|
Author
|
Topic: Is Jesus God?
|
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member
|
|
Message 256 of 492 (553247)
04-02-2010 10:00 AM
|
Reply to: Message 254 by Peg
04-01-2010 7:57 PM
|
|
Re: Jesus WAS God in earliest NT teaching
Unfortunately, the scriptures that have been used simply do not mesh with the many that I have posted which show the opposite. That's the Bible for you  Yes, there are contradictions. Yes, some passages say that Jesus was not the exact same thing as God. But regardless, you have been provided passages that do say that Jesus was God.
Even Jesus own words about who he was do not fit with the idea that he is God. Tell me why Jesus did not announce that he was God in the flesh? Rather he said said: I am God’s Son. (John 10:36) That's not exactly what my KJV Bible says...
quote:
36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?
Jesus was asking them if they were accusing him of blashphemy because he said that he was the Son of God. But take a look at these lines from John 10:
quote:
30 I and my Father are one. ... 38 But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.
He is one with God and they are in each other. Its clear that Jesus was God. Full context:
quote:
23 And Jesus walked in the temple in Solomon's porch. 24 Then came the Jews round about him, and said unto him, How long dost thou make us to doubt? If thou be the Christ, tell us plainly. 25 Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me. 26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you. 27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: 28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. 29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand. 30 I and my Father are one. 31 Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him. 32 Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me? 33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God. 34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? 35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; 36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God? 37 If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not. 38 But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.
Tell me why, if he was God, he said 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. (John 5:30) Everything is by the will of God (the Father).
Also, explain why when he was on the torture stake, he prayed to God when he cried out My God, my God why have you forsaken me. (Matthew 27:46) And then after he had been resurrected he told Mary Magdalene I am ascending to my Father and your Father and to my God and your God. (John 20:1, 17) Because he was man too. Jesus and God are not exactly identical.
And no one has even attempted to explain what John meant when he said under inspiration No man has seen God at any time. Please provide me with the verse (again? [so I don't have to dig for it]) and I'll give it a go.
The incarnation was not something the apostles or Jesus taught...it came much later by the very men who were killing their christian brothers for not believing the new teaching that they themselves introduced with the help of emperor constantine...a pagan worshiper. It was interpreted... kinda like a young earth, or not receiving blood, or a lot of the other components of religious dogma.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 254 by Peg, posted 04-01-2010 7:57 PM | | Peg has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 262 by Peg, posted 04-02-2010 9:05 PM | | New Cat's Eye has not replied |
|
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 257 of 492 (553248)
04-02-2010 10:02 AM
|
Reply to: Message 255 by cavediver
04-02-2010 8:51 AM
|
|
Re: Jesus WAS God in earliest NT teaching
I have to say that that is not my impression - for every passage that seems to (ambiguously) read in favour, there is another that reads (quite definitely) against. Yes, you can read between the lines and take away that Jesus is an aspect of God. You can just as (if not far more) easily take away that Jesus is most certainly not God. I would say that there is no way in hell that you can unabiguously take away that Jesus is God. Much like the trinity, for such supposedly important concepts, God is exceptionally (suspiciously) vague on these matters... Yeah, you're right. Its almost as if you can make the Bible say anything. I was under the impression that Peg thought there was nothing in the NT that supported Jesus being divine. I think its been shown that there are some things in there that say it.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 255 by cavediver, posted 04-02-2010 8:51 AM | | cavediver has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 266 by Peg, posted 04-03-2010 7:19 AM | | New Cat's Eye has replied |
|
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 108 days) Posts: 3571 Joined: 11-23-2007
|
|
|
Message 258 of 492 (553260)
04-02-2010 11:00 AM
|
Reply to: Message 254 by Peg
04-01-2010 7:57 PM
|
|
Re: Jesus WAS God in earliest NT teaching
Unfortunately, the scriptures that have been used simply do not mesh with the many that I have posted which show the opposite.
Even Jesus own words about who he was do not fit with the idea that he is God. Tell me why Jesus did not announce that he was God in the flesh? Rather he said said: I am God’s Son. (John 10:36)
Tell me why, if he was God, he said 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. (John 5:30)
Also, explain why when he was on the torture stake, he prayed to God when he cried out My God, my God why have you forsaken me. (Matthew 27:46)
And then aftere he had been resurrected he told Mary Magdalene I am ascending to my Father and your Father and to my God and your God. (John 20:1, 17)
And no one has even attempted to explain what John meant when he said under inspiration No man has seen God at any time. That is simply not true Peg. I have demonstrated several times now that that expression can and is qualified, by examples like Gen 18 and that Moses was asking to see Gods true nature. I think there is a greater point going on here. We often dont see things from others perspectives. I realized the other day that you truely believe in your mind what you are advocating because you have always been taught it and we are trying to force something down your throat. Perhaps the best that can be offered is that we all consider eachothers points. Im more interested at this point whether yourself and the other Christians consider this a matter of fellowship, whether you from the start consider such things mattersof felowship. Do you cosider others here as Christians because they do not believe as you do Back on trackhere however, I understand all your contentions about Jesus seeming dependancy on God, his being called a son, angels doing things for God. But yousimply cannot aois the fact that angels and men are not ASCRIBED with all the attributes of God. No angel is called the first and the Last, the Alpha and Omega. This point simply cannot be avoided or argued away. hey Just think about it and we will consider your positionas well
the meaning of 'soul' has changed since it was written in ancient times, I get the impression you are going with the current meaning of soul....as some life force that exists outside the physical body?
The original meaning of the word soul, as it is written in the scriptures, means 'the living body' but i wont take us off topic No what I meant was that God is everything, or everything in existence is God material. So God manipulating that material or presenting himself in humaan form would be relatively nothing as Catholic Scientist has indacted
Not at all. Visions were given to people so that they could be informed of what was to happen or what they were to do, or so that they could be assured that God was with them. God does not exist in any form,he is a spirit without a body, so he is invisble to human eyes. So obviously God gives us an image that we can understand...he gives us an image, but not of his true self. I agree. But whether it is a manifestation or a vision he is presenting himself in such a way as to say I am speaking to you in this form, it is I, God who addresses you. Like I said, we will consider your position if you will consider ours. That is the best we can hope for at this point. Beliefs and convictions run deep and change is never easy, whether its you or I. I have a friend who is JW and she recently died and left her daughter behind, because she signed a statement saying she would not recieve a transfusion, which have easily saved her life. True story again. It was very shocking to me, but as I said convictions run deep
Ill let you decide Thanks, if it is appropriate, Id like to discuss what constitutes fellowship and the areas where each of us believes that we need to part company in connection with excommunication. ill write it up and pass it through Admin and of course cavediver for approval in content and English Edited by EMA, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 254 by Peg, posted 04-01-2010 7:57 PM | | Peg has not replied |
|
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 108 days) Posts: 3571 Joined: 11-23-2007
|
|
|
Message 259 of 492 (553263)
04-02-2010 11:17 AM
|
Reply to: Message 255 by cavediver
04-02-2010 8:51 AM
|
|
Re: Jesus WAS God in earliest NT teaching
Much like the trinity, for such supposedly important concepts, God is exceptionally (suspiciously) vague on these matters... Welcome cavediver, also known to EAM as Space Ghost How else could the Apostle through inspiration made or stated it any clearer. If one does not understand what FORM of God means, he clears it up in the next two phrases, "did not think that EQUALITY with God was something to be GRASPED". You cannot let go of something you ARE NOT HOLDING". Then he says "He emptied himself of the EQUALITY and took on the form of a servant, made in the likeness of men" You cannot empty yourself of something you do not have. but the phrases must be read together as in any proper evaluation of a sentence, correct? In one verse all of Peg contentions concerning Christ are refuted That he is indeed God That he has manifested himself in the form of Man, or the likeness of men I dont see how he could hve made it any clearer. What language could he have used. The Apostle would be counter productive in even referncing Christ as God, if he was not and everybody already knew that, what would be the point of demonstrating that Christ was not equal to God, when Christ Paul and everybody else already knew that point. It would do more harm than good, if he was not God and everybody alrady knew that, because he was mere man As i keep pointing out to Peg, no Angel or man is ever referenced as Not being equal to God, for the very reason, that everybody already knows this fact As I keep pointing out to Peg, no one else is described as having the exact characteristics of God, except Christ. So the passages that seem to suggest he is less than God, should of course be understood as and during his servant state, the place where he emptied himself of these qualities, in figurative sense of course Concerning EAMs English Cavediver writes, in times past, "Can you do Better" I thought that was both helpful and funny. Also, the passage I referenced yours and Oni's name as being loathsome and vile, I was ofcourse kidding, I wanted to see if I could get a rise out of you. I hope you took it in the spirit it was given, in fun EAM Edited by EMA, : No reason given. Edited by EMA, : No reason given. Edited by EMA, : No reason given. Edited by EMA, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 255 by cavediver, posted 04-02-2010 8:51 AM | | cavediver has not replied |
|
kbertsche
Member (Idle past 2157 days) Posts: 1427 From: San Jose, CA, USA Joined: 05-10-2007
|
|
|
Message 260 of 492 (553290)
04-02-2010 2:55 PM
|
Reply to: Message 247 by Peg
03-31-2010 7:45 PM
|
|
Re: Jesus WAS God in earliest NT teaching
quote:
quote:
Yes, but this doesn't prove that it was not God. The phrase "The angel of the Lord" sometimes suggests an incarnation of God (or as a pre-incarnate form of Jesus), as EMA has been discussing in Genesis.
can you provide some scriptures showing this to be the case?
This is from the entry "angel" in Easton's Bible Dictionary:
Easton's Bible Dictionary writes:
Angel: a word signifying, both in the Hebrew and Greek, a messenger, and hence employed to denote any agent God sends forth to execute his purposes. ... But its distinctive application is to certain heavenly intelligences whom God employs in carrying on his government of the world. The name does not denote their nature but their office as messengers. The appearances to Abraham at Mamre (Gen. 18:2, 22. Comp. 19:1), to Jacob at Peniel (Gen. 32:24, 30), to Joshua at Gilgal (Josh. 5:13, 15), of the Angel of the Lord, were doubtless manifestations of the Divine presence, foreshadowings of the incarnation, revelations before the fulness of the time of the Son of God. ...
As you see, it lists the following references: Gen. 18:2, 22. Comp. 19:1; Gen. 32:24, 30; Josh. 5:13, 15.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 247 by Peg, posted 03-31-2010 7:45 PM | | Peg has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 264 by Peg, posted 04-02-2010 9:22 PM | | kbertsche has seen this message but not replied |
|
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member
|
Re: Jesus WAS God in earliest NT teaching
How else could the Apostle through inspiration made or stated it any clearer. If one does not understand what FORM of God means, he clears it up in the next two phrases, "did not think that EQUALITY with God was something to be GRASPED". You cannot let go of something you ARE NOT HOLDING". Then he says "He emptied himself of the EQUALITY and took on the form of a servant, made in the likeness of men" You cannot empty yourself of something you do not have. but the phrases must be read together as in any proper evaluation of a sentence, correct? In one verse all of Peg contentions concerning Christ are refuted That he is indeed God What verse is that? You should always include them anyways...
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 259 by Dawn Bertot, posted 04-02-2010 11:17 AM | | Dawn Bertot has not replied |
|
Peg
Member (Idle past 4955 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: 11-22-2008
|
Re: Jesus WAS God in earliest NT teaching
Catholic Scientist writes: Everything is by the will of God (the Father) thats right....yet if Jesus WAS the father, then everything would be his own will and his comment "I cannot do a single thing of my own initiative" is a contradiction. If Jesus was the father, then everything was Jesus will.
Catholic Scientist writes: Please provide me with the verse (again? [so I don't have to dig for it]) and I'll give it a go. John 1:18 "No man has seen God at any time; the only-begotten god who is in the bosom [position] with the Father is the one that has explained him"
|
Peg
Member (Idle past 4955 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: 11-22-2008
|
Re: Jesus WAS God in earliest NT teaching
cavediver writes: Much like the trinity, for such supposedly important concepts, God is exceptionally (suspiciously) vague on these matters... thats right, the scriptures are practically void on these matters because.... I'll let some theogian scholars answer why
The Encyclopedia of Religion: Theologians agree that the New Testament also does not contain an explicit doctrine of the Trinity. The New Encyclopdia Britannica: Neither the word Trinity nor the explicit doctrine appears in the New Testament. The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology : TheN[ew] T[estament] does not contain the developed doctrine of the Trinity. ‘The Bible lacks the express declaration that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are of equal essence’ [said Protestant theologian Karl Barth]. Yale University professor E.Washburn Hopkins affirmed: To Jesus and Paul the doctrine of the trinity was apparently unknown; ... they say nothing about it.Origin and Evolution of Religion. Historian Arthur Weigall notes: Jesus Christ never mentioned such a phenomenon, and nowhere in the New Testament does the word ‘Trinity’ appear. The idea was only adopted by the Church three hundred years after the death of our Lord.The Paganism in Our Christianity.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 255 by cavediver, posted 04-02-2010 8:51 AM | | cavediver has not replied |
|
Peg
Member (Idle past 4955 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: 11-22-2008
|
Re: Jesus WAS God in earliest NT teaching
kbertsche writes: But its distinctive application is to certain heavenly intelligences whom God employs in carrying on his government of the world. The name does not denote their nature but their office as messengers. The appearances to Abraham at Mamre (Gen. 18:2, 22. Comp. 19:1), to Jacob at Peniel (Gen. 32:24, 30), to Joshua at Gilgal (Josh. 5:13, 15), of the Angel of the Lord, were doubtless manifestations of the Divine presence, foreshadowings of the incarnation, revelations before the fulness of the time of the Son of God. The problem here is that that in one sentence they say that angels are 'heavenly intelligences whom God employs...' they also say that these 'messengers' appeard to Abraham, Jacob and Joshua as 'the angel of the Lord' but they do NOT say that the 'angels of the Lord' were God himself. They state that these 'angels of the Lord were manifestations of the Divine presence' which i agree with. If an angel of the Lord came to you, it most certainly was a manifestation of Gods presence.....but it wasnt God Himself. The messenger was still an angel sent by God just as all the verses of scripture i posted in msg 244...posted again below:
verses in msg 244 writes: Exodus 3:2-4 "Then Jehovah’s angel appeared to him in a flame of fire in the midst of a thornbush. ...4 When Jehovah saw that he turned aside to inspect, God at once called to him out of the midst of the thornbush and said" Judges 2:1 "Then Jehovahs angel went up from Gilgal to Bochim and said "I proceeded to bring you up out of Egypt and to bring you into the land which I swore to your forefathers...4 And it came about taht as soon as Jehovahs angel had spoken these words to all the sons of Isreal..." Acts 7:37-38 This is the Moses 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. Acts 7:53 "YOU who received the Law as transmitted by angels but have not kept it. Hebrews 2:2 "For if the word spoken through angels proved to be firm..." Galatians 3:19 "Why, then, the Law? ... and it was transmitted through angels..." Acts 7:30 And when forty years were fulfilled, there appeared to him in the wilderness of Mount Si′nai an angel in the fiery flame of a thornbush..." Of course these messengers represent God and so do represent the divine presence....but they are NOT God himself. If they were, why are they called his messengers? It would make no sense to have messengers if God was delivering the message himself.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 260 by kbertsche, posted 04-02-2010 2:55 PM | | kbertsche has seen this message but not replied |
|
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 108 days) Posts: 3571 Joined: 11-23-2007
|
|
|
Message 265 of 492 (553414)
04-03-2010 2:36 AM
|
Reply to: Message 264 by Peg
04-02-2010 9:22 PM
|
|
Re: Jesus WAS God in earliest NT teaching
thats right....yet if Jesus WAS the father, then everything would be his own will and his comment "I cannot do a single thing of my own initiative" is a contradiction. Not if he willingly set aside these privledeges, for the good of mankind, correct? He willingly set aside his deity, not literaly, but in purpose to be created a little lower than the angels and was found in the in the likeness of Men. To become a man means he would need to experience and live as a man with certain limitations, of his own freewill. You have not touched this point that I have now made numerous times, over again and again. His limitations as you see them were of his own freewill and he could as God have chosen to revoke those at any minute, but he did not. What angel or man could call down 10000 angels, should he decided to so through his father. yet the father image was due stricly and because he chose to be born a man, OF HIS OWN FREEWILL But it does not mean that he was not God as the rest of the scriptures concerning him indicate. If one wants to know what Philipians 2 means look at Colosians chapter one concerning him If one wishes to understand Philipians and Colosians, look at John the first chapter. The ambiguity that you suggest exist Peg does infact not exists concerning his deity if for example Philipians 2 were the only passage dealing with his alleged deity, then you have a point. happily it is not. the ones above and to may others give a CLEAR picture of what is being taught. isolating passages allows one a certain amount of ambiguity. The toatlity of the scriptures concerning this doctrine are very clear
If Jesus was the father, then everything was Jesus will. Jesus was not the Father and neither was Jehovah before the incarnation, there was simply Jehovah God. God was not the "father of spirits" Hebrews, before he created spirits. God was not the creator before he created anything, he was simply and soley God However the His will, thy Will and my Will makes perfect sense in a SELF-WILLED servant state. Besides the Peg if Jesus were simply a created being in the form of an angel angel, then he could not truely be called the unique or only begotten Son of God. Something had to be of God essence for him to be a unique Son of God We are all created by God, even if it is by birth. if there is not deity, then he was and is not Gods ONLY BEGOTTEN Son. We are created spirits, created and infused by Gods creative act by birth. If Jesus was simply a created being, then born (infused)of man by god, then it would follow that Jesus, the created being is no different than ourselves. But we are not unique or only begotten sons of God. So if jesus is a created being an not truely God, then why is his birth any different than anyone elses So God simply infused (overshadowed) Mary with a created before birth being
but they do NOT say that the 'angels of the Lord' were God himself. Your assuming that in a clear cut case as in Gen 18, that it simply does not mean exacally what it says, "the Lord spoke with Abraham" genesis 18[qs]22 The men turned away and went toward Sodom, but Abraham remained standing before the LORD. [e] 23 Then Abraham approached him and said: "Will you sweep away the righteous with the wicked? Standing before the Lord and Abraham approched him does not have to mean an angel or messenger and why would one assume it meant that to begin with, when the language is so clear Genesis 19 The two angels arrived at Sodom in the evening, and Lot was sitting in the gateway of the city. these two are described as angels, the Man in 18 is not decribed as an angel ever, but the Lord Why make any more out of it than what the text indicates EAM Edited by EMA, : No reason given. Edited by EMA, : No reason given. Edited by EMA, : No reason given. Edited by EMA, : No reason given. Edited by EMA, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 264 by Peg, posted 04-02-2010 9:22 PM | | Peg has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 267 by Peg, posted 04-03-2010 7:28 AM | | Dawn Bertot has replied |
|
Peg
Member (Idle past 4955 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: 11-22-2008
|
Re: Jesus WAS God in earliest NT teaching
Catholic Scientist writes: I was under the impression that Peg thought there was nothing in the NT that supported Jesus being divine. I think its been shown that there are some things in there that say it. please dont get me wrong, i certainly DO believe Jesus was divine. I just dont believe he is Jehovah, the Creator, the God of the OT. I believe as the scriptures state that Jesus is Gods Son, his only begotten son, the firstborn of all Gods creations.
Colossians 1:15: He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation
|
Peg
Member (Idle past 4955 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: 11-22-2008
|
Re: Jesus WAS God in earliest NT teaching
EMA writes: if for example Philipians 2 were the only passage dealing with his alleged deity, then you have a point. happily it is not. the ones above and to may others give a CLEAR picture of what is being taught. the problem is that you go beyond saying Jesus is a diety....You are saying he is the Creator, the Almighty Jehovah, YWHY They are not the same. They are both diety, one is the father and one is the son. One was created the other existed eternally. The son is subject to the father for the father is greater then the Son. The Son was sent to earth as a man to do the will of the Father. The Son became flesh in order to bring order back to the universe, at his Fathers request. The Son was killed and the Father resurrected him from the dead. They are two individuals...two dieties who exist with a myriad other dieties in the heavens.
|
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 108 days) Posts: 3571 Joined: 11-23-2007
|
|
|
Message 268 of 492 (553467)
04-03-2010 10:44 AM
|
Reply to: Message 267 by Peg
04-03-2010 7:28 AM
|
|
Re: Jesus WAS God in earliest NT teaching
the problem is that you go beyond saying Jesus is a diety....You are saying he is the Creator, the Almighty Jehovah, YWHY I didnt say he was the creator, John and Paul did, not the beatles the Apostles Col 1:13 "For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities-- all things have been created through Him and for Him." Rev 22:13 "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End." Isaiah 44:6 "Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the LORD of hosts: 'I am the first and I am the last, And there is no God besides Me there is only one God Peg, eternal in character and nature. Created beings are not God eternal.
New Living Translation (2007) I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End." English Standard Version (2001) I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end. New American Standard Bible (1995) "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end." International Standard Version (2008) I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end. GOD'S WORD Translation (1995) I am the A and the Z, the first and the last, the beginning and the end. King James Bible I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last. American King James Version I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last. American Standard Version I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end. Bible in Basic English I am the First and the Last, the start and the end. Douay-Rheims Bible I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end. Darby Bible Translation I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end. English Revised Version I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end. Webster's Bible Translation I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last. Weymouth New Testament I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End. World English Bible I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End. Young's Literal Translation I am the Alpha and the Omega -- the Beginning and End -- the First and the Last. Geneva Study Bible I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last. People's New Testament 22:13 I am Alpha and Omega. See PNT Re 1:8. The three titles given here have a similar signification. The first and the last. See Re 1:17. Wesley's Notes 22:13 I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last - Who exist from everlasting to everlasting. How clear, incontestable a proof, does our Lord here give of his divine glory! Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary 13. I am Alpha-Greek, ". the Alpha and the Omega." A, B, Vulgate, Syriac, Origen, and Cyprian transpose thus, "the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End." Andreas supports English Version. Compare with these divine titles assumed here by the Lord Jesus, Re 1:8, 17; 21:6. At the winding up of the whole scheme of revelation He announces Himself as the One before whom and after whom there is no God. Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary 22:6-19 The Lord Jesus spake by the angel, solemnly confirming the contents of this book, particularly of this last vision. He is the Lord God faithful and true. Also by his messengers; the holy angels showed them to holy men of God. They are things that must shortly be done; Christ will come quickly, and put all things out of doubt. And by the integrity of that angel who had been the apostle's interpreter. He refused to accept religious worship from John, and reproved him for offering it. This presents another testimony against idolatrous worship of saints and angels. God calls every one to witness to the declarations here made. This book, thus kept open, will have effect upon men; the filthy and unjust will be more so, but it will confirm, strengthen, and further sanctify those who are upright with God. Never let us think that a dead or disobedient faith will save us, for the First and the Last has declared that those alone are blessed who do his commandments. It is a book that shuts out form heaven all wicked and unrighteous persons, particularly those who love and make lies, therefore cannot itself be a lie. There is no middle place or condition. Jesus, who is the Spirit of prophecy, has given his churches this morning-light of prophecy, to assure them of the light of the perfect day approaching. All is confirmed by an open and general invitation to mankind, to come and partake freely of the promises and of the privileges of the gospel. The Spirit, by the sacred word, and by convictions and influence in the sinner's conscience, says, Come to Christ for salvation; and the bride, or the whole church, on earth and in heaven, says, Come and share our happiness. Lest any should hesitate, it is added, Let whosoever will, or, is willing, come and take of the water of life freely. May every one who hears or reads these words, desire at once to accept the gracious invitation. All are condemned who should dare to corrupt or change the word of God, either by adding to it, or taking from it. Isaiah 44:6 "Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the LORD of hosts: 'I am the first and I am the last, And there is no God besides Me John 1 "All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being." if after this you still believe that Christ is not God eternal, then so be it. We will indeed have to agree to disagree. hopefully we have given eachother insights to eachothers viewpoints EAM Edited by EMA, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 267 by Peg, posted 04-03-2010 7:28 AM | | Peg has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 269 by Peg, posted 04-03-2010 4:05 PM | | Dawn Bertot has replied |
|
Peg
Member (Idle past 4955 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: 11-22-2008
|
Re: Jesus WAS God in earliest NT teaching
EMA writes: I didnt say he was the creator, John and Paul did, not the beatles the Apostles Col 1:13 "For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities-- all things have been created through Him and for Him." Yes, Jesus did have a hand in the creation, but you have to ask, did he do it alone? As the firstborn of all creation, he existed before all other things, not alone, but with YWHY. That is why he is called Gods 'only begotten' because Jesus is the only 'direct' creation of God. All other things came into existence by Jesus THROUGH the power and direction of Jehovah. This does not make Jesus, Jehovah. They are still two separate entities. Remember Proverbs 8:27 When [God] prepared the heavens I was there; when he decreed a horizon upon the face of the surging waters, when he made firm the cloud masses above, ... when he decreed the foundations of the earth, then I came to be beside him as a master worker... EMA writes: there is only one God Peg, eternal in character and nature. Created beings are not God eternal. thats exactly right and its the reason why Jesus cannot be Jehovah. Jehovah is the Alpha and Omega in the OT, but you read the alpha and omega in revelation and assume its talking about Jesus only because of the trinity teaching. Look at Rev 1:8 "I am the Al'pha and the O.me'ga, ... the Almighty There is only one 'Almighty' in the OT and its always used in reference to YWHY. The apostle John was not speaking of Jesus when he refered to the Alpha and Omega...he is refering to the A&O from the OT...YWHY because the coming of Jesus is by the grace of YWHY.
EMA writes: if after this you still believe that Christ is not God eternal, then so be it. We will indeed have to agree to disagree. Yes we will. And i guess we will know if the trinity is true or not in due time when God himself settles the issue.
|
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 108 days) Posts: 3571 Joined: 11-23-2007
|
|
|
Message 270 of 492 (553588)
04-04-2010 1:53 AM
|
Reply to: Message 269 by Peg
04-03-2010 4:05 PM
|
|
Re: Jesus WAS God in earliest NT teaching
All other things came into existence by Jesus THROUGH the power and direction of Jehovah. I guess you knew where I was going to go from here. I dont want to be nit picky but I dont believe it says he had a hand in it, it says, "there is NOTHING made that is made, that was not made by and through him" I assume nothing means everything created, which would include Jesus, which means we have an aweful contradiction, that either the scriptures are true or Christ HAD HAND IN CREATING HIMSELF Yikes!!!!
All other things came into existence by Jesus This seems to be an addition by yourself or someone and it avoids what the plain text states This being the case as stated above, the expression "firstborn of all creation" would also be a contradiction of the expression, that "there is NOTHING THAT is MADE, THAT WAS NOT MADE BY AND THROUGH HIM" It would seem to make more sense therefore, that the expression "firstborn of all creation" would have to do with his birth as a man, since he did not create himself or did he have a hand in creating himself, but he was the creator of ALL THINGS He is also called the "firstborn from the dead". Not that he is the first person ever resurrected, but that his resurrection has superiority over all others, because of its nature, purpose and the fact that he did not die again. His creation as a man has superiority over all other births, because of who and what he was, God. Simply put, he cannot be the creator of ALL THINGS, as the scriptures clearly indicate and be a creature before his incarnation
thats exactly right and its the reason why Jesus cannot be Jehovah. Jehovah is the Alpha and Omega in the OT, but you read the alpha and omega in revelation and assume its talking about Jesus only because of the trinity teaching. Look at Rev 1:8 "I am the Al'pha and the O.me'ga, ... the Almighty There is only one 'Almighty' in the OT and its always used in reference to YWHY. The apostle John was not speaking of Jesus when he refered to the Alpha and Omega...he is refering to the A&O from the OT...YWHY because the coming of Jesus is by the grace of YWHY. the Apostle John was not speaking at all, Jesus was and he clearly describes himslef and the A&O, beginning and end. Revelations 2:8 "To the angel of the church in Smyrna write:
These are the words of him who is the First and the Last, who died and came to life again Now what arrogance of any Angel, or created being to declare himself as such. But if he is indeed God, it makes perfect sense
Yes we will. And i guess we will know if the trinity is true or not in due time when God himself settles the issue. Peg I am not mad, and you are a powerful teacher of Gods Word. Im not even sure this is a matter of fellowship. it may or may not be, lets explore it together. i would like to know your position on this as fellowshiping or anything else that makes this difference. As soon as I write the OP hopefully the other Christians and others will join in to add helpful information EAM Edited by EMA, : No reason given. Edited by EMA, : No reason given. Edited by EMA, : No reason given. Edited by EMA, : No reason given. Edited by EMA, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 269 by Peg, posted 04-03-2010 4:05 PM | | Peg has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 271 by Peg, posted 04-04-2010 5:37 AM | | Dawn Bertot has replied |
|
™ Version 4.2