- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (thethinker @ Aug. 03 2009,11:39) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Aug. 04 2009,03:20) Quote (Nick Hassan @ Aug. 03 2009,02:17) Hi WJ,
Does scripture agree with this interpretation in view of Hebrews 11.17?
He is the Son of God.
NHOf course it does.
Isaac though he was not the “Only Son”, he was the “Monogenes” Only Unique One” because he was the child of the promise through his miraculous conception.
If what you are implying is true then every one who has sons should be “Monogenes”, but you will not find that in scriptures will you NH?
WJ
WJ,
Isaac was the “only begotten” of Abraham by decree. Abraham had two sons. The decree concerning Isaac was not fulfilled in real time until Ishmael was cast out of the covenant. It was after Ishmael was cast out that God called Isaac Abraham's “only son.”The Word was not the Son until the decree came to David as recorded in Psalm 2:7. So Jesus was indeed the “begotten Son” before His exaltation: But only by decree. That decree was fulfilled in real time when Jesus was exalted to God's right hand. The Scriptures are VERY clear that Jesus actually became the “begotten Son” at His exaltation. This is conclusive because He was “lower than the angels” before His exaltation. He obtained the name “begotten Son” when He was made superior to the angels which was at His exaltation. Kathi's view infers that Jesus was never at any time lower than the angels.
Our adoption as sons is an illustration this principle. 1 John 3 says, “NOW are we called the sons of God.” Yet we are not actually adopted until the redemption of our bodies. Paul explicitly said that we are “eagerly waithing for the adoption” (Rom. 8).
thinker
Thinker,
I think that you are not grasping my view about how the Son was indeed higher than the angels before He came in the flesh BUT during the flesh, He was made lower than the angels by His humbling Himself to take on flesh and took on the form of a bondservant. Then after His death, He was once again higher than the angels and even more so.So, “Kathi's view” is that He became lower than the angels and it was by choice. He did that on purpose out of love for us and His Father.
Blessings,
KathiQuote (Lightenup @ Aug. 03 2009,16:51) Quote (thethinker @ Aug. 03 2009,11:39) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Aug. 04 2009,03:20) Quote (Nick Hassan @ Aug. 03 2009,02:17) Hi WJ,
Does scripture agree with this interpretation in view of Hebrews 11.17?
He is the Son of God.
NHOf course it does.
Isaac though he was not the “Only Son”, he was the “Monogenes” Only Unique One” because he was the child of the promise through his miraculous conception.
If what you are implying is true then every one who has sons should be “Monogenes”, but you will not find that in scriptures will you NH?
WJ
WJ,
Isaac was the “only begotten” of Abraham by decree. Abraham had two sons. The decree concerning Isaac was not fulfilled in real time until Ishmael was cast out of the covenant. It was after Ishmael was cast out that God called Isaac Abraham's “only son.”The Word was not the Son until the decree came to David as recorded in Psalm 2:7. So Jesus was indeed the “begotten Son” before His exaltation: But only by decree. That decree was fulfilled in real time when Jesus was exalted to God's right hand. The Scriptures are VERY clear that Jesus actually became the “begotten Son” at His exaltation. This is conclusive because He was “lower than the angels” before His exaltation. He obtained the name “begotten Son” when He was made superior to the angels which was at His exaltation. Kathi's view infers that Jesus was never at any time lower than the angels.
Our adoption as sons is an illustration this principle. 1 John 3 says, “NOW are we called the sons of God.” Yet we are not actually adopted until the redemption of our bodies. Paul explicitly said that we are “eagerly waithing for the adoption” (Rom. 8).
thinker
Thinker,
I think that you are not grasping my view about how the Son was indeed higher than the angels before He came in the flesh BUT during the flesh, He was made lower than the angels by His humbling Himself to take on flesh and took on the form of a bondservant. Then after His death, He was once again higher than the angels and even more so.So, “Kathi's view” is that He became lower than the angels and it was by choice. He did that on purpose out of love for us and His Father.
Blessings,
Kathi
Hi KathiYou are so close yet so far from being a Trinitarian!
If you do not mind I am going to post your post and change “one” word and see what I mean…
“I think that you are not grasping my view about how the [Word} was indeed higher than the angels before He came in the flesh BUT during the flesh, He was made lower than the angels by His humbling Himself to take on flesh and took on the form of a bondservant. Then after His death, He was once again higher than the angels and even more so.
So, “Kathi's view” is that He became lower than the angels and it was by choice. He did that on purpose out of love for us and His Father.”
And the Word was God and the Word came in the flesh!
Blessings Keith
Hi WJ,
Such a fate should not be welcomed but dreaded as it is based on man's tradition and not scripture.
The future for the deceived in the whore is described in Rev 17-18Quote (thethinker @ Aug. 03 2009,11:52) WorshippingJesus said to Kathi: Quote The heavens and the earth and the waters were already in existence without light and the stars and moon on the first day! WJ,
Yes! It is clear. The Father credited the Son with the creation of the heavens. The heavens were in existence without “light” on the first day. Therefore, the introduction of “light” cannot be the introduction of the Son. Kathi once said that she would need “compelling evidence” before she would change her mind. That evidence has been presented. I am afraid that she was really guising the fact that she has no intentions of changing. By her highly active imagination she has proven over and over again that she is not teachable. She is very creative and always finds a way to explain away the facts. Though she is far more intelligent than most of the men on this board she is nevertheless dead wrong.thinker
Thinker,
See here that the “expanse” was made on day two and that expanse was called heaven. Day two comes after the day one light began, fyi.Gen 1:3-8
3 Then God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light.
4 God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness.
5 God called the light day, and the darkness He called night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day.
6 Then God said, “Let there be an expanse in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.”
7 God made the expanse, and separated the waters which were below the expanse from the waters which were above the expanse; and it was so.
8 God called the expanse heaven. And there was evening and there was morning, a second day.
NASUThinker, the heavens may have had some type of existence before day one but it is undeniable that on day two they were still being “worked” on. The Son has been credited with the heavens being the “work” of His hands.
Kathi
Quote (Nick Hassan @ Aug. 03 2009,17:50) Hi WJ,
Such a fate should not be welcomed but dreaded as it is based on man's tradition and not scripture.
The future for the deceived in the whore is described in Rev 17-18
NHScripture to you is what you prefer, like at a smorgasborg, you only pick what you like and that is food to you, but the rest is just garbage!
I quote scriptures and you say it is not scripture!
WJ
Hi WJ,
No we believe scripture and that Jesus is the Son of God.Why do you not believe in the Son of God and rather use scripture to support your religious career?
Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 03 2009,18:16) Quote (thethinker @ Aug. 03 2009,11:52) WorshippingJesus said to Kathi: Quote The heavens and the earth and the waters were already in existence without light and the stars and moon on the first day! WJ,
Yes! It is clear. The Father credited the Son with the creation of the heavens. The heavens were in existence without “light” on the first day. Therefore, the introduction of “light” cannot be the introduction of the Son. Kathi once said that she would need “compelling evidence” before she would change her mind. That evidence has been presented. I am afraid that she was really guising the fact that she has no intentions of changing. By her highly active imagination she has proven over and over again that she is not teachable. She is very creative and always finds a way to explain away the facts. Though she is far more intelligent than most of the men on this board she is nevertheless dead wrong.thinker
Thinker,
See here that the “expanse” was made on day two and that expanse was called heaven. Day two comes after the day one light began, fyi.Gen 1:3-8
3 Then God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light.
4 God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness.
5 God called the light day, and the darkness He called night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day.
6 Then God said, “Let there be an expanse in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.”
7 God made the expanse, and separated the waters which were below the expanse from the waters which were above the expanse; and it was so.
8 God called the expanse heaven. And there was evening and there was morning, a second day.
NASUThinker, the heavens may have had some type of existence before day one but it is undeniable that on day two they were still being “worked” on. The Son has been credited with the heavens being the “work” of His hands.
Kathi
KathiLook close at those scriptures, the expanse which is called heaven is the sky, for the water was above the expanse.
Surely you are not saying that the waters were over the heavens which contained the stars.
There is more than one heaven in scriptures. Paul said there were three heavens. I believe that the first heaven is the sky where the prince of the power of the air dwells in those heavenly realms, then there is the second heaven which is the Universe and the stars, and then the third heaven which is the dimension of the Kindom, the Spiritual heaven.
Jesus was creator of the “Heavens”.
WJ
Quote (Nick Hassan @ Aug. 03 2009,18:23) Hi WJ,
No we believe scripture and that Jesus is the Son of God.Why do you not believe in the Son of God and rather use scripture to support your religious career?
NHWhy do you lie against me.
When have I ever said Jesus is not the Son of God!
You are a son of your Father are you not? Is your Father less human than you?
I think you should get a white block for lieing against me.
But then again you are the moderator so it doesn't matter if you bear false witness does it?
WJ
Quote (Nick Hassan @ Aug. 03 2009,18:45) Hi WJ,
You are not your own father and neither is the Son of God.
Jn 14
..”believe ALSO in me..”
NHImagine that, God asking us to believe in a mere man.
YHWH says not to lean on the arm of flesh! He also says to serve only one master and Lord.
WJ
Hi WJ,
So he is not the God who demands that you believe in His Son?
How many gods do you have or is Jesus rather your Lord?[1Cor8]?Quote (Nick Hassan @ Aug. 03 2009,19:10) Hi WJ,
Jesus should be your Lord and the Holy Spirit should help you say this.
Hi NHThe Holy Spirit helps me to say what Paul and Thomas also said…
Thomas answered and said to Him, “My Lord and my God!” John 20:28
while we wait for the blessed hope–the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ, Titus 2:13
How about you. Why do you not believe all the scriptures?
WJ
Hi WJ,
So you prefer your understanding of an apostle's words to the clear teaching of Paul in 1 cor8?
How long will you scurry away and hide behind what you do know is trinity falsehood?Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 04 2009,10:16) Quote (thethinker @ Aug. 03 2009,11:52) WorshippingJesus said to Kathi: Quote The heavens and the earth and the waters were already in existence without light and the stars and moon on the first day! WJ,
Yes! It is clear. The Father credited the Son with the creation of the heavens. The heavens were in existence without “light” on the first day. Therefore, the introduction of “light” cannot be the introduction of the Son. Kathi once said that she would need “compelling evidence” before she would change her mind. That evidence has been presented. I am afraid that she was really guising the fact that she has no intentions of changing. By her highly active imagination she has proven over and over again that she is not teachable. She is very creative and always finds a way to explain away the facts. Though she is far more intelligent than most of the men on this board she is nevertheless dead wrong.thinker
Thinker,
See here that the “expanse” was made on day two and that expanse was called heaven. Day two comes after the day one light began, fyi.Gen 1:3-8
3 Then God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light.
4 God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness.
5 God called the light day, and the darkness He called night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day.
6 Then God said, “Let there be an expanse in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.”
7 God made the expanse, and separated the waters which were below the expanse from the waters which were above the expanse; and it was so.
8 God called the expanse heaven. And there was evening and there was morning, a second day.
NASUThinker, the heavens may have had some type of existence before day one but it is undeniable that on day two they were still being “worked” on. The Son has been credited with the heavens being the “work” of His hands.
Kathi
Kathi,
See WJ's post above about the expanse (atmosphere, i.e., heaven). I will not repeat it. Your interpretation is problematic also because it infers that verses 3 & 6 have two separate persons speaking and acting. If what you are saying is true then verses 3 & 6 look like this:vs. 3: Then God [the Father] said, “let there be light.”
vs. 6: Then God [the Son] said, Let there be a firmament…called heaven.”
There is no hint at all that God in both verses is not the same Person. John 1:3 says that without the Word “not one thing came in to being that has come in to being.” “Not one thing” means NOT ONE thing!
thinker
Quote (Nick Hassan @ Aug. 03 2009,19:59) Hi WJ,
So you prefer your understanding of an apostle's words to the clear teaching of Paul in 1 cor8?
How long will you scurry away and hide behind what you do know is trinity falsehood?
NHWhat is unclear about his other words?
You assume that because 1 Cor 8:6 says that there is One God and One Lord that the One Lord and One God are not the same God!
WJ
Quote (thethinker @ Aug. 03 2009,20:26) Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 04 2009,10:16) Quote (thethinker @ Aug. 03 2009,11:52) WorshippingJesus said to Kathi: Quote The heavens and the earth and the waters were already in existence without light and the stars and moon on the first day! WJ,
Yes! It is clear. The Father credited the Son with the creation of the heavens. The heavens were in existence without “light” on the first day. Therefore, the introduction of “light” cannot be the introduction of the Son. Kathi once said that she would need “compelling evidence” before she would change her mind. That evidence has been presented. I am afraid that she was really guising the fact that she has no intentions of changing. By her highly active imagination she has proven over and over again that she is not teachable. She is very creative and always finds a way to explain away the facts. Though she is far more intelligent than most of the men on this board she is nevertheless dead wrong.thinker
Thinker,
See here that the “expanse” was made on day two and that expanse was called heaven. Day two comes after the day one light began, fyi.Gen 1:3-8
3 Then God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light.
4 God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness.
5 God called the light day, and the darkness He called night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day.
6 Then God said, “Let there be an expanse in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.”
7 God made the expanse, and separated the waters which were below the expanse from the waters which were above the expanse; and it was so.
8 God called the expanse heaven. And there was evening and there was morning, a second day.
NASUThinker, the heavens may have had some type of existence before day one but it is undeniable that on day two they were still being “worked” on. The Son has been credited with the heavens being the “work” of His hands.
Kathi
Kathi,
See WJ's post above about the expanse (atmosphere, i.e., heaven). I will not repeat it. Your interpretation is problematic also because it infers that verses 3 & 6 have two separate persons speaking and acting. If what you are saying is true then verses 3 & 6 look like this:vs. 3: Then God [the Father] said, “let there be light.”
vs. 6: Then God [the Son] said, Let there be a firmament…called heaven.”
There is no hint at all that God in both verses is not the same Person. John 1:3 says that without the Word “not one thing came in to being that has come in to being.” “Not one thing” means NOT ONE thing!
thinker
Hi JackHow true!
WJ
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Aug. 04 2009,12:49) Quote (Nick Hassan @ Aug. 03 2009,19:59) Hi WJ,
So you prefer your understanding of an apostle's words to the clear teaching of Paul in 1 cor8?
How long will you scurry away and hide behind what you do know is trinity falsehood?
NHWhat is unclear about his other words?
You assume that because 1 Cor 8:6 says that there is One God and One Lord that the One Lord and One God are not the same God!
WJ
Hi WJ,
1 cor 8 differentiates them but you can somehow amalgamate the Father and the son?Why open your mind to such confusion in defence of your job?
Quote (Nick Hassan @ Aug. 03 2009,20:56) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Aug. 04 2009,12:49) Quote (Nick Hassan @ Aug. 03 2009,19:59) Hi WJ,
So you prefer your understanding of an apostle's words to the clear teaching of Paul in 1 cor8?
How long will you scurry away and hide behind what you do know is trinity falsehood?
NHWhat is unclear about his other words?
You assume that because 1 Cor 8:6 says that there is One God and One Lord that the One Lord and One God are not the same God!
WJ
Hi WJ,
1 cor 8 differentiates them but you can somehow amalgamate the Father and the son?Why open your mind to such confusion in defence of your job?
NHUnlike you I do not white out scriptures that call Jesus God.
Isaiah calls Jesus God…
For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor,* Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Isa 9:6
Mattew and the Angel Gabriel calls Jesus God…
“The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel”*–which means, “God with us.” Matt 1:23
John calls Jesus God…
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. John 1:1
“I am the Alpha and the Omega,” says the Lord God, “who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty.” Rev 1:8
Thomas called Jesus God…
And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God. John 20:28
Luke calls Jesus God…
Keep watch over yourselves and all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers.* Be shepherds of the church of God,* which he bought with his own blood. Acts 20:28
Paul called Jesus God…
while we wait for the blessed hope–the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ, Titus 2:13
Who, being in very nature* God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, Phil 2:6
The Father calls Jesus God…
But about the Son he says, “Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever, and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom. Heb 1:8
Peter calls Jesus God…
Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who through the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ have received a faith as precious as ours: 2 Peter 1:1
And many of the Church Fathers called Jesus God!
The scriptures call the Father God!
The scriptures call Jesus God!
The scriptures call the Holy Spirit God!
Yet Paul says…
“…and that there is no God but one. 1 Cor 8:4
So get your white out NH and blot out the scriptures to justify your Arian teachings!
WJ
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
