Converts Debate: Paul Williams vs. Nabeel Qureshi

Advertisements

About Ken Temple

I am a follower of Jesus Christ. I am a sinner who has been saved by the grace of God alone (Ephesians 2:8-9), through faith alone (Galatians 2:16; Romans 3:28; 4:1-16), in Christ alone (John 14:6). But a true faith does not stay alone, it should result in change, fruit, good works, and deeper levels of repentance and hatred of my own sins of selfishness and pride. I am not better than you! I still make mistakes and sin, but the Lord is working on me, conforming me to His character. (Romans 8:28-29; 2 Corinthians 3:16-18) When I do sin, I hate the sin as it is an affront to God, and seek His forgiveness in repentance. (Mark 1:15; 2 Corinthians 7:7-10; Colossians 3:5-16 ) Praise God for His love for sinners (Romans 5:8), shown by the voluntary coming of Christ and His freely laying down His life for us (John 10:18), becoming flesh/human (John 1:1-5; 1:14; Philippians 2:5-8), dying for sins of people from all nations, tribes, and cultures (Revelation 5:9), on the cross, in history, rising from the dead (Romans 10:9-10; Matthew 28, Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24; John 20-21; 1 Corinthians chapter 15). His resurrection from the dead proved that Jesus is the Messiah, the eternal Son of God, the word of God from eternity past; and that He was all the gospels say He was and that He is truth and the life and the way to salvation. (John 14:6)
This entry was posted in Apologetics, Islam, Muslims. Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Converts Debate: Paul Williams vs. Nabeel Qureshi

  1. Pingback: Paul Bilal Williams leap of faith for something that contradicts history | Apologetics and Agape

  2. I thought you would appreciate this. Over at Williams’ blog, a Muhammadan misquotes Tertullian to prove that he wasn’t a Trinitarian:
    Infinity and One

    December 11, 2016 • 10:18 pm
    Here is the evidence that Tertullian was a subordinationist, not a full fledged Trinitarian. There was no standardized doctrine of the Trinity until the fourth century:

    “Because God is in like manner a Father, and He is also a Judge; but He has not always been the Father and Judge merely on the ground of His having always been God. For He could not have been the Father previous to the Son, nor a Judge precious to sin. There was, however, a time when neither sin existed with Him, NOR THE SON; the former of which was to constitute the Lord a Judge, and the latter a Father. (Against Hermogenes, Chapter Three)

    https://bloggingtheology.net/2016/12/10/christian-theology/#comment-35153

    Here is my response for your benefit:

    Tertullian believed that Jesus eternally existed as the very Reason, Wisdom and Word of God who was eternally inherent within God. As such Jesus was not a creature made from nothing, but the Father’s eternal Word who sprung forth or proceeded from within God’s own being and substance.

    It was at that moment when God spoke his Word which was inherent within him as his Reason that the Word became the Son and God therefore became the Father.

    Note the following quotes carefully:

    Chapter 18. An Eulogy on the Wisdom and Word of God, by Which God Made All Things of Nothing

    If any material was necessary to God in the creation of the world, as Hermogenes supposed, God had a far nobler and more suitable one in His own wisdom — one which was not to be gauged by the writings of philosophers, but to be learned from the words or prophets. This alone, indeed, knew the mind of the Lord. For “who knows the things of God, and the things in God, but the Spirit, which is in Him?” 1 Corinthians 2:11 Now His wisdom is that Spirit. This was His counsellor, the very way of His wisdom and knowledge. Isaiah 40:14 Of this He made all things, making them through It, and making them with It. “When He prepared the heavens,” so says (the Scripture ), “I was present with Him; and when He strengthened above the winds the lofty clouds, and when He secured the fountains which are under the heaven, I was present, compacting these things along with Him. I was He in whom He took delight; moreover, I daily rejoiced in His presence: for He rejoiced when He had finished the world, and among the sons of men did He show forth His pleasure.” Proverbs 8:27-31 Now, who would not rather approve of this as the fountain and origin of all things— of this as, in very deed, the Matter of all Matter, not liable to any end, not diverse in condition, not restless in motion, not ungraceful in form, but natural, and proper, and duly proportioned, and beautiful, such truly as even God might well have required, who requires His own and not another’s? Indeed, as soon as He perceived It to be necessary for His creation of the world, He immediately creates It, AND GENERATES IT IN HIMSELF. “The Lord,” says the Scripture, “possessed me, the beginning of His ways for the creation of His works. Before the worlds He founded me; before He made the earth, before the mountains were settled in their places; moreover, before the hills He generated me, and prior to the depths was I begotten.” Let Hermogenes then confess that the very Wisdom of God is declared to be born and created, for the special reason that we should not suppose that there is any other being than God alone who is unbegotten and uncreated. For if that, which FROM ITS BEING INHERENT IN THE LORD WAS OF HIM AND IN HIM, was yet not without a beginning—I mean His wisdom, which was then born and created, WHEN IN THE THOUGHT OF GOD IT BEGAN TO ASSUME MOTION for the arrangement of His creative works—how much more impossible is it that anything should have been without a beginning which was extrinsic to the Lord! But if this same Wisdom is the Word of God, in the capacity of Wisdom, and (as being He) without whom nothing was made, just as also (nothing) was set in order without Wisdom, how can it be that anything, except the Father, should be older, and on this account indeed nobler, than THE SON OF GOD, THE ONLY-BEGOTTEN AND FIRST-BEGOTTEN WORD? NOT TO SAY that what is unbegotten IS STRONGER THAN THAT WHICH IS BORN, and what is not made more powerful than that which is made. Because that which did not require a Maker to give it existence, will be much more elevated in rank than that which had an author to bring it into being. On this principle, then, if evil is indeed unbegotten, while the Son of God is begotten (“for,” says God, “MY HEART HAS EMITTED MY MOST ECELLENT WORD”), I am not quite sure that evil may not be introduced by good, the stronger by the weak, in the same way as the unbegotten is by the begotten. Therefore on this ground Hermogenes puts Matter even before God, by putting it before the Son. BECAUSE THE SON IS THE WORD, and “the Word is God,” John 1:1 and “I and my Father are one.” John 10:30 But after all, perhaps, the Son will patiently enough submit to having that preferred before Him which (by Hermogenes), is made equal to the Father!

    And:

    Chapter 20. Meaning of the Phrase— In the Beginning. Tertullian Connects It with the Wisdom of God, and Elicits from It the Truth that the Creation Was Not Out of Pre-Existent Matter

    But in proof that the Greek word means nothing else than beginning, and that beginning admits of no other sense than the initial one, we have that (Being) even acknowledging such a beginning, who says: “The Lord possessed me, the beginning of His ways for the creation of His works.” Proverbs 8:22 For since all things were made BY THE WISDOM OF GOD, it follows that, when God made both the heaven and the earth in principio— that is to say, in the beginning— He made them IN HIS WISDOM. If, indeed, beginning had a material signification, the Scripture would not have informed us that God made so and so in principio, at the beginning, but rather ex principio, of the beginning; for He would not have created in, but of, matter. When Wisdom, however, was referred to, it was quite right to say, in the beginning. For it was IN WISDOM that He made all things at first, because by meditating and arranging His plans therein, He had in fact already done (the work of creation); and if He had even intended to create out of matter, He would yet have effected His creation when He previously meditated on it and arranged it IN HIS WISDOM, since It was in fact the beginning of His ways: this meditation and arrangement BEING THE PRIMAL OPERATION OF WISDOM, opening as it does the way to the works by the act of meditation and thought. This authority of Scripture I claim for myself even from this circumstance, that while it shows me the God who created, and the works He created, it does not in like manner reveal to me the source from which He created. For since in every operation there are three principal things, He who makes, and that which is made, and that of which it is made, there must be three names mentioned in a correct narrative of the operation— the person of the maker the sort of thing which is made, and the material of which it is formed. If the material is not mentioned, while the work and the maker of the work are both mentioned, it is manifest that He made the work out of nothing. For if He had had anything to operate upon, it would have been mentioned as well as (the other two particulars). In conclusion, I will apply the Gospel as a supplementary testimony to the Old Testament. Now in this there is all the greater reason why there should be shown the material (if there were any) out of which God made all things, inasmuch as it is therein plainly revealed BY WHOM HE MADE ALL THINGS. “In the beginning was the Word” John 1:1 — that is, the same beginning, of course, in which God made the heaven and the earth Genesis 1:1 — “and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. All things were made by Him, and without Him nothing was made.” John 1:1-3 Now, since we have here clearly told us who the Maker was, that is, God, and what He made, even all things, AND THROUGH WHOM HE MADE THEM, EVEN HIS WORD, would not the order of the narrative have required that the source out of which all things were made by God THROUGH THE WORD should likewise be declared, if they had been in fact made out of anything? What, therefore, did not exist, the Scripture was unable to mention; and by not mentioning it, it has given us a clear proof that there was no such thing: for if there had been, the Scripture would have mentioned it.

    And here are some quotes from Tertullian’s response to Praxeas:

    Chapter 5. The Evolution of the Son or Word of God from the Father by a Divine Procession. Illustrated by the Operation of the Human Thought and Consciousness

    But since they will have the Two to be but One, so that the Father shall be deemed to be the same as the Son, it is only right that the whole question respecting the Son should be examined, as to whether He exists, and who He is and the mode of His existence. Thus shall the truth itself secure its own sanction from the Scriptures, and the interpretations which guard them. There are some who allege that even Genesis opens thus in Hebrew: “In the beginning God made for Himself a Son.” As there is no ground for this, I am led to other arguments derived from God’s own dispensation, in which He existed before the creation of the world, up to the generation of the Son. For before all things God was alone— being in Himself and for Himself universe, and space, and all things. Moreover, He was alone, because there was nothing external to Him but Himself. YET EVEN NOT THEN WAS HE ALONE, FOR HE HAD WITH HIM THAT WHICH POSSESSED IN HIMSELF, THAT IS TO SAY, HIS OWN REASON. For God is rational, AND REASON WAS FIRST IN HIM; and so all things were from Himself. This Reason is His own Thought (or Consciousness) which the Greeks call λόγος, by which term we also designate Word or Discourse and therefore it is now usual with our people, owing to the mere simple interpretation of the term, to say that the Word was in the beginning with God; although it would be more suitable to regard Reason as the more ancient; because God had not Word from the beginning, BUT HE HAD REASON EVEN BEFORE THE BEGINNINGL BECAUSE ALSO WORD ITSELF CONSISTS OF REASON, which it thus proves to have been the prior existence as being its own substance. Not that this distinction is of any practical moment. For although God had not yet sent out His Word, HE STILL HAD HIM WITHIN HIMSELF, BOTH IN COMPANY WITH AND INCLUDED WITHIN HIS VERY REASON, as He silently planned and arranged within Himself everything which He was afterwards about to utter through His Word. Now, while He was thus planning and arranging with His own Reason, HE WAS ACTUALLY CAUSING THAT TO BECOME WORD which He was dealing with in the way of Word or Discourse. And that you may the more readily understand this, consider first of all, from your own self, who are made “in the image and likeness of God,” Genesis 1:26 for what purpose it is that you also possess reason in yourself, who are a rational creature, as being not only made by a rational Artificer, but actually animated out of His substance. Observe, then, that when you are silently conversing with yourself, this very process is carried on within you by your reason, which meets you with a word at every movement of your thought, at every impulse of your conception. Whatever you think, there is a word; whatever you conceive, there is reason. You must needs speak it in your mind; and while you are speaking, you admit speech as an interlocutor with you, involved in which there is this very reason, whereby, while in thought you are holding converse with your word, you are (by reciprocal action) producing thought by means of that converse with your word. Thus, IN A CERTAIN SENSE, THE WORD IS A SECOND PERSON WITHIN YOU, through which in thinking you utter speech, and through which also, (by reciprocity of process,) in uttering speech you generate thought. The word is itself a different thing from yourself. NOW HOW MUCH FULLY IS ALL THIS TRANSACTED IN GOD, whose image and likeness even you are regarded as being, INASMUCH AS HE HAS REASON WITHIN HIMSELF EVEN WHILE HE IS SILENT, AND INVOLVED IN THAT REASON HIS WORD! I may therefore without rashness first lay this down (as a fixed principle) that even then before the creation of the universe GOD WAS NOT ALONE, SINCE HE HAD WITHIN HIMSELF BOTH REASON, AND, INHERENT IN REASON, HIS WORD, WHICH HE MADE SECOND TO HIMSELF BY AGITATING IT WITHIN HIMSELF.

    Chapter 6. The Word of God is Also the Wisdom of God. The Going Forth of Wisdom to Create the Universe, According to the Divine Plan
    This power and disposition of the Divine Intelligence is set forth also in the Scriptures under the name of Σοφία, Wisdom; for what can be better entitled to the name of Wisdom than the Reason or the Word of God? Listen therefore to Wisdom herself, CONSTITUTED IN THE CHARACTER OF A SECOND PERSON: “At the first the Lord created me as the beginning of His ways, with a view to His own works, before He made the earth, before the mountains were settled; moreover, before all the hills did He beget me;” Proverbs 8:22-25 that is to say, HE CREATED AND GENERATED ME IN HIS OWN INTELLIGENCE. Then, again, observe the distinction between them implied in the companionship of Wisdom with the Lord. “When He prepared the heaven,” says Wisdom, “I was present with Him; and when He made His strong places upon the winds, which are the clouds above; and when He secured the fountains, (and all things) which are beneath the sky, I was by, arranging all things with Him; I was by, in whom He delighted; and daily, too, did I rejoice in His presence.” Proverbs 8:27-30 Now, as soon as it pleased God to put forth into their respective substances and forms the things which He had planned and ordered within Himself, in conjunction with His Wisdom’s Reason and Word, He first put forth the Word Himself, HAVING WITHIN HIM HIS OWN INSEPARABLE REASON AND WISDOM, in order that all things might be made through Him through whom they had been planned and disposed, yea, and already made, so far forth as (they were) in the mind and intelligence of God. This, however, was still wanting to them, that they should also be openly known, and kept permanently in their proper forms and substances.

    Chapter 7. The Son by Being Designated Word and Wisdom, (According to the Imperfection of Human Thought and Language) Liable to Be Deemed a Mere Attribute. He is Shown to Be a Personal Being
    Then, therefore, DOES THE WORD ALSO HIMSELF ASSUME HIS OWN FORM AND GLORIOUS GARB, HIS OWN SOUND AND VOCAL UTTERANCE, when God says, “Let there be light.” Genesis 1:3 THIS IS THE PERFECT NATIVITY OF THE WORD, WHEN HE PROCEEDS FORTH FROM GOD— formed by Him first to devise and think out all things under the name of Wisdom— “The Lord created or formed me as the beginning of His ways;” Proverbs 8:22 then afterward begotten, to carry all into effect— “When He prepared the heaven, I was present with Him.” THUS DOES HE MAKE HIM EQUAL TO HIM: FOR BY PROCEEDING FROM HIMSELF HE BECAME HIS FIRST-BEGOTTEN, BECAUSE BEGOTTEN BEFORE ALL THINGS; Colossians 1:15 and His only-begotten also, because alone begotten of God, in a way peculiar to Himself, FROM THE WOMB OF HIS OWN HEART— even as the Father Himself testifies: “My heart,” says He, “has emitted my most excellent Word.” The Father took pleasure evermore in Him, who equally rejoiced with a reciprocal gladness in the Father’s presence: “You are my Son, today have I begotten You;” even before the morning star did I beget You. The Son likewise acknowledges the Father, speaking in His own person, under the name of Wisdom: “The Lord formed Me as the beginning of His ways, with a view to His own works; before all the hills did He beget Me.” For if indeed Wisdom in this passage seems to say that She was created by the Lord with a view to His works, and to accomplish His ways, yet proof is given in another Scripture that “all things were made by the Word, and without Him was there nothing made;” John 1:3 as, again, in another place (it is said), “By His word were the heavens established, and all the powers thereof by His Spirit” — that is to say, by the Spirit (or Divine Nature) which was in the Word: thus is it evident that it is one and the same power which is in one place described under the name of Wisdom, and in another passage under the appellation of the Word, which was initiated for the works of God Proverbs 8:22 which “strengthened the heavens;” “by which all things were made,” John 1:3 “and without which nothing was made.” John 1:3 Nor need we dwell any longer on this point, as if it were not THE VERY WORD HIMSELF, WHO IS SPOKEN OF UNDER THE NAME BOTH OF WISDOM AND OF REASON, and of the entire Divine Soul and Spirit. HE BECAME ALSO THE SON OF GOD, AND WAS BEGOTTEN WHEN HE PROCEEDED FORTH FROM HIM. Do you then, (you ask,) grant that the Word is a certain substance, constructed by the Spirit and the communication of Wisdom? Certainly I do. But you will not allow Him to be really a substantive being, by having a substance of His own; in such a way that He may be regarded as an objective thing and a person, and so be able (as being constituted second to God the Father,) to make two, the Father and the Son, God and the Word. For you will say, what is a word, but a voice and sound of the mouth, and (as the grammarians teach) air when struck against, intelligible to the ear, but for the rest a sort of void, empty, and incorporeal thing. I, on the contrary, contend that nothing empty and void could have come forth from God, seeing that it is not put forth from that which is empty and void; nor could that possibly be devoid of substance which has proceeded from so great a substance, and has produced such mighty substances: for all things which were made through Him, He Himself (personally) made. How could it be, that He Himself is nothing, without whom nothing was made? How could He who is empty have made things which are solid, and He who is void have made things which are full, and He who is incorporeal have made things which have body? For although a thing may sometimes be made different from him by whom it is made, yet nothing can be made by that which is a void and empty thing. Is that Word of God, then, a void and empty thing, which is called the Son, WHO HIMSELF IS DESGINATED GOD? “The Word was with God, and the Word was God.” John 1:1 It is written, “You shall not take God’s name in vain.” Exodus 20:7 This for certain is He “who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God.” Philippians 2:6 In what form of God? Of course he means in some form, not in none. For who will deny that God is a body, although “God is a Spirit?” John 4:24 For Spirit has a bodily substance of its own kind, in its own form. Now, even if invisible things, whatsoever they be, have both their substance and their form in God, whereby they are visible to God alone, how much more shall that which has been sent forth from His substance not be without substance! Whatever, therefore, was the substance of the Word that I designate a Person, I claim for it the name of Son; and while I recognize the Son, I assert His distinction as second to the Father. Against Praxeas

    • The following quotes further confirm that Tertullian believed in the essential and uncreated Deity of Christ, and affirmed the Triunity of God. Enjoy!

      There is one only God, but under the following dispensation, or oikonomia, as it is called, that this one only God has also a Son, His Word, WHO PROCEEDED FROM HIMSEL, by whom all things were made, and without whom nothing was made. Him we believe to have been sent by the Father into the Virgin, and to have been born of her — BEING BOTH MAN AND GOD, the Son of Man and the Son of God, and to have been called by the name of Jesus Christ; we believe Him to have suffered, died, and been buried, according to the Scriptures, and, after He had been raised again by the Father and taken back to heaven, to be sitting at the right hand of the Father, and that He will come to judge the quick and the dead; who sent also from heaven from the Father, according to His own promise, the Holy Ghost, the Paraclete, the sanctifier of the faith of those who believe in the Father, and in the Son, and in the Holy Ghost. That this rule of faith has come down to us from the beginning of the gospel, even before any of the older heretics.” – Against Praxeas, ch. 2.

      “All the Scriptures give clear proof of the Trinity, and it is from these that our principle is deduced…the distinction of the Trinity is quite clearly displayed.” – Against Praxeas, ch. 11.

      “[God speaks in the plural ‘Let us make man in our image’] because already there was attached to Him his Son, a second person, his own Word, and a third, the Spirit in the Word….one substance in three coherent persons. He was at once the Father, the Son, and the Spirit.” – Against Praxeas, ch. 12.

      “That there are, however, two Gods or two Lords, is a statement which at no time proceeds out of our mouth: not as if it were untrue that THE FATHER IS GOD, AND THE SON IS GOD, AND THE HOLY SPIRIT IS GOD, AND EACH IS GOD.” – Against Praxeas, ch. 13.

      “The connection of Father and Son, of Son and the Paraclete [Holy Spirit] makes three coherent Persons, who are yet distinct One from Another. And these three are one essence; not one person.” – Against Praxeas, ch. 25.

      THE SPIRIT IS GOD, AND THE WORD IS GOD, because proceeding from God, but yet is not actually the very same as He from whom He proceeds..” – Against Praxeas, ch. 26.

      “He will be God, and the Word — the Son of God. We see plainly the twofold state, which is not confounded, but conjoined in One Person — Jesus, GOD AND MAN…” –Against Praxeas, ch. 27.

      “Thus the nature of the two substances displayed Him as man and God, — in one respect born, in the other unborn;.” – On the Flesh of Christ, ch. 5.

      “Never did any angel descend for the purpose of being crucified, of tasting death, and of rising again from the dead.” – On the Flesh of Christ, ch. 6.

      “So too, that which has COME FORTH OUT OF GOD IS AT ONCE GOD AND THE SON OF GOD; and the two are one…. In his birth he is God and man united.” – Apology, ch. 21.

    • Ken Temple says:

      Thanks; I did see that but didn’t have time to fully digest it yet.

      sounds like the debate between “Eternal Sonship” vs. “Incarnational Sonship” (the Word was eternal with the Father – John 1:1 – but the Word became the Son in the womb of Mary at conception and resulting in the virgin birth. (Luke 1:34-35)

      What do you mean here?
      It was at that moment when God spoke his Word which was inherent within him as his Reason that the Word became the Son and God therefore became the Father.

      what was that “moment”?

      My understanding is that the Word was eternally always coming out from the Father, as in the Greek idea of “logos” means “the mind, reason, or thoughts expressing themselves in words”. There is never a “time” or “moment” in the idea of “eternally coming out from” or “eternally generated”.

      Your other post there was good also. Good summary of key quotes from Tertullian.

      I am reposting here; because I want to have it and look at these things deeper later. (and in case Williams’ deletes your entry)

      December 12, 2016 • 5:30 am
      The following quotes further confirm that Tertullian believed in the essential and uncreated Deity of Christ, and affirmed the Triunity of God. Enjoy!

      There is one only God, but under the following dispensation, or oikonomia, as it is called, that this one only God has also a Son, His Word, WHO PROCEEDED FROM HIMSEL, by whom all things were made, and without whom nothing was made. Him we believe to have been sent by the Father into the Virgin, and to have been born of her — BEING BOTH MAN AND GOD, the Son of Man and the Son of God, and to have been called by the name of Jesus Christ; we believe Him to have suffered, died, and been buried, according to the Scriptures, and, after He had been raised again by the Father and taken back to heaven, to be sitting at the right hand of the Father, and that He will come to judge the quick and the dead; who sent also from heaven from the Father, according to His own promise, the Holy Ghost, the Paraclete, the sanctifier of the faith of those who believe in the Father, and in the Son, and in the Holy Ghost. That this rule of faith has come down to us from the beginning of the gospel, even before any of the older heretics.” – Against Praxeas, ch. 2.

      “All the Scriptures give clear proof of the Trinity, and it is from these that our principle is deduced…the distinction of the Trinity is quite clearly displayed.” – Against Praxeas, ch. 11.

      “[God speaks in the plural ‘Let us make man in our image’] because already there was attached to Him his Son, a second person, his own Word, and a third, the Spirit in the Word….one substance in three coherent persons. He was at once the Father, the Son, and the Spirit.” – Against Praxeas, ch. 12.

      “That there are, however, two Gods or two Lords, is a statement which at no time proceeds out of our mouth: not as if it were untrue that THE FATHER IS GOD, AND THE SON IS GOD, AND THE HOLY SPIRIT IS GOD, AND EACH IS GOD.” – Against Praxeas, ch. 13.

      “The connection of Father and Son, of Son and the Paraclete [Holy Spirit] makes three coherent Persons, who are yet distinct One from Another. And these three are one essence; not one person.” – Against Praxeas, ch. 25.

      THE SPIRIT IS GOD, AND THE WORD IS GOD, because proceeding from God, but yet is not actually the very same as He from whom He proceeds..” – Against Praxeas, ch. 26.

      “He will be God, and the Word — the Son of God. We see plainly the twofold state, which is not confounded, but conjoined in One Person — Jesus, GOD AND MAN…” –Against Praxeas, ch. 27.

      “Thus the nature of the two substances displayed Him as man and God, — in one respect born, in the other unborn;.” – On the Flesh of Christ, ch. 5.

      “Never did any angel descend for the purpose of being crucified, of tasting death, and of rising again from the dead.” – On the Flesh of Christ, ch. 6.

      “So too, that which has COME FORTH OUT OF GOD IS AT ONCE GOD AND THE SON OF GOD; and the two are one…. In his birth he is God and man united.” – Apology, ch. 21.

      • Brother Ken,

        You are misunderstanding Tertullian’s view since he wasn’t arguing that Jesus became the Son at his Incarnation. Rather, he believed that at the moment God spoke forth or brought forth his Word from within him in order to speak creation into being that is when the Word became his Son, and therefore a separate Being or Person from him. Tertullian believed that Christ is uncreated in that he was God’s own Reason residing within God’s Mind, and that His Reason also had within it God’s Wisdom and Word which eventually came to be “materialized” or became actual rational beings distinct from God without separating from him.

        So in a weird way Tertullian believed that Jesus as God’s Reason did not initially exist as a distinct rational Person from the Father, even though he eternally resided within the Father. He only became a distinct rational Being from God when God brought him forth as his Word in order to then use his Word to create everything. It was that act of bringing forth his Word that made God’s Reason his Son.

        I hope this makes sense.

      • Ken Temple says:

        Thanks, I did not have time to fully digest all the material yet; I appreciate your comments.

  3. Here is my reply to a JW regarding Justin Martyr’s Christology which you can use to silence Infinite and One:

    Speaking of Justin, let’s see what he meant by Angel and what he really believed about Jesus:

    Chapter 56. GOD WHO APPEARED TO MOSES is distinguished from God the Father

    Justin: Moses, then, the blessed and faithful servant of God, declares that He who appeared to Abraham under the oak in Mamre IS GOD, sent with the two angels in His company to judge Sodom BY ANOTHER WHO REMAINS EVER IN SUPERCELESTIAL PLACES, invisible to all men, holding personal intercourse with none, whom we believe to be Maker and Father of all things; for he speaks thus: ‘God appeared to him under the oak in Mamre, as he sat at his tent-door at noontide. And lifting up his eyes, he saw, and behold, three men stood before him; and when he saw them, he ran to meet them from the door of his tent; and he bowed himself toward the ground, and said . . .’ Genesis 18:1-2 ‘Abraham went up early in the morning to the place where he stood before the Lord: and he looked toward Sodom and Gomorrha, and toward the adjacent country, and beheld, and, lo, a flame went up from the earth, like the smoke of a furnace.’

    And when I had made an end of quoting these words, I asked them if they had understood them. And they said they had understood them, but that the passages adduced brought forward no proof that there is any other God or Lord, or that the Holy Spirit says so, besides the Maker of all things.

    Justin: I shall attempt to persuade you, since you have understood the Scriptures, [of the truth] of what I say, that there is, AND THERE IS TO BE, ANOTHER GOD AND LORD subject to the Maker of all things; WHO IS ALSO CALLED AN ANGEL, BECAUSE HE ANNOUNCES TO MEN WHATSOEVER the Maker of all things—above whom there is no other God—WISHES TO ANNOUNCE TO THEM…

    Justin: If I could not have proved to you from the Scriptures that one of those three IS GOD, AND IS CALLED ANGEL, BECAUSE, AS I ALREADY SAID, HE BRINGS MESSAGES TO THOSE WHOM God the Maker of all things WISHES [messages to be brought], then in regard to Him who appeared to Abraham on earth in human form in like manner as the two angels who came with Him, AND WHO WAS GOD EVEN BEFORE THE CREATION OF THE WORLD, it were reasonable for you to entertain the same belief as is entertained by the whole of your nation…

    Justin: Reverting to the Scriptures, I shall endeavour to persuade you, that He who is said TO HAVE APPEARED TO ABRAHAM, AND TO JACOB, AND TO MOSES AND WHO IS CALLED GOD, is distinct from Him who made all things—numerically, I mean, not [distinct] in will. For I affirm that He has never at any time done anything which He who made the world—above whom there is no other God—has not wished Him both to do and to engage Himself with…

    Justin: The Scripture just quoted by me will make this plain to you. It is thus: ‘The sun was risen on the earth, and Lot entered into Segor (Zoar); and the Lord rained on Sodom sulphur and fire from the Lord out of heaven, and overthrew these cities and all the neighbourhood.’ Genesis 19:23…

    Justin: (After another pause.) And now have you not perceived, my friends, that one of the three, WHO IS BOTH GOD AND LORD, and ministers to Him who is in the heavens, is Lord of the two angels? For when [the angels] proceeded to Sodom, He remained behind, and communed with Abraham in the words recorded by Moses; and when He departed after the conversation, Abraham went back to his place. And when he came [to Sodom], the two angels no longer conversed with Lot, but Himself, as the Scripture makes evident; AND HE IS THE LORD WHO RECEIVED COMMISSION FROM THE LORD WHO [remains] IN THE HEAVENS, i.e., the Maker of all things, to inflict upon Sodom and Gomorrha the [judgments] which the Scripture describes in these terms: ‘The Lord rained down upon Sodom and Gomorrha sulphur and fire from the Lord out of heaven.’ (http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/01285.htm)

    Here Justin explains that Jesus is called Angel because he delivers messages from God the Father, NOT BECAUSE HE IS A CREATED SPIRIT CREATURE NAMED MICHAEL! He then proceeds to quote Genesis 18:1-33 and 19:1-29 to prove that Jesus is the God and Jehovah who appeared to Abraham as a man along with two other angels, and who brought fire down from another who is said be Jehovah in the heavens. Lord willing, I will have more quotes from Justin later in the day.

    Here are some more nuggets from Justin Martyr. In these next quotes you will see Justin identifying Jesus as the God of Abraham and the Jehovah of hosts of the Hebrew Bible:

    Chapter 36. HE PROVES THAT CHRIST IS CALLED LORD OF HOSTS

    Trypho: Let these things be so as you say—namely, that it was foretold Christ would suffer, and be called a stone; and after His first appearance, in which it had been announced He would suffer, would come in glory, and be Judge finally of all, and eternal King and Priest. Now show if this man be He of whom these prophecies were made.

    Justin: As you wish, Trypho, I shall come to these proofs which you seek in the fitting place; but now you will permit me first to recount the prophecies, which I wish to do in order to prove THAT CHRIST IS CALLED BOTH GOD AND LORD OF HOSTS, and Jacob, in parable by the Holy Spirit; and your interpreters, as God says, are foolish, since they say that reference is made to Solomon and not to Christ, when he bore the ark of testimony into the temple which he built. The Psalm of David is this:

    The earth is the Lord’s, and the fullness thereof; the world, and all that dwell therein. He has rounded it upon the seas, and prepared it upon the floods. Who shall ascend into the hill of the Lord? Or who shall stand in His holy place? He that is clean of hands and pure of heart: who has not received his soul in vain, and has not sworn guilefully to his neighbour: he shall receive blessing from the Lord, and mercy from God his Saviour. This is the generation of them that seek the Lord, that seek the face of the God of Jacob. Lift up your gates, you rulers; and be lifted up, you everlasting doors; and the King of glory shall come in. Who is this King of glory? The Lord strong and mighty in battle. Lift up your gates, you rulers; and be lifted up, you everlasting doors; and the King of glory shall come in. Who is this King of glory? The Lord of hosts, He is the King of glory.

    Accordingly, it is shown that Solomon is not the Lord of hosts; but when our Christ rose from the dead and ascended to heaven, the rulers in heaven, under appointment of God, are commanded to open the gates of heaven, THAT HE WHO IS KING OF GLORY may enter in, and having ascended, may sit on the right hand of the Father until He make the enemies His footstool, as has been made manifest by another Psalm. For when the rulers of heaven saw Him of uncomely and dishonoured appearance, and inglorious, not recognising Him, they inquired, ‘Who is this King of glory?’ And the Holy Spirit, either from the person of His Father, or from His own person, answers them, ‘The Lord of hosts, He is this King of glory.’ For every one will confess that not one of those who presided over the gates of the temple at Jerusalem would venture to say concerning Solomon, though he was so glorious a king, or concerning the ark of testimony, ‘Who is this King of glory?’

    Chapter 37. The same is proved from other Psalms

    Justin: Moreover, in the diapsalm of the forty-sixth Psalm, REFERENCE IS THUS MADE TO CHRIST: ‘GOD WENT UP WITH A SHOUT, THE LORD WITH THE SOUND OF A TRUMPET. Sing to OUR GOD, sing: sing to our King, sing; for God is King of all the earth: sing with understanding. God has ruled over the nations. God sits upon His holy throne. The rulers of the nations were assembled along with THE GOD OF ABRAHAM, for the strong ones of God are greatly exalted on the earth.’ And in the ninety-eighth Psalm, the Holy SpiriT reproaches you, AND PREDICTS HIM WHOM YOU DO NOT WISH TO BE KING TO BE KING AND LORD, both of Samuel, and of Aaron, and of Moses, and, in short, of all the others. And the words of the Psalm are these:

    The Lord has reigned, let the nations be angry: [it is] He who sits upon the cherubim, let the earth be shaken. The Lord is great in Zion, and He is high above all the nations. Let them confess Your great name, for it is fearful and holy, and the honour of the King loves judgment. You have prepared equity; judgment and righteousness have You performed in Jacob. Exalt the Lord our God, and worship the footstool of His feet; for He is holy. Moses and Aaron among His priests, and Samuel among those who call upon His name. They called (says the Scripture) on the Lord, and He heard them. In the pillar of the cloud He spoke to them; for they kept His testimonies, and the commandment which he gave them. O Lord our God, You heard them: O God, You were propitious to them, and [yet] taking vengeance on all their inventions. Exalt the Lord our God, and worship at His holy hill; for the Lord our God is holy. (http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/01283.htm)

    Justin applies Psalm 24, 47 and 99 to Jesus in order to identify him as Jehovah of hosts, Jehovah our God whom believers are to worship at his footstool, the Jehovah who sits enthroned upon the cherubim, and the God of Abraham. More in the next post.

    Now seeing that Justin identified Jesus as the Jehovah God Almighty who appeared to the OT saints such as Abraham and Moses, and seeing that Jehovah is uncreated by nature, this conclusively proves that Justin DID NOT think that Jesus is a part of creation, but is uncreated by nature. This is precisely what we find Justin saying:

    Chapter 61. Wisdom is begotten of the Father, as fire from fire

    Justin: I shall give you another testimony, my friends, from the Scriptures, that God begot BEFORE ALL CREATURES a Beginning, [who was] a certain rational power [proceeding] FROM HIMSELF, WHO IS CALLED BY THE HOLY SPIRIT, NOW THE GLORY OF THE LORD, NOW THE SON, AGAIN WISDOM, AGAIN AN ANGEL, THEN GOD, AND THEN LORD AND LOGOS; AND ON ANOTHER OCCASION HE CALLS HIMSELF CAPTAIN, WHEN HE APPEARED IN HuMAN FORM TO JOSHUA THE SON OF NAVE (NUN). For He can be called by all those names, since He ministers to the Father’s will, and since He was begotten of the Father by an act of will; just as we see happening among ourselves: for when we give out some word, we beget the word; yet not by abscission, so as to lessen the word [which remains] in us, when we give it out: and just as we see also happening in the case of a fire, which is not lessened when it has kindled [another], but remains the same; and that which has been kindled by it likewise appears to exist by itself, not diminishing that from which it was kindled. The Word of Wisdom, WHO IS HIMSELF THIS GOD BEGOTTEN OF THE FATHER OF ALL THINGS, and Word, and Wisdom, and Power, and the Glory of the Begetter, will bear evidence to me, when He speaks by Solomon the following:

    Note that Justin does not believe that Jesus was created from nothing but that he proceeded from the Father himself without ever severing from him, and therefore is separate from all creation, which is why he can say that Christ was begotten before all creatures. Clearly then, for Justin Jesus is not a part of the creation which the Father made out of nothing, but is the eternal Logos of the Father who resided within him in eternity and was then brought forth at the point in which the Father decided to bring all creation into being by that very Word/Wisdom that he eternally possessed. So much for Graham’s abuse and misuse of Justin since he does not believe that Justin is correct in identifying Jesus as the Jehovah God Almighty of the OT who appeared to all the OT prophets and saints. Lord willing, I have a question for Graham to answer which I will ask later in the day.

  4. Hey bro, I thought this would be of help. I posted this:

    BEGIN
    But your god can be contained in a tree:

    When he saw a fire, and said to his family, ‘Tarry you here; I observe a fire. Perhaps I shall bring you a brand from it, or I shall find at the fire guidance.’ When he came TO IT, A VOICE CRIED, ‘Moses, I AM THY LORD; put off thy shoes; thou art in the holy valley, Towa. I Myself have chosen thee; therefore give thou ear to this revelation. S. 20:10-13 Arberry

    When Moses said to his people ‘I observe a fire, and will bring you news of it, or I will bring you a flaming brand, that haply you shall warm yourselves.’ So, when he came TO IT, he was called: ‘Blessed IS HE WHO IS IN THE FIRE, and he who is about it. Glory be to God, the Lord of all Being! Moses, behold, it is I, God, the All-mighty, the All-wise. S. 27:7-9 Arberry

    Then, when Musa (Moses) had fulfilled the term, and was travelling with his family, he saw a fire in the direction of Tur (Mount). He said to his family: “Wait, I have seen a fire; perhaps I may bring to you from there some information, or a burning fire-brand that you may warm yourselves.” So when he reached IT (the fire), he was called from the right side of the valley, in the blessed place FROM THE TREE: “O Musa (Moses)! Verily! I AM ALLAH, the Lord of the ‘Alamin (mankind, jinns and all that exists)!” S. 28:29-30 Hilali-Khan

    Allah, who supposedly cannot enter his creation, not only entered into it but actually entered into a tree and in the fire which didn’t consume the tree! Go figure.

    Now what was that about cognitive dissonance?
    END

    Over here: https://bloggingtheology.net/2016/12/13/26479/

Comments are closed.