- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (Lightenup @ June 14 2010,05:29) Mike,
Jesus is the mighty WHAT?
Come on Kathi, stop playing.
To use my previous analogy about my son, Jesus is a girl who is my friend, but not my GIRLFRIEND. That role belongs to his God.
mike
Well, Mike, your 'friend' will be your bridegroom…you ought to realize that the 'friend' is a better 'friend' than you realize.
C'mon Mike, Jesus is your mighty what?
Hi Kathi,
Great post to Jack, I love it!
This is just for your info, nothing implied, okay? The Apostolic Creed, from circa 150-175 A.D., said only this of the Holy Spirit:
And (I believe) in the Holy Spirit, holy Church, forgiveness of sins, and the ressurection of the flesh.
No mention of a trinity.
The original Nicene Creed of 325 A.D. said this of the Holy Spirit:
And (we believe) in the Holy Spirit.
No mention of a trinity.
It was the Constantinopolitan Creed of 381 A.D. that included the Holy Spirit as part of the Godhead. That is the one similar to the one you posted.
peace and love,
mikeHi Roo,
Don't you get tired of posting stuff that will undoubtedly be used against you?
You latest includes these tidbits:The first preceded the outbreak of the Arian controversy, when, as might be expected in a follower of Origen, his interest was anti-Sabellian (what you guys call Modelism and claim to be no part of)and his emphasis chiefly upon the subordination of the Son of God.
The second stage began with the outbreak of the controversy in 318, and continued until the Nicene Council. During this period he took the side of Arius in the dispute with Alexander of Alexandria, and accepted what he understood to be the position of Arius and his supporters, who, as he supposed, taught both the divinity and subordination of the Son. It was natural that he should take this side, for in his traditional fear of Sabellianism, in which he was one with the followers of Origen in general, he found it difficult to approve the position of Alexander, who seemed to be doing away altogether with the subordination of the Son.
Meanwhile at the council of Nicaea he seems to have discovered that the Alexandrians were right in claiming that Arius was carrying his subordinationism so far as to deny all real divinity to Christ. To this length Eusebius himself was unwilling to go, and so, convinced that he had misunderstood Arius, and that the teaching of the latter was imperilling the historic belief in the divinity of Christ, he gave his support to the opposition, and voted for the Nicene Creed,
So first, he took the side of those claiming the Son was divine, but subordinate to the Father, as he also believed.
Then, he took the side of Arius again, for in his mind, Alexander was trying to completely do away with any subordination of the Son to the Father.
And his “third stage” was to give his support to “the opposition” because he came to be convinced that Arius was taking the subordination so far as to believe the Son wasn't divine at all. And that was taking it too far, as I also believe.
It is important to note, however, that the letter we've been debating was writtten as a support to the Nicene Council, and was worded the way he believed.
You've gone as far as posting proof that the Council later had to “doctor” his letter and claim that “this is what he really meant”.
Even then, I took the “adjusted” letter apart piece by piece and showed you very plainly that it says nothing about a trinity or the Son being equal to the Father.I still await your next “big gun”.
mike
Quote (Lightenup @ June 14 2010,06:13) Well, Mike, your 'friend' will be your bridegroom…you ought to realize that the 'friend' is a better 'friend' than you realize. C'mon Mike, Jesus is your mighty what?
Hi Kathi,You act as if we are discussing a different Jesus. It is the same Jesus. It's just to me, he is Lord of lords and King of kings, and my God is also his God.
To you, he is either a completely different God from the Father that you worship, or is co-joined to the Father making up one God, of which he is a part.
If it is the former…..woe to you.
If it is the latter, how can he be part of the being that he calls “my God”? How does God have a God?
mike
TO ALL:
A Jehovah's Witness concurs that Jesus could not have always been the “only begotten Son”
“If Jesus was always the 'only begotten son' he would have “always” been better than the other angels and his name would “always” have been better than thiers.”
The JW even uses my argument from Psalm 89 regarding king David:
“Also, King David prefigures Jesus in the pre-eminence of his Kingship as regards to Jehovah God. David was neither the first King in Israel, nor was he even the first male born in his family ( I think he was actually the last). Yet Jehovah covenanted to David that he would have a kingship that would last forever. Even more than that he stated at Psalms 89:20,27“
<a href="http://e-jehovahs-witnesses.com/forum/showthread.php?3797-How-was-Jesus-quot-the-Firstborn-quot-and-the-quot-only-begotten-Son-q
uot” target=”_blank”>http://e-jehovahs-witnesses.com/forum….on-quotNot all JW's are wrong all of the time.
It is self evident that if Jesus had always been the only begotten Son, then He always would have been superior to the angels. But He CLEARLY was lower than the angels in the days of His flesh.Hebrews 2:9 NWT:
” 9 but we behold Jesus, who has been made a little lower than angels, crowned with glory and honor for having suffered death, that he by God’s undeserved kindness might taste death for every [man].”
Therefore, the name “begotten Son” in reference to Jesus cannot mean that Jesus is the first to “come into being.” Mikeboll has turned a deaf ear to common sense on this point. But maybe he will consider the word of one of his own.
I'll be back!
the Roo
KJ,
“Not all JW's are [always] wrong”…Just as not all Desperarian are always wrong…
And for this reason I advocate that all contributions are read without prejudice for the contributor. And that acknowledgement is shown where there is agreement, not just the negative, disagreement points.
Who knows, it could even cause one to be positively drawn to the fuller Truth of the Testimony of Christ Jesus!
Hi,
No matter what his possible origins Jesus of Nazareth died.
Now he is a new creation, alive in the Spirit of Christ.
We no longer speak of him according to fleshQuote (Kangaroo Jack @ June 14 2010,07:02) Not all JW's are wrong all of the time. It is self evident that if Jesus had always been the only begotten Son, then He always would have been superior to the angels. But He CLEARLY was lower than the angels in the days of His flesh.
Wow Roo,You really did your homework! You went to a forum where Jehovah's Witnesses AND “Interested Others” are invited to do the same thing we do here at HN. It's obvious this random poster you quoted is not even a JW. If he is, someone better tell on him like you did to the elder in your church. Then the Tribal Council can beat the free thoughts right out of him.
How dare he have his own interpretation of scriptures!But, to answer your point, Heb 1:4 doesn't say Jesus became SUPERIOR to the angels, as if he wasn't before. It says he became “AS MUCH superior to the angels as the name he inherited is superior to theirs”. This doesn't say he wasn't already superior, does it?
Furthermore, I could turn your whole argument back on you and say that Jesus couldn't have been God before he was raised because he would have already been superior to the angels, right?
peace and love,
mikeHi MB,
Jesus was anointed with His Father's Spirit and worked in that name.
That Spirit is superior to the angels but is given for service to God even helping in the worship of God[Rom8]NAME is power and Authority.
Jesus inherited power and authority that was higher than the power and authority that he had before he came to earth.
The Princes are superior to the other Sons of God.
Hi JA,
He did inherit the promises given to Abraham being found a clean vessel by fulfilling the Law.
But the power and authority came by the anointing with God's Spirit at the Jordan. [Acts 10.38]Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 13 2010,14:59) Quote (Lightenup @ June 14 2010,06:13) Well, Mike, your 'friend' will be your bridegroom…you ought to realize that the 'friend' is a better 'friend' than you realize. C'mon Mike, Jesus is your mighty what?
Hi Kathi,You act as if we are discussing a different Jesus. It is the same Jesus. It's just to me, he is Lord of lords and King of kings, and my God is also his God.
To you, he is either a completely different God from the Father that you worship, or is co-joined to the Father making up one God, of which he is a part.
If it is the former…..woe to you.
If it is the latter, how can he be part of the being that he calls “my God”? How does God have a God?
mike
Mike,
What was your answer to that question “your Mighty ____?” Your Mighty what? C'mon Mike you have admitted that you have come to realize that the Son is divine and god and you have admitted that the Son is YOUR Mighty One. Can you just come to terms that the Son is YOUR Mighty god/God who has a God?Our governing authority…made up of:
1. The Unbegotten God
2. The Begotten God, begotten before the ages
together with the Spirit of the Unbegotten God which is given to believers through the Begotten God.Can you come to terms with this, huh, pleeeeease.
Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 14 2010,08:26) Hi MB,
Jesus was anointed with His Father's Spirit and worked in that name.
That Spirit is superior to the angels but is given for service to God even helping in the worship of God[Rom8]
Hi Nick,Someday you will have to deal with the fact that Jesus didn't become absorbed by God's Spirit. He is still an individual man, albeit in a spiritual body. He has a will of his own, and has yet to accomplish many things to the glory of his God.
mike
Hi MB,
At gethsemene Jesus struggled with God's leading in his life.
But as the sons of God are LED BY the Spirit of God[Rom8] this Son showed the way and submitted.Quote (Lightenup @ June 14 2010,09:59) Can you just come to terms that the Son is YOUR Mighty god/God who has a God?
Sorry Kathi,My God doesn't have a God He answers to. Give it up, girl.
mike
Hi MB,
From the time of the Jordan we see the Spirit of Christ teaching, healing and setting men free thanks to the submission of the wonderful vessel, the man Jesus.Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 14 2010,13:05) Hi MB,
At gethsemene Jesus struggled with God's leading in his life.
But as the sons of God are LED BY the Spirit of God[Rom8] this Son showed the way and submitted.
I don't read it that way, Nick. Jesus was always prepared to do his God's will. He was just hoping for a minute that God's will could be accomplished without him going through what he was about to.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
