Kingdom Ready

This is the fourteenth and final post in a moderated debate between Biblical Unitarian Danny Dixon and Trinitarian Marc Taylor. A complete list of posts can be accessed here.

If Danny isn’t convinced that Christ is referred to as “Master” in Jude 1:4 (despite virtually all the lexicons/dictionaries that disagree with him) I would direct him to 2 Peter 2:1 where despotes is also applied to the Lord Jesus. The Christian has “only” one Master (Jude 1:4) in heaven and as with God (Act 4:24) it applies “without qualification” to the Lord Jesus. Danny doesn’t believe that only really means only but it could mean another (others?). His attempt at defining (really redefining words) is necessary in order to deny the obvious – that Christ is God.

This is the thirteenth post in a moderated debate between Biblical Unitarian Danny Dixon and Trinitarian Marc Taylor. A complete list of posts can be accessed here.

This debate has turned out to be an entirely different thing that what I had expected. I have debated Marc before, so it was not so much that I would have expected his arguments to be radically different, substantially, than what occurred in the first discussion. I was not, back in June to October of 2006 as focused on his methodology of debate. And I should probably say that he did not, at that time, follow the approach he has taken in this contest—at least not to the degree to which he has done so in the present discussion. I’ll say more on that momentarily.

This is the twelfth post in a moderated debate between Biblical Unitarian Danny Dixon and Trinitarian Marc Taylor. A complete list of posts can be accessed here.

1. “Unique”

In 1 Corinthians 15:23-28, first, the Father who “subjected all things unto Christ” in the present is excepted from being made subject to Christ. Marc confusedly insists ed when he insists that exclusive terminology in the Scripture must stand “without qualification” in a context like Jude 4, when other biblical teaching does establish exceptions. All-inclusive language can be excepted (e.g. see marriage differences in Mark 10:12 and Matthew 19:9 defines

This is the eleventh post in a moderated debate between Biblical Unitarian Danny Dixon and Trinitarian Marc Taylor. A complete list of posts can be accessed here.

1. Only Master (Jude 1:4)
The NIDNTT reads: Belief in the one, only and unique God (Matt. 23:9; Rom. 3:30; 1 Cor. 8:4, 6; Gal. 3:20; 1 Tim. 2:5; Jas. 2:19) is an established part of primitive Christian tradition (2:73, God – J. Schneider). Jude 1:4 teaches that “the uniqueness of God can be applied without qualification to Jesus” (NIDNTT 2:725, One – K.H. Bartels). Unique is defined as “existing as the only one or as the sole example; single; solitary in type or characteristics” (Webster’s Encyclopedic Unabridged Dictionary, page 1554) while qualification is defined as a “restriction” (page 1174).
In your 2nd Rebuttal you ignored commenting on Jude 1:4 despite the fact that it was in my 2nd Constructive #4. Can you please explain why you either agree or disagree that there is no restriction in that Christ shares in the “uniqueness” (singleness) of the “only one” God?

This is the tenth post in a moderated debate between Biblical Unitarian Danny Dixon and Trinitarian Marc Taylor. A complete list of posts can be accessed here.

1. TDNT: Elsewhere, however, it is said of the Redeemer during His earthly life that He has laid aside His power and appeared in lowliness and humility, Mt. 11:29; 12:18-21; 2 C. 8:9; Phil. 2:5-8 -> kenow 3, 661, 13-28, cf. the temptation of Jesus, Mt. 4:8 f. par. Lk. 4:5 f. Thus, when the full power of Jesus is occasionally mentioned during the time of His humiliation, it is merely a proleptic fact.
A new situation is brought into being with the crucifixion and resurrection. The Chosen One seizes the full power which He had from the beginning of the world, Mt. 28:18: “All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth” (5:895, pas – Reicke).
The Lord Jesus was, is and will always be omnipotent. He chose not to always use His “full power” (omnipotence) during His earthly life. Refusal to employ ability does not necessitate inability.

This is the ninth post in a moderated debate between Biblical Unitarian Danny Dixon and Trinitarian Marc Taylor. A complete list of posts can be accessed here.

Marc:

This new phase of the discussion is upon us. I hope my questions are understandable. And I hope you can respond in a thorough way as may be necessary. Please note that we do not have full space to respond to the questions we leave for one another unless we do so either in the Comments or in our closing statements (We should have thought about that when we were making the rules for the discussion!)

Authority and Omnipotence

This is the eighth post in a moderated debate between Biblical Unitarian Danny Dixon and Trinitarian Marc Taylor. A complete list of posts can be accessed here.

I think we all can see the lack of value in quoting scholarly sources without providing explanation for the meaning of the sources. Once a theological concept appears in a word it becomes the responsibility of the person using the word to define it clearly so that the reasoning behind the selected scholarly texts can be explained, so that the readers, particularly in a debate, can see the different points of view and argumentation used to establish singular points. Scholars often are appealed to as final authorities on a subject. They are not. Readers are finally responsible for what they choose to embrace. Let me illustrate.

This is the seventh post in a moderated debate between Biblical Unitarian Danny Dixon and Trinitarian Marc Taylor. A complete list of posts can be accessed here.

1. The title “First and Last” is of course not simply “one theological statement with one theological truth”. Besides denoting that Christ is Eternal it also refers to His power and majesty.

a. Mounce: The word appears in Revelation in the phrase “beginning and end.” This theologically rich phrase articulates the power of God (Rev. 21:6) and Christ (22:13), denoting both extremes of beginning and end along with everything temporally and spatially in between (Mounce’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words, End, page 212).

This is the sixth post in a moderated debate between Biblical Unitarian Danny Dixon and Trinitarian Marc Taylor. A complete list of posts can be accessed here.

1. Only begotten

a. NIDNTT: While genos is distantly related to gennan, beget, there is little linguistic justification for translating monogenes as “only begotten.” The latter practice originated with Jerome who translated it by the Lat. unigenitus to emphasize Jesus’ divine origin in answer to Arianism. The word monogenes reflects the Heb. yahid, only, precious [Gen. 22:2, 12, 16, of Isaac], and is used in Heb. 11:17 of Isaac who was unique in the sense of being the sole son of promise, but who was not the only son whom Abraham begat. Perhaps the word may best be translated as “unique” (2:75-76, God – J. Stafford Wright).

This is the fifth post in a moderated debate between Biblical Unitarian Danny Dixon and Trinitarian Marc Taylor. A complete list of posts can be accessed here.

In examining the discussion thus far, I see that I have presented a few points that I do not think Marc has dealt with well, and I will restate them as well as present my final constructive points for the readers’ consideration.

1. Jesus, Uniquely Begotton, Was “With God”