- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ Aug. 16 2010,09:32) Mike, It's not that I am against the early church fathers. It's that you want to hide behind them when you are losing an argument scripturally.
I have said many times here and everyone knows where I stand. I don't give a hoot about anything but “What saith the scriptures.”
But you and Kathi when you are losing the argument scripturally invoke the fathers saying, “See, we're not alone.”
Nobody cares Mike!
the Roo
Hi Jack,What argument was I losing? That Jesus is Wisdom in a part of Proverbs?
And you say “Nobody cares Mike!”. Well I sure do. If I'm getting the same thing out of the scriptures as Eusebius – the most learned theologian of his day, and Ignatius who learned directly from the Apostle John, then I DO care. That tells me I'm on the right track.
mike
Quote (shimmer @ Aug. 16 2010,10:01) Mike, I havent read everything here today, only briefly because I'm not supposed to be here, I'm supposed to be cleaning the house lol, but if you are getting confused, take some time out, refocus, calm your mind down, pray, I know what it's like.
Hi Shimmer,I'm not confused at all. What makes you think that?
mike
Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ Aug. 16 2010,10:03) Kathi, Hooey! When you and Mike lose an argument scripturally you hide behind the fathers saying, “See, we're not alone.” That's what it's all about. It's all about you and Mike saving face when you can't win the argument scripturally.
Jack,I agree it feels good to have confirmation of what you thought in the first place. But did you ever ask yourself this question:
WHY do the church fathers always agree with Kathi and Mike, not me and WJ?
You should do it.
mike
Quote (shimmer @ Aug. 16 2010,10:11) KangarooJack, We all have day's like that, my problem is I'm on the other side of the world than most people, so I miss out on all the conversations and only catch up later, when everyones gone. I think Mike need's some time out.
You know Shimmer,I've have given you the benefit of the doubt so far. But your “opinions” without any substance to back them are wearing thin.
Did you not read the post where it was very clear I was talking about things that Jack has claimed that turned out to be false? Did you see where he took one of the things that HE claimed that I had just proven false and attributed it to me?
What you seem to do is to go through and read the “juicy” posts where Jack is all yelling and bolding and capitalizing words, and you don't actually check whether what he was yelling about even happened.
And then you make a snap judgement against ME?
Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 14 2010,23:24) So, I say the only begotten Son of God was begotten before the ages and the Son of Man was born in the world, during the ages.
KathiLOL, you agree with one point of the creed and pull it out of context to support your belief.
I have already explained what “begotten before the ages means”.
The Trintarians believed Jesus (the Word) always existed with the Father.
The context of the Athanasian creed does not allow for your definition of “God procreated another God equal to himself”, 2 Divine beings.
It is a true statement that he was begotten before the ages just as he was the lamb of God before the foundations of the world and foreordained to be the Lamb.
The definition of begotten does not always mean “procreate”.
WJ
Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 15 2010,00:16) Gene,
If you read the word 'God' here and think 'unbegotten God' it makes perfect sense.Isa 43:10….> Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant, whim I have chosen: that you may know and Believe me, and understand the (I) am he: before me there was (NO)unbegotten GOD formed< Neither shall the Be (AFTER ME). Many more show there is only (ONE) true unbegotten GOD, If you are in dought Believe what Jesus said in Prayer, “FOR THOU ARE THE (ONLY) TRUE unbegottenGOD”.
KathiHow can you add to the text and change its meaning and then say it makes perfect sense?
WJ
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 14 2010,23:25) Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ Aug. 15 2010,07:29) God said that there was no god formed before or AFTER Him (Is. 43:10).
Isaiah 43:10 NET
You are my witnesses,” says the Lord, “my servant whom I have chosen, so that you may consider and believe in me, and understand that I am he. No god was formed before me, and none will outlive me.This is closer to the thought God was making known IMO. It doesn't say no god was “formed” after Him, just before Him. This translation is more inline with scripture in which God many times calls others gods. It would seem strange for God to say there were no other gods at all, and then mention many gods througout scripture. Weren't Paul's words about the god of this age inspired of God?
mike
And the Net also says…Heb “and after me, there will not be”; NASB “there will be none after Me.”
WJ
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 15 2010,22:02) Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ Aug. 16 2010,09:32) Mike, It's not that I am against the early church fathers. It's that you want to hide behind them when you are losing an argument scripturally.
I have said many times here and everyone knows where I stand. I don't give a hoot about anything but “What saith the scriptures.”
But you and Kathi when you are losing the argument scripturally invoke the fathers saying, “See, we're not alone.”
Nobody cares Mike!
the Roo
Hi Jack,What argument was I losing? That Jesus is Wisdom in a part of Proverbs?
And you say “Nobody cares Mike!”. Well I sure do. If I'm getting the same thing out of the scriptures as Eusebius – the most learned theologian of his day, and Ignatius who learned directly from the Apostle John, then I DO care. That tells me I'm on the right track.
mike
MikeReally? Then why don't you follow through with their conclusions and call Jesus “your Lord and God” like Thomas and others?
WJ
Mike said:
Quote That definitely does NOT say none will be begotten after God, just that there will be none that exist after Him, or none that will “outlive” Him. TO ALL:
Just more of Mike's inconsistencies and contradictions. “Eyeneto” does not mean “to beget.” It means “to come into being.” God said that no god came into being before or after Him.
Mike himself says that none will exist after Him. That's exactly what “egeneto” means.
Again, Mike is not learned in the Greek and he has no credibility at all which I have shown in our debate. He said that John 8:44 is written grammatically the same as John 1:1 when they clearly are not. I will not let him get away with this nonsense!
the Roo
Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ Aug. 16 2010,19:45) Mike said: Quote I'm not confused at all. What makes you think that?
.TO ALL:
Just more of Mike's inconsistencies and contradictions. “Eyeneto” does not mean “to beget.” It means “to come into being.” God said that no god came into being before or after Him.
Mike himself says that none will exist after Him. That's exactly what “egeneto” means.
Again, Mike is not learned in the Greek and he has no credibility at all which I have shown in our debate. He said that John 8:44 is written grammatically the same as John 1:1 when they clearly are not. I will not let him get away with this nonsense!
the Roo
Mike said to Shimmer:Quote I'm not confused at all. What makes you think that? before he said
Quote That definitely does NOT say none will be begotten after God, just that there will be none that exist after Him, or none that will “outlive” Him. TO ALL: The word “eyeneto” is 2 aorist which means “no god CAME into being before and none shall exist after YHWH! How can a god not outlive YHWH when there were none that came into being in the first place? It says that none shall EXIST after YHWH as none existed before Him. Geez. Mike's own NWT on which he was brought up agrees. Mike is clearly confused and the fact that others see it means that his theology does not fly here.
btw, I am using the KJ Jr. account because I am not on my pc. My regular account does not work on the office computer.
the Roo
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 16 2010,14:02) Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ Aug. 16 2010,09:32) Mike, It's not that I am against the early church fathers. It's that you want to hide behind them when you are losing an argument scripturally.
I have said many times here and everyone knows where I stand. I don't give a hoot about anything but “What saith the scriptures.”
But you and Kathi when you are losing the argument scripturally invoke the fathers saying, “See, we're not alone.”
Nobody cares Mike!
the Roo
Hi Jack,What argument was I losing? That Jesus is Wisdom in a part of Proverbs?
And you say “Nobody cares Mike!”. Well I sure do. If I'm getting the same thing out of the scriptures as Eusebius – the most learned theologian of his day, and Ignatius who learned directly from the Apostle John, then I DO care. That tells me I'm on the right track.
mike
Mike,Then you are not an appropriate representative of Heavan Net if you are trying to instill the fear of man into people:
Quote The site contains content resulting from a thirst and passion for truth, so some of the content may seem controversial to some religiously bound people. The idea is to do God's will and shun all man-made tradition which is founded in the fear of man.This site is simply about sharing what God has put in our hearts and minds and putting those same things into the hearts and minds of others. There is no problem testing all doctrines, (even so-called sacred ones).
You assume you interpret the fathers correctly and then try to put the fear of man in God's people.You are not acting like a representative of Heaven Net.
Roo
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 16 2010,15:19) Quote (shimmer @ Aug. 16 2010,10:11) KangarooJack, We all have day's like that, my problem is I'm on the other side of the world than most people, so I miss out on all the conversations and only catch up later, when everyones gone. I think Mike need's some time out.
You know Shimmer,I've have given you the benefit of the doubt so far. But your “opinions” without any substance to back them are wearing thin.
Did you not read the post where it was very clear I was talking about things that Jack has claimed that turned out to be false? Did you see where he took one of the things that HE claimed that I had just proven false and attributed it to me?
What you seem to do is to go through and read the “juicy” posts where Jack is all yelling and bolding and capitalizing words, and you don't actually check whether what he was yelling about even happened.
And then you make a snap judgement against ME?
To all, This begotten thing is taking over the whole forum ! lol,Mike, as I said I was rushed I only saw what looked like JA and LU telling you that you needed to chill and needed time out, so as is supposed to be a Christian thing to do, I agreed that sometimes we get confused on these forums as I do, and I said time out often helps, your response to me upset me a bit, but fair enough, never mind. As I said Im done here. Im going to a church ! lol.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 16 2010,14:19) Quote (shimmer @ Aug. 16 2010,10:11) KangarooJack, We all have day's like that, my problem is I'm on the other side of the world than most people, so I miss out on all the conversations and only catch up later, when everyones gone. I think Mike need's some time out.
You know Shimmer,I've have given you the benefit of the doubt so far. But your “opinions” without any substance to back them are wearing thin.
Did you not read the post where it was very clear I was talking about things that Jack has claimed that turned out to be false? Did you see where he took one of the things that HE claimed that I had just proven false and attributed it to me?
What you seem to do is to go through and read the “juicy” posts where Jack is all yelling and bolding and capitalizing words, and you don't actually check whether what he was yelling about even happened.
And then you make a snap judgement against ME?
Mike,I made a mistake and I apologized and you still bring it up even after I apologized. You attributed the word “begotten” to me in reference to the LXX. So I thought that you were making that statement because I did not recognize it as my own because it was not my own. I am guilty of not paying careful attention.
I apologized. Now start acting like a moderator.
the Roo
TO ALL:
There is not one major and long established translation of the scriptures that supports Mike's view that gods came into existence after YHWH. Mike is saying that Isaiah 43:10 says that other gods exist but that they will not “out live” YHWH. Not one major translation supports Mike's theory.
NIV:
Quote “You are my witnesses,” declares the LORD,
“and my servant whom I have chosen,
so that you may know and believe me
and understand that I am he.
Before me no god was formed,
nor will there be one after me.NASB:
Quote “You are (A)My witnesses,” declares the LORD,
“And (B)My servant whom I have chosen,
So that you may know and believe Me
And understand that ÂI am He
(D)Before Me there was no God formed,
And there will be none after Me.KJV:
Quote 10Ye 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. NKJV:
Quote “ You are My witnesses,” says the LORD, “ And My servant whom I have chosen,
That you may know and believe Me,
And understand that I am He.
Before Me there was no God formed,
Nor shall there be after Me.Young's Literal:
Quote 10Ye [are] My witnesses, an affirmation of Jehovah, And My servant whom I have chosen, So that ye know and give credence to Me, And understand that I [am] He, Before Me there was no God formed, And after Me there is none. Even the NWT on which Mike was brought up and which Mike himself endorses does NOT support his view that gods exist but just won't outlive YHWH:
Quote 10 “YOU are my witnesses,” is the utterance of Jehovah, “even my servant whom I have chosen, in order that YOU may know and have faith in me, and that YOU may understand that I am the same One. Before me there was no God formed, AND AFTER ME THERE CONTINUED TO BE NONE. 11 I—I am Jehovah, and besides me there is no savior.”
Mike thinks the NET Bible supports his theory. But WJ has shown that the footnote really does not support Mike's theory.WJ said:
Quote And the Net also says… Heb “and after me, there will not be”
; NASB “there will be none after Me.”
Mike's rendering that no gods will outlive YHWH is totally without warrant. The scripture says that no gods came into being before YHWH and that none would exist after Him.the Roo
Mike said:
Quote It would seem strange for God to say there were no other gods at all, and then mention many gods througout scripture.
Poor Mike! He just don't get it! The scriptures are replete with statements inwhich God said that the gods exist in the people's own imaginations. In other words, their existence is not real but only in the minds of men.Paul said that they are “so called” gods (1 Corinthians 8).
the Roo
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Aug. 16 2010,01:04) Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 14 2010,23:24) So, I say the only begotten Son of God was begotten before the ages and the Son of Man was born in the world, during the ages.
KathiLOL, you agree with one point of the creed and pull it out of context to support your belief.
I have already explained what “begotten before the ages means”.
The Trintarians believed Jesus (the Word) always existed with the Father.
The context of the Athanasian creed does not allow for your definition of “God procreated another God equal to himself”, 2 Divine beings.
It is a true statement that he was begotten before the ages just as he was the lamb of God before the foundations of the world and foreordained to be the Lamb.
The definition of begotten does not always mean “procreate”.
WJ
Keith,
Are you saying that the begetting of the Son before the ages was in the sense of being foreordained before the ages?Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ Aug. 16 2010,09:50) Mike said: Quote It would seem strange for God to say there were no other gods at all, and then mention many gods througout scripture.
Poor Mike! He just don't get it! The scriptures are replete with statements inwhich God said that the gods exist in the people's own imaginations. In other words, their existence is not real but only in the minds of men.Paul said that they are “so called” gods (1 Corinthians 8).
the Roo
Hi Roo,Do you think satan was not a literal created being but just 'created' in our imagination?
Quote (shimmer @ Aug. 16 2010,05:35) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 16 2010,15:19) Quote (shimmer @ Aug. 16 2010,10:11) KangarooJack, We all have day's like that, my problem is I'm on the other side of the world than most people, so I miss out on all the conversations and only catch up later, when everyones gone. I think Mike need's some time out.
You know Shimmer,I've have given you the benefit of the doubt so far. But your “opinions” without any substance to back them are wearing thin.
Did you not read the post where it was very clear I was talking about things that Jack has claimed that turned out to be false? Did you see where he took one of the things that HE claimed that I had just proven false and attributed it to me?
What you seem to do is to go through and read the “juicy” posts where Jack is all yelling and bolding and capitalizing words, and you don't actually check whether what he was yelling about even happened.
And then you make a snap judgement against ME?
To all, This begotten thing is taking over the whole forum ! lol,Mike, as I said I was rushed I only saw what looked like JA and LU telling you that you needed to chill and needed time out, so as is supposed to be a Christian thing to do, I agreed that sometimes we get confused on these forums as I do, and I said time out often helps, your response to me upset me a bit, but fair enough, never mind. As I said Im done here. Im going to a church ! lol.
Hi Shimmer,
I wasn't telling Mike that he needed to chill but instead encouraging him to not let the boards burn him out since he was involved in so many threads. I could tell that you were encouraging him although it could have come across as a put down. I think some others were not encouraging him though.I agree with you, I think that it would be a good idea for you to get into a loving church that believed the inerrancy of the scriptures. You need some really good Christians in your area to befriend you and help you grow.
This can be not such a good place for a young Christian who isn't grounded yet.
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Aug. 16 2010,01:08) Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 15 2010,00:16) Gene,
If you read the word 'God' here and think 'unbegotten God' it makes perfect sense.Isa 43:10….> Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant, whim I have chosen: that you may know and Believe me, and understand the (I) am he: before me there was (NO)unbegotten GOD formed< Neither shall the Be (AFTER ME). Many more show there is only (ONE) true unbegotten GOD, If you are in dought Believe what Jesus said in Prayer, “FOR THOU ARE THE (ONLY) TRUE unbegottenGOD”.
KathiHow can you add to the text and change its meaning and then say it makes perfect sense?
WJ
keith,
If you read my post carefully, I suggest that you 'think' unbegotten God when you see the word 'God' in that verse. Do you not see the God speaking in that verse as the unbegotten God?Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 16 2010,11:54) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Aug. 16 2010,01:04) Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 14 2010,23:24) So, I say the only begotten Son of God was begotten before the ages and the Son of Man was born in the world, during the ages.
KathiLOL, you agree with one point of the creed and pull it out of context to support your belief.
I have already explained what “begotten before the ages means”.
The Trintarians believed Jesus (the Word) always existed with the Father.
The context of the Athanasian creed does not allow for your definition of “God procreated another God equal to himself”, 2 Divine beings.
It is a true statement that he was begotten before the ages just as he was the lamb of God before the foundations of the world and foreordained to be the Lamb.
The definition of begotten does not always mean “procreate”.
WJ
Keith,
Are you saying that the begetting of the Son before the ages was in the sense of being foreordained before the ages?
What I am saying is the Trintiarians concept of “One Divine being” could not include the definiton that God procreated an equal God from himself and there were 2 co-equal, co-eternal beings, or two Gods kathi.The Athanasian Creed would be a contradiction if that is what the Forefathers believed.
So likewise the Father is almighty, the Son almighty, and the Holy Ghost almighty. And yet they are not three Almighties, but one Almighty. So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God. **AND YET THEY ARE NOT THREE GODS, BUT ONE GOD**.
You do see that don't you Kathi?
The begetting must be understood as from eternity since the term “begetting” could be understood as something other than “Procreation”.
WJ
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
