of God. This is a clear assertion on Paul’s part of the deity of Christ. Daniel Waterland gets to the crux of the controversy by setting forth two series of texts. The first series includes Isa_43:10; Isa_44:8; Isa_45:5; Isa_46:9, which declare that God is one, and to him none can be likened. The second series includes Jhn_1:1, Rom_9:5, Php_2:6, Heb_1:3; Heb_1:8, which declare that Jesus Christ is God.
The consequences of the Arian scheme are that if the texts of Isaiah exclude the Son, he is altogether excluded, and is no God at all. He cannot, upon Arian principles, be the same God, because he is not the same Person: he cannot be another God, because excluded by the Isaiah texts.
If, therefore he be neither the same God, nor another God, it must follow, that he is no God. This is the difficulty which lies against the Arian scheme, and which Arians have not sufficiently attended to. It will not do to make Jesus Christ "a god" in a lesser sense, reserving only to the Father the title of supreme God, for neither Isaiah, nor the first commandment, allow for such a distinction.
If they had allowed such a distinction, then in what sense would the worship of Baal and Ashteroth be considered idolatry, if they were merely looked upon as inferior deities, and served with a subordinate worship? The Old Testament texts cannot mean that there is merely no other Supreme God; but absolutely no other: and therefore our blessed Lord must either be included and comprehended in the one Supreme God of Israel, or be entirely excluded with the other pretended or nominal deities.
In no case have the Arians proved—what must be proved if their understanding is to be received as correct—that texts which designate God the Father as the "only true God" (Jhn_17:3) or "one God" (1Co_8:6) are meant to teach that the Son is absolutely excluded also from such designations, just as the Son is emphatically designated one Lord (Eph_4:5) without design to exclude the Father from being Lord also (see Daniel Waterland, Works, vol. 1, pp. 275-280).
Waterland observes that the tactics of Arians in his day were to industriously run from the point, misrepresent our sense, and artfully conceal their own—characteristics which have not changed from his day to ours. Jesus must either be entirely excluded by the Isaiah texts, or not at all: and if he be not excluded, he is comprehended in the one Supreme God, and is one with him. Arians produce texts to show that the Father singly is the Supreme God, and that Christ is excluded from being the Supreme God: but I insist upon it, that you misunderstand those texts; because the interpretation you give of them is not reconcilable with other texts; and because it leads to such absurdities, as are too shocking even for yourself to admit.
In short, either you prove too much, or you prove nothing (Waterland, vol 1, p. 278, 281). Subsisting in the form of God proves his nature and essence to be divine. John Daille states "As then the Lord Jesus, before He took our flesh, was in the form of God, it necessarily follows that He was truly God, no one being able to have the glory of God but He who had His nature also. And what the apostle adds, that He was "equal with God," clearly also determines the same thing; it being evident that if the Son were a creature, He could not be equal to God; every creature being of necessity infinitely below the nature, power, and majesty of the Creator" (Comm. on Philippians, Sermon 9, pp. 91, 92). Isa_43:10; Isa_44:8; Isa_45:5; Isa_46:9, Jhn_1:1, Rom_9:5, Heb_1:3; Heb_1:8.
J.
GINOLJC, to all.
@Dizerner, and
@Pancho Frijoles, so you also may know and understand 101G Knowledge of the ONE TRUE GOD.
to Johann, Listen carefully. NONESENSE, none of the above what you posted, came from the mind of men, and don't even come close to who the Lord Jesus/the bible speak of. 101G will breakdown who, what, and why God is, in his creation.
A. Jesus is God in Ordinal designations. Scripture, Deuteronomy 6:4 "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is
one LORD:"
ONE: H259 אֶחָד 'echad (ech-awd') adj.
1. (properly) united, i.e. one.
2. (as an ordinal) first.
[a numeral from H258]
KJV: a, alike, alone, altogether, and, any(-thing), apiece, a certain, (dai-)ly, each (one), + eleven, every, few, first, + highway, a man, once, one, only, other, some, together.
Root(s): H258
NOTE DEFINITION #2.
(as an ordinal) first.. as in First and Last. supportive scripture, 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." There is the answer, "WITH" as in John 1:1 the Word was "
WITH" God and
was God. yes, the same one person. for Isaiah confirm this in Isaiah 48:12 "Hearken unto me, O Jacob and Israel, my called; I am he; I am the first,
I also am the last." I ... "
ALSO" AM ........ the Last? yes. for the term "ALSO" means,
in addition; too. so in addition to being the First, he is also the last,
the same one person just as in John 1:1. the Lord Jesus the Word is also God. meaning, Jesus, he is the First/LORD/Father and ...... "
ALSO" ..... the Last/Lord/Son, (in flesh). which again prove out John 3:13, and Philippians 2:6 "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal
with God:" WITH, WITH, WITH, God? Johann, we suggest you read the bible instead what some man writes.
B. This Ordinal Designations of GOD/JESUS was revealed unto all right in Genesis 1:1. yes, the very first verse in the bible. Genesis 1:1 "In the
beginning God created the heaven and the earth." and many are still IGNORANT of it today. the term "beginning". it is the Hebrew word,
H7225 רֵאשִׁית re'shiyth (ray-sheeth') n-f.
1. the first, in place, time, order or rank. (REMEMBER THIS DEFINITION)
2. (specifically) a firstfruit.
[from the same as H7218]
KJV: beginning, chief(-est), first(-fruits, part, time), principal thing.
definition #1 makes the point and the revelation. "THE FIRST", yes, in PLACE, TIME, ORDER, and RANK. First as in Ordinal First because he is the EQUAL SHARE of, of, of,... HIMSELF to come in flesh. and that EQUAL SHARE of himself (Spirit), was, was, was, to come in flesh, but in a
G2758 κενόω kenoo (ke-no-ō') 1. to make empty state. for this coming was in ORDINALDESIGNATION. this is why John 1:1 uses the term "WAS", (a past tense designation), because in TIME, he "WAS" to come with the Rank, Lord, and title "Son". which is proved out in Psalms 110:1 "A Psalm of David. The LORD said unto my
Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool." Lord here is the LORD Shared Equally in Flesh just as Philippians 2:6 clearly states, "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal
with God:" and as demonstrated in Isaiah, (the First ... "WITH" the Last is .... "ALSO" the Last. Oh the bible is so simple. for the term "Lord" in verse 5, is the "Lord" to come in flesh to die, and resurrected in amalgamation of,. of, of, his own Spirit. scripture, John 17:5 "And now, O Father, glorify thou
me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was." BINGO, what was that Glory before the world was? Spirit, but now resurrected... a glorified BODY. for God is "ONE". and this amalgamation of, of, of, Spirit and Flesh is what the BOOK of REVELATION is all about....... GOD in FLESH, .... WITHOUT BLOOD, the ETERNAL MAN, (which was to come), and we are to be PARTAKER of his NATURE. Oh this is so easy. Jesus is First and Last, meaning, he is Father/LORD, (FIRST). Son/Lord, (LAST), the same one Person. this is why, in the book of Revelation, he can sit on the throne and stand before it at the same TIME.
C. as Genesis 1:1 clearly states, he Jesus/God was Alone when he made ALL THINGS, supportive scripture, Isaiah 44:24 "Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens
alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth
by myself;" that's why Man was made in HIS, HIS, HIS, image, (ONE PERSON) and that IMAGE was to come, the Last. this is why Genesis 1:26 said "Let US, and OUR", for God
was to come in his OWN IMAGE. supportive scripture, Romans 5:14 "Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression,
who is the figure of him that was to come." to come is the Ordinal designation that
was to come in "TIME", "PLACE", ORDER", and "RANK, just as Genesis 1:1 clearly states, and the use of "WAS" in John 1:. for all was to come, in "TIME, PLACE, ORDER, and "RANK", just as Genesis 1:1 clearly states. for God is a plurality of, of, of, himself. just as Genesis 1:1 states. the term "God" here in Genesis 1:1 reveals it all.
H430 אֱלֹהִים 'elohiym (el-o-heem') n-m.
אֱלֹהֵי 'elohiy (el-o-hee') [alternate plural]
1. (literally) supreme ones.
2. (hence, in the ordinary sense) gods.
3. (specifically, in the plural, especially with the article) the Supreme God (i.e. the all supreme).
4. (sometimes) supreme, used as a superlative.
5. (occasionally, by way of deference) supreme magistrates, the highest magistrates of the land.
6. (also) the supreme angels (entities of unspecified type).
[plural of H433]
KJV: angels, X exceeding, God (gods)(-dess, -ly), X (very) great, judges, X mighty.
Root(s): H433
Compare: H5945, H7706, H8199, H4397
yes,
[plural of H433] so let's see what or who is H433.
H433 אֱלוֹהַּ 'elowahh (el-o'-ah) n-m.
אֱלֹהַּ 'eloahh (el-o'-ah) [shortened (rarely)]
1. one with supreme strength and ability.
2. the Supreme Being, God the Creator, Yahweh by name.
3. a supreme entity, a god-like creature (that is, one of God's supreme creations, or one of man's inventions).
[probably prolonged (emphat.) from H410]
KJV: God, god.
Root(s): H410
so, are these two separates and distinct persons as GOD? NO, and here's why. the definition states,
[plural of H433] did one see it? plural of, of, of. what do "OF" means. "of" translates the genitive case of nouns, with various shades of meaning. Of these
the subjective and objective are mentioned here, which need careful distinction.
Subjective, Spirit, terminology, unseen, not manifested yet, abstract.
Objective, Flesh, bone, terminology, seen, not manifested yet, concrete.
is this Subjective and Objective revealed in God? yes, supportive scripture, Revelation 22:16 "I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches.
I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star."
we know that the ROOT is before David, Spirit/Subjective/abstract/LORD. and the Offspring is after David, Flesh/Objective/Concrete/Lord. now the definition of "Offspring, G1085 γένος genos (ǰe'-nos) n.
kin.
{abstract or
concrete, literal or figurative, individual or collective}
[from G1096]
KJV: born, country(-man),
diversity, generation, kind(-red), nation, offspring, stock
Root(s): G1096
KIN? yes, as in KINSman REDEEMER, that's God who saved us, see Isaiah 35:4. and in flesh bone and blood...
concrete. also the KJV can translate Offspring as "
Diversity", which 101G is..... a Diversified Oneness. just as the bible says. and this diversity is the Plurality of God who is Spirit, SHARED EQUALLY in flesh and bone.
to Dizerner, and Pancho Frijoles, you too also may know 101G position on the Godhead. if any have any question for 101G please ask... ok. for we all seek clear understanding. be blessed.
101G
