- This topic has 579 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated 2 years, 1 month ago by
.
- Posts
Mike: 1. KATHI, WHO EXACTLY IS THE “GOD” THAT YOU WORSHIP AND SERVE AS THE CREATOR OF HEAVEN, EARTH, SEA, AND ALL THAT IS IN THEM?
LU: YAHWEH, THE GOD OF GODS AND THE LORD OF LORDS.
2. And is Jesus the Son OF the God that you worship and serve as the Creator of heaven, earth, sea, and all that is in them?
LU: Mike, who exactly do you think is the theos of this age that blinds the mind of the unbelievers?
Satan, of course. Just like every single commentator on this page (including Barnes and Gill) believes.
Mike,
You said:
No scripture ever mentions “biological son” in reference to Jesus and God.
That is an example of one of your ridiculous arguments that you think should actually be made.
A son, by default is a biological offspring of the parent. That should be your assumption unless told otherwise. The term “biological son” isn’t used of any son in scripture. That doesn’t mean that the use of the word “son” isn’t mainly for biological sons. In fact, when the Bible identifies someone as the son of so and so, you assume “biological son.”
Mike,
You ask:
2. And is Jesus the Son OF the God that you worship and serve as the Creator of heaven, earth, sea, and all that is in them?
I worship both the Father and the Son as the creator of heaven and earth, sea, and all that is in them.
Rev 5
13And I heard every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and in the sea, and all that is in them, saying:
“To Him who sits on the throne
and to the Lamb
be praise and honor and glory and power
forever and ever!”
14And the four living creatures said, “Amen,” and the elders fell down and worshiped.
LU: I see two people here that have given you a lot of their time trying to help you and we are both telling you similar things.
Correction, you are both attacking me personally – instead of my scripturally supported arguments. Case in point…
LU: …you are the one being exposed as the puppet of the master deceiver. It isn’t even hard for him. You are an easy puppet, you play your part well and are very predictable.
I can’t seem to locate my particular argument that this comment addresses or refutes. Maybe you could point it out to me. 😉
Btw, I describe the earth and the Father/Son relationship EXACTLY as the Bible describes those things. This is what Proclaimer and I are currently discussing in the Flat Earth thread…
And it is simple, scripture-based questions like these that cause Proclaimer to ignore the actual question, and go on a rant about how I don’t understand science and how I’m causing Adam to lose his soul. Dude, here’s the actual comment from Berean that prompted Proclaimer to make the ad hominem attack against me that I quoted earlier today…
Do you have eyes to see, Kathi? Can you see that Berean is basically saying, “I believe what the Bible teaches, ie: the sun, moon, and stars were created on the 4th day.”
And how does Proclaimer respond? By showing him from scripture that they WEREN’T? Of course not – because he can’t possibly do such a thing. So instead, it is a diatribe of personal attacks against me, Adam, and Berean because he knows it is impossible for him to refute Berean’s point with scripture.
So now that you know what we’re actually discussing over there, why not pop in with your own understanding? The Bible says the sun was created on day 4. Proclaimer says it was created on day 1. Who is right, Kathi? Proclaimer or the Bible?
As for our discussion, the Bible says Jesus is the son and servant OF the God who created heaven, earth, sea, and everything in them. You say he is a PART of that God – not the SON of that God. Who is right, Kathi? You or the Bible?
So yeah… I’m doing exactly what I should be doing here. I’m simply using scripture to promote truth. If that scriptural truth infringes upon your or Proclaimer’s personal worldviews, then perhaps it is you guys who “should ask YHVH if there is any truth to it instead of just dismissing it”.
Mike: No scripture ever mentions “biological son” in reference to Jesus and God.
LU: That is an example of one of your ridiculous arguments that you think should actually be made.
Great. Let’s see if the argument actually IS ridiculous, or if maybe you just don’t understand it.
LU: A son, by default is a biological offspring of the parent. That should be your assumption unless told otherwise. The term “biological son” isn’t used of any son in scripture. That doesn’t mean that the use of the word “son” isn’t mainly for biological sons. In fact, when the Bible identifies someone as the son of so and so, you assume “biological son.”
This, coming from the person who scoffs at my argument that in EVERY father/son relationship, the father exists first, and the son is brought into existence by the father? 😉
But okay – let’s go with what you just said…
Luke 3:38… the son of Enosh, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God.
Is Adam the “biological son” of God, Kathi? The Bible identified him as the son of God, right? So according to you, we should assume “biological son”, right? Are we told anything otherwise about Adam that we aren’t also told about Jesus? Nope.
So instead of calling my argument ridiculous, how about you just don’t add to the scriptures by inventing the term “biological son” for Jesus?
Mike,
You said:
You say he is a PART of that God .
So does Jesus.
John 17:20 …You, Father, are in Me, and I am in You.
Mike: 2. And is Jesus the Son OF the God that you worship and serve as the Creator of heaven, earth, sea, and all that is in them?
LU: I worship both the Father and the Son as the creator of heaven and earth, sea, and all that is in them.
That’s not what I asked you. Please directly and honestly answer the question I actually asked. Thanks.
Another ridiculous comment from you, Mike:
You asked:
Are we told anything otherwise about Adam that we aren’t also told about Jesus?
How about this…
Gen 2:7 Then the LORD God formed man from the dust of the ground and breathed the breath of life into his nostrils, and the man became a living being.
Mike: You say he is a PART of that God .
LU: So does Jesus.
John 17:20 …You, Father, are in Me, and I am in You.
John 17:21… that all of them may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I am in You. May they also be in Us, so that the world may believe that You sent Me.
So in your mind, is that Jesus saying that his disciples – and all who will come to believe through them – will also be a part of Jesus and a part of God? Yes or No, please.
Anxiously awaiting your direct and honest answer to question #2.
Mike,
This is also a ridiculous question of yours:
You asked:
Who is right, Kathi? Proclaimer or the Bible?
The answer has nothing to do with us both having the same concern about your teaching. If we have different views of what passage abc means, it is ridiculous to extrapolate that as a reason we couldn’t both be concerned about what you are doing.
I’m quite sure that you can find my answer to your question on a number of threads over the years, btw.
Mike,
You asked:
Yes or No, please.
Yes. Not the same part though. There is the “them” part and the “us” part. The Father and Son are of the “US” and the followers of Christ are to be part of the “them.”
There is an “us” and a “them”…a “we” and a “they.” There will always be an “us” and a “them.” Those in the “US” group are desiring to be a part within the oneness of the “them” group. Within that oneness there is the creator group and the created group. Not everybody will be part of the Godhead. Like the church, a unity with a head and a body. The members of the body are not the head yet in unity with the head. Together they make up the church. In John 17 The Father and the Son are the creator part and head part. Anyone else that is one with them are in the created part.
Mike,
You said:
Satan, of course. Just like every single commentator on this page (including Barnes and Gill) believes.
Do they also believe that Jesus was created?
See how you want to make another ridiculous point.
Do you think that the true Light that entered the world has some people blinded?
Hi Mike
I assume that LU means by “Biological son” what is written in Romans 8 (in capitals)
verse 3: For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending HIS OWN SON in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:and verses 31.32
What shall we then say to these things? If God be for us, who can be against us?
[32] He that spared not HIS OWN SON, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things?…HIS OWN SON…
JESUS IS THE OWN SON OF GOD.
HE IS OF GOD’S VERY SUBSTANCE 👉 SEE HEBREWS 1:3
Who being the brightness of his glory (of the Father), and the express image of his person,in other words, ALL THE FATHER IS, SO IS THE SON, THAT IS HIS DIVINE ESSENCE (Col.2:9) AND HIS HOLINESS.
OK, that’s what I understand
To be continued maybe….
God bless
Thank you Berean, you understand. Jesus is a son of God in the highest, truest sense begotten before the ages. He is unique as a son compared to any other entity that has been identified as a son of God in some other manner. He is the only begotten Son of God as Jesus, Himself tells us in John 3:16:
16“For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. 17“For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him. 18“He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19“This is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil. 20“For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed. 21“But he who practices the truth comes to the Light, so that his deeds may be manifested as having been wrought in God.”
Hi LU
Thank you Berean, you understand. Jesus is a son of God in the highest, truest sense begotten before the ages. He is unique as a son compared to any other entity that has been identified as a son of God in some other manner. He is the only begotten Son of God as Jesus, Himself tells us in John 3:16:
We agree on this essential point.
God has given us that which is most precious: HIS OWN SON (Rom.8:3,32) ONLY BEGOTTEN SON(John 3:16) so that whoever believes in HIM shall not perish but have life eternal.
Amen!God bless
Amen, Berean!
May God bless you with increased understanding as you continue to seek the Father and the Son and their Spirit!!
LU
LU: Gen 2:7 Then the LORD God formed man from the dust of the ground and breathed the breath of life into his nostrils, and the man became a living being.
Brilliant. Way to use the scriptures to completely refute my claim. Adam was clearly a bad example. Allow me to try again…
LU: A son, by default is a biological offspring of the parent. That should be your assumption unless told otherwise. The term “biological son” isn’t used of any son in scripture. That doesn’t mean that the use of the word “son” isn’t mainly for biological sons. In fact, when the Bible identifies someone as the son of so and so, you assume “biological son.”
Psalm 82:6… I have said, ‘You are gods; you are all sons of the Most High.’
Is there any reason that these sons of the Most High don’t fit your parameters above?
Mike: John 17:21… that all of them may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I am in You. May they also be in Us, so that the world may believe that You sent Me.
So in your mind, is that Jesus saying that his disciples – and all who will come to believe through them – will also be a part of Jesus and a part of God? Yes or No, please.
LU: Yes.
Not the same part though. There is the “them” part and the “us” part. The Father and Son are of the “US” and the followers of Christ are to be part of the “them.”
The direct answer is correct – which means Jesus “being in” his God Yahweh wouldn’t make him a part of Yahweh any more that us “being in” them both would make us a part of Yahweh.
The part after your correct direct answer is just you saying stuff that can’t be found anywhere in the Bible. In the future, please refrain from attempting to make the first part of John 17:21 say something that it clearly doesn’t say. Thanks.
Mike: Who is right, Kathi? Proclaimer or the Bible?
LU: The answer has nothing to do with us both having the same concern about your teaching. If we have different views of what passage abc means, it is ridiculous to extrapolate that as a reason we couldn’t both be concerned about what you are doing.
It appears as if you’re saying that even if you agree that I’m the one arguing from scripture, it is still a matter of Proclaimer spending hours putting up with a bunch of ridiculous crap from me, and he therefore has every right to make personal attacks against me.
Okay. But like I said before, I take every personal attack as a badge of honor because I know it represents the other person admitting defeat. After all, if the other person COULD refute me with scripture, they would, right? Just like you brilliantly refuted my Adam argument with scripture, right? And brilliant rebukes like that, using the words of scripture themselves to do your fighting for you, heap more burning coals on the other guy’s head than a thousand personal attacks.
LU: Do they also believe that Jesus was created?
See how you want to make another ridiculous point.
Do you think that the true Light that entered the world has some people blinded?
I’m not sure how pointing out that two of YOUR favorite Trinitarian commentators agree with all the other commentators on that page that Satan is the god of this world in 2 Cor 4:4 is a “ridiculous point”.
I will however point out two other things…
1. Jesus clearly calls Satan “the prince of this world”. (John 12:31, 14:30, 16:11)
2. 2 Cor 4:4 actually calls (?) the “god of this AGE”.
So is Jesus the god of only this particular age? Or is he, like your tradition says, “before ALL ages”? How about Yahweh? Is He the God of only this age?
On the other hand, we know for a fact that God has given authority over all the kingdoms of the world to Satan. (Luke 4:6) We also know from many scriptures that Satan’s rule will be short-lived. And our Lord Jesus taught us to pray that God’s will be done on earth – as it already is done in heaven. That is a sure sign that this world is not currently running according to God’s will, right? But we also know that this world (actually the new one) WILL run according to God’s will, right?
So knowing all of these things, who is better identified as the god of this particular age? Satan? Jesus? Yahweh?
I only appealed to the authority of Barnes and Gill because of the countless times that you have promoted them in the past. But I certainly don’t need them to make my case for Satan being the god of this age in 2 Cor 4:4.
Of course, you are free to believe whatever you want on this matter. (I can’t even remember what brought it up anymore – or how it could possibly relate to Jesus being the very God he is the Son of. 😎)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
