A Form of godliness

[Wrangler]

Well, by no means would I take that away by any stretch of the imagination

You did by the most insidious of means; to claim that he did not even have a choice in performing his greatest act.

 

[Wrangler]

But the argument is that the "us" and "our" of John 1:26 refers to this "divine council." I mean, really, I agree in principle, but would assert that this "divine council" consisted of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. :)

Absurd - even by trinitarian standards.

Me, Myself and I - a council does not make up.

 

[Wrangler]

I would say that His greatest accomplishment was the redemption of those He came to save.

You are confusing means and end just to be argumentative. People talk about the finished work that Christ did on the cross. That is what I am talking about. The consequence of this sacrifice, of this work is the redemption of man.

 

[Earburner]

Could you quote exactly what I said that led you to believe I think Proverbs 8 are not the words of God, but rather human philosophy?

No. I don't think Psalms was made up by a shepherd. I'm a firm believer that God is the author of all scripture, including Psalms.

2 Tim 3:16,

All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God, and [is] profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
​

It's be pretty hard to not get that message! :)

Rich said:
"Proverbs 8 is talking about wisdom (verse 1). There is no justification for changing that to Jesus other than a preconceived idea."
"You're being led too much by Greek philosophy. They were the first to personify wisdom. It sure wasn't the Jews, the ones to whom God actually wrote."

Who was it that God WROTE to?
The Jews.

So then, Proverbs 8 is indeed the word of God, and there is not one bit of Grecian philosophical ideology in the words of Proverbs 8. As result, it is God who personified "wisdom", and it is indeed God the Son who was "brought forth (begotten) from Everlasting", who is God the Father Himself.

Sorry, but I just don't see "God the Son" in those verses. Since "God the Son" is a key element of the trinity (supposedly our very salvation depends on it), wouldn't you think those words would be found somewhere in the Bible?

I think Psalms 2 makes a very clear distinction between God, the Father, and Jesus, His son.

Ps 2:7,

I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou [art] my Son; this day have I begotten thee.
​

Why can't we take this as a simple declaration that Jesus is the son of God, that Jesus was begotten of God?

Here's Strong's definition of "begotten:"

H3205 יָלַד yalad (yaw-lad') v.

1. to bear young.
2. (causatively) to beget.
3. (medically) to act as midwife.
4. (specifically) to show lineage.
​

If Jesus were God, then it would have to be some other God that bore him. That is clearly not tenable! But it is no problem for God to bear or beget a son. There is not a hint that God and Jesus are somehow one essence or something. It's a clear declaration that God bore a son. Let it go at that. Don't add anything to it. That is why Jesus is in fact called the "son of God" around 40 times whereas we never once see a "God the Son."

All other scripture must fit with that simple truth, and it just so happens that it does. There is no need to introduce council decisions into the scriptures. They fit just fine when left alone to themselves. The problems begin when we introduce strange doctrines into the equation.

It is a well know historical fact that the framers of the Nicean Council where the trinity was settled were very infatuated with Plato and Greek philosophy. It would be hard to find any Biblical scholars that would argue against that. Several so-called church fathers in Alexandria Egypt, most notably Augustin, made it their life mission to blend the scriptures with Greek philosophy.

“Christian theology has become so fused with Greek philosophy that it has reared individuals who are a mixture of nine parts Greek thought to one part Christian thought.” ~ Douglas T. Holden ~

I can assure you that Douglas is not alone among scholars in understanding the influence of Greek philosophy on the early church. History is history. In this case it very much agrees with the things Paul said about grievous wolves not sparing the flock. Paul was quite clear on the influence outside forces were having on the pure doctrine of the scriptures. His warnings to Timothy left nothing to doubt, the doctrine was becoming corrupt even before Paul died.

As I have clearly shown in Psalm 2, the words LORD and Lord clearly reveal the conversation between God the Father and God the Son, during His pre-existence with the Father, before He was made to be flesh.

As the titles of lordship denote position in Psalms 2, Jesus is explicitly truthful in His declaration of saying that His Father was greater than He was.

As a result of having that understanding of Proverbs 8 and Psalms 2, of Jesus having literal and conscious pre-existence with the Father, before He was made flesh, the title of God the Son is fully understood by all who are Born again of The Spirit of God, through having the Spirit of Jesus. Romans 8:8-9

 

[Wrangler]

At the very least, it must be acknowledged that there is a vast difference between Jesus being the image of God and our being created in God's image.

No difference at all, just semantics. Jesus is a man, who has the same image as all men, all who are image bearers of God.

Beyond the image, Jesus lived up the life his God had willed for him. That's the difference.

 

[Wrangler]

When Jesus Christ was referring to “the only true God” He was contrasting God with the world’s false gods\idols, and not with Jesus Himself.

Only does not mean "including another, such as myself."

It truly is amazing the inventions of language trinitarians will come up with to rationalize their idol. Your so contrary as to suppose God has a God.

 

[Wrangler]

That He was born before ~ created before ~ any of us. Which is just silly.

Given that Scripture says he was firstborn, it is consistent with Scripture; a reasonable interpretation. What makes it silly?

 

[face2face]

Why do you say "experience only" as if God doesn't know what evil is?

Even so, didn't God say, "Us", they have become like us, knowing good and evil. If this is as you are saying, it still means either that God had done evil, or that He didn't really mean "Us".

That's my general contention with anyone's argument, that it always seems to need for me to read something but not accept what it says.

Much love!

The issue you have is the angels are the ones who sent them from the Garden and placed Cherubs to protect the way. The context is sin, lets see if you can agree with that first. However, it is true that God has a knowledge of evil, but not be experience!

The context is clearly speaking to experience.

Boy this trinity really does a treat on the text.

F2F

 

[PinSeeker]

You did by the most insidious of means; to claim that he did not even have a choice in performing his greatest act.

I did no such thing. I did say, Wrangler that His intention was always His intention, and He would have made no other choice. Goodness gracious.

But by all means, stick to those (false) talking points, bro. You know, since you so choose... :)

Ugh. Same ole, same ole. :) Round and round... :)

Grace and peace to you, Wrangler.

 

[Behold]

Boy this trinity really does a treat on the text.

F2F

You would not think so, if you had not been taught to = not believe it.
Had that not happened to you,...
Then when you read "Let US...make man... in OUR image"....... you would realize that "Us" and "our", is certainly more than one.
But that you can't realize it, speaks to the depth of your indoctrination's ability to keep you from the truth.

 

[face2face]

You would not think so, if you had not been taught to = not believe it.
Had that not happened to you,...
Then when you read "Let US...make man... in OUR image"....... you would realize that "Us" and "our", is certainly more than one.
But that you can't realize it, speaks to the depth of your indoctrination's ability to keep you from the truth.

You are unable to see what's being shown you in Genesis 1-3. The Angelic Host are without number!

 

[Earburner]

You are unable to see what's being shown you in Genesis 1-3. The Angelic Host are without number!

Angels cannot create life in any capacity, nor do they procreate among themselves.

 

[Behold]

You are unable to see what's being shown you in Genesis 1-3. The Angelic Host are without number!

Listen carefully.

The Angelic Host, are created beings......just like you, and Satan.
They do not have "Creation" ability... and they are not "MAN".
So, when God says....Let US MAKE MAN....He is not talking about the Host of Heaven.. as the "US".......as they are not CREATED in God's Image, and they have no ability to cause CREATION to happen.
Understand?

So, when God says...."Let US Create"......He is talking about those who CAN CREATE, as they are EQUAL to God.
That is NOT the angels, or the "Host" of Heaven.

So, who is it then, that is the "US", and the "OUR"?

Its John 1. And the WORD was God.

And who is the WORD?
This is "The Word became FLESH".
This is JESUS, who was the WORD "pre-incarnate" as the "OUR and the US"....with God the Father.

Now, read :

John 1:10, and it will tell you the same.........

Read : Colossians 1:16....and you find again Jesus the WORD, who is the Creator "Us" and "our"... who was manifested in the Flesh....

1 Timothy 3:16.

 

[face2face]

Listen carefully.
The Angelic Host, are created beings......just like you, and Satan.
They do not have "Creation" ability... and they are not "MAN".

Supporting Scripture please.

 

[face2face]

Angels cannot create life in any capacity, nor do they procreate among themselves.

So Angles dont have God's Power?
Supporting text please.

 

[Behold]

Supporting Scripture please.

"let Us".... (God and Pre-incarnate Word)... John 1.


Make MAN.... In "OUR image". (Thats 2). 1+1 = OUR. = US.

See that Math?

Now.... "Angels."

1.) are not "man"
2.) Are not created in the "image of God".

Start in the Gospels then read all the the Epistles, then the Revelation.
There is a REASON that only "Man" is created "in the IMAGE" of God...
There is a REASON that "ADAM" is the 1st.....and JESUS, is the "2nd Adam".

 

[marks]

The issue you have is the angels are the ones who sent them from the Garden and placed Cherubs to protect the way. The context is sin, lets see if you can agree with that first. However, it is true that God has a knowledge of evil, but not be experience!

The context is clearly speaking to experience.

Boy this trinity really does a treat on the text.

F2F

If you are thinking I have an issue with a passage, please post that passage, and highlight or something the part you think I have an issue with, and tell me what you think that issue is, that will help me to know what you are talking about. I don't have any idea what point you are trying to make.

Much love!

 

[face2face]

"let Us".... (God and Pre-incarnate Word)... John 1.


Make MAN.... In "OUR image". (Thats 2). 1+1 = OUR. = US.

See that Math?

Now.... "Angels."

1.) are not "man"
2.) Are not created in the "image of God".

Start in the Gospels then read all the the Epistles, then the Revelation.
There is a REASON that only "Man" is created "in the IMAGE" of God...
There is a REASON that "ADAM" is the 1st.....and JESUS, is the "2nd Adam".

Ah deviation!

You said the Angels couldn't created because they are created beings, to which I asked for Scriptural evidence.

I'll allow you a second attempt.

F2F

 

[Behold]

Ah deviation!

You said the Angels couldn't created because they are created beings, to which I asked for Scriptural evidence.
I'll allow you a second attempt.

F2F

Realize that there is no verse from Gen to the REV... that says that Angel's create.
Why?
= Because only the CREATOR creates....and Angels are not the creator.

And only "MAN" is made in the "Image of God"...

Have you realized that Jesus's died on the Cross, not for fallen angels who also "sinned"?
There is a reason for that...

 

[face2face]

Be smarter.
Realize that there is no verse from Gen to the REV... that says that Angel's create.
Why?
= Because only the CREATOR creates....and Angels are not the creator.
I'll allow you to try to figure that out.
Take your time.

How God decides to Create is up to Him...you said angels cant create - I asked you for Scriptural evidence to which you have failed to do. If God made man in the image of the Elohim using the Elohim to carry out His tasks, who are you to suggest otherwise?

Also, I never said the Angels were "the" creator! I said God could use them to create....you know just how He uses his children to serve Him!