Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
You speak ignorantly not knowing that his authority to sit at the right hand of God began, hence why the scripture says "sit at my right hand",
And his authority to sit at the right hand of God also ends, hence why the scripture says "until". This scripture does not prove your statement that Jesus Christ is uncreated.
Sorry but that is rubbish buddy
Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death. For “God has put all things in subjection under his feet.” But when it says, “all things are put in subjection,” it is plain that he is excepted who put all things in subjection under him. When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to him who put all things in subjection under him, that God may be all in all. (1 Corinthians 15:24 [ESV])
Wrong. The Father needs no one. To say that the Father needed the Son is speaking without understanding.
Still rubbish buddy. You are trying to pluck things out of nothing!
Nope, in both verses "things" was added into the English translations and are not part of the original text, you can see for yourself in these interlinears,
http://biblehub.com/interlinear/john/1-3.htm
http://biblehub.com/interlinear/1_corinthians/8-6.htm
http://biblehub.com/greek/3956.htm
"Panta" means "all". In these scriptures, it refers to all that are alive, not all "things", as all "things" were not created by Jesus, because the earth and water already existed before he began speaking. However, all living beings did originate from Jesus Christ, since he spoke all life into existence, including angels.
Then there's no point in responding to you. Because you called this last scripture I posted as rubbish.
Your interpretations are rubbish / incorrect! With due respect of course!
“Do not give dogs what is holy, and do not throw your pearls before pigs, lest they trample them underfoot and turn to attack you. (Matthew 7:6 [ESV])
If a wise man goes to court with a fool, there will be ranting and raving but no resolution. (Proverbs 29:9 [HCSB])
Are you claiming some special revelation?Nope, in both verses "things" was added into the English translations and are not part of the original text, you can see for yourself in these interlinears,
http://biblehub.com/interlinear/john/1-3.htm
http://biblehub.com/interlinear/1_corinthians/8-6.htm
http://biblehub.com/greek/3956.htm
"Panta" means "all". In these scriptures, it refers to all that are alive, not all "things", as all "things" were not created by Jesus, because the earth and water already existed before he began speaking. However, all living beings did originate from Jesus Christ, since he spoke all life into existence, including angels.
Are you claiming some special revelation?
The fact that the Greek is different from English and doesn't always include words like "things" is not something to build an entire doctrine off of. Translators who are familiar with the differences between Biblical Greek and English frequently include these words because they are understood in the Greek context, but help make the text clearer to an English speaker who is unused to such things.
The same word (panta; root pas) is the same word that is elsewhere translated "everything." This is because when it is not used in combination with specific designators (typically "all these things" [panta tauta]) the meaning is "all things" or "everything." The inclusion of specific descriptors with the word "panta" is only necessary if the writer/speaker does not wish to designate "everything," but wants to specifically designate "everything that is of this specific nature."
Therefore, if your interpretation were true, there would be a specific designator here stemming from the root "zoe" (life) to show this specificity. The absence of such a specific designator shows that the author did not wish to limit the inclusion of "everything." Thus it is correctly translated "all things" or "everything."
But the earth was unseen and unready, and darkness was upon the abyss, and spirit of God bore upon the water. (Genesis 1:2 [ABP])
And God said, Let there be light! And there was light. (Genesis 1:3 [ABP])
No, this is already your interpretation. Light was created through Jesus, just as "all things" were. The word is clear, and going back to Genesis and explaining how your understanding of the text clashes with the revealed truth of God doesn't explain that.As I explained, the Genesis account coincides with what I just told you,
This water already existed before,
So already this scripture proves that all "things" were not created by Jesus Christ. However, all life certainly was.
It is not some "special" revelation. Its in the scriptures for anyone to plainly read, if they bother to even study it and dissect it and not believe things that are commonly taught that simply aren't true.
As I explained, the Genesis account coincides with what I just told you,
This water already existed before,
So already this scripture proves that all "things" were not created by Jesus Christ. However, all life certainly was.
It is not some "special" revelation. Its in the scriptures for anyone to plainly read, if they bother to even study it and dissect it and not believe things that are commonly taught that simply aren't true.
Wrong. The Father needs no one. To say that the Father needed the Son is speaking without understanding.
No, this is already your interpretation. Light was created through Jesus, just as "all things" were. The word is clear, and going back to Genesis and explaining how your understanding of the text clashes with the revealed truth of God doesn't explain that.
The Genesis account never says "Jesus said," so unless you have some special knowledge not revealed in the Bible, you cannot with any authority say that Jesus just "came into the picture" at some point. Especially when the Bible says differently.
I demonstrated for you how the Greek is rightly interpreted. If you look at the Greek lexicon you will even see that the word "panta" (a plural form of the Greek pas) means "all things" when it is not modified by a specific contextual designator (in the same sentence, not in the imagination of one person).
Furthermore, to make sure his point was perfectly clear, John didn't stop at "all things were created through Him." He went on to add that "without Him nothing was created that was created."
You claim to have authority over God's word while denying God's power of the Holy Spirit.
2 Timothy 3:1-73
"But know this, that in the last days perilous times will come: For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, unloving, unforgiving, slanderers, without self-control, brutal, despisers of good, traitors, headstrong, haughty, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having a form of godliness but denying its power. And from such people turn away! For of this sort are those who creep into households and make captives of gullible women loaded down with sins, led away by various lusts, always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth."
This will be my last post to you. I pray that you would humble yourself before God.
I don't disagree with Jesus. the Incarnate God Almighty. As a man, He is certainly less than God. Creating something in the image of something else can mean a lot of different things but those were not the words used in this thread so it is hardly relevant to bring up Adam, though we should all agree here that man is created in His Image.A lesser god is not imperfect, was Adam himself not created in the image of God, and he was originally perfect and blameless before God before he sinned? An image, although lesser, still reflects the attributes of God perfectly. Why do you argue against Jesus Christ being lesser when he himself admitted it?
No, it's not scripture. In fact, scripture denies your idea that God created Jesus on Day 1 when He created light, because God specifically calls the light "day."It is scripture. I've already proved it and you keep denying it. Read and learn before adding your own interpretation. Not going to keep argue with you over this when it is plainly written in scripture.
I don't disagree with Jesus. the Incarnate God Almighty. As a man, He is certainly less than God. Creating something in the image of something else can mean a lot of different things but those were not the words used in this thread so it is hardly relevant to bring up Adam, though we should all agree here that man is created in His Image.
Am more interested in someone using the phrase "exact image" of Perfection and thinking such a thing can be less than Perfection. Again I suggest finding a different word if one wants to worship multiple gods, as the proposed alternative to a "false" doctrine is said to have one supreme god (Father) being worshiped through a lessor god (Jesus).
No, it's not scripture. In fact, scripture denies your idea that God created Jesus on Day 1 when He created light, because God specifically calls the light "day."
Scripture is "in the beginning, God created the Heavens and the earth.... In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word Was God. He was with God in the beginning..."
Now everything that is created is created after "in the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth." But Jesus was already "with God in the beginning."
That's scripture.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?