05 Jun 09
10 edits
Originally posted by robbie carrobie=========================================
Gentle reader, let us take a moment for reflection,
Truth is generally the best vindication against slander. - Abraham Lincoln,
therefore let us proceed to examine the second text, that has been proffered, to persuade us of the divinity of the Christ. That of course being, Revelation 5:12,13, as quoted from above.
"Worthy is the Lamb tha ch Christ himself would have none of , but until then gentle reader, have peace 🙂
"Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power and riches and wisdom and might and honour and glory and blessing... To Him who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb, be blessing and honour and glory and dominion forever and ever" (Rev. 5:12-13).
you will of course notice that there are two entities here, the one who sits on the throne, and the Lamb. where is the third part of the triune God, the Holy spirit, who can tell, but that is not our objective, for if we can clearly identify these two entities, it will generally help us to see the distinction between the two.
======================================
I have not said that there is no distinction between the Second of the Triune God and the Third. I have said that there is no separation. Given the whole revelation of the Bible, where any One of the Three are, the other Two mutually indwell that One so as to make Them distinct but not separated.
And the Third of the Triune God is the eyes of the second. The seven eyes are the seven Spirits sent forth into all the earth -
" ... and the seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth" (5:6)
The seven Spirits of God are ranked with God the Father and Christ is Revelation 1:4,5) - "Grace to you and peace from Him who is and who was and who is coming, and from the seven Spirits who are before His throne, and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the Firstborn from the dead, and the Ruler of the kings of the earth."
The Father, the Holy Spirit (the seven Spirits), and the Son are in this salutation at the beginning of the book. So this, among other reasons, assures us that the seven Spirits of God signify the Holy Spirit, the Third of the Trinity.
=================================
firstly the one identified on the throne is none other than the Almighty himself, how do we know this? the immediate context helps us, cast your mind back a few verses, we can state quite clearly, that the one on the throne is the Almighty himself,
===================================
This does not argue against the incarnation of God in Christ. The Word was God (John 1:1). Teaching that the Word was another God as Russell does is polytheism.
==================================
"Each of the four living creatures had six wings and was covered with eyes all around, even under his wings. Day and night they never stop saying: "Holy, holy, holy is the Lord God Almighty, who was, and is, and is to come."Revelation 4:8
====================================
The mention of "holy, holy, holy" - ie. the three-fold praise of holy implies the Triune God.
And we also know that the Third of the Triune God - the Spirit, is meant because of the similarity of the seven Spirits here to the seven pipes of golden oil and seven eyes in Zechariah 3:9, 4:10. And when the prophet asks about the meaning of the vision, the angel say:
"This is the word of Jehovah to Zerubbabel, Not by might nor by power, but by My Spirit, says the Lord." (Zech. 4:6)
We know that that the seven Spirits mean the Spirit of Jehovah God, the Lord. That is the Holy Spirit in the New Testament who is ranked with the Father and the Son in Revelation 1:4,5.
==============================
thus is is quite easy to see, that the one who resides on the throne, is the Almighty himself. This word, almighty, is from a Hebrew word, el shaddaih, which is used with reference to God alone, never the Christ, the Greek equivalent being, pantokrator, thus we are able to determine from the original languages that the Bible writers meant us to make a clear distinction between the two.
=====================================
This does not argue that there is no incarnation of God and no Triune God. I have pointed out before that the Almighty says that He is the Alpha and the Omega in [b]Revelation 1:8 - I am the Alpha and the Omega, says the Lord God ... the Almighty" Yet the coming Lord Jesus Christ also says that He is the Alpha and the Omega in Revelation 22:12 - "Behold, I come quickly, and My reward is with Me to render to each one as his work is. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End ... I Jesus have sent My angel to testify to you these things for the churches ..." (See Rev. 22:12-16,20) [/b]
Stressing that the Almighty God is on the throne in chapter 4 does not negate the revelation of the Triune God.
====================================
the question is, is it feasible to give glory to God and to the Christ, and the answer is yes, entirely, doe this make them co-equal as the trinitarians would have us believe, not for the Christ himself taught something entirely different, even after his resurrection to heaven. Please note what the scripture states with regard to the Christ,
======================================
The net effect of Russell's polytheism is to creat such mistrust of Christ in the mind of the student that his heart is cold towards asking Jesus to come into his heart. That leads to the lack of assurance and many other errors which Robbie has displayed on this Forum.
If one does not believe that Jesus Christ is to be prayed to or called on, he will not be willing to receive Christ as Lord.
Calling oneself "trinitarian" or not is much less importance. Receiving Jesus Christ into one's heart is of the utmost importance. The heresy of Arius is designed to reduce the chances that a person would trust Jesus Christ to come into them to be their Lord and Savior.
A perculiar kind of religious pride insulates them from calling on Jesus or praying to Jesus, It may even make their heart cold towards praying to the Father to be saved in Christ as Lord. This polytheism of Robbie is dangerous because it makes the heart cold towards the Lord Jesus and shut to the Holy Spirit as the life giving Spirit..
=======================
"He humbled himself and became obedient as far as death, yes, death on a torture stake. For this very reason also God exalted him to a superior position and kindly gave him the name that is above every other name." Philipians - 2:8, 9.
============================
Yes. He did not exalt Himself. And the Father exalted Him not based upon what He was before incarnation but because of His obedience as a man. For that reason the Father exalted the man Jesus.
Even if Christ had not obeyed and had not gone to the cross, He had the right to ascend to the eternal throne as equal with God as He was before. But He did not exalt Himself on that regard. And He did not exalt Himself on any regard.
The Father exalted Him here, not because He was the Word who was with God. Though that was true, He was exalted because He was obedient unto death in submission to the will of the Father.
Robbie's attempts to use Philippians to deny the Deity of Christ still fail. It should be clear that a perfect God can express Himself as perfect submission as well as perfect authority. And as a man God incarnated and expressed Himself in Jesus, as perfect submission to authority.
It escapes Robbie that there is perfect authority and perfect submission to authority in the same Triune God.
===============================
thus for his faithfulness and loyalty, Jesus was resurrected, not as a human, but as “a life-giving spirit,” and to a superior position that any other of Gods creatures.
==================================
Though "the last Adam became a life giving Spirit" this does not mean that today Jesus is not human. He is still today God (Hebrews 1:8) as well as "the man Christ Jesus"
"For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus." (1 Tim. 2:5)
The above passage teaches that there is ONE God, not a polytheistic TWO as Arius, Russell, and Robbie teach, ie. God Almighty and the lesser created God of John 1:1, the Logos.
The above passage also clearly states that Jesus is still a MAN. So First Corinthians 15:45 - that "the last Adam became a life givng Spirit"[/b] does not make the last Adam no longer a MAN.
============================
notice that Christ Jesus on every occasion, whether by action or deed glorified the father,
===============================
That does not negate that God was incarnate in the man Jesus. The Word was God. And the Word became flesh (John 1:14)
Arius, Russell, and Robbie deal with this difficulty by proposing polytheism, ie. there must be TWO Gods in the Bible.
I will not reply to each and every line of Robbie's post. I just reiterate that he does not know that he is born of God. He does not know that he is redeemed for certain. He does not know that Christ lives in him. He is hoping for the best. And this hesitation and wavering he self deceptively regards as humility.
The damage of Jehovah Witness doctrine is evident. It is no accident. It is designed to rob people of the experience of the Triune God. It is designed by the enemy of God to prevent people from receiving Jesus as Lord that they might be saved.
05 Jun 09
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWhere in scripture does it say that Christ was created? I can show you a scripture in John which has Christ saying that he existed before the time as Abraham as well as scriptures saying that Christ is the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and end, but I can't find scritpures indicating that this mere mortal, as you call him, was created.
now this cannot be with reference to Christ, for he himself is a creation, and created all things with the exception of one, that being God, for he has always existed. if you look to the previous chapter, the Christ symbolised by the lamb, is described as, and i quote'
Edit; Please call 911 if you begin to have any chest pains. 😛
05 Jun 09
2 edits
Originally posted by whodeyI have given two Biblical references already, if you cannot find them, let me know, and i will give you the references AGAIN! as for having heart palpitations, you had better see the trinitarians, for each and every argument i have presented is logical, firmly rooted in scripture, was taught and demonstrated by Christ himself, and what is more, it has brought me great delight to expose their pre christian, pagan, blasphemous and idolatrous doctrine, not to mention immense satisfaction, Why?, For Christ himself has stated, Your Word (Gods Word, the Holy Bible), is Truth! 🙂
Where in scripture does it say that Christ was created? I can show you a scripture in John which has Christ saying that he existed before the time as Abraham as well as scriptures saying that Christ is the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and end, but I can't find scritpures indicating that this mere mortal, as you call him, was created.
Edit; Please call 911 if you begin to have any chest pains. 😛
I have never termed the Christ, a mere mortal, please do not put words in my mouth, all i have stated was as the scriptures themselves indicate, that he had a beginning and was the only thing directly created by God himself, all other things having been created through Christ.
Colossians 1:15 and Revelation 3:14 were the references, and here is another Proverbs 8:22
05 Jun 09
3 edits
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWhere does Proverbs 8:22 say that Christ was a lesser God created by God Almighty ?
I have given two Biblical references already, if you cannot find them, let me know, and i will give you the references AGAIN! as for having heart palpitations, you had better see the trinitarians, for each and every argument i have presented is logical, firmly rooted in scripture, was taught and demonstrated by Christ himself, and what is more, it h ...[text shortened]... t.
Colossians 1:15 and Revelation 3:14 were the references, and here is another Proverbs 8:22
"Jehovah possessed me in the beginning of His way, Before His works of old." [ Recovery Version]
If this personification of Wisdom is the Second "Person" of the Trinity, (as I believe it refers to Christ), where does verse 22 say that God created Christ before the creation of all other things ?
05 Jun 09
1 edit
Originally posted by jaywillit simply states, if you notice my dear Jaywill, that Christ had a beginning, that is all, and if you read the context, you will see, that it does indeed refer to Christ, as the personification of wisdom, but it says nothing about a trinity, no not a single word.
Where does Proverbs 8:22 say that Christ was a lesser God created by God Almighty ?
[b]"Jehovah possessed me in the beginning of His way, Before His works of old." [ Recovery Version]
If this personification of Wisdom is the Second "Person" of the Trinity, (as I believe it refers to Christ), where does verse 22 say that God created Christ before the creation of all other things ?[/b]
“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. When there were no watery deeps I was brought forth as with labor pains, when there were no springs heavily charged with water. Before the mountains themselves had been settled down, ahead of the hills, I was brought forth as with labor pains, when as yet he had not made the earth and the open spaces and the first part of the dust masses of the productive land. When he prepared the heavens I was there; when he decreed a circle upon the face of the watery deep, when he made firm the cloud masses above, when he caused the fountains of the watery deep to be strong, when he set for the sea his decree that the waters themselves should not pass beyond his order, when he decreed the foundations of the earth, then I came to be beside him as a master worker, and I came to be the one he was specially fond of day by day, I being glad before him all the time, being glad at the productive land of his earth, and the things I was fond of were with the sons of men."
if you wish me to extract the references to Christ i will do so, for they are both interesting and instructive. 🙂
Arius, peace be upon him!
06 Jun 09
Originally posted by robbie carrobieFirst-born (prototokos) is not to be interpreted literally in Col. 1:15 to mean that Christ was a created thing. This becomes obvious when we consider the immediate context. In the following two verses (vv. 16-17) Paul says that Christ existed before all things (ta panta). "All things" (ta panta) is absolutely exhaustive; that is, Christ himself, were he a created being, would have to be included in ta panta (all things). Yet Paul says, "he [Jesus] is before all things" (v. 17)**. Therefore, Christ was not created; Christ is God.
I have given two Biblical references already, if you cannot find them, let me know, and i will give you the references AGAIN! as for having heart palpitations, you had better see the trinitarians, for each and every argument i have presented is logical, firmly rooted in scripture, was taught and demonstrated by Christ himself, and what is more, it h ...[text shortened]... t.
Colossians 1:15 and Revelation 3:14 were the references, and here is another Proverbs 8:22
_________
** I'm pretty sure the New World Translation which you are citing from has purposefully and cleverly misinterpreted this passage to fit the Jehovah's Witness doctrine; it reads in the NWT, "He is before all other things." The word "other", readers should know, has been arbitrarily added; i.e., the word "other" does not appear in the original Greek.
Further, it should be noted, the NWT is the anonymous work of the “New World Bible Translation Committee.” Jehovah’s Witnesses claim that the anonymity is in place so that the credit for the work will go to God. Of course this has the added benefit of keeping the translators from any accountability for their errors, and prevents real scholars from checking their academic credentials.
The New World Translation is unique in one thing – it is the first intentional systematic effort at producing a complete version of the Bible that is edited and revised for the specific purpose of agreeing with a group's doctrine. The Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Watchtower Society realized that their beliefs contradicted Scripture. So, rather than conforming their beliefs to Scripture, they altered Scripture to agree with their beliefs.
06 Jun 09
Originally posted by epiphinehasWhat do you think the New Testament is? It was the first (long before the New World Translation) intentional systematic effort at producing a complete version of the bible that is edited and revised for the specific purpose of agreeing with a group's doctrine. The proto-orthodox Christians of the first and second centuries realized that many of their beliefs contradicted Scripture. So, rather than conforming their beliefs to Scripture, they altered Scripture to agree with their beliefs. And while these works truly were written anonymously, the early church fathers falsely claimed they were written by important church figures (Mark, Matthew, Luke and John).
The New World Translation is unique in one thing – it is the first intentional systematic effort at producing a complete version of the Bible that is edited and revised for the specific purpose of agreeing with a group's doctrine. The Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Watchtower Society realized that their beliefs contradicted Scripture. So, rather than conforming their beliefs to Scripture, they altered Scripture to agree with their beliefs.
Everything you are blaming Jehovah's Witnesses of doing was already done by the proto-orthodox Christian groups of the first and second centuries. Of all the bible fragments we have from antiquity, no two are exactly alike. They are all ridden with either scribal errors or intentional alterations. Many of these are inconsequential, but some have had a significant impact on how Christianity has subsequently been interpreted. This is not a fringe hypothesis, but is a demonstrable fact.
Likewise with the false attribution of the gospels to the authorship of Mark, Matthew, Luke and John. Virtually no serious bible scholar believes that the gospels were actually written by those people, with the possible exception of John which was apparently written by "a" John, but not any John in particular.
06 Jun 09
7 edits
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThank you epiphinehas. That note on the New World Translation is very helpful.
it simply states, if you notice my dear Jaywill, that Christ had a beginning, that is all, and if you read the context, you will see, that it does indeed refer to Christ, as the personification of wisdom, but it says nothing about a trinity, no not a single word.
“Jehovah himself produced me as the beginning of his way, the earliest of his achiev st i will do so, for they are both interesting and instructive. 🙂
Arius, peace be upon him!
Robbie,
Proverbs 8:22-31 is a personification of Wisdom
"Does not wisdom call and understanding lift up her voice?" (Prov. 8:1)
The Wisdom spoken of before the creation of all things must mean the Wisdom of God. But WHEN was God ever without His Wisdom ? As long as God was, the Wisdom of God also was.
In the same way as long as God was the Righteousness, the Holiness, and the Glory of God also were. There is no time in which God created these eternal attributes of His very Being.
Both the Recovery Version and JN Darby's New Translation translate Proverbs 8:22 - "Jehovah possesed me [Wisdom] in the beginning of His way, ..."
For God to POSSESS His Wisdom at the beginning of His way is NOT for God to CREATE His Wisdom at the beginning of His way. To believe that God CREATED His Wisdom is to believe that God was at one time WITHOUT His Wisdom. This is impossible. How would God have the wisdom to create His wisdom if He had none ?
He POSSESSED His Wisdom before the creation of all things.
Now I do acknowledge that verse 25 says "Before the mountains were settled, Before the hills I was brought forth." See also 24 - "When there were no depths, I was brought forth"
But this bringing forth cannot mean that God created His Wisdom at that time. God can "bring forth" His Holiness or "bring forth" His Glory or bring forth His Righteousness. It does not mean that before He brought these forth He was WITHOUT them.
The Word was with God and the Word WAS God in the same way that we can say the Wisdom was with God and the Wisdom was God.
"I was set up from eternity" should mean that Wisdom was eternally set up or "anointed" (as in Psalm 2:7).
The Spirit of Christ (which is the Spirit of God according to Romans 8:9 ) was the "eternal Spirit" through Whom the man Jesus Christ offered Himself without blemish to God (Hebrews 9:12)
Furthermore the writer of Hebrews makes a point to show the eternal pre-existence of Christ before incarnation as a man. He was "without beginning of days" (Hebrews 7:3).
You will not admit polytheism in your interpretation of TWO Gods in John 1:1.
Though the eternal Word or Wisdom of God became flesh, and flesh is an item of creation, the Word was God. As long as God was the Word was. If God had no beginning neither did the Word Who was God have a beginning.
06 Jun 09
1 edit
Originally posted by rwingettThe proto-orthodox Christians of the first and second centuries realized that many of their beliefs contradicted Scripture. So, rather than conforming their beliefs to Scripture, they altered Scripture to agree with their beliefs.
What do you think the New Testament is? It was the first (long before the New World Translation) intentional systematic effort at producing a complete version of the bible that is edited and revised for the specific purpose of agreeing with a group's doctrine. The proto-orthodox Christians of the first and second centuries realized that many of their belief exception of John which was apparently written by "a" John, but not any John in particular.
Sorry, I don't buy it. Where is your proof for this claim?
And while these works truly were written anonymously, the early church fathers falsely claimed they were written by important church figures (Mark, Matthew, Luke and John).
Mark and Luke weren't important church figures. John Mark was merely a companion of Peter and Luke was Paul's "beloved physician" - neither were apostles. If you are insinuating that the early church fathers attributed famous names arbitrarily to beef up the legitimacy of the Gospels, therefore, you haven't much of a case. The Gnostic Gospels, on the other hand, are a different story.
Also, the majority of biblical scholars accept the early church fathers' claims about the authorship of the Gospels. You forgot to mention that your claim that the early church fathers collectively lied about the authorship of the Gospels is an extreme fringe viewpoint and not widely accepted at all.
Yes, the Gospels were written anonymously, but the testimony of the early church is uniform regarding the authorship, and there are no known competitors for said authorship.
Many of these are inconsequential, but some have had a significant impact on how Christianity has subsequently been interpreted. This is not a fringe hypothesis, but is a demonstrable fact.
Give me one example of a "significant impact" on Christian doctrine due to what are, truly, for the most part, copying errors.
Virtually no serious bible scholar believes that the gospels were actually written by those people, with the possible exception of John which was apparently written by "a" John, but not any John in particular.
This is simply not the case. Unless, of course, you define "serious bible scholar" as only those bible scholars involved in the Jesus Seminar.
06 Jun 09
2 edits
Originally posted by epiphinehasMy primary sources for all these claims, as I've stated elsewhere, are the books of Bart Ehrman, who I don't believe is involved with the Jesus Seminar. Ehrman started out as a conservative, evangelical Christian who believed in biblical inerrancy. He attended the Moody Bible College, Wheaton Bible College, the Princeton Theological Seminary, and is currently chairman of the Department of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. So Ehrman is not some "fringe" scholar, criticizing the bible from without. He was deeply immersed in that culture, but changed his beliefs based on what he found out during the course of his studies.
The proto-orthodox Christians of the first and second centuries realized that many of their beliefs contradicted Scripture. So, rather than conforming their beliefs to Scripture, they altered Scripture to agree with their beliefs.
Sorry, I don't buy it. Where is your proof for this claim?
And while these works truly were written anonymou "serious bible scholar" as only those bible scholars involved in the Jesus Seminar.
His works are very accessible and well written. If Jesus could go out to the desert for 40 days and resist temptation, I think you owe it to yourself to try a similar test. Read any of Ehrman's books and see if your faith comes out unchanged. Who knows, perhaps it will be all the richer for it. His books which I've read (all of which I'd highly recommend) are:
Jesus, Interrupted: Revealing the Hidden Contradictions in the Bible (and Why We Don't Know About Them) - 2009
Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why - 2005
Lost Christianities: The Battles for Scripture and the Faiths We Never Knew - 2003
I also have, but haven't yet read:
God's Problem: How the Bible Fails to Answer Our Most Important Question – Why We Suffer - 2008 (Unlike the others, this one deals with the problem of evil)
06 Jun 09
1 edit
Originally posted by rwingettHeard some of his lectures.
My primary sources for all these claims, as I've stated elsewhere, are the books of Bart Ehrman, who I don't believe is involved with the Jesus Seminar. Ehrman started out as a conservative, evangelical Christian who believed in biblical inerrancy. He attended the Moody Bible College, Wheaton Bible College, the Princeton Theological Seminary, and is current on – Why We Suffer - 2008 (Unlike the others, this one deals with the problem of evil)
06 Jun 09
Originally posted by rwingett========================
My primary sources for all these claims, as I've stated elsewhere, are the books of Bart Ehrman, who I don't believe is involved with the Jesus Seminar. Ehrman started out as a conservative, evangelical Christian who believed in biblical inerrancy. He attended the Moody Bible College, Wheaton Bible College, the Princeton Theological Seminary, and is current ...[text shortened]... on – Why We Suffer - 2008 (Unlike the others, this one deals with the problem of evil)
God's Problem: How the Bible Fails to Answer Our Most Important Question – Why We Suffer - 2008 (Unlike the others, this one deals with the problem of evil)
=================================
He would find his answer in the book of Second Corinthians.