- This topic has 19,164 replies, 120 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 2 months ago by
.
- Posts
Quote Where did Jesus say he was the Son of God before he was born a son? John 17:5, 24
John 3:13, 31-36
John 1:15, 30
John 6:33, 38, 51, 62
John 8:23, 57In all these scriptures Christ identifies himself as a person, not a spirit, not a word, not a power, and not God; e.g., “I”, “he”
Quote If the Word was God and not Yeshua then you are saying the Word was the Father. Therefore you are saying the Father was with the Father. Jn 1:1,2 Jn 1:2
The same (Father) was in the beginning with God.Why not just look in the word of God to see if Christ identifies himself as the Word. Luke 8:11 says the seed is the Word of God. The Word is the precreative power of God just as an apple has seeds within it. The same is part of the apple, yet distinct. The same was in the beginning with God.
Quote You say…Quote Ifr a person holds that he was God and became the Son of God their holding God came himself, not that God gave his only begotten Son.
Look at your previous statement…
You say…Quote
Some hold that he was the Word before, which is just another way of stating he did not pre-exist because the Word is God, not the Son of God.
However you are saying the Father was made flesh.
The Word/God did come in the flesh, Yeshua. And he will come again according to Zech 14:3-9.
This is where your argument breaks down. The scripture does not say the Father was made flesh, it says the Word was made flesh. If you accept that the Word is the seed as Jesus taught there is no problem here. The Word by the Holy Spirit was used by God in preparing the flesh tabernacle for Christ to dwell in. It never occurred to me prior to just now that God may have expressed the Word in John 1:1 to distinguish this truth. Jesus said the Father is in me and he is in the Father so they are one in spirit, but distinct in person.
Quote Thomas knew who he was in John 20:28. It's interesting you bring this scripture into the purview of our discussion. When Thomas said “my Lord and My God”, do you see any significance that Thomas did not call him Father. Do you see any significance that it was Thomas that made this statement and that he is the only person in the gospels to reference Jesus as God? Do you suppose that Thomas who just realized that Jesus was alive from the dead is telling us that Jesus is God when Jesus denied that he was God? If you read the next three verses John who had been riding on the hip of Jesus from the beginning tells us who Jesus is and why the gospel was written (verse 31). You would think that his perspective, which is in harmony with all other testimony in the gospel would be quoted repetitously if one is espousing the truest identification of Christ. Just a thought.
Quote 1 Tim 3:16
And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.Indeed, God was manifest in the flesh. Jesus said the Father was in him and he in the Father and that the Father was with him at all times. Does that make Jesus the Father? The same book of Timothy says there is one God and one mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus. Why didn't Paul tell Timothy that the mediator was God if Jesus is most accurately referred to as God. I guess what I'm getting at is when we look at who Jesus is and witness for him, shouldn't we want our witness to be the truest and most accurate identification of the truth? Isn't that what being a true witness is all about? If someone asks you who is Jesus? Do you tell him that he is Lord of heaven and earth? You could, it's true, but is that really depicting Christ as shown in scripture? Wouldn't you want to tell them how we are all sinners and that God sent his Son from heaven to die for our sins and now he sits on the right hand and will be returning for those that accept him…?
I was reading this morning and I'd like your opinion on John 1 where it reads, that John the Baptist came to witness the Light, but was not that Light. Later he identifies the Light as Jesus Christ and says this is the one of whom I spake, whom you know not. Isn't John the Baptist saying that Christ is the Light whom God has evidently empowered to light every man that comes into the world. If that is true he would of had to exist to do that. John is very expressive. He says he came into the world, the world was made by him and the world knew him not. He came unto his own and his own received him not, as many as received him he gave power to become the sons of God. The Light is the same person being spoken of from verses 6 through 13. When John finally sees Jesus he bears witness of him and cries behold this is he of whom I spake. This is he who is preferred before me because he was before me. Isn't this the other person in the “Let us” in Genesis. Isn't this the Christ the Son of God who was with God from the beginning? Does he not declare in Revelation I am the alpha and the omega? Do not all things begin and end with Christ? Isn't the purpose of God from the beginning been the glorification of his Son?
Jesus said God gave him power to do all things so he also gave him the power to create the worlds because John tells us Jesus Christ the Light made the worlds. The Tanuck says God created all things by himself, but if God intended to keep his Son hid, we now know what the “Let us” is referring to. Isn't the New Testament the revelation of God in Christ which God kept hid since the foundation of the world? Has not God vested himself in his fullness in his Son? Just a few things to ponder, but if Christ is not the Light, then John the Baptist was a liar, too.
mr steve
Quote Where did Jesus say he was the Son of God before he was born a son? You say…
Quote John 17:5, 24
John 3:13, 31-36
John 1:15, 30
John 6:33, 38, 51, 62
John 8:23, 57In all these scriptures Christ identifies himself as a person, not a spirit, not a word, not a power, and not God; e.g., “I”, “he”
These are all post conception in Mary when the angel says “That Holy Thing shall be called the son of God”.
Interesting that these are all from the Gospel of John when John is the one who wrote John 1:1 and 1 Jn 1:1-3 and John 20:28. Still no evidence of him being a Son before he came in the flesh. Just inference.
Quote If the Word was God and not Yeshua then you are saying the Word was the Father. Therefore you are saying the Father was with the Father. Jn 1:1,2 Jn 1:2
The same (Father) was in the beginning with God.You say…
Quote
Why not just look in the word of God to see if Christ identifies himself as the Word. Luke 8:11 says the seed is the Word of God. The Word is the precreative power of God just as an apple has seeds within it. The same is part of the apple, yet distinct. The same was in the beginning with God.Why not look at the inspired scriptures that John wrote to see what he meant by the “Word in John 1:1?
1 Jn 1:
1 That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life;
2 (For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;)
3 That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ.Rev 19:13
And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.John clearly shows who the “Word” is he is refering to in John 1:1. Besides if the Word was a seed and the seed was God then the seed which is God is no longer God according to your analogy. So you would be saying the incorruptable seed could change.
Gods seed would be in him and not “with” him. Why didnt over 600 translators translate it that way GB?
You should study the Greek on this. Here is a little info…
and the Word was with God
In the second clause John’s language was typically precise and nuanced, he deliberately invoked a distinction in the two persons of “ton theon” and “ho Logos” and at the same time presented a new dynamic, they were coexisting in relationship. The significant word in the clause is “pros”, when used with the accusative it is widely regarded as being Greek shorthand for proswpon prov proswpon, which means face to face (in relationship). Here is how Robertson exegetes this clause:With God (prov ton qeon). Though existing eternally with God the Logos was in perfect fellowship with God. Prov with the accusative presents a plane of equality and intimacy, face to face with each other. In 1 John 2:1 we have a like use of prov: “We have a Paraclete with the Father” (paraklhton exomen prov ton patera). See proswpon prov proswpon (face to face, 1 Corinthians 13:12), a triple use of prov. There is a papyrus example of prov in this sense to gnwston thv prov allhlouv sunhqeiav, “the knowledge of our intimacy with one another” (M.&M., Vocabulary) which answers the claim of Rendel Harris, Origin of Prologue, p. 8) that the use of prov here and in Mark 6:3 is a mere Aramaism. It is not a classic idiom, but this is Koin‚, not old Attic. In John 17:5 John has para soi the more common idiom.
(source)So it’s in this clause that we have the John’s fullest expression of the type of relationship two subjects shared “in the beginning”. The Logos always existed in intimate fellowship with “ton theon” (The Father). Then in verse 3 a bombshell is dropped….
https://heavennet.net/cgi-bin….75;st=0Quote You say…Quote Ifr a person holds that he was God and became the Son of God their holding God came himself, not that God gave his only begotten Son.
Look at your previous statement…
You say…Quote
Some hold that he was the Word before, which is just another way of stating he did not pre-exist because the Word is God, not the Son of God.
However you are saying the Father was made flesh.
The Word/God did come in the flesh, Yeshua. And he will come again according to Zech 14:3-9.
You say…
Quote
This is where your argument breaks down. The scripture does not say the Father was made flesh, it says the Word was made flesh.But you left out the part of the verse that says “The Word was God”.
So it looks like your argument breaks down if you say the “Word was the Father”.
You say…
Quote
If you accept that the Word is the seed as Jesus taught there is no problem here.Problem is I dont see the word “seed” in Jn 1:1 for the name “Word” according to Rev 19:13.
You say…
Quote The Word by the Holy Spirit was used by God in preparing the flesh tabernacle for Christ to dwell in. Thats not at all what the the scriptures say. It says the “Word” was made flesh…
NLT – Jhn 1:14 – So the Word became human and lived here on earth among us. He was full of unfailing love and faithfulness. And we have seen his glory, the glory of the only Son of the Father.
Footnote: Greek grace and truth; also in 1:17.
New Living Translation © 1996 Tyndale Charitable Trust
NIV – Jhn 1:14 – The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth. Footnote: Or the Only Begotten
New International Version © 1973, 1978, 1984 International Bible SocietyESV – Jhn 1:14 – And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his gl
ory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.
The Holy Bible, English Standard Version © 2001 Crossway BiblesNASB – Jhn 1:14 – And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.
You say…
Quote
It never occurred to me prior to just now that God may have expressed the Word in John 1:1 to distinguish this truth. Jesus said the Father is in me and he is in the Father so they are one in spirit, but distinct in person.Well you are getting closer. They are distinct persons and they are “One Spirit”. But the “Word” in John 1:1 is not the Father or it would read…
In the beginning was the Father and the Father was with the Father and the Father was the Father.
Dont think so.
Quote Thomas knew who he was in John 20:28. You say…
Quote
It's interesting you bring this scripture into the purview of our discussion. When Thomas said “my Lord and My God”, do you see any significance that Thomas did not call him Father
No should he have called him Father. You should see the significance that he called him God.You say…
Quote
Do you see any significance that it was Thomas that made this statement and that he is the only person in the gospels to reference Jesus as God?First of all John has called him God in Jn 1:1 and 1 Jn 5:20 and Rev 1:8.
But if Thomas was the only one that said “My Lord and My God”, it is still scripture isnt it?
You say…
Quote
Do you suppose that Thomas who just realized that Jesus was alive from the dead is telling us that Jesus is God when Jesus denied that he was God?First of all show me a scripture where Yeshua denied he was God. For that matter show me a scripture where anyone except the unbelievers and the demons said he was not God.
You say…
Quote
If you read the next three verses John who had been riding on the hip of Jesus from the beginning tells us who Jesus is and why the gospel was written (verse 31). You would think that his perspective, which is in harmony with all other testimony in the gospel would be quoted repetitously if one is espousing the truest identification of Christ. Just a thought.
Yes but remember John also wrote Jn 1:1 and 1 Jn 5:20 and Rev 1:8.But lets look at what the next few verses do say…
Jn 20:
26 And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you.
27 Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing.
28 And *Thomas answered and said unto him*, My LORD and my God.
29 Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.
30 And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book:
31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.When studying scriptures good hermeneutics means we should always keep the context in mind.
Thomas had witnessed the crucifixtion of the Lord Jesus, and also I believe he remembered the words of Jesus that he would come again and that if they destroyed his temple, his body, then in three days he would raise it up.
After eight days Jesus appears and “Thomas says *unto him*, My Lord and my God.
Now there is several problems here for the non-Trinitarians.
1.He specifically spoke to Jesus.
2.He called him Lord and God (Theos).
3.Jesus didn’t rebuke him or correct him.What this means is:
1.Thomas committed an act of Idolatry.or
2.He was doing the right thing.
2 is the only option since Jesus never rebuked him nor corrected him but actually blessed him, for “Jesus ‘saith unto him’, *Thomas, because thou hast seen me*, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.
Jesus accepted Thomas's confession.
Also, note that John said there were many other signs, but these were written that you might believe that Jesus is the son of God. Why would John do this without any rebuke or correction for Thomas especially in the light of Jn 1:1?
Quote 1 Tim 3:16
And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.You say…
Quote
Indeed, God was manifest in the flesh. Jesus said the Father was in him and he in the Father and that the Father was with him at all times.Look at the verse closely. Did the Father come in the flesh? Was the Father justified in the Spirit? Did the Father preach unto the gentiles? was the Father recieved up into Glory?
Notice it says “Great is the mystery” of Godliness, God was manifest…
You say…
Quote
Does that make Jesus the Father?Why do you think whenever God is mentioned it means the Father?
The Father himself called Jesus God.
Heb 1:8
But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.Have you ever read some of the early Church Fathers writtigs? Especially Ignatius a desciple of John the beloved who leaned on Jesus bosom!
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/ignatius.htmlYou say…
Quote The same book of Timothy says there is one God and one mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus .
So do you have a contradiction? No. Jesus was both God in Spirit and Man in flesh. This is
why he truly is the only mediator. God didnt need just another man or anointed prophet to fulfill his purposes. He tells us in the Hebrew scriptures that he is our only Saviour and there is none other.You say…
Quote Why didn't Paul tell Timothy that the mediator was God if Jesus is most accurately referred to as God. Why did Paul under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit call him God in 1 Tim 3:16 and here…
Titus 2:13
Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;You say…
Quote
I guess what I'm getting at is when we look at who Jesus is and witness for him, shouldn't we want our witness to be the truest and most accurate identification of the truth? Isn't that what being a true witness is all about? If someone asks you who is Jesus? Do you tell him that he is Lord of heaven and earth? You could, it's true, but is that really depicting Christ as shown in scripture? Wouldn't you want to tell them how we are all sinners and that God sent his Son from heaven to die for our sins and now he sits on the right hand and will be returning for those that accept him…?Sorry but your argument here has no validity since the majority of those who get saved start off as Trinitarian.
What if I was to ask them…”Would you like to know the one who created all things”? Who would they think I was talking about?
But then… “Who hath betwixt you”. Why do people leave their first faith and the Jesus they believed in to follow another Jesus?
You say…
Quote
I was reading this morning and I'd like your opinion on John 1 where it reads, that John the Baptist came to witness the Light, but was not that Light. Later he identifies the Light as Jesus Christ and says this is the one of whom I spake, whom you know not. Isn't John the Baptist saying that Christ is the Light whom God has evidently empowered to light every man that comes into the world. If that is true he would of had to exist to do that. John is very expressive. He says he came into the world, the world was made by him and the world knew him not. He came unto his own and his own received him not, as many as received him he gave power to become the sons of God. The Light is the same person being spoken of from verses 6 through 13. When John finally sees Jesus he bears witness of him and cries behold this is he of whom I spake. This is he who is preferred before me because he was before me. Isn't this the other person in the “Let us” in Genesis. Isn't this the Christ the Son of God who was with God from the beginning? Does he not declare in Revelation I am the alpha and the omega? Do not all things begin and end with Christ? Isn't the purpose of God from the beginning been the glorification of his Son?Jesus said God gave him power to do all things so he also gave him the power to create the worlds because John tells us Jesus Christ the Light made the worlds. The Tanuck says God created all things by himself, but if God intended to keep his Son hid, we now know what the “Let us” is referring to. Isn't the New Testament the revelation of God in Christ which God kept hid since the foundation of the world? Has not God vested himself in his fullness in his Son? Just a few things to ponder, but if Christ is not the Light, then John the Baptist was a liar, too.
Yes Jesus is the light, this is what the beloved John said in Jn 1:4 confirming who the “Word” was in Jn 1:1.
But you bring up an interesting point and a contradiction for all of the “pre-existent” theologians here who do not believe Yeshua is God.
There is no way around it mr steve, if you believe that Jesus is not God, one with the Father and the Spirit then you have a contradiction and a huge hole in your doctrine. For there is no way to get around these scriptures that says God “Alone” “By himself” made all things.
Isa 43:10
Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.Isa 44:6
Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God.Isa 44:8
Fear ye not, neither be afraid: have not I told thee from that time, and have declared it? ye are even my witnesses. Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any.Isa 45:5
I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me: I girded thee, though thou hast not known me:Isa 45:21
Tell ye, and bring them near; yea, let them take counsel together: who hath declared this from ancient time? who hath told it from that time? have not I the LORD? and there is no God else beside me; a just God and a Saviour; there is none beside me.Hsa 13:4
Yet I am the LORD thy God from the land of Egypt, and thou shalt know no god but me: for there is no saviour beside me.You have to either chuck these, ignore them, or twist them. Or when you say some other lessor being was beside him other than God. Or that God made all things through a lessor being than himself then what are you saying about these scriptures?
Look again…
Isa 44:24
Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;How do you explain this mr steve?
The Trinitarian view is the only way to reconcile all scriptures my friend!
WJ;
Thank you for your response.
John came as a witness to bear witness of the Light. He speaks of this Light as a man, a person, who was before. A person that existed before him is not a post-conception scripture. His grand conclusion of this person in John 1:34 is that this is the Son of God. The person he is referring to is Jesus who he said he was bearing witness that he was the Light and created all things. Prior to the scriptures regarding the Light the scriptures talk about in the beginning was the Word… and by him all things were made and without him was not anything made that was made so you could reasonably infer that the Word was also the Son of God. He also said the Word was God. But you know very well that John 1:1 is probably that most argued scripture in the bible with respect to the Godhead.
What I am contending is that even if Christ is identified as the Word, the Light, and God, the definitive aspects of Christ relationship to his Father are expounded on by Christ throughout the gospel of John. For instance, Jesus said as I live by my Father even so he that eateth me shall live by me. This scripture tells us that Christ is dependent on the Father just like we are dependent on Christ. There are a host of other scriptures that indicate the same in many other respects. Christ is very clear he can do nothing in himself but was taught by God himself. He made is clear that the Father was greater than he. All of these truths contradict what the Trinity asserts, that all three are equal. So the Trinity does not reconcile scripture, it contradicts it in many respects.
By the way, you say you are a Trinitarian, but you deny that the Son of God pre-existed, that differs from the Trinity doctrine that teaches the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit have existed together eternally. Are you really Trinitarian or is there more than one type of Trinity doctrine?
Perhaps there is a truth in the Old Testament that can shine some light on God and Christ and us. In Genesis, the scriptures say that Abraham gave his all to Isaac, but to the six sons of Keturah (who were born after Sarah died) he gave only gifts and sent them into the east. I believe that God first gave all that he had to his Son before the foundation of the world, which is why he calls him God, and to us he has given gifts such as when Christ ascended up on hight and gave the gift ministeries of apostles, prophets, etc. But the scriptures say that God hid his purpose in Christ Jesus since the world began. Hebrews tell us that Christ was used by God to create all things. Jesus tells us that God gave him all things. Paul tells us God hid his purpose in Christ Jesus. Jesus said he was with the Father before the foundation of the world. That's not post-conception. I came from above and will go to where I was before. That's not post-conception. That's reconciling the scriptures.
There is no contradiction in the Old Testament because Christ was creating all things by the power given to him by God under the direction of God. If God wants to declare that he “alone created all things” and keep hid his purpose in Christ Jesus should we question him? Are we God's counsellors?
Quote Yes Jesus is the light, this is what the beloved John said in Jn 1:4 confirming who the “Word” was in Jn 1:1. But you bring up an interesting point and a contradiction for all of the “pre-existent” theologians here who do not believe Yeshua is God.
There is no way around it mr steve, if you believe that Jesus is not God, one with the Father and the Spirit then you have a contradiction and a huge hole in your doctrine. For there is no way to get around these scriptures that says God “Alone” “By himself” made all things.
I've already answered part of the above quote prior in this post, but I would like to focus on the part that says if you believe that Jesus is not God and one with the spirit and Father, you have a contradiction.
This statement is like unto Thomas, John 20:28 “my Lord my God”. Does it begin to do justice to what I believe the scriptures say? I've been teaching that Jesus Christ is subject to the Father. I believe that Christ was made Lord of heaven and earth by God the Father. I believe that Christ has been given all things from the Father as Abraham gave his all to Isaac. That's my testimony. Show me where I'm incorrect. You can't do it from the few scriptures you normally quote because the definitive aspects of how Christ is subject to God is not found within those scriptures; i.e., John 1:1 or John 20:28.
So when you say that I have holes in my doctrine and then tell me you believe the trinity and somehow reject the pre-existence of the Son of God, all I see is the Grand Canyon.
Quote You say…Quote John 17:5, 24
John 3:13, 31-36
John 1:15, 30
John 6:33, 38, 51, 62
John 8:23, 57In all these scriptures Christ identifies himself as a person, not a spirit, not a word, not a power, and not God; e.g., “I”, “he”
These are all post conception in Mary when the angel says “That Holy Thing shall be called the son of God”.
Interesting that these are all from the Gospel of John when John is the one who wrote John 1:1 and 1 Jn 1:1-3 and John 20:28. Still no evidence of him being a Son before he came in the flesh. Just inference.
WJ; Did you read these scriptures? They are all expressly stating that Jesus pre-existed. Yes they were written after Christ came. Are you throwing out the New Testament now, it's all post-conception?
I honestly cannot comprehend your reasoning. You believe in the trinity, yet you say Christ did not pre-exist as the Son of God. What?
You say he was the Word and the Light and that the world was made by him, but deny that John the Baptist spends the whole first chapter of the book of John stating this man existed before him. This man that is the Word, the Light, the one whom God created the world, you say, he did not pre-exist.
Then you say he existed but not as the Son of God, he was with God and was God, which in any language means he did exist yet. Now this is where your understanding differs from what Jesus taught. Jesus never said I use to be God, or I am God, or I was the Word in heaven. Jesus always refers to being sent from his Father from heaven into the world. That's the essence of his message. There's very little that is abstract about what Jesus taught. He said he was returning to where he was before. Is that abstract. He then ascended into heaven so he must have been telling the truth that he was there prior with his Father.
That's reconciling the scriptures.
Steven
Quote You either have to accept the trinitarian idology or reject the who idea that Jesus preexisted as a person before He was born or the scriptures are counterdicting them selves. Gene;
God bless. I hope you're doing well.
There are thousands of scriptures in the Old Testament that declare that the Lord is the only Lord, he alone is to be praised. etc. Nehemiah 9:6 say “Thou, even thou art Lord alone” You alwaus need to keep one thing in mind- God tells us what he wants us to know. He does not reveal his truths to all men. He even conceals truth. One scripture says it is the glory of God to conceal a thing, but the honor of kings is to search out a matter. So on the surface it may appear differently that it is when you see the unveiling of the truth. Paul and Jesus both said that the purpose in Christ Jesus has been kept hidden from the foundation of the world. Jesus was there, believe it. What Christ said is primary truth. God alone created all things by his power because it was his power in Christ that made it happen. In other words, it was God that had the money in the bank even though Christ was given authority to write the check. But God has choses his Son to dwell in so he can be among us.
The trinity holds the Christ is eternally co-existent and equal with God. Does that sound like the reconciliation of scripture to you? You know better.
Take Care
Steven
Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Oct. 26 2007,15:31) T8….>I left a post for you on the trinity thread Ill try to post it here Basically If you hold to the scripture that God created all things through and for Christ. And use that as one of your proof text of Jesus' prexistence, then what do you do with this.
Isa 44:24 ..> Thus saith the Lord, thy Redeemer and He that formed you From the (womb), I am the Lord that maketh all things; that stretches forth the heavens (ALONE); that spreadeth abroad the earth (BY MYSELF).
you either have to say we have a conunterdiction in scripture or Beleive WJ explanation of Jesus being God. But you can not believe He preexisted as some super being or as Michael the arch angle, as David say's.
The problem as i see it is that the scripture you used does not Say Jesus but Christ and Jesus may be the annointed but is not Himself the annointing, the annointing is the Spirit oF God.
So i submitt to you that your scripture you used was saying that it was God's Spirit which is the (Christo's) or annointing
that's is what God created all things through, and not Jesus.The same applies to the rock that followed the childern of Israel in the wilderness, the rock was the Christo's or Spirit and that was what was following them in the wilderness.
You either have to accept the trinitarian idology or reject the who idea that Jesus preexisted as a person before He was born or the scriptures are counterdicting them selves.
IMO…..peace gene
Gene, this could easily be the same as God being the only saviour as it is written, and yet Jesus is our saviour also.The point is that it is all God's will. When Christ faced his crucifixion, he asked that the cup be removed if possible, but then said God's will rather than his own.
So God's will was that he would save and it is written that he is our saviour, but he sent Christ to save and do his will.
If that doesn't explain it, then how do you reconcile that God is the only saviour and yet Jesus and Moses were also saviours who were not God themselves.
Isaiah 43:11
God is the only Saviour. “I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour.”Jude 1:25
to the only God our Savior be glory, majesty, power and authority, through Jesus Christ our Lord, before all ages, now and forevermore! Amen.Philippians 3:20
But our citizenship is in heaven. And we eagerly await a Savior from there, the Lord Jesus Christ,So if God who is the only saviour, saved us through Christ, then surely God who created all things, can create all things through Christ too.
T8….> we are not far apart, I agree that God did all things through the Cristo”s, it was the Cristo's in Jesus doing the Fathers will, and the Christo's is the Savior, but not Jesus the man no more then Moses the man was a Savoir. But it was the Christo's which was in Jesus (i.e. the Father who was doing the works). Thats why I believe that Christo's is just another way of saying God's Spirit and that what God created all things through and for.
T8…..> If the scripture would have said God Created all things through (Jesus) Christ, then what you are saying would be right, but when the Jesus' name is not mentiond in the texts then it's refering to the Spirit not the Person Jesus.
This same annointing was on Moses and the seventy Elders of Israel and even the angle that was leading them . Remember it ONLY ONE GOD in all and through ALL, and His Spirit is the Christos or the annointing.My main point is that when ever we see the Word Christ it does not always refer to Jesus the Man, but God the FAther who was in Him doing His work.
So when we see the word Christo's written we shouldn't always think it's refering to Jesus, it can be refering to God the Father and not Jesus the person.
IMHO…..T8…..bless you and your family brother……gene
OK, I hear you, but you say that if Jesus name isn't mentioned then it is the Christos/Spirit. So I assume that had his name been mentioned then it would be referring to him/Jesus.
But Jesus is specifically mentioned as being the saviour, so how do you reconcile this in this instance, if God or the Christos is the only saviour?
It also says in John 1:3:
Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.”Surely this is Jesus being spoken of. If it is the Christos, then is the Christos a “him” and if so, then are you saying that GOd made all things through his own Spirit or though himself, and not Jesus?
To all;
There's been much discussion about reconciling the scriptures in the Old Testament with respect to God creating all things by himself alone. The verses are found in Isaiah and Nehemiah, but there may be other verses as well.
In John the scriptures say that Christ created the world and without him was not anything made that was made. Similar verses are found in Colossians and Hebrews.
However, in the New Testament that verses with respect to Christ creating do not assert that he made all things alone. They say without him was not anything made that was was made. What this tells us is that while he was involved in creation with his Father, his Father simply made all things with his Son.
This explains the “Let us” verses and reconciles the scriptures perfectly. It also shows that Christ pre-existed with his Father at the time of creation.
Quote (Mr. Steve @ Oct. 31 2007,04:16) However, in the New Testament that verses with respect to Christ creating do not assert that he made all things alone. They say without him was not anything made that was was made. What this tells us is that while he was involved in creation with his Father, his Father simply made all things with his Son. This explains the “Let us” verses and reconciles the scriptures perfectly. It also shows that Christ pre-existed with his Father at the time of creation.
True.But this does not answer “how” Jesus was “with” the Father, which is one of the debates.
In other words, could the Father have made everthing “through” his Son if his Son was a part of himself? Sure, why not? The scriptures don't X this out as a possibility. The reason the debate goes on is because, in my opinion, the scriptures lend themselves to many theories.
Hey, good to see you Mr. Steve. Take care, Mandy
Mandy How can that be. In col. 1:15-18 It says that He was the firstborn of all creation. That means that He was there. Whether He was called the Word or the God Spoken Word or just God, what difference that does make, He was there,.We know that He was not the Almighty God, the Father is greater then the Son, is and always will be. But Col. tells us that He was there, before the world was. Otherwise scriptures would contradict, and that I do not belief it does.
Col. 1:15,16,17,18
Rev.3:14
Gen.1:26
Prov. 8:22-30 read it in the James Moffatt it explains it better.
Let us make man in our image. He was with the Father there.
I just can't understand how you go around these scriptures that are so clear cut. How can you read anything else out of it. If you do, you are adding to it. And you should know diffreent, Mandy.
No offence.
Peace and Love
Mr.Steve……> where does it say the (US) was Jesus, thats you asumption, the (US) could also be the Seven Spirits of GOD, just as easly as someone else.
What do you do with the scriptures where God said He created everything (ALONE) and Spread out the earth by
(MYSELF), if that be the case then it can only mean the Seven Spirits that Compose God, and go out into all the earth.IMO……..gene
Gene;
Where in the New Testament does it say God created anything that was made by the Spirit, or the seven spirits? In contrast, it does that several times with respect to Christ. Hence, it is the only reasonable conclusion.
Im4truth…….> First born does not mean first created, born indicates berth, while created indicates creation two different processes . Jesus was the Firstborn Son of GOD. That is to say He was the First born Human being to become a Son of God in all of creation. Why force the text to say something it does not (spicificly) say.
imo……PEACE …gene
Gene;
If you are interested in reconciling scripture. How do reconcile the fact that the Word is the Son of God, the Light is the Son of God, both which are referred to as him and without “him” was not anything made that was made. John the Baptist then goes on record stating this is the Son of God. This is the one that I have been preaching to you about. He it is that is preferred before me because he was before me. How do you reconcile those truths with first born means that the Son of God was just the first human born of God?
Mr.Steve……> GOD IS SPIRIT and those who worship Him must worship Him in Spirit and truth, isn't that what Jesus said.
And doesn't it say ” and the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters, Then God Said let there be Light: and there was light. From Genesis 1:1-25, there is no Us even meantioned, only God alone is mentioned.The Spirit of God is the creative (FORCE) of God. Its also the force that created Jesus and all things that exist. We are created unto good works by that same Spirit. It is that Same Spirit thats was in Jesus performing all the meracles and giving Jesus understanding of His destine.
You have no proof text that shows that Jesus preexisted in any form as a being pryer to His berth as a Begotten Son. The only preexistence of Jesus was in the Foreordained Plan of God, just as PETER said. He was foreordained befor the world (BUT) was Manifested in our Day. The word Manifested is to bring into apearence as Jesus was when he was born in the flesh.
If i told you that Leivi paid tithes in the bosom of Abraham like it says does that mean He actualy existed, NO.
Jesus was in the Bosom of the Father before the world began and at the right time God Produced Him. Its just the simple.
IMO…….gene
Quote (Mr. Steve @ Oct. 31 2007,06:13) Gene; If you are interested in reconciling scripture. How do reconcile the fact that the Word is the Son of God, the Light is the Son of God, both which are referred to as him and without “him” was not anything made that was made. John the Baptist then goes on record stating this is the Son of God. This is the one that I have been preaching to you about. He it is that is preferred before me because he was before me. How do you reconcile those truths with first born means that the Son of God was just the first human born of God?
Mr Steve …..> here is where you are wrong the word is Not Jesus, the word is what Jesus Spoke and he plainly said the words he spoke weren't His words.And the word is the intellect of GOD, and it enlightens every man comming into the world, and if you have that Light in you then you are also a light Just like Jesus was, because the words of God were in Him.
what your doing is Making Jesus God, by saying He is the Light and He is the word, this is the same as trinitarians do.
To have the light which is the word of God pass through you
is one thing, but to say the person is the light or word is quite another. God works (THROUGH HIS CREATION) AND THATS EVERTHING. That God may be all and THROUGH ALL.The preexistence idology is Just another way of stealing glory that belongs to the ONE AND ONLY TRUE GOD.
IMO…..gene
Quote (IM4Truth @ Oct. 31 2007,05:08) Mandy How can that be. In col. 1:15-18 It says that He was the firstborn of all creation. That means that He was there. Whether He was called the Word or the God Spoken Word or just God, what difference that does make, He was there,.We know that He was not the Almighty God, the Father is greater then the Son, is and always will be. But Col. tells us that He was there, before the world was. Otherwise scriptures would contradict, and that I do not belief it does.
Col. 1:15,16,17,18
Rev.3:14
Gen.1:26
Prov. 8:22-30 read it in the James Moffatt it explains it better.
Let us make man in our image. He was with the Father there.
I just can't understand how you go around these scriptures that are so clear cut. How can you read anything else out of it. If you do, you are adding to it. And you should know diffreent, Mandy.
No offence.
Peace and Love
Hi Irene,I just got home from running errands and I'm checking in real quick and then I'll respond later tonight in more depth.
But I wanted to say that there are TWO CREATIONS. One will pass away and the the other one will stand until eternity. Could it be that Jesus is the “firstborn” of the SECOND creation (the new birth)? I think he is. He is the firstfruit from the dead and we will follow.
No because it says that He was born before the world was. He came down from Heaven. Glorify me Oh Father with the glory we had before the foundation of the world. He is also the first born of the dead so in all He can have Preeminence. Preeminence means first in all. And who was in the beginning when God said 'Let us make Man in our image? John 1;1 is true, so many of you just want to ignore that scripture, and you are doing wrong by doing so. Believe me I had a hard time with this too, but once God has implanted into your mind there is no way that I ever change my mind about it. Just like when Towshaw comes and try to tell us there is no Messiah. I would not belief that either.
You are right when you say He is the firstborn of the dead. But that it is not the same then when it says the first born of all creatures. That is the verse before it. You need to read all of Col. 1:15-18
Since you did not read what it says in Proverb I will write it out for youProverb. 8:22 ” The Eternal formed me FIRST of his creation, FIRST when the earth began.”
v. 24″ I was BORN when there was no abysses, when there were no fountains full of water.”
v. 23 ” I was fashioned in the earliest ages, from the very first, when earth began.”
v.25 “e're he sunk the bases of the mountains, ere the hills existed, I was born.”
v. 26 ” when the earth and fields were not created, nor the very clods of the World.”
v. 27 ” WHEN HE SET THE HEAVEN UP, I WAS THERE, WHEN HE DREW THE VAULT O'ER THE ABUSS.”
v.28 ” WHEN HE MADE CLOUDS FIRM OVERHEAD, WHEN HE FIXED THE FOUNTAINS OF DEEP.”
v. 29 ” WHEN HE SET THE BOUNDARIES OF THE SEA, WHEN HE LAID FOUNDATIONS FOR THE EARTH;”
V. 30 ” I WAS WITH HIM THEN, HIS FOSTER CHILD, I WAS HIS DELIGHT DAY AFTER DAY, PLAYING IN HIS PRESENCE CONSTANTLY. That was not wisdom. Wisdom is what a person has, not is. I know that is what you have said before.ONE MORE IMPORTANT FACT. HE SAID THAT NOBODY HAS SEEN HIS FATHER EXCEPT HE THAT CAME FROM HEAVEN., WHO WAS THAT? JESUS. SO JEUS WAS THERE BEFORE HE BECAME A MAN AND DIED FOR US. He was then also the first to be born again of the dead.
Peace and Love Mrs.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
