- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Feb. 06 2013,19:11) Quote (Lightenup @ Feb. 05 2013,21:37) Who does the creed specifically say by whom all things are made?
Well, since the creed was originally written by Eusebius in the Greek language, the word used was most likely “dia”.The people who translated the creed from Greek to English should have translated the word “dia” as “THROUGH”, not as “BY”.
How can we know this? Read the green words of Tertullian in my recent post to Pierre. This was a man who understood the Greek language of the day. And surely his statement would not make sense if he said, He who creates is one, and he BY WHOM the thing is created is another.
So because of Tertullian's completely accurate and logical statement, we can know that the Greek-speaking people of the early AD centuries understood that all things were created THROUGH Jesus, and not BY him.
So to answer your question: The creed specifically says that Jesus is the one THROUGH whom all things are made.
This is another of the few things the creed got right.
Mike,
Through or by, they both indicate the second power was involved with the first power in creation, so it doesn't really make a difference. Through and by are synonyms and are both used for the same Greek work.Quote (mikeboll64 @ Feb. 06 2013,19:15) Quote (Lightenup @ Feb. 05 2013,21:40) In Acts 13, the God of Abraham, et al is the Father…one of the powers of YHVH. The Servant of Abraham is the second power of YHVH as the incarnated God/Man.
So why do you think they spoke about the God (not “Gods”) of Abraham, and listed Jesus as someone OTHER THAN Him?
Because they were establishing the fact that Jesus was from the God of their Fathers and not from another god of another nation.You keep saying that Jesus is someone other than God but I think the emphasis that the scriptures are making is that Jesus is someone WITH God and in whose name all things are done by God, i.e. Jesus is the Second Power of YHVH who is with the First Power of YHVH. The Jews understood two powers of YHVH. When you accept that, much of your confusion will be cleared up.
Quote (Lightenup @ Feb. 06 2013,21:23) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Feb. 06 2013,18:59) Quote (Lightenup @ Feb. 05 2013,21:35) The second power is the Son, the Word of YHVH/the Arm of YHVH……..
You mean like Cyrus, who is also called the “arm of YHWH”? Was Cyrus the “second power”?
Mike,You are just being ridiculous now.
No Kathi,I'm showing you that you can't make the claim that since Jesus is called “the arm of YHWH”, he is the “second power of YHWH”. Because Cyrus was also called “the arm of YHWH”, and HE surely wasn't the “second power of YHWH”. Your claim has been solidly refuted.
Quote (Lightenup @ Feb. 06 2013,21:23) So are you saying that YHVH is the Father's name? If so, then it is the name given to the Son since the Father gave His name to His Son. John 17
John 17:11
“Now I am no longer in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to You. Holy Father, keep through Your name those whom You have given Me, that they may be one as We are.”You mean that scripture? And now you'll point out that “those”is really a singular word, right? To which I'll remind you what you also always point out: The nation of Israel is often referred to with a singular pronoun and verb. So it could be translated as: keep through your name THAT [group of people] which you have given me.
And even IF you INSIST that it refers to Jesus being given YHWH's name, it proves that Jesus didn't ALWAYS HAVE YHWH's name. And that proves that Jesus hasn't ALWAYS BEEN “YHWH the Son”, as you so often claim.
Also:
Deuteronomy 10
9 The Lord will establish you as his holy people, as he promised you on oath, if you keep the commands of the Lord your God and walk in his ways. 10 Then all the peoples on earth will see that you are called by the name of YHWH, and they will fear you.Uh oh! Now the entire nation of Israel is also “YHWH the Son”!
Another point solidly refuted, Kathi.
Quote (Lightenup @ Feb. 06 2013,21:23) Quote (mikeboll @ 64) Kathi, you didn't address the actual point of my post, which was: WHY do you suppose Jesus is MANY TIMES in scripture listed as someone OTHER THAN the ONE God who created all things? Please address this question DIRECTLY. Because the name of Jesus is the name of the second power of YHVH through whom the first power of YHVH worked and not the first power of YHVH.
That answer does not even address my question, Kathi. Why is Jesus so often listed as someone OTHER THAN Jehovah, our one and only God? In other words, we all have but ONE God, Jehovah. Jesus also has this ONE God as his own God, right? So why is Jesus so often clearly listed in scripture as someone OTHER THAN our ONE God?
Quote (t8 @ Feb. 06 2013,22:09) And by that will, we have been made holy THROUGH/BY the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. If you took the BY option, it would not be saying that Jesus created holiness in us. It is obvious from the context that it is THROUGH this sacrifice that we are holy.
How about this one:Hebrews 1:2
but in these last days he has spoken to us through his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe.The words “he made” refer to the One who actually made the universe. The words “through whom” identify the Son as someone OTHER THAN the One who actually made the universe.
Once again: He who creates is one, and he through whom the thing is created is another. – Tertullian
Quote (Lightenup @ Feb. 06 2013,22:27) Mike,
Through or by, they both indicate the second power was involved with the first power in creation, so it doesn't really make a difference.
You are the one THROUGH WHOM God created your children, Kathi.Does that make you the “second power” of creation? Does it put you on an equal plane with Jehovah, YOUR God?
If not, then why would those same words put Jesus on an equal plane with Jehovah, HIS God?
Quote (Lightenup @ Feb. 06 2013,22:40) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Feb. 06 2013,19:15) Quote (Lightenup @ Feb. 05 2013,21:40) In Acts 13, the God of Abraham, et al is the Father…one of the powers of YHVH. The Servant of Abraham is the second power of YHVH as the incarnated God/Man.
So why do you think they spoke about the God (not “Gods”) of Abraham, and listed Jesus as someone OTHER THAN Him?
Because they were establishing the fact that Jesus was from the God of their Fathers and not from another god of another nation.
Again, that doesn't answer my question. Nor can what you've claimed be support by the words of Acts 13. The question was, So why do you think they spoke about the God (not “Gods”) of Abraham, and listed Jesus as someone OTHER THAN Him?To rephrase: Why is the God of Abraham only ONE God? And why is Jesus NOT that God, but the servant of that ONE God?
(I do agree that Jesus is FROM God the Father – as are all things. In John 6:57, Jesus teaches that he lives because of the Father – just as we all do.)
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Feb. 10 2013,12:42) Quote (Lightenup @ Feb. 06 2013,21:23) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Feb. 06 2013,18:59) Quote (Lightenup @ Feb. 05 2013,21:35) The second power is the Son, the Word of YHVH/the Arm of YHVH……..
You mean like Cyrus, who is also called the “arm of YHWH”? Was Cyrus the “second power”?
Mike,You are just being ridiculous now.
No Kathi,I'm showing you that you can't make the claim that since Jesus is called “the arm of YHWH”, he is the “second power of YHWH”. Because Cyrus was also called “the arm of YHWH”, and HE surely wasn't the “second power of YHWH”. Your claim has been solidly refuted.
Quote (Lightenup @ Feb. 06 2013,21:23) So are you saying that YHVH is the Father's name? If so, then it is the name given to the Son since the Father gave His name to His Son. John 17
John 17:11
“Now I am no longer in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to You. Holy Father, keep through Your name those whom You have given Me, that they may be one as We are.”You mean that scripture? And now you'll point out that “those”is really a singular word, right? To which I'll remind you what you also always point out: The nation of Israel is often referred to with a singular pronoun and verb. So it could be translated as: keep through your name THAT [group of people] which you have given me.
And even IF you INSIST that it refers to Jesus being given YHWH's name, it proves that Jesus didn't ALWAYS HAVE YHWH's name. And that proves that Jesus hasn't ALWAYS BEEN “YHWH the Son”, as you so often claim.
Also:
Deuteronomy 10
9 The Lord will establish you as his holy people, as he promised you on oath, if you keep the commands of the Lord your God and walk in his ways. 10 Then all the peoples on earth will see that you are called by the name of YHWH, and they will fear you.Uh oh! Now the entire nation of Israel is also “YHWH the Son”!
Another point solidly refuted, Kathi.
Quote (Lightenup @ Feb. 06 2013,21:23) Quote (mikeboll @ 64) Kathi, you didn't address the actual point of my post, which was: WHY do you suppose Jesus is MANY TIMES in scripture listed as someone OTHER THAN the ONE God who created all things? Please address this question DIRECTLY. Because the name of Jesus is the name of the second power of YHVH through whom the first power of YHVH worked and not the first power of YHVH.
That answer does not even address my question, Kathi. Why is Jesus so often listed as someone OTHER THAN Jehovah, our one and only God? In other words, we all have but ONE God, Jehovah. Jesus also has this ONE God as his own God, right? So why is Jesus so often clearly listed in scripture as someone OTHER THAN our ONE God?
Mike,
you said:Quote I'm showing you that you can't make the claim that since Jesus is called “the arm of YHWH”, he is the “second power of YHWH”. Because Cyrus was also called “the arm of YHWH”, and HE surely wasn't the “second power of YHWH”. Your claim has been solidly refuted. Solidly refuted?? Is Cyrus also called the First and the Last, the Word of God, the Lord of lords? You see, the 'arm of YHVH' is not the only name that the Son has. The Son and Cyrus are not even in the same ball park. You are wasting the reader's time with these types of arguments.
And then, regarding john 17:11…
you give us the translation of:
Now I am no longer in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to You. Holy Father, keep through Your name those whom You have given Me, that they may be one as We are.But that is not an accurate translation. If 'those' was correct, then it would be written in the masculine gender and not in the neuter gender which it is…like 'name' is written in the neuter gender and singular.
So the other translators have it right that refer to the name which was given to the Son. That is solid refutation. Here are some of those correct translations but there are many more. However, you already knew this, yet you continue to stiffen your neck.
New International Version (©1984)
I will remain in the world no longer, but they are still in the world, and I am coming to you. Holy Father, protect them by the power of your name–the name you gave me–so that they may be one as we are one.New American Standard Bible (©1995)
“I am no longer in the world; and yet they themselves are in the world, and I come to You. Holy Father, keep them in Your name, the name which You have given Me, that they may be one even as We are.International Standard Version (©2012)
I am no longer in the world, but they are in the world, and I am coming to you. Holy Father, protect them by your Name, the Name that you gave me, so that they may be one, as we are one.Now that is about the fourth time I have taken the time to point this out to you. It just shows that you do not want to learn and accept the truth. You fall into the category that you yourself label elsewhere, and I quote:
Quote Showing them scriptures that clearly refute their current understanding should work. In fact I've noticed during my time here that those who are truly seeking scriptural truth eagerly adjust their own understanding when shown scriptures that contradict that understanding. Of course, there are also those here who are so dead-set in their own man-made doctrines that no amount of scriptures will deter them from it.
from here (fifth post down)
https://heavennet.net/cgi-bin….4;&#topAnd finally, you quote Deuteronomy 10:9-10 but you probably mean Deuteronomy 28:9-10 which doesn't say anything close to what you are twisting it to mean. If you would read the context, you will see that if the people will obey YHVH, then they will be called BY His name, in other words, they will be established as His holy ones whom He will bless. If they do not obey YHVH, then they will be cursed. Read it for yourself:
Quote 7“The Lord will cause your enemies who rise against you to be defeated before you. They shall come out against you one way and flee before you seven ways. 8The Lord will command the blessing on you in your barns and in all that you undertake. And he will bless you in the land that the Lord your God is giving you. 9The Lord will establish you as a people holy to himself, as he has sworn to you, if you keep the commandments of the Lord your God and walk in his ways. 10And all the peoples of the earth shall see that you are called by the name of the Lord, and they shall be afraid of you. 11And the Lord will make you abound in prosperity, in the fruit of your womb and in the fruit of your livestock and in the fruit of your ground, within the land that the Lord swore to your fathers to give you. 12The Lord will open to you his good treasury, the heavens, to give the rain to your land in its season and to bless all the work of your hands. And you shall lend to many nations, but you shall not borrow. 13And the Lord will make you the head and not the tail, and you shall only go up and not down, if you obey the commandments of the Lord your God, which I command you today, being careful to do them, 14and if you do not turn aside from any of the words that I command you today, to the right hand or to the left, to go after other gods to serve them. Curses for Disobedience
15“But if you will not obey the voice of the Lord your God or be careful to do all his commandments and his statutes that I command you today, then all these curses shall come upon you and overtake you. 16Cursed shall you be in the city, and cursed shall you be in the field. 17Cursed shall be your basket and your kneading bowl. 18Cursed shall be the fruit of your womb and the fruit of your ground, the increase of your herds and the young of your flock. 19Cursed shall you be when you come in, and cursed shall you be when you go out.
20“The Lord will send on you curses, confusion, and frustration in all that you undertake to do, until you are destroyed and perish quickly on account of the evil of your deeds, because you have forsaken me. 21The Lord will make the pestilence stick to you until he has consumed you off the land that you are entering to take possession of it. 22The Lord will strike you with wasting disease and with fever, inflammation and fiery heat, and with drought and with blight and with mildew. They shall pursue you until you perish. 23And the heavens over your head shall be bronze, and the earth under you shall be iron. 24The Lord will make the rain of your land powder. From heaven dust shall come down on you until you are destroyed.
So, as you can see the two passages are about completely different things, but you knew this, didn't you…so once again, you fall into the category of those who are so 'dead set' on their own man made doctrines that no amount of scriptures will deter them from it.
Again, you judge yourself with your own words. It is sad, really.
Mike asked:
Quote
That answer does not even address my question, Kathi. Why is Jesus so often listed as someone OTHER THAN Jehovah, our one and only God? In other words, we all have but ONE God, Jehovah. Jesus also has this ONE God as his own God, right? So why is Jesus so often clearly listed in scripture as someone OTHER THAN our ONE God?Jesus is the one God OF God, not the one God who is the Father but the one God who came out of the Father…Jesus is God the Son who with the 'one God' the Father, was involved in creation.
As you know, some make Jesus out to be the Father also, but these types of verses show that He is not God the Father but someone with God the Father.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Feb. 10 2013,12:50) Quote (Lightenup @ Feb. 06 2013,22:27) Mike,
Through or by, they both indicate the second power was involved with the first power in creation, so it doesn't really make a difference.
You are the one THROUGH WHOM God created your children, Kathi.Does that make you the “second power” of creation? Does it put you on an equal plane with Jehovah, YOUR God?
If not, then why would those same words put Jesus on an equal plane with Jehovah, HIS God?
Once again Mike,
Jesus is the second power of YHVH because of being many things with the first power of YHVH.They are both the First and Last, He is the Word of YHVH, the Arm of YHVH, and the Lord of lords…also God with the God even in the beginning as well as the one who was given the name of YHVH by His Father.
All of that cannot be said of anyone else, Mike. Stop wasting the reader's time.
As you should know, I have not claimed anyone else including Cyrus or myself as being the second power of YHVH so I don't even know why you would imply such.
Mike says:
Quote And even IF you INSIST that it refers to Jesus being given YHWH's name, it proves that Jesus didn't ALWAYS HAVE YHWH's name. And that proves that Jesus hasn't ALWAYS BEEN “YHWH the Son”, as you so often claim. Being 'given' the name shows that He is a son and not the Father. What it doesn't show is that He didn't always deserve the name nor does it show that He wasn't always existent, nor does it show that they aren't an eternal unity. These things you haven't been able to clearly and solidly discredit.
Quote (Lightenup @ Feb. 10 2013,13:40) Solidly refuted?? Is Cyrus also called the First and the Last, the Word of God, the Lord of lords? You see, the 'arm of YHVH' is not the only name that the Son has.
Oh, I see now. The “second power of YHWH” must have this particular set of things said about him! How convenient for you that this particular set of things was ONLY ever said about Jesus!
Hey, I know how to solve this issue: Show me the scripture that EXPLICITELY teaches us that Jesus is the “second power of YHWH”.
Oops, bet there isn't one, is there?
Kathi, stop wasting the reader's time with your nonsense. Silly rabbit, Jesus is the Son and servant OF our one and only Almighty God. He is not that Almighty God Himself.
In fact, that one and only Almighty God is not only OUR God, but he is also JESUS' God as well.We and our Lord have the same exact God, Kathi. Do you believe this?
Quote (Lightenup @ Feb. 10 2013,13:40) Now that is about the fourth time I have taken the time to point this out to you. It just shows that you do not want to learn and accept the truth.
John 17:11 NLT
Now I am departing the world; I am leaving them behind and coming to you. Holy Father, keep them and care for them––all those you have given me––so that they will be united just as we are.The New Living Translation is one of the most recent English translations there is, Kathi. And like the KJV (one of the oldest), they translate as “those”, not “the name”.
You and I are just beginning to understand the BASICS of the Greek language. We certainly don't know the intricacies of it. So I don't think that YOU can claim, with any amount of certainty, that “those” is a flawed translation in John 17:11. It certainly doesn't seem flawed to the translators of the NLT, right?
When you become a Greek EXPERT, I will be more apt to listen.
I still maintain that “keep in your name THAT WHICH you have given me” can refer to the GROUP of people THAT (not WHO) was given to Jesus.
I am apparently not alone in this understanding.
Quote (Lightenup @ Feb. 10 2013,13:40) So, as you can see the two passages are about completely different things, but you knew this, didn't you…
It seems sensible to me that if Jesus was truly given the name of his God, Jehovah, then he would subsequently be “called BY the name of his God, Jehovah”.So how is that different from the nation of Israel being “called BY the name of their God, Jehovah”?
Quote (Lightenup @ Feb. 10 2013,13:55) As you should know, I have not claimed anyone else including Cyrus or myself as being the second power of YHVH so I don't even know why you would imply such.
Actually Kathi, what I've done is to point out people who you DON'T think are the “second power of YHWH”, and show you how the same things are said about them as are said about God's holy servant Jesus Christ.You have now had to change your strategy, and claim that EACH of these particular things have to be said about the one person to make him the “second power of YHWH”.
Is Cyrus called the arm of Jehovah? Yep. But those words were said about Jesus on the second Tuesday of the month of Nisan. They were said about Cyrus on a THURSDAY, thus proving that Jesus IS the “second power of YHWH”, and Cyrus is NOT!
There is a name for this strategy, but I'll just call it “Stacking the Deck in Jesus' Favor” for now.
Kathi, you know what else is said about Jesus? That he can do NOTHING on his own. That just like us, he also lives BECAUSE OF the Father. That his one and only God is also OUR one and only God. That he is the humble SERVANT of our God and his God – just as we should be. That we will someday see him as he is, and be just like him. That we will be BROTHERS to Jesus, and SONS to his and our God.
And on and on and on……………………
But you like to overlook these OBVIOUS things that clearly prove Jesus is someone OTHER THAN the God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, the Jews, and us. Why do you suppose you overlook such crystal clear scriptures that designate Jesus as someone OTHER THAN our one and only Almighty God, and focus instead on little tidbits like “first and last”, “Word OF God”, “arm OF God” and the fact that, LIKE MANY OTHERS IN SCRIPTURE, Jesus is a “lord of other lords”? (I mean really Kathi, two of your own “proofs” list Jesus as someone OTHER THAN the God he is the arm and Word OF for crying out loud.
)Quote (mikeboll64 @ Feb. 11 2013,07:49) Quote (t8 @ Feb. 06 2013,22:09) And by that will, we have been made holy THROUGH/BY the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. If you took the BY option, it would not be saying that Jesus created holiness in us. It is obvious from the context that it is THROUGH this sacrifice that we are holy.
How about this one:Hebrews 1:2
but in these last days he has spoken to us through his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe.The words “he made” refer to the One who actually made the universe. The words “through whom” identify the Son as someone OTHER THAN the One who actually made the universe.
Once again: He who creates is one, and he through whom the thing is created is another. – Tertullian
Agreed.But you won't find agreement from those that teach false doctrine. They will continue to twist the scriptures to say what they want. They have demonstrated clearly their lack of care for the truth.
And why would they change now, when they have had ample opportunity to do that in the past and not taken it.
Quote (Lightenup @ Feb. 10 2013,13:59) Mike says: Quote And even IF you INSIST that it refers to Jesus being given YHWH's name, it proves that Jesus didn't ALWAYS HAVE YHWH's name. And that proves that Jesus hasn't ALWAYS BEEN “YHWH the Son”, as you so often claim. Being 'given' the name shows that He is a son and not the Father. What it doesn't show is that He didn't always deserve the name nor does it show that He wasn't always existent, nor does it show that they aren't an eternal unity. These things you haven't been able to clearly and solidly discredit.
“Solidly discredit”? Doesn't it first have to BE a valid scriptural claim before the other guy needs to “discredit” it?What I know is that YOU claim Jesus has been “YHWH the Son” from eternity. But apparently, that claim is wrong if Jesus was at some point GIVEN the name YHWH from his God.
And now that you realize this (a point for which I can't take credit, for t8 mentioned it to you months ago), you are once again hemming and hawing and asking us to prove a negative.
Well, even if Jesus was GIVEN the name YHWH, you can't prove that he WASN'T always existent – so there!
But yes I can, Kathi. With one little word: SON. If Jesus is the SON of God, then God came first. No father and son have EVER existed from the same point in time. The father ALWAYS existed first, and then later begets a son.
Of course you'll say that man's rules don't apply to God. But then, what proof do you really have of this? What proof do you offer that Jesus has always existed? What proof do you offer that, in the case of Gods, the father and son exist from the same point in time?
NONE. You have nothing but your own, self-made claims…….. and not a single scripture that backs such claims.
I think I'm with Princess and t8 on this one: Binity truly has become quite the bore.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Feb. 11 2013,16:35) There is a name for this strategy, but I'll just call it “Stacking the Deck in Jesus' Favor” for now.
That is right. Although, technically speaking that is stacking the deck in favor of lies. It is another form of deception. i.e., when a rule doesn't apply across the board, but only to that which a person selects. Selective reasoning.The one thing that I find amazing in all this is where do they get their passion to teach lies every day? I mean, for what reward do they get. They are not paid in cash, and the result is not a good reward from God. So why do they even bother?
Similarly, why does Satan the Father of Lies continue to deceive when he has already lost the war.
Do these deceivers think that lies still has every chance of winning in the end or something?
Maybe it is more a matter of Satan just being extremely angry and destroying all that he can, while deceivers actually think they are doing God a service.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Feb. 11 2013,16:44) Of course you'll say that man's rules don't apply to God. But then, what proof do you really have of this? What proof do you offer that Jesus has always existed? What proof do you offer that, in the case of Gods, the father and son exist from the same point in time?
Of course, if God made us to have sons and children, then why does he let us use the same word son?Because it is not that different.
If God has a son and I have a son, then that means that God has offspring, and we do to.
If Jesus always existed with the Father as a proceeding YHWH Spirit, then why call that a son, when our sons are nothing like that.
God has a Holy Spirit that proceeds from him. And yet is the Holy Spirit another son?
Kathi is deceived.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
