For those who think Christ is not God.

[Johann]

It would seem F2F "like" your reply to me, so let me ask you @RedFan, was Christ Jesus ever created?
J.

...and this debate is whether Jesus is God or not.
J.

 

[Brakelite]

A contrary position has been argued by C. K. Barrett, J. B. Bauer, F. Büchsel, R. H. Lightfoot, B. Lindars, and R. Schnackenburg. While admitting the linguistic strength of the preceding view, these scholars have argued that in the Johannine passages monogené̄s denotes Jesus’ origin in addition to His uniqueness. Jesus is not only the “only” Son of the Father: He is the “begotten” Son because He derives His being from the Father. Barrett, e.g., insisted that the Son proceeds from the Father in personal though never independent existence (p. 166). J. B. Bauer held that in John huiós designates Jesus’ origin and contains the idea of His eternal begetting by God (p. 868).

C. B. Hoch Jr., "Only Begotten" The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Revised (Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1979–1988) 606.

Bold text is true.

Agree.

 

[Waiting on him]

View attachment 22615

It wasn't just the crucifixion but every day wrestling with his own will and very few actually know how he overcame his temptations. So few Christians understand - They shout "he was a God-Man" he was "divine" he was part of a three headed god. It's man made doctrine which has deceived 100's of millions. The true Christ will appear and when he does all will be revealed.

So then, anyone like to tell us how he overcame if he was a man who had a Father in Heaven and a mum on earth? What was his secret?

It wasn’t the flesh. The power of God, walked Jesus up the hill.

 

[Waiting on him]

Christ clothed His divinity with humanity. He lived fully as a human, not once using His divine attributes to accomplish anything or to carry out His work. He lived by faith. There were a couple of occasions when His divinity shone through, like when the mob fell backwards in the garden. The plan devised between Father and Son to redeem man required precisely what you alluded to earlier...a man who could become a High Priest.

You have it backwards, God put new raiment upon him.

 

[Johann]

Altered Bible Joe, the proper word it through not by. Take the Bible as a whole. Jesus was created, the first and only creation by Jehovah exclusively since nothing else existed Rev 3:14, even your verse 15 showed he was the firstborn of every creature, but you seem to overlook that. Jesus became the master worker in the creation Pro 8:30, assisting Jehovah with everything that was created Gen 1:26. The in the beginning of Jn 1:1 was speaking about creation Joe

You want to argue semantics?

Col 1:16 Because in Him were created all things in Shomayim and on Ha'Aretz, the visible and the nistar (hidden), whether thrones or dominions, whether rulers or authorities, all things through Him and for Him have been created. [TEHILLIM 33:6]
OJB
ἐν αὐτῷ... ἐκτίσθη...
Part of Speech: Verb

Tense: Aorist< Tell me what this mean..
Voice: Passive< ...and this
Mood: Indicative
Person: third [he/she/it]
Number: Singular

a primary preposition denoting (fixed) position (in place, time or state), and (by implication) instrumentality (medially or constructively), i.e. a relation of rest (intermediate between G1519 and G1537)
You will lose this debate or have lost it already Robert.
J.

 

[Johann]

Not arguing with the preexistence of Jesus. He is/was Creator of all things... And not created Himself.

..and thus God, for only God can create something from nothing..just to see if we are on the same page.
J.

 

[Waiting on him]

And let all the angels of God worship him.” Hebrew 1:6 Christ had to be begotten before He came into the world, else it could not be said that God brought “the firstbegotten into the world."John

Oddly we read of John commanded to write epistles to Angels in revelation.

The passage continues “And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.” Hebrew 1:6 Christ had to be begotten before He came into the world, else it could not be said that God brought “the firstbegotten into the world."John the gospel writer said exactly the same. .

 

[Johann]

Point taken! I'm not going to cherry pick something out of Hebrews 11 and declare that its author meant what John's gospel (or any other writer) meant by the word monogenes, simply through the lens of how many sons Abraham actually had when he went to sacrifice Isaac. (Shame on me, I thought Isaac was Abe's only son at that point in time. I guess Johann thinks the author of Hebrews disagrees -- otherwise his point would fall flat.)

If we reject the effort to divorce monogenes from the process of generation, and translate it as only-begotten giving "begotten" its usual meaning, the issue becomes: does being "generated" necessarily entail being "created." This is the Arian controversy in a nutshell (and all of those fourth century folks spoke Greek, so their understanding of monogenes surely differed from Johann's).

Actually, you need to know the difference between yachid and echad to see how this is translated as "only begotten" in the KJV

 

[APAK]

Are you blind? It says He is coming in His glory and the gliry of the Father ..."

It's clear you are not born again, baptized in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. If the Holy Spirit does not live in you, your Bible Study 101 class is retarded, blurry and superficial or at best on th level of a Pharisee. You are like half of the virgins who didn't have oil for their lamps. Do you know what the oil is symbolic for? Better get some for your lamp, the light is out. He is coming soon in His glory, the glory He had with the Father before the foundation of the earth.
This path you are on, with its perpetual onslaught of degrading and dishonoring Christ is evil at its core.

Ron, let me remind you that the point of the last post was to focus on other scriptural sources to clarify that the Father is the only source of all 'righteous glory.' And I just pointed to only two scripture verses that show this, beside the one you originally used to 'prove' to yourself that God = Jesus etc. Which I said was incorrect, as you added into this verse your own personal spin and meaning without really understanding the words in it.

Now I see you have found yet another scripture that says something a little different, that Christ also has his own glory to I guess bring up to me that has now reinforced your same error, into thinking that Christ = God. This new verse does not change anything Ron, with the addition that Christ also has glory. His glory is still from his Father as the glory given to angels and every true believer today. It is true righteous glory!

When we do Bible study it is very common to find other scripture to support you conclusions to really clarify it as best as possible so we don't jump to hasty conclusions and cause serious err or damage to our beliefs. And that is what I believe you are doing once again with the same false conclusion.

Read the link below that is from a member of this CB forum/site that quite elegantly says what I was ready to write in this post for your benefit.

An then keep or tuck away all these pertinent scripture passages in your back pocket, those that we have discussed including those in this link, as those scriptures say, Christ has the glory of righteousness because of his Father's glory, period.

Now it will be easy in the future just to pull them out as a set of cards to show anyone this is the scripture that supports this claim.

The link by keithr...A Curious Question For Non-Trinitarians

Blessings to you with your journey to the truth as the Spirit can be your guide

 

[marks]

True, caution is needed when using types, anti-types, allegorical meanings etc. It might be possible to take them too far. Of course Galatians 4&5 is a great example and one I think few would have interpreted from Gen 16 if it wasn't for the Apostle Paul inspired work.

What if . . . types and anti-types and metaphors and such have already all been identified and explained in the Bible? What if no one has any business calling something an allegory that the Bible does not?

Yes, Hagar and Sarah, the earthly Jerusalem and heavenly Jerusalem, this is a terrific example! I expect you are correct, we would not be thinking of the story that way had not Paul explained it so.

Re your comments on John 17:5 we have a slight issue to deal with first before jumping to the common trinitarian conclusion.

If the Scripture speaks as though others per-existed, as well as Christ, what are we to make of that?

Of believers, Paul "Whom he did foreknow." (Romans 8:29) - are you to assert from this a literal reading also and say that God foreknew you therefore you per-existed?

He does this to make the riches of his glory shine even brighter on those to whom he shows mercy, who were prepared in advance for glory. Romans 9:23 & 2 Timothy 1:9

What's interesting here, is if we took a literal approach to these verses we would have the entire elect per-existing - imagine that?

Your first one there,

Whom he did foreknow, that is, whom He knew ahead of time. Proginosko. There is no pre-existance here. This speaks of advance knowledge.

And even so, whether or not you've proven a point regarding others, it does not prove a different point regarding Jesus, does it?

Take a literal approach, absolutely! But realize where some read into the text things that are not there.

Proginosko is advance knowledge, not advance relationship. If we take it literally, that's what we have, and no conflict or disharmony with trinitarian doctrine.

That's the thing with me, I find that all these seeming conflicts and "tensions" are removed by sticking with exactly what is written.

Much love!

 

[marks]

Now I know how you will justify these verse's and provide all manner of explanation all the while holding fast to your trinitarian notions of Christ, but the truth is, you and others here cherry pick verses to support you beliefs and in doing so fail to obtain a wider understanding of God's plan in Christ Jesus our Lord.

I was about to respond to the next part, when I glanced down and saw this.

Nevermind.

Much love!

 

[robert derrick]

The last 2 could actually be applied Joe. Jesus is Jehovah's right hand man so to speak, likely that is where the term came from as sitting at God's right hand is a statement of position. Jesus is in the number 2 position in heaven, subject only to Jehovah Himself. 1 Cor 11:3

This is true according to the letter of Scripture only, and not not with the Spirit who inspired and wrote all Scripture.

The Lamb is indeed sitting at the right hand of God, and He will once again obey the Father, who will send Him a second time to earth, and the Son and Word is the second position of the Godhead: the Father, The Son, the Holy Ghost.

However, by the Spirit of all Scripture, we also know that the Word was God, and the Son is the true God and Saviour.

The letter only, without the Spirit kills any understanding and knowledge of the truth.

Also, Scripture never says the Son sits at the right hand of the Father, but only of God, and so the Father also sits at the hand of God on His throne.

And all that overcome on this earth as Jesus did, will also be seated at the hand of God with the Father and the Son:

To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.

The throne of God is therefore both the Father and the Son's throne: God's throne is the Father's throne and the throne of the Son: His throne the same as the Father.

Those who read the letter of Scripture only without the Spirit, are the carnal minded who do not believe any letters written that they cannot figure out for themselves: they do not trust all Scripture to be true as written, and so will never see how all Scripture together interprets itself.

The carnal mind does not therefore believe all Scriptures as written, having not the Spirit who wrote all Scripture within their hearts.

And since the Scripture is not written in the hearts by the Spirit, but only on paper in letters, they have no problem changing, adding to, or taking away any letters of Scripture they don't like: those letters that do not conform to their own carnal minds.

 

[marks]

I am confident if I posted any and every verse which speaks to the closeness of Father to Son, and Son to Father, you would instantly assert Trinitarian doctrine, even though the text might hold deeper more profound meaning.

Then why are you bothering to post?

Much love!

 

[marks]

But regarding the fact that he (God) has raised Jesus from the dead, never again to be in a state of decay,

You've said, here, "Never again" to be in a state of decay. What did you mean? When was Jesus in a "state of decay"? What Scriptures do you learn that from?

Much love!

 

[robert derrick]

Knowing that Jesus Christ is God as well as the Father and the Spirit is easy, when Scripture is believed as written.

All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

The Word was the Maker of all things:

Thus saith the LORD, the Holy One of Israel, and his Maker...For thy Maker is thine husband; the LORD of hosts is his name; and thy Redeemer the Holy One of Israel; The God of the whole earth shall he be called.

And so the Word was the LORD Yehovah by name, the Holy One of Israel, and became the Redeemer Jesus Christ by name, which is now above every name He ever named for Himself, including Yehova, which is why His name Yehova is nowhere written in Scripture after His name Jesus is written.

The Husband of His church is Jesus Christ by name. Now if there is another Lord and Husband, then He is not the Husband of the chruch of Jesus Christ. So, is Israel after the flesh married to another Husband? If so, that would be the god of this world: jehovah so named by some today.

This all makes easy perfect since to those that read and believe all Scripture as written.

It doesn't take a theological seminary to prove it, when simple Scripture is taken simply by them that believe Scripture is the written word of the true God.

Even them that don't believe, can still read and see it plainly for themselves.

The problem with them that change and twist Scripture for their own thinking, is that they don't even treat the the Bible with as much honesty as any other book on earth: to read what it is saying and seek to understand what the author means by it.

What other book on earth has so many people reading it and end up trying to change and mangle it, to say something different than the ones who wrote it?

 

[Ronald David Bruno]

Ron, let me remind you that the point of the last post was to focus on other scriptural sources to clarify that the Father is the only source of all 'righteous glory.' And I just pointed to only two scripture verses that show this, beside the one you originally used to 'prove' to yourself that God = Jesus etc. Which I said was incorrect, as you added into this verse your own personal spin and meaning without really understanding the words in it.

Now I see you have found yet another scripture that says something a little different, that Christ also has his own glory to I guess bring up to me that has now reinforced your same error, into thinking that Christ = God. This new verse does not change anything Ron, with the addition that Christ also has glory. His glory is still from his Father as the glory given to angels and every true believer today. It is true righteous glory!

When we do Bible study it is very common to find other scripture to support you conclusions to really clarify it as best as possible so we don't jump to hasty conclusions and cause serious err or damage to our beliefs. And that is what I believe you are doing once again with the same false conclusion.

Read the link below that is from a member of this CB forum/site that quite elegantly says what I was ready to write in this post for your benefit.

An then keep or tuck away all these pertinent scripture passages in your back pocket, those that we have discussed including those in this link, as those scriptures say, Christ has the glory of righteousness because of his Father's glory, period.

Now it will be easy in the future just to pull them out as a set of cards to show anyone this is the scripture that supports this claim.

The link by keithr...A Curious Question For Non-Trinitarians

Blessings to you with your journey to the truth as the Spirit can be your guide

To APAK and to all non-Trinitarians, I am sorry that there remains no resolution in this topic, Trinitarian vs. Non-Trinitarian. You interpret scripture differently. This is crucial, your concept of Jesus and of course the Holy Spirit as well!
We are separated by this impenetrable wall built up by years, decades, centuries of lies ...and/or it is just a veil that hasn't really been removed yet. So our efforts are futile. At this point in our journey only the truth about Jesus will only be accepted when He looks at us face to face and tells us Himself. What a shameful day that will be for some ... and I would say that more likely it will be the 3% who have it wrong.

 

[marks]

By you saying Jesus didn't have the propensities to sin must by your understanding mean he cannot be tempted for its impossible to be tempted to do evil if the desire is not present.

Someone can tempt you with evil, but if you have no desire you are not tempted. Do you see the clarity of both senses of "tempt"?

God does not tempt you. That's an outside action working upon you. You are tempted, this is an internal action acting upon yourself.

YLT 1 Peter 1:6, in which ye are glad, a little now, if it be necessary, being made to sorrow in manifold trials,

peirasmos . . . translated both test and tempt.

Outside contrary circumstances tempt/test you. You are tempted/tested when you have evil desires.

If you have no evil desire, the outside contrary circumstance contains no testing or temptation. The issue with trials and tempations to sin is this.

Something happens in your life, or you think or feel something, that appears to be against you. Either some threat from outside, some inner fear, desire for something that's wrong for you, all manner of things. We are to endure such things, denying any fleshy response, until such a time when it's over.

When we successfully endure, we mature in the Spirit, renewing the inner man. When we don't endure, that ceasing to endure is the entrance into the works of the flesh. We respond in a flesh way instead of a spiritual way.

Jesus was put to the test by all the contrary circumstances any of us face, yet did not have any desire for evil things, and always trusted the Father to care for Him according to what the Father knew was best.

He wouldn't sin, just like we wouldn't eat putrid rotting meat, even though there was plenty of opportunity and instigation.

Much love!

 

[Waiting on him]

John 6:63 KJV
[63] It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

 

[Johann]

You've said, here, "Never again" to be in a state of decay. What did you mean? When was Jesus in a "state of decay"? What Scriptures do you learn that from?

Much love!

An astute observation, since it would mean that Christ was in a "state of decay"

Ron, let me remind you that the point of the last post was to focus on other scriptural sources to clarify that the Father is the only source of all 'righteous glory.' And I just pointed to only two scripture verses that show this, beside the one you originally used to 'prove' to yourself that God = Jesus etc. Which I said was incorrect, as you added into this verse your own personal spin and meaning without really understanding the words in it.

Now I see you have found yet another scripture that says something a little different, that Christ also has his own glory to I guess bring up to me that has now reinforced your same error, into thinking that Christ = God. This new verse does not change anything Ron, with the addition that Christ also has glory. His glory is still from his Father as the glory given to angels and every true believer today. It is true righteous glory!

When we do Bible study it is very common to find other scripture to support you conclusions to really clarify it as best as possible so we don't jump to hasty conclusions and cause serious err or damage to our beliefs. And that is what I believe you are doing once again with the same false conclusion.

Read the link below that is from a member of this CB forum/site that quite elegantly says what I was ready to write in this post for your benefit.

An then keep or tuck away all these pertinent scripture passages in your back pocket, those that we have discussed including those in this link, as those scriptures say, Christ has the glory of righteousness because of his Father's glory, period.

Now it will be easy in the future just to pull them out as a set of cards to show anyone this is the scripture that supports this claim.

The link by keithr...A Curious Question For Non-Trinitarians

Blessings to you with your journey to the truth as the Spirit can be your guide

Yup, I stand in agreement with Ron, in your desperate attempt to discard the Triune God you must alter the gospel, the good news and it would seem that you are deifying yourself above Christ Jesus who was in a "state of decay"...that was a bad choice of wording.
I don't think I'm going to be much longer on this forum reading Christology from various heteros viewpoints.
Seems like we have all kinds of "religions" grouped together in one lump and call it Christian Forum.
You from 101?
I visited that site and thought there was something off.
Guess that's me rambling, getting late here.
J.

 

[Johann]

Agree.

Disagree
J.