What sort of thing do you mean?
:sad_yes:
…well, he got you there–if Scriptures only spoke of Christ as Mary’s and Joseph’s son!
…of course, your friend may be protestant but he is not Christian as anyone who bares His Name must submit to His Lorship, Kingship, and Authority… as that ole movie coined: “There can Be Only One!”
:doh2:
this is a beautiful passage one can use to explain that Jesus is God, but it doesnt touch d question of whether or not the begotten had a starting point in eternity
my friend is bible only,
he doesnt even try to really define d word begotten he prefers to answer any question about d origin of christ with the passage “the lord created me as d first of his works” and titles like “firstborn of creation”. For him begotten means came to exist which seem to equal created in his dictionary.
he has a funny explanation for this, he says calling christ d logos doesnt make him in a literal sense d father’s word, according to him he is logos because he is a messager of yahweh bringing a message. So he believes ‘logos’ is just a title, he say christ is d logos yet “yahweh” still has his word and reason inside him and christ is d power of God yet “yahweh” still has his power.
he will ridicle anything with the letters “ca”, im sure no animal around him will be safe if d animal is painted “catholic”. He prefers to define terms himself. Besides i would love a link dat shows definition of those terms.
thanks i will
he is a witness, he considers himself a christian but he believes christ is just an arch angel “yahweh” sent to die for d world.
my friend will scream heresy!
for my friend nicea was a concil convened by a pagan emperor who forced paganism into christianity, and d bishops agreed to please d emperor and those wu held on to their faith were forced to vacate their sees. For my friend arius is d champion of true doctrine
for my friend d above is proof against d trinity.
i agree it isnt among d easy stuff, but anyone wu gets it right will get many others.
if he was begotten doesnt that mean he had a beginning in eternity?
he would treat d above as of no importance he believes christ is simply using d verb to be and he isnt refering to d divine name.
he believes God can delegate that authority, he believe he delegated dat power to christ and to d apostles
he would reply that d son doesnt know d hour d world will help, he will stick to those word no matter your explanations, he would remain on that verse even after showing him passages that say christ knows all.
he believe d jews erred and couldnt understand what christ meant for him that verse means that d father and son have one purpose.
he says d bible calls d angels sons of God and calls humans Gods, only in the sense would he agree that Jesus is God.
…though I did not read the material… I think that the issue is self-explanatory since God is Eternal and Immutable–I believe that any interpretation that attempts to determine the emergence of Christ or the Holy Spirit must be born from the Holy Spirit’s dumbing down God’s existence to a level that is more acceptable to our finity understanding–we are linear (past, present, future) and we tend to do better when things are presented/received in such chronological events (ie: first the Father, God, then the Son, God, finally the Holy Spirit, God)… hence the trouble some find with God unless they can breakdown God into levels of “importance.”
…the problem with your friend, as with most who follow arianism and other heresies, is that they tend to accept those passages in Scriptures which they can assimilate while ignoring/rejecting all others…
…yet, this same Yahweh God, who is the Father, acknowledges Christ as His Son… but not only that… God, Who is God Alone, and will not share His Glory (Power), then Commands His servants to serve (worship) His Son… a Son Who is introduced to the world by God, the Father, as God:
…if it were a single word or expression here or there one would even feel tempted to agree with the heretical theology to which they abscribe their belief; but the preponderance of Scriptures allows no other conclusion but that Jesus is God–to be precise the second Person of God (which only means the Second Person to be Revealed)!
…only if God is not Eternal and not Immutable—Christ, the Incarnate Word, has a Beginning.
…I suspect that you protest too much… it seems that your friend is actually dictating the responses to the posts to which you are replying… that or you know his mind and thought as no other…
actually most of the points presented here are a repetition of the ones i gave him. The issue is about 2000yrs old and it seems everybody knows the next point one will make.
…my remarks, you must agree, are suspect because you propose a great number of points to which you reply as your friend would… it makes one think that either you are that “friend” or he is there with you as you propose the measures and countermeasures…
Sounds like your friend is a Jehovah’s Witness, who teach that Jesus was the earthly manifestation of Michael the only archangel. Since Michael is the only archangel he gets the title “only begotten.”
Then he is being willfully ignorant. Stop trying to convincehim.
Where is the Scriptural support for that?
Point to Scripture where the Son will judge the earth (John 5:26), find a verse that says an angel will judge mankind.
Again, willfully ignorant.