Click Photo To View Video
Herman & Ron - Debate 1.
The Mystery Of God-liness.
I have written a book called Unity In Love. An excert from chapter 2 speeks
to the following issue, "Jesus Is God", which is what this debate
is about. This involves a Rama word from the Lord. My definition of a
Rama word from the Lord is in part ain't nobody saying this but me and
the bible. A natural extention of this same issue which is reserved for
a later date is, "The Holy Spirit Is God.
Paul said in Romans 1:20 that if you do not have a basic understanding of the God-head, or you are unwilling to accept this basic understanding, that is the nature of God him-self, that you were without excuse, although it was actually a mystery.
Romans 1:20 says: For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
Then 1 Timothy 3:16 went on to say that the necessary
knowledge of the Mystery Of God-liness was that:
And without controversy great is the mystery of god-liness: God was manifested
in the flesh, Justified in the Spirit, Seen by angels, Preached among
the Gentiles, Believed on in the world, Received up in glory.
The bible does not say that these things happened to a certain god. No! It says that these things happened to God himself, the definite article of the sentence. Speaking of the definite article, John 1:1 and 14 says: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth (see chapter 5 in my book, Seeing the Godhead in nature). In this sentence structure, the Word, is the definite article. Or God himself is the definite article in the phrase ‘the Word was with God’. It is important at this point to understand that the Greek language has a definite article, (...the...), but does not have an indefinite article, (...A...). Because the first use of the word ‘God’ in the structure the Word was with God, clearly refers to the Only True God, the Eternal Pre-existent Creator, more than likely, or necessarily so, John would have used a different Greek construction than he did, if he had meant for this next phrase, ‘and the Word was God’, to refer to a ‘lesser’ god, and did not want us to confuse this with the True God he had just mentioned. Greek does not operate in the same way as English does, in regard to the use of the words, ...the..., and, ...A... Furthermore, even though the Greek language does not have an ‘indefinite article’ like we think of in English, there is a way in Greek for the writer to indicate the indefinite idea and thus avoid confusion. This is done in Greek by using the Greek indefinite pronoun, ‘tis’, as an adjective. This would have made it clear that the Word was ‘a certain god’, but not the one he was just referring to. For examples of this, see the verses Mark 14 51, Luke 8 27, Luke 1 5, and Luke 11 1 (among many other examples). So, it seems that by the Greek grammatical structure in this statement, John is indicating that the Word (Jesus Christ in John 1:14) is the same essence and nature as God the Father.
This same essence and nature is further demonstrated
in the usage of the word another. In Greek there is two uses of the word
another. One is another of the same kind. Anotther usage is another of
a different kind. This usage can be found in John 14:16.
And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that
he may abide with you for ever;
The Greek word “ALLOS,” which was translated “another” in this verse, is in contrast with the Greek word “HETEROS,” which means “another of a different sort”, (Vine’s Expository Dictionary). “Allos expresses a numerical difference and denotes another of the same sort. Christ promised to send ‘another Comforter’ (...another like Himself...)”. The Holy Spirit is another Comforter just like Jesus. The Holy Spirit is not another of a different kind making it a force. In John 16:7, Jesus said it was actually to our advantage to have the ministry of the Holy Spirit rather than His personal presence.
This same essence and nature is further demonstrated in the usage of the word begotton verses the word created. The Bible tells us in John 3:16: For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. Then the bible goes on to say in Acts 13:33: God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.
So, what is the difference between begotten and created? Some say that they are synonyms, therefore there are no differences. Yet, all synonyms sepa-rate at some point. Here is where beget and create sepa-rate.
Human men beget baby humans, swallows beget baby swallows in eggs, and cats beget kittens. One thing begets a thing that is the same kind of thing as itself. God said that everything in nature reproduces after its own kind. They are equal things. Though a baby is smaller than a man, it is no less human than the man. The same is with cats and swallows and all other living things.
Now, what of creating? God created laws of nature. A swallow creates a nest of mud. Has the swallow made something that is the same kind of thing as itself? No! A cat makes something in the litter box. I don’t need to be more descriptive than that, do I? It is definitely not another cat! Would you ever say that a nest, or litter box leaving, is equal to the creature that made it? How about a man? What does he make or create?
CS Lewis writes, “A man makes a statue. If he is a clever enough carver, he may make a statue which is very like a man indeed. But, of course, it is not a real man; it only looks like one. It cannot breathe or think. It is not alive.” Lewis then continues to clarify the differences between begetting and creating:
“Now that is the first thing to get clear. What God begets is God; just as what man begets is man. What God creates is not God; just as what man creates is not man. Although man has tried his hand at cloneing. Yet, he has yet to succeed. When man succeeds at cloning then maybe we can begin a conversation on that level. Until then it is just conspiracy theory. That is why men are not Sons of God in the sense that Christ is. They may be like God in certain ways, but they are not things of the same kind. They are more like statues or pictures of God.”
It is easy to see how this misunderstanding can come about, when we don’t understand the difference between begetting and creating. If we assume they are the same thing, or use the words interchangeably, we miss the important difference that a begotten thing is the same kind of thing as the thing that begot it, and a created thing is a different kind of thing than the thing that created it. However, we can also deduce, even without the understanding of the two words we are discussing, that what God created was not another God. Hear oh Isreal the Lord our God is one God. He is a unique kind of a thing. There was no other essence like him created before him, alongside him, or after him. Yet, what he begot was the same kind of thing that he himself was. Having the same divine nature that he himself has. Having the same attributes of being eternal, from everlasting and to everlasting, self-sufficient, omnipresent, the same essence, nature, and etcetera as he himself.
This same essence and nature is further demonstrated in the definition of the word is, in the statement that Jesus is God. The word is, in the Merriam-Webster dictionary, is literally defined as from different individuals of the same species.
The critic asserts that it is not possible for two different things to in fact be the same thing. Clearly the word is, says that the criteria is that they simply need to be of the same species. The word species is defined as a group of organisms framed by the resources they depend on. God is self-sufficient and does not have to depend on anyone or anything, and Jesus is the same kind of thing, the same species, the same essence as God himself is. He is God's only begotton son. For many years, I have intuitively known, and verbally articulated, that God and Jesus were the same essence. Now, here the dictionary clearly defined them as the same species, which is a synonym of essence. Thus, this understanding is a rama word from the Lord.
Accordingly, the bible says that "Hear old Israel, the Lord our God is one God. There was no other God created before him, after him, nor beside him. There is no other species, or essence, like him in all the universe. In that sense angels are not Gods. Satan is not a God. Kings are not Gods, and statues are not Gods. Gods are a unique kind of a thing, for example, The Father, The Son, and The Holy Ghost. Again, we are not sons of God in the same way that Jesus is the son of God. Yet, we can be adopted sons of God. We can be adopted gods. For, John 17:22 says "And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them", and 1 John 3:2 says, "we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is". Thus, making us adopted gods, not begotton Gods.
This same essence and nature is further demonstrated
in Colossians 2:9 when Paul wrote:
For in him dwelleth all the fulness of they Godhead bodily.
Then it was further demonstrated in Colossians 1:16-20,
when Paul wrote:
_For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are
in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions,
or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for
him:
_And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
_And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the
firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.
_For it pleased the Father that in him should all fullness dwell;
_And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile
all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth,
or things in heaven.
Without controversy, Colossians 2:9 and Colossians 1:19 both state clearly that all the fullness of the Godhead, or the nature of God himself, dwells in the body of Jesus Christ as a man.
Then Colossians 1:16-18 goes on to say, that all things
that were created, were created by him and for him. It makes it clear
that there was nothing that was created, that was not created by him.
Yet, some people feel a need to add to the scripture and say, all other
things. Those same people accuse others of making subtle changes to the
scripture, while they excuse themselves from making phenomenal changes,
to force the scripture to say what they want it to say. The scripture
does not say all other things that were created. It says that all things
that were created, were created by him. If he did not create it, then
it was not created. Yet, it may have been begotten. Who is to say? Likewise,
those same people manipulate John 1:1 to say, the word was a god, instead
of the word was God. God help us to rightly define the word of truth.
So let it be.
This same essence and nature is further demonstrated in the book of Psalms.
Psalm 90:2 says that God was from everlasting, to everlasting.
Also, the eternity in both the past and the future, of the Messiah who would be born as a man was declared by the Hebrew prophets. For instance, Looking from eternity past Micah 5:2 stated that Messiah's "goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting." Looking to eternity future, Isaiah 9:6-7 called Jesus the "everlasting Father" and declared that "of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end" because he will reign on the throne of David "with justice from henceforth even for ever."
Here we can see that if we start with the presupposition that God exists, and the presupposition that Jesus is God's only begotten son, then the two centry old mystery of the trinity, which says that Jesus is God, is simply deductive reasoning.This is primarily because according to the dictionary, "..IS.." can mean a different person of the same species, as mentioned herein. Praise God for the clarity of his word reveiled by his servent.
The Holy Spirit Is God..
Now in relationship to the Holy Spirit being God. Matthew
1:18 says:
Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary
was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with
child of the Holy Ghost.
Is it normal for women to be found with a child of the Holy Ghost or is this a unique exception of the laws of nature? Here we can see that the Holy Ghost was the father of Jesus. What? Jesus as a man was begotton by the Holy Ghost? We have already explained that the begotton is the same kind of thing as his parent. They are necerssarily of the same species. Everything in nature reproduses after its own kind.
Furthermore, and equally important, let's look at Acts
5:3-4.
-But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to
the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the price of the land?
-Whiles it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold, was
it not in thine own power? why hast thou conceived this thing in thine
heart? thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God.
This is one of the clearest scriptural references about the Holy Ghost being God. In Acts 5:3, Peter said that Ananias had lied unto the Holy Ghost; then in verse 4, the bible said Ananias had not lied unto men but unto God, thereby using the names God and Holy Ghost interchangeably. Wow! My my my. All scripture is profitable for doctrine.
In eternity, Yahwah begot 1 and only 1 son Jesus, making him a member of the same species as he himself was. I know that we do not like to talk about Gods as the mame of a species. Yet, it is what it is. After all the Greek and Roman gods, if they even existed, which I personally do not think that they ever existed, Yet they were defined as a species. Nevertheless, they were defined as a species who all had an atribute of imortality. Even though we are persuaded that they did not exist, we clearly understand that all members of the same species have certain atributes in common, even in biblical times. Likewise, all angels have an atribute of imortality in conmon.
Some if not all angels or spirits have the ability to change themselves into men, and impregnate women. This is evidenced by the angels who left their first domain. That is a characteristic of the species called angels.
Likewise, all men which are a different species than anamals have certain atributes in common.
All others are not begotton Gods at all. At best they are adopted gods or anointed as gods, just as we are adopted sons of God. We are not begotton sons of God.
Thus, just as Jesus was God's only begotton son, as described in John 3:16, and Hebrews 1:5, here in Matthew 1:18 it is clear that the Holy Spirit begot Jesus. Let us look at these two scriptures and contrast them with Matthew 1:18.
John 3 16 says.
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever
believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Hebrews 1:5 says.
For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this
day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he
shall be to me a Son?
2 Timothy 3:16-17 goes on to say:
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine,
for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the
man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.
When reading and interpreting scripture, the issue is not either or. We don't say over here it says, blah blah blah, but over there is says something different. No! The issue is what do they have in common. How are both true?
Jesus was begotten by God the father, making Jesus the same kind of thing as God the father. Jesus was begotten by the Holy Spirit, making Jesus the same kind of thing as the Holy Spirit. Furthermore, Ananias lied to the Holy Spirit, which was the same as lying to God. Now, let us add one more scripture to this mystery.
Isaiah 9:6 goes on to say:
For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government
shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor,
The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
Wow! These names are attributes of Jesus. For, such is the function of names. Some attributes of Jesus are Wonderful, Counsellor, The Prince of Peace. These are very discriptive names. Praise God. Yet, let us pay particular attention to the last two discriptive names. The mighty God. Are there several mighty Gods roaming around in the universe, such as the greek and Roman gods, and Jesus? For, Exodus 23:13 says: And in all things that I have said unto you be circumspect: and make no mention of the name of other gods, neither let it be heard out of thy mouth.
Finally, the last discription, The everlasting Father. That sounds similar to, Emmanuel, God with us. Wow! The son is The everlasting Father! My my my! This adds a new understanding to Jesus is God. All three are of the same species. Hear oh Israel, the Lord our God is one God. He is one species. There was no other God, or species like him created before him, after him, nor alongside him. God is the name of the species. Therefore, God is a reference to the uniqueness of the species. Weather, all the members of the species can at some point merge into on being, who is to say? The Buddhist say that they can, and will. I say I do not know. It is not for me to say. What happens when we see Jesus as he is, face to face. All I know is what the bible says.
In this debate I started off with the proposition that Jesus is God. Yet, not according to the Nicene Creed or the Afination Creed. Then I went on to express the definition of Is. I heard very little if anything, in relation to my definition of is, which in the Merriam-Webster dictionary, is literally defined as from different individuals of the same species.
My opponent argued from the perspective that, it is not possible for two different things, to be the same thing. Clearly, the word is, says that the criteria is that they simply need to be of the same species, weather or not they are different things. My definition of is, is stright from the dictionary, weather or not the writers of the creeds, had that definition in mind when making their argument.
What I learned in relationship to debating, is to define
myself for myself. Do not allow others to define you for you. Do not allow
the creeds to define you.
The bible does not take on the obligation to define the words that it
uses. It uses words that are already defined.
The word species was defined as a group of organisms framed by the resources they depend on. God is self-sufficient and does not have to depend on anyone or anything, and Jesus is the same kind of thing, the same species, the same essence as his father who begotton him is. He is God's only begotton son. Then I went on to define the word begotton, as Jesus is necessarily the same kind of thing as his father. I went on to define God as the name of the species, not the personal name of the being. Finally, I pointed to the fact that Jesus, the son, was clearly defined by the scripture itself, as the everlasting father.
My critic made no attempt to address any of these definitions. Thus, severely hampering this rebuttal. I would conclude that that alone would result in a major failure on his part. Nevertheless, I will attempt to repeat and re-but all of the things that he did mention.
Colossians 1:14-18.
-In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of
sins:
-Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
-For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are
in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions,
or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for
him:
-And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
-And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the
firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.
I have already made it clear that, Is, can refer to different, entities, of the same, species.
Hebrews 1:3 says Jesus is the express image of the Father.
The Amplified Bible translates this verse as “[Now] He is the exact
likeness of the unseen God. The visible representation of the invisible;
He is the Firstborn of all creation.”
IMAGE.
It was not in the physical realm that Jesus was the image of God. Jesus’
physical body was plain. Isaiah said that there was no beauty in Jesus
that we should desire Him (Isaiah 53:2). Paul said in Philippians 2:7
that Jesus’ physical body was “made in the likeness of men.”
Jesus totally represented the Father in actions, nature, and character.
Jesus said, “He that hath seen me hath seen the Father” (John
14:9). Jesus gave us an exact image of the Father’s heart, (Hebrews
1:3).
We are predestined “to be conformed to the image of his Son”. As surely “as we have borne the image of the earthly, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly”, (1 Corinthians 15:49), and we don’t have to wait for eternity for this to happen. As we now behold the glory of the Lord, we “are changed into the same image from glory to glory”, (2 Corinthians 3:18).
God the Father is invisible to our natural senses, but He has and will be seen.
FIRSTBORN.
Firstborn means preeminence, not necessarily the first one out of the
woumb.
DAVID AS GOD'S FIRSTBORN.
Psalm 89:20, and 27 NASB.
-I have found David My servant; With My holy oil I have anointed him,
-I also shall make him My firstborn, The highest of the kings of the earth.
King David is a perfect example of this phenomenon, the seventh and last in a series of sons, but was chosen by God to receive the effective birthright, and become the progenitor of Christ, despite being the youngest. David, was the favoured son and had the most appropriate character, to be king according to God, and thus was called the "firstborn".
There are numerous examples where this normal course of the birthright privilege was changed:
EPHRAIM WAS GOD'S FIRSTBORN.
Jeremiah 31:9.
I am Israel's father, and Ephraim is my firstborn son.
1 Chronicals 5:1.
the inheritance of a double portion of land that should have gone to Reuben
went to Joseph's sons, Ephraim and Manassehm, although Ephraim was Joseph's
2nd born child.
ISRAEL IS GOD'S FIRSTBORN.
Exodus 4:22.
And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, Thus saith the LORD, Israel is my son,
even my firstborn:
Israel is called God's firstborn son. However, Jacob was not firstborn nor was the nation of Israel the first nation nor the greatest. I was the recipient of God's favours.
Esau sold his birthright to Jacob and Jacob truly inherited all the benefits of being the firstborn.
The next verse to rebut is, Collosians 1:18. Jesus is called the firstborn of the dead. Jesus was not the first person resurrected, but Jesus was easily the most important person resurrected.
In Collosians 1:15, Jesus is described as the firstborn of all creation, meaning the most important person.
Paul referring to Jesus as “the firstborn of every creature” was not intended to make Jesus inferior to God in any respect. Indeed, Colossians 1:16-17 disputes that interpretation. Jesus was before every other creature, and He created all things. Calling Jesus the firstborn of every creature is stressing His preeminence. The compound word firstborn, neither implies that he was, or was not born. See terms like white-collar. There are other rules for the meaning of compound words. The term does not mean being born or not born, never mind the order. Jesus actually existed before he was born. The firstborn child always received the greater blessing and inheritance. He had the preeminence. That is what the Apostle Paul was saying about Jesus.
Some people have tried to use this term “firstborn” to argue that Jesus was a created being and not the Creator. That is not true. “Firstborn” is used here in the sense of first in importance. This is verified by the context of this very verse, where Paul said Jesus was to have the preeminence in all things.
Jesus “is before all things, and by him all things
consist”.
In bible days, the Jews understood the term “firstborn” to
refer to position and rank. In other words, the firstborn (according to
Jewish custom), was his father’s heir. All that his father possessed
was his. This term signifies that the Son is the “default heir,
of all things” (Hebrews 1:2). Taken in context, this passage clearly
reveals that all things in heaven and earth were created by the Son and
for the Son (Colossians 1:16-17). By virtue of this fact, the Son stands
as Ruler, Creator, and Firstborn.
This English word “firstborn” was translated from the Greek word “PROTOTOKOS.” According to Strong’s Concordance, this is a compound Greek word comprised of “PROTOS,” which means “foremost (in time, place, order or importance),” and “TIKTO,” which means “to produce (from seed...).” Therefore, this word “firstborn” could refer to either first in order or importance. Both of these applications are true of Jesus.
Although others were raised from the dead before Jesus, Jesus was the first one to be raised from the dead never to die again. Jesus was also the firstborn in the sense of importance, since His resurrection made all other resurrections possible.
In context, Paul was stressing that we believers are predestined to be just like Jesus, then he drew from scripture that prophesied Jesus being the firstborn (Psalms 89:27). Therefore, the point being made is the extent that we will be conformed to the image of Jesus. There are other children who will become just like Jesus, and it is in this sense that “firstborn” is used here.
---
Colossians 1:18.
And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the
firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.
Jesus is Lord of creation and Lord of the church. He
is supreme over everyone and everything.
Other people were raised from the dead before Jesus rose from the dead.
But all of those people died again. Jesus rose never to die. Therefore,
He is the firstborn from (or has the preeminence among) the dead.
This is another passage that those who do not believe in the deity of Christ try to use to “dethrone” Christ. This is not speaking of Jesus as having a beginning like other creatures; this is speaking of Christ’s resurrection. He was the beginning of a whole new species of beings that had never existed before. These are the new creations that Paul spoke of in 2 Corinthians 5:17. Jesus Christ was the first person ever begotten from the dead and raised in newness of life (Romans 6:4,).
It is also correct to speak of Jesus as “the beginning” if we are defining “beginning” as “a source or an origin”, (American Heritage Dictionary). This is the way “beginning” is used in a number of scriptures referring to Jesus.
Jesus was not the first person to be raised from the dead. Elijah raised the widow’s son from the dead. Elisha raised the Shunammite woman’s son from the dead. One man came back to life when his body was tossed in the tomb of Elisha and touched Elisha’s dead bones (2 Kings 13:21). Jesus raised three people from the dead (Luke 7:15, Matthew 9:25, and John 11:44) prior to His own resurrection.
However, no one had been resurrected as Jesus was. Jesus didn’t just come back to life to have to die again; He was resurrected with a spiritual body that can never die (Romans 6:9). Jesus was also the first “born-again” person. He not only had a glorified body, but He also had a spirit that had been raised in newness of life (Romans 6:4).
The word “preeminence” was translated from the Greek word “PROTEUO,” and this Greek word means “to be first (in rank or influence)” (Strong’s Concordance). The American Heritage Dictionary defines “preeminent” as “superior to...all others; outstanding.” This was what Paul was stressing–Jesus is Lord of all.
===
The next verse to rebut, is Revelation 3:14.
And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things
saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation
of God;
Some claim that if Jesus is the "beginning" of the creation of God, that must mean that He is part of that creation. They believe that this verse upholds the view that Jesus is the first creation.
Beginning
The Greek word translated "beginning" here is the word "arche."
Arche certainly can mean "beginning" as in "the first in
series,! which is how some understand it here. But it can also mean "beginning"
in the sense of the "origin" or "source" of a thing,..
or can carry the sense of "the one with whom a process begins."...
It even can mean "ruler" or "authority,".... from
which we get words like "archbishop", "archangel",
or "arch enemy." In Greek philosophy, the "arche"
was the eternal absolute from which all created things are derived,.....
from which we get words like "archetype". So it is not enough
merely to note that Jesus is the "beginning of the creation of God."
We have to ask in what sense is Jesus the "arche" of creation?
How is He using the word here?
Jesus is addressing the church at Laodicea. He is not merely stating random facts about Himself but is reinforcing the authority of His words. The term "Amen" is a strong affirmation of the truthfulness of a statement. When Jesus calls Himself "the amen," He is saying that His own identity is the ultimate affirmation of truth. Who He is proves the truthfulness of what He says. This is reinforced by the second title He gives Himself here, "the faithful and true witness." The context is emphasizing Jesus' authority and identity as the arbiter of truth. When He gives the third title, that He is the "arche" of creation, it seems highly unlikely that the sense intended here is merely "God made me before He made you. I come first on a timeline." If Jesus is the source of everything that is or the ruler of everything that is, that furthers His point. Stating that He is one of the things that God created and comes first in chronological order doesn't do anything to establish His authority or the truthfulness of His testimony. The statement would simply be out of place. Translators have long realized this.
Jesus was not created. He was begotton. He was not the only thing created directly by God. The angels were created directly by God. Adam was the only man created directly by God.
---
The next scripture to rebut is, John 14:28.
The father is greater than I.
Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you.
If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father:
for my Father is greater than I.
Philippians 2:5-8 says.
-Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:
-Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with
God:
-But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant,
and was made in the likeness of men:
-And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient
unto death, even the death of the cross.
At that point in time, when Jesus said this, the father was definitely greater than Jesus. Nevertheless, this was humility. When he was restored he was clearly justified in thinking that he was equal back then.
---
The next scripture to rebut is, John 15:10.
If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have
kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love.
Jesus always kept his father's commandments. The fact that he had to keep his fathers commandments in order to be the same species as God himself, or begotton and not created baffles me. The issue is because Jesus is God, he has all the attributes of God, including divinity, from everlasting to everlasting, selfseficient and etc. That is because they are the same species, whether or not they are the same entity.
---
The next scripture to rebut is, Collosians 15:20.
But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them
that slept.
Jesus had a spicific function. Jesus was responsible to teach us how to be like him, to put all enemies under his feet. Once that function is completed, then his function is over. Therefore, he surrenders the kingdom to his father so that the father takes on the responsibility for us. He is actually out of a job, unless he is given another assignment.
---
The next scripture to rebut is, 1 Corinthians 8:5-6.
For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth,
(as there be gods many, and lords many,)
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.
1 God and 1 Lord does not mean they are necessarily seperate or different, because that 1 God is your Lord, and that 1 lord is your God. As Thomas said in John 20:28, my Lord and my God. Here Jesus was clearly Thomas's Lord and his God, and not just a god. If anybody called any angel his God, the angel had a responsibility to rebuke him. Not only did Jesus not rebuke Thomas but he complemented him, saying: Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed, (that I am your God): blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed, (that I am their God).
Furthermore, the phrase, (as there be gods many, and lords many), is in parenthesis. This tells the reader the the text actually was not part of the original text. It was added by the commentator. Therefore, what is left is:
For though there be that are called gods, whether in
heaven or in earth,
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.
This tells me that many of these socalled gods, are false gods or a joke of a god. This is my interpretation of the opponent's own proof text.
----
The next scripture to rebut is, John 5:18-19.
Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had
broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself
equal with God.
Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.
My opponent's issue was that nobody has to teach God anything. He just knows everything intuitively. Really! God and Jesus were together in eternity for what might be the equivilent of 10 thousand years. Then they were both in heven together for another 2,000 years. Is there anything else that he has to learn relative to this world. Phillippians 2:7 says that Jesus emptied himself before becoming a man.
However, taken in context, it is obvious that Jesus was stating His complete unity with the Father (John 10:30). We can do nothing of ourselves (John 15:5) because we are powerless. That was not the case with Jesus. He could do nothing of Himself because of His complete unity with the Father. One part of the Godhead does not operate independently of the others.
----
The next scripture to rebut is, 1 Corinthians 11:3.
But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the
head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.
This is structure. Nevertheless, they each have their specific function. Structure is necessary. Yet, as the woman is not inferior to the man Christ is not inferior to God. Jesus said in Philippians 2:6, Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
This concludes my rebuttal of the text of my oponent.