• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The Gospel of John Claims that Jesus is God

PearlSeeker

Well-Known Member
Hi Pearlseeker ;

I didn't want to interrupt your discussion but to make a very specific point regarding greek. The greek words you quoted, "εν αρχη" do NOT mean "the first principle or the creative principle".

These two greek words simply mean "In [the] beginning..." (the article lacks, but is implied)

These two words alone, reference time, they do not, without other words to provide context, refer "to any creative principle." One MUST refer to other words or phrases to give more meaning than this to these two greek words.

Clear
ειειτωσετζω
Hi Clear!

Thank you for such a kind response and for Clear-ing things. From the context I thought verses in Jn 1 were about philosophical arche because It's about Logos - "all things were made through Him."
 

PearlSeeker

Well-Known Member
EDIT: After doing some follow up research, you maybe correct that monogenes is better translated as "unique" or "only" (no begotten). This conflicts with how the Church Fathers interpreted it in councils and creeds, but it wouldn't be the first time they got something wrong.

However, we can always visit other verses that assert he is begotten, so it is of little consequence:

Psalm 2:7“I will surely tell of the decree of the Lord: He said to Me, ‘You are My Son, Today I have begotten You.

Hebrews 1:5 For to which of the angels did He ever say, “You are My Son, Today I have begotten You”? And again, “I will be a Father to Him And He shall be a Son to Me”?​
Son of God in OT was God's human representative as a king. The attribute of pre-existency and heavenly origin was added after Jesus claimed so. That's why he was accused of blasphemy. This was foreign to then beliefs.
 
Last edited:

Clear

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Hi @PearlSeeker;

I hope my post did not come across as condescending, that was not my intent. It was simply to clarify the meaning of the Greek. We seem to have large areas of agreement regarding the early Christian tradition that Jesus was, in concert with the Fathers plan, the creator of material worlds that we inhabit.

For example, though New Testament Hebrews makes the innocuous statement that “God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds.” (kjv Heb 1:1-2) , I think the concept underlying the words the Son "made the worlds" is often overlooked. However this tradition that the Son (or the son of man, or the word, or the logos, etc) was the creator of the words (as directed by his Father to do so) is not common knowledge. However, the early Judeo-Christian literature describes the early Christian tradition in more detail.

While N.T. Hebrews traditionally referred to the time before creation when he was “…made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.” Vs 4, the prophet enoch spoke of this same tradition and time period, when, before creation, “ At that hour, that Son of Man was given a name, in the presence of the Lord of the Spirits, the head of days." This time period was “… even before the creation of the sun and the moon, before the creation of the stars, he was given a name in the presence of the Lord of the Spirits.” And he became the Chosen One... (c.f.1st Enoch 48:1-7)

The tradition of the Son of Man becoming chosen by God as the savior (i.e. the lamb slain before the foundation of the world” and his special servant) is woven into early textual histories just as his role as “the Word of God” (i.e. the “Logos”).

Thus many of the early Hellenistic synagogal prayers reflect God the Father, having create the world through Jesus (referred to as “the logos” by John 1:1).

For example, one post Eucharistic prayer reads : #1 vs 2 We give thanks to you, O God and Father of Jesus our Savior...on behalf of the knowledge and faith and love and immortality which you gave to us through Jesus your Son. 4 O Master Almighty, the God of the universe, you created the world and what is in it through him, and you planted deeply in our souls a law; and you prepared for men the things (necessary) for communion; " (aposCon 7.26. 1-3)

Thus 1 Clement also taught the early Christian saints as he refers to God the Father as “ ... the creator of the universe...through his beloved servant Jesus Christ, “…through whom he called us from darkness to light, from ignorance to the knowledge of the glory of his name.

Clement still realized that the Father is the “primal source” since all is done by direction of and in in accordance with the Fathers plan. The Father commands, and the Word or Logos, Jesus, obeys. 1 Clement 59:2-3;

This is the same context of another Hellenistic Synagogal prayer which Blesses God, the “King of the ages, who through Christ made everything, and through him in the beginning ordered that which was unprepared; who separated waters from waters with a firmament, and put a lively spirit in these; 3 who settled the earth (firmly), and stretched out heaven, and ordered the exact arrangement of each one of the creatures..... Vs 18 And the goal of the creative work – the rational living creature, the world citizen – having given order by your Wisdom, you created, saying, “let us make man according to our image and likeness” (aposCon 7.34.1-8) ;

Barnabas
speaks of this same close relationship where the Father includes the Son in his plan from this early stage of creation. “For the Scripture speaks about us when he says to the Son: “Let us make man according to our image and likeness, and let them rule over the beasts of the earth and the birds of the air and the fish of the sea.” And when he saw that our creation was good, the Lord said: “Increase ad multiply and fill the earth.” These things he said to the Son" The Epistle of Barnabas 6:12;

And, again he refers to the Lord Jesus as “Lord of the Whole world” says “And furthermore, my brothers: if the Lord submitted to suffer for our souls, even though he is Lord of the whole world, to whom God said at the foundation of the world, “Let us make man according to our image and likeness, how is it, then, that he submitted to suffer at the hands of men.?The Epistle of Barnabas 5:5

The early tradition which has Jesus / the word/logos as the main one to whom God the Father was speaking permeates multiple synagogal prayers. When God said Let us make man according to our image and likeness

Even at this early stage of creation, the traditions indicate that the Savior was already mediating creation. Thus yet another Hellenistic Synagogal prayer reads : #4 vs 2 “O Creator, Savior, rich One in favors, Long-sufferer, and supplier of mercy, who do not withdraw from the salvation of your creatures!” as the prayer shifts to honoring the father (vs38) the prayer reads : “ For you are the Father of wisdom, the Creator, as cause, of the creative workmanship through a Mediator...41 the God and Father of the Christ,... (aposCon 7.35.1-10);

As yet another example, Hellenistic Synagogal prayer #5 starts out recognizing this same relationship, saying : O Lord, Almighty One, you created the cosmos through Christ, and marked out a Sabbath day for a remembrance of this; 2 because on it you rested from the works (of creation), in order to give attention to your own laws. “ (aposCon 7.36.1-7);

Such references that were so ingrained in early Christian prayers and texts were incredibly influential and had profound popularity in early Christianity. For example, the very text that Columbus used as a guide to how long his journey across the ocean would take, also references this same relationship between the Lord God and his “word” or his “logos”. It reads :
O Lord, you spoke at the beginning of creation, and said on the first day, ‘Let heaven and earth be made,’ and your word (i.e. the logos - Jesus) accomplished the work. ...”Again, on the second day you created the spirit of the firmament, and commanded him to divide and separate the waters,...”On the third day you commanded the waters to be gathered together in the seventh part of the earth; six parts you dried up and kept so that some of them might be planted and cultivated and be of service before you. For your word went forth, and at once the work was done.” the Fourth Book of Ezra 6:38-44;

There is the Son of man and there is the son of the Son of man. The Lord is the Son of man, and the son of the Son of man is he who is created through the Son of man. The Son of man received from God the capacity to create. He also has the ability to beget.” The gospel of Phillip;

This early and clear tradition was described in multiple early texts, thus the jewish haggadah relates Adam was created by God and “the word” created the rest : “The superiority of man to the other creatures is apparent in the very manner of his creation, altogether different from theirs. He is the only one who was created by the hand of God. The rest sprang from the Word of God.” The Haggadah (Man and the world)

Still, regardless of any involved in actual creation, the plan remained the Fathers plan. It was according to his design and his will. Thus it was said that ““Logos followed Will for through the logos, Christ created all things. The Secret Book of John (of Sophia);

As the work of the farmer is the plough and the helmsman the guidance of the ship so my work is a song to the Lord ....He created and rested. Created things follow a pattern. They do not know rest. ....And nothing exists without the Lord. He was before anything was, and our worlds were made by his word, his thought and his heart. THE ODES OF SOLOMON ODE 16;

In the Gospel of Bartholomew, Mary also glorified God the Father as a primal creator “… exceeding great and all wise, king of the ages, indescribable, ineffable, .who created the breadths of the heavens by your word and arranged the vault of heaven in harmony, who gave form to disorderly matter and brought together that which was separated....” Later, speaking of the logos/word of the Father, she refers to his descent through the seven heavens and explains the context of creation, saying :. The seven heavens could scarcely contain you, but you were pleased to be contained in me, without causing me pain, you who are the perfect Word of the Father, through whom everything was created. The Gospel of Bartholomew ch two


At any rate Pearlseeker, the early textual traditions from the earliest days before the “three is one” trinity doctrine developed in the later evolutions of doctrine, clearly describe the Plan for mans' salvation originated with the father and, once he choses a savior and mediator, then that mediator (Jesus, logos, the word, the arm of the Lord, etc...) is involved very closely with the father as his servant and "son", to the point of taking on the role of Creator of much of creation.


In any case, I hope your spiritual journey is good.


Clear
ειειφινεειω
 
Last edited:

Hockeycowboy

Witness for Jehovah
Premium Member
John does Not teach Jesus is ' before ' the beginning of creation.
Psalms 90:2 teaches only God was ' before ' the beginning.
So, true, Jesus was ' in ' the beginning, but Jesus was Not ' before ' the beginning as his God was.
This is why John could write at Revelation 3:14 that pre-human Jesus was the beginning of the creation by God.

God sends forth His spirit (energy) according to Psalms 104:30.
So, God supplied His abundant dynamic energy ( Power and Strength ) to create the visible world - Isaiah 40:26
Keep in mind, John 1:1 does not say "In the beginning"...it says "In beginning".
 

Hockeycowboy

Witness for Jehovah
Premium Member
Also, I'm not a JW. I've never said or insinuated that God engaged in physical intercourse (God doesn't have a physical body).

These two sentences aren't related. JW's do not believe such nonsense!

You didn't mean to imply that, did you?
 

Clear

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Keep in mind, John 1:1 does not say "In the beginning"...it says "In beginning".

Hi @Hockeycowboy : I just wanted to offer a correction to your comment on John 1:1. Since the Greek "Αρχη" ("beginning") in John 1:1 is a noun. It requires either a direct or indirect article and thus it must be translated as either "A beginning" or "THE beginning" in english (as opposed to a verb "beginning" which does not require "a" or "an"). Either the direct or indirect is often simply implied in the greek and that is why you do not see it in John 1:1 in this specific instance.

I hope your spiritual journey is good Hockycowboy.

Clear
ειειφυτζδρω
 
Last edited:

Oeste

Well-Known Member
John does Not teach Jesus is ' before ' the beginning of creation.

Of course he does. "In the beginning was the Word..."

So “In the beginning” the Word was already there.

Psalms 90:2 teaches only God was ' before ' the beginning.

Yes! Jesus “was”, which tells us Jesus is God.

So, true, Jesus was ' in ' the beginning, but Jesus was Not ' before ' the beginning as his God was.

The assertion is nonsensical. If Jesus was “in” the beginning, then the beginning was there long before Jesus “was”.

How can you have a created Jesus "in" a "beginning" that's already begun, when it's Jesus that creates the beginning?

It simply doesn't make any sense.

This is why John could write at Revelation 3:14 that pre-human Jesus was the beginning of the creation by God.

“Beginning” (arche) here simply means “source” or “origin” and not “first in a series of created things”. So Jesus is the source of creation but is not created himself.
 

Oeste

Well-Known Member
EDIT: After doing some follow up research, you maybe correct that monogenes is better translated as "unique" or "only" (no begotten). This conflicts with how the Church Fathers interpreted it in councils and creeds, but it wouldn't be the first time they got something wrong.

Only the cults claim to get everything right.

However, we can always visit other verses that assert he is begotten, so it is of little consequence:

Psalm 2:7“I will surely tell of the decree of the Lord: He said to Me, ‘You are My Son, Today I have begotten You.

Hebrews 1:5 For to which of the angels did He ever say, “You are My Son, Today I have begotten You”? And again, “I will be a Father to Him And He shall be a Son to Me”?

I’m afraid this is of huge consequence because you run into the same problem as @URAVIP2ME and the Witnesses. If Jesus is created, then these verses show he was created after time, because “Today” is already there.

Jesus is the creator of all things. There is nothing created that wasn’t created by Jesus. Unfortunately for the “created Jesus” folk this includes space and time.

Prior to the act of creation there was only God. No space, no time, no nothing....just God. Once God creates Jesus it can't be stated Jesus "created all things" unless Jesus created himself.
 

Oeste

Well-Known Member
God isn't an angel, and Hebrews 1 completely undermines the idea that Christ is/was an angel.

Excellent @iam1me! This is sound, deductive exegesis and I couldn’t agree with you more. I’m glad to see we have some common ground.

You’re a lot closer to the Witnesses in your Christology so this may give them something to ponder.

You couldn't be more off the mark. Moses was not God to Pharaoh in the same manner as the Egyptian Gods.

You’ve totally missed the point. Only Yahweh is God, so Moses is no more God to Pharaoh than Ra is God to Pharaoh. Ra is called a God, but Ra is not a God any more than Moses was ever a God. The fact is, you can call anything or anyone a God, but that doesn’t make the thing called a God.


In the first place because when God says that he makes Moses God to Pharaoh, it is by virtue of agency - in the same manner as the angels who spoke for God.

No one is questioning agency @iam1me. A righteous angel can speak for God just as Moses did, but it doesn’t make either a God. Agency is not equivalency. There’s was, is and will always be a one God limit. Any other God is a false God.

In the second place, Pharaoh never once worships Moses or addresses him as a god.

So when God stated he would make Moses a God to Pharaoh, He failed?

Moses was made God to Pharaoh the same way Ra was made God to Pharaoh. Neither is or was a God.

According to Christ, all to whom the Word of God has come are gods in the same sense as with Moses & the Angels being called God. You must be one who is doing God's will.

Doing God’s will makes you godly Iam1me, it does not make you a God.

The Church Fathers went much further with this idea, if you ever get around to reading their works. They would assert things like: through the Holy Spirit, we too participate in the divine nature/substance of God.

Of course.:
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. Galatians 5:22-23
 

moorea944

Well-Known Member
Of course he does. "In the beginning was the Word..."

So “In the beginning” the Word was already there.



Yes! Jesus “was”, which tells us Jesus is God.



The assertion is nonsensical. If Jesus was “in” the beginning, then the beginning was there long before Jesus “was”.

How can you have a created Jesus "in" a "beginning" that's already begun, when it's Jesus that creates the beginning?

It simply doesn't make any sense.



“Beginning” (arche) here simply means “source” or “origin” and not “first in a series of created things”. So Jesus is the source of creation but is not created himself.


Of course he does. "In the beginning was the Word..."
So “In the beginning” the Word was already there.


Christ was born, he did not pre-exist. The "Word" in John one is not talking about Jesus yet, it is talking about the word God. The LOGOS, God's plan and purpose, which Jesus is a part of. The translators put the capital W in that word. Jesus is in verse 14.

Yes! Jesus “was”, which tells us Jesus is God.

No, Psalms 90 which you were looking at has nothing to do with Jesus. It is a pray from Moses talking about God. Moses was not told of a coming Messiah that was already here. Look at Deut 18.

The assertion is nonsensical. If Jesus was “in” the beginning, then the beginning was there long before Jesus “was”.
How can you have a created Jesus "in" a "beginning" that's already begun, when it's Jesus that creates the beginning?
It simply doesn't make any sense.


Jesus was in the beginning only in God's plan and purpose. He was in God's mind, just like us. In scripture it says that God knew us before we were born. Heb 1, tells us that God spoke through the prophets in past times, then in the last days he spoke through his son. If Jesus pre-existed, those verses would be different, infact, Genesis would be written differently too. But we know that Jesus didnt pre-exist, he was born. The son of God.
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
EDIT: After doing some follow up research, you maybe correct that monogenes is better translated as "unique" or "only" (no begotten). This conflicts with how the Church Fathers interpreted it in councils and creeds, but it wouldn't be the first time they got something wrong.
However, we can always visit other verses that assert he is begotten, so it is of little consequence:
Psalm 2:7“I will surely tell of the decree of the Lord: He said to Me, ‘You are My Son, Today I have begotten You.
Hebrews 1:5 For to which of the angels did He ever say, “You are My Son, Today I have begotten You”? And again, “I will be a Father to Him And He shall be a Son to Me”?​
Also, I'm not a JW. I've never said or insinuated that God engaged in physical intercourse (God doesn't have a physical body). Don't go around accusing people of such obviously false doctrines.

Just to be clear, I find Jehovah's Witnesses do Not believe God engaged in any intercourse.
- www.jw.org and www.jwbroadcasting
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
Of course he does. "In the beginning was the Word..."
So “In the beginning” the Word was already there.

Christ was born, he did not pre-exist. The "Word" in John one is not talking about Jesus yet, it is talking about the word God. The LOGOS, God's plan and purpose, which Jesus is a part of. The translators put the capital W in that word. Jesus is in verse 14.
Yes! Jesus “was”, which tells us Jesus is God.
No, Psalms 90 which you were looking at has nothing to do with Jesus. It is a pray from Moses talking about God. Moses was not told of a coming Messiah that was already here. Look at Deut 18.
The assertion is nonsensical. If Jesus was “in” the beginning, then the beginning was there long before Jesus “was”.
How can you have a created Jesus "in" a "beginning" that's already begun, when it's Jesus that creates the beginning?
It simply doesn't make any sense.

Jesus was in the beginning only in God's plan and purpose. He was in God's mind, just like us. In scripture it says that God knew us before we were born. Heb 1, tells us that God spoke through the prophets in past times, then in the last days he spoke through his son. If Jesus pre-existed, those verses would be different, infact, Genesis would be written differently too. But we know that Jesus didnt pre-exist, he was born. The son of God.

I find Jesus was ' first born ' of all creation according to Colossians 1:15. - (1 Corinthians 8:6)
God was never born but from everlasting as per Psalms 90:2
Thus only God was ' before ' the beginning.
So, pre-human Jesus was Not 'before' the beginning as his God was 'before' the beginning.
John penned about Jesus at Revelation 1:5; Revelation 3:14 B that pre-human Jesus was in the beginning.
John never wrote that Jesus was before the beginning.
Even the resurrected ascended-to-heaven Jesus still thinks he has a God over him - Revelation 3:12; 3:21
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
...........The attribute of pre-existency and heavenly origin was added after Jesus claimed so. That's why he was accused of blasphemy. This was foreign to then beliefs.

I find according to Jesus reply at John 10:36 that Jesus was accused of blasphemy for saying he is the Son of God.
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
Of course he does. "In the beginning was the Word..."
So “In the beginning” the Word was already there.
Yes! Jesus “was”, which tells us Jesus is God.
The assertion is nonsensical. If Jesus was “in” the beginning, then the beginning was there long before Jesus “was”.
How can you have a created Jesus "in" a "beginning" that's already begun, when it's Jesus that creates the beginning
It simply doesn't make any sense.
“Beginning” (arche) here simply means “source” or “origin” and not “first in a series of created things”. So Jesus is the source of creation but is not created himself.

I find it does Not say 'before' the beginning was the Word.
I do find at Psalms 90:2 that God was before the beginning.
Thus Jesus was Not before the beginning as his God was before the beginning.
This is why Colossians 1:15 lets us know Jesus is ' first born '......
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
...................................
Jesus is the creator of all things. There is nothing created that wasn’t created by Jesus. Unfortunately for the “created Jesus” folk this includes space and time.

I find the Bible writers are the ' created-Jesus ' folks. - Colossians 1:15
God did Not send Himself to Earth but He sent the created pre-human Jesus to Earth.
So, through God creating the pre-human Jesus is why Revelation 4:11 gives all the credit to God as Creator.
- Revelation 3:14 B
 

moorea944

Well-Known Member
I find Jesus was ' first born ' of all creation according to Colossians 1:15. - (1 Corinthians 8:6)
God was never born but from everlasting as per Psalms 90:2
Thus only God was ' before ' the beginning.
So, pre-human Jesus was Not 'before' the beginning as his God was 'before' the beginning.
John penned about Jesus at Revelation 1:5; Revelation 3:14 B that pre-human Jesus was in the beginning.
John never wrote that Jesus was before the beginning.
Even the resurrected ascended-to-heaven Jesus still thinks he has a God over him - Revelation 3:12; 3:21


I find Jesus was ' first born ' of all creation according to Colossians 1:15. - (1 Corinthians 8:6)
Yes, that's correct. But which creation. Paul says there's two.......... Adam was the first. Jesus was the second. A new covenant, a new creation. Etc.....

God was never born but from everlasting as per Psalms 90:2
Yes, that's also correct. I think that's what I was saying......

So, pre-human Jesus was Not 'before' the beginning as his God was 'before' the beginning.
Pre-human Jesus????? lol Wow, when did that come into play......

John penned about Jesus at Revelation 1:5; Revelation 3:14 B that pre-human Jesus was in the beginning.
Rev 1v5 has nothing to do with pre-existing. Same with 3v14. And what does this term "pre-human" mean. Is there a verse that says that Jesus is a pre-human being? If not, then why bring in words that arent in the bible.

John never wrote that Jesus was before the beginning.
But I thought that is what you were implying.........

Even the resurrected ascended-to-heaven Jesus still thinks he has a God over him - Revelation 3:12; 3:21
Yes. That's exactly what I believe in too. Not really sure what your saying here...... You keep on flipping.
 

iam1me

Active Member
Son of God in OT was God's human representative as a king. The attribute of pre-existency and heavenly origin was added after Jesus claimed so. That's why he was accused of blasphemy. This was foreign to then beliefs.

Nothing in scripture claims that Jesus is uncreated (to the contrary, it asserts he is begotten). There are hints at the idea of pre-existing (firstborn of creation), but that's not the same thing.

Also, Jesus was accused of blasphemy because the Jews were without understanding. They accused him of claiming to be God, while he merely asserted to be God's Son - and he further defended himself by pointing out that the scriptures call them all gods. Indeed, not once in scripture does Jesus claim to be God - but always God's Son.
 

iam1me

Active Member
Only the cults claim to get everything right.

That's what the councils were about - asserting the one truth of the Church, despite there historically being many competing theological positions. And they used force to make people conform to the council doctrines and policies. The Trinity was just the biggest of many issues that Constantine pushed the Church into standardizing - because he thought any difference of opinion in the church was a horrible thing.

I’m afraid this is of huge consequence because you run into the same problem as @URAVIP2ME and the Witnesses. If Jesus is created, then these verses show he was created after time, because “Today” is already there.

Not a problem at all. Time isn't a thing that it needs to be created. Even if, for the sake of argument, I concurred that Jesus is God and uncreated, time would still not be something that needs to be created. Rather, time is nothing more than the phenomenon of change. Unless we were to make God out to be static, time must be part of God such that he can think and act, and respond to his creation.

Some erroneously taking the idea that God is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow too far - to the point of denying the obvious changes that God does go through in scripture. Indeed, God is constantly adapting to man's (mis)deeds. It is not that God does not change in any way imaginable, it is that God's core characteristics and spirit do not change. God is himself a temporal being who experiences events as they unfold.

Jesus is the creator of all things. There is nothing created that wasn’t created by Jesus. Unfortunately for the “created Jesus” folk this includes space and time.

Everything thing was created through Jesus - this is not the same thing as saying that Jesus himself created everything.

The Church Fathers often interpreted Jesus as the Wisdom Proverbs 8:

Proverbs 8:22-31 “The Lord possessed me at the beginning of His way,
Before His works e]">[e]of old.
23 “From everlasting I was f]">[f]established,
From the beginning, from the earliest times of the earth.
24 “When there were no depths I was g]">[g]brought forth,
When there were no springs abounding with water.
25 “Before the mountains were settled,
Before the hills I was h]">[h]brought forth;
26 While He had not yet made the earth and the i]">[i]fields,
Nor the first dust of the world.
27 “When He established the heavens, I was there,
When He inscribed a circle on the face of the deep,
28 When He made firm the skies above,
When the springs of the deep became j]">[j]fixed,
29 When He set for the sea its boundary
So that the water would not transgress His k]">[k]command,
When He marked out the foundations of the earth;
30 Then I was beside Him, as a master workman;
And I was daily His delight,
l]">[l]Rejoicing always before Him,
31 m]">[m]Rejoicing in the world, His earth,
And having my delight in the sons of men.

Wisdom was established before all else, and through wisdom all was created - but wisdom was not the creator.

Prior to the act of creation there was only God. No space, no time, no nothing....just God. Once God creates Jesus it can't be stated Jesus "created all things" unless Jesus created himself.

The scriptures often have obvious exceptions in them that aren't expounded upon precisely because they are obvious. Paul demonstrates this here:

1 Cor 15:27 For He has put all things in subjection under His feet. But when He says, “All things are put in subjection,” it is evident that He is excepted who put all things in subjection to Him.
No where else in scripture where it talks about all things being put in subjection to Him does it point out the obvious exception of God himself. Paul mentions it in passing, and remarks that "it is evident" - aka obvious.
 

iam1me

Active Member
You’ve totally missed the point. Only Yahweh is God, so Moses is no more God to Pharaoh than Ra is God to Pharaoh. Ra is called a God, but Ra is not a God any more than Moses was ever a God. The fact is, you can call anything or anyone a God, but that doesn’t make the thing called a God.

You've missed the point. God (or the angel speaking as/for God) is asserting that he makes Moses God to Pharaoh. This isn't just calling anyone or anything god because you can, this is coming from God himself. Nor again is anyone asserting that we interpret this literally, as if Moses were literally God. Rather, it is precisely my point that he is called God by God and yet we all know he is not God.

No one is questioning agency @iam1me. A righteous angel can speak for God just as Moses did, but it doesn’t make either a God. Agency is not equivalency. There’s was, is and will always be a one God limit. Any other God is a false God.

When an angel/Moses speaks on God's behalf, that is considered to be God speaking. When an angel/Moses acts on God's behalf, that is considered to be God acting.

It is by this same reasoning that Jesus asserts that if you have seen him, you have seen the Father (though we know he isn't the Father), because he speaks and acts on the Father's behalf - so much so that he says that his words are not spoken by his own initiative.

John 14:7-15 If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also; from now on you know Him, and have seen Him.”

8 Philip *said to Him, “Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us.” 9 Jesus *said to him, “Have I been so long with you, and yet you have not come to know Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; how can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? 10 Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father is in Me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on My own initiative, but the Father abiding in Me does His works. 11 Believe Me that I am in the Father and the Father is in Me; otherwise believe because of the works themselves. 12 Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes in Me, the works that I do, he will do also; and greater works than these he will do; because I go to the Father. 13 Whatever you ask in My name, that will I do, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. 14 If you ask Me anything in My name, I will do it.

15 “If you love Me, you will keep My commandments.

So when God stated he would make Moses a God to Pharaoh, He failed?

Moses was made God to Pharaoh the same way Ra was made God to Pharaoh. Neither is or was a God.

Of course he did not fail, it is your interpretation which has failed.

Doing God’s will makes you godly Iam1me, it does not make you a God.

They aren't my words - take it up with Jesus and his interpretation of Psalms 82.
 
Last edited:
Top