'In Christ'...How?

[gregoryfl]

I will share one more point which I think everyone can agree on, even though there be differences of understanding in our earthly experience.

Solomon spoke of, not only the heaven we see above, but also the heaven of heavens, not being able to contain God, which the ancients understood to mean that all creation is in God, like a womb inside a mother:

But will God in very deed dwell on the earth? behold, heaven and the heaven of heavens can't contain you; how much less this house that I have built!
(1Ki 8:27)

Now from man's experience, they could argue with Solomon saying, "Of course he dwells on the earth...he is dwelling in the most holy place is he not?" And they would be correct, but that does not mean Solomon was not correct. They both would be, it is all a matter of perspective. One doesn't discount the other.

Speaking of the Word, before becoming flesh, John wrote that everything that is created was created in the Word:

Everything existed by his hand and without him not even one [thing] existed. That which existed in him was life and the life was the light of men.
(Joh 1:3-4 MGI)

And then, to me, the most powerful expression of this truth is Paul's witness, that everything that was built, including thrones, lordships, rulers, and authorities, which we in the East understand to mean evil powers of darkness, was built in him, and that they stand in him. Apart from him nothing can exist, or stand:

And in him everything that is in heaven and on earth was built, all that is seen and all that is not seen, whether thrones or lordships or rulers or authorities, everything [is] by way of him and was built in him. And he is in front of all and everything stands in him.
(Col 1:16-17 MGI)

Those espousing dualistic Greek thinking will probably not like this, but it is what the earliest believers understood, and is why I share it as an alternative starting point, the one Athanasius held to, instead of the more common understanding today built out of a framework starting from separation, as Augustine held to.

This that I have shared is not in opposition to one's responsibility to confess Yeshua, to turn to God, to live as one connected to the Head, who is Messiah, nor of the need to be saved.

If people are in a room full of light and their eyes are closed, they will be fumbling as those who are lost in the dark. This does not negate both truths, that they are in the room, and in the light (God's reality), yet at the same time, they are walking in darkness (man's reality). They do not need to have someone lead them to the room to enter it (they are already inside it). What they need is for someone like Paul to 'open their eyes, so that they will turn from darkness to the light and from the authority of Satan to God and they will receive forgiveness of sins and a portion with the holy [ones] by faith that [is] in me.' (Act 26:18 MGI)

They are like the Greeks he spoke to, who were blindly groping about trying to find the God they were inside the whole time! This is why there is so much emphasis on opening the eyes, having the eyes of the heart enlightened, etc, not for the purpose of entering into Messiah, but to realize where they are and grow in their experience of that truth.

[Seth]

I understand what you are getting at and I am glad that we agree on faith in Christ and salvation etc. I just want to share how I see this scripture:

John 7:37-39
In the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink. 38 He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. 39 (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)

It's not that the Holy Spirit has been given but not everyone realizes it within themselves. "The Holy Ghost was not yet given" in the first place. You cannot awake to something within you which has not even been given yet.  Even the prophets had the Spirit in them, but not this manifestation. Christ THROUGH the Spirit unto "living waters that flow outwardly" had not been given yet at the moment, and it is only given to the believers.

Jesus had to be glorified first, because he would come to his disciples at Pentacost in a manner not yet seen and this gift would only be given to the believer. Of course, this gets into a whole trinity debate I don't want to get into.

But even we agree basically, I cannot say that the Holy Spirit had already been given, when John says, "it had not yet been given."

[gregoryfl]

Even the prophets had the Spirit in them, but not this manifestation. Christ THROUGH the Spirit unto "living waters that flow outwardly" had not been given yet at the moment, and it is only given to the believers.

I agree wholeheartedly. There is a big difference in my understanding between Messiah being in us, and us being in Messiah, and us 'having Messiah'. John wrote of those who have Messiah and those who do not, when he wrote:

Everyone who holds fast to the Son also holds fast to life. And everyone who does not hold fast to the Son of God does not have life to him. (1Jo 5:12 MGI)

Here, holding fast to the Son is what you in the West would understand to mean 'having' or 'possessing the Son'.

But even we agree basically, I cannot say that the Holy Spirit had already been given, when John says, "it had not yet been given."

Very true. The Spirit was not given. In fact, Yeshua, after his resurrection, breathed on them saying, "Receive the Rukha d'Qdshah!
(Joh 20:22)

These I believe to be manifestations, that which we as humans could relate to, things pertaining to our experience. Thus, the Spirit did not fill them until Shavuot, when they were in the upper room.

As related to the greater reality though, what I see is that they did have the Spirit indwelling them, which Yeshua said was the case before the Spirit was breathed on them and given later:

And I will ask of my Father and he will give you another Deliverer, who will be with you forever, the Spirit of truth that the world is not able to receive, because it has not seen him and does not know him. But you know him, because he lives with you and he is in you.
(Joh 14:16-17 MGI)

I am aware of the difference between the Aramaic and the Greek here, for the Greek reads:

the spirit of truth, which the world can not get, for it is not beholding it, neither is knowing it. Yet you know it, for it is remaining with you and will be in you."
(Joh 14:17)

As everyone here probably knows by now, the 1st century writings I primarily hold to are those of the Aramaic, (which is a whole different debate which I also would prefer not getting into) so I naturally lean toward the Aramaic's reading, and see it as harmonious with everything else, although others no doubt would disagree. I can understand that, and am fine with it. Again, this is all just sharing of another perspective to consider.

[micah7:9]

Joh 4:24  God is Spirit......always been there, the workings certainly are different. :dsunny:

[eaglesway]

I agree that the early writings were most likely in Aramaic, and believe those writings would carry the Hebrew mind-set more clearly than the later Greek translations/interpretaions/transliterations.

[gregoryfl]

I agree that the early writings were most likely in Aramaic, and believe those writings would carry the Hebrew mind-set more clearly than the later Greek translations/interpretaions/transliterations.

I agree, and to that point, I have been in discussion on an Aramaic message board concerning the translation of John 1:3,4. I know from years of experience how easy it is to read something and not truly see what it is saying, because of preconceived ideas. It is amazing how much such things have an effect on hiding what is in plain view. I believe that the rendering of John 1:3 and 4 fits that description, simply because we have been trained and taught to read it the way we see it in the translations we have today.

I know I quoted one early believer who rendered it differently, but over the centuries he is not the only one to do so. Here are some others I have found, which at least adds some weight to it's validity. It caused me to go back to my Aramaic text (and also the Greek) and can now see (for myself) that the ancient way they understood those verses is actually the accurate one. Here is what I posted on the other message board concerning this, which demonstrates to me that there was understood the greater reality of everything that exists doing so in Him, since in Him all things consist.

While I know of no modern translation that has this rendering, I do have several from the church fathers. Here are some more quotes of verse 3, all of which end the sentence differently than is done in today's translations:

"Understand now for me the mystery of the truth, granting pardon if I shrink from advancing further in the treatment of it, by announcing this alone: 'All things were made by Him, and without Him was not even one thing.'" (Clement of Alexandria, Stromata 6.11)
"But it is said Providence, from above, from what is of prime importance, as from the head, reaches to all, 'as the ointment,' it is said, 'which descends to Aaron's beard, and to the skirt of his garment'(that is, of the great High Priest, 'by whom all things were made, and without whom not even one thing was made' not to the ornament of the body; for Philosophy is outside of the People, like raiment." (Stromata 6.17)

" 'And God said, Let there be light, and there was light.' Immediately there appears the Word, 'that true light, which lighteth man on his coming into the world,' and through Him also came light upon the world. From that moment God willed creation to be effected in the Word, Christ being present and ministering unto Him: and so God created. And God said, 'Let there be a firmament . . . and God made the firmament;' and God also said, 'Let there be lights (in the firmament); and so God made a greater and a lesser light.' But all the rest of the created things did He in like manner make, who made the former ones—I mean the Word of God, 'through whom all things were made, and without whom nothing was made.' Now if He too is God, according to John, (who says,) 'The Word was God,' then you have two Beings—One that commands that the thing be made, and the Other that executes the order and creates." (Tertullian, Adversus Praxean 12).

"Let him who is inclined to entertain this suspicion hear the undoubted declaration of Scripture pronouncing, 'In wisdom hast Thou made them all,' and the teaching of the Gospel, that 'by Him were all things made, and without Him nothing was made;'" (Origen, De Principiis I.2)

And here are a couple quotes of verse 4, which is in agreement with the ancient rendering:

"John also, who lived after him, said, 'That which was in the Logos was life, and the life was the light of men;'" (Contra Celsum 6.5)

'This is what John suggested when he said about the Word: "That which was made was life in Him." Life then came in the Word.' (Origen, Commentary On John; 22)

More convincing to me though, is the literal rendering of the words of the Aramaic (which to me is easier to see, although the same can be done in Greek as well). If John wanted to communicate that 'without Him nothing existed [of] what was made', then he would have prefixed the word for 'what' (medem) with a dalet. Since he did not, then the sentence reads more naturally (no need to insert the word 'of') to be ended as it was anciently, after the word medem.

Acts 4:34 gives an example of medem with the dalet prefix rightly being translated as 'of what'.

Ronen

[eaglesway]

Had to read that through a couple times. We(all believers) need these insights. Translators have been so cavalier in handling the Word, and the Hebrew mindset from which it sprang has been largely ignored.

"What advantage was there to be Jewish? Many. For one thing they were entrusted with oracles of God."

[rosered]

Here is another related aspect to this, in reverse, having to do with Christ in man. I am not referring to the truth of whether someone has Christ or not, but the greater reality of whether Christ is in all.

Here is one passage of scripture that most are familiar with:

Everything existed by his hand and without him not even one [thing] existed [of] that which existed. In him was life and the life was the light of men. (Joh 1:3-4 MGI)

Reading this in virtually every translation today, you would never get even a hint of thinking that this has anything to do with all being in Christ, except perhaps (as I had come to understand) the very last phrase 'the life was the light of men'.

However, I found out that the early church quoted this verse totally different than we have it today, and it makes a huge difference in understanding. Since there was no periods, commas, etc, in those days, one had to insert them where they believed they should be. Here is a comparison of the way it is commonly translated today, with how, as an example, Cyril of Alexandria rendered it.

Everything existed by his hand and without him not even one [thing] existed [of] that which existed. In him was life and the life was the light of men. (Joh 1:3-4 MGI)

All things were made by Him, and without him was not anything made. That which was made, in it was Life. And the Life was the light of men.

You can see this for yourself here: 
https://archive.org/stream/CyrilOfAlexandriaCommentaryOnJohnVolume1Tr.P.E.Pusey1874/cyril#page/n103/mode/2up
https://archive.org/stream/CyrilOfAlexandriaCommentaryOnJohnVolume1Tr.P.E.Pusey1874/cyril#page/n111/mode/2up

Here we clearly see a difference in understanding, the modern day view speaking of life being in the Son...which, of course, is true, and yet...

What John appears to be truly saying, and was interpreted as such in early church, was that Everything that was made had this Life, the Son, in it. This is the conclusion they drew. Feel free to read Cyril's commentary on this.

This to me (who is in Christ, and who Christ is in) is not simply about doctrine. It truly affects so much of how we view each other, again, whether based on the foundation of separation, or of inclusion, neither of which does away with the importance of heeding the upward call, nor of the consequences of rejecting it as long as one does so. It does not, to me, cause me to not feel the need to share the gospel with others...on the contrary, this is the very gospel I feel compelled to share.

I am sure that what I shared about Cyril will most likely not convince anyone to read John 1:3,4 differently, but again, at least you can see that there are others, even those many years closer to our Master than we, who had a different understanding, one that spoke of cohesion and inclusion.

Ronen

  I dont know how I missed this     ,
I believe  that  , Jesus said in the least/smallest one  you have done unto one of these you have done it unto ME .

   Seems the Light of men   Being the Anointing of God   ''Christ ''  in them   

  I can see also    how one would       be  killing  crucifying  Jesus  Christ    in them   as well as others   doing the same   

So Sorry to back peddle         as you others are further along

Had to read that through a couple times. We(all believers) need these insights. Translators have been so cavalier in handling the Word, and the Hebrew mindset from which it sprang has been largely ignored.

"What advantage was there to be Jewish? Many. For one thing they were entrusted with oracles of God."

  I so agree John with this  statement you have made !

How do we handle   the'' WORD OF LIFE ''

[marie glen]

this was very interesting to read! I can see how the aramaic would be more accurate, as that is what the nation was using at the time..

"In the beginning.. God.." the allness of all.. "In Him we live and move and have our being.."

.."the firstborn/firstbegotten of all creation" (gathering all things in heaven and earth in Jesus)
strong's greek #4416 "firstbegotten", from #4413 "protos" ( :smile: prototype) formost, best, chief, beginning, first of all, former
- also from #5088 to produce from seed, birth, deliver

"..even as some of your own poets have said.." greek poets, "in Him we live and move and have our being.."

..in the beginning.. there was God.. only God.. there is still only God.. [so why is life like it is? many ask] it would seem, He created rational creatures. With thinking ability comes the ability to choose - tho of course highly limited! ..He is letting, it would seem, these other choices (besides His/God's) to run their course..

Surely 'in the beginning' before He ever created, he could see all possibilities before His sight stretched out like a blanket.. and surely He has chosen all things just as He has in order to bring about the (very) best of all possibilities..

seeing something, to me, seems a bit like a circle. It has 360 degrees.. our focus on any given thing / truth, can be on any of those 360 degrees, but only one degree is the 100% accurate? :laughing7: just thinking out loud.. so "accurate" is good..

[sheila]

as thornbushes in the hands of a drunk,is a proverb[word of wisdom] in the mouth of a fool.  but if ever that wicked servant

say 'my master is delaying and become drunk and begin beating those in the household.......

    surely the wisdom of the wise were consumed at the cross[crown of thorns]

    ...for the foolishness of God is wiser than man's wisdom