- This topic has 713 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 11 months ago by
.
- Posts
I believe that the Son of God was always a living entity even before He was begotten. You seem to say that the Son of God became a living entity AFTER he was begotten.
The Word was God or an attribute of God, then it was WITH God. Then God created all things through him.
1 John 1 tells us that even from the beginning, Jesus was the eternal life with God.
From the first fire another was produced. And that second fire will never go out. That is pretty much how the early fathers put it. They did not say that the second fire burned for all eternity, but that it came from the first with no mention of the second being temporary.
Jesus is not just a word of God or a bunch of attributes of God that became alive and called a son. Jesus is the Word ‘of life’ and that life was eternally with the Father.
The Word that came from God would naturally have the attributes of God himself. For where else does the Word with God come from? The early fathers worded it as the first work of God. Whereas you would disagree with them and say not the first, because it was always like this.
This notion of yours suggests two Gods side by side and in unity. Two sources because they both existed together with them not ever not existing together. But for us, there is one God the Father. That is what we/us fundamentally believe. Your religion on who the one true God is different to what we believe. You have a different gospel and teaching on who God is. Yours is but one divergent among many other religions and paths. The wide path caters for all that is not true.
t8, you said: From the first fire another was produced.
This is not taught in the Bible and I don’t think that church father teaches this either. I don’t think you understand what they are saying about this. You have missed the meaning if you think that the Word was a first work. The begetting of the word was the first work. The Word already was himself, within the Father before the begetting.
t8 you said:
This notion of yours suggests two Gods side by side and in unity. Two sources because they both existed together with them not ever not existing together. But for us, there is one God the Father. That is what we/us fundamentally believe. Your religion on who the one true God is different to what we believe. You have a different gospel and teaching on who God is. Yours is but one divergent among many other religions and paths. The wide path caters for all that is not true.
I do not suggest two Gods side by side and in unity. I believe that there are two members within the unity of God as one God unity together with their Spirit. One member is the God of gods and the other member is the Lord of lords. The Father is the source because He is the One who initiates the activity according to His will. The Son always aligns Himself with His Father’s will. He does this because He is a perfect son, not because He is unable in anyway.
t8, according to you , when did the Word and God the Father become one? Please use scripture if possible.
t8, you asked:
Scripture and verse please.
I already told you that you will find that the Word was the eternal life that was with the Father from the beginning in 1 John 1:1-3.
The Word already was himself, within the Father before the begetting.
Commonly known as an attribute of God, not another person or being.
This eternal being inside the womb of God for all eternity past is not taught anywhere.
Are you not aware that the head of Christ is God, the head of the woman is the man, and the head of the man is Christ.
If Christ or the Word lived as a different being inside God, then did man live inside Christ, and was Eve in Adam?
Well they may have come from such, but Eve was not a living being inside Adam, but came from him at the appointed time.
The Word that was in God and still is in God that was WITH God, is not God himself, but is WITH him.
Further, scripture clearly teaches us who the one true God is and the one whom he has sent. You disagree with this, but you are entitled to disagree.
I do not suggest two Gods side by side and in unity. I believe that there are two members within the unity of God as one God unity together with their Spirit.
But in your previous post you suggest that the Word was an unborn living being in his own right. An eternal fetus or other such description.
t8, according to you , when did the Word and God the Father become one? Please use scripture if possible.
The Word was with God. When you are with God, that generally means you are for him, in unity with him, agree with him, but it never means you are him.
Scripture teaches us that Jesus is now back with God in the glory he had with him before creation. And when he returns, he has a name written on him, “The Word of God”.
If you had a good grasp of the English language, you would know that being OF GOd is a sure way to say you are NOT God.
I already told you that you will find that the Word was the eternal life that was with the Father from the beginning
God has no beginning. He precedes that. Simple.
Have you heard the saying: “flogging a dead horse”.
It kind of means that no matter how hard you try to make a dead horse alive, it will remain dead. Similarly, a doctrine that fails scripture will not suddenly become relevant by repeating the same errors?
@t8
you said:
The Word was with God. When you are with God, that generally means you are for him, in unity with him, agree with him, but it never means you are him.
T8, please answer this question:
Do you believe that God ALWAYS had His Word or was there a time when the Word was not?
The logos is an attribute of God and like all attributes, they are part of God and always have been and always will be. He changes not. The Word as another is spoken about in John 1:1 as being in the beginning. “The Word was WITH God”. This Word that was with God seem to be before creation itself and after God, so in the middle. There was God, then there was God and the Word, followed by creation coming from God through the Word.
It also seems that Jesus is identified as that Word and we are also told that God created all things through the son, which may be a reference to him being the Word that God created all through. As a man, Jesus is also the mediator between God and man, again in the middle as a mediator. This makes him unique, but not God. He has first place in all things. God doesn’t become first because he delegates first and has always been. He is the source of the Son and the Word. All things, even the son, come from God. All things that are good that is. There is another god by whom things come, that is Satan. He is the father of lies and murder.
So the Word was not always with God unless we want to believe there were two beings side by side. While you may not hold to that, your doctrine is even weirder than that as it suggests God was eternally pregnant with the other being. But we can rule that out because we know that there is one God, not two, or three. And there is no mention of God being pregnant anywhere in scripture. Further, we know for sure that this one true God is the Father and that Jesus is the one whom he sent, Jesus said it himself, so why even question this. We have the scriptures to guide us in these matters, so what is our excuse. Our own understanding and spirit will never figure God out. A person led by the Spirit will reject any words that come from one’s own spirit and understanding.
@t8
you said:
The logos is an attribute of God and like all attributes, they are part of God and always have been and always will be. He changes not.
My response:
So, within your last few posts you have said that the logos is a part of God and has always been a part of God and has always been in unity with God. Is that correct? Please answer yes, or no, or I don’t know.
When the Logos was WITH God, this didn’t diminish the logos in God.
When the Truth walked this Earth, this didn’t mean that God who is the Father didn’t have truth. Truth is part of his character.
God creates and begats from his own nature and attributes. We can be truthful, but that doesn’t diminish truth in God.
God is eternal. He shares his attributes and nature.
Are you not aware that we can participate in divine nature? Does that make us God or does God become less divine as a result of that?
I agree with two of your points but not necessarily this one.
always been in unity with God
It suggests that there is another being that has always been in unity with God.
I have certain traits, characteristics, strengths, and weaknesses. I wouldn’t say they are in unity with me, but are me.
Hi t8,
Been a while since I went to this discussion of ours. I stopped by to find a post that I made about cell division and how a parent cell begets an offspring cell during mitosis which showed how two in number are only one in essence. Well I found it on page 9 of this discussion, dated in 2012. I will quote part of what I said there:
Look at the one cell with two things in it, that represents a cell with the potential to reproduce.
The next picture of one cell with four things in it represents a cell that is in the first phase of reproducing.
The third and fourth picture of one cell shows the cell in the third and fourth phase of reproducing.
The last picture shows the begettal of the reproduction. It shows a second cell exactly like the first cell. The two cells represent a first cell and a second cell (a father cell and a son cell). The father cell is exactly like the son cell in nature and attributes and identity-both are identified as the same type of cell except that one is father and one is from the father, that one is the son.The reason that I bring that up tonight is because I was watching this YouTube video where this guy said that God gave him a revelation about a cell dividing into two cells representing the Father and the Son. Check it out at 6:42 on the timeline. Coincidence??
Been a while since I went to this discussion of ours. I stopped by to find a post that I made about cell division and how a parent cell begets an offspring cell during mitosis which showed how two in number are only one in essence. Well I found it on page 9 of this discussion, dated in 2012. I will quote part of what I said there:
And one cell came from the other. Both are not the same age so to speak. If from the original cell comes another, then you could say that cell is the first-born. Obviously there is a parallel with God who is not only spirit, but the Father of all spirits. Thus, of all the other spirits, there had to be one who was first besides the original. The prototype.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
