Search Members

[Rudy]

Quote (malcolm ferris @ May 23 2006,03:17)

Rudy That's good, what I object to is the rationale that God is in His Church. There are many groups that claim this, and therefore claim to speak for God in matters of interpreting His Word. But the test is always His Word, not men's say so, or majority agreement. God is in His Church as long as His Church stays in His Word. The truth is in Jesus, and we are in the truth so long as we stay by his spirit in the word of truth. Many claim to be in Jesus and to have the life of God in them by faith. The proof is not found in which group that agrees is the biggest. The proof is in whether the one claiming to be born of God is true to the word. God is in His Word. (John 1:1-2)

Excellent Malcom,

That is the point of the Council of Nicea, they were doing the very thing you elaborated.  The “Catholic Church” is the body of Christ, and “catholic” means “universal”, that is to say the body of Christ is NOT contained within the walls of a building, but rather the clay vessels we are contain and house the Spirit (singular) of God; the Father, the Son our Lord Jesus, and the Holy Spirit.  We are “God Bearers”, as Ignatius says in his dialogue with Trajan http://www.myfortress.org/pliny.html, if we have the Spirit of Christ.  (1 John 1:3, Rom 8:9-11)

Col 1:25
Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God;  [Even] the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints:  To whom God would make known what [is] the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory:

Jer 31:33-34
But this [shall be] the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD (YHWH), I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.  And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD (YHWH): for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

2Cor 6:16
And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in [them]; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

Ezek 37:26-27
Moreover I will make a covenant of peace with them; it shall be an everlasting covenant with them: and I will place them, and multiply them, and will set my sanctuary in the midst of them for evermore.  My tabernacle also shall be with them: yea, I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

Everything that exists was made by the Pre-incarnate Logos, Christ the LORD, who alone is ONE with the Father and posesses incommunicable attributes together with the Father and Holy Spirit. (John 1:3, Col 1:16-17)

Jn 20:28-31
And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.  Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed [are] they that have not seen, and [yet] have believed.  And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book:  But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.

Joel 2:32
And it shall come to pass, [that] whosoever shall call on the name of the LORD (YHWH) shall be delivered: for in mount Zion and in Jerusalem shall be deliverance, as the LORD (YHWH) hath said, and in the remnant whom the LORD (YHWH) shall call.

Acts 4:12
Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.

Acts 22:16
And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord (Jesus).

Phil 2:10-11
That at the name of Jesus (Yeshua, Y'shua, Yahshua: Yah = YHWH, shua = savior/saves) every knee should bow, of [things] in heaven, and [things] in earth, and [things] under the earth; And [that] every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ [is] Lord (Kurios = Gr. for YHWH/LORD), to the glory of God the Father.

Isa 45:22-23
Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I [am] God, and [there is] none else.  I have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of my mouth [in] righteousness, and shall not return, That unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear.

The Aramaic New Testament which traces it's roots to before the fourth century translate Lord in Phil 2:11 from MarYah, which is Mar = Lord, and Yah = short form of YHWH which again coincides perfectly with Is 45:23

Nick,

Your arguments will ALWAYS fall short, because you forget, Christ is now, post-resurrection, omnipresent.  No angel, cherub, seraphim, or man or any being below God (that is to say, created) can posses that attribute. No created being inhabited eternity past.  That is reserved for God alone.

Blessings,

Rudy

[Rudy]

Quote (malcolm ferris @ May 23 2006,02:25)

Rudy Not implying the minority are right – just pointing out that the majority is not the way God does things. So to state that something has a certain authority based on human majority, although it seems reasonable, is not.

The point is that the “majority” of those following the leadership of the Holy Spirit will be awakened to the deception that is being brought forth and promoted.  The majority recognized the Arian teaching as “NEW”.

History shows that the majority agreed that the “Rule of Faith” handed down from the Apostolic Fathers (the Apostles) was that Christ is categorically God, equal in substance being brought forth of and “one” with God's very own substance, begotten, not made or created – everlasting having the characteristics that belong to God alone.  (Micah 5:2)

That is to say, the incommunicable attributes that make God God, and that without those attributes God is categorically NOT God.

One of which is omnipresence.  No other being has omnipresence but God – and Christ IS omnipresent.

While on earth he divested Himself of His rights as God (John 1:1;  Phil 2) and took on a body being made in the likeness of man and subjected Himself as a servant, becoming obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

So God the Father has exalted Him to the Position of Glory which He held prior to the incarnation – All power is now Christs once again as it was before He laid His glory down to come and live our life, our substitute, and die in our place, the last Adam, the Lord (Kurios=YHWH) from heaven.

Jn 17:3-5
And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.  I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.  And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.

Jn 17:3-20
And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.  I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.  And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.  And when they saw him, they worshipped him: but some doubted.  And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.  Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:  Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, [even] unto the end of the world. Amen.

Mt 18:20
For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.

Rom 8:9-11
But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.   And if Christ [be] in you, the body [is] dead because of sin; but the Spirit [is] life because of righteousness.  But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.

1Cor 12:13
For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether [we be] Jews or Gentiles, whether [we be] bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

Jn 10:27-33
My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:  And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any [man] pluck them out of my hand.  My Father, which gave [them] me, is greater than all; and no [man] is able to pluck [them] out of my Father's hand.  I and [my] Father are one.  Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.  Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?  The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.

The audience before Christ understood every word, and this is the word passed down through the Apostles.

Blessings,

Rudy

[Rudy]

Quote (malcolm ferris @ May 22 2006,22:08)

Quote One should remember that these points were already debated at the Council of Nicea where the overwhelming majority of Bishops agreed with and adopted the Nicean Creed to establish the orthodox interpretation of Christ as defined in scripture. Since when has bineg in the majority indicated correctness? It was a majority that councilled Kings of Israel and Judah to go to war against the Syrians. Only one man, a minority, stayed with the word of God, a minority. (1 Kings 22) It was a majority that spoke out against Jesus, in his lifetime, spurred on by the majority decision of the religious leaders of the day. (Mt 27:20) In the psalms is says the rulers take council together against the Lord and agains His Christ. (Psalm 2:2) Very accurate given the events of history.

So, are you implying that the minority are always right? According to this logic we should accept any minority that brings in a heretical doctrine?

[Rudy]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 22 2006,22:03)

Hi jbl and welcome, True It also fails the test for “antichrist” doctrine found in 1Jn 4.2 as they say; God came in flesh. ” By this you know the Spirit of God; every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God..” It also fails because it denies Jesus is the Son of God and makes that term a phony title only. 1Jn 2.23 ” Whoever denies the Son does not have the Father..”

Really?!  The test of the Anti-Christ was the denial that Christ came in the Flesh-

1Jn 4:3
And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that [spirit] of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

1Tim 3:16
And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

—————-

The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the YHWH, make straight in the desert a highway for our God. – Isaiah 40:3

For this is he that was spoken of by the prophet Esaias, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord (Kurios, Gk.), make his paths straight. …

I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier that I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire: …

Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to Jordan unto John, to be baptized of him.

– Matthew 3:3, 11 & 13

[Rudy]

Nick,

The link below summarizes the scriptural details surrounding the Identity of the Son of God.  I quote only the summation from the end, the rest is already well documented and going over it again and again will not change anything.  You understand our arguments and we understand yours.

Quote

The final and most meaningful evidence of Jesus’ divine consciousness in this discourse is the emphasis throughout the discourse on the complete and exact parallelism between what the Father does and what the Son does (e.g., vv. 17, l9b, 21, 26). The equality between the Father and the Son is stressed in these verses, because the emphasis is that exactly what the Father does the Son does also in precisely the same way. The heart of the entire discourse and the purpose of God in all that he commits to the Son is expressed in the words, “That all men should honour the Son even as they honour the Father” (v. 23). For added emphasis Jesus then stated the same truth negatively, “He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him.” As Bauman summarizes the evidence, “It must be maintained just as strongly, however, that Jesus knew himself to be the Son of God, partaking fully of the divine nature. . . . This unique filial consciousness contributed a divine dimension to every word and act of his life. The author of John built his Gospel on this conviction, but it is just as obvious in the Synoptics, where Jesus is the Son of God.” The Synoptic Gospels are the ones which record the trial of Jesus before the council of the Jews where the high priest places him under oath to say whether or not he is “the Christ, the Son of God” (Matt. 26:63). Mark says, “the Christ, the Son of the Blessed” (Mark 14:61), and Luke makes two questions with Jesus answering the one, “Art thou then the Son of God?” (Luke 22:70). In all three Gospels Jesus in effect (the wording varies slightly) acknowledges under oath this identity. To his admission Matthew and Mark add the statement: “Henceforth ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven” (Matt. 26:64; Mark 14:62). Instead of accepting Jesus’ statement under oath as the truth and acknowledging him as “the Christ, the Son of God,” the high priest and the council condemn him as guilty of blasphemy by his own words and worthy of death. Their accusation of Jesus before Pilate was sedition and treason (e.g., Luke 23:2), but John records their acknowledgment of Jesus’ divine consciousness and claim when the Jews explained to Pilate, “We have a law and by our law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God” (John 19:7). Many modern churchmen are like the Jewish leaders; in spite of the evidence they refuse to accept it. The incongruity and logical inconsistency of modern theology on this point is recognized by many. Harrison points this out when he writes, “Those who exalt Jesus as the great teacher do not always realize the awkwardness of their position when they go on to refuse to him the rank of deity. It it logical to accept his teaching on God, on man, on the ethical life, and then refuse to accept his teaching about himself?” The logical alternatives to the biblical evidence of  Jesus’ divine consciousness and claims are (1) he was indeed the Son of God incarnate; (2) he was a liar and a deceiver; (3) he was insane, suffering from illusions of grandeur. If either of the latter two alternatives is accepted, then Jesus’ teaching should no more be extolled and believed than his claims. Harrison writes, “Is it psychologically possible for a person to project such claims, which lie so far outside the realm of human attainment, and be otherwise completely normal; and could the record of these claims as they stand in the Gospels have created such profound reception and faith as it has created, apart from having solid truth behind them” Hiram Elfenbein carries the logic a step farther. As a Jew he does not accept the New Testament records concerning Jesus of Nazareth. But he does recognize the centrality of the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ to those records and to the Christian faith. He writes, “But ‘Christianity-without-Christ’ is as sensible as a rice pudding without rice. It just can’t be.” He insists that modern churchmen who agree with him in the denial of the deity of Jesus are at best playing a great game of make-believe by continuing to call themselves Christians and to remain in the Christian church. He asks, “If Jesus is eliminated from the credo as a God Who once lived in Human Form, how can the church’s buildings, personnel and ‘services’ be justified? How can individuals honestly and intellectually continue to patronize and to belong to that establishment of brick and mortar and ritual and clerics minus the nominal God around Which they worship?” He summarizes as follows, “Obviously, if you delete from the New Testament, the one all-important detail of Jesus’ divinity, we see the collapse of the whole story of his prophesied birth and death, his miracles, and his long mistaken and misunderstood expressions, which together in an inseparable union form the foundation of Christianity.” “What think ye of Christ?”

More info available here:

Orthodox Christology

Blessings,

Rudy

[Rudy]

We?  Nick, Please be more specific in your answers.

Not ALL here believe alike.  Nick and others hold an unorthodox interpretation of the scriptures definition of Christ and deny that Christ being the One and ONLY (unique) Son of God places Him as categorically God and equal to the Father in substance as defined by Paul in Phillipians Chapter 2.

But, these points have been debated here exhaustively.  One should remember that these points were already debated at the Council of Nicea where the overwhelming majority of Bishops agreed with and adopted the Nicean Creed to establish the orthodox interpretation of Christ as defined in scripture.  

http://www.the-highway.com/c_christology.html

Quote

There were some three hundred bishops gathered at the Council of Nicea from all around the world. Eusebius lists many of them and their country of origin in his writings. It should be remembered that many of those present had, because of the recent persecutions, suffered and had faced threat of death for their faith. These were not wishy-washy men. It might also be remarked, that they were extremely sensitive to details of doctrine. As evidence of this, the second major concern of the Council of Nicea was to address the hotly debated question of what the proper day was to celebrate the resurrection. The bishops of the Council stopped their ears on hearing the words of Arius and immediately rejected his teaching as distant and alien from the belief of the Church. They tore to pieces a letter of Eusebius of Nicomedia containing Arius' teaching, as well as an Arian confession of faith (see the appendix on the Council of Nicea in Baker Book House's, “Eusebius' Ecclesiastical History”). Originally seventeen of those bishops gathered at the council were unwilling to sign the Creed penned by the Council, and all but three of these were convinced to sign by the end. It is thus apparent that the Arians were a distinct minority among the bishops. Initially there was some resistance to the Nicene Creed, not because of what it said but because of how it said it. Many objected to the use of the word “homoousias” in an official document because it was not used in Scripture, despite their agreement with the meaning it conveyed. The Council interrogated Arius using Scripture, only to find that he had a new way of interpreting every verse they brought before him. Finally, they used the argument that Arius' view had to be wrong because it was new. Athanasius says, “But concerning matters of faith, they [the bishops assembled at Nicea] did not write: 'It has been decided,' but 'Thus the Catholic Church believes.' And thereupon confessed how they believed. This they did to show that their judgement was not of more recent origin, but was in fact of Apostolic times…” (Volume 1, Faith of the Early Fathers, p338). In this regard also, Athanasius askes rhetorically, “… how many fathers [in other words, the writings of the early Christians] can you cite for your phrases?” (Ibid, p325) The Church was willing to accept the help of an emperor, to listen to what he had to say, but not to accept the rule of an emperor in matters of faith. However one describes the role of Constantine at the Council of Nicea, it must be remembered that the Creed of Nicea expressed what the great majority of bishops at the council found to be traditional, Biblical, and orthodox of the Christian faith, a faith in which they believed so firmly that they were willing to die for it. http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/arch/sbrandt/nicea.htm

Of Course, to argue past this point Nick, T8 and others will say that these men at the Council of Nicea were all heretics.  That is absolutely false.  In point of fact, the first heresy after the ascension of Christ was one which denied His human nature promoting His Deity only, that is Gnosticism.  Gnosticism promoted a view that the physical realm was inherently evil so therefore Christ could not have truly come in any real physical sense.

Consequently the Apostle's Creed was developed which overthrew the Gnostic idea which denied the bodily incarnation of Christ.

http://www.ccel.org/s/schaff/history/About.htm

Blessings,

Rudy

[Rudy]

All power is All power, so then Christ if not God, who is over us?

That would mean God is NOT in control, Jesus is. Because ALL POWER is HIS (Jesus) 'till His enemies are His footstool, so apparently God the Father has no power right now and as the song says, “God is in control…” is incorrect and others who deny the deity of Christ there is NO God over us at this moment.

[Rudy]

Quote (Is 1:18 @ Oct. 30 2005,04:00)

The Holy Spirit is not an 'active force', that is a poor conclusion to draw from the Biblical data. click click

Hi, Is 1:18

Nice links.

Thank You!

[Rudy]

Cubes/Nick,

Who said “let there be light”?

If Christ created all things by the will of the Father and Christs' words accomplish His will and the Fathers' will, Christ “doing” the will of the Father,

Who said “let there be light”?

[Rudy]

Nick,

What then was Christs' role in creation since in fact all things that exist (Yahweh excluded) were created by Him and for Him and that by Him all things are upheld?

Specifically, what did He do?

[Rudy]

Ok,

sorry for the short answers, I'm still at work and do not have unlimited time to discuss, I'm doing what I can.

Rudy

[Rudy]

So you do NOT believe Him to be a created being?

[Rudy]

Nick,

How do you explain this pre-incarnate birth?

[Rudy]

Cubes,

What you say makes sense to a degree.  However, I do not believe that the Most High God ever was or ever will be MUTE!  So by that token God is in Christ and Christ in God!  The two are one and inseperable.  So the Word cannot act aside from Yahweh and ALL of Yahwehs' Creation is by the Word.  So to try and seperate them is again ludicrous.  They are the same.

So by the same token we are not the definers of the nature of God.  I believe that the entire discourse of Proverbs 8 possibly refers to the entire plan of creation itself or one of the seven spirits of God.  For without a vision the people perish, it seems more likely to me that that is what the wisdom is, the entire plan, seeing the end of a thing from its' beginning.

Isaiah 11:2 – And the spirit of the LORD shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the LORD…

Rev 4:5 And out of the throne proceeded lightnings and thunderings and voices: and there were seven lamps of fire burning before the throne, which are the seven Spirits of God.

Rev 5:6 And I beheld, and, lo, in the midst of the throne and of the four beasts, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth.

Just so we all agree, I trust noone in this forum is trying to say that The Son of God was one of the “sons of God” referred to in Genesis and Job, for those are clearly angels, and I would hope that noone here honestly believes that Christ was an angel.

——————
edit Re. Proverbs 8:

After further meditation it can be none other than the spirit of wisdom, for it may be imparted to anyone who asks,

1 Corinthians 12:8 – For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit;

Luke 7:35 – But wisdom is justified of all her children.

[Rudy]

I'm here and willing to listen.

[Rudy]

Nick,

Who do you say that Christ is? In detail from the beginning please.

[Rudy]

I have only spoken according to the scripture, I have not changed their meaning, I ask you to believe what they say and NOT read more in than is ther. for instance:

The Word became Flesh! It does NOT say anywhere that Yeshua was spiritually begotten. It says rather that in the beginning, (Genesis 1:1) God (Yahweh) created heaven and earth.

It is prophesied in the Psalms that a “body” was prepared for Him to become a son!

To contemplate that there were “negotiations” prior to creation is ridiculous.

[Rudy]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ April 26 2005,23:54)

Hi Rudy, So God becomes a father but does not really have a Son as they are the same in substance but have different names?

He is “begotten” according to the Flesh. Prior to that He is The Word of God that is God and with God, they are Yahweh!

That is the entire miracle of God's redemption. That The Word (pre-incarnate Yeshua) was willing to leave glory to come and save His own creation!

But His own rejected Him, at least most seem to, I don't know the number, I'm just a servant/brother to the Lord according to the spirit of adoption which is by faith and obedience.

He bacame obedient as a Son and lives evermore as the “Firstborn” of many brethren. It took the Holy incarnate blood of Christ to free man from the wages of sin. Presented in the heavenly tabernacle it cleanses “all who will believe” when coming to Him in simple faith and obedience!

That is why He says there is no greater Love that a man lay down his life, but Christ did it for His own creation!

That's is why I will serve Him and Love Him all the days of my life, He has become our salvation!

I will declare Him to the ends of the age!

[Rudy]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ April 26 2005,23:38)

Hi Rudy, The word says that Yeshua was conceived of the Holy Ghost. But are you saying that is not true but he was conceived in Mary of himself? It sounds strange.

The Holy Ghost overshadowed Mary, Yeshua was conceived at that point (according to the flesh), at birth God in heaven becomes a Father, not just Creator with the Word of God.

The Word “became Flesh” and God in heaven “became a Father.

Yeshua, “Yahweh's Salvation”, The reedeemer Yahweh of Hosts became flesh and dwelt among us, was raised and sent by His Father to redeem us.

God (The Word incarnate and the Father in heaven, they are one but not one and the same) redeems man back to Himself.  Yeshua rises from the grave and is evermore our High Priest, brother (according to the spirit of adoption), Good Shehpard, owner of the sheep and the pasture.

He is Our Salvation!

[Rudy]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ April 26 2005,23:16)

Hi Rudy, So “Son of God ” is only another title for the Father of the Son of God? That seems funny because Ephesians 3.15 says every family in heaven and earth derives it's name from the Father. So there is no family relationship between the Father and the Son and every family on earth and and in heaven is then a nonsense. Is that what you see in scripture?

Son of God is who Yeshua is since His incarnation. He is the Only “Begotten” of the Father, and so shall ever be, but His name is still “Word of God”:

Rev. 19:12 His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself. 13 And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God. 14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean. 15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God. 16 And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.

[Author]

Posts