Dean Porter

Joined

• started 0 topics
• posted 74 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Dean Porter

• 
  126

  Troublesome Trinity Verses Part 10

  by hooberus in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  the watchtower and other unitarians use scriptures that say that all things were "through" jesus christ in order to reduce him to being less than god.

  they reason that since all things are "of" the father and "through" the son that therefore the son is not also jehovah with the father.

  those who believe in the deity of jesus believe that both the father and the son are jehovah (though different persons within the one jehovah).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Dean Porter

  Kenneson,
  
  You ask what is it that distinguishes the Father from the angels and the whole of creation.
  
  Well, I think your comments just prior to that question, answers it for you.
  
  Clearly the Father is distinguished from all others by the fact that he is uncreated , is not made, is unbegotten and does not proceed from anyone else.
  
  I find it strange that when the trinitarian definition itself shows the Son to be BEGOTTEN, whereas the Father is not, that you would still argue they are EQUAL. Clearly if the Son is Begotten, then he has not always existed in the sense that the Father alone has.
  
  The Son, as the only - begotten son stands between the Father and the rest of creation.
  
  This is why he is called the Logos. He is the IMAGE of God. He stands as the representative of God.
  
  He could not 'represent' God if he is that same Almighty God. Surely that is why Hebrews calls him the Image and then goes on to prove that he is the ultimate spokesman for God.
  
  Paul reasons in this Book that Jesus is the Greater spokesman, superior to the Angels divine and human.
  
  Greater than Melchezidek, Moses, Joshua etc. ( they were all human in nature like Jesus but his authority and position was greater).
  
  Greater than all the Angels ( divine sons of God in nature as Jesus is now but his authority and position is greater.)
  
  If Paul believed that Jesus is God Almighty why would he bother reasoning on his superiority over these typical men and angels.
  
  If he is God then his superiority is implied and there is no need to reason and prove this.
  
  Clearly, this was not in Pauls mind. He is reasoning on the basis that Jesus is the ultimate MEDIATOR ;
  PRIEST and KING, who rules for God and intercedes for man.
  
  For more on this line of thought , I would direct you to read George Buchanan's commentary on Hebrews
  printed as part of the Anchor Bible Commentary Series.
  
  page 21 " For the author , the Son was the first-born, the Apostle of God, the reflection of God's Glory, and the Stamp of his Nature ( 1:3,6), BUT HE WAS NOT GOD HIMSELF."
  
  Also, it is now known that these human mediators like Melchezidek and Moses were thought of in Second Temple Judaism as Angelic Mediator Figures. So the implication of Pauls reasoning is that he is equating Jesus as the ultimate Angelic Mediator Figure. A man who is gloryfied and exalted to a heavenly angelic mediatorial role.
  
  Just a few thoughts to ponder on.
  
  Dean.
• 
  38

  Troublesome Trinity Verses Part 8

  by hooberus in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  jehovah saith unto my lord, sit thou at my right hand, until i make thine enemies thy footstool.

  " psalm 110:1 asv.

  unitarians tend to look at psalm 110:1 in this way:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Dean Porter

  Hooberus,
  
  I was taking you at your word that you " sincerely wanted to understand my position".
  
  But as your next post showed you were all the time trying to trap me into saying something you could attack.
  
  At least be honest about it. Don't say something like Sincerely if you don't really mean it.
  
  As far as the texts you have posted in response; I don't need to comment on them further.
  
  I have clearly pointed out what I believe, with reasoning and referrences. If you still want to TWIST what I have stated , then be my guest. If you want to catch me out on a point , then just be UPFRONT about it.
  
  I post here so as to try and LEARN and to try and EDUCATE. I'm not here to play games.
  
  Dean.
• 
  38

  Troublesome Trinity Verses Part 8

  by hooberus in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  jehovah saith unto my lord, sit thou at my right hand, until i make thine enemies thy footstool.

  " psalm 110:1 asv.

  unitarians tend to look at psalm 110:1 in this way:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Dean Porter

  Hooberus,
  
  O.K. I'll try again and hopefully I can make clear to you my position.
  
  Although you have asked specific questions and used specific phrases ; I will nonetheless answer in my own terminology; because from the questions you have phrased it is clear you have not understood me and are putting words in my mouth that I have not spoken.
  
  With regard to nature, you mention 3 definitions. I see there being only "2" natures i.e. Divine Nature and Human Nature.
  
  In this thread we all seem to be hung up on this question of ANGELS. This is how I see it.
  
  What we generally refer to as Angels , are indeed divine spirit beings. However the term Angel really just means Messenger.
  
  So Angel can simply be viewed as a Functionary title referring to the task that a messenger carries out.
  Thus a human can be an Angel in the sense of being a messenger.
  
  Therefore when talking of the divine messengers in the heavenly realms, I prefer to speak of them as "Bene ha Elohim" as this hebrew term tells us specifically what their NATURE is i.e. Sons of God or Beings of the class of Elohim.
  
  This term then differentiates Divine Angels from any earthly Human 'angels'.
  
  You asked me do I think Jesus was exalted to become an Angel ? Well I would say NO.
  
  He was an 'Angel' whilst he walked this earth as a Man. Angel in the sense that he was a Messenger !
  
  During his earthly life, I believe he was born a perfect sinless Human. I do not believe that he was a combination of Divine nature and Human nature. I don't think the scriptures say that.
  
  As far as I read the scriptures they say he was Flesh - a Man. Not a spirit being having assumed a fleshly veneer .
  I believe he was a perfect Man in exactly the sense that Adam had been created.
  
  However, by means of his Resurrection from the dead, the Father raised him in the spirit to life as a Divine spirit being.
  
  So whilst certain scriptures written after his death and resurrection refer to him as' The Man' Jesus this is to be understood as referrence to what he 'was'. So that whilst we understand him to be now at the Father's right hand in heaven, he is there as a Spirit being - a divine being.
  
  In a similar, but still different way , when certain Bene Ha Elohim appeared as theophanies on earth , the bible accounts speak of them as Men or a Man. It is not saying they were literally men - it is figures of speech.
  
  A last thought on Hebrews chapter 1.
  
  The chapter contrasts, the 'means' by which God has spoken to mankind. The point though is that both the Angels and the Son spoken of and contrasted here are contrasted as Spokesmen.
  
  I think the point is not a question of Nature per se but of Superiority and Rank and Importance.
  
  Both parties are Sons of God ( by nature). Both parties are Angels ( by function) but the Son is Superior in Rank / Importance by virtue of him being the FIRSTBORN and his BEGETTAL by the Father.
  
  I hope I have covered all the pertinant points and that my position on the matter is clearer to you.
  
  regards
  
  Dean.
• 
  38

  Troublesome Trinity Verses Part 8

  by hooberus in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  jehovah saith unto my lord, sit thou at my right hand, until i make thine enemies thy footstool.

  " psalm 110:1 asv.

  unitarians tend to look at psalm 110:1 in this way:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Dean Porter

  Hooberus,
  
  No we cannot agree on that point for the following reasons:
  
  1) I have already stated my position in my post that you are replying to. I have tried to spell out clearly what I
  am saying but still you don't seem to grasp it. I do not mean to be cheeky but I find that you don't really
  seem to read my posts properly as evidenced by you asking me questions on subjects I have already
  made my position clear.
  
  2) As LittleToe has interjected, you appear to be willing to agree to a position that undermines what the
  Trinity teaches about Jesus.
  
  3) You also appear to be agreeing to a position that you have elsewhere denied. Namely, in another thread
  you argued that Jesus in Heaven is now BOTH God and Man ; not simply a Man. ( In fact you have
  elsewhere stated that Jesus on Earth was a God/Man, thus you don't believe at all that Jesus is simply a
  Man )
  
  So , as I have stated before, in reading your posts I have come to the conclusion that You don't even know
  what you actually believe. Your reasoning does not appear to be consistant.
  
  Regards
  
  Dean.
• 
  38

  Troublesome Trinity Verses Part 8

  by hooberus in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  jehovah saith unto my lord, sit thou at my right hand, until i make thine enemies thy footstool.

  " psalm 110:1 asv.

  unitarians tend to look at psalm 110:1 in this way:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Dean Porter

  LittleToe,
  
  I'm glad you found the site. Yes, it is very interesting information.
  
  It has opened some doors in my thinking which I am now investigating further.
  
  I also found the articles by Hurtado and Davila, on the same subject , as equally enlightening.
  
  All good stuff.
  
  Dean.
• 
  38

  Troublesome Trinity Verses Part 8

  by hooberus in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  jehovah saith unto my lord, sit thou at my right hand, until i make thine enemies thy footstool.

  " psalm 110:1 asv.

  unitarians tend to look at psalm 110:1 in this way:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Dean Porter

  LittleToe,
  
  I'm chilled mate.
  
  May be I was being pedantic, but I am quite fussy about fine detail in all things in life. I'm just a bit serious by nature.
  
  As I have said before, please by all means pull me up on what I say, but I felt in that last post you were pulling me up for something I had not said.
  
  But it is cool. No problemo.
  
  Please by all means have a look at Fletcher- louis.
  
  A six-week course on the development of Christology was offered at Oxford University in May and June of 1998 by Professor Christopher Rowland and Dr. Crispin H. T. Fletcher-Louis. There is no formal connection between this course and the Divine Mediator Figures module at St. Andrews, but Dr. Fletcher-Louis kindly posted summaries of his lectures on the mediators list . (Dr. Fletcher-Louis was a participant on the mediators list and a presenter and respondent at the International Conference on the Origins of the Worship of Jesus.)
  
  http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_sd/med_oxford1.html
  
  There are three lectures on the web site and all three are well worth reading.
  
  I look forward to your comments on.
  
  Cheers
  
  Dean.
• 
  38

  Troublesome Trinity Verses Part 8

  by hooberus in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  jehovah saith unto my lord, sit thou at my right hand, until i make thine enemies thy footstool.

  " psalm 110:1 asv.

  unitarians tend to look at psalm 110:1 in this way:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Dean Porter

  Hooberus,
  
  
  For the record he is Now a Glorified Divine Spirit being by means of his Resurrection from the dead. ACTS 17:31.
  
  
  So, therefore Adoni is still appropriate as it was for the Heavenly Angel in Zechariah 4:4, or did you not actually take that point on board ?
  
  
  
  
  
  If Jesus is sitting at the right -hand of YHWH , then he is not YHWH. He cannot be seen to be in this Position if he is in fact YHWH himself.
  
  
  Dean.
  
  P.S. after originally posting those last comments, I thought further on the matter. We were originally looking at this verse to see what the verse said about the lord who was to come.
  
  So from the information that we have looked at ; the hebrew term pointed to a HUMAN DESCENDANT of King David who would be appointed his Kingly successor.
  
  The N.T. shows that indeed Jesus was born a MAN into Davids line and was Anointed by God to Be the Davidic King or the Messiah. It goes on to show that Jesus was exalted to the Heavens by means of his resurrection from the dead and sat down at YHWH's right-hand in the Heavens. But the point is as Acts 17:31 shows was that it was a ' MAN ' who was exalted to this position.
  
  Also, the references to Melchizedek in Psalm 110 also point to a Man who would be exalted to a Heavenly position ( Angelic Mediator ) as was the Jewish thinking in the " Second Temple Period ".
  
  For evidence of this see the Lecture notes by Crispin H. T. Fletcher-Louis which can be found on the website Oxford lectures on the st. Andrews Divine Mediators site.
  ( I would love to cut and paiste those notes but the author has added a note that they can't be copied without permission.)
  
  Other university lecturers in theology have posted similar thoughts , so it appears to be the common understanding in those circles.
  
  An understanding that I agree with and which I think fits the scriptures perfectly.
  
  Dean.
• 
  126

  Troublesome Trinity Verses Part 10

  by hooberus in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  the watchtower and other unitarians use scriptures that say that all things were "through" jesus christ in order to reduce him to being less than god.

  they reason that since all things are "of" the father and "through" the son that therefore the son is not also jehovah with the father.

  those who believe in the deity of jesus believe that both the father and the son are jehovah (though different persons within the one jehovah).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Dean Porter

  Kenneson,
  
  
  your quote regarding ' roles' and ' office ' seemed to lend support to what Earnest was saying rather than refute it.
  
  
  It made me think of the passage in LUKE 20: 9-17. There Jesus gives the parable of the vineyard owner who sends his Servants to his Tenants. The Servants are Sent ones i.e. Shaliachs; they are authoritative agents of the Owner and thus represent him when they deliver his message. They are Messengers or Angels in the true sense of the greek term.
  
  
  When the Tenants don't listen to them , the Landlord sends his Son as his Shaliach or authoritative Messenger or Angel.
  
  
  Thus we see that whilst the Son was the greater by virtue of his Sonship he nevertheless shared in the same role or office as a Messenger that his fathers servants had also.
  
  
  You mention worship being directed to the Son in Hebrews but as expressed elsewhere in scripture the worship is to the Glory of God the Father. Remember the Son is the Agent or Apostle of God. As the Psalms says " Kiss the Son ( i.e. prostrate oneself ) lest God be angry".
  
  
  Did you know that in the Jewish mindset, there were DIVINE MEDIATORS who acted as Angelic intermediatories for God. Wisdom ; Logos ; Son of Man; Melckizedek ; Enoch etc. The writings like Sirach and the Book of Enoch as preserved in the Dead Sea Scrolls confirm that these figures were thought of as being Angelic and received worship as representatives of God.
  
  
  So with this in mind a first century reader of the book of Hebrews would see Jesus as the Ultimate Angelic Mediator.
  
  
  By the way in the gospel of John, Jesus continually says that what he speaks is not of his own originallity but what the father speaks he tells us. In other words he is passing on a message from someone other than himself- thus he is an AGGELOS.
  
  
  Some interesting comments I found on the web from theologian Martin Werner seem pertinent here :
  
  
  Then, to, notwithstanding its fervently sustained insistence upon monotheism, upon the belief that the only true God was the transcendental God of the Jewish Scriptures, Judaism, the cradle of christianity, sometimes went surprisingly far in applying divinizing terms to angels, to the personalized concepts of Wisdom and the Logos and even to men. Angels could carry the designations "son of God," "lord" and even "god"- the Qumran documents have brought further evidence of this. Jewish writing about Wisdom, the Logos and the Torah(the Law of Moses)contains close parallels to the New Testament description of Jesus Christ as God's image, the effulgence of God's glory, his firstborn, God's agent in the creation of the world and so on.
  
  
  Noteworthy first of all is the fact that, in his post-resurrection heavenly life, Jesus is portrayed as retaining a personal individuality every bit as distinct and separate from the person of God as was his in his life on earth as the terrestrial Jesus. Alongside God and compared to God, he appears, indeed, as yet another heavenly being in God's heavenly court, just as the angels were- though as God's Son, he stands in a different category, and ranks far above them. Small wonder, then, that angel christology was a prominent strand of early christological thought, as Martin Werner has emphasised and other scholars have recognised.[Werner, op.cit.pp.120-41. Cf, too, Grillmeier, op.cit.pp.52-62.]Werner further argued that in calling Jesus "Lord"("Kyrios"), Paul and the early church meant that Jesus "was a high heavenly being of an angelic kind", the designation "Lord" being a particular instance of the designation and invocation of angels as "lords"("kyrioi") in late Judaism.[Werner, op.cit.p.124.]
  
  
  regards,
  
  
  Dean.
• 
  126

  Troublesome Trinity Verses Part 10

  by hooberus in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  the watchtower and other unitarians use scriptures that say that all things were "through" jesus christ in order to reduce him to being less than god.

  they reason that since all things are "of" the father and "through" the son that therefore the son is not also jehovah with the father.

  those who believe in the deity of jesus believe that both the father and the son are jehovah (though different persons within the one jehovah).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Dean Porter

  Earnest,
  
  I am fully with you on this matter, we are clearly 'on the same wavelength'. You have expressed in your quotations and your reasoning , the same thoughts I was having , but you have expressed them more eloquently than I could.
  
  I have much appreciated your input here.
  
  With regard to Kenneson's quote from Augustine; I read it and thought , this actually upholds what WE are saying rather than refute our position.
  
  As I see it , the book of Hebrews shows that God 'speaks ' to man via MESSENGERS or AGENTS. It contrasts the use of the Angels with the Son. But the point is that both the Angels and the Son are MESSENGERS or MEDIATORS or AGENTS that represent God to Man.
  
  The very fact that the Son speaks for God shows he is an ANGEL or MESSENGER or AGENT. The Role that Jesus has as the Word or Logos is to represent to men the Message / Revelation / Mind of God.
  
  He is the SENT ONE or SHALIACH of God. He is the authoritative AGENT of the Father and has thus been given a Greater name than the other BENE HA ELOHIM.
  
  But again , the point is He and the Angels are by ' NATURE' both SONS OF GOD but his Sonship is GREATER by virtue that he is the ONLY-BEGOTTEN SON.
  
  They are both Aggelos / Shaliach in their roles but he is the LOGOS and therefore the Father's primary AGENT.
  
  Regards,
  
  Dean.
• 
  38

  Troublesome Trinity Verses Part 8

  by hooberus in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  jehovah saith unto my lord, sit thou at my right hand, until i make thine enemies thy footstool.

  " psalm 110:1 asv.

  unitarians tend to look at psalm 110:1 in this way:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Dean Porter

  LittleToe,
  
  with respect, my friend, I did not ask " does it MATTER "? Because I do think it matters.
  
  What I asked was " does it make a DIFFERENCE " ?
  
  That is to say , would the removal of the vowel pointing change or affect the meaning that could be taken from the verse.
  
  You are correct in saying that I am 'assuming' that the Oral Tradition has remained unchanged over the years but I think that numerous bible translators who have relied upon the Masoretic text over the years have done the same too.
  
  You mentioned the Dead Sea scrolls, and I recall reading something on them recently in this context. Do have anything specific on that point as to what the Scrolls may reveal about the accuracy of the Masoretic readings ?
  
  You mention that the Mormons and the J.W.'s believe that a great Apostasy set in after the 1st Century : but I think that was in reference to the Christian Congregation NOT with regard to Judaism !
  
  I found a page on the web which addresses this point and makes mention of the LXX and the bearing it may have on the Masoretic accuracy, here is a part of it.
  
  SIT THOU AT MY RIGHT HAND
  (Psalm 110:1)
  by Allon Maxwell
  
  CONFIRMATION FROM THE SEPTUAGINT
  There are some who persist in reading the word ADONAI in this verse, instead of ADONI. This is usually justified by claiming that the Massoretes have assigned the wrong vowel points. However the "Greek factor" from the Septuagint version (LXX) supports the Massoretes.
  
  The following information was passed on to me recently by Bill Wachtel. (5)
  
  The Hebrew text in Ps. 110:1 is actually LADONI ("L" + "adoni").
  
  ADONI = my lord.
  LADONI = TO my lord.
  
  In the Greek of the LXX, LADONI becomes:
  "to kurio mou" (= to my lord)
  
  If the text had read:
  LADONAI (= to the Divine Lord) the Greek would have read simply "to kurio."
  
  Thus the LXX confirms for us that the original Hebrew is ADONI, and that the Massoretes got it right.
  
  THE MASSORETIC VOWEL POINTS
  The following information on the Massoretes and their work has been condensed from various
  books, encyclopedias and Internet sources.
  The ancient Hebrew texts were comprised of consonants only. There were no vowels or punctuation
  marks. The Massoretes were Hebrew scholars who, over several centuries, established a system of vowel
  markings to indicate the traditional pronunciation and intonation. We call these the "vowel points."
  This work was not completed until several centuries after the beginning of the Christian era.
  One sometimes encounters people whose determination to retain Psalm 110:1 as a Trinitarian "proof text"
  leads them to (selectively) discount the reliability of the Massoretic vowel pointing system, in favour of
  some other personal preference, especially when it suits their particular theological bias. However unless
  there is compelling documented evidence for changes of this kind, they are seldom helpful. We must be
  very cautious about introducing arbitrary changes of this kind, lest we leave ourselves open to accusations
  of "intellectual dishonesty."
  The following summary will provide a brief introduction to the Massoretes:
  - The work of the Massoretes was done principally in the period AD 500-900.
  - Although there were different schools of Massoretes, their differences seem to have left us very few
  variations in the meaning of the Hebrew consonantal text.
  - It was the goal of the Massoretes to preserve the traditional meaning of the Hebrew text. (This was
  perceived as necessary, because ancient Hebrew is a strictly consonantal language, and therefore prone
  to error in transmission.)
  - One of the ways they did this was to develop a system of vowel pointing, which indicates the traditional
  pronunciation and meaning of the text.
  - Since Hebrew is a consonantal language, there are many places where the same consonants are used for
  quite different words.
  (Note:- That is no different from English! Often the same consonants form different words when
  associated with different vowels. Often the same combination of consonants and vowels has a
  different pronunciation, and a different meaning. When that happens, we use context and tradition
  to interpret the intended meaning.)
  - The Massoretic vowel pointing indicates the traditional meaning, understanding, and pronunciation which
  had formerly been passed down from generation to generation, by oral tradition, through their teachers.
  - In cases where identical groups of consonants were traditionally understood to be different words, with
  different meanings attached, the pointing system made that clear and preserved it for future generations.
  - Our current English translations all rely heavily on the pointed text.
  As a LAYMAN, I conclude that what we have now is the work of dedicated Jewish Scholars, which reflects the best consensus about what was ALREADY accepted as the traditional understanding of the text, over many centuries.
  Consequently when the Massoretes reported "adoni" instead of "adonai," in Psalm 110:1, they were following the oral tradition. As we have already seen above, the LXX, which predates the pointed text by centuries, supports this conclusion.
  The Massoretes knew that in the unpointed text for that verse, the word "ADNY" was properly read and understood as a human lord, "ADONI," and not the divine Lord, "ADONAI."
  And in the providence of God, they inserted vowel points which preserved it that way for us (and our English translators).
  
  
  5. Bill Wachtel has an M.A. in New Testament from Wheaton College, Wheaton, Illinois. He was an instructor
  at the former Oregon Bible College of the Church Of God General Conference, from 1962 to 1968, and president
  from 1963 to 1968. At OBC he taught Greek classes, as well as other subjects.
  ______________________________________________________
  
  Regards
  
  Dean.