Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Are you taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need
https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
-
-
-
-
Wearing the right shoes, and properly clothed spiritually?
Join Elected By Him for a devotional on Ephesians 6:14-15
https://christianforums.net/threads/devotional-selecting-the-proper-shoes.109094/
- Status
The Word was God. God is not the Father?
Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (ESV)
"In the beginning" is clearly a reference to Gen 1:1. "Was the Word," that is, when the beginning began, the Word was already in existence, and hence, had always been in existence. "And the Word was with [the] God"--"God" contains the article, and is therefore a reference to the Father (at a minimum). "With," being pros, means "intimate relationship" or "communion." "The Word was God" refers to the nature of the Word, as "God" doesn't have the article.
John's whole point is who the Word is. To sum then, the Word had eternal pre-existence, in intimate relationship with God (the Father), and was in nature deity himself. Yet, we know there was only one God. Hence, one reason why the Trinity best takes into account all that God reveals of himself--there is plurality within the one God.
But, we should also consider John's reference to Gen 1 and what else happens in that chapter.
Gen 1:1 In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.
...
Gen 1:26 Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”
Gen 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. (ESV)
Clearly there is only one God. Interestingly, this one God uses plural personal pronouns of himself--"us" and "our"--to speak of creating humans. But when he actually does create man and woman, the pronouns become singular--"his" and "he." Again, this shows that there is plurality within the one God.
So, how about addressing these points about Phil 2:5-8:
1. Jesus was in "the form of God." This is supported by John 1:1--"the Word was with God, and the Word was God." The NIV has a clearer rendering of what is meant in verse 6: "being in very nature God." The Expositor's Greek Testament and M. R. Vincent (Word Studies in the New Testament) agree. That Paul is referring to the divinity of Christ is without question.
2. He "did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped"; that is, being in the form of God, being equal with the Father, he did not consider that equality something to be "forcefully retained [or held onto]." The meaning is that anything to do with the appearance of his glory as God had to be let go of in order for the completion of his humiliation, which was necessary for man's salvation. Again, the NIV brings out the meaning a bit better: "did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage."
3. He, being Jesus, emptied himself. Firstly then, it was he who did the emptying. And, secondly, he emptied himself of something. That is, there is something that he emptied himself of something that was necessary in the taking on of a human form. Jesus willingly chose to take the form of a human for the salvation of mankind. Whatever Paul means here, and we must always be careful to not say more or less than what the Bible says, Jesus, as God Incarnate, still maintains his full deity in becoming truly and fully human.
4. In emptying himself, he took on the "form of a servant," "being born in the likeness of men"--this is what John 1:14 is speaking of. Paul is contrasting Jesus's "being born in the likeness of men" with being in the "form of God."
5. Being found in "human form"--again, as opposed to his having been in "the form of God"--he "humbled himself by becoming obedient."
These all address the further context. Do you agree or disagree with any of it? If you disagree, why?
Free said,
He "did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped"; that is, being in the form of God, being equal with the Father, he did not consider that equality something to be "forcefully retained [or held onto]." The meaning is that anything to do with the appearance of his glory as God had to be let go of in order for the completion of his humiliation, which was necessary for man's salvation. Again, the NIV brings out the meaning a bit better: "did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage."[/QUOTE\]
Ralph Martin, in The Epistle of Paul to the Philippians says of the original Greek: “It is questionable, however, whether the sense of the verb can glide from its real meaning of ‘to seize’, ‘to snatch violently’ to that of ‘to hold fast.’” The Expositor's Greek Testament also says: “We cannot find any passage where ἁρπάζω [har·paʹzo] or any of its derivatives has the sense of ‘holding in possession,’ ‘retaining’. It seems invariably to mean ‘seize, snatch violently. So it is not permissible to glide from the true sense ‘grasp at’ into one which is totally different, ‘hold fast.’”
So the scripture at Philippians 2:6 should not convey any kind of thought of forcefully retained or held onto. The Greek work harpazo nowhere in the scriptures is used that way. So for anyone to try to force the word harpazo to be used that way when its not ever in any scripture used that way because of your belief you want to force the word harpazo to be used that way, I'm not going to agree with.
Philippians 2:6 being translated, "Who, being in the form of God, did not count equality with God something to be grasped.” Is an accurate translation. So the point of Philippians 2:6 is that although Jesus was in the form of God he never snatched at the idea or thought that he was equal to God. This is the truth you don't want to accept because this scripture explicitly confirms Jesus isn't God and he never said he was.
He "did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped"; that is, being in the form of God, being equal with the Father, he did not consider that equality something to be "forcefully retained [or held onto]." The meaning is that anything to do with the appearance of his glory as God had to be let go of in order for the completion of his humiliation, which was necessary for man's salvation. Again, the NIV brings out the meaning a bit better: "did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage."[/QUOTE\]
Ralph Martin, in The Epistle of Paul to the Philippians says of the original Greek: “It is questionable, however, whether the sense of the verb can glide from its real meaning of ‘to seize’, ‘to snatch violently’ to that of ‘to hold fast.’” The Expositor's Greek Testament also says: “We cannot find any passage where ἁρπάζω [har·paʹzo] or any of its derivatives has the sense of ‘holding in possession,’ ‘retaining’. It seems invariably to mean ‘seize, snatch violently. So it is not permissible to glide from the true sense ‘grasp at’ into one which is totally different, ‘hold fast.’”
So the scripture at Philippians 2:6 should not convey any kind of thought of forcefully retained or held onto. The Greek work harpazo nowhere in the scriptures is used that way. So for anyone to try to force the word harpazo to be used that way when its not ever in any scripture used that way because of your belief you want to force the word harpazo to be used that way, I'm not going to agree with.
Philippians 2:6 being translated, "Who, being in the form of God, did not count equality with God something to be grasped.” Is an accurate translation. So the point of Philippians 2:6 is that although Jesus was in the form of God he never snatched at the idea or thought that he was equal to God. This is the truth you don't want to accept because this scripture explicitly confirms Jesus isn't God and he never said he was.
The Father is God.
The Son is God.
The Holy Spirit is God.
These three are one.
For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one.
1 John 5:7
JLB
Yes, the Word was in the beginning with God the Son.
When Jesus rose from the dead, He rose to fill all things (Ephesians 4:10); that is, to exist outside of time.
So, Jesus exists from eternity past to eternity future in the Person of the Son.
Actually, the One on the throne is the Lamb (Revelation 3:21) in the book of Revelation.
Last edited:
The Word was God. God is not the Father?
Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (ESV)
"In the beginning" is clearly a reference to Gen 1:1. "Was the Word," that is, when the beginning began, the Word was already in existence, and hence, had always been in existence. "And the Word was with [the] God"--"God" contains the article, and is therefore a reference to the Father (at a minimum). "With," being pros, means "intimate relationship" or "communion." "The Word was God" refers to the nature of the Word, as "God" doesn't have the article.
John's whole point is who the Word is. To sum then, the Word had eternal pre-existence, in intimate relationship with God (the Father), and was in nature deity himself. Yet, we know there was only one God. Hence, one reason why the Trinity best takes into account all that God reveals of himself--there is plurality within the one God.
But, we should also consider John's reference to Gen 1 and what else happens in that chapter.
Gen 1:1 In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.
...
Gen 1:26 Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”
Gen 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. (ESV)
Clearly there is only one God. Interestingly, this one God uses plural personal pronouns of himself--"us" and "our"--to speak of creating humans. But when he actually does create man and woman, the pronouns become singular--"his" and "he." Again, this shows that there is plurality within the one God.
The Word was the pre-incarnate Son of God, God the Son.
Note that after John 1:6, the discussion briefly changes to John the Baptist, who "came as a witness, to bear witness about the light" (vvs 7-8). This "true light, which gives light to everyone, was coming into the world" (vs 9). Then, verse 10 links back to verse 3 by saying "the world was made through him [the Word]." Verse 12 states that "But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God." The light clearly refers to Jesus, the pre-Incarnate Word, the Son of God, who was coming into the world, of whom John witnessed, and in whom alone believing in his name gives on "the right to become children of God."
The Son existed in eternity past prior to creation, which is clearly prior to his death, resurrection, and ascension. When he ascended, he simply returned to the place from where he came.
journeymanisnothing
Member
Hello Free.
This is good. Would you agree that our Lord didn't excercise his full authority in judgement as God during his ministry?
Personally, I believe what Paul meant is that our God emptied himself of the wrath he has toward people who sin against him.
This is the reason Jesus could only be God.
The pre-incarnate Son is the Father (Isaiah 9:6).
Then you have two dwelling in eternity who are identified as the Son. The pre-incarnate Son, being outside of time, and the after-incarnate Son, also being outside of time: therefore you have two who are identified as the Son existing outside of time.
This presents a dilemna for your theology; for now you are not purporting a Trinity but a Quadrinity: Father, Son, Son, and Holy Ghost.
Rubbish.
Did you actually read that verse?
We get to sit on Jesus's throne just as He sat down "with" His Father on "His" Fathers throne.
The throne in Daniel 7 that the Son of Man approaches and receives from the one sitting on that throne.
To the one who is victorious, I will give the right to sit with me on my throne, just as I was victorious and sat down with my Father on his throne.
I saw a Lamb, looking as if it had been slain, standing at the center of the throne, encircled by the four living creatures and the elders. The Lamb had seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven spirits a of God sent out into all the earth. 7He went and took the scroll from the right hand of him who sat on the throne.
So you believe the Father became flesh? I though it was the Father who sent Jesus?
Therefore, when Christ came into the world, he said:
“Sacrifice and offering you did not desire,
but a body you prepared for me;
6 with burnt offerings and sin offerings
you were not pleased.
7 Then I said, ‘Here I am—it is written about me in the scroll—
I have come to do your will, my God.
The Father is not His Son. The fullness of the Deity, (Father ), is living in His Son. So if you see that One Deity in the Son you see the Father doing His work. They are One united in that Deity.
Jesus is not His Father
"Father into your hands I commit My spirit"
It is testified to that Jesus came down from Heaven. He did not begin as a person in Mary's womb. What came down from heaven then? "His Spirit"
How did the Father in heaven live in Jesus on earth? By "His" Spirit
This same Jesus ascended to where He was before.
John 6:62
62 Then what if you were to see the Son of man ascending where he was before?You are free to believe how you believe and I don't expect to change your mind but I would not call your beliefs rubbish. I would however state that you are mistaken.
The Father is deity.
The fullness of the Fathers Deity lives in or dwells in the Firstborn who is therefore a image of that Deity -Col 1:19
The Spirit is the Fathers Spirit and has the Fathers nature. Fathers promise-acts 2:17
I see the one and same God in all 3. I see "2" persons. Father and Son. All 3 testify. The Spirit only what He hears.
They shall all be taught by that one Deity.
John 6
It is written in the Prophets: ‘They will all be taught by God.’ Everyone who has heard the Father and learned from him comes to me.
They were the words of God but not "Jesus's" words
JOHN 17:8
For I gave them the words you gave me and they accepted them. They knew with certainty that I came from you, and they believed that you sent me.
JOHN 7
So Jesus told them, “My message is not my own; it comes from God who sent me. 17 Anyone who wants to do the will of God will know whether my teaching is from God or is merely my own
HEBREWS 1
In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, 2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son
You may indeed see these things is the scriptures you quoted.
Im not denying that you see what you see, however the scriptures that you are using do not somehow undermine the truth that Jesus Christ is God; God the Son, the only begotten Son of the Father.
- What I am asking you is can you see that Jesus Christ is God, from these scriptures? (Not God the Father, but the Son; God the Son.)
For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men, teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly in the present age, looking for the blessed hope and glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, Titus 2:11-13
Simon Peter, a bondservant and apostle of Jesus Christ,
To those who have obtained like precious faith with us by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ: 2 Peter 1:1
For I am the LORD your God,
The Holy One of Israel, your Savior;
Isaiah 43:3
JLB
Please be reasonable, and let’s work together to reconcile our understanding to what the scriptures actually and truthfully say, not what we are trying to make them say.
Please, can we do this?
Here is the scripture you quoted, Colossians 1:19 as well as some surrounding context.
The first thing I see is the word deity is not mentioned.
(as in a deity)
The word God is mentioned; In this context God refers to the Supreme God of creation. Not a god or deity.
Next we see this statement:
- For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth
Jesus, the Son, created all things in heaven and on earth:
Hebrews 1:8-10
Zechariah 12:1
John 1:1-3
Colossians 1:16
He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him. And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist. And He is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He may have the preeminence.
For it pleased the Father that in Him all the fullness should dwell, and by Him to reconcile all things to Himself, by Him, whether things on earth or things in heaven, having made peace through the blood of His cross. Colossians 1:15-20
Jesus the Son is God, the One who created the heavens and the earth.
JLB
How about instead of just saying something is rubbish (in violation of the ToS), you actually try and show where you think the errors are. There are quite a number of points I’ve made throughout the discussion that you haven’t addressed.
- Status