the “root-branch” who would restore the family. Your treatment of the Hebrew word sheresh is lacking because it presents Christ as branch alone.Christ's statement in Revelation 22 has nothing to do with Christ as a “root-branch” but only as “root.” Note the grammmatical construction below,
Ἐγὼ Ἰησοῦς ἔπεμψα τὸν ἄγγελόν μου μαρτυρῆσαι ὑμῖν ταῦτα ἐπὶ ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις. ἐγώ εἰμι ἡ ῥίζα καὶ τὸ γένος Δαυίδ, ὁ ἀστὴρ ὁ λαμπρὸς ὁ πρωϊνός.
I put the two articles in bold. Article noun kai + article noun indicates that the nouns “root” and “offspring” are not the same.
–article noun kai + article noun means that the two nouns are NOT the same.
–article noun kai + noun means that they are the same.
Greek 101
In other words, Christ did NOT say that He was the “root-branch” as it is said of Him in Isaiah 11. In Revelation He said that He was the ORIGIN as well as the offspring of David. I give you Vine's Expository Dictionary again. It says that “ridza” means cause, origin, source (p. 304).
You failed to show the idea of Christ as “root-branch” in Isaiah 11. You represented Him as branch alone. You failed also to distinguish that Isaiah 11 and Revelation 22 are speaking about two different things. And you failed to answer the verse I gave from Mark 12:37,
Quote Therefore, David Himself calls Him Lord; how is He then his son? If David knew the Messiah as his “Lord” then the Messiah was pre-existent.
Logic 101
thinker
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
