Who is the creator of all things?

This topic is empty.

Viewing 20 posts - 181 through 200 (of 420 total)

←1 2 3…91011…19 20 21 →

Author
Posts

January 17, 2012 at 3:06 pm#272929

terraricca

Participant

Quote (Lightenup @ Jan. 17 2012,18:23)

Quote (terraricca @ Jan. 16 2012,17:31)

Quote (Lightenup @ Jan. 17 2012,16:19)

Pierre,
“Over all creation” is in scripture. You yourself quote it that way

Col 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.

There you go…bolded.

Is Jesus YOUR god Pierre?

Kathi

Over all of creation ,means what to you ?

Firstborn ,means what to you ??

Being an image of someone does not make you that one right ??

Jesus is deffinetly my god as Moses was god to his people and his brother,

Pierre

Hi Pierre,
Here are answers to your questions as I understand:

'Over all creation' means that the Son is the Lord of all that was created. He is supreme.

Firstborn means that He is the Son of God which furthermore means that He is God like His Father. Like begets like. God begets God.

Being an image of the invisible God means that what the invisible God is, the Son is also and that the Son is not the Father. Like begets like.

Pierre, what type of 'being' is the Jesus that you have as your god?

Kathi

kathi

my Christ and establish god by his father the almighty God,being Gods son means the very thing he is ,created because the son was not always a son ,and the father was at one time not a father,so the son became by his special creation the closes to Gods nature that anyone can claim,but it is ludicrous to think that he his God or equal to God his father,
There is no scriptures that says that ,there is no truth in those who peach other doctrine than those from the apostles,

The reason for the diversity of thinking from scriptures is only do to the addition of personal opinions ,and give more credit to the opinion than the word of God,

This of cause is related to each own heart ,that shows it is not with Gods interest but their own.

Pierre

January 17, 2012 at 11:13 pm#272991

mikeboll64

Blocked

Quote (Lightenup @ Jan. 16 2012,19:09)

Mike,
Prov 8:22 is translated as 'possessed' and not created in most translations and is in reference to wisdom.

Oh, have you changed your former belief that Proverbs 8 was about Jesus?

Provebs 8:22 NET ©
The Lord created me as the beginning of his works, before his deeds of long ago.

Read this info a little closer this time, Kathi:
There are two roots קָנָה (qanah) in Hebrew, one meaning “to possess,” and the other meaning “to create.” The earlier English versions did not know of the second root, but suspected in certain places that a meaning like that was necessary (e.g., Gen 4:1; 14:19; Deut 32:6). Ugaritic confirmed that it was indeed another root. The older versions have the translation “possess” because otherwise it sounds like God lacked wisdom and therefore created it at the beginning. They wanted to avoid saying that wisdom was not eternal. Arius liked the idea of Christ as the wisdom of God and so chose the translation “create.” Athanasius translated it, “constituted me as the head of creation.” The verb occurs twelve times in Proverbs with the meaning of “to acquire”; but the Greek and the Syriac versions have the meaning “create.” Although the idea is that wisdom existed before creation, the parallel ideas in these verses (“appointed,” “given birth”) argue for the translation of “create”

Do you see it all now, Kathi? The earlier English versions were UNAWARE of the root “to create”, although they SUSPECTED it must be because of other scriptures. And they translated as “possessed” because they didn't like the idea that wisdom was created.

But both Arius and Athanasius knew this passage was about Jesus. Arius translated it correctly, while Athanasius, the main pusher of the trinity doctrine, made up words that don't even come close to the Hebrew text, just to keep from saying Jesus was created. (This is likely one of the first recorded instances of a “Jesus is God” person taking liberties with and TWISTING the scriptures in an effort to FORCE them into conveying their own “truth”. )

The Greek and Syriac versions have CREATE, Kathi. And the parallel idea of GIVEN BIRTH in the passage argues STRONGLY for “CREATE”.

Pay close attention to what the 25 Trinitarian scholars of NETNotes are saying in that last part, Kathi. They say that the phrase GIVEN BIRTH argues for the translation of CREATE, as if those things are SYNONYMS!

Apparently, they don't agree with your view that someone who is born can't be a creation.

Quote (Lightenup @ Jan. 16 2012,19:09)

Who created every creature? The Father and the Son.

That is incorrect and unscriptural. We aren't said to have had CREATORS, Kathi. Nor is Jesus ever said to have CREATED anything.

January 17, 2012 at 11:40 pm#272994

mikeboll64

Blocked

Quote (Lightenup @ Jan. 16 2012,19:35)

Ask yourself 'who is His Father' and that will help you see who He is the Firstborn of.

Please don't pretend like this is so hard for you.

Exodus 22:29
You must give me the firstborn of your sons.

Are we to assume that the father of these firstborn is “your sons”? Or should we assume that these are the first ones born who are a PART OF THE GROUP called “your sons”? Which one, Kathi?

Quote (Lightenup @ Jan. 16 2012,19:35)

Jesus was and is in a lower position than His Father as a Son

Then we truly have but ONE God Almighty, right? Because if Jesus is a god who is in a lower position than his own God, only ONE of them can be called “God Most High”, or “God OF gods”, or “God Almighty”, right?

January 18, 2012 at 4:21 am#273031

Lightenup

Participant

Quote (terraricca @ Jan. 17 2012,09:06)

Quote (Lightenup @ Jan. 17 2012,18:23)

Quote (terraricca @ Jan. 16 2012,17:31)

Quote (Lightenup @ Jan. 17 2012,16:19)

Pierre,
“Over all creation” is in scripture. You yourself quote it that way

Col 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.

There you go…bolded.

Is Jesus YOUR god Pierre?

Kathi

Over all of creation ,means what to you ?

Firstborn ,means what to you ??

Being an image of someone does not make you that one right ??

Jesus is deffinetly my god as Moses was god to his people and his brother,

Pierre

Hi Pierre,
Here are answers to your questions as I understand:

'Over all creation' means that the Son is the Lord of all that was created. He is supreme.

Firstborn means that He is the Son of God which furthermore means that He is God like His Father. Like begets like. God begets God.

Being an image of the invisible God means that what the invisible God is, the Son is also and that the Son is not the Father. Like begets like.

Pierre, what type of 'being' is the Jesus that you have as your god?

Kathi

kathi

The reason for the diversity of thinking from scriptures is only do to the addition of personal opinions ,and give more credit to the opinion than the word of God,

This of cause is related to each own heart ,that shows it is not with Gods interest but their own.

Pierre

Hi Pierre,

you said:

Quote

my Christ and establish god by his father the almighty God…

So what verse tells us that Christ 'was established' as god by his father?

Quote

…being Gods son means the very thing he is ,created because the son was not always a son

But what type of being is God's only begotten Son? What was the Son before He was a Son?

Quote

and the father was at one time not a father,so the son became by his special creation the closes to Gods nature that anyone can claim,

That is in direct conflict with Heb 1:3 which states that He is:

Heb 1:3And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power. When He had made purification of sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,

We have to go by scriptures Pierre. The scripture does not say that He was almost the exact representation of His nature, does it?

Quote

but it is ludicrous to think that he his God or equal to God his father,

You may think it ludicrous, yet that is what scripture tells us, that He is the EXACT representation of His nature. Exact means equal. We have to go by scriptures, Pierre. Someone or something that is an EXACT representation of something else would be equal to that which they are an exact representation of. Again, scripture doesn't say that He was almost an exact representation, or a pretty close representation, does it Pierre. Handle scripture more carefully Pierre. That is what we go by, not our own wishes as to what you want it to say.

Quote

There is no scriptures that says that ,there is no truth in those who peach other doctrine than those from the apostles,

Oh really, read this verse regarding Jesus:

Phil 2:6 In God's own form existed he, and shared with God equality, deemed nothing needed grasping.

Satan tried to grasp equality with God, but Jesus did not need to try to grasp it, Jesus was equal with God. He pre-existed in God's own form. No mention of Him being established in this form. He just had it…He came by it naturally as an offspring of God would.

Quote

There is no scriptures that says that ,there is no truth in those who peach other doctrine than those from the apostles,

Well, I just showed you a scripture, so adjust your doctrine to line up with the apostles, Pierre. Truth is always the right choice and the only way to truly understand the scriptures. N'est pas?

Kathi

January 18, 2012 at 5:06 am#273036

Lightenup

Participant

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 17 2012,17:13)

Quote (Lightenup @ Jan. 16 2012,19:09)

Mike,
Prov 8:22 is translated as 'possessed' and not created in most translations and is in reference to wisdom.

Oh, have you changed your former belief that Proverbs 8 was about Jesus?

Provebs 8:22 NET ©
The Lord created me as the beginning of his works, before his deeds of long ago.

The Greek and Syriac versions have CREATE, Kathi. And the parallel idea of GIVEN BIRTH in the passage argues STRONGLY for “CREATE”.

Apparently, they don't agree with your view that someone who is born can't be a creation.

Quote (Lightenup @ Jan. 16 2012,19:09)

Who created every creature? The Father and the Son.

That is incorrect and unscriptural. We aren't said to have had CREATORS, Kathi. Nor is Jesus ever said to have CREATED anything.

Mike,
I do understand that the wisdom is talked about in chapter 8 and it is the wisdom that is found in the Son who was begotten. The NET translators say that they 'argue' for the translation to be 'created' but I believe their argument is just an argument…their guess. As they say, the word is not translated as 'created' elsewhere in Proverbs. We do not have any passage in scripture to confirm that wisdom is created to give credibility to their guess. Can you show me any scripture that says wisdom of God was created aside from what you think Prov 8:22 says? Btw, nothing is said that create and given birth were synonyms except in your mind.

Quote

Nor is Jesus ever said to have CREATED anything.

Well, you do know that the scholars say that He did according to the scriptures. Even your buddy Eusebius does, Arius did and JW's do, so, you are just being either stubborn or blinded here. You waste a lot of time by not acknowledging that Jesus made all things. That is one reason you are failing to understand higher truths. You have to lay a firm foundation in order to continue building a strong building, Mike.

If I made a castle through J.C. Castle builders, then J.C. Castle builders built the castle. This is a no brainer that you keep spinning around and making yourself dizzy with by not just getting this.

Another example: If I had a pool cover installed through Mikeboll…who installed the pool cover Answer=Mikeboll
See how easy that is?

See this about the Arians:

Because virtually all extant written material on Arianism was written by its opponents, the nature of Arian teachings is difficult to define precisely today. The letter of Auxentius,[10] a 4th-century Arian bishop of Milan, regarding the missionary Ulfilas, gives the clearest picture of Arian beliefs on the nature of the Trinity: God the Father (“unbegotten”), always existing, was separate from the lesser Jesus Christ (“only-begotten”), born before time began and creator of the world. The Father, working through the Son, created the Holy Spirit, who was subservient to the Son as the Son was to the Father.
from here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arianism

See this about the JW's
Jehovah's Witnesses believe that Jesus was God's only direct creation, that everything else was created by means of Christ, and that the initial unassisted act of creation uniquely identifies Jesus as God's “only-begotten Son”.[153]
From here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehovah's_Witnesses

So Mike, you lose this point. Get past this.

Kathi

January 18, 2012 at 5:41 am#273039

Lightenup

Participant

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 17 2012,17:40)

Quote (Lightenup @ Jan. 16 2012,19:35)

Ask yourself 'who is His Father' and that will help you see who He is the Firstborn of.

Please don't pretend like this is so hard for you.

Exodus 22:29
You must give me the firstborn of your sons.

Are we to assume that the father of these firstborn is “your sons”? Or should we assume that these are the first ones born who are a PART OF THE GROUP called “your sons”? Which one, Kathi?

Quote (Lightenup @ Jan. 16 2012,19:35)

Jesus was and is in a lower position than His Father as a Son

Mike,
you asked:

Quote

Exodus 22:29
You must give me the firstborn of your sons.

Are we to assume that the father of these firstborn is “your sons”? Or should we assume that these are the first ones born who are a PART OF THE GROUP called “your sons”? Which one, Kathi?

Read this to help you know the answer.

Exodus 13
Consecration of the Firstborn
1Then the LORD spoke to Moses, saying, 2“Sanctify to Me every firstborn, the first offspring of every womb among the sons of Israel, both of man and beast; it belongs to Me.”

3Moses said to the people, “Remember this day in which you went out from Egypt, from the house of slavery; for by a powerful hand the LORD brought you out from this place. And nothing leavened shall be eaten. 4“On this day in the month of Abib, you are about to go forth. 5“It shall be when the LORD brings you to the land of the Canaanite, the Hittite, the Amorite, the Hivite and the Jebusite, which He swore to your fathers to give you, a land flowing with milk and honey, that you shall observe this rite in this month. 6“For seven days you shall eat unleavened bread, and on the seventh day there shall be a feast to the LORD. 7“Unleavened bread shall be eaten throughout the seven days; and nothing leavened shall be seen among you, nor shall any leaven be seen among you in all your borders. 8“You shall tell your son on that day, saying, ‘It is because of what the LORD did for me when I came out of Egypt.’ 9“And it shall serve as a sign to you on your hand, and as a reminder on your forehead, that the law of the LORD may be in your mouth; for with a powerful hand the LORD brought you out of Egypt. 10“Therefore, you shall keep this ordinance at its appointed time from year to year.

11“Now when the LORD brings you to the land of the Canaanite, as He swore to you and to your fathers, and gives it to you, 12you shall devote to the LORD the first offspring of every womb, and the first offspring of every beast that you own; the males belong to the LORD. 13“But every first offspring of a donkey you shall redeem with a lamb, but if you do not redeem it, then you shall break its neck; and every firstborn of man among your sons you shall redeem. 14“And it shall be when your son asks you in time to come, saying, ‘What is this?’ then you shall say to him, ‘With a powerful hand the LORD brought us out of Egypt, from the house of slavery. 15‘It came about, when Pharaoh was stubborn about letting us go, that the LORD killed every firstborn in the land of Egypt, both the firstborn of man and the firstborn of beast. Therefore, I sacrifice to the LORD the males, the first offspring of every womb, but every firstborn of my sons I redeem.’

the first offspring of every womb among the sons of Israel, both of man and beast; it belongs to Me.”

The firstborn of every womb would be many firstborns, not just one.

If Col 1:15 said this:
The firstborn of all creation, both of man and beast, then you can see that this would NOT be speaking of just one being, the very first birth to be had FROM man or beast, but it would be speaking of each first offspring FROM every man and beast. This would be many offsprings, do you see that? It would also imply that a man or a beast would be the parents of their firstborn.

Kathi

This is another passage that you are simply in denial of Mike. Get past this in order to grow in your understanding.

January 18, 2012 at 6:00 pm#273090

terraricca

Participant

Quote (Lightenup @ Jan. 18 2012,21:21)

Quote (terraricca @ Jan. 17 2012,09:06)

Quote (Lightenup @ Jan. 17 2012,18:23)

Quote (terraricca @ Jan. 16 2012,17:31)

Quote (Lightenup @ Jan. 17 2012,16:19)

Pierre,
“Over all creation” is in scripture. You yourself quote it that way

Col 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.

There you go…bolded.

Is Jesus YOUR god Pierre?

Kathi

Over all of creation ,means what to you ?

Firstborn ,means what to you ??

Being an image of someone does not make you that one right ??

Jesus is deffinetly my god as Moses was god to his people and his brother,

Pierre

Hi Pierre,
Here are answers to your questions as I understand:

'Over all creation' means that the Son is the Lord of all that was created. He is supreme.

Firstborn means that He is the Son of God which furthermore means that He is God like His Father. Like begets like. God begets God.

Being an image of the invisible God means that what the invisible God is, the Son is also and that the Son is not the Father. Like begets like.

Pierre, what type of 'being' is the Jesus that you have as your god?

Kathi

kathi

The reason for the diversity of thinking from scriptures is only do to the addition of personal opinions ,and give more credit to the opinion than the word of God,

This of cause is related to each own heart ,that shows it is not with Gods interest but their own.

Pierre

Hi Pierre,

you said:

Quote

my Christ and establish god by his father the almighty God…

So what verse tells us that Christ 'was established' as god by his father?

Quote

…being Gods son means the very thing he is ,created because the son was not always a son

But what type of being is God's only begotten Son? What was the Son before He was a Son?

Quote

and the father was at one time not a father,so the son became by his special creation the closes to Gods nature that anyone can claim,

That is in direct conflict with Heb 1:3 which states that He is:

We have to go by scriptures Pierre. The scripture does not say that He was almost the exact representation of His nature, does it?

Quote

but it is ludicrous to think that he his God or equal to God his father,

Quote

There is no scriptures that says that ,there is no truth in those who peach other doctrine than those from the apostles,

Oh really, read this verse regarding Jesus:

Phil 2:6 In God's own form existed he, and shared with God equality, deemed nothing needed grasping.

Quote

There is no scriptures that says that ,there is no truth in those who peach other doctrine than those from the apostles,

Well, I just showed you a scripture, so adjust your doctrine to line up with the apostles, Pierre. Truth is always the right choice and the only way to truly understand the scriptures. N'est pas?

Kathi

I did not forgot you ,I will get your answer a little later ,so stay put ,

Pierre

January 18, 2012 at 10:44 pm#273143

mikeboll64

Blocked

Quote (Lightenup @ Jan. 17 2012,22:06)

The NET translators say that they 'argue' for the translation to be 'created' but I believe their argument is just an argument…their guess.

Btw, nothing is said that create and given birth were synonyms except in your mind.

Once again:
the parallel ideas in these verses (“appointed,” “given birth”) argue for the translation of “create”
This is HOW and WHY they came to their “guess”, Kathi. They recognize the PARALLEL IDEA of “given birth” in the same passage, and they know that bringing one forth in BIRTH is equivalent to CREATING that one.

Also, from Thesaurus.com:
Main Entry: beget [bih-get] Show IPA

Part of Speech: verb

Definition: create, bear

Synonyms:

afford, breed, bring, bring about, cause, effect, engender, father, generate, get, give rise to, multiply, occasion, procreate, produce, progenerate, propagate, reproduce, result in, sire

And, from the same source:
Main Entry: create [kree-eyt] Show IPA

Part of Speech: verb

Definition: develop in mind or physically

Synonyms:

actualize, author, beget, bring into being, bring into existence, bring to pass, build, cause to be, coin, compose, conceive, concoct, constitute, construct, contrive, design, devise, discover, dream up, effect, erect, establish, fabricate, fashion, father, forge, form, formulate, found, generate, give birth to, give life to, hatch, imagine, initiate, institute, invent, invest, make, occasion, organize, originate, parent, perform, plan, procreate, produce, rear, set up, shape, sire, spawn, start

Is it still “only in MY mind”, Kathi? Notice the bold words are words I've used before, trying to explain to you that every son is both begotten AND created.

Quote (Lightenup @ Jan. 17 2012,22:06)

Can you show me any scripture that says wisdom of God was created aside from what you think Prov 8:22 says?

Notice the synonym “ESTABLISH” above, and compare:
Job 28:27
NET
then he looked at wisdom and assessed its value; he established it and examined it closely.

NASB ©
Then He saw it and declared it; He established it and also searched it out.

NRSV ©
then he saw it and declared it; he established it, and searched it out.

Quote (Lightenup @ Jan. 17 2012,22:06)

Quote (mikeboll @ 64)

Nor is Jesus ever said to have CREATED anything.

Well, you do know that the scholars say that He did according to the scriptures.

Let me know when you find a SCRIPTURE that says he did, okay? And when you do, try to explain to me why Jesus is listed as someone OTHER THAN the One who created all things in Isaiah 42, Acts 4 and 17, Hebrews 1, and Revelation 3 and 4 (and counting).

Can scripture contradict itself, Kathi? If Jesus is listed as one of the things CREATED BY God in Acts 4, then how can he also be our ONE Creator?

So it is YOU who loses this point, Kathi. You know why? Because your support comes from mere men, while mine comes from God-inspired scripture.

January 18, 2012 at 10:59 pm#273151

mikeboll64

Blocked

Quote (Lightenup @ Jan. 17 2012,22:41)

Read this to help you know the answer.

Exodus 13
Consecration of the Firstborn………………

So then, the actual ANSWER to my question is:

Even though it is worded as “the firstborn of the flock”, for example, it doesn't refer to “the flock”, as a whole, being the FATHER of this one. INSTEAD, IT REFERS TO THIS FIRSTBORN BEING A MEMBER OF the group called “the flock”.

Isn't that the CORRECT ANSWER, Kathi? YES or NO?

And what about the other part of my post?

Quote (Lightenup @ Jan. 16 2012 @ 19:35)

Jesus was and is in a lower position than His Father as a Son….

January 18, 2012 at 11:10 pm#273154

mikeboll64

Blocked

Proverbs 8 NIV 1984
22 “The LORD brought me forth as the first of his works,
before his deeds of old;
23 I was appointed[d] from eternity,
from the beginning, before the world began.
24 When there were no oceans, I was given birth,
when there were no springs abounding with water;
25 before the mountains were settled in place,
before the hills, I was given birth,
26 before he made the earth or its fields
or any of the dust of the world.
27 I was there when he set the heavens in place,
when he marked out the horizon on the face of the deep,
28 when he established the clouds above
and fixed securely the fountains of the deep,
29 when he gave the sea its boundary
so the waters would not overstep his command,
and when he marked out the foundations of the earth.

Look at the PARALLELS, Kathi. Footnote “D” says, “or FASHIONED”. But look at “given birth”, “fashioned”, “appointed”, “first of His works”.

All of these things SCREAM for a translation of “created”, or “brought into existence”.

But let's say “possessed” is correct – just for argument's sake. It STILL won't match up with YOUR understanding, because YOU think Jehovah ALWAYS “possessed” Jesus. In which case, possessing Jesus would have been in effect since from eternity, and could therefore NOT be called “THE FIRST OF GOD'S WORKS”.

Also notice “before His works of old”. WHOSE works, Kathi?

And it seems that Wisdom/Jesus was there when WHO set the heavens in place, and laid the foundations of the earth?

January 20, 2012 at 8:40 am#273404

Lightenup

Participant

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 18 2012,16:59)

Quote (Lightenup @ Jan. 17 2012,22:41)

Read this to help you know the answer.

Exodus 13
Consecration of the Firstborn………………

So then, the actual ANSWER to my question is:

Isn't that the CORRECT ANSWER, Kathi? YES or NO?

And what about the other part of my post?

Quote (Lightenup @ Jan. 16 2012 @ 19:35)

Jesus was and is in a lower position than His Father as a Son….

Mike,
If it were worded “Give me the firstborn of the flock” that would mean every first offspring of every womb. There could be a whole pen full of the firstborn of the flock. If the wording was “Give me the first offspring to be born of the flock” that could mean the first offspring of the entire flock…whichever is the first to give birth, that offspring would be given. See the difference.

God killed the 'firstborn of all Egyptians' during the Passover and many were killed, not just one Mike.

So, your answer is NO…'the firstborn of the flock' would not be limited to be just one member but could be several members and each firstborn would come from a member of the flock.

Jesus was one firstborn and not several…He was not the firstborn of each creature (the first offspring of the first beast as well as the first offspring of the first fish as well as the first offspring of the first man, etc.) and His Father was not a member of creation. Get past this Mike.

The Father created all those creatures, both visible and invisible creatures, by His Firstborn. Both were involved in the process of creation.

John 5:19
19 So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing. For whatever the Father does, that the Son does likewise.

The Father creates…the Son creates.

Kathi

January 20, 2012 at 10:04 am#273406

Lightenup

Participant

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 18 2012,16:44)

Quote (Lightenup @ Jan. 17 2012,22:06)

The NET translators say that they 'argue' for the translation to be 'created' but I believe their argument is just an argument…their guess.

Btw, nothing is said that create and given birth were synonyms except in your mind.

Also, from Thesaurus.com:
Main Entry: beget [bih-get] Show IPA

Part of Speech: verb

Definition: create, bear

Synonyms:

And, from the same source:
Main Entry: create [kree-eyt] Show IPA

Part of Speech: verb

Definition: develop in mind or physically

Synonyms:

Is it still “only in MY mind”, Kathi? Notice the bold words are words I've used before, trying to explain to you that every son is both begotten AND created.

Quote (Lightenup @ Jan. 17 2012,22:06)

Can you show me any scripture that says wisdom of God was created aside from what you think Prov 8:22 says?

Notice the synonym “ESTABLISH” above, and compare:
Job 28:27
NET
then he looked at wisdom and assessed its value; he established it and examined it closely.

NASB ©
Then He saw it and declared it; He established it and also searched it out.

NRSV ©
then he saw it and declared it; he established it, and searched it out.

Quote (Lightenup @ Jan. 17 2012,22:06)

Quote (mikeboll @ 64)

Nor is Jesus ever said to have CREATED anything.

Well, you do know that the scholars say that He did according to the scriptures.

Can scripture contradict itself, Kathi? If Jesus is listed as one of the things CREATED BY God in Acts 4, then how can he also be our ONE Creator?

So it is YOU who loses this point, Kathi. You know why? Because your support comes from mere men, while mine comes from God-inspired scripture.

Mike,
Beget can mean create when there is no gestational period involved. In regards to an idea, you can beget/bring forth/create a solution to a problem in an instant. In regards to begetting an offspring, the begetting of the offspring can mean just the birthing/bringing out part, not necessarily the conception and the gestational period also.

When the Son is said to be begotten, I believe that if refers to the 'bringing out' of the offspring of God, into a position of service, not a conception-birth begettal since I believe that the offspring was eternally always available to the Father when He was within the Father, to serve Him as His perfect Son when brought out.

Quote

Is it still “only in MY mind”, Kathi? Notice the bold words are words I've used before, trying to explain to you that every son is both begotten AND created.

The big controversy of the arians/trinitarians was…did the Son come from eternal substance or from nothing. The Arians believed that there was a time that the Son was NOT. The trinitarians believed that there was NEVER a time that the Son was not. Created things did not exist at one point and so regarding things created, there was a time when they were not.

16For this reason it is by faith, in order that it may be in accordance with grace, so that the promise will be guaranteed to all the descendants, not only to those who are of the Law, but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all, 17(as it is written, “A FATHER OF MANY NATIONS HAVE I MADE YOU”) in the presence of Him whom he believed, even God, who gives life to the dead and calls into being that which does not exist.

So, was the Son 'called into being, that which did not exist' or was He begotten/brought out from the Father where He existed beforehand-eternally? If He existed beforehand-eternally, then He was not created, just begotten.

Quote

John 1:3, John 1:10

3All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.

10He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him.

Col 1 15+
15He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. 16For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things have been created through Him and for Him. 17He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together.

I
n the verses that you mentioned, if Jesus is mentioned apart from the one credited with creation in the passage, it could be because there were two involved with creation and the speaker in the passage is specifically speaking to the Father and not also to the Son, or is speaking to the unity as one Jehovah/God/Lord apart from the man nature. Context can help you see the difference.

Scripture doesn't contradict itself, Mike, and that is why the unity of the Father and the Son explains how in the beginning, the Word was with God and was God and yet the Creator was alone.

Quote

Because your support comes from mere men, while mine comes from God-inspired scripture.

LOL, these mere men are quoting and explaining those God-inspired scriptures. The fact that they are mere men does not make them wrong, Mike. Would you rather they be monkeys? Mere men wrote the scriptures which God inspired. Mere men were told to preach the gospel to all the nations. The question is in the understanding of those mere men and the rest of us as well…are we understanding and teaching the truth or believing and teaching a lie. Our interpretation needs to be substantiated by other witnesses and I have shown the evidence of other witnesses to my understanding. There are a bizillion other scholars to provide the same understanding as me on this but I do not find support for your view that Jesus did not create one thing.

You can keep living in your own thoughts about this Mike and stay stuck, like you have been for as long as I have known you, if that is what you wish. I read someone's words that said “greater faith brings greater understanding”

A lot of people can see what you can't Mike…so who would be the blind person here? Think about it.

Kathi

January 21, 2012 at 1:08 am#273558

mikeboll64

Blocked

Quote (Lightenup @ Jan. 20 2012,01:40)

Mike,
If it were worded “Give me the firstborn of the flock” that would mean every first offspring of every womb.

That's correct, Kathi. Which means that these firstborn are PART OF “the flock”, right?

And it DOESN'T mean that these firstborn have “the flock” as their father, right?

Quote (Lightenup @ Jan. 20 2012,01:40)

God killed the 'firstborn of all Egyptians' during the Passover and many were killed, not just one Mike.

That is another good example, Kathi. These firstborn were PART OF THE GROUP called “Egyptians”, right?

They did NOT have the “nation of Egypt” as their father, right?

Are you starting to get it now? “FLOCK” does not have to be the father of “the firstborn of the flock”, just as “CREATION” doesn't have to be the father of “the firstborn of creation”.

And similarly, the firstborn of the flock is a PART OF THE GROUP called “the flock”. Just as the firstborn of creation is PART OF THE GROUP called “creation”.

Surely you are now able to see this?

January 21, 2012 at 1:25 am#273559

mikeboll64

Blocked

Quote (Lightenup @ Jan. 20 2012,03:04)

Well, MY son was that which did not exist………….AND…………..was begotten. It is only your WISHES that prohibit you from seeing this same thing with Jesus.

But I'm glad that you got the opportunity to see that YOU are the only one who tries so hard to make a distinction between being begotten and being a creation.

Quote (Lightenup @ Jan. 20 2012,03:04)

Or it could be just like the scriptures teach us all along: The Father ALONE created all things, INCLUDING JESUS. After He created Jesus as the “FIRST OF HIS WORKS”, He chose to create all other things THROUGH His Son. Why can you not accept THIS possibility, Kathi?

Quote (Lightenup @ Jan. 20 2012,03:04)

Scripture doesn't contradict itself, Mike,

That's right. And counting Proverbs 8, I've now got SEVEN individual scriptures that list “God” as the ONE who created all things, and Jesus as someone OTHER THAN that “God” who created all things.

Speaking of which, please address these points that you missed:

But let's say “possessed” is correct – just for argument's sake. It STILL won't match up with YOUR understanding, because YOU think Jehovah ALWAYS “possessed” Jesus. In which case, possessing Jesus would have been in effect since from eternity, and could therefore NOT be called “THE FIRST OF GOD'S WORKS”.

Also notice “before His works of old”. WHOSE works is Jesus talking about, Kathi? His own?

It seems that Jesus was there when JEHOVAH set the heavens in place, and laid the foundations of the earth, right?

January 21, 2012 at 4:05 am#273591

Lightenup

Participant

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 20 2012,19:08)

Quote (Lightenup @ Jan. 20 2012,01:40)

Mike,
If it were worded “Give me the firstborn of the flock” that would mean every first offspring of every womb.

That's correct, Kathi. Which means that these firstborn are PART OF “the flock”, right?

And it DOESN'T mean that these firstborn have “the flock” as their father, right?

Quote (Lightenup @ Jan. 20 2012,01:40)

God killed the 'firstborn of all Egyptians' during the Passover and many were killed, not just one Mike.

That is another good example, Kathi. These firstborn were PART OF THE GROUP called “Egyptians”, right?

They did NOT have the “nation of Egypt” as their father, right?

And similarly, the firstborn of the flock is a PART OF THE GROUP called “the flock”. Just as the firstborn of creation is PART OF THE GROUP called “creation”.

Surely you are now able to see this?

Mike,
you said:

Quote

That's correct, Kathi. Which means that these firstborn are PART OF “the flock”, right?

And it DOESN'T mean that these firstborn have “the flock” as their father, right?

The firstborn would not be part of the flock if their parents were not also a part of the flock first. That is what you are missing, Mike. If Jesus was the firstborn of all creation, then His Father would be a member of the created group.

Jesus is the firstborn of the uncreated group…He is the image of the invisible God. He is not the image of all creation. Creation was made in His image.

Quote

That is another good example, Kathi. These firstborn were PART OF THE GROUP called “Egyptians”, right?

They did NOT have the “nation of Egypt” as their father, right?

Once again to be a firstborn of all the Egyptians, the parents of the firstborns would have to be Egyptians first. What don't you get about this? God the Father was not a member of the creatures…He and His Son created the creatures.

True or False Mike, the firstborn of a group must come as an offspring from a member of the group? Can you answer that for me please?

Jesus is the Firstborn of God, true or false, Mike? Can you answer that also, thanks.

Quote

I never said that creation would have to be the father, I said that the creatures would have to be the father…the first cow, the first giraffe, the first man, etc. they each would be his father if he were the firstborn of all creation.

If, in the beginning, Adam made a big corral and directed the firstborn of all creation into the corral, it would get quite full. The potential would be one offspring per creature type. Right, do you see?

Did you ever realize that the Greek word for firstborn is different than the Greek for first created? Those are very different terms.

Quote

Just as the firstborn of creation is PART OF THE GROUP called “creation”.

The reason a firstborn is part of a group is because of the parents being part of the group. The firstborn cannot be part of the group unless the parent/parents are first part of the group. Is Jesus' Father a creature Mike? If not then neither would His Son be.

If I can find it easily, I will show you the two different Greek terms for firstborn and first created. There is a difference in how each got to be the first. One came as an offspring, the other came as a new creation. Hint…the firstborn came as an offspring.

January 21, 2012 at 4:56 am#273605

Lightenup

Participant

Mike,
you said:

Quote

Well, MY son was that which did not exist………….AND…………..was begotten. It is only your WISHES that prohibit you from seeing this same thing with Jesus.

If your son DID always exist and you were his father, then you would have had to always exist, right? Now since we understand the Father as always existing, and you not always existing, the Father's Son could have always existed within Him, but YOUR son could not…because his father didn't. So there is a reason for your son not always existing Mike…you didn't always exist. However, that is not the case with Jesus' Father. The two sons cannot be compared because the two fathers were of completely different types.

Furthermore, not only did your son NOT always exist…he didn't even pre-exist, so why do you think the Son who did pre-exist is limited to follow the laws of the natural world that your son had to follow?

Quote

The scriptures teach us that He was WITH someone else and that means NOT solitarily alone. So, the obvious understanding is that He and the Son were alone together. Like you and your son can be alone together. Or, my son and his girlfriend can be alone together. Surely you aren't going to argue how two can't go off and be alone, are you? So, it is perfectly scriptural to say that the Father and the Son were alone when the world was created…in that way, we can also say that the Word was WITH God.

Also, Jesus is not called the 'first of His works' according to the Hebrew words. God possessed the Son before His works.

Prov 8:22″The LORD possessed me at the beginning of His way, Before His works of old.

Mike, when was the beginning of the LORD's way? Hint, the LORD always existed.

Quote

And that someone was with God, the Father and that someone was the only begotten Son of that Father and therefore of the same inherent nature of that Father which could ONLY be perfect, nothing less than perfect. He was in the form of God all along until He emptied Himself to come in the form of a bondservant. Note that Philippians does not say that He was in the form of an angel and then emptied Himself.

Phil 2:6 In God's own form existed he, and shared with God equality, deemed nothing needed grasping.

Note, I am not arguing that Jesus was alone as the creator, so no doubt that you can find passages that speak of another besides Jesus as the creator. So what? Can't you get the notion that since the Son was there too, that makes more than one? That means that both can be credited with creation. The Son does whatever work He sees the Father doing. Accept scripture and let it free you of endlessly arguing.

John 5:19
19 So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing. For whatever the Father does, that the Son does likewise.

The Father creates…the Son creates.

Worship the creator…the Father and the Son together with their Holy Spirit. THEY made man, including you.

Quote

Also notice “before His works of old”. WHOSE works is Jesus talking about, Kathi? His own?

It seems that Jesus was there when JEHOVAH set the heavens in place, and laid the foundations of the earth, right?

Like I have said, the name 'Jehovah' can be the Father, the Son or the unity of them both. Jehovah the Son was with Jehovah the Father during creation and they both worked.

Kathi

January 21, 2012 at 5:13 pm#273683

Lightenup

Participant

The biblical use of the word “firstborn” can have different meanings. The first born child in a physical family is one of its meanings. This is exemplified in Luke 2:7:

“And she gave birth to her son, the firstborn, and she bound him with cloth bands and laid him in a manger, because there was no place for them in the lodging room.”

Another meaning of the word “firstborn” is pre-eminence (This in turn means to have paramount rank, dignity, or importance). For example, notice what Psalm 89:20, 27 states:

“I have found David my servant; With my holy oil I have anointed him…Also, I myself shall place him as firstborn, The most high of the kings of the earth.”

Furthermore, “firstborn” in the scriptures can also be a title which is transferable. This is indicated by the information from two set of scriptures. The first is Genesis 41:51-52, there it states:

“So Joseph called the name of the firstborn Ma•nas´seh, because, to quote him, “God has made me forget all my trouble and all the house of my father.” And the name of the second he called E´phra•im, because, to quote him, “God has made me fruitful in the land of my wretchedness.””

In the above scripture Manasseh is the firstborn. The second is Ephraim. The firstborn title is transferred though to Ephraim as indicated in Jeremiah 31:9:

“With weeping they will come, and with [their] entreaties for favor I shall bring them. I shall make them walk to torrent valleys of water, in a right way in which they will not be caused to stumble. For I have become to Israel a Father; and as for E´phra•im, he is my firstborn.”

With all of the above in mind, we come to the scripture in Colossians 1:15-17 which speaks of Jesus as being the firstborn of all creation and about creation in general:

(New World Translation) : “He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation; because by means of him all [other] things were created in the heavens and upon the earth, the things visible and the things invisible, no matter whether they are thrones or lordships or governments or authorities. All [other] things have been created through him and for him. Also, he is before all [other] things and by means of him all [other] things were made to exist”

The above scripture with the addition of “[other]” in several places supports and leads one to conclude that firstborn in this scripture indicates first created. The logic being, Jesus was created first and then all “[other]” things were created by him as he could not have created himself.

This logic would be accurate if firstborn in the above scripture did in fact indicate first created. It does not. At the time in which Paul wrote the above scriptures, the Greek word for first created is proto with ktizo. This is not what Paul used when examining the Greek writings. Rather, Paul used the Greek word for firstborn with the indication of pre-eminence which is proto with tikto.

If Paul wanted to clearly indicate Jesus was first created he would have used the Greek word protoktizo; rather, it was not Paul’s intention to indicate such. Jesus is before all things in pre-eminence and Paul indicated that by using the Greek word prototikto.

The original writings of the scriptures did not contain the “[other]” placements as done by the Watchtower Society in their New World Translation of the Bible. Furthermore, it is not needed as Paul is speaking of pre-eminence and not of being first created. That is why other translations do not contain the “[other]” in the verses…

(New International Version) : “He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together.”

(New American Standard Bible) : “He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities–all things have been created through Him and for Him. He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together.”

(New King James Version) : “He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him. And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist.”

(Young's Literal Translation) : “who is the image of the invisible God, first-born of all creation, because in him were the all things created, those in the heavens, and those upon the earth, those visible, and those invisible, whether thrones, whether lordships, whether principalities, whether authorities; all things through him, and for him, have been created, and himself is before all, and the all things in him have consisted.”

Indeed, the Watchtower Society is adding to the scriptures to support its doctrine and teaching that Jesus was created. That is not what Colossians is stating. Jesus is the pre-eminent one of all things. The Watchtower Society should not be adjusting scripture to fit their doctrine and teaching. They should be adjusting their doctrine and teaching to fit scripture.
http://savedfromthewatchtower.blogspot.com/2009….ed.html

Here you go Mike, this should end this bit of “first created” false doctrine that you cling to in regards to Col 1:15

As you know, I believe that the Son is the only born Son of God, literally, and also supreme…so I accept the two meanings of firstborn as stated in the above article.

I hope that helps,
Kathi

January 21, 2012 at 7:08 pm#273702

terraricca

Participant

Quote (Lightenup @ Jan. 22 2012,10:13)