The Duality -- The Father and The Son

by UnDisfellowshipped 218 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  fjtoth

  Undisfellowshiped,

  In your most recent post, you quoted Hebrews 2:4:

  It was declared at first by the Lord , and it was attested to us by those who heard, while God also bore witness by signs and wonders and various miracles and by gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his will.

  I wonder if you see the sharp contrast in that verse between "the Lord" (Jesus) and "God". We are told that Jesus declared the message, that the message was confirmed by those who heard Jesus' preaching, and that while the Lord Jesus was preaching "God also bore witness."

  There was no "duality" here. "Lord" and "God" are not always synonomous. If Jesus was God in the flesh, we would not be reading that someone else who is called God was "also" bearing witness by signs and wonders, etc. By claiming Jesus was God, I believe you are taking away credit from God the Father, as if he doesn't exist. Jesus performed the miracles, but not by his own power or authority. He did not have the essential qualities of God as well as of man. Instead, as explained by an eyewitness to Jesus' ministry, " when the crowds saw this, they were awestruck, and glorified God, who had given such authority to men." (Matthew 9:6) The crowds did not view Jesus as God. Neither did Matthew an eyewitness and an apostle. Instead, God was someone else. God was the one who "had given such authority" to the man Jesus. And thus Jesus did not possess that authority inherently as he would have if he were a God-man. It is silly to think that God gave authority to himself.

  Jesus was 100% human, a man -- not possessing a duality as a God-man. Other men performed miracles, and they also were simply men. As was the case with Jesus, they did not possess authority within themselves to perform miracles. They had to be "given such authority" since they were mere men, not God. Simon, a baptized believer knew this, and he wanted to have that authority. So he said to the apostles "Give this authority to me as well." (Acts 8:19) By way of a strong rebuke, the apostles took no credit for this authority. They called it "the gift of God." (Verse 20)

  Contrary to what Trinitarians say about them, Jesus' enemies also knew that he was not God and never claimed to be. That is why they asked him, "By what authority are you doing these things, and who gave you this authority?" ( Matthew 21:23; Mark 11:28; Luke 20:2) They asked the apostles the same question, knowing that they too were not God himself and never pretended to be. (Acts 4:7)

  The most Jesus ever said about himself is that he is the Son of God: "And they all said, 'Are you the Son of God, then?' And he said to them, 'Yes, I am.'" (Luke 22:70) He was never asked, "Are you God, then?"

  On one occasion the Jews accused Jesus of "making himself equal with God." Please note: They were not accusing him of "saying" he was equal with God. He only said that God was his Father, and they twisted his meaning. Also please note: To a monotheistic Jew, making oneself equal to God meant making oneself into another God, not the God they claimed to worship. They had no "Early Church Fathers" concept of a Binity or Trinity. They did not claim he was making himself the one true God, but "was calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God." (John 5:16-18) Their concept was that the Father was one Being and that Jesus, another being, was making himself equal to the Father, thus making two gods. It's amusing to me that Trinitarians rush to this account in defense of their doctrine.

  But the question is, were Jesus' enemies at least partially correct? Had Jesus ever claimed to be "equal with God" in any sense of the word? The answer is an unequivocal "No!" When explaining to them all the authority he had, he clearly pointed out that the Father "gave" him this authority. (Verses 26, 27) It was not an authority built into his nature. It was not an essential characteristic of his being or existence as a man. No divine "duality" here.

  On another occasion, they accused him of blasphemy, "because you, being a man, make yourself out to be God." (John 10:33) Did Jesus agree that he had made himself out to be God? His answer: "I said, `I am the Son of God'." (Verse 36) A person cannot be God if he is a son of God. Adam was "the son of God," but not God. (Luke 3:38) Sons of God were on the scene in Noah's day, but none of them was God. (Genesis 6:1, 2) Sons of God exist in heaven, yet none of them is God. (Job 1:6; 38:7) It is a twisting of the Scriptures for anyone to claim that "Son of God" means "God".

  Frank
• 

  UnDisfellowshipped

  fjtoth said:

  If all the words of the Bible are "inspired directly by The Holy Spirit," whom you claim is a member of the Trinity, it seems to me you should be saying the words of Jesus, the apostles and the prophets are all of equal value. Or do you believe the words of the third member of the Trinity are of less importance than the words of the second member? There's something that strikes me as very odd about your reasoning here. But I'll look for your explanation, just to be sure.

  All of Scripture is equally INSPIRED, but that does not mean that every verse is of equal importance. For example, is it equally important to read and understand and study Judges chapter 19 (the rape and murder of a concubine) as it is to read and understand and study John chapter 3? (Jesus teaching about salvation and eternal life) Is it equally important to read and understand and study Numbers chapter 1 as it is to read and understand and study Luke chapter 1? I could go on, but I think you understand what I am saying.

  Is it equally important to spend your time trying to understand the ancient genealogies found in the Bible as it is to spend time studying the Book of Revelation or the Book of Romans?

  1 Timothy 1:4 (ESV): nor to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies, which promote speculations rather than the stewardship from God that is by faith.

  Titus 3:9 (ESV): But avoid foolish controversies, genealogies, dissensions, and quarrels about the law, for they are unprofitable and worthless.

  Revelation 1:3 (ESV): Blessed is the one who reads aloud the words of this prophecy, and blessed are those who hear, and who keep what is written in it, for the time is near.

  Is it equally important to study the Laws of Moses as it is to study the Four Gospels?

  The Apostle Paul said not to worry about different opinions about non-essential teachings (or things that are not required for salvation) of the Bible (see Romans 14:1-5).

  The Apostle Paul also declared that the Gospel of Jesus Christ is OF FIRST IMPORTANCE IN THE BIBLE:

  1 Corinthians 15:1-4 (ESV): Now I would remind you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, which you received, in which you stand, and by which you are being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you--unless you believed in vain. For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures,

  Have you seen what Paul said about Christ's words?:

  1 Timothy 6:3-5 (ESV): If anyone teaches a different doctrine and does not agree with the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ and the teaching that accords with godliness, he is puffed up with conceit and understands nothing. He has an unhealthy craving for controversy and for quarrels about words, which produce envy, dissension, slander, evil suspicions, and constant friction among people who are depraved in mind and deprived of the truth, imagining that godliness is a means of gain.

  Did you see that? Paul said to reject "ANYONE" who teaches something that contradicts the sound words of the Lord Jesus Christ. You claimed that Gabriel contradicted Jesus' plain statement in John 17:5. I know that Gabriel would never have contradicted Jesus. So, it must be you who is contradicting the Lord Jesus.

  Colossians 3:16 (ESV): Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly, teaching and admonishing one another in all wisdom, singing psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, with thankfulness in your hearts to God.

  Jesus Himself said that His own Words come first (Matthew 7:24-26; Matthew 24:35; Mark 8:28; John 6:63; John 12:48; John 14:10; John 14:24; John 15:7; John 17:8). John the Baptist said the same thing about Jesus at John 3:31-36.

  However, this does NOT mean that you should downgrade or reject a holy angel's message that he is delivering from God. All I have been trying to say is that if ANYONE'S message ever contradicts Jesus' message, then that message does not originate with God. Period. The End. Any message that does not originate with God originates from either the Devil or sinful man.
• 

  UnDisfellowshipped

  fjtoth said:

  My point is that one man's wrong interpretation of what Jesus said is just as bad as another man's wrong interpretation of what an angel said.

  I agree with that 100%.

  My interpretation should, no, MUST be checked against the rest of the Scriptures to make sure I am telling the truth, and to make sure I have understood and explained that Scripture correctly, the same way that you, or anyone else should be checked.

  I asked for your explanation of John 17:5, and I have not yet seen it. When I receive your explanation, then I will check it against the rest of the Bible.

  Some statements in the Bible seem so incredibly obvious to me as to the meaning that they don't even have to be interpreted. For example, Jesus saying "I came down from heaven." I don't see how you can "interpret" that verse in any other way.
• 

  fjtoth

  Undisf'd,

  You wrote:

  You claimed that Gabriel contradicted Jesus' plain statement in John 17:5. I know that Gabriel would never have contradicted Jesus. So, it must be you who is contradicting the Lord Jesus.

  This is interesting, no, it's fascinating! I'm eager see where or how it was that I "claimed that Gabriel contradicted Jesus' plain statement in John 17:5."

  Please fire away, by all means!

  Frank
• 

  fjtoth

  Undisf'd,

  You wrote:

  All of Scripture is equally INSPIRED, but that does not mean that every verse is of equal importance.

  So, then, you disagree with the apostle Paul? He wrote that "All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work." (2 Timothy 3:16, 17, ESV)

  In other words, you are of the conviction that some portions of the Bible were not breathed out by God--is that correct?

  Frank
• 

  UnDisfellowshipped

  fjtoth,

  Jesus Christ said:

  "And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed." (John 17:5, ESV)

  You said:

  "Gabriel said that Jesus was not great before he was born."

  To me, that is an obvious, unbelievable contradiction. If you care to explain how those two statements are not contradictions, be my guest.

  Also, you said:

  You are referring to my statement that the greatness of Jesus was yet future, that Jesus was not great at the time of his conception and birth.

  Now you are trying to change what you originally said. You originally said that Gabriel said Jesus was NOT GREAT BEFORE HE WAS BORN. You did not originally say "He was not great AT the time of his conception and birth." You said He was not great BEFORE His birth. Why the change?
• 

  fjtoth

  Undisf'd,

  You wrote:

  Is it equally important to spend your time trying to understand the ancient genealogies found in the Bible as it is to spend time studying the Book of Revelation or the Book of Romans?

  1 Timothy 1:4 (ESV): nor to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies, which promote speculations rather than the stewardship from God that is by faith.

  I gather from this that you believe the Bible contains "myths," and that since there are "myths" in the Bible, as well as "endless genealogies," that there are some portions of the Bible we should not give devotion to, according to the way you interpret 1 Timothy 1:3, 4. Am I correct?

  Frank
• 

  UnDisfellowshipped

  fjtoth said:

  So, then, you disagree with the apostle Paul? He wrote that "All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work." (2 Timothy 3:16, 17, ESV)

  I agree 100% with Paul's statement at 2 Timothy 3:16-17. Paul did not say that all Scripture was of equal importance. Rather he said that all Scripture is profitable for teaching. Did you actually read the other Scriptures from Paul that I posted above, where Paul himself said that certain Scripture was of FIRST IMPORTANCE?

  I ask you, should we spend the same amount of time studying the rape of a concubine in the Old Testament as we spend studying about God The Father and His Son in the Gospels? Are they equally important to us?

  fjtoth said:

  In other words, you are of the conviction that some portions of the Bible were not breathed out by God--is that correct?

  Every word is God-breathed. That does not mean every word is equally important for Christians to study or read or understand.

  You yourself above in this thread said that Hebrews chapter 2 was comparing Jesus' words about salvation and immortality with the angels' words (which you said was the Mosaic Law), and that Jesus' words about salvation and immortality were more important than the Mosaic Law.

  In fact, the entire Book of Hebrews was written to prove that the teachings of Jesus (and His Apostles) are more important than the Mosaic Law:

  Hebrews 8:6-9 (ESV):

  But as it is, Christ has obtained a ministry that is as much more excellent than the old as the covenant he mediates is better, since it is enacted on better promises. For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion to look for a second. For he finds fault with them when he says: "Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will establish a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt. For they did not continue in my covenant, and so I showed no concern for them, declares the Lord.

  Hebrews 8:13 (ESV):

  In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.

  Hebrews 10:28-29 (ESV):

  Anyone who has set aside the law of Moses dies without mercy on the evidence of two or three witnesses. How much worse punishment, do you think, will be deserved by the one who has spurned the Son of God, and has profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has outraged the Spirit of grace?

  Paul also taught that the teachings of the New Covenant had more much more glory than the teachings of the Old Covenant:

  2 Corinthians 3:7-11 (ESV):

  Now if the ministry of death, carved in letters on stone, came with such glory that the Israelites could not gaze at Moses' face because of its glory, which was being brought to an end, will not the ministry of the Spirit have even more glory? For if there was glory in the ministry of condemnation, the ministry of righteousness must far exceed it in glory. Indeed, in this case, what once had glory has come to have no glory at all, because of the glory that surpasses it. For if what was being brought to an end came with glory, much more will what is permanent have glory.
• 

  UnDisfellowshipped

  fjtoth,

  The Bible contains no myths. Have you read the surrounding context of 1 Timothy 1:4? I highly encourage you to do so:

  1 Timothy 1:4-9 (ESV): nor to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies, which promote speculations rather than the stewardship from God that is by faith. The aim of our charge is love that issues from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith. Certain persons, by swerving from these, have wandered away into vain discussion, desiring to be teachers of the law, without understanding either what they are saying or the things about which they make confident assertions. Now we know that the law is good, if one uses it lawfully, understanding this, that the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who strike their fathers and mothers, for murderers,

  Paul was speaking about people, false teachers, who were promoting their own distorted interpretations of the Law, and who were encouraging people to study the genealogies of the Law endlessly, which only promoted speculations and vain discussion.
• 

  fjtoth

  Undisf'd,

  You wrote:

  To me, that is an obvious, unbelievable contradiction. If you care to explain how those two statements are not contradictions, be my guest.

  May I submit that I'm glad you qualified your statement by introducing it with "To me." There is no "obvious, unbelievable contradiction." Not all Bible believers view John 17:5 the way you do. Even some Trinitarians disagree with your view. I haven't explained my view of that text, so I think you're making a mountain out of a molehill here. As I said earlier, I wish to keep within the theme of this thread and not go off into other directions, which is where a thorough discussion of John 17:5 will take us. I think you agreed that we should stay within the thread. You also agreed that you would begin an examination of my rebuttals to your long essays. I'm waiting.

  You wrote:

  Now you are trying to change what you originally said. You originally said that Gabriel said Jesus was NOT GREAT BEFORE HE WAS BORN. You did not originally say "He was not great AT the time of his conception and birth." You said He was not great BEFORE His birth. Why the change?

  I think you need to take a breath or something. I changed nothing, except that I added "at the time of his ... birth." When Gabriel gave his prophecy regarding the future greatness of Jesus, he was speaking before Jesus' conception and before his birth. If you read Gabriel's words carefully, you will know that I haven't distorted anything about what he said or when he said it. So calm down, man, and start doing some thinking instead of firing off like a wild man in the jungle!

  I have to tell you that I'm a bit surprised at your actions tonight. I thought we were engaged in serious Bible discussion, not the scattering of wild opinions to see where they might land. Again, I say, calm down. Cool it!

  Frank