- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 26 2013,09:49) According to the words in the quote box, “The Epistle of Ignatius to the Romans”, which do you think is the most correct answer: #1 Jesus is NOT identified as our God in any way.
#2 ONLY Jesus IS identified as our God.
#3 ONLY the Father is identified as our God.
#4 The Father IS identified as our God, the Son IS identified as our God.
I don't have the Greek text to scrutinise the translation, but if this is an accurate translation, then Ignatius can only be saying that The Father is overall Theos and Jesus is our theos or next in authority over us.Theos is not exclusive to the Father, but is used to describe God, Jesus, his counsels, magistrates, judges, angels, and Satan.
Thus a judge could be described in Greek as being theos over us. But Jesus could be described as our theos rather than theos over us.
Trying to make Theos mean YHWH is not going to work in all cases. Granted it works in most in scripture, because Theos is predominately used to describe the Father and negatively as false gods. In some cases, we see it applied to Jesus, counsels, magistrates, judges, angels, and Satan. Knowing this, no amount of attempting to get around this is going to make me forget this.
I should also add that many scriptures that Trintarians use as proof verses are controversial, in that they can say something else if you move the comma or they were added into scripture by man. So it would not surprise me if the same bias showed up in the translations of these other writings.
But I don't have the time to scrutinise everything, but suffice to say that scripture is clear that the only true God is the Father and his son is Jesus. We see this time and time again even in the writings of these early church fathers, so I am guessing that you need to interpret their views with this in mind. In other words, let the Bible be its own dictionary and let their writings interpret their writings.
So if they make an absolute statement and then appear to contradict it in the next sentence, it is more likely that they are using theos in another legitimate way, and not in the Trinitarian way.
Quote (abe @ Mar. 24 2013,21:17) God has sent forth the Spirit of His SON into our hearts, crying,”Abba! Father!” You HAVE to see now.
Abe,I said I don't believe Jesus has HIS OWN Holy Spirit thing going on.
Please explain to me how you jump from God GIVING His Son the Spirit without measure to the spirit of Christ actually BEING the Holy Spirit of God.
I'm not seeing any such link in the scripture you quoted – nor in any other scripture.
Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 24 2013,21:03) Mike,
you asked:Quote Do you agree that John 1:1 speaks of TWO gods, one of whom was with the other? YES or NO?
Yes…………Quote Do you agree that the theos in part b is “the uncreated cause of all things”? YES or NO? Both theos are together the uncreated cause of all things.
Okay, so you, me, and Origen all agree that 1:1 is speaking about TWO gods, one of whom was with the other.But you disagree with me and Origen that the god with the article, in part b, is the uncreated cause of all things.
(4) Now there are many who are sincerely concerned about religion, and who fall here into great perplexity. They are afraid that they may be proclaiming two theos, and their fear drives them into doctrines which are false and wicked.
Since you agree with me that there are indeed TWO gods being discussed in 1:1, you are obviously not one of those who is so afraid that he bends over backwards to “correct” the Bible when it speaks of other gods. This is a good thing.
But do you agree with Origen's point above………. that many people ARE driven to false doctrines, simply because of their fear of accepting the fact that John wrote about TWO gods in 1:1, and possibly 1:18?
Quote (2besee @ Mar. 24 2013,21:28) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Mar. 25 2013,13:03) As for your comment, I don't think it takes any amount of “scholary/Greek studies” to know that “the one God” cannot possibly be with “the one God”. I think a kindergarten education should suffice to know this.
'There is ONE GOD, and one Mediator between God and Man, the MAN, Christ Jesus'.That is one God.
So then Jesus is NOT a god after all? Hmmm……………. But didn't you recently tell t8 that Jesus WAS a god – just not “THE God”?It seems you're okay accepting the scriptural fact that Jesus IS called a god in scriptures……….. UNTIL it threatens your doctrine. Once your doctrine is threatened by this fact of scripture, you're all of a sudden back to claiming that there is LITERALLY only ONE god.
Perhaps you should make up your mind and STICK WITH IT. (Oh, and when you DO make up your mind, be sure that you're conclusion aligns with the scriptures – whether or not it threatens your doctrine.)
Quote (t8 @ Mar. 24 2013,21:34) The most logical thing to point out here is if Ignatius believes that the Father is God and Jesus is his son as attested in the second quoted paragraph, then Ignatius is obviously not saying that Jesus is God in the sense that I think you are hoping he is saying it, because if that were the case, he would be contradicting himself making him a double-minded man who is unstable in his way. Thus not an authority in scriptural understanding and not to be taken as an authority of any kind. But I am pretty certain that he is using the word theos in ways that myself and Mike have been explaining to you, and not in a way that undermines his own teaching that he clearly spells out in the second paragraph you quoted.
We already know that theos refers to God, Jesus, Council containing men, angels, and even Satan. And if he was writing in Greek, then it appears that this follows the normal usage of theos. Thus if Jesus can say, “ye are theos”, then Ignatius can say, “Jesus is theos”. Either example is certainly not saying that Jesus is the Most High God YHWH or that any man is, but only a Trinitarian or some variation such as a Binitarian would say that Jesus is the Almighty God (YHWH) when reading such verses.
Well put, t8.Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 24 2013,21:47) Ignatius in other writings calls the Son, the eternal Word. Do you believe that the Son was the eternal Word, t8?
Did he say Jesus IS the eternal Word……… or HAS BEEN the eternal Word from eternity?Because I believe what Paul wrote: Since Jesus died and was raised, he cannot die again. His God has given him eternal life, like He will give it to many of us. So Jesus is NOW “the eternal Word of God”.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Mar. 25 2013,18:22) Quote (abe @ Mar. 24 2013,21:17) God has sent forth the Spirit of His SON into our hearts, crying,”Abba! Father!” You HAVE to see now.
Abe,I said I don't believe Jesus has HIS OWN Holy Spirit thing going on.
Please explain to me how you jump from God GIVING His Son the Spirit without measure to the spirit of Christ actually BEING the Holy Spirit of God.
I'm not seeing any such link in the scripture you quoted – nor in any other scripture.
Hi Mike,Jn.14:17 [Even] the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.
18I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.
Peace brother.
Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 24 2013,21:43) Did you miss this:
“Jesus Christ, our God and Saviour;”
It seems to me that t8 already addressed that in the post I quoted 2 posts above this one.Yes, in Biblical language, Jesus is a god. Just like angels and certain men are gods in scripture.
And yes, we accept Jesus as the savior God sent into the world.
So tell me once again how those words from Ignatius say Jesus is the MOST HIGH God…………
Quote (abe @ Mar. 25 2013,20:52) 18I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.
Yes Abe,Jesus will not only ask that the Father send the Spirit as a helper, but he will also come to us whenever two or more are gathered in his name.
He will never desert those who maintain the word of his God and the testimony that he himself brought to us on earth.
So the Spirit will be sent to help us, and Jesus, also via spirit, will not leave us as orphans, but will be with us.
Are you trying to make some connection that Jesus IS the Holy Spirit that he said he'd SEND? If so, I'm sure not seeing it.
Quote (t8 @ Mar. 24 2013,22:09) Kathi and Mike, When Jesus said about Judas, “one of you is devil”, was he saying:
1) That Judas was the Devil (Satan).
2) That Judas was a devil (excluding Satan)
3) That Judas had the characteristics or nature of the Devil
4) Another explanationWhat is your choice?
#2 and #3, since they both go hand in hand.But in the English translation of that verse, we have to ADD an article – just like with John 1:1. So we can ADD the definite article, making Jesus say that one of them was THE Devil…………. or we can ADD the indefinite article, making Jesus say that one of them was A devil.
How do most English translations render it?
It's important to note that this is the same dilemma we have when translating John 1:1 to English. One way or the other, we in English have to ADD an article. Most English translations ADD the definite article, making it say that THE god was with THE god.
A few better translations have correctly added the indefinite article “a”, instead of the definite article “the”.
Quote (t8 @ Mar. 25 2013,03:39) Case closed because you ignore a huge glaring plank and concentrate on a speck that even if it was written as Jesus only is not even proof that Jesus is the Most High God.
Amen to that! Unfortunately, Kathi also does the same thing with the scriptures. In her never-ending search for little specks of scripture that she can twist into saying Jesus is God Almighty, she completely overlooks or ignores the huge glaring plank that CLEARLY and UNEQUIVICALLY declares Jesus to be the Son, Servant, Prophet, Lamb, Messiah, Priest, Mediator and Spokesman OF the Most High God.Quote (mikeboll64 @ Mar. 26 2013,16:47) Quote (t8 @ Mar. 24 2013,21:34) The most logical thing to point out here is if Ignatius believes that the Father is God and Jesus is his son as attested in the second quoted paragraph, then Ignatius is obviously not saying that Jesus is God in the sense that I think you are hoping he is saying it, because if that were the case, he would be contradicting himself making him a double-minded man who is unstable in his way. Thus not an authority in scriptural understanding and not to be taken as an authority of any kind. But I am pretty certain that he is using the word theos in ways that myself and Mike have been explaining to you, and not in a way that undermines his own teaching that he clearly spells out in the second paragraph you quoted.
We already know that theos refers to God, Jesus, Council containing men, angels, and even Satan. And if he was writing in Greek, then it appears that this follows the normal usage of theos. Thus if Jesus can say, “ye are theos”, then Ignatius can say, “Jesus is theos”. Either example is certainly not saying that Jesus is the Most High God YHWH or that any man is, but only a Trinitarian or some variation such as a Binitarian would say that Jesus is the Almighty God (YHWH) when reading such verses.
Well put, t8.
ChurYes Mike. It amazes me when discussing with people who ignore the plank and find a speck and expect us to ignore the plank too. Kathi is not the only one. Stu the Atheist is the same.
Quote (t8 @ Mar. 25 2013,17:50) Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 26 2013,09:49) According to the words in the quote box, “The Epistle of Ignatius to the Romans”, which do you think is the most correct answer: #1 Jesus is NOT identified as our God in any way.
#2 ONLY Jesus IS identified as our God.
#3 ONLY the Father is identified as our God.
#4 The Father IS identified as our God, the Son IS identified as our God.
I don't have the Greek text to scrutinise the translation, but if this is an accurate translation, then Ignatius can only be saying that The Father is overall Theos and Jesus is our theos or next in authority over us.Theos is not exclusive to the Father, but is used to describe God, Jesus, his counsels, magistrates, judges, angels, and Satan.
Thus a judge could be described in Greek as being theos over us. But Jesus could be described as our theos rather than theos over us.
Trying to make Theos mean YHWH is not going to work in all cases. Granted it works in most in scripture, because Theos is predominately used to describe the Father and negatively as false gods. In some cases, we see it applied to Jesus, counsels, magistrates, judges, angels, and Satan. Knowing this, no amount of attempting to get around this is going to make me forget this.
t8,
I see that you have commentary about my post but you did not make a specific choice. Which choice is most correct?
#1
#2
#3
#4Quote (mikeboll64 @ Mar. 25 2013,22:19) Quote (t8 @ Mar. 25 2013,03:39) Case closed because you ignore a huge glaring plank and concentrate on a speck that even if it was written as Jesus only is not even proof that Jesus is the Most High God.
Amen to that! Unfortunately, Kathi also does the same thing with the scriptures. In her never-ending search for little specks of scripture that she can twist into saying Jesus is God Almighty, she completely overlooks or ignores the huge glaring plank that CLEARLY and UNEQUIVICALLY declares Jesus to be the Son, Servant, Prophet, Lamb, Messiah, Priest, Mediator and Spokesman OF the Most High God.
This should get you a tile. All sorts of lies here.Reader please note:
This comment is so full of lies it is awful and the moderator is so breaking the HN rules and the other moderator agrees with him. Both moderators are corrupt on HN. Both misrepresent me terribly and get away with it because they are moderators and don't tile themselves. Abuse of power!!Moderators, if you disagree with me, that Mike's statement about me is full of lies, then prove it to be true. Have I EVER SAID that Jesus is not the Son, Servant, Prophet, Lamb, Messiah, Priest, Mediator and Spokesman of the most high God? No I haven't. I fully accept all of that.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Mar. 25 2013,21:33) Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 24 2013,21:03) Mike,
you asked:Quote Do you agree that John 1:1 speaks of TWO gods, one of whom was with the other? YES or NO?
Yes…………Quote Do you agree that the theos in part b is “the uncreated cause of all things”? YES or NO? Both theos are together the uncreated cause of all things.
Okay, so you, me, and Origen all agree that 1:1 is speaking about TWO gods, one of whom was with the other.But you disagree with me and Origen that the god with the article, in part b, is the uncreated cause of all things.
(4) Now there are many who are sincerely concerned about religion, and who fall here into great perplexity. They are afraid that they may be proclaiming two theos, and their fear drives them into doctrines which are false and wicked.
Since you agree with me that there are indeed TWO gods being discussed in 1:1, you are obviously not one of those who is so afraid that he bends over backwards to “correct” the Bible when it speaks of other gods. This is a good thing.
But do you agree with Origen's point above………. that many people ARE driven to false doctrines, simply because of their fear of accepting the fact that John wrote about TWO gods in 1:1, and possibly 1:18?
I can't speak for others Mike.Are you afraid of admitting that one of those two gods gave his name to the other?
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Mar. 25 2013,21:51) Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 24 2013,21:47) Ignatius in other writings calls the Son, the eternal Word. Do you believe that the Son was the eternal Word, t8?
Did he say Jesus IS the eternal Word……… or HAS BEEN the eternal Word from eternity?Because I believe what Paul wrote: Since Jesus died and was raised, he cannot die again. His God has given him eternal life, like He will give it to many of us. So Jesus is NOW “the eternal Word of God”.
Quote Chapter VIII.—Caution against false doctrines. Be not deceived with strange doctrines, nor with old fables, which are unprofitable. For if we still live according to the Jewish law, we acknowledge that we have not received grace. For the divinest prophets lived according to Christ Jesus. On this account also they were persecuted, being inspired by His grace to fully convince the unbelieving that there is one God, who has manifested Himself by Jesus Christ His Son, who is His eternal Word, not proceeding forth from silence,676 and who in all things pleased Him that sent Him.
Be not deceived with strange doctrines, “nor give heed to fables and endless genealogies,”677 and things in which the Jews make their boast. “Old things are passed away: behold, all things have become new.”678 For if we still live according to the Jewish law, and the circumcision of the flesh, we deny that we have received grace. For the divinest prophets lived according to Jesus Christ. On this account also they were persecuted, being inspired by grace to fully convince the unbelieving that there is one God, the Almighty, who has manifested Himself by Jesus Christ His Son, who is His Word, not spoken, but essential. For He is not the voice of an articulate utterance, but a substance begotten by divine power, who has in all things pleased Him that sent Him.679
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Mar. 26 2013,15:46) Quote (2besee @ Mar. 24 2013,21:28) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Mar. 25 2013,13:03) As for your comment, I don't think it takes any amount of “scholary/Greek studies” to know that “the one God” cannot possibly be with “the one God”. I think a kindergarten education should suffice to know this.
'There is ONE GOD, and one Mediator between God and Man, the MAN, Christ Jesus'.That is one God.
So then Jesus is NOT a god after all? Hmmm……………. But didn't you recently tell t8 that Jesus WAS a god – just not “THE God”?It seems you're okay accepting the scriptural fact that Jesus IS called a god in scriptures……….. UNTIL it threatens your doctrine. Once your doctrine is threatened by this fact of scripture, you're all of a sudden back to claiming that there is LITERALLY only ONE god.
Perhaps you should make up your mind and STICK WITH IT. (Oh, and when you DO make up your mind, be sure that you're conclusion aligns with the scriptures – whether or not it threatens your doctrine.)
Mike..
I know who my Father is, and i know that my Father is ONE. I do not go to the Father and picture 'two Fathers' or 'two Gods'. Do you??
I know that others are also called 'gods'.
You are using the fact that others are called 'gods' to try and prove that John 1:1 is supposedly talking about TWO GODS when I know through the Holy Spirit of truth as was shown to me and to countless others that John 1:1 is talking about the one God. I trust what what shown to me. You can believe what you like.
The confusion is with you!!!
I cannot be in two threads talking about the same thing, will leave you to it. maybe see you on the other thread.
Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 25 2013,21:48) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Mar. 25 2013,22:19) Quote (t8 @ Mar. 25 2013,03:39) Case closed because you ignore a huge glaring plank and concentrate on a speck that even if it was written as Jesus only is not even proof that Jesus is the Most High God.
Amen to that! Unfortunately, Kathi also does the same thing with the scriptures. In her never-ending search for little specks of scripture that she can twist into saying Jesus is God Almighty, she completely overlooks or ignores the huge glaring plank that CLEARLY and UNEQUIVICALLY declares Jesus to be the Son, Servant, Prophet, Lamb, Messiah, Priest, Mediator and Spokesman OF the Most High God.
This should get you a tile. All sorts of lies here.Reader please note:
This comment is so full of lies it is awful and the moderator is so breaking the HN rules and the other moderator agrees with him. Both moderators are corrupt on HN. Both misrepresent me terribly and get away with it because they are moderators and don't tile themselves. Abuse of power!!Moderators, if you disagree with me, that Mike's statement about me is full of lies, then prove it to be true. Have I EVER SAID that Jesus is not the Son, Servant, Prophet, Lamb, Messiah, Priest, Mediator and Spokesman of the most high God? No I haven't. I fully accept all of that.
Sorry, let me correct my statement:In her never-ending search for little specks of scripture that she can twist into saying Jesus is God Almighty, she completely overlooks or ignoresTHE IMPLICATIONS OF the huge glaring plank that CLEARLY and UNEQUIVICALLY declares Jesus to be the Son, Servant, Prophet, Lamb, Messiah, Priest, Mediator and Spokesman OF the Most High God.
In other words, you ignore the fact that if Jesus is all these things OF THE ONE AND ONLY MOST HIGH GOD EVER MENTIONED IN SCRIPTURE, then he can't possibly BE that ONE AND ONLY MOST HIGH GOD EVER MENTIONED IN SCRIPTURE.
Is that better?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
