Hebrews: An imperfect Christ?

Post by **_Allyn** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 1:45 pm

Well I am hoping Steve will chime in here because this, to me, is a very serious situation you have placed yourself in. If Steve is in agreement with you then I am not long for this discussion board. You sound like a Jehovah Witness to me and I do not agree that they have correct understanding just as you do not. In my opinion and as far as the fundamental teachings of the Bible are concerned you are treading on dangerous ground.

Post by **_thisglimpse** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 1:51 pm

no offense to either of you, but could you perhaps take this discussion to a different thread? You've strayed a long ways from the original topic I posted.

Post by **_Paidion** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 2:49 pm

Yes, we have strayed off the topic you posted. Sorry about that, ThisGlimpse.

Allyn has terminated the discussion, anyway, so there should be no further problem.

Post by **_Steve** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 5:03 pm

I admit that I do not fully understand Paidion's viewpoint. Some time ago, I recognised that he has a different view than my own. He may be wrong. However, my vote would be to allow him to express his views. If they are wrong, as I think they are, they are always subject to review.

Post by **_Roger** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 5:14 pm

I don't have a bible in front of me right now and am on someone elses computer but I know that Hebrews 1:8 says" But unto the Son he sayeth, Thy throne oh God is forever and ever."

I once showed this verse to some visiting Jehovah's Witnesses and they had a hard time with this verse.

What do you have to say concerning this verse?

Roger

Post by **_Homer** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 8:46 pm

Allyn,

Hang with us! Your view is needed and appreciated. As Steve likes to say "the truth always has the best arguments".

Post by **_Allyn** » Thu Mar 02, 2006 9:25 pm

Thanks Homer, I will stay but I wish Steve's response had been a little more assertive. I think this was a new opportunity to affirm ones belief but I am glad he responded none the less.

I have no problem with a discussion between two opposing values but I do believe we also need to step outside of the debate game once in a while and say just what our solid beliefs are as presented by Scripture and stand fast when dangerous teachings are presented. I am in no way attempting to run Paidion off but I will stand against anyone who presents falsehoods. What that person does with that stand is up to him or her.

Post by **_Paidion** » Fri Mar 03, 2006 10:39 pm

I don't have a bible in front of me right now and am on someone elses computer but I know that Hebrews 1:8 says" But unto the Son he sayeth, Thy throne oh God is forever and ever."

Roger, many versions do indeed translate the sentence that way, as if the Father were addressing His Son as "God". If that were true, then the word "God" should be in the vocative case. But it isn't. The words in Greek are "ho theos", which is in the nominative case. Thus it should read, "God is your throne for ages and ages" (or forever and ever, if you prefer). Or possibly, "Your throne is God for ages and ages."

The translation of both the WTNT and the TRC do not regard "God" as if it were vocative. They both translate it this way:

Hebrews 1:8 But unto the son he saith: God thy seat shall be for ever, and ever.

By the way, I wish to make clear that I do not believe that Jesus the Son of God is merely "a god" as Jehovah's Witnesses and some others affirm, or that He is merely the highest created angel.

Rather I believe that Jesus and His Father are equally Deity, but not the same Individual, that Jesus was begotten by the Father, not created. That the begetting of the Son was the first of God's acts. This was the position of first and second century Christians. I think modalism also came into beng fairly early --- either the second or third century, I think.

Trinitarianism prevailed in the fourth century.

Post by **_Homer** » Sat Mar 04, 2006 12:10 am

Paidion,

You assert that some trinitarians are modalists unawares. You say that Jesus is equally God as much as God the Father and that they are two individuals. If words have any precise meaning at all, your words make you a polytheist! Perhaps unaware?

Post by **_STEVE7150** » Sat Mar 04, 2006 9:56 am

You assert that some trinitarians are modalists unawares. You say that Jesus is equally God as much as God the Father and that they are two individuals. If words have any precise meaning at all, your words make you a polytheist! Perhaps unaware?

I've heard Hank Hannagraff the BAM say numerous times that the trinity is "One God revealed in three persons." So what seems to define God is not the limitation of a person but something more TRANSCENDENT such as essence,nature,power,charactor,substance etc. So apparently God is not limited to personhood as humans are and i suspect we are not capable of truly conceptualizing this existance.
Also i believe Phil 2.6 says that Jesus "emptied" (kenosis) himself of His divinity before He came as a man so i think He was fully God and fully man but He set aside His divinity to "be like us in every way."