Post by bornagainchristian on Sept 17, 2013 4:24:32 GMT -5
Alexander Winslow,
There is no contradiction about the Father and the Son being equal and not equal.
There is a categorical distinction between their equality and inequality.
EQUAL IN NATURE
NOT EQUAL IN AUTHORITY
It is possible to be equal in nature but not equal in authority.
For example:
The President and the Vice President are equal being human, but in their authority within the company; they are not equal.
Jesus Christ is not a hybrid.
Jesus Christ is 100% God before his incarnation.
Jesus Christ is 100% God and 100% Man after his incarnation.
Jesus Christ is 100% God and 100% Man even until now in heaven.
Jesus Christ has been existing for all eternity as God even before his incarnation, with or without his human nature.
Only God is holy by nature; everybody else is not.
Angels can sin and humans can sin, but God cannot sin.
John 5:18-19,30 Barnes Commentary
Making himself equal with God - This shows that, in the view of the Jews, the name Son of God, or that calling God his Father, implied equality with God. The Jews were the best interpreters of their own language, and as Jesus did not deny the correctness of their interpretations, it follows that he meant to be so understood. See Joh_10:29-38. The interpretation of the Jews was a very natural and just one. He not only said that God was his Father, but he said that he had the same right to work on the Sabbath that God had; that by the same authority, and in the same manner, he could dispense with the obligation of the day. They had now two pretences for seeking to kill him - one for making himself equal with God, which they considered blasphemy, and the other for violating the Sabbath. For each of these the law denounced death, Num_15:35; Lev_24:11-14.
John 5:19
The Son can do nothing of himself - Jesus, having stated the extent of his authority, proceeds here to show its “source and nature,” and to prove to them that what he had said was true. The first explanation which he gives is in these words: “The Son” - whom he had just impliedly affirmed to be equal with God - did nothing “of himself;” that is, nothing without the appointment of the Father; nothing contrary to the Father, as he immediately explains it. When it is said that he can “do nothing” of himself, it is meant that such is the union subsisting between the Father and the Son that he can do nothing “independently” or separate from the Father. Such is the nature of this union that he can do nothing which has not the concurrence of the Father, and which he does not command. In all things he must, from the necessity of his nature, act in accordance with the nature and will of God. Such is the intimacy of the union, that the fact that “he” does anything is proof that it is by the concurring agency of God. There is no separate action - no separate existence; but, alike in being and in action, there is the most perfect oneness between him and the Father. Compare Joh_10:30; Joh_17:21.
John 5:30
Of mine own self - See Joh_5:19. The Messiah, the Mediator, does nothing without the concurrence and the authority of God. Such is the nature of the union subsisting between them, that he does nothing independently of God. Whatever he does, he does according to the will of God.
As I hear I judge - To “hear” expresses the condition of one who is commissioned or instructed. Thus Joh_8:26, “I speak to the world those things which I have “heard” of him;” Joh_8:28, “As the Father hath taught me, I speak those things.” Jesus here represents himself as commissioned, taught, or sent of God. When he says, “as I ‘hear,’” he refers to those things which the Father had “showed” him Joh_5:20 - that is, he came to communicate the will of God; to show to man what God wished man to know.
I judge - I determine or decide. This was true respecting the institutions and doctrines of religion, and it will be true respecting the sentence which he will pass on mankind at the day of judgment. He will decide their destiny according to what the Father wills and wishes - that is, according to justice.
Because I seek ... - This does not imply that his own judgment would be wrong if he sought his own will, but that he had no “private” ends, no selfish views, no improper bias. He came not to aggrandize himself, or to promote his own views, but he came to do the will of God. Of course his decision would be impartial and unbiased, and there is every security that it will be according to truth. See Luk_22:42, where he gave a memorable instance, in the agony of the garden, of his submission to his Father’s will.
Even your own translation still says that there will be no God formed after Yahweh.
1) WHAT DOES WORD "BEGOTTEN" MEAN TO YOU?
2) DOES GOD BEGOT SOMEBODY IN A LITERAL SENSE?
3) DOES GOD PROCREATE AND MULTIPLY?
4) GIVE ME THESE VERSES WHERE GOD HAS BEGOTTEN JESUS. WE WILL EXAMINE THEM.
5) IS IT THE SAME MEANING AND PRINCIPLE WHENEVER GOD USES "BEGOTTEN" FOR HIS SON JESUS TO HOW HUMANS USED BEGOTTEN FOR THEIR CHILDREN?
Genesis 6:1-7
New King James Version (NKJV)
1 Now it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born to them, 2 that the sons of God saw the daughters of men, that they were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves of all whom they chose.
3 And the LORD said, “My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.” 4 There were giants on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown.
5 Then the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6 And the LORD was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. 7 So the LORD said, “I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth, both man and beast, creeping thing and birds of the air, for I am sorry that I have made them.”
1) THE "SONS OF GOD" ARE NOT ANGELS; THEY ARE HUMANS JUST LIKE THE DAUGHTERS OF MEN. THE TERM "SONS OF GOD" DOES NOT ALWAYS MEAN ANGELS.
2) YOU YOURSELF ADMITTED THAT BY DEFINITION, THE "SONS OF GOD" ARE NOT THE "FALLEN ONES" BUT THE NEPHILIMS OR THE GIANTS.
3) THE NEPHILIMS OR THE GIANTS HAVE BEEN EXISTING BEFORE, DURING AND AFTER THE UNION OF THE SONS OF GOD WITH THE DAUGHTERS OF MEN. EVEN AFTER THE FLOOD, AND EVEN TODAY THERE ARE GIANT PEOPLE.
4) GREAT WICKEDNESS OF MEN IS THE REASON FOR THE FLOOD; NOT THE EXTERMINATION OF THE HYBRIDS (ACCORDING TO YOUR INTERPRETATION).
5) NOWHERE IN THE BIBLE YOU WILL EVER FIND THAT THESE ANGELS LEFT HEAVEN BECAUSE THEY WANTED TO HAVE SEX WITH HUMANS. IF THERE IS ONE, GIVE ME THIS VERSE; WE WILL EXAMINE IT.
There is no contradiction about the Father and the Son being equal and not equal.
There is a categorical distinction between their equality and inequality.
EQUAL IN NATURE
NOT EQUAL IN AUTHORITY
It is possible to be equal in nature but not equal in authority.
For example:
The President and the Vice President are equal being human, but in their authority within the company; they are not equal.
Jesus Christ is not a hybrid.
Jesus Christ is 100% God before his incarnation.
Jesus Christ is 100% God and 100% Man after his incarnation.
Jesus Christ is 100% God and 100% Man even until now in heaven.
Jesus Christ has been existing for all eternity as God even before his incarnation, with or without his human nature.
Only God is holy by nature; everybody else is not.
Angels can sin and humans can sin, but God cannot sin.
John 5:18-19,30 Barnes Commentary
Making himself equal with God - This shows that, in the view of the Jews, the name Son of God, or that calling God his Father, implied equality with God. The Jews were the best interpreters of their own language, and as Jesus did not deny the correctness of their interpretations, it follows that he meant to be so understood. See Joh_10:29-38. The interpretation of the Jews was a very natural and just one. He not only said that God was his Father, but he said that he had the same right to work on the Sabbath that God had; that by the same authority, and in the same manner, he could dispense with the obligation of the day. They had now two pretences for seeking to kill him - one for making himself equal with God, which they considered blasphemy, and the other for violating the Sabbath. For each of these the law denounced death, Num_15:35; Lev_24:11-14.
John 5:19
The Son can do nothing of himself - Jesus, having stated the extent of his authority, proceeds here to show its “source and nature,” and to prove to them that what he had said was true. The first explanation which he gives is in these words: “The Son” - whom he had just impliedly affirmed to be equal with God - did nothing “of himself;” that is, nothing without the appointment of the Father; nothing contrary to the Father, as he immediately explains it. When it is said that he can “do nothing” of himself, it is meant that such is the union subsisting between the Father and the Son that he can do nothing “independently” or separate from the Father. Such is the nature of this union that he can do nothing which has not the concurrence of the Father, and which he does not command. In all things he must, from the necessity of his nature, act in accordance with the nature and will of God. Such is the intimacy of the union, that the fact that “he” does anything is proof that it is by the concurring agency of God. There is no separate action - no separate existence; but, alike in being and in action, there is the most perfect oneness between him and the Father. Compare Joh_10:30; Joh_17:21.
John 5:30
Of mine own self - See Joh_5:19. The Messiah, the Mediator, does nothing without the concurrence and the authority of God. Such is the nature of the union subsisting between them, that he does nothing independently of God. Whatever he does, he does according to the will of God.
As I hear I judge - To “hear” expresses the condition of one who is commissioned or instructed. Thus Joh_8:26, “I speak to the world those things which I have “heard” of him;” Joh_8:28, “As the Father hath taught me, I speak those things.” Jesus here represents himself as commissioned, taught, or sent of God. When he says, “as I ‘hear,’” he refers to those things which the Father had “showed” him Joh_5:20 - that is, he came to communicate the will of God; to show to man what God wished man to know.
I judge - I determine or decide. This was true respecting the institutions and doctrines of religion, and it will be true respecting the sentence which he will pass on mankind at the day of judgment. He will decide their destiny according to what the Father wills and wishes - that is, according to justice.
Because I seek ... - This does not imply that his own judgment would be wrong if he sought his own will, but that he had no “private” ends, no selfish views, no improper bias. He came not to aggrandize himself, or to promote his own views, but he came to do the will of God. Of course his decision would be impartial and unbiased, and there is every security that it will be according to truth. See Luk_22:42, where he gave a memorable instance, in the agony of the garden, of his submission to his Father’s will.
Christ Jesus was never a ‘created’ God; this was his capacity as the ‘Word’ and later after his earthly period when he was again ‘begotten’ for the second time. Due to lazy translators, the scripture: “…there is no god formed after Yahweh.” Should read: “…Before me there was no GOD formed, and after me there continued to be none.” (Isaiah 43:10 ) NMTCS
1) WHAT DOES WORD "BEGOTTEN" MEAN TO YOU?
2) DOES GOD BEGOT SOMEBODY IN A LITERAL SENSE?
3) DOES GOD PROCREATE AND MULTIPLY?
4) GIVE ME THESE VERSES WHERE GOD HAS BEGOTTEN JESUS. WE WILL EXAMINE THEM.
5) IS IT THE SAME MEANING AND PRINCIPLE WHENEVER GOD USES "BEGOTTEN" FOR HIS SON JESUS TO HOW HUMANS USED BEGOTTEN FOR THEIR CHILDREN?
Genesis 6:1-7
New King James Version (NKJV)
1 Now it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born to them, 2 that the sons of God saw the daughters of men, that they were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves of all whom they chose.
3 And the LORD said, “My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.” 4 There were giants on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown.
5 Then the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6 And the LORD was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. 7 So the LORD said, “I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth, both man and beast, creeping thing and birds of the air, for I am sorry that I have made them.”
1) THE "SONS OF GOD" ARE NOT ANGELS; THEY ARE HUMANS JUST LIKE THE DAUGHTERS OF MEN. THE TERM "SONS OF GOD" DOES NOT ALWAYS MEAN ANGELS.
2) YOU YOURSELF ADMITTED THAT BY DEFINITION, THE "SONS OF GOD" ARE NOT THE "FALLEN ONES" BUT THE NEPHILIMS OR THE GIANTS.
3) THE NEPHILIMS OR THE GIANTS HAVE BEEN EXISTING BEFORE, DURING AND AFTER THE UNION OF THE SONS OF GOD WITH THE DAUGHTERS OF MEN. EVEN AFTER THE FLOOD, AND EVEN TODAY THERE ARE GIANT PEOPLE.
4) GREAT WICKEDNESS OF MEN IS THE REASON FOR THE FLOOD; NOT THE EXTERMINATION OF THE HYBRIDS (ACCORDING TO YOUR INTERPRETATION).
5) NOWHERE IN THE BIBLE YOU WILL EVER FIND THAT THESE ANGELS LEFT HEAVEN BECAUSE THEY WANTED TO HAVE SEX WITH HUMANS. IF THERE IS ONE, GIVE ME THIS VERSE; WE WILL EXAMINE IT.