|
|
Post by kangaroojack on Dec 31, 2010 11:34:08 GMT -5
"Can you tell me why you think "Jesus Christ is a created being" is a heresy?" If Jesus is a created being, He suffers under the same Adamic curse that all creation does. Consequently, He would require a redeemer as well. If He requires a redeemer, then He cannot redeem us. The sacrificial atonement had to be a spotless lamb, free of defect. Were Christ created, He would be as tainted by the stain of sin as anyone of us, and His sacrificial death could not atone for us. Jesus is God manifest in the flesh (which is what the phrase "God incarnate"means). If He is created, He cannot be God. And if He is not God, He cannot save us, as there is only one name under heaven by which men must be saved. As someone else cited Isaiah, God alone is savior. Therefore either Christ is also God (something to which He alluded to many times in scripture), or He is not. If He is not, His death, no matter how well intentioned, was in vain. Oh, and as to why I believe it's a heresy? Because it nullifies the atonement, which is the single-most important truth of the entire Bible. That's my $.02.  Hi Crow, First to make a point back to the subject of "labels." I have not labeled non-trinitarians as "heretics" here. I take each non-trinitarian individually because there are as many kinds of them as there are ingredients in Heinz 57 Steak Sauce. In fact, on another site I have called non-trinitarianism the "Heinz 57 theology." Those who deny that Christ is the Savior in His own right cannot be truly Christian. Many non-trinitarians maintain that Christ is the Savior in His own right. The problem is that they hold to a theology which often leads to the denial that Christ is the Savior in His own right. The inspired scripture says that "the Father sent the Son, THE Savior of the world" (1 John 4:14). The Father is no more the Savior than He is the Son. The title "Savior" in the New Testament is attributed to God generically and Christ specifically. The title "Savior" is never attributed to the Father.
The Father SENT the Savior...."You are correct that Christ cannot be created. The Father Himself attributes the creation to the Son: Trinitarians have the testimony of the Father Himself. Non-trinitarians have only their "scholars." Muslims agree with Trinitarians on what this text says so they just say that it is corrupt. At least the Muslims accept the clear meaning without the gymnastics that other non-trinitarians employ. The Muslims rather deny that the text is inspired. The question in Hebrew 1:8-10 is clearly not one of meaning but of inspiration. That's all for this holiday weekend. Roo |
|
|
|
Post by MoGrace2U on Dec 31, 2010 11:58:01 GMT -5
It is men who create labels and then insist you must apply them to have fellowship with them. So what news is it that it is men who say you must confess the label they have created for God? The effect of such labels is that you cannot refute them without marking yourself a heretic in their eyes. Must we confess the trinitarian creed to believe that Jesus is God? Must we agree with Calvin's view on Paul's writings lest we cannot understand Paul words? This is what men do to one another to justify themselves. So how is it that they forget they will judged by their own words? It would be better not to create such creeds in the first place, since the Lord is not the one who requires them for fellowship with Him. A confession that Jesus is Lord, is enough for Him and more than sufficient to bring salvation!
|
|
|
|
Post by stormcrow on Dec 31, 2010 12:20:44 GMT -5
"I have not labeled non-trinitarians as "heretics" here."
I haven't either. I was asked specifically why I thought Christ being a "created being" was a heresy. I thought I answered it. "The inspired scripture says that "the Father sent the Son, THE Savior of the world" (1 John 4:14). The Father is no more the Savior than He is the Son." Obviously, I disagree with your last comment. When Jesus said "I and the Father are one" and when John wrote "In the beginning was the Word...and the Word was God", when Jesus appropriated the name "I am" numerous times in John 8, the same name the Father used in identifying Himself to Moses (Exodus 3:14), what did He mean? As I wrote before, I believe God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit are three ways God manifests Himself to us. Paul wrote "Jesus is the image (manifestation) of God" and whom "in Him dwelt the fullness of the God-head bodily." Jesus is also "God incarnate" (God "in the flesh."). And Christ made the claims of equality with, and identity to, God clear enough even for the partially blinded Jews to see, that on several occasions the tried to stone Him for blasphemy. It was a charge leveled against Him at His trial. It's based upon all these things that I understand Christ to be God and vice-versa. If there is no other name under heaven by which men must be saved, and if we are told to baptize in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, then it's clear - according to the inspired Word - that these three share a common name, common purpose, and common essence. 4 There is one body and one Spirit, just as also you were called in one hope of your calling; 5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6 one God and Father of all who is over all and through all and in all. 7 But to each one of us grace was given according to the measure of Christ's gift. Ephesians 4:4-7 (NASB77)
56 " Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad." 57 The Jews therefore said to Him, "You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?" 58 Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am." 59 Therefore they picked up stones to throw at Him; but Jesus hid Himself, and went out of the temple. John 8:56-59 (NASB77)
And God said to Moses, " I AM WHO I AM"; and He said, "Thus you shall say to the sons of Israel, ' I AM has sent me to you.'" Exodus 3:14 (NASB77)
"And now, glorify Thou Me together with Thyself, Father, with the glory which I had with Thee before the world was. John 17:5 (NASB77) One God expressing Himself three ways: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. As noted before, I understand the Trinitarian point of view, and agree with it insofar as it sees God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit as one God. The slippery slope, however, many Trinitarians tend to slide down is that they see the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as three gods, not one. There are dangers in taking one view (Trinitarian or Unitarian) wholly to the exclusion of the other, for the reasons I've outlined here and in other posts. Peace. Out. |
|
|
|
Post by Morris on Jan 6, 2011 16:23:39 GMT -5
Well, after a couple of 'thumbs up', I might as well just come right out and say I'm right with you stormcrow.
|
|
|
|
Post by Once4all on Jan 6, 2011 21:24:21 GMT -5
John 8:58 is not Jesus saying he was God. It's about him as the promise and that the promise of his coming existed before Abraham.
|
|
|
|
Post by Allyn on Jan 6, 2011 22:14:40 GMT -5
John 8:58 is not Jesus saying he was God. It's about him as the promise and that the promise of his coming existed before Abraham. I have never heard it explanied your was but I think Jesus is showing His truer connection as God by proclaiming His identity as God. Even the Pharisees seemed to get it but hated Him all the more for it. |
|
|
|
Post by Once4all on Jan 7, 2011 0:02:46 GMT -5
John 8:58 is not Jesus saying he was God. It's about him as the promise and that the promise of his coming existed before Abraham. I have never heard it explanied your was but I think Jesus is showing His truer connection as God by proclaiming His identity as God. Even the Pharisees seemed to get it but hated Him all the more for it. How can you say the Pharisees seemed to get it when they thought Jesus was saying that he saw Abraham? John 8:56-58 NASB (56) "Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad." (57) So the Jews said to Him, "You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?" (58) Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am." Jesus said that Abraham rejoiced to see his day, not that he rejoiced to see him. Abraham believe God's promise to him, that from his seed all the families of the earth would be blessed. "Seeing his day" was believing that God would keep his promise. And here are a few more things to consider regarding the idea that Jesus was claiming to be God in John 8:58 — 1. Isn't it odd that Jesus would blurt out to the Jews that he was God when he didn't even want his disciples to reveal that he was the Christ (Mark 8:30, Matthew 16:20)? 2. Then there's the odd view of an escaping God. One who, after supposedly identifying himself as God with the "I am" statement, hid himself and left the temple because some Jews were going to throw rocks at him (John 8:59). If Jesus was claiming to be God, his running from the threat of rocks would have left the Jews laughing. Can you imagine God saying "I AM GOD," then running away? 3. If Jesus were claiming to be God in John 8:58, why did he say in John 8:54, "If I honor myself, my honor is nothing. It is my Father who honors me, of whom you say He is your God."? In John 8:55, Jesus says he knows God, he doesn't say that he is God. Jesus says that he keeps God's word. John 8:54-55 NASB (54) Jesus answered, "If I glorify Myself, My glory is nothing; it is My Father who glorifies Me, of whom you say, 'He is our God'; (55) and you have not come to know Him, but I know Him; and if I say that I do not know Him, I will be a liar like you, but I do know Him and keep His word. |
|
|
|
Post by simplyforgiven on Jan 7, 2011 2:37:13 GMT -5
Exactly why i dont call myself a Trinitarian.
Will God ever honor the titles of manmade doctrines?
Nay
|
|
|
|
Post by simplyforgiven on Jan 7, 2011 2:46:21 GMT -5
I have never heard it explanied your was but I think Jesus is showing His truer connection as God by proclaiming His identity as God. Even the Pharisees seemed to get it but hated Him all the more for it. How can you say the Pharisees seemed to get it when they thought Jesus was saying that he saw Abraham? John 8:56-58 NASB (56) "Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad." (57) So the Jews said to Him, "You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?" (58) Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am." Jesus said that Abraham rejoiced to see his day, not that he rejoiced to see him. Abraham believe God's promise to him, that from his seed all the families of the earth would be blessed. "Seeing his day" was believing that God would keep his promise. And here are a few more things to consider regarding the idea that Jesus was claiming to be God in John 8:58 — 1. Isn't it odd that Jesus would blurt out to the Jews that he was God when he didn't even want his disciples to reveal that he was the Christ (Mark 8:30, Matthew 16:20)? 2. Then there's the odd view of an escaping God. One who, after supposedly identifying himself as God with the "I am" statement, hid himself and left the temple because some Jews were going to throw rocks at him (John 8:59). If Jesus was claiming to be God, his running from the threat of rocks would have left the Jews laughing. Can you imagine God saying "I AM GOD," then running away? 3. If Jesus were claiming to be God in John 8:58, why did he say in John 8:54, "If I honor myself, my honor is nothing. It is my Father who honors me, of whom you say He is your God."? In John 8:55, Jesus says he knows God, he doesn't say that he is God. Jesus says that he keeps God's word. John 8:54-55 NASB (54) Jesus answered, "If I glorify Myself, My glory is nothing; it is My Father who glorifies Me, of whom you say, 'He is our God'; (55) and you have not come to know Him, but I know Him; and if I say that I do not know Him, I will be a liar like you, but I do know Him and keep His word. 1. He didnt that why most are confused about the Diety of Christ. 2. Intentions doesnt prove anything? So Jesus humanly running away proves something? In fact explain this: If Jesus angered the Jews SO MUCH, how is it POSSIBLE that he COULD RUNAWY. How is it that he got away so easily amoung so many that wanted to kill him? Your logic works against you. Speculation is never good. 3. The Word is LIVING, its not something written. and Jesus is the Image of the Invisible God. Here is another thing, he told Philip that when you see Jesus, you see the Father, becaus the father is inside him. There is no honor in limited flesh, but the honor came from the Divine part of Jesus inside himself. Also, its impossible to KNOW God. Nobody knows God, and for anyone to KNOW God, they would die. So in that simple understanding for Jesus to cliam to KNOW God, is to cliam that he IS God. How can you understand infinity? or eternity? its impossible. If Jesus is not GOD, than what is he? |
|
|
|
Post by Allyn on Jan 7, 2011 8:36:16 GMT -5
I have never heard it explanied your was but I think Jesus is showing His truer connection as God by proclaiming His identity as God. Even the Pharisees seemed to get it but hated Him all the more for it. How can you say the Pharisees seemed to get it when they thought Jesus was saying that he saw Abraham? That's how they got it. |
|
|
|
Post by kangaroojack on Jan 7, 2011 12:30:49 GMT -5
How can you say the Pharisees seemed to get it when they thought Jesus was saying that he saw Abraham? That's how they got it. Bev overlooks that the apostle John himself said that Jesus made Himself equal with God. Question: Who said that Jesus made Himself equal with God? Answer: John! Roo |
|
|
|
Post by mellontes on Jan 7, 2011 12:45:35 GMT -5
Bev overlooks that the apostle John himself said that Jesus made Himself equal with God. Question: Who said that Jesus made Himself equal with God? Answer: John! Roo I am not going to pick sides in this discussion, but being "equal" isn't really definite enough. Does a pound of oranges equal a pound of apples. If Bob scored 95.75% on a math test and Philip scored 95.75% on the same math test does it mean that Bob and Philip are equal? Are they even equal in math abilities? I think the same kind of rational can be applied to 1 John 5:7 where it is said that "these three are one." One in what? |
|
|
|
Post by kangaroojack on Jan 7, 2011 14:11:38 GMT -5
Mellontes wrote:
So you don't deny then that it was John who said that Jesus made Himself equal with God? It was a matter of what John meant by the term "equal."
Roo
|
|
|
|
Post by Morris on Jan 7, 2011 14:41:59 GMT -5
I am not going to pick sides in this discussion, but being "equal" isn't really definite enough. The thing is though, only God can have anything 'equal' to Him, in any sense of the word. So, regardless of what we may think equal refers to, the very fact that something about, or some quality of Jesus, was equal to God means that God was operating in Jesus without restriction. |
|
|
|
Post by Once4all on Jan 7, 2011 16:12:11 GMT -5
Bev overlooks that the apostle John himself said that Jesus made Himself equal with God. Question: Who said that Jesus made Himself equal with God? Answer: John! Roo John 5:18 NASB (18) For this reason therefore the Jews were seeking all the more to kill Him, because He not only was breaking the Sabbath, but also was calling God His own Father, making Himself equal with God. Why were the Jews seeking to kill Jesus? Because, according to the Jews, Jesus broke the Sabbath and made himself equal with God. Did Jesus break the Sabbath, as John reports? If so, guess what? Jesus didn't keep the Law perfectly. That means he sinned. John was reporting the reasons that the Jews were seeking to kill Jesus; he was recording the thinking of the Jews, which was incorrect thinking. We know that Jesus didn't sin, and we know that he was not equal with God because Jesus himself said that the Father was greater than he. |
|
|
|
Post by Allyn on Jan 7, 2011 16:51:25 GMT -5
Bev overlooks that the apostle John himself said that Jesus made Himself equal with God. Question: Who said that Jesus made Himself equal with God? Answer: John! Roo John 5:18 NASB (18) For this reason therefore the Jews were seeking all the more to kill Him, because He not only was breaking the Sabbath, but also was calling God His own Father, making Himself equal with God. Why were the Jews seeking to kill Jesus? Because, according to the Jews, Jesus broke the Sabbath and made himself equal with God. Did Jesus break the Sabbath, as John reports? If so, guess what? Jesus didn't keep the Law perfectly. That means he sinned. John was reporting the reasons that the Jews were seeking to kill Jesus; he was recording the thinking of the Jews, which was incorrect thinking. We know that Jesus didn't sin, and we know that he was not equal with God because Jesus himself said that the Father was greater than he. He didn't sin. He violated the ammendments to the Law created by men but he did not break the Law as given to Moses. |
|
|
|
Post by simplyforgiven on Jan 7, 2011 16:58:40 GMT -5
Bump For Bev
|
|
|
|
Post by Once4all on Jan 7, 2011 18:09:51 GMT -5
... Also, its impossible to KNOW God. Nobody knows God, and for anyone to KNOW God, they would die. So in that simple understanding for Jesus to cliam to KNOW God, is to cliam that he IS God. How can you understand infinity? or eternity? its impossible. Impossible to know God? That sounds like a line from some tradition (Reformed/Calvinist?) rather than from the words of Scripture. 1 Thessalonians 4:5 NASB (5) not in lustful passion, like the Gentiles who do not know God; 2 Thessalonians 1:8 NASB (8) dealing out retribution to those who do not know God and to those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. Titus 1:15-16 NASB (15) To the pure, all things are pure; but to those who are defiled and unbelieving, nothing is pure, but both their mind and their conscience are defiled. (16) They profess to know God, but by their deeds they deny Him, being detestable and disobedient and worthless for any good deed. |
|
|
|
Post by Once4all on Jan 7, 2011 18:16:04 GMT -5
John 5:18 NASB (18) For this reason therefore the Jews were seeking all the more to kill Him, because He not only was breaking the Sabbath, but also was calling God His own Father, making Himself equal with God. Why were the Jews seeking to kill Jesus? Because, according to the Jews, Jesus broke the Sabbath and made himself equal with God. Did Jesus break the Sabbath, as John reports? If so, guess what? Jesus didn't keep the Law perfectly. That means he sinned. John was reporting the reasons that the Jews were seeking to kill Jesus; he was recording the thinking of the Jews, which was incorrect thinking. We know that Jesus didn't sin, and we know that he was not equal with God because Jesus himself said that the Father was greater than he. He didn't sin. He violated the ammendments to the Law created by men but he did not break the Law as given to Moses. JOHN SAID that "not only was he breaking the Sabbath." The whole argument you guys are making is that JOHN SAID that Jesus was making himself equal with God. Well, JOHN ALSO SAID—in the same sentence—that Jesus was breaking the Sabbath. You are not being consistent. |
|
|
|
Post by kangaroojack on Jan 7, 2011 18:41:06 GMT -5
Bev wrote:
Jesus did break the sabbath and in another place He admitted that He broke it as His father David broke it. He justified His breaking the sabbath by saying that He is the "Lord of the sabbath."
If He had not broken the sabbath then His claim to be "Lord" over it has no force.
Your age old argument does not hold water. Wake up Bev!
Roo
|
|
|
|
Post by Once4all on Jan 7, 2011 19:00:03 GMT -5
Bev wrote: Jesus did break the sabbath and in another place He admitted that He broke it as His father David broke it. He justified His breaking the sabbath by saying that He is the "Lord of the sabbath." If He had not broken the sabbath then His claim to be "Lord" over it has no force.Your age old argument does not hold water. Wake up Bev! Roo Now, I could come back and say, "No, YOU wake up, Roo!" But that is precisely the behavior that I discourage in these forums, as well as the statements that instigate it. And an "I'm right, you're wrong" attitude will not get any of us anywhere. I seek an attitude of humility, not pride. I'm not always successful. Matthew 12:2-8 NASB (2) But when the Pharisees saw this, they said to Him, "Look, Your disciples do what is not lawful to do on a Sabbath." (3) But He said to them, "Have you not read what David did when he became hungry, he and his companions, (4) how he entered the house of God, and they ate the consecrated bread, which was not lawful for him to eat nor for those with him, but for the priests alone? (5) "Or have you not read in the Law, that on the Sabbath the priests in the temple break the Sabbath and are innocent? (6) "But I say to you that something greater than the temple is here. (7) "But if you had known what this means, 'I DESIRE COMPASSION, AND NOT A SACRIFICE,' you would not have condemned the innocent. (8) "For the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath." And what do you suppose the lesson in his explanation is? He gave another lesson: Matthew 12:11-13 NASB (11) And He said to them, "What man is there among you who has a sheep, and if it falls into a pit on the Sabbath, will he not take hold of it and lift it out? (12) "How much more valuable then is a man than a sheep! So then, it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath." (13) Then He said to the man, "Stretch out your hand!" He stretched it out, and it was restored to normal, like the other. |
|
|
|
Post by kangaroojack on Jan 7, 2011 19:06:05 GMT -5
Bev wrote:
And yesterday you made reference to the Reformed "myth." This was without provocation. That was tantamount to saying, "I'm right and you're wrong."
Paul clearly said that if anyone even an angel from heaven preach any other gospel than his faith alone gospel, let him be anathema.
Roo
|
|
|
|
Post by Allyn on Jan 7, 2011 19:12:05 GMT -5
Bev wrote: And yesterday you made reference to the Reformed "myth." This was without provocation. That was tantamount to saying, "I'm right and you're wrong." Paul clearly said that if anyone even an angel from heaven preach any other gospel than his faith alone gospel, let him be anathema. Roo I would actually like to see less provocation from all of us but I do know the nature and personal characteristics of each individual comes in to play. So with that I will allow a little leeway taking note that it just may be the style of the poster. But I can tell the difference so I may be on some of you like a monkey on a donut |
|
|
|
Post by kangaroojack on Jan 7, 2011 19:17:17 GMT -5
TO ALL:
John said that jesus both broke the sabbath and claimed that He was equal with godd! bev questions John's accuracy. Jesus Himself admitted that He had broken the sabbath as His father David broke it.
Note that Jesus was accused of breaking the sabbath and He did not deny it. He said that David had broken it according to the letter and was justified. So Jesus was justified in breaking the sabbath because He was "Lord of the sabbath."
His claim to be Lord of the sabbath has no force if He had not broken it at least in the letter.
When will the non-trinitrians come up with a solid argument?
Roo
|
|
|
|
Post by Once4all on Jan 7, 2011 19:18:44 GMT -5
Bev wrote: And yesterday you made reference to the Reformed "myth." This was without provocation. That was tantamount to saying, "I'm right and you're wrong." Paul clearly said that if anyone even an angel from heaven preach any other gospel than his faith alone gospel, let him be anathema. Roo I said I wasn't always successful, but you omitted that. Love doesn't remember wrongs. How many other past offenses do you wish to bring up? The other gospel/anathema verse is another popular CARM defense that posters lash out with. Please stop, because you are starting to resemble a sweet pastry. |
|
|
|
Post by kangaroojack on Jan 7, 2011 19:28:55 GMT -5
Allyn said:
Okay. But people who are too sensitive here expect the rest of us to walk on eggs not taking into consideration the nature of the beast. My daughter used to do this and quit because of the nature of it. Theological discussion is an arena of competition and not an utopia. Competition will necesssarily get heated especially in the area of ideas. In an utopia nobody would argue ideas.
The difference between trinitarianism and non-trinitarianism is the difference between light and darkness. It is spiritual warfare?
Roo
|
|
|
|
Post by Once4all on Jan 7, 2011 19:31:33 GMT -5
TO ALL: John said that jesus both broke the sabbath and claimed that He was equal with godd! bev questions John's accuracy. Jesus Himself admitted that He had broken the sabbath as His father David broke it. Note that Jesus was accused of breaking the sabbath and He did not deny it. He said that David had broken it according to the letter and was justified. So Jesus was justified in breaking the sabbath because He was "Lord of the sabbath." His claim to be Lord of the sabbath has no force if He had not broken it at least in the letter. When will the non-trinitrians come up with a solid argument? Roo I do not question John's accuracy. I look at the context to determine why he said it. I wish you would learn to stop making judgments about the poster and stick to the content. So if Jesus justified his "breaking the Sabbath" by being Lord of the Sabbath, what was David's justification? The lesson is that doing good for others is not breaking the Sabbath. Love, dear brother, is a higher law and everything else falls in place beneath it. There is no edification in contentious discussion so I am going to be more selective about responding. |
|
|
|
Post by kangaroojack on Jan 7, 2011 19:42:37 GMT -5
Bev wrote:
What past offenses did I bring up? I simply reminded you that your "Reformed myth" statement was provocative and I didn't even say anything about it at the time. I know that it is the nature of the beast. But I will bring it up when I am called on the carpet for an offense that is no greater.
You CARMalize anyone that uses any term you don't like. Paul said that another gospel is "anathema" and he calls no other error by that term. CARM calls every dissention by that term. So please stop with your CARMalizing.
Christ did not die so God would accept that we would "do well." Christ died because we are sinners that could not please God. It is all of grace from start to finish.
I have always though your "Once4all" name is a contradiction of what you really believe. This is my reasoned opinion.
Roo
|
|
|
|
Post by mellontes on Jan 7, 2011 20:59:46 GMT -5
But I can tell the difference so I may be on some of you like a monkey on a donut Monkeys like donuts!! Man, am I ever out of touch... |
|
|
|
Post by Allyn on Jan 7, 2011 21:05:54 GMT -5
But I can tell the difference so I may be on some of you like a monkey on a donut Monkeys like donuts!! Man, am I ever out of touch... Well its a matter of being at a place where you see both at the same time. |
|
