- This topic is empty.
- Posts
You are determined to affirm polytheism aren't you t8?…. I think there is and will only ever be One divine being – YHWH. Why not just accept biblical monotheism?
Excluding the Word of God, but even that is open to interpretation, give me 3 verses that say Jesus is Theos referring to divinity.
I am not saying that they don't exist, but I want to work with those 3 scriptures.
I won't write an essay, but just to make some comparision with “theos” and “elohim” when used of men and angel.
Quote (Is 1:18 @ Sep. 22 2007,11:40) You are determined to affirm polytheism aren't you t8?…. I think there is and will only ever be One divine being – YHWH. Why not just accept biblical monotheism?
He he.I worship one God the Father.
You worship One God the Father, One God the son, and one God the Spirit. I count 3 Gods there.
Also there is one Spirit. Of course there are in reality a multitude of spirits as the Father is the father of spirits and angels are spirits.
But from what I can see from your theology you must believe that the Father is spirit, the son is spirit, and the Holy Spirit is spirit. So again I count 3. But it is written that there is one God, one faith, one Spirit.
Then after all that you say I am a polytheist.
He he. Has it crossed your mind that you may be a slight bit arrogant or ignorant?
I mean you accuse me of polytheism and I believe in One God the Father who is the Spirit, and that he is the one True God. And you believe in 3.
Quote (t8 @ Sep. 22 2007,11:43) Excluding the Word of God, but even that is open to interpretation, give me 3 verses that say Jesus is Theos referring to divinity. I am not saying that they don't exist, but I want to work with those 3 scriptures.
I won't write an essay, but just to make some comparision with “theos” and “elohim” when used of men and angel.
You want me to give you three “scripture” excluding the “Word of God”??Do you want me to quote from the hindu or Islamic scriptures t8?….
Quote (Is 1:18 @ Sep. 22 2007,11:32) Can you name a verse in the NT where “theos” is use of Yeshua but where the context unmistakably bears out that divinity is not implied (like Psa 82:6)??
Still waiting for an answer to this….That is a loaded question coming from you. If I say yes, I am condemned and if I say no I am condemned. So I will say it like this, so you cannot take my words out of context.
“There is not one who is referred to as “theos” and “elohim”. “You can check that out in scripture for yourself.
“But there is only one “theos” and “elohim” who is above all and is the source of all, which makes him the only true Theos.”
Obviously you say that Jesus is a divine being. But you really believe, whether you know it or not, that he is only part of a divine being. Because you also have 2 others who are part of that same divine being. So you cannot believe that he is not 100% that being because that would exclude the other 2.
Your tradition is complex and beyond reason, and is in truth just plain foolishness. Complexity and things beyond understanding are not wrong, but the fact that your thology is not written or taught, coupled with the fact that you hide behind the “God is beyond our understanding” argument to justify it, is the part that you need to repent of.
If God is 100% God, and there are 3 who are God, and Jesus is one of of the 3 and yet 100% God, then you have to hide behind the “God is beyond our understanding” argument, because your argument doesn't add up. Couple that with the fact that it is not written, my advice is to give it up and let scripture and the Word renew your mind.
Quote (Is 1:18 @ Sep. 22 2007,11:51) T8, tell me if you agree with this statement:- There is only one divine being.
Anyone who cannot give an emphatic 'yes' to this question should be seriously reevaluating their theology.Quote (Is 1:18 @ Sep. 22 2007,11:53) You want me to give you three “scripture” excluding the “Word of God”?? Do you want me to quote from the hindu or Islamic scriptures t8?….
I will cut to the chase.Theos as applied to Jesus Christ is not proof that Jesus is Yahweh, just as much as thoes as applied to men or angel is.
Jesus is the son of Yahweh, and we are the sons of Yahweh, and angels are sons too.
To deny that Jesus is the son is to deny the true foundation and rock that Christ built his Church on. The elementary teachings of Christ include that he is the son of God and the messiah. Not that he is God because that rules out that he is the son of God. He is not his own son obviously and that is why God is called the Father. Because he has sons.
Quote (Is 1:18 @ Sep. 22 2007,12:15) Quote (Is 1:18 @ Sep. 22 2007,11:51) T8, tell me if you agree with this statement:- There is only one divine being.
Anyone who cannot give an emphatic 'yes' to this question should be seriously reevaluating their theology.
Paul said it like this:1 Corinthians 8:5
5 For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”),
6 yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.Anyone who denies what Paul said should serously eveluate their trust in scripture. I have taught this all along, even today.
But you do not agree with Paul. You have one God the Father, one God the son, one God the Spirit.
You should seriously reevaluate your theology.
Quote (Is 1:18 @ Sep. 22 2007,12:21) In what sense is Yeshua the Son of God? Please be specific.
He was born of God.He came from God.
He is of God.
He wasn't exclusively created like we are. We were created by God through Christ. Christ was begotten/born of God.
God is his Father.
Quote (t8 @ Sep. 22 2007,12:17) The elementary teachings of Christ include that he is the son of God and the messiah. Not that he is God because that rules out that he is the son of God. He is not his own son obviously and that is why God is called the Father. Because he has sons.
Yeshua is both “the Son of man” and “man”, what do you make of that t8? Seems like there's a Hebraic nuance to consider here….Quote (t8 @ Sep. 22 2007,12:25) Quote (Is 1:18 @ Sep. 22 2007,12:21) In what sense is Yeshua the Son of God? Please be specific.
He was born of God.He came from God.
He is of God.
He wasn't exclusively created like we are. We were created by God through Christ. Christ was begotten/born of God.
God is his Father.
Where do we read about Yeshua's pre-incarnation beginning? Which NT writer explains to us that the title Son of God means pre-incarnate progeny of God?Quote (Is 1:18 @ Sep. 22 2007,12:27) Yeshua is both “the Son of man” and “man”, what do you make of that t8? Seems like there's a Hebraic nuance to consider here….
A Hebraic nuance to consider here for yourself is that we are men, and we are sons of God.Are we Yahweh?
No.Now Jesus is a man and the son of God. Is he Yahweh?
No.Quote (t8 @ Sep. 22 2007,12:28) He is the son of man and the son of God. It's not too hard to grasp.
You missed the point t8. If the two terms “Son of man” and “man” are not at all antithetical to the Jewish mind, on what grounds do you assert that “Son of God” and “God” are?T8, you have left a trail of unanswered questions behind you. It would be good if you could at least answer that last one for me. I have to go, will check in later…
I haven't answered everything because I am resisting you pushing me away from scripture. I am sticking to scripture and everything else I hold outside of that is just an opinion that cannot be proven.
In addition to that, I don't know everything and haven't claimed to know everything.
I have given you what I believe from scripture and that should be enough. I will not accept the temptation to move away from scripture and into tradition and philosophy.
Jesus is the son of God and his God is the Father and his God is our God. This is scripture and it is true. I am not really interested in turning faith into a science and coming up with vain theories. I just accept scripture and I try to understand it. I am open to God revealing things to me. But I am not interested in wandering away from that and trying to rely on my own understanding.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
