Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,819 Year: 3,076/9,624 Month: 921/1,588 Week: 104/223 Day: 2/13 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   How Can Trinity Believers Explain This
Legend
Member (Idle past 5006 days)
Posts: 1226
From: Wales, UK
Joined: 05-07-2004


Message 211 of 300 (164291)
12-01-2004 7:28 AM
Reply to: Message 190 by wmscott
11-19-2004 7:05 PM


Re: Jesus and Jehovah are both mighty gods, but only Jehovah is Almighty
wmscott writes:
Jesus while on earth was a perfect sinless man, just as Adam was before he sinned. Adam was without sin or defect when he was created. "God proceeded to create the man . . . God saw everything he had made and, look! [it was] very good." Genesis 1:27-31 Adam became sinful once he sinned. Adam's creation would not be described by God as being very good if he was sinful or imperfect when he was created. The world of mankind was without sin until Adam sinned, it was this sin that condemned him and all his off spring to death. To make up for what Adam lost, another perfect man would need to offer his life as a sacrifice, none of mankind could do this since we were all born in sin and fall short of perfection.
Agreed. I used this argument not realising that you believed Jesus to be divine. Now that I see that you do, this point is moot.
wmscott writes:
If Jesus had been a "god-man" the value of his life would not have matched what Adam lost, he had to be a perfect man, nothing more, nothing less.
Quick note on this. Jesus was a perfect man. He was also God incarnate. Jesus had two natures, one human and one divine. By sacrificing his human self, he matched what Adam lost. He was not a "god-man", he was "god and man".
wmscott writes:
Peter wasn't saying that Jesus knew everything in an absolute sense, he was saying it a relative sense. Peter was aware of Jesus' ability to know things through the spirit, the way he could read what was in a person's mind and heart, that is what he was referring to,
Neither of us knows the nuances of Peter's speech, or what he was thinking at the time. I take the text at face value, Jesus "knew all things".

"In life, you have to face that some days you'll be the pigeon and some days you'll be the statue."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 190 by wmscott, posted 11-19-2004 7:05 PM wmscott has not replied

Legend
Member (Idle past 5006 days)
Posts: 1226
From: Wales, UK
Joined: 05-07-2004


Message 212 of 300 (164292)
12-01-2004 7:43 AM
Reply to: Message 191 by wmscott
11-19-2004 7:05 PM


Jesus forgiving sins
quote:
Note that the Father has given Jesus authority "over all flesh". This is referring to the physical manifestation of God among sinners, i.e. Jesus, the man. And it's Jesus, the man, who is praying to the Father (just like in Luke 23:34) . The focal point here, is that Jesus has the power to give eternal life. He also has the power to forgive sins (Mark 2:5-7; Eph. 1:7), judge the world (John 5:22, 27), and control nature (Matt. 8:26). Since only God can do these things, what is the logical conclusion here ?
wmscott writes:
You skipped a logic groove here, he stated that it was his Father who had given these things to him. You are making the same error that scribes made believing that only God can forgive sins, notice what Jesus said to them. "Now there were some of the scribes there, sitting and reasoning in their hearts: "Why is this man talking in this manner? He is blaspheming. Who can forgive sins except one, God?" But Jesus, having discerned immediately by his spirit that they were reasoning that way in themselves, said to them: "Why are YOU reasoning these things in YOUR hearts? Which is easier, to say to the paralytic, 'Your sins are forgiven,' or to say, 'Get up and pick up your cot and walk'? But in order for YOU men to know that the Son of man has authority to forgive sins upon the earth,"he said to the paralytic: "I say to you, Get up, pick up your cot, and go to your home." At that he did get up, and immediately picked up his cot and walked out in front of them all," Mark 2:6-12 Jesus corrected them by demonstrating that God had given him authority to forgive sins, he didn't agree with them and say "yes only god can forgive sins" and then prove himself as being God.
The scribes were perfectly right in believing that only God can forgive sins.
Their error was not in their reasoning, nor in their desire to examine this new teacher, but in their refusal to see who Jesus was (much like you do). So, Jesus demonstrates that he has the power and authority of God, to forgive sins.
wmscott writes:
[Jesus] he didn't agree with them and say "yes only god can forgive sins" and then prove himself as being God.
That's exactly what he does, only not using those words. He calls himself Son of Man, which is a Messianic title (Daniel 7:13-14). He never admonishes the scribes for believing that only God can forgive sins and he never refutes the statement. Instead he says he has the authority and cures the paralytic. To sum it up: he reads the scribes' minds, he -indirectly- accepts that only God forgives sins and then he forgives and cures the paralytic. If that's not a demonstration of him being God, I don't know what is!
wmscott writes:
Also with the judging, the authority is given him by God. Only God can control nature? Read about the OT prophets, they controlled nature on many occasions, and none of them were God.
Like I explain in Message 209 delegation of authority doesn't necessary imply physical empowerment. Even if it did, Philippians 2:7, suggests that Jesus emptied himself of powers to become a man. So, either way, "the authority is given him by God" doesn't mean that he is lower than God.
The OT prophets were performing 'miracles' as a direct instrument of God. Jesus has the power and authority to do miracles at will ( John 5:21 - "quickeneth whom he will" ). You can't even compare the two.

"In life, you have to face that some days you'll be the pigeon and some days you'll be the statue."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 191 by wmscott, posted 11-19-2004 7:05 PM wmscott has not replied

wmscott
Member (Idle past 6248 days)
Posts: 580
From: Sussex, WI USA
Joined: 12-19-2001


Message 213 of 300 (164381)
12-01-2004 1:46 PM
Reply to: Message 205 by Phat
11-25-2004 3:21 AM


A smoke and mirrors trick
Dear Phatboy;
I see you can search and cut and paste, but do you even understand what this little storm in a tea kettle you posted is all about? First you are off topic, your post has very little to do with the Trinity. Second it is attacking a change in the way the Watchtower (published by Jehovah's Witnesses) applied John 2:19. It seems that they had a wrong understanding of this verse in 1952 and had corrected that viewpoint by 1969. Ancient history, between 52 years ago and 33 years ago, they changed their view that the body Jesus spoke of at John 2:19 was not the spiritual body of the congregation, but Christ's physical body.
What was interesting is your source quoted from all these articles in the Watchtower, but did not quote or try to refute the scriptures used to support the position that Jesus did not raise himself. Why did he skip the scriptures? After all, it is the scriptures that matter, everything else is just so much hot air. Let's take a look.
(Romans 8:11) . . .If, now, the spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwells in YOU, he that raised up Christ Jesus from the dead . . .
(Acts 2:24) But God resurrected him
(Acts 10:40) . . .God raised this One up on the third day . . .
(1 Corinthians 6:14) But God both raised up the Lord and will raise us up out of [death] through his power.
(1 Corinthians 15:15) . . .God that he raised up the Christ, . . .
(Ephesians 1:17-20) . . .that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, . . . It is according to the operation of the mightiness of his strength, with which he has operated in the case of the Christ when he raised him up from the dead . . .
(Hebrews 13:20-21) . . .Now may the God of peace, who brought up from the dead the great shepherd of the sheep with the blood of an everlasting covenant, our Lord Jesus, . . .
Now you see why your source didn't quote the scriptures, the Bible clearly teaches that Jehovah God was the one who raised Jesus Christ from the dead. Jesus did not personally resurrect himself. All that stuff about quoting from articles with different views, was a smoke and mirrors trick to distract you from the fact that Jehovah's Witnesses are biblically correct on their teaching that Jesus didn't resurrect himself. As for their claim that Jesus stating he was going to resurrect himself, at John 2:19 look at the actual wording.
John 2:19-22 ""Break down this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." . . . When, though, he was raised up from the dead, his disciples called to mind that he used to say this; and they believed the Scripture and the saying that Jesus said."
Look at the last part, "When, though he was raised up from the dead" he was raised, an action done by someone else, not an action by Jesus himself. So even the writer of John 2:19 didn't believe that Jesus raised himself, (John also wrote Acts, see the verses above) in fact he believed in the many prophecies that stated that Jehovah would resurrect the Messiah. There no prophecies predicting the messiah would raise himself. The Trinitarians are misunderstanding Jesus' words, when he said "I will raise it up," he was referring to what his Father would do for him. Many times in the Bible Jehovah is credited with having done something, but the actual action was preformed by one of God's servants acting in his name. In the same way, Jehovah and Jesus work in close unity for a common purpose and Jesus was referring to this common purpose in work when He said 'I' when the actual resurrection would be done for him by his Father in his behalf.
Sincerely yours; Wm Scott Anderson

This message is a reply to:
 Message 205 by Phat, posted 11-25-2004 3:21 AM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 214 by Phat, posted 12-01-2004 4:50 PM wmscott has replied

Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 214 of 300 (164430)
12-01-2004 4:50 PM
Reply to: Message 213 by wmscott
12-01-2004 1:46 PM


Re: A smoke and mirrors trick
Wm Scott, I don't have a problem with Jehovah raising Jesus. I have a problem with the attribution of Jesus as a "first created" being by Jerhovah. Just because Jesus was with Jehovah in the Beginning, why is it so hard to imagine One source(Creator) with two (three?) natures? You quote scriptures that refute the Trinity according to an admittedly progressive organizations attempts at explanation. Many other scholars disagree with the Watchtower. Why are they not to be taken seriously? Example#1: Biblehelp.org
I may not have a scholastic logic that explains the scriptures, but I know what I feel to be true and real. Watchtower logic is too intellectual and too backed up by sources that are only within JW theology. It is inconceivable that one organization has such a monopoly on the "truth". You are very nice people, however. Some of my friends are Witnesses, but we have long since learned not to debate religion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 213 by wmscott, posted 12-01-2004 1:46 PM wmscott has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 215 by wmscott, posted 12-05-2004 4:10 PM Phat has not replied

wmscott
Member (Idle past 6248 days)
Posts: 580
From: Sussex, WI USA
Joined: 12-19-2001


Message 215 of 300 (165422)
12-05-2004 4:10 PM
Reply to: Message 214 by Phat
12-01-2004 4:50 PM


Re: A smoke and mirrors trick
Dear Phatboy;
quote:
. I have a problem with the attribution of Jesus as a "first created" being by Jerhovah. Just because Jesus was with Jehovah in the Beginning,
The belief that Jesus has a beginning and was created by Jehovah is based on scripture. We are told that he is the firstborn of creation, that he was created first.
Colossians 1:15 "He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation;"
This thought is repeated at Revelation 3:14.
Revelation 3:14 "the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation by God,"
And is explained in more detail at Proverbs 8:22-23 "Jehovah himself produced me as the beginning of his way, the earliest of his achievements of long ago. From time indefinite I was installed, from the start, from times earlier than the earth."
Consider the most famous and one of the most important verses in the Bible.
John 3:16 "For God loved the world so much that he gave his only-begotten Son,"
Notice the term "only-begotten Son", to be begotten as a son, you have to be born or be created. If you always existed you can't be any body's son or be begotten. The very term 'son' requires that Jesus had a beginning when he was "fathered" or created, otherwise he could not be God's son. The relationship requires that Jesus was created by God, which is why they are Father and son.
quote:
Many other scholars disagree with the Watchtower. Why are they not to be taken seriously?
Only the Bible is inspired. There are also many scholars who agree with non trinitarianism, so in the end you have to examine the scriptures and decide for yourself. That is why Jehovah's Witnesses offer free home Bible studies to everyone, so that everyone can learn what the Bible said and make their own informed decision.
quote:
I may not have a scholastic logic that explains the scriptures, but I know what I feel to be true and real. Watchtower logic is too intellectual and too backed up by sources that are only within JW theology. It is inconceivable that one organization has such a monopoly on the "truth".
The lack of "a scholastic logic that explains the scriptures" can be corrected by studying the Bible and finding the answers to your questions for yourself. But it most unwise to trust in a 'feeling' instead of doing the biblical research and finding the answers, it would be like navigating a plane in the dark by a 'feeling', just as that would be sure to end in disaster so will blindly trusting a 'feeling' in deciding religious truth.
If a doctrine is truly supported by scripture, it will be logical and well supported by what the Bible says on the matter, in contrast with things that are not which are said to be 'mysteries' or 'beyond our human comprehension'. Logic and supporting evidence is what differentiates fact from fiction. As for sources being only accepted with Jehovah's Witnesses, they base everything on the Bible which still finds wide acceptance among Christians the world over. As for having a monopoly on truth. What did Jesus have? And what did his followers have? Jesus prayed that his followers would be one in unity or one group, so it is to be expected that there would be a monopoly on truth. For if there somehow happened to be two groups who did both have the truth, wouldn't their common cause and respect for Jesus' wishes for unity, cause them to become one?
You are wise not to debate with your Witness friends, but what you should do is study with them and learn what they know, then you will know what both sides of the debate knows and will be in a better position to make a discission on the matter.
Sincerely Yours; Wm Scott Anderson

This message is a reply to:
 Message 214 by Phat, posted 12-01-2004 4:50 PM Phat has not replied

wmscott
Member (Idle past 6248 days)
Posts: 580
From: Sussex, WI USA
Joined: 12-19-2001


Message 216 of 300 (165428)
12-05-2004 4:19 PM
Reply to: Message 209 by Legend
11-26-2004 5:37 PM


Re: Jesus is YHWH
Dear Legend;
Before I start, I would like to say that the quality of your posts is excellent. Generally I find that Trinitarians just mindlessly repeat what they have been told, but your posts show original thinking, which is something most Trinitarians don't do. In replying I will attempt to encourage you to think outside of the Trinitarian box. The hardest puzzles to solve are the ones when our starting premiss is wrong, it is only when we discover that, that we can see the solution.
quote:
(John 5:19 -"He is fully submitted to the Father's will - by choice," he is a separate being since he can made a choice, only independent beings can do so.)- This is reasoning that is drawn on and can be applied only to humans. But God is not human, so you cannot apply this on this occasion. The Trinity consists of three separate 'persons' (please note the quotes), each with their own will, but who are One in essence and purpose. If there are two separate beings (Father and Son), each with their own will and essence, there is nothing stopping one from leaving / disagreeing / contradicting the other, other than subjugation, as in a Master / Servant relationship. In a Trinity, this can never happen, as the two have their own will but are one essence and their purpose is one, not by coercion (as it would be if they were two separate beings), but by love and that is emphasised in v20: "For the Father loves the Son".
(Genesis 1:26 "And God went on to say: "Let us make man in our image, according to our likeness," The Bible tells us that we are like God, so there are similarities in the way our minds work to his. He is far greater of course, but because we are made in his image, his way of thinking is not alien to us or totally incomprehensible to us. While we can not grasp the full extent of Jehovah, we can relate to him or come to know him.
You are correct on separate beings, that love is why the son loyally serves his Father. That is why the Devil tested Jesus' loyalty, he thought that he could break the bond of love between the Father and the son. The Devil testing the loyalty of part of a Trinity to itself, would be stupid and pointless since there wouldn't be anything to even test, the Devil is wicked but he certainly isn't stupid. Jesus set an example for us in submission and obedience to his Father, but it would only be an example if he was an independent being. If he had no freewill or choice, he wouldn't have set an example at all, since then it wouldn't have been a matter of faithful devotion, merely a preprogramed routine. But when you read the gospels and read Jesus' words as he speaks to his Father;
(Matthew 26:38-39 "Then he said to them: "My soul is deeply grieved, even to death. Stay here and keep on the watch with me." And going a little way forward, he fell upon his face, praying and saying: "My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass away from me. Yet, not as I will, but as you will.""
Look at the heavy emotional context, the deep feeling, these are words spoken by a son to his father. They are not words spoken by someone talking to himself, they are not spoken by someone who has no will of his own. There are the earnest words of a beloved son talking with his dear father. The son is asking his father remove part of the testing he is to under go, but he states that he is willing to face it. If Jesus had no will of his own, if he wasn't an independent being, this conversation would never have taken place. This exchange could have only occurred between two independent beings, the request, the feelings and the statement of loyalty, would be meaning less and could not have happened between two parts of a Trinity.
Just look at the verse, two wills are mentioned, God's will and Jesus' will, since they each have their own will, they are two independent beings. Otherwise what is Jesus' 'will' in the above verse?
quote:
First of all, where is it said that the power was granted to him ? You are confusing Delegation of Authority with Granting Power . Nowhere it is mentioned that Jesus didn't have the power before. It's just that now, he has the authority, given to him by the Father.
Considering the fact that Jesus as First born of creation was used to create everything, he always had great power, but he did not as you said, have the authority. But then we both agree that there was a time when he didn't have the authority.
quote:
To use a crude analogy, if you think of me and my colleague John, we both have the same status and power, but he is producing test documents, while I'm producing design documents. This is our role at work. If, one day, he gives me the authority to produce test documents myself, I'll accept it and do it, not because I'm ordered to do so (we are of the same status at work) but because I like and respect him. Just because he delegated his authority, doesn't mean he's now my boss, or that he's more capable than I am, it's just that he's given me authority to do something that he's been doing. I always had the ability (power), I just didn't have the authority. I now have it and will exercise it at my own will.
Beautiful illustration, I like it and I think it has more truth to it then what you may realize. You and John are two independent beings who work together in unity based on mutual respect ( I could even say 'love' in the loyal sense ), that is how Jehovah and Jesus work together. They are no more part of a Trinity than you and John are. But the key part here is, is the relationship between Jehovah and Jesus one of equals like you and John? or does one have authority over the other? In your illustration you and John are equals, but what if one of you was the boss?
What the scriptures say as to the balance of authority between the Father and the son. First off, it is a Father and son relationship. Image that your coworker John was your Father, that would tend to change the balance of authority, especially if the two of you had your own business. Now the balance of authority between fathers and sons can vary, so let us see what the Bible states.
1 Corinthians 11:3 "But I want YOU to know that the head of every man is the Christ; in turn the head of a woman is the man; in turn the head of the Christ is God."
Here it is stated that God has Headship over Christ just like a husband has over his wife.
John 5:19 "Therefore, in answer, Jesus went on to say to them: "Most truly I say to YOU, The Son cannot do a single thing of his own initiative, but only what he beholds the Father doing."
John 5:30 "I cannot do a single thing of my own initiative; just as I hear, I judge; and the judgment that I render is righteous, because I seek, not my own will, but the will of him that sent me."
Image yourself saying the above words when describing your working relationship to your coworker John, it certainly wouldn't sound at all like you were describing an equal. Anyone hearing you say the above is probably going to be looking at you thinking the word "slave" because you would be saying that John had total absolute authority over you and you accepted this and obey him as perfectly as you can.
Now the above statement of total submission to you coworker may stun some of your listeners, and perhaps someone will try to look for loopholes, like you didn't mean it to sound that way. But then later you make the following statement about going back to the office to see John.
John 20:17 "Jesus said to her: "Stop clinging to me. For I have not yet ascended to the Father. But be on your way to my brothers and say to them, 'I am ascending to my Father and YOUR Father and to my God and YOUR God.'"
Now remember Jesus spoke the above words after he had been raised from the dead, he was at this point no longer just a human man and he in his resurrected form in which he was soon to go to heaven in, stated that the Father was his God. Now if you said that your coworker John was your God, aside from thinking you were nuts, I would think that you worshipped him and he had total authority over you. That if 'John' snapped his fingers you were right there with a "Yes John, what is your will?". If we saw you repeatedly praying to "John" that would also reenforce that impression, since prayer is a form of worship. If we saw you go off by yourself to pray to 'John' we would also know that you were not just trying to set an example for us.
As you can see using your illustration for the relationship between Jehovah and Jesus becomes strange, because will you and John are equals, Jehovah and Jesus are not.
quote:
This statement is very significant in relation to the miracles of Jesus, distinguishing them from similar miracles of prophets and apostles, who as human instruments were employed to perform supernatural actions, while Jesus did all as the Father's commissioned agent indeed, but in the exercise of his own absolute right of action. Jesus has the same power as the father and the will to use it as he sees fit.
The power Jesus had to do miracles was the power of Jehovah's holy spirit Jesus was anointed with at his baptism in the Jordan river.
Acts 10:37-38 "after the baptism that John preached, namely, Jesus who was from Nazareth, how God anointed him with holy spirit and power, and he went through the land doing good and healing all those oppressed by the Devil; because God was with him."
Acts 2:22 "Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus the Nazarene, a man publicly shown by God to YOU through powerful works and portents and signs that God did through him in YOUR midst,"
Hebrews 2:4 "while God joined in bearing witness with signs as well as portents and various powerful works and with distributions of holy spirit according to his will?"
Jesus while he was on earth was just a human man, he had no supernatural power of his own, he could do what he did only because Jehovah's holy spirit was with him to do the works.
Luke 5:17 'In the course of one of the days he was teaching, . . . and Jehovah's power was there for him to do healing. '
Luke 6:19 "And all the crowd were seeking to touch him, because power was going out of him and healing them all."
It was the power of the holy spirit with which Jesus had been given at his baptism that did the healings, it was not Jesus' own power, it was from Jehovah. That is why Acts 2:22 and Hebrews 2:4 give credit to Jehovah for the miracles Jesus did, for as Acts states, God did the portents through Jesus, Jesus didn't do them on his own.
quote:
What is interesting is how you can explain that Jehovah judges in the OT and the NT {John) says that "the Father judges no one at all" ?! My explanation: Jehovah is the name of the Trinity God. He judges now, as he always did and we now know that he judges through Jesus. What is your explanation ?
The explanation is very simple, Jehovah is God and does all the judging, then he installs Jesus Christ as King and Judge to carry out God's will and judgements. Jehovah can be said to judge in that he has appointed Christ to do the judging, yet God doesn't directly judge since Christ is the one who actually does the judging. God gets the credit, yet it is Jesus who actually does the work. Many things God has done were done through angels or even men.
This post is getting far too long and I am short of time, so I will post what I have so.
Sincerely yours; Wm Scott Anderson

This message is a reply to:
 Message 209 by Legend, posted 11-26-2004 5:37 PM Legend has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 217 by Legend, posted 12-06-2004 9:22 AM wmscott has replied

Legend
Member (Idle past 5006 days)
Posts: 1226
From: Wales, UK
Joined: 05-07-2004


Message 217 of 300 (165604)
12-06-2004 9:22 AM
Reply to: Message 216 by wmscott
12-05-2004 4:19 PM


Re: Jesus is YHWH
wmscott,
thanks for your reply and comments.
Just for the record, I am not a Trinitarian, not even a Christian. I used to be and at the time, I had no problem accepting the Trinity doctrine. Like I've said in a previous post to Buzzsaw, the Trinity is a good way of overcoming some of the difficulties that arise when interpreting the Bible. It may not be the best way and it's definitely not the only way, it's just a good way.
wmscott writes:
In replying I will attempt to encourage you to think outside of the Trinitarian box
I would have thought that my non-belief would suggest that I do!
In this thread, I've tried to explain the doctrine - to the best of my ability - and defend my position that the doctrine is supported -not contradicted- by the Bible. I'm not saying that non-trinitarian doctrines are wrong, I'm saying that the Trinity doctrine isn't wrong - hope you can see the difference between the two.
The beauty of the Bible -and partly reason for its success- is that it's so wonderfully ambiguous and open to interpretation. A lot of basic concepts aren't clear and have to be inferred or interpreted. I personally know of at least 4 churches (Catholic, JWs, LDS, 7th-day Adv) that teach things vastly different to each other, but all based on the Bible! It's not easy to discard someone else's interpretation, because the bible isn't black & white. There's a lot of grey in it.
Still, some posters here, have rejected the Trinity doctrine off hand and refused to even try to understand it, which I find very fanatical and close-minded. It seems that you understand the principles behind it, though you disagree with it, and -unlike others and to your credit- can support your views with biblical evidence.
Anyhow, I am considering the points you raised in your last post. Just a few quick notes off the top of my head:
I used the 'me and my colleague John' analogy to illustrate that Delegation of Authority doesn't necessarily imply subordination in power or stature. I didn't -in any way- suggest that the Trinity consists of separate beings, as happens in my analogy. At the end of the day, in my analogy, I could turn round and say 'listen John, I like and respect you, but I refuse to do your work, I got other things on my plate, etc.'. This can never happen in the Trinity because, although all three 'persons' have their own will and role, they are of one essence and can never contradict or conflict with each other.
There is no direct analogy -in everyday terms- that I could use to describe the Trinity. Like I said in a previous post, the 'separate wills = separate beings' logic is drawn on humans and can only be applied to humans. You can't infer that because something is true for men it must be true for God.
Also, as you've raised this point in previous posts too:
wmscott writes:
That is why the Devil tested Jesus' loyalty, he thought that he could break the bond of love between the Father and the son. The Devil testing the loyalty of part of a Trinity to itself, would be stupid and pointless since there wouldn't be anything to even test, the Devil is wicked but he certainly isn't stupid.
I can accept that the Devil was trying to break the bond of love between the Father and the son. But I think the most important thing here is that he was trying to make Jesus deny his human nature. Satan is not testing Jesus, the God, that would be stupid, as you say. He's testing Jesus the man. Jesus became a man so that he could live with the same rules and constraints that the rest of us are, so that he could redeem us. If Jesus didn't feel pain, fear, hunger, temptation, etc. he wouldn't be an 'equivalent ransom', his human existence would be pointless. As Jesus was being tempted by Satan, he could have turned round and use his divine power to easily defeat him. However, in doing so, he would have denied his human nature, his sacrifice would be pointless, Satan would have won. So, Jesus fights Satan the only way a man can: by using the scriptures as his weapon and that is the important message (IMHO) of those verses.
quote:
What is interesting is how you can explain that Jehovah judges in the OT and the NT {John) says that "the Father judges no one at all" ?! My explanation: Jehovah is the name of the Trinity God. He judges now, as he always did and we now know that he judges through Jesus. What is your explanation ?
wmscott writes:
The explanation is very simple, Jehovah is God and does all the judging, then he installs Jesus Christ as King and Judge to carry out God's will and judgements. Jehovah can be said to judge in that he has appointed Christ to do the judging, yet God doesn't directly judge since Christ is the one who actually does the judging. God gets the credit, yet it is Jesus who actually does the work. Many things God has done were done through angels or even men.
But, if Jehovah is the name of the Father (as you claim), that still doesn't explain why does John say that "the Father judges no one at all" while the OT repeatedly states that the Father judges?! If John meant that he doesn't judge any longer, why didn't he say so ? John's statement, at face value, suggests that the Father's role is not one of judging. This is contradicted in the OT, unless you accept that the word Jehovah refers to the Trinity God, not just the Father,
I will reply to the rest of your points as soon as I get a chance.

"In life, you have to face that some days you'll be the pigeon and some days you'll be the statue."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 216 by wmscott, posted 12-05-2004 4:19 PM wmscott has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 218 by jar, posted 12-06-2004 9:31 AM Legend has not replied
 Message 221 by wmscott, posted 12-09-2004 7:03 PM Legend has replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 218 of 300 (165606)
12-06-2004 9:31 AM
Reply to: Message 217 by Legend
12-06-2004 9:22 AM


Re: Jesus is YHWH
I can accept that the Devil was trying to break the bond of love between the Father and the son. But I think the most important thing here is that he was trying to make Jesus deny his human nature. Satan is not testing Jesus, the God, that would be stupid, as you say. He's testing Jesus the man. Jesus became a man so that he could live with the same rules and constraints that the rest of us are, so that he could redeem us. If Jesus didn't feel pain, fear, hunger, temptation, etc. he wouldn't be an 'equivalent ransom', his human existence would be pointless. As Jesus was being tempted by Satan, he could have turned round and use his divine power to easily defeat him. However, in doing so, he would have denied his human nature, his sacrifice would be pointless, Satan would have won. So, Jesus fights Satan the only way a man can: by using the scriptures as his weapon and that is the important message (IMHO) of those verses.
Thank you.
IMHO it is very important and often ignored that Jesus, prior to his resurection, WAS man, with all of the limitation, all of weaknesses, all of the doubts and concerns of any of the people around him.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 217 by Legend, posted 12-06-2004 9:22 AM Legend has not replied

TheLiteralist
Inactive Member


Message 219 of 300 (165734)
12-06-2004 5:52 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Angel
11-08-2004 5:40 PM


The Oneness View
Hi Angel,
This topic is of tremendous importance, imo, to those who choose to believe the Bible.
There is a non-Trinitarian Christian view which you might find interesting: the Oneness doctrine. The Oneness doctrine has nothing to do with the Witnesses, btw. It is held by an organization called United Pentecostal Church International and a few others. Often we call ourselves Apostolic Pentecostals and we are not to be confused with Trinitarian Pentecostals. Other denominations call us "Jesus Only" churches (because we will baptize only in Jesus' name), and we take no exception to that "title" , for it describes us and our doctrines beautifully.
In the Oneness view, the only God is God the Father. It is worth noting a few things: (1) the Bible NEVER calls Jesus "God the Son" and (2) the Bible NEVER calls Jesus the "Eternal Son." Jesus is neither of these things. Jesus IS the "Son of God" and the "only begotten Son" of the Father. The Bible does, however, mention "God the Father" in several places. I Corinthians 8:6 is very informative:
But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.
To sum up this view: God (the Father) is an omnipresent, invisible Spirit (the Holy Spirit ~ simply another term by which to refer to this Spirit but which is usually used in reference to the power of God esp. when working among or through men). The Son of God (the man Jesus) never existed until the day Mary was overshadowed by the Holy Spirit. The Spirit of Jesus is simply God the Father and has existed for all eternity. Put another way, Jesus is God (the Father, the Holy Ghost) manifest in the flesh (the Son).
Consider this verse:
Luke 1:35

And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.
A few things: The Father (of the Son) is the Holy Ghost. Jesus is called the "Son of God" because He is the product of the Holy Ghost (the power of the Highest). This verse actually calls the Son of God "that holy thing."
That Jesus was fully human is manifest in several scriptures. That Jesus was fully God is manifest in several scriptures. That He could speak from either viewpoint (i.e., His limited, human viewpoint or His unlimited divine viewpoint) is manifest in several scriptures.
Jesus is also called Emmanuel: God with us. Another place says that "God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself" (II Cor. 5:19).
In addition to Matthew 10:20 and Mark 13:11, consider Luke 21:14-15. As far as Acts 7:55-56 is concerned, please consider that Stephen did not literally see Jesus standing on the right hand of God. God is invisible and, being an omnipresent Spirit, doesn't have a literal right side. The phrase "on the right hand of God" is a reference to a place of exaltation or acceptance by God.
Consider Apostle Paul's question and God's answer in Acts 9:5. Consider Thomas's actions and comments in John 20:28.
Finally, look at Matthew 28:19, which says:
Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost
Two things: (1)the word name is singular in this verse, indicating that all three share one name, and (2)Peter first obeyed this verse in Acts chapter 2, which name did Peter use (Acts 2:38)?
I certainly DO consider Jesus to be God.
I consider the Trinity to be a pagan belief made up by a pagan organization called the Catholic Church, which organization has demonstrated in almost innumeral ways that it has nothing to do with biblical Christianity. I consider the Jehovah's Witnesses doctrines to be incorrect because they consider Jesus a lesser god, which the Bible never declares Jesus to be.
I am extremely interested in this topic, which has great depth and can go in many directions. I feel I have not done a very good job of expressing the Oneness view. If you have any questions about this view, please feel free to ask. I shall try my best to answer them.
This message has been edited by TheLiteralist, 12-06-2004 05:56 PM
This message has been edited by TheLiteralist, 12-06-2004 05:59 PM
This message has been edited by TheLiteralist, 12-06-2004 10:17 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Angel, posted 11-08-2004 5:40 PM Angel has not replied

Legend
Member (Idle past 5006 days)
Posts: 1226
From: Wales, UK
Joined: 05-07-2004


Message 220 of 300 (165861)
12-07-2004 9:29 AM
Reply to: Message 208 by wmscott
11-25-2004 10:57 AM


How many Gods are there ?
quote:
One more thing: if I'm reading you correctly, you seem to believe that Jesus was created by God and he's 'like' God but not 'quite' God. In my eyes, that gives us 2 gods (albeit one 'lesser' than the other). This is contradicted in the Bible:
"Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me." (Isaiah 43:10)
"Fear ye not, neither be afraid: have not I told thee from that time, and have declared it? ye are even my witnesses. Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any." (Isaiah 44:8)
wmscott writes:
This is a common misunderstanding. In the Bible the word or title "god" is used in a lesser sense and an absolute sense. Here Jesus uses the lesser sense. John 10:34-35 "Jesus answered them: "Is it not written in your Law, 'I said: "YOU are gods"'? If he called 'gods' those against whom the word of God came," Here Jesus was stating that in Psalm 82:1 Jehovah is calling men gods, this is the lesser sense of the term. While in the scriptures you cited, the absolute meaning is used. Here is a classic verse where both the greater and lesser meaning of the title 'god' are used in the same verse. 1 Corinthians 8:5-6 "just as there are many "gods" (lesser) and many "lords," there is actually to us one God (absolute sense, notice the capital 'G'.) the Father, out of whom all things are, and we for him; and there is one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things are,"
The verses you cite do not acknowledge, or even hint at, the existence of other Gods. The Bible acknowledges those that are CALLED gods (1 Cor. 8:5) that are not, by nature, gods at all (Gal. 4:8). The judges of Psalm 82 were called "gods" because in their office they determined the fate of other men. Also, in Exodus 21:6 and 22:8-9, God calls earthly judges "gods" .
In contrast, in Isaiah, God talks about himself, proclaiming that there are no other gods. Not only that, he also proclaims that he doesn't even know of any other gods! (Isaiah 44:8). Even if Jesus was a 'lesser' god, as you claim, why would God deny the existence of 'a God beside him' ?! He doesn't claim there is no other God 'like him' or 'of the same power', he emphatically states "Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any." (emphasis is mine}. Why doesn't he know of any God beside him ?
Also: Deut. 4:35, "To you it was shown that you might know that the Lord, He is God; there is no other besides Him."
wmscott writes:
Notice also that Paul states that everything was created through Jesus. Paul stated that there are many 'gods' but only one GOD.
Paul doesn't state that everything was created through Jesus he states that everything was created by Jesus. (Col 1:15). Paul states that are many who are called gods (1 Cor. 8:5) but aren't, by nature, gods at all (Gal. 4:8). Paul also makes it clear, like in Isaiah, that there is only one God.
wmscott writes:
So you are right, Jesus is a mighty god, but there is only one Almighty God, Jehovah.
may I refer you to Message 197, where I'm asking :
Legend writes:
Then, how do you explain that YHWH is called the Mighty God in Jeremiah 32:18 and Isaiah 10:21 ?
In these verses, and also in Isaiah 9:6, the Hebrew word for "mighty" (gibbor) is used.

"In life, you have to face that some days you'll be the pigeon and some days you'll be the statue."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 208 by wmscott, posted 11-25-2004 10:57 AM wmscott has not replied

wmscott
Member (Idle past 6248 days)
Posts: 580
From: Sussex, WI USA
Joined: 12-19-2001


Message 221 of 300 (166666)
12-09-2004 7:03 PM
Reply to: Message 217 by Legend
12-06-2004 9:22 AM


it certainly doesn't simplify Bible comprehension, it complicates it beyond all measu
Dear Legend;
quote:
The beauty of the Bible -and partly reason for its success- is that it's so wonderfully ambiguous and open to interpretation. A lot of basic concepts aren't clear and have to be inferred or interpreted.
The reason for the apparent ambiguity is that the Bible is written in sort of a 'code' (not a literal code) and most people don't understand the 'code,' but once you do, the ambiguity disappears. Jesus referred to this at;
Matthew 11:25-26 "I publicly praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and intellectual ones and have revealed them to babes. Yes, O Father, because to do thus came to be the way approved by you."
Jesus stated that the hidden knowledge was revealed, once you understand it, you understand the Word of God with a much greater clarity than those who do not and the fuzziness disappears. Paul explained this at greater length.
1 Corinthians 2:6-16 "Now we speak wisdom among those who are mature, but not the wisdom of this system of things nor that of the rulers of this system of things, who are to come to nothing. But we speak God's wisdom in a sacred secret, the hidden wisdom, which God foreordained before the systems of things for our glory. This [wisdom] not one of the rulers of this system of things came to know, for if they had known [it] they would not have impaled the glorious Lord. But just as it is written: "Eye has not seen and ear has not heard, neither have there been conceived in the heart of man the things that God has prepared for those who love him." For it is to us God has revealed them through his spirit, for the spirit searches into all things, even the deep things of God. For who among men knows the things of a man except the spirit of man that is in him? So, too, no one has come to know the things of God, except the spirit of God. Now we received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is from God, that we might know the things that have been kindly given us by God. These things we also speak, not with words taught by human wisdom, but with those taught by [the] spirit, as we combine spiritual [matters] with spiritual [words]. But a physical man does not receive the things of the spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot get to know [them], because they are examined spiritually. However, the spiritual man examines indeed all things, but he himself is not examined by any man. For "who has come to know the mind of Jehovah, that he may instruct him?" But we do have the mind of Christ."
Once you have this deeper understanding, you can see that "Scripture is inspired of God . . . for setting things straight" (2 Timothy 3:16) and that the Bible clearly teaches one truth without any ambiguity. Using the scriptures you can clearly show what the Bible teaches and what it doesn't.
quote:
the Trinity is a good way of overcoming some of the difficulties that arise when interpreting the Bible. It may not be the best way and it's definitely not the only way, it's just a good way.
The Trinity doctrine is so extremely complicated and has so many ad hoc special rules for the many conflicting verses, it certainly doesn't simplify Bible comprehension, it complicates it beyond all measure. I of course don't believe in it and have no Bible 'difficulties' as a result. The non Trinitarian Bible view is much simpler and logical. I have never had any one come up with a verse that required a Trinity to explain it, and I know of hundreds of verses that create big problems for the Trinity requiring all sorts of complicated explanations that in the end don't make any sense. Even simple definitions of Trinitarian terms results in incomprehensible answers if they can even be called answers. While the non- Trinitarian has none of these problems and simply reads the Bible and understands a few basic concepts like oneness and unity and such. Jesus disciples were described as "men unlettered and ordinary" (Acts 4:13) what do you think they believed? Bible scholars can't truly explain the Trinity in an understandable way, yet common fishermen are to have taught it? Sounds fishy to me.
quote:
in Isaiah, God talks about himself, proclaiming that there are no other gods. Not only that, he also proclaims that he doesn't even know of any other gods! (Isaiah 44:8). Even if Jesus was a 'lesser' god, as you claim, why would God deny the existence of 'a God beside him' ?! He doesn't claim there is no other God 'like him' or 'of the same power', he emphatically states "Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any." (emphasis is mine}. Why doesn't he know of any God beside him ?
Because Jehovah is Almighty, no one is equal to him. Jesus Christ is like God, but he is not equal to God. Jesus was very clear that his heavenly Father was his God, while Jesus is called a mighty god, there is no scripture which states he is Almighty God. Jesus Christ is the archangel, and angels are referred to as gods. (Psalm 82:1) "God is stationing himself in the assembly of the Divine One; In the middle of the gods he judges:" (Psalm 8:5) "You also proceeded to make him a little less than godlike ones," Both scriptures use the Hebrew word "elohim" which means "gods" and when Paul quotes Psalms 8:5 "You made him a little lower than angels;" he uses the word 'angels' since that is who the 'gods' are in Psalms. Paul also stated that Jesus was an angel of God. (Galatians 4:14) "YOU received me like an angel of God, like Christ Jesus." So Jesus is an angle and a god or godlike. His being call an angel makes it impossible for him to be part of a Trinity since it is impossible for Jehovah to be part angel. So the statement that there are no other Gods, refers to the fact that no one can successfully claim to be the Almighty creator like Jehovah. Jehovah is unique, he is all powerfully and not one can compare to him, there are no other Gods in the supreme sense.
quote:
I used the 'me and my colleague John' analogy to illustrate that Delegation of Authority doesn't necessarily imply subordination in power or stature. I didn't -in any way- suggest that the Trinity consists of separate beings, as happens in my analogy. . . . There is no direct analogy -in everyday terms- that I could use to describe the Trinity.
I knew what you were trying to illustrate, I was showing you the full implications of your illustration, it was better than you intended. I was showing you that if I put what Jesus said into your mouth, everyone would know that you were not equal to your co-worker. Now when you hear the same words spoken by Jesus they don't mean the same thing to you because you are hearing them through the Trinity doctrine. Outside of the Trinity you understand the words one way, but inside of its influence, you hear them another way. I wanted to show you this because I wanted you to see that your thinking is still being controlled by the Trinity doctrine, you are unknowingly still inside the Trinity box, you can't see outside of it. Your thinking is controlled, trapped by an old mind-set.
It is like when you and to go to the store, but you find yourself driving to work by habit. Now with the Trinity it is as if I am riding in the car with you to go to the store and I notice that you are driving to your place of work instead of the store. I point this out and you answer that that is how to get to the store. I point out that the store is in the opposite direction from your work place, but in reply you pull out a recruitment brochure you got when you were hired showing how close everything in town is to the company plant. I get out a map and measure the routes showing the difference in distance, in reply you launch into a long explanation on how the importance of your company has distorted the local space around it into a none linear form. Puzzled, I press on and point to the travel times on the map showing that your route still takes more time. In answer you explain about how the flow of time in the area has been changed by sun spots and a secret alien underground factory under part of town that has changed the way times flows in different parts of town. So I decide to drive the different routes with stopwatch in hand, but when I present the results, I am told that my results are wrong because of the direction of the magnetic field, the effects of an advanced mining process being used in the next town and so on. The moral of the story is that you can only teach people as much as they are willing to learn.
Please don't be offended by my silly story, I just wanted you for a moment to see how the Trinity doctrine looks to those of us who don't believe in it. Sometimes talking to a Trinitarian is like watching someone on the street stepping over invisible obstacles and walking around things that are not there, while you see other people walk down the same sidewalk without any problems. Why do all those complicated mental gymnastics for a doctrine that is even explained or taught in scripture? Isn't it obvious that the Trinity is a mind-set, like a person with good vision wearing extremely thick glasses and trying to read with them on, it only obscures the view and makes understanding God harder.
quote:
Satan is not testing Jesus, the God, that would be stupid, as you say. He's testing Jesus the man. Jesus became a man so that he could live with the same rules and constraints that the rest of us are, so that he could redeem us. If Jesus didn't feel pain, fear, hunger, temptation, etc. he wouldn't be an 'equivalent ransom', his human existence would be pointless. As Jesus was being tempted by Satan, he could have turned round and use his divine power to easily defeat him. However, in doing so, he would have denied his human nature, his sacrifice would be pointless, Satan would have won. So, Jesus fights Satan the only way a man can: by using the scriptures as his weapon and that is the important message (IMHO) of those verses.
Under this logic Jesus would have 'denied his human nature' each time he performed a miracle. Was each miracle a sin? I think you are missing the point here anyway, the issue between Jehovah and the Devil was never one of power. The Devil has never questioned God's power to rule, what he has questioned is God's right to rule. The Devil has stated that no man will remain faithful to God if tested, Jesus demonstrated that is untrue. Jesus to this day hasn't destroyed the Devil because it isn't Jehovah's time for that to occur, certain issues need to be resolved first once and for all time. Jesus' demonstration of loyal faithfulness as a human man, would not have answered the Devil's charge or served as a reasonable example for us to follow, if he was part God at the time. A spirit being using a human body like a puppet, is not the same thing as just being human, Jesus had to be just a man. So when Jesus quoted scripture, he meant it, his answer to Satan was that he would only worship Jehovah.
quote:
that still doesn't explain why does John say that "the Father judges no one at all" while the OT repeatedly states that the Father judges?! If John meant that he doesn't judge any longer, why didn't he say so ? John's statement, at face value, suggests that the Father's role is not one of judging. This is contradicted in the OT, unless you accept that the word Jehovah refers to the Trinity God, not just the Father,
Paul stated at Romans 2:16 "This will be in the day when God through Christ Jesus judges the secret things of mankind, according to the good news I declare." Paul repeats the same thought at Acts 17:31 "Because he has set a day in which he purposes to judge the inhabited earth in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed, and he has furnished a guarantee to all men in that he has resurrected him from the dead."
That is how Jehovah judges after Jesus Christ is installed as messianic king, before Jesus received the Kingdom, his Father Jehovah did the judging. When Jesus was raised to a superior position then what he had before, he was given new authority and power, one of the responsibilities he was then intrusted with was the judging.
Jesus in making his statement (John 5:22) "the Father judges no one at all, but he has committed all the judging to the Son," was talking about the authority he would have as King of Kings and Lord of Lords, which he received when he was raised to a superior position after his return to heaven. He wasn't talking about the past, he was talking about his role in the future.
Sincerely yours; Wm Scott Anderson

This message is a reply to:
 Message 217 by Legend, posted 12-06-2004 9:22 AM Legend has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 222 by Legend, posted 12-13-2004 7:25 AM wmscott has not replied
 Message 223 by Legend, posted 12-13-2004 7:39 AM wmscott has not replied
 Message 224 by Legend, posted 12-14-2004 7:41 PM wmscott has replied

Legend
Member (Idle past 5006 days)
Posts: 1226
From: Wales, UK
Joined: 05-07-2004


Message 222 of 300 (167640)
12-13-2004 7:25 AM
Reply to: Message 221 by wmscott
12-09-2004 7:03 PM


Jesus tempted by Satan
wmscott writes:
Under this logic Jesus would have 'denied his human nature' each time he performed a miracle. Was each miracle a sin? I think you are missing the point here anyway, .......
The big difference is that Jesus never used his power for self-serving purposes. All miracles he performed were to help others and not himself. He had to suffer and be tempted like a man and, in doing so, he demonstrated how men can deal with suffering and temptation and that is exactly what he's doing when tempted by Satan. Had he used his divine power to banish Satan, he would have detached himself from the rest of mankind, as the rest of us can never deal with temptation by miraculously removing its source, but have to endure it and fight it by faith and willpower.Consequently, he could never be an 'equivalent sacrifice' and Satan would have ultimately won.

"In life, you have to face that some days you'll be the pigeon and some days you'll be the statue."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 221 by wmscott, posted 12-09-2004 7:03 PM wmscott has not replied

Legend
Member (Idle past 5006 days)
Posts: 1226
From: Wales, UK
Joined: 05-07-2004


Message 223 of 300 (167641)
12-13-2004 7:39 AM
Reply to: Message 221 by wmscott
12-09-2004 7:03 PM


Trinity: one of many Bible truths
wmscot writes:
The reason for the apparent ambiguity is that the Bible is written in sort of a 'code' (not a literal code) and most people don't understand the 'code,' but once you do, the ambiguit disappears. Jesus referred to this at; Matthew 11:25-26 "I publicly praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and intellectual ones and have revealed them to babes. Yes, O Father, because to do thus came to be the way approved by you."
Jesus stated that the hidden knowledge was revealed, once you understand it, you understand the Word of God with a much greater clarity than those who do not and the fuzziness disappears. .
Matthew 11:25-26 : Jesus indirectly praises those who received his message. The ' wise and intellectual' ones are people who through pride and arrogance refused to accept his message. I personally think, he's referring here to the scribes and Jewish intelligensia who mocked him. He calls his disciples 'babes', in that they are men docile and humble, men who, conscious that they know nothing, do not question his teachings. He is not referring to any 'hidden knowledge', he is saying that people who are arrogant, materialistic and clever (in the bad sense of the word) have the message 'hidden from them'. He then goes to claim that the Father is revealed only through him (v27). To claim, based on those verses, that 'the hidden knowledge is revealed, once you understand it' is wild extrapolation, IMHO.
I think to even suggest that the Father does not reveal some things to some people is absurd, especially in the wide context of the N.T 'salvation for all' message. If there is some 'hidden knowledge' that is not revealed to all, or if some 'code' is needed to understand God's word, then what is the point of Jesus's life and death? Why did he live and die, if the real meaning of his life is only available to a selected few under terms and conditions?!
How can you verify that this knowledge you have is true if it's hidden and selectively revealed to some (especially when many of them have a contradicting set of knowledge revealed to them)? How do you know that your 'code key' is the right one and someone else's isn't, when they both are derived from (and fit in) the bible?
wmscot writes:
Once you have this deeper understanding, you can see that
"Scripture is inspired of God . . . for setting things straight" (2 Timothy 3:16) and that the Bible clearly teaches one truth without any ambiguity.
The issue here is how you derive this 'deeper understanding' ? If you've already decided on your theology then you can shoehorn the Bible into it. It's the other way round that's the tricky bit: deriving your theology based on the Bible. The sad fact is that the Bible is ambiguous and inconsistent. The Bible can be what you want it to be. The proof of this is that we're having this debate, it's that there are -without exaggeration- hundreds of churches, each with different beliefs and dogmas, all based on the Bible.
wmscot writes:
Please don't be offended by my silly story, I just wanted you for a moment to see how the Trinity doctrine looks to those of us who don't believe in it.
No offence taken, on the contrary your description gives me great insight. It's always good to know how other people think.
wmscot writes:
Using the scriptures you can clearly show what the Bible teaches and what it doesn't.
Using the scriptures you can show that :
- there is only One God (Isaiah 43:10, 44:6).
- there are many Gods - (Genesis 1:26, 3:22, 11:7).
-God can be seen (Gen. 18:1, Exodus 6:2-3, Gen. 17:1 )
-God cannot be seen (John 1:18, Exodus 33:20)
- God does not change (Malachi 3:6)
- God changes (Exodus 32:14)
- We are saved by works (James 2:24, Matthew 19:1617)
- We are saved by grace (Ephesians 2:8-9, Rom. 3:20,28)
- All sins can be forgiven (1 John 1:9, Acts 13:39).
- All sins can not be forgiven (Matthew 12:31, Mark 3:29)
- It's ok to kill , as long as it's endorsed by God (Numbers 31:17).
- It's not ok to kill (Luke 18:20).
I could go on for a couple of pages, but I hope by now you get my point, which is this:
The Bible, at face value, does not offer a clear, unambiguous basis for a theological framework. You have to infer and form your theology, based on (what you consider to be) the most plausible interpretation of different verses, taking into account the linguistic, historical, cultural and contextual constraints.
Once you have concluded the direction of your theological concepts (i.e. you have formed a theological bias), you will interpret any subsequent ambiguous verses, using this bias.
So, for example, Trinitarians will interpret the verses of God's appearances, as proof of the multi-faceted God, because that fits in with their dogma, not because any grammatical or contextual reason dictates that they should.
You (JWs) will interpret the word 'firstborn', as proof that Jesus was created, because it fits in with your dogma, not because any grammatical or contextual reason dictates that you should (BTW, on the contrary 'firstborn', in the Bible, is used to denote hierarchy and importance not physical creation)
LDS will interpret Matt 5:48 "...perfect, as your Father in heaven" as proof that they can become Gods, because it fits in with their dogma, not because any grammatical or contextual reason dictates that they should.
Allow me to use your 'driving to the store' analogy, which is a good analogy but we have to change the constraints slightly to better illustrate the situation :
We both set together to drive to the store. The catch is , neither of us has been to the store before, all we have is a map. Furthermore, the map is slightly skewed, the distances on it do not reflect the real terrain and the compass on it does not reflect the magnetic north. Now, you are familiar with some of the roads of the map, because you've driven in them before and I'm familiar with some other roads, because I've driven in them before. Based on all this, we both come up with an itinerary on how to get to the store, but your route is different to mine.
Because, your route goes through the roads you are familiar with, you are convinced that this is the quickest and safest route and are very reluctant to even look at mine. Similarly, I am very skeptical about your route, as the roads you are using are not familiar to me.
Epilogue:
we won't know which one is the correct route until if and when we get to the store. It could be that both routes are correct and they both lead to the store. It could be that they are both flawed and we never get to the store. Like Satan says in South Park, to people arriving in hell, 'sorry guys, but the mormons were right!'

"In life, you have to face that some days you'll be the pigeon and some days you'll be the statue."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 221 by wmscott, posted 12-09-2004 7:03 PM wmscott has not replied

Legend
Member (Idle past 5006 days)
Posts: 1226
From: Wales, UK
Joined: 05-07-2004


Message 224 of 300 (168264)
12-14-2004 7:41 PM
Reply to: Message 221 by wmscott
12-09-2004 7:03 PM


The Bible teaches that there is only one God
Legend writes:
in Isaiah, God talks about himself, proclaiming that there are no other gods. Not only that, he also proclaims that he doesn't even know of any other gods! (Isaiah 44:8). Even if Jesus was a 'lesser' god, as you claim, why would God deny the existence of 'a God beside him' ?! He doesn't claim there is no other God 'like him' or 'of the same power', he emphatically states "Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any." (emphasis is mine}. Why doesn't he know of any God beside him ?
wmscott writes:
Because Jehovah is Almighty, no one is equal to him. Jesus Christ is like God, but he is not equal to God. Jesus was very clear that his heavenly Father was his God, while Jesus is called a mighty god, there is no scripture which states he is Almighty God. Jesus Christ is the archangel, and angels are referred to as gods. (Psalm 82:1) "God is stationing himself in the assembly of the Divine One; In the middle of the gods he judges:" (Psalm 8:5) "You also proceeded to make him a little less than godlike ones," Both scriptures use the Hebrew word "elohim" which means "gods" and when Paul quotes Psalms 8:5 "You made him a little lower than angels;" he uses the word 'angels' since that is who the 'gods' are in Psalms. Paul also stated that Jesus was an angel of God. (Galatians 4:14) "YOU received me like an angel of God, like Christ Jesus." So Jesus is an angle and a god or godlike. His being call an angel makes it impossible for him to be part of a Trinity since it is impossible for Jehovah to be part angel. So the statement that there are no other Gods, refers to the fact that no one can successfully claim to be the Almighty creator like Jehovah. Jehovah is unique, he is all powerfully and not one can compare to him, there are no other Gods in the supreme sense.
To fully understand the meaning of the Isaiah verses, you have to look at the usage of the Hebrew words for God. In Hebrew, the word YHWH (Jehovah) is used as the personal name of the true GOD.
Elohim is a general term for God (deity), it is also used when describing false gods. Elohim is plural in form, however, when it refers to the true God, it refers to only one being. This is known because it is consistently used with singular verbs, and with adjectives and pronouns in the singular, so that by the rules of Hebrew grammar it must be understood and translated as singular (God).
For instance, Exodus 20:2-3 declares: "I am the LORD thy God [Elohim] which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt . . . Thou shalt have no other gods [Elohim] before me."
With that in mind, let's have a look at Isaiah again, taking into account the usage of the Hebrew words:
Isaiah 43:10,11: "Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD [Jehovah] and my servant whom I have chosen; that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God [Elohim] formed, neither shall there be after me. I, even I, am the LORD [Jehovah]; and beside me there is no savior."
You can see from these verses that there are several things which are made clear:
(1) There is only one God (Elohim) and Jehovah (YHWH) is that one true God.
(2) There were no Elohims formed before Jehovah.
(3) There will be no Elohims formed after Jehovah.
Now, you claim Jesus to be a God, but not the GOD, i.e. Jesus to be Elohim. But the above verses say that there are no Elohim, before or after Jehovah.
Let's also have a look at Isaiah 44:6,8 again:
"Thus saith the LORD [Jehovah]... I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God [Elohim] ... Fear ye not, neither be afraid: have not I told thee from that time, and have declared it? ye are even my witnesses. Is there a God [Elohim] beside me? yea, there is no God [Elohim] I know not any."
This is emphatic. That's what God proclaims ("Thus saith Jehovah") :
(1) Jehovah is the first Elohim and the last Elohim. There can be only one first and only one last. Again, this rules out the possibility of any other Gods existing throughout all of eternity past and all of eternity future. It also again shows that Jehovah and Elohim are not different Gods.
(2) Jehovah is the only God (Elohim) that exists. This again rules out the possibility of other gods, lesser or greater, existing.
AS if Isaiah wasn't emphatic enough, the point is further re-inforced in Deuteronomy 6:4. "Hear, O Israel: The LORD [Jehovah] your God [Elohim] is one LORD [Jehovah]."
The Conclusion: The Bible proclaims that there is only one God in all existence. No other gods were ever created.

"In life, you have to face that some days you'll be the pigeon and some days you'll be the statue."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 221 by wmscott, posted 12-09-2004 7:03 PM wmscott has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 225 by wmscott, posted 12-15-2004 5:43 PM Legend has not replied

wmscott
Member (Idle past 6248 days)
Posts: 580
From: Sussex, WI USA
Joined: 12-19-2001


Message 225 of 300 (168674)
12-15-2004 5:43 PM
Reply to: Message 224 by Legend
12-14-2004 7:41 PM


there are no other Gods in the supreme sense
Dear Legend;
quote:
The big difference is that Jesus never used his power for self-serving purposes. All miracles he performed were to help others and not himself. He had to suffer and be tempted like a man and, in doing so, he demonstrated how men can deal with suffering and temptation and that is exactly what he's doing when tempted by Satan. Had he used his divine power to banish Satan, he would have detached himself from the rest of mankind, as the rest of us can never deal with temptation by miraculously removing its source, but have to endure it and fight it by faith and willpower.Consequently, he could never be an 'equivalent sacrifice' and Satan would have ultimately won.
You mean that he only helped others, that if he missed the boat, he would never use miraculous power to walk on water? Matthew 14:23-25 "Eventually, having sent the crowds away, he went up into the mountain by himself to pray. Though it became late, he was there alone. By now the boat was many hundreds of yards away from land, being hard put to it by the waves, because the wind was against them. But in the fourth watch period of the night he came to them, walking over the sea." Granted, maybe Jesus planned this all out so his disciples would see him walking on the water to build their faith. But consider all the miracles they had witnessed, and Jesus had a transportation problem, his having to get over the water seems to have been at least part of the reason for the miracle.
What you are saying doesn't make any sense, look at; Luke 22:41-43 "And he himself drew away from them about a stone's throw, and bent his knees and began to pray, saying: "Father, if you wish, remove this cup from me. Nevertheless, let, not my will, but yours take place." Then an angel from heaven appeared to him and strengthened him." If Jesus was part God, why did he need strengthening from an angel? Why did he pray that God's will be done rather than his own? Was all of this just acting for our benefit? If it was meant as an act, why did he go off by himself? Only if Jesus was just a human man does this make sense, if he was a god-man it was some sort of very complicated deception that makes no sense.
Even in Matthew when tested by the devil, at Matthew 4:11 "Then the Devil left him, and, look! angels came and began to minister to him." he is helped by angels. If he was merely acting in the preceding verses when being tested by the Devil by limiting himself to human replies, why did he need angelic help? A God-man would not have been tired by testing that was a mere act, only a man wound have been tired by the experience.
quote:
To claim, based on those verses, that 'the hidden knowledge is revealed, once you understand it' is wild extrapolation, IMHO.
I think to even suggest that the Father does not reveal some things to some people is absurd, especially in the wide context of the N.T 'salvation for all' message. If there is some 'hidden knowledge' that is not revealed to all, or if some 'code' is needed to understand God's word, then what is the point of Jesus's life and death? Why did he live and die, if the real meaning of his life is only available to a selected few under terms and conditions?!
How can you verify that this knowledge you have is true if it's hidden and selectively revealed to some (especially when many of them have a contradicting set of knowledge revealed to them)? How do you know that your 'code key' is the right one and someone else's isn't, when they both are derived from (and fit in) the bible?
Mark 4:11-12 "he proceeded to say to them: "To YOU the sacred secret of the kingdom of God has been given, but to those outside all things occur in illustrations, in order that, though looking, they may look and yet not see, and, though hearing, they may hear and yet not get the sense of it, nor ever turn back and forgiveness be given them." The 'Sacred Secret' was about how Jesus came to die for our sins and gain us life, but this knowledge was hidden in the scriptures and was progressively revealed over time. As you can see by Jesus' words that the understanding about this secret was not given to all. Those to whom it is not revealed are those who do not have a proper heart condition towards the Kingdom and Jehovah's sovereignty, for those who turn their back on God, the Sacred Secret is still sealed. Paul explained this at; 1 Corinthians 2:14-15 "But a physical man does not receive the things of the spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot get to know [them], because they are examined spiritually. However, the spiritual man examines indeed all things," To those who persist in pursuing fleshly things of the world rather than spiritual things, the Bible is a sealed book, they don't understand it. You could literally take these people and strap them down and force them to listen, but it would be a wasted effort, they wouldn't grasp the real meaning of what you were telling them. Most have no interest in serving God, and even of those who would like to gain the prize of the hope, we are warned. Luke 13:23-24 ""Lord, are those who are being saved few?" He said to them: "Exert yourselves vigorously to get in through the narrow door, because many, I tell YOU, will seek to get in but will not be able," Certainly not a once saved always saved thing as so many religions teach.
So even if you have the spirit so to speak, how do you "verify that this knowledge you have is true"? Simple, Acts 17:11-12 "Now the latter were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with the greatest eagerness of mind, carefully examining the Scriptures daily as to whether these things were so. Therefore many of them became believers, " You verify for yourself that what is being taught is what the Bible teaches. The Bible teaches only one truth, so only one key will fit the lock.
quote:
The issue here is how you derive this 'deeper understanding' ? If you've already decided on your theology then you can shoehorn the Bible into it. It's the other way round that's the tricky bit: deriving your theology based on the Bible. The sad fact is that the Bible is ambiguous and inconsistent. The Bible can be what you want it to be. The proof of this is that we're having this debate, it's that there are -without exaggeration- hundreds of churches, each with different beliefs and dogmas, all based on the Bible.'
Shoehorning is exactly what most do, like the Trinity, not mentioned, named, explained or even taught in scripture, yet look at our debate. Shoehorning is obvious by the longer explanations it requires for what should be simple questions. You have to be open to what the Bible teaches, you have to be willing to be taught by God, on his terms not yours. If you are willing to be taught, free Bible studies are available, and people are taught how to recognize the difference between religious truth and lies, by using the Bible.
The Bible is not ambiguous or inconsistent, it is very consistent and has a very sharp edge. Hebrews 4:12 "For the word of God is alive and exerts power and is sharper than any two-edged sword and pierces even to the dividing of soul and spirit, and of joints and [their] marrow, and [is] able to discern thoughts and intentions of [the] heart". If you can't see the sharp definition that is the Bible, perhaps it is because your spiritual vision has been blinded by man made doctrines like the Trinity. 2 Corinthians 4:3-4 "If, now, the good news we declare is in fact veiled, it is veiled among those who are perishing, among whom the god of this system of things has blinded the minds of the unbelievers,"
quote:
Using the scriptures you can show that :
- there is only One God (Isaiah 43:10, 44:6).
- there are many Gods - (Genesis 1:26, 3:22, 11:7).
Isaiah is using the term 'god' in the almighty creator of the universe sense, (Isaiah 45:18 "For this is what Jehovah has said, the Creator of the heavens, He the [true] God, the Former of the earth and the Maker of it, He the One who firmly established it, who did not create it simply for nothing, who formed it even to be inhabited: "I am Jehovah, and there is no one else.") while in Genesis the 'us' refers to Jehovah, Jesus and other angels.
Paul addressed this issue. 1 Corinthians 8:5-6 "For even though there are those who are called "gods," whether in heaven or on earth, just as there are many "gods" and many "lords," there is actually to us one God the Father, out of whom all things are, and we for him; and there is one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things are, and we through him." Notice that Paul stated that there were many gods, but there is only one God in the sense of the Almighty creator, which was the same sense used in Isaiah. Also notice that all things are through Jesus, referring to Jesus' role in helping Jehovah create all things.
quote:
-God can be seen (Gen. 18:1, Exodus 6:2-3, Gen. 17:1 )
-God cannot be seen (John 1:18, Exodus 33:20)
Jehovah God can not literally be seen by human eyes as John 1:18, Exodus 33:20 state. No one has ever seen Jehovah, what they did see were his angelic messengers acting in his name. Paul stated that Moses did not speak directly with Jehovah, but spoke with his angels. Acts 7:37-38 "This is the Moses that said to the sons of Israel, 'God will raise up for YOU from among YOUR brothers a prophet like me.' This is he that came to be among the congregation in the wilderness with the angel that spoke to him on Mount Sinai and with our forefathers, and he received living sacred pronouncements to give YOU." The other times in the OT where "Jehovah" comes and talks with men, it was an angel acting for God. Hebrews 13:1-2 "Let YOUR brotherly love continue. Do not forget hospitality, for through it some, unknown to themselves, entertained angels."
quote:
- God does not change (Malachi 3:6)
- God changes (Exodus 32:14)
God doesn't change his personality, he is always the same. Isaiah 46:4 "Even to [one's] old age I am the same One; and to [one's] gray-headedness I myself shall keep bearing up. I myself shall certainly act, that I myself may carry and that I myself may bear up and furnish escape." That is how Jehovah is unchanging, we can always count on him.
But there are ways that Jehovah does change, he changes his judgement if someone repents. Joel 2:12-13 "And now also," the utterance of Jehovah is, "come back to me with all YOUR hearts, and with fasting and with weeping and with wailing. And rip apart YOUR hearts, and not YOUR garments; and come back to Jehovah YOUR God, for he is gracious and merciful, slow to anger and abundant in loving-kindness, and he will certainly feel regret on account of the calamity."
Jeremiah 18:8-10 "and that nation actually turns back from its badness against which I spoke, I will also feel regret over the calamity that I had thought to execute upon it. But at any moment that I may speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom to build [it] up and to plant [it], and it actually does what is bad in my eyes by not obeying my voice, I will also feel regret over the good that I said [to myself] to do for its good.'"
So when God decides to exercise mercy, he 'feels regret' over the judgment he would have otherwise carried out. A point to remember is that Jehovah is perfect and never makes a mistake, so he never has that kind of regret. Numbers 23:19 "God is not a man that he should tell lies, Neither a son of mankind that he should feel regret." God only feels regret in the sense of changing his course of action, such as in response to some one repenting or he decides not to execute sentence because of other factors. His regret is merely a way of saying he decided not to do something, such as when a person or group is guilty, but he decides not to execute them. He 'regrets' the punishment and doesn't carry it out. So for God, a regret is not a change, he doesn't change, he is merely withholding a punishment.
quote:
- We are saved by works (James 2:24, Matthew 19:1617)
- We are saved by grace (Ephesians 2:8-9, Rom. 3:20,28)
The old faith vs works controversy, there isn't a controversy in the Bible. "Works of the Law" referring to the Mosaic law which Christ ended, have no value in God's eyes. The works that save are works of faith, which are faith in action. A faith that is inactive or produces no works, is dead. James 2:26 "Indeed, as the body without spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead." We are saved by having a faith that moves us to live in harmony with God's will, our salvation is a gift since our works of faith do not earn it.
quote:
- All sins can be forgiven (1 John 1:9, Acts 13:39).
- All sins can not be forgiven (Matthew 12:31, Mark 3:29)
All sins can be forgiven, but one. All the mistakes we make do in sinning, can be forgiven, the one sin that is not forgiven is a deliberate act, not a mere mistake. The unforgivable sin is not an error, being a willful rebellion against God it is not covered by Jesus sacrifice. Mark 3:28-29 "Truly I say to YOU that all things will be forgiven the sons of men, no matter what sins and blasphemies they blasphemously commit. However, whoever blasphemes against the holy spirit has no forgiveness forever, but is guilty of everlasting sin." Those who fight against the holy spirit, knowingly oppose God's will, willful rebellion and sinning is not forgiven. Hebrews 10:26 "For if we practice sin willfully after having received the accurate knowledge of the truth, there is no longer any sacrifice for sins left,"
1 John 1:9 and Acts 13:39, are referring to inherited human imperfections or the sin of Adam. Blaspheming the holy spirit is not part of that inherited sin, but is rather a wilful choice made by the individual. Such people have in effect joined Satan in rebelling against God and are no more covered by Jesus' sacrifice than the Devil is.
quote:
- It's ok to kill , as long as it's endorsed by God (Numbers 31:17).
- It's not ok to kill (Luke 18:20).
Luke 18:20 is quoting Exodus 20:13 "You must not murder" which is of course one of the ten Commandments given to the same people who did the killing in Numbers 31:17. There is no conflict since an execution is not murder, one is judice carried out under law, the other is not. God as Judge can certainly sentence people to death and have the Israelites carry out the execution.
quote:
(1) Jehovah is the first Elohim and the last Elohim. There can be only one first and only one last. Again, this rules out the possibility of any other Gods existing throughout all of eternity past and all of eternity future. It also again shows that Jehovah and Elohim are not different Gods.
(2) Jehovah is the only God (Elohim) that exists. This again rules out the possibility of other gods, lesser or greater, existing.
AS if Isaiah wasn't emphatic enough, the point is further re-inforced in Deuteronomy 6:4. "Hear, O Israel: The LORD [Jehovah] your God [Elohim] is one LORD [Jehovah]."
The Conclusion: The Bible proclaims that there is only one God in all existence. No other gods were ever created.
Jehovah is Almighty, no one is equal to him, he alone is the creator of all things. There are no other all powerful Gods like Jehovah, he is unique. We agree on that, what we disagree on is that Jesus is called a mighty god and yet is not part of Jehovah. You believe that the statements that Jehovah is the only God, prohibit the existence of other lesser 'gods' or mighty gods.
Angels in the Bible are called gods. (Psalm 82:1) "God is stationing himself in the assembly of the Divine One; In the middle of the gods he judges:" In this verse the word "elohim" (god) is used in regard to Jehovah's angels. (Psalm 8:5) "You also proceeded to make him a little less than godlike ones," Both scriptures use the Hebrew word "elohim" which means "gods" and when Paul quotes Psalms 8:5 "You made him a little lower than angels;" he uses the word 'angels' since that is who the 'gods' are in Psalms. So when God states that there are no other Gods, he is not saying he doesn't have any angels who are called gods, what he is saying is that there are not other Gods like Almighty Jehovah the creator of all things. The use of the term 'god' in those scriptures is in the absolute sense, not in a lesser sense, other wise it would be a major conflict of scripture, for the Bible writers who recorded the "no other Gods" also wrote about there being other gods. Obviously the writers never intended to imply that there were no other lesser gods, the statements can only be understood as stating that there were no other Gods like Jehovah. Jehovah is unique, he is all powerfully and not one can compare to him, there are no other Gods in the supreme sense.
Sincerely Yours; Wm Scott Anderson

This message is a reply to:
 Message 224 by Legend, posted 12-14-2004 7:41 PM Legend has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024