The Duality -- The Father and The Son

by UnDisfellowshipped 218 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • Blueblades
    Blueblades

    The Bible is the basis for this whole topic. The Bible is a man made book, not holy or from God. So, to me this whole subject is for believers only. I don't believe any of it.

    Blueblades

  • mouthy
    mouthy

    I don't believe any of it.

    Blueblades

    Isnt it wonderful to be able to express this to each other & still love each other ((((HUGS))) FREEDOM!!!!!!

  • fjtoth
    fjtoth

    Mouthy wrote:

    Frank... I will NOT get into this discussion.As it is obvious you do NOT believe Jesus is GOD! Big G
    Undisfellowshipped. >You said it very well. I enjoyed the way you reason(hug) Thanks

    Wink! Wink!

    . .

  • fjtoth
    fjtoth

    Undisfellowshiped,

    You wrote:

    I agree. Trinitarians also agree. The early church fathers agreed as well. The Father is being compared to the sun, and The Son is being compared to the light rays emitted from the sun.

    You again failed to read carefully. The Bible doesn't compare Christ to the rays of the sun. I wrote that "The Son reflects or radiates that glory." It is the moon that "reflects" and "radiates" light from the sun. The moon is like a mirror. But your description of God's Son likens him to the space between the sun and moon and between a person and a mirror.

    "Christ ... is the image of God." (2 Corinthians 4:4) "He is the image of the invisible God." (Colossians 1:15)

    When you look into a mirror, where is your image? Is it somewhere between you and the mirror, or is your image seen in the mirror?

    Mankind was created in God's image, "in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them." (Genesis 1:27) Is man in God's image seen somewhere between heaven and earth? Of course not! God's image is in the persons he created, Adam and Eve! "A man ought not to have his head covered, since he is the image and glory of God." (1 Corinthians 11:7)

    You wrote:

    But, if there was a time when the sun did not give off light rays, then it was a dead star, correct? So, how could The Father ever exist without giving off rays of His glory? Was there ever a time when The Father was not glorious?

    I'm amazed that anyone can be serious about such a silly illustration. First, it has no support anywhere in the Bible! Secondly, you insult God by suggesting that he is glorious only when someone exists to reflect the light he radiates. Thirdly, your illustration is totally unscientific. There are billions of brilliant stars that have never been seen, and they are so far away that the light from them disipates in the distance to the point where those stars cannot be seen. Your weak illustration says that such stars don't exist, or that they are each a "dead star."

    You wrote:

    Also, light rays are constantly, always proceeding from the sun, just like The Son is always, constantly being begotten or proceeding from The Father [the Source].

    There is no text in the Bible that even suggests that God's Son "is always, constantly being begotten" as if he is constantly dying and being reborn as an infant. The Bible tells us that Jesus was begotten only once. (Luke 1:31-33) The idea of an "eternal begetting" is as pagan as pagan can be. I'm amazed that you can't see the contradiction. First you claim that the Son is without a beginning, and then you claim he is constantaly undergoing a beginning! Furthermore, the very nature of a son is that he is not the same age as his father. A son is born from a father. Thus the idea of an eternal Son is self-contradictory. A person who has been begotten cannot have existed from all past eternity. God did not tell his Son, "I beget thee eternally." He said, "Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee." (Acts 13:33; Hebrews 1:5) A day is a specified and limited time period, not an endless eternity without beginning or end.

    You wrote:

    If something is begotten by a human, it IS HUMAN. The begotten always has the SAME NATURE as the one who beget him because the human father passes on his genes, his nature, to his offspring.

    Then what do you say about humans who become Christians? Do they also become Gods with a capital G? In 1 Peter 1:3, as well as other texts, we are told that we Christians are begotten of God.

    You wrote:

    However, whatever is begotten by God IS GOD, and has the Nature of God. That is why Jesus Christ is called "The ONLY-Begotten Son of God."

    In view of the following quotations from various translations of 1 Peter 1:3, this statement of yours is highly absurd.

    • Blessed [be] the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to his great mercy begat us again unto a living hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. (American Standard Version)
    • Blessed [be] the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who, according to his great mercy, has begotten us again to a living hope through [the] resurrection of Jesus Christ from among [the] dead. (Darby Translation)
    • "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to His abundant mercy has begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead." (King James Version)
    • Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His abundant mercy has begotten us again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. (New King James Version)
    • Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a living hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. (Third Millennium Bible)
    • Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a living hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. (21st Century King James Version)
    • Blessed [be] the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again to a living hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. (Webster Bible)
    • Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who in His great mercy has begotten us anew to an ever-living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. (Weymouth New Testament)
    • Blessed be God, and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which by his great mercy [which after his great mercy] begat us again into living hope, by the again-rising of Jesus Christ from death [by the again-rising of Jesus Christ from dead]. (Wycliffe New Testamen)
    • Blessed [is] the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who, according to the abundance of His kindness did beget us again to a living hope, through the rising again of Jesus Christ out of the dead. (Young's Literal Translation)

    Are we also "eternally begotten"???

    It is merely a Trinitarian theory that "begotten" means to be born of the same "nature." You have no evidence for such a theory in the Bible. Jesus is God's special Son, but he is not God's only Son. Since the exaltation of Jesus to heavenly glory, God has begotten thousands of other men and women and made them the brothers of Christ. (John 20:17; Romans 8:29; Colossians 1:18; Hebrews 2:11, 12, 17)

    You wrote:

    As you said, Jesus is the "genetic Son" of God The Father, and actually has God's "genes" within Him. That has to mean that Jesus shares God's Nature, and is God by His Nature.

    This is also absurd. Every single human has God's genes. Our lineage goes all the way back to Adam, "the son of God." (Luke 3:38) Where did Adam get his genes if he did not get them from God?

    You wrote:

    Yet, Colossians 2:9 says that Jesus Christ has all of the fullness of the Deity (or God's Nature) dwelling in His Body. So, does Jesus possess God's Nature or not?

    Are you saying that Ephesians 3:19 is no part of the Bible? I've mentioned this verse before, but you seem oblivious to it. It is part of Paul's prayer "that you may be filled up to all the fullness of God." And at Colossians 2:10 we are told "you have been given fullness in Christ, who is the head over every power and authority." The fullness of God dwells in Jesus Christ but also in every genuine Christian. The problem is that Trinitarians have no understanding of what "the fullness of God" or "the fullness of deity" actually means.

    You wrote:

    How can Jesus be an EXACT COPY of The Father but still be a lesser creature, considering that Psalm 89 and several other Scriptures teach that NO CREATURE is anything like God at all, not even the highest angelic creatures in heaven?

    Where does the Bible say that Jesus is "an EXACT COPY of The Father"?

    Adam was "in the image and likeness of God." In a sense, he was "an exact copy of the Father," but on a smaller scale. To be a "copy" does not necessarily mean equality. You are simply grasping at straws. You admit that God has no equal, but out of another corner of your mouth you insist that he does! Hebrews 1:3 says of Christ: "And he is the radiance of his glory and the exact representation of his nature." There is a big difference between being the real thing and radiating or reflecting the real thing in a representative way.

    You wrote:

    Considering those Scriptures, it would be ultimate BLASPHEMY for any creature, even the highest heavenly creature, to say that if you have seen him, you have seen The Father,

    Only in your mind is it blasphemy. Jesus did not say that he looked like his Father. He didn't say that it was for that reason men have seen the Father by seeing Jesus. Jesus pointed to the works that he performed. He asked to be judged by the works -- works that the Father performed, and works that Jesus was doing in imitation of his Father and with the power and authority that God gave him. It's just a pitiful shame that Trinitarians lack holy spirit to the extent that they are blind to this. Even people who were not yet Christians were able to see the difference. They were not like Trinitarians. The accomplishments of Jesus did not convince them that he was God. Instead, they saw the work of God in the work Jesus was doing as God's agent: "But when the crowds saw this, they were awestruck, and glorified God, who had given such authority to men." (Matthew 9:8) Were those people guilty of blasphemy for not viewing Jesus as Almighty God? Then why accuse others who have the same perception they had? Before his resurrection, the apostles never said Jesus was God. Were they blasphemous? When Jesus asked them who they thought he was, Peter answered: "You are the Christ [Messiah], the Son of the Living God." And Jesus told Peter that it was God who revealed that to Peter. If Jesus was God, why didn't the Father reveal that to Peter? (Matthew 16:16, 17)

    As great as his works were in imitation of his Father, Jesus said, "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes in me, the works that I do, he will do also; and greater works than these he will do." (John 14:12) Such persons would be performing as images or mirrors of Christ. People "were amazed, and began to recognize them as having been with Jesus." (Acts 4:13) And it is God's pre-stated plan that every Christian should be made in the image of Christ:

    • For those whom he foreknew, he also predestined to become conformed to the image of his Son, so that he would be the firstborn among many brethren. (Romans 8:29)
    • But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as from the Lord, the Spirit. (2 Corinthians 3:18)
    • Do not lie to one another, since you laid aside the old self with its evil practices, and have put on the new self who is being renewed to a true knowledge according to the image of the One who created him-- a renewal in which there is no distinction between Greek and Jew, circumcised and uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave and freeman, but Christ is all, and in all. (Colossians 3:9-11)

    You wrote:

    Show me from the Bible where it says that The Son was only given what He has "AFTER HE WAS BORN." Where does the Bible ever say that?

    It amazes me that you do not know this!

    • You shall name Him Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of his father David; and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and his kingdom will have no end. ... So the holy one to be born will be called the Son of God. (Luke 1:31-33, 35)
    • The scroll of the prophet Isaiah was handed to him. Unrolling it, he found the place where it is written: "The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to release the oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor." Then he rolled up the scroll, gave it back to the attendant and sat down. The eyes of everyone in the synagogue were fastened on him, and he began by saying to them, "Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing." (Luke 4:17-21)
    • And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to me in heaven and on earth. (Matthew 28:18)
    • The Father loves the Son and has given all things into his hand. (John 3:35)
    • For just as the Father has life in himself, even so he gave to the Son also to have life in himself; and he gave him authority to execute judgment, because he is the Son of Man. (John 5:26, 27)
    • Therefore let all the house of Israel know for certain that God has made him both Lord and Christ--this Jesus whom you crucified. (Acts 2:36)
    • He raised him from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly places, far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come. And he put all things in subjection under his feet, and gave him as head over all things to the church, which is his body, the fullness of him who fills all in all. (Ephesians 1:20-23)
    • I am the Living One; I was dead, and behold I am alive for ever and ever! And I hold the keys of death and Hades. (Revelation 1:18)

    Many other passages tell us that Jesus was given all the above authority and power following his birth and even more so following his resurrection.

    Frank

  • mouthy
    mouthy

    I will NOT get into this discussion

    FRank!!>>>>I should have added WITH YOU!!! But to any who reasons from MY understanding of Scripture I will commend if it sounds reasonable....You are not the only one who I answer...

    It seems to be so important to you that folks agree with YOUR interpretation.... We are all pressing on towards the Goal Frank! & Scripture says "If on some point you think differantly,that too God will make clear to you. Only let us live up to what we have already attained."( Phill :3 15,16.) I dont know everything .... All I know at MY age. after being brought into this world--- for what purpose I have no idea. I KNOW there exists a Creator...Only by viewing with my eyes.Now after serving men for nearly 65 years ( even before I was a JW-I served MEN) I have come to rely on CHRIST,,, who I believe IS GOD!!!! I am sorry if I offend you with my views --but I WILL NOT be pushed in to any body else telling me what I SHOULD believe. I AM FREE IN CHRIST>>> So all your pictures of a vicious old Mouthy... Do not offend ....just that you make me look better than I am....

  • fjtoth
    fjtoth

    Mouthy,

    You want it both ways! You don't want to participate, but you feel it's okay to mock someone who has a view that's different from yours. If you want to mock me for what I believe, don't be offended if you get back what you dish out. I'm not forcing my beliefs on you or anybody. This is a forum. If you don't like what you see here, move on to another thread. You're not forced to be here. I didn't introduce this topic. I'm merely a participant. But as a participant, I give my reasons for a different opinion. I don't sit on the sidelines and simply criticize one side or the other without offering something from the Bible that's worth thinking about.

    Frank

  • fjtoth
    fjtoth

  • UnDisfellowshipped
    UnDisfellowshipped

    Frank (fjtoth), you have accused me repeatedly of not taking the time to answer all of your questions and arguments in this thread. I admit, I have not had the time yet, and I explained why in previous posts. Yet, I could say the same thing to you, because I have posted so many questions that you have not commented on yet. In fact, on some of my strongest arguments, you have claimed that you cannot comment on them in this thread because it would take this thread "off topic" or because it should be commented on in a new thread.

    I cannot put this thread or this website ahead of my family or my job or my time with God. I do agree that it is extremely important for me to answer questions and give a reason for the hope that is within me, and I am doing so as I have the time. It is especially important for me to glorify God's Name through the Internet, because I believe this to be the will of God.

    However, this thread's topic is about whether or not The Father and The Son are the One God, or whether The Son is a separate creature, so ANYTHING that has a bearing on that topic, ANYTHING that could help explain the TRUTH about this topic, SHOULD be able to be discussed IN THIS THREAD.

    You don't have to discuss anything that you don't want to discuss, but please don't use the excuse that it will make this thread go "off topic."

    fjtoth said:

    I can imagine you will argue against that point of view as well. I think you will do it because I suspect you have never read the Bible from cover to cover. I'm not saying that to be insulting. I'm saying it because of things you say about the Bible and about what is in it. Again, I want to emphasize, Undisfellowshiped, I'm not saying it to be insulting. It's just that something exudes from you that impresses me as coming from someone who is a novice in handling the Bible.

    Wow, I have something "exuding" from me? Sounds weird. lol.

    If a Bible "novice" means someone who has not gone to Bible schools or training classes, then yes, I am a Bible "novice." Jesus and the 12 Apostles did not go to any official Bible schools. Paul did receive official Pharisaical schooling, however, he chose not to use his wisdom, but to use the wisdom given him by The Holy Spirit.

    fjtoth said:

    You will probably tell me you have read the Bible cover-to-cover. You may even tell me you've done it several times. I will confess that I cannot believe it. If you have, I cannot help but wonder how you have forgotten so much.

    I will be honest with you, because I am a Christian. But, will you do me a favor, and also be honest with me and tell me how many times you have read the Bible from "cover-to-cover"? (Why should I have to tell you, but you not have to tell me?) Now, for my honest reply:

    I have read the entire New Testament, I would say 10 or more times. I have read the Gospels 15 or more times. I have read the complete Torah (Genesis - Deuteronomy) around 4 times. I have read Joshua, Judges, and Ruth at least twice, I have read 1 Samuel through 2 Chronicles at least 3 times, I have read Ezra and Nehemiah at least twice, I have read Esther at least 3 times. I have read Job about 6 times. I try to read the Psalms daily. I have read through all of the Psalms at least 3 times. I have read through Proverbs 3 or 4 times, and I read a chapter Proverbs a day (if possible). I have read Ecclesiastes at least 3 times. I have read Song of Solomon (aka Canticles, Song of Songs) at least 3 times. I have read through Isaiah twice, and I am currently in the middle of reading it for the 3rd time. I read Jeremiah once (and will read it again shortly). I read Lamentations once. I read Ezekiel once. I have read Daniel at least 3 times. I have read Hosea twice. I read Joel twice. I read Amos twice. I have read Obadiah at least 4 times. I read Jonah at least 4 times. I have read Micah twice. I read Nahum once. I read Habakkuk once. I have read Zephaniah at least twice. I read Haggai once. I read Zechariah at least twice. I have read Malachi at least twice. I have read Revelation probably 15 times.

    All of that is in addition to my topical studies, devotional studies, and my other studies I have done. I have studied so much about WHO Jesus Christ is, that is what I have studied more than anything, which is very appropriate because Jesus said that our eternal life is at stake.

    fjtoth said:

    At any rate, I really doubt we would be having this kind of discussion if you were actually quoting ideas and thoughts from the Bible as they actually occur there.

    Oh, I would have to agree with you there for the most part, except I believe I am the one who has been posting the Biblical ideas and thoughts.

    fjtoth said:

    You have impressed me as being very different from 99% of the people with whom I've had Bible discussions throughout my life.

    Thanks, I guess (if that was a complement).

    fjtoth said:

    I would highly recommend that you read the Bible through at least once before attempting to teach others what it says. There is a dire warning to all of us in James 3:1: "Let not many of you become teachers, my brethren, knowing that as such we will incur a stricter judgment." We could find ourselves among those described in 1 Timothy 1:7 who wanted to be teachers, "even though they do not understand either what they are saying or the matters about which they make confident assertions."

    I already knew about that warning, thank you, and I take it very seriously. I hope that you do the same. I would not be on this website trying to preaching and teaching if I did not believe 100% that God wanted me to do this.

    fjtoth said:

    I really hope you mean that. I've already submitted so many questions that you haven't touched yet. What, for example, is your answer to the question about the way God speaks of himself thousands of times in the Scriptures?

    I've been wondering why you have ignored that question for so long.

    I already replied to this question above in another post (perhaps you overlooked it?).

    fjtoth said:

    God NEVER speaks of himself as "us" or "we" or "our". He ALWAYS says "I" and "me" and "myself." How do you explain that if he is speaking for THREE persons?

    In another thread you used to argue that God said "us" in Genesis. But that was only three times compared with the THOUSANDS of times where he speaks as a singular person. In those three instances he was speaking to others as the context shows, but Trinitarians make a big issue over those three verses in Genesis. Why don't you say something about those thousands of other verses that I mentioned?

    First, you say that "God NEVER speaks of himself as "us," but then in your very next paragraph, you admit that God did indeed say "us" in Genesis THREE TIMES.

    So which is the truth, did God NEVER say "us" or did God say "us" THREE TIMES?

    Why should I believe your explanation of the "us" in Genesis, instead of the Trinitarian explanation? Who was God speaking to in Genesis 1:26? Was He talking to angels? Did angels help God create humans? Are humans created in the image of angels?

  • fjtoth
    fjtoth

    Undisfellowshiped,

    You wrote:

    Frank (fjtoth), you have accused me repeatedly of not taking the time to answer all of your questions and arguments in this thread. I admit, I have not had the time yet, and I explained why in previous posts. Yet, I could say the same thing to you, because I have posted so many questions that you have not commented on yet. In fact, on some of my strongest arguments, you have claimed that you cannot comment on them in this thread because it would take this thread "off topic" or because it should be commented on in a new thread.

    What you write here is typical. First you say I accuse you, as if I've made a false accusation, and I haven't. Then you say I've done this "repeatedly," which is totally false since I did it merely a time or two. Then you admit you haven't answered my questions, and the reason you give is that you haven't had the time yet.

    The truth of the matter is that you have simply failed to deal with my questions. Instead of dealing with them you've gone all over the map in this thread, regularly bringing up new arguments that you believe are in support of the Trinity. Be a little honest with yourself and with the rest of us, will you?

    As for me, you will notice that I've been dealing with your questions right from the beginning as you've raised them. I gave you examples of just a few of my questions that you haven't touched, so now tell me what questions of yours I've avoided. I'd be interested to know so that I can point out to you the answers I've given.

    You know you are not being honest when you say I've claimed I can't answer "some" of your "strongest arguments" due to not wanting to start a new thread. I've said this only with regard to one facet of John 1:1. So, before you go any further, prove to me that you are not being dishonest. Tell me what others of "some" arguments I've said this about. Go ahead; I'm waiting.

    Frank

  • fjtoth
    fjtoth

    Undisfellowshiped,

    You wrote:

    I cannot put this thread or this website ahead of my family or my job or my time with God. I do agree that it is extremely important for me to answer questions and give a reason for the hope that is within me, and I am doing so as I have the time. It is especially important for me to glorify God's Name through the Internet, because I believe this to be the will of God.

    However, this thread's topic is about whether or not The Father and The Son are the One God, or whether The Son is a separate creature, so ANYTHING that has a bearing on that topic, ANYTHING that could help explain the TRUTH about this topic, SHOULD be able to be discussed IN THIS THREAD.

    You are not the only person who is busy with other responsibilities. You are sounding like you are getting a bit exasperated due to not getting anywhere. You can't name a single point you've succeeded in making thus far in this whole debate. If I were you, I'd be getting tired of this whole thing too.

    I've got thousands of texts in the Bible that deny the Trinity, and you by comparison have a mere handful that seem to prove your point. But you hold on to these, despite the fact that the Trinity isn't mentioned in the Bible and despite the fact that it wasn't even hinted at throughout the entire Bible period. It is a new doctrine introduced long after the apostles had died. Your problem is that you prefer the teachings of ininspired clergymen and a politician who brought them all together. You'd rather accept their word than the words of the Bible.

    So, I can go on with this discussion for months to come. There is no end to what the Bible has to say about false doctrines such as the Trinity.

    You wrote"

    You don't have to discuss anything that you don't want to discuss, but please don't use the excuse that it will make this thread go "off topic."

    Show me what you think is an "excuse," and I'll go over it again with you to explain why it's a "reason." There's a big difference, and I'm sure you know that.

    Frank

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit