1 edit
The book and its author:
The Language of the New Testament, Eugene Van Ness Goetchius, Episcopal Theological Seminary, Cambridge, Mass, Charles Scribner's Sons, New York. 1965
According to what Dr. Goetchius told some of us who hired him as a GReek Tutor, "a god" in John 1:1 was much less likely grammatically to be the case.
Though he went over the technicalities of his explanation. I cannot remember them.
2 edits
===========================================
ummm, why would Jesus want to live inside a human, it doesn't make sense, he lives in heaven, as the scriptures say, at the 'right hand', of God.
=======================================
Robert, the same chapter in Romans which says that Christ is at the right hand of God (v.34) also says that Christ is in the believers (v.9-11).
God created man in the image of God for the purpose of indwelling man.
Remember that God placed the first created man and woman before the tree of life. That tree of life represented the life of God Himself. They never took the opportunity to eat of the tree of life. Had they done so they would not only have been created in God's image but would have had God within them too. God intended that this man live a united and mingled life with Himself.
He did not want simply a "good man". He wanted a "God man".
We have to see the difference between a man made in God's image and a man in God's image with God living within him.
Think of the glove in the shape of a human hand. It has that unique shape so that a human hand might fit comfortably into the glove.
We are made inwardly in a "God shaped" manner. As the hand fits into the glove so God Himself fits into man.
The incarnation of God into a man is part of the fulfillment of God's eternal purpose to live in man that man and God might be one united, and mutually indwelling entity.
Now please pay attention that Romans 8:34 does say Christ ... who also at the right hand of God ...". But Romans 8:10 says " But if Christ is in you ...".
He is not only Triune. He is also at the right hand of God and at the same time in the Christians here on earth.
Originally posted by jaywilllol, jaywill, you really should give up music and become a writer of fiction, you excel at it, that last post contained more fantasy than the Lord of the rings, trilogy !!!
[b]===========================================
ummm, why would Jesus want to live inside a human, it doesn't make sense, he lives in heaven, as the scriptures say, at the 'right hand', of God.
=======================================
Robert, the same chapter in Romans which says that Christ is at the right hand of God (v.34) also says that Christ i ...[text shortened]... o at the right hand of God and at the same time in the Christians here on earth.[/b]
Originally posted by Rajk999
how do you determine which is literal and which is figurative ?
That comes under reading the Bible with discernment. We all must dicide for ourselvelves what that discernment reveals.
(Like my new honey-coated language? ... 😀)[/b]
?? I don't understand it, but if you like using terms of endearment in debate formats, it's okay by me.
8 edits
Originally posted by NemesioI have addressed this before.
Actually, it says the Son of God is the firstborn of creation.
Created means not from eternity.
You keep equivocating but not addressing my explanations.
Nemesio
In that the Word who was from eternity put upon Himself flesh, blood, and humanity in His incarnation, THEN He became the Firstborn of all creation.
It is not as Arius taught - that He was the first creature created by God.
I have already proved that the Son says that He is the First and the Last:
"And when I saw Him, I fell at His feet as dead, and He placed His right hand on me, saying, Do not fear; I am the First and the Last and the living One; and I became dead, and behold, I am living forever and ever; and I have the keys of death and of Hades." (Rev. 1:17)
Here the Son of Man is the First and the Last. Yet Jehovah God in the Old Testament, the uncreated God, is the First and the Last -
"Thus says Jehovah King of Israel, And his Redeemer, Jehovah of hosts, I am the First and I am the Last, And apart from Me there is no God." (Isa. 44:6)
"Listen to Me, O Jacob, And Israel, whom I called; I am He, I am the First, I am also the Last" (Isa. 48:12)
The Son of Man is therefore the uncreated Jehovah God the King of Israel become a Man - Jesus Christ.
So the church fathers spoke of the Trinity, a term first seen in writing from Theophilus of Antioch (A.D. 115 - 188). And the way he used the term it is understood that it must have been accepted by that time by his audience.. THis was in his Book II,15 of Theophilus to Antolycus, in a comment on Genesis 1:1-13 he wrote:
"In like manner also the three days which were before the luminaries are types of the Trinity, of God and His Word, and His Wisdom."
My main point here is that this was, I believe, the earliest historical reference to the Trinity in Christian writing according to William Freeman.
[The Testimony of Church History Regarding the Mystery of the Triune God, William Freeman, Stream Publishers, 1976, page 8]
Originally posted by robbie carrobieBluster without substance.
lol, jaywill, you really should give up music and become a writer of fiction, you excel at it, that last post contained more fantasy than the Lord of the rings, trilogy !!!
You also have no rebuttle for the Zechariah passages on Jehovah of hosts sending Jehovah of hosts.
I think it is time for a change of subject from the biblical soundness of the Trinity.
Originally posted by jaywill''In that the Word who was from eternity put upon Himself flesh, blood, and humanity in His incarnation, THEN He became the Firstborn of all creation'', lol oh jaywill, you lamentable one, this could never be, because as the context shows, ALL OTHER THINGS were created for him and through him, the physical universe, the cosmos, the physical earth the angels and finally mankind and the animals, and naturally Christ came as a man AFTER all of these things were created, and AFTER his birth or creation in heaven, therefore he could not be the firstborn in the sense that you state, because 1.he had been born or created before, and 2. so had many others, both animate and inanimate, you are not making sense my friend!
I have addressed this before.
In that the Word who was from eternity put upon Himself flesh, blood, and humanity in His incarnation, [b]THEN He became the Firstborn of all creation.
It is not as Arius taught - that He was the first creature created by God.
I have already proved that the Son says that He is the First and the Last:
[ ...[text shortened]... ng the Mystery of the Triune God, William Freeman, Stream Publishers, 1976, page 8] [/b][/b]
Originally posted by jaywillsorry it was such an imaginative and well written piece of fiction i did not want to spoil it for you, but if you like i can show you the refutation!
Bluster without substance.
You also have no rebuttle for the Zechariah passages on Jehovah of hosts sending Jehovah of hosts.
I think it is time for a change of subject from the biblical soundness of the Trinity.
5 edits
Originally posted by robbie carrobie=======================================
''In that the Word who was from eternity put upon Himself flesh, blood, and humanity in His incarnation, THEN He became the Firstborn of all creation'', lol oh jaywill, you lamentable one, this could never be, because as the context shows, ALL OTHER THINGS were created for him and through him, the physical universe, the cosmos, the physical earth the ...[text shortened]... , and 2. so had many others, both animate and inanimate, you are not making sense my friend!
''In that the Word who was from eternity put upon Himself flesh, blood, and humanity in His incarnation, THEN He became the Firstborn of all creation''
=========================================
Yes. And your complaint to this is -
========================================
... this could never be, because as the context shows, ALL OTHER THINGS were created for him and through him, the physical universe, the cosmos, the physical earth the angels and finally mankind and the animals, and naturally Christ came as a man AFTER all of these things were created, and AFTER his birth or creation in heaven, therefore he could not be the firstborn in the sense that you state,
=========================================
I fail to see your point. You admit that all creation was created for Him. So humanity was created for Him before He became a man.
Robert, you must deal with the fact that the Son of Man says He is the First and the Last in Revelation 1:17 exactly as Jehovah God the Almighty - El'Shadai (as you have agreed) speaks in Isaiah 44:6,48:12.
That is not going to go away Robert. Are you hoping such passages will disappear or something ?
Secondly, we are told that the Redeemer was " foreknown before the foundation of the world BUT has been manifested in the last times for your sakes ..." (See 1 Peter 1:18-20)
The time of His manifestation was indeed after the creation of all things. But He was foreknown to hold this office before the creation of the universe.
The mystery of the reason of the creation of all things was hidden from generations:
" ... by revelation the mystery was made known to me, as I have written previously in brief, by which in reading it, you can perceive my understanding in the mystery of Christ, which in other generations was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed to His holy apostles and prophets in spirit." (Eph. 3:3-5)
The point argued here is that God could create all things for and unto the Godman Jesus Christ, yet keep the essential mystery of this plan hidden until the time of His manifestation as a Redeemer. This is true regardless of Christ's eternal pre-existence or not.
Your reason of the late incarnation of the Word as flesh timewise, is not strong enough to prove that He could not be the main object of all God's creating activity.
=======================================
because 1.he had been born or created before, and 2. so had many others, both animate and inanimate, you are not making sense my friend!
======================================
The Word who was with God and was God, before His incarnation as a man, is never said to be created at all. He had only divinity in eternity past. After incarnation He took upon Him humanity. In resurrectio He ascended back to the eternal throne with both divinity and humanity.
If you reason that the God Whom He WAS is another created God that is NOT the God with Whom the He was WITH, then you might have that kind of reasoning.
But most orthodox Christian teachers believe that in John 1:1 the God He WAS is the same God as the God that HE was WITH.
I think you would have to try to convince me from the NT that this is not so. I do not think you can succeed at this.
John says that God abides in the regenerated Christians - "Whosoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him and he in God." (1 John 4:15)
Yet Paul says that the Father dwells in the believers - "One God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and IN all." (Eph. 4:6)
The context shows that Paul means all members of Christ's Body, the saved.
3 edits
I wrote:
===============================
John says that God abides in the regenerated Christians - "Whosoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him and he in God." (1 John 4:15)
Yet Paul says that the Father dwells in the believers - "One God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and IN all." (Eph. 4:6)
====================================
To make myself clear, the indwelling of Christ in the believers is the indwelling of the God Who is the Father.
The believers can make NO DISCERNABLE SEPERATION between them. And there is nothing suggesting that the God abiding in the believers is a created one. Rather He is the eternal one, the Father, and the uncreated eternal life.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIt's not a question of logic versus scripture you know , it's using both together. If there was anything unscriptural about my last post then you would no doubt have challenged it as so. The fact that Jesus said he would judge mankind (a role usually reserved for God himself) is entirely scriptural. The fact that he said he was to live in us is also scriptural.
have you never read in the book of acts chapter 17 verse 11 ,' These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so', - I would therefore suggest that one should follow their example and rather than dismiss the scholarly study of sc ...[text shortened]... Boreans did, and you know what, it just might have a chance of broadening your understanding.
And yet you cannot challenge me on this or any of Jesus' sayings on the Holy Spirit. Instead you seem to be saying that we should ignore reasoning and just focus on scripture all the time. God doesn't live in a book and his truth would still be truth without any scripture.
I do not dismiss scripture I just think logic plays a part.
Why, for example , did Jesus say so many things that imply we are to think of him as God or part of the Godhead? If he was just a "spiritual being" would it not have been better to have stayed clear of all that and place a clear line between himself and God instead?
1 edit
Originally posted by jaywillis there any chance you could make your posts smaller as i find that by the time i have got to the end I am either lost trying to understand the various components and secondly it would save you a whole bunch of typing verses that have nothing to do with the context under discussion, and terms like Godman, and mystery are not really helping you much, also that the word, 'was God', you yourself had a distaste to discuss, because a perfectly sound rendering was devastating to this claim, how is it possible for god to die jaywill, that is what you are saying? does not this alone contradict your whole stance, IT IS NOT POSSIBLE FOR GOD TO DIE jaywill, and CHRIST does not ascend an is immediately given the throne, no he must wait, and get this, he SUBJECTS himself to God, get that again jaywill, he SUBJECTS himself to god, even after his resurrection and ascension to heaven he is SUBJECT to God, 1 Corinthians 15:28, ' And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all. the conclusion jaywill you are talking severe nonsense here , HOW is it possible for God to subject himself to himself, really think about what it is you are actually saying 😀
[b]=======================================
''In that the Word who was from eternity put upon Himself flesh, blood, and humanity in His incarnation, THEN He became the Firstborn of all creation''
=========================================
Yes. And your complaint to this is -
========================================
... this could never be, he context shows that Paul means [b]all members of Christ's Body, the saved.[/b]