- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 10 2010,01:13) Quote (Lightenup @ June 08 2010,23:07) Jesus became the second Adam when He came in the flesh.
KathiAgreed, and thats when he became the “Monogenes' Son, and was “ginomai” (came into existence as man) made flesh, (John 1:14 – Phil 2:6-8) and after his ressurction is when he became the “firstborn”, (having the preeminence) over all creation. (Col 1:15).
WJ
Keith,In my debate with Mike I pointed out to him that Strong's says that “ginomai” has a “WIDE LATITUDE” of meanings. One of the meanings Strong gives is, “to be ordained to be.”
Mike ignored this.
Paul said that Jesus was “decreed” to be the Son of God (Rom. 1:1-4).
Jack
Kathi said:
Quote Thanks for showing me that you do not understand that a requirement for the term 'firstborn' is to be actually born. Adam wasn't the firstborn of man, Cain was the firstborn of all men. Adam wasn't born at all, he was created.
Jesus was born at His incarnation! When was He born prior to this? Oh I forgot, you believe that God has a body with both male and female reproductive capacities.Your statement above infers that you must side with Keith that Jesus did not become God's firstborn until He was incarnated.
And then there is the problem with His being firstborn from the dead. You have said that this was the second time Jesus was firstborn. According to you He was “born” when He was raised from the dead? How was Jesus “born” at His resurrection? Did God have relations with Himself AGAIN with His supposed SHEMALE body you claim He possesses?
If you cannot apply your logic consistently then you should dump it. Your views are thoroughly pagan and you and Mikeboll are in gross error. Mike's people believe that Jesus is God “Junior.”
Quote So Jesus, the only-begotten Son, had a beginning to his life. And Almighty God can rightly be called his Begetter, or Father, in the same sense that an earthly father, like Abraham, begets a son. (Hebrews 11:17) Hence, when the Bible speaks of God as the “Father” of Jesus, it means what it says—that they are two separate individuals. God is the senior. Jesus is the junior—in time, position, power, and knowledge.
https://heavennet.net/cgi-bin….2;st=80So let's translate John 1:1 according to popular vernacular:
“In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God Senior and the Word was God Junior.”
The scripture expressly declares that Jesus was “begotten” at His exaltation (Acts 2 & 13; Rom. 1; Heb. 1 & 5). And He was indeed “BORN” prior to this.
JESUS WAS BORN MISS KATHI!
the Roo
Quote (Ed J @ June 05 2010,11:53) Quote (Ed J @ June 03 2010,14:52) Quote (Is 1:18 @ May 31 2010,16:14) Quote (t8 @ May 31 2010,13:07) Hey at least he changed his name from the thinker (which didn't suit) to something more accurate. After all, he does jump around quite a bit trying to dodge difficulties.
I don't see it that way. Jack is an anomaly in this forum – he consistently and cogently answers questions. He answers the whole post and doesn't cherry pick. I haven't seen him run from anyone.
Hi Isaiah 1:18,He has ran away from me on numerous threads!
What about the Posts he doesn't answer at all (choosing to ignore)?
Ask him, he'll tell you: When ever I ask him to explain inconsistencies in what he presents,
he ignores those Posts, instead choosing to engage in endless arguments with those who knowingly disagree with him.God bless
Ed J
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
For Isaiah 1:18
Re-Bump for Is.1:18.Mikeboll said:
Quote Hey Roo! Who places Jesus' enemies as a footstool for him again? The Father and the Son act as one. I don't need to show you the Father's part. So I will repeat for the UMTEENTH TIME the Son's part:
As for us, our citizenship exists in the heavens, from which place also we are eagerly waiting for a savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, 21 who will refashion our humiliated body to be conformed to his glorious body according to the operation of the power that he has, even to subject all things to himself. Philippians 3:20-21 NWT
Are you going to argue with your own translation Mike? It says that Christ will subdue all things to Himself according to the power “HE HAS” (present tense).
I know…you have a “because” clause you want to add.
the Roo
Quote (Arnold @ June 09 2010,05:50) Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ June 02 2010,08:31) Quote (Arnold @ June 02 2010,07:58) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 02 2010,07:21) Quote (Arnold @ June 01 2010,15:05) W.J. and K! What do you think in the beginning means? To me it means that Jesus did have a beginning.
Really? The Father was there with Jesus in the beginning! So does that mean the Father had a beginning?WJ
W.J. You know that the Father always existed don't be funny…. all those Scriptures that Kathi is giving again, I also have given over and over again, yet you and KJ just ignore and ignore this…. you know that is why I have not posted for awhile…. when members that have been here for so long and yet just don't want to learn, why even bother with them….at one time I too said you got to be kidding me, but God did not leave me in that unbelief… lucky me…. Irene
Irene,The problem with your conclusion is that both Jesus and God are called “the beginning.”
God is called “the beginning” (Rev. 21:6)
Jesus is called “the begining: (Rev. 22:13)
So WJ's point stands!
the Roo
No that is not what it says. It says in the Beginning was the Word and the Word was God and the Word was with God…… you are adding to Scriptures that is not wise……
The Word of God had a beginning and not His Father. He is all knowing immortal always been there…. You W.J and JK you just want to do away with that Jesus had a beginning, because that would certainly put a dent in the trinity doctrine….
I think Math. 15:9 is for you….You are just impossible to say the least. Why should anyone even bother with you, You will never give up your ignorance to some Scriptures that were given…..
Irene,You are plain wrong!
God is called “the beginning”
5 Then He who sat on the throne said, “Behold, I make all things new.” And He said to me, “Write, for these words are true and faithful.” 6 And He said to me, “It is done! I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End. I will give of the fountain of the water of life freely to him who thirsts. Rev. 21:6
He who “sat on the throne” is God. He says, “I am the beginning.”
Jesus is called the “beginning”
12 “And behold, I am coming quickly, and My reward is with Me, to give to every one according to his work. 13 I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End, the First and the Last.” 22:12-13
He who is “coming quickly is Jesus. He says “I am the beginning.”
So you prove nothing when you say that Jesus is the beginning.
Jack
Hi KJ,
Many folk misinterpret Revelation.
There are at least 4 speakers in it and context must be understood differently.
rev 1 1-7
Both the verse you offer above are spoken by the Father despite the fact that Jesus speaks before the last quote.Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 10 2010,01:27) Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 08 2010,20:12) Let's see if you can be honest, WJ. Isn't it very clear from the Eusebius letter that YOU originally posted on HN that Eusebius truly took the word “monogenes” to mean “only begotten” and the words “prototokos pasa ktisis” to mean “firstborn of every creature”? Mike
No, because the definition of those words to the Forefathers do not mean that Jesus had a beginning.
Now if you can show us where Eusebius says Jesus had a beginning then you have a point which wouldn't matter anyway.
Your denial of what Jack told you the original meanings of the words is without merrit, for now we have evidence that what Jack said concerning those words are true!
Are you just wanting to be right about something here so you can deny the facts about the words “begotten” and “firstborn” in relation to Jesus!
WJ
Keith,Mike seems to have his head buried in the sand-again. Eusebius submitted his creed to the TRINITARIAN council and it was accepted as ORTHODOX.
Quote Eusebius' creed was orthodox, but it did not deal explicitly with the Arain position. It was taken as its base, and put forward by the council in this revised form (additions and alterations in italic type): We believe in one God, the Father All-Sovereign, the maker of things visible and invisible;
And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father, only begotten, that is, of the substance1 of the Father, God of God, Light of Light, true God of true God, begotten not made, of one substance2 with the Father, through whom all thhings were made, things in heaven and things on earth….1 'from the inmost being of the Father,' inseparably one.
2 sharing one being with the Father, and therefore distinct in existence though essentially one.Documents of the Christian church page 25
Eusebius obviously did not take “only begotten” to mean that Jesus had a beginning.
But Mike continues his filibuster anyway.
Jack
Quote (JustAskin @ June 09 2010,19:27) What is this that Ignatius says..'Jesus is our Lord God' and yet is held up as great theologian scholar?
Ignatuis was right up there with Thomas. Memba Thomas JA? The guy who addressed Jesus saying, “My Lord and my God.”Thomas: “My Lord and my God.”
Ignatius: “Jesus is our Lord God.”
JustAskin: No way!
KJ
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 10 2010,01:31) Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 08 2010,20:30) You guys should look a little closer at what you post to “support” the trinity, because I get some of my best info AGAINST the trinity from stuff you post in support of it.
MikeThats because you still cannot understand the concept of plural unity. Trinitarians believe the Father and the Son are distinct in person, but not in nature or the very essence of what God is!
WJ
Jesus is the “exact representation” of God's substance. The word “exact representation” is the Greek “charakter” and it means that in His substance Jesus is indistinguishable from God.The Greek word “charakter” is used in the Septuagint translation of Leviticus 13:28:
13:28 εαν δε κατα χωραν μεινη το αυγαζον και μη διαχυθη εν τω δερματι αυτη δε η αμαυρα η ουλη του κατακαυματος εστιν και καθαριει αυτον ο ιερευς ο γαρ χαρακτηρ του κατακαυματος εστιν
Lev: 13:28 in English:
And if the glossy spot continues unchanged and makes no advances in the skin, and is rather INDISTINCT, it is the mark of the inflammation, and the priest shall pronounce him clean, for it is the mere hurt of the inflammation. Leupold's Translation
The Greek “charakter” in Leviticus 13:28 means “INDISTINCT.”
Jesus is the “exact representation”, that is, the “indistinct representation” of God's substance. In other words, if the substance of God and Jesus could be put under a microscope and studied it could not be determined which is which for the substance of both Persons is indistinguishably the same.
“He that has seen Me has seen the Father”
Jack
Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 10 2010,07:41) Hi KJ,
Indeed God was in him.
Hebrews 1 does not say that God was in Him. It says that He is the indistinguishable representation of God's substance.KJ
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 09 2010,09:13) Quote (Lightenup @ June 08 2010,23:07) Jesus became the second Adam when He came in the flesh.
KathiAgreed, and thats when he became the “Monogenes' Son, and was “ginomai” (came into existence as man) made flesh, (John 1:14 – Phil 2:6-8) and after his ressurction is when he became the “firstborn”, (having the preeminence) over all creation. (Col 1:15).
WJ
Oh! I don't think that the church father's agree with you on that…isn't the general trinitarian consensus that the Son was eternally generated and creator of all creation and always preeminent over His creation? I find it strange that the creator of creation wouldn't have preeminence over it until thousands of years later when He was resurrected and that He would have to be appointed over His own creation.Since you believe that He wasn't preeminent over all creation before He was resurrected, who do you believe was preeminent over creation before the resurrection? Any references?
Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ June 09 2010,11:04) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 10 2010,01:13) Quote (Lightenup @ June 08 2010,23:07) Jesus became the second Adam when He came in the flesh.
KathiAgreed, and thats when he became the “Monogenes' Son, and was “ginomai” (came into existence as man) made flesh, (John 1:14 – Phil 2:6-8) and after his ressurction is when he became the “firstborn”, (having the preeminence) over all creation. (Col 1:15).
WJ
Keith,In my debate with Mike I pointed out to him that Strong's says that “ginomai” has a “WIDE LATITUDE” of meanings. One of the meanings Strong gives is, “to be ordained to be.”
Mike ignored this.
Paul said that Jesus was “decreed” to be the Son of God (Rom. 1:1-4).
Jack
So Paul wouldn't have agreed with the trinity doctrine either…hmmm.Quote (Lightenup @ June 10 2010,08:19) Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ June 09 2010,11:04) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 10 2010,01:13) Quote (Lightenup @ June 08 2010,23:07) Jesus became the second Adam when He came in the flesh.
KathiAgreed, and thats when he became the “Monogenes' Son, and was “ginomai” (came into existence as man) made flesh, (John 1:14 – Phil 2:6-8) and after his ressurction is when he became the “firstborn”, (having the preeminence) over all creation. (Col 1:15).
WJ
Keith,In my debate with Mike I pointed out to him that Strong's says that “ginomai” has a “WIDE LATITUDE” of meanings. One of the meanings Strong gives is, “to be ordained to be.”
Mike ignored this.
Paul said that Jesus was “decreed” to be the Son of God (Rom. 1:1-4).
Jack
So Paul wouldn't have agreed with the trinity doctrine either…hmmm.
Huh?The point is that Christ preexisted His title and office as Son.
the Roo
Quote (Lightenup @ June 10 2010,08:16) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 09 2010,09:13) Quote (Lightenup @ June 08 2010,23:07) Jesus became the second Adam when He came in the flesh.
KathiAgreed, and thats when he became the “Monogenes' Son, and was “ginomai” (came into existence as man) made flesh, (John 1:14 – Phil 2:6-8) and after his ressurction is when he became the “firstborn”, (having the preeminence) over all creation. (Col 1:15).
WJ
Oh! I don't think that the church father's agree with you on that…isn't the general trinitarian consensus that the Son was eternally generated and creator of all creation and always preeminent over His creation? I find it strange that the creator of creation wouldn't have preeminence over it until thousands of years later when He was resurrected and that He would have to be appointed over His own creation.Since you believe that He wasn't preeminent over all creation before He was resurrected, who do you believe was preeminent over creation before the resurrection? Any references?
Kathi,You and I discussed this last year. Tertullian and the Trinitarian Apologists denied eternal generation. They taught that the eternal Word became Son in time.
There are many trinitarian sites you can visit and see for yourself that many trinitarians today do not accept eternal generation because it is an oxymoron. Jesus was appointed to be God's firstborn Son for the new covenant age as David was appointed to be God's firstborn son under the old covenant theocracy.
the Roo
Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ June 09 2010,16:51) Quote (Lightenup @ June 10 2010,08:16) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 09 2010,09:13) Quote (Lightenup @ June 08 2010,23:07) Jesus became the second Adam when He came in the flesh.
KathiAgreed, and thats when he became the “Monogenes' Son, and was “ginomai” (came into existence as man) made flesh, (John 1:14 – Phil 2:6-8) and after his ressurction is when he became the “firstborn”, (having the preeminence) over all creation. (Col 1:15).
WJ
Oh! I don't think that the church father's agree with you on that…isn't the general trinitarian consensus that the Son was eternally generated and creator of all creation and always preeminent over His creation? I find it strange that the creator of creation wouldn't have preeminence over it until thousands of years later when He was resurrected and that He would have to be appointed over His own creation.Since you believe that He wasn't preeminent over all creation before He was resurrected, who do you believe was preeminent over creation before the resurrection? Any references?
Kathi,You and I discussed this last year. Tertullian and the Trinitarian Apologists denied eternal generation. They taught that the eternal Word became Son in time.
There are many trinitarian sites you can visit and see for yourself that many trinitarians today do not accept eternal generation because it is an oxymoron. Jesus was appointed to be God's firstborn Son for the new covenant age as David was appointed to be God's firstborn son under the old covenant theocracy.
the Roo
So the original trinity doctrine has been revised? OR was the original trinity doctrine found to be incorrect in part and truth in part which means the trinity doctrine is wrong since it is not completely accurate? No co-eternal Son now? When was that wording changed in the doctrine?Are you saying that many trinitarians of today are not the true trinitarians of early Christianity? If they are not in agreement with the trinity doctrine of early Christianity, then they are false trinitarians. That would make you a false trinitarian too but many of us knew that. I would say that the term 'trinitarian apologists' is an oxymoron if they did not agree with the trinity doctrine 100%.
Was the eternal word an 'it?'
Are you saying that David was preeminent over all creation for the old covenant age and Jesus is preeminent over all creation for the new covenant age?
Where does it say that David was preeminent over all creation?
Who was preeminent over all creation before David?Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ June 09 2010,16:33) Quote (Lightenup @ June 10 2010,08:19) Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ June 09 2010,11:04) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 10 2010,01:13) Quote (Lightenup @ June 08 2010,23:07) Jesus became the second Adam when He came in the flesh.
KathiAgreed, and thats when he became the “Monogenes' Son, and was “ginomai” (came into existence as man) made flesh, (John 1:14 – Phil 2:6-8) and after his ressurction is when he became the “firstborn”, (having the preeminence) over all creation. (Col 1:15).
WJ
Keith,In my debate with Mike I pointed out to him that Strong's says that “ginomai” has a “WIDE LATITUDE” of meanings. One of the meanings Strong gives is, “to be ordained to be.”
Mike ignored this.
Paul said that Jesus was “decreed” to be the Son of God (Rom. 1:1-4).
Jack
So Paul wouldn't have agreed with the trinity doctrine either…hmmm.
Huh?The point is that Christ preexisted His title and office as Son.
the Roo
So, are you saying that there was a time when the second person of the trinity was not preeminent over His own creation? Who was then?Hi WJ, this is really the last thing I have to say here (on this thread) because I cant be bothered with these debates, but just to clear up this matter on the Saint Ignatius..
I cheaked it and your right
Authentic letters:
To the Ephesians
To the Magnesians
Letter to the Trallians
To the Romans
To the Philadelphians
To the Smyrnaeans
To Polycarp, Bishop of SmyrnaEpistles attributed to Saint Ignatius but of spurious origin:
Epistle to the Tarsians
Epistle to the Antiochians
Epistle to Hero, a Deacon of Antioch
Epistle to the Philippians
The Epistle of Maria the Proselyte to Ignatius
Epistle to Mary at Neapolis,
Zarbus First Epistle to St. John
Second Epistle to St. John
The Epistle of Ignatius to the Virgin Mary
Reply of the Blessed Virgin to this LetterBut WJ, that leaves these Authentic parts of Saint Ignatius…
(Ignatius) To the Smyrneans
Ignatius, who is also called Theophorus, to the Church of God the Father, and of the beloved Jesus Christ.
Ignatius, who is also called Theophorus, to the Church of God the most high Father and His beloved Son Jesus Christ.
Glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who by Him has given you such wisdom, that He was the Son of God, “the first-born of every creature,” God the Word, the only-begotten Son, and was of the seed of David according to the flesh, by the Virgin Mary; was baptized by John, that all righteousness might be fulfilled by Him; that He lived a life of holiness without sin, and was truly, under Pontius Pilate and Herod the tetrarch, nailed [to the cross] for us in His flesh. (I).
To the Ephesians
Ignatius, who is also called Theophorus, to the Church which is at Ephesus… being united and elected through the true passion by the will of God the Father, and of our Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour.
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, but who afterwards became also man, of Mary the virgin. For “the Word was made flesh.” 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. (VII).
For the Son of God, who was begotten before time began, and established all things according to the will of the Father, He was conceived in the womb of Mary, according to the appointment of God, of the seed of David, and by the Holy Ghost. For [it]says, “Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and He shall be called Immanuel.” He was born and was baptized by John, that He might ratify the institution committed to that prophet. (XVIII).
Jesus Christ, in His faith and in His love, in His suffering and in His resurrection. Especially if the Lord make known to me that ye come together man by man in common through grace, individually, in one faith, and in Jesus Christ, who was of the seed of David according to the flesh, being both the Son of man and the Son of God. (XX).
The faith of Jesus Christ, and in His love, in His passion, and in His resurrection. Do ye all come together in common, and individually, through grace, in one faith of God the Father, and of Jesus Christ His only-begotten Son, and “the first-born of every creature,” but of the seed of David according to the flesh. (XX).
To the Magnesians
The ministry of Jesus Christ, who was with the Father before the beginning of time, and in the end was revealed. (VI).
The ministry of Jesus Christ. He, being begotten by the Father before the beginning of time, was God the Word, the only-begotten Son, and remains the same for ever; for “of His kingdom there shall be no end. (VI).
Do ye therefore all run together as into one temple of God, as to one altar, as to one Jesus Christ, who came forth from one Father, and is with and has gone to one.(VII).
Do ye all, as one man, run together into the temple of God, as unto one altar, to one Jesus Christ, the High Priest of the unbegotten God. (VII).
There is one God, who has manifested Himself by Jesus Christ His Son, who is His eternal Word. (VIII).
There is one God, the Almighty, who has manifested Himself by Jesus Christ His Son, who is His Word. (VIII).
Fare ye well in the harmony of God, ye who have obtained the inseparable Spirit, who is Jesus Christ. (XV).
Fare ye well in harmony, ye who have obtained the inseparable Spirit, in Christ Jesus, by the will of God. (XV).
To the Romans
Ignatius, 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….I also salute in the name of Jesus Christ, the Son of the Father…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….I also salute in the name of Almighty God, and of Jesus Christ His Son… abundance of happiness unblameably, in God, even the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ.
“For the things which are seen are temporal, but the things which are not seen are eternal.” For our God, Jesus Christ, now that He is with the Father, is all the more revealed [in His glory]. (III).
Quote (Lightenup @ June 09 2010,15:11) Hi Mike,
I just wanted to make sure you saw these words of Ignatius: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, but who afterwards became also man, of Mary the virgin.
Hi Kathi,I have slowly come to terms with Jesus being a god, even though the word in Biblical times was used for men and angels too. Even the fallen angel, Satan.
I agree that he must be divine if he came directly from the Father God.
But you must know that we are only told to worship ONE GOD in scripture. He is a jealous God and will not tolerate anyone thinking He should share His glory with another.
So, you must decide for yourself: Either Jesus is part of the same being as the Father, and therefore you worship a “binity” with no scriptural support. Or Jesus is truly the Son that the Father begat, in which case he is a separate being and therefore you are forbidden by God to worship him as God.
I want to also get past this with you. Your a big girl, make up your own mind. As for me and my house, we will worship Jehovah only.
peace and love,
mikeQuote (WorshippingJesus @ June 10 2010,01:27) Now if you can show us where Eusebius says Jesus had a beginning then you have a point which wouldn't matter anyway.
Hi WJ,1. What did “genao” mean in NT times?
And how can you “honestly” deny the fact that Eusebius thought Jesus to be the firstborn of every creature BEFORE ALL THE AGES? 2. How could that POSSIBLY be mistaken to mean he thought Jesus was “preeminemt over mankind” if he thought it happened BEFORE ALL THE AGES?
Only two questions….
peace and love,
mike
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
