- This topic has 18,300 replies, 268 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 3 months ago by
.
- Posts
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 19 2007,07:17) Quote Was this answer for me? It was addressed to “W”…. “Monogenes” denotes that Yahshua is unique, one of a kind.
“Firstborn” denotes that he is preeminent.But that aside, I don't see how this answers the question….where in scripture do we read about the Logos being “directly derived” from YHWH?
And another question comes to mind – can a “divine” being beget another that is “not divine”?
Hi Is 1:18
The original question started with you!
Blessings
Hi WJ,
Yes I know, It looked like the answer belonged with my question, but it was not addressed to me. I just wanted clarification.Hope you're well.
Quote Hi WJ,
Yes I know, It looked like the answer belonged with my question, but it was not addressed to me. I just wanted clarification.Hope you're well.
Is 1:18
Im great. Hope you are too.
Blessings
Quote (Is 1:18 @ Jan. 19 2007,07:02) Quote (Nick Hassan @ Jan. 18 2007,19:11) Hi W,
Monogenes.
The monogenes son was sent into the world.
All creation came through him but he was begotten as firstborn.
Was this answer for me? It was addressed to “W”….“Monogenes” denotes that Yahshua is unique, one of a kind.
“Firstborn” denotes that he is preeminent.But that aside, I don't see how this answers the question….where in scripture do we read about the Logos being “directly derived” from YHWH?
And another question comes to mind – can a “divine” being beget another that is “not divine”?
Hi Is 1.18,
Preeminent?
God has had a child.
Acts 4:27
For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together,
Acts 4:30
By stretching forth thine hand to heal; and that signs and wonders may be done by the name of thy holy child Jesus.
1 John 5:1
Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and whoever loves the Father loves the child born of Him.Quote (Nick Hassan @ Jan. 19 2007,08:22) Hi Is 1.18,
Preeminent?
God has had a child.
Acts 4:27
For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together,
Acts 4:30
By stretching forth thine hand to heal; and that signs and wonders may be done by the name of thy holy child Jesus.
Yes, but these verses speak of His earthly birth, do they not? I mean you don't think that Jesus was born a child 'in the beginning', and grew up with God, do you? I can't imagine you do, but that seems to be what you are implying…I think they all allude to this:
Luke 1:31-35
31″And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall name Him Jesus.
32″He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David;
33and He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and His kingdom will have no end.”
34Mary said to the angel, “How can this be, since I am a virgin?”
35The angel answered and said to her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; and for that reason the holy Child shall be called the Son of God.That makes sense of the scriptures to me…
Quote 1 John 5:1
Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and whoever loves the Father loves the child born of Him.I think this verse….
1 John 5:1-2
1Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and everyone who loves the father loves his child as well.….refers to the adopted children of God (i.e. human believers), the next verse appears to support this:
2This is how we know that we love the children of God: by loving God and carrying out his commands.
Blessings
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 19 2007,06:12) Quote You state –
I dont follow the words of Erasmus.Response –
Curious, you claim a preference for the KJV and a respect for the church fathers. Erasmus was the primary translator of the KJV. Do you now reject him because he does not agree with your interpretation?M42
Then why did he put the pronouns refering to a living being if the Word/conversation was not a being?
Goodbye.
Already answered, but I will expand more.I ask you to give me your authority for interpreting Logos as Jesus. You said on the basis of the personal pronouns being used.
You claim the pronouns him refer to the noun word and you believe that word = Jesus. From this you deduce that him in verse 3 refers to Jesus. What a bunch of circular resoning. First you assume Jesus is equal to word. Second the only true living being noun/name used prior to verse 3 is the name God. Therefore “him” in verse 3 refers to God in verses 1 and 2.
By replacing the pronoun “him” with the noun it takes the place of, verse John 1:3 should read – All things were made by God; and without God was not any thing made
that was made.
— My authority is based on the gramer used without logos/Christ assumptions.—-
You further make the assumption that the English “with God” means literally preexistant for all time. The actuall Greek words used are “toward God”. This phrase is interesting because it’s usage here carries the concept of a reflection in a mirror or an image. Again refer to my previous post indicating Jesus as the expressed image of God.
—My authority is based on the actual Greek words used, not on assumptions. —–
The only way to come to the conclusion that the pronouns refer to Logos/Jesus is to assume Logos equals Jesus. Again reading your doctrine into scripture instead of reading the scriptures as they stand.Second – It is a common practice for Hebrews to personify inanimate objects. For instance wisdom is refered to as a “she”. This personal pronoun certainly does not indicate that wisdom is a living being. We carry on this practice today as in calling ships, cars, houses ect. by personal pronouns.
—-
My authority is based on the Hebrew culture and mindset. The way in which they thought and worte. ——I give you two reasonable reasons for the personal pronouns in John based on sound hermaneutics, actual Greek words used, proper grammer, and cultural understanding of the way in which Hebrews thought and wrote.
So far all you have given me is an interpretation based on your doctrine. Your doctrine determines your interpretation. You have elevated your doctrine to the status of the cannon of scripture. You have given up being scriptural in favor of being doctrinal.We are back to the same question. As someone who claims to be on here to teach the truth of the Trinity, I ask you this, on what authority do trinitarians interpret Logos as Jesus? On what authority do they take a dozen ambiguous verses out of the general context of scripture and interpret a word contained within in a different manner then the over 300 times it is used in scripture.
third – This is a public forum. I can post when I wish to do so. If you do not like that, I do not know what to tell you. I am only following your example. You have claimed to be on here to teach against the heresy of the Arian/JW teachings. With that example in mind, I can choose to teach against the heresy of the Trinity.
By the way before you accuse me of being a member of Watchtower or an Arian, I will remind you that I am not. I believe the Watchtower doctrines to be as messed up as the Trinitarian doctrine. From what I can deduce in the sketchy info available on Arianism, He believed much as the JWs in that Jesus was a secondary created God. A lesser God if you will. This is absolutely wrong! Jesus was human. His makeup was fully human. Not an augmented dual natured non-human hybrid creature.Perhaps you feel “if” I am a Christian, I should join you in your fight agains the Watchtower cult. If it were that simple I would agree. The problem is I see no purpose in saving them from one heresy only to envelope them in the heresy taught by the Trinity.
If anyone is teaching heresy it is those who teach the Trinity. –
They ignor very clear scripture like –
Malachi 3:6
For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.
Instead of taking God at His word here, they teach that God became a man.
One of the most defining aspects of the Judeo-Christian God is His immutable nature.
Numbers 23:19
God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?
The Hebrew word here for man is “eesh”. It means man and is a contraction of the word en-oshe, meaning a human or man in general.
Over 90 times Jesus is refered to as the son of man. The word used in the NT for man is “anthropos” which can only mean human being. It does not mean a dual natured being. Not only does this denote his full humanity, but clearly shows he cannot be a God without contradicting all of these scriptures. Again they ignor these verses and claim that Jesus was a man and a God at the same time. In fact there is not one clear scripture that describes Jesus as being a dual natured being.
The very core and heart of being a member of the human race is our single human nature. When trinitarians make Jesus of a dual nature, they remove Him from the ranks of humanity and make him a diferent creature.
When the trinity doctrine proclaims things like God became a man or that Jesus is fully God and fully man at the same time, they are in clear contradiction of scripture and are not worshipping the God of the bible.The Hebrews kept themselves seperate from the heathen nations and their many changable Gods. Greek mythology has several God’s that change their nature. Modern Wicca boasts of Gods that take on human form. Does it seem resonable that YHWH would be of the same type of changable nature?
WJ — From what I gather from your posts, you believe Jesus to have a dual nature. Both fully God and fully man. With this in mind, by what process do you associate his many acts with either his humanity or his deity? If we are to be like Him in reality it would be important to know what aspects of His nature we are to become like. Of course, every aspect you claim is attributable to His devine nature is an aspect of Jesus which we cannot immulate.
Now we have two more quagmires.
1. Determining which aspects are attributable to his human nature and which are attributable to his divine nature. Since scripture doen not differentiant between them, by what standard do we?
2. We must discount scriptures in John that state we are to be one with God even as (the same as) Jesus is one with God. Also scriptures that state we are to be Holy and Perfect like our Father in Heaven must be augmented to account of our lack of a divine/dual nature.Truth is the doctrine of the Trinity/dual nature has no function toward the plan of God. It does nothing to help or enable us to become like Christ. By making Jesus a God we place a seperation between us and Him. He is not our real brother and fellow human being. He cannot be a r
eal example for us because He is not the same as us in basic nature.
True teaching should be elevating man to a position of dominion over the Earth that we lost at the fall. True teaching should make it possible for us to become like Christ. True teaching should enable us to have relationship with our Father/creater even as Jesus didInstead the doctrine of the Trinity devalues and changes the nature of God by saying He can become a man. It makes Jesus as a pattern null and void by making him a creature with two natures unlike us. Because Jesus is made into a diffeent creature then us, nothing he did can be an example for us, including his overcoming the devil and his resurection. The Trinity doctrine basically scraps all of the hope of Christianity.
Quote (Is 1:18 @ Jan. 19 2007,08:42) Quote (Nick Hassan @ Jan. 19 2007,08:22) Hi Is 1.18,
Preeminent?
God has had a child.
Acts 4:27
For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together,
Acts 4:30
By stretching forth thine hand to heal; and that signs and wonders may be done by the name of thy holy child Jesus.
Yes, but these verses speak of His earthly birth, do they not? I mean you don't think that Jesus was born a child 'in the beginning', and grew up with God, do you? I can't imagine you do, but that seems to be what you are implying…I think they all allude to this:
Luke 1:31-35
31″And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall name Him Jesus.
32″He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David;
33and He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and His kingdom will have no end.”
34Mary said to the angel, “How can this be, since I am a virgin?”
35The angel answered and said to her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; and for that reason the holy Child shall be called the Son of God.That makes sense of the scriptures to me…
Quote 1 John 5:1
Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and whoever loves the Father loves the child born of Him.I think this verse….
1 John 5:1-2
1Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and everyone who loves the father loves his child as well.….refers to the adopted children of God (i.e. human believers), the next verse appears to support this:
2This is how we know that we love the children of God: by loving God and carrying out his commands.
Blessings
Hi Is 1.18,
Yes, I agree, they do relate to his fleshly sonship.But of course the monogenes son was sent into the world[1Jn 4] so he was a son before he was sent. Christ also came in the flesh so he was Christ before he came.
Hello
The extent that men will go to resist the truth plainly taught in scripture is mind boggling.
No wonder Jesus did all that he did right before their eyes and they still did not believe.
If Jesus was standing right in front of them and saying… “look at the example of my servant who doubted me' They would say… “but Lord you are only supposed to worship the Father”
Jn 20:
26 And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you.
27 Then saith he to Thomas, reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing.
28 And Thomas answered and **said unto him**, My Lord and my God.
And Jesus response to him was not “worship the Father Thomas”. But his response was…29 Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast **seen me**, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.
To be sure that Thomas was not worshipping and calling the Father God in him.
Look at the words ***said unto him***, My Lord and My God.
To be sure that Jesus was accepting his praise and acknowledgment of him being God.
Look at the words because thou hast **seen me**, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.
Based on this, Jesus is saying “Blessed are those who believe I am God and have not seen”
Father,Son and Holy Spirit. These three are one God.
Hi W,
“Father,Son and Holy Spirit. These three are one God. “
So speaks tradition.
But we do not serve tradition.
Tradition was the spirit behind those who murdered Christ.Quote Hi Is 1.18,
Yes, I agree, they do relate to his fleshly sonship.But of course the monogenes son was sent into the world[1Jn 4] so he was a son before he was sent. Christ also came in the flesh so he was Christ before he came.
NH
So the son was a son and then born a son.
Then John 1:1 should read…
[1] In the beginning was the Son, and the Son was with God, and the Son was God
To what extent they will go to twist the scriptures. Sad.
you do realize the trinitarian position is that Jesus has always been the son even before his incarnation?
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 19 2007,18:36) Quote Hi Is 1.18,
Yes, I agree, they do relate to his fleshly sonship.But of course the monogenes son was sent into the world[1Jn 4] so he was a son before he was sent. Christ also came in the flesh so he was Christ before he came.
NH
So the son was a son and then born a son.
Then John 1:1 should read…
[1] In the beginning was the Son, and the Son was with God, and the Son was God
To what extent they will go to twist the scriptures. Sad.
Hi,
I love the way God placed Jn 1.1 in the bible. He knew it would force a choice between those who would emphasise God being with God, two beings, and those who would deny Christ was ever truly the monogenes Son of God who was sent into the world and then distort the whole framework of Scripture to justify their choice.you do realize the trinitarian position is that Jesus has always been the son even before his incarnation?
Not this trinitarian.
Quote Hi,
I love the way God placed Jn 1.1 in the bible. He knew it would force a choice between those who would emphasise God being with God, two beings, and those who would deny Christ was ever truly the monogenes Son of God who was sent into the world and then distort the whole framework of Scripture to justify their choice.I understand NH you have to resort to foolishness now because you know that you have no response for your foolish belief.
“the son was a son and then born a son”
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 19 2007,19:13) Quote Hi,
I love the way God placed Jn 1.1 in the bible. He knew it would force a choice between those who would emphasise God being with God, two beings, and those who would deny Christ was ever truly the monogenes Son of God who was sent into the world and then distort the whole framework of Scripture to justify their choice.I understand NH you have to resort to foolishness now because you know that you have no response for your foolish belief.
“the son was a son and then born a son”
The son was begotten as the first creative work, then he incarnated as a man, as our messiah.Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 19 2007,19:13) Quote Hi,
I love the way God placed Jn 1.1 in the bible. He knew it would force a choice between those who would emphasise God being with God, two beings, and those who would deny Christ was ever truly the monogenes Son of God who was sent into the world and then distort the whole framework of Scripture to justify their choice.I understand NH you have to resort to foolishness now because you know that you have no response for your foolish belief.
“the son was a son and then born a son”
Hi,
The Son of God was sent by God and God became his human father by His Spirit. How can the “third person in God” be the father of Jesus?Good grief, how can something so simple become so profoundly complicated?
The Word of God was with God and was God. Like God, the Word of God had no beginning because the two are one.
Jesus was begotten of God by the Holy Spirit, thereby becoming His Son.
The Word of God was never the Son of God until He was conceived.
Revelation 19:13 clearly shows us that Jesus is still the Word of God.
It's really quite simple.
Hi Oxy,
1jn 4
” 8He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love.9In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him.
10Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.”
Jn 3
” 13And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.14And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:
15That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
16For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”
Quote Hi Oxy,
1jn 4
” 8He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love.9In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him.
10Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.”
Jn 3
” 13And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.14And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:
15That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
16For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”
NH
As the Word he was sent and became the Son. He wasnt a Son until he was born.
How hard is that?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
