The doctrine I don't want to believe-eternal fire

[Atwood]

Re: OT: Digression on the "Begotten" Mistranslation

μονογενῆ, the accusative, singular masculine adjective, dictionary form μονογενής, composed of 2 primary morpheme mon- & gi(g)n as seen in the words μόνος = only & γεν = kind -- compare the biology word genus. Thus the term means one-of-kind or unique.

I meant to give gen-, not gi(g)n as the 2nd morpheme of monogenē. Let me also fix a typo. The statement should read as follows:

μονογενῆ, the accusative, singular masculine adjective, dictionary form μονογενής,
is composed of 2 primary morphemes:

(1) mon- & (2) gen- as seen in the words μόνος => only + γεν => kind
-- compare the biology word genus. Thus the term monogenē means one-of-kind or unique.

 

[Butch5]

Butch, I concur with Jason (here) that your answers do not make sense,

making the Scriptural implications of your view absurd and, therefore, untrue

as I have amply demonstrated (here).

So I do not think it profitable to engage any further with you on this topic.

Regarding what Jason said, I don't believe you know my position on that. Regarding what you said, again, it doesn't matter what the dictionary says, that's an appeal to the majority and is fallacious. The Scriptures and logic prove that aionios cannot mean eternal. If you choose doctrine over Scripture that is your prerogative, however, to say my view is absurd when both yours and Jason's contradict Scripture is, I think what is really absurd.

Have you noticed that even though Jason says what I believe is false, we've not seen any Scripture stating that Jesus is the one true God? If what He claims is true then we should find it easily enough in Scripture. It is my contention that the Father is the one true God. Now, let me ask you whose view agrees with Scripture.

KJV John 17:1 These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee:
2 As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him.
3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. (Joh 17:1-3 KJV)

There you go, I believe exactly what Jesus said, the Father is the one true God. I believe what Paul said,

6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him. (1Co 8:6 KJV)


I'm still waiting to see Scripture that says, to us there is one God, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. I'm still waiting to see Scripture that says Jesus is the one true God.

 

[Atwood]

And this is [what? a JW cultist?]

As to aionios, I have plastered the page with proof texts. And that is the procedure of the BDAG Lexicon, the meanings given have accompanying texts to prove the alleged meanings. It isn't some theoretician postulating arbitrary meanings.

 

[Butch5]

Re: OT: Digression on the "Begotten" Mistranslation

"What the earliest Christians believed" (primitivism) is not the best approach to doctrine. The correct approach is "What does the Word of God teach." As a matter of fact we can't prove "what the earliest Christians believed" apart from the NT. Who could get in a Dr. Who tardis & go back to I AD & take a survey in the early churches; then tally the results? Taking the selection of post-NT writings preserved by the papal system is no authority.

Begotten is a misnomer as it is often applied to the Lord Jesus. In John 3:16 "only begotten" is a mistranslation of

μονογενῆ, the accusative, singular masculine adjective, dictionary form μονογενής, composed of 2 primary morpheme mon- & gi(g)n as seen in the words μόνος = only & γεν = kind -- compare the biology word genus. Thus the term means one-of-kind or unique.

The Greek stem for beget in not γεν-, but γενv- (not gen, but genn-), 2 n's, not 1. So far as I know the one & only instance of "begotten" (2 n's) as applied to Christ is taken from Psalm 2, which appears to be a coronation formula as when a King designates his son the new king (compare David designating Solomon, while both were alive). "This day I have begotten you."

Thus, all the who-shot-cock-robin explanations of how Christ is "begotten of God" are misguided. The expression would be theologically interpreted as "eternally begotten," the Father-Son relationship being eternal. I agree that the Father-Son relationship is eternal, but μονογενής (monogenēs) does not mean begotten. And the expression "begotten" allows idiots to go off on a tangent about a sexual act involving the virgin Mary.

I'm sorry but I'll have to disagree here. I've heard the "one and only" areguments and don't agree. However, they don't address the words of Jesus Himself where He said He came out of God. Nor do they address Micah 5:2 that tell us His origins are of old.

 

[1joseph]

Teachers have always said that Jesus talked more about Hell than He talked about Heaven,
but I cannot vouch for that ... because I've never gone through the gospels and counted them.

I don't know either. What I have heard that Jesus said more than anything else is, "Fear not..." But I have never confirmed that either.

 

[Atwood]

KJV John 17:1 These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee: 2 As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him. 3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. (Joh 17:1-3 KJV) There you go, I believe exactly what Jesus said, the Father is the one true God. I believe what Paul said, 6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him. (1Co 8:6 KJV) I'm still waiting to see Scripture that says, to us there is one God, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. I'm still waiting to see Scripture that says Jesus is the one true God.

The Father is the one true God, so is the Lord Jesus, and so is the Holy Spirit. That the Father is God does not exclude the Son. There are 3 egos in the one God.

The proof is absolute in scripture for Christ being God.
First, he has the attributes of God.
Second, He is called God.
3rd, He has the name of God.

Before Abraham was born, I AM.
The audience recognized the claim in John. I AM is a name of God.
Except you believe that I AM, you shall die in your sins.

There is no SAvior, but YHWH; Isaiah is clear. Scripture is also clear that the Lord Jesus is the Savior par excellence.
There is none other name under Heaven, given among men whereby we must be saved.

1Tim. 1:1 God our Saviour,
2:3 This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;


4:10 For to this end we labor and strive, because we have our hope set on the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of them that believe.


1:4 Christ Jesus our Saviour.


2Pet. 1:1 Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained a like precious faith with us in the righteousness of our God and Saviour Jesus Christ:

Titus 2:13 looking for the blessed hope and appearing of the glory of our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ;

As Thomas confessed (no rebuke) to Christ: My Lord and My God!

His name is Immanuel = God with us.
He is El Gibbor, the Mighty God.

At His incarnation He was named Jesus, YHWH-salvation, because He (Jesus) would save! If He were not actually YHWH that would be a blasphemy. But God doesn't blaspheme Himself. To merely get a theanthropic name can be for no higher reason than to commemorate God in some way. But Jesus was given the name of YHWH-salvation BECAUSE He Jesus was going to save. Thus the name itself with the reason given is that He is YHWH the only Savior.

After Christ became a man, adding humanity to His deity, it was given Him in that theanthropic union to have
THE NAME WHICH IS ABOVE ALL NAMES (Philip 2) which is YHWH.

Romans 10:13 makes this clear. For in context "LORD" = the Lord Jesus. But the quote is from Joel where LORD is YHWH. For whosoever shall call upon the name of the kyrios shall be saved. Kyrios (in its genitive form) stands for YHWH. From Hebrew it is rendered, "For whosoever shall call upon the name of YHWH shall be saved."

He is not just called God, but YHWH.

With this you may compare where the NT says that Isaiah saw Christ's glory, but in Isaiah 6 it is YHWH's glory that was seen by Isaiah.

Isaiah 48 puts it all together in words like those of John 1 where in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.


Come ye near unto
[2] me, hear ye this; from the beginning
[2] I have not spoken in secret; from the time that it was, there [2] I AM : and now
[1] the Lord YHWH hath sent me, and
[3] His Spirit.

I AM is a name of YHWH.

Except ye believe that I AM,
Ye shall die in your sins.

Will you now fall back & to your knees on the ground?


John 18: Whom seek ye? They answered him, Jesus of Nazareth.
Jesus saith unto them,I AM!
And Judas also, who betrayed him, was standing with them.
When therefore He said to them, I AM!,
they went backward, and fell to the ground.

And having fallen down, will you set down your stones?

Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was born, I am. They took up stones therefore to cast at him:

Will you confess with Thomas? My Lord and My God!

 

[Atwood]

To Whomever Wants to Come Here W/ JW POISON

I can see that this thread would draw a JW type person, for one of their hobby horses seems to be denying eternal punishment of sinners. Of course you can be a Christian & deny that -- it won't damn you.

But denying who the Lord Jesus is, will damn you, you preach another Christ, who thus is an idol who cannot save you, an imaginary Jesus. He must be properly confessed (agreed to) with God when you come for salvation, namely that he is YHWH who became a man in the flesh.

I myself have read the Bible from cover to cover, marking all the references to Christ in the OT and in the New Testament all the references where He is mentioned as someone special. I highlighted in blue.

He is very God, YHWH. That is the only reasonable conclusion from reading the evidence. When one goes to the trouble to learn a bit of Hebrew and check the NT refs to the Lord Jesus where it refers back to Him in the OT, one finds that He is actually called YHWH in the Bible, as when the NT calls Him kyrios, but kyrios (Lord) is the standard rendering of YHWH in the Greek NT. So when you find Christ called kyrios, the question is raised at once whether this is YHWH or equivalent to Adonai (master). And when you find that the word kyrios applied to Christ is from an OT passage where the original Hebrew is YHWH, that should convince you.

 

[Butch5]

The Father is the one true God, so is the Lord Jesus, and so is the Holy Spirit. That the Father is God does not exclude the Son. There are 3 egos in the one God.

The proof is absolute in scripture for Christ being God.
First, he has the attributes of God.
Second, He is called God.
3rd, He has the name of God.

Before Abraham was born, I AM.
The audience recognized the claim in John. I AM is a name of God.
Except you believe that I AM, you shall die in your sins.

There is no SAvior, but YHWH; Isaiah is clear. Scripture is also clear that the Lord Jesus is the Savior par excellence.
There is none other name under Heaven, given among men whereby we must be saved.

1Tim. 1:1 God our Saviour,
2:3 This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;


4:10 For to this end we labor and strive, because we have our hope set on the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of them that believe.


1:4 Christ Jesus our Saviour.


2Pet. 1:1 Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained a like precious faith with us in the righteousness of our God and Saviour Jesus Christ:

Titus 2:13 looking for the blessed hope and appearing of the glory of our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ;

As Thomas confessed (no rebuke) to Christ: My Lord and My God!

His name is Immanuel = God with us.
He is El Gibbor, the Mighty God.

At His incarnation He was named Jesus, YHWH-salvation, because He (Jesus) would save! If He were not actually YHWH that would be a blasphemy. But God doesn't blaspheme Himself. To merely get a theanthropic name can be for no higher reason than to commemorate God in some way. But Jesus was given the name of YHWH-salvation BECAUSE He Jesus was going to save. Thus the name itself with the reason given is that He is YHWH the only Savior.

After Christ became a man, adding humanity to His deity, it was given Him in that theanthropic union to have
THE NAME WHICH IS ABOVE ALL NAMES (Philip 2) which is YHWH.

Romans 10:13 makes this clear. For in context "LORD" = the Lord Jesus. But the quote is from Joel where LORD is YHWH. For whosoever shall call upon the name of the kyrios shall be saved. Kyrios (in its genitive form) stands for YHWH. From Hebrew it is rendered, "For whosoever shall call upon the name of YHWH shall be saved."

He is not just called God, but YHWH.

With this you may compare where the NT says that Isaiah saw Christ's glory, but in Isaiah 6 it is YHWH's glory that was seen by Isaiah.

Isaiah 48 puts it all together in words like those of John 1 where in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.


Come ye near unto
[2] me, hear ye this; from the beginning
[2] I have not spoken in secret; from the time that it was, there [2] I AM : and now
[1] the Lord YHWH hath sent me, and
[3] His Spirit.

I AM is a name of YHWH.

Except ye believe that I AM,
Ye shall die in your sins.

Will you now fall back & to your knees on the ground?


John 18: Whom seek ye? They answered him, Jesus of Nazareth.
Jesus saith unto them,I AM!
And Judas also, who betrayed him, was standing with them.
When therefore He said to them, I AM!,
they went backward, and fell to the ground.

And having fallen down, will you set down your stones?

Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was born, I am. They took up stones therefore to cast at him:

Will you confess with Thomas? My Lord and My God!

Please explain how three different beings can all be the one true God.

 

[Butch5]

As to aionios, I have plastered the page with proof texts. And that is the procedure of the BDAG Lexicon, the meanings given have accompanying texts to prove the alleged meanings. It isn't some theoretician postulating arbitrary meanings.

You can post all the dictionaries in the world, as an appeal to authority, however, the Scriptures trump them all and the Scriptures show that aionios cannot logically mean eternal.

 

[sveinen]

Please explain how three different beings can all be the one true God.

"if you explain howcome you call them different and one.."
you want love, ok.
you need love.

 

[sveinen]

You can post all the dictionaries in the world, as an appeal to authority, however, the Scriptures trump them all and the Scriptures show that aionios cannot logically mean eternal.

scripture dissin logic there, sir

 

[Butch5]

"if you explain howcome you call them different and one.."
you want love, ok.
you need love.

Because you either have three or you have Modalism.

 

[Butch5]

scripture dissin logic there, sir

I don't think so, that's just an excuse for those who can't prove their doctrine.

 

[Atwood]

Atwood posted: "The Father is the one true God, so is the Lord Jesus, and so is the Holy Spirit. That the Father is God does not exclude the Son. There are 3 egos in the one God."

Please explain how three different beings can all be the one true God.

Please explain how you get "three different beings" from the doctrine of the Trinity. You really accomplish nothing by inventing your own straw man & then questioning it.

 

[Atwood]

those who can't prove their doctrine.

You surely have experience of that.

 

[Atwood]

Because you either have three or you have Modalism.

Kindly refrain from posting falsehood.

Are you being honest?
Prove that God does not have 3 egos, prove that a single being cannot have 3 egos. We wait for the proof.

 

[kennethcadwell]

Water, ice, steam

All different forms, yet made up of the same elements....

 

[Atwood]

Atwood posted:
"As to aionios, I have plastered the page with proof texts. And that is the procedure of the BDAG Lexicon, the meanings given have accompanying texts to prove the alleged meanings. It isn't some theoretician postulating arbitrary meanings."

You can post all the dictionaries in the world, as an appeal to authority, however, the Scriptures trump them all and the Scriptures show that aionios cannot logically mean eternal.

You can ignore what is posted & pretend something else was posted & attack your straw men, as an appeal to obtuseness, but the Scriptures trump your straw men.

You can keep saying things with no proof saying what a word can't logically mean, but it is not logical to believe something just because you keep saying it.

Scripture yes, Butch no!

 

[Atwood]

Water, ice, steam

All different forms, yet made up of the same elements....

Sounds like the heresy called modalism, Kenneth.

 

[Atwood]

Re: OT: Digression on the "Begotten" Mistranslation

I'm sorry but I'll have to disagree here. I've heard the "one and only" areguments and don't agree. However, they don't address the words of Jesus Himself where He said He came out of God. Nor do they address Micah 5:2 that tell us His origins are of old.

There is no room for disagreement. The stem gen- is not the stem genn-, different stems with different meanings.

Now you bring up a vague allusion to some passage & Micah 5:2, neither of which use the term "begotten."

"the words of Jesus Himself," you say. But the whole Bible is His Word; words elsewhere in the Bible are of equal authority to the sayings recorded in the gospels as spoken by Christ.

Micah 5:2 does not refer to an "origin," as the Lord Jesus is the 2nd person of the Trinity, eternal, not having an origin. In the beginning WAS the Word -- not "came to be."

whose goings forth are from of old, from everlasting. nothing about "begotten"