- This topic has 18,300 replies, 268 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 3 months ago by
.
- Posts
Hi FYI,
2Peter 1
” But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly introduce destructive heresies, EVEN DENYING THE MASTER WHO BOUGHT THEM, bringing swift destruction upon themselves. Many will follow their sensuality, and because of them the way of truth will be maligned”
2 Peter 3.15
” ..just as our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him,wrote to you, as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of Scriptures, to their own destruction”
2Tim 1.13
” Retain the standard of sound words which you have heard from me, in the faith and love which are in Christ Jesus who dwells in us, the treasure which has been entrusted to you”
2 Tim 3.13
” But evil men and imposters wil proceed from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived. You, however, continue in the things you have learned and become convinced of, knowing from whom you have learned them, and that from childhood you have known the sacred writings , which are able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith in Christ Jesus”FYI,
Why follow false teachers who distort scripture to their ruin?Follow the Son of God , the Shepherd of God.
Hi,
Jesus is the Good Shepherd.
A shepherd is not a landowner but is employed by the landowner to look after the sheep. He is an employee of the landowner. He may be a son and an heir of the landowner but he serves that landowner. They are his sheep given to guard and nurture but they are also belonging to the landowner.God is the landowner.
God is the vinedresser.
God is the vineyard owner.The Son of God serves his Lord, his Master and his God.
Quote (Guest @ July 04 2005,09:42) Being,n In vbl sense; also or esp.
1. existence[in -,existing];
2. constitition,
3. nature,
4. essence;
5. anything that exists;
6. the Supreme-,God];
7. a person.What about the six other possible meanings Nick?
Hi L,
So the meanings describe whatever contains life in itself?Jn 5.26
“For just as the Father has life in Himself, even so He gave to the Son also to have life in himself”So the Son of God was given to have life in himself by the Father. So he did not share the life of the Father as a trinity from eternity but he was given his own life. That is why he is the only begotten Son of Yahweh and not Yahweh Himself.
Eternal ife is what he brought as a gift to whoever would receive his message of salvation. He is the only way to the Father. In him is that life.
1Jn 5.11
“And the witness is this, that God has given us eternal life , and this life is in His Son”To all,
http://aramaicnttruth.org/downloa….aha.pdf
Quote When reading the New Testament, one may become confused. There seems to be ‘two people’ who have
divinity and both are called ‘Lord’. Usually, ‘LORD’ and ‘Lord’ are used, to distinguish these ‘two people’.
True Christians who have the Holy Spirit (I will explain this later on, from Scripture), know that Jesus IS God,
they know that these ‘two people’ are really just ONE, that Jesus is a manifestation of God, not a separate
God/person/Lord.
Is this differentiation of ‘LORD’ and ‘Lord’ to refer to “God the Father” and “Jesus the Son” respectively,
justified? It may well be in the Greek, as different words may be used in the Greek. But this is irrelevant, as the
Greek texts are merely translations from the Peshitta. So we look to the Lamsa Bible, one of the more popular
translations of the Peshitta. Unfortunately, the same distinction is there, ‘LORD’ and ‘Lord’ are used, to
differentiate God from Jesus. However! Often the same word is used for ‘LORD’ as ‘Lord’! Unfortunately,
Lamsa, who was against the trinity and who tried to keep his version in line with the KJV, chose to translate the
word for ‘LORD’ as ‘Lord’ (which is disastrous!) in verses where Jesus is being discussed. So basically, there
are verses in the original New Testament, where no distinction is made between God and Jesus.Greetings.
Very interesting. Thank you FYI.
Nick Hassan a question for you to answer. Was Jesus always the Son of God or did He at some time during His existence become the Son. I will look forward to your reply.Hi L,
Of course he was not always the Son of God.
He was begotten from the Father in the beginning.
Only the Father always is and always was.Nick Hassan,
So you are saying Jesus became the Son when He was begotten in the beginning, yes? OK please supply me with the scripture that elucidates this.It can mean “unique” or it could also refer to the incarnation. I don't think it refers to a birth event that happaned before time, do you? If you do hold to this then where is the scripture that supports it?
Hi,
2Cor 1.21
” Now He who establishes us with you in Christ and anointed us is God, who also sealed us and gave us the Spirit in our hearts as a pledge”So God is not Christ and Christ is not God.
Thayers supports your view laureaus… from “begotten” in Jn 3:16,
G3439
μονογενής
monogenēs
Thayer Definition:
1) single of its kind, onlyQuote (Nick Hassan @ July 05 2005,05:42) Hi,
2Cor 1.21
” Now He who establishes us with you in Christ and anointed us is God, who also sealed us and gave us the Spirit in our hearts as a pledge”So God is not Christ and Christ is not God.
fallacy alert!!!!! lol… you are creating a false dichotomy in your strained exegesis of the verse…“Now He who establishes us with you in Christ and anointed us is God, who also sealed us and gave us the Spirit in our hearts as a pledge”
this does not say that it is impossible that Christ be God simply because of the different activities being addressed here… God the Father, Yahweh, establishes and anoints His people in His Son, Christ Jesus, and Yahweh also gave us “the” Spirit in our hearts as a “pledge” or down payment… a seal that sets aside His people as His own, eternally so……. but there is absolutely nothing here that says that because of Yahweh's activities, it must logically follow that the Son cannot be God. Its not an either “God is not Christ and Christ is not God.” Its rather, the Son is not the Father and the Father is not the Son, this is the ONLY distinction being made.
btw… I should add, for clarification the above passage is not just 2 Cor. 1:21 but is rather 2 Cor. 1:21-22…
Hi E,
Christ has divine nature as the Son of God.But in this verse he cannot be the God that establishes us in Christ surely? How can he both do the establishing and be 'the being' being established in at the same time?
laura… just wanted to add some other info on jn 3:16's word mongenes… :”Although this word is often translated “only begotten,” such a translation is misleading, since in English it appears to express a metaphysical relationship. The word in Greek was used of an only child (a son [Luke 7:12, 9:38] or a daughter [Luke 8:42]). It was also used of something unique (only one of its kind) such as the mythological Phoenix (1 Clement 25:2). From here it passes easily to a description of Isaac (Heb 11:17 and Josephus, Ant. 1.13.1 [1.222]) who was not Abraham’s only son, but was one-of-a-kind because he was the child of the promise. Thus the word means “one-of-a-kind” and is reserved for Jesus in the Johannine literature of the NT. While all Christians are children of God (tevkna qeou', tekna qeou), Jesus is God’s Son in a unique, one-of-a-kind sense. The word is used in this way in all its uses in the Gospel of John (1:14, 1:18, 3:16, and 3:18).” (NET bible)
Quote (epistemaniac @ July 05 2005,06:02) Quote (Nick Hassan @ July 05 2005,05:42) Hi,
2Cor 1.21
” Now He who establishes us with you in Christ and anointed us is God, who also sealed us and gave us the Spirit in our hearts as a pledge”So God is not Christ and Christ is not God.
fallacy alert!!!!! lol… you are creating a false dichotomy in your strained exegesis of the verse…“Now He who establishes us with you in Christ and anointed us is God, who also sealed us and gave us the Spirit in our hearts as a pledge”
this does not say that it is impossible that Christ be God simply because of the different activities being addressed here… God the Father, Yahweh, establishes and anoints His people in His Son, Christ Jesus, and Yahweh also gave us “the” Spirit in our hearts as a “pledge” or down payment… a seal that sets aside His people as His own, eternally so……. but there is absolutely nothing here that says that because of Yahweh's activities, it must logically follow that the Son cannot be God. Its not an either “God is not Christ and Christ is not God.” Its rather, the Son is not the Father and the Father is not the Son, this is the ONLY distinction being made.
btw… I should add, for clarification the above passage is not just 2 Cor. 1:21 but is rather 2 Cor. 1:21-22…
Hi E,
What I cannot understand is why, having delineated
Yahweh from the Son and the Spirit in a scriptural way, why anyone would artificially combine them in an unscriptural trinity compound God?The beauty is in the simplicity and the combination theory has been unnecessarily added destroying this beauty.
Quote (epistemaniac @ July 05 2005,06:13) laura… just wanted to add some other info on jn 3:16's word mongenes… :”Although this word is often translated “only begotten,” such a translation is misleading, since in English it appears to express a metaphysical relationship. The word in Greek was used of an only child (a son [Luke 7:12, 9:38] or a daughter [Luke 8:42]). It was also used of something unique (only one of its kind) such as the mythological Phoenix (1 Clement 25:2). From here it passes easily to a description of Isaac (Heb 11:17 and Josephus, Ant. 1.13.1 [1.222]) who was not Abraham’s only son, but was one-of-a-kind because he was the child of the promise. Thus the word means “one-of-a-kind” and is reserved for Jesus in the Johannine literature of the NT. While all Christians are children of God (tevkna qeou', tekna qeou), Jesus is God’s Son in a unique, one-of-a-kind sense. The word is used in this way in all its uses in the Gospel of John (1:14, 1:18, 3:16, and 3:18).” (NET bible)
Hi,
3439 monogenes from 3441 and 1096 only begotten;-only[3], only begotten[6]3441 monos-a prim word;alone:-alone[31], by themselves[1],even [1], just[2],mere[1],merely[2], only[18], only one[1], only thing[1], private[m][1]
1096ginomai;from a prim.root gen;to come into being , to happen, to become;-accomplished[1],appeared[2],appeared[2],arise[1],arisen[1],arises[2]arose[16],arri
ved[2],became[53], become[83],becomes[8],becoming[2],been[17],been made[1],befall[1],behaved[m][1], being[2],being carried out[1], being done[2],being made[2],born[m][5],breaking[1],brought[m][1], came[m][1],came into being[2],came to be[3],came to pass[2],come[26],come into being[1],come to be[1],comes[1],comes to pass[3],coming[1]dawn[1],determined[1],developing[1],done[21],drawing[1],during[1],elapsed1],existed[1],falling[1],feeling[m][1],fell[m][6],finished[1],followed[1],formed[m][3], found[2],get[4],give[1],got[1],granted[1],grown up[1],had[1],happen[6],happened[5], proving to be[1],put on[1],reached[2], realised[1],result[m][1],results[2],rose[1], show[1],spent[1],split[1],spoken[m][1],starting[1],take place[5],taken[2],taken place[1],taking place [3],thundered[1],took place[7],turned[1], turns out[3][33],happening[5],has[m][3],join[1],joined[3],made[16],might[1],occur[3]occurrred[10
],performed[4],prove[5],prove to be[5],proved[1],proved to be[5]How easy is it to understand monogenes?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
