Only True God

@LukeHill Who knows? I once got suspended because I made a few too many comments on a thread, apparently.

@GratefulDisciple What does Swinburne say exactly?

@GratefulDisciple Thanks for this! Bookmarked.

@GratefulDisciple Yes, this might be behind the differing accounts.

@GratefulDisciple Ya, that's probably the way to go.

@GratefulDisciple This article, though, states what I thought re Irenaeus. exegeticaltools.com/2020/05/24/who-is-the-john-of-revelation "Irenaeus introduces a series of quotations from Revelation with an introductory formula. In this formula, he claims that “John, the Lord’s disciple” wrote the following words in “the Apocalypse.”"

@GratefulDisciple ChatGPT might be right. Look at en.wikipedia.org//wiki/Authorship_of_the_Johannine_works under 'attestation'. I'm having a hard time finding clear discussion of this.

@GratefulDisciple Pretty sure Irenaeus supports same author theory. :S

@GratefulDisciple Rolls eyes. My main reason for thinking Rev author isn't GoJ is that the styles are very different. Authors tend to sound identifiable, even within different genres.

@GratefulDisciple How are you decreasing the credit given if you are trying to get me to sign up to ChatGPT?!?

@GratefulDisciple I'm sad. ;)

@GratefulDisciple It's like if you have some belief floating around in your head, and someone says "How do you know that?" And you start to recollect all the things that went into forming it. Usually, you don't just have a footnote for a belief you hold.

@GratefulDisciple That would only work if the claim is being made in a straightforward 1:1 way, though.

@GratefulDisciple I don't have an account with ChatGPT. :(

@GratefulDisciple What did it say?

@Matthew Yes, that's my guess. The big breakthrough vis a vis traditional search engines is in synthesis of results and interface.

@MikeBorden Standard answer seems to be "grammatically, it can, but it's conceptually impossible here!" :P

@MikeBorden Nice!

@MikeBorden Yes, the argument would be that Jesus was in the form of a god with the wonderworking of his ministry, but humbled himself as a regular man all the way to the cross and crucifixion.

@MikeBorden " "in the form of a god" which very simply is not in the text" What do you mean, it's 'not in the text'? The Greek is ambiguous.

@MikeBorden See starting at 8:15 here youtube.com/watch?v=8o8yj8nBwJ0

@MikeBorden Yes, the key is 'form of'. "The most natural reading" How do you know that's the most natural reading?

@Mr.Bond Re Gen. 3:15, "I will." ? I refer to Isaiah in the original post. In Isaiah, God also says He alone is God. Yet Moses is God in Ex. The first point in the original post is that BUs posit an agent/author distinction. It is core to their hermeneutic, and there a large scriptural basis for doing so.

@MikeBorden Sure, that's a way for a Trinitarian to try to make sense of Acts. But it leans heavily on a specific interpretation of an unclear sentence in Phil. 2. I think Phil. 2 is talking about how Jesus was in the form of a god, in the Roman-Greek understanding of 'theos' applied to men. I don't think your interpretation would have crossed Paul's mind.

@Mr.Bond In some sense, when Jesus is born he's the savior - yes, but only because he will then be exalted. The saving occurs when he's exalted.

@Mr.Bond I don't really understand what you're saying here. Yes, Jesus = the prophesied saviour. He is the person referred to. But the 'activation' of that capacity doesn't happen until later. Note 'in order to'. It's something that doesn't happen until Jesus is exalted.

@Mr.Bond I don't understand why it's invalid. Can you rephrase?

It's in the Acts 5:31 quote. Luke 2:11 is stating that Jesus, who has just been born, is that person who will be exalted as Savior. Was baby Jesus currently saving people when he was born? No, that happens later.

@RevelationLad Deuble isn't saying 'ages' has nothing to do with the material world. Songs, for ex., occur in the material world. But referring to 'songs' is very different from referring to the 'universe'. I think you're taking a specific interpretation of his word 'spiritual' that isn't intended by Deuble.

@RevelationLad Are you asking me what 'ages' refers to in Hebrews 11:3? It sounds like it refers to an eras - ages. The verse is a bit opaque, and looking a commentary confirms that to me, where commentators give their theories about what it means exactly. The point about 'ages' isn't that the material world isn't part of an age. ?

@RevelationLad No, I put forth a question to see what people say. Anyone can answer it. I then went and looked to see in various books if there was something better than in the REV, and found Deuble's take on it.

@RevelationLad FWIW, Deuble suffered a large personal cost to going Trinitarian -> Unitarian. He's not lying or making stuff up to intentionally mislead people - he genuinely believes what he's saying.

@RevelationLad I'm not sure why you're so upset about this. Deuble might be wrong, but I'm almost certain he's not lying. You can't say aionas means universe, and cite lexicons that cite ... Heb. 1:2! That's circular.

@RevelationLad Again, I asked you for specific verses to support your claim. You gave Acts 3:21, which just means 'long ago', and doesn't mean the universe.

@RevelationLad Not sure why you're carrying on like this.

@RevelationLad I'm sorry, this is just wrong. Acts 3:21 isn't a good example. Every translation I've looked at translates it 'long ago' or something similar.

@RevelationLad Please be specific.

@RevelationLad This is just wrong. ?

@RevelationLad Which translation interprets aionos in Acts 3:21 as material creation? It just means 'long ago'.

@RevelationLad Where does 'aion' refer to material creation in the Bible?

@RevelationLad Yes?

@RevelationLad It depends on how 'epoiesen' is working in the sentence. Does it mean 'made' as in Genesis creation? Or 'formed' as in changing the playing out of history?

@RevelationLad The ages are formed or made of course involve matter. I don't see how this contradicts what Deuble is saying. ?

@RevelationLad Stepping back, I think the bigger question is whether you think John 1 and various texts in Paul are talking about Genesis creation through the Son. If so Hebrews just fits into that pattern. If not, then there isn't a contextual argument for translating it 'universe'. Most translators assume John 1 and so on is about the Son creating the universe.

@RevelationLad Presumably the ages involve the material world in some way. ?

@RevelationLad Rather, it refers to periods of time.

@RevelationLad Deuble's use of 'spiritual' is ambiguous, but it's a secondary point and I don't think too much should be put on it. His basic point is it doesn't refer to the material universe.

@RevelationLad Well, should it be 'ages' or 'universe' there? It's not clear to me. It requires a contextual argument at Heb 11:3.

@RevelationLad The question isn't whether KJV translates aion as 'world' at certain points - it's whether the Greek actually means 'the material universe' or whatever.

@RevelationLad Can you be more specific? I'm pretty sure Deuble has looked at the lexicon.