Refutting Greg Stewart? Was Jesus (the Amen) created? And, what about begotten? Greg Stewart (said): Andrew Graham, I read the blog above and I agree with Majority of what was written and conveyed except, God did not create Jesus, He begets Him, and this is the reason He (Jesus the Christ) is called THE ONLY BEGOTTEN SON OF GOD. Why? Because He did came out of the bosom of the Father before the world was. No matter how one tries to negate this important fact. Nothing will change it that God did brought forth a Son before the was anything made of created. Reply, “God did not create Jesus, He begets Him, and this is the reason He (Jesus the Christ) is called THE ONLY BEGOTTEN SON OF GOD. Why? Because He did came out of the bosom of the Father before the world was. No matter how one tries to negate this important fact. Nothing will change it that God did brought forth a Son before the was anything made of created.” “God did not create Jesus…” Absolutely and 110% wrong! Here is how and why, as it also, highlights, why you do not understand the finer points of Greek! In Rev 3:14, Jesus is the “Amen” (2 Cor 1:19-23); it says in Rev 3:14 that the “Amen” (Jesus, God’s son) is: “And to the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write, ‘These things says the Amen, the Faithful and True Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God” NKJV the NWT has “by God” and not “of God”; I have already explained several times, why the NWT is correct and the others not correct, as scholars readily recognise, that the proposition in Rev 3:14 belongs to the subjective genitive “by God” and not the Objected genitive “of God”, unless one thinks that “God” was created, “…the beginning of the creation OF God”, that another person was responsible for ‘God’s creation’, which is reflected in the Objective genitive! there is no real need for me to continue and repeat myself, lest to say, that your argument to the contrary, is not just weak, but non existent and that, it wasnt a case of, “God did not create Jesus…” but a definite case of, ““God did create Jesus…”, not only that, as we see elsewhere in the Greek of the NT (Mark 1:1; 24:8) whenever “Arche” is followed by a/the genitive expression “of …”, as we see in the two examples in Mark above (and elsewhere) such denotes the beginning, start, commencement…of something new, original…certain translators try to obfuscate such, by inserting out od context terms, such as, “originator, ruler, source…of God’s creation” and like your argument, is clearly wrong, as those terms just used are associated with “rulership, authority and power” and even when “Arche” is not connected to a genitive expression, the context clearly shows, that it is referring to a beginning…! God’s son is “begotten” alright, but he belongs to ‘class, category’ – “begotten”, such as, “firstborn from the dead”: Col 1:18 NASB “He is also head of the body, the church; and He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, so that He Himself will come to have first place in everything.” Notice, that Jesus is the “firstborn from the (class, category) dead”, God’s son is of class, group “dead”, he is the first one of class “dead” to be raised to immortality (John 5:26) and others (the apostles…) were to follow, these also being (2nd, 3rd, 4th…) born from (class, category) “dead”! The only defence, Greg has, is assumption and personal theology: I agree with Majority of what was written and conveyed except, God did not create Jesus, He begets Him, and this is the reason He (Jesus the Christ) is called THE ONLY BEGOTTEN SON OF GOD. Other than opinion, where are the texts, the grammar...to back up what Greg says, even prov 8:22 LXX is loaded with the genitive expression, denoting a start, beginning...! Notice how some translations render the original language terms: The LORD brought me forth as the first of his works, before his deeds of old NIV The LORD made me at the beginning of His creation... HCSB The LORD created me as the beginning of his works... NET Bible To the readers, notice the explicit genitive of his...! Greg does not really have a leg to stand on, unless he can refute the above! I need say no more on this, as the above clearly shows you are wrong and limited in your understanding and comprehension of Greek and how to clearly read what the English is saying”, in short, you think you know the bible and JWs do not!
Posted on: Sat, 13 Sep 2014 21:31:27 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015