I love the way Brad(humanityofjesus on youtube) teaches.Very humbly,sincerely,and soundly.I only hope Yahushua by the spirit will work though him to compel others to the true God and the true Son of God.It doesn't happen overnight that seeds grow,but they can and do.:)The truth is so simple,beautiful and important.
Tuesday, May 31, 2011
Monday, May 30, 2011
Sunday, May 29, 2011
Jehovah's Witnesses and the Faithful and Discreet Slave
Matthew 24:45 “Who then is the faithful and wise servant, whom his master has set over his household, to give them their food at the proper time? 46 Blessed is that servant whom his master will find so doing when he comes. 47 Truly, I say to you, he will set him over all his possessions.
The Watchtower "Insight" publication says:
"Those forming the Christian congregation are referred to by the apostle Paul as “members of the household of God” (Eph 2:19; 1Ti 3:15), and the same apostle shows that ‘faithful stewardship’ among such household members involved the dispensing of spiritual truths on which those becoming believers would ‘feed.’ (1Co 3:2, 5; 4:1, 2; compare Mt 4:4.)Whereas this(food dispension) was a prime responsibility of those appointed as ‘shepherds’ of the flock (1Pe 5:1-3), the apostle Peter shows that such stewardship of the divine truths was actually committed to all the ‘chosen ones,’ all the spirit-anointed ones, of the Christian congregation. (1Pe 1:1, 2; 4:10, 11)"(Insight vol. 1 under "faithful and discreet slave")
So,awesomely enough,the WT is willing to admit that in the first century,because they believe that at that time ALL true Christians were anointed,that this parable is in application to every member within the congregations,feeding one another as well as getting fed.They articulate this by saying further:
"The entire anointed Christian congregation was to serve in a united stewardship, dispensing such truths. At the same time the individual members making up such composite body, or the “domestics” making up the “house” of God (Mt 24:45; Heb 3:6; Eph 2:19), would also be recipients of the “food” dispensed. (Heb 5:11-14; compare 1Co 12:12, 19-27.)"
The WT admits this parable applies to the entire body of Christ,and thus everyone who was present in the congregations(the home fellowships) of the 1st century fulfilled it.Today,however, they inexplicably believe only a few "chosen ones",literally only thousands of people within their organization itself,fulfill it,and especially those in their "governing body."
We actually have a decent starting point because at least the WT admits that the "household" of God are anointed Christians.It's just entirely too bad that they think most Christians aren't spirit anointed at all!Therefore,they have to equivocate as they expand the household of God to include Christians who aren't in Christ at all to justify their unique application of this parable.The REAL problem with this is that the New Testament scriptures don't speak of anyone who is supposed to be Christian as actually being outside the body of Christ,which IS "God's household."In other words,to say there's a group distinct from the body of Christ within the household of God is scripturally baseless.When there are people progressing to true Christianity,once they have decided to exercise faith in the Messiah,then they need to live in him as their ark and truth,as their sole mediator and way to eternal life.(Jn. 14:6,1 Tim. 2:5)They receive the SAME reward(life in Christ alone) as those who are more mature in the faith.(Matt. 10:40-42)Essentially,fulfilling the parable along with every professed believer because they become slaves for Christ who,hopefully,are faithful and discreet ones.
Let's see,further, who scripture actually identifies as "God's household" to get a proper understanding of Matt. 24:45.Scripture says:
1 Peter 2:5:you also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.
1 Timothy 3:15 if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God's household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.
Hebrews 3:6:Christ is faithful over God's house as a son. And we are his house if indeed we hold fast our confidence and our boasting in our hope.
The WT,of course,claim these texts apply to all Christians in the 1st century and VERY FEW today.This is because they believe the only true Christians are Jehovah's Witnesses,and most of them are of a class that are *outside* the body of Christ.This has been determined by their leaders by a clever misuse of texts like John 10:16 and Luke 12:32.Even though common sense as well as the bible itself makes it clear the "other sheep" are Gentiles(while the little flock are Jews) & that ALL ,quite frankly, share in the blessings of the body of Christ.(Eph. 2:11-22 expounds on the two groups)It would seem the WT has a different application for this parable from the 1st century to now.THEN,it was "all the Christians" feeding one another and being fed.Now it's just a few Christians(of a little flock anointed class,particularly privileged) feeding those who are not anointed at all(the less privileged).
How can the discreet slave of the WT feed God's household if,according to scripture,God's household is explicitly identified as the body of Christ?In other words,if it is the body of Christ that feeds those who aren't in it at the "proper time"(according to Watchtower theology),then who feeds the household(the body of Christ) itself?I'm sure JW's would say "Christ does" but according to this parable,faithful stewards OF Christ do.(with Christ as sole leader of every true believer of course)Since the governing body are ALSO "God's household" as members of Christ's body,then what faithful and wise servant feeds them in fulfillment of the parable?Also,if one says "the governing body of the JW's" feeds the *rest* of Christ's body,then on what scriptural basis can this be dogmatically established clearly & scripturally,while also asserting that the anointed fed ones fulfill the parable too even as they accomplish the EXACT SAME WORK as the "other sheep"?But that the "other sheep" somehow just don't fulfill it at all?It seems more to be a baseless assertion than a solid truth.If the WT magazines and such are your "food at the proper time",then how in the world did the Christians in the 1st century ever get properly nourished?
God in these last days has spoken to us through his SON.(Heb. 1:2)We have the holy scriptures and nothing else is essential,nothing else is prophesied to be necessary food for salvation.Only the truth found in Christ.I suppose that's why men who make claims as lofty as the governing body do always give themselves away with something,like false date setting and a bizarre separation of Christians into "classes."Yahushua is being ignored and an institution/organization "arrangement" and "food" is being hailed as something that's necessary for salvation.It's really blasphemous considering the sufficiency of Yahushua,the blemishless Lamb,eternal life from the Father himself.
I guess one of my beefs here is the fact that if you raise any objections to JW's about their unwarranted application of this parable,you will be met with claims like :
"but this parable can't be applied to all Christians individually because it's only for those set OVER the household."
This objection will not hold up at all if you read the WT publications themselves where they admit,again,about 1st century Christians,that "the entire anointed Christian congregation was to serve in a united stewardship, dispensing such truths. At the same time the individual members making up such composite body, or the “domestics” making up the “house” of God,would also be recipients of the “food” dispensed."So I guess my question is:
WHY,if in the 1st century every Christian in the congregations fulfilled this parable,even if they weren't spiritual leaders or elders or appointed in any position of oversight at all,can't this also be true of the parable today?OR,reworded:How can you say that every Christian can't possibly meet the requirements of this parable today because not every Christian is in a position of oversight if,according to the WT,all Christians used to fulfill this parable in the past regardless of not being appointed as leaders of any kind?Where is the justice in changing the parable's application at all?Wouldn't that be not only inconsistent,but peculiar and sly even?
Please keep in mind,JW's,that most of those claiming to be in the body of Christ within the WT organization itself are being fed by the governing body,even as the governing body claims that those not in the governing body yet in the body of Christ who are anointed JW's *also* fulfill this parable.So,again,why is it that the "other sheep" aren't fulfilling the parable as well since they are doing the **exact same** "faithful and discreet" work as the rest of the anointed JW's who claim to be in Christ who are outside the governing body itself?We have some real inconsistencies going on in WT theological matters!
This parable,clearly,is about those within the body of Christ tending carefully,faithfully,and discreetly to one another,handling the word of truth aright.If one MUST say it's in application solely to some spiritual leaders or teachers of the church,then why would that be "the governing body of JW's" as opposed to all the elders and servants appointed in the humble fellowships of the first century and today?In fact,where was the governing body in the 1st century home fellowships?Where was the location where they convened?Where is the evidence that any governing body privately,in closed chambers,concocted the "food" for all the fellowships at "the proper time?"Where are the rules by which the members could discreetly be appointed?Since there are detailed regulations for the appointment of elders and the like,it would only make sense that there would likewise be for the governing body that supposedly(according to the WT alone) dictated every affair of every congregation.It's absence in the epistles would be dumbfounding were it a prevailing reality.And absent it is!
Please keep in mind that regardless of the application of who the stewards are in Matthew 24:45,these stewards are feeding the body of Christ(identified in scripture as God's household befitting the parable) as opposed to people kept FROM the body of Christ by an manmade organization.
How can slaves of Christ be faithful and discreet?
Galatians 6:10 Therefore, as we have opportunity, let us do good to all people, especially to those who belong to the family of believers.
Matthew 7:24 Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock.
Luke 16:10 Whoever can be trusted with very little can also be trusted with much, and whoever is dishonest with very little will also be dishonest with much.
2 Tim. 2:15:Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth.
As Christians,we all have the responsibility to slave for Christ as faithfully and discreetly as possible.
A bible commentary says about this parable:
"The "servant" is there called a "steward", for such a servant is meant; and a name that is very proper for the apostles and ministers of the word, who are stewards of the mysteries of Christ, and of the manifold grace of God; and whose characters are, that they are "faithful": for this is required in stewards, that they be faithful to the trust reposed in them; as ministers are, when they preach the pure Gospel of Christ, and the whole of it; conceal no part, nor keep anything of it; seek not to please men, but God; neither seek their own things, their ease, honour, and profit, but the glory of God, the honour of Christ, and the good of souls; and abide by the truths, cause, and interest of a Redeemer, at all hazards. And they are "wise", who know and are well instructed in divine things; who make Christ the main subject of their ministry; who improve their talents and time for their master's use, and the advantage of those that are under their care; who seek for, and deliver acceptable words and matter; and manage their whole trust, so as to be able to give in a good account of their stewardship another day. The post that such a person is put in, and the work he is to do, follow:" ~Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible
Scripture enlightens:
Proverbs 14:35 A king delights in a wise servant, but a shameful servant incurs his wrath.
Proverbs 28:20 A faithful man will be richly blessed, but one eager to get rich will not go unpunished.
Hmm..looks like we better,as believers,be wise and faithful slaves.:)(Rom. 6:22,Eph. 6:6,Col. 3:24)For to do so entails an inheritance like no other,yes,eternal life!!Found in Christ alone,not an organization.
The Watchtower "Insight" publication says:
"Those forming the Christian congregation are referred to by the apostle Paul as “members of the household of God” (Eph 2:19; 1Ti 3:15), and the same apostle shows that ‘faithful stewardship’ among such household members involved the dispensing of spiritual truths on which those becoming believers would ‘feed.’ (1Co 3:2, 5; 4:1, 2; compare Mt 4:4.)Whereas this(food dispension) was a prime responsibility of those appointed as ‘shepherds’ of the flock (1Pe 5:1-3), the apostle Peter shows that such stewardship of the divine truths was actually committed to all the ‘chosen ones,’ all the spirit-anointed ones, of the Christian congregation. (1Pe 1:1, 2; 4:10, 11)"(Insight vol. 1 under "faithful and discreet slave")
So,awesomely enough,the WT is willing to admit that in the first century,because they believe that at that time ALL true Christians were anointed,that this parable is in application to every member within the congregations,feeding one another as well as getting fed.They articulate this by saying further:
"The entire anointed Christian congregation was to serve in a united stewardship, dispensing such truths. At the same time the individual members making up such composite body, or the “domestics” making up the “house” of God (Mt 24:45; Heb 3:6; Eph 2:19), would also be recipients of the “food” dispensed. (Heb 5:11-14; compare 1Co 12:12, 19-27.)"
The WT admits this parable applies to the entire body of Christ,and thus everyone who was present in the congregations(the home fellowships) of the 1st century fulfilled it.Today,however, they inexplicably believe only a few "chosen ones",literally only thousands of people within their organization itself,fulfill it,and especially those in their "governing body."
We actually have a decent starting point because at least the WT admits that the "household" of God are anointed Christians.It's just entirely too bad that they think most Christians aren't spirit anointed at all!Therefore,they have to equivocate as they expand the household of God to include Christians who aren't in Christ at all to justify their unique application of this parable.The REAL problem with this is that the New Testament scriptures don't speak of anyone who is supposed to be Christian as actually being outside the body of Christ,which IS "God's household."In other words,to say there's a group distinct from the body of Christ within the household of God is scripturally baseless.When there are people progressing to true Christianity,once they have decided to exercise faith in the Messiah,then they need to live in him as their ark and truth,as their sole mediator and way to eternal life.(Jn. 14:6,1 Tim. 2:5)They receive the SAME reward(life in Christ alone) as those who are more mature in the faith.(Matt. 10:40-42)Essentially,fulfilling the parable along with every professed believer because they become slaves for Christ who,hopefully,are faithful and discreet ones.
Let's see,further, who scripture actually identifies as "God's household" to get a proper understanding of Matt. 24:45.Scripture says:
1 Peter 2:5:you also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.
1 Timothy 3:15 if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God's household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.
Hebrews 3:6:Christ is faithful over God's house as a son. And we are his house if indeed we hold fast our confidence and our boasting in our hope.
The WT,of course,claim these texts apply to all Christians in the 1st century and VERY FEW today.This is because they believe the only true Christians are Jehovah's Witnesses,and most of them are of a class that are *outside* the body of Christ.This has been determined by their leaders by a clever misuse of texts like John 10:16 and Luke 12:32.Even though common sense as well as the bible itself makes it clear the "other sheep" are Gentiles(while the little flock are Jews) & that ALL ,quite frankly, share in the blessings of the body of Christ.(Eph. 2:11-22 expounds on the two groups)It would seem the WT has a different application for this parable from the 1st century to now.THEN,it was "all the Christians" feeding one another and being fed.Now it's just a few Christians(of a little flock anointed class,particularly privileged) feeding those who are not anointed at all(the less privileged).
How can the discreet slave of the WT feed God's household if,according to scripture,God's household is explicitly identified as the body of Christ?In other words,if it is the body of Christ that feeds those who aren't in it at the "proper time"(according to Watchtower theology),then who feeds the household(the body of Christ) itself?I'm sure JW's would say "Christ does" but according to this parable,faithful stewards OF Christ do.(with Christ as sole leader of every true believer of course)Since the governing body are ALSO "God's household" as members of Christ's body,then what faithful and wise servant feeds them in fulfillment of the parable?Also,if one says "the governing body of the JW's" feeds the *rest* of Christ's body,then on what scriptural basis can this be dogmatically established clearly & scripturally,while also asserting that the anointed fed ones fulfill the parable too even as they accomplish the EXACT SAME WORK as the "other sheep"?But that the "other sheep" somehow just don't fulfill it at all?It seems more to be a baseless assertion than a solid truth.If the WT magazines and such are your "food at the proper time",then how in the world did the Christians in the 1st century ever get properly nourished?
God in these last days has spoken to us through his SON.(Heb. 1:2)We have the holy scriptures and nothing else is essential,nothing else is prophesied to be necessary food for salvation.Only the truth found in Christ.I suppose that's why men who make claims as lofty as the governing body do always give themselves away with something,like false date setting and a bizarre separation of Christians into "classes."Yahushua is being ignored and an institution/organization "arrangement" and "food" is being hailed as something that's necessary for salvation.It's really blasphemous considering the sufficiency of Yahushua,the blemishless Lamb,eternal life from the Father himself.
I guess one of my beefs here is the fact that if you raise any objections to JW's about their unwarranted application of this parable,you will be met with claims like :
"but this parable can't be applied to all Christians individually because it's only for those set OVER the household."
This objection will not hold up at all if you read the WT publications themselves where they admit,again,about 1st century Christians,that "the entire anointed Christian congregation was to serve in a united stewardship, dispensing such truths. At the same time the individual members making up such composite body, or the “domestics” making up the “house” of God,would also be recipients of the “food” dispensed."So I guess my question is:
WHY,if in the 1st century every Christian in the congregations fulfilled this parable,even if they weren't spiritual leaders or elders or appointed in any position of oversight at all,can't this also be true of the parable today?OR,reworded:How can you say that every Christian can't possibly meet the requirements of this parable today because not every Christian is in a position of oversight if,according to the WT,all Christians used to fulfill this parable in the past regardless of not being appointed as leaders of any kind?Where is the justice in changing the parable's application at all?Wouldn't that be not only inconsistent,but peculiar and sly even?
Please keep in mind,JW's,that most of those claiming to be in the body of Christ within the WT organization itself are being fed by the governing body,even as the governing body claims that those not in the governing body yet in the body of Christ who are anointed JW's *also* fulfill this parable.So,again,why is it that the "other sheep" aren't fulfilling the parable as well since they are doing the **exact same** "faithful and discreet" work as the rest of the anointed JW's who claim to be in Christ who are outside the governing body itself?We have some real inconsistencies going on in WT theological matters!
This parable,clearly,is about those within the body of Christ tending carefully,faithfully,and discreetly to one another,handling the word of truth aright.If one MUST say it's in application solely to some spiritual leaders or teachers of the church,then why would that be "the governing body of JW's" as opposed to all the elders and servants appointed in the humble fellowships of the first century and today?In fact,where was the governing body in the 1st century home fellowships?Where was the location where they convened?Where is the evidence that any governing body privately,in closed chambers,concocted the "food" for all the fellowships at "the proper time?"Where are the rules by which the members could discreetly be appointed?Since there are detailed regulations for the appointment of elders and the like,it would only make sense that there would likewise be for the governing body that supposedly(according to the WT alone) dictated every affair of every congregation.It's absence in the epistles would be dumbfounding were it a prevailing reality.And absent it is!
Please keep in mind that regardless of the application of who the stewards are in Matthew 24:45,these stewards are feeding the body of Christ(identified in scripture as God's household befitting the parable) as opposed to people kept FROM the body of Christ by an manmade organization.
How can slaves of Christ be faithful and discreet?
Galatians 6:10 Therefore, as we have opportunity, let us do good to all people, especially to those who belong to the family of believers.
Matthew 7:24 Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock.
Luke 16:10 Whoever can be trusted with very little can also be trusted with much, and whoever is dishonest with very little will also be dishonest with much.
2 Tim. 2:15:Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth.
As Christians,we all have the responsibility to slave for Christ as faithfully and discreetly as possible.
A bible commentary says about this parable:
"The "servant" is there called a "steward", for such a servant is meant; and a name that is very proper for the apostles and ministers of the word, who are stewards of the mysteries of Christ, and of the manifold grace of God; and whose characters are, that they are "faithful": for this is required in stewards, that they be faithful to the trust reposed in them; as ministers are, when they preach the pure Gospel of Christ, and the whole of it; conceal no part, nor keep anything of it; seek not to please men, but God; neither seek their own things, their ease, honour, and profit, but the glory of God, the honour of Christ, and the good of souls; and abide by the truths, cause, and interest of a Redeemer, at all hazards. And they are "wise", who know and are well instructed in divine things; who make Christ the main subject of their ministry; who improve their talents and time for their master's use, and the advantage of those that are under their care; who seek for, and deliver acceptable words and matter; and manage their whole trust, so as to be able to give in a good account of their stewardship another day. The post that such a person is put in, and the work he is to do, follow:" ~Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible
Scripture enlightens:
Proverbs 14:35 A king delights in a wise servant, but a shameful servant incurs his wrath.
Proverbs 28:20 A faithful man will be richly blessed, but one eager to get rich will not go unpunished.
Hmm..looks like we better,as believers,be wise and faithful slaves.:)(Rom. 6:22,Eph. 6:6,Col. 3:24)For to do so entails an inheritance like no other,yes,eternal life!!Found in Christ alone,not an organization.
Friday, May 27, 2011
10 Questions for Trinitarians
You probably won't find a question here that I haven't asked before!No,there is nothing new under the sun.:)I guess what I'm looking for are BETTER,more scripturally viable and reasonable,responses from trinitarians.Thanks.
Question # 1:In Colossians 2:9,is the fullness of God in Christ the man that of God the father,God the Son,God the Holy Spirit, or God the triune essence?If "fullness of God" means one IS God,how come Christians aren't God if they have his fullness?(Eph. 3:19)
Question # 2:How come blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is unforgivable but blasphemy against "God the Son" is,if they're coequal persons in God?And for that matter,where is God the father in this equation?Yes,how come it's only unforgivable to blaspheme against one of God's supposed three "persons" within his very "being?"(Matt. 12:31-32)
Question # 3:In 1 John 1:1-3,the "word of life" that was with God in the beginning is called an "it" as opposed to a "who" in even trinitarian bias bibles.If the Word of Life(correlating with the Word of God in John 1:1) was the pre-existing "God the Son",why and how could this be?Why and how is "God the Son" an "it" as the word in 1 John ch. 1?And if trinitarians are willing to call this "word of life" an "it" and a "which" as opposed to a "him" and a "who" (in their bias translations)in 1 John 1 then why are people like me said to be blasphemers for recognizing the same in John 1:1,as an obvious correlation?Please understand I'm not suggesting that God's word of life didn't become the man Yahushua for the life of the world when it was manifest in him.:)
Question # 4:According to Luke 1:35 ,does "Son of God" mean that Yahushua is "God the Son" OR that God is his father because the father's spirit overshadowed a virgin womb,causing the conception of a Son?If the latter be the case,then why must it be that "Son of God" means "God the Son"?And if the Holy Spirit is the one who overshadowed Mary,then how come He isn't the father of Yahushua?(given that scripture says that that is in fact WHY God is the father of His Son)
Question # 5:How come God the father knows the day and the hour but "God the Son" and "God the Holy spirit" don't?If "God the Holy Spirit" is coequal with "God the father" and "God the Son" as well as equally omniscient,shouldn't he and the Son at least know the day and hour along with the father?(Matt 24:36)
Question # 6:How can you claim Christ is omniscient if he didn't know the day nor the hour and had to grow in knowledge from his birth on?(Luke 2:52)How can trinitarians claim that Christ is God because he has all the attributes of God if he doesn't have all the attributes of God(like omniscience) and had to be given everything he does have?(Rev. 1:1,Jn. 5:19)
Question # 7:Does Hebrews 1:2 communicate that God spoke AS Yahushua in the last days or that he spoke THROUGH Yahushua?If it was the father that spoke through Christ,then wouldn't that mean that it was that same father that spoke through the prophets?How come "God the Son" isn't said to have spoken through the prophets?Does 2 Corinthians 5:19 communicate that God WAS Christ reconciling the world unto himself or that he was IN Christ reconciling the world unto himself?And who was in Christ?God the father?God the Son?God the Holy Spirit?All three?Can you demonstrate it was anyone BUT God the father in Christ by means of his own spirit?
Question # 8:Does Yahushua have an "ontological right" as the second person of a triune essence to inherit a kingdom?Or is he heir to a Kingdom because he obeyed his own God who made him firstborn heir because of his obedience and faithfulness as the Last Adam TO the One God?(Phil. 2:8,9)If Yahushua created the angels,why does he need an exaltation and inheritance to be greater than them?(Heb. 1:8,9)If he IS God,same question.If he WERE God,shouldn't Hebrews 1:9 have said that because Christ is God,he is better than the angels instead of that because he *obeyed* God that he was *made* that way by a special anointing and exaltation?Does the God of Abraham,Isaac, and Jacob have a God and an inheritance from someone he calls "greater"?(Jn. 14:28,Acts 3:13)The glorified servant of Yahuwah IS that same being of Yahuwah whom one person of Yahuwah glorified?
Question # 9:In 1 Cor. 2:11,the spirit of God is compared to the spirit of man.Is the spirit of man a separate person in his very being?If not,then how can man's spirit possibly in any capacity whatsoever be compared to God's?When man's spirit "searches" or "grieves" would it mean the spirit of man is a separate person within man's being or would it be personification?
Question # 10:If God had to become a man and dwell amongst men to demonstrate his love,then what would this say about the father's love and the Holy Spirit's love?
Question # 1:In Colossians 2:9,is the fullness of God in Christ the man that of God the father,God the Son,God the Holy Spirit, or God the triune essence?If "fullness of God" means one IS God,how come Christians aren't God if they have his fullness?(Eph. 3:19)
Question # 2:How come blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is unforgivable but blasphemy against "God the Son" is,if they're coequal persons in God?And for that matter,where is God the father in this equation?Yes,how come it's only unforgivable to blaspheme against one of God's supposed three "persons" within his very "being?"(Matt. 12:31-32)
Question # 3:In 1 John 1:1-3,the "word of life" that was with God in the beginning is called an "it" as opposed to a "who" in even trinitarian bias bibles.If the Word of Life(correlating with the Word of God in John 1:1) was the pre-existing "God the Son",why and how could this be?Why and how is "God the Son" an "it" as the word in 1 John ch. 1?And if trinitarians are willing to call this "word of life" an "it" and a "which" as opposed to a "him" and a "who" (in their bias translations)in 1 John 1 then why are people like me said to be blasphemers for recognizing the same in John 1:1,as an obvious correlation?Please understand I'm not suggesting that God's word of life didn't become the man Yahushua for the life of the world when it was manifest in him.:)
Question # 4:According to Luke 1:35 ,does "Son of God" mean that Yahushua is "God the Son" OR that God is his father because the father's spirit overshadowed a virgin womb,causing the conception of a Son?If the latter be the case,then why must it be that "Son of God" means "God the Son"?And if the Holy Spirit is the one who overshadowed Mary,then how come He isn't the father of Yahushua?(given that scripture says that that is in fact WHY God is the father of His Son)
Question # 5:How come God the father knows the day and the hour but "God the Son" and "God the Holy spirit" don't?If "God the Holy Spirit" is coequal with "God the father" and "God the Son" as well as equally omniscient,shouldn't he and the Son at least know the day and hour along with the father?(Matt 24:36)
Question # 6:How can you claim Christ is omniscient if he didn't know the day nor the hour and had to grow in knowledge from his birth on?(Luke 2:52)How can trinitarians claim that Christ is God because he has all the attributes of God if he doesn't have all the attributes of God(like omniscience) and had to be given everything he does have?(Rev. 1:1,Jn. 5:19)
Question # 7:Does Hebrews 1:2 communicate that God spoke AS Yahushua in the last days or that he spoke THROUGH Yahushua?If it was the father that spoke through Christ,then wouldn't that mean that it was that same father that spoke through the prophets?How come "God the Son" isn't said to have spoken through the prophets?Does 2 Corinthians 5:19 communicate that God WAS Christ reconciling the world unto himself or that he was IN Christ reconciling the world unto himself?And who was in Christ?God the father?God the Son?God the Holy Spirit?All three?Can you demonstrate it was anyone BUT God the father in Christ by means of his own spirit?
Question # 8:Does Yahushua have an "ontological right" as the second person of a triune essence to inherit a kingdom?Or is he heir to a Kingdom because he obeyed his own God who made him firstborn heir because of his obedience and faithfulness as the Last Adam TO the One God?(Phil. 2:8,9)If Yahushua created the angels,why does he need an exaltation and inheritance to be greater than them?(Heb. 1:8,9)If he IS God,same question.If he WERE God,shouldn't Hebrews 1:9 have said that because Christ is God,he is better than the angels instead of that because he *obeyed* God that he was *made* that way by a special anointing and exaltation?Does the God of Abraham,Isaac, and Jacob have a God and an inheritance from someone he calls "greater"?(Jn. 14:28,Acts 3:13)The glorified servant of Yahuwah IS that same being of Yahuwah whom one person of Yahuwah glorified?
Question # 9:In 1 Cor. 2:11,the spirit of God is compared to the spirit of man.Is the spirit of man a separate person in his very being?If not,then how can man's spirit possibly in any capacity whatsoever be compared to God's?When man's spirit "searches" or "grieves" would it mean the spirit of man is a separate person within man's being or would it be personification?
Question # 10:If God had to become a man and dwell amongst men to demonstrate his love,then what would this say about the father's love and the Holy Spirit's love?
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
Sunday, May 15, 2011
Does Luke 23:43 prove that the dead are alive in Paradise?
Luke 23:43: And he said to him, “Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise.”(according to most translations, that is)
I will be assessing this verse in three ways:
1.Gramatically
2.Contextually &
3.Logically as well as biblically speaking
Right off the bat,let's examine the grammar.Because there is no punctuation in the Greek here,it depends upon where the comma is placed within this passage what the true intent of Yahushua was in his statement therein.First,does the bible provide any precedent that the comma can be placed AFTER the word today?Absolutely.Please examine:
Deut. 30:18:I declare to you today, that you shall surely perish.
Acts 20:26:Why I take you to record this day, that I am pure from the blood of all men.
The grammar is possible either way.If you look at bias sites,you will find bias opinions.Scripture from cover to cover should be the determining factor.Obviously in texts like the above, "today" or "this day" is said to emphasize a point,not to propose that what was being said would actually occur on that day.
A website says:
"the phrase in verse 43, “I tell you the truth today,” was a common Hebrew idiom used to emphasize the solemnity and importance of an occasion or moment." (compare Deut. 4:26, 39, 40; 5:1; 6:6; 7:11, Josh. 23:14).(from:http://www.truthortradition.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=370 )
All that being said,it should go without saying that Yahushua isn't going to propose something that would contradict clear and prevailing revelations throughout his father's word.So to establish those revelations,let's examine the context itself of the passage in question as well as the passages that cannot be contradicted throughout the bible itself to help establish an interpretation of Luke 23:43 itself that doesn't negate prevailing biblical sentiments.First,context.
It is paradise that we inherit when Christ returns and the earth is made new,not anytime before that if we are to believe common sense scriptures.Perhaps that is why the man on the cross said “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.” (Lk. 23:42)Perhaps that is also why Yahushua stressed that he would remember the thief in his kingdom.After all,isn't his kingdom "paradise"?As Anthony Buzzard notes "the Lord's assertion more than satisfies the thief's request."("What happens when we die?" p. 56)Since when was "sheol"(in Hebrew) or "hades"(in Greek),which is where the dead go until they're resurrected, "paradise" anyway?(Job 14:13,Acts 2:31)
Yahushua said in Luke 22:18(not long before he addressed the malefactor on the cross) :"I will not drink of the fruit of the vine from now on until the kingdom of God comes."To which I suppose a traditionalist Christian could say: "Why not..if you'll be in Paradise the day you die?"Acts 2:31 says about Yahushua that "he was not abandoned to Hades, nor did his flesh see corruption."So apparently unless one is resurrected from the GRAVE,as opposed to "Paradise" where it seems everything would be beautifully preserved,the "flesh"(yes,proving actual "flesh" must be in Hades)would decay.If Hades is a Paradise of disembodied souls,why is there flesh there and why does it decay?
I would suggest that when Yahushua addressed the man in Luke that what came to mind for this criminal was the Garden of Eden that Adam lost.(Rev. 2:7,22:2)Adam lived there with his body intact.And thanks to the Last Adam,we can too!!At the Last Day.(1 Thes. 4:17,2 Tim. 4:8)I would also suggest to you that the "tree of life" doesn't grow where the dead sleep.And that since the tree of life is in the "paradise of God" then the dead don't eat of it.Otherwise,what *exactly* was the curse for all sinful men Adam caused?To turn to dust *so that* you can eat of the tree of life?(Reason is called for.)That tree of life in God's paradise is obviously a gift bestowed not upon the dead,but rather upon the resurrected faithful.
If the dead are in some interim called paradise,it must be utterly silent without joy,breath,livelihood,any semblance of intellect,or even awakeness.Otherwise,what God has actually said irrefutably and rather plainly about their state would be utterly nonsensical.So now it's time for some holy scripture and logic.
Examine:
Ps. 115:17: The dead do not praise the Lord,
nor do any who go down into silence.
Ps. 146:4: His spirit departs, he returns to the earth; In that very day his thoughts perish.
Please note the passage says that *he* does,as opposed to a flesh capsule without *him* in it.When the spirit,or the breath of life,exits the body,the entire person ceases to breathe,think,or remain awake.At least according to plain unambiguous language.
Ecc. 9:5 For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing, ..and verse 10:there is no work or thought or knowledge or wisdom in Sheol, to which you are going.(sheol is hades in Hebrew)
I could go on and on here describing the proper state of the dead,but I'll spare you.For those of you who believe that all the "silence" and "sleep" and "breath leaving the body as the thoughts perish" texts are in reference solely to a "body" with no one in it,then I suppose the only appeal I can make is for you to reconsider such an unwarranted leap,one made imo without any solid reason.That view is similar to the remarkable and unfounded view that much of what Christ accomplished was due to a "nature",(including even his very death!) and not the actual whole person of Yahushua *himself.*Why let theological presuppositions and long held traditional inferences butcher plain language?
Matthew 9:23-25, John 11:11-14, Jeremiah 51:39, Acts 7:60 all describe the dead as asleep(connoting God's ability to awake them in a resurrection)..Would "sleeping" be the best possible way to describe those who are awake in sheol or hades,which those who have misused Luke 23:43 have managed to call "Paradise"?It would seem to be,logically speaking,that the resurrections that took place in scripture would have been more like intolerable cruelty than a joyous occasion if the dead are alive in Paradise,given that a "resurrection" would rob them of their joy with God as spirits even as it gives them back their tainted flesh that often causes much discomfort and agony.(Rom. 7:18-25)I also find it interesting,and you can argue that I'm arguing from silence while I would say instead that we're commanded to reason(and so I will argue with that intact),that no one resurrected in scripture described how they were alive anywhere in a state of being awake and alive(in ANY condition) before they were made alive in the biblical records of resurrections performed by everyone from Elijah to Yahushua to Peter & Paul.
Please also note that all the dead are said to be in Sheol or Hades,so where is there a distinguishing mark between those who are wicked and those who are righteous?In other words,if Hades is the destination of all who die,how can it properly be called "Paradise"?Do the wicked inherit "Paradise" at death?If not,then how can sheol and hades actually BE Paradise?
For those of you who think hades and Paradise(assuming that you believe the dead are in both hades and Paradise because hades is in fact somehow Paradise) are also both somehow "heaven"(because in your theological view Paradise IS Heaven),then how could you possibly reconcile that with Christ's proclamation that he hadn't ascended to the father and didn't for 40 days(Jn. 20:17) and also the bible's revelation that none of God's faithful servants had either?(Acts 2:34)
Paul said in 2 Corinthians:
2 Cor. 5:2 For in this tent we groan, longing to put on our heavenly dwelling 3 if indeed by putting it on we may not be found naked. 4 For while we are still in this tent, we groan, being burdened—not that we would be unclothed, but that we would be further clothed, so that what is mortal may be swallowed up by life.
Why would Paul scoff at the idea of being "unclothed" if God intends to "unclothe him" as a disembodied spirit in some interim supposedly called "Paradise"(where he's perfect & blissful with Yahushua mind you!) before he's resurrected?If that was God's intention,shouldn't Paul have rather "groaned" to be unclothed and free from the burden of his body so that he could be with Yahushua in Paradise as a spirit creature?Instead Paul says something very telling..he says "we may not be found naked. " and " we groan...*not that we would be unclothed*, but that we would be *further clothed*"Also, note how Paul contrasts "mortality" from "being swallowed up by life."If mortality actually entails being alive then the apparent contrast would be entirely lost..I logically detect no need of a resurrection at all if we're made perfect in Paradise with Christ the moment we die.What is so exceptional about regaining a body if Paradise is held in the palm of our hands without one?
As yet another reasoning point,wouldn't peace in "Paradise" with Yahushua be absolutely perfect?According to Heb. 11:40,all the faithful are made perfect TOGETHER,not apart from one another.And when?When they're resurrected,of course.(1 Cor. 15:52)So if the thief was made perfect apart from everyone else,the bible lies.
Significantly enough,Rom. 10:7 says Christ was in the *abyss* for 3 days like Jonah was in the belly of the sea monster(Matt. 12:40)i.e. NOT in paradise.The abyss,I can assure you,is not paradise.Yahushua said "*I* was dead."*I* entails an ego and mind in the Greek language so a *body* with no Yahushua in it isn't a sufficient death to save anyone.His mind,breath,and thoughts had to cease to function or he didn't die for anyone.If he was awake anywhere at all he didn't legitimately die for anyone.(John 11:11,Ps. 115:17,146:4)Bodies don't die without people in them,except by an absurd unwarranted inference,quite frankly initially based upon Platonic type philosophies of men.
In summary,the criminal on the cross(in context) is asking about assurance that he will be saved when Yahushua returns as king,not that *particular* day.Because the hope for all mankind from cover to cover is a resurrection to glory at the LAST DAY,and not glory before it.(2 Tim. 4:8,1 Cor. 15:52,1 Thes. 4:16)Again,either translation for Luke 23:43 is gramatically viable(in terms of comma placement),but the one that harmonizes with the bible's unambiguous declarations from cover to cover is the only one that can be right.
I will be assessing this verse in three ways:
1.Gramatically
2.Contextually &
3.Logically as well as biblically speaking
Right off the bat,let's examine the grammar.Because there is no punctuation in the Greek here,it depends upon where the comma is placed within this passage what the true intent of Yahushua was in his statement therein.First,does the bible provide any precedent that the comma can be placed AFTER the word today?Absolutely.Please examine:
Deut. 30:18:I declare to you today, that you shall surely perish.
Acts 20:26:Why I take you to record this day, that I am pure from the blood of all men.
The grammar is possible either way.If you look at bias sites,you will find bias opinions.Scripture from cover to cover should be the determining factor.Obviously in texts like the above, "today" or "this day" is said to emphasize a point,not to propose that what was being said would actually occur on that day.
A website says:
"the phrase in verse 43, “I tell you the truth today,” was a common Hebrew idiom used to emphasize the solemnity and importance of an occasion or moment." (compare Deut. 4:26, 39, 40; 5:1; 6:6; 7:11, Josh. 23:14).(from:http://www.truthortradition.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=370 )
All that being said,it should go without saying that Yahushua isn't going to propose something that would contradict clear and prevailing revelations throughout his father's word.So to establish those revelations,let's examine the context itself of the passage in question as well as the passages that cannot be contradicted throughout the bible itself to help establish an interpretation of Luke 23:43 itself that doesn't negate prevailing biblical sentiments.First,context.
It is paradise that we inherit when Christ returns and the earth is made new,not anytime before that if we are to believe common sense scriptures.Perhaps that is why the man on the cross said “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.” (Lk. 23:42)Perhaps that is also why Yahushua stressed that he would remember the thief in his kingdom.After all,isn't his kingdom "paradise"?As Anthony Buzzard notes "the Lord's assertion more than satisfies the thief's request."("What happens when we die?" p. 56)Since when was "sheol"(in Hebrew) or "hades"(in Greek),which is where the dead go until they're resurrected, "paradise" anyway?(Job 14:13,Acts 2:31)
Yahushua said in Luke 22:18(not long before he addressed the malefactor on the cross) :"I will not drink of the fruit of the vine from now on until the kingdom of God comes."To which I suppose a traditionalist Christian could say: "Why not..if you'll be in Paradise the day you die?"Acts 2:31 says about Yahushua that "he was not abandoned to Hades, nor did his flesh see corruption."So apparently unless one is resurrected from the GRAVE,as opposed to "Paradise" where it seems everything would be beautifully preserved,the "flesh"(yes,proving actual "flesh" must be in Hades)would decay.If Hades is a Paradise of disembodied souls,why is there flesh there and why does it decay?
I would suggest that when Yahushua addressed the man in Luke that what came to mind for this criminal was the Garden of Eden that Adam lost.(Rev. 2:7,22:2)Adam lived there with his body intact.And thanks to the Last Adam,we can too!!At the Last Day.(1 Thes. 4:17,2 Tim. 4:8)I would also suggest to you that the "tree of life" doesn't grow where the dead sleep.And that since the tree of life is in the "paradise of God" then the dead don't eat of it.Otherwise,what *exactly* was the curse for all sinful men Adam caused?To turn to dust *so that* you can eat of the tree of life?(Reason is called for.)That tree of life in God's paradise is obviously a gift bestowed not upon the dead,but rather upon the resurrected faithful.
If the dead are in some interim called paradise,it must be utterly silent without joy,breath,livelihood,any semblance of intellect,or even awakeness.Otherwise,what God has actually said irrefutably and rather plainly about their state would be utterly nonsensical.So now it's time for some holy scripture and logic.
Examine:
Ps. 115:17: The dead do not praise the Lord,
nor do any who go down into silence.
Ps. 146:4: His spirit departs, he returns to the earth; In that very day his thoughts perish.
Please note the passage says that *he* does,as opposed to a flesh capsule without *him* in it.When the spirit,or the breath of life,exits the body,the entire person ceases to breathe,think,or remain awake.At least according to plain unambiguous language.
Ecc. 9:5 For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing, ..and verse 10:there is no work or thought or knowledge or wisdom in Sheol, to which you are going.(sheol is hades in Hebrew)
I could go on and on here describing the proper state of the dead,but I'll spare you.For those of you who believe that all the "silence" and "sleep" and "breath leaving the body as the thoughts perish" texts are in reference solely to a "body" with no one in it,then I suppose the only appeal I can make is for you to reconsider such an unwarranted leap,one made imo without any solid reason.That view is similar to the remarkable and unfounded view that much of what Christ accomplished was due to a "nature",(including even his very death!) and not the actual whole person of Yahushua *himself.*Why let theological presuppositions and long held traditional inferences butcher plain language?
Matthew 9:23-25, John 11:11-14, Jeremiah 51:39, Acts 7:60 all describe the dead as asleep(connoting God's ability to awake them in a resurrection)..Would "sleeping" be the best possible way to describe those who are awake in sheol or hades,which those who have misused Luke 23:43 have managed to call "Paradise"?It would seem to be,logically speaking,that the resurrections that took place in scripture would have been more like intolerable cruelty than a joyous occasion if the dead are alive in Paradise,given that a "resurrection" would rob them of their joy with God as spirits even as it gives them back their tainted flesh that often causes much discomfort and agony.(Rom. 7:18-25)I also find it interesting,and you can argue that I'm arguing from silence while I would say instead that we're commanded to reason(and so I will argue with that intact),that no one resurrected in scripture described how they were alive anywhere in a state of being awake and alive(in ANY condition) before they were made alive in the biblical records of resurrections performed by everyone from Elijah to Yahushua to Peter & Paul.
Please also note that all the dead are said to be in Sheol or Hades,so where is there a distinguishing mark between those who are wicked and those who are righteous?In other words,if Hades is the destination of all who die,how can it properly be called "Paradise"?Do the wicked inherit "Paradise" at death?If not,then how can sheol and hades actually BE Paradise?
For those of you who think hades and Paradise(assuming that you believe the dead are in both hades and Paradise because hades is in fact somehow Paradise) are also both somehow "heaven"(because in your theological view Paradise IS Heaven),then how could you possibly reconcile that with Christ's proclamation that he hadn't ascended to the father and didn't for 40 days(Jn. 20:17) and also the bible's revelation that none of God's faithful servants had either?(Acts 2:34)
Paul said in 2 Corinthians:
2 Cor. 5:2 For in this tent we groan, longing to put on our heavenly dwelling 3 if indeed by putting it on we may not be found naked. 4 For while we are still in this tent, we groan, being burdened—not that we would be unclothed, but that we would be further clothed, so that what is mortal may be swallowed up by life.
Why would Paul scoff at the idea of being "unclothed" if God intends to "unclothe him" as a disembodied spirit in some interim supposedly called "Paradise"(where he's perfect & blissful with Yahushua mind you!) before he's resurrected?If that was God's intention,shouldn't Paul have rather "groaned" to be unclothed and free from the burden of his body so that he could be with Yahushua in Paradise as a spirit creature?Instead Paul says something very telling..he says "we may not be found naked. " and " we groan...*not that we would be unclothed*, but that we would be *further clothed*"Also, note how Paul contrasts "mortality" from "being swallowed up by life."If mortality actually entails being alive then the apparent contrast would be entirely lost..I logically detect no need of a resurrection at all if we're made perfect in Paradise with Christ the moment we die.What is so exceptional about regaining a body if Paradise is held in the palm of our hands without one?
As yet another reasoning point,wouldn't peace in "Paradise" with Yahushua be absolutely perfect?According to Heb. 11:40,all the faithful are made perfect TOGETHER,not apart from one another.And when?When they're resurrected,of course.(1 Cor. 15:52)So if the thief was made perfect apart from everyone else,the bible lies.
Significantly enough,Rom. 10:7 says Christ was in the *abyss* for 3 days like Jonah was in the belly of the sea monster(Matt. 12:40)i.e. NOT in paradise.The abyss,I can assure you,is not paradise.Yahushua said "*I* was dead."*I* entails an ego and mind in the Greek language so a *body* with no Yahushua in it isn't a sufficient death to save anyone.His mind,breath,and thoughts had to cease to function or he didn't die for anyone.If he was awake anywhere at all he didn't legitimately die for anyone.(John 11:11,Ps. 115:17,146:4)Bodies don't die without people in them,except by an absurd unwarranted inference,quite frankly initially based upon Platonic type philosophies of men.
In summary,the criminal on the cross(in context) is asking about assurance that he will be saved when Yahushua returns as king,not that *particular* day.Because the hope for all mankind from cover to cover is a resurrection to glory at the LAST DAY,and not glory before it.(2 Tim. 4:8,1 Cor. 15:52,1 Thes. 4:16)Again,either translation for Luke 23:43 is gramatically viable(in terms of comma placement),but the one that harmonizes with the bible's unambiguous declarations from cover to cover is the only one that can be right.
Sunday, May 8, 2011
Is Jesus your creator?
My brief questions about these passages are in parentheses.And the questions are for those who think Yahushua was named Word and Wisdom and that he created for the father.
Job 9:8 who alone stretched out the heavens
and trampled the waves of the sea;(Alone with another named Wisdom?)
Job 38:4 “Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth?(Yahushua laid the foundation of the earth as well?)
Tell me, if you have understanding.
5 Who determined its measurements—surely you know!
Or who stretched the line upon it?(Yahushua did?)
6 On what were its bases sunk,
or who laid its cornerstone,
7 when the morning stars sang together
and all the sons of God shouted for joy?
8 “Or who shut in the sea with doors
when it burst out from the womb,
9 when I made clouds its garment
and thick darkness its swaddling band,(Yahushua did it for me?)
10 and prescribed limits for it
and set bars and doors,
11 and said, ‘Thus far shall you come, and no farther,
and here shall your proud waves be stayed’?
Isaiah 44:24: Thus says the Lord, your Redeemer,
who formed you from the womb:
“I am the Lord, who made all things,
who alone stretched out the heavens,
who spread out the earth by myself,(Yahushua was with him and did the work?)
Psalm 8:3 When I look at your heavens, the work of your fingers,
the moon and the stars, which you have set in place,(by the spirit named Word's fingers?)
Psalm 19:1 The heavens declare the glory of God,
and the sky above proclaims his handiwork.(Yahushua's handiwork?)
Psalm 95:5 The sea is his, for he made it,
and his hands formed the dry land.(Yahushua's hands formed the dry land?)
2 Kings 19:15: And Hezekiah prayed before the Lord and said: “O Lord, the God of Israel, enthroned above the cherubim, you are the God, you alone, of all the kingdoms of the earth; you have made heaven and earth.(You made heaven and earth by a spirit creature named Wisdom?)
Jeremiah 27:5: “It is I who by my great power and my outstretched arm have made the earth, with the men and animals that are on the earth, and I give it to whomever it seems right to me.(And the arm is named Word?)
Isaiah 45:12: I made the earth
and created man on it;...18 For thus says the Lord,
who created the heavens
(he is God!),
who formed the earth and made it
(he established it;
he did not create it empty,
he formed it to be inhabited!):
“I am the Lord, and there is no other.(Well,there is one other who created?)
Malachi 2:10: Have we not all one Father? Has not one God created us? (One God and One Lord created us?)
Mark 10:6: But from the beginning of creation, ‘God made them male and female.’(said Yahushua,the one who REALLY made them male and female?)
Mark 13:19 For in those days there will be such tribulation as has not been from the beginning of the creation that God created until now, and never will be...(from the beginning of creation that Yahushua created?)
Acts 4:24 And when they heard it, they lifted their voices together to God and said, “Sovereign Lord, who made the heaven and the earth and the sea and everything in them,(no ,his servant Yahushua did with help from his father?)
Acts 17:24 The God who made the world and everything in it, being Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in temples made by man, 25 nor is he served by human hands, as though he needed anything, since he himself gives to all mankind life and breath and everything.(Really Messiah did?) 30 The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent, 31 because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed;(the one who as a spirit really created for the father?) and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead.”(The first Adam's creator was the Last Adam who came after him and then died for 3 days?)
1 Timothy 6:13 I charge you in the presence of God, who gives life to all things, and of Christ Jesus, who in his testimony before Pontius Pilate made the good confession,(Yahushua gave life to all things in Genesis?)
Hebrews 2:10: For it was fitting that he, for whom and by whom all things exist, in bringing many sons to glory, should make the founder of their salvation perfect through suffering.(the founder of their salvation as the REAL cause of their existence?)
Hebrews 11:3: By faith we understand that the universe was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things that are visible.(and this word was a spirit being?)
Psalm 33:6:By the word of the Lord the heavens were made,
and by the breath of his mouth all their host.(this word was a spirit creature?Or are there two words?From the lips and then *also* a person?)
Genesis 1:1: In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. 2 The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.(through a spirit creature named Word?)3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. .(God spoke but that wasn't the MAIN word?).6 And God said, “Let there be an expanse in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.” .(God spoke again but his word was a spirit creature?).9 And God said, “Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear.” And it was so(God spoke but that's not the main word here,correct?). ..11 And God said, “Let the earth sprout vegetation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind, on the earth.” And it was so. (This word from his lips is just one of the words there,right?The other is named Word and is creating for him?) ..14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night. And let them be for signs and for seasons, and for days and years.(God spoke again!And the word by which he created is from his lips and *also* from someone named Word?).
Proverbs 3:19: The Lord by wisdom founded the earth;
by understanding he established the heavens;(wisdom is a spirit creature but understanding isn't?)
Psalm 104:24: O Lord, how manifold are your works!
In wisdom have you made them all;
the earth is full of your creatures.(Two wisdoms?One of God's & another spirit named just that?)
Psalm 136:5: to him who by understanding made the heavens,
for his steadfast love endures forever;(And I suppose Yahushua was a spirit named Understanding too?)
Jeremiah 10:12: It is he who made the earth by his power,
who established the world by his wisdom,
and by his understanding stretched out the heavens.(Wisdom the spirit in addition to the wisdom & understanding of God?)
Jeremiah 51:15 “It is he who made the earth by his power,
who established the world by his wisdom,
and by his understanding stretched out the heavens.(Established the world by Wisdom the spirit creature?)
Hebrews 4:4:"And on the seventh day God rested from all his work."(Why didn't Word the spirit rest?)
The Wisdom of Solomon 9:1 O God of my fathers, and Lord of mercy, who hast made all things with thy word,2 And ordained man through thy wisdom, that he should have dominion over the creatures which thou hast made 3 And order the world according to equity and righteousness, and execute judgment with an upright heart: (If Wisdom is Yahushua,who is equity and righteousness?)
How was Yahushua the Wisdom of God?
1 Corinthians 2:7 But we impart a secret and hidden wisdom of God, which God *decreed* before the ages for our glory.
So he's the decreed wisdom,not a spirit named Wisdom.
1 Corinthians 1:24:but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.
Howso?As spirit entity?OR:
1 Corinthians 1:30:It is because of him that you are in Christ Jesus, who has ***become*** for us wisdom from God--that is, our righteousness, holiness and redemption.
With the NT creation passages that say God created through Christ,there must be a few things we keep in mind:
1.The milk of the word,like that expounded above
2.The context of a new creation generally
3.that even **if** there are allusions to the old creation that not only can words like "dia"(through,by,for the sake of,in etc.) be translated in a NUMBER of ways,but also that the Hebrews sometimes wrote in a highly poetic fashion.Though I don't necessarily always agree with them,scholars like James Dunn say that whatever is said of the father's word and wisdom in the OT can be applied to Christ in the new,not absolutely literally but rather poetically.Why?Because he **came to** embody the divine mind(the wisdom of the father as well as the word that symbolized his plan to give life to mankind in Christ) by which all things were created.I don't know if we necessarily have to see the NT creation passages in this poetic light though given the forward thinking kingdom contexts.
Isaiah 51:16 says:"I have put My words in your mouth and have covered you with the shadow of My hand, to establish the heavens, to found the earth, and to say to Zion, 'You are My people.'
This is future thinking..as one commentary states:
"It refers to the restoration of the Jews to their own land; to the re-establishment of religion there; to the introduction of the new economy under the Messiah, and to all the great changes which would be consequent on that. This is compared with the work of forming the heavens, and laying the foundation of the earth. It would require almighty power; and it would produce so great changes, that it might be compared to the work of creating the universe out of nothing. Probably also the idea is included here that stability would be given to the true religion by what God was about to do permanency that might be compared with the firmness and duration of the heavens and the earth."~Barnes' Notes on the Bible
Could the proper mindset be the following,even IF there are poetic allusions to the old creation in a few passages:
“…if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation” (2 Cor. 5:17).
“…in him all things hold together. He is the head of the body” ( Col. 1:17).
· “…to head up all things in Christ things upon the heavens and things upon the earth; in him, in whom also we were assigned” (Eph. 1:10, 11KIT).
“For in Christ Jesus…a new creation” (Gal. 6:15).
“For we are the product of His work and were created in Christ Jesus ”(Eph. 2:10).
Notice a theme?
And let's pretend there are no kingdom contexts..no new creation(again,I'm pretending)and that everything in the New Testament about the creation has to do with Genesis...then creating everything *in* or *for the sake of*(perfectly apropos definitions of dia,the preposition used in the passages in question that Arians and trinitarians commonly use to try and prove Christ created for God) Christ still would by no means demand a pre-existence.If I were to build a nursery and a home for the sake of,and with a yet to be born baby at the center of it,as the focus of it,as the reason for it,would that baby have to be there while I did?And what would you think if the baby was instead a grown man and I told him to build a home with a nursery yet claimed I built that home and nursery absolutely alone,wouldn't that seem odd?
It really doesn't matter how much sophistry you incorporate in attempting to justify a view that Yahushua,in Genesis,created heaven and earth,man and woman,etc..To say so blatantly contradicts a number of passages.It does no good pretending either that the Hebrews never used poetic hyperbole,both in the new and OT.You can try to say,like I used to as an Arian,that God can say he does anything alone even if he uses another,but you're still going to need to deal with the fact that this supposed other one is not mentioned in the key OT creation passages ANYWHERE.(to read him into them is almost as far fetched as reading a hypostatic union into everything Christ said,butchering plain language with unwarranted inference ultimately while refusing to consider valid & logical alternative interpretations for ambiguous passages that you assume give you cause)Also keep in mind the context,generally speaking,in the NT is a new creation.Sorry.And that even if the old creation is alluded to,the preposition"dia" can mean "in" or "for the sake of."Would it really be so shocking for God to create everything(even in Genesis) in or for the sake of the Lamb that would redeem the world considering he's a God who:
1.Sees the end from the very beginning (Isaiah 46:10)
2.Sees things that aren't as though they are.(Rom. 4:17)
Considering all things,(like Hebrew poetic hyperbole according to scholars like James Dunn,the new creation context that's glaring,the many possible ways to interpret words like dia)I'm left with the fact that I should take no dogmatic stance on the intention of the bible authors with some of the NT creation passages.What I cannot in good conscience do however is read them in such a way so as to contradict and make moot of the milk God establishes left and right.
Don't forget the milk(of the word).It does the body(of Christ) good.:)
I have several blogs on texts like Colossians 1:16 and Hebrews 1:10 if you're interested.Look to the right under "trinity texts" and explore away.Please,if you just skimmed or rapidly read the above Genesis creation passages,go back and read them very carefully.With no inference,what do they suggest?With no inference,are the word and wisdom of God by which he created a spirit creature?Read them again.You may say there are two words & two wisdoms (God's and then the spirit entity that became Christ),but I maintain that logically and biblically speaking,the plain texts espoused above about God creating in his word and wisdom actually define what they *really* are,no added inference needed at all.And that when poetic books like Proverbs personify God's wisdom, to literalize it would be a serious mistake.
I have also been told by many that passages like Colossians 1:16 & Hebrews 1:10 don't have a kingdom new creation context.Umm,only if you don't read around them.
Job 9:8 who alone stretched out the heavens
and trampled the waves of the sea;(Alone with another named Wisdom?)
Job 38:4 “Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth?(Yahushua laid the foundation of the earth as well?)
Tell me, if you have understanding.
5 Who determined its measurements—surely you know!
Or who stretched the line upon it?(Yahushua did?)
6 On what were its bases sunk,
or who laid its cornerstone,
7 when the morning stars sang together
and all the sons of God shouted for joy?
8 “Or who shut in the sea with doors
when it burst out from the womb,
9 when I made clouds its garment
and thick darkness its swaddling band,(Yahushua did it for me?)
10 and prescribed limits for it
and set bars and doors,
11 and said, ‘Thus far shall you come, and no farther,
and here shall your proud waves be stayed’?
Isaiah 44:24: Thus says the Lord, your Redeemer,
who formed you from the womb:
“I am the Lord, who made all things,
who alone stretched out the heavens,
who spread out the earth by myself,(Yahushua was with him and did the work?)
Psalm 8:3 When I look at your heavens, the work of your fingers,
the moon and the stars, which you have set in place,(by the spirit named Word's fingers?)
Psalm 19:1 The heavens declare the glory of God,
and the sky above proclaims his handiwork.(Yahushua's handiwork?)
Psalm 95:5 The sea is his, for he made it,
and his hands formed the dry land.(Yahushua's hands formed the dry land?)
2 Kings 19:15: And Hezekiah prayed before the Lord and said: “O Lord, the God of Israel, enthroned above the cherubim, you are the God, you alone, of all the kingdoms of the earth; you have made heaven and earth.(You made heaven and earth by a spirit creature named Wisdom?)
Jeremiah 27:5: “It is I who by my great power and my outstretched arm have made the earth, with the men and animals that are on the earth, and I give it to whomever it seems right to me.(And the arm is named Word?)
Isaiah 45:12: I made the earth
and created man on it;...18 For thus says the Lord,
who created the heavens
(he is God!),
who formed the earth and made it
(he established it;
he did not create it empty,
he formed it to be inhabited!):
“I am the Lord, and there is no other.(Well,there is one other who created?)
Malachi 2:10: Have we not all one Father? Has not one God created us? (One God and One Lord created us?)
Mark 10:6: But from the beginning of creation, ‘God made them male and female.’(said Yahushua,the one who REALLY made them male and female?)
Mark 13:19 For in those days there will be such tribulation as has not been from the beginning of the creation that God created until now, and never will be...(from the beginning of creation that Yahushua created?)
Acts 4:24 And when they heard it, they lifted their voices together to God and said, “Sovereign Lord, who made the heaven and the earth and the sea and everything in them,(no ,his servant Yahushua did with help from his father?)
Acts 17:24 The God who made the world and everything in it, being Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in temples made by man, 25 nor is he served by human hands, as though he needed anything, since he himself gives to all mankind life and breath and everything.(Really Messiah did?) 30 The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent, 31 because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed;(the one who as a spirit really created for the father?) and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead.”(The first Adam's creator was the Last Adam who came after him and then died for 3 days?)
1 Timothy 6:13 I charge you in the presence of God, who gives life to all things, and of Christ Jesus, who in his testimony before Pontius Pilate made the good confession,(Yahushua gave life to all things in Genesis?)
Hebrews 2:10: For it was fitting that he, for whom and by whom all things exist, in bringing many sons to glory, should make the founder of their salvation perfect through suffering.(the founder of their salvation as the REAL cause of their existence?)
Hebrews 11:3: By faith we understand that the universe was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things that are visible.(and this word was a spirit being?)
Psalm 33:6:By the word of the Lord the heavens were made,
and by the breath of his mouth all their host.(this word was a spirit creature?Or are there two words?From the lips and then *also* a person?)
Genesis 1:1: In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. 2 The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.(through a spirit creature named Word?)3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. .(God spoke but that wasn't the MAIN word?).6 And God said, “Let there be an expanse in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.” .(God spoke again but his word was a spirit creature?).9 And God said, “Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear.” And it was so(God spoke but that's not the main word here,correct?). ..11 And God said, “Let the earth sprout vegetation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind, on the earth.” And it was so. (This word from his lips is just one of the words there,right?The other is named Word and is creating for him?) ..14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night. And let them be for signs and for seasons, and for days and years.(God spoke again!And the word by which he created is from his lips and *also* from someone named Word?).
Proverbs 3:19: The Lord by wisdom founded the earth;
by understanding he established the heavens;(wisdom is a spirit creature but understanding isn't?)
Psalm 104:24: O Lord, how manifold are your works!
In wisdom have you made them all;
the earth is full of your creatures.(Two wisdoms?One of God's & another spirit named just that?)
Psalm 136:5: to him who by understanding made the heavens,
for his steadfast love endures forever;(And I suppose Yahushua was a spirit named Understanding too?)
Jeremiah 10:12: It is he who made the earth by his power,
who established the world by his wisdom,
and by his understanding stretched out the heavens.(Wisdom the spirit in addition to the wisdom & understanding of God?)
Jeremiah 51:15 “It is he who made the earth by his power,
who established the world by his wisdom,
and by his understanding stretched out the heavens.(Established the world by Wisdom the spirit creature?)
Hebrews 4:4:"And on the seventh day God rested from all his work."(Why didn't Word the spirit rest?)
The Wisdom of Solomon 9:1 O God of my fathers, and Lord of mercy, who hast made all things with thy word,2 And ordained man through thy wisdom, that he should have dominion over the creatures which thou hast made 3 And order the world according to equity and righteousness, and execute judgment with an upright heart: (If Wisdom is Yahushua,who is equity and righteousness?)
How was Yahushua the Wisdom of God?
1 Corinthians 2:7 But we impart a secret and hidden wisdom of God, which God *decreed* before the ages for our glory.
So he's the decreed wisdom,not a spirit named Wisdom.
1 Corinthians 1:24:but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.
Howso?As spirit entity?OR:
1 Corinthians 1:30:It is because of him that you are in Christ Jesus, who has ***become*** for us wisdom from God--that is, our righteousness, holiness and redemption.
With the NT creation passages that say God created through Christ,there must be a few things we keep in mind:
1.The milk of the word,like that expounded above
2.The context of a new creation generally
3.that even **if** there are allusions to the old creation that not only can words like "dia"(through,by,for the sake of,in etc.) be translated in a NUMBER of ways,but also that the Hebrews sometimes wrote in a highly poetic fashion.Though I don't necessarily always agree with them,scholars like James Dunn say that whatever is said of the father's word and wisdom in the OT can be applied to Christ in the new,not absolutely literally but rather poetically.Why?Because he **came to** embody the divine mind(the wisdom of the father as well as the word that symbolized his plan to give life to mankind in Christ) by which all things were created.I don't know if we necessarily have to see the NT creation passages in this poetic light though given the forward thinking kingdom contexts.
Isaiah 51:16 says:"I have put My words in your mouth and have covered you with the shadow of My hand, to establish the heavens, to found the earth, and to say to Zion, 'You are My people.'
This is future thinking..as one commentary states:
"It refers to the restoration of the Jews to their own land; to the re-establishment of religion there; to the introduction of the new economy under the Messiah, and to all the great changes which would be consequent on that. This is compared with the work of forming the heavens, and laying the foundation of the earth. It would require almighty power; and it would produce so great changes, that it might be compared to the work of creating the universe out of nothing. Probably also the idea is included here that stability would be given to the true religion by what God was about to do permanency that might be compared with the firmness and duration of the heavens and the earth."~Barnes' Notes on the Bible
Could the proper mindset be the following,even IF there are poetic allusions to the old creation in a few passages:
“…if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation” (2 Cor. 5:17).
“…in him all things hold together. He is the head of the body” ( Col. 1:17).
· “…to head up all things in Christ things upon the heavens and things upon the earth; in him, in whom also we were assigned” (Eph. 1:10, 11KIT).
“For in Christ Jesus…a new creation” (Gal. 6:15).
“For we are the product of His work and were created in Christ Jesus ”(Eph. 2:10).
Notice a theme?
And let's pretend there are no kingdom contexts..no new creation(again,I'm pretending)and that everything in the New Testament about the creation has to do with Genesis...then creating everything *in* or *for the sake of*(perfectly apropos definitions of dia,the preposition used in the passages in question that Arians and trinitarians commonly use to try and prove Christ created for God) Christ still would by no means demand a pre-existence.If I were to build a nursery and a home for the sake of,and with a yet to be born baby at the center of it,as the focus of it,as the reason for it,would that baby have to be there while I did?And what would you think if the baby was instead a grown man and I told him to build a home with a nursery yet claimed I built that home and nursery absolutely alone,wouldn't that seem odd?
It really doesn't matter how much sophistry you incorporate in attempting to justify a view that Yahushua,in Genesis,created heaven and earth,man and woman,etc..To say so blatantly contradicts a number of passages.It does no good pretending either that the Hebrews never used poetic hyperbole,both in the new and OT.You can try to say,like I used to as an Arian,that God can say he does anything alone even if he uses another,but you're still going to need to deal with the fact that this supposed other one is not mentioned in the key OT creation passages ANYWHERE.(to read him into them is almost as far fetched as reading a hypostatic union into everything Christ said,butchering plain language with unwarranted inference ultimately while refusing to consider valid & logical alternative interpretations for ambiguous passages that you assume give you cause)Also keep in mind the context,generally speaking,in the NT is a new creation.Sorry.And that even if the old creation is alluded to,the preposition"dia" can mean "in" or "for the sake of."Would it really be so shocking for God to create everything(even in Genesis) in or for the sake of the Lamb that would redeem the world considering he's a God who:
1.Sees the end from the very beginning (Isaiah 46:10)
2.Sees things that aren't as though they are.(Rom. 4:17)
Considering all things,(like Hebrew poetic hyperbole according to scholars like James Dunn,the new creation context that's glaring,the many possible ways to interpret words like dia)I'm left with the fact that I should take no dogmatic stance on the intention of the bible authors with some of the NT creation passages.What I cannot in good conscience do however is read them in such a way so as to contradict and make moot of the milk God establishes left and right.
Don't forget the milk(of the word).It does the body(of Christ) good.:)
I have several blogs on texts like Colossians 1:16 and Hebrews 1:10 if you're interested.Look to the right under "trinity texts" and explore away.Please,if you just skimmed or rapidly read the above Genesis creation passages,go back and read them very carefully.With no inference,what do they suggest?With no inference,are the word and wisdom of God by which he created a spirit creature?Read them again.You may say there are two words & two wisdoms (God's and then the spirit entity that became Christ),but I maintain that logically and biblically speaking,the plain texts espoused above about God creating in his word and wisdom actually define what they *really* are,no added inference needed at all.And that when poetic books like Proverbs personify God's wisdom, to literalize it would be a serious mistake.
I have also been told by many that passages like Colossians 1:16 & Hebrews 1:10 don't have a kingdom new creation context.Umm,only if you don't read around them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)