Tbeing = essence and substance

[Ed J]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Mar. 11 2011,03:18)

Quote (Ed J @ Mar. 10 2011,11:08) .     WJ said to T8: Quote I am human and humans beget humans. Hi WJ, Was Jesus' mother “Mary” a human? God bless   Ed J http://www.holycitybiblecode.org Ed Yes Jesus is a man according to the flesh. Whats your point? WJ

Hi WJ,

My point is (Click Here)…  Jesus is the progeny of God and Mary.
50% God and 50% Man = 100% JESUS…  Son of God and Son of man

God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (Ed J @ Mar. 10 2011,13:10)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Mar. 11 2011,03:18) Quote (Ed J @ Mar. 10 2011,11:08) .     WJ said to T8: Quote I am human and humans beget humans. Hi WJ, Was Jesus' mother “Mary” a human? God bless   Ed J Ed Yes Jesus is a man according to the flesh. Whats your point? WJ Hi WJ, My point is (Click Here)…  Jesus is the progeny of God and Mary. 50% God and 50% Man = 100% JESUS…  Son of God and Son of man

Yes and I knew that was going to be your answer.

So in other words Jesus is a “half-breed” or a “demi-god” a freak of nature, half man and half God?  

Is God the only being in the Universe that has a Son that is not totally like him in nature or being?

If he is what you say then he cannot be “the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being.”

Nope, your Jesus is not the Jesus I know.

WJ

[Proclaimer]

Quote (Kangaroo Jack Jr. @ Mar. 10 2011,08:02)

t8, Your metaphysics are unscriptural and goes against all the philosophers. Identity = nature and within that identity or nature there may be individual persons. I have given many lexographers and even Aristotle a while back. All you give is your own perceptions of things. Are you an expert by your own authority? Cough up some scripture and some philosophers that support you. KJ

OK, if this particular word trips you up, then let's get to the crux of the concept.

Instead of trying to defeat the truth with an out-clause or on a technicality, let us look at the truth pure and simple:

One Adam,
and many adams or one adam which is a group made up of all humanity.

First off, the top example is talking about the first man and the second is all humanity.

Now if you wish to blur this distinction in scripture the end result for you is as follows:

You can't identify Adam because according to you, we are all Adam.
You can't even indentify the second Adam who is Christ because according to you, we are all Adam.

If you have to deny such a basic concept in order to cover the inconsistencies in your argument, then you are like a business who is no longer profitable and has to cut staff to make the budget work.
My guess is that you will continue down this road of denying basic things but try to dress it up as something that looks complex and intelligent. In otherwords, the wise who became fools.

That is what Isaiah had to do in order to come across as intelligent while preaching something really silly.

Oh, and one more thing. For US, there is one God the Father.
But not for you right?

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (t8 @ Mar. 10 2011,18:08)

One Adam, and many adams or one adam which is a group made up of all humanity. First off, the top example is talking about the first man and the second is all humanity.

Not so fast t8

Is the first Adam also not part of the second adam example?

Is Adam also not part of humanity?

Your logic fails and is a weak way to try and explain away Jesus being of the “God kind” in nature.

So lets look at you logic and its comparison to God and god using your word format…

One God
and many gods or one god which is a group made up of all gods.

The One God in your model is not part of the gods or one god is it?  

Who is being tripped up here t8?

WJ

[Proclaimer]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Mar. 11 2011,03:16)

t8 OK lets test your theory again. Does a name identify a class of being? In what way is “Adam” different in nature than “adam”? You see t8 your model doesn't work because you cannot seperate “identity” from “nature”. Please give us an example in the Universe where you can “identify” something with a title or name without “identifying” the “nature” of the thing. If I say “star” does that mean a “star” in the sky or does it mean a “human”? How do you know unless you know the nature of the thing being referred to? Come on guys, you can do better than this. WJ

WJ, it is a no brainer that you can identify many things.

You can identify a species among all animals, you can identify the nature of something, and you can identify a person.

If I said “the waterfall is 200 metres away”, I am talking about a SPECIFIC waterfall.
If I say, “waterfalls range from one metre to hundreds of metres high, then I am talking about waterfalls in general. I am not talking about a specifc waterfall.
If I say the flow of water is faster in the form of a waterfall than it is in the rapids, then I may be identifying a waterfall as opposed to rapids, but I am not talking about any one particular waterfall.
If I say, “the waterfalls are the highlight of Iguazu Natiuonal Park”, then I may be indentifying waterfalls among other highlights of Iguazu National Park, but I still am not indentifying one particular waterfall.

When we have THE Adam or THE God, you are identifying a particular person or God. You can't change fact WJ, you can only accept it or reject it.
When we say, 'adam' or 'theos' without the definte article, then we are not indentifying one particular person or theos. Of course you always need to read the context too.

Now, this shouldn't be hard to grasp WJ, because it is similar in English as it is in Greek, except that Greek requires the definite article before a name, and in English we just capitalise instead.

For this reason, you will see 'Adam' with a capital letter in our English translations and for 'adam', you will see the word 'man' or mankind.

If you go back to primary school or whatever the first level of education is in the States, you will have been taught about capital letters for names as far back as then. Can you remember that?.

[Proclaimer]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Mar. 11 2011,10:18)

Not so fast t8 Is the first Adam also not part of the second adam example? Is Adam also not part of humanity?

I have answered this before.

adam consists of all humans including Adam himself.
Adam is the first human and excludes all others including Eve.

Eve is not Adam.
Eve is adam.

I didn't invent Greek, WJ, I am only pointing out a reality.
Please don't blame me for the way English and Greek are structured.

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (t8 @ Mar. 10 2011,18:25)

When we have THE Adam or THE God, you are identifying a particular person or God.

Are you sure? How do you know?

What if I said Joe believes that “The God” he serves is his money?

Does that identify the One True God?

How do you know if it is the One True God unless you identify his nature?

WJ

[Proclaimer]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Mar. 11 2011,02:50)

t8 God is not a name is it t8? But even if I had my Fathers name you would know that my Father and I are human wouldn't you?

Correct.

Father is not a name either.

For us there is one God the Father.

So now you have even less excuse to deny this.

Yes we know that we have human fathers and similarly, men and angels are called “elohim/theos”.

But it is US that acknowledge this. It is you who is putting his head in the sand.

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (t8 @ Mar. 10 2011,18:27)

I have answered this before. adam consists of all humans including Adam himself.

Good t8

And God consist of Jesus and the Holy Spirit since they are part of the God kind.

WJ

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (t8 @ Mar. 10 2011,18:35)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Mar. 11 2011,02:50) t8 God is not a name is it t8? But even if I had my Fathers name you would know that my Father and I are human wouldn't you? Correct. Father is not a name either. For us there is one God the Father. So now you have even less excuse to deny this. Yes we know that we have human fathers and similarly, men and angels are called “elohim/theos”. But it is US that acknowledge this. It is you who is putting his head in the sand.

I never said the word Father was a name.

More spin.

WJ

[Proclaimer]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Mar. 11 2011,10:30)

Are you sure? How do you know? What if I said Joe believes that “The God” he serves is his money? Does that identify the One True God? How do you know if it is the One True God unless you identify his nature? WJ

In that case, you are identifying a false god which is money. We know if it is the one true God by context.

e.g., the God of this world/age in scripture is not the Most High God. He is identified as Satan. The God of the Earth is identified as YHWH.

Generally speaking if the context is not a false God or the God of this world, if Theos is being indentified, then it is the one true God.

E.g., Grace from God and the Lord Jesus Christ.

Context is important in understanding anything WJ.

[Proclaimer]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Mar. 11 2011,10:37)

Quote (t8 @ Mar. 10 2011,18:27) I have answered this before. adam consists of all humans including Adam himself. Good t8 And God consist of Jesus and the Holy Spirit since they are part of the God kind. WJ

Don't forget to add us into your doctrine.

We are one with God and Christ and with each other.
We can participate in divine nature.
Men and angels are called theos and elohim too.

So if you have to stick to the Trinity, then be consistent and be prepared to add more persons.

Of course we don't have the burden of defending the false doctrine of the Trinity, so we are happy to acknowledge that there is one God the Father and that qualitatively speaking he shares his nature and authority. But no matter what, there is one God the Father for US, because we have identified the true God.

[Proclaimer]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Mar. 11 2011,10:39)

I never said the word Father was a name. More spin. WJ

I never said you did and I also never said that God was a name.

Obviously not spin when you understand that aye?
But no problem, I know that you are not prefect and get things wrong from time to time, (as we all do).

[Ed J]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Mar. 11 2011,06:49)

Quote (Ed J @ Mar. 10 2011,13:10) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Mar. 11 2011,03:18) Quote (Ed J @ Mar. 10 2011,11:08) .     WJ said to T8: Quote I am human and humans beget humans. Hi WJ, Was Jesus' mother “Mary” a human? God bless   Ed J Ed Yes Jesus is a man according to the flesh. Whats your point? WJ Hi WJ, My point is (Click Here)…  Jesus is the progeny of God and Mary. 50% God and 50% Man = 100% JESUS…  Son of God and Son of man Yes and I knew that was going to be your answer. So in other words Jesus is a “half-breed” or a “demi-god” a freak of nature, half man and half God?   Is God the only being in the Universe that has a Son that is not totally like him in nature or being? If he is what you say then he cannot be “the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being.” Nope, your Jesus is not the Jesus I know. WJ

Hi WJ,

The systems of religion and traditions of men communicate…
distortions of truth, confusion of mind, and distractions of spirit.

Well, you should get to know the REAL Jesus of “The Bible”,
and loose the one taught by “Mystery Babylon“! (Rev.18:2-5)

Your brother
in Christ, Jesus!
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

[mikeboll64]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Mar. 10 2011,09:50)

God is not a name is it t8?

Good Keith,

You never answered me in my poll about “God” being a personal name.  I've got your answer now, thanks.

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Mar. 10 2011,09:50)

But even if I had my Fathers name you would know that my Father and I are human wouldn't you?

Yes.  We would also know you are not the same being.  

Keith, I've grown weary of these games.  You never did reply to the “hammer” thing, because you know it doesn't work.  None of this works, and I'm tired of you PRETENDING things you know are just plain nonsense.

Keith, Mike is to human as God is to spirit.

The only begotten son of the being of Mike will be human, but not Mike himself.

The only begotten son of the being of God will be spirit, but not God Himself.

That's really all there is to it.  “God” is not a “species” or a “kind”.  God is a SINGLE BEING.  So the fact that God begot Jesus means that Jesus is a powerful spirit being, LIKE his Father.  It does not mean he IS the being of his Father.

You have clearly admitted that Jesus is the Son of the single being we know as “God”.  If Jesus is the Son OF that One, then he is NOT that One.

mike

[Ed J]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Mar. 11 2011,06:49)

If he is what you say then he cannot be “the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being.”

Hi WJ,

Your radiance example is a Good one, we can work with that!
Is the radiance of the “SUN”, the entire sun? (Please answer)

God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

[mikeboll64]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Mar. 10 2011,09:34)

You and Mike cannot tell us in what way in his nature Jesus is not like the Father?

Keith,

You answer is right there in your own words. If Jesus is LIKE the Father, then Jesus is NOT the Father, right?

And we know from scripture that our only God IS the Father.

So you're really saying that Jesus is LIKE God. And if he is LIKE God, then he can't BE God.

mike

[Kangaroo Jack Jr.]

TO ALL,

See for yourselves that my defininitions on this thread are supported by ancient thought. So I have given lexographers, philosophers and now ancient thought. All the Arains have given in reply is unscholary like mockery.

Quote

Personhood in the Trinity does not match the common Western understanding of “person” as used in the English language—it does not imply an “individual, self-actualized center of free will and conscious activity.”[17] To the ancients, personhood “was in some sense individual, but always in community as well.”[17]p.186 In the Trinity doctrine, each person is understood as having the same identical essence or nature, not merely similar natures. The being of Christ can be said to have dominated theological discussions and councils of the church through the 7th century, and resulted in the Nicene and Constantinopolitan creeds, the Ephesine Formula of 431 AD, and the Christological statement of the Epistola Dogmatica of Leo I to Flavianus. From these councils, the following christological doctrines were condemned as heresies: Ebionism, Docetism, Basilidianism, Alogism or Artemonism, Patripassianism, Sabellianism, Arianism, Apollinarianism, Nestorianism, Eutychianism, Monophysitism, and Monothelitism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity

Here it is again:

To the ancients, personhood “was in some sense individual, but always in community as well.”

Ancient thought is on the Trinitarian's side. God could not always had Personhood if He had not always a Companion by His side!

THE WORD WAS ALWAYS THAT COMPANION AT HIS SIDE!

The Arains have been beaten!

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Mar. 10 2011,19:23)

Keith, Mike is to human as God is to spirit.

Good Mike

Now follow it through….

If Keith and Mike is to human as God is to Spirit then that means that Gods Spirit is God just as our flesh is human.

You say Jesus is a Spirit being like the Father I agree that the Spirit of Jesus is the Spirit of God. But are you saying that angels, and men who are spirits “ARE” the same “Spirit” God is? Are the angels spirit the Spirit of God? Is your Spirit the Spirit of God? Because Jesus Spirit is the Spirit of God the Spirit of Christ.

So these little word games you play by switching around the title god with names is simple hoo doo.

Jesus is the “Only Begotten Son/God” according to the scriptures right?

No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him. John 1:18 NIV

The word for Begotten is “Monogenes” and the definition is…

1) single of its kind, only….(Or the EXACT REPRESENTATION OF HIS BEING)

a) used of only sons or daughters (viewed in relation to their parents)

b) used of Christ, denotes the only begotten son of God

So that fits right in with John 1:1 where it says God is with God.

Now please show us how your logic lines up with the scripture and common sense Mike.

You have bought into Greek Mythology with your belief that God begets “a god” when the truth is God begets God, just as Man begets Man.

God is not a species but “God is a Kind” and Jesus is of the same Kind.

All your spin and opinions doesn't change this fact.

I would be tired of defending falsehoods like you teach too if I had to jump through so many hoops and spin around like the Tazmanian like your post.

WJ

[mikeboll64]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Mar. 11 2011,14:56)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Mar. 10 2011,19:23) Keith, Mike is to human as God is to spirit. Good Mike Now follow it through….

No Keith,

YOU follow it through! Where's the rest of my post? Oh, here it is:

The only begotten son of the being of Mike will be human and will be LIKE Mike, but not Mike himself.

The only begotten son of the being of God will be spirit and will be LIKE God, but not God Himself.

Answer to THAT part, Keith.

Btw, why don't you use the Strong definition of “monogenes”?
Strong says: 3439. monogenes mon-og-en-ace' from 3441 and 1096; only-born, i.e. sole:–only (begotten, child).

mike

[Author]

Posts