- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 04 2011,10:49)
Well when you can explain how logically something comes through someone but is not coming from that someone you may have a point.
Keith, I don't have to "explain it", but only believe God's words. All things are FROM God and THROUGH Jesus. I don't know how it works or what exactly it means. I only believe what the scriptures teach. And the prayer in Acts 4 is a perfect example of how Peter and John prayed TO the One who created the heavens, the earth, and everything in them. But they prayed TO this One THROUGH another. They called this "other" God's Holy Servant Jesus.Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 04 2011,10:49)
The fact is Mike even if you don't believe that Jesus is God then you must believe that he is currently fully acting out the role of God.
Keith, God could at this very moment exalt YOU to the name above all other names if He wanted to. He could arrange it so that all knees, INCLUDING JESUS' bow to YOU if He wanted to. And Jesus would happily bow to you knowing that it was his God's will. So would I. But the bottom line is that no matter how high God set you, or no matter how much reign He gave you over His Kingdom, you would still not BE the God who exalted you.I know you can see this in my funky analogy. So what keeps you from seeing it with Jesus? Jesus is someone OTHER THAN God who was exalted BY God to the right hand OF God. Jesus was given power and authority to rule BY his own God, and will eventually turn this rule back over TO his God.
Jesus is the Son OF God, which prohibits him from being the God he is the Son OF.
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 04 2011,10:49)
Rom 11:36 tells us God is the "source", the "agent" and the "goal". Lo and behold Jesus is also the same.Mike is Jesus the "source" of your life?
Keith, you are using your famous, "God is good and Jesus is good, therefore Jesus must BE God" argument here. Here's one: God is a spirit and Jesus is a spirit, therefore God must BE Jesus. Please don't use these weak points while simultaneously ignoring all the scriptures that speak of Jesus as someone OTHER THAN and LESSOR TO his own God.And to answer your question, "NO!" God ALONE is the SOURCE of my life. But God made me THROUGH the creatures of Jesus, Adam, Noah and my parents, among many others.
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 05 2011,10:56) BTW Mike You didn't address this point as well as others…
For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but ”IF YE **THROUGH (dia)** THE SPIRIT” do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live. Rom 8:13
Mike, does the Holy Spirit do the work of destroying the deeds of the flesh or does the word (dia) “through” mean the Holy Spirit didn’t do the work?
WJ
WJbefore the holy spirit can do on you anything you should apply it to your live then it will show you how you will change from the flesh to the spirit (will of God )
if you do not believe the words of the holy spirit it will do nothing for you and so be lost even to your self.
Pierre
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 04 2011,10:56) BTW Mike You didn't address this point as well as others…
For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but ”IF YE **THROUGH (dia)** THE SPIRIT” do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live. Rom 8:13
Mike, does the Holy Spirit do the work of destroying the deeds of the flesh or does the word (dia) “through” mean the Holy Spirit didn’t do the work?
WJ
NET ©
(for if you live according to the flesh, you will die), but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body you will live.Sounds to me like WE put to death the deeds of the body WITH THE HELP OF God's Spirit. So WE do it THROUGH the power of the Spirit.
Is that what you're asking? I don't get the point you're trying to make.
mike
Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 04 2011,07:32) Quote (david @ June 02 2011,00:32) Quote There is NO scripture that states "God created alone through Jesus" In fact if you wanted to be Scriptuarly Truthful you could have stated "God creates alone" and "all things were created though/by Jesus"
So your statement is just an example of your lame attempt to try to mix in scripture to make it fit your doctrine, and plus its a CONTRADICITION.
I find your logic interesting.
You concede that it is scripturally truthful to say that "God creates alone" and that "all things were created through Jesus," yet you believe we can not put those related ideas together.
Even Tertullian, the man credited with starting the trinity, agrees that the one from whom all things are is different than the one through whom all things are.Do you agree D?
Hi Mike,I cant tell who are you writing to because David was quoted along side with me. So when you say "D" i cant tell if your reffering to "D"avid or "D"ennison.
Just sayin,I dont know of Tertulian that much, and on just the little i have read about him and the things he has written, i dont really care for him, and never have.
so i couldnt answer that question unless you have a direct quote where i could see the context of his paper referring to whatever your talking about.
Quote (kerwin @ June 04 2011,10:26) Dennison, I quoted your points I am responding to.
Quote To whom are you writing to? I was writing to David specifically but I consider it a public conversation that anyone can join.
To clarify my position I don’t believe God necessary created the universe alone as I believe angels, like man are just tools in his hands to accomplish his goals even as men founded the city of Jerusalem and yet it was God who stated “Thou art built” and though Solomon supervised the founding of the Temple it was God who declared “Thou art founded”, Isaiah 44:28.
Quote 1.You stated that no other God created with him, (scripture please?) Quote Isaiah 44(Young's Literal Translation (YLT)) 24Thus said Jehovah, thy redeemer, And thy framer from the womb: `I [am] Jehovah, doing all things, Stretching out the heavens by Myself, Spreading out the earth — who [is] with Me?
Quote Yet we know for a fact that Jesus did create, so than its either he is God or he is not. I do not believe that Jesus was with God when God created the universe as that is and was not the purpose of Jesus. The purpose of Jesus is to the Leader and Perfecter of the New Covenant. He is the too who through and by the new man is created like God in true holiness and righteousness.
Quote Than there isn’t one god out of many. It depends on what you mean by “god”. There is only one God as Jehovah is God.
Mike actually states that “Of course no other god is "God" as Jehovah is”. So when I state God I mean a God as Jehovah is God. He also admits the other gods are not worthy of worship. To me it sounds like is making an argument over words unless he wants to convince others that demons and angels exist and are corruptly or erroneously worshipped by some. I simply see nothing I disagree with in what he states when I examine what he actually believes on the matter.
Quote Scripture never speaks of Angels actually creating anything. I agree so it is speculation to say that God used them or that he did not. There is some scripture that may be hinting at them being involved but Scripture does state the Spirit of God was there and so it may be the Spirit instead of angels those scriptures are effected by.
Quote Mike actually states that “Of course no other god is "God" as Jehovah is”. So when I state God I mean a God as Jehovah is God. He also admits the other gods are not worthy of worship. To me it sounds like is making an argument over words unless he wants to convince others that demons and angels exist and are corruptly or erroneously worshipped by some. I simply see nothing I disagree with in what he states when I examine what he actually believes on the matter. Actually Kerwin, the problem with Mikes statements is that he believes Jesus is not God, though he is called God just as Satan and other beings are called Gods.
when we show him the context and the biblical interpretation, he refusese to accept it.
So he excuses it and says that Jesus is a god amoung many gods, the "second" most powerful being.I of course disagree with this. Every mention of "Elohim" and "theos" is defined by context.
And the whole arguement has always been that Jesus is God, therefore also proving that Satan and other beings are not the Almighty God as well.
And we state many reasons why they are not God, and why Jesus is God.
Thats the basis, he tries to belittle the title of God, when the title is also used to identify a specific entity.
thats just the gist of it.
We asked, if Jesus is not God than what is he? he of course says something bogus like just "a god amoung other gods" okkk so than what is that?
an angel? a Human? aaaaa?
??? what?Son of God? ok what is that?
Anyways im very sleepy and i have no idea if any of that makes sense, but im just trying to clear things up for you.
and since you kindof concede your point because you admitted its pure speculation to state that Angels were used to created or not, than there is nothing further to be said about it.
SF
Quote We asked, if Jesus is not God than what is he? he of course says something bogus like just "a god amoung other gods" okkk so than what is that? an angel? a Human? aaaaa?
what?Son of God? ok what is that?
you do not know what is a SON ?
Christ says ;he is the son of God and son of MAN do you not believe him or you want to make Jesus a liar ?
The son is never the father ,right or are you your father?
when scriptures say God and refers to Jehovah God this would be the creator ,the almighty,there is only one like it he stands alone ,
all others so called gods are powered people or beings, but who have never done anything out of the will or tolerance of the almighty God Jehovah.
so it truth to say that there is no other God than Jehovah.Right.yes.
Pierre
Quote (terraricca @ June 05 2011,20:25) SF Quote We asked, if Jesus is not God than what is he? he of course says something bogus like just "a god amoung other gods" okkk so than what is that? an angel? a Human? aaaaa?
what?Son of God? ok what is that?
you do not know what is a SON ?
Christ says ;he is the son of God and son of MAN do you not believe him or you want to make Jesus a liar ?
The son is never the father ,right or are you your father?
when scriptures say God and refers to Jehovah God this would be the creator ,the almighty,there is only one like it he stands alone ,
all others so called gods are powered people or beings, but who have never done anything out of the will or tolerance of the almighty God Jehovah.
so it truth to say that there is no other God than Jehovah.Right.yes.
Pierre
Pierre,You should re-read what im sayin because right now your making yourself sound ignorant.
Im the Son of my Father, and im still HUMAN.
Jesus is the Son of God, and he is? what?Quote (SimplyForgiven @ June 05 2011,01:32) Hi Mike, I cant tell who are you writing to because David was quoted along side with me. So when you say "D" i cant tell if your reffering to "D"avid or "D"ennison.
Just sayin,I dont know of Tertulian that much, and on just the little i have read about him and the things he has written, i dont really care for him, and never have.
so i couldnt answer that question unless you have a direct quote where i could see the context of his paper referring to whatever your talking about.
Hi Deuces,If I ever say "D", I mean you. I respect David enough to use his full name when posting to him.
Click Here to see some writings of Tertullian that t8 posted in Kathi's "Ancient Syriac Documents" thread. (5th post down) Tertullian is the earliest known person to have used the word "Trinity".
But here's the particular writing to which I referred:
For the Father is the entire substance, but the Son is a derivation and portion of the whole, as he himself confesses, "My Father is greater than I." In the Psalm his inferiority is described as being "a little lower than the angels." Thus the Father is distinct from the Son, being greater than the Son, inasmuch as He who begets is one, and he who is begotten is another. He, too, who sends is one, and he who is sent is another, and He, again, who makes is one, and he through whom the thing is made is another. (Against Praxeas, 9).
Everything Tertullian wrote above is simple common sense, D. How you can come to the conclusion that the one sent IS the One who sent is beyond me, and shows your apparent lack of that sense that is said to be so "common".
peace to you,
mikeQuote (SimplyForgiven @ June 05 2011,01:41)
And the whole arguement has always been that Jesus is God
I'm well aware of WHAT the agument is. It's just that your claim is not supported by any scripture, and is clearly contradicted by MANY of them. Jesus is the SON OF GOD, not God.Quote (SimplyForgiven @ June 05 2011,01:41)
Son of God? ok what is that?
A prophet? What is that? That's how ludicrous your question is, D. The Son of God is God's Son. When scripture says Isaac is the son of Abraham, do you not know what that means? It means that Isaac is one single being who was brought forth from a different single being. It means that when you mention both Abraham and Isaac together, you use the words "THEY" or "THEM", not "HE" or "HIM".Now go and apply what you've learned here to God's Son.
And remember Tertullian's words, Thus the Father is distinct from the Son, being greater than the Son, inasmuch as He who begets is one, and he who is begotten is another." mike
Quote (SimplyForgiven @ June 05 2011,10:21) Im the Son of my Father, and im still HUMAN.
Jesus is the Son of God, and he is? what?
D, your father is a human being, right? So therefore as his son, you are a DIFFERENT human being than your father, right?God is a spirit being, right? So naturally, as His Son, Jesus would be a DIFFERENT spirit being than his Father.
I really don't see the problem you're having. (Well, actually I do. You WANT Jesus to BE God so badly that you are willing to pretend you can't understand this very simple principle I've posted.)
Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 05 2011,21:52) Quote (SimplyForgiven @ June 05 2011,01:32) Hi Mike, I cant tell who are you writing to because David was quoted along side with me. So when you say "D" i cant tell if your reffering to "D"avid or "D"ennison.
Just sayin,I dont know of Tertulian that much, and on just the little i have read about him and the things he has written, i dont really care for him, and never have.
so i couldnt answer that question unless you have a direct quote where i could see the context of his paper referring to whatever your talking about.
Hi Deuces,If I ever say "D", I mean you. I respect David enough to use his full name when posting to him.
Click Here to see some writings of Tertullian that t8 posted in Kathi's "Ancient Syriac Documents" thread. (5th post down) Tertullian is the earliest known person to have used the word "Trinity".
But here's the particular writing to which I referred:
For the Father is the entire substance, but the Son is a derivation and portion of the whole, as he himself confesses, "My Father is greater than I." In the Psalm his inferiority is described as being "a little lower than the angels." Thus the Father is distinct from the Son, being greater than the Son, inasmuch as He who begets is one, and he who is begotten is another. He, too, who sends is one, and he who is sent is another, and He, again, who makes is one, and he through whom the thing is made is another. (Against Praxeas, 9).
Everything Tertullian wrote above is simple common sense, D. How you can come to the conclusion that the one sent IS the One who sent is beyond me, and shows your apparent lack of that sense that is said to be so "common".
peace to you,
mike
Hi Old fart,Lol
Assuming the my memory serves me correctly but the doctrine of Trinity is named after Tertullian who presented that Idea of three persons of one Godhead right?
Here is the problem with what he Wrote on the particular passage you posted.
> He states the Son is the "portion" of the whole.
and than he goes further to contradict himself, by stating there is another.Its either or.. Its
Either there are compeletly two different pies altogether, one that is Gigantic and beyond this universe, and another pie that i sent to you that is smaller.Or
That out of this Gigantic pie, a "portion" is sent to you to consume, but out of the same pie. So the Porition is from the same substance and the same taste, flavor, and nutrietion that you would receive from the whole gigantic pie.
but eatin the gigantic one would kill you, but eating that one portion is enough.
Tertuilian is trying to present a "godhead" of three beings, thats why he is contradicting himself in his statments.
We have been taught that he proceeds forth from God, and in that procession he is generated [ begotten], so that he is the Son of God, and is called "God" from unity of substance with God. For God, too, is Spirit. Even when the ray is shot from the sun, it is still part of the parent mass, the sun will still be in the ray, because it is a ray of the sun–there is no division of substance, but merely an extension. Thus Christ is spirit of the Spirit, and god of the God, as light of Light is kindled.
The only problem with Tertuillian statements that He focuses on two seperate persons. But he make good points, if only his conclusive thoughts were a tad different.
Actually there are many scriptures that describe what I refer to the one sent and the sender being one and the same being.
What was sent, was what you could know.
I think the Pie example fits what i refer too.Duece
Hi D,
So you disagree with Tertullian's common sense understanding that He who makes is one, and he through whom the thing is made is another?
It is for this point that I brought up Tertullian in the first place, and you've not commented on this part of his writing.
Dennison,
God is not a unique title in scripture. God of gods is from my recollection. I believe the later is equivalent to stating the angels are a little higher than mankind and yet God is higher than them.
I believe “Every mention of "Elohim" and "theos" is defined by context” but I am also certain that at least some of the context is unwritten and other unclear as the ones the scripture was originally addressed to knew the subject already.
Miike freely admits that Satan and other angelic type beings are not God as Jehovah is God and so trying to convince him it is so, is meaningless.
In conclusion it seems that the discussion should be about what the context of scripture infers God means in each particular occurrence.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 06 2011,00:43) Hi D, So you disagree with Tertullian's common sense understanding that He who makes is one, and he through whom the thing is made is another?
It is for this point that I brought up Tertullian in the first place, and you've not commented on this part of his writing.
Hi Mike,
Im telling you that Tertullians a deluded.
And His Ideas seem to contradict one another.If he literally believes that one created seperate from the other, than that would contradict his example about the sun and the sun rays and what not.
Again, without the exact context about everthihng the dude was referring to i couldnt make a accurate statement.
Either way, he is a moot point.
I never studied his writings until you brought him up.
Quote (kerwin @ June 06 2011,00:52) Miike freely admits that Satan and other angelic type beings are not God as Jehovah is God and so trying to convince him it is so, is meaningless. In conclusion it seems that the discussion should be about what the context of scripture infers God means in each particular occurrence.
Kerwin,Dude, your not getting it. You just stated exactly what i been trying to get Mike to Understand.
He Believes that Jesus is a God just like Satan and other things are called Gods.
This is our disagreement, my Main point from the begiining is that every mention of Elohim should be DEFINED BY CONTEXT. I have repeated this many times!
And my emphasis was to prove how and why Satan and other things are called gods but are not gods AT ALL, yet Jesus particularly is DIFFERENT and set apart from all these other being which is WHY he is literally be CAlled God as much as Jehovah is called God.
Thats what this whole circle of arguements are all about.
Mike tried to used a shady tactic to try to excuse the mention of Jesus as God Almighty by stating that he is "one of many gods".
HE Freely admits that Jesus is "a god" but not His God? or whatever, just one of many.
We wont let him make that excuse.has that cleared things up for you?
Quote (SimplyForgiven @ June 16 2011,14:08) Quote (kerwin @ June 06 2011,00:52) Miike freely admits that Satan and other angelic type beings are not God as Jehovah is God and so trying to convince him it is so, is meaningless. In conclusion it seems that the discussion should be about what the context of scripture infers God means in each particular occurrence.
Kerwin,Dude, your not getting it. You just stated exactly what i been trying to get Mike to Understand.
He Believes that Jesus is a God just like Satan and other things are called Gods.
This is our disagreement, my Main point from the begiining is that every mention of Elohim should be DEFINED BY CONTEXT. I have repeated this many times!
And my emphasis was to prove how and why Satan and other things are called gods but are not gods AT ALL, yet Jesus particularly is DIFFERENT and set apart from all these other being which is WHY he is literally be CAlled God as much as Jehovah is called God.
Thats what this whole circle of arguements are all about.
Mike tried to used a shady tactic to try to excuse the mention of Jesus as God Almighty by stating that he is "one of many gods".
HE Freely admits that Jesus is "a god" but not His God? or whatever, just one of many.
We wont let him make that excuse.has that cleared things up for you?
Denison,Mike has told me that angels and demons are not God as Jehovah is God.
He does claim that the are members the members of the mighty as is Jehovah. Jahovah being the mightiest of the mighty. He and David both hold that God mean "mighty".
I have no idea why you believe Jesus is called God as Jahovah is God in scripture.
Denison,
Why don't you ask Mike himself if he believes that Jesus is God as Jahovah is God?
When you know his answer then you can discuss why you believe Scripture teaches that Jesus is God as Jahovah is God.
Quote (SimplyForgiven @ June 16 2011,14:08) This is our disagreement, my Main point from the begiining is that every mention of Elohim should be DEFINED BY CONTEXT. I have repeated this many times!
Hi DennisonExactly! If the context bears out it is a king, priest, judge, idol, gods of the heathen Etc., then it should be translated that way.
Paul said there are "no gods but one", his language cannot be any more clear.
There is only "One True God" and all others are not gods at all.
Blessings Keith
Quote (kerwin @ June 16 2011,06:26) I have no idea why you believe Jesus is called God as Jahovah is God in scripture.
Hi KerwinBecause the reality is Jesus currently rules supreme over all for "all authority and power", including all judgment is in his hands!
Unlike satan who is called the god of this world and who appears as an angel of light and usurps power over those who do not believe in Jesus,
Jesus is the "God" of all creation who sits in the throne of God ruling as God.
It is obvious satan is not "a god" at all but only rules by deception because he has no power over the believers.
Context clearly tells us that Jesus is our Lord and God. John 20:28, Titus 2:13,14
WJ
Quote (SimplyForgiven @ June 06 2011,03:21) Pierre, You should re-read what im sayin because right now your making yourself sound ignorant.
Im the Son of my Father, and im still HUMAN.
Jesus is the Son of God, and he is? what?
Hi Dennison,Jesus is also the son of his mother, and she is?
what?God bless
Ed J
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
