- This topic has 713 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 9 months ago by
.
- Posts
Hi Kathi.
I have decided to go straight to the Supreme Court with your view. You mentioned in the thread that I was not suppose to post in that I don't answer your questions.
So here is the opportunity for me to answer your questions and for you to answer mine and to get feedback and questions from others.
Because this is in the Hot Seat, I am forced to answer your questions. I do not answer your other questions because I have not read them. I can't remember not answering a question that I have seen from you.
Kathi, you say that the Father is God and Jesus is the begotten God and together they are God. This appears to be the doctrine you teach here.
Question: You believe in an unbegotten God and a begotten God.
Excuse me if this seems overly obvious, but that is 2 Gods is it not?
Bear in mind that you say there is a begotten GOd and an unbegotten GOd meaning that the begotten God cannot be the unbegotten God and vice versa.I count 2 Gods.
Please explain.
BTW, if this is a duplicate Hot Seat debate, then I can shut this down and post my questions in the original.
This is great t8, I welcome the opportunity but I think that it would be easier to stick to us answering each other's questions if it were a closed discussion. Would you mind limiting it to a discussion just between the two of us? It would be much easier for us to keep a flow going in the discussion. There can be another thread for a discussion about our discussion if you would like.
OK, we will do that.
But how about letting others post when we are both done with asking each other questions.
It can be good to allow others to comment on the conversation at the end.Well, if we do that then either one of us may come up with a whole line of more questions after a 'lull' in the conversation. I think that having another thread for comments to our discussion would be better. It would make it a lot easier for us to quote each other's thoughts, for me anyway.
While I wait for your response to that last post, I will begin to address your questions.
There are two sides to a coin, agreed? When the coin is laying on the table, you see only one side.
What it seems to me is that what you are doing is insisting that there is only one side to the coin while I am insisting that there are two. I am trying to show you that the coin is made up of one head and one tail. If you look at the head side, you see a coin…if you look at the tail side, you see a coin also. If you hold the coin in a clenched fist, you know that you have the coin in your fist and it is not specifically heads or tails.
In other words, in some contexts scripture calls Jesus 'God' and in other contexts scripture calls the Father 'God.' I see them both as God sorta like I see both sides of the coin as a coin. Then there are all sorts of others that scripture calls 'god.' They would be like the plastic coins that by nature are not real coins but have some representations to a coin. Ultimately, they have no real value except for showing that there is a difference between the coins that are valuable and the coins that aren't and perhaps how to count money.
If I showed a picture of a coin to a child and he saw only the heads side and then showed another picture of the same coin to the same child but it showed the tails side…then I asked the child if he thought he was seeing the same coin, he might mistakenly say no. The person who took the pictures would know that it was the same coin but the person who did not witness the picture being taken would have to either believe the photographer or not. Now as an adult, we understand that a coin has two sides with two different pictures and can accept that it very well could be the same coin. Understanding coins and witnessing the photographer makes it crystal clear. However, if we weren't around to witness the photographer, then we lean on our understanding and take a guess. The photographers word is like the word of God. We can believe it or not. One way or the other, there is only one truth. It seems to me that you have only one side to your coin, t8. It seems that, to you, the heads side up is the only way a real coin is but the tails side up is less than the real coin.
For us, there is only one head on the coin, the Father and one tail on the coin, Jesus Christ. We do not have a coin with two heads on it or two tails. I believe that in some contexts, the Bible author distinguishes between the two 'sides' by calling one God and one Lord…both are called 'God' in other contexts, i.e. John 1:1. One side of the coin is with the other side of the coin 'in the beginning.' The two sides are inseparable…together they make one coin.
So, in summary, there are two persons that make up the one God unity like two sides make up the one coin.
Are you understanding my word picture at all here? It is just a word picture and as the nature of word pictures go, it is not perfect by any means. The Lord used them though so I thought I would give it a try
I hope it helps you to understand why I say there are two Gods but one God.t8
you said:Quote Because this is in the Hot Seat, I am forced to answer your questions. I do not answer your other questions because I have not read them. I can't remember not answering a question that I have seen from you. Do you not check this thread that you created? Do you have an answer?
Quote (Lightenup @ July 18 2012,04:32) There are two sides to a coin, agreed? When the coin is laying on the table, you see only one side. What it seems to me is that what you are doing is insisting that there is only one side to the coin while I am insisting that there are two. I am trying to show you that the coin is made up of one head and one tail. If you look at the head side, you see a coin…if you look at the tail side, you see a coin also. If you hold the coin in a clenched fist, you know that you have the coin in your fist and it is not specifically heads or tails.
You are applying your own understanding here. A coin has 2 main sides yes. But a dice has 6. I could equally make the argument that there is the Trinity, plus, redeemed man, cherubs, and seraphs that all have or can participate in divine nature. Now I have Quintinity.Of course I am not going to make that argument, but I have as much evidence here as you do with your Binity.
Quote (Lightenup @ July 18 2012,04:32) In other words, in some contexts scripture calls Jesus 'God' and in other contexts scripture calls the Father 'God.' I see them both as God sorta like I see both sides of the coin as a coin. Then there are all sorts of others that scripture calls 'god.' They would be like the plastic coins that by nature are not real coins but have some representations to a coin. Ultimately, they have no real value except for showing that there is a difference between the coins that are valuable and the coins that aren't and perhaps how to count money.
Look at the bigger picture.Some context scriptures call Jesus theos, man as theos, angel as theos, idols as theos, Satan as theos.
You are narrowing it down to 2 because your predefined belief says God has 2 faces and I have shown that theos is applied to multiple beings and things.
Again, I could equally argue any number of persons in one God just as you have.
But I believe Paul when he said, “for US, there is one God the Father”. Whereas you would have me believe your view instead which states that there is one God the Father and Son. Your view is not written in scripture, Paul's is.
Quote (Lightenup @ July 18 2012,04:32) For us, there is only one head on the coin, the Father and one tail on the coin, Jesus Christ. We do not have a coin with two heads on it or two tails. I believe that in some contexts, the Bible author distinguishes between the two 'sides' by calling one God and one Lord…both are called 'God' in other contexts, i.e. John 1:1. One side of the coin is with the other side of the coin 'in the beginning.' The two sides are inseparable…together they make one coin.
Again, this is not a reasonable interpretation .There is one God the Father is not similarly constructed as there is one head on the coin.
God in your analogy is the coin, yet Paul is effectively saying that God is the whole thing and that Jesus is not even mentioned as being the coin so to speak. if you care to read what Paul actually said you will see this to be the case.
Quote (Lightenup @ July 18 2012,04:32) So, in summary, there are two persons that make up the one God unity like two sides make up the one coin.
Paul says in summary that there is one God the Father. He does not say that there is one God the Father and Son.You clearly differ with Paul and obviously I cannot embrace Paul's teaching and yours at the same time. That would make me a double minded man making me unstable in all my ways.
t8,
you saidQuote You are applying your own understanding here.
Yes, that is what you are after here, isn't it?Quote A coin has 2 main sides yes.
Very good!Quote But a dice has 6. I could equally make the argument that there is the Trinity, plus, redeemed man, cherubs, and seraphs that all have or can participate in divine nature. Now I have Quintinity. How many have divine deity nature as their original nature?
Quote Of course I am not going to make that argument, but I have as much evidence here as you do with your Binity. Are you and your wife a binity or a unity? What is the difference in your opinion or are they the same?
Quote But I believe Paul when he said, “for US, there is one God the Father”. Whereas you would have me believe your view instead which states that there is one God the Father and Son. Your view is not written in scripture, Paul's is. How many persons are listed in this verse regarding how many gods and lords are for us, one or two?
1 Cor 8:6
To us, ours is one God The Father, for all things are from him and we are in him, and The One LORD JEHOVAH Yeshua The Messiah, for all things are by him, and we are also in his hand.Quote (Lightenup @ July 28 2012,14:48) t8,
you saidQuote You are applying your own understanding here.
Yes, that is what you are after here, isn't it?
Yes that is right. And I want you to see that it is your own understanding and even by your own admission now.There is a difference between applying your own understanding and understanding the things of God.
The former is from your own spirit or mind, the latter is from God.Quote (Lightenup @ July 28 2012,14:48) How many have divine deity nature as their original nature?
I don't have a figure but God shares his nature or allows beings to participate in it. This never makes a person God himself, although that doesn't rule out being called theos. But THE Theos and theos are 2 different things. Not many are aware of that.Likewise, the Spirit and spirit are not the same thing too.
Quote (Lightenup @ July 28 2012,14:48) Are you and your wife a binity or a unity? What is the difference in your opinion or are they the same?
A unity of course.Now let's look at Paul's writing.
For US there is one God the Father.
Now let's apply that to your figurative argument here.
There is one Man the husband. In other words a husband and wife are not THE Man because you cannot say there is one Man the husband and wife. Not that is two adams/man. Not one.
Likewise the Father and Son are not THE God. The Father is.
Quote (Lightenup @ July 28 2012,14:48) 1 Cor 8:6
To us, ours is one God The Father, for all things are from him and we are in him, and The One LORD JEHOVAH Yeshua The Messiah, for all things are by him, and we are also in his hand.
kathi.Jesus is lord. It was God that made him lord. Yet it doesn't really need an explanation that Jesus is lord, but not lord of the one who made him lord.
Same with Pharaoh and Joseph. The Pharaoh effectively made Joseph lord of his empire, but not lord over Pharaoh himself.
So you could say that Pharaoh was lord and so was Joseph and yet who in their right mind would argue that they were the same being because they were both referred to as lord.
If you have ever rented a house you had a landlord, and there are lords to this day in The House of Lords which is the upper house of the Parliament of the United Kingdom.
Lord means ruler or authority and who would argue that if Jesus was made lord by the ultimate authority God, then would that make him God. Of course not.
We know for example that God has handed all things to Jesus and when they all come under his feet, then he hands it all to God because at that point all is now under the Kingdom, and God can indwell all. When you read that particular scripture is clearly states that this does not include God himself.
1 Corinthians 15:27
For he “has put everything under his feet.” Now when it says that “everything” has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ.So your idea of using the word lord to prove that someone is God is misguided.
Quote (t8 @ July 29 2012,00:27) Quote (Lightenup @ July 28 2012,14:48) t8,
you saidQuote You are applying your own understanding here.
Yes, that is what you are after here, isn't it?
Yes that is right. And I want you to see that it is your own understanding and even by your own admission now.There is a difference between applying your own understanding and understanding the things of God.
The former is from your own spirit or mind, the latter is from God.
Hold on there Scholar…you are judging my own understanding as being not from God. How is it that you decide if another's own understanding is from God or just their fleshly thoughts? Do you know? Is your test a comparison between your own understanding and another's? If someone agrees with you, then they understand the things of God and if they don't agree with you, then they don't understand the things of God?What does the Bible say about how to decide what is the right interpretation of scripture?
Here are some tests that scripture has for us to see if one is with understanding from God or not:
Aramaic Bible in Plain English (©2010)
Philippians 2:11 And every tongue shall confess that Yeshua The Messiah is THE LORD JEHOVAH to the glory of God his Father.Aramaic Bible in Plain English (©2010)
1 Cor 12:3
Because I inform you of this: there is no man who speaks by The Spirit of God and says, “Yeshua is damned”, neither can a man say, “Yeshua is THE LORD JEHOVAH”, except by The Spirit of Holiness.So, test yourself t8, can you say that Yeshua is the LORD JEHOVAH…or the Messiah is the LORD JEHOVAH?
Scripture says that you can only confess that by the Spirit of Holiness. If you can't confess that, realize that I can. So, you see, I am not alone in my understanding…it is apparent that the authors of the manuscripts of which the Aramaic Bible in Plain English clearly understands this also.
So here are your own words judging you:
“There is a difference between applying your own understanding and understanding the things of God.
The former is from your own spirit or mind, the latter is from God.”Quote (t8 @ July 29 2012,00:29) Quote (Lightenup @ July 28 2012,14:48) How many have divine deity nature as their original nature?
I don't have a figure but God shares his nature or allows beings to participate in it. This never makes a person God himself, although that doesn't rule out being called theos. But THE Theos and theos are 2 different things. Not many are aware of that.Likewise, the Spirit and spirit are not the same thing too.
t8,
Ok, you don't have a figure. So, according to scripture, there are gods that are by nature not gods.Gal 4:8 8For then when you had not known God, you served those which by their nature were not gods.
Therefore, there are also a god or gods that by nature ARE gods.
You admit that you do not know how many persons have this divine deity nature as their original nature…realize that you DO NOT KNOW by your own admission.
Also realize that the question was not how many persons that have a non-deity divine original nature partake of this nature.
You say that Theos and theos are two different things and not many are aware of that.
I don't think that you are aware of who is Theos and who is theos. The person/persons who are 'Theos' would have the nature of god. Those who are merely 'theos' would NOT have the nature of god but would be served as if they had the nature of god.
Jesus is THE only begotten Theos, not a begotten theos.
New American Standard Bible (©1995)
No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.Also, Jesus is the exact representation of God's nature.
Heb 1:3
New American Standard Bible (©1995)
And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power. When He had made purification of sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,Quote Quote (t8 @ July 08 2012,08:14) Quote (Lightenup @ July 08 2012,20:16) Mike,
You indicate that I believe in one person that is His own Son yet in the next sentence you indicate that I believe in two persons. I'm pretty sure that you know that I believe in two persons and one is from the other so why would you act like I was saying that one came from himself? You probably need a break or something.
Do you object to that doctrine being called the Binity so we can use one word to refer to it?
Hi t8,
Thanks for asking. I do object to using the word 'binity' to express what I believe. Are you and your wife a binity? If you want a word to sum up what I believe, use the word that the Bible uses:Jehovah
Deut 10:17
For Jehovah your God, he is God of gods, and Lord of lords, the great God, the mighty, and the terrible, who regardeth not persons, nor taketh reward.t8,
It seems that you did not bother to read the answer to your question that you asked me in the Delusions thread. If you read it yet still call what I believe a binity, why would you do that since I said that it was not what I wanted you to call it?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
