- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote Note that I specifically asked David to explain how he could have two Saviors. He replied saying that he started another thread called “Confusion Trick Savior” inwhich my questions are answered. But David did not start a thread called “Confusion Trick Savior.” The thread he started is called “Title Confusion Trick: The word god” inwhich he does not take up Christ's title as Savior at all. THINKER, there are two or three other threads called “title confusion trick.” (As you use that trick in various ways.)
Right now, you're in the “god” one. There are actually 2 other ones on the “savior.” I started the first 'savior' one before this “god” one, and then I started a second one when that one was going way off track.Quote David, See my post earlier today inwhich I demonstrate that you were totally evasive regarding my original question. I asked you how Jesus Christ could be the Savior without being divine. You didn't even mention His title as Savior in your OP. You totally evaded my question.
THINKER, why do you continue to speak when you have no idea what you're talking about. I do understand that you must have been gone for a few days, and so maybe you missed it, but I've already started 2 savior threads that do answer your question.
THIS THREAD, THINKER, IS NOT IN RESPONSE TO YOUR QUESTION. NOR DOES IT INDICATE IT IS. STOP SAYING THINGS THAT ARE OBVIOULSY UNTRUTHFUL!
Quote TO ALL: David goes on and on in his OP showing that the word “god” frequently is used of angels and human rulers and suggests that this is how we are to understand the NWT'S reading “a god” in John 1:1. But David ignores that verse 3 says Jesus created all things. How many angels or human “gods” created the universe? David goes on and on spewing out “facts” while ignoring context and thus fails to prove anything.
thinker
AH, FINALLY SOMETHING TO DO WITH THIS ACTUAL SUBJECT. Excellent!
Quote How many angels or human “gods” created the universe? There are 2 things wrong with that argument:
1. I can make the same argument distinguishing between angels called gods and humans called gods by saying:
How many human “gods” are invisible?
The “defintion” of God is not someone who created everything. That is the definition of “creator.”2. Many Bibles say that “through” him all things were made. (1:3) There's that “through” word again, just like when it says God is a savior “through” Jesus, in that he used Jesus to save the world. It's tricky how you ignore these facts.
Quote (david @ Dec. 25 2009,13:58) [2. Many Bibles say that “through” him all things were made. (1:3) There's that “through” word again, just like when it says God is a savior “through” Jesus, in that he used Jesus to save the world. It's tricky how you ignore these facts.
DavidSo you think that when it says that the Father created all things by or through Jesus that is proof that Jesus cannot be the creator or be God?
WJ
Quote (david @ Dec. 25 2009,13:58) The “defintion” of God is not someone who created everything. That is the definition of “creator.”
But is there any other that created all things but God?WJ
Quote (david @ Dec. 26 2009,05:58) The “defintion” of God is not someone who created everything. That is the definition of “creator.”
Hi David,I find it funny how you don't seem to be able to understand my simple questions?
Here is another question for you and the watchtower society.
Since you say Jesus is “The Creator”, then please explain this verse…Jer.10:11 Thus shall ye say unto them, The gods that have not made the heavens and the earth,
even they shall perish from the earth, and from under these heavens.Ed J (AKJV Joshua 22:34 / Isaiah 60:14)
Constitutionalist,
I am not sure what your point is. It seems by your words that you are trying to make the case that Jews are polytheistic. I think using certain scriptures that you are instead speaking of the unity of the Spirit.
When God announces he alone is God does he speak in a compound unity or a absolute singular?
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Dec. 26 2009,13:08) Quote (david @ Dec. 25 2009,13:58) The “defintion” of God is not someone who created everything. That is the definition of “creator.”
But is there any other that created all things but God?WJ
Who has any proof but tradition that the angels were not involved?Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Dec. 26 2009,18:06) Quote (david @ Dec. 25 2009,13:58) [2. Many Bibles say that “through” him all things were made. (1:3) There's that “through” word again, just like when it says God is a savior “through” Jesus, in that he used Jesus to save the world. It's tricky how you ignore these facts.
DavidSo you think that when it says that the Father created all things by or through Jesus that is proof that Jesus cannot be the creator or be God?
WJ
I think it means what it says. I think Jehovah is called “creator” very often. And I think that Jehovah created things “through” Jesus, as the scripture says.Quote (Ed J @ Dec. 26 2009,18:27) Quote (david @ Dec. 26 2009,05:58) The “defintion” of God is not someone who created everything. That is the definition of “creator.”
Hi David,I find it funny how you don't seem to be able to understand my simple questions?
Here is another question for you and the watchtower society.
Since you say Jesus is “The Creator”, then please explain this verse…Jer.10:11 Thus shall ye say unto them, The gods that have not made the heavens and the earth,
even they shall perish from the earth, and from under these heavens.Ed J (AKJV Joshua 22:34 / Isaiah 60:14)
I don't say Jesus is the creator. I have never said that he is. I have said that Jehovah created things “through” Jesus, as the scripture says.And, I'm not sure what your question is, Ed.
Quote (david @ Dec. 27 2009,07:27) I have said that Jehovah created things “through” Jesus, as the scripture says.
Hi David,You have answered my question, but now you present another…
Please show where in Scripture it says what you now say?God bless
Ed J
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgQuote (WorshippingJesus @ Dec. 26 2009,18:08) Quote (david @ Dec. 25 2009,13:58) The “defintion” of God is not someone who created everything. That is the definition of “creator.”
But is there any other that created all things but God?WJ
WJ,
David views are really getting convoluted now.
thinker
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Dec. 26 2009,18:08) Quote (david @ Dec. 25 2009,13:58) The “defintion” of God is not someone who created everything. That is the definition of “creator.”
But is there any other that created all things but God?WJ
TO ALL:David is proving what Wikipedia says about the NWT containing an “incoherent polytheism.”
thinker
Colossians 1:15-18: By Yashuw'ah Were All Things Created
“The firstborn of every creature: for by (Yashuw'ah) were all things created that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers; all things were created by him, and for him: and he is before all things, and by him all things consist. And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead…”This is typical of those passages which can give the impression that Yashuw'ah actually created the earth.
If this were true, then so many other passages are contradicted which teach that Yashuw'ah did not exist before his birth.
The record in Genesis clearly teaches that Yahuweh was the creator.
Either Yashuw'ah or Yahuweh were the creator; if we say that Yashuw'ah was the creator while Genesis says that Yahuweh was, we are saying that Yashuw'ah was directly equal to Yahuweh.
In this case it is impossible to explain the many verses which show the differences between Yahuweh and Yashuw'ah.
Yashuw'ah was the “firstborn”, which implies a beginning.
There is no proof that Yashuw'ah was Yahuweh’s “firstborn” before the creation of the literal earth.
Passages like 2 Sam 7:14 and Ps 89:27 predicted that a literal descendant of David would become Yahuweh’s firstborn.
He was clearly not in existence at the time those passages were written, and therefore not at the time of the Genesis creation either.
Yashuw'ah became “the Son of Yahuweh with power” by his resurrection from the dead (Rom. 1:4).
Yahuweh “has raised up Yashuw'ah again; as it is also written in the second psalm, You are My Son, this day have I begotten you” (Acts 13:32,33).
Thus Yashuw'ah became Yahuweh’s firstborn by his resurrection.
Note too that a son standing at his father’s right hand is associated with being the firstborn (Gen. 48:13-16), and Yashuw'ah was exalted to Yahuweh’s right hand after his resurrection (Acts 2:32 R.V.mg.; Heb. 1:3).
It is in this sense that Jesus is described as the firstborn from the dead (Col. 1:18), a phrase which is parallel to “the firstborn of every creature” or creation (Col. 1:15 R.V.).
He therefore speaks of himself as “the first begotten of the dead…the beginning of the creation of Yahuweh” (Rev. 1:5; 3:14).
Yashuw'ah was the first of a new creation of immortal men and women, whose resurrection and full birth as the immortal sons of Yahuweh has been made possible by the death and resurrection of Yashuw'ah (Eph. 2:10; 4:23,24; 2 Cor. 5:17).
“In Yashuw'ah shall all (true believers) be made alive. But every man in his own order: Yashuw'ah the firstfruits, afterward they that are Yashuw'ah’s at his coming” (1 Cor. 15:22,23).
This is just the same idea as in Col. 1. Yashuw'ah was the first person to rise from the dead and be given immortality, he was the first of the new creation, and the true believers will follow his pattern at his return.
The creation spoken about in Col. 1 therefore refers to the new creation, rather than that of Genesis. Through the work of Yashuw'ah “were all things created…thrones…dominions” etc.
Paul does not say that Yashuw'ah created all things and then give examples of rivers, mountains, birds etc.
The elements of this new creation refer to those rewards which we will have in Yahuweh’s Kingdom.
“Thrones…dominions” etc. refer to how the raised believers will be “kings and priests, and we shall reign on the earth” (Rev. 5:10).
These things were made possible by the work of Yashuw'ah.
“In him were all things created in the heavens” (Col. 1:16 R.V.).
In Eph. 2:6 we read of the believers who are in Yashuw'ah as sitting in “heavenly places”. If any man is in Yashuw'ah by baptism, he is a new creation (2 Cor. 5:17).
By being in Yashuw'ah we are saved by His death (Col. 1:22).
The literal planet could not be created by being in Yashuw'ah.
Thus these verses are teaching that the exalted spiritual position which we can now have, as well as what we will experience in the future, has all been made possible by Yashuw'ah.
The “heavens and earth” contain “all things that needed reconciliation by the blood of (Yashuw'ah’s) cross” (Col. 1:16,20), showing that the “all things…in heaven” refer to the believers who now sit in “heavenly places…in Yashuw'ah”, rather than to all physical things around us.
If Yashuw'ah were the creator, it is strange how He should say: “…from the beginning of the creation Yahuweh made them…” (Mk. 10:6).
This surely sounds as if He understood Yahuweh to be the creator, not He Himself.
And if He literally created everything in Heaven, this would include Yashuw'ah.
That “by him” is a poor translation is readily testified by reliable scholars. Take J.H. Moulton: “for because of him [Yashuw'ah]…”; or the Expositor's Greek Commentary: “en auto: This does not mean “by Him””.
It should be noted, as a general point, that Yahuweh the Father alone, exclusively, is described as the creator in many passages (e.g. Is. 44:24; Is. 45:12; Is. 48:13; Is. 66:2).
These passages simply leave no room for the Son to have also created the literal planet.
James Dunn comments on Col. 1:20: “Yashuw'ah is being identified here not with a pre-existent being but with the creative power and action of God…There is no indication that Yashuw'ah thought or spoke of himself as having pre-existed with Yahuweh prior to his birth”.
Hebrews 1:2:”The Son… by whom [Yahuweh] made the worlds”
Heb. 1:2 is another passage misunderstood to believe that Yashuw'ah created the earth. We read of “the Son… by whom [Gk. dia] He [Yahuweh] also made the worlds [Gk. aion]”.
A quick look at Strong's concordance or an online Bible seems to me conclusive. 'Dia' can mean ‘for whom / for the sake of / on account of'.
It doesn’t always mean that, as it’s a word of wide usage- but it very often does mean ‘on account of’ and actually frequently it cannot mean ‘by’. There are stacks of examples:
In a creation context, we read that all things were created dia, for the sake of, Yahuweh’s pleasure (Rev. 4:11).
Significantly, when 2 Pet. 3:5 speaks of how the world was created “by” the word of Yahuweh, the word dia isn’t used- instead hoti, signifying ‘causation through’.
This isn’t the word used in Heb. 1:2 about the creation of the aion on account of, dia, the Son.
Eve was created dia Adam- she wasn’t created by Adam, but for the sake of Adam (1 Cor. 11:9).
1 Cor. 8:6 draws a helpful distinction between ek [out of whom] and dia- all things are ek Yahuweh, but dia, on account of, Yashuw'ah (1 Cor. 8:6).
The context of Heb. 1:2 features many examples of where dia clearly means ‘for the sake of’ rather than ‘by’.
Just a little later we read in Heb. 1:14 of how the Angels are “ministering spirits” who minister dia, for the sake of, the believers.
Because of [dia] Yashuw'ah’s righteousness, Yahuweh exalted Him (Heb. 1:9).
The Mosaic law was “disannulled” dia “the weakness and unprofitableness thereof” (Heb. 7:18).
The weakness of the law didn’t disannul the law; the law was disannulled by Yahuweh for the sake of the fact it was so weak.
Levi paid tithes dia Abraham (Heb. 7:9), not by Abraham, but for the sake of the fact he was a descendant of Abraham.
Yashuw'ah was not an Angel dia the suffering of death (Heb. 2:9).
Clearly here the word means ‘for the sake of’ rather than ‘by’.
Yashuw'ah was
born a man for the reason that He could die.He was not an Angel who was then made ‘not an Angel’ by the fact of death. That makes no sense.
Scripture was written dia us- not by us, but ‘for our sakes’ (1 Cor. 9:10)
The martyrs were executed dia, for the sake of, their witness to Yashuw'ah (Rev. 20:4)
Israel today are loved by Yahuweh dia the Jewish fathers (Rom. 11:28)- clearly the word here means ‘for the sake of’ and not ‘by’.
Cold and wet people made a fire dia, for the sake of, because of, the rain and cold (Acts 28:2).
They didn’t make a fire ‘by’ the rain and cold.
Timothy was circumcised dia, for the sake of, the critically minded Jews (Acts 16:3).
He was not circumcised by them.
When the voice came from Heaven, Yashuw'ah commented that the voice came not dia me, but dia the disciples (Jn. 12:30).
Clearly dia here means ‘for the sake of’ and not ‘by’.
“Dia the people that stand by I said it” (Jn. 11:42)- Yashuw'ah said ‘it’ for the sake of the bystanders; He didn’t speak ‘by’ them.
The authorities couldn’t punish the apostles dia the people’s support for them- clearly dia here means ‘for the sake of’ and not ‘by’.
Paul wrote dia many tears (2 Cor. 2:4).
He didn’t write literally by or with those tears, but for the sake of his tears and grief for Corinth, he wrote to them.
“By reason of” (Gk. dia) false teachers, the truth is badly spoken of (2 Pet. 2:2)
We labour dia, for the sake of, the Lord’s name (Rev. 2:3).
We believe dia Yashuw'ah- not that He creates faith in us in an arbitary way or forces us to believe; we believe for the sake of what we have seen and known in Yashuw'ah (1 Pet. 1:21).
Likewise we experience the birth of faith within us “dia the resurrection of Yashuw'ah” (1 Pet. 1:3).
This doesn’t mean that when Yashuw'ah rose, He created us as believers without any choice on our part.
Rather, for the sake of [dia] Yashuw'ah’s resurrection, generations of believers have come to faith and hope whenever they have encountered and believed in the fact of His resurrection..
Thus Yashuw'ah was raised dia our justification (Rom. 4:25).
He was not raised by our justification, but for the sake of it.
Yashuw'ah was manifested “for [dia] you” (1 Pet. 1:20)- He was not manifested by us in a causative sense, but was manifested for our sakes.
“Wherefore”- dia, for the sake of, Diotrephes’ behaviour, John would discipline him (3 Jn. 10).
To read dia as ‘by’ here makes no sense.
“For the truth’s sake”- dia aletheia (2 Jn. 2); “for righteousness sake”, dia dikaiosune (1 Pet. 3:14)
Those who are “of the world” dia, “therefore”, for this reason, speak in a worldly way (1 Jn. 4:5).
Because we are “not of the world”, dia, “therefore”, the world doesn’t accept us (1 Jn. 3:1).
Persecution arises dia the word of Yahuweh- for the sake of the word (Mt. 13:21).
It’s not persecution of us by the word of Yahuweh.
Likewise men will hate us, not by Yashuw'ah, but for the sake of (dia) Yashuw'ah (Mk. 13:13).
There was a division “because of” (dia) Yashuw'ah (Jn. 7:43).
“They could not… bring him in because of (dia) the multitude” (Lk. 5:19).
They didn’t aim on bringing the man in by the multitude.
‘For the sake [dia] of the elect’, and not by the elect, the days will be shortened (Mk. 13:20).
Herod bound John dia Herodias- clearly, ‘for the sake of’ rather than ‘by’.
It was not Herodias who did the binding. It was Herod.
A ship waited on Yashuw'ah dia the crowd pushing on Him (Mk. 3:9)- clearly ‘because of’ and not ‘by’.
“The Sabbath was made dia [for] man” (Mk. 2:24).
It wasn’t man who made the Sabbath; it was made for the sake of man.
Then, aion, [AV “worlds”] is a plural- if this verse means 'Yashuw'ah created the earth', then, did He create multiple, plural 'earths'?
That the word means 'the ages' or ‘an age’ is again clear from seeing how else 'aion' is used.
In almost every case where the word aion occurs in the New Testament, it doesn’t mean ‘the physical planet earth’, but rather an age or situation on the earth, rather than the physical planet.
In Eph. 2:7 we read of “the ages to come”- and it is the word aion again.
The church will glorify Yashuw'ah “throughout all generations”, and this is paralleled with the phrase ‘the aion of the aions’ [Eph. 3:21- AV “world without end”; the same parallel occurs in Col. 1:26, “hid from aions and from generations”].
Clearly aion refers to periods of time rather than a physical planet.
Just a few verses after Heb. 1:2, we read that the son will reign ‘for the aions and the aions’, or in English “for ever and ever” (Heb. 1:8).
Surely the combined message is that the previous ages / aions existed only for the sake of Yashuw'ah, and He will rule over all future aions.
There is the aion to come [AV “the world to come”, Heb. 6:5], and Yashuw'ah will be a priest “for ever” [Gk. ‘for the aion’, Heb. 5:6].
The aion to come is the eternity of Yashuw'ah’s Kingdom.
It will be, in somewhat hyperbolic language, an eternity of eternities. Later in Hebrew we read that Yashuw'ah made His sacrifice for sin “in the end of the world / aion” (Heb. 9:26).
If an aion ended at the death of Yashuw'ah, then clearly the word doesn’t refer to the physical planet- but rather to the age which then ended.
The Hebrew writer clinches this view of aion in Heb. 11:3, where he prefaces his outline of Bible history from Abel to the restoration from Babylon by saying that the ages / aion are framed by the word of Yahuweh.
Response by faith to Yahuweh’s word, seeing the invisible by the eye of faith, occurred amongst the faithful in every aion.
The aion [AV “worlds”] were framed by the word of Yahuweh.
Consider other uses of the word aion where clearly it refers to the ages and not to a literal planet:
“The cares of this world” (Mk. 4:19)
The prophets which have been “since the world began” (Lk. 1:70).
There were no prophets standing there at creation.
The context clearly refers to the prophets of the Old Testament Scriptures.
“The children of this world” (Lk. 16:8)
“Be not conformed to this world” (Rom. 12:2)
“The wisdom of this world” (1 Cor. 2:6; 1 Cor. 3:18), “the princes of this world” (1 Cor. 2:8)
“This present evil world” (Gal. 1:4)- there’s nothing evil about the physical planet, the reference is clearly to the world-system.
“The darkness of this world” (Eph. 6:12)
Loving “this present world” (2 Tim. 4:10) is wrong, Paul says.
Surely he wasn’t referring to the literal planet.
The whole of history, with all its ages, and all that is to come, is for the sake of Christ.
He is the One who gives meaning to history.
Further, if this verse means 'Yashuw'ah created the earth', then OK, question:
Genesis and many other passages say Yahuweh created.
If this says Yashuw'ah was the actual creator, then is Yashuw'ah directly equal to Yahuweh?
Also, if Heb 1:2 is saying that Yashuw'ah is the creator of earth, the One through whom Yahuweh did the job, then, why do we have to wait until Hebrews to know that?
There's no indication in Genesis or even in the whole Old Testament nor in the teaching of Yashuw'ah that Yashuw'ah was the creator of earth on Yahuweh's behalf.
That's my problem with the pre-existence idea- it's nowhere in the Old Testament.
So wo
uld believers have been held in ignorance of this fact for 4000 years?If so, then, is it so important to covenant relationship with Yahuweh?
I am sure David, Abraham etc. believed that Yahuweh and not Messiah created the earth.
If they'd have been asked:
'Did Messiah create the earth, or Yahuweh?
Does Messiah now exist?', they'd have answered 'No' both times.
Surely?
It is often commented that a few verses later, Heb. 1:10 appears to quote words about Yahuweh (from Ps. 102:25) and apply them to Yashuw'ah.
To take a Psalm or Bible passage and apply it to someone on earth, even a normal human, was quite common in first century literature.
It's rather like we may quote a well known phrase from Shakespeare or a currently popular movie, and apply it to someone.
It doesn't mean that that person is to be equated with Romeo, Juliet, Othello, Hamlet, Macbeth etc.
By quoting the words about them, we're saying there are similarities between the two people or situations; we're not claiming they're identical.
And seeing that the Son of Yahuweh was functioning for His Father, it's not surprising that words about Yahuweh will be quoted about the Lord Yashuw'ah.
Con……..Very good Post brother, we have for some reason been given a lot of these lately. Keep up the good work it does help us all who have the SPIRIT to understand it.
Peace and love to you and yours……………………….gene
hi Ron
you don't believe in the preexistence of Christ has the” word” with what i read of you.That's my problem with the pre-existence idea- it's nowhere in the Old Testament.
do i read you right??Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Dec. 26 2009,18:06) Quote (david @ Dec. 25 2009,13:58) [2. Many Bibles say that “through” him all things were made. (1:3) There's that “through” word again, just like when it says God is a savior “through” Jesus, in that he used Jesus to save the world. It's tricky how you ignore these facts.
DavidSo you think that when it says that the Father created all things by or through Jesus that is proof that Jesus cannot be the creator or be God?
WJ
I think it says what it says.I just don't want us or anyone to forget all that it says.
Jehovah is numerous times called “creator.”
We are told he created “through” Jesus.
Jesus is never called “creator.”
Quote (Ed J @ Dec. 27 2009,09:22) Quote (david @ Dec. 27 2009,07:27) I have said that Jehovah created things “through” Jesus, as the scripture says.
Hi David,You have answered my question, but now you present another…
Please show where in Scripture it says what you now say?God bless
Ed J
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
It's all over the place, Ed.Scriptures that come to mind:
John 1:3,10;
1 Cor 8:6; Col 1:16; heb 1:2Quote (david @ Dec. 27 2009,19:29) Quote (Ed J @ Dec. 27 2009,09:22) Quote (david @ Dec. 27 2009,07:27) I have said that Jehovah created things “through” Jesus, as the scripture says.
Hi David,You have answered my question, but now you present another…
Please show where in Scripture it says what you now say?God bless
Ed J
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
It's all over the place, Ed.Scriptures that come to mind:
John 1:3,10;
1 Cor 8:6; Col 1:16; heb 1:2
Hi David,OK, Hebrews 1:2 is a hit.
Ed J
Constitutionalist wrote:
Quote It should be noted, as a general point, that Yahuweh the Father alone, exclusively, is described as the creator in many passages (e.g. Is. 44:24; Is. 45:12; Is. 48:13; Is. 66:2).
Thank you! I have heard the claim but could not find any scripture to back it up. Now I can see what those passages state.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
