- This topic is empty.
- Posts
TO All,
I marvel that t8 has involved himself in two debates with WJ. Proclaimer has said numerous times here that Jesus is God qualitatively. This means that Jesus is God! Proclaimer will need to give up his “qualitative” explanation if he is going to be consistent and have a chance against WJ.
If he doesn’t then he has already defeated himself.
KJ
Quote (Kangaroo Jack Jr. @ Feb. 22 2011,01:46) TO All, I marvel that t8 has involved himself in two debates with WJ. t8 has said numerous times here that Jesus is God qualitatively. This means that Jesus is God! t8 will need to give up his “qualitative” explanation if he is going to be consistent and have a chance against WJ.
If he doesn't then he has already defeated himself.
KJ
Hi Jack:Why do you want to argue with scripture?
Quote 1 Timothy 2:5 (King James Version)
5For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;Quote John 20:17Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. The scripture that I quoted states that there is “One God”, and Jesus said that he was ascending “to his Father and our Father” and to “his God” and “our God”.
You then do not have anything to argue about unless you do not believe these scriptures.
Love in Christ,
MartyQuote (942767 @ Feb. 22 2011,11:04) Quote (Kangaroo Jack Jr. @ Feb. 22 2011,01:46) TO All, I marvel that t8 has involved himself in two debates with WJ. t8 has said numerous times here that Jesus is God qualitatively. This means that Jesus is God! t8 will need to give up his “qualitative” explanation if he is going to be consistent and have a chance against WJ.
If he doesn't then he has already defeated himself.
KJ
Hi Jack:Why do you want to argue with scripture?
Quote 1 Timothy 2:5 (King James Version)
5For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;Quote John 20:17Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. The scripture that I quoted states that there is “One God”, and Jesus said that he was ascending “to his Father and our Father” and to “his God” and “our God”.
You then do not have anything to argue about unless you do not believe these scriptures.
Love in Christ,
Marty
MartyWhy do you want to argue against scriptures like Matt 28:19?
WJ
Quote (942767 @ Feb. 23 2011,03:04) Quote (Kangaroo Jack Jr. @ Feb. 22 2011,01:46) TO All, I marvel that t8 has involved himself in two debates with WJ. t8 has said numerous times here that Jesus is God qualitatively. This means that Jesus is God! t8 will need to give up his “qualitative” explanation if he is going to be consistent and have a chance against WJ.
If he doesn't then he has already defeated himself.
KJ
Hi Jack:Why do you want to argue with scripture?
Quote 1 Timothy 2:5 (King James Version)
5For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;Quote John 20:17Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. The scripture that I quoted states that there is “One God”, and Jesus said that he was ascending “to his Father and our Father” and to “his God” and “our God”.
You then do not have anything to argue about unless you do not believe these scriptures.
Love in Christ,
Marty
Marty,This is about t8's admission that Christ is God qualitatively. This means that He is God. So how can t8 think that he will stand a chance against WJ? t8 has already defeated Himself.
WJ and I are still waiting for one of you guys to give a negation statement such as, “Christ is NOT God.”
Jack
Quote (Kangaroo Jack Jr. @ Feb. 22 2011,01:46) TO All, I marvel that t8 has involved himself in two debates with WJ. t8 has said numerous times here that Jesus is God qualitatively. This means that Jesus is God! t8 will need to give up his “qualitative” explanation if he is going to be consistent and have a chance against WJ.
If he doesn't then he has already defeated himself.
KJ
Continue to marvel KJ.Qualitatively speaking, more than YHWH is called theos, elohim, el.
So as you can see, you jumped the gun.
Back to the start line KJ. Or should I say, back to the drawing board.
You will notice it is blank meaning you need to start again because the foundation you are building your teaching from is weak and has already fallen.
Quote (t8 @ Feb. 23 2011,08:04) Quote (Kangaroo Jack Jr. @ Feb. 22 2011,01:46) TO All, I marvel that t8 has involved himself in two debates with WJ. t8 has said numerous times here that Jesus is God qualitatively. This means that Jesus is God! t8 will need to give up his “qualitative” explanation if he is going to be consistent and have a chance against WJ.
If he doesn't then he has already defeated himself.
KJ
Continue to marvel KJ.Qualitatively speaking, more than YHWH is called theos, elohim, el.
So as you can see, you jumped the gun.
Back to the start line KJ. Or should I say, back to the drawing board.
You will notice it is blank meaning you need to start again because the foundation you are building your teaching from is weak and has already fallen.
t8,Note your words I put in bold. How do you figure that because some were called “god” that this means that they were God qualitatively? Men were “gods” BY APPOINTMENT. It had reference ot their office as God's representative rulers.
Now note the definition of the word “quality”
quality peculiar and essential character, nature (Webster's).
Are you going to tell us with a straight face that others who were called “god” were God in their essential character and nature? When you say that Jesus is God qualitatively you are saying that He is God in His essential character and nature. So it's back to the drawing board for you if you're going to stand a chance against WJ.
Christ ALONE is God qualitatively because He ALONE is the EXACT representation of the Father's SUBSTANCE (Heb. 1:1-3). You have defeated yourself before you even get started.
KJ
Quote (Kangaroo Jack Jr. @ Feb. 22 2011,12:42) WJ and I are still waiting for one of you guys to give a negation statement such as, “Christ is NOT God.”
Are you kidding? Isn't the title “Christ” enough? “Christ” refers to one who was anointed BY God. Did God anoint Himself?
How about the fact that we have but ONE God, THE FATHER. And Jesus is the Son OF that ONE God, THE FATHER? He cannot be the Son OF the being of God and yet BE the being of God.
How about the fact he is the High Priest to God? Is God now His own Priest?
How about Marty's point that our God is also HIS God?
I could go on and on, but it's really off topic here.
mike
To all,
There are two possibilities that allow Jesus to be God.
Either God can be tempted by sin and scripture is wrong or Jesus was not tempted even as we are and scripture is wrong.
Scripture is not wrong therefore neither of the above explanations is true and Jesus is not God. Instead he is the exact image of God's righteousnes and holiness as he lives by the Spirit through his complete faith in God. Since he did not fall short of the glory of God he was apointed King of all things by God who is his Father and our Father.
Quote (kerwin @ Feb. 23 2011,15:57) To all, There are two possibilities that allow Jesus to be God.
Either God can be tempted by sin and scripture is wrong or Jesus was not tempted even as we are and scripture is wrong.
Scripture is not wrong therefore neither of the above explanations is true and Jesus is not God. Instead he is the exact image of God's righteousnes and holiness as he lives by the Spirit through his complete faith in God. Since he did not fall short of the glory of God he was apointed King of all things by God who is his Father and our Father.
Hi Kerwin,Why is Jesus called “Prince”?(Son of God) …Is it because his Father is “KING”?(God)
Acts 3:15 And killed the Prince of life, whom God hath raised from the dead; whereof we are witnesses.
Rev.1:5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead,
and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us
from our sins in his own blood, Acts 5:31 Him hath God exalted with
his right hand to be a Prince and a Savior, for to give
repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins.Psalm 29:10 The LORD sitteth upon the flood; yea, the LORD sitteth King for ever.
Psalm 10:16 The LORD is King for ever and ever: the heathen are perished out of his land.Hebrews Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.
John 6:15 When Jesus therefore perceived that they would come and take
him by force, to make him a king, he departed again into a mountain himself alone.Your brother
in Christ, Jesus!
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgEd J.
Jesus is not forordained to become a prince of a world enslaved to sin. His kingdom is the Kingdom of the Holy Spirit. Those who thought to make him king wished to make him a king of world ruled by sin and not a world ruled by the Holy Spirit.
A prince is a king to be, or anointed one.
Jesus told his student he was made Lord of everything in heaven and on earth, which is to say King.
Still I agree that Jesus is prince to God's King as he is subject to God and God's Son through the Spirit.
Quote (Kangaroo Jack Jr. @ Feb. 23 2011,08:26) Christ ALONE is God qualitatively because He ALONE is the EXACT representation of the Father's SUBSTANCE (Heb. 1:1-3). You have defeated yourself before you even get started.
Jesus proves you wrong by quoting text for the Judges of Israel, “ye are gods, ye are all sons of the Most High.Jesus made it clear that he was saying that he was the son and reminded them that accused him of blasphemy of the usage of the word elohim/theos could be applied to more than God. He finished by saying that he was the son of God.
If you want to teach that Jesus taught that he was The Most High God, then it is your choice to teach that he blasphemed by claiming to be God. But I know that Jesus was without sin and never made such a statement anyway.
You also ignore scripture that calls angels 'elohim' too.
Your teaching doesn't add up to 3. In fact it adds up to nothing because it defies reason.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Feb. 23 2011,13:33) Are you kidding? Isn't the title “Christ” enough? “Christ” refers to one who was anointed BY God. Did God anoint Himself? How about the fact that we have but ONE God, THE FATHER. And Jesus is the Son OF that ONE God, THE FATHER? He cannot be the Son OF the being of God and yet BE the being of God.
How about the fact he is the High Priest to God? Is God now His own Priest?
How about Marty's point that our God is also HIS God?
I could go on and on, but it's really off topic here.
mike
He is serious. Serious about undermining the rock that Jesus built his Church on. “You are the Christ, the son of the living God”.If you ever wondered why this false doctrine is so prolific and argued for, we only need to see that destroying the Church is accomplished when you destroy her foundation. And when we see what it was that Jesus built his Church on, it was Peter's confession that Jesus was Christ and son of God.
It is this very truth that Satan has set to undermine for millenia. He even goes to the length of saying that he is God, so long as you do not believe that he truly is the son OF God.
Quote (kerwin @ Feb. 23 2011,19:43) Ed J. Jesus is not forordained to become a prince of a world enslaved to sin. His kingdom is the Kingdom of the Holy Spirit. Those who thought to make him king wished to make him a king of world ruled by sin and not a world ruled by the Holy Spirit.
A prince is a king to be, or anointed one.
Jesus told his student he was made Lord of everything in heaven and on earth, which is to say King.
Still I agree that Jesus is prince to God's King as he is subject to God and God's Son through the Spirit.
Hi Kerwin,A “Prince” can NEVER be King until his Father dies, which
in Jesus case can NEVER HAPPEN; because God cannot die!Witnessing to the world in behalf of YHVH! (Psalm 45:17)
117=יהוה האלהים (JEHOVAH GOD) YÄ-hä-vā hä ĔL-ō-Hêêm!
Ed J (AKJV Isaiah 49:16 / Isaiah 60:14 / Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org …(Eccl.9:12-16)Quote (kerwin @ Feb. 23 2011,19:43) Ed J. Jesus told his student he was made Lord of everything in heaven and on earth, which is to say King.
Hi Kerwin,Lord means “owner”, NOT King. Jesus is owner(Lord),
because his Father, JEHOVAH, is “The Owner”(The LORD)God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgQuote (mikeboll64 @ Feb. 23 2011,13:33) Quote (Kangaroo Jack Jr. @ Feb. 22 2011,12:42) WJ and I are still waiting for one of you guys to give a negation statement such as, “Christ is NOT God.”
Are you kidding? Isn't the title “Christ” enough? “Christ” refers to one who was anointed BY God. Did God anoint Himself?How about the fact that we have but ONE God, THE FATHER. And Jesus is the Son OF that ONE God, THE FATHER? He cannot be the Son OF the being of God and yet BE the being of God.
How about the fact he is the High Priest to God? Is God now His own Priest?
How about Marty's point that our God is also HIS God?
I could go on and on, but it's really off topic here.
mike
Where does the scripture say that Jesus is NOT God? And I have already posted my commentary about the “One God” statement.Worshippingjesus said:
Quote Because we know that the word “God” does not mean “powerful ruler” and if it does you still loose because Jesus is sitting next to the Father having all “Authority and Power” in his hands which according to your own definition means he is God.
Both the Father and the Son are called “despotes” in scripture which means “SUPREME Ruler.” In Acts 4:24 the Father is called “despotes” and in Jude 4 Christ is called “only despotes.” So by Mike's logic the Father must be excluded from being called “only despotes” because Christ is called the “only despotes” (supreme ruler).If the expression “only God” in reference to the Father must exclude Jesus, then the expression “only despotes” in reference to Christ must exclude the Father. Yet the scripture says that the Father is “despotes” just as clearly as it says that Christ is “God.”
https://heavennet.net/cgi-bin….=280147
Roo
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Feb. 23 2011,13:33) Quote (Kangaroo Jack Jr. @ Feb. 22 2011,12:42) WJ and I are still waiting for one of you guys to give a negation statement such as, “Christ is NOT God.”
Are you kidding? Isn't the title “Christ” enough? “Christ” refers to one who was anointed BY God. Did God anoint Himself?How about the fact that we have but ONE God, THE FATHER. And Jesus is the Son OF that ONE God, THE FATHER? He cannot be the Son OF the being of God and yet BE the being of God.
How about the fact he is the High Priest to God? Is God now His own Priest?
How about Marty's point that our God is also HIS God?
I could go on and on, but it's really off topic here.
mike
Quote 5. JESUS DOES WORKS OF JEHOVAH
Grace and peace. Jesus together with the Father is the giver of grace and peace:”Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.”(Phm 1:3; Rom 1:7; 1Cor 1:3; 2Cor 1:2; Eph 1:2; Php 1:2. See also 2Th 1:2; Eph 6:23; 1Th 1:1; 2Th 1:1):“The phrase `God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ,' present in Paul's salutations, thanksgivings, and other doxological passages, indicates a FUNCTIONAL IDENTITY between the Father and the Lord. They are JOINTLY the source of grace and peace” (Capes, D.B., 1992, “Old Testament Yahweh Texts in Paul's Christology,” pp.62-64, 68).
“[Gal 1:3] This grace and peace come from God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ … the main theological point is the close association of Christ with God. Indeed, the use of the word Kyrios, 'Lord', as a title of Christ would in itself be sufficient to assure this. Much study has been devoted to this Greek word, the one chosen by the early translators into Greek of the Hebrew Bible to stand for the divine name YHWH…. Kyrios varied in meaning … to the full sense of 'Lord', in confession of the deity of Christ. When the early Christians used the phrase, 'Jesus is Lord' [Rom 10:9; 1Cor 12:3] …they cannot have meant less than this.” (Cole, R.A., 1989, “The Letter of Paul to the Galatians:,” p.70. Emphasis original
http://jesusisyhwh.blogspot.com/2010….on.htmlJack
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Feb. 23 2011,13:33) Quote (Kangaroo Jack Jr. @ Feb. 22 2011,12:42) WJ and I are still waiting for one of you guys to give a negation statement such as, “Christ is NOT God.”
Are you kidding? Isn't the title “Christ” enough? “Christ” refers to one who was anointed BY God. Did God anoint Himself?How about the fact that we have but ONE God, THE FATHER. And Jesus is the Son OF that ONE God, THE FATHER? He cannot be the Son OF the being of God and yet BE the being of God.
How about the fact he is the High Priest to God? Is God now His own Priest?
How about Marty's point that our God is also HIS God?
I could go on and on, but it's really off topic here.
mike
Quote God, the Father, and the Lord. Jesus Christ Paul's letters generally followed the literary patterns of that day. … Paul followed contemporary epistolary practice by including certain stereotyped forms in his introductory formulae, thanksgivings, and farewells. In these sections he often utilized the formula, `God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,' or a variation of it. … Thus, his typical salutation read: `Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ' … Paul designated both God the Father and the Lord Jesus as dispensers of grace and peace to the Church. … God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ bring these blessings into men's lives by faith. They are UNIFIED IN FUNCTION. Such a connection is possible only if God and the Lord RESIDE AT THE SAME LEVEL in Paul's thought … One final factor needs to be mentioned. The phrase `God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ,' present in Paul's salutations, thanksgivings, and other doxological passages, indicates a FUNCTIONAL IDENTITY between the Father and the Lord. They are JOINTLY THE SOURCE OF GRACE AND PEACE. Praise, thanksgiving, and blessing belong to them.” (Capes, D.B., 1992, “Old Testament Yahweh Texts in Paul's Christology,” J.C.B. Mohr: Tübingen, Germany, pp.62-64, 68). “[Gal 1:3] This grace and peace come from God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ. It is probable that by the common construction known as chiasmus (which could be translated as an 'x-shaped' construction), the source of grace is seen as Christ, and the source of peace as God the Father. Again, however, the main theological point is the close association of Christ with God. Indeed, the use of the word Kyrios, 'Lord', as a title of Christ would in itself be sufficient to assure this. Much study has been devoted to this Greek word, the one chosen by the early translators into Greek of the Hebrew Bible to stand for the divine name YHWH, which might not be pronounced by the pious Jew, and for which the Hebrew adonai, 'my Lord', had already been substituted. Kyrios varied in meaning from the polite 'sir', used in formal address to a stranger, to the full sense of 'Lord', in confession of the deity of Christ. When the early Christians used the phrase, 'Jesus is Lord' [Rom 10:9; 1Cor 12:3], as a baptismal confession, they cannot have meant less than this.” (Cole, R.A., 1989, “The Letter of Paul to the Galatians: An Introduction and Commentary,” The Tyndale New Testament commentaries, [1965], Inter-Varsity Press Leicester: UK, Second edition, p.70).
“[1Th 1:1] God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. The combination of both terms (a. God the Father, b. the Lord Jesus Christ) after one preposition (in; that is grounded in) would seem to indicate that the two are entirely co-ordinate, that is, that the reference is to the first and to the second person of the Holy Trinity. Note also the trinitarian character of verses 3-5. Hence, the third person (Holy Spirit), mentioned in verse 5, is implied already in verse 1. Paul often mentions the three together in series of closely connected passages (II Thess. 2:13, 14; I Cor. 12:4-6; II Cor. 13:14; Eph. 2:18; 3:2-5; 3:14-17; 4:4-6; 5:18-20). In referring to the second person the full name is used here: the Lord Jesus Christ. In the LXX the name Lord (kurios) translates Jehovah, the God of Israel. It is more often the rendering of Jehovah than of anything else. (At times it is the equivalent of Adon, Adonai, Baal, etc.) Now the Jews were strict monotheists. Yet Paul, though himself a Jew, again and again gives to Jesus the title Lord. This shows that, in the thinking of the apostle, Jesus is just as fully divine as is God the Father: one and the same essence is possessed by the Father and by the Son (also by the Spirit, II Cor. 13:14).” (Hendriksen, W., 1955, “1 & 2 Thessalonians,” New Testament Commentary, Banner of Truth: Edinburgh UK, British edition, 1972, pp.40-41. Emphasis original).
“But there was a far stronger reason for the application of the Greek term `Lord' to Jesus than that which was found in its general currency among Greek-speaking peoples. The religious use of the term was not limited to the pagan cults, but appears also, and if anything even more firmly established, in the Greek Old Testament. The word `Lord' is used by the Septuagint to translate the `Jahwe' of the Hebrew test. It would be quite irrelevant to discuss the reasons which governed the translators in their choice of this particular word. No doubt some word for `Lord' was required by the associations which had already clustered around the Hebrew word. And various reasons may be suggested for the choice of `kyrios' rather than some other Greek word meaning `lord' [As, for example, despotes] Possibly the root meaning of `kyrios' better expressed the idea which was intended; perhaps, also, a religious meaning had already been attached to `kyrios,' which the other words did not possess. At any rate, whatever may have been the reason, `kyrios' was the word which was chosen. And the fact is of capital importance. For it was among the readers of the Septuagint that Christianity first made its way. The Septuagint was the Bible of the Jewish synagogues, and in the synagogues the reading of it was heard not only by Jews but also by hosts of Gentiles, the `God-fearers' of the Book of Acts. It was with the `God-fearers' that the Gentile mission began. And even where there were Gentile converts who had not passed at all through the school of the synagogue in the very earliest period perhaps such converts were few-even then the Septuagint was at once used in their instruction. Thus when the Christian missionaries used the word `Lord' of Jesus, their hearers knew at once what they meant. They knew at once that Jesus occupied a place which is occupied only by God. For the word `Lord' is used countless times in the Greek scriptures as the holiest name of the covenant God of Israel, and these passages were applied freely to Jesus.” (Machen, J.G., 1925, “The Origin of Paul's Religion: The James Sprunt Lectures Delivered at Union Theological Seminary in Virginia,” Eerdmans: Grand Rapids MI, Reprinted, 1965, pp.307-308).
“[1Th 1:1] Also peculiar to these Epistles is the phrase in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ (Paul usually says 'in Christ'). It is striking (a) that he speaks of the Father and the Lo
rd in one breath (no-one else could be linked with the Father in this way), (b) that he joins the two under one preposition in, and © that he expresses the closeness of the tie linking the Thessalonians with their God in terms of Christ as well as the Father. 'The association could hardly be closer' (Ward). This high view of Jesus is continued with the use of Lord and Christ. Lord was used in LXX as the translation of the divine name and it was commonly used of deity in other religions (as well as having less significant uses). It points to a very high place. Christ means 'anointed' and is equivalent to 'Messiah'. And all this in a letter written only about twenty years after the crucifixion. From very early times Jesus was seen to have the highest place.” (Morris, L.L., 1984, “The Epistles of Paul to the Thessalonians: An Introduction and Commentary,” Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, [1956], Inter-Varsity Press: Leicester UK, Second Edition, p.41).“[1Th 1:1] In God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ (en theoi patri kai kurioi Jesou Christoi). This church is grounded in (en, with the locative case) and exists in the sphere and power of God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. No article in the Greek, for both theoi patri and kurioi Jesou Christoi are treated as proper names. In the very beginning of this first Epistle of Paul we meet his Christology. He at once uses the full title, `Lord Jesus Christ,' with all the theological content of each word. The name `Jesus' (Saviour, Matt. 1:21) he knew, as the `Jesus of history,' the personal name of the Man of Galilee, whom he had once persecuted (Acts 9:5), but whom he at once, after his conversion, proclaimed to be `the Messiah,' (ho Christos, Acts 9:22). This position Paul never changed. In the great sermon at Antioch in Pisidia which Luke has preserved (Acts 13:23) Paul proved that God fulfilled his promise to Israel by raising up `Jesus as Saviour' (sotera Iesoun). Now Paul follows the Christian custom by adding Christos (verbal from chrio, to anoint) as a proper name to Jesus (Jesus Christ) as later he will often say `Christ Jesus' (Col. 1:1). And he dares also to apply kurios (Lord) to `Jesus Christ,' the word appropriated by Claudius (Dominus, Kurios) and other emperors in the emperor-worship, and also common in the Septuagint for God as in Psa. 32:1f. (quoted by Paul in Rom. 4:8). Paul uses Kurios of God (I Cor. 3:5) or of Jesus Christ as here. In fact, he more frequently applies it to Christ when not quoting the Old Testament as in Rom. 4:8. And here he places `the Lord Jesus Christ' in the same category and on the same plane with `God the father.' There will be growth in Paul's Christology and he will never attain all the knowledge of Christ for which he longs (Phil. 3:10-12), but it is patent that here in his first Epistle there is no `reduced Christ' for Paul. He took Jesus as `Lord' when he surrendered to Jesus on the Damascus Road: `And I said, What shall I do, Lord? And the Lord said to me' (Acts 22:10). It is impossible to understand Paul without seeing clearly this first and final stand for the Lord Jesus Christ. Paul did not get this view of Jesus from current views of Mithra or of Isis or any other alien faith. The Risen Christ became at once for Paul the Lord of his life.” (Robertson, A.T., 1931, “Word Pictures in the New Testament: Volume IV: The Epistles of Paul,” Broadman Press: Nashville TN, p.6. Emphasis original).
“[2Th 1:2] From God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ (apo theou patros kai Kuriou lesou Christou). … Note absence of article both after en and apo, though both God and Lord Jesus Christ are definite. In both cases Jesus Christ is put on a par with God, though not identical. See on I Thess. 1:1 for discussion of words, but note difference between en, in the sphere of, by the power of, and apo, from, as the fountain head and source of grace and peace.” (Robertson, 1931, p.41. Emphasis original).
http://jesusisyhwh.blogspot.com/2010….on.htmlJack
Quote (t8 @ Feb. 23 2011,19:51) Quote (Kangaroo Jack Jr. @ Feb. 23 2011,08:26) Christ ALONE is God qualitatively because He ALONE is the EXACT representation of the Father's SUBSTANCE (Heb. 1:1-3). You have defeated yourself before you even get started.
Jesus proves you wrong by quoting text for the Judges of Israel, “ye are gods, ye are all sons of the Most High.Jesus made it clear that he was saying that he was the son and reminded them that accused him of blasphemy of the usage of the word elohim/theos could be applied to more than God. He finished by saying that he was the son of God.
If you want to teach that Jesus taught that he was The Most High God, then it is your choice to teach that he blasphemed by claiming to be God. But I know that Jesus was without sin and never made such a statement anyway.
You also ignore scripture that calls angels 'elohim' too.
Your teaching doesn't add up to 3. In fact it adds up to nothing because it defies reason.
You're being evasive t8. This is about your admission that Jesus is God qualitatively which is an admission that He is God. I gave Webster's Dictionary which says that the word “quality” means, “essential character, nature.”When you say that Jesus is God qualitatively you infer that He is GOD in His essence, character and nature.
You can't win the debates until you denounce that Jesus is God qualitatively.
YOU CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS SIR! YOU CANNOT ADMIT THAT JESUS IS GOD QUALITATIVELY AND DENOUNCE THAT HE IS GOD IN HIS ESSENTIAL CHARACTER AND NATURE AT THE SAME TIME. YOU MUST DENOUNCE THAT JESUS IS GOD QUALITATIVELY OR WJ IS GOING TO EAT YOU UP.
KJ
Quote (kerwin @ Feb. 23 2011,02:43) Still I agree that Jesus is prince to God's King as he is subject to God and God's Son through the Spirit.
I agree Kerwin. I've stated the same to Keith a couple of days ago.Jesus is King of kings as far as everyone else is concerned. But he is Prince to his own King, Jehovah.
mike
Hi t8,
Quote (t8 @ Feb. 23 2011,02:56)
He is serious. Serious about undermining the rock that Jesus built his Church on. “You are the Christ, the son of the living God”.
And being called not only the “Son of God”, but the “Son of THE LIVING GOD” absolutely destroys their “son of man=man/Son of God=God” theory.They try desparately to liken the BEING OF God to some kind of “species”. As if Jesus, as the son of the “species of Godkind” is equally “Godkind”. But he is not the Son of some “species of Godkind”, he is the Son of the SINGLE BEING of God Himself. And since they readily admit that God is ONE BEING, it is clearly a case of pretending when they claim that Jesus can BE the ONE BEING that he is the Son of.
It's merely a word game………and a weak one at that. But they will stop at nothing. In Jack's latest thread, he straight out claims that he is the same being as his father……..just to make his point. Is there no end to the lunacy?
Quote (t8 @ Feb. 23 2011,02:56)
If you ever wondered why this false doctrine is so prolific and argued for, we only need to see that destroying the Church is accomplished when you destroy her foundation. And when we see what it was that Jesus built his Church on, it was Peter's confession that Jesus was Christ and son of God.It is this very truth that Satan has set to undermine for millenia. He even goes to the length of saying that he is God, so long as you do not believe that he truly is the son OF God.
Satan is on a mission to taunt God. Proverbs 27:11 says:11 Be wise, my son, and make my heart rejoice, that I may make a reply to him that is taunting me.
He taunts God by spreading atheism. And the ones with too much faith for atheism, he gets to worship others than God. What a slap in the face of both Jesus and his God it must be to see all these mislead ones breaking a direct commandment of God that was clearly repeated by Jesus himself. But what joy it must bring to the Deceiver and the Father of the Lie.
Satan has successfully blinded the minds of these ones by convincing them they are doing God and His Son a favor by breaking the very commandment of God not to worship anyone but Him.
It's sad and frustrating, really. I want to do more. I want to publish a short book using laymen's terms that will easily display the total nonsense supported by the trinity doctrine. I want to make bumper stickers with a red circle with a slanted line through the word “Trinity”. Maybe underneath it could say, “Jesus is the SON of God, not God Himself” or “God so loved the world, He sent His SON……………not Himself”, or something.
We are losing the battle of numbers here. And I believe with all my heart that it is only because 99% of Trinitarians have no clue about it at all. They don't even know they are breaking the commands of the God and the Son they love.
mike
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
