- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (JustAskin @ June 14 2010,13:17) To All, Please try to abide by this information that KJ has issued.
Discussion cannot move forward if inadmissable information is brought into play – whether by lack of understanding or for other reasons.
[JA – Moderator]
JAHMMM!
I am impressed!
WJ
Quote (JustAskin @ June 15 2010,05:17) To All, Please try to abide by this information that KJ has issued.
Discussion cannot move forward if inadmissable information is brought into play – whether by lack of understanding or for other reasons.
[JA – Moderator]
JA,Thanks! I appreciate that you understand this. It is only that which Eusebius believed in the end that counts.
KJ
Quote (Lightenup @ June 13 2010,13:27) 1. the Nicene Creed specifically says that the Son was begotten by the Father before all worlds. You say He was begotten when He was resurrected. 2. The doctrine of the trinity says that the Son is co-eternal, you say that the Son began being the Son after the resurrection.
KathiBut the way you interpret these 2 points puts them in conflict with each other!
For the Creed to mean “begotten” is the beginning of the Son would contradict the point that the Son is “co-eternal”.
And in fact according to your definition that the Son had a beginning and the point “the Son is co-eternal” would be an oxymoron, unless of course the Fathers did not believe the Son had a beginning but in fact believed that the Father was always the Father and the Son was always the Son in person, yet was declared to be the begotten Son and took on the roles of being a Father and a Son at some point in time.
Of course we know the Father became the Father of Jesus when he was born of the virgin Mary!
Therefore we can say the Father always existed with the Son and still be true to the scriptures because we are still speaking of the same persons though they took on new roles and titles!
WJ
Hi Kathi
God has enlightened you huh?
Quote (Lightenup @ June 13 2010,23:56) 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn (first fruit) over all creation,
First of all the word “first fruit” is not found in the definition of the word “firstborn” (prōtotokos), but in fact Paul and John used the word firstfruits (aparchē) 8 times, in which they call both Jesus and the saints “firstfuits” and where he used the term “firstfruits” in referring to Jesus it is after the “resurrection”. 1 Cor 15:20These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were redeemed from among men, being the firstfruits (aparchē) unto God and to the Lamb. Rev 14:4
Paul could have used the word in Col but didn't. It is wrong to insert words in the text to support a theory and even if it could be said “firstfruits” in relation to Jesus it could not have been in the beginning of all things, but instead after his resurrection!
And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. Col 1:18
Paul clearly gives us the definition of the word “firstborn” (prōtotokos) it simply means he had the preemninence over all things in which he created by and for himself!
WJ
Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ June 14 2010,11:16) Worshippingjesus said to Mikeboll: Quote Why are you denying the fact that Eusebius had changed his position?
Keith,Mike must continue his filibuster. He can't admit that Eusebius changed his position.
Did you read the true story I told about an elder at my church who wrote essays which said that Christ was not God in the flesh? This was ten years ago. I submitted a letter of complaint to the governing body at my church and they referred my complaint to a higher governing body in the denomination. That higher governing body called the elder in to examine him and he recanted of his errors.
For a while I continued to hold the elder's former errors against him. Then finally a wise elder corrected me saying, “In the end he got it right.” This inferred that the writings of the errant elder before he recanted didn't count. In the end the elder got it right.
Anything Eusebius said or wrote before he submitted to and signed the Nicean creed doesn't count. In the end Eusebius got it right. Even sometime before Eusebius must have changed because he submitted his own creed to the council of Nicea and they accepted it as “orthodox.” Then they revised it and Eusebius signed it.
So in the end all 300 plus church fathers including Eusebius spoke with ONE voice saying that the word “begotten” in reference to Jesus meant that He is “of ONE substance with the Father.”
This goes right along with our view on the word “begotten.” So you and I have ALL the church fathers including Eusebius on our side.
Jack
JackGood points. Mike has denied the numbers that did agree!
WJ
Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 14 2010,15:46) Hi WJ,
Yes Jesus died and now we speak of the Spirit of Christ as the Lord.
So Jesus does not live in you?WJ
Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 14 2010,15:51) Hi WJ,
The Spirit of Christ does.
What about you?
NHAbsolutlely. The Father, 2 Cor 6:16, The Son 2 Cor 13:5, and the Holy Spirit, John 14:17, 1 Cor 6:19 as one God!
WJ
Hi WJ,
Jesus is in heaven at the right hand of the Father
If the Spirit of Christ does not live in you you are none of his,[Rom8]
He is the head of his body and they are joined to him and his God by the Holy SpiritQuote (Nick Hassan @ June 14 2010,15:56) Hi WJ,
Jesus is in heaven at the right hand of the Father
If the Spirit of Christ does not live in you you are none of his,[Rom8]
He is the head of his body and they are joined to him and his God by the Holy Spirit
Examine yourselves to see whether you are in the faith; test yourselves. Do you not realize that Christ Jesus is in you–unless, of course, you fail the test? 2 Cor 13:5There is only “One Spirit” and “One God” that lives in his people!
WJ
Hi WJ,
CHRIST Jesus.
There is only one Spirit and that is the Spirit of Christ and God[Rom8,1Cor2]But you have a third??
Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 14 2010,16:13) Hi WJ,
CHRIST Jesus.
There is only one Spirit and that is the Spirit of Christ and God[Rom8,1Cor2]But you have a third??
It is you that claims more than one!WJ
Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 15 2010,06:22) Hi KJ,
Why?
Nick,Because it is righteous. You don't count a man's former views. Would you think of counting Paul's views before his conversion to Christ and making arguments from them?
KJ
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
