 |
Bible-Discussion.com
Private Bible Studies and Christian Fellowship Available - Ask Nobby
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
Mattathias
King of the Jungle
Joined: 06 Jul 2007
Posts: 1991
Location: Atlanta
|
 Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2008 9:59 am Post subject: |
 |
|
I offer for consideration in support of Beasley-Murray (and oceanfirehawk) the commentary of R.V.G. Tasker.
| Quote: | | 30. One translates the Greek neuter hen. This verse was much quoted in the Aryan controversy by the orthodox in support of the doctrine that Christ was of one substance with the Father. The expression seems however mainly to imply that the Father and the Son are united in will and purpose. Jesus prays in xvii.11 that His followers may all be one (hen), i.e., united in purpose, as He and His Father are united. |
(The Gospel According to St. John, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, Vol. 4, p. 136)
_________________
"All wish to possess knowledge, but few, comparatively speaking, are willing to pay the price." - Juvenal |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
JB
Tiger
Joined: 16 Feb 2008
Posts: 865
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2008 11:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
Matthias,
I will get back to you in a couple days. My business seems to be really getting busier.
God Bless
JB |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mattathias
King of the Jungle
Joined: 06 Jul 2007
Posts: 1991
Location: Atlanta
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2008 3:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| JB wrote: | | I will get back to you in a couple days. My business seems to be really getting busier. |
I'm glad your business is thriving in these difficult times. I hope you'll be able to sustain it. In the meantime, I'll continue the discussion with others. 
_________________
"All wish to possess knowledge, but few, comparatively speaking, are willing to pay the price." - Juvenal |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mattathias
King of the Jungle
Joined: 06 Jul 2007
Posts: 1991
Location: Atlanta
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2008 3:37 pm Post subject: Re: Jesus is the Father |
|
|
| PentecostalFire wrote: | | 5. For example, Jesus stated in John 12:45, "And he that seeth me seeth him that sent me." In other words, if a person sees Jesus as to His deity, he sees the Father. |
Jesus' statement is a perfect example of agency. If a person sees the agent/representative (Heb. shaliach) of the person who sent the agent/representative, it's the same as if they've seen the sender himself.
The Father sent His uniquely begotten son, Jesus. The Father placed His words in the mouth of Jesus. The words that Jesus spoke were not his words they were the words of his God, the Father. Jesus is not the Father. Jesus is the Father's supreme shaliach. It is for this reason that if you have seen Jesus you have, in effect, seen the Father (who sent him and told him what to say.)
| Quote: | | Agent (Heb. Shaliah; The main point of the Jewish law of agency is expressed in the dictum, "a person's agent is regarded as the person himself" (Ned. 72B; Kidd, 41b). Therefore any act committed by a duly appointed agent is regarded as having been committed by the principal, who therefore bears full responsibility for it with consequent complete absence of liability on the part of the agent. |
(The Encyclopedia of the Jewish Religion, p. 15)
_________________
"All wish to possess knowledge, but few, comparatively speaking, are willing to pay the price." - Juvenal |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JB
Tiger
Joined: 16 Feb 2008
Posts: 865
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2008 9:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Matthias
You said:
The Greek word for "before" is pro. It has three common meanings:
1. before, in the sense of place = "in front of"; and
2. before, in the sense of time = "prior to"; and
3. before, in the sense of preeminence, rank, advantage.
I am suggesting that the third option is the correct sense to understand how Jesus claimed to be "before" Abraham.
Have you ever had the opportunity to read Barclay's commentary on this incident? (I've edited this post to place it here for your consideration. I discuss it at great length in another thread.)
Quote:
When Jesus said to the Jews that Abraham rejoiced to see his day, he was talking language that they could understand. The Jews had many beliefs about Abraham which would enable them to see what Jesus was implying. There were altogether five different ways in which they would interpret this passage.
(a) Abraham was living in Paradise and able to see what was happening on earth...
(b) But that is not the correct interpretation. Jesus said Abraham rejoiced to see my day, past tense...They took the great promise to Abraham in Genesis 12:3...and said that when that promise was made, Abraham knew that it meant that the Messiah of God was to come from his line and rejoiced at the magnificence of the promise.
(c) Some of the Rabbis held that in Genesis 15:8-21 Abraham was given a vision of the whole future of the nation of Israel and therefore had a vision of the time when the Messiah would come.
(d) Some of the Rabbis took Genesis 17:17, which tells us that Abraham laughed when he heard that a son would be born to him, not as a laugh of unbelief, but a laugh of sheer joy that from him the Messiah would come.
(e) Some of the Rabbis had a fanciful interpretation of Genesis 24:1...The margin of the Authorized Version tells us that the Hebrew literally means that Abraham had "gone into days." Some of the Rabbis held that to mean that in a vision given by God Abraham had entered into the days which lay ahead, and had seen the whole history of the people and the coming of the Messiah.
Matthias:
You said:
| Quote: | From all this we see clearly that the Jews did believe that somehow Abraham, while he was still alive, had a vision of the history of Israel and the coming of the Messiah. So when Jesus said that Abraham had seen his day, he was making a deliberate claim that he was the Messiah. He was really saying: "I am the Messiah Abraham saw in his vision."
(William Barclay, The Gospel of John, Vol. 2, pp. 34, 35)[i]
Jesus wasn't claiming in this conversation that he was YHWH. He was claiming that he was YHWH's Messiah. |
First, I would like to point out that I did in fact pull my Barclay Commentary off the shelf and he doesn't agree with you.
Here is what William Barclay said. Page 36
Here Jesus claims that he was timeless. There was never a time when He came into being. There will never be a time when He is not a being.
Secondly I would like to point out a few verses that conflict with your idea of pro
Pro
You said:
| Quote: | The Greek word for "before" is pro. It has three common meanings:
1. before, in the sense of place = "in front of"; and
2. before, in the sense of time = "prior to"; and
3. before, in the sense of preeminence, rank, advantage. |
Colossians 1:17 And He is before(pro) all things and by Him all things consist.
John 17:5 And Now O Father glorify thou Me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before(pro) the world was.
John 17:24 Father I will that they also whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am that they may behold my glory which thou hast given me, for thou lovest me before the foundation of the world.
John seems to say that pro is not an abstract idea of timelessness. But it is Gods dominion over the world and history. We see pro used in the sense that God foreordained “before all times” or before the foundation of the world. We also see this idea in the sending of His Son and the salvation that comes with Him.
As glory is an attribute of God, “before all eternity” so then Jesus can say that He possessed this divine Glory even before the foundation of the earth.
In John 1;1-18 we see the mention of this pre-existence Of Christ and His basic significance in the creation.
In Colossians 1:17 we see that Jesus existed before all creation and He was referred to as the creator. (By Him all things consist)
1 Peter 1:20 For He was foreknown before (pro) the foundation of the world, but has appeared in these last times for the sake of you.
JB
. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mattathias
King of the Jungle
Joined: 06 Jul 2007
Posts: 1991
Location: Atlanta
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 4:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| JB wrote: | First, I would like to point out that I did in fact pull my Barclay Commentary off the shelf and he doesn't agree with you.
Here is what William Barclay said. Page 36
Here Jesus claims that he was timeless. There was never a time when He came into being. There will never be a time when He is not a being. |
Barclay gave a good analysis of the incident, which is what I posted. I found nothing in it to disagree with. You apparently found nothing to disagree with either. Barclay (a Trinitarian) then reached a conclusion (which you posted) that I do not agree with.
| Quote: | | Secondly I would like to point out a few verses that conflict with your idea of pro |
There is nothing in the verses you posted which conflict with the Jewish concept of preexistence.
Why do you reject Jesus' teaching that the Father alone is God?
_________________
"All wish to possess knowledge, but few, comparatively speaking, are willing to pay the price." - Juvenal |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JB
Tiger
Joined: 16 Feb 2008
Posts: 865
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 4:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
Matthias,
I believe that you quoted the beginning of Jesus' life as being around 4 BCE . Now you are saying that you agree with pre-existence. Could you kindly explain?
JB |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mattathias
King of the Jungle
Joined: 06 Jul 2007
Posts: 1991
Location: Atlanta
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 5:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| JB wrote: | | I believe that you quoted the beginning of Jesus' life as being around 4 BCE . Now you are saying that you agree with pre-existence. Could you kindly explain? |
I believe that Jesus was uniquely begotten (i.e., uniquely brought into existence) as described by Matthew and Luke. This even occurred circa 4 B.C.
I believe in ideal (or notional) preexistence. In other words, I believe that Jesus preexisted his begetting in the logos of his God.
Why do you reject Jesus' teaching that the Father alone is God?
_________________
"All wish to possess knowledge, but few, comparatively speaking, are willing to pay the price." - Juvenal |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JB
Tiger
Joined: 16 Feb 2008
Posts: 865
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 5:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
Matthias,
Interesting. Are you saying that Jesus was an idea rather than an existence prior to His birth?
JB |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mattathias
King of the Jungle
Joined: 06 Jul 2007
Posts: 1991
Location: Atlanta
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 5:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| JB wrote: | | Are you saying that Jesus was an idea rather than an existence prior to His birth? |
My view on preexistence is consistent with the Jewish understanding of preexistence.
I'm saying that Jesus existed in the plan of God before God brought him into literal existence.
So why do you reject Jesus' teaching that the Father alone is God?
_________________
"All wish to possess knowledge, but few, comparatively speaking, are willing to pay the price." - Juvenal |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mattathias
King of the Jungle
Joined: 06 Jul 2007
Posts: 1991
Location: Atlanta
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 5:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
The Nature of Pre-existence in the Hebraic Mind and the "Logos"
Link
_________________
"All wish to possess knowledge, but few, comparatively speaking, are willing to pay the price." - Juvenal
Last edited by Mattathias on Sat Oct 11, 2008 6:17 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JB
Tiger
Joined: 16 Feb 2008
Posts: 865
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 6:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
Matthias,
In Acts 2 we see Peter making mention of the Pre-Determinant Council. To accept the idea that Jesus was just an idea, would complicate this text unless we say that God was talking to Himself or maybe reasoning with Himself.
I guess the question is, "does God do that"?
JB |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mattathias
King of the Jungle
Joined: 06 Jul 2007
Posts: 1991
Location: Atlanta
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 6:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| JB wrote: | | I guess the question is, "does God do that"? |
It's a good question. Here's another,
| Quote: | | So why do you reject Jesus' teaching that the Father alone is God? |
_________________
"All wish to possess knowledge, but few, comparatively speaking, are willing to pay the price." - Juvenal |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JB
Tiger
Joined: 16 Feb 2008
Posts: 865
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 6:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Matthias,
You asked:
| Quote: | | So why do you reject Jesus' teaching that the Father alone is God? |
I am not sure that I have ever done that. Since I believe that Christ was God and I don't necessarily subscribe to the triune idea, what makes you think I don't believe in ONE GOD?
JB |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JB
Tiger
Joined: 16 Feb 2008
Posts: 865
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 6:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
Matthias,
Since the Scriptures point to the Deity of Christ, this must be reconciled with the Onenes Of God.
JB |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
FAQ 
Search 
Make a Donation 
Usergroups 
Contact
Register
Submit Articles 
Log in to check your private messages 
