- This topic has 19,164 replies, 120 voices, and was last updated 1 year ago by
.
- Posts
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Sep. 07 2011,08:03) That is a good point, t8. But if God divided everytime He brough forth another being, He would be a lot less now than when He started creating. 
I didn't divide myself to beget my son, why would God?
Mike,
Actually you did divide yourself… of the 50 trillion cells (approx) in the human body you gave up a few million so that in the end one cell could produce your son. So were you reduced? perhaps Solomon got shorter over the years
T8 is correct no matter much you remove from infinity your left with infinite and you cannot divide infinity as your left with multiple infinities.
Wm
Quote (kerwin @ Sep. 07 2011,15:42) T8, My argument is that God is divided because creating a being from God would make two Gods and not one.
A couple of considerations Kerwin.1) God making a being from himself is not 2 Almighties but a being that has the same nature as him.
Philippians 2:6
Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,2) We will become like Jesus is now. Our lowly bodies will be transformed to a body like his. And we are specifically told that we can participate in divine nature and that we first partake of the flesh and then the spiritual body. Likewise Jesus is now back in the glory that he had with the Father before the world began. Yet we both know that we are not God and God is not divided just because Jesus or us share or partake of his nature.
Further, some of the second century apostles looked at the Word that was with God as like fire coming from fire. The flame of the first fire is not lessened when it produces a new fire.
Tatian (165 A.D)
For just as from one torch many fires are lighted, but the light of the first torch is not lessened by the kindling of many torches, so the Word, coming forth from the Word-Power of the Father, has not divested of the Word-Power Him who begat Him.To All………….God is SPIRIT , problem here is not understanding what SPIRIT IS> Spirit is not a Being it is what is (IN) Beings . The same Spirit can be in everyone all at the same time, rather a clean or unclean spirits, Spirits simply put, are (INTELLECTS) . They are not BEINGS they control the BEINGS MINDS they are (IN)> Why do you think it say “THAT GOD MAY BE ALL AND (IN) ALL”, GOD is the very life of all creation and is in all creation as His seven spirits direct it all. Man did not become a living SOUL until a Spirit of life from GOD entered into him and (THEN) he became a (LIVING SOUL)> IMO
peace and love to you all…………………………………….gene
If the eternal Light begets more Light, that begotten Light was always there, just not brought forth until the right time.
Think about it.
Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 08 2011,10:25) If the eternal Light begets more Light, that begotten Light was always there, just not brought forth until the right time. Think about it.
KathiChrist is not light bulb,is he ?
Pierre
Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 08 2011,03:25) If the eternal Light begets more Light, that begotten Light was always there, just not brought forth until the right time. Think about it.
Huge assumption and no scriptural backing.We know that Jesus came from God, but you are saying that he always was, which is different.
John 8:42
Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and now am here. I have not come on my own; but he sent me.I can see eventually you may well be a Trinitarian.
Interesting to watch the transformation.
We could learn much from observing this process sped up.
It would probably mirror Church history in the context of the apostacy.Remember that the Binity preceded the Trinity.
The Holy Spirit was added as the third person some 60 or so years after the Binity.
Perhaps 60 days in your case?Quote (kerwin @ Sep. 06 2011,22:42) My argument is that God is divided because creating a being from God would make two Gods and not one.
Then this is simply a misunderstanding on your part, Kerwin. 1 Cor 8:6 plainly tells us that ALL THINGS came FROM God. And none of those things that came FROM Him are also God, right?God begetting a spirit Son would not “divide” Him, nor would it make the Son “God”. Instead, it would make him the Son OF God.
Imagine that Michael the archangel mated with a female angel and begot a son. The son would be a spirit being and share a spirit nature with Michael, but the son would not BE Michael. Nor would the son automatically be an archangel. It would simply be a matter of a spirit being begetting a DIFFERENT spirit being – and nothing more.
The same would apply to God, Kerwin. God is ONE Spirit Being who begat a DIFFERENT spirit being. The being He begot is not Him. And since only He is God Almighty, then the being God Almighty begot is someone OTHER THAN God Almighty.
I feel that you are putting restrictions on what God can and can't do out of your selfish desire to have Jesus be nothing more than “exactly like you”.
Stand back from yourself for a minute and really answer this question:
Kerwin, is it IMPOSSIBLE for God to have begotten a spirit Son unto Himself?
When you consider the fact that NOTHING is IMPOSSIBLE for God, the only correct answer is “NO”.
mike
Quote (kerwin @ Sep. 06 2011,22:55) Mike, The fact that Jesus was conceived in his mother's womb just as John the Baptist was conceived in his mother's womb according to Luke 1:36.
That's right, Kerwin. And nobody here has ever denied this scriptural fact.Hebrews 2:14
Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might destroy him who holds the power of death—that is, the devil—What person who was never anything BUT human would have it said about him that he “SHARED IN HUMANITY”? If this person was never anything BUT human, then this is a senseless and unnecessary thing for the writer of Hebrews to say. Instead the writer of Hebrews is telling us the reason that Jesus emptied himself of the nature he was sharing with God and was made in the likeness of a human being, Kerwin. He who was rich had to become poor in order to be able to DIE, thereby conquering death for the rest of us who were born “poor”.
Nobody is denying that Jesus was born of Mary as a human being. But many of you are denying that all things were created through him way before he became flesh.
Quote (kerwin @ Sep. 06 2011,22:55) There were certainly angels before that time.
Yes, because the Spirit Being God created MANY spirit sons unto Himself. Why you think it is impossible for Jesus to have been the FIRST of these sons is beyond me.Kerwin, it seems that you non-preexisters all have the same reason for ignoring or twisting clear scriptures like “I came down from heaven”. Your reason is this: If Jesus was nothing other than “exactly like me”, then I feel more confident that I can accomplish what he did.
It is a selfish reason to re-write the scriptures. And it seems that not one of you stop to think that Jesus had God Himself as his LITERAL Father – even as a human! None of you can claim this. So, no matter how hard you try, or how many scriptures you have to re-write, you will NEVER be able to make Jesus be “exactly like you”.
Kerwin, look at where you guy's selfish ambition has led you. You have admitted an “UNKNOWN” only begotten of God, since you refuse to let the Word be Jesus.
Marty claims that John 17:5 is a case of Jesus asking for the glory the “THOUGHT OF HIM IN GOD'S HEAD” had before the creation of the world.
Paladin claims that when Jesus refers to ascending to where he WAS BEFORE, right after clearly stating that he came DOWN from heaven, he was really speaking of ascending back to earth from the grave.
Gene has to add his own words into the scriptures to make John 1:14 say “the Word CAME TO BE IN SOMEONE WHO WAS FLESH”; and to make Revelation 22:16 say Jesus is the “Offspring and Offspring of David”.
Consider Colossians 1:15-16. The actual words of the scripture say that Jesus is the firstborn of all creation because all invisible things in heaven and visible things on earth were created through him.
On one hand, we have the “Jesus is God” people saying, “Well, it doesn't have to mean Jesus was the first creature ever created by God” because they don't want Jesus to have a beginning or to be a creation of his God. So these people assert that it means Jesus, as GOD HIMSELF, is preeminent over creation. (As if “firstBORN” would be a word that would ever apply to the God who has no beginning or end.
)On the other hand, we have the non-preexisters saying, “Well, it doesn't have to mean Jesus was the first creature ever created by God” because they want Jesus to have been “exactly like them”, and to have begun his existence as a human being. So these people assert that the words “ALL creation” in verse 15 really mean “NEW creation. And the words “ALL things” in verse 16 really mean “NEW things”. But only a man with a PERSONAL agenda would confuse the word “ALL” for the word “NEW”.
Now, right smack dab in the middle of these two voices stands me……….wondering why it can't just mean what it clearly says. And on both sides, I get all kinds of alternate things Paul could have been saying with those words. And all of these alternate scenarios are clearly driven, not by the words of Col 1:15-16 themselves, but by PERSONAL agendas. And through it all, I've yet to get any scriptural reason why it can't just be saying “Jesus was the first creation of his God, and then all other things were subsequently created through him”. This is the most LOGICAL meaning of those words. And there are many other scriptures that SUPPORT this meaning. And most importantly, there are NO other scriptures that CONFLICT with this meaning.
So tell me Kerwin: What SCRIPTURE would prohibit Col 1:15-16 from meaning exactly what I understand it to mean?
Kerwin, I know this was a long post. I'm not looking for a response from you. I was just airing some things out.
peace,
mikeQuote (t8 @ Sep. 07 2011,17:43) Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 08 2011,03:25) If the eternal Light begets more Light, that begotten Light was always there, just not brought forth until the right time. Think about it.
Huge assumption and no scriptural backing.We know that Jesus came from God, but you are saying that he always was, which is different.
John 8:42
Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and now am here. I have not come on my own; but he sent me.I can see eventually you may well be a Trinitarian.
Interesting to watch the transformation.
We could learn much from observing this process sped up.
It would probably mirror Church history in the context of the apostacy.Remember that the Binity preceded the Trinity.
The Holy Spirit was added as the third person some 60 or so years after the Binity.
Perhaps 60 days in your case?
Hey t8,
How about let's discuss what is Christian instead of worrying about trinitarian. OK.If Jesus came out of the Father, i.e. begotten, then He could have always been in the Father before He was begotten from the Father.
The scriptures tell us that He is in the bosom of the Father and elsewhere scriptures tell us that He came out from Him. This is beyond our understanding but to say that He couldn't have always been within the Father before He was begotten, well, you have no scriptural proof to say that couldn't have been the case. If He was always within before He was begotten, then that would demonstrate how He was a Son and not a partner who always was with the Father as a second person. It would show an eternal aspect to the Son's existence and justify all the scriptures that speak of Him as deity. It would also make it clear that the Word of God who is the Wisdom of God always was within the Father and did not have a beginning.
There is no scriptural proof to think this is not possible. Anyone that begets, as in gives birth, brings another out that was within for a while.
The Light brought forth Light. It is like having a lamp under a bushel basket then removing the basket. The light was there under the basket but when the basket was taken off, the light was brought forth.
Jesus is the radiance of His glory, the true Light of the world.
Kathi
Hi Kathi,
I noticed that you twice informed t8 there's nothing that says it couldn't have happened the way you imagine. Did you forget that there's also nothing that says it DID happen that way?
There's nothing in scripture to prevent Jesus from being a unicorn made out of popcorn either. But I'm not about to start building a doctrine around this nonsense just because no scripture specifically prohibits it.
Perhaps you should build your doctrine around what the scriptures DO say, as opposed to what they don't specifically prohibit.
The words “begotten”, “born”, “brought forth”, and “created” refer to one who at one time DIDN'T exist, but then DID. This is the DEFAULT meaning of those words. And without any scriptural evidence to override the default, you are just wishing things into reality in your own mind.
mike
Mike,
All fathers by default had a beginning and did not exist at one point, so therefore, by your default logic, the Heavenly Father did not exist at one point? Why compare the supernatural to the natural? Created was not used in reference to the Son, ever, except that all things were created through Him.Scripture tells us that Jesus was the Word that was in the beginning and was God with the God. No one can be a God with deity nature unless they have always existed. That is what I believe and no one has given me a shred of evidence, that can remain under scrutiny, to deny this.
God the Father was never without His Word or His Spirit.
Kathi
Kathi,
Jesus is called by the title “god”, just as Satan is. Do you assert that Satan is also without beginning?
Other than that, I know of Col 2:9, where it is said that the fullness of THE Deity dwells in bodily form in the person of Jesus. But we already knew that from Col 1:15, right?
What scriptures are you using to come to the conclusion that Jesus is exactly as much “God” as the One he himself calls “my God”? How do you conclude that Jesus IS the invisible Deity whose fullness dwells in him?
Kathi
Quote God the Father was never without His Word or His Spirit. Kathi
but the scriptures do not say that -THE WORD -IS HIS SPIRIT OR HIS SPOKEN WORD,
you do not understand God words
Pierre
Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 08 2011,10:57) If Jesus came out of the Father, i.e. begotten, then He could have always been in the Father before He was begotten from the Father.
What about yourself.God is the father of all spirits right.
Were you with the Father always because your spirit came from the Eternal God?Back to the drawing board.
Mike,
Quote That's right, Kerwin. And nobody here has ever denied this scriptural fact. Hebrews 2:14
Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might destroy him who holds the power of death—that is, the devil—What person who was never anything BUT human would have it said about him that he “SHARED IN HUMANITY”? If this person was never anything BUT human, then this is a senseless and unnecessary thing for the writer of Hebrews to say. Instead the writer of Hebrews is telling us the reason that Jesus emptied himself of the nature he was sharing with God and was made in the likeness of a human being, Kerwin. He who was rich had to become poor in order to be able to DIE, thereby conquering death for the rest of us who were born “poor”.
Your words agree with mine but your definition of conceived is a new one that I have not read in any dictionary. A being is conceived in their mother’s inner parts when they first begin to exist and from that point they develop to birth and are called a neonatal. An angel that transformed into a human being, even if they do it within a human woman’s inner parts, is not conceived.
Quote Nobody is denying that Jesus was born of Mary as a human being. But many of you are denying that all things were created through him way before he became flesh. Scripture does not attest that all the old things were created through Jesus at a time before he came to exist as a human being. What scripture does declare is that the old man was put death and the new man was created as a first fruit of the new creation.
Quote Kerwin, it seems that you non-preexisters all have the same reason for ignoring or twisting clear scriptures like “I came down from heaven”. Your reason is this: If Jesus was nothing other than “exactly like me”, then I feel more confident that I can accomplish what he did. I cannot speak for all those that believe Jesus was conceived as a human being in his mother’s womb instead of being transformed from an angel, but as for myself, I find that belief beneficial for maintaining faith in the promise of God that he will make me righteous and holy as he is.
I have not confidence that “I can accomplish what he did” as such faith is faith in the flesh and not of the spirit of God. My confidence is that God will do as he promised and make me righteous and holy as he is through, by, and for his Son.
As for the scripture that states “I come down from heaven” and similar ones, it is you that misunderstand it, for Jesus came down from heaven in the same way the baptism of John the Baptist did since Jesus is a prophet and even more than a prophet.
Quote It is a selfish reason to re-write the scriptures. So hungering and thirsting for righteousness is a selfish desire according to you. Is that why Jesus blessed those that do it?
Quote And it seems that not one of you stop to think that Jesus had God Himself as his LITERAL Father – even as a human! Why would I choose to believe in that polytheistic belief that depends on the principles of man and not of God?
God desires children that are righteous as he is righteous for they are the children of his spirit as he is the Spirit of love just as is written in 1 John 4:16. Jesus Anointed is the chief of those children.
Quote Kerwin, look at where you guy's selfish ambition has led you. You have admitted an “UNKNOWN” only begotten of God, since you refuse to let the Word be Jesus. I merely admitted I do not know all things. I have looked into the situation more and the Word made human has a glory as the glory of the Wisdom of God. The Wisdom of God has long been acknowledged to be the begotten of God by both Christians and Jews.
Quote Marty claims that John 17:5 is a case of Jesus asking for the glory the “THOUGHT OF HIM IN GOD'S HEAD” had before the creation of the world. Jesus stated in the great commission that he was made King of all things in heaven and on earth. Since that is the glory God gave him after he sacrificed himself in compassion for all mankind and was resurrected by the power of the Spirit of God and we know that God planned it out before hand it is reasonable that that is also the glory Jesus spoke of earlier. Marty is correct about the traditional definition of Godhead that existed before the Trinitarians took it to use for their own purposes.
Quote Paladin claims that when Jesus refers to ascending to where he WAS BEFORE, right after clearly stating that he came DOWN from heaven, he was really speaking of ascending back to earth from the grave. Paladin is in error on that one as Jesus was merely paraphrasing the idea that those that obey all God’s commands come from heaven and are rewarded with eternal life for doing so.
It is true that Jesus did descend to Sheol and then ascended to earth and so Paladin’s understanding does not harm his understanding of the message of salvation unless it causes him to add or subtract from the message.
Quote Gene has to add his own words into the scriptures to make John 1:14 say “the Word CAME TO BE IN SOMEONE WHO WAS FLESH”; and to make Revelation 22:16 say Jesus is the “Offspring and Offspring of David”. What you state Gene believes is confusing but his use of English is not always the same as mine and so I would have to communicate with him to find out what his idea actually is.
Quote So tell me Kerwin: What SCRIPTURE would prohibit Col 1:15-16 from meaning exactly what I understand it to mean? The use of English, Greek, and probably every other human language prohibit such., for instance first born has more than one application and thus can mean the first born in time, order, or importance. That is why context is important.
Mike….> if you do not believe the word (LOGOS) of God came to be in Jesus, then answer this “THE WORDS I AM TELLING YOU ARE NOT MY WORDS BUT THE WORDS OF HIM WHO SENT ME”. And while you at it answer this , The Father who is (IN) Me (HE) doth the Works, so tell us O Wise one , how was the Father (IN) Jesus?< was it not by the Spirit (intellect) of GOD which produced the LOGOS or Word of GOD (IN) Him. So now if those words were not his, then how is it you call him the words he obviously said were not his.? I have never denied Jesus spoke GOD the Fathers WORDS to us, and as your words are your are yours, so is GOD Words His also. Mike no one does more "TWISTING of Scriptures then you Preexistences, and your brother the Trinitarians do. IMO
peace and love……………………………………………gene
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Sep. 08 2011,13:45) Kathi, Jesus is called by the title “god”, just as Satan is. Do you assert that Satan is also without beginning?
Other than that, I know of Col 2:9, where it is said that the fullness of THE Deity dwells in bodily form in the person of Jesus. But we already knew that from Col 1:15, right?
What scriptures are you using to come to the conclusion that Jesus is exactly as much “God” as the One he himself calls “my God”? How do you conclude that Jesus IS the invisible Deity whose fullness dwells in him?
Mike! I was just reading what you said about Col. 2:9….Col 2:9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
Col 1:15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
That however does not mean that Jesus had Deity, He has immortality now….
if Jesus was Deity like His Father , He could not have died for us….
Jehovah God is Deity….He is above All….Deity means being a God I grant you that…. But why did God not come to earth Himself, why did He send His Son? Because He could not die for us, but Jesus could, He was not Deity…. Then every being that is called God is Deity?? I don't think so…..One more thing..
Before Jesus went back to Heaven He said thisJhn 14:28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come [again] unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.
Do you think that Jesus would have said this if He would have been exactly like His Father and Deity? I don't believe that…..
He now has immortality…
Jhn 5:24 ¶ Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.
Jhn 5:25 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live.
Jhn 5:26 For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself;Jhn 4:23 But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.
Jhn 4:24 God [is] a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship [him] in spirit and in truth.
Those that believe that Jesus too is Deity will worship Jesus too
like those that belong to the Catholic Church and others that believe in the trinity….because they all believe that Jesus always existed…
Peace IreneQuote (terraricca @ Sep. 08 2011,09:51) Kathi Quote God the Father was never without His Word or His Spirit. Kathi
but the scriptures do not say that -THE WORD -IS HIS SPIRIT OR HIS SPOKEN WORD,
you do not understand God words
Pierre
Pierre,Are you claiming The Word of God is not the Word of God?
Quote (Pastry @ Sep. 09 2011,10:44) Mike! I was just reading what you said about Col. 2:9…. Col 2:9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
That however does not mean that Jesus had Deity, He has immortality now….
Hi Irene,That was my point. One of the scriptures that many Trinitarians use to pretend Jesus is God is Col 2:9. They say that Col 2:9 calls JESUS Deity. It does not, however. It say that the fullness OF THE Deity dwells in him. In other words, Col 2:9 also speaks of the fact that there is only ONE Deity. And the fullness of that ONE Deity (namely, Jehovah), dwells IN Jesus. It does NOT say that Jesus is Deity.
That's what I was pointing out to Kathi.
peace,
mikeQuote (kerwin @ Sep. 09 2011,00:02)
An angel that transformed into a human being, even if they do it within a human woman’s inner parts, is not conceived.
I see. After Jesus died, was he BORN again? Isn't that how he got to be the FIRSTBORN from the dead? But, according to you, that can't be. Because if Jesus was already born once by Mary, then he couldn't possibly have been born again from the dead. Do you see how weak your argument is?Take you, for instance. You hope that someday you will be BEGOTTEN by God, and become a NEW creation. But how can you? Your philosophy prohibits you from being begotten after you've already been begotten. Your philosophy prohibits you from becoming a NEW creation since you already WERE a creation.
Kerwin, if God can take a human being who died, and raise that human being up as a brand new spirit being, then why can't he take a spirit being, place it in a woman's womb, and have that spirit be CONCEIVED as a human being?
Your argument is as weak as they come, as it puts limits on what God can and can't do. And you didn't address my point about Jesus SHARING IN humanity. What did that mean if he was never anything BUT human?
Quote (kerwin @ Sep. 09 2011,00:02)
Scripture does not attest that all the old things were created through Jesus at a time before he came to exist as a human being.
You are looking at a scripture that says “WHITE” and claiming, not only that it DOESN'T say “WHITE”, but also that it DOES say “BLACK” when in fact, it doesn't. You say scripture doesn't attest? Read 1 Cor 8:6 Kerwin. The same exact “ALL THINGS” that came from the Father also came through our Lord Jesus Christ. So if you want to blindly change the INSPIRED SCRIPTURAL word “ALL” to “NEW”, then you have to do it with the Father also. So………….do you believe that only NEW things came from the Father?Quote (kerwin @ Sep. 09 2011,00:02)
As for the scripture that states “I come down from heaven” and similar ones, it is you that misunderstand it, for Jesus came down from heaven in the same way the baptism of John the Baptist did since Jesus is a prophet and even more than a prophet.
Really? So they BOTH came from God the same exact way, yet John said he wasn't even worthy to untie the sandals of Jesus. Kerwin, read this scripture:John 6:46
No one has seen the Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father.Could John the Baptiser also say this, Kerwin? How is it that Jesus had seen the Father, but John hadn't – considering that, according to you, they both came down from heaven the same way. (That's just one of MANY Jesus/John contrasts that I can scripturally show you.)
Quote (kerwin @ Sep. 09 2011,00:02) Quote (mikeboll @ 64) And it seems that not one of you stop to think that Jesus had God Himself as his LITERAL Father – even as a human! Why would I choose to believe in that polytheistic belief that depends on the principles of man and not of God?
Kerwin, GOD impregnated Mary through His Holy Spirit. This is what the scriptures teach, and why the one born of Mary was called the “Son of the Most High God”. So even IF Jesus began his existence when he was born of Mary, he was STILL the LITERAL Son of God. And calling me a polytheist will not change that SCRIPTURAL FACT.Quote (kerwin @ Sep. 09 2011,00:02) Quote (mikeboll @ 64) So tell me Kerwin: What SCRIPTURE would prohibit Col 1:15-16 from meaning exactly what I understand it to mean? The use of English, Greek, and probably every other human language prohibit such., for instance first born has more than one application and thus can mean the first born in time, order, or importance. That is why context is important.
WHAT?!? Please, by all means, show me how. I realize that “firstborn” has more than one application. What I asked for is a SCRIPTURE that PROHIBITS Col 1:15-16 from saying that Jesus was the first creature God ever created and all other creatures were subsequently created by God through Jesus.ALONG WITH this scripture, feel free to show me how “the use of English, Greek, and probably every other human language prohibit such”. This should be interesting. (Actually, I believe your mouth just wrote a check that your butt can't cover.
But nevertheless, I am anxious to see how you'll attempt to cover this statement.)mike
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
