- This topic is empty.
- Posts
This is good from Ignatius, the one discipled by John the Evangelist who wrote John 1:1. I would think that He would have a proper understanding of whether the 'Word' that was in the beginning was 'made' or not.
Quote Chapter VII.—Beware of false teachers. For some are in the habit of carrying about the name [of Jesus Christ] in wicked guile, while yet they practise things unworthy of God, whom ye must flee as ye would wild beasts. For they are ravening dogs, who bite secretly, against whom ye must be on your guard, inasmuch as they are men who can scarcely be cured. There is one Physician who is possessed both of flesh and spirit; both made and not made; God existing in flesh; true life in death; both of Mary and of God; first possible and then impossible,—534 even Jesus Christ our Lord.
But some most worthless persons are in the habit of carrying about the name [of Jesus Christ] in wicked guile, while yet they practise things unworthy of God, and hold opinions contrary to the doctrine of Christ, to their own destruction, and that of those who give credit to them, whom you must avoid as ye would wild beasts. For “the righteous man who avoids them is saved for ever; but the destruction of the ungodly is sudden, and a subject of rejoicing.”535 For “they are dumb dogs, that cannot bark,”536 raving mad, and biting secretly, against whom ye must be on your guard, since they labour under an incurable disease. But our Physician is the only true God, the unbegotten and unapproachable, the Lord of all, the Father and Begetter of the only-begotten Son. We have also as a Physician the Lord our God, Jesus the Christ, the only-begotten Son and Word, before time began,537 but who afterwards became also man, of Mary the virgin. For “the Word was made flesh.”538 Being incorporeal, He was in the body; being impassible, He was in a passible body; being immortal, He was in a mortal body; being life, He became subject to corruption, that He might free our souls from death and corruption, and heal them, and might restore them to health, when they were diseased with ungodliness and wicked lusts.
Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 25 2013,21:50) I can't speak for others Mike.
So then you haven't noticed that people like Gene, Marty, Kerwin, and 2B are so afraid of acknowledging the TWO gods mentioned in 1:1, that they fabricate their own false doctrines to adjust for this fear? Hmmmm……………….Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 25 2013,21:50) Are you afraid of admitting that one of those two gods gave his name to the other?
So Jesus is called by the name of his God? So was Israel. So what?Are you forgetting that if Jehovah the Father GAVE His name to Jesus at some point in time, then your theory that Jesus has been “YHWH the Son” from eternity goes bye-bye?
Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 25 2013,21:59) there is one God, who has manifested Himself by Jesus Christ His Son, who is His eternal Word, not proceeding forth from silence, and who in all things pleased Him that sent Him.
Are you unable to see that there is ONE God, who made Himself know through His Son, who is now His eternal spokesman (since his God has given him eternal life), and who pleases that ONE God who SENT him?I guess I'm not seeing your point, Kathi. In fact, I haven't seen anything in those Ignatius writings that actually teach what you imagine they're teaching.
Mike,
Ignatius is saying:
The Word was eternal, not proceeding forth from silence. I take that to mean…there wasn't a period of 'no word' (silence) before the eternal word proceeded forth.Quote (2besee @ Mar. 25 2013,22:00) I do not go to the Father and picture 'two Fathers' or 'two Gods'. Do you?
Nope.Quote (2besee @ Mar. 25 2013,22:00) I know that others are also called 'gods'.
I know that you know this………….. because you have said so many times in different threads. I know you also know that Jesus is one of these gods.Quote (2besee @ Mar. 25 2013,22:00) You are using the fact that others are called 'gods' to try and prove that John 1:1 is supposedly talking about TWO GODS……..
Well, there ARE scripturally “many gods and many lords”, right? And 1:1 IS talking about a god who was WITH “THE God”, right? Surely John wasn't trying to tell us that “THE God” was WITH “THE God”, right? So what's the hangup?Quote (2besee @ Mar. 25 2013,22:00) 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……….
Oh. So the “Holy Spirit” showed you this, huh? Just like the “Holy Spirit” shows the Trinitarians that their nonsensical three person in one God thing is scriptural when it truly isn't?2B, if you don't want to be questioned on John 1:1 by me, then stay out of my discussions about it, okay? Because once you put in your two cents in an attempt to refute the things I'M saying, I have no choice but to fight back for the truth of the matter.
Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 25 2013,22:16) This is good from Ignatius…………
Yes it is. And once again, it doesn't say a single thing about Jesus being the MOST HIGH God, does it?In fact, once again Ignatius DISTINGUISHES Jesus FROM the MOST HIGH God, right?
Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 25 2013,22:21) Mike,
So can you admit that Jesus was possibly given the name Jehovah by His Father?
I don't believe any scripture says such a thing……… BUT IF IT DID, it woudn't mean anything more than Israel being called by the name of YHWH.Plus, you have the added problem that IF Jesus was given YHWH's name, it proves that he hasn't eternally been “YHWH the Son”. Why don't you address THAT part, Kathi?
Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 25 2013,22:25) Mike,
Ignatius is saying:
The Word was eternal, not proceeding forth from silence. I take that to mean…there wasn't a period of 'no word' (silence) before the eternal word proceeded forth.
He says “IS eternal”, not “WAS”. And not proceeding forth from silence could simply mean that he proceeded forth from God – not “nothing”.Don't read too much into the specks, Kathi. Instead, focus on the huge planks that clearly distinguish Jesus as someone OTHER THAN our Most High God, okay?
Do that not only with the writings of Ignatius, but also (and more importantly) with the scriptures.
Mike,
A person can exist before they are named. Being named doesn't cause the 'existence' of their person. Did John the Baptist exist before he was named 'John?' Yes or No. Was he John before he was named 'John' in his father's mind?Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 26 2013,17:40) 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
#4
Kathi, I am not sure that any are correct because I cannot tell if there are definite articles or not. If you asked this question from a biblical verse, I could most likely give you a definite answer.Hence why I said what I said.
Mike,
Are you afraid that if the 'Word' from John 1:1 existed eternally, then your theology is challenged?Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 25 2013,22:47) Mike,
A person can exist before they are named. Being named doesn't cause the 'existence' of their person. Did John the Baptist exist before he was named 'John?' Yes or No. Was he John before he was named 'John' in his father's mind?
If Jesus eternally existed as “YHWH the Son”, then there never could have been a time when the Father GAVE him His name. End of story.Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 26 2013,17:48) 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.
Plank (Opening line no less)
Ignatius, who is also called Theophorus, to the Church which has obtained mercy, through the majesty of the Most High God the Father, and of Jesus Christ, His only-begotten Son;Speck
enlightened by the will of God, who formed all things that are according to the faith and love of Jesus Christ, our God and Saviour;Notice how the speck overrides the plank according to you? Yet we see the plank and know that the speck must line up with the plank. Thus we draw on our understanding of the usage of 'theos' in Greek.
We believe the plank, you nullify the plank with the speck.
So it is true what we say. And this is not the first time this has happened. I wouldn't say such a thing if it only happened once and might not say anything if it happened twice. But tree times onward and we have a pattern.
We speak correctly regarding this matter.
Quote (t8 @ Mar. 25 2013,23:47) Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 26 2013,17:40) 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
#4
Kathi, I am not sure that any are correct because I cannot tell if there are definite articles or not. If you asked this question from a biblical verse, I could most likely give you a definite answer.Hence why I said what I said.
t8,
Just base your answer by what is translated here in the quote box, t8.Quote
The Epistle of Ignatius to the Romans
Shorter and Longer VersionsIgnatius, who is also called Theophorus, to the Church which has obtained mercy, through the majesty of the Most High Father, and Jesus Christ, His only-begotten Son; the Church which is beloved and enlightened by the will of Him that willeth all things which are according to the love of Jesus Christ our God, which also presides in the place of the region of the Romans, worthy of God, worthy of honour, worthy of the highest happiness, worthy of praise, worthy of obtaining her every desire, worthy of being deemed holy,819 and which presides over love, is named from Christ, and from the Father, which I also salute in the name of Jesus Christ, the Son of the Father: to those who are united, both according to the flesh and spirit, to every one of His commandments; who are filled inseparably with the grace of God, and are purified from every strange taint, abundance of happiness unblameably, in Jesus Christ our God.
Ignatius, who is also called Theophorus, to the Church which has obtained mercy, through the majesty of the Most High God the Father, and of Jesus Christ, His only-begotten Son; the Church which is sanctified and enlightened by the will of God, who formed all things that are according to the faith and love of Jesus Christ, our God and Saviour; the Church which presides in the place of the region of the Romans, and which is worthy of God, worthy of honour, worthy of the highest happiness, worthy of praise, worthy of credit,820 worthy of being deemed holy,821 and which presides over love, is named from Christ, and from the Father, and is possessed of the Spirit, which I also salute in the name of Almighty God, and of Jesus Christ His Son: to those who are united, both according to the flesh and spirit, to every one of His commandments, who are filled inseparably with all the grace of God, and are purified from every strange taint, abundance of happiness unblameably, in God, even the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ.
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.Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 25 2013,22:51) Mike,
Are you afraid that if the 'Word' from John 1:1 existed eternally, then your theology is challenged?
Kathi,If there was any scriptural evidence that the Word existed from eternity, than I would immediately adjust my understanding of scriptures to embrace that truth. I wouldn't be “afraid” of it at all.
Why – IS there such evidence in scripture? Because the scriptures I know about speak of Jesus having origins “from days of old”, and being the “firstborn of every creature”, and being “the beginning of the creation by God”, etc.
My understanding has to go where the scriptures lead it, Kathi. Unlike you, I don't have the privledge of letting my own emotions and fantasies drown out what the scriptures actually teach. I suppose we are just made differently.
Quote (t8 @ Mar. 25 2013,23:59) Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 26 2013,17:48) 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.
Plank (Opening line no less)
Ignatius, who is also called Theophorus, to the Church which has obtained mercy, through the majesty of the Most High God the Father, and of Jesus Christ, His only-begotten Son;Speck
enlightened by the will of God, who formed all things that are according to the faith and love of Jesus Christ, our God and Saviour;Notice how the speck overrides the plank according to you? Yet we see the plank and know that the speck must line up with the plank. Thus we draw on our understanding of the usage of 'theos' in Greek.
We believe the plank, you nullify the plank with the speck.
So it is true what we say. And this is not the first time this has happened. I wouldn't say such a thing if it only happened once and might not say anything if it happened twice. But tree times onward and we have a pattern.
We speak correctly regarding this matter.
t8,
I have said that that there are two powers of Jehovah, the Father is the FIRST Power and the Son is the SECOND Power. That would make the Father the most high power would it not?Mike,
Quote Because the scriptures I know about speak of Jesus having origins “from days of old”, and being the “firstborn of every creature”, and being “the beginning of the creation by God”, etc. And you do not understand ANY of those things accurately, imo.
Most early Fathers who mention the Word talk about it residing in God as an attribute and then it being brought forth at some point like a flame that lights another flame. Where as you believe that there was always 2 flames (so to speak).
We see a similar account regarding Wisdom in scripture. Spoken of as an attribute (she) it is given birth and becomes the workman at God's side.
So if you take logos and wisdom and rewind the clock, they originate in God as attributes of his nature.
Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 26 2013,19:03) Quote (t8 @ Mar. 25 2013,23:59) Quote (Lightenup @ Mar. 26 2013,17:48) 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.
Plank (Opening line no less)
Ignatius, who is also called Theophorus, to the Church which has obtained mercy, through the majesty of the Most High God the Father, and of Jesus Christ, His only-begotten Son;Speck
enlightened by the will of God, who formed all things that are according to the faith and love of Jesus Christ, our God and Saviour;Notice how the speck overrides the plank according to you? Yet we see the plank and know that the speck must line up with the plank. Thus we draw on our understanding of the usage of 'theos' in Greek.
We believe the plank, you nullify the plank with the speck.
So it is true what we say. And this is not the first time this has happened. I wouldn't say such a thing if it only happened once and might not say anything if it happened twice. But tree times onward and we have a pattern.
We speak correctly regarding this matter.
t8,
I have said that that there are two powers of Jehovah, the Father is the FIRST Power and the Son is the SECOND Power. That would make the Father the most high power would it not?
PlankJohn 17:3
Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.Speck
John 20:28
Thomas said to him, “My Lord and my God!”So in your view Kathi, the speck nullifies the plank, and in our view, the plank is true and the speck can be read in 2 ways.
One as supporting the plank completely by referring to Jesus and then God the Father, and even the other one doesn't nullify the plank because Jesus said, “ye are theos” to men, thus in a similar way and all the more so, could be applied to Jesus too.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
