mlculwell: Sorry Beowulf, I will not allow you to get away without me answering
Beowulf2k8
Culwell replies to the argument from Hebrews 7:3 saying "Argument??? What argument? Jesus did not exist! (Romans 5:14) Adam who was the figure of him that was to come(He was not back there but was coming) Adam came before Jesus.
So Culwell takes the view that Jesus didn't exist back in the beginning when Adam was living on the earth. This does nothing but prove that (as I already pointed out) he does not care one iota about what Scripture says but only about what knot he can twist it into.
mlculwell: We shall see what the scriptures actually teach concerning this subject.
Beowulf2k8:
John 1:1 says "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God
and the Word was God.
That is, the Word has always existed as God, and was God but was "with God" because although he is God he is also a distinct person from the Father.
mlculwell: Here is a taste of what Beowulf actually thinks John 1:1 says: In the beginning was the word(God the son) and the word(God the son) was with God(The father) and the word(God the son) was God (the father) To whom the word was with.
There is no way for the trinitarain to get around this glaring contradiction of their doctrine. They mistakenly believe *The word*/Logos is Jesus pre - existing with *God* the Father. The only why they try and get around thier glaring contradiction is by employing a greek grammar rule for the second theos(Oh consistency thou art a Jewel) making the second Theos something else to get around the contradiction, Nothing is in the passage about* God the father* it is assumed by the trinitarain, it is assumed correct of course, but to them The word is God also. How do they get around another God? By making and pompously assuming another person of God so as not to violate the prohibition in scripture of Polytheism.
Actually, The word/Logos was not with God as another person of God.
Paul uses the same term logos/word of two individuals in(2nd. Tim. 2:17)
and their word/logos will eat as doth a canker of whom is Hymeneus and
Philetus who concerning the truth have erred.
Paul uses the term in it's intended meaning and usage and would have
been in agreement with John's usage of the term which was the thought,
plan, concept, Idea, Deity expressed.
The logos of the two individuals was not the Logos of God, but the meaning is consistent, never was the term to be used in the way the Trinitarian's mishandle the Logos/word and add a new meaning that has never before been.
In the Septuagint (the Greek of the Hebrew Old testament) The Logos is used in (Psalm 33:6) in creation. Do we see another person of God from the passage when it is revealed how he actually created by the Logos? No!
By the Word/Logos of the LORD(Jehovah) were the heavens made and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth.
The day the Trinitarian's can make the word by the breath of God's mouth another person of God , is the day they will have an argument from (John 1:1) God does not draw breath to convey his thoughts but rather this is more in line with the Pneuma(Spirit breathed or Life) Not an intangible breath force as the Jehovah's Witnesses wrongly assume..
The main reason they(the trinitarains as well as the JW's believe the word is another person of God is based on the term :*with*(*Pros,* Greek) (Of course the JW's Believe Jesus pre-existed but not as another person of God) To continue: But in (1st. John 1:1-2) John again speaks of the same word/logos calling the word by two different terms this time. (verse1 the *word of Life*) and (Verse 2 *eternal life* that was* with* the father.)That eternal life with the father was the glory (John 17:5) spoke that trinitarains mistake the Lord Jesus as claiming he literally had pre-existent Glory as another person with the father but when you look closer at( John 17:24) the same continued context from verse 5 the Disciples were to behold his glory(Which is his passion) the same passion (Rev. 13:8 )spoke of as the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. John goes on to say in verse 3. that we(the Apostles) have seen and handled the word after he was made flesh and we saw the glory he had with the father before the foundation of the world which was Jesus being slain in the plan for future redemption(Not literally) and our
fellowship is with the father and with his son.
(Side note)
This is not a problem for the Oneness view as Trinitarian's suppose, as the father and son even being after the passion(death, burial, resurrection , and ascension) does not represent two persons of God. But One man, whom God as Omni present spirit (The father)has taken permanent residence. The distinction is seen to remain until he delivers the kingdom to God (1st. Cor.5:24-28)even the father. Or as (Eph. 5:27 ) That Jesus present it to himself a Glorious Ekklisia.
Beowulf2k8:
John 1:2 "The same was in the beginning with God."
Stress being placed on the fact of his being a distinct person from the
Father.
mlculwell: The same Could be said of Hymeneus and Philetus as their evil plan was hatched in the beginner (Whenever the beginning was that it was hatched) but one thing is for sure, beginning does not denote eternality for God's word either as Beginning denotes origin.
Beowulf2k8:
John 1:3 "All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made."
The Father employed the Word in the creation of all things.
mlculwell: Yes Of Course, but I do not believe trinitarians have an understanding as to what is meant by the word/Logos as their doctrine get's in the way of scriptures.
Beowulf2k8:
Now, compare that to Hebrews 1:1-2 "God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds" which shows that the Word and the Son are one and the same person, for whereas John says that all things were made by the Word the writer of Hebrews says that the Father employed the Son in the creation of all things.
mlculwell: The word was not a pre-existent Jesus but the word was the plan of God for future redemption. The scriptures teach all things were made by Him and for him the whole creation was predicated upon his coming and he was the creator because of the incarnation not because he pre-existed because he was God manifest in the flesh or that the spirit was given to him without measure his deity was the creator but there is nor was there ever a god the son it was God the father in the son doing the works (John 14:10)
Beowulf2k8:
Now John also indicates that the Word is Jesus Himself, for he says in John 1:14 "And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth."
mlculwell: If the word had to be made anything then the word was not another person of god, as the other person of God would not have to be made anything. The plan was then put into action when the fullness of time was come(Gal. 44:) God sent forth HIS SON(Not from eternity, But from time.) *Made* of a woman, *MADE under the Law*. (Refutes His son came from eternity)This also refutes Beowulf's God had no father Baloney! Jesus father was the Spirit.(God! Math. 1:20-21)
Beowulf2k8:
He shows then that the Word became man and lived on earth and was the only-begotten of the Father.
mlculwell:
Actually the plan/Logos/word was put into action for our redemption, the word did not change from one thing into another.
Beowulf2k8:
But he goes on in the next verse to say "John (i.e. the Baptist) bare witness of him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom I spake, He that cometh after me is preferred before me: for he was before me." (John 1:15)
mlculwell: Yes, John in One breath prophesied because of Jesus deity (John 14:10)in one breath and then doubted when he was in prison John asks: are you the one to whom was Prophesied or do I Look for another?
Beowulf2k8:
Clearly it is Jesus that John the Baptist bore witness of, as we know from all the Synoptic gospels, but here John in his gospel says that it is the Word that John the Baptist bore witness to. This shows that the Word and Jesus are one and the same person.
mlculwell: It again shows no such thing that the word/Logos was the person of Jesus! John bare witness of His deity in the incarnation that which was God , The word could not be separated from God, or he would not be God(The father) this is god's creative Power.
Beowulf2k8:
But he continues in the next verse, "And of his fullness have all we received, and grace for grace. For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ." (John 1:16-17)
Now he explicitly identifies the Word who was IN THE BEGINNING, and who was both God and was with God--that is, was God but also was a distinct person from the Father--he explicitly identities this Word as Jesus Christ.
mlculwell: There is no beginning for God, there was only a beginning for his plan for redemption of mankind.
Beowulf2k8:
So then, everywhere in John 1 where we find "the Word" we can legitimately replace that phrase with "Jesus Christ." So, in John 1:1 "In the beginning was [Jesus Christ], and [Jesus Christ] was with God, and [Jesus Christ] was God."
mlculwell: As I have mentioned in passing concerning this issue you raised prior above, the same word/Logos you falsely claim was Jesus and mistakenly claim as with God the father would put the second theos also as the same God the father. Unless you are JW and make the second Theos either "a god" or godlike. The Only option that does no harm to Jesus deity, is that of the Oneness of God and also maintains the monotheism of the scriptures.
Beowulf2k8
So, we find that:
1. Jesus was in the beginning.
mlculwell: The only way for Jesus to be in the beginning and be eternal for Jesus to be God the Father. If he were the word as you claim then beginning would denote and origin.
Beowulf2k8:
2. Jesus was God.
mlculwell: Although I do believe Jesus is God Jesus was not the God being spoken of in John 1:1 as Jesus had a beginning in his earthly life per (Gal. 4:4, Romans 5:14) the Only way Jesus was God, was in the incarnation being made God as His humanity had a beginning M-A-D-E no matter who protests is the term used in scripture(1st. 15:45.Math. 28:18,Acts 2:36,John 3:34)
Beowulf2k8
3. Jesus was with God, that is, he was a distinct person from the Father.
mlculwell: Nothing is said in the passage nor alluded that the word is another person of God in the other two usages I employed of the word/Logos from (2nd.Tim. 2:17 , Nor Psalm 33:6) are there indications of such. Even the two individuals Hymeneus and Philetus's word is *with* them but it is most certainly not another person of God and neither is that being taught in (John 1:1-14)
Beowulf2k8:
Now, Culwell says "Jesus did not exist!" This statement is clearly laughable based on the facts presented above! How can we help but feel sorry for Culwell's blindness?
mlculwell: Feel sorry all you like. But it is I that feels sorry for you, when you will stand before God and give an account for your mishandling of scripture doing a roughshod glossary reading with God's precious word trying to teach when you have need to sit down of be taught.
Beowulf2k8:
Now, we can go further and show all the more the blindness of Culwell's position, and this we will do.
In Colossians 1, Paul speaks of the Son of God into whose kingdom Christians have been translated, saying in Colossians 1:15-20,
"He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.
mlculwell: This hardly helps you at all Beowulf a matter of fact it contradicts you and helps my position. I have said all along that in the Incarnation Jesus was the image of the invisible God that had a start firstborn denotes a start even if it was was before creation(I believe that was in the plan/Logos of God) As the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.(Rev. 13:8)
Beowulf2k8:
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)
Now, if the Father begat the Son before all things and employed the Son to create all things, and more than that, all things consist or hold together by the Son's power, then how can Culwell claim that the Son did not always exist?
mlculwell: Very easily Beowulf, I still maintain the son did not exist! What you term as the incarnation is why and how the son is the creator and him not existing. His deity was the creator. Not his humanity! You most certainly could not make that claim either. you would calim it was his deity in the incarnation all you have to do is present one passage that shows me the God the son was incarnate. there is no such passages! but there are many that show the father was in the son doing the works and made the son The One true God(John 14:10) The father In me he doeth the works! Jesu actually says: I CAN OF MINE OWNSELF DO NOTHING!(John 5:43) Jesus as son did not even know the itme of his own coming as God the father as Gspirit in him and in heaven did not reveal it to his limited humanity.
Beowulf2k8:
How can he say so blindly "Jesus did not exist!"??? Notice also that all things were made not only by the Son but FOR the Son.
mlculwell: Yes Amen! "they were made for the son" everything was predicated on the coming son.
Beowulf2k8:
Note also that in ALL THINGS he is given the preeminence.
mlculwell: Again checkmate as the why would God need to be given pre-eminence? he would already have it! God does not need to be given anything. The limited Human son was given ALL power. That slaps all of you in the face even the New Arians.
Beowulf2k8:
And note that he is explicitely connected with the cross via the expression "through the blood of His cross." It is clearly manifest that Jesus existed, therefore, "BEFORE ALL THINGS" and that he was employed by the Father to make all things and that all things were made not only by him but also FOR him.
mlculwell: His existence was in the plan of god as the lamb slain from the foundation of the world for coming humanity he did not exist as another person of God If I ran roughshod over the scriptures with a glossary study I would come up with the same mess you have come up with.
No comments:
Post a Comment