The Gospel of John Claims that Jesus is God

[101G]

GINOLJC, to all.

The Father revealed in the flesh:
The author of John also makes it kind of obvious that Jesus is claiming to be God revealed in the flesh when Jesus says "Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Show us the Father?" This was in reply to Philip asking Jesus to "show us the Father". (John 14:8-9)

So Jesus the Son of God is "The Word of God" and "the Truth". This is how the Son declares the God that no one can see. (John 1:18) He declares Him just by being. Because He is the "Truth" and the "Word made flesh". In other words, Jesus is all of God that can be seen.

Looking at other writings attributed to John we find that in 1 John 3:1-6 that John makes no distinction between the Father and the Son. But speaks of them as One.

First thanks for this reply. secondly you made a good assessment, "Looking at other writings attributed to John we find that in 1 John 3:1-6 that John makes no distinction between the Father and the Son". in natures, NO, lets examine some other writing outside of John and confirm, as wht you said in John.

this understanding of "WITH" in John 1:1 can easly be seen clearly as the same and the one self person. yes the Father is the Son Manifested in flesh, and the way he did it is by "SHARING" himself in flesh, or better known as being the manifested "Offspring" of David line. to understand this concept "WITH" is to read the book of Isaiah.

Isaiah 41:4 "Who hath wrought and done it, calling the generations from the beginning? I the LORD, the first, and with the last; I am he." Notice the LORD is the "FIRST" and the LORD is "WITH" the "LAST" correct. it seems like that there are two separate person, do it not seems that way? lets be sure, remember, it's the "LORD" by himself, who is the "First" and WITH the "Last" lets see if this is true.

Isaiah 48:12 "Hearken unto me, O Jacob and Israel, my called; I am he; I am the first, I also am the last." STOP, that right there just put to rest any two separate persons in the Godhead. the LORD said that he is the First and "ALSO" the Last, the same one person is the "First" and the "Last". but he's the "First" WITH" the "Last".

one need to compare Isaiah 41:4 with Isaiah 48:12, to get the clear understanding of WITH, as the same one person. the same PERSON in Isaiah 41:4 said that he, he, he, a single person designation "I", said that he is the First and with the Last, but in Isaiah 48:12 the same one designated person said that he, "I", the Frist is "ALSO" the Last, meaning the same one PERSON.

now, when one can understand and explain how the ONE TRUE GOD can be with himself and be "also" himself as "ANOTHER" of himself in FLESH & BLOOD, and this being at the same time, then the Godhead is clearly identified. supportive scripture, John 3:13 "And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven." HOLD IT, was not the Son of Man talking to Nicodemus on EARTH and was in heaven at the same time...

well it's very easy to understand. the apostle Paul first give us the clues, and the understanding of how God can be with himself and "also" be himself as ONE at the same time, while in flesh and Blood on Earth, and Spirit in Heaven. it's right there in our bibles.

PICJAG.

 

[Clear]

1) THE THEORY THAT NOTHING BUT GOD EXISTED BEFORE GOD CREATED THIS EARTH / PLANETS AND STARS
@URAVIP2ME interpreted Psalms 90:2 as meaning “…God existed ' before ' the beginning of anything else.” (post #641). @74x12 agreed saying : “…Yes only God was before the beginning….” (post #647)


74X12 said : “ I personally believe God called everything out of the primordial sea which is called the abyss or chaos.” (post 659)

Yes, we can agree that God organized chaotic matter to make organized material things.

While it IS rational to suppose God created organize, material thing out of chaotic, unorganized matter, the theory that only God (i.e. nothing else) existed before God began to create is less rational and less coherent theory. If you meant something else when you said “only God was before the beginning” then you can elaborate.

In early Judeo-Christian doctrine, God was not the only thing in existence before he began to create the Earth, Sun and Stars, etc. Chaotic, unformed matter ALSO existed with God in the beginning. Thus, there were other things in existence with God “before the beginning” of creation in early Christian worldviews (before the adoption of the later theory that God created material things out of “nothing”…..


2) THE ANCIENT DOCTRINE OF CREATION FROM MATTER

Anciently, early Christians UNDERSTOOD a creation out of pre-existing matter. For examples :


Justin Martyr, in his First Apology, says : “We have been taught that He in the beginning did of his goodness, for man's sake, create all things out of unformed matter” (ex amorphou hyles). First Apology, 49.

Philo says : "This cosmos of ours was formed out of all that there is of water, and air and fire, not even the smallest particle being left outside" (De Plantatione 2.6). Further, "when the substance of the universe was without shape and figure God gave it these; when it had no definite character God molded it into definiteness. . ." (De Somniis 2.6.45).

Clement, the colleague of the Apostle Peter taught the world was created from matter. Justin Martyr, in discussing this preexistent primal matter (hyle), he assures us, "we have learned" from our revelations was in the tradition of Clement (c. A.D. 96) who had praised God who "has made manifest (ephaneropoiesas) the everlasting fabric (aenaon sustasin) of the world."

Athenagoras, (despite his stress on the transcendence of God), explains concerning the preexistent Son: "He came forth to be the energizing power of things, which lay like a nature without attributes, and an inactive earth, the grosser particles being mixed up with the lighter."

Creation from matter is implicit throughout Greco-Roman literature of the time of Christianity's inception, and there is no indication in the Christian writings that they held a different view. On the contrary, the famous late nineteenth-century study by Edwin Hatch on the inroads of Greek philosophy into early Christianity describes the tacit but widespread assumption of the coexistence of matter with God. It is often the ancient language idioms (which disorient the non-historian reader) which gives rise to the confusion. For example : In Secrets of Enoch, 25.1-3, God says : "I commanded . . . that visible things should come from invisible . . . ."

Dodd, in “The Bible and the Greeks”, p. 111 explained that to the ancients, such creation meant organization of the elements, as the Codex Brucianus"Creation is organization" (Manuscript No 96) and it explains that first, there is matter. And what is done with the matter it that it is organized into things created. Cosmos MEANS order.

The early Jewish Apocalypes of Abraham hails God as the one who brings order out of confusion, ever preparing and renewing worlds for the righteous. The Berlin (Mandaean) Papyrus says " At the same time, the great thought came to the elements in united wisdom, spirit joining with matter."

Matter can be imbued with spirit, but it will always be undergoing change and processing.

Pistis Sophia says "I (christ) called upon Gabriel from the midst of the worlds (aeons) along with Michael, pursuant to the command of my Father...and I gave to them the task of outpouring of the light and caused them to go down into matter unorganized (chaos) and assist Pistis Sophis"

Even 2 Maccabees, which is often used to SUPPORT ex nihilo, has Syriac recensions as well as some Greek manuscripts describing an organization of [chaotic] matter, which is also the explicit position of Wisdom of Solomon 11:17 where we read of God's hand which "created the world out of unformed matter (ktisasa ton kosmon ex amorphou hyles),"

Even the English translation of "non-existent" cited in 2 Maccabees 7:28 is not absolute nothing, but rather is . . . the metaphysical substance . . . in an uncrystallized state." This relative "nonbeing" referred to a chaotic, shadowy state of matter before the world was made; as we might say in biblical terms, "without form and void."

The Early writings are full of references regarding how chaotic matter is used. The ancients understood that "At a new creation there is a reshuffling of elements " This particular 'restating' of the 'conservation of mass' is from Ben Sirach. But the principle is also found in the Odes of Solomon; it's in the Ginza; it's in the Mandaean Johannesbuch; it's in Berlin Manichaean; it's in the Pistis Sophia, and it's in the oldest and most impressive Coptic writings. As the Talmud points out, this world was made from debris of other creations. It was partly because of the concept of this world being build out of a “trash dump”, the rabbinic Jews prohibited the discussions of and teachings about conditions and things that were going on before the creation of this earth.

The point here is that these were common teachings and the ancients were NOT unaware of matter and how it was used in creation from chaotic matter (rather than the later doctrine of creation from "nothing").


3) THE EFFECTS OF A RETURN TO THIS ANCIENT CHRISTIAN ORTHODOXY

The implications of creation from eternal chaotic matter are profound in how they affects the context; the understanding and the debates that have raged among theists; philosophers and scientists since later Christians abandoned the belief in creation of material things from “matter”. These arguments have lasted for hundreds and hundreds of years.

A re-adoption of this doctrine has profound implication for religious philosophers. For example, The Organization of all Material things from eternally existing “matter” (which has it’s own innate eternal characteristics) rather than organizing them from “nothing” changes the locus of responsibility for evil. IF there was no evil before God created, and there IS evil AFTER God created, then God is also responsible for Evil (if he is omnipotent AND omniscient). The return to creation from matter changes both the debates AND their underlying assumptions and questions in such debates. It improves the logic and rational considerations.

If the universe is created from eternal matter, then there are principles as eternal as God, and these principles possess their own innate characteristics. This is important, since, if God does not create the conditions from which arises evil, then he is not responsible for it. Obviously there are many other philosophical implications that are just as profound.

The restoration of this principle has profound implications for scientists. Creation from matter is a type of creation that they can agree with and which can rationalize (make rational) religious creation with their scientific knowledge. Such a creation makes for better sense and for better science. The Scientific Laws of Thermodynamics which are universally applied in modern science, no longer argues with a conflicting Religious Law of Creation from “Nothing”. Religious truth and Scientific truth will stop fighting and may again dance together by the restoration of this ancient principle.

The restoration of this principle has it’s most profound implications for religion. The implications seem to run deeper and are more profound than the implications for all other disciplines. The principle of Creation from eternally existing matter provides a framework for all subsequent religious considerations. If matter is eternal with it's own basic eternal characteristics, yet God uses that matter and organizes it into spirits which have some inherent characteristics, such as “intelligence” and the ability to “progress”, this forms a context for all other subsequent considerations.

If one knows this, one can predict the subsequent ancient doctrines as to WHAT God is doing with this matter; with the spirits of men; and WHY he is doing it; and HOW he going to accomplish these purposes. It provides logic and understanding of why Moral law is eternally important both outside and inside the atonement of Jesus Christ. The doctrine that God organized and created the Material universe and all other material things from eternally existing “matter” is a simple principle that acts as one of the important beacons that sets men on the path to understanding what God is doing with that matter and why.


Clear
ειφινεσεσεω

 

[74x12]

I think it IS talking about real light. It's a story of creation. Why wouldnt it be talking about that? I think sometimes we try to examine every little piece of scripture into our own terms without looking at the big picture of the chapter or book.

Then you have to explain how there was already matter(there was water) which is comprised of energy which we've known since the atom was split. (Think of the atom bomb) And light is energy. So ... light had to exist before matter or at least simultaneously.

And besides, God himself is light. (1 John 1:5)

I have this understanding of Genesis chapter 1 from John chapter 1. This is what John is talking about. The clue is in the wording. "In the beginning ..."

It's kind of obvious that John is expounding on Genesis chapter 1 once you see it; you'll hardly be able to un-see it. So look into it for yourself. This has been overlooked by many people who are trying to understand John's writing by itself when it should be understood in light of Genesis chapter 1.

In the Hebrew of Genesis 1:1 there is something hidden that's not translated in English Bibles. The "Aleph/Tav" is there. Which are the first and last letters of the original Hebrew Alphabet. This is referencing the Word of God or the "Alpha and Omega". All words are comprised of letters and so this is the "Word" that was in the beginning with God that John speaks about. So this means the Word of God was whole and complete and with God from the beginning before there was anything created.

Jesus calls Himself the "Alpha and Omega" and by this claims to be all the Word of God. We can't ignore the significance of "Let there be Light" (Genesis 1:3) because this is the first recorded spoken words of God in the scriptures. And indeed as it is written "the entrance of thy words gives light" (Psalm 119:130)

The fact that the first recorded saying of God is about Jesus, the Light of the world is highly significant.

 

[101G]

Anciently, early Christians UNDERSTOOD a creation out of pre-existing matter. For examples :

Now saying that you're right or wrong, but consider this on the early church believers. Romans 1:19 & 20 "Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them." 20 "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:"
and also this, Hebrews 11:3 "Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear."

maybe Justin Martyr and the others got it wrong. and if they got that wrong, how much more they got wrong.

PICJAG.

 

[Muffled]

I think it IS talking about real light. It's a story of creation. Why wouldnt it be talking about that? I think sometimes we try to examine every little piece of scripture into our own terms without looking at the big picture of the chapter or book.

As best that I can tell light is particles in a wave. It would make sense then that these particles could be used to bring elements into existence. So it makes sense as a starting point for creation.

 

[Clear]

Hi @101G

1) YOUR BIBLICAL EXAMPLES DO NOT TEACH THAT MATERIAL WORLDS WERE CREATED FROM "NOTHING"

101G said : [I][COLOR=#ff0000]Now saying that you're right or wrong, but consider this on the early church believers. [/COLOR][URL='https://www.religiousforums.com/bible/romans/1:19/'][COLOR=rgb(255, 0, 0)]Romans 1:19[/COLOR][/URL] [COLOR=#ff0000]& 20 "Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them." 20 "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:"
and also this,[/COLOR] [URL='https://www.religiousforums.com/bible/hebrews/11:3/'][COLOR=rgb(255, 0, 0)]Hebrews 11:3[/COLOR][/URL][COLOR=#ff0000] "Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear." (post #664) [/COLOR][/I]

[USER=67473]@101G

Can you clarify what the scriptures you quoted, have to do with either "creation from nothing" or "ONLY God existing before he created this earth?"

For example, you quote romans 1:19-20 where, speaking of Wicked men, the text tells us : “For what is known of God is manifest (φανερον) to them for God manifested (εφανερωσεν) it unto them. Since the creation of the world, his unseen nature (doings/creations), his eternal power and deity has been clearly demonstrated (manifest/perceived) in things that that have been made.

IF the physical creations manifest the nature and works of God, how does this show either

1) Nothing existed in the beginning with God?
OR
2) Material creations were made of nothing?

Also, You quoted Hebrews 11:3 which says : By faith we understand that the word of God created the world in that things we see (Βλεπομενον) were made by things not apparent (φαινομενων) to us. (Πιστει νοουμεν κατηργτισθαι τους αιωνας ρηματι θεου εις το μη εκ φαινομενων το Βλεπομενον γεγονεναι.)

IF the word created the worlds and things we see in this life were made by things we have not seen, how does this demonstrate either :

1) Nothing existed in the beginning with God?
OR
2) Material creations were made of nothing?


2) THE THEORY THAT THE CHRISTIAN BELIEF IN MATERIAL CREATION FROM MATTER IS WRONG

@101G said : maybe Justin Martyr and the others got it wrong. and if they got that wrong, how much more they got wrong.” (post 664)

While anything is possible, you must remember that Clement (whom Justin quotes) was a convert of the apostle Peter and his doctrine came from the Apostle Peter. In fact one of the first things Clement tells us that the apostle Peter taught Clement was that the Christians did not believe there was evil in matter.

Perhaps the reason the Apostle Peter taught Clement this in explaining Christian beliefs was because it was commonly held that a God could not interact with “evil” matter. In fact the later controversy by docetists (who adopted the common view that matter was evil) caused them to tend to deny the reality of Jesus’ humanity. This was one of the early schizmatic forces that threatened to split the church in the time of Ignatius (an apostolic father and bishop who lived in the time of the apostolic age).

While is it possible that the apostle Peter, Clement, Philo, Justin, Athenagoras (etc) and early Christianity as a movement, are mistaken regarding creation from matter (Atheists often tell us that we theists are wrong in many of their beliefs) still the early Judeo-Christian concept that the earth, sun, planets, etc and other material creations were created out of MATTER, and NOT out of NOTHING is still the more rational and logical and historically coherent doctrine in my opinion.

IF you think that creating the earth out of NOTHING is more rational and logical, you are welcome to make the case for it.


3) NON HISTORICAL USE OF SCRIPTURES TO SUPPORT THE THEORY THAT MATERIAL THINGS ARE MADE OF "NOTHING"

Regarding your attempt to use scriptures to support the concept that material things are made of “nothing” (no-thing) or something “immaterial”, you must remember that their use of words is not the same as your use of words. Their religion and beliefs are not the same as your religion and beliefs. For examples :

Your attempt to use the word “invisible” (αορατο = unseen) as a cognate for ‘nothing” is incorrect. An “unseen” substance or material was still a material to the ancients. 2 Enoch tells us “From invisible and visible substances I created man”. 2nd Enoch 30:10-17. While he describes a substance as “invisible” or “unseen”, he is still referring to a material substance.

It is in this same context that Enoch has God explaining that “Before anything existed at all, from the very beginning, whatever exists I created from the non-existent, and from the invisible the visible. ….4 For, before any visible things had come into existence, I, the ONE, moved around in the invisible things, like the sun, from east to west and from west to east. But the sun has rest in himself; yet I did not find rest, because everything was not yet created. And I thought up the idea of establishing a foundation, to create a visible creation. “ 2nd Enoch (version “J”) Ch 24:2-4


Even the words "non-existent" simply represent "a change of form or status". These “things” that are spoken of are material “things” and not “no-thing”. God is describing the chaotic material “things” which he takes and forms from a lower, less organized state of existence into a more organized and higher state of existence. This is simply how ancient records described the process of creation.

Thus, when God commanded that the earth come into existence, the early Judeo-Christian descriptions of their beliefs describe this process as God saying “And I commanded the lowest things; Let one of the invisible things descend visibly!”.... “ 2nd Enoch (version “J”) 25:1

And after God commanded “the lowest things.. “Let one of the invisible things descend visibly...”And I called out a second time into the very lowest things, and I said, “Let one of the invisible things come out visibly, solid’ 2nd Enoch 26

These early descriptions describe the process of the “lowest”, “disorganized things” taking shape and becoming the planets and stars, etc” The text continues “And thus I made solid the heavenly Orbs...And from the rocks I assembled the dry land; and I called the dry land Earth.”.. 2nd Enoch 28:1-2

The fact that it took “time” (6 "days"...) to create reflects the underlying assumption that it took time to organize the chaotic matter (If God created from “nothing” , all could have been done at an instant, however chaotic matter took time to organize).

For example, Jewish Haggadah explains “When God commanded, “Let the waters be gathered together, unto one place, and let the dry land appear,” certain parts refused to obey. They embraced each other all the more closely. In his wrath at the waters, God determined to let the whole of creation resolve itself into Chaos again.” The Haggadah (The Second day) ch 3;

Such texts reveal not only the use of chaotic materials in creation, but it reaveals the assumption that just as it began as chaotic matter that was organized, it could, if he allowed it, return to a chaotic form.

Thus, the early texts that refer to the process of God, having created the earth through his Son, “the word” also refer to Jesus, arranging “disorderly matter” as the process of creation. For example, In Marys’ prayer in the gospel of Bartholemew, she addresses God “...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….” The Gospel of Bartholomew chapt two

Jewish Kabbalah describes this organization of the chaotic matter as happening “… like a fog forming in the unformed...”

I don’t want to over-burden you with examples other than to say the concept of creation from matter that existed in a chaotic form as a source material for the creation of this earth was the Judeo-Christian orthodoxy of this earliest Christian movement and, my point is that the earliest Christian doctrines on this specific doctrine, were, in my estimation, more logical, more rational and more coherent than the later Christian religions that adopted Creation from “nothing”.

In any case, I hope your spiritual journey is wonderfuf @101G

Clear
ειφυειτζτωω[/user]

 

[101G]

@Clear
GINOLJC, to all.
I read your post, and thank you for it. I will try to answer, one point at a time.
Your first point, which may answer everything concering your questions,so lets look at each of your points one step at a time.
POINT#1. you said, “ 1) YOUR BIBLICAL EXAMPLES DO NOT TEACH THAT MATERIAL WORLDS WERE CREATED FROM "NOTHING"
Can you clarify what the scriptures you quoted, have to do with either "creation from nothing" or "ONLY God existing before he created this earth?"

Sure we will clarify, Acts 17:28 "For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring." this world we live in is a creation of God in God, and by God. for us it's a shadow, meaning this creation is real based on OUR preceptions of what's REAL, or what you and many call matter. This world we live in is a perception of the real world which we cannot see. God is “REAL” and he's not meterial, we’re just his creation, or image. Now, remember what I said? what did I said? “For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made”. did I say from nothing? see post #664
Now, to understand what I said, is this. God is a Spirit, can you see him? He’s invisible. look at creation from God point of view. This is a created world, meaning this world did not exist as what we call real, or the meterial world. for this is only an IMAGE of the true and real world that truly exist. 1 Corinthians 2:9 "But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him." NOW PLEASE UNDERSTAND THIS, our existence is only based on what we perceive around us, and not in us. If you really want to know about what you called “MATTER”, please I insist that you view this, for it will enlighten you to your perceived “MATTER”.

Then you asked, “IF the physical creations manifest the nature and works of God, how does this show either”
Keeping Acts 17:28 in mind, our Perception of object is in observation, which make what we call matter real. but it is not.
Again, instead of taking a Quantum Physics course we suggest you view this for your edification

Understand GOD is real, we’re his creation, we’re an IMAGE of the real. After you view both videos then we can talk, and discuss these very thing that are in the bible concerning Quantum Physics, yes, the Quantum Physics of God that the apostle wrote about.

PICJAG

 

[Clear]

@URAVIP2ME said : “Since God had 'No beginning' according to Psalms 90:2 being from-and-to everlasting.” (post #641)
Based on this claim that God had “no beginning” he then theorizes “To me that makes God existing ' before ' the beginning of anything else.” (post #641).
@74x12 seems to agree, saying : “…Yes only God was before the beginning….” (post #647)


REGARDING THESE TWO CLAIMS :
1) “ONLY GOD” WAS BEFORE THE BEGINNING
2) MATTER DID NOT EXIST BEFORE IT WAS CREATED IN THE BEGINNING


Hi @101G

101G said : “Acts 17:28 "For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring." this world we live in is a creation of God in God, and by God. for us it's a shadow, meaning this creation is real based on OUR preceptions of what's REAL, or what you and many call matter. This world we live in is a perception of the real world which we cannot see. God is “REAL” and he's not meterial, we’re just his creation, or image. (post #667)


My point has always been that the Historical Early Judeo-Christian belief that there was more than God which existed in the beginning (i.e. matter also existed in some form as well) is more rational and logical than the belief that NOTHING but God existed before the creation of this earth.

While philosophers may argue about the reality of existence, they still want to pick up their paychecks at the end of the week. Thus, there is an existence at which we all live that matters to us. As you move from historical beliefs and into philosophy/quantum physics I have less interest in following.

If you think that the belief that ONLY God existed before the creation of this earth is more rational and logical than the ancient belief that other things (such as matter in one form or another) existed before creation as well, then I am interested in that sort of discussion (and you can certainly offer us reasons why you think it is more logical and rational and more coherent). While my work is scientific, I honestly don't have much interest in the philosophico-scientifics of quantum physics as it applies to historical Christian doctrines.


Clear
ειφυειφυφιω

 

[101G]

My point has always been that the Historical Early Judeo-Christian belief that there was more than God which existed in the beginning (i.e. matter also existed in some form as well) is more rational and logical than the belief that NOTHING but God existed before the creation of this earth.

First thanks for the reply, second, there is no such thing as "MATTER" Which is only "ENERGY". the things what the world call "Matter" is nothing but coexisting force field of ENEGRY that make up our universe, (meaning the material object in it). and these forces of fields, (which are four of them), contains all the material that exisit. and in our created world contain these four forces. that's either in a subatomic wave or particle form. and the feild that we're created in, meaning particle that make up elements which the world calls "MATTER" is nothing but a field of (a). electrons, (b). neutrino, (c). with up and or down quarks. which is establish in the one of the two four force we call the gravitational force field co-existing with the electromagnetic force field. (now the effect of these fields on the human body and mind is a whole another topic). this is where Einstein deduce his theory of relativity, and none of these Law was in effect until God put them into place. for any law to be enacted, it must be written first. supportive scripture, Hebrews 11:3 "Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear."
that word "Framed" is very telling, for the word of God spoke and the gravitational force and electromagnetic force field was enacted. supportive scripture, Genesis 1:3 "And God said, Let there be light: and there was light." here, light, is not sunlight, but the subatomic "wave" field,. and when the natural sun was establish or.ignited, or burning, which give off the electron "partcle" in fusion that induce what we call "natural light" that make what we call objects visible, again scripture, Romans 1:20 "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:"
did you notice, "the invisible things of him". yes, "of HIM", so nothing was here before God, he is more that these fields of forces that he created and enacted, that caused this creation to come into existence.

see, by knowing these things I can clearly see how and why the Lord Jesus could "appear" and "disappear" at will after his resurrection. he simply collapsed the wave field, or caused interference within the field itself. BINGO, simple and understandable . what we learned in school was in error, as the bible states, we need to RE-NEW our minds.

the bible is not only a science book, but at the same time a history book. and when understood, bring salvation clearly.

so I believe what God said anyday over what some man will say. so I'll stay with what the bible say, but that's your choice...

PICJAG.

 

[Clear]

Hi @101G I hope your holidays were wonderful. I have been traveling.


1) THE THEORY THAT NOTHING EXISTED BEFORE GOD CREATED IT (I.E. HE CREATED MATERIAL WORLDS FROM "NOTHING")

@URAVIP2ME said : “Since God had 'No beginning' according to Psalms 90:2 being from-and-to everlasting.” (post #641)
Based on this claim that God had “no beginning” he then theorizes “To me that makes God existing ' before ' the beginning of anything else.” (post #641).
@74x12 seems to agree, saying : “…Yes only God was before the beginning….” (post #647)
101G said : “This world we live in is a perception of the real world which we cannot see. God is “REAL” and he's not meterial, we’re just his creation, or image. (post #667)


2) THE ANCIENT JUDEO-CHRISTIAN WORLDVIEW THAT GOD CREATED MATERIAL THINGS OUT OF MATTER
Clear replied : “My point has always been that the Historical Early Judeo-Christian belief that there was more than God which existed in the beginning (i.e. matter also existed in some form as well) is more rational and logical than the belief that NOTHING but God existed before the creation of this earth.” (post #668)

101G replied “…there is no such thing as "MATTER"…” (post #669)



3) REGARDING 101GS THEORY THAT THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS “MATTER’.

Well. Your theory that "there is no such thing as matter" will be a hard sell for normal individuals. For example, on the planet where I live, most individuals believe that there is matter in the world in which they exist. This is true anciently as well.

For example, when a carpenter frames a house, he actually believes the hammer he is holding is made of matter we call wood and that the metal head on it is made of a material we call steel or iron. While framing a house, he uses nails that he believes are made of material called metal and he hammers these nails into other material we call wood. All these things are made of matter (which you say does not exist).

Similarly, to the ancients, when the Word "framed" or "formed" the worlds, it was just like the carpenter who framed a house, they assumed "The word" used matter to frame or form the earth.


4) REGARDING THE INACCURATE USE OF ROMANS 1:20

101G said : Romans 1:20 "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:" did you notice, "the invisible things of him". yes, "of HIM", so nothing was here before God

The writer of romans says : "From the creation of the word, his unseen nature, his eternal power and diety has been percieved in the things that have been made. (Romans 1:20)

Why are you conflating “unseen” αορατος which is something "unseen" with "non existence"?? You do not see me and I do not see you. This does NOT mean we do not exist.

When Peter, speaking of the resurrected Jesus, writes "Without having seen him (ουκ ιδοντεσ), you love him" and "though you do not now see him (μη ορωντεσ), you believe in him" 1 Pet 1:8, Peter does not mean jesus is non existent, merely unseen.

Do you see the difference?

Perhaps you can look at a bit of historical use of the words αορατος and it’s opposite ορατος to see how such words were used frequently in reference to God (who exists), to perception of things which exist, etc. You are becoming confused and your scripture does not say God created all things out of nothing OR that NOTHING existed except God before God began to create this world.


5) THE EARLY JUDEO-CHRISTIAN BELIEF THAT MATERIAL THINGS WERE CREATED FROM MATTER IS MORE RATIONAL THAN THE LATER BELIEF THAT ALL THINGS WERE CREATED FROM “NOTHING”.

The Historical Early Judeo-Christian belief that there was more than God which existed in the beginning (i.e. matter also existed in some form as well) is more rational and logical and more coherent than the belief that NOTHING but God existed before the creation of this earth.”

If you actually HAVE evidence that material creation from nothing is more rational and logical than material creation from nothing, now would be a good time to offer it before we spend many more posts, only to confirm the logic of early Judeo-Christian doctrines.

In any case 101G, I hope your journey in this life is wonderful and satisfying.

Clear
ειφυτωδρφυω

 

[101G]

GINOLJC, to all.
@Clear, first thanks, and we hope you and your family had a wonderful and blessed holday also. me, I ate too much, still hurting, but it's all Good. now I got to deal with christmas...
also thanks again, and hope that your journey through this life be prosperous for you and all those around you as well, and that you have peace in Christ Jesus.

after reading your synopsis, I must still hold to my belifs. for this word is CREATED, meaning it didn't exist before. as said, there is no matter, what we know is only based on perceptions. for the bible is always correct, "we walk by FAITH and not by sight". for my FAITH is more real than the car I drive.
but thanks for the discussion.

PICJAG.

 

[Clear]

1) THE THEORY THAT NOTHING EXISTED BEFORE GOD CREATED IT (I.E. HE CREATED MATERIAL WORLDS FROM "NOTHING")

101G said : “…I must still hold to my belifs..." (post 671)

This is no surprise. My intent was not to force you to adopt the logical ancient Christian doctrine. Instead, I wanted readers to understand that the original Christian teaching of “logical creation” where God creates the world from matter is superior to “magical creation” where God creates the world from “nothing”.


2) THE PROBLEM WITH RE-DEFINING THE WORD “CREATION” TO MEAN "CREATION OF MATTER FROM NOTHING"

101G said : “…this wor[l]d is CREATED, meaning it didn't exist before." (post 671)

Of course the world did not exist before it was formed or created. Neither did my car exist before it was create. However, the chaotic matter which formed both my car and the earth did exist in some form before the earth was formed in early Judeo-Christian worldviews.

The point was always that the early and historical Judeo-Christian doctrine of the earth being created or formed from matter is more logical and more rational and superior to the later theory where the world was created from “nothing”


A) SCRIPTURAL “CREATION” NEVER MEANT CREATION FROM “NOTHING”


FOR EXAMPLE GENESIS 1:1-2

Frank Cross of the Dead Sea Scroll translation team reminds us that it was ex nihilo creation tradition itself which caused the 1600's era King James translation of Gen. 1:1. Other Biblical translation teams noticed the same linguistic error and have NOT followed the wording of the King James. For example, according to The Interpreter's Bible, the Hebrew bere' sheit would more properly be rendered "In the beginning OF" creation rather than simply "In the beginning.". Hebrew readers will notice that there is a sheva under the Beyt (of Berasheit) and thus the correct translation never was and cannot BE “In the beginning" (with a definite article).

Almost all Hebrew language scholars have noticed the error. For example, E.A. Speiser translates Gen 1:1 "When God set about to create heaven and earth, the world being then a formless waste. ." or, as Cross renders it "When God began to create the heaven and the earth, then God said, 'Let there be light.'" Thus the traditional translation of Gen. 1:1 as an independent statement, implying that God first created matter out of nothing, and then (verse 2.) proceeded to fashion the world from that raw material, is a known error, and several recent translations have adopted the approach advocated by Speiser and Cross.

Spieser, who translated Gen 1:1 as above, then adds: “The question, however, is not the ultimate truth about cosmogony, but only the exact meaning of the Genesis passages which deal with the subject.. . . At all events, the text should be allowed to speak for itself.”

Other modern versions which incorporate this usage include The New Jewish Version: "When God began to create the heaven and the earth, the earth being unformed and void. . . ."; similarly The Bible, An American Translation (1931); The Westminster Study Edition of the Holy Bible (1948); Moffat's translation (1935); and the Revised Standard Version (RSV), and many others.

B) THE MEANING AND USE OF THE WORD "CREATED

The translation of the word "created" similarly, is clarified with simple examination. The Hebrew verb bara' of the opening verse "In the beginning God created ..." is, here translated "created", and in ex-nihilo tradition was often used for God's activity in forming the world and all things in it. However, synonymous terms and phrases scattered throughout the Hebrew scriptures exclude this word as evidence that only an ex nihilo creation is being described in Gen. 1. The most common of these synonyms are yasar, (to shape or form) or 'asah, (to make or produce).

In a study of the Hebrew conception of the created order, Luis Stadelmann insists that both bara', and yasar carry the anthropomorphic sense of fashioning, while 'asah connotes a more general idea of production. Throughout the Old Testament the image of creation is that of the craftsman fashioning a work of art and skill, the potter shaping the vessel out of clay, or the weaver at his loom. The heavens and the earth are "the work of God's hand." Thus to translate bara' as "to organize", or "to shape" or "to mold" etc are as valid as "to create", and none of these implies ex nihilo creation.

For example: "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." and later he creates again "God created man in his own image; in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them." Gen. i: 27.

In both passages the Greek verb for "created" is identical, and the text makes no distinction in the meaning of “creation” between the first verse (creation of the earth from matter) and the twenty seventh verses (creation of Adam from matter). It is illogical to affirm that the same word when used in expressing a continuous act of creation, signifies the beginning, an act a creation out of “nothing”, (the earth), but then, later, means a molding of matter as when Adam is created from dust.

In all these texts the word "figure" or "mold" is rightly substituted for "formed" or "created." This is underlies the various more modern biblical translations of Genesis 1:1 as "In the beginning the Gods shaped, fashioned or molded the heavens and the earth."

The Harper's Bible Commentary reads: As most modern translations recognize, the P creation account (1:1-2:4a) begins with a temporal clause ("When, in the beginning, God created"); such a translation puts Gen. 1:1 in agreement with the opening of the J account (2:4b) and with other ancient, Near Eastern creation myths. . . . The description of the precreation state in v.2 probably is meant to suggest a storm-tossed sea: darkness, a great wind, the water abyss . . . chaotic forces.

The KJT of Gen. 1:2, which renders the Hebrew as "void," has been used to support to the creation ex nihilo theory, whereas actually this word always occurs in the Old Testament in tandem with tohu ("formless"), describing a "formless waste," or the "chaos" common to most Near Eastern creation mythology The earth was tohu wabohu: "without form and void," as the Authorized (King James) Version renders it, "and darkness was upon the face of the deep (tehom)," i.e., the watery chaos (cf. 2 Pet. 3:5). This hardly signifies absolute nonexistence; rather it speaks of the formless primeval chaotic matter, the Urstoff out of which the Creator fashioned the world. If one DOES associate Gen. 1 with the ubiquitous creation stories of antiquity, it would more strongly support ruling out creation ex nihilo as the idea behind the biblical text.

"'Tohu wabohu' means the formless; the primeval waters over which darkness was superimposed characterizes the chaos materially as a watery primeval element, but at the same time gives a dimensional association: “tehom ('sea of chaos') is the cosmic abyss. . . . This declaration, then, belongs completely to the description of chaos and does not yet lead into the creative activity. . . ." Brown, Driver, and Briggs, A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament (Oxford - Clarendon Press -, p. 26. Cf. von Rad, Genesis , p. 49) However, the Septuagint's rendition of the Hebrew tohu wabohu in Gen. 1:2 as aoratos kai akataskeuastos (unseen and unfurnished) "probably meant to suggest the creation of the visible world out of preexistent invisible elements" (Dodd, The Bible and the Greeks, p. 111).

Just as elsewhere in the Old Testament, when the Lord God "laid the foundations of the earth," his command brought response from the elements rather than effecting existence as such (Ps. 104:5-9; cf. Isa. 48:13).

C) INACCURATE USE OF BIBLICAL IN PRIOR POSTS DO NOT SUPPORT THE THEORY THAT MATERIAL THINGS WERE MADE OF "NOTHING"

While the failed attempt was made to use Heb 11:3 to support the idea of creation from nothing, just as the text of Genesis does not clearly support ex nihilo, all scriptures rendering the word "CREATE" such as used in Hebrews 11:3 is just as easily interpreted to refer to pre-existing matter.

Another failed use of scriptures was the attempt to use the word “framed" as creation from “nothing”. The problem is that this word is never used to indicate creation from nothing. Instead, it appears in scriptures in the sense of to “repair”, to “restore” from breach or decay, to “mend”, to “put in order”, to “reform”, to “appoint”; “perfect”; “adjust”, or to “train” etc. It’s not used as a creation from “nothing”.

Nowhere in greek literature does this Greek term mean “to create out of nothing”. Our dictionary gives no such definition. If "framed" in this specific instance, did mean creation out of “nothing”, one expects a writer to pause and clarify this strange use of this term. But the ancient writer does not do this, but instead, he leaves the sense of the sentence to the sense that is common for his readers.

Heb. 11: 3 does not teach the creation “out of nothing” but rather it implies that God, by the power of faith, applied order and harmony upon pre-existing elements of the world; and that these visible creations were not made by material agencies which are seen (such as tools of men), but rather they are created by the power of an invisible faith which is not seen, or, does not appear.

Furthermore, in Rom. 9:20-23 Paul himself employs the “potter-vessel image” of Isa. 29:16, while 2 Pet. 3:5 reminds us that the earth "was formed out of water" (RSV)–the primeval chaos, or "deep" of Gen. 1:2 Such considerations coordinate New Testament writers with those of the Old when they referred to the creation. What this means for the present discussion is that no one is justified in changing the normal meaning of biblical text to support a personal belief that God created the worlds “out of nothing”.

Thus, the inaccurate use of the biblical text does not really allow one to say they "believe the bible" and yet reinterpret it arbitrarily to mean God created the world from "nothing". They must believe this on their own, without support from biblical text and ancient usage and against logical and rational thought.

Clear
ειφυδρφυσεω

 

[101G]

GINOLJC, to all.
@Clear, first no one can force anyone to do anything...lol. my, oh my.
second,

the original Christian teaching of “logical creation” where God creates the world from matter is superior to “magical creation” where God creates the world from “nothing”.

ERROR, God is what we so call matter. listen, Acts 17:28 "For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring."
did you know there is nothing outside of Go? once again, "in him we live, and move, and have our being" can you grasp that? he upholds everything.

then you answered what we been saying all along

For example: "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." and later he creates again "God created man in his own image; in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them." Gen. i: 27.

In both passages the Greek verb for "created" is identical, and the text makes no distinction in the meaning of “creation” between the first verse (creation of the earth from matter) and the twenty seventh verses (creation of Adam from matter). It is illogical to affirm that the same word when used in expressing a continuous act of creation, signifies the beginning, an act a creation out of “nothing”, (the earth), but then, later, means a molding of matter as when Adam is created from dust.

one can only "make" from something "created", but to create is not from what is made. Romans 1:20 "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:"
that term "of" means self, BINGO.

we suggest you study Acts 17:28 & Romans 1:20 and then come back for discussion.

PICJAG.

 

[Clear]

1) THE MODERN THEORY THAT NOTHING BUT GOD EXISTED BEFORE THE CREATION OF THIS WORLD

@URAVIP2ME said : “Since God had 'No beginning' according to Psalms 90:2 being from-and-to everlasting.” (post #641)
Based on this claim that God had “no beginning” he then theorizes “To me that makes God existing ' before ' the beginning of anything else.” (post #641).
@74x12 seems to agree, saying : “…Yes only God was before the beginning….” (post #647)
Clear said : “The Historical Early Judeo-Christian belief that there was more than God which existed in the beginning (i.e. matter also existed in some form as well) is more rational and #668)
101G said : “…there is no such thing as "MATTER"…” (post #669)


101G now says : “God is what we so call matter. (post #673)

Hi @101G It is confusing to have you claim that matter doesn’t exist when your posts then repeatedly speak of material things. It is confusing to claim both, that there is "no such thing as matter", but then claim "God is matter".


2) 101Gs INSISTENCE THAT READERS MUST SEE A VIDEO ON "QUANTUM MECHANICS" IN ORDER TO BETTER UNDERSTAND 101Gs THEORY

In post #667, you asked me to look at a video on quantum mechanics, so that I could better understand your theories about God. 101G explained : “ After you view both videos then we can talk, and discuss these very thing that are in the bible concerning Quantum Physics, yes, the Quantum Physics of God that the apostle wrote about.” (101G in post #667).

Your insistence that one needs to have some knowledge of quantum mechanics in order to understand what the apostles were writing is also very problematic since the ancient were not writing to quantum physicists, but instead, they used koine, the common Greek to speak to fairly common individuals (none of which were physicists familiar with quantum mechanics.)

As we discuss these issues, It is becoming even more clear that the early Judeo-Christian belief that this earth was made of chaotic matter which was used in it’s formation is not only more rational and logical than the theory that the earth was made of “nothing”, but Early Christian doctrines were much simpler and more intuitive than the theory that the material earth was not made of matter.


3) 101Gs REFERENCE TO ACTS 17:28 AS SUPPORT FOR HIS THEORY
101G said : “Listen, Acts 17:28….did you know there is nothing outside of Go[d]? once again, "in him we live, and move, and have our being" can you grasp that? he upholds everything. (post #673)

Please tell me you are not trying to use the words “in him” ' gk = εν αυτο” as a locative, (i.e. referring to a location “inside” of God). If you are, WHY?
For example, While Greek "εν" can be used in a local sense (i.e. within the limits of some space), the greek preposition “εν” has MANY meanings (Moulton called it the “maid-of-all-work” among the greek prepositions.). Can you clarify how you are interpreting this sentence in Acts to support your theory?


4) RE-DEFINING THE WORD "CREATE" DOESN'T HELP 101Gs THEORY ACHIEVE COHERENCE, LOGICALNESS, RATIONALITY, SIMPLICITY OR INTUITIVENESS

101G said : “ to create is not from what is made….” (Post #673)

This is simply a re-statement of your prior incorrect claim. Certainly, one can "create" from pre-existing materials.

If a painter creates a painting, the painting is made of canvas and paints which exist before the painting is created.
IF a sculptor creates a statue, the marble he creates his statue from existed before the statue was created.
Early Judeo-Christians believed that the world was created out of matter which existed before the world was created and framed (furnished) into its present form.


5) THE ANCIENT JUDEO-CHRISTIAN BELIEF THAT THE WORLD WAS CREATED OUT OF MATTER IS SUPERIOR TO THE LATER THEORY THAT THE WORLD WAS CREATED OUT OF "NOTHING"

This early Christian belief did NOT require one to look at a you tube video on Quantum Mechanics in order to understand. Thus, their belief was is MUCH simpler than your personal “quantum theory” of creation. This ancient Judeo-Christian belief is more logical and rational than the later theory that the earth was created “from nothing”. The early Christian religion was much more intuitive on this specific doctrine than your religion. The early Christian religion is, in this specific respect, superior to your religion.


IF you have data that shows nothing existed before God created this world, NOW, would be a very, very good time to offer it before we spend many more posts. Do you actually HAVE data to support your religious theory?

In any case, I do NOT want to discourage you from generating your own models and theories of creation and how God did it. I simply want readers to understand that ancient Christianity and their beliefs are more logical, more rational, they are simpler and more intuitive than the later theories adopted by various later Christians and later Christian movements.

I hope your journey is Good and wonderful 101G.

Clear
ειφυφυτζδρω

 

[101G]

1) THE MODERN THEORY THAT NOTHING BUT GOD EXISTED BEFORE THE CREATION OF THIS WORLD

@URAVIP2ME said : “Since God had 'No beginning' according to Psalms 90:2 being from-and-to everlasting.” (post #641)
Based on this claim that God had “no beginning” he then theorizes “To me that makes God existing ' before ' the beginning of anything else.” (post #641).
@74x12 seems to agree, saying : “…Yes only God was before the beginning….” (post #647)
Clear said : “The Historical Early Judeo-Christian belief that there was more than God which existed in the beginning (i.e. matter also existed in some form as well) is more rational and #668)
101G said : “…there is no such thing as "MATTER"…” (post #669)


101G now says : “God is what we so call matter. (post #673)

Hi @101G It is confusing to have you claim that matter doesn’t exist when your posts then repeatedly speak of material things. It is confusing to claim both, that there is "no such thing as matter", but then claim God IS matter.


2) THE REQUEST THAT READERS LOOK AT A VIDEO ON "QUANTUM MECHANICS" IN ORDER TO BETTER UNDERSTAND 101Gs THEORY

In post #667, you asked me to look at a video on quantum mechanics, so that I could better understand your theories about God. 101G explained : “ After you view both videos then we can talk, and discuss these very thing that are in the bible concerning Quantum Physics, yes, the Quantum Physics of God that the apostle wrote about.” (101G in post #667).

Your insistence that one needs to have some knowledge of quantum mechanics in order to understand what the apostles were writing is also very problematic since the ancient were not writing to quantum physicists, but instead, they used koine, the common Greek to speak to fairly common individuals (none of which were physicists familiar with quantum mechanics.)

As we discuss these issues, It is becoming even more clear that the early Judeo-Christian belief that this earth was made of chaotic matter which was used in it’s formation is not only more rational and logical than the theory that the earth was made of “nothing”, but Early Christian doctrines were much simpler and more intuitive than the theory that the material earth was not made of matter.


3) 101Gs REFERENCE TO ACTS 17:28 AS SUPPORT FOR HIS THEORY
101G said : “Listen, Acts 17:28….did you know there is nothing outside of Go[d]? once again, "in him we live, and move, and have our being" can you grasp that? he upholds everything. (post #673)

Please tell me you are not trying to use the words “in him” ' gk = εν αυτο” as a locative, (i.e. referring to a location “inside” of God). If you are, WHY?
For example, While Greek "εν" can be used in a local sense (i.e. within the limits of some space), the greek preposition “εν” has MANY meanings (Moulton called it the “maid-of-all-work” among the prepositions.). Can you clarify how you are interpreting this sentence in Acts to support your theory?


4) RE-DEFINING THE WORD "CREATE" DOESN'T HELP 101Gs THEORY ACHIEVE COHERENCE, LOGICALNESS, RATIONALITY, SIMPLICITY OR INTUITIVENESS

101G said : “ to create is not from what is made….” (Post #673)

This is simply a re-statement of your prior incorrect claim. Certainly, one can "create" from pre-existing materials.

If a painter create a painting, the painting is made of canvas and paints which exist before the painting is created.
IF a sculptor creates a statue, the marble he creates his statue from existed before the statue was created.
Early Judeo-Christian believe that the world was created out of matter which existed before the world was created and framed (furnished) into its present form.


5) THE ANCIENT JUDEO-CHRISTIAN BELIEF THAT THE WORLD WAS CREATED OUT OF MATTER IS SUPERIOR TO THE LATER THEORY THAT THE WORLD WAS CREATED OUT OF "NOTHING"

This early Christian belief did NOT require one to look at a you tube video on Quantum Mechanics in order to understand. Thus, their belief was is MUCH simpler than your personal “quantum theory” of creation. This ancient Judeo-Christian belief is more logical and rational than the later theory that the earth was created “from nothing”. The early Christian religion was much more intuitive on this specific doctrine than your religion. The early Christian religion is, in this specific respect, superior to your religion.


IF you have data that shows nothing existed before God created this world, NOW, would be a very, very good time to offer it before we spend many more posts. Do you actually HAVE data to support your religious theory?

In any case, I do NOT want to discourage you from generating your own models and theories of creation and how God did it. I simply want readers to understand that ancient Christianity and their beliefs are more logical, more rational, they are simpler and more intuitive than the later theories adopted by various later Christians and later Christian movements.

I hope your journey is Good and wonderful 101G.

Clear
ειφυφυτζδρω

one word, well two words, perception based on presumption. that's your reality in this created world.

PICJAG.

 

[Clear]

In answer to my various questions and comments and requests for clarification and justification, 101G replied : “two words, perception based on presumption. that's your reality in this created world.” (post #675)

Hi @101G

This sort of response does not provide clarifying data nor does it answer the questions you actually being asked. Nor does your inaccurate use of scriptures support your religious theory on this point. For examples :

REGARDING THE THEORY THAT ONLY GOD EXISTED BEFORE CREATION AND MATERIAL THINGS WERE MADE OF “NOTHING”

In Post #662 I claimed the ancient Christian doctrine that matter also existed as well was a more rational and logical belief. I gave at least 17 examples from early literature and discussed profound effects of a return to this early doctrine.

In Post #664 You, (101G) suggested early Christians were wrong but then you incorrectly used two scriptures in an attempt to support the creation from “non matter” theory. Neither scripture you referred to supported either the notion of creation from “nothing” or that ONLY God existed before creation. You then also incorrectly conflated the notion of “invisible” and the word “nothing”.

In post #666, I (Clear) pointed out your errors and gave 8 more examples from ancient Judeo-Christian literature to demonstrate correct ancient usage of these concepts.

In Post #667 You (101G) insisted we look at two you tube videos regarding Quantum Physics principles you say “the apostle wrote about”. And in Post #669 You (101G) theorized that “there is no such thing as matter”. Yet, in post #673, you claim that "God is what we so call matter."

In Post #670 I (Clear) pointed out many problems with your theory that “matter doesn’t exist” in practical and religious contexts. For example, Most individuals believe matter exists and speak of it and experience it in daily living. I described your inaccurate use of Romans 1:20 (“unseen” does not mean “non-existent”). I asked you for evidence your theory was more rational and logical than the early Christian doctrine and you have been consistently unable to provide any evidence. It is irrational and illogical to proffer a belief in a debate forum without having some data and rational logic as to WHY a theory is plausible.

In Post #671, your justification was simply : “ I must hold to my beliefs “

Post #672 I (Clear) explained material creation does not mean an object is made of “nothing” and gave 13 (or more) new examples from Genesis creation account to support this point. I (Clear) pointed out your error in using of Heb 11:3 to mean creation from “nothing” and gives multiple examples demonstrating this error.

In Post #674 I (Clear) pointed out the confusion of 101Gs logic when he claims that there is BOTH “no such thing as matter” (post 669) and that “God is what we so call matter” (post 673). I (Clear) also pointed out the absurdity of your insistence that knowledge in quantum mechanics is necessary to understand the Biblical text.

You (101G) failed in an attempted to inaccurately use Acts 17:28 to support a point. I (Clear) pointed out that simply re-defining the word “create” will not support your theory. I asked for clarification of your (101Gs) attempt to use Acts 17:28 to support your theory.

In Post #675 you (101G) simply replied “two words, perception based on presumption that's your reality…”


CURRENT PERCEPTION
The theory that the material world was made of “nothing” and/or that ONLY God existed before he created this world, does not have any significant textual support so far. This theory of creation from “nothing” and/or ONLY God existing before creation of this world is less rational, less logical, more complex and less intuitive than early Christian belief that the material worlds were made of material.

CURRENT PRESUMPTION
Since you have been unable to present any coherent argument for your theory, the presumption is that the current data confirms that early Christian religion where God creates the earth out of matter that was present at creation is more rational, more logical, more simple and more historically coherent than your religious theory.


If you do not have any data or coherent, logical, rational thought to offer, then I think we can leave this specific point at this conclusion. Thank you so much for the discussion 101G. I honestly hope your spiritual journey is good and insightful in this life.


Clear
ειφυσετζτζω

 

[Terral]

Hi 74x12:

Thank you for starting this topic that can get controversial and heated at times. You wrote:

In the book of John it's pretty obvious that the author is saying that Jesus is God.

John 1:1 makes that much easily clear. The Word was with God and the Word was God. [snip]

Please forgive the large OP content snip, but most of what is presented proves little or nothing either way about Jesus Christ's true identity. John the Baptist and Jesus Christ both testify to Christ's identity in God's Word, saying,

"The next day he *saw Jesus coming to him and *said, “Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world! ... I myself have seen, and have testified that this is the Son of God.” John 1:29+34.

"Jesus answered them, “Has it not been written in your Law, ‘I said, you are gods’? If he called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken), do you say of Him, whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’?" John 10:34-36.

Jesus Christ is most certainly "the Son of God" as in the "Only Begotten Son" from John 3:16 no matter how anyone wants to interpret the truth of John 1:1-3,14. God and Christ appear in too many verses together for anyone (IMHO) to confuse God with the Son of God who is also our "one Mediator between God and men..." 1Tim. 2:5. God is "God" and Christ is the "Son of God" who God raised from the dead on the third day, so on and so forth. Too simple...

Blessings,

Terral

 

[74x12]

Hi 74x12:

Thank you for starting this topic that can get controversial and heated at times. You wrote:



Please forgive the large OP content snip, but most of what is presented proves little or nothing either way about Jesus Christ's true identity. John the Baptist and Jesus Christ both testify to Christ's identity in God's Word, saying,



Jesus Christ is most certainly "the Son of God" as in the "Only Begotten Son" from John 3:16 no matter how anyone wants to interpret the truth of John 1:1-3,14. God and Christ appear in too many verses together for anyone (IMHO) to confuse God with the Son of God who is also our "one Mediator between God and men..." 1Tim. 2:5. God is "God" and Christ is the "Son of God" who God raised from the dead on the third day, so on and so forth. Too simple...

Blessings,

Terral

Of course he is the Son of God and the "Lamb of God" that takes away the sins of the world. No one is arguing against that.

Buuut ... that doesn't mean He isn't more besides. You already admit that Jesus is the Lamb of God right? That means He is the sacrifice. So then how is He also the High Priest that offers the sacrifice? (Hebrews 9:11) And how is He the temple also? (John 2:19)

So seeing that He is the sacrifice, the high Priest and the temple. Then it's no wonder He can also be the God of the temple as well. Because He is already so many things.

And God has always manifested Himself in different ways. So it's no surprise.

 

[Terral]

Hi 74x12:

Of course he is the Son of God and the "Lamb of God" that takes away the sins of the world. No one is arguing against that.

Buuut ... that doesn't mean He isn't more besides. You already admit that Jesus is the Lamb of God right? That means He is the sacrifice. So then how is He also the High Priest that offers the sacrifice? (Hebrews 9:11) And how is He the temple also? (John 2:19)

So seeing that He is the sacrifice, the high Priest and the temple. Then it's no wonder He can also be the God of the temple as well. Because He is already so many things.

And God has always manifested Himself in different ways. So it's no surprise.

No. As many members of this Board have attempted to share with you already, the substance of the OP in no way makes the case that Jesus Christ is God. You can believe in your heart of hearts that Jesus Christ is the Eastern Bunny or Santa Claus, if the Son of God must be all things for all occasions. John the Baptist and Jesus Christ Himself agree that Jesus Christ is the "Son of God" and trying to replace His God and Father with the Son of God is IDOLATRY. Period. As already presented there is ONE GOD and ONE MEDIATOR "BETWEEN" God and men and that is Christ Jesus. 1Tim. 2:5. There is a place in Christian Theology for "God" and the "Son of God" our Lord Jesus Christ who God raised from the dead on our behalf. Right? Okay then. God is God and Jesus Christ is the Son of God. End of story.

Blessings,

Terral

 

[Jesuslightoftheworld]

And, yes, frankly all this squabbling between "God's People" has undermined my belief in the whole mess! Don't worry, the Muslims sects do the same sort of "sibling rivalry". Having raised a family, sometimes the things I see cause me to feel that I am in the middle of my Children's squabbling. My mother used to whip us, all six, with a green willow switch. I'm still very sure of the existence of a Creator, but humans are dismal at ordering their own lives. Perhaps we were not created to ever govern ourselves? Did the Creator always know that a superior being was going to have to come and do that?

Meanwhile, the Jews have been quietly devising many/most of the world's scientific advances, and smugly allowing the Gentile Dogs to wreck the house.

Lol!!!