Hi! I'm Roy Monis
I am new on this site and I've had my very first post blocked. Everything that I've posted was perfectly valid and supported by Scripture, so I don't understand why discussion on a perfectly valid Scriptural question such as " Was Jesus Created or Born?" blocked. Is it the purpose of this forum to discuss Scripture or not? I have not brought any of my own teachings or ideas in as far as I'm aware, so why?
Can someone please explain. I was given a link to a site that accepted all faiths, this to me was an insult, as I believe in the Scripture that says; "Jesus *said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me." (Jn.14:6).
This is the only way to God and there is no other, so who took it on himself to insult me?
Is this normal procedure on this site? If it is God help us.
I look forward to some sense being made of this. I'm sure the person who took it on himself to block that thread would have been aware of that Scripture and not give offense.
Peace!
Roy UK
Hey
Roy
Dont sweat IT bro... :icon_flower:
One normally can only post after joining in the welcome section making themselves Known to members( this is to trap any spammers) but Ive seen youve done this already..
Posts go through whatever and THEN they MAY be dealt with as according to the rules.
I can only say at this time without finding out more info..maybe you post got lost out there in cyberspace My friend...Please try again.
It not normal procedure Roy..as I say ,Please try again.
Blessings
Taffy
Having Checked, I dont see it in the Holding tank OR recycle bins which is where all deleted posts go
Roy
If it was the one where you asked Craig about the origins of Jesus, that thread was merged with the one from the guest board and was locked by me, Martin merged the two and the lock is still on but the topic hinges on the trinity which is ess. not allowed to be debated here as per the owner Gary's instructions.
At FLf in my siggy below, this is allowed and there are topics there. You will get both sides of the argument there.
Blessings
Quote from: SeekerSA on August 13, 2008, 10:32:57 PM
Roy
If it was the one where you asked Craig about the origins of Jesus, that thread was merged with the one from the guest board and was locked by me, Martin merged the two and the lock is still on but the topic hinges on the trinity which is ess. not allowed to be debated here as per the owner Gary's instructions.
At FLf in my siggy below, this is allowed and there are topics there. You will get both sides of the argument there.
Blessings
Hi! SeekerSA
My post had nothing whatsoever to do with the Trinity theory, I don't subscribe to it and never have done. Matthew 1:18 &20 takes good care of that; "....found to be with child by the Holy Spirit." Vs.18 and "...Child who has been conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit.".Vs.20.
That wasn't the question, the question was "Was Jesus Christ created or begotten/born?" I resent being directed to a site that embraces all faiths, seeing as I embrace just the one. We are supposedly followers of Christ and as such;
"I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me." (Jn.14:6), there is no other faith.
OK you are directed not to discuss the Trinity farce but surely you know what you believe? Whether Jesus Christ/The Word was Created or Begotten/Born? I do not mean the carnal man Jesus in the flesh who was indeed created; this Scripture takes care of that "Therefore, when He comes into the world, He says, "Sacrifice and offering You have not desired, But a body You have prepared for Me; In whole burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin You have taken no pleasure. "Then I said, Behold, I have come (In the scroll of the book it is written of Me) To do Your will, O God.'"
(Heb.10:5-7).
This leaves just the one issue to be answered. Was Jesus Christ The Word created or begotten/born? I don't know who you mean by Craig, the only Craig I know is a moderator on BT and I have asked the same question there. I'm sorry to raise this issue but I didn't realize that there were so many different schools of thought on it and I believe in just the one. To be like minded, in fairness and honesty to the site and membership we should all believe the same doctrines or we are hypocrites.
If the basic beliefs of the site teachings were clearly stated in the entrance exam I went through to register I would have had a better idea, but as it is I'm having to find out now.
So what is your teaching on this subject, please let me know as it is of the utmost importance? Since coming out of Babylon I have learned the True Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Salvation of ALL mankind. I have learned the utter fallacy of man having a free will, and I'm truly grateful for all these marvelous revelations. But I believe that these are all the cosmetics, without the true Foundation Stone (Jesus Christ) being in place the house will collapse no matter how inspired the other teachings may be.
Thank you in love.
Peace! (http://dl4.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1176/1176424t4nufen6go.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
<---- I am Craig (who by the way was the Original "Craig" of BT forums, until Craig banned me and took the Nickname)
I have always believed that all doctrine is relevant to the discussion of Universal Salvation because not everyone is on the same page and what a person presupposes in their belief is foundation to why they believe in Universal Salvation.
Reason works in this way.
Foundation (Definition, Proposition/Presupposition, Argument, Conclusion)
Doctrine based on Foundation -> Propositional Argument -> Propositional Conclusion
Example:
Water Baptism.
If a person believes that a person must be literally water baptized to go to heaven but also believes in Universal Salvation, that person needs to reconcile how it is possible to have Universal Salvation without Water Baptism, or how all are Water Baptized now or eventually in order to be saved.
As a result, a long discussion on water baptism would be needed where we define baptism, state our propositions and presuppositions, argue the reasoning for the propositions and presuppositions, and arrive at a conclusion based on the facts, philosophy and reasoning.
Though many people do not know how to have a proper discussion, it is usually too emotionally charged and results in character insults of the person who disagrees with them, and instead of addressing the problem by getting rid of the one who insults another to get his point across but don't. There are many reasons for this, chiefly being that people have a victims mentality and claim things are insults that are not insults, and end up discussing what is an insult or not in a water baptism discussion. Other reasons include, lack of knowledge to be discussing the discussion, lack of knowledge in how to have a discussion, politics of a discussion which involves emotions, the headaches of having to deal with the complaints that someone said another person could be, or is wrong, etc.
After 5 years of Tentmaker Forums, 2 of them being Administrator, I am at a loss to why many of these things is a problem but it does seem to be a problem and so Gary (the administrator) made it simple. From experience in the forums, he knows, like most moderators and administrators past and present, what discussions end up turning into fights and not profitable. They range from was Jesus born/created, did we pre-exist, serpent seed doctrine, Trinity, Water Baptism, Speaking in tongues, among many others, and it just so happens that most of these discussions have nothing to do with Universal Salvation (unless of course the person having the discussion some how has pointed out it is an issue to them concerning Universal Salvation and in that case I believe it should be discussed [see example above]).
That is why I asked, what is the dilemma whether Jesus was born or created causes you. If it prevents you or changes your mind or reinforces the idea, etc of Universal Salvation, then it needs to be addressed. If it isn't really a problem or road block to understanding Universal Salvation, then it won't be discussed as it is a non-issue concerning UR/CU and won't be discussed here for the above reasons.
To give an example. I (Craig) believe in the Trinity, SeekerSA does not. But it doesn't make a difference when it comes to UR/CU, and we agree to disagree, we both have our reasons and they are both pretty solid, and we love God more and more, and are friends with each other. The Trinity is not an issue when it concerns UR/CU.
Craig
Thanx Craig
Roy FLf is not an all faiths forum - yet. 95% members there are members here. The forum started when this one was cut back to a narrower focus. The boards that once were here are there now. It is ess. just another place where these "no-no" topics when needing discussing can be rerouted there.
If a Buddhist signed up there we would accommodate him/her but we would not surrender the Christ centric focus of the forum. There is just a broader focus than here the main focus being Father's Love.
Hope that clears it up for you.
(Martin chime in when you see this)
Blessings
10.He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.
--John 1, KJV, 1611
001:001 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
001:002 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
--Hebrews 1, KJV, 1611
O Lord Jesus, the Creator!
Quote from: SOtW on August 14, 2008, 04:32:12 PM
<---- I am Craig (who by the way was the Original "Craig" of BT forums, until Craig banned me and took the Nickname)
I have always believed that all doctrine is relevant to the discussion of Universal Salvation because not everyone is on the same page and what a person presupposes in their belief is foundation to why they believe in Universal Salvation.
Reason works in this way.
Foundation (Definition, Proposition/Presupposition, Argument, Conclusion)
Doctrine based on Foundation -> Propositional Argument -> Propositional Conclusion
Example:
Water Baptism.
If a person believes that a person must be literally water baptized to go to heaven but also believes in Universal Salvation, that person needs to reconcile how it is possible to have Universal Salvation without Water Baptism, or how all are Water Baptized now or eventually in order to be saved.
As a result, a long discussion on water baptism would be needed where we define baptism, state our propositions and presuppositions, argue the reasoning for the propositions and presuppositions, and arrive at a conclusion based on the facts, philosophy and reasoning.
Though many people do not know how to have a proper discussion, it is usually too emotionally charged and results in character insults of the person who disagrees with them, and instead of addressing the problem by getting rid of the one who insults another to get his point across but don't. There are many reasons for this, chiefly being that people have a victims mentality and claim things are insults that are not insults, and end up discussing what is an insult or not in a water baptism discussion. Other reasons include, lack of knowledge to be discussing the discussion, lack of knowledge in how to have a discussion, politics of a discussion which involves emotions, the headaches of having to deal with the complaints that someone said another person could be, or is wrong, etc.
After 5 years of Tentmaker Forums, 2 of them being Administrator, I am at a loss to why many of these things is a problem but it does seem to be a problem and so Gary (the administrator) made it simple. From experience in the forums, he knows, like most moderators and administrators past and present, what discussions end up turning into fights and not profitable. They range from was Jesus born/created, did we pre-exist, serpent seed doctrine, Trinity, Water Baptism, Speaking in tongues, among many others, and it just so happens that most of these discussions have nothing to do with Universal Salvation (unless of course the person having the discussion some how has pointed out it is an issue to them concerning Universal Salvation and in that case I believe it should be discussed [see example above]).
That is why I asked, what is the dilemma whether Jesus was born or created causes you. If it prevents you or changes your mind or reinforces the idea, etc of Universal Salvation, then it needs to be addressed. If it isn't really a problem or road block to understanding Universal Salvation, then it won't be discussed as it is a non-issue concerning UR/CU and won't be discussed here for the above reasons.
To give an example. I (Craig) believe in the Trinity, SeekerSA does not. But it doesn't make a difference when it comes to UR/CU, and we agree to disagree, we both have our reasons and they are both pretty solid, and we love God more and more, and are friends with each other. The Trinity is not an issue when it concerns UR/CU.
Craig
#############
Hi! Craig
After all that what you're really saying is, if I understand you correctly, that as long as one believes that ALL mankind will be eventually saved it doesn't matter what one really believes? In short there is no such thing as hell.
Peace!(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif)[/url
Roy UK (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
QuoteHi! Craig
After all that what you're really saying is, if I understand you correctly, that as long as one believes that ALL mankind will be eventually saved it doesn't matter what one really believes? In short there is no such thing as hell.
In this forum at least.
The truth is the truth regardless if a person believes it or not. God is no respecter of persons, and therefore not subject to our perceptions. So, in this way it doesn't matter what a person believes is true or not, the truth remains.
Now if a person wants to know what is true, then it does matter what a person believes because not everything a person believes is true. Therefore discussing it, talking about it, praying about it, studying it, all becomes relevant if you want to live out of the Truth as well. In this forum, if you believe in salvation of all mankind, or don't believe it and have questions on how that is possible, or objections to why it might not be, well that is why Tentmaker Forums is up, to discuss, talk, pray, study all about it.
On a side note, I believe there is a hell, it just isn't perpetual in nature and is nothing like Dante's Inferno.
Jesus is Lord! Amen.
Craig
Quote from: SOtW on August 16, 2008, 08:09:21 PM
QuoteHi! Craig
After all that what you're really saying is, if I understand you correctly, that as long as one believes that ALL mankind will be eventually saved it doesn't matter what one really believes? In short there is no such thing as hell.
In this forum at least.
The truth is the truth regardless if a person believes it or not. God is no respecter of persons, and therefore not subject to our perceptions. So, in this way it doesn't matter what a person believes is true or not, the truth remains.
Now if a person wants to know what is true, then it does matter what a person believes because not everything a person believes is true. Therefore discussing it, talking about it, praying about it, studying it, all becomes relevant if you want to live out of the Truth as well. In this forum, if you believe in salvation of all mankind, or don't believe it and have questions on how that is possible, or objections to why it might not be, well that is why Tentmaker Forums is up, to discuss, talk, pray, study all about it.
On a side note, I believe there is a hell, it just isn't perpetual in nature and is nothing like Dante's Inferno.
Jesus is Lord! Amen.
Craig
##############
Hi! Craig
Yes 'tis true there is a hell of age duration and its called "God's Consuming Fire" for refining purposes. This much I believe and owe to bible truths and also no free moral agency. The Trinity absurdity I of course knew from the apostle Matthew to be an impossibility.
I am here to learn about Jesus Christ my Lord, but if the wrong Jesus Christ, a created being, is being taught then I am worshiping a creature and not the Creator. The Jesus I believe in is the legitimate Son of God who was in the bosom of the Father from the very beginning, the Word. (Jn.1:1). It is this Jesus Christ/Word/Son of God/God who is the Creator who was Begotten/Born of the Father, not created. There is no mention in the Bible that the Father had any part in creation, all power was given to the Son for that purpose. This is what Scripture tells us. Why don't we believe the Scriptures and add insult to injury by teaching a false False Jesus Christ?
I'm sorry but I do not mix myself up with other heathen religions. You say that Tentmakers is only interested in those who believe in salvation for all mankind. That's precisely it, I believe in the salvation of all mankind, but if we do not believe in the True Jesus Of that salvation then we are all going to burn in God's Consuming Fire for one heck of a long time. Which is no walk in the park.
"I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me." (Jn.14:6). That is my rock and foundation nothing else, no arguments, totally biased.
Is this not a legitimate subject to be discussed on this forum considering it concerns salvation of all mankind?
Peace!(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 17, 2008, 02:47:56 PM
That's precisely it, I believe in the salvation of all mankind, but if we do not believe in the True Jesus Of that salvation then we are all going to burn in God's Consuming Fire for one heck of a long time. (http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Rom 9:28 For
he will finish the work, and cut it
short in righteousness: because a
short work will the Lord make
upon the earth.
Isa 26:9 With my soul have I desired thee in the night; yea, with my spirit within me will I seek thee early: for when thy judgments are
in the earth, the inhabitants of the world will learn righteousness.
Is there scriptures that says one will be in the LOF "a heck of a long time"??
Mat 24:50 The lord of that servant shall come in a day when he looketh not for him, and in an hour that he is not aware of,
Mat 24:51 And shall cut him asunder, and appoint him his portion with the hypocrites: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
Psa 30:5 For his anger endureth but a moment; in his favor is life: weeping may endure for a night, but joy cometh in the morning.
moment:
H7281
רגע
rega‛
reh'-gah
From H7280; a wink (of the eyes), that is, a very short space of time: - instant, moment, space, suddenly.
Quote from: laren on August 17, 2008, 05:31:14 PM
Mat 24:50 The lord of that servant shall come in a day when he looketh not for him, and in an hour that he is not aware of,
Mat 24:51 And shall cut him asunder, and appoint him his portion with the hypocrites: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
Psa 30:5 For his anger endureth but a moment; in his favor is life: weeping may endure for a night, but joy cometh in the morning.
moment:
H7281
רגע
rega‛
reh'-gah
From H7280; a wink (of the eyes), that is, a very short space of time: - instant, moment, space, suddenly.
:icon_flower:
sounds awful egh?..but that flesh has to die ....
Psa 59:13
Consume [them] in
wrath, consume [them], that they [may] not [be]: and
let them know that God ruleth in Jacob unto the ends of the earth. Selah. speaks of Grace for mine,,,
Psa 110:5 The Lord at thy
right hand shall strike through kings in the
day of his wrath. Isa 13:13 Therefore I will
shake the heavens, and the
earth shall remove out of her place, in the
wrath of the LORD of hosts, and in the day of his fierce anger. Eze 7:19 They shall
cast their silver in the streets, and
their gold shall be removed: their
silver and their gold shall not be able to deliver them in the day of the wrath of the LORD: they
shall not satisfy their souls, neither fill
their bowels: because it is the
stumblingblock of their iniquity. What worketh WRATH?
Rom 4:15 Because the
law worketh wrath: for where no law is, [there is] no transgressioN
:icon_flower:
I agree Taffy,
My point is whether if someone doesn't "believe" right about the who TRUE Jesus is,
that they will burn a very long time.
Here Roy is saying we must believe in a TRUE JESUS,
but then if we don't that his "wrath" will be a very long time.
Is that true?? Will we burn a "very long time" if we don't believe in the TRUE Jesus.
If not, then isn't that a false belief about Jesus, and therefore a "wrong belief" about who the True Jesus is?
Is there any scripture that talks of "burning a very LONG time" for some sins??
To me, that would imply a "sick torturing God", one who prolongs his judgements on purpose just to "get even".
Quote from: laren on August 17, 2008, 06:19:47 PM
I agree Taffy,
My point is whether if someone doesn't "believe" right about the who TRUE Jesus is,
that they will burn a very long time.
Here Roy is saying we must believe in a TRUE JESUS,
but then if we don't that his "wrath" will be a very long time.
Is that true?? Will we burn a "very long time" if we don't believe in the TRUE Jesus.
If not, then isn't that a false belief about Jesus, and therefore a "wrong belief" about who the True Jesus is?
Is there any scripture that talks of "burning a very LONG time" for some sins??
To me, that would imply a "sick torturing God", one who prolongs his judgements on purpose just to "get even".
For sure Laren, I have my thoughts concerning scripture in such matters..But for now. Im waiting for Me fellow Brit ( Roy :icon_flower:) to answer himself, im hoping he will clear up it up... :icon_flower:
Later bro
T
QuotePsa 30:5 For his anger endureth but a moment; in his favor is life: weeping may endure for a night, but joy cometh in the morning.
Awesome Scripture Laren. :D
Quote from: Taffy on August 17, 2008, 06:29:55 PM
Quote from: laren on August 17, 2008, 06:19:47 PM
I agree Taffy,
My point is whether if someone doesn't "believe" right about the who TRUE Jesus is,
that they will burn a very long time.
Here Roy is saying we must believe in a TRUE JESUS,
but then if we don't that his "wrath" will be a very long time.
Is that true?? Will we burn a "very long time" if we don't believe in the TRUE Jesus.
If not, then isn't that a false belief about Jesus, and therefore a "wrong belief" about who the True Jesus is?
Is there any scripture that talks of "burning a very LONG time" for some sins??
To me, that would imply a "sick torturing God", one who prolongs his judgements on purpose just to "get even".
For sure Laren, I have my thoughts concerning scripture in such matters..But for now. Im waiting for Me fellow Brit ( Roy :icon_flower:) to answer himself, im hoping he will clear up it up... :icon_flower:
Later bro
T
Hi! Taff
This is what I'm about, the difference between Begotten and Created. There is a gulf as wide as East to West between them.
Let us first consider the physical world.
To be born it requires two individuals to be involved, the result boy/girl has the character traits of both father and mother, they are not a mirror image of either of the parents. They are separate individuals.
Now let us consider the spiritual.
The Father is Spirit and we are told that "No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God
who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him." (Jn.1:18) Only the Son who is in the bosom of the Father has seen Him. We are also told that; "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God." (Jn.1:1-2) that the Word/Son/Christ was in the beginning, and that the Word was with God the Father, and that the
Word was God.This can only mean that the Son (Fetus) was in the bosom of the Father from the very beginning. In which case the Son has the identical character traits bestowed on Him by the Father as the Father is ONE GOD therefore only one parent with no genealogy.
"I and the Father are one." (Jn.10:30). "Worthy art thou, our Lord and our God, to receive the glory and the honor and the power: for thou didst create all things, and because of thy will they were, and were created." (Rev.4:11). In short a snapshot image of the Father but junior to or less than the Father by virtue of being His Son. "You heard that I said to you, 'I go away, and I will come to you.' If you loved Me, you would have rejoiced because I go to the Father, for the
Father is greater than I." (Jn.14:28).
What the Word of God is saying to me is that when the Father decided to start His work of Creation He brought forth, gave birth to His Only Begotten Son, who is a legitimate Son/God/Christ, and not a created God/Christ, who is then commissioned by the Father to create all things that are of or in the Father. Jesus Christ is the Creator/God and the beginning of all creation.
If we worship the created Christ we are worshiping the creation not the CREATOR. That's what I believe and that is what the Word of God is saying to me, Scripture witness Scripture, and spiritual witness spiritual. To worship the creature, a created being, is pure idolatry. The TRUE JESUS CHRIST is GOD by right, and not something of man's creation. The penalty for leaving your First Love, God;
'Therefore remember from where you have fallen, and repent and do the deeds you did at first; or else I am coming to you and will remove your lampstand out of its place—unless you repent." Rev.2:5) and worshiping an idol is to have that idol burned out of you for no matter how long it takes, but one thing is certain it WILL COME OUT. Even from the Stalin's, Hitler's, Pol Pots and Saddam's.
I hope this answers your question.
Peace!(http://dl4.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1176/1176424t4nufen6go.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy (fellow Britt)
Quote from: Taffy on August 17, 2008, 06:29:55 PM
Quote from: laren on August 17, 2008, 06:19:47 PM
I agree Taffy,
My point is whether if someone doesn't "believe" right about the who TRUE Jesus is,
that they will burn a very long time.
Here Roy is saying we must believe in a TRUE JESUS,
but then if we don't that his "wrath" will be a very long time.
Is that true?? Will we burn a "very long time" if we don't believe in the TRUE Jesus.
If not, then isn't that a false belief about Jesus, and therefore a "wrong belief" about who the True Jesus is?
Is there any scripture that talks of "burning a very LONG time" for some sins??
To me, that would imply a "sick torturing God", one who prolongs his judgements on purpose just to "get even".
For sure Laren, I have my thoughts concerning scripture in such matters..But for now. Im waiting for Me fellow Brit ( Roy :icon_flower:) to answer himself, im hoping he will clear up it up... :icon_flower:
Later bro
T
Hi! Taff
This is what I'm about, brother, the difference between Begotten and Created. There is a gulf as wide as East to West between them.
Let us consider the physical world first.
For anyone to be born it requires the involvement of two individuals, the result boy/girl has the character traits of both father and mother, it is not a mirror image of either one. The child is a completely separate individual with character traits of its own, a mix of the two parents..
Now let us consider the spiritual.
The Father is Spirit and we are told that "No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him." (Jn.1:18) Only the Son
(Fetus) who is in the bosom of the Father has seen Him. We are also told that; "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God." (Jn.1:1-2) that the Word/Son/Christ was in the beginning, and that the Word was with God the Father,
and that the Word was God.This can only mean that the Son was in the bosom of the Father from the very beginning. In which case the Son has the identical character traits bestowed on Him by the Father as the Father is ONE GOD with no genealogy.
"I and the Father are one." (Jn.10:30). "Worthy art thou, our Lord and our God, to receive the glory and the honor and the power: for thou didst create all things, and because of thy will they were, and were created." (Rev.4:11). In short he is a snapshot image of the Father but junior to or less than the Father by virtue of being His Son. "You heard that I said to you, 'I go away, and I will come to you.' If you loved Me, you would have rejoiced because I go to the Father,
for the Father is greater than I." (Jn.14:28). He possesses all the identical character traits of the Father but of lower rank hence subject to Him.
What the Word of God is saying to me is that when the Father decided to start His work of Creation He brought forth, gave birth to His Only Begotten Son, who is the Father's legitimate Son/God/Christ, and not a created god/christ, who is then commissioned by the Father to create all things that are of or in the Father. Jesus Christ is the Creator/God and the beginning of all creation.
If we worship the created Christ we are worshiping the creation not the CREATOR. That's what I believe and that is what the Word of God is saying to me, Scripture witness Scripture, spiritual witness spiritual. To worship the created Christ is;
'Therefore remember from where you have fallen, and repent and do the deeds you did at first; or else I am coming to you and will remove your lampstand out of its place—unless you repent." (Rev.2:5). to fall from your First Love, which is the True God.
The punishment for disobedience is for the duration it takes to burn that, false Christ idol, out of ones character; "For if, after they have escaped the defilements of the world by the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and are overcome, the last state has become worse for them than the first. For it would be better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than having known it, to turn away from the holy commandment handed on to them. It has happened to them according to the true proverb, "A dog returns to its own vomit," and, "A sow, after washing, returns to wallowing in the mire." (2Pet.2:20-22). One thing is for sure we will all burn till the dross and evil is removed and we are pure/perfect for our God is PERFECT. "And I will bring the third part through the fire,
Refine them as silver is refined, And test them as gold is tested. They will call on My name, And I will answer them; I will say, 'They are My people,' And they will say, 'The Lord is my God.' " (Zech.9)
I hope this answers your question?
Peace!(http://dl4.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1176/1176424t4nufen6go.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy (fellow Britt)
Quote from: Molly on August 14, 2008, 11:35:39 PM
10.He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.
--John 1, KJV, 1611
001:001 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
001:002 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
--Hebrews 1, KJV, 1611
O Lord Jesus, the Creator!
#######
Hi! Molly
I fully appreciate and fully agree with all that you have said above but my question is; "Which Jesus Christ are we worshiping? Are we worshiping the the True Jesus Christ, Son of God , the Word as He is called in (Jn.1:1-2) who was Begotten/ Given birth to, Born of the Father, or are we worshiping the the Created Jesus. Because there are apparently two Jesus' on the market at the moment, and it is vitally important that we worship the correct One.
If we worship the Created Christ we are worshiping the creation, an idol, and not the Creator. If we worship the Christ that is given birth to by the Father then we are worshiping God the Creator. Please read my post to brother Taffy and you'll see the full picture of what I'm saying.
Peace! (http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 18, 2008, 02:09:54 PM
The punishment for disobedience is for the duration it takes to burn that, false Christ idol, out of ones character; "For if, after they have escaped the defilements of the world by the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and are overcome, the last state has become worse for them than the first. For it would be better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than having known it, to turn away from the holy commandment handed on to them. It has happened to them according to the true proverb, "A dog returns to its own vomit," and, "A sow, after washing, returns to wallowing in the mire." (2Pet.2:20-22). One thing is for sure we will all burn till the dross and evil is removed and we are pure/perfect for our God is PERFECT. "And I will bring the third part through the fire, Refine them as silver is refined, And test them as gold is tested. They will call on My name, And I will answer them; I will say, 'They are My people,' And they will say, 'The Lord is my God.' " (Zech.9)
I hope this answers your question?
Peace!(http://dl4.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1176/1176424t4nufen6go.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy (fellow Britt)
I'm still hung up on your word "duration" a few posts earlier. I still don't see any evidence of duration in your verses you quoted.
again I ask, to anyone, is there verses out there that describe the lake of fire as certain duration's?? longer for worshiping the creation rather than the creator, or longer for "worse sins" than "less worse sins"??
it does sound like different intensities (worse off)however.
Quote from: laren on August 17, 2008, 04:50:46 PM
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 17, 2008, 02:47:56 PM
That's precisely it, I believe in the salvation of all mankind, but if we do not believe in the True Jesus Of that salvation then we are all going to burn in God's Consuming Fire for one heck of a long time. (http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Rom 9:28 For he will finish the work, and cut it short in righteousness: because a short work will the Lord make upon the earth.
Isa 26:9 With my soul have I desired thee in the night; yea, with my spirit within me will I seek thee early: for when thy judgments are in the earth, the inhabitants of the world will learn righteousness.
Is there scriptures that says one will be in the LOF "a heck of a long time"??
############################
##########################
Hi! Laren
I'm Roy. Let me explain what I mean in the quote from my post above.
Today there are two Jesus Christs being taught on the market. One is the True Jesus Christ
who is Begotten /Born/Given birth to by the Father just as, in the world we live in, a woman gives birth to a child. This is the Jesus Christ spoken of in the Bible; In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the
Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. (Jn.1:1-2). This Word who is God is the true Jesus Christ, God.
"And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth." (Jn.1:14).
.
Now using simple logic, if you tell a lie you'll get your wrist slapped but if you murder someone then you're in for the high jump and get stuck in prison for a long period but you'll eventually come out, hopefully a good boy.
Now spiritually it's very similar, if you tell a lie and then repent the Lord will forgive you, unlike on earth where you get your wrist slapped. If you leave your First love and then repent and return to Him, He will not stick you in jail, but forgive you. But if you do not repent and return to Him then He is not going to forgive you and you'll have to go to the heavenly jail which is God's Consuming Fire to be purified and have the sin removed, because you cannot enter heaven with that sin. God is Perfect and you have to be perfect like Him before you can get anywhere near His kingdom. Peter tells us this; "For if, after they have escaped the defilements of the world by the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and are overcome, the last state has become worse for them than the first. For it would be better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than having known it, to turn away from the holy commandment handed on to them. It has happened to them according to the true proverb, "A dog returns to its own vomit," and, "A sow, after washing, returns to wallowing in the mire." (2Pet.2:20-22) That means burning in jail for a long time till you learn to be a good boy and then you'll be let out. Salvation for all good and bad.
I hope this helps.
Peace! (http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Hi Roy
Been a little slow in responding..its not been one of my better days.
Firstly I would agree we do NOT worship Christ after the FLESH, we WORSHIP him in SPIRIT and TRUTH, being new a NEW MAN CREATED in HIM.
So, WHAT is SPIRIT and TRUTH?
Christ\ is SPIRIT and HE IS TRUTH ,meaning ,we WORSHIP Him by HIM IN being in US and US IN HIM , ..now, this goes around as well, as The Father and Christ are ONE ,we now live in HIM being After the Cross,HIS LIFE..no longer knowing HIM AFTER THE FLESH.
Ib believe Most churches preach HIM in US AND US IN HIM, even if for now ,they may not fully grasp the finer details.
QuoteNow the other Jesus is they say is Created. This Jesus isn't mentioned in the Bible it is only the way man takes it upon himself to interpret the words in the Bible. This created Jesus Christ is a fake, a creation, an idol of man's imagination and to worship an idol is sin as you well know. Now we are told in; "But I have this against you, that you have left your first love. 'Therefore remember from where you have fallen, and repent and do the deeds you did at first; or else I am coming to you and will remove your lampstand out of its place—unless you repent." (Rev.1:4-5) that God is our First love and we have fallen away from Him by worshiping the wrong Christ the created one, in this case, and to repent or face the consequences
For mine Dear friend you take this out of the context to whom it was written ...thia speaks of those primarilly who slipped away from GRACE back to LAW, .....which is very much the theme throughout more than a few epistles.
QuoteNow using simple logic, if you tell a lie you'll get your wrist slapped but if you murder someone then you're in for the high jump and get stuck in prison for a long period but you'll eventually come out, hopefully a good boy.
Now spiritually it's very similar, if you tell a lie and then repent the Lord will forgive you, unlike on earth where you get your wrist slapped. If you leave your First love and then repent and return to Him, He will not stick you in jail, but forgive you. But if you do not repent and return to Him then He is not going to forgive you and you'll have to go to the heavenly jail which is God's Consuming Fire to be purified and have the sin removed, because you cannot enter heaven with that sin. God is Perfect and you have to be perfect like Him before you can get anywhere near His kingdom. Peter tells us this; "For if, after they have escaped the defilements of the world by the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and are overcome, the last state has become worse for them than the first. For it would be better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than having known it, to turn away from the holy commandment handed on to them. It has happened to them according to the true proverb, "A dog returns to its own vomit," and, "A sow, after washing, returns to wallowing in the mire." (2Pet.2:20-22) That means burning in jail for a long time till you learn to be a good boy and then you'll be let out. Salvation for all good and bad.
again Roy for this too speak of those who fall away to false teaching, those Clouds without water etc,,,again for mine our friends the pharisses.
to Larens questions....No you will not find a Duration of time specified.. other than age..so how longs an age...?
whats purified our minds brother ,the flesh , that which is enmity towards HIM...That Tongue which preaches death ( M OF D)
The liars ,murders etc bro..are all those who TEACH LAW as a way to life, they are liars, murderers..these are metaphors Bro for such kind...those still of the CARNAL MIND....
Blessings for now Roy
T
Matthew 18:8
Wherefore if thy hand or thy foot offend thee, cut them off, and cast them from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life halt or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into everlasting fire.
Matthew 25:41
Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:
Matthew 25:46
And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.
Thessalonians 1:9
Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;
Jude 1:6
And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day
These are the passages dealing with what I presume to be the platform supporting the everlasting judgment concept.
There are about 3 times as many that speak of everlasting life also. In this light, it does give the appearance that a case of eternal hell could be supported by these passages.
I am new to the idea of UR . . . I'm in a place where explaining it isn't as easy as accepting it. The reason for this is because I don't rely on my own personal interpretations of Scripture as much as I do to the sound of the voice of the Lord within me. Usually, once I give way to the new direction, understanding eventually comes to explain "why" my direction changed. This is one of those times. I didn't even know there was a name for "all being saved" until I began reading the forums. I didn't come to realize I believed in it until about 3 months ago . . .and just learned what it was called about 6 weeks ago, but I have believed the lake of fire to be a process of purification rather than destruction for years . . somehow, I never made the connection between that and UR.
From what little conversations I've been a part of . . .the word "everlasting" has a different meaning than what we perceive it to mean . .but if that is the cast, then does it also apply to the verses speaking about everlasting life?
Quote from: Taffy on August 17, 2008, 06:29:55 PM
Quote from: laren on August 17, 2008, 06:19:47 PM
I agree Taffy,
My point is whether if someone doesn't "believe" right about the who TRUE Jesus is,
that they will burn a very long time.
Here Roy is saying we must believe in a TRUE JESUS,
but then if we don't that his "wrath" will be a very long time.
Is that true?? Will we burn a "very long time" if we don't believe in the TRUE Jesus.
If not, then isn't that a false belief about Jesus, and therefore a "wrong belief" about who the True Jesus is?
Is there any scripture that talks of "burning a very LONG time" for some sins??
To me, that would imply a "sick torturing God", one who prolongs his judgements on purpose just to "get even".
For sure Laren, I have my thoughts concerning scripture in such matters..But for now. Im waiting for Me fellow Brit ( Roy :icon_flower:) to answer himself, im hoping he will clear up it up... :icon_flower:
Later bro
T
################
Hi! Taff
I don't follow. What is it you want me to answer myself with to clear what up. If I knew what it was you are referring to I'd be only too pleased to do it. Is it the use of the word duration. Well what I mean by that is all souls won't be subject to God's refining process for the same duration of time. Someone like Saddam who has a massive history of crimes against his fellow brothers will take longer to make perfect than someone like the apostle Peter who has only a few bad character traits. Is that what you're looking for? Failing that I don't know what you mean.
Peace! (http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/117/117193tdajxe3wh8.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 18, 2008, 06:24:18 PM
Quote from: Taffy on August 17, 2008, 06:29:55 PM
Quote from: laren on August 17, 2008, 06:19:47 PM
I agree Taffy,
My point is whether if someone doesn't "believe" right about the who TRUE Jesus is,
that they will burn a very long time.
Here Roy is saying we must believe in a TRUE JESUS,
but then if we don't that his "wrath" will be a very long time.
Is that true?? Will we burn a "very long time" if we don't believe in the TRUE Jesus.
If not, then isn't that a false belief about Jesus, and therefore a "wrong belief" about who the True Jesus is?
Is there any scripture that talks of "burning a very LONG time" for some sins??
To me, that would imply a "sick torturing God", one who prolongs his judgements on purpose just to "get even".
For sure Laren, I have my thoughts concerning scripture in such matters..But for now. Im waiting for Me fellow Brit ( Roy :icon_flower:) to answer himself, im hoping he will clear up it up... :icon_flower:
Later bro
T
################
Hi! Taff
I don't follow. What is it you want me to answer myself with to clear what up. If I knew what it was you are referring to I'd be only too pleased to do it. Is it the use of the word duration. Well what I mean by that is all souls won't be subject to God's refining process for the same duration of time. Someone like Saddam who has a massive history of crimes against his fellow brothers will take longer to make perfect than someone like the apostle Peter who has only a few bad character traits. Is that what you're looking for? Failing that I don't know what you mean.
Peace! (http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/117/117193tdajxe3wh8.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy
it's Laren not Taffy asking the question,
but yes, the duration part is what i'm questioning. I see no scripture re: longer duration for "worse sins". I was hoping you had some.
thanks
Laren
Hi Roy
Been a little slow in responding..its not been one of my better days.
Firstly I would agree we do NOT worship Christ after the FLESH, we WORSHIP him in SPIRIT and TRUTH, being new a NEW MAN CREATED in HIM.
So, WHAT is SPIRIT and TRUTH?
Christ\ is SPIRIT and HE IS TRUTH ,meaning ,we WORSHIP Him by HIM being in US and US IN HIM , ..now, this goes around as well, as The Father and Christ are ONE ,we now live in HIM being After the Cross,HIS LIFE..no longer knowing HIM AFTER THE FLESH.
I believe Most churches preach HIM in US AND US IN HIM, even if for now ,they may not fully grasp the finer details.
QuoteNow the other Jesus is they say is Created. This Jesus isn't mentioned in the Bible it is only the way man takes it upon himself to interpret the words in the Bible. This created Jesus Christ is a fake, a creation, an idol of man's imagination and to worship an idol is sin as you well know. Now we are told in; "But I have this against you, that you have left your first love. 'Therefore remember from where you have fallen, and repent and do the deeds you did at first; or else I am coming to you and will remove your lampstand out of its place—unless you repent." (Rev.1:4-5) that God is our First love and we have fallen away from Him by worshiping the wrong Christ the created one, in this case, and to repent or face the consequences
For mine Dear friend, you take this out of the context to whom it was written ...this speaks of those primarilly who slipped away from GRACE back to LAW, .....which is very much the theme throughout more than a few epistles.
QuoteNow using simple logic, if you tell a lie you'll get your wrist slapped but if you murder someone then you're in for the high jump and get stuck in prison for a long period but you'll eventually come out, hopefully a good boy.
Now spiritually it's very similar, if you tell a lie and then repent the Lord will forgive you, unlike on earth where you get your wrist slapped. If you leave your First love and then repent and return to Him, He will not stick you in jail, but forgive you. But if you do not repent and return to Him then He is not going to forgive you and you'll have to go to the heavenly jail which is God's Consuming Fire to be purified and have the sin removed, because you cannot enter heaven with that sin. God is Perfect and you have to be perfect like Him before you can get anywhere near His kingdom. Peter tells us this; "For if, after they have escaped the defilements of the world by the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and are overcome, the last state has become worse for them than the first. For it would be better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than having known it, to turn away from the holy commandment handed on to them. It has happened to them according to the true proverb, "A dog returns to its own vomit," and, "A sow, after washing, returns to wallowing in the mire." (2Pet.2:20-22) That means burning in jail for a long time till you learn to be a good boy and then you'll be let out. Salvation for all good and bad.
again Roy, this too speaks of those who fall away to false teaching, those Clouds without water etc,,,again for mine our friends the pharisses.
to Larens questions....No you will not find a Duration of time specified.. other than age..so how longs an age...?
whats purified Roy is our minds brother ,the flesh , that which is enmity towards HIM...That Tongue which preaches death ( M OF D)
The liars ,murders etc bro..are all those who TEACH LAW as a way to life, they are liars, murderers..these are metaphors Bro for such kind...those still of the CARNAL MIND....
Blessings for now Roy
T
Quote from: Taffy on August 18, 2008, 06:49:09 PM
to Larens questions....No you will not find a Duration of time specified.. other than age..so how longs an age...?
I think Martin wrote about a duration of 3 weeks to 5 months of :bdh: and then :angelharp:
Quote from: WhiteWings on August 18, 2008, 06:58:14 PM
Quote from: Taffy on August 18, 2008, 06:49:09 PM
to Larens questions....No you will not find a Duration of time specified.. other than age..so how longs an age...?
I think Martin wrote about a duration of 3 weeks to 5 months of :bdh: and then :angelharp:
:laughing7:
Possibly throwing a spanner in the works - here is how I view the whole Jesus begotten aspects.
Firstly - I am not one that believes in the Virgin Birth although I do not deny that it is possible with the Father.
Whatever happened - I will be honest and say - I don't know. The reason I do not hold to this is because when God delegated procreation to us - that was finished and He said it was Good.
We have all the OT accounts and Prophets who mostly were done away with as they in essence opposed the system and the system had become the god instead of the Father.
I shared recently on another thread about these POV of mine.
I still hold to a personage of a deity in Jesus but I am not one that holds to the trinity doctrine. Now we have Matthew and Luke's account and at best they are 2nd or 3rd hand accounts. My John studies actually show that His brothers were not believers in Him and if the VB was true such a miracle would have been common knowledge to His siblings. (see my blog or or FLf it is there also.)
Now if we believe in the VB or not is still remains IMO a non sequitur as His ministry started at the Baptism of JTB. If we accept that the Lord can use a mortal donkey to speak then why can we not accept that He (the Father) cannot mightily use a person irrespective of His genetical make up. To digress here if He Jesus was VB born then Mary His mother was still of the Adamic seed and hence Jesus was still at least 50% "adam". The RCC took this a step further and made Mary also "immaculate" but that would still make her 50% and Jesus 25% adam hence the only way to remove the adamic seed is to go all the way back to creation IOW pre-Adam. Likely it is this that gave rise to the idea that Jesus was literally God in the Flesh.
Now I am sure 2000 odd years ago they likely did not know how genetics work and as the bloodline of Jesus is traced back via Joseph, the descendant Jesus was NOT via Mary's bloodline. Of course folk have suggested they were distant cousins so the blood line remains valid either way. That is purely conjecture as there is no standard biblical evidence for that. 2 gospels suggest the VB and and 2 completely make no mention. Personally I think that John covers Jesus' important fact more comprehensively than Matt or Luke.
So was Jesus pre-existent? The bible does not say and it is merely IMO and based on what I have gleaned off in my studies, mere conjecture.
Let us say Jesus was 100% human and possibly Joseph was the biological father. Even at the time of conception and by virtue of where Jesus originated from was not where the folk were expecting a Prophet to originate from let alone a Messiah. Can we assume that the Father still enveloped that which had been conceived naturally and blessed it? I would think so based on the Psalm where it states He knits us together in our mother's womb.
Furthermore, if Jesus was only 50% human, He had an edge over us in that He had double the chance to resist sin as opposed to us. I think this is where the Only Begotten Son goes pear shaped in that He then must have existed prior to His natural birth. Is that not possible for us too? Only difference is that we do not have any recall. Did Jesus have this recall? It seems very likely. Let us assume He had full knowledge of everything - how would being born make that any more a requirement? Well many folk say He had to have every possible human experience and ......... Well that IMO puts God in an small box. He created us so in all likelihood He should have a pretty good idea what makes us tick - why would He God need a human experience literally to "understand" our situation, trials and temptations. Surely these petty contrivances are no biggie for God, He is after all Omniscient - No?
So at the end of the day you need to ask yourself, If Jesus was not born of a Virgin, how does that detract from His teachings?
If you come to the conclusion of - NONE - then is the VB belief necessary? You decide!
When we follow on through His ministry, we eventually come to the cross and His "alleged" sacrifice for all humanity. Now if Jesus was/is God then He sacrificed Himself to Himself. This is the logic that I cannot accept. As a Divine Son - it makes more sense but only then with the paradigm that existed of a wrathful, cruel, intolerant God espoused by the Jewish religion. So what did the modern writers do? IMO they tried to unsuccessfully marry the old with the new and we know Jesus warned against that. SO the folk with their likely good knowledge of the Torah and OT writings set out to match the life and times of Jesus with the "alleged" prophesies of the OT.
IMO this is where the early church went wrong. The foundation should be Christ and NOT the Judaic system of yore. Yes Jesus was still under the Old covenant and as a result of breaking their laws, He suffered the penalty for breaking those laws. It was after the fact that the disciples and early believers tried to make sense of His death. I do believe His death was foreordained as a Jesus that died of old age would certainly not even raised a blip on the religious radar screen. Hence His death was very pivotal in bringing about the changes the Father wanted. I do not have to even cite scripture but refer to recent history that great men actually became more famous after their deaths. So too was it with Jesus.
Now this is what I have come to believe and I do not expect anyone to agree with me. Even the texts that suggest He was w/o sin can merely be interpreted to without sin (focus) Jesus never let go of His prime focus and that was of the Father. In this I see clearly the WAY He pointed to the Father in all His teachings. Once the paradigm of trinity is dismissed and we see Jesus as a man Exstrodinaire, we the see how I believe the NT folk viewed Him (Acts to Revelation). I am not well versed in the Gnostic texts but the bit I have seen tends to lean more in this personal POV. Of course, even in their ranks were radicals and likely they were as many of us are today deemed heretical under one broad brush. Too many ancient texts were lost to make a cognitive conclusion so even my POV is at best a supposition.
Yet I believe that which we have - even if it seems biased - The Lord can use to reveal both Jesus and the Father to us.
So what am I saying? I pick and choose that which suits my belief, maybe but I tend to see that even we as fallible humans are today, back then they were no different and as Paul said, we see dimly etc.
Once you go down this path of "textual criticism" there are a myriad of possibilities. IMO that makes God just soo much bigger than the "boxed" version many of us were taught.
I think we folk here at TM have all similar concepts but no one person can claim to have it all - maybe I am just one that dares to stretch the possibilities - be open to new things and trust the HS to reign me in when I also go too far. I also believe that as a body we each have pieces of the puzzle and not the whole puzzle with a purpose - lest any one should boast.
Well that is my dump for the day - be blessed by it or dismiss it. Not my choice either way.
Blessings
Quote from: SOtW on August 17, 2008, 08:21:21 PM
QuotePsa 30:5 For his anger endureth but a moment; in his favor is life: weeping may endure for a night, but joy cometh in the morning.
Awesome Scripture Laren. :D
Hi! SOtW
So what you are saying is that Saddam with his massive crimes against humanity will be judged and receive the same punishment as all of us. Certainly joy cometh in the morning but that morning will not be the same for everyone, but it will eventually come to all. We do agree that salvation is for all humanity eventually but let us be right about it, the Lake of Fire is real and we will be refined in accord with our works, all hay, straw, wood etc will be burned out. The good works will be refined as gold or silver, the chaff will be destroyed but the person if he has no works of value will still be saved but as through fire. "Now if any man builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw, each man's work will become evident; for the day will show it because it is to be revealed with fire, and the fire itself will test the quality of each man's work. If any man's work which he has built on it remains, he will receive a reward.
If any man's work is burned up, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire." (1Cor.3:12-15).
So where is the "Awesome Scripture, Lauren."? God isn't torturing for nothing. Were Saddam's, Hitler's and Stalin's crimes, NOTHING and will God punish you equally with them. Give us a break. Indeed it is Awesome but let's face it we are dealing with an Awesome, Just and Loving God who shows no partiality, the punishment will fit the crime. There is a difference between a just judgment and the totally ridiculous and unjust cruelty like the hell advocates believe.
Peace! (http://dl4.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1298/1298544e42yk3c624.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Quote from: SeekerSA on August 18, 2008, 07:02:31 PM
I think this is where the Only Begotten Son goes pear shaped in that He then must have existed prior to His natural birth. Is that not possible for us too?
I think it is entirely possible
Jer 1:5 Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, [and] I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.
This may not be about all mankind, but if it is true for one human, there is no reason for it not to be true in the same manner unless the bible tells us it isn't.
QuoteHi! SOtW
So what you are saying is that Saddam with his massive crimes against humanity will be judged and receive the same punishment as all of us. Certainly joy cometh in the morning but that morning will not be the same for everyone, but it will eventually come to all. We do agree that salvation is for all humanity eventually but let us be right about it, the Lake of Fire is real and we will be refined in accord with our works, all hay, straw, wood etc will be burned out. The good works will be refined as gold or silver, the chaff will be destroyed but the person if he has no works of value will still be saved but as through fire. "Now if any man builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw, each man's work will become evident; for the day will show it because it is to be revealed with fire, and the fire itself will test the quality of each man's work. If any man's work which he has built on it remains, he will receive a reward. If any man's work is burned up, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire." (1Cor.3:12-15).
So where is the "Awesome Scripture, Lauren."? God isn't torturing for nothing. Were Saddam's, Hitler's and Stalin's crimes, NOTHING and will God punish you equally with them. Give us a break. Indeed it is Awesome but let's face it we are dealing with an Awesome, Just and Loving God who shows no partiality, the punishment will fit the crime. There is a difference between a just judgment and the totally ridiculous and unjust cruelty like the hell advocates believe.
agh..Grace ,now no longer becomes Grace, WHERE SIN ABOUNDS Grace abounds even MORE brother ROY.
seems brother you set up the flesh and are a respector of certain kinds of it....
PUNISHMENT IS "CORRECTION""""....for me a Correction of our minds...
whats burnt up in these scrips Brother hay, wood straw, are again METAPHORS FOR OUR CARNALITY...that which is LEFT is SPIRIT, just as Pauls say..you are NOT FLESH, you are SPIRIT...All Flesh has to persih Bro
Gold = TRUTH= HIM, silver= His blood in which we are purified , you may find such precious stones on the Breastplate of the priests ,which signify the 12 Tribes,of israel, which are the symbolic ones mentioned in Revelation....that being US in HIM Him in US.
Exd 25:7 Onyx stones, and stones to be set in the ephod, and in the breastplate.
:icon_flower:
Paul considered himself the worst sinner, and in one fast moment; his house came tumbling down.
LOVE revealed CONSUMES.
Quote from: seekerSASo was Jesus pre-existent? The bible does not say and it is merely IMO and based on what I have gleaned off in my studies, mere conjecture.
What? How did he create the kosmos, then--or are you throwing that out of your Bible, too?
Quote from: laren on August 18, 2008, 03:59:18 PM
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 18, 2008, 02:09:54 PM
The punishment for disobedience is for the duration it takes to burn that, false Christ idol, out of ones character; "For if, after they have escaped the defilements of the world by the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and are overcome, the last state has become worse for them than the first. For it would be better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than having known it, to turn away from the holy commandment handed on to them. It has happened to them according to the true proverb, "A dog returns to its own vomit," and, "A sow, after washing, returns to wallowing in the mire." (2Pet.2:20-22). One thing is for sure we will all burn till the dross and evil is removed and we are pure/perfect for our God is PERFECT. "And I will bring the third part through the fire, Refine them as silver is refined, And test them as gold is tested. They will call on My name, And I will answer them; I will say, 'They are My people,' And they will say, 'The Lord is my God.' " (Zech.9)
I hope this answers your question?
Peace!(http://dl4.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1176/1176424t4nufen6go.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy (fellow Britt)
I'm still hung up on your word "duration" a few posts earlier. I still don't see any evidence of duration in your verses you quoted.
again I ask, to anyone, is there verses out there that describe the lake of fire as certain duration's?? longer for worshiping the creation rather than the creator, or longer for "worse sins" than "less worse sins"??
it does sound like different intensities (worse off)however.
Hi! Laren
What are you talking about, brother, I can't make sense of it? There are no Scriptures out there regarding duration and I never said there were any, now did I? I am not perfect and neither are you, but it would be safe to say that neither of us can be compared with Saddam, Hitler or Stalin so would it not be safe to assume that they would be in there for a longer
duration than you or I, at least I hope so for me, I can't say for you.
You're asking if there are any Scriptures out there regarding duration of time spent in the Lake of Fire, should I not also ask if there are any Scriptures that state longer for worse sins than for less worse sins. I'm just quoting what I believe not what you believe.
1)....I believe that the True Jesus is the Jesus Christ Begotten of God.
If you don't believe that that's up to you.2)....I believe that the true Jesus is the First Love mentioned in Rev.2:4.
If you don't believe that that's up to you. 3)....I believe that the person worshiping the created Jesus Christ has left his first love and fallen from grace and as such will spend longer in the Lake of Fire.
If you don't believe that then that is up to you. What I write is what I believe, debate it by all means but don't nitpick whether certain words are in the Scriptures as all words aren't; hell is just one example. But some things are blatantly obvious as to length of time one spends in the Lake of Fire, it is God's refining process and each will be judged in accord with the measure of his works/crimes/sins whatever. The Lake of Fire is no walk in the park, it is a place of correction, to make the imperfect, perfect in order to enter the kingdom. And
NO this is not in the Scriptures or in the Bible just in case you happen to ask anyone out there.
I hope this clears that issue.
Peace!
Roy UK(http://dl4.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1298/1298544e42yk3c624.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Quote from: seekersaLet us say Jesus was 100% human and possibly Joseph was the biological father. Even at the time of conception and by virtue of where Jesus originated from was not where the folk were expecting a Prophet to originate from let alone a Messiah. Can we assume that the Father still enveloped that which had been conceived naturally and blessed it? I would think so based on the Psalm where it states He knits us together in our mother's womb.
11 "You are worthy,
our Lord and God, to receive glory and honor and power,
for you created all things, and by your will they were created
and have their being."
--Rev 4
10.He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.--John 1, KJV, 1611
005:002 But thou,
Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of
Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old,
from everlasting. --Micah 5, KJV, 1611
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 18, 2008, 08:16:24 PM
Quote from: laren on August 18, 2008, 03:59:18 PM
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 18, 2008, 02:09:54 PM
The punishment for disobedience is for the duration it takes to burn that, false Christ idol, out of ones character; "For if, after they have escaped the defilements of the world by the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and are overcome, the last state has become worse for them than the first. For it would be better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than having known it, to turn away from the holy commandment handed on to them. It has happened to them according to the true proverb, "A dog returns to its own vomit," and, "A sow, after washing, returns to wallowing in the mire." (2Pet.2:20-22). One thing is for sure we will all burn till the dross and evil is removed and we are pure/perfect for our God is PERFECT. "And I will bring the third part through the fire, Refine them as silver is refined, And test them as gold is tested. They will call on My name, And I will answer them; I will say, 'They are My people,' And they will say, 'The Lord is my God.' " (Zech.9)
I hope this answers your question?
Peace!(http://dl4.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1176/1176424t4nufen6go.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy (fellow Britt)
I'm still hung up on your word "duration" a few posts earlier. I still don't see any evidence of duration in your verses you quoted.
again I ask, to anyone, is there verses out there that describe the lake of fire as certain duration's?? longer for worshiping the creation rather than the creator, or longer for "worse sins" than "less worse sins"??
it does sound like different intensities (worse off)however.
Hi! Laren
What are you talking about, brother, I can't make sense of it? There are no Scriptures out there regarding duration and I never said there were any, now did I? I am not perfect and neither are you, but it would be safe to say that neither of us can be compared with Saddam, Hitler or Stalin so would it not be safe to assume that they would be in there for a longer duration than you or I, at least I hope so for me, I can't say for you.
You're asking if there are any Scriptures out there regarding duration of time spent in the Lake of Fire, should I not also ask if there are any Scriptures that state longer for worse sins than for less worse sins. I'm just quoting what I believe not what you believe.
1)....I believe that the True Jesus is the Jesus Christ Begotten of God. If you don't believe that that's up to you.
2)....I believe that the true Jesus is the First Love mentioned in Rev.2:4. If you don't believe that that's up to you.
3)....I believe that the person worshiping the created Jesus Christ has left his first love and fallen from grace and as such will spend longer in the Lake of Fire. If you don't believe that then that is up to you.
What I write is what I believe, debate it by all means but don't nitpick whether certain words are in the Scriptures as all words aren't; hell is just one example. But some things are blatantly obvious as to length of time one spends in the Lake of Fire, it is God's refining process and each will be judged in accord with the measure of his works/crimes/sins whatever. The Lake of Fire is no walk in the park, it is a place of correction, to make the imperfect, perfect in order to enter the kingdom. And NO this is not in the Scriptures or in the Bible just in case you happen to ask anyone out there.
I hope this clears that issue.
Peace!
Roy UK(http://dl4.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1298/1298544e42yk3c624.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
I'm not nitpicking, I truly was wondering. this was your quote: "That's precisely it, I believe in the salvation of all mankind,
but if we do not believe in the True Jesus Of that salvation then we are all going to burn in God's Consuming Fire for one heck of a long time.You spoke this as a truth, and I wondered where you were getting that from? that's all. nothing else implied. i showed scripture where "a short work was God's judgement/wrath", so wondered how you came up with that statement.
i'll drop out now,
peace
laren
Quote from: Taffy on August 18, 2008, 06:49:09 PM
Hi Roy
Been a little slow in responding..its not been one of my better days.
Firstly I would agree we do NOT worship Christ after the FLESH, we WORSHIP him in SPIRIT and TRUTH, being new a NEW MAN CREATED in HIM.
So, WHAT is SPIRIT and TRUTH?
Christ\ is SPIRIT and HE IS TRUTH ,meaning ,we WORSHIP Him by HIM being in US and US IN HIM , ..now, this goes around as well, as The Father and Christ are ONE ,we now live in HIM being After the Cross,HIS LIFE..no longer knowing HIM AFTER THE FLESH.
I believe Most churches preach HIM in US AND US IN HIM, even if for now ,they may not fully grasp the finer details.
QuoteNow the other Jesus is they say is Created. This Jesus isn't mentioned in the Bible it is only the way man takes it upon himself to interpret the words in the Bible. This created Jesus Christ is a fake, a creation, an idol of man's imagination and to worship an idol is sin as you well know. Now we are told in; "But I have this against you, that you have left your first love. 'Therefore remember from where you have fallen, and repent and do the deeds you did at first; or else I am coming to you and will remove your lampstand out of its place—unless you repent." (Rev.1:4-5) that God is our First love and we have fallen away from Him by worshiping the wrong Christ the created one, in this case, and to repent or face the consequences
For mine Dear friend, you take this out of the context to whom it was written ...this speaks of those primarilly who slipped away from GRACE back to LAW, .....which is very much the theme throughout more than a few epistles.
QuoteNow using simple logic, if you tell a lie you'll get your wrist slapped but if you murder someone then you're in for the high jump and get stuck in prison for a long period but you'll eventually come out, hopefully a good boy.
Now spiritually it's very similar, if you tell a lie and then repent the Lord will forgive you, unlike on earth where you get your wrist slapped. If you leave your First love and then repent and return to Him, He will not stick you in jail, but forgive you. But if you do not repent and return to Him then He is not going to forgive you and you'll have to go to the heavenly jail which is God's Consuming Fire to be purified and have the sin removed, because you cannot enter heaven with that sin. God is Perfect and you have to be perfect like Him before you can get anywhere near His kingdom. Peter tells us this; "For if, after they have escaped the defilements of the world by the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and are overcome, the last state has become worse for them than the first. For it would be better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than having known it, to turn away from the holy commandment handed on to them. It has happened to them according to the true proverb, "A dog returns to its own vomit," and, "A sow, after washing, returns to wallowing in the mire." (2Pet.2:20-22) That means burning in jail for a long time till you learn to be a good boy and then you'll be let out. Salvation for all good and bad.
again Roy, this too speaks of those who fall away to false teaching, those Clouds without water etc,,,again for mine our friends the pharisses.
to Larens questions....No you will not find a Duration of time specified.. other than age..so how longs an age...?
whats purified Roy is our minds brother ,the flesh , that which is enmity towards HIM...That Tongue which preaches death ( M OF D)
The liars ,murders etc bro..are all those who TEACH LAW as a way to life, they are liars, murderers..these are metaphors Bro for such kind...those still of the CARNAL MIND....
Blessings for now Roy
T
Hi! Taff
I'm not denying that brother, but what it truly boils down to is whether we are on the same wavelength. It all hinges on one fact of belief; 1)... Do you believe that Jesus Christ is the legitimate Son of God, Begotten, brought forth, given birth to; or, 2)....Do you believe in the Created Jesus Christ. It is only if we can establish one of these as fact for both of us that we can actually proceed or else we'll be working to cross purposes.
I am not unaware of the fact that falling from the First Love refers to those who slipped away back to the law, but would you say that someone who held as their First Love a created being, an idol, was still under grace?
Would you say that worshiping a false Christ is not following false teachings?
Did I mention purification of the flesh anywhere, no I didn't, the flesh has long since returned to the earth from which was taken. It is the soul that will be purified and the soul is spirit. Flesh cannot be purified in spiritual fire.
Forgive me, brother, I do know my Scriptures and the context in which they are used, but Context...Context....Context is very familiar to Babylon and at times it doesn't always apply as I have shown above where falling out of grace has absolutely nothing to do with the Law of Moses but has everything to do with the Law of Christ which is the Law we are under now.
Have I made myself clear now? All that remains is for us to verify that we are on the same wavelength.
Peace!
Roy(http://dl4.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1298/1298544e42yk3c624.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Quote from: roy morrisWould you say that worshiping a false Christ is not following false teachings?
4And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you.
5For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many. --Mat 24
What is the pope called? The vicar of Christ--vicarious Christ--in place of Christ--
I am ChristLet no man deceive you--
1 Timothy 2:5
For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
Quote from: Nathan on August 18, 2008, 06:16:32 PM
Matthew 18:8
Wherefore if thy hand or thy foot offend thee, cut them off, and cast them from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life halt or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into everlasting fire.
Matthew 25:41
Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:
Matthew 25:46
And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.
Thessalonians 1:9
Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;
Jude 1:6
And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day
These are the passages dealing with what I presume to be the platform supporting the everlasting judgment concept.
There are about 3 times as many that speak of everlasting life also. In this light, it does give the appearance that a case of eternal hell could be supported by these passages.
I am new to the idea of UR . . . I'm in a place where explaining it isn't as easy as accepting it. The reason for this is because I don't rely on my own personal interpretations of Scripture as much as I do to the sound of the voice of the Lord within me. Usually, once I give way to the new direction, understanding eventually comes to explain "why" my direction changed. This is one of those times. I didn't even know there was a name for "all being saved" until I began reading the forums. I didn't come to realize I believed in it until about 3 months ago . . .and just learned what it was called about 6 weeks ago, but I have believed the lake of fire to be a process of purification rather than destruction for years . . somehow, I never made the connection between that and UR.
From what little conversations I've been a part of . . .the word "everlasting" has a different meaning than what we perceive it to mean . .but if that is the cast, then does it also apply to the verses speaking about everlasting life?
Hi! Brother Nathan
Are we on the same wavelength? Have you read what "Can You Explain" is about? Let me refresh your memory.
It's about whether Jesus Christ is the legitimate Begotten/Born Son of God, who was in His Father's boson from all eternity? As stated in "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being." (Jn.1:1-3).
or
Is He some Created Christ not specifically quoted as such in the Scriptures?
Peace! (http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
QuoteHi! Taff
I'm not denying that brother, but what it truly boils down to is whether we are on the same wavelength. It all hinges on one fact of belief; 1)... Do you believe that Jesus Christ is the legitimate Son of God, Begotten, brought forth, given birth to; or, 2)....Do you believe in the Created Jesus Christ. It is only if we can establish one of these as fact for both of us that we can actually proceed or else we'll be working to cross purposes.
well Roy I thought i explained that in my post...theres Christ after the flesh, and after the spirit...im just interted in the one we worhip...so i would say we agree. :icon_flower:
Quote
I am not unaware of the fact that falling from the First Love refers to those who slipped away back to the law, but would you say that someone who held as their First Love a created being, an idol, was still under grace?
Personally Roy im only interested in what the Scriptures mean ,There are a few threads on tent which talks about Revelation and who it was for,...Law V Grace and Truth.
Id say an idol is one who serves the creature, that would be OUR FLESH brother , theres No bigger IDOL than US., I have tendancy to look inward to what scripture applies ...
Quote
Would you say that worshiping a false Christ is not following false teachings?
do you Know, Ive heard of SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO many Christs, But I only Know one we are saved BY, for me its the Indivdual who sees different Christs from where they maybe at in their walk....
False Teachings , false Christs , False Prophet, satan, levia-thon, the serpent, the Dragon ,the ANTI- Christ- The Beast, THE flesh ARE ALL THE SAME THING BRO...its all relates to worshiping the creature( us) rather than The SPIRIT of TRUTH.
Quote
Did I mention purification of the flesh anywhere, no I didn't, the flesh has long since returned to the earth from which was taken. It is the soul that will be purified and the soul is spirit. Flesh cannot be purified in spiritual fire.
No you didnt Bro, I did..when I say flesh, its the Mind OR MIND SET , its that which is Purified brother, we are to HAVE ONLY ONE MIND, ALL THINGS RENEWED
Rom 12:2 And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what [is] that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.
Rom 15:6 That ye may with one mind [and] one mouth glorify God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ
1Cr 2:16 For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ.
Quote
Forgive me, brother, I do know my Scriptures and the context in which they are used, but Context...Context....Context is very familiar to Babylon and at times it doesn't always apply as I have shown above where falling out of grace has absolutely nothing to do with the Law of Moses but has everything to do with the Law of Christ which is the Law we are under now.
[/b]
Youve not known me long enough Brother..For those who often see me say"""""""""Christ is the Context of scripture"""...Christ also being the Context of what wa Mentioned in Rev..First LOVE,..Law also Bears witness to HIM..but theres no life to be found there brother.
Roy It was the LAW of MOSES certain Babes were falling back too, therefore Falling from Grace( the law of LIFE, SPIRIT, RIGHTEOUSNESS , GOD, FAITH ,CHRIST,LIBERTY.
Gal 5:4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are
justified by the law; ye are
fallen from grace. Quote
Have I made myself clear now? All that remains is for us to verify that we are on the same wavelength.
yeah no probs brud..me hope i have too matey
Blessings
T
Peace!
Hello Roy,
Let me clarify. My view is fairly mainstream Christianity but with some explanations of why it is like this, versus just believing that is how it is. There is some dissension concerning the how and why even though most of us all agree on the end result.
God is not respecter of persons. Whether we believe or do not believe, does not change His plans of salvation for all mankind. His will will be done. Now, for the one who believes, they are acquainted with the foundation and therefore build in accordance to what they are acquainted and it will not come down. With those who are not acquainted with the foundation they build in accordance to what they do not know and it will shatter to pieces.
You can read more about this: http://www.studentoftheword.com/About.html
Each person is judged in accordance to what they built/planted, (1 Corinthians 3:10-15, Hebrews 6:7-8) and in the Day of Judgment what they built/planted is either a) saved or b) destroyed but it is by the Grace of God, that regardless whatever a person gained or lost, that they are saved (1 Corinthians 3:15, Hebrews 6:9).
So in response to your Saddam analogy, everything Saddam built was destroyed and in this life did he receive his reward in full, in regards to the little old widow and orphan in Iraq who trusts in the Lord all things, because God is the husband to the widow, and father to the orphan may have lost everything in life, but receive blessings in Heaven. Each person must stand before God and receive repayment accordingly to their deeds and their words. (Job 34:11, Job 34:25; Psalm 62:12; Proverbs 24:12; Psalm 28:4; Jeremiah 17:10; Jeremiah 32:19; Ezekiel 33:20; Matthew 16:27; Romans 2:6; Romans 14:12; 1 Corinthians 3:8, 13; 2 Corinthians 5:10; Ephesians 6:8; Colossians 3:25; ; Revelation 2:23; Revelation 20:12; Revelation 22)
The biggest concern is the duration (if any) of the punishment (which there is) for those who are sent into eternal punishment. There is no indication that it is perpetual in nature.
Quote from: laren on August 18, 2008, 08:51:21 PM
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 18, 2008, 08:16:24 PM
Quote from: laren on August 18, 2008, 03:59:18 PM
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 18, 2008, 02:09:54 PM
The punishment for disobedience is for the duration it takes to burn that, false Christ idol, out of ones character; "For if, after they have escaped the defilements of the world by the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and are overcome, the last state has become worse for them than the first. For it would be better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than having known it, to turn away from the holy commandment handed on to them. It has happened to them according to the true proverb, "A dog returns to its own vomit," and, "A sow, after washing, returns to wallowing in the mire." (2Pet.2:20-22). One thing is for sure we will all burn till the dross and evil is removed and we are pure/perfect for our God is PERFECT. "And I will bring the third part through the fire, Refine them as silver is refined, And test them as gold is tested. They will call on My name, And I will answer them; I will say, 'They are My people,' And they will say, 'The Lord is my God.' " (Zech.9)
I hope this answers your question?
Peace!(http://dl4.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1176/1176424t4nufen6go.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy (fellow Britt)
I'm still hung up on your word "duration" a few posts earlier. I still don't see any evidence of duration in your verses you quoted.
again I ask, to anyone, is there verses out there that describe the lake of fire as certain duration's?? longer for worshiping the creation rather than the creator, or longer for "worse sins" than "less worse sins"??
it does sound like different intensities (worse off)however.
Hi! Laren
What are you talking about, brother, I can't make sense of it? There are no Scriptures out there regarding duration and I never said there were any, now did I? I am not perfect and neither are you, but it would be safe to say that neither of us can be compared with Saddam, Hitler or Stalin so would it not be safe to assume that they would be in there for a longer duration than you or I, at least I hope so for me, I can't say for you.
You're asking if there are any Scriptures out there regarding duration of time spent in the Lake of Fire, should I not also ask if there are any Scriptures that state longer for worse sins than for less worse sins. I'm just quoting what I believe not what you believe.
1)....I believe that the True Jesus is the Jesus Christ Begotten of God. If you don't believe that that's up to you.
2)....I believe that the true Jesus is the First Love mentioned in Rev.2:4. If you don't believe that that's up to you.
3)....I believe that the person worshiping the created Jesus Christ has left his first love and fallen from grace and as such will spend longer in the Lake of Fire. If you don't believe that then that is up to you.
What I write is what I believe, debate it by all means but don't nitpick whether certain words are in the Scriptures as all words aren't; hell is just one example. But some things are blatantly obvious as to length of time one spends in the Lake of Fire, it is God's refining process and each will be judged in accord with the measure of his works/crimes/sins whatever. The Lake of Fire is no walk in the park, it is a place of correction, to make the imperfect, perfect in order to enter the kingdom. And NO this is not in the Scriptures or in the Bible just in case you happen to ask anyone out there.
I hope this clears that issue.
Peace!
Roy UK(http://dl4.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1298/1298544e42yk3c624.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
I'm not nitpicking, I truly was wondering. this was your quote: "That's precisely it, I believe in the salvation of all mankind, but if we do not believe in the True Jesus Of that salvation then we are all going to burn in God's Consuming Fire for one heck of a long time.
You spoke this as a truth, and I wondered where you were getting that from? that's all. nothing else implied. i showed scripture where "a short work was God's judgement/wrath", so wondered how you came up with that statement.
i'll drop out now,
peace
laren
Hi! Laren
You're absolutely right those are my words; "I'm not nitpicking, I truly was wondering. this was your quote:" "That's precisely it, I believe in the salvation of all mankind, but if we do not believe in the True Jesus Of that salvation then we are all going to burn in God's Consuming Fire for one heck of a long time." What's wrong with it? I still stand by it. The true Jesus Christ legitimate Son of God, the Word; "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God,
and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God." (Jn.1:1-2) is our Saviour God who died for the sins of the whole world and not some created false Jesus Christ who is not supported by the Scriptures.
If we cast aside or tread under foot (yes there is a Scripture that says this) the true Jesus Christ and worship an idol do we not deserve a more severe chastisement for a longer period?
"For if, after they have escaped the defilements of the world by the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and are overcome, the last state has become worse for them than the first. For it would be better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than having known it, to turn away from the holy commandment handed on to them. It has happened to them according to the true proverb, "A dog returns to its own vomit," and, "A sow, after washing, returns to wallowing in the mire." (2Pet.2:20-22). This is the Word of God talking not I, any argument it's with God.
Let me put it this way. Which would you get the more severe punishment for punching your friend or doing the same to your president? Don't tell me I know the answer.
Peace!(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/117/117193tdajxe3wh8.gif)[/url
Roy UK (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Quote from: Molly on August 18, 2008, 07:54:09 PM
Quote from: seekerSASo was Jesus pre-existent? The bible does not say and it is merely IMO and based on what I have gleaned off in my studies, mere conjecture.
What? How did he create the kosmos, then--or are you throwing that out of your Bible, too?
Hi! Molly
I just don't believe what I'm witnessing. He doesn't believe in the virgin birth, everything in the Bible appears to be conjecture to him, what's he discussing here? Does he know? Is this Scripture conjecture I wonder or does he believe it?
"Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and whoever loves the Father loves the child born of Him." (1Jn.5:1)
I give up, I'm beginning to think that I'm in the wrong place. I came to discuss whether Jesus Christ is the legitimate Son of God, born of the Father as quoted in the Holy Scriptures or whether He is some created being invented by man.
What I'm receiving in response is just unbelievable. No one is keeping to the issue in question, everyone seems to want to appear intellectual and nitpick on words. For their information the word nitpick is not in the Scriptures, just in case they are tempted to ask someone out there.
From what I've read of what he believes and doesn't I'd say, YES, he has thrown the whole Bible out the window. Heaven help us.
Peace!
(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/117/117193tdajxe3wh8.gif)Roy uk
Quote from: laren on August 18, 2008, 07:39:45 PM
Paul considered himself the worst sinner, and in one fast moment; his house came tumbling down.
LOVE revealed CONSUMES.
Hi! brother Laren
With all due respect, what on earth has all that you've said above got to do with whether Jesus Christ was Begotten or created? Do you understand the simple question? Please explain.
Peace!(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/117/117193tdajxe3wh8.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 19, 2008, 01:59:07 PM
Quote from: laren on August 18, 2008, 07:39:45 PM
Paul considered himself the worst sinner, and in one fast moment; his house came tumbling down.
LOVE revealed CONSUMES.
Hi! brother Laren
With all due respect, what on earth has all that you've said above got to do with whether Jesus Christ was Begotten or created? Do you understand the simple question? Please explain.
Peace!(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/117/117193tdajxe3wh8.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Your point imo, was that if one doesn't believe in Jesus Christ the begotten, then they would burn in LOF for one heck of a long time.
I objected only to the second half of the statement, because you are stating "one heck of a long time" which is only your opinion. I was never addressing the begotten or created part of your post.
To me you should have stated, "
in my opinion they will burn for one heck of a long time".
I never was addressing your "begotten or created" point. I apologize as I didn't "stick" to the your original "theme" of the post. but it bothers me when someone speaks something as a truth, and has no scripture to back it up. The concept of burning someone in LOF for "a long time" is not backed up by scripture, or at least I don't know of it.
my point with Paul, is he was stated as the "worst sinner" which would appear to me to be as bad as "not believing in Jesus the begotten" and his conversion was in an instant, not a "heck of a long time". When God's grace and Love is revealed, repentance can be immediate. It doesn't have to be for a very long time.
peace
Quote from: SeekerSA on August 18, 2008, 07:02:31 PM
Possibly throwing a spanner in the works - here is how I view the whole Jesus begotten aspects.
Firstly - I am not one that believes in the Virgin Birth although I do not deny that it is possible with the Father.
Whatever happened - I will be honest and say - I don't know. The reason I do not hold to this is because when God delegated procreation to us - that was finished and He said it was Good.
We have all the OT accounts and Prophets who mostly were done away with as they in essence opposed the system and the system had become the god instead of the Father.
I shared recently on another thread about these POV of mine.
I still hold to a personage of a deity in Jesus but I am not one that holds to the trinity doctrine. Now we have Matthew and Luke's account and at best they are 2nd or 3rd hand accounts. My John studies actually show that His brothers were not believers in Him and if the VB was true such a miracle would have been common knowledge to His siblings. (see my blog or or FLf it is there also.)
Now if we believe in the VB or not is still remains IMO a non sequitur as His ministry started at the Baptism of JTB. If we accept that the Lord can use a mortal donkey to speak then why can we not accept that He (the Father) cannot mightily use a person irrespective of His genetical make up. To digress here if He Jesus was VB born then Mary His mother was still of the Adamic seed and hence Jesus was still at least 50% "adam". The RCC took this a step further and made Mary also "immaculate" but that would still make her 50% and Jesus 25% adam hence the only way to remove the adamic seed is to go all the way back to creation IOW pre-Adam. Likely it is this that gave rise to the idea that Jesus was literally God in the Flesh.
Now I am sure 2000 odd years ago they likely did not know how genetics work and as the bloodline of Jesus is traced back via Joseph, the descendant Jesus was NOT via Mary's bloodline. Of course folk have suggested they were distant cousins so the blood line remains valid either way. That is purely conjecture as there is no standard biblical evidence for that. 2 gospels suggest the VB and and 2 completely make no mention. Personally I think that John covers Jesus' important fact more comprehensively than Matt or Luke.
So was Jesus pre-existent? The bible does not say and it is merely IMO and based on what I have gleaned off in my studies, mere conjecture.
Let us say Jesus was 100% human and possibly Joseph was the biological father. Even at the time of conception and by virtue of where Jesus originated from was not where the folk were expecting a Prophet to originate from let alone a Messiah. Can we assume that the Father still enveloped that which had been conceived naturally and blessed it? I would think so based on the Psalm where it states He knits us together in our mother's womb.
Furthermore, if Jesus was only 50% human, He had an edge over us in that He had double the chance to resist sin as opposed to us. I think this is where the Only Begotten Son goes pear shaped in that He then must have existed prior to His natural birth. Is that not possible for us too? Only difference is that we do not have any recall. Did Jesus have this recall? It seems very likely. Let us assume He had full knowledge of everything - how would being born make that any more a requirement? Well many folk say He had to have every possible human experience and ......... Well that IMO puts God in an small box. He created us so in all likelihood He should have a pretty good idea what makes us tick - why would He God need a human experience literally to "understand" our situation, trials and temptations. Surely these petty contrivances are no biggie for God, He is after all Omniscient - No?
So at the end of the day you need to ask yourself, If Jesus was not born of a Virgin, how does that detract from His teachings?
If you come to the conclusion of - NONE - then is the VB belief necessary? You decide!
When we follow on through His ministry, we eventually come to the cross and His "alleged" sacrifice for all humanity. Now if Jesus was/is God then He sacrificed Himself to Himself. This is the logic that I cannot accept. As a Divine Son - it makes more sense but only then with the paradigm that existed of a wrathful, cruel, intolerant God espoused by the Jewish religion. So what did the modern writers do? IMO they tried to unsuccessfully marry the old with the new and we know Jesus warned against that. SO the folk with their likely good knowledge of the Torah and OT writings set out to match the life and times of Jesus with the "alleged" prophesies of the OT.
IMO this is where the early church went wrong. The foundation should be Christ and NOT the Judaic system of yore. Yes Jesus was still under the Old covenant and as a result of breaking their laws, He suffered the penalty for breaking those laws. It was after the fact that the disciples and early believers tried to make sense of His death. I do believe His death was foreordained as a Jesus that died of old age would certainly not even raised a blip on the religious radar screen. Hence His death was very pivotal in bringing about the changes the Father wanted. I do not have to even cite scripture but refer to recent history that great men actually became more famous after their deaths. So too was it with Jesus.
Now this is what I have come to believe and I do not expect anyone to agree with me. Even the texts that suggest He was w/o sin can merely be interpreted to without sin (focus) Jesus never let go of His prime focus and that was of the Father. In this I see clearly the WAY He pointed to the Father in all His teachings. Once the paradigm of trinity is dismissed and we see Jesus as a man Exstrodinaire, we the see how I believe the NT folk viewed Him (Acts to Revelation). I am not well versed in the Gnostic texts but the bit I have seen tends to lean more in this personal POV. Of course, even in their ranks were radicals and likely they were as many of us are today deemed heretical under one broad brush. Too many ancient texts were lost to make a cognitive conclusion so even my POV is at best a supposition.
Yet I believe that which we have - even if it seems biased - The Lord can use to reveal both Jesus and the Father to us.
So what am I saying? I pick and choose that which suits my belief, maybe but I tend to see that even we as fallible humans are today, back then they were no different and as Paul said, we see dimly etc.
Once you go down this path of "textual criticism" there are a myriad of possibilities. IMO that makes God just soo much bigger than the "boxed" version many of us were taught.
I think we folk here at TM have all similar concepts but no one person can claim to have it all - maybe I am just one that dares to stretch the possibilities - be open to new things and trust the HS to reign me in when I also go too far. I also believe that as a body we each have pieces of the puzzle and not the whole puzzle with a purpose - lest any one should boast.
Well that is my dump for the day - be blessed by it or dismiss it. Not my choice either way.
Blessings
Hi! SeekerSA
Your quote: "Firstly - I am not one that believes in the Virgin Birth although I do not deny that it is possible with the Father."
It did happen, the Scriptures say so, do you believe the Scriptures? "Now the birth of Jesus Christ was as follows: when His mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph,
before they came together she was found to be with
child by the Holy Spirit." (Matt.1:18). Whether you believe it or not is immaterial, it's there.
Your quote; "I still hold to a personage of a deity in Jesus but I am not one that holds to the trinity doctrine."
I accept: "Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife; for the Child who has been
conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit." (Matt.1:20). If the Holy Spirit is God then He would be Jesus' Father, but we know that that is not the case as Jesus calls the Father His Father. "I and the Father are One." (Jn.10:30), not the Holy Spirit.
Your quote; "Likely it is this that gave rise to the idea that Jesus was literally God in the Flesh."
Jesus was 100% God and 100% flesh, proof "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and
the Word was God." (Jn.1:1). Not 50% God but 100% God "Sacrifice and offering You have not desired,
But a body You have prepared for Me;" (Heb.10:5). Not 50% body of flesh but 100% of flesh.
Your quote; "bloodline of Jesus is traced back via Joseph, the descendant Jesus was NOT via Mary's bloodline."
Jesus' 100% carnal flesh had nothing to do with Adam or Eve. Read the Scriptures it plainly says before they came together the Holy Spirit implanted the flesh body/Jesus that was prepared and occupied by the Word, into Mary. Not Joseph's seed the Father's seed. Hence we have Jesus (flesh) with the Word (God) in His body making Him God. Jesus is 100% flesh and 100% God. Nothing to do with the carnal genetic process. Read Hebrews 10 fully for a full explanation, that's if Hebrews is not conjecture to you. The fact that He was given birth to by natural process requires that His bloodline be traced through His carnal parents to David, but in actual fact it can be traced right back to Adam and Eve. A pure bloodline. That's the carnal we're talking spiritual.
Carnal/physical eyes cannot see this truth it is enmity to God.
Your quote; "Now I am sure 2000 odd years ago they likely did not know how genetics work and as the bloodline of Jesus is traced back via Joseph."
We only discovered that the earth was round about the 15th, 16th century but this was well known to the ancients 3000 to 4000 years ago. "Have ye not known? have yet not heard? hath it not been told you from the beginning? have ye not understood from the foundations of the earth? It is he that sitteth
above the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in;" (Isa.40:21-22).
Your quote; "So was Jesus pre-existent? The bible does not say and it is merely IMO and based on what I have gleaned off in my studies, mere conjecture."
I beg to differ the Bible does say, if you read it properly with spiritual eyes: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the
Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being." (Jn.1:1-3). "And the
Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth." (Jn.1:4).
And
"But as for you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, Too little to be among the clans of Judah, From you One will go forth for Me to be ruler in Israel.
His goings forth are from long ago, From the days of eternity." (Micah 5:2).
Well that is what the Scriptures say to most of your questions, and I'm terribly sorry but I have better things to do than answer the rest of your ridiculous questions, for which you don't quote a single Scripture.
Peace! And Amen! (http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/117/117193tdajxe3wh8.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Quote from: Molly on August 18, 2008, 09:30:56 PM
Quote from: roy morrisWould you say that worshiping a false Christ is not following false teachings?
4And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you.
5For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.
--Mat 24
What is the pope called? The vicar of Christ--vicarious Christ--in place of Christ--I am Christ
Let no man deceive you--
1 Timothy 2:5
For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
Hi! Molly
You're about the only one on the same wavelength as me. Those who proclaim a created Jesus Christ are false prophets that we have been warned against and I've left one such site just recently for that specific reason.
"Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves. "You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they? "So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit."A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit. "Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. "So then, you will know them by their fruits. "Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter. "Many will say to Me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?' "And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness." (Matt.7:15-23).We need to be aware of such and avoid them but it is they the false christs and prophets that need to heed the advice more seeing that they too are only human like us.
Peace!
(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/117/117193tdajxe3wh8.gif)Roy UK
Quote from: Annaone seeing Jesus after the flesh and one seeing Jesus in spirit and truth.
thats Good... no nonsence Anna :icon_flower:
Quote from: Taffy on August 18, 2008, 09:53:40 PM
QuoteHi! Taff
I'm not denying that brother, but what it truly boils down to is whether we are on the same wavelength. It all hinges on one fact of belief; 1)... Do you believe that Jesus Christ is the legitimate Son of God, Begotten, brought forth, given birth to; or, 2)....Do you believe in the Created Jesus Christ. It is only if we can establish one of these as fact for both of us that we can actually proceed or else we'll be working to cross purposes.
well Roy I thought i explained that in my post...theres Christ after the flesh, and after the spirit...im just interted in the one we worhip...so i would say we agree. :icon_flower:
Quote
I am not unaware of the fact that falling from the First Love refers to those who slipped away back to the law, but would you say that someone who held as their First Love a created being, an idol, was still under grace?
Personally Roy im only interested in what the Scriptures mean ,There are a few threads on tent which talks about Revelation and who it was for,...Law V Grace and Truth.
Id say an idol is one who serves the creature, that would be OUR FLESH brother , theres No bigger IDOL than US., I have tendancy to look inward to what scripture applies ...
Quote
Would you say that worshiping a false Christ is not following false teachings?
do you Know, Ive heard of SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO many Christs, But I only Know one we are saved BY, for me its the Indivdual who sees different Christs from where they maybe at in their walk....
False Teachings , false Christs , False Prophet, satan, levia-thon, the serpent, the Dragon ,the ANTI- Christ- The Beast, THE flesh ARE ALL THE SAME THING BRO...its all relates to worshiping the creature( us) rather than The SPIRIT of TRUTH.
Quote
Did I mention purification of the flesh anywhere, no I didn't, the flesh has long since returned to the earth from which was taken. It is the soul that will be purified and the soul is spirit. Flesh cannot be purified in spiritual fire.
No you didnt Bro, I did..when I say flesh, its the Mind OR MIND SET , its that which is Purified brother, we are to HAVE ONLY ONE MIND, ALL THINGS RENEWED
Rom 12:2 And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what [is] that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.
Rom 15:6 That ye may with one mind [and] one mouth glorify God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ
1Cr 2:16 For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ.
Quote
Forgive me, brother, I do know my Scriptures and the context in which they are used, but Context...Context....Context is very familiar to Babylon and at times it doesn't always apply as I have shown above where falling out of grace has absolutely nothing to do with the Law of Moses but has everything to do with the Law of Christ which is the Law we are under now.
[/b]
Youve not known me long enough Brother..For those who often see me say"""""""""Christ is the Context of scripture"""...Christ also being the Context of what wa Mentioned in Rev..First LOVE,..Law also Bears witness to HIM..but theres no life to be found there brother.
Roy It was the LAW of MOSES certain Babes were falling back too, therefore Falling from Grace( the law of LIFE, SPIRIT, RIGHTEOUSNESS , GOD, FAITH ,CHRIST,LIBERTY.
Gal 5:4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.
Quote
Have I made myself clear now? All that remains is for us to verify that we are on the same wavelength.
yeah no probs brud..me hope i have too matey
Blessings
T
Peace!
Hi! Taff
Who mentioned justification by the law, I didn't that's for sure matey? I agree that there are sooooooooo many christs, but which Christ is the right one that we believe in that's the question without going off the issue. There are two Jesus Christs that I am aware of that are being taught.
1)..... "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the
Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being." (1Jn.1:1-3). "And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth." (Jn.1:14).
This is the legitimately Born Jesus Christ Son of God; "Whoever believe that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and whoever loves the Father loves the
child born of Him." 1Jn.5:1).
The other Jesus Christ2).......Is a Created Jesus Christ based on man's interpretation of the Scripture:" To the angel of the church in Laodicea write: The Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the
Beginning of the creation of God, says this:.." (Rev.3:14).
Now forgetting everything else so as to establish a common ground for discussion we must of necessity believe in just one of the two options.
I am declaring my total belief in the first number 1. The only Begotten Son of God. All I ask is which of the two is your choice? Only then can we continue or we'd be at cross purposes and it will just lead to confusion.
Peace!(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/117/117193tdajxe3wh8.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy
Quote. There are two Jesus Christs that I am aware of that are being taught.
1)..... "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being." (1Jn.1:1-3). "And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth." (Jn.1:14).
This is the legitimately Born Jesus Christ Son of God; "Whoever believe that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and whoever loves the Father loves the child born of Him." 1Jn.5:1).
The other Jesus Christ
2).......Is a Created Jesus Christ based on man's interpretation of the Scripture:" To the angel of the church in Laodicea write: The Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the """""""Beginning"""""" of the creation of God, says this:.." (Rev.3:14).
Now forgetting everything else so as to establish a common ground for discussion we must of necessity believe in just one of the two options.
I am declaring my total belief in the first number 1. The only Begotten Son of God. All I ask is which of the two is your choice? Only then can we continue or we'd be at cross purposes and it will just lead to confusion.
Well bro, for mine they are Both the same....who do you think this Christ is In Revelation...? ChristS name comes In many Metaphors Bro...
HE IS The
Beginning and END..The ALPHA and OMEGA....what does this mean to you?
for me, :icon_flower: it coincides and bears witness to the one you call No 2? :icon_flower:
Quote from: Molly on August 18, 2008, 08:22:31 PM
Quote from: seekersaLet us say Jesus was 100% human and possibly Joseph was the biological father. Even at the time of conception and by virtue of where Jesus originated from was not where the folk were expecting a Prophet to originate from let alone a Messiah. Can we assume that the Your I would think so based on the Psalm where it states He knits us together in our mother's womb.
11 "You are worthy, our Lord and God,
to receive glory and honor and power,
for you created all things,
and by your will they were created
and have their being."
--Rev 4
10.He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.
--John 1, KJV, 1611
005:002 But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.
--Micah 5, KJV, 1611
Hi! Molly
Your quote from above: " Father still enveloped that which had been conceived naturally and blessed it?" How would that be possible Molly, considering that Mary conceived by the Holy Spirit BEFORE Mary and Joseph came together. She had already conceived the Word in the body/Jesus that had been prepared for Him.
"But a body You have prepared for Me; (Heb.10:5).
Jesus was the Word the Son of God in the Mary's womb before Joseph had relations with her. That's what that Scripture is saying to me, can you not see it?
Peace! url=
http://www.glitter-graphics.com](http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif)[/url
Roy UK
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 19, 2008, 06:42:45 PM
Hi! Molly
Your quote from above: " Father still enveloped that which had been conceived naturally and blessed it?" How would that be possible Molly, considering that Mary conceived by the Holy Spirit BEFORE Mary and Joseph came together. She had already conceived the Word in the body/Jesus that had been prepared for Him. "But a body You have prepared for Me; (Heb.10:5).
Jesus was the Word the Son of God in the Mary's womb before Joseph had relations with her. That's what that Scripture is saying to me, can you not see it?
Peace! url=http://www.glitter-graphics.com](http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif)[/url
Roy UK
Yes, it had nothing to do with Joseph--Mary was a virgin. (I'm not sure which quote you mean, but I don't think it's mine).
I know of Catholics who are shocked when you tell them that Jesus existed before he was born a baby in Bethlehem.
I studied with the JW's for a while--at least they were willing to study the Bible with me, and they came to my house--very nice people. But around 6 months into it, they announced that Jesus was the archangel Michael, and not God. So that was the end of that but, before we parted ways, I showed them scripture that rendered them speechless.
So there are groups of people that don't understand, besides the Jews that is, but it is because they do not read, or do not believe, the Bible.
Rom 1:3 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;
Rom 1:4 And declared [to be] the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:
Jhn 11:25 Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me (insert: resurrection), though he were dead, yet shall he live:
2Pe 1:5 ¶ And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge;
2Pe 1:6 And to knowledge temperance; and to temperance patience; and to patience godliness;
2Pe 1:7 And to godliness brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness charity.
2Pe 1:8 For if these things be in you, and abound, they make [you that ye shall] neither [be] barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.
2Pe 1:9 But he that lacketh these things is blind, and cannot see afar off, and hath forgotten that he was purged from his old sins.
2Pe 1:10 Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall:
Quote from: laren on August 19, 2008, 06:56:18 PM
Rom 1:3 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;
Rom 1:4 And declared [to be] the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:
Yes, but what does this mean to you?
Quote from: Molly on August 19, 2008, 07:05:45 PM
Quote from: laren on August 19, 2008, 06:56:18 PM
Rom 1:3 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;
Rom 1:4 And declared [to be] the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:
Yes, but what does this mean to you?
LIFE
Quote from: laren on August 19, 2008, 07:07:35 PM
Quote from: Molly on August 19, 2008, 07:05:45 PM
Quote from: laren on August 19, 2008, 06:56:18 PM
Rom 1:3 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;
Rom 1:4 And declared [to be] the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:
Yes, but what does this mean to you?
LIFE
well, in particular, what does it mean that Jesus was made of the seed of David according to the flesh?
Quote from: laren on August 19, 2008, 07:07:35 PM
Quote from: Molly on August 19, 2008, 07:05:45 PM
Quote from: laren on August 19, 2008, 06:56:18 PM
Rom 1:3 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;
Rom 1:4 And declared [to be] the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:
Yes, but what does this mean to you?
LIFE
yup..LIFE :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower:
I'm not sure what I did with that previous post I put out . . .I think it was intended for another thread . . not sure how I screwed that one up.
At any rate, I haven't said much on this thread mainly because I really don't see the big issue between whether Christ was created or begotten. I don't see the relevance. I think I kind of understand your feeling in that people create an image of who they think Christ is to them . .which is a far cry from who Christ is. But your argument feels like it dips in and out of the literal "was Jesus created or was he born of God" . . .Adam was created by God, but he is also born of God. Adam is the reflection of Christ. If Adam is both . . then I see that Christ is also both.
But like I said, if it's man's carnal image of a created Jesus that you're concerned about . . . then I guess I could see your issue to a degree. But it still sounds like you're bringing confusion into many who are trying to pursue Christ, but according to you, now the one they are pursuing may not be the right one. So in that light . . . I can see why this is an unsettled thread.
Quote from: Nathan on August 19, 2008, 07:11:56 PM
I'm not sure what I did with that previous post I put out . . .I think it was intended for another thread . . not sure how I screwed that one up.
At any rate, I haven't said much on this thread mainly because I really don't see the big issue between whether Christ was created or begotten. I don't see the relevance. I think I kind of understand your feeling in that people create an image of who they think Christ is to them . .which is a far cry from who Christ is. But your argument feels like it dips in and out of the literal "was Jesus created or was he born of God" . . .Adam was created by God, but he is also born of God. Adam is the reflection of Christ. If Adam is both . . then I see that Christ is also both.
But like I said, if it's man's carnal image of a created Jesus that you're concerned about . . . then I guess I could see your issue to a degree. But it still sounds like you're bringing confusion into many who are trying to pursue Christ, but according to you, now the one they are pursuing may not be the right one. So in that light . . . I can see why this is an unsettled thread.
It could make a huge difference as far as organized religion is concerned.
If organized religion is teaching a false Christ, then huge numbers of people are being led astray, which impacts the whole world.
Let's take Hagee's ministry as an example--Jesus is not the Messiah and we have to start armageddon to usher in the coming of the Messiah? Where the Christians will be raptured and so miss all the bad stuff they started?
As Willie says--Please!
Perhaps . .but to say it's a different Jesus . . .to me . .it's the same Jesus . . .it's his interpretation of Jesus that's incomplete. Like what was stated with the JW . . .now "their" belief of Jesus is a different Jesus than what Paul preaches. I don't know, maybe it's just in the phonetics.
Quote from: Nathan on August 19, 2008, 07:21:05 PM
Perhaps . .but to say it's a different Jesus . . .to me . .it's the same Jesus . . .it's his interpretation of Jesus that's incomplete. Like what was stated with the JW . . .now "their" belief of Jesus is a different Jesus than what Paul preaches. I don't know, maybe it's just in the phonetics.
Doesn't Jesus warn us of this very thing?
He warns us for a reason.
23Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.
24For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect. --Mat 24
Besides, regarding Hagee, killing people is not 'phonetics.'
Sigh . . .so . . .let's just killem' all then.
Look, we have a different vision than Hagee, that's obvious and apparent, but I think it gets a little dangerous when we become judgmental about them and use literal interpretations to again, cut other people down. There for the grace of God go I. Who's to say that this time tomorrow, Hagee won't be found laying in his office, prostrate before God, blinded by an invisible light, deafened by an unheard sound. If we are truly called in the spirit . .then why the stone throwing?
If I'm a spirit being, called to walk in the spirit and not in the flesh . .then I think these verses are not to be read and applied to "people" but to "me" saying that "in me" there is an ego that aproaches my mind as a wolf in sheeps clothing. "In me" there is this justification of my identity being connected with my position or my works. The sword isn't meant to be used on others . . .it's meant to be used "in me".
See the difference? That's all I'm trying to say here. Let Hagee do his dance . . . as a priest and king, let's release truth on the man . .call it out . . .speak light over him and let the Holy Spirit make the changes in his thinking . .just as he did in ours.
I'm referring to the earlier post of Matthew here . . .forgot to tack that on.
Oh, by the way . . .this passage quoted earlier . . .
"Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves. "You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they? "So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit."A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit. "Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. "So then, you will know them by their fruits. "Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter. "Many will say to Me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?' "And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness." (Matt.7:15-23).
To me the emphasis here is these guys lost their identity. It's become their ministries and works . . .rather than relationships. The will of the Father is not that you idolize ministry. Ministry works "within" relationships, but relationships should never be based on ministry. These guys had it backwards. It has nothing to do with whether Jesus was created or born, but I didn't bring it up. :happygrin:
Hagee doing his dance could result in millions of people being killed.
Other Christians are dancing as well, supporting fascism as they did throughout history.
We are to be witnesses to the truth.
We get our marching orders from the Creator of the universe--and he says, Love your enemies.--not kill them.
Millions being killed? How is he killing millions?
Quote from: Nathan on August 19, 2008, 07:40:45 PM
Millions being killed? How is he killing millions?
Well, for example, he takes 5000 people to Washington every year to lobby Congress to bomb Iran and the middle east.
Not to mention the millions he preaches this to.
Hello Roy,
Let me clarify. My view is fairly mainstream Christianity but with some explanations of why it is like this, versus just believing that is how it is. There is some dissension concerning the how and why even though most of us all agree on the end result.
God is not respecter of persons. Whether we believe or do not believe, does not change His plans of salvation for all mankind. His will will be done. Now, for the one who believes, they are acquainted with the foundation and therefore build in accordance to what they are acquainted and it will not come down. With those who are not acquainted with the foundation they build in accordance to what they do not know and it will shatter to pieces.
Each person is judged in accordance to what they built/planted, (1 Corinthians 3:10-15, Hebrews 6:7-8) and in the Day of Judgment what they built/planted is either a) saved or b) destroyed but it is by the Grace of God, that regardless whatever a person gained or lost, that they are saved (1 Corinthians 3:15, Hebrews 6:9).
So in response to your Saddam analogy, everything Saddam built was destroyed and in this life did he receive his reward in full, in regards to the little old widow and orphan in Iraq who trusts in the Lord all things, because God is the husband to the widow, and father to the orphan may have lost everything in life, but receive blessings in Heaven. Each person must stand before God and receive repayment accordingly to their deeds and their words. (Job 34:11, Job 34:25; Psalm 62:12; Proverbs 24:12; Psalm 28:4; Jeremiah 17:10; Jeremiah 32:19; Ezekiel 33:20; Matthew 16:27; Romans 2:6; Romans 14:12; 1 Corinthians 3:8, 13; 2 Corinthians 5:10; Ephesians 6:8; Colossians 3:25; ; Revelation 2:23; Revelation 20:12; Revelation 22)
The biggest concern is the duration (if any) of the punishment (which there is) for those who are sent into eternal punishment. There is no indication that it is perpetual in nature.
[/quote]
###################
Hi! Brother SOtW
Absolutely, brother, have I at anytime disagreed with your quote?: "Each person is judged in accordance to what they built/planted, (1 Corinthians 3:10-15, Hebrews 6:7-8) and in the Day of Judgment what they built/planted is either a) saved or b) destroyed but it is by the Grace of God, that regardless whatever a person gained or lost, that they are saved (1 Corinthians 3:15, Hebrews 6:9).
What brought that up? I believe in salvation for all mankind. I also agree with every Scripture you have quoted, but they don't apply to the subject under discussion. As far as my use of the word duration, it's not in Scripture by the way in case someone should ask, would you disagree if I were to say that Saddam would need longer in the purification process than you or I, surely we don't need as much as him? I can't see what all the nitpicking over a simple word can achieve? Can you?
The subject in case we have forgotten is whether the Bible's definition of the Divinity of the true Jesus Christ is to be believed or the trumped up man concocted created Jesus Christ. Who is right, God or man? It's as simple as that. A simple choice so why are we trying to make square circles? I hope no one is going to ask if square circles are in Scripture?
Taffy goes on about grace. What does grace do?
God "judges" us by "chastening" us! (I Cor. 11:32) "chasten," Greek: 'paideuo' #3811
God "graces" us by "teaching" us! (Titus 2:12) "teaching," Greek: 'paideuo' #3811
HOW does God "judge" us? BY CHASTENING (#3811, paideuo)!.
HOW does God's "grace and save" us? BY CHASTENING (#3811, paideuo
Judgment and grace are virtually the same thing, chastisement, it certainly isn't a carefree walk in the park or free donkey ride for Hitler or Saddam.
So let us contemplate on who the real Jesus Christ is, the Provider of this grace. The other fellow can only get you into deeper trouble along side Hitler and Saddam very likely. No the green highlight is not in Scripture it is just MO, for crying out loud.
But we are making a bit of progress brother. By the Grace of God they are saved all humanity, salvation for all by chastisement. that's what grace is all about. Grace isn't what we think it is, we need to get a better understanding of it.
Peace!url=http://www.glitter-graphics.com](http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif)[/url
Roy UK
Roy I must inform you
Long before you came to BTs ...some at Tent were there Long before you....
I assure you I know the work of L.Ray.Smith and he too knows me, I also Know the Mods there very well too...,
Not the new ones ,but Guys like Craig, Hills ( Joe) Dennis...and me old Mate Chris Read..we go back a few yrs...
so if your going to use his work and words here, there nothing new my friend, well not to me....
Im well aware of what Grace means....its obvious from your previous post that you didnt know what falling away meant as one falling BACK TO LAW, that being the law of MOSES...BECAUSE, INDEED it does have something to do with it.
You have a beef about a carnal Jesus and a spiritual ONE...more than a few have adressed it,
Ill warn you this brother, if you expect those at TENT to agree with your EVERY WORD....then I suggest your at the wrong venue...if you wish to share your thoughts and veiws along side us, then indeed your welcome.
If you set yourself UP..there are those here who will quite happily MEET YOU AT THAT PLACE BRO..., for all other have their opinion also
Blessings
Taffy a fellow Brit :icon_flower:
Quote from: roy morrisGod "judges" us by "chastening" us! (I Cor. 11:32) "chasten," Greek: 'paideuo' #3811
God "graces" us by "teaching" us! (Titus 2:12) "teaching," Greek: 'paideuo' #3811
HOW does God "judge" us? BY CHASTENING (#3811, paideuo)!.
HOW does God's "grace and save" us? BY CHASTENING (#3811, paideuo
Judgment and grace are virtually the same thing, chastisement,
This is interesting. I didn't know this. Thanks!
1 I will lift up mine eyes unto the hills, from whence cometh my help.
2My help cometh from the LORD, which made heaven and earth.
3He will not suffer thy foot to be moved: he that keepeth thee will not slumber.
4Behold, he that keepeth Israel shall neither slumber nor sleep.
5The LORD is thy keeper: the LORD is thy shade upon thy right hand.
6The sun shall not smite thee by day, nor the moon by night.
7The LORD shall preserve thee from all evil: he shall preserve thy soul.
8The LORD shall preserve thy going out and thy coming in from this time forth, and even for evermore.
---Psalm 121
1 Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James, to them that are sanctified by God the Father, and preserved in Jesus Christ, and called:
2Mercy unto you, and peace, and love, be multiplied.
--Jude 1
So was the prodigal son and the son who stayed by the Fathers side saved the same way?
Both were given the gift (gift of grace imo), one stayed faithful;
grace is only accessed by faith
the other squandered it (fell from grace) and was saved through fire.
Psa 11:5 The LORD trieth the righteous (via grace through faith): but the wicked and him that loveth violence his soul hateth.
Psa 11:6 Upon the wicked he shall rain snares, fire and brimstone, and an horrible tempest: [this shall be] the portion of their cup.
Psa 11:7 For the righteous LORD loveth righteousness; his countenance doth behold the upright.
Quote from: laren on August 19, 2008, 09:56:28 PM
So was the prodigal son and the son who stayed by the Fathers side saved the same way?
Both were given the gift (gift of grace imo), one stayed faithful;
grace is only accessed by faith
the other squandered it (fell from grace) and was saved through fire.
They were both sons.
12But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
13Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. --John 1
Quote from: Anna on August 19, 2008, 04:30:54 PM
In Jesus' own words
John 17:5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee BEFORE THE WORLD WAS.
John 17:24 Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be one with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me; for thou LOVEDST ME BEFORE THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD.
Roy, I'm a no nonsense woman and really hesitate posting publicly so I decided to just share privately with you.
I think perhaps the problem is not so much the difference between begotten and created (although I have many scriptural verses to indicate the difference) as betweem whether one is worshipping the historic Jesus (rituals, social justice ) or worshipping the risen Jesus... one seeing Jesus after the flesh and one seeing Jesus in spirit and truth.
Peace!
Anna
Hi! Anna
Glad you posted. "Wherefore we henceforth know no man after the flesh: even though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now we know him so no more. Wherefore if any man is in Christ, he is a new creature: the old things are passed away; behold, they are become new."(2 Cor.5:16-17). I think that's perfectly clear, Anna, and I agree with you. But now follow the centre reference for the meaning of
creature and it will take you to Romans 8:16 and this gives the definition as the
Spirit of God. The Spirit of God dwells in all of us, it is not a creature as something created.
But as far as knowing what we are worshiping it makes a mountain of a difference. It is not the same thing to be worshiping an idol created by man and to be worshiping the true Creator God. With all due respect, it has absolutely nothing to do with: your quote; "as betweem whether one is worshipping the historic Jesus (rituals, social justice ) or worshipping the risen Jesus... one seeing Jesus after the flesh and one seeing Jesus in spirit and truth." All this carnal reasoning confuses the issue and provides food for the adversary. We have to decide whether we worship the True Jesus Christ Begotten Son of the Father, who purchased us with His blood
"Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and whoever loves the Father loves the child born of Him." (1Jn.5:1), or the false imposter created Christ who is trying to unseat Him. Salvation is with the True God/Jesus Christ and not with an imposter, idol.
"Little children, guard yourselves from idols." (1Jn.5:21).
Peace!(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/117/117193tdajxe3wh8.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Hi Molly..THIS IS TRUE..
but theres much more....this comes across like God BEATS us witha Stick..Well Yes..a ROD( strong words)of Correction.
Jhn 8:16 And yet if I judge, my judgment is true: for I am not alone, but I and the Father that sent me
Do WE beleive Christs judgments to BE TRUE?
Jhn 8:15 Ye judge after the flesh; I judge no man.
wowza...DONT THAT THROW A spanner in the works?...
whats True Judgement ?.afater all thats what Christ Judges IN...
John 5:22 For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son
Zach 7:9 Thus speaketh the LORD of hosts, saying, Execute true judgment, and shew mercy and compassions every man to his brother:
RIGHTEOUS( true) Judgment connects very much to MERCY...AINT WE THANKFUL HIS JUDGMENT is NOT like CARNAL MAN....
Psa 85:10 Mercy and truth are met together; righteousness and peace have kissed [each other].
Psa 89:14 Justice and judgment [are] the habitation of thy throne: mercy and truth shall go before thy face.
Psa 101:1 [[A Psalm of David.]] I will sing of mercy and judgment: unto thee, O LORD, will I sing.
Isa 16:5 And in mercy shall the throne be established: and he shall sit upon it in truth in the tabernacle of David, judging, and seeking judgment, and hasting righteousness.
Mat 23:23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier [matters] of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.
Job 29:14 I put on righteousness, and it clothed me: my judgment [was] as a robe and a diadem.
DONT THESESCRIPTURES take on a WHOLE new MEANING when we see after the spirit.
Psa 9:8 And he shall judge the world in righteousness, he shall minister judgment to the people in uprightness.
Psa 33:5 He loveth righteousness and judgment: the earth is full of the goodness of the LORD.
Psa 72:2 He shall judge thy people with righteousness, and thy poor with judgment.
Psa 94:15 But judgment shall return unto righteousness: and all the upright in heart shall follow it.
Pro 2:9 Then shalt thou understand righteousness, and judgment, and equity; [yea], every good path
.
Isa 5:16 But the LORD of hosts shall be exalted in judgment, and God that is holy shall be sanctified in righteousness.
Jhn 16:8 And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment
awesome SCRIPTURES...
Mat 9:13 But go ye and learn what [that] meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.
Grace....MERCY...AND Righteous judgment.....AWESOME
Quote from: Taffy on August 19, 2008, 06:17:22 PM
Quote. There are two Jesus Christs that I am aware of that are being taught.
1)..... "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being." (1Jn.1:1-3). "And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth." (Jn.1:14).
This is the legitimately Born Jesus Christ Son of God; "Whoever believe that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and whoever loves the Father loves the child born of Him." 1Jn.5:1).
The other Jesus Christ
2).......Is a Created Jesus Christ based on man's interpretation of the Scripture:" To the angel of the church in Laodicea write: The Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the """""""Beginning"""""" of the creation of God, says this:.." (Rev.3:14).
Now forgetting everything else so as to establish a common ground for discussion we must of necessity believe in just one of the two options.
I am declaring my total belief in the first number 1. The only Begotten Son of God. All I ask is which of the two is your choice? Only then can we continue or we'd be at cross purposes and it will just lead to confusion.
Well bro, for mine they are Both the same....who do you think this Christ is In Revelation...? ChristS name comes In many Metaphors Bro...
HE IS The Beginning and END..The ALPHA and OMEGA....what does this mean to you?
for me, :icon_flower: it coincides and bears witness to the one you call No 2? :icon_flower:
Hi! Taffy
You see no difference in: "To the angel of the church in Laodicea write:The Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God, says this:" (Rev.3:1) and this
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being." (Jn.1:1-3). Who are you kidding brother, no, not me.
I have two pedigree dogs and begin a specialized kennel, I'm the creator of it but I hope I'm not part of the kennel.
But you believe in both so that puts us on different wavelengths so we have no common ground for discussion and must part agreeing to disagree as brothers.
Thanks for the input in any case, we are all entitled to our own beliefs. But before we part let me just explain one thing since you raised it; Grace.
What is Grace?
The subject of I Cor. 11:32 is JUDGING.
The subject of Titus 2:11 is GRACE AND SALVATION.
HOW does God "judge" us? BY CHASTENING (#3811, paideuo)!.
HOW does God "grace and save" us? BY CHASTENING (#3811, paideuo)!
God JUDGES by chastening (I Cor. 11:32), and God GRACES by chastening (Titus 2:11).
By GRACE GOD JUDGES US and by JUDGING GOD GRACES US!It's not a Sunday casual walk in the park.
Peace!(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/117/117193tdajxe3wh8.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 19, 2008, 11:09:01 PM
Quote from: Taffy on August 19, 2008, 06:17:22 PM
Quote. There are two Jesus Christs that I am aware of that are being taught.
1)..... "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being." (1Jn.1:1-3). "And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth." (Jn.1:14).
This is the legitimately Born Jesus Christ Son of God; "Whoever believe that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and whoever loves the Father loves the child born of Him." 1Jn.5:1).
The other Jesus Christ
2).......Is a Created Jesus Christ based on man's interpretation of the Scripture:" To the angel of the church in Laodicea write: The Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the """""""Beginning"""""" of the creation of God, says this:.." (Rev.3:14).
Now forgetting everything else so as to establish a common ground for discussion we must of necessity believe in just one of the two options.
I am declaring my total belief in the first number 1. The only Begotten Son of God. All I ask is which of the two is your choice? Only then can we continue or we'd be at cross purposes and it will just lead to confusion.
Well bro, for mine they are Both the same....who do you think this Christ is In Revelation...? ChristS name comes In many Metaphors Bro...
HE IS The Beginning and END..The ALPHA and OMEGA....what does this mean to you?
for me, :icon_flower: it coincides and bears witness to the one you call No 2? :icon_flower:
Hi! Taffy
You see no difference in: "To the angel of the church in Laodicea write:The Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God, says this:" (Rev.3:1) and this "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being." (Jn.1:1-3). Who are you kidding brother, no, not me.
I have two pedigree dogs and begin a specialized kennel, I'm the creator of it but I hope I'm not part of the kennel.
But you believe in both so that puts us on different wavelengths so we have no common ground for discussion and must part agreeing to disagree as brothers.
Thanks for the input in any case, we are all entitled to our own beliefs. But before we part let me just explain one thing since you raised it; Grace.
What is Grace?
The subject of I Cor. 11:32 is JUDGING.
The subject of Titus 2:11 is GRACE AND SALVATION.
HOW does God "judge" us? BY CHASTENING (#3811, paideuo)!.
HOW does God "grace and save" us? BY CHASTENING (#3811, paideuo)!
God JUDGES by chastening (I Cor. 11:32), and God GRACES by chastening (Titus 2:11).
By GRACE GOD JUDGES US and by JUDGING GOD GRACES US!
It's not a Sunday casual walk in the park.
Peace!(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/117/117193tdajxe3wh8.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy
I so enjoy one way questions Roy...could you not answer ONE of mine above?
I suppose by your reasoning THIS is another Christ mentioned in Revelation?
Rev 1:5 And from Jesus Christ, [who is] the faithful witness, [and] the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,
peace to you my friend :icon_flower:
Blessings
T
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 19, 2008, 09:23:56 PM
Hi! Brother SOtW
Absolutely, brother, have I at anytime disagreed with your quote?: "Each person is judged in accordance to what they built/planted, (1 Corinthians 3:10-15, Hebrews 6:7-8) and in the Day of Judgment what they built/planted is either a) saved or b) destroyed but it is by the Grace of God, that regardless whatever a person gained or lost, that they are saved (1 Corinthians 3:15, Hebrews 6:9).
What brought that up?
It was a clarification, not an issue of agreement or disagreement to prevent you from assuming I said something I did not.
What brought it up was earlier in this response to me: http://www.tentmaker.org/forum/index.php?topic=3153.25 when you brought up Saddam.
QuoteWould you disagree if I were to say that Saddam would need longer in the purification process than you or I, surely we don't need as much as him? I can't see what all the nitpicking over a simple word can achieve? Can you?
Yes I would disagree, because only God knows the heart of man and their disposition to repentance when wrong has been been identified. We do not know the process duration because it is aionios, not aidios. There is no nitpicking over a simple word except by those who continue to deny what it actually means.
QuoteThere is no nitpicking over a simple word except by those who continue to deny what it actually means.
AMEN :icon_flower:
Quote from: TaffyGrace....MERCY...AND Righteous judgment.....AWESOME
Yes, it is awesome. I think we are given an innate sense of fairness from him, and I have always believed that his judgments would be fair and true, and really, no surprise to anyone.
28Any person who has violated and [thus] rejected and set at naught the Law of Moses is put to death without pity or mercy on the evidence of two or three witnesses.
29How much worse (sterner and heavier) punishment do you suppose he will be judged to deserve who has spurned and [thus] trampled underfoot the Son of God, and who has considered the covenant blood by which he was consecrated common and unhallowed, thus profaning it and insulting and outraging the [Holy] Spirit [Who imparts] grace (the unmerited favor and blessing of God)?
30For we know Him Who said, Vengeance is Mine [retribution and the meting out of full justice rest with Me]; I will repay [I will exact the compensation], says the Lord. And again, The Lord will judge and determine and solve and settle the cause and the cases of His people.
31It is a fearful (formidable and terrible) thing to incur the divine penalties and be cast into the hands of the living God!
32But be ever mindful of the days gone by in which, after you were first spiritually enlightened, you endured a great and painful struggle,
33Sometimes being yourselves a gazingstock, publicly exposed to insults and abuse and distress, and sometimes claiming fellowship and making common cause with others who were so treated.
34For you did sympathize and suffer along with those who were imprisoned, and you bore cheerfully the plundering of your belongings and the confiscation of your property, in the knowledge and consciousness that you yourselves had a better and lasting possession.
35Do not, therefore, fling away your fearless confidence, for it carries a great and glorious compensation of reward.
36For you have need of steadfast patience and endurance, so that you may perform and fully accomplish the will of God, and thus receive and [e]carry away [and enjoy to the full] what is promised.
37For still a little while (a very little while), and the Coming One will come and He will not delay.
38But the just shall live by faith [My righteous servant shall live by his conviction respecting man's relationship to God and divine things, and holy fervor born of faith and conjoined with it]; and if he draws back and shrinks in fear, My soul has no delight or pleasure in him.
39But our way is not that of those who draw back to eternal misery (perdition) and are utterly destroyed, but we are of those who believe [who cleave to and trust in and rely on God through Jesus Christ, the Messiah] and by faith preserve the soul.
--Hebrews 10
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 19, 2008, 11:09:01 PM
You see no difference in: "To the angel of the church in Laodicea write:The Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God, says this:" (Rev.3:1) and this "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being." (Jn.1:1-3). Who are you kidding brother, no, not me.
"Beginning of the creation of God" is sorta like "God's Creative Original" in the Concordant Literal New Testament. You
can read a contradiction to the rest of the Scriptures into it, if you wish, but it's just saying that He began God's Creation just as it says in John's Gospel, Colossians, and Hebrews.
willieH: Hi Laren... :hithere:
Sorry for veering :offtopic: ...and I dont mean to :hijacked:
BUT... I agree with Sotw... this is an awesome verse, and I have used myself many times while discussing ET with its believers!
QuotePsa 30:5 For his anger endureth but a moment; in his favor is life: weeping may endure for a night, but joy cometh in the morning.
THIS LIFE, ...
IS... the
Lake of Fire...
That WRATH ...IS... revealed from Heaven... (
Rom 1:18) ...
IN THIS LIFE...
The JUDGEMENT ...IS...
NOW (
John 12:31) ...
IN THIS LIFE...
Our lives are but a VAPOR, which appears for a SHORT TIME (a moment
NOW), then vanishes away... (
James 4:14) ...
IN THIS LIFE...
The "BOOKS" of our lives are OPEN "BOOKS", before Him
NOW (
Rev 20:12) ...
IN THIS LIFE...
DEATH and the GRAVE are involved with us
NOW! (
Rev 20:14)! ...
IN THIS LIFE...
I love this :happygrin: :
(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/117/117193tdajxe3wh8.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Hope you dont mind me using them Roy... :happy3:
PeacE...
...willieH :icon_king:
Roy Monis,
My head is spinning with all of this created or begotten stuff. What the heck do you mean?
My son was begotten by my husband and I, and he was also created. I don't see the difference. Are you talking about pre-existence? Do you believe we must believe in Jesus's pre-existence to be legitimate? Is that the pivotal belief?
Quote from: willieHTHIS LIFE, ...IS... the Lake of Fire...
I think it might be for us believers,--Judgment begins at the house of God-- but I don't know about the others.
I see a lot of wicked seeming to prosper. :dontknow:
1 Peter 4:17
For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God?
Quote from: Molly on August 20, 2008, 05:16:55 AM
Quote from: willieHTHIS LIFE, ...IS... the Lake of Fire...
I think it might be for us believers,--Judgment begins at the house of God-- but I don't know about the others.
I see a lot of wicked seeming to prosper. :dontknow:
1 Peter 4:17
For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God?
Believers don't go through the Lake of Fire. This cannot be the Lake of Fire, because it happens last.
Quote
29How much worse (sterner and heavier) punishment do you suppose he will be judged to deserve who has spurned and [thus] trampled underfoot the Son of God, and who has considered the covenant blood by which he was consecrated common and unhallowed, thus profaning it and insulting and outraging the [Holy] Spirit [Who imparts] grace (the unmerited favor and blessing of God)?
30For we know Him Who said, Vengeance is Mine [retribution and the meting out of full justice rest with Me]; I will repay [I will exact the compensation], says the Lord. And again, The Lord will judge and determine and solve and settle the cause and the cases of His people.
31It is a fearful (formidable and terrible) thing to incur the divine penalties and be cast into the hands of the living God!
:icon_flower:
Good Morning Molly..
do You recall a Post of NATHANS mentioning the difference of seeing whats Written on the surface BEING totally DIFFERENT to what understood beneath it?...If you see GOD as ONE of Torture, death etc,,thats what you will READ.
This again talks like many before it of those who fall way from their First Love, Christ within us....
First and foremost Molly check out the word Punishment in verse 29...timōria which can be undertood as ASSISTANCE or Rendering HELP :icon_flower:
Are we Not Told Give place for His wrath , that Vengeance is HIS, vengeance ties in with the word Recompence( repay)
so where are we Recompenced? or how?..did you miss the LORD will JUDGE HIS PEOPLE MOLLY?..Judgment is NOW molly for the Church of GOD, read some more of WILLIE( the old Git :laughing7: ) H posts which talk of NOW.
Heb 10:3 For we know him that hath said, Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord. And again,
The Lord shall judge his people. where?
Prov 11:31 Behold, the
righteous shall be
recompensed in the earth:
much more the wicked and the sinner. Prov 20:22 Say not thou, I will recompense evil; but wait on the LORD, and
he shall save thee. RECOMPENCED IN THE earth molly..WITHIN us...HE does repay Molly, .
Romans 2:9
Tribulation and anguish, "upon
every soul of man that
doeth evil, of the
Jew first, and also of the Gentile; ya could say Molly we reap what sow...By removing ourself From Grace we internally suffer a greater pressing and Anguish....
recall this verse/
Jhn 16:21 A woman when she is in
travail hath sorrow, because her hour is come: but as soon as she is delivered of the child, she
remembereth no more the anguish, for joy that a
man is born into the world. But what are Told Molly
the LOvE of God conquers ALL
Rom 8:35 Who shall
separate us from the love of Christ? [shall]
tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword?
Paul Talk to to Corinith very MUCH in the same vein to whats being talked of in Heb.
1Cr 11:27 Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink [this] cup of the Lord, unworthily,
shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. 1Cr 11:28 But let a
man examine himself, and so
let him eat of [that] bread, and drink of [that] cup.
1Cr 11:29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and
drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body. do you Notice Molly..for this cause.MANY are WEAK and sickly.....AND THEY ARE LIKENED TO THOSE WHO SLEEP?
hey girl One has to chastened( corrected) to ARISE from such SLUMBER
1Cr 11:30 For this cause many [are] weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.
AAGH molly...just what does this MEAN..., if we Judge ourselves KNOWING Christ LIVES within through FAITH we No need to BE Judged by HIM who chastises uS through HIS LOVE
1Cr 11:31 For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged.
1Cr 11:32 But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world.
what does this mean Molly?.. those who EAT of HIS body AND DWELL in faith, THEY wait FOR THE SICKLY and aid their lack of understanding..THE MORE MATURE in the FAITH, the ELDERS etc...(..agin , like those who fell away,..same issue, different Book.
1Cr 11:33 Wherefore, my brethren, when ye come together to eat, tarry one for another.
i leave this one with you?
1Cr 11:34 And if any man hunger, let him eat at home; that ye come not
together unto condemnation. And the rest will I set in order when I come.
TOO ADD
God is a Jealous God,....He will devour the enmity of our flesh which keeps us from ONE UNION..the adversary lies within us ALL
Hbr 10:27 But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which
shall devour the adversaries. God does not forsake us , HE corrects US, HE never leaves us, we leave HIM, THROUGH HIS LOVE he conquers ALL.
This all talks of the INWARD man which
SHALL BE REVEALED.
:icon_flower:
Quote from: taffyIf you see GOD as ONE of Torture, death etc,,thats what you will READ.
Hi Taffy, Just a little about my background on this--I have always seen God as a God of love, from my earliest life. And this was evident in the way I lived my life. In fact, I walked amongst vipers unscathed all the time because I just didn't see them--I thought everyone was basically good--and God always has protected me, even through some pretty hard times.
But--the last year or so, I have been taken on some kind of metaphysical grand tour of evil. Things I never saw before are now plain as day. How much evil there is in the world--and how bottomless it is--it's depth and shamelessness, seems endless to me now. And, it's everywhere, in little deeds and big ones, small actions and huge ones. Even Mother Theresa looks like some hardened, wizened old woman who had no love in her heart for anyone and who just cynically used her position to raise millions for her own agenda, not to help the poor. So many illusions and liars everywhere. It's sickening.
So right now I am welcoming a God of retribution. I want to see all this evil gone from the face of the earth--the sooner the better. And, I'm recognizing, that real evil is without remorse, arrogant, smug, and self satisfied with its ability to dupe the world and crush the vulnerable--sadistic, cynical, and insane. (Can you tell I've just been reading about the pedophile problem in the church?)
So there you have it--this is my season of discontent I guess. Other than that, I didn't understand a word of what you just said in your post lol--although I recognize it is a general theme that you are trying to get across to me.
But, right now, I'm cheering on John the Baptist when he says--
"You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the coming wrath? 8Produce fruit in keeping with repentance.
10The ax is already at the root of the trees, and every tree that does not produce good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire. --Mat 3
well, this is off topic except to say that ultimately it will be up to Jesus, who will be the judge. Vengence belongs to him.
Quote from: Molly on August 20, 2008, 01:32:55 PM
Quote from: taffyIf you see GOD as ONE of Torture, death etc,,thats what you will READ.
Hi Taffy, Just a little about my background on this--I have always seen God as a God of love, from my earliest life. And this was evident in the way I lived my life. In fact, I walked amongst vipers unscathed all the time because I just didn't see them--I thought everyone was basically good--and God always has protected me, even through some pretty hard times.
But--the last year or so, I have been taken on some kind of metaphysical grand tour of evil. Things I never saw before are now plain as day. How much evil there is in the world--and how bottomless it is--it's depth and shamelessness, seems endless to me now. And, it's everywhere, in little deeds and big ones, small actions and huge ones. Even Mother Theresa looks like some hardened, wizened old woman who had no love in her heart for anyone who just cynically used her position to raise millions for her own agenda, not to help the poor. So many illusions and liars everywhere. It's sickening.
So right now I am welcoming a God of retribution. I want to see all this evil gone from the face of the earth--the sooner the better. And, I'm recognizing, that real evil is without remorse, arrogant, smug, and self satisfied with its ability to dupe the world and crush the vulnerable--sadistic, cynical, and insane.
So there you have it--this is my season of discontent I guess. Other than that, I didn't understand a word of what you just said in your post lol--although I recognize it is a general theme that you are trying to get across to me.
But, right now, I'm cheering on John the Baptist when he says--
"You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the coming wrath? 8Produce fruit in keeping with repentance.
10The ax is already at the root of the trees, and every tree that does not produce good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire.
--Mat 3
well, this is off topic except to say that ultimately it will be up to Jesus, who will be the judge. Vengence is belongs to him.
Hey Molly :icon_flower:
I did say """IF"""
Thanks for opening up some, gee i too see the world in similar vein..sick to the Core..im 47 ,but body is well toured and worn even thou its not that old....along with many mental and physical scares which bear testimony to it.
I can reason with your logic, ....................
I live for the HOPE within and the
HOPE FOR ALL...
no worries if you didnt understand sis,. :icon_flower:...
Blessings :icon_flower:
G
QuoteYou see no difference in: "To the angel of the church in Laodicea write:The Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God, says this:" (Rev.3:1) and this "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being." (Jn.1:1-3). Who are you kidding brother, no, not me.
Hi Roy, I'm late to this discussion, but you are saying that the Jesus speaking in Rev.3 is the anti-Christ and not the Christ.
So we are to disregard all the things he said concerning the churches?
Are you sure its not your understanding of the scriptures that cause you to see Rev.3 as being of the anti Christ?
You base this on where it say
"the Beginning of the creation of God"You may not be aware of this Roy but
"the beginning of the creation of God" is the foundation stone on which the new creation is built upon, For we are his workmanship,
created in Christ Jesus.
So Jesus Christ is
the beginning/foundation of the creation of God.
Rev.3 is not saying Jesus was created, its saying that in HIM are all things created.
God bless
Quote from: pneuma on August 20, 2008, 03:49:26 PM
QuoteYou see no difference in: "To the angel of the church in Laodicea write:The Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God, says this:" (Rev.3:1) and this "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being." (Jn.1:1-3). Who are you kidding brother, no, not me.
Hi Roy, I'm late to this discussion, but you are saying that the Jesus speaking in Rev.3 is the anti-Christ and not the Christ.
So we are to disregard all the things he said concerning the churches?
Are you sure its not your understanding of the scriptures that cause you to see Rev.3 as being of the anti Christ?
You base this on where it say "the Beginning of the creation of God"
You may not be aware of this Roy but "the beginning of the creation of God" is the foundation stone on which the new creation is built upon, For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus.
So Jesus Christ is the beginning/foundation of the creation of God.
Rev.3 is not saying Jesus was created, its saying that in HIM are all things created.
God bless
Hi Scott.
AMEN..
I truly was hoping bro Roy would also come to reach this conclusion
:icon_flower:
Quote from: Molly on August 20, 2008, 05:16:55 AM
I think it might be for us believers,--Judgment begins at the house of God-- but I don't know about the others.
I see a lot of wicked seeming to prosper. :dontknow:
King David had this problem in one of the Psalms, until he went into the house of God and saw how the wicked would turn out. :cloud9:
Quote from: Molly on August 20, 2008, 05:16:55 AM
1 Peter 4:17
For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God?
I'm thinking it's the next verse in the NASB that points out that if the righteous is saved with difficulty, what will become of the Godless man and the sinner? First of all, how did the righteous become the righteous? Were the righteous ever the Godless man and the sinner? If the righteous is saved with difficulty, the Godless man and the sinner will be saved with difficulty. Next verse: therefore, those also who suffer according to the will of God (or in defiance to temptation, testing, and trial because of Christ's finished work) shall entrust their souls to a faithful Creator in doing what is right. And the next few verses are about keeping every care cast upon the Lord because the same experiences (i.e. the exact same) are being accomplished by your brethren "who are in the world."
Quote from: martincisneros on August 20, 2008, 06:48:15 PM
Quote from: Molly on August 20, 2008, 05:16:55 AM
I think it might be for us believers,--Judgment begins at the house of God-- but I don't know about the others.
I see a lot of wicked seeming to prosper. :dontknow:
King David had this problem in one of the Psalms, until he went into the house of God and saw how the wicked would turn out. :cloud9:
Quote from: Molly on August 20, 2008, 05:16:55 AM
1 Peter 4:17
For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God?
I'm thinking it's the next verse in the NASB that points out that if the righteous is saved with difficulty, what will become of the Godless man and the sinner? First of all, how did the righteous become the righteous? Were the righteous ever the Godless man and the sinner? If the righteous is saved with difficulty, the Godless man and the sinner will be saved with difficulty. Next verse: therefore, those also who suffer according to the will of God (or in defiance to temptation, testing, and trial because of Christ's finished work) shall entrust their souls to a faithful Creator in doing what is right. And the next few verses are about keeping every care cast upon the Lord because the same experiences (i.e. the exact same) are being accomplished by your brethren "who are in the world."
yo Martin...
when I responded to Molly concerning the WICKED of the world ..I wasnt referRing to Scripture BUT to how she was seeing things Right now..
I always use the phrase
for MINE...and this mentioned below is no different...each to their OWN :icon_flower:
Its for sure, many think im nuts..
But first the Natural as shown in the OLD as with DAVID......which is the shadow of the New being spiritual..
For me the WICKED is the flesh WITHIN, that which enmity To the LAW of the spirit being Christ In us..
psalms and proverbs begin to come to life...
these few say all the same thing bro...altho to the carnal eye it may seem different.,,for me its isnt
Psa 145:20 The
LORD preserveth all them that love him: but all the
wicked will he destroy Psa 147:6 The
LORD lifteth up the meek: he casteth the
wicked down to the ground.
Psa 119:155
Salvation [is] far from the wicked: for
they seek not thy statutes. Psa 106:18 And a fire was
kindled in their company; the
flame burned up the wicked. If one reads scripture thinking it means OTHERS, for mine..it really speaks of US...the flesh and spirit...the two edged sword seperates the flesh FROM SPIRIT....therefore the flesh dies, and the spirit Lives via faith....
The tares are the flesh within US..HE is the WHEAT....what burns first,,always the flesh...whats left...HIM, its speak of the INWARD MAN.
you mention 1 peter about the righteous scarcely , meaning with difficulty..., heres a witness of such difficulty
Prov 11:31 Behold, the
righteous shall be
recompensed in the earth: much more the
wicked and the sinner. the difficulty comes moving from the Child brother... back those days, it was really difficult to leave the LAW of their fathers and believe in an nobody from Bethlehem....so scriptures uses words like these..
Jer 22:23 O inhabitant of Lebanon, that makest thy nest in the cedars, how gracious shalt thou be when
pangs come upon thee,
the pain as of a woman in travail! Tis called giving Birth ...the pain , the anguish of moving from Child Under law...to a SON of faith.....
Jhn 16:21 A woman when she is in
travail hath sorrow, because her
hour is come: but as soon as she is delivered of the child,
she remembereth no more the anguish, for
joy that a
man is born into the world. This martin ,IS what Peter is referring to brother..
with difficulty one is saved....
Laren, Willie H and Craig will love this scrip....
For wrath is GOOD brother as is HIS vengeance with recompense....as noted to Molly....althou it was very brief in description
Psa 30:5 For his
anger [endureth but] a moment; in his
favour [is] life:
weeping may endure for a night, but
joy [cometh] in the morning. Joy, my Dear Brother is another Title hidden given to our LORD.....
Job 38:7 When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God
shouted for joy?
WELL IM JABBERING....
Ill quote HIS WORDS all day long..and if bores people....WELL what can one say....but willie has a few to pick from :icon_flower:
Maybe Molly this will aid you also.
Blessings to you Both :icon_flower: :icon_flower:
Taffy
QuoteI'm thinking it's the next verse in the NASB that points out that if the righteous is saved with difficulty, what will become of the Godless man and the sinner? First of all, how did the righteous become the righteous? Were the righteous ever the Godless man and the sinner? If the righteous is saved with difficulty, the Godless man and the sinner will be saved with difficulty. Next verse: therefore, those also who suffer according to the will of God (or in defiance to temptation, testing, and trial because of Christ's finished work) shall entrust their souls to a faithful Creator in doing what is right. And the next few verses are about keeping every care cast upon the Lord because the same experiences (i.e. the exact same) are being accomplished by your brethren "who are in the world."
Drr Martin...just re-read your post matey..and realised we saying similar things... :icon_flower:
scripture just says it better for my understanding...
Quote from: Taffy on August 20, 2008, 07:37:53 PM
Its for sure many think im nuts..
Those that love the Father love His kid as well, those that don't love His kid don't love the Father either. I stopped worrying about what people with unrenewed minds think a long time ago 'cause they're tossed to and fro with every wind, every emotion, every book, everything on television, etc. The Bible teaches that someone that's not renewed in the spirit of their minds isn't the least bit stable, so why worry about it, right? Which is worse, the person that can act crazy 'cause they're just having fun, but all of their boundaries are in place -- or, the person that can act crazy because they genuinely are floating between realities and have no firm foundation in all things being theirs, in all of their enemies being their footstool, in their seating with Christ, and in the expression of His High Priesthood through them? Jesus' mother, sisters, and brothers came RUNNING to get Him one time 'cause they thought He'd snapped because He wasn't living according to the religious rules, was having too much fun, and was establishing how things would turn out. The descendants of Jesus' mother, brothers, and sisters are with us to the present day :mshock:
As far as I'm concerned, I'm at the resurrection year of my life, whatever any nay sayers would ever care to say about it. Life's only going to get better, regardless of any doomsday prophets. Weeping's already endured enough nights, and now the dawning of joy has come. 'Cause I'm a Postmillenialist, I get asked all of the time about this tribulation passage or that tribulation passage and they're usually dumbfounded when I ask "haven't you already had 7 years of tribulation in your life? Why are you looking for more tribulation? To expect more tribulation after we've already had tribulation -- how loving is that towards the people that Christ shed His Blood for to bring them out of their tribulation? Get out of your tribulation in the Name of Jesus! You're not called to tribulation but to reign with Christ and to bring people out of their great tribulation!!"
In Christian eschatology, postmillennialism is an interpretation of chapter 20 of the Book of Revelation which sees Christ's second coming as occurring after (Latin post-) the "Millennium", a Golden Age or era of Christian prosperity and dominance. The term subsumes several similar views of the end times, and it stands in contrast to premillennialism and, to a lesser extent, amillennialism
Although some postmillennialists hold to a literal millennium of 1,000 years, most postmillennialists see the thousand years more as a figurative term for a long period of time (similar in that respect to amillennialism). Among those holding to a non-literal "millennium" it is usually understood to have already begun, which implies a less obvious and less dramatic kind of millennium than that typically envisioned by premillennialists, as well as a more unexpected return of Christ.
Postmillennialism also teaches that the forces of Satan will gradually be defeated by the expansion of the Kingdom of God throughout history up until the second coming of Christ. This belief that good will gradually triumph over evil has led proponents of postmillennialism to label themselves "optimillennialists" in contrast to "pessimillennial" premillennialists and amillennialists.
Many postmillennialists also adopt some form of preterism, which holds that many of the end times prophecies in the Bible have already been fulfilled.
well..for sure this aint telling me much either...man...I can just imagine people years back going..Im a.....Yaeh and Im a....sounds awful complicated..WHAT EVER HAPPENED TO SIMPLICITY.
OK,,Martin..spill the beans matey..where do you fit in the above, give me a Platform to work from bud.
:icon_flower:
Quote from: Molly on August 19, 2008, 06:55:07 PM
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 19, 2008, 06:42:45 PM
Hi! Molly
Your quote from above: " Father still enveloped that which had been conceived naturally and blessed it?" How would that be possible Molly, considering that Mary conceived by the Holy Spirit BEFORE Mary and Joseph came together. She had already conceived the Word in the body/Jesus that had been prepared for Him. "But a body You have prepared for Me; (Heb.10:5).
Jesus was the Word the Son of God in the Mary's womb before Joseph had relations with her. That's what that Scripture is saying to me, can you not see it?
Peace! url=http://www.glitter-graphics.com](http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif)[/url
Roy UK
Yes, it had nothing to do with Joseph--Mary was a virgin. (I'm not sure which quote you mean, but I don't think it's mine).
I know of Catholics who are shocked when you tell them that Jesus existed before he was born a baby in Bethlehem.
I studied with the JW's for a while--at least they were willing to study the Bible with me, and they came to my house--very nice people. But around 6 months into it, they announced that Jesus was the archangel Michael, and not God. So that was the end of that but, before we parted ways, I showed them scripture that rendered them speechless.
So there are groups of people that don't understand, besides the Jews that is, but it is because they do not read, or do not believe, the Bible.
Hi! Molly
Forgive me, old age I suppose is responsible but the quote I ascribed to you was actually SeekerSA's and not yours. Sorry for the confusion.
You're absolutely right, the JWs believe the same as the SDA founded by Ellen Gould White who was the first to claim that Jesus was the archangel Michael. But the Bible tells a different story. Jesus Christ the Word/God existed in the bosom of the Father from the very beginning, before creation, when there was only God the Father. "No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the
bosom of the Father, He has explained Him." (J.1:18). There's no arguing about that, now is there?
No Jesus had nothing whatsoever to do with Joseph and Mary other than the physical birthing process and they acting as His sort of guardians or earthly parents but they were not His biological parents. The Bible is perfectly clear on that. Long before Joseph had relations with Mary, while she was yet a virgin the Holy Spirit of the Father implanted the seed of the prepared body and the Word into Mary's womb and she conceived."Now the birth of Jesus Christ was as follows: when His mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph,
before they came together she was found to be with
child by the Holy Spirit. And Joseph her husband, being a righteous man and not wanting to disgrace her, planned to send her away secretly. But when he had considered this, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, "Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife; for the Child who has been conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit. "She will bear a Son; and you shall
call His name Jesus......" (Matt.1:18-21).
Do not be tempted by those who want you to believe in a created Jesus Christ rather than the True Jesus Christ Born of the Father, they are not the same. The created Christ is an idol and the Chrisy Born of the Father is God, that's the difference. If worshiped the idol we deny the Creator God and Jesus has something to say about that.
"Therefore everyone who confesses Me before men, I will also confess him before My Father who is in heaven. But whoever denies Me before men, I will also deny him before My Father who is in heaven." (Matt.10:32-33).
I know who I believe in and I'm confessing Him right here and will do to the world.
Peace!(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif)[/url
Roy UK
(http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Sounds a little like the wikipedia article on it, which might explain some of your confusion on it :icon_jokercolor:
Quote from: Taffy on August 20, 2008, 08:48:46 PM
In Christian eschatology, postmillennialism is an interpretation of chapter 20 of the Book of Revelation which sees Christ's second coming as occurring after (Latin post-) the "Millennium", a Golden Age or era of Christian prosperity and dominance. The term subsumes several similar views of the end times, and it stands in contrast to premillennialism and, to a lesser extent, amillennialism. Although some postmillennialists hold to a literal millennium of 1,000 years, most postmillennialists see the thousand years more as a figurative term for a long period of time (similar in that respect to amillennialism).
That's fine so far, as far as a definition. Jesus doesn't come back in Revelation 19 in the Cosmic Rambo scenario envisioned by many Premillenialists. A very strong outpouring of the Holy Spirit does begin at that time though which slays the wickedness from the wicked. I can handle the millenium being a thousand years or several thousand years. I won't have a fall-out with anyone over the Jewish calendar or the Gentile calendar either where that's concerned.
Quote from: Taffy on August 20, 2008, 08:48:46 PM
Among those holding to a non-literal "millennium" it is usually understood to have already begun, which implies a less obvious and less dramatic kind of millennium than that typically envisioned by premillennialists, as well as a more unexpected return of Christ.
This part sounds like they're confusing Amillenialists with Postmillenialists 'cause the millenium of a Postmillenialist is more obvious and very dramatic in seeing the fulfillment of the Holy Spirit being poured out upon all flesh.
Quote from: Taffy on August 20, 2008, 08:48:46 PM
Postmillennialism also teaches that the forces of Satan will gradually be defeated by the expansion of the Kingdom of God throughout history up until the second coming of Christ. This belief that good will gradually triumph over evil has led proponents of postmillennialism to label themselves "optimillennialists" in contrast to "pessimillennial" premillennialists and amillennialists.
Again, works for me so far on the definition side, though obviously the "throughout history" part would be inclusive of the millenium. This is in contrast with the premillenial "big bang" of Jesus returning and for a thousand years doing all that He told us to do in winning and discipling the nations.
Quote from: Taffy on August 20, 2008, 08:48:46 PM
Many postmillennialists also adopt some form of preterism, which holds that many of the end times prophecies in the Bible have already been fulfilled.
My views of Scripture would be both partial preterist and futurist 'cause I don't believe all of the prophecies have been fulfilled yet, though many statements from Jesus and St. Paul were fulfilled in the 1st century.
Quote from: Taffy on August 20, 2008, 08:48:46 PM
....sounds awful complicated..WHAT EVER HAPPENED TO SIMPLICITY. OK,,Martin..spill the beans matey..where do you fit in the above, give me a Platform to work from bud.
I'd already given a partial response to your question at this link:
http://www.tentmaker.org/forum/index.php?topic=2751.msg32498#msg32498 (http://www.tentmaker.org/forum/index.php?topic=2751.msg32498#msg32498)
If anything's still unclear, just let me know.
Yo Martin
Thanks
posted the above while you were composing yours ....
im just working my way through it all :icon_flower:
Quote from: Taffy on August 20, 2008, 10:08:11 PM
Yo Martin
Thanks
posted the above while you were composing yours ....
im just working my way through it all :icon_flower:
Same here. I don't know it all, but a lot more has been making sense to me over the last 7 years than ever has in my entire life. God's been answering all of my childhood questions. What do I do if I run out of questions for God? I'm getting there fast!
Quote from: Taffy on August 19, 2008, 09:40:17 PM
Roy I must inform you
Long before you came to BTs ...some at Tent were there Long before you....
I assure you I know the work of L.Ray.Smith and he too knows me, I also Know the Mods there very well too...,
Not the new ones ,but Guys like Craig, Hills ( Joe) Dennis...and me old Mate Chris Read..we go back a few yrs...
so if your going to use his work and words here, there nothing new my friend, well not to me....
Im well aware of what Grace means....its obvious from your previous post that you didnt know what falling away meant as one falling BACK TO LAW, that being the law of MOSES...BECAUSE, INDEED it does have something to do with it.
You have a beef about a carnal Jesus and a spiritual ONE...more than a few have adressed it,
Ill warn you this brother, if you expect those at TENT to agree with your EVERY WORD....then I suggest your at the wrong venue...if you wish to share your thoughts and veiws along side us, then indeed your welcome.
If you set yourself UP..there are those here who will quite happily MEET YOU AT THAT PLACE BRO..., for all other have their opinion also
Blessings
Taffy a fellow Brit :icon_flower:
Hi! Taffy
So I didn't know that falling out of grace in Rev. meant falling back to the law. That's as much as you know with all your years of experience that you so proudly declare, have you forgotten that humility is one of God's major requirements, I see precious little of that here. If I commit a sin and don't repent of it am I still under grace? Have I suddenly slipped back under the law? Come of it, brother, you fall out of grace the moment you disobey God's Word and don't repent.
But why are we still discussing these matters seeing that we have no common ground, you believe in two masters, the Created and the Begotten. I believe in just the One Begotten God. So let us agree to disagree.
I don't know what you mean by this statement: "If you set yourself UP..there are those here who will quite happily MEET YOU AT THAT PLACE BRO..., for all other have their opinion also."
Are you referring to me? If so, in what way have I set myself up in anything, all I've done is express my belief and profess that Jesus Christ is Born of God and the true Creator in obedience to His command.
"Therefore everyone who confesses Me before men, I will also confess him before My Father who is in heaven. But whoever denies Me before men, I will also deny him before My Father who is in heaven." (Matt.10:32-33). Do you see anything wrong in that, because even if you do, bad luck, I will not stop? You wouldn't by any chance be confusing yourself with me, brother, regarding the setting yourself up and MEET YOU AT THAT PLACE BRO. You make it sound like a dangerous crowd. I'm expressing my opinion and not interfering with anyone else's opinion so what's the big deal?
If anyone wants to discuss my opinion on something I'm happy to do so, if they don't then just don't get involved and if I've no one interested I'll soon shut up. If I plunge into a discussion I have to have a good reason for doing so, or I keep out.
Now does that clear things up? We don't see eye to eye on the subject I've raised so don't get involved. I've learned a lot from BT and it's a lot more than I'm going to learn here by the looks of it. I'm indebted to BT though I don't see eye to eye with their teaching on this very subject we're discussing here.
So let's agree to disagree as brothers in Christ Jesus our Lord. Amen!
Peace!(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 20, 2008, 11:05:49 PM
I've learned a lot from BT and it's a lot more than I'm going to learn here by the looks of it. I'm indebted to BT though I don't see eye to eye with their teaching on this very subject we're discussing here.
So let's agree to disagree as brothers in Christ Jesus our Lord. Amen!
Peace!(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy
well if u don't see eye to eye with BT on this subject, then it seems you are indebted to a bunch of people teaching false teachings, and those going to LOF (based on your posts that if one doesn't believe the way u do, they will be burned. Where is the separation from babylon"?
quote from your earlier post ""I'm sorry but I do not mix myself up with other heathen religions. You say that Tentmakers is only interested in those who believe in salvation for all mankind. That's precisely it, I believe in the salvation of all mankind, but if we do not believe in the
True Jesus Of that salvation then we are all going to burn in God's Consuming Fire for one heck of a long time. Which is no walk in the park."I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me." (Jn.14:6). That is my rock and foundation nothing else, no arguments, totally biased.'
Quote from: SOtW on August 20, 2008, 06:24:28 AM
Quote from: Molly on August 20, 2008, 05:16:55 AM
Quote from: willieHTHIS LIFE, ...IS... the Lake of Fire...
I think it might be for us believers,--Judgment begins at the house of God-- but I don't know about the others.
I see a lot of wicked seeming to prosper. :dontknow:
1 Peter 4:17
For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God?
Believers don't go through the Lake of Fire. This cannot be the Lake of Fire, because it happens last.
I will be answering this post in the NEW THREAD:
LAKE OF FIRE... part of the Revelation of JESUS CHRIST...
In
Bible Threatenings Forum... :happygrin:
QuoteSo I didn't know that falling out of grace in Rev. meant falling back to the law.
indeed you didnt, then so much for your Humilty my friend, for it was you who mentioned it..so, can we Just stick to scriptural terms , so we dont get LOST with our own versions of what we think IT is,,Noted by Laren as the LONG time spent in the lake..whichYOU STARTED.
Quote
That's as much as you know with all your years of experience that you so proudly declare, have you forgotten that humility is one of God's major requirements, I see precious little of that here.
opps there you go again..if you expect me to BOW to you with YES SIR ,NO SIR ,thank you very much sir...then think again my British Friend...., been down that path BOWING to men...dint like it much as they used my humilty and beat me on the HEAD with it.....I bow to NO man Roy, Inc YOU...especially by your admitance of being WRONG...Get a Grip Roy
Quote
If I commit a sin and don't repent of it am I still under grace? Have I suddenly slipped back under the law? Come of it, brother, you fall out of grace the moment you disobey God's Word and don't repent.
Ok Roy back to you,,whats sin ? Define under the New C SO I know of what you speak of...can you answer this?....or will you avoid it like the other few questions given....then Ill happilly reply to the rest of your statement
Quote
But why are we still discussing these matters seeing that we have no common ground, you believe in two masters, the Created and the Begotten. I believe in just the One Begotten God. So let us agree to disagree.
Roy excuse me..But you are BLIND to the words you quote..IVE BEEN FOLLOWING the thread about this on Bts all day..Kat, Hills among others ,have been striving to tell you the same thing.....But no brother..everyone else be wrong, BAR YOU...maybe Ill post the link here to see that thread....what say you?
you dont LISTEN brother because you see WHAT you wish to see....thats it
Quote
I don't know what you mean by this statement: "If you set yourself UP..there are those here who will quite happily MEET YOU AT THAT PLACE BRO..., for all other have their opinion also."
Let me explain then Roy,if you SET yourself UP expecting OTHERS to see things YOUR WAY, then expect OTHERS who dont agree with you to propose thiers and WHY?
Quote
Are you referring to me?
No Roy, the Cats Auntie..who do you think Roy?
Quote
If so, in what way have I set myself up in anything, all I've done is express my belief and profess that Jesus Christ is Born of God and the true Creator in obedience to His command. "Therefore everyone who confesses Me before men, I will also confess him before My Father who is in heaven. But whoever denies Me before men, I will also deny him before My Father who is in heaven." (Matt.10:32-33). Do you see anything wrong in that, because even if you do, bad luck, I will not stop? You wouldn't by any chance be confusing yourself with me, brother, regarding the setting yourself up and MEET YOU AT THAT PLACE BRO. You make it sound like a dangerous crowd. I'm expressing my opinion and not interfering with anyone else's opinion so what's the big deal?
Im heartened to Hear Opinion Roy ,because up to Now thats all you propose...even thou many have given you alternatives....,yes Roy express your biews by all means..but what Ive seen thus Far ,for those who dont agree with you are deem false prophets, false christs etc ..maybe youll like me to add these to this Post ,for others to figure because for sure that what you Implied...Thats not very Nice Roy...I suppose you would call It "what HAS DARKNESS to do with LIGHT"...as you Know the scrips, then youll Know the one I mean.
we aint dangerous Roy,,far from it bro...ya got the wrong end of the Stick
QuoteIf anyone wants to discuss my opinion on something I'm happy to do so, if they don't then just don't get involved and if I've no one interested I'll soon shut up. If I plunge into a discussion I have to have a good reason for doing so, or I keep out.
Thats a very good point Roy,cause for sure, this thread has exhausted itself.
could you be so Kind to adress those few questions posted earlier matey Or will yet again avoid them...im betting on the Latter.... :icon_flower:
I hate religion Roy....sorta makes my skin crawl and raises the Blood pressure a Little..
Later if you so cal wish Brother
Tafft
Quote from: willieH on August 20, 2008, 11:25:50 PM
Quote from: SOtW on August 20, 2008, 06:24:28 AM
Quote from: Molly on August 20, 2008, 05:16:55 AM
Quote from: willieHTHIS LIFE, ...IS... the Lake of Fire...
I think it might be for us believers,--Judgment begins at the house of God-- but I don't know about the others.
I see a lot of wicked seeming to prosper. :dontknow:
1 Peter 4:17
For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God?
Believers don't go through the Lake of Fire. This cannot be the Lake of Fire, because it happens last.
I will be answering this post in the NEW THREAD:
LAKE OF FIRE... part of the Revelation of JESUS CHRIST...
In Bible Threatenings Forum... :happygrin:
Phew thank you willie for not taking the Bait...,
Nothing perSonal Craig, as I understand where you both are on The lake...I just saw a Red Rag To a Bull... :laughing7:
But you both Know what Im saying :icon_flower: :icon_flower:
T
Quote
I've learned a lot from BT and it's a lot more than I'm going to learn here by the looks of it. I'm indebted to BT though I don't see eye to eye with their teaching on this very subject we're discussing here.
So let's agree to disagree as brothers in Christ Jesus our Lord. Amen!
Of course Roy Lets,,,,.....But sounds a Little to me, you came to Tent MAYBE to seek AGREEANCE with what you you proposed..seems we have a Little more in common with Bts than you suggest, becuase you havent found it here Either....
:icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower:
Quote from: Roy MonisSo I didn't know that falling out of grace in Rev. meant falling back to the law. That's as much as you know with all your years of experience that you so proudly declare, have you forgotten that humility is one of God's major requirements, I see precious little of that here. If I commit a sin and don't repent of it am I still under grace? Have I suddenly slipped back under the law? Come of it, brother, you fall out of grace the moment you disobey God's Word and don't repent.
Hello Roy,
I agree with the error you are seeing concerning grace and law and will expound on this. Though I agree with you on the Only Begotten of God, I reserve my answer for later.
In the meantime, let me address this above quote.
When I was pastor of a church which taught exclusively on Grace there was nothing else we taught. It was awesome. Along the way, we had to face constant misunderstandings of Grace. So we encountered some errors in reasoning.
Error #1.
If a person was to fall from Grace...
...they fell back to the Law.
When Paul said those who seek to be justified by the law have fallen from grace, he was not saying at the same time, those who seek to be justified by grace have fallen from the law. Grace and Law are not opposites nor is one an antonym of the other. Grace does not replace the law, nor does law replace grace as a system of salvation or belief. Earlier in the letter to Galatians, Paul writes that the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ so that we may be justified by faith, now that faith as come we are no longer under the law.
So now we recognize what Paul was talking about when it came to 'falling from grace'. What was happening with Galatians was that they had divine favour (Grace) with God to spread the Gospel, but the moment they began to teach a different gospel (one justified by the law) they were no longer under that divine favour but were treated as those who have abandoned faith and treated as unbelievers.
The answer:
If a person was to fall from grace...
...means they have fallen from divine favour.
If a person seeks to be justified by the law...
...means they are bound by unbelief (we are justified by faith).
A person who lives by unbelief...
...means they will be cut off like Israel who also sought to be justified by the law and fell from grace as a result.
So just as you said, to fall from grace does not mean that we have fallen to the law. To fall from grace means we have done something which prevents us from enjoying the benefits of the Kingdom of God.
As Paul writes, "You were running a good race. Who cut in on you and kept you from obeying the truth? That kind of persuasion does not come from the one who calls you. 'A little yeast works through the whole batch of dough.' I am confident in the Lord that you will take no other view. The one who is throwing you into confusion will pay the penalty, whoever he may be. You, my brothers, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the sinful nature; rather, serve one another in love. The entire law is summed up in a single command: "Love your neighbor as yourself." If you keep on biting and devouring each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each other.
The problem I see is that people who came into the understanding of Universal Salvation/Ultimate Reconciliation/etc. have taken with them their old way of thinking. They continue to believe that if someone falls from grace, that they have fallen from reconciliation with God and that somehow hell has become perpetual again! What stunted growth indeed. They need to renew their minds by the washing of the Word, and recognize that when it is not good to have zeal without knowledge and if they do not know the righteousness that comes from God they have sought to establish their own, and they do not submit to God's righteousness.
Now of course we are justified by his grace through redemption that came by Christ Jesus. God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement by faith (not man's faith, but God's faith) in His blood.
Now concerning the Begotten or Created of God, though I believe Jesus is the Only Begotten and not created in any fashion so do not think I am posting in disagreement. What people do not understand about me is that I defend the right for people to believe what they believe as long as they have a rational and reasonable cause to believe it. That means, though I agree with you concerning Jesus Christ, I need to see why this is so important that everyone else needs to know it without condemnation and other forms of fallacy.
Quote from: Taffy on August 21, 2008, 12:01:11 AM
Of course Roy Lets,,,,.....But sounds a Little to me, you came to Tent MAYBE to seek AGREEANCE with what you you proposed..seems we have a Little more in common with Bts than you suggest, becuase you havent found it here Either...
I'm not sure if anybody around here really even agrees with anybody else 70% of the time on all things that come up. If it's genuinely important, then you can find a way of edifying, encouraging, nurturing, and even exciting with it from time to time. That's how I personally judge what to post and what not to post. If it's just a personal opinion and I can't figure how anyone would genuinely be the better for it, the more lightened of whatever burdens they've had that day, or the more eager to go out and win the world to Christ, then I'll seldom ever go there. I've known countless ministers [and other Christian brethren] that at the end of their lives were deeply regretful that they hadn't spent more time with the ministry of encouragement during their ministries. Personally, now that I've been made aware of it, I won't have that regret. Life's already full of things "to put everyone in their place" from the moment you get up to the moment that you go to bed. The boards should be an escape from that and not just one more place to argue about one more thing.
I'm getting confused here. Does anyone in this thread think Jesus is created?
They have reopened investigation on the shroud of Turin--maybe it's the real thing after all.
But, one intriquing fact about it--the scientists think the image was created by a sudden increase in temperature of a chemical/biological nature from the body inside the shroud--could this turn out to be physical proof of the resurrection?
Jesus claimed he would be responsible for resurrecting himself. Could a created being do that?
John 2:19
Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.
17Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again.
18No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.
Also, what is BT?
Quote
So just as you said, to fall from grace does not mean that we have fallen to the law. To fall from grace means we have done something which prevents us from enjoying the benefits of the Kingdom of God.
so Craig what would these things be...
when all Iread is this..
Gal 5:4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.
for mine,yes the LAW was to lead to Christ..but the rest of what your saying,,mm...
explian moere
Quote from: Molly on August 21, 2008, 12:18:08 AM
They have reopened investigation on the shroud of Turin--maybe it's the real thing after all.
It is the real thing. In the years since it's carbon-14 dating, tons and tons of evidence has come up to discredit that original medieval dating of it. Plus the stitching is uniquely 1st century Palestine. Lots of other interesting stuff about it that one could get into.
Quote from: Molly on August 21, 2008, 12:18:08 AM
But, one intriquing fact about it--the scientists think the image was created by a sudden increase in temperature of a chemical/biological nature from the body inside the shroud--could this turn out to be physical proof of the resurrection?
Beyond that, the image on the shroud and on it's accompanying face cloth [that's usually kept somewhere else and goes by a different name] turn out to be a perfect hologram with encoded digital information. Again, impossible to forge in the 1200s, just as the photography aspect of it that was discovered a little over a hundred years ago. The image was also created in negative gravity. Some scientists say that it's evidence of the Creation of a new Universe.
Quote from: Molly on August 21, 2008, 12:18:08 AM
Also, what is BT?
L. Ray Smith's Bible Truths website www.bible-truths.com (http://www.bible-truths.com)
Quote from: Taffy on August 21, 2008, 12:21:26 AM
Quote
So just as you said, to fall from grace does not mean that we have fallen to the law. To fall from grace means we have done something which prevents us from enjoying the benefits of the Kingdom of God.
so Craig what would these things be...
when all Iread is this..
Gal 5:4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.
for mine,yes the LAW was to lead to Christ..but the rest of what your saying,,mm...
explian moere
Taffy,
Why not read all of the letter to Galations as a whole and find out instead of reading line upon line, precept upon precept, which leads one to fall backward, be injured and snared and captured? If you had kept reading even kept reading Galations 5, you would find out what these things would be.
Here they are: The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that
those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God. -Galations 5:19-21
Craig
QuoteHere they are: The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.
Come on Craig..if I havent read.....
these are those which keep us from Entering ....yes ,the Flesh ,but Im spirit Bro ,Paul Tells me,Ive died to the Flesh, seeing these things mentioned in a different light to you maybe friend ,these ARE the WORKS of the Flesh,which PREVENT us being ONE with HIM..., My flesh has died, been Burnt, therefore I no longer LIVE....
Just how can I put this into words... :icon_flower:., the Flesh doesnt wish TO DIE,its enmity...TO THE SPIRIT,...THE WICKED is No longer Craig.....these things listed No longer prevent me being ONE....for I live in the SPIRIT...
For me it about the battle within..Flesh V spirit., the flesh remains in Darkness dead, while we toil against the spirit, by submitting ,for the sense of a better word, the flesh dies and we become one again with HIM........ill try harder tomorrow Craig....
Im not disagreeing but im trying to relate maybe a different concept to what Is normally taught....I live Grace and Truth Brother,,not by the WORKS of the Flesh...
later bud
G
You asked:
Quote"so Craig what would these things be..."
I answered.
There is no secret agenda or motive. If you want me to explain more, the first thing that needed to be clarified is that you knew what those things would be. It seemed you set yourself as judge concerning these things, as if there was not anything you could do which would prevent you from inheriting the Kingdom of God.
Quote from: SOtW on August 21, 2008, 01:33:35 AM
You asked:
Quote"so Craig what would these things be..."
I answered.
There is no secret agenda or motive. If you want me to explain more, the first thing that needed to be clarified is that you knew what those things would be. It seemed you set yourself as judge concerning these things, as if there was not anything you could do which would prevent you from inheriting the Kingdom of God.
Craig.. Thank you for anwering for I did ask,..I just wanted you to clarify what you MEANT AS YOU didnt put in your POST to Roy did you...No you didnt... therefore forgive me for asking for clarification...and me for being so silly not to read the Gal 5
Indeed Craig I Judge Myself, as quoted in an earlier post.
1Cr 11:31 For if we would judge ourselves, we should
not be judged. have a Nice day Craig..see you over the Lake of fire thread.... :icon_flower:
Well if you knew the answer, why ask the question there was no clarification just an trap which I disarmed.
What do you think the works of the flesh are? Do you think it is the Law?
Quote from: SOtW on August 21, 2008, 05:06:29 AM
Well if you knew the answer, why ask the question there was no clarification just an trap which I disarmed.
What do you think the works of the flesh are? Do you think it is the Law?
no craig your wrong....utter rubbish.....Craig please get off that defensive streak which reaps RIGHT THROUGH YOU..youll endear more people that way...we are NOT your enemy Bro, but your Neither the VOICE of all.
the works of the Flesh are what I stated....those which KEEP me from being spirit..thought that was plain enough .
works of the Flesh...yes some can like adultery etc be associated..but its the Flesh within which is being talked about
and Like I said...Im spirit..what are you Craig,,bound by the Flesh?,,...do these things bother you bro?
if so why?....
Like I said scripture shows us we Indeed judge Ourselves as noted.....dont you/
where do you wish to go with this? because up till now you aint got no where
Quote from: Taffy on August 21, 2008, 05:18:33 AM
Quote from: SOtW on August 21, 2008, 05:06:29 AM
Well if you knew the answer, why ask the question there was no clarification just an trap which I disarmed.
What do you think the works of the flesh are? Do you think it is the Law?
no craig your wrong....utter rubbish.....Craig please get off that defensive streak which reaps RIGHT THROUGH YOU..youll endear more people that way...we are NOT your enemy Bro, but your Neither the VOICE of all.
the works of the Flesh are what I stated....those which KEEP me from being spirit..thought that was plain enough .
works of the Flesh...yes some can like adultery etc be associated..but its the Flesh within which is being talked about
and Like I said...Im spirit..what are you Craig,,bound by the Flesh?,,...do these things bother you bro?
if so why?....
Like I said scripture shows us we Indeed judge Ourselves as noted.....dont you/
where do you wish to go with this? because up till now you aint got no where
What is that supposed to mean? Where did I say I was voice to all? I have never asserted this, nor claimed this. So where does this come fro?
You must be blind to it, because once again you set up the questions as if to position yourself as God over your own life. Like Ron pointed out, there is a lack of humility in your responses, because any time it is brought up that there is an authority greater than you, you affirm you are your own judge. Brother, don't take the 'judge' yourself out of context.
1 Corinthians 11:31But if we judged ourselves, we would not come under judgment.
It doesn't say, "if
I judge
myself,
I would not come under judgment."
Believe it or not, you are held accountable by your brothers and sisters in Christ, you do not belong to yourself when you submitted to Christ but the Body.
1 Corinthians 5:11-13But now I am writing you that you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a slanderer, a drunkard or a swindler. With such a man do not even eat. What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? God will judge those outside. "Expel the wicked man from among you."
Here is what it means to fall from Grace. We are to judge those who call themselves the 'church', if someone calls himself a brother but lives by the works of the flesh, he has fallen from grace he is not part of the 'church' and God will judge them and sinners of Zion tremble because of it.
If it is a misunderstanding, then understand it is a misunderstanding. I am replying to your words and if they are not what you meant, then just say it. I can accept misunderstanding, I cannot accept an attack from you.
QuoteWhat is that supposed to mean? Where did I say I was voice to all? I have never asserted this, nor claimed this. So where does this come fro?
You assumed Criag that I set out to Trap you...I didnt , I asked a More than resonable question concerning what you thought,...even when I apologised for your over sight, you kept on, it was I who apologied for you, Not clarifying what you meant..
Quote
You must be blind to it, because once again you set up the questions as if to position yourself as God over your own life. Like Ron pointed out, there is a lack of humility in your responses, because any time it is brought up that there is an authority greater than you, you affirm you are your own judge. Brother, don't take the 'judge' yourself out of context
wow Craig, you want to have a good look on the discusion between you and I ...ONLY one has apologised...and you say I lack humility..thanks you bro,..May I suggest take a look in the mirror
Quote
1 Corinthians 11:31
But if we judged ourselves, we would not come under judgment.
It doesn't say, "if I judge myself, I would not come under judgment."
Believe it or not, you are held accountable by your brothers and sisters in Christ, you do not belong to yourself when you submitted to Christ but the Body.
And I agree Craig, my body is Not My BODY, its HIS,....
doesnt It, if one
eats worthily of the body , Then Indeed there is
No judgment , ..but the PRE-REQUISITE is we EAT
worthily....thats what you mean isnt it?
1Cr 2:15 But he that is
spiritual judgeth all things, yet he
himself is judged of no man. 1Cr 2:16 For who hath
known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him?
But we have the mind of Christ. for it is those who
ATE unworthily who are
subjected to BE JUDGED., those who are alseep and sick, ...perhaps they were just having a Kip in the pews at the back
but it seems there were some among the Corinthians who werent worthy..., what Has darkness to do with Light , flesh and SPIRIT do not Mix bro...
for mine, those who are told "do Not eat with.....",Indeed walk in the Light and In the spirit, while those who sleep, live in darkness.....
1Cr 5:6 Your glorying [is] not good. Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump?
1Cr 5:7 Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:
1Cr 5:8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened [bread] of sincerity and truth.
Quote
1 Corinthians 5:11-13
But now I am writing you that you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a slanderer, a drunkard or a swindler. With such a man do not even eat. What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? God will judge those outside. "Expel the wicked man from among you."
Here is what it means to fall from Grace. We are to judge those who call themselves the 'church', if someone calls himself a brother but lives by the works of the flesh, he has fallen from grace he is not part of the 'church' and God will judge them and sinners of Zion tremble because of it.
If it is a misunderstanding, then understand it is a misunderstanding. I am replying to your words and if they are not what you meant, then just say it. I can accept misunderstanding, I cannot accept an attack from you.
Whos attacking you craig, for certainly not I,..wasnt made it clear ABOUT the works of the flesh , THAT I being dead to it, in my previous post ,that the
WICKED is dead,...The church at Corinth as you know was at Its early stages...babes to the word...still saw very much after the works of the Flesh which Included law .....
1Cr 3:1 And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, [even] as unto babes in Christ.
1Cr 3:2 I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able [to bear it], neither yet now are ye able.
1Cr 3:3 For ye are yet carnal: for whereas [there is] among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and
walk as men? They were very much still learning of the Inward man of the Heart, walking in the ways of the flesh , not knowing That the
flesh was truly dead..1Cr 5:5 To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.
I see paul saying I cant be with you always , those among you who are strong in the faith KEEP the FAITH,and not let the young be mislead by the works of the flesh....seems they were taking other MATTERS BEFORE THE law, paul mentions it in the very next verse, hardly surprising their was strife and contention
1Cr 6:1 Dare any of you, having a matter against another,
go to law before the unjust, and
not before the saints? as you know later in the Book, we see a different side of Paul...Far better to be encouraged in LOVE than BY the WORD of the ROD, Are these not the same people he was talking about earlier in the Book?
Those who SLEEP are SICK AND WEAK in the faith..
far better to Judge ourselves than Have God chasten us as Paul showed earlier when admonishing....but irresepective, the Spirit will be saved...sorta, how do you want it....this way OR THAT....
this for me is a re-iteration of what He said earlier...but with softer words...
1Cr 11:27 Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink [this] cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.
1Cr 11:28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of [that] bread, and drink of [that] cup.
1Cr 11:29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.
1Cr 11:30 For this cause many [are] weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.
1Cr 11:31 For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged.
1Cr 11:32 But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we
should not be condemned with the world. 1Cr 11:33 Wherefore, my brethren, when ye come together to eat,
tarry one for another. 1Cr 11:34 And if
any man hunger, let him
eat at home; that
ye come not together unto condemnation. And the rest will I set in order when I come. SO yes Craig, Falling From Grace is to works of the Flesh is Likened to the works of the LAW, for if you fail in one point, you fail in all others.
As for BRO Roy,..and BRO Craig...
1Jo 3:14 We know that we have *passed from
death unto life*, because we
love the brethren. He that *
loveth not*
his brother *
abideth in death*.
Blessings
:icon_flower:
Quote from: laren on August 19, 2008, 07:04:55 PM
2Pe 1:5 And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge;
2Pe 1:6 And to knowledge temperance; and to temperance patience; and to patience godliness;
2Pe 1:7 And to godliness brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness charity.
2Pe 1:8 For if these things be in you, and abound, they make [you that ye shall] neither [be] barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.
2Pe 1:9 But he that lacketh these things is blind, and cannot see afar off, and hath forgotten that he was purged from his old sins.
2Pe 1:10 Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall:
[/quot
Hi! Brother Laren.
You're talking about a wrong age, brother. What we are discussing here came into being long, long before Jesus appeared on earth in the flesh. Read John 1:1-3 for an idea of where we are at. All you have said in your three postings come into being ages after.
Peace! url=http://www.glitter-graphics.com](http://dl4.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1176/1176424t4nufen6go.gif)[/url]
Roy UK
no,
you said that if one doesn't beleive in the "true Jesus" that he will burn for a very long time.
that is not a long ago age.
you have taken it throught the ages, from long ago to the end.
Quote from: Molly on August 19, 2008, 07:24:25 PM
Quote from: Nathan on August 19, 2008, 07:21:05 PM
Perhaps . .but to say it's a different Jesus . . .to me . .it's the same Jesus . . .it's his interpretation of Jesus that's incomplete. Like what was stated with the JW . . .now "their" belief of Jesus is a different Jesus than what Paul preaches. I don't know, maybe it's just in the phonetics.
Doesn't Jesus warn us of this very thing?
He warns us for a reason.
23Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.
24For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.
--Mat 24
Besides, regarding Hagee, killing people is not 'phonetics.'
Hi! Molly
Good one, and well said. Jesus does indeed warn about this very thing and you're on the right track. There is only the one True Jesus Christ who was Begotten/Born/Given birth to by the Father and
not created by Him. Jesus Christ is
NOT a creature, repeat,
NOT A CREATURE He is the Son of God. Born as an identical snapshot image of the Father. The Bible says so and if you don't believe it throw your Bible out the door, that is Scripture and Scripture cannot be broken. End of story. Not my word but God's Word, read it.
"Therefore everyone who confesses Me before men, I will also confess him before My Father who is in heaven. But whoever denies Me before men, I will also deny him before My Father who is in heaven." (Matt.10:32-33).
Peace!it.url=http://www.glitter-graphics.com](http://dl4.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1176/1176424t4nufen6go.gif)[/url]
Roy UK
Quote from: Nathan on August 19, 2008, 07:37:21 PM
Sigh . . .so . . .let's just killem' all then.
Look, we have a different vision than Hagee, that's obvious and apparent, but I think it gets a little dangerous when we become judgmental about them and use literal interpretations to again, cut other people down. There for the grace of God go I. Who's to say that this time tomorrow, Hagee won't be found laying in his office, prostrate before God, blinded by an invisible light, deafened by an unheard sound. If we are truly called in the spirit . .then why the stone throwing?
If I'm a spirit being, called to walk in the spirit and not in the flesh . .then I think these verses are not to be read and applied to "people" but to "me" saying that "in me" there is an ego that aproaches my mind as a wolf in sheeps clothing. "In me" there is this justification of my identity being connected with my position or my works. The sword isn't meant to be used on others . . .it's meant to be used "in me".
See the difference? That's all I'm trying to say here. Let Hagee do his dance . . . as a priest and king, let's release truth on the man . .call it out . . .speak light over him and let the Holy Spirit make the changes in his thinking . .just as he did in ours.
I'm referring to the earlier post of Matthew here . . .forgot to tack that on.
Oh, by the way . . .this passage quoted earlier . . .
"Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves. "You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they? "So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit."A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit. "Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. "So then, you will know them by their fruits. "Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter. "Many will say to Me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?' "And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness." (Matt.7:15-23).
To me the emphasis here is these guys lost their identity. It's become their ministries and works . . .rather than relationships. The will of the Father is not that you idolize ministry. Ministry works "within" relationships, but relationships should never be based on ministry. These guys had it backwards. It has nothing to do with whether Jesus was created or born, but I didn't bring it up. :happygrin:
Hi! Nathan
Let's be a bit more specific, brother, who are we talking about that's being judgmental. First and foremost what on earth has Hagee got to do with the topic "Can You Explain?" absolutely nothing as far as I can see, so why are we discussing him here, why not start a new topic on him that will suit your purpose better and not confuse this issue.
Peace!it.url=http://www.glitter-graphics.com](http://dl4.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1176/1176424t4nufen6go.gif)[/url]
Roy UK
Quote from: laren on August 19, 2008, 09:56:28 PM
So was the prodigal son and the son who stayed by the Fathers side saved the same way?
Both were given the gift (gift of grace imo), one stayed faithful;
grace is only accessed by faith
the other squandered it (fell from grace) and was saved through fire.
Hi! Laren
Saved by Fire that is chastisement, in short saved by grace.
Peace!it.url=http://www.glitter-graphics.com](http://dl4.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1176/1176424t4nufen6go.gif)[/url]
Roy UK
Quote"Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves.
The wolves in sheep's clothing--I think the point here is that these people are not just deluded or mistaken--they are carnivores. They have a purpose, like all wolves, to eat the sheep alive.
That's why Jesus is warning us about them. They are, although disguised as sheep, extremely dangerous.
Hi! Nathan
Let's be a bit more specific, brother, who are we talking about that's being judgmental. First and foremost what on earth has Hagee got to do with the topic "Can You Explain?" absolutely nothing as far as I can see, so why are we discussing him here, why not start a new topic on him that will suit your purpose better and not confuse this issue
I referred to it because it was in response to a previous post by someone who used him as an example . . .I didn't start that discussion, I just commented on it. Sorry you're confused.
This thread is six pages long . . .you went all the way back to the third page to ask that now??? :mshock:
Hi! Taffy
This is he question you want answering: "Rev 1:5 And from Jesus Christ, [who is] the faithful witness, [and] the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,"
Have I ever anywhere denied that Jesus Christ is the faithful witness and the first born of the dead? No, brother I have not. I have stressed that the true Jesus Christ that I'm supporting is the only Begotten of the Father from the beginning long before He was resurrected and became the only Begotten of the dead, the Saviour/God of the dead. Yes, this is the Jesus I'm talking about He is not a different Jesus, but He is not your created Christ, He is the legitimately Born Son of God. "Therefore everyone who confesses Me before men, I will also confess him before My Father who is in heaven. But whoever denies Me before men, I will also deny him before My Father who is in heaven." (Matt.10:32-33).
Not one sided, brother, here is your answer. "You are My Son, Today I have begotten You"? And again, "I will be a Father to Him And He shall be a Son to Me"? And when He again brings the firstborn into the world, He says, "And let all the angels of God worship Him." (Heb.1:5).
The first time the Word was given birth to was the beginning of creation, the earth did not exist for whatever period 5 creation days or ages amounts to. On the 6th day the earth was created and then several millennium later the Word/Son of God in the prepared body was implanted into Mary by the Holy Spirit. Now let's pay attention to the words. When He again brings the first Born/Word/Jesus Christ into the WORLD, our world, the carnal world.
The first time the Word was The Son of the Father and not Jesus. When the Word entered the body, which was prepared for Him, He was given birth to again (a second time) as Jesus Christ/the Word/the Son of God. "Therefore, when He comes into the world, He says, "Sacrifice and offering You have not desired, But a body You have prepared for Me ;" (Heb.10:5).
Not one sided brother your question is answered.
Peace!url=http://www.glitter-graphics.com](http://dl4.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1176/1176424t4nufen6go.gif)[/url]
Roy
Thanks Roy.
B blessed :icon_flower:
Quote from: SOtW on August 19, 2008, 11:51:27 PM
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 19, 2008, 09:23:56 PM
Hi! Brother SOtW
Absolutely, brother, have I at anytime disagreed with your quote?: "Each person is judged in accordance to what they built/planted, (1 Corinthians 3:10-15, Hebrews 6:7-8) and in the Day of Judgment what they built/planted is either a) saved or b) destroyed but it is by the Grace of God, that regardless whatever a person gained or lost, that they are saved (1 Corinthians 3:15, Hebrews 6:9).
What brought that up?
It was a clarification, not an issue of agreement or disagreement to prevent you from assuming I said something I did not.
What brought it up was earlier in this response to me: http://www.tentmaker.org/forum/index.php?topic=3153.25 when you brought up Saddam.
QuoteWould you disagree if I were to say that Saddam would need longer in the purification process than you or I, surely we don't need as much as him? I can't see what all the nitpicking over a simple word can achieve? Can you?
Yes I would disagree, because only God knows the heart of man and their disposition to repentance when wrong has been been identified. We do not know the process duration because it is aionios, not aidios. There is no nitpicking over a simple word except by those who continue to deny what it actually means.
Hi! SOtW
Do you believe that a blanket." Sorry Lord I have committed an abundance of atrocities of insane torture and taken great pleasure from watching them suffer. Forgive me!" will set him free of all chastisement? Be real brother, I don't mean any disrespect. You and I have repented of our sins but none as vicious as our friend Saddam, yet we will undergo chastisement till we are perfect. God is the final judge I fully agree, but I think a little bit of carnal commonsense would be in order here. Don't you or the emphasis put on the meaning of grace can run amok?
Peace!url=http://www.glitter-graphics.com](http://dl4.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1176/1176424t4nufen6go.gif)[/url]
Roy UK
Quote from: Taffy on August 19, 2008, 11:55:13 PM
QuoteThere is no nitpicking over a simple word except by those who continue to deny what it actually means.
AMEN :icon_flower:
Hi! Taffy
You keep coming up with some weird statements "simple word except by those who
continue to deny[/b"
What is the simple word that I'm continually denying? Let's have the offending word and then let us analyse it. Should we do that? I'm not claiming to be perfect, I could very easily be wrong and will admit it and apologize for the error, but let's prove it.
Peace!(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif)[/url
Roy (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 21, 2008, 06:15:50 PM
Quote from: SOtW on August 19, 2008, 11:51:27 PM
Yes I would disagree, because only God knows the heart of man and their disposition to repentance when wrong has been been identified. We do not know the process duration because it is aionios, not aidios. There is no nitpicking over a simple word except by those who continue to deny what it actually means.
Hi! SOtW
Do you believe that a blanket." Sorry Lord I have committed an abundance of atrocities of insane torture and taken great pleasure from watching them suffer. Forgive me!" will set him free of all chastisement? Be real brother, I don't mean any disrespect. You and I have repented of our sins but none as vicious as our friend Saddam, yet we will undergo chastisement till we are perfect. God is the final judge I fully agree, but I think a little bit of carnal commonsense would be in order here. Don't you or the emphasis put on the meaning of grace can run amok?
Peace!url=http://www.glitter-graphics.com](http://dl4.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1176/1176424t4nufen6go.gif)[/url]
Roy UK
You are not understanding my position, because I am one of the few in this forum who does believe in an afterlife punishment, there is no such thing, or very rare thing as a deathbed repentance one's actions after a life-time of wickedness people like Saddam did. Since Saddam did not repent in this life he most definitely is being sent into aionios punishment. What type of punishment that is, how long it lasts, is dependent upon God's providence. If God in His plan makes this to be a blanket, then that is how God wanted it to be; if God in His plan makes this to be reliving his same life but with different choices, then that is how God wanted it to be. We do not know Saddam's heart, God takes everything into account when He renders His Judgment, so this is why I disagree with you. God judges those who are on the outside.
Quote from: martincisneros on August 20, 2008, 02:48:41 AM
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 19, 2008, 11:09:01 PM
You see no difference in: "To the angel of the church in Laodicea write:The Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God, says this:" (Rev.3:1) and this "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being." (Jn.1:1-3). Who are you kidding brother, no, not me.
"Beginning of the creation of God" is sorta like "God's Creative Original" in the Concordant Literal New Testament. You can read a contradiction to the rest of the Scriptures into it, if you wish, but it's just saying that He began God's Creation just as it says in John's Gospel, Colossians, and Hebrews.
Hi! Martin
I hope I'm not being too forward abbreviating your name, I like the name Martin much better and easier to handle than Martincisneros which is quite a mouthful :hammerhead: :hammerhead: LOL the meaning of which my friend Joyce made me aware.
I agree with you Martin. The Word began the Father's creative work but who is the Word? Is he a created being and as such a part of the creation, a creature, or is he the legitimately Begotten Son of God, as it says in (John 1:1-3), GOD, who is doing the creating the CREATOR? That's the question and that's the difference. Are we worshiping the creature an idol or are we worshiping the CREATOR/GOD?
Peace!(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif)[/url
Roy UK (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 21, 2008, 04:30:55 PM
Quote from: laren on August 19, 2008, 09:56:28 PM
So was the prodigal son and the son who stayed by the Fathers side saved the same way?
Both were given the gift (gift of grace imo), one stayed faithful;
grace is only accessed by faith
the other squandered it (fell from grace) and was saved through fire.
Hi! Laren
Saved by Fire that is chastisement, in short saved by grace.
Peace!it.url=http://www.glitter-graphics.com](http://dl4.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1176/1176424t4nufen6go.gif)[/url]
Roy UK
for me, I see it as
accessing grace is only through faith. so we don't receive chastisement unless given faith, and the trial by fire for those accessing grace by faith is the trial of their faith.
those stuck in the mindest of "law" are saved through fire/destruction, and is not imo, by accessing grace via faith. It's the result of not having accessed grace via faith.
for me, along with what i posted in the LOF thread, I see fire by destruction (brimstone) as different than fiery trial by faith
Psa 11:6 Upon the wicked he shall rain snares, fire and brimstone, and an horrible tempest: [this shall be] the portion of their cup.
Psa 11:7 For the righteous LORD loveth righteousness; his countenance doth behold the upright.
Hbr 12:18 For ye are not come unto the mount that might be touched, and that burned with fire, nor unto blackness, and darkness, and tempest,
Quote from: SOtW on August 21, 2008, 06:35:53 PM
What type of punishment that is, how long it lasts, is dependent upon God's providence. If God in His plan makes this to be a blanket, then that is how God wanted it to be; if God in His plan makes this to be reliving his same life but with different choices, then that is how God wanted it to be. We do not know Saddam's heart, God takes everything into account when He renders His Judgment, so this is why I disagree with you. God judges those who are on the outside.
Yep Craig. And even more; God tries to find every reason/excuse to pass the mildest possible judgement.
Matthew 11:20-24 Then began he to upbraid the cities wherein most of his mighty works were done, because they repented not: 21 Woe unto thee, Chorazin! woe unto thee, Bethsaida! for if the mighty works, which were done in you, had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. 22 But I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon at the day of judgment, than for you. 23 And thou, Capernaum, which art exalted unto heaven, shalt be brought down to hell: for if the mighty works, which have been done in thee, had been done in Sodom, it would have remained until this day. 24 But I say unto you, That it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment, than for thee.
Again, to read the spiritual picture of this. . .the wicked is not people . . .it's my carnality. My carnal man is going to have snares, fire and brimstone rain down on it.
This is really the difference between reading it by how we were once taught, and reading by the leading of the spirit. The spiritual rendition is taking the word to the inner man . .not to the men of the physical earth.
In the New Testament there's a famous passage that traditionalists quote to back-up their rapture theories and such . .it deals with the fact that in the last days there is to be a great falling from God . . .they profess this is dealing with the world population leaving the church and denying God . .which falls in with their "mark of the beast" theology.
But again, we are spirit beings, this is a spirit word that's intended to be taken spiritually. It's saying the same things we've been saying in most of our conversations in one form or another . .the falling away is not men, but "man". My old man . . .the falling away is actually the outbreak of the Light and Truth being exposed to the hearts of all men . .this will cause a great falling away of the old man.
If there is any form of fear in the message, chances are, it's a misinterpreted message. The kingdom Jesus preached was one of hope, promise and power. The message the church preaches is one of commandments, warnings and despair. It's no wonder people are quitting on the church. I would to if I weren't the Pastor of one.
Quote from: willieH on August 20, 2008, 04:20:48 AM
willieH: Hi Laren... :hithere:
Sorry for veering :offtopic: ...and I dont mean to :hijacked:
BUT... I agree with Sotw... this is an awesome verse, and I have used myself many times while discussing ET with its believers!
QuotePsa 30:5 For his anger endureth but a moment; in his favor is life: weeping may endure for a night, but joy cometh in the morning.
THIS LIFE, ...IS... the Lake of Fire...
That WRATH ...IS... revealed from Heaven... (Rom 1:18) ...IN THIS LIFE...
The JUDGEMENT ...IS... NOW (John 12:31) ...IN THIS LIFE...
Our lives are but a VAPOR, which appears for a SHORT TIME (a moment NOW), then vanishes away... (James 4:14) ...IN THIS LIFE...
The "BOOKS" of our lives are OPEN "BOOKS", before Him NOW (Rev 20:12) ...IN THIS LIFE...
DEATH and the GRAVE are involved with us NOW! (Rev 20:14)! ...IN THIS LIFE...
I love this :happygrin: :
(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/117/117193tdajxe3wh8.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Hope you dont mind me using them Roy... :happy3:
PeacE...
...willieH :icon_king:
Hi! willieH :icon_joker: :Shoot: :bdh:
At last we meet! No longer are you the icon king, you're talking to your successor who has just dethroned you. :swordfight:
But I agree with you all the way there, we the chosen are being judged here and now in this world, I learned that at BT and I believe it, Judgment must start at the House of God..
[
](http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif)
(http://dl4.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1176/1176424t4nufen6go.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
The NEW :icon_king:
Quote from: craigI am one of the few in this forum who does believe in an afterlife punishment
Amen..I to am another :icon_flower:
Ok, what does this mean?
2 Thess 2
1Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,
2That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.
3Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
4Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.
5Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?
6And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.
7For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.
8And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:
9Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,
10And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
11And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
12That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
13But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:
14Whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.
15Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.
16Now our Lord Jesus Christ himself, and God, even our Father, which hath loved us, and hath given us everlasting consolation and good hope through grace,
17Comfort your hearts, and stablish you in every good word and work.
Quote from: WhiteWings on August 21, 2008, 08:21:28 PM
Quote from: SOtW on August 21, 2008, 06:35:53 PM
What type of punishment that is, how long it lasts, is dependent upon God's providence. If God in His plan makes this to be a blanket, then that is how God wanted it to be; if God in His plan makes this to be reliving his same life but with different choices, then that is how God wanted it to be. We do not know Saddam's heart, God takes everything into account when He renders His Judgment, so this is why I disagree with you. God judges those who are on the outside.
Yep Craig. And even more; God tries to find every reason/excuse to pass the mildest possible judgement.
I would not say mildest possible judgment, most effective and efficient judgment which originates from God, who is Love. Be rest assured, if you are not already, that God's judgment comes a holy purpose and if He causes grief in order to bring correction, it is repaid surpassingly in measure to His everlasting Love. Remember God knows exactly what changes people, there is no trial or error, so there is no unnecessary pain or suffering and when it is done there is great joy and happiness.
Quote from: SOtW on August 21, 2008, 09:07:01 PM
Quote from: WhiteWings on August 21, 2008, 08:21:28 PM
Quote from: SOtW on August 21, 2008, 06:35:53 PM
What type of punishment that is, how long it lasts, is dependent upon God's providence. If God in His plan makes this to be a blanket, then that is how God wanted it to be; if God in His plan makes this to be reliving his same life but with different choices, then that is how God wanted it to be. We do not know Saddam's heart, God takes everything into account when He renders His Judgment, so this is why I disagree with you. God judges those who are on the outside.
Yep Craig. And even more; God tries to find every reason/excuse to pass the mildest possible judgement.
I would not say mildest possible judgment, most effective and efficient judgment which originates from God, who is Love. Be rest assured, if you are not already, that God's judgment comes a holy purpose and if He causes grief in order to bring correction, it is repaid surpassingly in measure to His everlasting Love. Remember God knows exactly what changes people, there is no trial or error, so there is no unnecessary pain or suffering and when it is done there is great joy and happiness.
So in army speak: A surgical strike instead of carpet bombing.
If you agree with that I was saying the same thing. I'm just nos a poetic with words as you are Craig :laughing7:
Quote from: Molly on August 21, 2008, 09:00:41 PM
Ok, what does this mean?
2 Thess 2
1Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,
2That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.
3Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
4Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.
5Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?
6And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.
7For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.
8And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:
9Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,
10And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
11And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
12That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
13But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:
14Whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.
15Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.
16Now our Lord Jesus Christ himself, and God, even our Father, which hath loved us, and hath given us everlasting consolation and good hope through grace,
17Comfort your hearts, and stablish you in every good word and work.
Hi Molly
Care to tell what you think? :icon_flower:
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 21, 2008, 06:31:07 PM
Quote from: Taffy on August 19, 2008, 11:55:13 PM
QuoteThere is no nitpicking over a simple word except by those who continue to deny what it actually means.
AMEN :icon_flower:
Hi! Taffy
You keep coming up with some weird statements "simple word except by those who continue to deny[/b"
What is the simple word that I'm continually denying? Let's have the offending word and then let us analyse it. Should we do that? I'm not claiming to be perfect, I could very easily be wrong and will admit it and apologize for the error, but let's prove it.
Peace!(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif)[/url
Roy (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Greetings Bro Roy
Please excuse me for not reponding to your last post as such..I just saw no point continuing to go round in circles bro..please be free to beleive what you wish.
as for this
QuoteWe do not know the process duration because it is aionios, not aidios. There is no nitpicking over a simple word except by those who continue to deny what it actually means.
I was in agreement with Craig....thats why he proposes what he did, along with Laren( myself inc if ya wish)..its a PERIOD of TIME,..but your saying Sadam and the Like are going to be there a LONG time, in so , for me,your inferring to greater sin.
In a Post earlier I did mention PAUL...was there any worse than HIM,?...if ya well read at Bts, im sure ya learnt that from there..and The power above converted HIM in moments...thats the basics of what some have been saying.
Does that Clear it now brother? :icon_flower:
Quote from: Sarah on August 20, 2008, 04:26:22 AM
Roy Monis,
My head is spinning with all of this created or begotten stuff. What the heck do you mean?
My son was begotten by my husband and I, and he was also created. I don't see the difference. Are you talking about pre-existence? Do you believe we must believe in Jesus's pre-existence to be legitimate? Is that the pivotal belief?
Hi! Sarah
You're perfectly correct your son was born of you but Who created you, your husband and son? Was it not God? So you are a part of the creation of God as I am and the rest of humanity. Do you agree? If you agree that it was God who created all things as it says in the Scriptures then it matters a great deal to know who this God is.
This is the God who created you and all things."Then God spoke all these words, saying, "I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. "You shall have
no other gods before Me. "You shall not make for
yourself an idol, or any likeness of what is in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the water under the earth. "
You shall not worship them or serve them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children, on the third and the fourth generations of those who hate Me," (Ex.20:1-5). Do you believe this Sarah?
This is the God I am talking about, the only Begotten Son of the Father. He is the Word spoken of in "In the
beginning was the Word, and the
Word was with God, and the
Word was God. He was in the beginning with God.
All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being." (Jn.1:1-3). It says here very clearly that all things came into being through Him.
We must bear in mind that Created and Begotten do not have the same meaning.
The meaning of Created in accord with the Strong's Concordance is #1254 in the Hebrew is to make, to create, creator, something that only God can do.
The meaning of Created in accord with the Strong's Concordance is #2936 in the Greek is to create, creator, to make.
Both the Hebrew and Greek give just one number for the word create and both translations are the same.
The meaning of Begat/Begotten in accord with the Strong's Concordance is #3205 in the Hebrew
to bear young, to beget, to be born, to bring forth, to give birth, to hatch.
The meaning of Begat/Begotten in accord with the Strong's Concordance is #1080 in the Greek.
to begat, to be born, to bear, to bring forth, to conceive,
Now Sarah you can see very plainly that Created and Begotten are not the same. you did not create your son you gave birth to Him, remember only God can create. Your son has the character traits of both you and your husband, he is not the same as either of you, he is unique with an DNA of his very own.
Now consider the case of the Father/God and the Word His son who we are told is in His bosom from the beginning; "No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the
bosom of the Father, He has explained Him." (Jn.1:18). There is only one parent the Father so the Son/Word will have the identical character traits of the Father by right of parentage, He is a snapshot identical image of the Father, but subject to the Father by virtue of being the Son. In my opinion this is the God, Jesus Christ, who we must worship, the one born of the Father.
To worship a created Jesus is to worship a created being, an idol which is against the very first commandment of God. Now do you see what I'm about.
Peace!(http://dl4.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1176/1176424t4nufen6go.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Quote from: pneuma on August 20, 2008, 03:49:26 PM
QuoteYou see no difference in: "To the angel of the church in Laodicea write:The Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God, says this:" (Rev.3:1) and this "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being." (Jn.1:1-3). Who are you kidding brother, no, not me.
Hi Roy, I'm late to this discussion, but you are saying that the Jesus speaking in Rev.3 is the anti-Christ and not the Christ.
So we are to disregard all the things he said concerning the churches?
Are you sure its not your understanding of the scriptures that cause you to see Rev.3 as being of the anti Christ?
You base this on where it say "the Beginning of the creation of God"
You may not be aware of this Roy but "the beginning of the creation of God" is the foundation stone on which the new creation is built upon, For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus.
So Jesus Christ is the beginning/foundation of the creation of God.
Rev.3 is not saying Jesus was created, its saying that in HIM are all things created.
God bless
Brother Pneuma
That is a scurrilous accusation, where have you seen any such thing said by me? I think you owe me an apology.
Indeed I'm saying that Jesus Christ is the CREATOR, the one who created all things and not a created being which would make Him part of the creation.
Please read my posts very carefully before coming out with such blasphemies or cease communicating with me. I only deal with people who use facts, produce the evidence with the accusation next time. Do you understand me brother?
Peace!(http://dl4.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1176/1176424t4nufen6go.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Quote from: taffyI was in agreement with Craig....thats why he proposes what he did, along with Laren( myself inc if ya wish)..its a PERIOD of TIME,..but your saying Sadam and the Like are going to be there a LONG time, in so , for me,your inferring to greater sin.
In a Post earlier I did mention PAUL...was there any worse than HIM,?...if ya well read at Bts, im sure ya learnt that from there..and The power above converted HIM in moments...thats the basics of what some have been saying.
So are you saying that all sin is equal? Premeditated murder of millions is the same as stealing a piece of candy from the 7/11 because you're hungry and have no money?
Paul was involved in murder, although he thought he was doing the right thing by God, so it wasn't for his own power or sadistic pleasure or money, but, even so--he never stopped calling himself the chief of sinners. Was he just being hard on himself?
2 Thess 2
1Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,
2That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.
3Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
It's not people falling away . . .it's the veil falling away. When it falls away, the son of perdition is revealed . . .your ego. It hides behind the veil
When we perceive things with our natural minds, our first instinct to interpret something is from a fallen nature which will only focus on death and destruction. I believe that could also be what's happening even here. What if this falling away isn't about believers falling away from truth, what if it's the reverse?
The whole emphasis when walking in the kingdom is not about men falling from God, but it's about men being transformed "by" God. Why would this then be any different? When Jesus died on the cross, there was a falling away of sin's power over us. But Paul speaks to us about a veil that is over the hearts of men that's causing them to be blind to the truth of the kingdom. And only when they turn to Christ will that veil be taken away. Well, what if this falling away is not men falling away from God, but what if this falling away, is the veil falling away from the minds of men? When reading it with that perspective, it puts the entire passage in a whole new light.
2 Thessalonians 2
1Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, 2That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. (It's already begun)
3Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first,f(the veil of carnal thinking) and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; (Which is my mind)
4Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; (my mind at enmity) so that he as God sitteth in the temple (Same word Paul used when referring to your body as the temple) of God, shewing himself that he is God. (You're carnal mind desires control over your nature or identity)
5Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?
6And now ye know what withholdeth (Our mind creates the veil which "holds back" the freedom in truth) that he might be revealed in his time. (The time is the Sabbath Day, The third day, the resurrection day, they're all one and the same and that time is Now)
7For the mystery of iniquity doth already work (My mind is the mystery of iniquity, my carnal logic) only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way. (It's not God letting, it's my mind letting, It's letting carnal thinking take priority over spiritual truth, but once my mind is taken out of the way, then truth is revealed)
8And then shall that Wicked be revealed, (the truth is, the wicked is your mind, what's being revealed is, your mind is the source of wickedness, if it wasn't, it wouldn't need to constantly be renewed) whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: (The word of truth brings revelation to your spirit which takes captive your thoughts and then you can see his light in, through, and out of you)
9Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan (original word "adversary" which again is your carnal nature, same word used when Jesus called Peter satan, Peter, in acting on his own logic, became an adversary to the purpose of Christ) with all power and signs and lying wonders,
10And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. (many have been saved by emotional manipulation, not by the love of truth and are deceived into thinking they're in truth. But truth and love go hand in hand. Religion stages love based on a performance, it can duplicate the appearance on the surface, but not in the heart. Love is not an emotion you can cultivate, it's a person, it's "the" nature of God)
11And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: (believing a lie, it's a picture of your mind again. Because you "let" your mind deceive you, strong "delusion" that word simply means energy. Strong energy, it's saying you'll become stubborn in your carnal thinking)
12That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness. (It's not about loving sin, it's about loving religion, there is no righteousness in living by the law.)
13But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:
I just think that this does fit better and can be seen clearer if we could see this as the veil falling away instead of people falling away. The entire purpose for the birthing of the church is to remove the veil. It's what the bride does at the wedding ceremony, she removes her veil and can see clearly the features of her new groom. But our groom won't come to us clearly if our veil is still in place, so before the coming of the Lord "to me", there must first be a falling away of my veil of carnality
Quote from: Molly on August 21, 2008, 11:04:19 PM
Quote from: taffyI was in agreement with Craig....thats why he proposes what he did, along with Laren( myself inc if ya wish)..its a PERIOD of TIME,..but your saying Sadam and the Like are going to be there a LONG time, in so , for me,your inferring to greater sin.
In a Post earlier I did mention PAUL...was there any worse than HIM,?...if ya well read at Bts, im sure ya learnt that from there..and The power above converted HIM in moments...thats the basics of what some have been saying.
So are you saying that all sin is equal? Premeditated murder of millions is the same as stealing a piece of candy from the 7/11 because you're hungry and have no money?
Paul was involved in murder, although he thought he was doing the right thing by God, so it wasn't for his own power or sadistic pleasure or money, but, even so--he never stopped calling himself the chief of sinners. Was he just being hard on himself?
ya miss the Point...but God wiling In time your MIND will be enlightened .
Quote from: nathanIt's not people falling away . . .it's the veil falling away. When it falls away, the son of perdition is revealed . . .your ego. It hides behind the veil
So, you are saying that my carnal nature/ego is the son of perdition in this passage?
What about where Jesus says--
John 17:12
While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.I always thought that referred to a person, Judas, who betrayed Christ for money. Only one disciple did that, so are all of them really the son of perdition that Jesus lost?
2 Thess goes on to talk about "that Wicked" that the Lord will consume, someone who is coming 'after the working of satan with powers, signs, and wonders,' and 'them that perish' because 'they receive not the truth.'
So, that sounds to me like people doing specific things. People who had 'pleasure in unrighteousness.'
I'm not arguing, I'm just having trouble seeing how this applies to me or any of us here.
Quote from: roy morrisIt's what the bride does at the wedding ceremony, she removes her veil and can see clearly the features of her new groom. But our groom won't come to us clearly if our veil is still in place, so before the coming of the Lord "to me", there must first be a falling away of my veil of carnality.
In a way, that's beautiful. But, on the other hand, if I removed the veil at my wedding and saw the son of perdition standing there, I might go running out of the church. :mshock:
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 21, 2008, 10:48:47 PM
Quote from: pneuma on August 20, 2008, 03:49:26 PM
QuoteYou see no difference in: "To the angel of the church in Laodicea write:The Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God, says this:" (Rev.3:1) and this "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being." (Jn.1:1-3). Who are you kidding brother, no, not me.
Hi Roy, I'm late to this discussion, but you are saying that the Jesus speaking in Rev.3 is the anti-Christ and not the Christ.
So we are to disregard all the things he said concerning the churches?
Are you sure its not your understanding of the scriptures that cause you to see Rev.3 as being of the anti Christ?
You base this on where it say "the Beginning of the creation of God"
You may not be aware of this Roy but "the beginning of the creation of God" is the foundation stone on which the new creation is built upon, For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus.
So Jesus Christ is the beginning/foundation of the creation of God.
Rev.3 is not saying Jesus was created, its saying that in HIM are all things created.
God bless
Brother Pneuma
That is a scurrilous accusation, where have you seen any such thing said by me? I think you owe me an apology.
Indeed I'm saying that Jesus Christ is the CREATOR, the one who created all things and not a created being which would make Him part of the creation.
Please read my posts very carefully before coming out with such blasphemies or cease communicating with me. I only deal with people who use facts, produce the evidence with the accusation next time. Do you understand me brother?
Peace!(http://dl4.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1176/1176424t4nufen6go.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Hi Roy, I think there is a misunderstanding here brother. (probably mine)
So let me try it this way.
I asked this question
I'm late to this discussion, but you are saying that the Jesus speaking in Rev.3 is the anti-Christ and not the Christ.
If your answer is yes, does that not make the Jesus, who you believe was created and spoke in Rev.3 antichrist?
If so my post stands as is, if not then I simply misunderstood you and if that is the case I do indeed apologise.
Quote from: Molly on August 22, 2008, 02:25:59 AM
Quote from: nathanIt's not people falling away . . .it's the veil falling away. When it falls away, the son of perdition is revealed . . .your ego. It hides behind the veil
So, you are saying that my carnal nature/ego is the son of perdition in this passage?
What about where Jesus says--
John 17:12
While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.
I always thought that referred to a person, Judas, who betrayed Christ for money. Only one disciple did that, so are all of them really the son of perdition that Jesus lost?
2 Thess goes on to talk about "that Wicked" that the Lord will consume, someone who is coming 'after the working of satan with powers, signs, and wonders,' and 'them that perish' because 'they receive not the truth.'
So, that sounds to me like people doing specific things. People who had 'pleasure in unrighteousness.'
I'm not arguing, I'm just having trouble seeing how this applies to me or any of us here.
Molly.
Have you ever considered why Christ often uses the Pharisees especially....for our benefit?
For me, its two fold having shared a little with Laren on the LOF thread...
consider....The pharisees( those of law) Typify the carnal Nature of Man, that Is the Mind of what some of us refer to as
Flesh BEING ENMITY to the LAW of the SPIRIT( Christ)....therefore you have the equation of FLESH V SPIRIT, pauls speaks of this many times.
...but this also shows what Nathan is refering to, the son of Perdition ,the wicked is the FLESH, not only the Flesh of the pharisees, BUT THE flesh OF ALL men, WHICH AT ONE TIME were kept out side the VEIL( Holy of Holies).
Scripture in this way ,presents its self two fold....so yes ,the WICKED can be seen as a People, typfied and used as a prime example, the ONES WHO SAT IN MOSES SEAT, and also, that which is the flesh, of us all
.
Its only by faith ,that the VEIL of our hearts is renedered,( picturing US dying with Him on the cross )allowing entry to SEE and understand the LIFE which lies within, WHICH SCRIPTURE CALLS THE Hidden MAN OF THE heart being Christ in us, WHICH PAUL CALLS THE MYSTERY OF THE AGES).
..therefore our FLESH dies, its no more, we died with HIm at the cross...we NOW LIVE anew IN HIS LIFE.
This is ALL CHRIST doing Molly, you heard willie , myself and others refer to it Many times,..By the GRACE of GOD walk I.
Ever herad the term JUDGE NOT LEST you BE judged,....YA SEE ,Christ lays Hidden in the hearts of all men Molly ,but HES only revealed By faith ...AN UNVEILING IS A revealing MOLLY OF THAT WHICH has always been
Luk 10:22 All things are delivered to me of my Father: and no man knoweth who the Son is, but the Father; and who the Father is, but the Son, and [he] to whom the Son will
reveal [him].
Gal 1:16 To
reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with
flesh and blood: ...."IVE come to save that which IS LOST",..we are LOST molly , all of us at one time until HE REVEALS who HE IS to us, via faith and Grace.
CHRIST DOESNT COME DOWN FROM THE SKIES MOLLY AND ENTER US..HES REVEALED FROM WITHIN US...
sorta makes ya humble and NOT so special dont it....
The WICKED MOLLY is the carnal nature of US all,..but those in HIM, Not longer walk in the Flesh Molly, the wicked is no longerwith in us....BUT your confusion is you still see the carnal nature of man in the world....YES molly, thats true, again epitomised by the pharisees...., each man in HIS APPOINTED time, as Christ say I come a THIEF in the """"NIGHT""""...to REMOVE the son of pedition , that is our carnal nature (Youve read many of my posts Molly to know what I mean by Darkness, night), just like saul, who is an example for ua all....HE WAS IN DARKNESS Molly, he couldnt see, one cant see in darkness Molly, Christ aplied eyesalve to remove HIS DARKNESS...getting the picture sis
makes sense Molly?
T
These scrips also speak to me the same thing..that which is Dark, night, wicked and EVIL....TwoCovenants, theres a Time for BOTH
Isa 45:7 I
form the light, and
create darkness: I
make peace, and
create evil: I the LORD do all these [things].
I mentioned this on other threads and other forums, but your question brings it back to me again. I see the Scripture to be read in three basic dimensions . . .just as there are three dimensions to you, your body, soul, and spirit . .three dimensions to God . .Father, Son, Holy Spirit . .three dimensions to the tabernacle . .outer court, inner court, or holy place, and the holy of holies . . ..Jesus is the Word . . .John 1:1. Jesus spoke in parables. He said his words are "spirit" . . .a parable is an earthly story with a spiritual meaning.
There is a reason everything is hidden . .it has to do with hunger. If I am hungry for truth, I dig for it. Not that God wants to be mean and hide it from me, but that God is LOVE and hides it 'FOR' me. Several times in Scripture there was a pattern that Jesus would do . .when he was walking with the disciples after his resurrection and they didn't recognize him . . .he spoke to them about his message before he left . .they still didn't recognize him . . .then when they reached they're destination, Jesus continued walking as though to leave them . .they invited him in . . he politely rejected . .but then they insisted . .he came in, ate with them . .there is a huge spiritual connection that takes place when one eats with another . .and when he gave thanks for the food . . . IN FRONT OF THEIR SEEING EYES he disappeared and immediately, revelation came to them of who he was. It never would have happened if they just settled with being happy having a conversation with him on their way home.
Revelational truth only comes by way of relationship through Christ. Seeing comes through grace . .you have the grace, you just have to be willing to lay down what flesh and blood has taught you. The act of laying down what you think to be true will be your faith manifesting . . . at which point, God will reveal to you great mysteries of who Jesus is. There is so much I can see . .but there is still so much I don't know.
That's why these forums can be such a great tool and blessing as we come to receive more than to give. But in reading of the giving from others . .like Taf and H . . .it sparks things in us that causes us to "want" to let it flow out of us and into others. The more we let it flow out, the more God allows it to flow in . . .the circle of life is not around me or in me . .it is through me.
Just as what comes out of your mouth can defile you . .not what goes in . .so to, what comes out of your mouth can also purify you . . .I can't tell you how many times I've said things I've never heard before . . . it's unreal at times. I do personally struggle sometimes when others only base their acceptance on your words, if you have a Scripture to back it up . . . The spirit is not confined to what is written. This is not to say that the Spirit will say things that are opposite of what was written . .like . . .killing is an okay thing . . lying, cheating . .all of that . . but it is saying that the Spirit will take the word that's already been spoken and illuminate more even though the Word doesn't clarify it . .actually, the Word is not supposed to be what clarifies truth. It's the Spirit that clarifies the Word, not the other way around.
To your original question about Judas . . .we all have a "son of perdition" in us. It's the same as when Jesus turned to Peter and called him satan . . .we all have a satan in us . .. simply means "adversary". Peter, not having the vision to see Jesus purpose was to bring resurrection life . .only heard Jesus was going to die . so he stepped in to "defend" . . .those who base life on the written word . .take note . . . The word is not to defend anything. Peter did it more than once, and Jesus rebuked him more than once.
Jesus does not need us to defend him. He needs us to manifest him.
Hope this helps
Quote from: TaffyCHRIST DOESNT COME DOWN FROM THE SKIES MOLLY AND ENTER US..HES REVEALED FROM WITHIN US...
sorta makes ya humble and NOT so special dont it....
On the contrary,it makes me feel VERY special. Humble in the sense of the awesome responsibility of it, to be a vessel of Christ on this earth, to work towards that end my whole life, to be a living sacrifice. And, it makes me look at my fellow humans--with a renewed sense of hope, awe, and love.
...do you love me?(Jn 21:16)
Christ is truth--
I am...the truth... (Jn14:6)
That means, in a world of lies, he will show us all truth about everything.
That means, in a world where the truth is completely hidden, nothing will be hidden that is not revealed.
Truth can be a very bitter pill--which is partly why most people avoid it.
...do you love me?Revelation 10:10
And I took the little book out of the angel's hand, and ate it up; and it was in my mouth sweet as honey: and as soon as I had eaten it, my belly was bitter.11And he said unto me, Thou must prophesy again before many peoples, and nations, and tongues, and kings.
What is the bitter truth that must be prophesied before peoples, nations, tongues, and kings?
We are to be witnesses to the truth.
19And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. --John 3
Quote from: NathanJesus does not need us to defend him. He needs us to manifest him.
Amen to that!
Quotesorta makes ya humble and NOT so special dont it....
Special ,In the context of being BETTER , superior ,(in the FLESH) than others...I beleive you know what I mean Molly :icon_flower:
Quote from: Taffy on August 22, 2008, 06:39:10 PM
Quotesorta makes ya humble and NOT so special dont it....
Special ,In the context of being BETTER , superior ,(in the FLESH) than others...I beleive you know what I mean Molly :icon_flower:
Yes, I do. And, what you are describing is one way that satan has perverted the scripture.
I know what you mean. :icon_flower:
The servant is not greater than the master.
QuoteYes, I do. And, what you are describing is one way that satan has perverted the scripture.
Tis YOUR OPINION Molly......or ARE you saying My veiws are satanic? :dontknow: :dontknow:
Quote from: Taffy on August 22, 2008, 07:20:44 PM
QuoteYes, I do. And, what you are describing is one way that satan has perverted the scripture.
Tis YOUR OPINION Molly......or ARE you saying My veiws are satanic? :dontknow: :dontknow:
No. LOL
Ok let me try again.
I understand what you meant by not being special. Those who would exalt themselves above all others--even take upon themselves the right to kill others--consider themselves special. Those that deck themselves out with gold and jewels and garments of fine cloth and have others kiss their hands--have gotten it wrong. That is the flesh. I understand that. Jesus didn't do any of that. He was a servant.
Just agreeing with you.
But from the point of view of Spirit we are special--in that our master is special--
the unique Son of God.
Quote from: Molly on August 22, 2008, 08:26:21 PM
Quote from: Taffy on August 22, 2008, 07:20:44 PM
QuoteYes, I do. And, what you are describing is one way that satan has perverted the scripture.
Tis YOUR OPINION Molly......or ARE you saying My veiws are satanic? :dontknow: :dontknow:
No. LOL
Ok let me try again.
I understand what you meant by not being special. Those who would exalt themselves above all others--even take upon themselves the right to kill others--consider themselves special. Those that deck themselves out with gold and jewels and garments of fine cloth and have others kiss their hands--have gotten it wrong. That is the flesh. I understand that.
Just agreeing with you.
But from the point of view of Spirit we are special--in that our master is special--the unique Son of God.
Phew..Im glad I was Confused.....thanks for explaining :icon_flower: :icon_flower: :icon_flower:
You two okay now? Give each other a hug, blow your noses . . . sheesh . .crazy kids. :boyheart: :girlheart:
Quote from: Nathan on August 22, 2008, 08:46:20 PM
You two okay now? Give each other a hug, blow your noses . . . sheesh . .crazy kids. :boyheart: :girlheart:
Twas I Nathan... :mblush: not molly :HeartThrob:
Weve had our threads ,but every thing continues AS was, :icon_flower: after wards.
At moment we are away celebrating our 20th anniversary, so I just pop on and off the PC....
Later matey :icon_flower:
Congratulations bro! Our 20th anniversary is next month . . .I just got handed a plaque . .I kid you not, about 20 minutes ago from my supervisor here at work, celebrating my 20 years of working here at Quaker.. . I got on here two weeks after our wedding. I even get to order out of a gift catologue! I wonder how I'd look in pearl ear rings . . . :laughing7:
Quote from: Nathan on August 22, 2008, 08:58:58 PM
Congratulations bro! Our 20th anniversary is next month . . .I just got handed a plaque . .I kid you not, about 20 minutes ago from my supervisor here at work, celebrating my 20 years of working here at Quaker.. . I got on here two weeks after our wedding. I even get to order out of a gift catologue! I wonder how I'd look in pearl ear rings . . . :laughing7:
Thanks Nat..wow..,really......gee,..well matey, Congrats on BOTH,..
we have two anniversaries every yr...the 21st and the 22nd...as a Pastor, why would that be Nat?..leave ya with that puzzler :laughing7:
could you clarify the riddle? I'd like to have a clearer understanding before I answer it :laughing7:clearly wrong
Quote from: Nathan on August 22, 2008, 09:30:13 PM
could you clarify the riddle? I'd like to have a clearer understanding before I answer it :laughing7:clearly wrong
sure Bro..
we got married in the WWCG, they hold no registered buildings in the UK to certify marriage, we at the time were sabbath Keepers( Saturday) so, we Got married at a Local comminity Centre on the Sunday by the Pastor of our Church and had our ceremony there...Monday Morning we were down to the Local registry office to be married again according to the LAW of the LAND....so, ya could say this is also Our 40th :laughing7: :laughing7: :laughing7:
:icon_flower: :icon_flower:
Wow, you religious people are freakin' wierd!
That's why we always buy American! (yeah, I know, it makes no sense, but it's all I got!)
Quote from: Nathan on August 22, 2008, 10:52:29 PM
Wow, you religious people are freakin' wierd!
That's why we always buy American! (yeah, I know, it makes no sense, but it's all I got!)
HE HAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!
Man was that church raking it in...they imposed three tithes on its members but told them NO WORKING saturdays....while the ministry had everything paid for 2nd homes, new cars, pensions,etc.. while many of the members couldnt afford to keep their heads above water...man ya Right, religous folk are wierd...
Pastors normally get My hairs up,.......A little like when we first met..remember Pastor I :laughing7:...
but you aint the Norm, your strange,,,,, :Sparkletooth:
Now you have ME laughing outloud . . .you're beginning to sound like my WIFE!! :bgdance:
Quote from: pneuma on August 22, 2008, 04:57:26 AM
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 21, 2008, 10:48:47 PM
Quote from: pneuma on August 20, 2008, 03:49:26 PM
QuoteYou see no difference in: "To the angel of the church in Laodicea write:The Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God, says this:" (Rev.3:1) and this "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being." (Jn.1:1-3). Who are you kidding brother, no, not me.
Hi Roy, I'm late to this discussion, but you are saying that the Jesus speaking in Rev.3 is the anti-Christ and not the Christ.
So we are to disregard all the things he said concerning the churches?
Are you sure its not your understanding of the scriptures that cause you to see Rev.3 as being of the anti Christ?
You base this on where it say "the Beginning of the creation of God"
You may not be aware of this Roy but "the beginning of the creation of God" is the foundation stone on which the new creation is built upon, For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus.
So Jesus Christ is the beginning/foundation of the creation of God.
Rev.3 is not saying Jesus was created, its saying that in HIM are all things created.
God bless
Brother Pneuma
That is a scurrilous accusation, where have you seen any such thing said by me? I think you owe me an apology.
Indeed I'm saying that Jesus Christ is the CREATOR, the one who created all things and not a created being which would make Him part of the creation.
Please read my posts very carefully before coming out with such blasphemies or cease communicating with me. I only deal with people who use facts, produce the evidence with the accusation next time. Do you understand me brother?
Peace!(http://dl4.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1176/1176424t4nufen6go.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Hi Roy, I think there is a misunderstanding here brother. (probably mine)
So let me try it this way.
I asked this question
I'm late to this discussion, but you are saying that the Jesus speaking in Rev.3 is the anti-Christ and not the Christ.
If your answer is yes, does that not make the Jesus, who you believe was created and spoke in Rev.3 antichrist?
If so my post stands as is, if not then I simply misunderstood you and if that is the case I do indeed apologise.
Dear Brother pneuma
Your quote:- If your answer is yes, does that not make the Jesus, who you believe was created and spoke in Rev.3 antichrist?
My answer:-Where on earth have you got this from, I have never made any such statement. Can you quote from any of my posts.
I regret to say you're wrong. You may have seen that in someone else's post but certainly not mine. Jesus Christ is my Lord and Saviour God,
born of the Father but
not created by Him. Please remember this brother, and don't credit me with such a scurrilous accusation it is offensive.
Peace!(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/117/117193tdajxe3wh8.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Quote from: Roy
I regret to say you're wrong. You may have seen that in someone else's post but certainly not mine. Jesus Christ is my Lord and Saviour God, born of the Father but not created by Him. Please remember this brother, and don't credit me with such a scurrilous accusation it is offensive.
Hi Roy,
You say Christ was born of the Father but not created by Him. I don't see the difference. My way of looking at this is, if Jesus didn't exist at one time whether he was born or whatever he is a creation of God. To create: is to cause to come into existance. This is what God the Father did with Christ.
CHB
Quote from: SOtW on August 21, 2008, 06:35:53 PM
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 21, 2008, 06:15:50 PM
Quote from: SOtW on August 19, 2008, 11:51:27 PM
Yes I would disagree, because only God knows the heart of man and their disposition to repentance when wrong has been been identified. We do not know the process duration because it is aionios, not aidios. There is no nitpicking over a simple word except by those who continue to deny what it actually means.
Hi! SOtW
Do you believe that a blanket." Sorry Lord I have committed an abundance of atrocities of insane torture and taken great pleasure from watching them suffer. Forgive me!" will set him free of all chastisement? Be real brother, I don't mean any disrespect. You and I have repented of our sins but none as vicious as our friend Saddam, yet we will undergo chastisement till we are perfect. God is the final judge I fully agree, but I think a little bit of carnal commonsense would be in order here. Don't you or the emphasis put on the meaning of grace can run amok?
Peace!url=http://www.glitter-graphics.com](http://dl4.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1176/1176424t4nufen6go.gif)[/url]
Roy UK
You are not understanding my position, because I am one of the few in this forum who does believe in an afterlife punishment, there is no such thing, or very rare thing as a deathbed repentance one's actions after a life-time of wickedness people like Saddam did. Since Saddam did not repent in this life he most definitely is being sent into aionios punishment. What type of punishment that is, how long it lasts, is dependent upon God's providence. If God in His plan makes this to be a blanket, then that is how God wanted it to be; if God in His plan makes this to be reliving his same life but with different choices, then that is how God wanted it to be. We do not know Saddam's heart, God takes everything into account when He renders His Judgment, so this is why I disagree with you. God judges those who are on the outside.
Hi! SOtW
Did Saddam show mercy while he watched his victims suffer? "For judgment will be
merciless to one who has shown no mercy; mercy triumphs over judgment." (Jas.2:13)
Peace!(http://dl4.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1298/1298544e42yk3c624.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 25, 2008, 05:09:57 PM
Hi! SOtW
Did Saddam show mercy while he watched his victims suffer? "For judgment will be merciless to one who has shown no mercy; mercy triumphs over judgment." (Jas.2:13)
Peace!
Roy UK
Only God knows Roy, not man. Mankind perceives anything they want to see, even that which was never there in the first place. I would not trust the lie of human perception over the truth of God's perception. Start paying attention o my replies, because I answered this already for you, we are not God, we do not know the heart of any man but our own. However, on this, Saddam was not shown any mercy. His empire destroyed, and he was hanged and his head displayed in disrespect. Saddam was not shown any mercy, he was killed even before his tribunal had pronounced his guilt.
Quote from: CHB on August 25, 2008, 04:53:50 PM
Quote from: Roy
I regret to say you're wrong. You may have seen that in someone else's post but certainly not mine. Jesus Christ is my Lord and Saviour God, born of the Father but not created by Him. Please remember this brother, and don't credit me with such a scurrilous accusation it is offensive.
Hi Roy,
You say Christ was born of the Father but not created by Him. I don't see the difference. My way of looking at this is, if Jesus didn't exist at one time whether he was born or whatever he is a creation of God. To create: is to cause to come into existance. This is what God the Father did with Christ.
CHB
Hi! CHB
Not I brother, the Word of God is saying it "Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and whoever loves the Father loves the
child born of Him. " (1Jn.5:1).
Born of the Father and not
created by the Father. A big, BIG difference. A matter of worshiping an idol or false christ, which is contrary to the first commandment "You shall have no other gods before Me. You shall not make for yourself
an idol, or
any likeness of what is in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the water under the earth. You shall not
worship them or serve them; for I, the Lord your God, am a
jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children, on the third and the fourth generations of those who hate Me," (Ex.20:3-5).
A false christ is an idol "Children, it is the last hour; and just as you heard that antichrist is coming, even now
many antichrists have appeared; from this we know that it is the last hour." (1Jn.2:18). Antichrists are false christs, IDOLS.
"Little children, guard yourselves from idols." (1Jn.5:21).
Why all the confusion and lack of understanding "For this reason God will send
upon them a deluding influence so that they will
believe what is false, in order that they all may be judged who did not
believe the truth, but took pleasure in wickedness." (2Thess.2:11-12). And what is the false and what is the truth? The
false is the created christ, an idol created by man, and the
truth is the TRUE CHRIST who is begotten/born of God "No one has seen God at any time;
the only begotten God who is
in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him." (Jn.1:18).
This is why you cannot see the BIG difference between begotten and created. If you truly believed in the True Jesus Christ the difference would stick out like a sore thumb.
Peace!(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Want to see the spiritual picture of these passages Roy has quoted? The false Christs is not me, nor is it you . . .it is the carnal mind of man. It is my ego that inflates things beyond their original intention. It does not know how the kingdom of God operates. Want to guard yourself from Idols? 2 Corinthians 10 tells you how . . ."take captive your thoughts."
It's not about people . . .it's about ME . . . if the Christians would just take care of their own salvation and not try to impose thier standards on others . . .what a wonderful world this would be!!!
I will agree, there is a created Christ . . .it's one that my head has formulated. And there is a born of God Christ . .it's one that my heart has imulated. Now, which one we choose to follow is up to us.
Quote from: Nathan on August 25, 2008, 06:36:57 PM
Want to see the spiritual picture of these passages Roy has quoted? The false Christs is not me, nor is it you . . .it is the carnal mind of man. It is my ego that inflates things beyond their original intention. It does not know how the kingdom of God operates. Want to guard yourself from Idols? 2 Corinthians 10 tells you how . . ."take captive your thoughts."
It's not about people . . .it's about ME . . . if the Christians would just take care of their own salvation and not try to impose thier standards on others . . .what a wonderful world this would be!!!
I will agree, there is a created Christ . . .it's one that my head has formulated. And there is a born of God Christ . .it's one that my heart has imulated. Now, which one we choose to follow is up to us.
Hi! Brother Nathan
I think we are drifting slightly, we are not talking about you or me but about those who preach and teach the false christs. They are the antichrists because they are promoting a christ of their own making, an idol. You and I are the innocent victims of that teaching if we do not have our spiritual eyes open and alert. If we accept the false we become victims of the false christ. If we accept the Truth we become victims of the True Christ. Which Christ would you rather be the victim of seeing we are all searching for the truth?
No one that I can see is imposing their belief on anyone, we are just having a discussion on a topic to find the truth, and the truth can only be found if one is prepared to discuss openly without falling out over it, that leads nowhere. The only way to prove the truth is with the scriptures not by our own opinions.
The scriptures I've quoted are God's Words not mine, so I'm not trying to impose my belief on anyone. If you believe that the scriptures are the truth, then follow them and they will hopefully lead you to the truth, if you are prepared to forget all preconceived ideas and study them with an open mind they will do that, but if you don't then they won't.
It's all up to the individual, no one is forcing anyone to accept anything. I believe what I believe and I'm willing to share it with you but if you don't want to share, fair enough, don't. Do you see my point, I mean no harm, all I say and write is done in love for my brothers and sisters in Christ Jesus, if it helps them fair enough if it doesn't it's still fair enough, no one loses or gains anything. Is that not how it should be, help one another?
Peace!(http://dl8.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1247/1247598g8oyd7jln8.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Quote from: NathanWant to see the spiritual picture of these passages Roy has quoted? The false Christs is not me, nor is it you . . .it is the carnal mind of man. It is my ego that inflates things beyond their original intention.
I don't know that is quite true.
Jesus specifically talks about shepherds--false Christs--antiChrist--"in place of Christ"--who come to destroy the sheep.
They are actual men claiming to be Christ, in order to lead the sheep astray. Once you understand that, you can see them everywhere.
There is only one good shepherd, one Christ, and it's not you or me, but Jesus.
10The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly.
11I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep.
12But he that is an hireling, and not the shepherd, whose own the sheep are not, seeth the wolf coming, and leaveth the sheep, and fleeth: and the wolf catcheth them, and scattereth the sheep.--John 10
Quote from: Nathan
I will agree, there is a created Christ . . .it's one that my head has formulated. And there is a born of God Christ . .it's one that my heart has imulated. Now, which one we choose to follow is up to us.
I choose both because they are one and the same.
(Col. 1:15) "Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature".
If Christ is the firstborn of every creature that means he was created.
(Col 1:18) And he is the head of the body, the church:
who is the beginningChrist was the beginning of the creation.
(Rev. 3:14) These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness,
the beginning of the creation of God. CHB
I think we are drifting slightly, we are not talking about you or me but about those who preach and teach the false christs. They are the antichrists because they are promoting a christ of their own making, an idol. You and I are the innocent victims of that teaching if we do not have our spiritual eyes open and alert. If we accept the false we become victims of the false christ. If we accept the Truth we become victims of the True Christ. Which Christ would you rather be the victim of seeing we are all searching for the truth?
Perhaps this is why it's so hard to enter into the realm of rest. You're still trying to guard the unguardable. Do you believe "greater is he that is IN me"? If you do then this shoudn't be an issue. False teachings . . .false doctrines, false prophets . .
It's not our responsibility to judge which is and which isn't. It may be to you, but again . . .sigh . . .this seems to be getting us no where today. . . Everything you guys are stating is coming from a "works-based" thinking. You're basing all of your conclusions on things that were stated 2,000 years ago, you're not even trying to see the spiritual piece, you're arguing over the false prophets that they were being warned about 2000 years ago in the flesh . . .the physical . . the natural, which ever you wish to title it . . .those guys he was warning about are DEAD. We are ALIVE . .and if we choose to live in ETERNAL LIFE then we should digest that which makes us alive and not dead.
Worrying about false teachings and prophets is not living truth. It's yesterday's manna . . . spirit is what brings life . .so why does everyone choose to continue to live according to flesh? You're interpreting Scripture naturally . . . you make it sound like the false prophets have more power than you . .everyone is throwing up red flags . .because my mind has never heard this before . . .it must be a false teaching.
"Growing in the Lord does not mean you continue to digest that which you already know"
All of these promises you're quoting . .things like seeing in a glass darkly . ."but then we shall see clearly . . ." "Right now we know not what we will be . . . ." that was 2000 years ago . . .today I know what I will be . . .I will be what I am . .I am a king and a priest . .that was never declared until John saw it by revelation. It was also delcared there are many mysteries that were hidden for such a time as this . . . you make it sound like when the Bible was complete the progression of God in man stopped as well.
My base, Scripturally derives from Zechariah 4 . . .the things that once required priests to sustain the ministries of the tabernacle are no longer necessary . . . EVERYTHING now comes through the power of the cross . .now that we're entering into the day of REST. I am not enforcing you to believe a certain way . . .I'm trying to give you back the WHOLE of until recently, has only been a part. The Bible was not intended for me to memorize and try to conform to. There is so much more beneath the surface of it all.
I am not "drifting slightly" I and sailing "purposefully" . . .God want's us to take this internally. If he changes my inside thinking . . .it will immediately affect my outside living. But if I'm rigid in my inside doctrinal beliefs, I'll be so much less mobile in my outside living. "I can't "believe" that because the Bible says . .to a generation 2,000 years before me . . that I'm supposed to think this other way . . ."
The time-table is still ticking away and many of us "have" been changed from law to life, from religion to relationship . . . others are still "in" transition. I pray that all can come into the light and life of "freedom" and seeing these things "inwardly" is a part of that. So I remain on what I originally said . . .it "is" the spiritual picture of that passage.
:boyheart: :icon_flower:
Fly Bro Fly :icon_flower:
QuoteHi! Taff
Who mentioned justification by the law, I didn't that's for sure matey? I agree that there are sooooooooo many christs, but which Christ is the right one that we believe in that's the question without going off the issue. There are two Jesus Christs that I am aware of that are being taught.
1)..... "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being." (1Jn.1:1-3). "And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth." (Jn.1:14).
This is the legitimately Born Jesus Christ Son of God; "Whoever believe that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and whoever loves the Father loves the child born of Him." 1Jn.5:1).
The other Jesus Christ
2).......Is a Created Jesus Christ based on man's interpretation of the Scripture:" To the angel of the church in Laodicea write: The Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God, says this:.." (Rev.3:14).
Now forgetting everything else so as to establish a common ground for discussion we must of necessity believe in just one of the two options.
I am declaring my total belief in the first number 1. The only Begotten Son of God. All I ask is which of the two is your choice? Only then can we continue or we'd be at cross purposes and it will just lead to confusion.
Hi Roy this is where I think my misunderstanding (if indeed I am misunderstanding you) came from.
It seems to me upon reading this that you were saying that the Jesus spoken of in Rev.3:14 is a false Jesus because this (or other Jesus as you called him) Jesus says he is the Beginning of the creation .
Is this what you are stating here?
If so then does that not make the Jesus in Rev.3:14 the antichrist?
I am sorry if this is upsetting you Roy, but when someone says the other Jesus Christ and then gives Rev.3:14 as proof of another Jesus Christ I don't know how to take it except that one is saying the Jesus in Rev.3:14 is not the Jesus begotten of the Father.
So please explain.
Quote from: SOtW on August 25, 2008, 05:44:35 PM
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 25, 2008, 05:09:57 PM
Hi! SOtW
Did Saddam show mercy while he watched his victims suffer? "For judgment will be merciless to one who has shown no mercy; mercy triumphs over judgment." (Jas.2:13)
Peace!
Roy UK
Only God knows Roy, not man. Mankind perceives anything they want to see, even that which was never there in the first place. I would not trust the lie of human perception over the truth of God's perception. Start paying attention o my replies, because I answered this already for you, we are not God, we do not know the heart of any man but our own. However, on this, Saddam was not shown any mercy. His empire destroyed, and he was hanged and his head displayed in disrespect. Saddam was not shown any mercy, he was killed even before his tribunal had pronounced his guilt.
Hi! SWtO
Good point and thanks. I see what you mean now. Saddam was shown no mercy here that's true and he paid the price for his crimes against humanity. Now from God's perspective, I agree that it is none of our business, the measure of chastisement under His mercy is entirely His prerogative and not for us to judge.
I always pay attention to what others say brother, but what I meant by blanket cover was, does or should that mercy apply to man's judgment as well? It's a two edged sword. No mercy under man's judgment, but a measure of mercy under God's judgment.
Now the question: From man's perspective was he wrong to have done what he did or should he have shown mercy and set him go free? The first part of that verse.
Pay attention to what I'm saying. :happygrin: :happygrin: :happygrin:
Peace!
Roy UK
QuoteOnly God knows Roy, not man. Mankind perceives anything they want to see, even that which was never there in the first place. I would not trust the lie of human perception over the truth of God's perception. Start paying attention o my replies, because I answered this already for you, we are not God, we do not know the heart of any man but our own. However, on this, Saddam was not shown any mercy. His empire destroyed, and he was hanged and his head displayed in disrespect. Saddam was not shown any mercy, he was killed even before his tribunal had pronounced his guilt.
I just got to say this ... I confess I dont even know my own heart !!
much less anyones elses intent ''of the heart''
lucky you , if you do
I have found im in that Place in Romans
But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.
Rom
7:23 Paul shared with us
in his mind the Spirit is willing
but the flesh is weak and yes I read Romans 8 and thats why I still have faith and have not given up yet
an the example of Sadam , welllllllll , to me its apparent he was definatly
in the flesh serving the law of sin
Paul slew many of innocent, a chief sinner by his own mouth confessed this for all time
in the Word of God
and Gods mercy was made Known by this example
and with Sadam we got death by judgement
did this man not live lusciously while his people suffered greatly ?
seen many kings of the earth [flesh] go down in the Book [bible ] by GODS judgment
its the bitter /gall
polar opposite of the sweet
and honest to goodness I would never have known love if not knowing hate first :( with that fear of death ..
this is a sad and open confession ........ peace
Quote from: Molly on August 25, 2008, 08:00:55 PM
Quote from: NathanWant to see the spiritual picture of these passages Roy has quoted? The false Christs is not me, nor is it you . . .it is the carnal mind of man. It is my ego that inflates things beyond their original intention.
I don't know that is quite true.
Jesus specifically talks about shepherds--false Christs--antiChrist--"in place of Christ"--who come to destroy the sheep.
They are actual men claiming to be Christ, in order to lead the sheep astray. Once you understand that, you can see them everywhere.
There is only one good shepherd, one Christ, and it's not you or me, but Jesus.
10The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly.
11I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep.
12But he that is an hireling, and not the shepherd, whose own the sheep are not, seeth the wolf coming, and leaveth the sheep, and fleeth: and the wolf catcheth them, and scattereth the sheep.
--John 10
Hi! Molly
That is precisely my point: your quote;
Jesus specifically talks about shepherds--false Christs--antiChrist--"in place of Christ"--who come to destroy the sheep. And this is where He mentions it;
"Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves." (Matt.7:15).
What more warning does one need?
"For if one comes and preaches another Jesus whom we have not preached, or you receive a different spirit which you have not received, or a different gospel which you have not accepted, you bear this beautifully." (2Cor.11:4)
So what Jesus is Paul preaching?
"You are My Son, Today I have begotten You"? (Heb.1:5). Is this not the Word, the only begotten Son born of God, The TRUE JESUS CHRIST and not a replacement by man of a created creature named jesus, a false christ? Will the true Jesus confess us before the Father if we confess the created jesus or will He deny us?
"Therefore everyone who confesses Me before men, I will also confess him before My Father who is in heaven. But whoever denies Me before men, I will also deny him before My Father who is in heaven. (Matt.10:32-33).
If we believe in the created jesus we are deluding ourselves
"For this reason God will send upon them a deluding influence so that they will believe what is false, in order that they all may be judged who did not believe the truth, but took pleasure in wickedness." (2Thess.2:11-12) and we are on the broad road leading to judgment and not on the narrow road leading to life.
"Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it. For the gate is small and the way is narrow that leads to life, and there are few who find it." (Matt.7:12-14).
Roy UK
Quote from: Nathan on August 25, 2008, 10:32:49 PM
I think we are drifting slightly, we are not talking about you or me but about those who preach and teach the false christs. They are the antichrists because they are promoting a christ of their own making, an idol. You and I are the innocent victims of that teaching if we do not have our spiritual eyes open and alert. If we accept the false we become victims of the false christ. If we accept the Truth we become victims of the True Christ. Which Christ would you rather be the victim of seeing we are all searching for the truth?
Perhaps this is why it's so hard to enter into the realm of rest. You're still trying to guard the unguardable. Do you believe "greater is he that is IN me"? If you do then this shoudn't be an issue. False teachings . . .false doctrines, false prophets . .
It's not our responsibility to judge which is and which isn't. It may be to you, but again . . .sigh . . .this seems to be getting us no where today. . . Everything you guys are stating is coming from a "works-based" thinking. You're basing all of your conclusions on things that were stated 2,000 years ago, you're not even trying to see the spiritual piece, you're arguing over the false prophets that they were being warned about 2000 years ago in the flesh . . .the physical . . the natural, which ever you wish to title it . . .those guys he was warning about are DEAD. We are ALIVE . .and if we choose to live in ETERNAL LIFE then we should digest that which makes us alive and not dead.
Worrying about false teachings and prophets is not living truth. It's yesterday's manna . . . spirit is what brings life . .so why does everyone choose to continue to live according to flesh? You're interpreting Scripture naturally . . . you make it sound like the false prophets have more power than you . .everyone is throwing up red flags . .because my mind has never heard this before . . .it must be a false teaching.
"Growing in the Lord does not mean you continue to digest that which you already know"
All of these promises you're quoting . .things like seeing in a glass darkly . ."but then we shall see clearly . . ." "Right now we know not what we will be . . . ." that was 2000 years ago . . .today I know what I will be . . .I will be what I am . .I am a king and a priest . .that was never declared until John saw it by revelation. It was also delcared there are many mysteries that were hidden for such a time as this . . . you make it sound like when the Bible was complete the progression of God in man stopped as well.
My base, Scripturally derives from Zechariah 4 . . .the things that once required priests to sustain the ministries of the tabernacle are no longer necessary . . . EVERYTHING now comes through the power of the cross . .now that we're entering into the day of REST. I am not enforcing you to believe a certain way . . .I'm trying to give you back the WHOLE of until recently, has only been a part. The Bible was not intended for me to memorize and try to conform to. There is so much more beneath the surface of it all.
I am not "drifting slightly" I and sailing "purposefully" . . .God want's us to take this internally. If he changes my inside thinking . . .it will immediately affect my outside living. But if I'm rigid in my inside doctrinal beliefs, I'll be so much less mobile in my outside living. "I can't "believe" that because the Bible says . .to a generation 2,000 years before me . . that I'm supposed to think this other way . . ."
The time-table is still ticking away and many of us "have" been changed from law to life, from religion to relationship . . . others are still "in" transition. I pray that all can come into the light and life of "freedom" and seeing these things "inwardly" is a part of that. So I remain on what I originally said . . .it "is" the spiritual picture of that passage.
Hi! Nathan
Your quote brother: Everything you guys are stating is coming from a "works-based" thinking. You're basing all of your conclusions on things that were stated 2,000 years ago, you're not even trying to see the spiritual piece, you're arguing over the false prophets that they were being warned about 2000 years ago in the flesh . . .the physical . . the natural, which ever you wish to title it . . .those guys he was warning about are DEAD. We are ALIVE . .and if we choose to live in ETERNAL LIFE then we should digest that which makes us
alive and not dead.
So they are dead for over 2000 years, Adam and Eve are dead for much, much longer but we are still very much alive, so what use is all that tripe in the Bible to us let's throw the lot out the window. Is that what you're saying? 'Tis true we can't see the spiritual, you've just thrown it out the window, now no one can see it whether dead or alive. Good going
Be real brother!(http://dl2.glitter-graphics.net/pub/531/531092obq4tfxk6k.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Peace!
Roy UK.
Hi Nathan,
This isn't a 2000 year old message. It's a message for today--what is, and was, and will be.
Haven't you noticed what is going on in this country? Haven't you noticed what is going on in the world?
People are dying every day, all over the world, because of the antichrist--millions of them.
What happens when the sheep have blind guides and vipers leading them?
They are made more the chldren of Hell than their guides. They are scattered by the wolves and eaten alive.
Central to our faith, our life, our future is --who do men say that I the Son of man am?
--But who do you say I am? (Mat 16)
We won't enter into our rest until enough men answer that question correctly--such that we have the manifestation of the sons of God.
Mat 19:19 Honor thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.
As long as a world of evil "out there" is your focus and perception; it continues to be a reflection of your "inner man" you have not yet embraced and loved.
The "world out there" is "in you". Learn to love yourself, and the world changes.
Quote from: Taffy on August 25, 2008, 10:37:05 PM
:boyheart: :icon_flower:
Fly Bro Fly :icon_flower:
Hi! Taffy
Your lovely quote, I just love it, brother, "I am declaring my total belief in the first number 1. The only Begotten Son of God. All I ask is which of the two is your choice? Only then can we continue or we'd be at cross purposes and it will just lead to confusion." fellow Britt. At last we're on the same wavelength, now we've removed the sand foundation and replaced it with the Rock let us build on it, Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour. Amen.
Peace! Should we put this in for Willie's sake?
(http://dl9.glitter-graphics.net/pub/786/786729g5n5q7a7lf.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy
Quote from: laren on August 26, 2008, 03:39:06 PM
Mat 19:19 Honor thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.
As long as a world of evil "out there" is your focus and perception; it continues to be a reflection of your "inner man" you have not yet embraced and loved.
The "world out there" is "in you". Learn to love yourself, and the world changes.
Love thy neighbor as thyself.
Yes--so I want to ask (not you, Laren, but in general)--what is it about that simple command from *God* that you Christians don't understand?
The world won't change until what is in me is in the world.
Quote
Hi! Taffy
Your lovely quote, I just love it, brother, "I am declaring my total belief in the first number 1. The only Begotten Son of God. All I ask is which of the two is your choice? Only then can we continue or we'd be at cross purposes and it will just lead to confusion." fellow Britt. At last we're on the same wavelength, now we've removed the sand foundation and replaced it with the Rock let us build on it, Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour. Amen.
Peace! Should we put this in for Willie's sake?
(http://dl9.glitter-graphics.net/pub/786/786729g5n5q7a7lf.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy
John 17:5 And, now, glorify Me thou, Father! with Thyself, with the
glory which I had, before the world's existence, with Thee Jhn 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time;
the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared [him].
compare this now with the meaning of Elohim, a small excerpt shared by sister onanother forum while discussing Honour THY Father and Mother( with promise)
Eloah or Eloh is the feminine singular part of Elohim
the "im" is the masculine plural in Hebrew
so Eloh + im can point to the male and female attributes within God...
this, of course, is already known but I thought it was cool that it was contained in the word Elohim and this could be why it is seemingly plural....
...God IS mother AND father...
it is also interesting to note that until Moses asked Elohim his name (Exo 3:13) God was commonly referred to as El Shaddai...
and some scholars have linked "shaddai" to "breasts"....this would make sense then that for the initial period of human history God would have been known by his more female/mothering/nuturing characteristics...just as when babies are first born the mother is the primary caregiver and provides the most essential mother's milk...
by the God of your father who will help you, by the Almighty (shaddai) who will bless you with blessings of heaven above, blessings of the deep that crouches beneath, blessings of the breasts (shad) and of the womb.
Genesis 49:25
just to add Roy
Sgs 4:5 Thy two breasts [are] like two young roes that are twins, which
feed among the lilies. Job 21:24 His
breasts are full of milk, and his bones are moistened with marrow
PS.
Willie H wont be around for a season, hes under going surgery within the next couple of weeks
Quote from: CHB on August 25, 2008, 08:14:45 PM
Quote from: Nathan
I will agree, there is a created Christ . . .it's one that my head has formulated. And there is a born of God Christ . .it's one that my heart has imulated. Now, which one we choose to follow is up to us.
I choose both because they are one and the same.
(Col. 1:15) "Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature".
If Christ is the firstborn of every creature that means he was created.
(Col 1:18) And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning
Christ was the beginning of the creation.
(Rev. 3:14) These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God.
CHB
Hi! CHB
You have quoted incorrectly, brother.
Your quote: (Col. 1:15) "Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature".
Where does it say that, I don't see it in any of the three Bibles I can afford, the Interlinear Hebrew/English/Greek, the KJV or the NASV. The correct translation is: "He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation." (1Col.1:15). Now look up the meaning of firstborn in the centre column and it will take you to 2Cor.4:4 which tells you that the
firstborn is the Image of the glory of Christ not the
first created image of the creature.
Peace!(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
So they are dead for over 2000 years, Adam and Eve are dead for much, much longer but we are still very much alive, so what use is all that tripe in the Bible to us let's throw the lot out the window. Is that what you're saying? 'Tis true we can't see the spiritual, you've just thrown it out the window, now no one can see it whether dead or alive. Good going
You're not the first to receive it in this light. I never said the Bible is no longer of any use to us. I'm saying . ..say when Paul instructed the women of the church to be silent and let the men receive from the Pastor and then take it home to the wives and let the wives receive the seed from the husbands . . . .do you think that we're to take "that" literally? No, it was for THAT church setting . . .THAT group of people in THAT day. The spirit breathes on his Word . .including the Bible, there's no doubt about that and I'm not trying to take your Bible away.
What I'm trying to do is identify with you that there is a reason for this call to come out of the church. It's not so that we can become independant in our own thinking . . but it's to call us to a higher understanding . . .a deeper relationship that organized churches have shot themselves in the foot with because they've drawn out boundaries in their beliefs, not allowing them to see a new anything. So, the church programs can turn people into cattle and the day of farm labor is over . . . it went out with the end of the 6th day.
There's more to this . .to me . .than just quitting church. It's not about what you're leaving, it's about "why" did God call you out? He never takes anything from you unless he's got something better waiting. So . . .which is it? Am I supposed to make sure no women teach? No women are allowed to preach? Only men can be anointed by God when it comes to ministering to adults?
I don't want to "assume" your answers . . . I get accused of bad things already . . . but in my experience, I have not come across one person that feels that this passage of Scripture pertains to me. So what then? Do we just throw it out? Was it not also inspired by God? And this is just my point in all of this. We'll say "no, that part was just for them, the church they had was brand-new and they didn't have any established way of handling things then so Paul had to teach them how to conduct themselves."
So IF that part isn't supposed to be applied literally . . .then where does it end? Are we to leave it up to ourselves as to what verse is taken literally and what verse isn't? And I believe that's just what we "have" done . . .which is another reason why there are so many different denominations. Everybody has their own version of how to apply it literally. So . . .it occurred to me one day . . .what if NONE of it is to be taken literally . .like . . .in the same manner they received it when it was written to them.
Now, people are telling me I'm saying you should throw the Bible out and beings those people are all dead, the Bible is dead as well . . . come on . .think about your accusations. I'm a pastor for pitty sake . . .I preach out of the Bible EVERY Sunday . .so why would I then say it's useless? I'm not saying that at all. I'm not even saying that by applying it literally to your own life, that it's not effective . . .what I "am" saying is . . .there's so much MORE to it than just what's on the surface.
So, if I'm not to apply that passage about women being silent literally . . .how "do" I apply it? Ha! So glad you asked :cloud9: You apply it "spiritually" (big surprise!) What is the spiritual picture with that passage? Well, the man is your spirit, the woman is your mind . . .the woman is to remain silent so the spirit can receive the Word of Truth and then, as the mind is in submission to the spirit . . .the original order of our Genesis, Truth can then be birthed into our understanding . . .my mind is my womb.
So I quit picking what is and what isn't to be applied literally, and I've chosen to pursue all of it on the same plain . . .spiritually. And from there, other things begin to manifest. Jesus said his words are "spirit". Nothing of what he stated was intended to be taken literally. The disciples took him literally . . .they still thought that he was literally going to be King of Israel. Well, if the Word was the beginning . . .the Word was with God . . .and the word WAS/IS God. . .then if we weren't to take Jesus words literally, why are we embracing the written word literally?
Again, I am not saying there is absolutely no room for literal understanding . . .I'm saying that the literal piece is just a stepping stone to lead you into the spiritual piece. When I walk in the spirit, I see it's not about being right or wrong . . .I see that this kind of thinking is connected to the tree of knowledge of "good" and "evil". Living in that tree, one always must define black from white, up from down, left from right . . .in the tree of life . . . both in balance are "good." Both "bring" balance, which is . ."Good."
I think the literal depiction that women shouldn't be preaching has nothing to do with how many years ago it was written. The literal is also for now as well, do not get wrapped up in the mystical thinking that "modern times" means a hill of beans.
It is to cause women to see and fullfill their role as nurturing spirits so that they can preach in a way a man cannot. I am not trying to be sexist but fuuzy wuzzy men preachers fail miserably, but women can preach that way and it can soften the hearts of people and inspire love even in men. However, to inspire with determination and strength, a man has that down and can motivate women to be strong.
It is not about not preaching it is about women not preaching in the same manner as men.
Paul...
that was great, bro.
I agree with you.
:HeartThrob:,
sparrow
1Cr 7:29 But this I say, brethren, the time [is] short: it remaineth, that both they that have wives be as though they had none;
literally, I guess we married folk should be as though we aren't
Quote from: Paul Hazelwood on August 26, 2008, 04:57:21 PM
I think the literal depiction that women shouldn't be preaching has nothing to do with how many years ago it was written. The literal is also for now as well, do not get wrapped up in the mystical thinking that "modern times" means a hill of beans.
It is to cause women to see and fullfill their role as nurturing spirits so that they can preach in a way a man cannot. I am not trying to be sexist but fuuzy wuzzy men preachers fail miserably, but women can preach that way and it can soften the hearts of people and inspire love even in men. However, to inspire with determination and strength, a man has that down and can motivate women to be strong.
It is not about not preaching it is about women not preaching in the same manner as men.
lol , good job Paul I do believe that Paul the apostle was speaking more of this lines in the effeminate nature Effeminate1 Strong's Number: 3120 Greek: malakos
"soft, soft to the touch" (Lat., mollis, Eng., "mollify," "emollient," etc.), is used (a) of raiment, Mat 11:8 (twice); Luk 7:25; (b) metaphorically, in a bad sense, 1Cr 6:9, "effeminate," not simply of a male who practices forms of lewdness, but persons in general, who are guilty of addiction to sins of the flesh, voluptuous.
Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the
Spirit of our God. Jam 3:15 This wisdom descendeth not from above, but [is] earthly, sensual, devilish.
there is the ''spiritual preaching '' and than there is that ''soulful preaching '' too is it not ..soul·ful
adj. Full of or expressing deep feeling; profoundly emotional.
soul'ful·ly adv., soul'ful·ness n.
ears to hear what the Spirit of God is saying is key to understanding .......
peace rr
QuoteWell, the man is your spirit, the woman is your mind . . .the woman is to remain silent so the spirit can receive the Word of Truth and then, as the mind is in submission to the spirit . . .the original order of our Genesis, Truth can then be birthed into our understanding . . .my mind is my womb
simply put bro...
women are likened to the Church and Man to Christ..Adam first , theN Eve.....NOT CALLED TO USURP THE AUTHORITY OF THE man....
The woman (representative of the church) must give BIRTH, by which a "man" is born into the world, SAVED bY CHILDBEARING...
But In Christ there is No male or Female. we are all equal......THIS ALL SPEAKS VERY MUCH AFTER THE SPIRITUAL.
Later bro
Quote from: Molly on August 26, 2008, 03:20:37 PM
Hi Nathan,
This isn't a 2000 year old message. It's a message for today--what is, and was, and will be.
Haven't you noticed what is going on in this country? Haven't you noticed what is going on in the world?
People are dying every day, all over the world, because of the antichrist--millions of them.
What happens when the sheep have blind guides and vipers leading them?
They are made more the chldren of Hell than their guides. They are scattered by the wolves and eaten alive.
Central to our faith, our life, our future is --who do men say that I the Son of man am?
--But who do you say I am? (Mat 16)
We won't enter into our rest until enough men answer that question correctly--such that we have the manifestation of the sons of God.
Hi! Molly
Well quoted "-But who do
you say I am?" And what did they say? The answer "You are the
Christ, the
Son of the living God." (Matt.16:16). Not the false antichrist created, idol, he calls christ.
Unless we accept this fact, judgment, and in my opinion
only severe judgment, is the order of the day.
Peace!(http://dl4.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1176/1176424t4nufen6go.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Quote from: laren on August 26, 2008, 05:09:21 PM
1Cr 7:29 But this I say, brethren, the time [is] short: it remaineth, that both they that have wives be as though they had none;
literally, I guess we married folk should be as though we aren't
yeppers Laren
seeing being faithful to Jesus Christ [ His body TRUE Church]
and not so much ''Joined'' to the world
its not a thing that can be done , we are one or the other to me
this is why Jesus and Paul both spoke of cast out
and castaways to me
peace rosered
Quote from: Taffy on August 26, 2008, 05:13:18 PM
QuoteWell, the man is your spirit, the woman is your mind . . .the woman is to remain silent so the spirit can receive the Word of Truth and then, as the mind is in submission to the spirit . . .the original order of our Genesis, Truth can then be birthed into our understanding . . .my mind is my womb
simply put bro...
women are likened to the Church and Man to Christ..Adam first , theN Eve.....NOT CALLED TO USURP THE AUTHORITY OF THE man....
The woman (representative of the church) must give BIRTH, by which a "man" is born into the world, SAVED bY CHILDBEARING...
But In Christ there is No male or Female. we are all equal......THIS ALL SPEAKS VERY MUCH AFTER THE SPIRITUAL.
Later bro
GOOD ONE TAFF !
I so agree its the SPIRIT OF GOD speaking through the new/old wineskins /bags vessels etc . as Paul told us in the other posts on page 8 lol ..
you guys are so fast . whew!
peace rr
QuoteGOOD ONE TAFF !
I so agree its the SPIRIT OF GOD speaking through the new/old wineskins /bags vessels etc . as Paul told us in the other posts on page 8 lol ..
you guys are so fast . whew!
peace rr
hey sis..so pleased to hear you in good spirits..and even more so to see back posting a little :HeartThrob:
Quote from: Taffy on August 26, 2008, 05:24:56 PM
QuoteGOOD ONE TAFF !
I so agree its the SPIRIT OF GOD speaking through the new/old wineskins /bags vessels etc . as Paul told us in the other posts on page 8 lol ..
you guys are so fast . whew!
peace rr
hey sis..so pleased to hear you in good spirits..and even more so to see back posting a little :HeartThrob:
here is something along them lines again for page 9 lol ... hee hee
1Cr 6:9, 10 11
Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God?
Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God
.
And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified/set apart,
but ye are justified/ judged in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.
I so Love His Spirit /WORD it is truth . thanks matey :girlheart:
peace rr
Quote from: laren on August 26, 2008, 03:39:06 PM
Mat 19:19 Honor thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.
As long as a world of evil "out there" is your focus and perception; it continues to be a reflection of your "inner man" you have not yet embraced and loved.
The "world out there" is "in you". Learn to love yourself, and the world changes.
Hi! Laren
I used to love myself, brother, till I realized how truly rotten I was, a total lack of love for others, only selfishness and worldly greed. Now I don't love myself anymore, I love Him who is within me above life itself. So your advice is wrong, to love yourself is to love the world because that is what the human self's desire is, carnal. I have changed, I love you now, and him, and her, I love my neighbour more than myself, but I love God most of all.
The first will be last, that is the order for me now. In the beginning self was first and God last, neighbour inbetween. Now it's God first, neighbour (you brother) and myself last.
Peace!
RoyUK(http://dl4.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1176/1176424t4nufen6go.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Isn't it a bit difficult to love others if you can't even love yourself? It's got nothing to do with loving worldly things, it's simply applying the same grace to your own shortcomings as God does. If his image is in you, and if you're to see others as he sees them, being blind to the failures of sin and others is what it's all about.
If I love others and can't stand myself . . .it that not hypocracy?
What is your description of false humility?
delete
Roy,
Do you agree Jesus loved many that surrounded Him?
They where as rotten as you are.
Was Jesus wrong in loving them?
So if Jesus loves it, its likely ok to love it...
Quote from: Taffy on August 26, 2008, 04:14:20 PM
Quote
Hi! Taffy
Your lovely quote, I just love it, brother, "I am declaring my total belief in the first number 1. The only Begotten Son of God. All I ask is which of the two is your choice? Only then can we continue or we'd be at cross purposes and it will just lead to confusion." fellow Britt. At last we're on the same wavelength, now we've removed the sand foundation and replaced it with the Rock let us build on it, Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour. Amen.
Peace! Should we put this in for Willie's sake?
(http://dl9.glitter-graphics.net/pub/786/786729g5n5q7a7lf.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy
John 17:5 And, now, glorify Me thou, Father! with Thyself, with the glory which I had, before the world's existence, with Thee
Jhn 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared [him].
compare this now with the meaning of Elohim, a small excerpt shared by sister onanother forum while discussing Honour THY Father and Mother( with promise)
Eloah or Eloh is the feminine singular part of Elohim
the "im" is the masculine plural in Hebrew
so Eloh + im can point to the male and female attributes within God...
this, of course, is already known but I thought it was cool that it was contained in the word Elohim and this could be why it is seemingly plural....
...God IS mother AND father...
it is also interesting to note that until Moses asked Elohim his name (Exo 3:13) God was commonly referred to as El Shaddai...
and some scholars have linked "shaddai" to "breasts"....this would make sense then that for the initial period of human history God would have been known by his more female/mothering/nuturing characteristics...just as when babies are first born the mother is the primary caregiver and provides the most essential mother's milk...
by the God of your father who will help you, by the Almighty (shaddai) who will bless you with blessings of heaven above, blessings of the deep that crouches beneath, blessings of the breasts (shad) and of the womb.
Genesis 49:25
just to add Roy
Sgs 4:5 Thy two breasts [are] like two young roes that are twins, which feed among the lilies.
Job 21:24 His breasts are full of milk, and his bones are moistened with marrow
PS.
Willie H wont be around for a season, hes under going surgery within the next couple of weeks
Thanks Taffy
That was just great. I knew Elohim was male/female or giving birth wouldn't be too practical, but of course with God all is possible, I got that from a Hebrew translation of the word. But you opened my eyes with your reference to Songs of S, no not SOS, and Job. I'll have to give them both a good look over. That never entered my dull head to be honest, but it's brilliant. Twins could account for the exact image in the Scriptures.
Sorry to hear about Willie, what's that lovely guy been up to? I've only just met him and am beginning to miss him. Strange old world this, give him my love and wish for a speedy recovery if you're in touch.
Thanks again.(http://dl2.glitter-graphics.net/pub/311/311492icz767qx0t.jpg) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Love to self and the better half.
Peace!
Roy
Quote from: Nathan on August 26, 2008, 06:12:19 PM
Isn't it a bit difficult to love others if you can't even love yourself? It's got nothing to do with loving worldly things, it's simply applying the same grace to your own shortcomings as God does. If his image is in you, and if you're to see others as he sees them, being blind to the failures of sin and others is what it's all about.
If I love others and can't stand myself . . .it that not hypocracy?
What is your description of false humility?
I think we all start out loving ourselves--it's the carnal nature of man--flesh doesn't want to die--flesh loves itself.
Self love is normally called self interest. The question is will people go against their own self interest to save another?
Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. (Jn 15:13)
I loved myself first until I found someone who so eclipsed me that He became my first love...
Maybe our definition of loving is what is messing this up.
How about . . .can we "accept" ourselves for who we are? Why would you hate what God created? If I see only darkness in myself . .then how can I reflect light into others? How can I "be" light to others? "It's not I, but Christ in me . . ." Yeah, I get that, but it involves "you".
I think if God went so far as to release his son into this earth to bring me life . . . I must be pretty special.
Without Christ . . .I am nothing . . .
Are you then saying you are without Christ? You are far from nothing, you are kings and priests, God delights in you. He's loved you before you even were aware of him. Forget loving the world . . .you are not the world. You are a spirit, you are not flesh. You're flesh is simply a temporary dwelling place . . . your identity is Christ . .to love yourself . .is to love Christ.
The Bible says to love your neighbor as yourself . . . again . . .how can you love someone else if you first don't love yourself. Who told you, that you were naked? You've not been listening to the voice of Truth. Truth says you are righteous. Why would you not love righteousness? I do love me. I'm finding a few more aches as the days go by, but I figure if God loves me, then there must be "some" worth there.
I'm again surprised. God is love . . .love is God. God is in me, love is in me. Love loves me . .I love me.
Yes, Nathan--I agree--but first, like Adam and Eve, we must see ourselves as naked, before we can see Him, the one who would cloth us in righteousness.
Love your enemies.
How, do yu love your enemies if there is only evil in him? Is there Christ in the enemy to love??
So how do you love your enemies, if Christ isn't in them??
or is the mystery revealed, Christ is in all of us?
Many just don't see it when there perceptions are on "the good branch", or "bad branch" of the tree where no life is revealed.
Know no man after the flesh?? why and how??
The mystery has been revealed to the Gentiles, but even if you don't know that, you know the simple command which can be acted on in obedience by the smallest child--
Love your enemies.
Love is first and foremost--an action.
Let me put this another way--
If the 200 million Christians of the most powerful country on the planet instructed their elected officials to follow these directives of their God--Love your enemies, Love your neighbor as yourself--
How would the world change overnight?'
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 26, 2008, 04:26:19 PM
Quote from: CHB on August 25, 2008, 08:14:45 PM
Quote from: Nathan
I will agree, there is a created Christ . . .it's one that my head has formulated. And there is a born of God Christ . .it's one that my heart has imulated. Now, which one we choose to follow is up to us.
I choose both because they are one and the same.
(Col. 1:15) "Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature".
If Christ is the firstborn of every creature that means he was created.
(Col 1:18) And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning
Christ was the beginning of the creation.
(Rev. 3:14) These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God.
CHB
Hi! CHB
You have quoted incorrectly, brother. Your quote: (Col. 1:15) "Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature".
Where does it say that, I don't see it in any of the three Bibles I can afford, the Interlinear Hebrew/English/Greek, the KJV or the NASV. The correct translation is: "He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation." (1Col.1:15). Now look up the meaning of firstborn in the centre column and it will take you to 2Cor.4:4 which tells you that the firstborn is the Image of the glory of Christ not the first created image of the creature.
Peace!(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Hi Roy,
In my KJV it is worded exactly like I said it was. In the YLT it says "firstborn of all creation".
I noticed you didn't say anything about the other verses I gave.
If Christ was the
beginning and he said he was, then He had to have been the first thing that was created.
The "beginning" is the first person or thing in a series.
CHB
Quote from: Molly on August 26, 2008, 08:00:07 PM
Let me put this another way--
If the 200 million Christians of the most powerful country on the planet instructed their elected officials to follow these directives of their God--Love your enemies, Love your neighbor as yourself--
or Molly ,,,IF my AUNTIE had a set of genitals, she be me Uncle..... :laughing7:
sorry couldnt resist :icon_flower:
well, I can hope--because that's what it's going to take.
What is it about 'Love your enemies' you don't understand, Christians?
Is that a difficult sentence? Are you all braindead?
This is the danger of the antichrist who leads the sheep astray, to scatter and devour them.
Quote from: Molly on August 26, 2008, 08:00:07 PM
Let me put this another way--
If the 200 million Christians of the most powerful country on the planet instructed their elected officials to follow these directives of their God--Love your enemies, Love your neighbor as yourself--
How would the world change overnight?'
Surely the world would change. The USA would be a 3rd world country in a very short time.
Just look what and who supports your economy.
Yes it's very sad. But I fear it's even more true.
Quote from: Nathan on August 26, 2008, 06:12:19 PM
Isn't it a bit difficult to love others if you can't even love yourself? It's got nothing to do with loving worldly things, it's simply applying the same grace to your own shortcomings as God does. If his image is in you, and if you're to see others as he sees them, being blind to the failures of sin and others is what it's all about.
If I love others and can't stand myself . . .it that not hypocracy?
What is your description of false humility?
Hi! Brother Nathan
I didn't say I hated myself, now did I? I didn't love the person I was, I love Him within me more than my life itself and I love my neighbour (you brother) more than myself, the
"I" comes last. Yes, I grant you my old self was a hypocrite because, if the truth be known, my love for you (my neighbour) wouldn't have stood an earthly chance if challenged by the lures of the world, greed. God of course wouldn't have entered the equation. But now it's different, I have at last found my First Love "But I have this against you, that you have left your first love." (Rev.2:4).
Having found Him I have also found myself, I have consumed Him and He has consumed me, now I live for Him and not myself, there is no hypocrisy in it now. The
"I" no longer exists it is He that controls everything, the Captain of this humble ship. A big ocean and me in a small ship needs a Captain such as the Lord. This, then is my description of true humility, does it answer your description of it as a false humility? Or is it your humility that's in doubt?
Peace!(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif)[/url
Roy UK
(http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Yes, Nathan--I agree--but first, like Adam and Eve, we must see ourselves as naked, before we can see Him, the one who would cloth us in righteousness
Nope, nope, nope . . . that may very well be what people do and have done, but that's not the order that God originally established. Nakedness is not bad. Walking in the spirit is walking in innosence. Adam's nature did not come into the fallen state until "after" he chose knowledge over life.
This "knowledge" did nothing for his awareness of who God was. It didn't illuminate God's love, mercy . .grace . nothing . .all it did was reveal that Adam was naked. That's all law ever does, it illuminates the fallen state of me and others. Seeing myself as naked is not something God instills in us, it's the thing that law instils . . the carnal mind, the religious thinking person.
That's why that's such a profound question God posed to Adam . ."Who told you that you were naked? Because knowing nakedness is the evidence of carnal knowledge. Human reasoning can not enter into the kingdom of heaven. All it can do is identify with the fallen state of man. That's what sparked this conversation in the first place, the idea that I can't love myself for that would be loving the carnal earth . . . the ego of man would love for all men to dwell there . .because living in that state of mind will distract you from coming into the full knowledge of who you are in Christ.
"That's" why Proverbs says not we're not to lean on our own understanding. When I think I've got the whole understanding of something, I start building walls at the boundaries of that understanding. Then when other's come with difference of perspectives, we retract and defend rather than openly enter into the new ideas, because to accept something new would mean I must first admit that what I have is incomplete . . . egos hate admitting to stuff like that.
Do I think we can change the world? I think if we first let Truth into my personal world, my earth . .my mind . . ."then" that which is changed from within, will have a greater affect on that which is without.
how do we love our enemy if we are not to love the things of the world??
Quote from: Nathan on August 26, 2008, 08:29:02 PM
Yes, Nathan--I agree--but first, like Adam and Eve, we must see ourselves as naked, before we can see Him, the one who would cloth us in righteousness
Nope, nope, nope . . . that may very well be what people do and have done, but that's not the order that God originally established. Nakedness is not bad. Walking in the spirit is walking in innosence. Adam's nature did not come into the fallen state until "after" he chose knowledge over life.
This "knowledge" did nothing for his awareness of who God was. It didn't illuminate God's love, mercy . .grace . nothing . .all it did was reveal that Adam was naked. That's all law ever does, it illuminates the fallen state of me and others. Seeing myself as naked is not something God instills in us, it's the thing that law instils . . the carnal mind, the religious thinking person.
That's why that's such a profound question God posed to Adam . ."Who told you that you were naked? Because knowing nakedness is the evidence of carnal knowledge. Human reasoning can not enter into the kingdom of heaven. All it can do is identify with the fallen state of man. That's what sparked this conversation in the first place, the idea that I can't love myself for that would be loving the carnal earth . . . the ego of man would love for all men to dwell there . .because living in that state of mind will distract you from coming into the full knowledge of who you are in Christ.
"That's" why Proverbs says not we're not to lean on our own understanding. When I think I've got the whole understanding of something, I start building walls at the boundaries of that understanding. Then when other's come with difference of perspectives, we retract and defend rather than openly enter into the new ideas, because to accept something new would mean I must first admit that what I have is incomplete . . . egos hate admitting to stuff like that.
Do I think we can change the world? I think if we first let Truth into my personal world, my earth . .my mind . . ."then" that which is changed from within, will have a greater affect on that which is without.
a friend of mine wrote this, thought i'd throw it out there for thought:
"My thought is that to be clothed in Christ's righteousness is to be naked and unashamed. Now how's that for logic, lol!
Seriously, the hebrew word translated "naked" is "arowm". Its' "parent root" is "aram" which means "crafty". Now get this ..
Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. (Gen 3:1)
The word translated "subtil" is "aruwm". It is the past participle of "aram". The serpent "was" crafty (or subtil). That doesn't mean that the serpent was crafty yesterday, it just means that the writer is staying true to his tense in the story. If they didn't, it would be akin to "I is running".
To be naked, was to have your "aram" uncovered. To say that your craftiness is uncovered is sort of a flirtatious language in the literal sense -- or (and?) could be very much like our childrens' saying that their "privates" are covered.
They had their craftiness uncovered and were not ashamed because their eyes were not "opened". Iow, they were unconsciously naked.
This can also be seen metaphorically - having craftiness uncovered yet not being conscious and therefore ashamed or fearful.
Literal nakedness probably relays a sense of vulnerability, especially to people who lived waaay long ago.
Their eyes being opened could be their having become aware of their own craftiness.. what they were capable of. It is knowledge itself becoming unveiled to them.
Any
fear or shame would be based on judgements that they passed upon owning/internalizing that new knowledge.
The righteousness of Christ though is God clothing us with unconditional love. We can be naked/exposed and be loved regardless"
BINNNNNNGO!!!! :bgdance: :bgdance:
Quote from: WhiteWings on August 26, 2008, 06:19:53 PM
Roy,
Do you agree Jesus loved many that surrounded Him?
They where as rotten as you are.
Was Jesus wrong in loving them?
So if Jesus loves it, its likely ok to love it...
Dear WhiteWings
I agree Jesus loved all the multitude that surrounded Him and I agree that they were all not just rotten but dung like me, but you forgot to mention does that include you or not? Maybe you're special, I should have thought of that, I'm sorry, please forgive me.
No He loved them all, as He has commanded me to love you. Whether Jesus was wrong to love them or not is up to Jesus, I be thinking, you'd best ask Him seeing you're so righteous. He really loved self-righteous people, Pharisees especially!
Peace brother, I love :boyheart: :boyheart: :boyheart: :boyheart: :boyheart: :boyheart:you.(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif)[/url
(http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy
Quote from: Nathan on August 26, 2008, 08:49:50 PM
BINNNNNNGO!!!! :bgdance: :bgdance:
Nice post Laren.. :icon_flower:
and Nathan, less of the jigging..a man your age :laughing7:..youll do ya self an injury :laughing7:
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 26, 2008, 08:21:58 PM
Quote from: Nathan on August 26, 2008, 06:12:19 PM
Isn't it a bit difficult to love others if you can't even love yourself? It's got nothing to do with loving worldly things, it's simply applying the same grace to your own shortcomings as God does. If his image is in you, and if you're to see others as he sees them, being blind to the failures of sin and others is what it's all about.
If I love others and can't stand myself . . .it that not hypocracy?
What is your description of false humility?
Hi! Brother Nathan
I didn't say I hated myself, now did I? I didn't love the person I was, I love Him within me more than my life itself and I love my neighbour (you brother) more than myself, the "I" comes last. Yes, I grant you my old self was a hypocrite because, if the truth be known, my love for you (my neighbour) wouldn't have stood an earthly chance if challenged by the lures of the world, greed. God of course wouldn't have entered the equation. But now it's different, I have at last found my First Love "But I have this against you, that you have left your first love." (Rev.2:4).
Having found Him I have also found myself, I have consumed Him and He has consumed me, now I live for Him and not myself, there is no hypocrisy in it now. The "I" no longer exists it is He that controls everything, the Captain of this humble ship. A big ocean and me in a small ship needs a Captain such as the Lord. This, then is my description of true humility, does it answer your description of it as a false humility? Or is it your humility that's in doubt?
Peace!(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif)[/url
Roy UK
(http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Mind if I expound on your passage you quoted there? Kind of keep it in the context . . .
2 "I know all the things you do. I have seen your hard work and your patient endurance. I know you don't tolerate evil people. You have examined the claims of those who say they are apostles but are not. You have discovered they are liars. 3 You have patiently suffered for me without quitting.
4 "But I have this complaint against you. You don't love me or each other as you did at first! 5 Look how far you have fallen! Turn back to me and do the works you did at first. If you don't repent, I will come and remove your lampstand from its place among the churchesThe part that jumped out at me here was the fact that the didn't tolerate evil people. We're talking on this thread about loving yourself . .or not . . and here, these guys wouldn't tolerate evil people and they were bent on proving others to be false in their appearances (sounds kind of familiar . .) This on the surface, sounds like a pretty busy church pursuing Christ . .but if that's true, then why did he find that they'd lost their first love? They don't love Christ as much as they once did . . .can you see why? Because they enjoyed proving others wrong more than they did loving Christ. And they were good at it . .. they proved them . .it wasn't just an attempt to prove people wrong . . .they really proved them to be wrong . .but where did it get them?
Back to Romans 3 . . .law is the knowledge of sin, but the righteousness of God is made manifest, it becomes visible . . .without the law . . .when we ignore the sin.
Quote from: Molly on August 26, 2008, 04:02:42 PM
Quote from: laren on August 26, 2008, 03:39:06 PM
Mat 19:19 Honor thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.
As long as a world of evil "out there" is your focus and perception; it continues to be a reflection of your "inner man" you have not yet embraced and loved.
The "world out there" is "in you". Learn to love yourself, and the world changes.
Love thy neighbor as thyself.
Yes--so I want to ask (not you, Laren, but in general)--what is it about that simple command from *God* that you Christians don't understand?
The world won't change until what is in me is in the world.
Hi! Molly
Your quote: "what is it about that simple command from *God* that you Christians don't understand?" I don't understand what you mean by that statement. Who are you referring to as Christians? I and I assume most on this forum were once in the established Babylonian Churches and have now come out of them and their false gospel, freewill, Trinity and eternal hell fire beliefs, so if they are the Christians you are referring to please exclude me.
Call me what you will but not one of them.
Regarding the "As long as a world of evil "out there" is your focus and perception; it continues to be a reflection of your "inner man" you have not yet embraced and loved.
The "world out there" is "in you". Learn to love yourself, and the world changes.
I don't see the connection. We are all aware of the evil out there it cannot be avoided, it's all over, but who on earth is making it an object of one's focus, have I given that impression? As far as the world out there being in me, it most certainly isn't. It's Christ that is in me and the two don't mix. I love Christ more than myself (and you brother and sister) and that has indeed changed me beyond my wildest dreams. I leave you with your own advice you love yourself and I'll love the Lord. How's that, we'll both be happy?
As for this: "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself". It's a command from God and we have to obey it if we profess to love Him. It's as simple as that.
" 'You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.' This is the great and foremost commandment. The second is like it, 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets." (Matt.22:37-40). I thought this was basic knowledge; "If someone says, "I love God," and hates his brother, he is a liar; for the one who does not love his brother whom he has seen, cannot love God whom he has not seen. And this commandment we have from Him, that the one who loves God should love his brother also." (1Jn.4:20-21).
Peace! :IloveU: :IloveU: :IloveU: :IloveU:
Roy UK.
Quote from: Nathan on August 26, 2008, 04:41:52 PM
So they are dead for over 2000 years, Adam and Eve are dead for much, much longer but we are still very much alive, so what use is all that tripe in the Bible to us let's throw the lot out the window. Is that what you're saying? 'Tis true we can't see the spiritual, you've just thrown it out the window, now no one can see it whether dead or alive. Good going
You're not the first to receive it in this light. I never said the Bible is no longer of any use to us. I'm saying . ..say when Paul instructed the women of the church to be silent and let the men receive from the Pastor and then take it home to the wives and let the wives receive the seed from the husbands . . . .do you think that we're to take "that" literally? No, it was for THAT church setting . . .THAT group of people in THAT day. The spirit breathes on his Word . .including the Bible, there's no doubt about that and I'm not trying to take your Bible away.
What I'm trying to do is identify with you that there is a reason for this call to come out of the church. It's not so that we can become independant in our own thinking . . but it's to call us to a higher understanding . . .a deeper relationship that organized churches have shot themselves in the foot with because they've drawn out boundaries in their beliefs, not allowing them to see a new anything. So, the church programs can turn people into cattle and the day of farm labor is over . . . it went out with the end of the 6th day.
There's more to this . .to me . .than just quitting church. It's not about what you're leaving, it's about "why" did God call you out? He never takes anything from you unless he's got something better waiting. So . . .which is it? Am I supposed to make sure no women teach? No women are allowed to preach? Only men can be anointed by God when it comes to ministering to adults?
I don't want to "assume" your answers . . . I get accused of bad things already . . . but in my experience, I have not come across one person that feels that this passage of Scripture pertains to me. So what then? Do we just throw it out? Was it not also inspired by God? And this is just my point in all of this. We'll say "no, that part was just for them, the church they had was brand-new and they didn't have any established way of handling things then so Paul had to teach them how to conduct themselves."
So IF that part isn't supposed to be applied literally . . .then where does it end? Are we to leave it up to ourselves as to what verse is taken literally and what verse isn't? And I believe that's just what we "have" done . . .which is another reason why there are so many different denominations. Everybody has their own version of how to apply it literally. So . . .it occurred to me one day . . .what if NONE of it is to be taken literally . .like . . .in the same manner they received it when it was written to them.
Now, people are telling me I'm saying you should throw the Bible out and beings those people are all dead, the Bible is dead as well . . . come on . .think about your accusations. I'm a pastor for pitty sake . . .I preach out of the Bible EVERY Sunday . .so why would I then say it's useless? I'm not saying that at all. I'm not even saying that by applying it literally to your own life, that it's not effective . . .what I "am" saying is . . .there's so much MORE to it than just what's on the surface.
So, if I'm not to apply that passage about women being silent literally . . .how "do" I apply it? Ha! So glad you asked :cloud9: You apply it "spiritually" (big surprise!) What is the spiritual picture with that passage? Well, the man is your spirit, the woman is your mind . . .the woman is to remain silent so the spirit can receive the Word of Truth and then, as the mind is in submission to the spirit . . .the original order of our Genesis, Truth can then be birthed into our understanding . . .my mind is my womb.
So I quit picking what is and what isn't to be applied literally, and I've chosen to pursue all of it on the same plain . . .spiritually. And from there, other things begin to manifest. Jesus said his words are "spirit". Nothing of what he stated was intended to be taken literally. The disciples took him literally . . .they still thought that he was literally going to be King of Israel. Well, if the Word was the beginning . . .the Word was with God . . .and the word WAS/IS God. . .then if we weren't to take Jesus words literally, why are we embracing the written word literally?
Again, I am not saying there is absolutely no room for literal understanding . . .I'm saying that the literal piece is just a stepping stone to lead you into the spiritual piece. When I walk in the spirit, I see it's not about being right or wrong . . .I see that this kind of thinking is connected to the tree of knowledge of "good" and "evil". Living in that tree, one always must define black from white, up from down, left from right . . .in the tree of life . . . both in balance are "good." Both "bring" balance, which is . ."Good."
Dear Brother Nathan
I find your reply of 26/08/08 very interesting indeed and would like to read it carefully and reply. Please forgive my foolish attempt at sarcasm it was out of order and your response has truly humbled me. It is getting very late here and I'm pretty tired so I'll rest it till tomorrow if God so wills.
Thank you and I'll be back God willing.
Peace! (http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/117/117193tdajxe3wh8.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK.
Sleep well Roy....
must be getting a little dark in the evenings in Lancs this time of yr... :icon_flower:
Quote from: laren on August 26, 2008, 08:40:01 PM
The righteousness of Christ though is God clothing us with unconditional love. We can be naked/exposed and be loved regardless"
Isn't that what intimacy is?
..then shall I know fully, even as I am fully known. (1 Cor 13)
Quote from: Molly on August 26, 2008, 06:39:28 PM
Quote from: Nathan on August 26, 2008, 06:12:19 PM
Isn't it a bit difficult to love others if you can't even love yourself? It's got nothing to do with loving worldly things, it's simply applying the same grace to your own shortcomings as God does. If his image is in you, and if you're to see others as he sees them, being blind to the failures of sin and others is what it's all about.
If I love others and can't stand myself . . .it that not hypocracy?
What is your description of false humility?
I think we all start out loving ourselves--it's the carnal nature of man--flesh doesn't want to die--flesh loves itself.
Self love is normally called self interest. The question is will people go against their own self interest to save another? Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. (Jn 15:13)
I loved myself first until I found someone who so eclipsed me that He became my first love...
Hi! Molly
I'm So pleased that you have seen my drift. Self sacrifice for others can only happen if Christ Dwells in you. Loving yourself is carnal and reaps the carnal rewards, envy, covetousness, greed, hate etc. But I will concede I should have said, I love myself last in line; God, neighbour then self.
I hope this clears my point up with Nathan.
Peace! :boyheart: :boyheart: :boyheart: :boyheart: :boyheart: :boyheart: :boyheart:
Roy UK
Quote from: Nathan on August 26, 2008, 06:50:39 PM
Maybe our definition of loving is what is messing this up.
How about . . .can we "accept" ourselves for who we are? Why would you hate what God
created? If I see only darkness in myself . .then how can I reflect light into others? How can I "be" light to others? "It's not I, but Christ in me . . ." Yeah, I get that, but it involves "you".
I think if God went so far as to release his son into this earth to bring me life . . . I must be pretty special.
Without Christ . . .I am nothing . . .
Are you then saying you are without Christ? You are far from nothing, you are kings and priests, God delights in you. He's loved you before you even were aware of him. Forget loving the world . . .you are not the world. You are a spirit, you are not flesh. You're flesh is simply a temporary dwelling place . . . your identity is Christ . .to love yourself . .is to love Christ.
The Bible says to love your neighbor as yourself . . . again . . .how can you love someone else if you first don't love yourself. Who told you, that you were naked? You've not been listening to the voice of Truth. Truth says you are righteous. Why would you not love righteousness? I do love me. I'm finding a few more aches as the days go by, but I figure if God loves me, then there must be "some" worth there.
I'm again surprised. God is love . . .love is God. God is in me, love is in me. Love loves me . .I love me.
Hi! Nathan
I probably worded it wrong. What I mean is, in the love stakes I put myself last; My new found Love God first, next my neighbour (you my brother and Molly) then last but not least myself. The light within me, is not me, it is Christ my new found love within me that shines.
So there is no hypocrisy and no darkness except for the remaining elements of the carnal which each and everyone of us is struggling to rid ourselves of. A long and tedious task but with the help of Him within is possible.
I'm saying the direct opposite to you; I'm not saying I'm without Christ, I'm saying Christ is within me. How can I be without Him if He is within?
Your quote: I'm again surprised. God is love . . .love is God. God is in me, love is in me. Love loves me . .
I love me. No brother "Love loves me" the realization of that truth is more than enough for me, I don't need to love myself. You're not listening brother, I've never said I loved the world, I hate it with all its corruption. You're right in sating I'm not in the world now, I agree with you there.
But I appreciate your line of thought and can see what your point is, but not for me. Christ is ALL. If you love me and I love you that is enough for me. When I start loving myself then I'm in the carnal realm and standing on dangerous ground. "He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me; and he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me.
He who has found his life will lose it, and he who has l
ost his life for My sake
will find it.(Matt.10:37-39).
(http://dl8.glitter-graphics.net/pub/625/625568k4a6ika3dj.jpg) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Peace!
Roy UK
PS: Please brother don't be offended as none is intended, but please capitalize pronouns when they refer to Almighty God. In all humility I ask just as a mark of respect.
OK Roy.
My trains a rollin , (http://soleilimg1.free.fr/gifs/locomotion/trains/train002.gif)The real Smilie King is back Im Town Bro,Time to flex my smilie Muscles(http://soleilimg1.free.fr/gifs/personnages/perso3d/3d050.gif)Your riegn is over my Brit Bro,,,time to move over(http://soleilimg1.free.fr/gifs/personnages/perso3d/3d257.gif)and I mean Business man!(http://soleilimg1.free.fr/gifs/personnages/perso3d/3d245.gif)the Boys in Blue are out for you too,your finished man(http://soleilimg1.free.fr/gifs/personnages/perso3d/3d242.gif)and if they dont get ya...ive a few friends of me own(http://soleilimg1.free.fr/gifs/personnages/perso3d/3d222.gif)so take this taxi while ya can and git out me town(http://soleilimg1.free.fr/gifs/locomotion/voitures/voitu047.gif)
Quote from: laren on August 26, 2008, 07:03:08 PM
Love your enemies.
How, do yu love your enemies if there is only evil in him? Is there Christ in the enemy to love??
So how do you love your enemies, if Christ isn't in them??
or is the mystery revealed, Christ is in all of us?
Many just don't see it when there perceptions are on "the good branch", or "bad branch" of the tree where no life is revealed.
Know no man after the flesh?? why and how??
Hi! Laren
Did our Lord Jesus Christ give His life only for the righteous or for all mankind, even for the worst of sinners Paul?
Indeed Christ came not save the righteous but the sinner. "Father forgive them for they know not what they do!" That was His last prayer before dying for all humanity, even enemies who knew Him not.
"Father, forgive them; for they do not know what they are doing." (Mark 23:34)
Peace! (http://dl4.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1176/1176424t4nufen6go.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 26, 2008, 08:51:45 PM
Quote from: WhiteWings on August 26, 2008, 06:19:53 PM
Roy,
Do you agree Jesus loved many that surrounded Him?
They where as rotten as you are.
Was Jesus wrong in loving them?
So if Jesus loves it, its likely ok to love it...
Dear WhiteWings
I agree Jesus loved all the multitude that surrounded Him and I agree that they were all not just rotten but dung like me, but you forgot to mention does that include you or not? Maybe you're special, I should have thought of that, I'm sorry, please forgive me.
No He loved them all, as He has commanded me to love you. Whether Jesus was wrong to love them or not is up to Jesus, I be thinking, you'd best ask Him seeing you're so righteous. He really loved self-righteous people, Pharisees especially!
Peace brother, I love :boyheart: :boyheart: :boyheart: :boyheart: :boyheart: :boyheart:you.(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif)[/url
(http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy
I think there is some sort of misunderstanding here.
From your pov you shouldn't love yourself.
Now suppose you have lived during the time of Jesus.
Jesus: He Roy, I love you!
Roy: You are wrong Jesus.
Jesus: Why.
Roy: Well because I don't love myself you would be stupid to do so.
So what I mean is; if Jesus tells you are good enough to be loved why ignore his advice by saying are to rotten to love yourself.
Bit more clear now? :bgdance:
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 27, 2008, 03:29:35 PM
Quote from: laren on August 26, 2008, 07:03:08 PM
Love your enemies.
How, do yu love your enemies if there is only evil in him? Is there Christ in the enemy to love??
So how do you love your enemies, if Christ isn't in them??
or is the mystery revealed, Christ is in all of us?
Many just don't see it when there perceptions are on "the good branch", or "bad branch" of the tree where no life is revealed.
Know no man after the flesh?? why and how??
Hi! Laren
Did our Lord Jesus Christ give His life only for the righteous or for all mankind, even for the worst of sinners Paul?
Indeed Christ came not save the righteous but the sinner. "Father forgive them for they know not what they do!" That was His last prayer before dying for all humanity, even enemies who knew Him not. "Father, forgive them; for they do not know what they are doing." (Mark 23:34)
Peace! (http://dl4.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1176/1176424t4nufen6go.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Hi Roy,
here's my thoughts about what u said earlier and has me thinking. You said you don't love yourself, but you love Christ in you.
So how do you love your enemy, if there is no Christ in them?
Actually, I saw above where you said you love yourself last in line. This whole thinking puts limitations on love. Love God more, others a little less, and me even less??
does love, love in degrees??
Quote from: Molly on August 26, 2008, 07:06:22 PM
The mystery has been revealed to the Gentiles, but even if you don't know that, you know the simple command which can be acted on in obedience by the smallest child--
Love your enemies.
Love is first and foremost--an action.
Well said Molly
"If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but do not have love, I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy, and know all mysteries and all knowledge; and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. And if I give all my possessions to feed the poor, and if I surrender my body to be burned, but do not have love, it profits me nothing. Love is patient, love is kind and is not jealous; love does not brag and is not arrogant, does not act unbecomingly; it does not seek its own, is not provoked, does not take into account a wrong suffered, does not rejoice in unrighteousness, but rejoices with the truth; bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Love never fails; but if there are gifts of prophecy, they will be done away; if there are tongues, they will cease; if there is knowledge, it will be done away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part; but when the perfect comes, the partial will be done away.
When I was a child, I used to speak like a child, think like a child, reason like a child; when I became a man, I did away with childish things. For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face; now I know in part, but then I will know fully just as I also have been fully known. But now
faith, hope, love, abide these three; but the
greatest of these is love. (1Cor.13).
(http://dl8.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1247/1247598g8oyd7jln8.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Peace!
Roy UK
Quote from: CHB on August 26, 2008, 08:07:07 PM
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 26, 2008, 04:26:19 PM
Quote from: CHB on August 25, 2008, 08:14:45 PM
Quote from: Nathan
I will agree, there is a created Christ . . .it's one that my head has formulated. And there is a born of God Christ . .it's one that my heart has imulated. Now, which one we choose to follow is up to us.
I choose both because they are one and the same.
(Col. 1:15) "Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature".
If Christ is the firstborn of every creature that means he was created.
(Col 1:18) And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning
Christ was the beginning of the creation.
(Rev. 3:14) These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God.
CHB
Hi! CHB
You have quoted incorrectly, brother. Your quote: (Col. 1:15) "Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature".
Where does it say that, I don't see it in any of the three Bibles I can afford, the Interlinear Hebrew/English/Greek, the KJV or the NASV. The correct translation is: "He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation." (1Col.1:15). Now look up the meaning of firstborn in the centre column and it will take you to 2Cor.4:4 which tells you that the firstborn is the Image of the glory of Christ not the first created image of the creature.
Peace!(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Hi Roy,
In my KJV it is worded exactly like I said it was. In the YLT it says "firstborn of all creation".
I noticed you didn't say anything about the other verses I gave.
If Christ was the beginning and he said he was, then He had to have been the first thing that was created.
The "beginning" is the first person or thing in a series.
CHB
No CHB
No, brother. The Beginning is a noun meaning, the Beginner, the Creator. For a start notice the "B" in upper case, now along side of the beginning you see a small letter or figure referring you to the centre column reference where you'll be referred to (Col.1:15). Here you are told that He is the image of the invisible God, the
firstborn of all creation, and not the firstcreated being, a mere creature.
Does that help brother, antichrist turns and twists words and phrases to suit his purpose that's why we are so sternly warned to beware of him. "For
false Christs and
false prophets will arise and will show great signs and wonders, so as to mislead, if possible, even the elect. Behold, I have told you in advance." (Matt.24:24-25). False teachers are false prophets.
(http://dl6.glitter-graphics.net/pub/410/410766aea22387hc.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Peace!
Roy UK.
Quote from: Taffy on August 26, 2008, 08:09:32 PM
Quote from: Molly on August 26, 2008, 08:00:07 PM
Let me put this another way--
If the 200 million Christians of the most powerful country on the planet instructed their elected officials to follow these directives of their God--Love your enemies, Love your neighbor as yourself--
or Molly ,,,IF my AUNTIE had a set of genitals, she be me Uncle..... :laughing7:
sorry couldnt resist :icon_flower:
Hi! Taffy
That was naughty, say sorry! :icon_jokercolor: :icon_joker: :icon_jokercolor: :icon_joker: :icon_jokercolor: :icon_joker: :icon_joker: :icon_jokercolor: :icon_jokercolor: :happy3:
(http://dl.glitter-graphics.net/pub/270/270601mreat66odd.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Peace!
Roy
I agree Roy,
Let us say Jesus is not the Son of God, but just a man (Not that I am not stating that, just removing this proposition for a moment).
God would also be the Beginning and the End. Yet, God has no beginning or end, so how can that be? Being that all things begin with Him and all things end with Him, He is the Beginning and the End. Just as you stated, it is a misunderstanding of the language they are speaking. It is a philosophical point of the reality He created, not the a characteristic of his nature. As Paul said concerning the Greeks as their poets said, "In Him we live and move and have our being." Everything begins with Him and everthing ends with Him, He is creations Beginning and End.
Now return Jesus to being the Son of God, all things begin with Him and all things end with Him, He is God made manifest in the flesh, not created but formed like Woman was taken from Adam and later named Eve, The Word was taken from God and later named Jesus. A difficult concept for people to understand that Jesus literally is God as much as he was a man.
Quote from: Roy Monis
No, brother. The Beginning is a noun meaning, the Beginner, the Creator. For a start notice the "B" in upper case, now along side of the beginning you see a small letter or figure referring you to the centre column reference where you'll be referred to (Col.1:15). Here you are told that He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation, and not the firstcreated being, a mere creature.
Does that help brother, antichrist turns and twists words and phrases to suit his purpose that's why we are so sternly warned to beware of him. "For false Christs and false prophets will arise and will show great signs and wonders, so as to mislead, if possible, even the elect. Behold, I have told you in advance." (Matt.24:24-25). False teachers are false prophets.
So, you admit that Jesus was the
firstborn? That makes Jesus the
firstborn of all living and the firstborn of all the dead. Do you agree with this? If so, that makes Jesus the beginning, or Beginning, doesn't matter, he was
first.CHB
Quote from: LarenSo how do you love your enemy, if there is no Christ in them?
Love is an action. Watch a mother with a sick child. Does she just sit there and exude some mysterious emotion called love? No, she works hard to get the child well--whatever it takes, 24 hours a day if that's what it takes.
It's a motivator. It motivates us to walk the extra mile (another command).
It is motion. It causes us to do the right thing, not because of what another is, but because of what we are.
It first does no harm--the oath that all doctors take. Even if you do nothing else, do no harm.
You don't have to know anything about the other person to carry out these directives.
We even see it present itself in wars, institutionalized in laws--the Geneva convention, the Constitution--no cruel and unusual punishment, no torture, no locking somebody up without counsel, without habeas corpus, and throwing away the key. I don't love those prisoners we see in the news in any romantic or emotional or personal sense but when I see what was done to them my skin crawls and I want to throw up. Waterboarding goes back to the Inquisition!
Without love, we will slip back into the dark ages.
Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of many will grow cold...--Mat 24
Quote from: Molly on August 26, 2008, 08:14:24 PM
well, I can hope--because that's what it's going to take.
What is it about 'Love your enemies' you don't understand, Christians?
Is that a difficult sentence? Are you all braindead?
This is the danger of the antichrist who leads the sheep astray, to scatter and devour them.
Hi! Molly
Heaven forbid. If the West were to throw up their arms like that, in no time Allah would be in control not God. Allah is waiting patiently for an opportunity to pounce, 9/11 was just the prelude. I know it's not God's way but it's the only way man can see to keep the dogs at bay.
Surely you can see that? I know Israel did that and sought help from Egypt instead of relying on God. But..But...But...I don't have an answer for that other than;
(http://dl2.glitter-graphics.net/pub/419/419062tg71km3kmb.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Peace!
Roy UK
Quote from: WhiteWings on August 26, 2008, 08:15:26 PM
Quote from: Molly on August 26, 2008, 08:00:07 PM
Let me put this another way--
If the 200 million Christians of the most powerful country on the planet instructed their elected officials to follow these directives of their God--Love your enemies, Love your neighbor as yourself--
How would the world change overnight?'
Surely the world would change. The USA would be a 3rd world country in a very short time.
Just look what and who supports your economy.
Yes it's very sad. But I fear it's even more true.
Hi! WhitWings
Not just the USA brother the whole beastly world including Islam under those nuts, harder and crazier than the walnut.
(http://dl6.glitter-graphics.net/pub/110/110026qsida0z6wg.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Peace!
Roy UK
Quote from: Molly on August 26, 2008, 07:02:50 PM
Yes, Nathan--I agree--but first, like Adam and Eve, we must see ourselves as naked, before we can see Him, the one who would cloth us in righteousness.
Molly love!
The Lord would have to be pretty sharp because I look ghastly naked, I hope the spiritual is a lot better.
Now give us a smile! :gangel: :gangel: :gangel: :gangel: :gangel: :gangel: :gangel: :gangel: :gangel:
Peace!
Roy UK
He Ha ..Just a Little light hearted banter Roy
(http://soleilimg1.free.fr/gifs/personnages/divers/diver114.gif) :laughing7:
[quote
PS: Please brother don't be offended as none is intended, but please capitalize pronouns when they refer to Almighty God. In all humility I ask just as a mark of respect.
[/quote]
Um . . .all due respect Roy, I don't mean to offend you either, but I elect to decline your proposal. The reason is not to be rebellious against you or God, but to make a point. It's the very thing we have been talking about on many different topics. We claim we are free from the laws of man and we are not confined to the standards of other people in their views of God . . .and in the same breath, I'm asked to capitalize my pronouns whenever I'm refering to God? Isn't that kind of the opposite of living free from the law?
I meant no disrespect in what ever words you saw that I didn't capitalize and I mean no disrespect by not coming under your advisement. But if we're free "in" Christ, to me, that would include "having" to capitlize pronouns, right along with having to wear a suit in church, having to wear a tie, having to not do this, or have to do that . . . Personally, I wear bluejeans every Sunday . .mainly because that's my personality . .I'm a blue-collar follower of Christ. Anymore, the only times I break out the suits is for weddings or funerals . . .and there've been a couple weddings where I didn't even do "that". :icon_king:
Quote from: laren on August 26, 2008, 08:35:46 PM
how do we love our enemy if we are not to love the things of the world??
Hi! Laren
You love your brother, my friend. Your so-called enemy is also your brother and you must love your brother whether he is in or out of the world. That's how.!
Peace!
Roy UKurl=h[ttp://www.glitter-graphics.com](http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/681/681483u7y91w3fyi.gif)[/url]
Quote from: Nathan on August 27, 2008, 05:51:02 PM
Um . . .all due respect Roy, I don't mean to offend you either, but I elect to decline your proposal. The reason is not to be rebellious against you or God, but to make a point. It's the very thing we have been talking about on many different topics. We claim we are free from the laws of man and we are not confined to the standards of other people in their views of God . . .and in the same breath, I'm asked to capitalize my pronouns whenever I'm refering to God? Isn't that kind of the opposite of living free from the law?
I meant no disrespect in what ever words you saw that I didn't capitalize and I mean no disrespect by not coming under your advisement. But if we're free "in" Christ, to me, that would include "having" to capitlize pronouns, right along with having to wear a suit in church, having to wear a tie, having to not do this, or have to do that . . . Personally, I wear bluejeans every Sunday . .mainly because that's my personality . .I'm a blue-collar follower of Christ. Anymore, the only times I break out the suits is for weddings or funerals . . .and there've been a couple weddings where I didn't even do "that". :icon_king:
AMEN.
I have a friend who told me she was offended if someone referred to God as "daddy" or "dad". I think it is so easy to project human perception onto God, as if God's view of us changed based on what we do.
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 27, 2008, 06:08:35 PM
Quote from: laren on August 26, 2008, 08:35:46 PM
how do we love our enemy if we are not to love the things of the world??
Hi! Laren
You love your brother, my friend. Your so-called enemy is also your brother and you must love your brother whether he is in or out of the world. That's how.!
Peace!
Roy UKurl=h[ttp://www.glitter-graphics.com](http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/681/681483u7y91w3fyi.gif)[/url]
If someone approached you and offered you a beer, or wine, or mixed drink . . .would you take it? Or would you explain to them nicely that it's an abomination against God to defile your body with such things?
Quote from: Nathan on August 27, 2008, 06:49:59 PM
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 27, 2008, 06:08:35 PM
Quote from: laren on August 26, 2008, 08:35:46 PM
how do we love our enemy if we are not to love the things of the world??
Hi! Laren
You love your brother, my friend. Your so-called enemy is also your brother and you must love your brother whether he is in or out of the world. That's how.!
Peace!
Roy UKurl=h[ttp://www.glitter-graphics.com](http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/681/681483u7y91w3fyi.gif)[/url]
If someone approached you and offered you a beer, or wine, or mixed drink . . .would you take it? Or would you explain to them nicely that it's an abomination against God to defile your body with such things?
i'd take it and ask for another one. :grin: :grin:
Quote from: laren on August 27, 2008, 06:51:37 PM
Quote from: Nathan on August 27, 2008, 06:49:59 PM
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 27, 2008, 06:08:35 PM
Quote from: laren on August 26, 2008, 08:35:46 PM
how do we love our enemy if we are not to love the things of the world??
Hi! Laren
You love your brother, my friend. Your so-called enemy is also your brother and you must love your brother whether he is in or out of the world. That's how.!
Peace!
Roy UKurl=h[ttp://www.glitter-graphics.com](http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/681/681483u7y91w3fyi.gif)[/url]
If someone approached you and offered you a beer, or wine, or mixed drink . . .would you take it? Or would you explain to them nicely that it's an abomination against God to defile your body with such things?
i'd take it and ask for another one. :grin: :grin:
I would politely reject it, and ask if they had spiced rum and diet coke instead. I get migraines from beer.
Quote from: SOtW on August 27, 2008, 07:16:54 PM
[
I would politely reject it, and ask if they had spiced rum and diet coke instead. I get migraines from beer.
it's the grain in the beer
my grain
:grin:
Quote from: Nathan on August 26, 2008, 09:00:51 PM
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 26, 2008, 08:21:58 PM
Quote from: Nathan on August 26, 2008, 06:12:19 PM
Isn't it a bit difficult to love others if you can't even love yourself? It's got nothing to do with loving worldly things, it's simply applying the same grace to your own shortcomings as God does. If his image is in you, and if you're to see others as he sees them, being blind to the failures of sin and others is what it's all about.
If I love others and can't stand myself . . .it that not hypocracy?
What is your description of false humility?
Hi! Brother Nathan
I didn't say I hated myself, now did I? I didn't love the person I was, I love Him within me more than my life itself and I love my neighbour (you brother) more than myself, the "I" comes last. Yes, I grant you my old self was a hypocrite because, if the truth be known, my love for you (my neighbour) wouldn't have stood an earthly chance if challenged by the lures of the world, greed. God of course wouldn't have entered the equation. But now it's different, I have at last found my First Love "But I have this against you, that you have left your first love." (Rev.2:4).
Having found Him I have also found myself, I have consumed Him and He has consumed me, now I live for Him and not myself, there is no hypocrisy in it now. The "I" no longer exists it is He that controls everything, the Captain of this humble ship. A big ocean and me in a small ship needs a Captain such as the Lord. This, then is my description of true humility, does it answer your description of it as a false humility? Or is it your humility that's in doubt?
Peace!(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif)[/url
Roy UK
(http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Mind if I expound on your passage you quoted there? Kind of keep it in the context . . .
2 "I know all the things you do. I have seen your hard work and your patient endurance. I know you don't tolerate evil people. You have examined the claims of those who say they are apostles but are not. You have discovered they are liars. 3 You have patiently suffered for me without quitting.
4 "But I have this complaint against you. You don't love me or each other as you did at first! 5 Look how far you have fallen! Turn back to me and do the works you did at first. If you don't repent, I will come and remove your lampstand from its place among the churches
The part that jumped out at me here was the fact that the didn't tolerate evil people. We're talking on this thread about loving yourself . .or not . . and here, these guys wouldn't tolerate evil people and they were bent on proving others to be false in their appearances (sounds kind of familiar . .) This on the surface, sounds like a pretty busy church pursuing Christ . .but if that's true, then why did he find that they'd lost their first love? They don't love Christ as much as they once did . . .can you see why? Because they enjoyed proving others wrong more than they did loving Christ. And they were good at it . .. they proved them . .it wasn't just an attempt to prove people wrong . . .they really proved them to be wrong . .but where did it get them?
Back to Romans 3 . . .law is the knowledge of sin, but the righteousness of God is made manifest, it becomes visible . . .without the law . . .when we ignore the sin.
Hi! Nathan
Your quote : 4 "But I have this complaint against you. You don't love me or each other as you did at first! 5 Look how far you have fallen! Turn back to me and do the works you did at first.
Which Bible did you get this from, brother? I can only afford three; KJV; NASV; Interlinear Hebrew/Greek/English and a Strong's Concordance, and none of them translate it as you have done above. This is how it appears in them all; "'But I have this against you, that
you have left your first love. Therefore remember
from where you have fallen, and
repent and do the deeds you did at first; or else I am coming to you and will remove your lampstand out of its place—unless you repent." (Rev.2:4-5).
That to my understanding is very plain: I have l
eft my First Love which is God nothing about neighbour or self there.
Remember from
where you have fallen and repent and do the
deeds you did before. I read that to mean I have
fallen from grace. Do the deeds you did before, so what were the deeds I did before? I read this to mean to
Love God and my neighbour which is the commandment I have had fallen away from. Nothing there about loving myself.
I can't see any reference to toleration of evil people in it, and as far as enjoying seeing the wrong in other people I can't see that in it either, well, not in the three Bibles at my disposal.
I fail to see what you are driving at? Sounds kind of familiar, what sounds kind of familiar?
Maybe you're above my head, could you try and make it a bit, no not bit but a lot simpler?
Peace! :egyptdance: :ilu: :Egyptdance2: :boogie: :egyptdance: :Egyptdance2: :boogie: :ilu:
Roy UK
..you have left your first love.
Isn't that what Adam did?
Where are you? (Gen 3)
Roy, are you aware of the passage that speaks about those being in outer darkness and they argued "but we cast out demons in your name . .we prophesied in your name . . ." on and on but the response simply was "depart from me I never knew you . . ." The church in Revelation . .to me . . .is this same group. Their identity was more in their ministry to remove tares than to plant wheat.
To look at it the traditional way . . .what you're saying then is . .no matter how good you are, Jesus will always find something wrong with you . . .I just don't see that way anymore. I think Jesus was leading up to the fact that they lost their first love, by identifying what they gave that first love up for . . .it was their works . . their concern to prove that everyone else was false and they were right. We've said all along, for those who walk in the spirit . . .it's not about right or wrong . . .its about being as One.
The other comment about sounding familiar was a cheap shot on my part . . .I was not in the best of moods yesterday, I apologize for that. I need to do a better job at keeping those kinds of things in check. :sigh:
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 26, 2008, 10:22:42 PM
Quote from: Nathan on August 26, 2008, 04:41:52 PM
So they are dead for over 2000 years, Adam and Eve are dead for much, much longer but we are still very much alive, so what use is all that tripe in the Bible to us let's throw the lot out the window. Is that what you're saying? 'Tis true we can't see the spiritual, you've just thrown it out the window, now no one can see it whether dead or alive. Good going
You're not the first to receive it in this light. I never said the Bible is no longer of any use to us. I'm saying . ..say when Paul instructed the women of the church to be silent and let the men receive from the Pastor and then take it home to the wives and let the wives receive the seed from the husbands . . . .do you think that we're to take "that" literally? No, it was for THAT church setting . . .THAT group of people in THAT day. The spirit breathes on his Word . .including the Bible, there's no doubt about that and I'm not trying to take your Bible away.
What I'm trying to do is identify with you that there is a reason for this call to come out of the church. It's not so that we can become independant in our own thinking . . but it's to call us to a higher understanding . . .a deeper relationship that organized churches have shot themselves in the foot with because they've drawn out boundaries in their beliefs, not allowing them to see a new anything. So, the church programs can turn people into cattle and the day of farm labor is over . . . it went out with the end of the 6th day.
There's more to this . .to me . .than just quitting church. It's not about what you're leaving, it's about "why" did God call you out? He never takes anything from you unless he's got something better waiting. So . . .which is it? Am I supposed to make sure no women teach? No women are allowed to preach? Only men can be anointed by God when it comes to ministering to adults?
I don't want to "assume" your answers . . . I get accused of bad things already . . . but in my experience, I have not come across one person that feels that this passage of Scripture pertains to me. So what then? Do we just throw it out? Was it not also inspired by God? And this is just my point in all of this. We'll say "no, that part was just for them, the church they had was brand-new and they didn't have any established way of handling things then so Paul had to teach them how to conduct themselves."
So IF that part isn't supposed to be applied literally . . .then where does it end? Are we to leave it up to ourselves as to what verse is taken literally and what verse isn't? And I believe that's just what we "have" done . . .which is another reason why there are so many different denominations. Everybody has their own version of how to apply it literally. So . . .it occurred to me one day . . .what if NONE of it is to be taken literally . .like . . .in the same manner they received it when it was written to them.
Now, people are telling me I'm saying you should throw the Bible out and beings those people are all dead, the Bible is dead as well . . . come on . .think about your accusations. I'm a pastor for pitty sake . . .I preach out of the Bible EVERY Sunday . .so why would I then say it's useless? I'm not saying that at all. I'm not even saying that by applying it literally to your own life, that it's not effective . . .what I "am" saying is . . .there's so much MORE to it than just what's on the surface.
So, if I'm not to apply that passage about women being silent literally . . .how "do" I apply it? Ha! So glad you asked :cloud9: You apply it "spiritually" (big surprise!) What is the spiritual picture with that passage? Well, the man is your spirit, the woman is your mind . . .the woman is to remain silent so the spirit can receive the Word of Truth and then, as the mind is in submission to the spirit . . .the original order of our Genesis, Truth can then be birthed into our understanding . . .my mind is my womb.
So I quit picking what is and what isn't to be applied literally, and I've chosen to pursue all of it on the same plain . . .spiritually. And from there, other things begin to manifest. Jesus said his words are "spirit". Nothing of what he stated was intended to be taken literally. The disciples took him literally . . .they still thought that he was literally going to be King of Israel. Well, if the Word was the beginning . . .the Word was with God . . .and the word WAS/IS God. . .then if we weren't to take Jesus words literally, why are we embracing the written word literally?
Again, I am not saying there is absolutely no room for literal understanding . . .I'm saying that the literal piece is just a stepping stone to lead you into the spiritual piece. When I walk in the spirit, I see it's not about being right or wrong . . .I see that this kind of thinking is connected to the tree of knowledge of "good" and "evil". Living in that tree, one always must define black from white, up from down, left from right . . .in the tree of life . . . both in balance are "good." Both "bring" balance, which is . ."Good."
Dear Brother Nathan
I find your reply of 26/08/08 very interesting indeed and would like to read it carefully and reply. Please forgive my foolish attempt at sarcasm it was out of order and your response has truly humbled me. It is getting very late here and I'm pretty tired so I'll rest it till tomorrow if God so wills.
Thank you and I'll be back God willing.
Peace! (http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/117/117193tdajxe3wh8.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK.
Hi! Nathan
Allow me first and foremost to congratulate you on your brave move and stance for the True Gospel of Jesus Christ - Salvation For All Mankind. It is hard enough for the ordinary lay person like myself to break away from tradition and years of indoctrination in the Babylonian culture, to answer the call to "I heard another voice from heaven, saying, "Come out of her, my people, so that you will not participate in her sins and receive of her plagues; for her sins have piled up as high as heaven, and God has remembered her iniquities." (Rev.18:4-5), but for someone like you a pastor it must have been truly very difficult indeed. You're a very brave man if I may say so without inflating your ego.
I am very interested in what you have to say here and would like very much to go into it in depth with you but first i must ascertain that we are on the same wavelength and have the same beliefs. If you have no objection to a bit of a quiz please give me your views on;
1).....Do you believe that Jesus Christ is the only Begotten Son born of the Father or do you
believe that He is a mere created being, a creature? I'm talking about Christ/Son of God.
2)......Have you got proof that Elohim is plural for the Father/God?
3)......Do you believe that the Father is Sovereign and that man has no free-will as such
without a causation.
Brother you could be the answer to my prayer. I look forward to you response. You can PM me if you so wish.
Peace! (http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
#1 . . .yes. I've never seen him as a creation of God . . . and at the same time, I've never seen the purpose to articulate as much between the two as I've seen you do. It's obviously a passion of yours and I do respect that. For me, there is a created image of Christ that pretty much everyone has been a part of at one time or another. But I'm also VERY much aware in my own experience that Truth and interpretation of truth are usually lightyears apart. So, in my eyes, there is the begotten Son, and there are interpretations of the Son. I think it's the same language as you, you call it a created Christ, I call it an interpretation of Christ . . . the end results are the same. I "think" that's where you're coming from with that.
#2 . . .as far as I understand . . .yes. From what I understand, Elohim is a plural Hebrew word from what the dictionaries and Strongs suggest . . . it's plural. Now, do I believe that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are three separate entities? No. Just as my body, soul and spirit make up who "I" am, I see the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are the three components that make up "Love". So . ..whether "Elohim" is or isn't plural, again, it's not a huge factor to me as Jesus made it about as plain as you can get . .he and the Father are One.
#3 . . . yes. I do fully believe God is sovreign. There is only one God, one Lord, one Light. As to the free will of man . . .ugh!
I believe God has put his order "in" man, and it's man's decision as to whether or not he wishes to walk in that order, or walk in his own.
I believe Adam's purpose was to do what he did, so that Christ could manifest on the earth, as he is in heaven. And as we are all born of the first Adam, we also are in need of redemption. Acknowledging the cross now . . .to me . . .is activating all that I am into this realm now. Rejecting the cross, leaves the freedom from the power of sin in a state of dormancy. I do have a choice . . .keeping in mind that none can come to the cross by their own choice alone, they must first be called.
See, that one's not a fair question . . .there's so much more to it than just a yes or no. I believe you have the freedom to choose . .to make decisions, to do what you will.
I also believe that you do not have a choice as to where you end up in the end.
If I choose Christ willingly, then that changes everything. Because "then" Christ is working in me, both to will, and to do his good pleasure. He changes my "want to" so that I don't "want" to do whatever my flesh desires . .This is when God begins his work in setting the stage in my life experiences to get me into his will . . .it's because I've already invited him in to be Lord of my life . .I gave him permission to set me up unknowningly. Before I asked him in my heart, he was just a hand, knocking on a door . . .but once I invited him in, that gave him permission to create, from the invisible realm, situations that would prod and nudge me into places where he want's me to be.
That's the one thing so many people over look when I preach freedom. If someone is addicted to sex . . .let them go . .don't condemn them . . .you think they don't already know it's not good? And if they do think it's good . . .then it's clearly not the time for you to plant in them anyway.
But the point is, sex is like every other "sin". It isn't as big of an evil as our minds . .our religious minds make it out to be. Am I saying that I think it's okay to sleep with whoever turns you on? No . .. I'm saying that "when" you pursue Christ and stop focusing on the flesh . .HE changes the desires within you. . . it's "his" work . .not yours/mine. See? I told you this wasn't a fair question . . .
I don't think it was God's will that Cain should kill his brother. But God didn't intervein when Cain did kill Abel. That's why I asked the question earlier about why don't we see Baptist's experiencing the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. I believe God honors our decisions, even if it means we're in for a life of bondage and hardship as a result.
But I also believe there has been a over-all plan from the beginning that no man could ever change. There is a predestined plan for every one of us. No matter if I think I'm going in the opposite direction on purpose . .it will still lead to where he wants me to be in the end. So in that sense, no, you don't have free will. And "that's" a good thing.
I was doing so good at keeping this simple . .until your last question. sigh . . .
So if a man is addicted to porn and it's ruining his marriage and thereby hurting his wife and thereby hurting his kids, and he comes to you for advice, or she comes to you for advice, your advice is to tell them to pursue Christ? You don't mention anything about right or wrong, good or bad?
Just asking..
Quote from: Molly on August 27, 2008, 11:14:16 PM
So if a man is addicted to porn and it's ruining his marriage and thereby hurting his wife and thereby hurting his kids, and he comes to you for advice, or she comes to you for advice, your advice is to tell them to pursue Christ? You don't mention anything about right or wrong, good or bad?
Just asking..
HI Molly....didnt paul say all things are permitted but not all is beneficial?
we reap what we sow Molly,..for instance, say we remarry, to some one who was once married himself....what comes with That is Baggage,..the baggage of what went before...ya get Nothing for FREE,....
so, what would one say in the scenario you mentioned...as I tell my 17 premiscouos( spelling) daughter.."""my dear, you will reap what you sow.."" and in lifes course you will learn.....life is learnt this way Molly , through experience ...
we can not learn for others...my wife and I have endeavoured from when they were young to teach ,if you will right from wrong...but heck Molly there kids
maybe you forgot you too were once an Ignorant Child..how soon we forget when we Look out wards to Others and forge twhat WE ONCE WERE ,OR MAYBE IN SOMEWAYS """"STILL ARE""""""
get off the Righteous pedastal Molly.....you may feel less stressful for it...
It may be true that one can not always learn from another--although a hallmark of the human race is precisely its ability to learn in this manner--this still doesn't mean that one should not continue to speak the truth, assuming one knows the truth.
So I'm just asking him--do you speak the truth to these people? Do you tell both the husband and wife that what he is doing--i.e. harming the family--is wrong?
Or, do you not consider behavior that is spefically prohibited in the Bible 'wrong,' just a bump in the road from which we all learn eventually, assuming we survive it?
I see fewer and fewer of these voices out there, mostly because people do not like to be attacked, as just happened to me for asking.
So a guy goes out after being told to quit looking at porn, and tries really really hard. he lasts 3 months. Wow, look at me; God must be really pleased. Then he fails, guilt, condemnation, failure. So sorry God, so sorry. Climbs back on, and on he goes until failure again.
and we call that LIFE.
the problem I see is the focus is on behavior, moving from point A to point B, and the means to it is prayer and the Holy Spirit.
rather than
the focus on relationship the prize, HIM/LIFE
Quote from: Molly on August 27, 2008, 11:47:33 PM
It may be true that one can not always learn from another--although a hallmark of the human race is precisely its ability to learn in this manner--this still doesn't mean that one should not continue to speak the truth, assuming one knows the truth.
So I'm just asking him--do you speak the truth to these people? Do you tell both the husband and wife that what he is doing--i.e. harming the family--is wrong?
Or, do you not consider behavior that is spefically prohibited in the Bible 'wrong,' just a bump in the road from which we all learn eventually, assuming we survive it?
I see fewer and fewer of these voices out there, mostly because people do not like to be attacked, as just happened to me for asking.
Molly ..oh heck to calling ya Molly...ya be just another statistic from now on... :laughing7:
Its a Fallacy , that we learn from the mistakes of made before ..track back History to the Ho chi min trail in veitnam,,those dull yanks learnt NOTHING from the FRENCH ,WHO TOO ,MADE THE SAME ERROR...thaats Just one example
Gosh ,..we have FOUR teenage Children..what do you think weve instilled in these we love for the last two decades?
we LEARN or we die...sounds harsh ,but to me in the last 47 yrs..that seems to be the case ..again Molly we reap what we sow..right now My dear wife is in anguish seeing our eldest the way she is..but she HAS to let go...all children are HIS...we just have them on lease hire....
Just accept HE knows what HES doing..even if for a season we aint got a Clue....letting Go, doesnt mean we dont CARE or wish for the best for them..who ever they are...Ya Just Got to CUT Wilson Loose...when the time Comes
Quote from: laren on August 28, 2008, 12:03:10 AM
So a guy goes out after being told to quit looking at porn, and tries really really hard. he lasts 3 months. Wow, look at me; God must be really pleased. Then he fails, guilt, condemnation, failure. So sorry God, so sorry. Climbs back on, and on he goes until failure again.
and we call that LIFE.
the problem I see is the focus is on behavior, moving from point A to point B, and the means to it is prayer and the Holy Spirit.
rather than
the focus on relationship the prize, HIM/LIFE
hey bro
I know for a FACT you speak from the heart after reading this.....I recall the Laren of old...
and AMEN to your words :icon_flower:
Quote from: laren on August 28, 2008, 12:03:10 AM
So a guy goes out after being told to quit looking at porn, and tries really really hard. he lasts 3 months. Wow, look at me; God must be really pleased. Then he fails, guilt, condemnation, failure. So sorry God, so sorry. Climbs back on, and on he goes until failure again.
and we call that LIFE.
the problem I see is the focus is on behavior, moving from point A to point B, and the means to it is prayer and the Holy Spirit.
rather than
the focus on relationship the prize, HIM/LIFE
Not exactly. I didn't say to judge them. I said to tell them what is right and what is wrong according to God. You would be amazed at what a great relief this can be, especially to the victim who might think she is losing her mind and everything she thought was right or wrong is upsidedown.
Just state the truth. Having said that, don't reward what is wrong. This is why Paul tells us to cut loose from company of those following the darkness. What communion does light have with darkness? Take a wife with a cheating husband, for instance--someone who is lying to her constantly, exposing her to disease--what advice would you give?
Taffy--you are talking about a different case--parent of teenagers. You have my deepest sympathies (four of them)!
I think you are taking the right approach since the job of teenagers is to push against their parents--sometimes, the harder you push, the harder they push back. You seem to be dealing with it very wisely, and in a moderate fashion.
But, the one I asked this question of is a pastor. And, I asked the question about adults.
Jesus himself says,
Go and sin no more.
QuoteI think you are taking the right approach since the job of teenagers is to push against their parents--sometimes, the harder you push, the harder they push back. You seem to be dealing with it very wisely, and in a moderate fashion.
But, the one I asked this question of is a pastor. And, I asked the question about adults.
all born 18 months apart..two boys and Two girls.
as the Your question is posed to Nathan then for sure let Him answer,,but sis, I too have one also,,..Nat first .
2and he taught them:
3God blesses those people
who depend only on him.
They belong to the kingdom
of heaven! 4God blesses those people
who grieve.
They will find comfort!
5God blesses those people
who are humble.
The earth will belong
to them!
6God blesses those people
who want to obey him more than to eat or drink.
They will be given
what they want!
7God blesses those people
who are merciful.
They will be treated
with mercy!
8God blesses those people
whose hearts are pure.
They will see him!
9God blesses those people
who make peace.
They will be called
his children!
10God blesses those people
who are treated badly
for doing right.
They belong to the kingdom
of heaven.
--Mat 5
Quote from: Taffy on August 27, 2008, 03:24:49 PM
OK Roy.
My trains a rollin , (http://soleilimg1.free.fr/gifs/locomotion/trains/train002.gif)The real Smilie King is back Im Town Bro,Time to flex my smilie Muscles(http://soleilimg1.free.fr/gifs/personnages/perso3d/3d050.gif)Your riegn is over my Brit Bro,,,time to move over(http://soleilimg1.free.fr/gifs/personnages/perso3d/3d257.gif)and I mean Business man!(http://soleilimg1.free.fr/gifs/personnages/perso3d/3d245.gif)the Boys in Blue are out for you too,your finished man(http://soleilimg1.free.fr/gifs/personnages/perso3d/3d242.gif)and if they dont get ya...ive a few friends of me own(http://soleilimg1.free.fr/gifs/personnages/perso3d/3d222.gif)so take this taxi while ya can and git out me town(http://soleilimg1.free.fr/gifs/locomotion/voitures/voitu047.gif)
Good one Taff
I'm a runnin, brother! Where on earth did you get all them nasty graphics from? I sure could do with some.
The puff, puff is not a rollin; mussel man looks awesome; karate kid is going to do himself or the delightful bird an injury; the baddie is a shootin the stupid cop; so thanks, I won't be needing the taxi. CANCEL it.
Have a nice day, brother you have just been crowned :icon_king: :icon_king:over Willie and M??????e
Peace!
Roy. the new :icon_joker: :icon_jokercolor:
(http://deephousepage.com/smilies/muscles.gif)(http://deephousepage.com/smilies/respect.gif)
Hey Roy..Ill post a Thread listing a load of smilies :icon_flower:, we can all be Kings together :icon_joker:(http://deephousepage.com/smilies/bananalama.gif)
Quote from: SOtW on August 27, 2008, 05:01:54 PM
I agree Roy,
Let us say Jesus is not the Son of God, but just a man (Not that I am not stating that, just removing this proposition for a moment).
God would also be the Beginning and the End. Yet, God has no beginning or end, so how can that be? Being that all things begin with Him and all things end with Him, He is the Beginning and the End. Just as you stated, it is a misunderstanding of the language they are speaking. It is a philosophical point of the reality He created, not the a characteristic of his nature. As Paul said concerning the Greeks as their poets said, "In Him we live and move and have our being." Everything begins with Him and everthing ends with Him, He is creations Beginning and End.
Now return Jesus to being the Son of God, all things begin with Him and all things end with Him, He is God made manifest in the flesh, not created but formed like Woman was taken from Adam and later named Eve, The Word was taken from God and later named Jesus. A difficult concept for people to understand that Jesus literally is God as much as he was a man.
Hi! SOtW
That is what I'm saying brother, all things are in God the Father including the Son, ONE GOD. At the consummation of the ages all will return to God including the Son, then God will be ALL IN ALL. "For He has put all things in subjection under His feet. But when He says, "All things are put in subjection," it is evident that He is excepted who put all things in subjection to Him. When all things are
subjected to Him, then the
Son Himself also will be
subjected to the One who subjected all things to Him, so that God may be
all in all." (1Cor.15:27-28).
When the Son has completed the will of His Father and put all creation including death under His feet, then He, the Son, will hand all His work to the Father and subject Himself to the Father's Sovereign authority and power so that God/Father becomes ALL in ALL, ONE GOD.
For the Son to be able to hand all the things He has created including us to the Father then He himself must of necessity be Someone apart from that creation, such as the Creator of it.
Hence we worship the Creator God and not the creature of creation.
Peace!(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK.
Quote from: CHB on August 27, 2008, 05:05:34 PM
Quote from: Roy Monis
No, brother. The Beginning is a noun meaning, the Beginner, the Creator. For a start notice the "B" in upper case, now along side of the beginning you see a small letter or figure referring you to the centre column reference where you'll be referred to (Col.1:15). Here you are told that He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation, and not the firstcreated being, a mere creature.
Does that help brother, antichrist turns and twists words and phrases to suit his purpose that's why we are so sternly warned to beware of him. "For false Christs and false prophets will arise and will show great signs and wonders, so as to mislead, if possible, even the elect. Behold, I have told you in advance." (Matt.24:24-25). False teachers are false prophets.
So, you admit that Jesus was the firstborn? That makes Jesus the firstborn of all living and the firstborn of all the dead. Do you agree with this? If so, that makes Jesus the beginning, or Beginning, doesn't matter, he was first.
CHB
Hi! CHB
Yes! I admit that the Christ/Word/Son was the firstborn
before creation, the Creator of all creation and that Jesus Christ was the firstborn of all the dead. Yes Jesus Christ was the first to be born, the Creator. Jesus Christ is first of all things, He is the head, He is the Creator of all things, so it stands to reason that He must be first.
Peace!(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Quote from: laren on August 27, 2008, 06:40:13 PM
Quote from: Nathan on August 27, 2008, 05:51:02 PM
Um . . .all due respect Roy, I don't mean to offend you either, but I elect to decline your proposal. The reason is not to be rebellious against you or God, but to make a point. It's the very thing we have been talking about on many different topics. We claim we are free from the laws of man and we are not confined to the standards of other people in their views of God . . .and in the same breath, I'm asked to capitalize my pronouns whenever I'm refering to God? Isn't that kind of the opposite of living free from the law?
I meant no disrespect in what ever words you saw that I didn't capitalize and I mean no disrespect by not coming under your advisement. But if we're free "in" Christ, to me, that would include "having" to capitlize pronouns, right along with having to wear a suit in church, having to wear a tie, having to not do this, or have to do that . . . Personally, I wear bluejeans every Sunday . .mainly because that's my personality . .I'm a blue-collar follower of Christ. Anymore, the only times I break out the suits is for weddings or funerals . . .and there've been a couple weddings where I didn't even do "that". :icon_king:
AMEN.
I have a friend who told me she was offended if someone referred to God as "daddy" or "dad". I think it is so easy to project human perception onto God, as if God's view of us changed based on what we do.
Hi! Laren
It appears that I have offended you brother, none was intended, but I apologize. I agree God is the judge.
But little things like that, of no consequence to man, are of importance to God, after all is said and done He is our God. Call Roy, roy; Nathan nathan; Taffy taffy; Molly molly; it's not nice but we are just human carnal beasts and it all goes by the board. But should we not exercise much greater care when dealing with our Sovereign Almighty God? Now you be the judge of yourself.
" '
A son honors his father, and a
servant his master. Then if
I am a father, where is
My honor? And if
I am a master, where is
My respect?' says the
Lord of hosts to you, O priests who
despise My name. But you say, 'How have we despised Your name?' "You are presenting defiled food upon My altar. But you say, 'How have we defiled You?' In that you say, 'The table of the Lord is to be despised.' "But when you present the blind for sacrifice, is it not evil? And when you present the lame and sick, is it not evil? Why not
offer it to your governor? Would he be
pleased with you? Or would he
receive you kindly?" says the Lord of hosts. "But now will you not
entreat God's favor, that He
may be gracious to us? With such an offering on your part, will He
receive any of you kindly?" says the Lord of hosts." (Mal.1:6-9).
Peace!(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Quote" 'A son honors his father, and a servant his master. Then if I am a father, where is My honor? And if I am a master, where is My respect?' says the Lord of hosts to you, O priests who despise My name. But you say, 'How have we despised Your name?' "You are presenting defiled food upon My altar. But you say, 'How have we defiled You?' In that you say, 'The table of the Lord is to be despised.' "But when you present the blind for sacrifice, is it not evil? And when you present the lame and sick, is it not evil? Why not offer it to your governor? Would he be pleased with you? Or would he receive you kindly?" says the Lord of hosts. "But now will you not entreat God's favor, that He may be gracious to us? With such an offering on your part, will He receive any of you kindly?" says the Lord of hosts."
Bro Roy, I do deeply agree with Both Laren and Nathan , and your quote from Malachi has nothing to do with what Both proposed.
The Rebuke were to the Priests for ROBBING the storehouses , using poor quality produce for the temple and sacrifices...which were
symbolic of Christ...they indeed ,were keeping the Best for themselves , therefore bringing DISHONOR to God .
It really has nothing to do with capping Pronouns bro....BUT if you find me a scripture which states this otherwise...i may reconsider...
for mine, its all to MUCH religion and MANS attempt TO BE RIGHTEOUS...WHICH WE both KNOW , self - righteousness is but filthy rags bro..so I have get my gun down..and shoot you OK :laughing7: :laughing7: (http://deephousepage.com/smilies/AR15firing.gif)
Quote from: Nathan on August 27, 2008, 06:49:59 PM
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 27, 2008, 06:08:35 PM
Quote from: laren on August 26, 2008, 08:35:46 PM
how do we love our enemy if we are not to love the things of the world??
Hi! Laren
You love your brother, my friend. Your so-called enemy is also your brother and you must love your brother whether he is in or out of the world. That's how.!
Peace!
Roy UKurl=h[ttp://www.glitter-graphics.com](http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/681/681483u7y91w3fyi.gif)[/url]
If someone approached you and offered you a beer, or wine, or mixed drink . . .would you take it? Or would you explain to them nicely that it's an abomination against God to defile your body with such things?
Hi! Nathan
I don't quite understand the point of your question. You'd make a good politician, always beating round the bush and never getting to the point.
If what you mean is; if a stranger came along and offered me a beer, wine, lemonade would I take it? Well, if I fancied a beer, wine or lemonade and could afford to return the same, I wouldn't want to offend my brother and refuse, yes, I'd take it.
On the other hand I wouldn't be so rude as to impose my belief on to him, I'd just politely refuse. "No thank you, but thank you for the your kind offer" in reply is all it would need. After all what has what I believe got to do with him, he's a very kind person, a brother and I'd enjoy a chat with him, if he so wished.
Does that answer you or is there some mystery behind the question?
Peace! (http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Quote from: laren on August 27, 2008, 07:20:21 PM
Quote from: SOtW on August 27, 2008, 07:16:54 PM
[
I would politely reject it, and ask if they had spiced rum and diet coke instead. I get migraines from beer.
it's the grain in the beer
my grain
:grin:
Good answers SOtW and Laren, better than the ones I thought.
Have a nice, jolly day and don't get drunk, lemonade does some strange things.
Peace!(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll68/roymonis/4953591.gif)
Roy UK
Hi roy :happygrin:
you have not offended me at all, i'm not sure why u would think that from my post. Disagree, yes;
Honoring our FATHER has nothing to do with capitializing his name. That in my opinion is religion .
It is all a heart condition. Now I respect that for you, you express your heart through capitalizing a word. But to infer that if one doesn't capitalize the word He in reference to God; that they are not honoring God is again imo; religion. And religion like that; sickens my stomach; literally.
Quote from: laren on August 28, 2008, 03:28:36 PM
. But to infer that if one doesn't capitalize the word He in reference to God; that they are not honoring God is again imo; religion. And religion like that; sickens my stomach; literally.
sorta makes me feel a litle Like this Laren...ya just experience freedom THEN:-(http://deephousepage.com/smilies/splat.gif)
Quote from: Molly on August 27, 2008, 07:43:26 PM
..you have left your first love.
Isn't that what Adam did?
Where are you? (Gen 3)
Yes Molly that is so, he didn't just leave, he went a runnin as they say without any pants on. Nathan is in danger of doing the same if he keeps asking about beer and lemonade.
Peace!(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll68/roymonis/4953591.gif)
Roy UK
Roy, Roy, Roy . . .what to do with you . . .
First, you sound like Adam's woman . . .before she was named Eve . . .as the serpent was testing her knowledge of what was said . . .God never said that you could not touch the tree, he just said not to eat of it . . . I never said anything about lemonade . . .I said beer or mixed drinks.
And I must say, I'm pleasantly surprised at the answers . . . perhaps, the question should have been in reverse . . . if someone of reputation did you a favor and if you heard a voice in you suggesting you repay them with a 6-pack of beer . . . would you do it or rebuke the voice within you?
Yeah, there is a reason for my asking. I . . . My . . . Not sure how to word this . . . being brought up under strict religious enforcement, I know what it's like to be bound by the very thing that was intended to set people free. We used Scriptures to prove why everyone was going to hell and why we should live a particular life-style. We were not allowed to watch tv . . .which raised quite a stir in our house because we lived out in the boonies pretty much . .and there wasn't much of a social life happening and my Mom got her relief from watching the tube . . .much inner fighting in my early years . .eventually, Mom won out, but it took years.
At any rate, since I've been led out of that bondage, I've found that there are still many issues in my life that continually need to be purged and purified. So even though we do walk on a happier road, I'm still very much aware that growth and change are continual. So when I see some of the comments that people interject . . . it makes me wonder just how free some people are.
For example, in our study last night . . .I was enjoying what God was showing us as we were moving through the book of Revelation . . .pretty fast to . .about 4 verses an hour!!! And I was saying something, don't remember what the point was now, but I inserted a slang word . . ."freakin'" and man, people just went haywire. "Oh, Pastor!! Wash your mouth out with soap!! We don't talk like that! You should know better your a Pastor! On and on . . . it occurred to me, no matter how much we "think" we are in the spirit, there is still much flesh in us that manifests by reflex, more than we care to admit.
But I couldn't help but think of how Roy feels about capitalizing pronouns . . . I then took the rest of the time we had and went back to emphasizing that regardless of whether I think someone is living in sin . . . just how much closer am I bringing them to God be approaching them and instructing or advising them how "I see" they should change. Are we not "seated" at the right hand of the Father in "heavenly" places?
That isn't supposed to be a temporary position. I'm sitting until I see someone else who is not in aligment with my standards . . .then I need to "get up" and straighten them out. If I'm spending all my time convicting others . . .what's the Holy Spirit supposed to do then? Isn't that "His" job?
I asked that question about the beer because that's usually a touchy one for those who are still in a religious cycle. And that's again why I'm surprised that there seems to be some resistance toward the idea of revelating with people on this forum. You seem to be able to see somethings that can only be seen from a spiritual plain . . .such as UR . .that is made known to us only by way of God revealing it to us. Otherwise, if we were totally and wholly fundamentalists, we'd be just as strong about ET as the others.
It takes much more grace and faith to believe UR than it does ET. And there's absolutely nothing wrong with that . . .the ONLY way you can please God is by FAITH. What is faith again? It's believing in what can't be seen, accepting what can't be understood. Those who embrace the literal written word aren't walking in faith, they're walking by sight. Those that see the spiritual truth beneath the surface of what's written are the ones walking in faith.
Two birds with one stone here . .
Molly, the first thing I would do, if I were the one counceling the young man, would be to tell him, I'm going to lay the Bible aside for just a moment and let's talk about what's real "to the young man". I'm not saying I don't believe the Bible is real, I'm saying that people receive so much more when they see you setting your religious badge aside. Personally, I believe your decription of the man's acivity is wrong . . .but . . . When you live according to right and wrong, you are walking in the tree of knowledge of good and evil . .not in life
When people's lives are falling apart, the last thing they need is for me to tell them . . ."Dude . . .you're so messed up!" What they need is, someone that is oblivious to the obvious and just love on them. My advice to them would be to just take a minute and do a quick evaluation of their situation . .ask them what their priorities are . . .does he really care about his wife, does he want to remain a part of this family . . . But telling him that it's all his fault and he needs to straigten up and act responsible, that's natural reasoning talking . .what he needs is true Love to intervene.
I can't manifest God's love while pushing my own agenda at the same time.
Quote from: Nathan on August 27, 2008, 08:44:54 PM
Roy, are you aware of the passage that speaks about those being in outer darkness and they argued "but we cast out demons in your name . .we prophesied in your name . . ." on and on but the response simply was "depart from me I never knew you . . ." The church in Revelation . .to me . . .is this same group. Their identity was more in their ministry to remove tares than to plant wheat.
To look at it the traditional way . . .what you're saying then is . .no matter how good you are, Jesus will always find something wrong with you . . .I just don't see that way anymore. I think Jesus was leading up to the fact that they lost their first love, by identifying what they gave that first love up for . . .it was their works . . their concern to prove that everyone else was false and they were right. We've said all along, for those who walk in the spirit . . .it's not about right or wrong . . .its about being as One.
The other comment about sounding familiar was a cheap shot on my part . . .I was not in the best of moods yesterday, I apologize for that. I need to do a better job at keeping those kinds of things in check. :sigh:
Hi! Nathan
No need for the apology brother, we are all human, but it sounded nice, thank you.
Now regarding the passage that you're wondering whether I'm aware of it, I presume you mean this one; "Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter. "Many will say to Me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?' "And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness." (Matt.7:21-23).
Yes! Brother I'm aware of it. What this is telling me is very simple and both you and I have obeyed that call; "I heard another voice from heaven, saying, "Come out of her, my people, so that you will not participate in her sins and receive of her plagues; for her sins have piled up as high as heaven, and God has remembered her iniquities." Rev.18:4-5).
Was it not Babylon who preached the gospel (false), prophesied, spoke in tongues, worked miracles, and said Lord! Lord! and is it not those who proclaim a false created christ also among them who say; Lord! Lord! (did we not worship the wrong christ :laughing7: :laughing7: :laughing7:). Is it not those heretics and blasphemers to whom He is saying, I never knew you, depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness?
You are right, it is as you say, they are the ones who have left their First Love and fallen from grace. Literally they believe they are on the narrow road but spiritually they are on the broad one that leads to destruction, even lower down the scale than Saddam because "For if, after they have
escaped the defilements of the world by the knowledge of the
Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are
again entangled in them and are overcome, the
last state has become
worse for them than the first. For it would be
better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than
having known it, to turn away from the holy commandment handed on to them. It has happened to them according to the true proverb, "A dog returns to its own vomit," and, "A sow, after washing, returns to wallowing in the mire" ("Pet.2:20-22) their present state is worse than it was at first before they knew the Truth.
Now the Lord has sent them a deep delusion, where they will believe the false and reject the Truth. "For this reason God will
send upon them a deluding influence so that they
will believe what is false, in order that they all may be
judged who did not believe the truth, but took pleasure in wickedness."
(2Thess.2:11-12).
Peace!
Roy UK(http://dl8.glitter-graphics.net/pub/206/206938s9pnr6xz6d.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Quote from: NathanYeah, there is a reason for my asking. I . . . My . . . Not sure how to word this . . . being brought up under strict religious enforcement, I know what it's like to be bound by the very thing that was intended to set people free. We used Scriptures to prove why everyone was going to hell and why we should live a particular life-style. We were not allowed to watch tv . . .which raised quite a stir in our house because we lived out in the boonies pretty much . .and there wasn't much of a social life happening and my Mom got her relief from watching the tube . . .much inner fighting in my early years . .eventually, Mom won out, but it took years.
That's interesting. I grew up with total freedom, running through the fields barefoot, with the wolves. Not wild, but wind in your hair freedom. All things were possible but not all things were beneficial. I knew this at a very young age. I learned it body surfing during a hurricane. I knew Jesus and his love before the age of five. I didn't know about Hell--my church didn't mention it-- until I went away to school and read Dante. Then, I thought--this guy has some weird problems. Somehow I lucked out, knowing love and freedom at such a young age. So don't think I don't understand what you are saying--freedom is in my bones. God himself put it there and raised me on it. My milk was freedom.
But it was only possible because the adults were acting so responsibly...
So don't think I take responsibility as a burden, --I don't need to search out freedom, I breathe it--I know his yoke is easy and his burden is light. I want to give back what was given to me.
QuoteI didn't know about Hell--my church didn't mention it-- until I went away to school and read Dante. Then, I thought--this guy has some weird problems
hey Molly get the lemonade out...then puor me a southern comfort :laughing7:
to this I agree whole heartedly(http://deephousepage.com/smilies/party_06.gif)
Quote from: Taffy on August 28, 2008, 06:10:06 PM
QuoteI didn't know about Hell--my church didn't mention it-- until I went away to school and read Dante. Then, I thought--this guy has some weird problems
hey Molly get the lemonade out...then puor me a southern comfort :laughing7:
to this I agree whole heartedly(http://deephousepage.com/smilies/party_06.gif)
I'm actually wondering if the church paid him to write that. It would make an interesting study.
No one could be that insane--having those visions and walking the streets.
QuoteNo one could be that insane--having those visions and walking the streets.
arh..that HEART is deceitful above alll things.....probably didnt need paying ..just saw it as Justice, one can only say these things in ignorance, not Knowing Christ lies in the hearts of all men, be it a fact hes hidden from MANY.
Quote from: Taffy on August 28, 2008, 06:22:43 PM
QuoteNo one could be that insane--having those visions and walking the streets.
arh..that HEART is deceitful above alll things.....probably didnt need paying ..just saw it as Justice, one can only say these things in ignorance, not Knowing Christ lies in the hearts of all men, be it a fact hes hidden from MANY.
I'm serious. If you look closely at the practices of the catholic church, you see them doing everything they can to control people. They were the first to discover that church is big business and people can be controlled by fear. I bet he was commissioned to write that. It's too contrived--speaking of deceitful.
I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if what you feel were to be true. But even so, it's been so instilled in the traditional church for so long . . . People have spent so much time and effort in their lives, shoring up this belief system that it would literally take a miracle of God to tear it down . . .which by the way, I do believe it will happen . . .one final shaking as Hebrews speaks of.
Quote from: Taffy on August 28, 2008, 12:53:01 AM
QuoteI think you are taking the right approach since the job of teenagers is to push against their parents--sometimes, the harder you push, the harder they push back. You seem to be dealing with it very wisely, and in a moderate fashion.
But, the one I asked this question of is a pastor. And, I asked the question about adults.
all born 18 months apart..two boys and Two girls.
as the Your question is posed to Nathan then for sure let Him answer,,but sis, I too have one also,,..Nat first .
Hi! Taffy
Congratulations! You're taking the right course with the teenies, they are naturally a rebellious lot, I was the same and so were you and you can't tell me any different. I am the father of a son who is a grandfather with two sons of his own. He was a rebellious bounder as well.
One of his school habits was spitting on the street and watching if anyone noticed. When I asked where he learned that filthy habit? He replied, "Oh Jimmie clever clots, he does it and it's great." "Now that's really clever, if he's as good as that with his school work, he'll be top of the class I should imagine?" I said. "Is he heck as like, he hardly ever shows up at school, they're always chasing after him, he's always in trouble." came the reply " That really does sound good, and you want to be like that I imagine, you'll soon be getting chased as well." The spitting stopped brother.
A neighbour came and reported that he and his two mates were smoking round the corner, nosey neighbour, but well meaning. So I goes round and hauls the three in, sits them on the settee and gives each one (I used to smoke then myself, bad boy) a cigar and I kept them company and explained that I had no objection to him smoking but I'd rather him do it in the house than round street corners for all the neighbours to see. We lit up and all four of us had a real good time for about an hour, then and then it took effect, all three were as sick as a parrot and wonders will never cease, they all three stopped smoking.
I never went against his wishes, no I always went along with him and somehow it worked. Praise the Lord! God is good!
You're right on track brother and I pray it works out for you and your better half as well.
Peace!(http://dl8.glitter-graphics.net/pub/206/206938s9pnr6xz6d.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy
Quote from: Nathan on August 28, 2008, 06:30:51 PM
I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if what you feel were to be true. But even so, it's been so instilled in the traditional church for so long . . . People have spent so much time and effort in their lives, shoring up this belief system that it would literally take a miracle of God to tear it down . . .which by the way, I do believe it will happen . . .one final shaking as Hebrews speaks of.
Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Last night I was reading about how the three translators of the Geneva Bible were burned at the stake, and all those Bibles confiscated and burned. It was a death sentence to be caught with that Bible. The church did everything they could do to keep the New Testament out of the hands of people who could read it in their own language. Why is that so threatening, you might ask?
Because if there is only one mediator between man and God--Christ, and if being made free by the Son, you are free indeed, and if we are justified by faith alone--that's bad for business.
Christ warned us about this--and it happened just as he said it would.
QuoteI'm serious. If you look closely at the practices of the catholic church, you see them doing everything they can to control people. They were the first to discover that church is big business and people can be controlled by fear. I bet he was commissioned to write that. It's too contrived--speaking of deceitful.
Coming from a Church which I know were controlling, nothing surprises me thesedays with what happens with many denominations..be it the Catholics or not....but Dante is up there with the best of them
Quote from: Taffy on August 28, 2008, 03:20:55 PM
Quote" 'A son honors his father, and a servant his master. Then if I am a father, where is My honor? And if I am a master, where is My respect?' says the Lord of hosts to you, O priests who despise My name. But you say, 'How have we despised Your name?' "You are presenting defiled food upon My altar. But you say, 'How have we defiled You?' In that you say, 'The table of the Lord is to be despised.' "But when you present the blind for sacrifice, is it not evil? And when you present the lame and sick, is it not evil? Why not offer it to your governor? Would he be pleased with you? Or would he receive you kindly?" says the Lord of hosts. "But now will you not entreat God's favor, that He may be gracious to us? With such an offering on your part, will He receive any of you kindly?" says the Lord of hosts."
Bro Roy, I do deeply agree with Both Laren and Nathan , and your quote from Malachi has nothing to do with what Both proposed.
The Rebuke were to the Priests for ROBBING the storehouses , using poor quality produce for the temple and sacrifices...which were symbolic of Christ...they indeed ,were keeping the Best for themselves , therefore bringing DISHONOR to God .
It really has nothing to do with capping Pronouns bro....BUT if you find me a scripture which states this otherwise...i may reconsider...
for mine, its all to MUCH religion and MANS attempt TO BE RIGHTEOUS...WHICH WE both KNOW , self - righteousness is but filthy rags bro..so I have get my gun down..and shoot you OK :laughing7: :laughing7: (http://deephousepage.com/smilies/AR15firing.gif)
Hi! Laren and Nathan
Taffy has spoken! I have been nitpicking and I'm awfully sorry, please forgive me for picking nits they're playing havoc with my constitution. Please yourself whether you cap or decap, we'll start minding our own business for a change. If I become self-righteous I won't need Taffy to shoot me :robinhood: I'll shoot myself :Shoot:
Peace!(http://dl2.glitter-graphics.net/pub/531/531092obq4tfxk6k.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
1Behold, the LORD's hand is not shortened, that it cannot save; neither his ear heavy, that it cannot hear:
2But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear.
3For your hands are defiled with blood, and your fingers with iniquity; your lips have spoken lies, your tongue hath muttered perverseness.
4None calleth for justice, nor any pleadeth for truth: they trust in vanity, and speak lies; they conceive mischief, and bring forth iniquity.
5They hatch cockatrice' eggs, and weave the spider's web: he that eateth of their eggs dieth, and that which is crushed breaketh out into a viper.
6Their webs shall not become garments, neither shall they cover themselves with their works: their works are works of iniquity, and the act of violence is in their hands.
7Their feet run to evil, and they make haste to shed innocent blood: their thoughts are thoughts of iniquity; wasting and destruction are in their paths.
8The way of peace they know not; and there is no judgment in their goings: they have made them crooked paths: whosoever goeth therein shall not know peace.
9Therefore is judgment far from us, neither doth justice overtake us: we wait for light, but behold obscurity; for brightness, but we walk in darkness.
10We grope for the wall like the blind, and we grope as if we had no eyes: we stumble at noon day as in the night; we are in desolate places as dead men.
11We roar all like bears, and mourn sore like doves: we look for judgment, but there is none; for salvation, but it is far off from us.
12For our transgressions are multiplied before thee, and our sins testify against us: for our transgressions are with us; and as for our iniquities, we know them;
13In transgressing and lying against the LORD, and departing away from our God, speaking oppression and revolt, conceiving and uttering from the heart words of falsehood.
14And judgment is turned away backward, and justice standeth afar off: for truth is fallen in the street, and equity cannot enter.
15Yea, truth faileth; and he that departeth from evil maketh himself a prey: and the LORD saw it, and it displeased him that there was no judgment.
16And he saw that there was no man, and wondered that there was no intercessor: therefore his arm brought salvation unto him; and his righteousness, it sustained him.
17For he put on righteousness as a breastplate, and an helmet of salvation upon his head; and he put on the garments of vengeance for clothing, and was clad with zeal as a cloak.
18According to their deeds, accordingly he will repay, fury to his adversaries, recompence to his enemies; to the islands he will repay recompence.
19So shall they fear the name of the LORD from the west, and his glory from the rising of the sun. When the enemy shall come in like a flood, the Spirit of the LORD shall lift up a standard against him.
20And the Redeemer shall come to Zion, and unto them that turn from transgression in Jacob, saith the LORD.
21As for me, this is my covenant with them, saith the LORD; My spirit that is upon thee, and my words which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed's seed, saith the LORD, from henceforth and for ever.
--Isa 59
Quote from: Molly on August 28, 2008, 06:26:31 PM
Quote from: Taffy on August 28, 2008, 06:22:43 PM
QuoteNo one could be that insane--having those visions and walking the streets.
arh..that HEART is deceitful above alll things.....probably didnt need paying ..just saw it as Justice, one can only say these things in ignorance, not Knowing Christ lies in the hearts of all men, be it a fact hes hidden from MANY.
I'm serious. If you look closely at the practices of the catholic church, you see them doing everything they can to control people. They were the first to discover that church is big business and people can be controlled by fear. I bet he was commissioned to write that. It's too contrived--speaking of deceitful.
Hi! Molly
You're right, the hell business all started with the Catholic Church, I have all the evidence somewhere in my files, I'll have to look it up and post it. Fear was the only way people could be made to toe the line and the Catholic Church under Emperor Constantine made sure of that.
Yes, there is no one wealthier than the Church of Rome. :Shoot:
Peace!
Roy UK
Quote from: Molly on August 28, 2008, 08:30:19 PM
1Behold, the LORD's hand is not shortened, that it cannot save; neither his ear heavy, that it cannot hear:
2But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear.
3For your hands are defiled with blood, and your fingers with iniquity; your lips have spoken lies, your tongue hath muttered perverseness.
4None calleth for justice, nor any pleadeth for truth: they trust in vanity, and speak lies; they conceive mischief, and bring forth iniquity.
5They hatch cockatrice' eggs, and weave the spider's web: he that eateth of their eggs dieth, and that which is crushed breaketh out into a viper.
6Their webs shall not become garments, neither shall they cover themselves with their works: their works are works of iniquity, and the act of violence is in their hands.
7Their feet run to evil, and they make haste to shed innocent blood: their thoughts are thoughts of iniquity; wasting and destruction are in their paths.
8The way of peace they know not; and there is no judgment in their goings: they have made them crooked paths: whosoever goeth therein shall not know peace.
9Therefore is judgment far from us, neither doth justice overtake us: we wait for light, but behold obscurity; for brightness, but we walk in darkness.
10We grope for the wall like the blind, and we grope as if we had no eyes: we stumble at noon day as in the night; we are in desolate places as dead men.
11We roar all like bears, and mourn sore like doves: we look for judgment, but there is none; for salvation, but it is far off from us.
12For our transgressions are multiplied before thee, and our sins testify against us: for our transgressions are with us; and as for our iniquities, we know them;
13In transgressing and lying against the LORD, and departing away from our God, speaking oppression and revolt, conceiving and uttering from the heart words of falsehood.
14And judgment is turned away backward, and justice standeth afar off: for truth is fallen in the street, and equity cannot enter.
15Yea, truth faileth; and he that departeth from evil maketh himself a prey: and the LORD saw it, and it displeased him that there was no judgment.
16And he saw that there was no man, and wondered that there was no intercessor: therefore his arm brought salvation unto him; and his righteousness, it sustained him.
17For he put on righteousness as a breastplate, and an helmet of salvation upon his head; and he put on the garments of vengeance for clothing, and was clad with zeal as a cloak.
18According to their deeds, accordingly he will repay, fury to his adversaries, recompence to his enemies; to the islands he will repay recompence.
19So shall they fear the name of the LORD from the west, and his glory from the rising of the sun. When the enemy shall come in like a flood, the Spirit of the LORD shall lift up a standard against him.
20And the Redeemer shall come to Zion, and unto them that turn from transgression in Jacob, saith the LORD.
21As for me, this is my covenant with them, saith the LORD; My spirit that is upon thee, and my words which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed's seed, saith the LORD, from henceforth and for ever.
--Isa 59
What on earth is all this about, Molly. Please explain! The armour of God, that was for Taffy and his Mrs not you, because they need it with four teenagers. You're happy without teens to worry about, I'm assuming, like me and we're quite happy with our freedom indeed. Poor Taffy!
I think a little prayer for them would be in order.
Like this little
cherub[(http://dl10.glitter-graphics.net/pub/948/948060jo4m3gvnnu.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Peace!
Roy UK
QuoteThe armour of God, that was for Taffy and his Mrs not you, because they need it with four teenagers. You're happy without teens to worry about, I'm assuming, like me and we're quite happy with our freedom indeed
Why thanks Roy , for sure my wife would appreciate it....hey ,I always see the CUP half full and not Half empty,..so it could be worse, we could have 8 teenagers.. :laughing7:
Quote from: Nathan on August 28, 2008, 04:41:08 PM
Roy, Roy, Roy . . .what to do with you . . .
First, you sound like Adam's woman . . .before she was named Eve . . .as the serpent was testing her knowledge of what was said . . .God never said that you could not touch the tree, he just said not to eat of it . . . I never said anything about lemonade . . .I said beer or mixed drinks.
And I must say, I'm pleasantly surprised at the answers . . . perhaps, the question should have been in reverse . . . if someone of reputation did you a favor and if you heard a voice in you suggesting you repay them with a 6-pack of beer . . . would you do it or rebuke the voice within you?
Yeah, there is a reason for my asking. I . . . My . . . Not sure how to word this . . . being brought up under strict religious enforcement, I know what it's like to be bound by the very thing that was intended to set people free. We used Scriptures to prove why everyone was going to hell and why we should live a particular life-style. We were not allowed to watch tv . . .which raised quite a stir in our house because we lived out in the boonies pretty much . .and there wasn't much of a social life happening and my Mom got her relief from watching the tube . . .much inner fighting in my early years . .eventually, Mom won out, but it took years.
At any rate, since I've been led out of that bondage, I've found that there are still many issues in my life that continually need to be purged and purified. So even though we do walk on a happier road, I'm still very much aware that growth and change are continual. So when I see some of the comments that people interject . . . it makes me wonder just how free some people are.
For example, in our study last night . . .I was enjoying what God was showing us as we were moving through the book of Revelation . . .pretty fast to . .about 4 verses an hour!!! And I was saying something, don't remember what the point was now, but I inserted a slang word . . ."freakin'" and man, people just went haywire. "Oh, Pastor!! Wash your mouth out with soap!! We don't talk like that! You should know better your a Pastor! On and on . . . it occurred to me, no matter how much we "think" we are in the spirit, there is still much flesh in us that manifests by reflex, more than we care to admit.
But I couldn't help but think of how Roy feels about capitalizing pronouns . . . I then took the rest of the time we had and went back to emphasizing that regardless of whether I think someone is living in sin . . . just how much closer am I bringing them to God be approaching them and instructing or advising them how "I see" they should change. Are we not "seated" at the right hand of the Father in "heavenly" places?
That isn't supposed to be a temporary position. I'm sitting until I see someone else who is not in aligment with my standards . . .then I need to "get up" and straighten them out. If I'm spending all my time convicting others . . .what's the Holy Spirit supposed to do then? Isn't that "His" job?
I asked that question about the beer because that's usually a touchy one for those who are still in a religious cycle. And that's again why I'm surprised that there seems to be some resistance toward the idea of revelating with people on this forum. You seem to be able to see somethings that can only be seen from a spiritual plain . . .such as UR . .that is made known to us only by way of God revealing it to us. Otherwise, if we were totally and wholly fundamentalists, we'd be just as strong about ET as the others.
It takes much more grace and faith to believe UR than it does ET. And there's absolutely nothing wrong with that . . .the ONLY way you can please God is by FAITH. What is faith again? It's believing in what can't be seen, accepting what can't be understood. Those who embrace the literal written word aren't walking in faith, they're walking by sight. Those that see the spiritual truth beneath the surface of what's written are the ones walking in faith.
Two birds with one stone here . .
Molly, the first thing I would do, if I were the one counceling the young man, would be to tell him, I'm going to lay the Bible aside for just a moment and let's talk about what's real "to the young man". I'm not saying I don't believe the Bible is real, I'm saying that people receive so much more when they see you setting your religious badge aside. Personally, I believe your decription of the man's acivity is wrong . . .but . . . When you live according to right and wrong, you are walking in the tree of knowledge of good and evil . .not in life
When people's lives are falling apart, the last thing they need is for me to tell them . . ."Dude . . .you're so messed up!" What they need is, someone that is oblivious to the obvious and just love on them. My advice to them would be to just take a minute and do a quick evaluation of their situation . .ask them what their priorities are . . .does he really care about his wife, does he want to remain a part of this family . . . But telling him that it's all his fault and he needs to straigten up and act responsible, that's natural reasoning talking . .what he needs is true Love to intervene.
I can't manifest God's love while pushing my own agenda at the same time.
Hi! Nathan
Brother I'm having considerable difficulty following you. One moment you're here with me the next you're at home with your TV, then you're with your congregation or whatever.
1)... Let us start with your strict bringing up, mine was very strict as well and we didn't have any TV or radio then either. In that respect you were very fortunate. But you don't say why were you not allowed to watch TV? Who was stopping you, because your mom also seemed to be under the hammer? All this doesn't make sense to me, it's very fragmented.
2)....Now we're at a Bible study and you come out with a bad word, or the one of the members thinks it is and tells you to wash your mouth out. You appear to be in amongst the wolves. You were lucky to get out in one piece.
3).....Now you're on to me and my obsession with God. What you fail to see is that I was brought up in a much stricter generation than you, seeing you're talking about TVs. In my generation we had to toe the line and show respect for elders, raise our cap to ladies and offer our seat in trains and public transport to a lady the elderly and all such stuff, which is now considered a load of tripe. As I grew older and God entered my life those ingrained good habits remained, and if they were good enough for man then they were certainly good for my God. Hence everything to do with God in the written word is Capitalized. Good habits learned when young cling and I am grateful to my God for that and my parents. I don't regret that one bit, and we got disciplined and properly disciplined, which show good results to this day. Pity it stopped when you look round now.
I have apologized to you and Laren after a shooting incident with my mate Taffy, which he won. I admitted it was nitpicking, this is my own way of showing respect, what anyone else chooses to do is their own business. I apologize to you again for that. If someone asks, I express my opinion, if they don't agree it's OK, if they want to discuss it that to is OK, I'll discuss it. But I am in no way trying to push my belief on to anyone. If my message is the truth the Holy Spirit will do the rest, I'm not trying to do the impossible, and usurp His role.
4).....Yes, I understand. I belonged to a Pentecostal movement before I came out and they were very much against all forms of spirit, the liquid variety, which was a law of their own and contrary to the Bible teaching. Our Lord Himself enjoyed a good quality wine as provided at the wedding in Cana, gallons of it and the best (the best is strongest), so what right had they to ban it.
6)......Then you went on to faith and lost me because I didn't know whether I was coming or going by then.
7).......Finally you had a go at Molly. By then I'd had enough and left you with Molly to answer her own.
Sorry Nathan, I'm a simple dumb cluck and can only handle one question at a time, too many and I get the beer-grain or my-grain as Laren calls it.
Peace!(http://dl4.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1176/1176424t4nufen6go.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
1 . . .never did I say I cornered the market on understanding all things . . . so if things I say are not clear, chances are it's because I didn't share them clearly . . . I started out by saying "I don't know how to put this . . ." Notice that? The whole point to that line of questioning was stemming from how often it sounds like people fall back on their religious backgrounds. And yes, the nitpicking thing was in the same time frame and I don't know that your apology to Taf came out yet . . .not that it matters, I'm not trying to pin you on anything here . . .it was just a question trying to test the waters a bit about the idea as to how much law was still out there . . .thus the question about giving a guy a beer . . .obviously, there is no issue in this arena.
2. The comments about what transpired in church are related in the sense that no matter how long one is in the kingdom perspectives, one still has boundaries based on personal standards. When other's cross those boundaries, law manifests in us and we try to "correct" the other person to come back into our standards . . that was what happened with those reacting negatively to the choice of wording I used. It was quickly evident there still are areas where freedom had not yet been let in.
3. The issues that continue to rise up on this forum, people want proof . .biblical proof that what is being seen has already been written. My response is . .what is faith? Is it not beleiving in what you don't understand and accepting what you can not see? But people fall back on the "written" passages where it talks about testing spirits and reproofing with the Word . .so that nobody trusts anyone . . and the ability to see things that are beneath become a struggle to all because you just can't prove it scripturally . . at times I do throw passages out, but it's not the passage that's the issue, it's the recipient of what's being said. People have already drawn their conclusions, and if they think I'm a nutcase . . then no matter whether I quote or not quote, they still choose not to recieve.
Then I went to Molly who posed the question about the husband stuck in porno . . .
Does any of this help?
Quote from: NathanWhat on earth is all this about, Molly
I just randomly share what God is sharing with me. That's a very powerful chapter, isn't it?
Describing a time when truth is fallen in the street, judgment is backwards, and justice is standing afar off.
They don't know the way of peace, just violence, and any man who departs from evil is clobbered.
I think it has to do with our convention season. :mshock:
But he promises a Redeemer from his right hand, and that he will put his words in our mouths...
It has been interesting to watch this thread veer from one area to another, I thought I might throw another thought out there that might be worthy of consideration in light of the original topic that was presented.
I have come to believe that virtually anything taught by the denominations is wrong, it is so leavened as to have lost it's true meaning or it is just out and out dung. Certainly I do not suggest to have all the answers, maybe a few, maybe none.
But consider this for a minute;
Joh 8:12 Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.
Joh 9:5 As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world.
Keeping that in mind let's go back to Genesis;
Gen 1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
Gen 1:4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.
Gen 1:5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
I do not believe everything came about in six literal days (another church teaching) but rather in ages or periods or stages. With this in mind and with scripture telling us the sun was created on the fourth day what or should I say Who was the Light created on Day One?
A couple more things to consider;
Joh 20:1 The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulcher and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulcher.
Joh 20:19 Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst and saith unto them, Peace be unto you.
Another huge first day, the day that gives us our hope! In Genesis we see Light before the sun, in Revelation we see Light with no need for the sun!
Rev 22:5 And there shall be no night there; and they need no candle, neither light of the sun; for the Lord God giveth them light: and they shall reign forever and ever.
Peace to you all,
RM
Quote from: rivermanJoh 20:1 The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulcher and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulcher.
The resurrected Christ! He is the beginning.
Thank you! :Sparkletooth:
Ephesians 5:14
Wherefore he saith, Awake thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall give thee light.
You are welcome Molly!
Peace,
RM
SOunds Familier RM
Fine post.
Consider the work of the second day....one bears witness to another as two represents....both Cs.
More to be said on the THIRD DAY also Bro :Sparkletooth:
Quote from: Nathan on August 28, 2008, 11:00:37 PM
1 . . .never did I say I cornered the market on understanding all things . . . so if things I say are not clear, chances are it's because I didn't share them clearly . . . I started out by saying "I don't know how to put this . . ." Notice that? The whole point to that line of questioning was stemming from how often it sounds like people fall back on their religious backgrounds. And yes, the nitpicking thing was in the same time frame and I don't know that your apology to Taf came out yet . . .not that it matters, I'm not trying to pin you on anything here . . .it was just a question trying to test the waters a bit about the idea as to how much law was still out there . . .thus the question about giving a guy a beer . . .obviously, there is no issue in this arena.
2. The comments about what transpired in church are related in the sense that no matter how long one is in the kingdom perspectives, one still has boundaries based on personal standards. When other's cross those boundaries, law manifests in us and we try to "correct" the other person to come back into our standards . . that was what happened with those reacting negatively to the choice of wording I used. It was quickly evident there still are areas where freedom had not yet been let in.
3. The issues that continue to rise up on this forum, people want proof . .biblical proof that what is being seen has already been written. My response is . .what is faith? Is it not beleiving in what you don't understand and accepting what you can not see? But people fall back on the "written" passages where it talks about testing spirits and reproofing with the Word . .so that nobody trusts anyone . . and the ability to see things that are beneath become a struggle to all because you just can't prove it scripturally . . at times I do throw passages out, but it's not the passage that's the issue, it's the recipient of what's being said. People have already drawn their conclusions, and if they think I'm a nutcase . . then no matter whether I quote or not quote, they still choose not to recieve.
Then I went to Molly who posed the question about the husband stuck in porno . . .
Does any of this help?
Brother Nathan
Are you sure you and I are in the same world?
1.....I never said anything about you cornering the market.
2.....In what way did I fall back on my religious background? My father and mother were Catholic and not very good ones. My background, in my opinion, was based on good solid social etiquette in all areas of social behaviour including appropriate discipline, and though I didn't like it at the time, I am now regretting that it's gone out of fashion.
Just my opinion.
3.....In what way do I fall back on the OT law? I am fully aware of the fact that, that has been done away with. But we are under a new law, the law of Christ, the law of liberty and it is an enlargement of and not a reduction of the old law of commandments. Faith has a lot to do with it but we can't throw the commandments out the window. It is called the law of liberty but we can't take liberties with it and do as we please, we do have to obey them and the written word in the Bible tells us how.
4.....You give me to understand that I haven't apologized to Taffy. I agree Taffy corrected me in connection with the context of that Scripture I quoted, and I accepted his correction, but there is another aspect to that verse. We cannot always take the Scriptures in context, context, context which is literal. There is a spiritual side to it to be considered in view of the subject in hand with regard to the two words
honour and
respect. But, I accept that it is not for me to judge, the capitalization is my option and not necessarily yours, this I termed nitpicking. Let's not forget that the Bible, all of it, is signified, in symbols, parables and literal.
5......Are you suggesting that we should not rely on the Bible teachings, such as, testing of spirits; knowing them by their fruits etc.etc? If so, then what's the point of the Bible, let's throw it through the window and be done. Why waste our time, faith and grace will increase and cover us as our transgressions increase. Eat, drink and make merry we're covered, like the Babylonian Pentecostals "Once saved always saved."
Keep things simple brother, I'm a very simple minded person.
"Lord the ocean is such an enormous span of water, and this boat I'm in is so very, very small."Peace!(http://dl.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1551/1551031u6k25jgwzu.png) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Quote from: Roy Monis
Quote from: Nathan2. The comments about what transpired in church are related in the sense that no matter how long one is in the kingdom perspectives, one still has boundaries based on personal standards. When other's cross those boundaries, law manifests in us and we try to "correct" the other person to come back into our standards . . that was what happened with those reacting negatively to the choice of wording I used. It was quickly evident there still are areas where freedom had not yet been let in.
Quote from: Roy Monis2.....In what way did I fall back on my religious background? My father and mother were Catholic and not very good ones. My background, in my opinion, was based on good solid social etiquette in all areas of social behaviour including appropriate discipline, and though I didn't like it at the time, I am now regretting that it's gone out of fashion. Just my opinion.
Roy,
Let me explain what is going on here. What is happening in this reply to you is guilt by association. It is just a cheap trick of people who cannot handle the fact that their belief systems have no knowledge attached to them. They can't find any valid reason to disagree with you and so they fall to a fallacy to discredit you rather than actually refuting what you said in a civil, reasonable fashion. Believing that Jesus died on the cross and rose on the third day is from a religious background, so if you proclaim this does this mean you are falling back on your religious background? No, of course not. "Falling back on religious background" or "Traditional Christianity" or "Western Thinking", all these are not valid objections to anything, they are fallacies used by those who lack understanding and looking for someway to look important. It seems to be a persistent problem, and usually proclaimed by people who believe they are more spiritual than you are.
Remember we still are unable to judge the heart of any man, because only God and that man knows what is going on in their heart; but, I wouldn't put much clout on those who need to use fallacy to support the knowledge of the Truth, because the Truth does not need fallacy to defend it. I find it sad that true good behavior (behavior that is not done for show, but out of sincerity) is condemned as not being spiritual and those who claim to spiritual need to use lies to defend the truth. There is some irony however in telling you that you are religious because you are correcting him, and he is correcting you saying that those who correct each other are religious and falling back to the Law. So what does that mean, he too has fallen back to the Law? See, no knowledge whatsoever of what they are doing and saying.
Quote from: Taffy on August 29, 2008, 04:01:39 PM
SOunds Familier RM
Fine post.
Consider the work of the second day....one bears witness to another as two represents....both Cs.
More to be said on the THIRD DAY also Bro :Sparkletooth:
Thank you Taffy,
My present understanding is that the six "days" of creation is also a prophecy of Christ's first and second coming, the first 3 days a prophecy of the earthly ministry and subsequently the establishment of the church and the second 3 days the true spiritual Kingdom beginning.
A two part work.
We have the second day of creation as preparing the way for the third or John the Baptist and water baptism preceeding the fruit bearing tree (Christ) where the fruit has the seed within (elect).
This could get real involved, if there is any interest in discussing and sharing perhaps we could start another thread, we are really veering off topic now! :laughing7:
Peace to you,
RM
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 28, 2008, 02:15:45 PM
Hi! CHB
Yes! I admit that the Christ/Word/Son was the firstborn before creation, the Creator of all creation and that Jesus Christ was the firstborn of all the dead. Yes Jesus Christ was the first to be born, the Creator. Jesus Christ is first of all things, He is the head, He is the Creator of all things, so it stands to reason that He must be first.
Peace!(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
If you agree that Christ is the first, then he was part of a series. After first comes second, right? If he was first he had a beginning, just like the second, third, and fourth. I don't mean he was made out of clay or anything, he came from God. Jesus was part of the creation, he was first. Jesus was the creator of all things except himself. But it says he was God the Father's
first creation.
CHB
Quote from: riverman on August 29, 2008, 04:49:08 PM
Thank you Taffy,
My present understanding is that the six "days" of creation is also a prophecy of Christ's first and second coming, the first 3 days a prophecy of the earthly ministry and subsequently the establishment of the church and the second 3 days the true spiritual Kingdom beginning.
A two part work.
We have the second day of creation as preparing the way for the third or John the Baptist and water baptism preceeding the fruit bearing tree (Christ) where the fruit has the seed within (elect).
This could get real involved, if there is any interest in discussing and sharing perhaps we could start another thread, we are really veering off topic now! :laughing7:
Peace to you,
RM
Hi riverman,
I would really like to hear what you have to say on this topic but I will be gone after today until next Wednesday. Will get back to you then. If you start a new thread, I will catch up when I get back.
CHB
I'd like to see riverman start a new thread on this study. It answers a question I've had recently about why God is always creating during the daylight in Genesis 1.
He separated light from darkness 5and named the light "Day" and the darkness "Night."
Evening came and then morning--that was the first day.
--Gen 1
The Jewish day went from sundown to sundown. Ours goes from midnight to midnight.
But God's day in Genesis 1 seems to start at daybreak, at which point he starts creating, with the night being a throwaway. He doesn't create at night. He creates at dawn. if that makes sense lol.
"morning"
H1242
בּקר
bôqer
bo'-ker
From H1239; properly dawn (as the break of day); generally morning: - (+) day, early, morning, morrow.
Molly much of this ive talked about for ages..much shared on the 1000YR THREAD SIS....
Christ is called the MORNING star which rises in our HEARTS .correlate that to what you posted :icon_flower:
Christ --the morning star--yes!
You talked about it on the 1000 year thread? I don't remember that.
Just goes to show--you can't see it until you're ready. lol
BTW, Nathan is talking about reading the Bible spiritually--the day of rest which we are now in.
But I can't see the spiritual unless I first read it literally--as we can see in this example--because every word is so important.
The spiritual is tied to every word of the literal, embedded in --as Jesus said--every jot and tittle.
lol Molly tis true.
RM please start another thread matey :icon_flower:
Molly . . .THANK YOU that's exactly EXACTLY what I am saying. I never said throw the Bible away, never said reading it literal was wrong . . .all I've ever said was that there's just so much more than the literal piece and that by "living" by the literal, you miss the spiritual truth . ..so as a result . . .let go of the idea of applying the literal . . . of course you must read it . . .if you don't read it . .it's just as you say, you won't see the spiritual meaning beneath it.
To see spiritual truth, you really need to be walking in the spirit realm . . .seeing with spiritual eyes . . . can't see spiritually when walking by your natural reasoning. Pursuing Christ is walking spiritually.
Thank you again Molly . . .you may not agree with me on everything and I'm cool with that . .but I totally agree with you on this . . . 1000%
I can demonstrate differently, continuing in looking at Scripture and everything in God's Will as spiritual. We read in Genesis that on the Seventh Day He rested from His work, but at the same time we see God has not yet rested from His work. Spiritual things are believed on by faith, faith because it isn't a present reality but something that yet is to come. Therefore what read in Genesis, has yet come to pass because the seven days were a full account of God's creation of which we are still a part of. We trust in the completed work, and can rest presently, in the now, because God does not fail.
I already explained earlier, but will reiterate, God has yet to finish the work He started, this too is spiritual understanding. Paul called it a race to the finish line, and that we are all still running. We have not arrived yet to God's Rest, but by faith we rest now knowing He is faithful to complete the work He has started within us. The definition of resting, is also in dispute. When Jesus said rest in Him, it meant do not worry about tomorrow and do not look at yesterday's mistakes but push forward with both hands firm on the plow because we were created to do good works.
Prior to the understanding of UR/CU, the understanding of good works conflicted with the doctrine of salvation that said we were saved by grace through faith. The conflict of grace and works became a constant battle because by the old standard, I always saw it relating to our salvation. However, now I am beyond that line of thinking, since I recognize my salvation is by grace, and good works concern things which accompany salvation.
Scripture begins to unfold properly for those who did not throw out the baby with the bathwater. Just because the doctrine of eternal judgment has changed in their minds, does not change the doctrines repentance from acts which lead to death, of faith in God, or baptisms, of laying on of hands, and the resurrection of the dead. But like most people, they throw out everything they ever learned growing up with Christianity and hang solely on to this new revelation of Universal Salvation believing that it is the all and all of what Jesus and the apostles were talking about. That is not the full truth, in fact Salvation is only the milk, it is not the meat and those who are accustomed to milk are still infants, and like infants will be tossed to and fro by every wind of teaching and the cunning and craftiness of men in their deceitful scheming because they have not held on to what is True. So if idea that you are saved and all mankind is saved is where you have stopped your growth, you are stunted and not free in anything.
If people need Scripture to support what I said above, I can provide in multitude. There is no condemnation to those in Christ Jesus, those who follow not after the flesh but the spirit.
Quote from: riverman on August 29, 2008, 04:34:00 AM
It has been interesting to watch this thread veer from one area to another, I thought I might throw another thought out there that might be worthy of consideration in light of the original topic that was presented.
I have come to believe that virtually anything taught by the denominations is wrong, it is so leavened as to have lost it's true meaning or it is just out and out dung. Certainly I do not suggest to have all the answers, maybe a few, maybe none.
But consider this for a minute;
Joh 8:12 Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.
Joh 9:5 As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world.
Keeping that in mind let's go back to Genesis;
Gen 1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
Gen 1:4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.
Gen 1:5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
I do not believe everything came about in six literal days (another church teaching) but rather in ages or periods or stages. With this in mind and with scripture telling us the sun was created on the fourth day what or should I say Who was the Light created on Day One?
A couple more things to consider;
Joh 20:1 The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulcher and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulcher.
Joh 20:19 Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst and saith unto them, Peace be unto you.
Another huge first day, the day that gives us our hope! In Genesis we see Light before the sun, in Revelation we see Light with no need for the sun!
Rev 22:5 And there shall be no night there; and they need no candle, neither light of the sun; for the Lord God giveth them light: and they shall reign forever and ever.
Peace to you all,
RM
Hi! Brother RM
I agree wholeheartedly with your assessment of the established denominational Churches , dung indeed. I do believe that is why you and I and the rest of us here have made the wise move to obey the call and "Come Out Of Her"
It is a very interesting thought you have thrown in and, yes, the original topic seems to have got lost, so let us remind ourselves as to what that was; "Was Jesus Christ begotten/ born or was He created?"
Before we get into the meat let me say that I also believe that the six days of creation were more than the literal six days, it is more like six ages or eons.
At a period before the command went out; "Let there be light" we must of necessity consider the very beginning where we are told; "I
n the beginning was the Word, and the
Word was with God, and the
Word was God. He was in the
beginning with God. All things came into being through Him,
and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being...........No one has seen God at any time; the
only begotten God who is
in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him." (Jn.1:1-3 & 18).
Now let us establish some facts; 1...In the beginning was the Word. 2....The word was with God. 3.....The Word was God. 4.....He was in the beginning with God. 5.....He was the only begotten God in the bosom of the Father. Here we have five crucial and undeniable facts.
Start with
(3), the Word was God. Now
(2) the Word was with God. Now (1&4), both Gods were from the very beginning. Last of all let us take (5) the only begotten God was in the bosom of the Father. But we are told that there is only the ONE GOD.
"Remember the former things long past, For
I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is no one like Me, Declaring the end from the beginning, And from ancient times things which have not been done, Saying, 'My purpose will be established, And I will accomplish all My good pleasure';" (Isa.46: 9-10) But in
(Vs.18) we are told that the Word/God is in the bosom of the Father/God. Now we can identify the two Gods; one is the Father and the other is the Word in the Father's bosom. So there is still just the ONE GOD.
Now let us progress to your question about: "Let there be light." Where did it come from? We are told; "This is the message we have heard from Him and announce to you, that
God is Light, and in Him there is
no darkness at all." (1Jn.1:5). Jesus tells us that
God/Father is Light and there is
no darkness in Him. Next we are told that the Word/Son is the image pf the Father "He is the
image of the invisible God, the
firstborn of all creation." (Col.1:15). He is the
image of the Father and the
Father is Light, and He is the
FIRSTBORN and
NOT as some would have it CREATED[/color][/b]
Now "LET THERE BE LIGHT" at this command the Son who is Light comes forth/begotten/ born of the Father and the process of creation commences. Light is energy and it is with this energy drained from the Father that the Son/Word accomplishes His Father's will.
From this point on it is the Word/Son before He came to earth in the body of Jesus that did the rest of the creation work. On day one light was not created, the light was the begotten God. (vs18)
When the Messiah was due, the Word/Son took possession of the body that was prepared for Him; "Sacrifice and offering You have not desired, But a body You have prepared for Me; In whole burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin You have taken no pleasure. "Then I said, 'Behold, I have come (In the scroll of the book it is written of Me) To do Your will, O God.' " (Heb.10:5-7).
The Holy Spirit of the Father then implanted the body containing the Word/Son into Mary and commanded Joseph to name Him Jesus. "But when he had considered this, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, "Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife; for the Child who has been conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit. She will bear a Son; and you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins." (Matt.1:20-21).
In Rev. there will be no need for light because we will all be the begotten sons of God through Jesus Christ our Lord, "Born Again." (not created) and the Father of Lights will be our illumination.
I hope this helps brother, it is but my understanding of the Scriptures.
(http://dl.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1551/1551031u6k25jgwzu.png) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Peace!
Roy UK
Quote from: SOtW on August 29, 2008, 07:37:19 PM
Scripture begins to unfold properly for those who did not throw out the baby with the bathwater. Just because the doctrine of eternal judgment has changed in their minds, does not change the doctrines repentance from acts which lead to death, of faith in God, or baptisms, of laying on of hands, and the resurrection of the dead. But like most people, they throw out everything they ever learned growing up with Christianity and hang solely on to this new revelation of Universal Salvation believing that it is the all and all of what Jesus and the apostles were talking about. That is not the full truth, in fact Salvation is only the milk, it is not the meat and those who are accustomed to milk are still infants, and like infants will be tossed to and fro by every wind of teaching and the cunning and craftiness of men in their deceitful scheming because they have not held on to what is True. So if idea that you are saved and all mankind is saved is where you have stopped your growth, you are stunted and not free in anything.
Yup!
Quote from: Roy MorrisIn Rev. there will be no need for light because we will all be the begotten sons of God through Jesus Christ our Lord, "Born Again." (not created) and the Father of Lights will be our illumination.
Yes! Jesus as the unique Son of God is the spirit of prophecy.
Revelation 19:10
And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See thou do it not: I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.
Hi Roy,
QuoteHi! I'm Roy Monis
I am new on this site and I've had my very first post blocked. Everything that I've posted was perfectly valid and supported by Scripture, so I don't understand why discussion on a perfectly valid Scriptural question such as " Was Jesus Created or Born?" blocked. Is it the purpose of this forum to discuss Scripture or not? I have not brought any of my own teachings or ideas in as far as I'm aware, so why?
According to my Webster dictionary on e-sword, Created or Born mean the same.
BegottenBEGOT', BEGOT'TEN, pp. of get.
Procreated;
generated.
QuoteNow let us establish some facts; 1...In the beginning was the Word. 2....The word was with God. 3.....The Word was God. 4.....He was in the beginning with God. 5.....He was the only begotten God in the bosom of the Father. Here we have five crucial and undeniable facts.
Start with (3), the Word was God. Now (2) the Word was with God. Now (1&4), both Gods were from the very beginning. Last of all let us take (5) the only begotten God was in the bosom of the Father. But we are told that there is only the ONE GOD.
"Remember the former things long past, For I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is no one like Me, Declaring the end from the beginning, And from ancient times things which have not been done, Saying, 'My purpose will be established, And I will accomplish all My good pleasure';" (Isa.46: 9-10) But in (Vs.18) we are told that the Word/God is in the bosom of the Father/God. Now we can identify the two Gods; one is the Father and the other is the Word in the Father's bosom. So there is still just the ONE GOD.
My thoughts on John 1 differ from yours some what, so allow me to share my studies. Here's my research on John 1
John 1:1I have another train of thought for you to think about. For almost 400 years, we have a read John 1 through the eyes of the Catholic Church. (reinforcing the Trinity). In the New Testament, "the Word" (
Logos) happens to be of the masculine gender. Therefore, it's pronoun -"he" in our English translations - is a matter of interpretation, not translation. Did John write concerning "the word" that "he" was in the beginning with God or did he write concerning "the word" that "it" was in the beginning with God? As already stated, in the NT Greek the
logos or word is masculine noun. It is okay in English to use "he" to refer back to his masculine noun if there is good contextual reason to do so. But is there good reason to make "the word" a "he" here?
The English translations of the Greek text before the King James version of 1611 actually read this way: (notice Him and He are now "It").
Tyndale 1534:Joh 1:1 In the beginnynge was the worde and the worde was with God: and the worde was God. 2 The same was in the beginnynge with God. 3 All thinges were made by
it and with out
it was made nothinge that was made. 4 In
it was lyfe and the lyfe was ye lyght of men
Bishops 1568:Joh 1:1 In the begynnyng was the worde, & the worde was with God: and that worde was God. 2 The same was in the begynnyng with God. 3 All thynges were made by
it: and without
it, was made nothyng that was made. 4 In
it was lyfe, and the lyfe was the lyght of men,
Geneva 1587:Joh 1:1 In the beginning was that Word, and that Word was with God, and that Word was God. 2 This same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by
it, and without
it was made nothing that was made. 4 In
it was life, and that life was the light of men.
And now our modern Concordant Literal Version:Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the word, and the word was toward God, and God was the word. " 2 This was in the beginning toward God. 3 All came into being through
it, and apart from
it not even one thing came into being which has come into being." 4 In
it was life, and the life was the light of men."
The word
logos appears many, many more times in this very Gospel of John. And nowhere else do the translators capitalize it or use the masculine personal pronoun "he" to agree with it ! The rest of the New Testament is the same. Logos is variously translated as "statement" (Luke 20:20), "question" (Matt 21:24), "preaching" (1 Tim 5:17), "command" (Gal 5:14), "message" (Luke 4:32), "matter" (Acts 15:6), "reason" (Acts 10:29), so there is actually no reason to make John one say that "the Word" is the person Jesus himself, unless of course the translators are wanting to make a point to.
In all cases logos is an "it." In the light of this background it is far better to read John's prologue to mean that in the beginning God had a plan, a dream, a grand vision for the world, a reason by which He brought all things into being. This word or plan was expressive of who he is.
"The Word" for John is an "it" not a "he." On one occasion, Jesus is given the name "the word of God" and this is in Revelations 19:13. This name has been given to him after his resurrection and ascension, but we will not find it before his birth. It is not until we come to verse 14 of John's prologue that this
logos becomes personal and becomes the son of God, Jesus. "And the Word became flesh." A great plan that God had in his heart from before the creation at last is fulfilled. Be very clear that it does not say that God became flesh. There is even strong evidence suggest the John himself reacted to those who were already misusing his gospel to mean that Jesus was himself the Word who had personally preexist the world. When later he wrote his introduction to
1 John, he clearly made the point that what was in the beginning was not a "who" he put it this way: "
What was from the beginning,
what we have heard,
what we have seen with our eyes,
what we beheld and our hands handled, concerning
the word of life"
Logos - This word is translated in English as
"Word". It is not as some would have you believe Jesus' middle name. Jesus is not called
Jesus Logos of Nazareth. This word has an actual meaning which has been almost completely lost due to the Greek philosophical interpretation of John 1:1-3 & 14.
"I also saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their testimony to Jesus and for the word (logos) of God." Notice that they were beheaded for their testimony to Jesus
AND for the
logos of God. Jesus and the word of God are not the same thing. Word of God in this verse means God's plan of salvation for us (NAB), i.e. the kingdom of God message. So what does
"logos" mean?
Logos - 1. Denotes an internal reasoning process,
plan, or
intention, as well as an external word. 2. The
expression of thought. As embodying a
conception or
idea (New American Bible (footnote) & Vine's Expository Dictionary).
According to
Liddell and Scott Greek Lexicon, it also means:
Logos - the
inward thought which is expressed in the spoken word.
I will give you a brief paraphrase of John 1:1-3 using the definitions for
"logos:""In the beginning was God's plan, will, or idea for our salvation. It was present in his mind, and God's plan or will possessed all the attributes of God."The very Trinitarian Roman Catholic
New American Bible has this comment on this verse:
"Lack of a definite article with "God" in Greek signifies predication rather than identification." Predication - to affirm as a quality or
attribute (Webster's Dictionary).
So how does the Word (
logos) become flesh in John 1:14? Let me use an example which most of us can relate to. We are all familiar with the expression,
"was this baby planned?" Let's say it was planned. You and your wife had a plan to have a baby. You had
a logos, a plan. Your plan (logos)
became flesh the day that your
baby was born. In the same way, God's
plan of salvation for us became a
reality, became
flesh, when
Jesus was born. This verse is probably one of the biggest culprits in the creation of the trinity. The reason being that to someone educated in Greek philosophy such as the early church fathers of the 3rd, 4th, and 5th, centuries, logos had an entirely different meaning. Tertullian who was responsible for much of the creation of the trinity was a
Stoic lawyer. The Stoics defined
"logos" as the
"divine principle of life." Which is basically a definition of God. With this definition you are going to arrive at a completely different interpretation than what John intended. You will interpret it something like this:
"In the beginning was the divine principle of life, and the divine principle of life was with God, and the divine principle of life was God. Then, the divine principle of life became flesh." With this definition you arrive at the conclusion that the divine principle of life, which is God, became flesh. Now you have God's essence in two places at once. The explanation for this obvious problem came in the form of the Doctrine of the Trinity. Then you have God's essence in flesh, so the description of Jesus becomes that he is fully God and fully man. These concepts come straight out of
Greek philosophy. Greek philosophers believed that man was composed of flesh and a divine spark.
You decide which definition is correct, Greek philosophy's or John's Jewish definition.
So why did John write his Gospel? To teach us that Jesus is God, or something else? Well, he tells us in
John 20:31"but these have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ (anointed one), the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name."So are we going to believe John's inspired writings, that Jesus is the "Son of God", or the tradition of men who teach Jesus is "God the son."
It was the 1611 Kings James bible that began to change the way we read John 1, and tradition is a hard thing to overcome!
Paul
Quote from: SOtW on August 29, 2008, 04:39:26 PM
Quote from: Roy Monis
Quote from: Nathan2. The comments about what transpired in church are related in the sense that no matter how long one is in the kingdom perspectives, one still has boundaries based on personal standards. When other's cross those boundaries, law manifests in us and we try to "correct" the other person to come back into our standards . . that was what happened with those reacting negatively to the choice of wording I used. It was quickly evident there still are areas where freedom had not yet been let in.
Quote from: Roy Monis2.....In what way did I fall back on my religious background? My father and mother were Catholic and not very good ones. My background, in my opinion, was based on good solid social etiquette in all areas of social behaviour including appropriate discipline, and though I didn't like it at the time, I am now regretting that it's gone out of fashion. Just my opinion.
Roy,
Let me explain what is going on here. What is happening in this reply to you is guilt by association. It is just a cheap trick of people who cannot handle the fact that their belief systems have no knowledge attached to them. They can't find any valid reason to disagree with you and so they fall to a fallacy to discredit you rather than actually refuting what you said in a civil, reasonable fashion. Believing that Jesus died on the cross and rose on the third day is from a religious background, so if you proclaim this does this mean you are falling back on your religious background? No, of course not. "Falling back on religious background" or "Traditional Christianity" or "Western Thinking", all these are not valid objections to anything, they are fallacies used by those who lack understanding and looking for someway to look important. It seems to be a persistent problem, and usually proclaimed by people who believe they are more spiritual than you are.
Remember we still are unable to judge the heart of any man, because only God and that man knows what is going on in their heart; but, I wouldn't put much clout on those who need to use fallacy to support the knowledge of the Truth, because the Truth does not need fallacy to defend it. I find it sad that true good behavior (behavior that is not done for show, but out of sincerity) is condemned as not being spiritual and those who claim to spiritual need to use lies to defend the truth. There is some irony however in telling you that you are religious because you are correcting him, and he is correcting you saying that those who correct each other are religious and falling back to the Law. So what does that mean, he too has fallen back to the Law? See, no knowledge whatsoever of what they are doing and saying.
Thank you SOtW
I was beginning to think I was going round the bend. Thanks for putting me straight. God bless you brother.
Peace!
(http://dl.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1551/1551031u6k25jgwzu.png)Roy UK.
Quote from: CHB on August 29, 2008, 04:49:42 PM
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 28, 2008, 02:15:45 PM
Hi! CHB
Yes! I admit that the Christ/Word/Son was the firstborn before creation, the Creator of all creation and that Jesus Christ was the firstborn of all the dead. Yes Jesus Christ was the first to be born, the Creator. Jesus Christ is first of all things, He is the head, He is the Creator of all things, so it stands to reason that He must be first.
Peace!(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
If you agree that Christ is the first, then he was part of a series. After first comes second, right? If he was first he had a beginning, just like the second, third, and fourth. I don't mean he was made out of clay or anything, he came from God. Jesus was part of the creation, he was first. Jesus was the creator of all things except himself. But it says he was God the Father's first creation.
CHB
Hi! CHB
Look at the wording CHB. The firstborn of God, not firstcreaton of God. He came into being before creation started, He is the Creator. He started the series as you prefer to call creation that.
Peace!(http://dl.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1551/1551031u6k25jgwzu.png) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Quote from: PieracSo are we going to believe John's inspired writings, that Jesus is the "Son of God", or the tradition of men who teach Jesus is "God the son."
That Jesus is God is in the Bible--it is not the tradition of men.
But, they don't want us to discuss this here, so I won't, but I want to put in my voice against what you are teaching.
He is
the wonderful Counselor, the mighty God, the everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace. (Isa 9:6)
Quote from: Pierac on August 29, 2008, 08:39:32 PM
Hi Roy,
QuoteHi! I'm Roy Monis
I am new on this site and I've had my very first post blocked. Everything that I've posted was perfectly valid and supported by Scripture, so I don't understand why discussion on a perfectly valid Scriptural question such as " Was Jesus Created or Born?" blocked. Is it the purpose of this forum to discuss Scripture or not? I have not brought any of my own teachings or ideas in as far as I'm aware, so why?
According to my Webster dictionary on e-sword, Created or Born mean the same.
Begotten
BEGOT', BEGOT'TEN, pp. of get. Procreated; generated.
QuoteNow let us establish some facts; 1...In the beginning was the Word. 2....The word was with God. 3.....The Word was God. 4.....He was in the beginning with God. 5.....He was the only begotten God in the bosom of the Father. Here we have five crucial and undeniable facts.
Start with (3), the Word was God. Now (2) the Word was with God. Now (1&4), both Gods were from the very beginning. Last of all let us take (5) the only begotten God was in the bosom of the Father. But we are told that there is only the ONE GOD.
"Remember the former things long past, For I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is no one like Me, Declaring the end from the beginning, And from ancient times things which have not been done, Saying, 'My purpose will be established, And I will accomplish all My good pleasure';" (Isa.46: 9-10) But in (Vs.18) we are told that the Word/God is in the bosom of the Father/God. Now we can identify the two Gods; one is the Father and the other is the Word in the Father's bosom. So there is still just the ONE GOD.
My thoughts on John 1 differ from yours some what, so allow me to share my studies. Here's my research on John 1
John 1:1
I have another train of thought for you to think about. For almost 400 years, we have a read John 1 through the eyes of the Catholic Church. (reinforcing the Trinity). In the New Testament, "the Word" (Logos) happens to be of the masculine gender. Therefore, it's pronoun -"he" in our English translations - is a matter of interpretation, not translation. Did John write concerning "the word" that "he" was in the beginning with God or did he write concerning "the word" that "it" was in the beginning with God? As already stated, in the NT Greek the logos or word is masculine noun. It is okay in English to use "he" to refer back to his masculine noun if there is good contextual reason to do so. But is there good reason to make "the word" a "he" here?
The English translations of the Greek text before the King James version of 1611 actually read this way: (notice Him and He are now "It").
Tyndale 1534:
Joh 1:1 In the beginnynge was the worde and the worde was with God: and the worde was God. 2 The same was in the beginnynge with God. 3 All thinges were made by it and with out it was made nothinge that was made. 4 In it was lyfe and the lyfe was ye lyght of men
Bishops 1568:
Joh 1:1 In the begynnyng was the worde, & the worde was with God: and that worde was God. 2 The same was in the begynnyng with God. 3 All thynges were made by it: and without it, was made nothyng that was made. 4 In it was lyfe, and the lyfe was the lyght of men,
Geneva 1587:
Joh 1:1 In the beginning was that Word, and that Word was with God, and that Word was God. 2 This same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by it, and without it was made nothing that was made. 4 In it was life, and that life was the light of men.
And now our modern Concordant Literal Version:
Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the word, and the word was toward God, and God was the word. " 2 This was in the beginning toward God. 3 All came into being through it, and apart from it not even one thing came into being which has come into being." 4 In it was life, and the life was the light of men."
The word logos appears many, many more times in this very Gospel of John. And nowhere else do the translators capitalize it or use the masculine personal pronoun "he" to agree with it ! The rest of the New Testament is the same. Logos is variously translated as "statement" (Luke 20:20), "question" (Matt 21:24), "preaching" (1 Tim 5:17), "command" (Gal 5:14), "message" (Luke 4:32), "matter" (Acts 15:6), "reason" (Acts 10:29), so there is actually no reason to make John one say that "the Word" is the person Jesus himself, unless of course the translators are wanting to make a point to. In all cases logos is an "it."
In the light of this background it is far better to read John's prologue to mean that in the beginning God had a plan, a dream, a grand vision for the world, a reason by which He brought all things into being. This word or plan was expressive of who he is.
"The Word" for John is an "it" not a "he." On one occasion, Jesus is given the name "the word of God" and this is in Revelations 19:13. This name has been given to him after his resurrection and ascension, but we will not find it before his birth. It is not until we come to verse 14 of John's prologue that this logos becomes personal and becomes the son of God, Jesus. "And the Word became flesh." A great plan that God had in his heart from before the creation at last is fulfilled. Be very clear that it does not say that God became flesh. There is even strong evidence suggest the John himself reacted to those who were already misusing his gospel to mean that Jesus was himself the Word who had personally preexist the world. When later he wrote his introduction to 1 John, he clearly made the point that what was in the beginning was not a "who" he put it this way: "What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we beheld and our hands handled, concerning the word of life"
Logos - This word is translated in English as "Word". It is not as some would have you believe Jesus' middle name. Jesus is not called Jesus Logos of Nazareth. This word has an actual meaning which has been almost completely lost due to the Greek philosophical interpretation of John 1:1-3 & 14.
"I also saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their testimony to Jesus and for the word (logos) of God."
Notice that they were beheaded for their testimony to Jesus AND for the logos of God. Jesus and the word of God are not the same thing. Word of God in this verse means God's plan of salvation for us (NAB), i.e. the kingdom of God message. So what does "logos" mean?
Logos - 1. Denotes an internal reasoning process, plan, or intention, as well as an external word. 2. The expression of thought. As embodying a conception or idea
(New American Bible (footnote) & Vine's Expository Dictionary).
According to Liddell and Scott Greek Lexicon, it also means:
Logos - the inward thought which is expressed in the spoken word.
I will give you a brief paraphrase of John 1:1-3 using the definitions for "logos:"
"In the beginning was God's plan, will, or idea for our salvation. It was present in his mind, and God's plan or will possessed all the attributes of God."
The very Trinitarian Roman Catholic New American Bible has this comment on this verse:
"Lack of a definite article with "God" in Greek signifies predication rather than identification."
Predication - to affirm as a quality or attribute (Webster's Dictionary).
So how does the Word (logos) become flesh in John 1:14? Let me use an example which most of us can relate to. We are all familiar with the expression, "was this baby planned?" Let's say it was planned. You and your wife had a plan to have a baby. You had a logos, a plan. Your plan (logos) became flesh the day that your baby was born. In the same way, God's plan of salvation for us became a reality, became flesh, when Jesus was born. This verse is probably one of the biggest culprits in the creation of the trinity. The reason being that to someone educated in Greek philosophy such as the early church fathers of the 3rd, 4th, and 5th, centuries, logos had an entirely different meaning. Tertullian who was responsible for much of the creation of the trinity was a Stoic lawyer. The Stoics defined "logos" as the "divine principle of life." Which is basically a definition of God. With this definition you are going to arrive at a completely different interpretation than what John intended. You will interpret it something like this:
"In the beginning was the divine principle of life, and the divine principle of life was with God, and the divine principle of life was God. Then, the divine principle of life became flesh."
With this definition you arrive at the conclusion that the divine principle of life, which is God, became flesh. Now you have God's essence in two places at once. The explanation for this obvious problem came in the form of the Doctrine of the Trinity. Then you have God's essence in flesh, so the description of Jesus becomes that he is fully God and fully man. These concepts come straight out of Greek philosophy. Greek philosophers believed that man was composed of flesh and a divine spark.
You decide which definition is correct, Greek philosophy's or John's Jewish definition.
So why did John write his Gospel? To teach us that Jesus is God, or something else? Well, he tells us in John 20:31
"but these have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ (anointed one), the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name."
So are we going to believe John's inspired writings, that Jesus is the "Son of God", or the tradition of men who teach Jesus is "God the son."
It was the 1611 Kings James bible that began to change the way we read John 1, and tradition is a hard thing to overcome!
Paul
I enjoyed that, thanks
Quote from: Taffy on August 29, 2008, 06:01:37 PM
Molly much of this ive talked about for ages..much shared on the 1000YR THREAD SIS....
Christ is called the MORNING star which rises in our HEARTS .correlate that to what you posted :icon_flower:
Yes Taffy
Good thread, I'm interested, start it or let riverman do the necessary.
Peace!
(http://dl.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1551/1551031u6k25jgwzu.png) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy.
Quote from: Nathan on August 29, 2008, 06:27:26 PM
Molly . . .THANK YOU that's exactly EXACTLY what I am saying. I never said throw the Bible away, never said reading it literal was wrong . . .all I've ever said was that there's just so much more than the literal piece and that by "living" by the literal, you miss the spiritual truth . ..so as a result . . .let go of the idea of applying the literal . . . of course you must read it . . .if you don't read it . .it's just as you say, you won't see the spiritual meaning beneath it.
To see spiritual truth, you really need to be walking in the spirit realm . . .seeing with spiritual eyes . . . can't see spiritually when walking by your natural reasoning. Pursuing Christ is walking spiritually.
Thank you again Molly . . .you may not agree with me on everything and I'm cool with that . .but I totally agree with you on this . . . 1000%
Hi! Nathan
Forgive me for disagreeing but that's not what I gathered by your posts. If it was what you were contriving to say then I just didn't get it. It could have been presented in a less unobtrusive way. If I have offended please forgive.
Peace!(http://dl.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1551/1551031u6k25jgwzu.png) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
I've spent about 3 hours trying to respond to you Roy . . .you wouldn't believe what I've been going through in trying to get this out . . .I've started a new thread that is directed to you due to our conversation . .not because I want to set you straight . . .so please don't think that's my motive. But I do think you're honestly asking . . .and that's why I do wish to respond. I can't even remember what I titled the stupid thing already and I just sent it. :msealed:
"Dimensional thinking . . .Clearing the Air" I had to look it up.
Quote from: SOtW on August 29, 2008, 07:37:19 PM
I already explained earlier, but will reiterate, God has yet to finish the work He started, this too is spiritual understanding. Paul called it a race to the finish line, and that we are all still running. We have not arrived yet to God's Rest, but by faith we rest now knowing He is faithful to complete the work He has started within us. The definition of resting, is also in dispute. When Jesus said rest in Him, it meant do not worry about tomorrow and do not look at yesterday's mistakes but push forward with both hands firm on the plow because we were created to do good works.
Hello Craig,
Just to clarify my own position I tend to have at some agreement with you here, it is my present belief that we are really not even through the first half of the prophetic creation week yet.
Isa 46:10 Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand and I will do all my pleasure:
CHB, Molly & Taffy,
I would enjoy discussing this topic with you all but I will not be in a position to dedicate much time to the Board until Tuesday, I will be entertaining guests here throughout the Labor Day weekend holiday which includes Monday. A creation week (and related items of interest) topic might prove to be very interesting!
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 29, 2008, 07:42:00 PM
It is a very interesting thought you have thrown in and, yes, the original topic seems to have got lost, so let us remind ourselves as to what that was; "Was Jesus Christ begotten/ born or was He created?"
Hi Roy,
Thanks for your response I will bow out of your thread as I am not much of a debator these days, its been burned out of me (I pray).
Peace,
RM
QuoteHello Craig,
Just to clarify my own position I tend to have at some agreement with you here, it is my present belief that we are really not even through the first half of the prophetic creation week yet.
Isa 46:10 Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand and I will do all my pleasure:
Exactly, declaring the end from the beginning, and from the ancient times things that are not yet done, is exactly what is going on. By faith we can live Today, knowing the end is complete, even though it has not yet been done. It takes some work for a person to comprehend what this means, it is a simple phrase but it is a complicated concept which does not rely on concrete proof to believe.
There is three basic understandings happening when you trust in the Lord, some revelations of reality for a Child of God. There are of course many more, but I find many people confused.
The first is that you are still in this world not taken from it, just as Jesus prayed to the Father not to take them but to protect them from the evil One. Some do not believe the prayer of Jesus in John 17, and believe that they are already taken from this world and therefore are above the principles of life. This is true by faith to be a present reality but in and of itself it is still something that will be.
The second is that although you are in this world you are not of this world which means we are not called to live as ordinary men and women, we are ambassadors who are called out to shine brightly. Some here do not believe this, they believe that freedom comes with no responsibility or accountability, taking there freedom in Christ to sin against both God and man. Though it is true that presently we are free because He set us free, we are not to use this freedom to sin. Man cannot serve two masters, and he is a slave to the one who he serves. We still have responsibility to carry out the commission set before us regardless.
The third is Jesus has already destroyed the work of the evil one and death has no power over you because to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord. This is not the same as destroying the evil one, because the first reality is that he is wandering and looking for whom he can devour. While we are in this natural (not carnal or fleshly, but physical flesh and blood) body, the Lord is with us protecting us from the evil one. At the same time, if you live by the carnal and fleshly desires of your heart, you begin the work of the evil one who has taken and captured you to do his will. We must put on the full armour of God, and put on the belt of Truth which holds it all together. It is Truth, which many have the hardest time in accepting.
So yes, we live presently and now for Christ, by His Spirit He has given to us as promise of things to come, we can presently access the throne of Grace in our time of need and bound and loose both on earth and in heaven that things which are our right through the inheritance given to us by His wonderful grace. This is a present and powerful reality now, but it does not negate or ignore that we still have to run the race, stay focused, and finish this life which we have been called as Ambassadors to share the good news of what was and is and is to come.
Quote from: Pierac on August 29, 2008, 08:39:32 PM
Hi Roy,
QuoteHi! I'm Roy Monis
I am new on this site and I've had my very first post blocked. Everything that I've posted was perfectly valid and supported by Scripture, so I don't understand why discussion on a perfectly valid Scriptural question such as " Was Jesus Created or Born?" blocked. Is it the purpose of this forum to discuss Scripture or not? I have not brought any of my own teachings or ideas in as far as I'm aware, so why?
According to my Webster dictionary on e-sword, Created or Born mean the same.
Begotten
BEGOT', BEGOT'TEN, pp. of get. Procreated; generated.
QuoteNow let us establish some facts; 1...In the beginning was the Word. 2....The word was with God. 3.....The Word was God. 4.....He was in the beginning with God. 5.....He was the only begotten God in the bosom of the Father. Here we have five crucial and undeniable facts.
Start with (3), the Word was God. Now (2) the Word was with God. Now (1&4), both Gods were from the very beginning. Last of all let us take (5) the only begotten God was in the bosom of the Father. But we are told that there is only the ONE GOD.
"Remember the former things long past, For I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is no one like Me, Declaring the end from the beginning, And from ancient times things which have not been done, Saying, 'My purpose will be established, And I will accomplish all My good pleasure';" (Isa.46: 9-10) But in (Vs.18) we are told that the Word/God is in the bosom of the Father/God. Now we can identify the two Gods; one is the Father and the other is the Word in the Father's bosom. So there is still just the ONE GOD.
My thoughts on John 1 differ from yours some what, so allow me to share my studies. Here's my research on John 1
John 1:1
I have another train of thought for you to think about. For almost 400 years, we have a read John 1 through the eyes of the Catholic Church. (reinforcing the Trinity). In the New Testament, "the Word" (Logos) happens to be of the masculine gender. Therefore, it's pronoun -"he" in our English translations - is a matter of interpretation, not translation. Did John write concerning "the word" that "he" was in the beginning with God or did he write concerning "the word" that "it" was in the beginning with God? As already stated, in the NT Greek the logos or word is masculine noun. It is okay in English to use "he" to refer back to his masculine noun if there is good contextual reason to do so. But is there good reason to make "the word" a "he" here?
The English translations of the Greek text before the King James version of 1611 actually read this way: (notice Him and He are now "It").
Tyndale 1534:
Joh 1:1 In the beginnynge was the worde and the worde was with God: and the worde was God. 2 The same was in the beginnynge with God. 3 All thinges were made by it and with out it was made nothinge that was made. 4 In it was lyfe and the lyfe was ye lyght of men
Bishops 1568:
Joh 1:1 In the begynnyng was the worde, & the worde was with God: and that worde was God. 2 The same was in the begynnyng with God. 3 All thynges were made by it: and without it, was made nothyng that was made. 4 In it was lyfe, and the lyfe was the lyght of men,
Geneva 1587:
Joh 1:1 In the beginning was that Word, and that Word was with God, and that Word was God. 2 This same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by it, and without it was made nothing that was made. 4 In it was life, and that life was the light of men.
And now our modern Concordant Literal Version:
Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the word, and the word was toward God, and God was the word. " 2 This was in the beginning toward God. 3 All came into being through it, and apart from it not even one thing came into being which has come into being." 4 In it was life, and the life was the light of men."
The word logos appears many, many more times in this very Gospel of John. And nowhere else do the translators capitalize it or use the masculine personal pronoun "he" to agree with it ! The rest of the New Testament is the same. Logos is variously translated as "statement" (Luke 20:20), "question" (Matt 21:24), "preaching" (1 Tim 5:17), "command" (Gal 5:14), "message" (Luke 4:32), "matter" (Acts 15:6), "reason" (Acts 10:29), so there is actually no reason to make John one say that "the Word" is the person Jesus himself, unless of course the translators are wanting to make a point to. In all cases logos is an "it."
In the light of this background it is far better to read John's prologue to mean that in the beginning God had a plan, a dream, a grand vision for the world, a reason by which He brought all things into being. This word or plan was expressive of who he is.
"The Word" for John is an "it" not a "he." On one occasion, Jesus is given the name "the word of God" and this is in Revelations 19:13. This name has been given to him after his resurrection and ascension, but we will not find it before his birth. It is not until we come to verse 14 of John's prologue that this logos becomes personal and becomes the son of God, Jesus. "And the Word became flesh." A great plan that God had in his heart from before the creation at last is fulfilled. Be very clear that it does not say that God became flesh. There is even strong evidence suggest the John himself reacted to those who were already misusing his gospel to mean that Jesus was himself the Word who had personally preexist the world. When later he wrote his introduction to 1 John, he clearly made the point that what was in the beginning was not a "who" he put it this way: "What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we beheld and our hands handled, concerning the word of life"
Logos - This word is translated in English as "Word". It is not as some would have you believe Jesus' middle name. Jesus is not called Jesus Logos of Nazareth. This word has an actual meaning which has been almost completely lost due to the Greek philosophical interpretation of John 1:1-3 & 14.
"I also saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their testimony to Jesus and for the word (logos) of God."
Notice that they were beheaded for their testimony to Jesus AND for the logos of God. Jesus and the word of God are not the same thing. Word of God in this verse means God's plan of salvation for us (NAB), i.e. the kingdom of God message. So what does "logos" mean?
Logos - 1. Denotes an internal reasoning process, plan, or intention, as well as an external word. 2. The expression of thought. As embodying a conception or idea
(New American Bible (footnote) & Vine's Expository Dictionary).
According to Liddell and Scott Greek Lexicon, it also means:
Logos - the inward thought which is expressed in the spoken word.
I will give you a brief paraphrase of John 1:1-3 using the definitions for "logos:"
"In the beginning was God's plan, will, or idea for our salvation. It was present in his mind, and God's plan or will possessed all the attributes of God."
The very Trinitarian Roman Catholic New American Bible has this comment on this verse:
"Lack of a definite article with "God" in Greek signifies predication rather than identification."
Predication - to affirm as a quality or attribute (Webster's Dictionary).
So how does the Word (logos) become flesh in John 1:14? Let me use an example which most of us can relate to. We are all familiar with the expression, "was this baby planned?" Let's say it was planned. You and your wife had a plan to have a baby. You had a logos, a plan. Your plan (logos) became flesh the day that your baby was born. In the same way, God's plan of salvation for us became a reality, became flesh, when Jesus was born. This verse is probably one of the biggest culprits in the creation of the trinity. The reason being that to someone educated in Greek philosophy such as the early church fathers of the 3rd, 4th, and 5th, centuries, logos had an entirely different meaning. Tertullian who was responsible for much of the creation of the trinity was a Stoic lawyer. The Stoics defined "logos" as the "divine principle of life." Which is basically a definition of God. With this definition you are going to arrive at a completely different interpretation than what John intended. You will interpret it something like this:
"In the beginning was the divine principle of life, and the divine principle of life was with God, and the divine principle of life was God. Then, the divine principle of life became flesh."
With this definition you arrive at the conclusion that the divine principle of life, which is God, became flesh. Now you have God's essence in two places at once. The explanation for this obvious problem came in the form of the Doctrine of the Trinity. Then you have God's essence in flesh, so the description of Jesus becomes that he is fully God and fully man. These concepts come straight out of Greek philosophy. Greek philosophers believed that man was composed of flesh and a divine spark.
You decide which definition is correct, Greek philosophy's or John's Jewish definition.
So why did John write his Gospel? To teach us that Jesus is God, or something else? Well, he tells us in John 20:31
"but these have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ (anointed one), the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name."
So are we going to believe John's inspired writings, that Jesus is the "Son of God", or the tradition of men who teach Jesus is "God the son."
It was the 1611 Kings James bible that began to change the way we read John 1, and tradition is a hard thing to overcome!
Paul
##############
Hi! Pierac
1.......Your quote Joh 1:1 In the beginnynge was the worde and the worde
was with God: and the worde was God. 2 The same was in the beginnynge with
God.
Old English but what matter, it's the same, the only difference being you left out the vs.18
which adds meaning to what appears to be an enigma.
As far as the heresy goes I refuse to answer and request you remove it off my thread.
"And I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse, and He who sat on
it is called Faithful and True, and in righteousness He judges and wages war. His eyes
are a flame of fire, and on His head are many diadems; and He has a name written on
Him which no one knows except Himself. He is clothed with a robe dipped in blood,
and His name is called The Word of God." (Rev.19:11-13).
The Word/Son of God is our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and to refer to Him as
"IT" is
blasphemy of the highest order. (You need your mouth washing out with something
stronger than fullers soap, may I suggest arsenic). I believe some of the blasphemers
were justly rewarded on earth but yet to face the purifying wrath of God.
2..........Your quote: And now our modern Concordant Literal Version:
Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the word, and the word was toward God, and God was
the word. "
There is nothing new in this it is the same thing except for the missing vs.18. What it is saying to me is; The Word was in the beginning and the Word was toward God. This can only mean that God the Father was the beginning, and that the Word which was toward Him was in the beginning which was God/Father, and that the Word itself was God/Son. NOTHING DIFFERENT other than the heresy. I've dealt with it enough so kindly remove all of it or will someone kindly show me how I can do Mr Pierac the honour.
Thank you for your response but I don't suffer heresies and blasphemy too kindly, please take it elsewhere. Your deep study is putting you under a deep delusion; "For this reason God will send upon them a deluding influence so that they will believe what is false, in order that they all may be judged who did not believe the truth, but took pleasure in wickedness." (2Thess.2:11-12)
url=http://www.glitter-graphics.com](http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif)[/url]
Not "IT" You Blasphemer!
Peace!
Roy UK.
Quote from: SOtW on August 29, 2008, 11:01:34 PM
QuoteHello Craig,
Just to clarify my own position I tend to have at some agreement with you here, it is my present belief that we are really not even through the first half of the prophetic creation week yet.
Isa 46:10 Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand and I will do all my pleasure:
Exactly, declaring the end from the beginning, and from the ancient times things that are not yet done, is exactly what is going on. By faith we can live Today, knowing the end is complete, even though it has not yet been done. It takes some work for a person to comprehend what this means, it is a simple phrase but it is a complicated concept which does not rely on concrete proof to believe.
There is three basic understandings happening when you trust in the Lord, some revelations of reality for a Child of God. There are of course many more, but I find many people confused.
The first is that you are still in this world not taken from it, just as Jesus prayed to the Father not to take them but to protect them from the evil One. Some do not believe the prayer of Jesus in John 17, and believe that they are already taken from this world and therefore are above the principles of life. This is true by faith to be a present reality but in and of itself it is still something that will be.
The second is that although you are in this world you are not of this world which means we are not called to live as ordinary men and women, we are ambassadors who are called out to shine brightly. Some here do not believe this, they believe that freedom comes with no responsibility or accountability, taking there freedom in Christ to sin against both God and man. Though it is true that presently we are free because He set us free, we are not to use this freedom to sin. Man cannot serve two masters, and he is a slave to the one who he serves. We still have responsibility to carry out the commission set before us regardless.
The third is Jesus has already destroyed the work of the evil one and death has no power over you because to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord. This is not the same as destroying the evil one, because the first reality is that he is wandering and looking for whom he can devour. While we are in this natural (not carnal or fleshly, but physical flesh and blood) body, the Lord is with us protecting us from the evil one. At the same time, if you live by the carnal and fleshly desires of your heart, you begin the work of the evil one who has taken and captured you to do his will. We must put on the full armour of God, and put on the belt of Truth which holds it all together. It is Truth, which many have the hardest time in accepting.
So yes, we live presently and now for Christ, by His Spirit He has given to us as promise of things to come, we can presently access the throne of Grace in our time of need and bound and loose both on earth and in heaven that things which are our right through the inheritance given to us by His wonderful grace. This is a present and powerful reality now, but it does not negate or ignore that we still have to run the race, stay focused, and finish this life which we have been called as Ambassadors to share the good news of what was and is and is to come.
Hi! SOtW
How very true, too much is taken for granted under the umbrella of Liberty and grace which makes one complacent regarding obedience to that Law of Liberty and grace. Knowing the end from the beginning, yes we are somewhere in between because what is ahead of us has already been, there is nothing new under the sun. That which
has been is that
which will be, And that which
has been done is that which
will be done. So there is
nothing new under the sun. Is there anything of which one might say,
"See this, it is new"? Already it
has existed for ages Which were before us........ He has made everything appropriate in its time. He has also set
eternity in their heart, yet so that man will not find out the work which God has done from the
beginning even to the end......
That which is has been already and
that which will be has already been, for God seeks what has passed by........ I have seen that nothing is better than that man should be happy in his activities, for that is his lot. For who will bring him to see what will occur after him?" (Eccl.3:11,15,22)
Peace!(http://dl.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1551/1551031u6k25jgwzu.png) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Hey Roy,
I am one for discussion. Unforuntately, I find no benefit to just calling out a person's beliefs as heresy and so much to refuse them discussion as a result of it. I know you believe Arianism is heresy, but at the same time the same going around telling people this is heresy is not going to help them understand the why, how and what this heresy is. I have had many disagreements with Pierac concerning the Trinity and it doesn't go anywhere but the discussion usually isn't for changing minds of those with the positions but to give those reading the discussion informed decisions. Don't need to use the same fallacy which is used against you, against another person.
People have thrown out the baby with the bathwater since accepting the UR/CU and so everything has become open discussion even the things that were once considered heresy, because Universalism has been called heresy and so now free of this label, what other things which were called heresy are not? I still retain that not everything we learned in Christianity was false, but there are some who question it all now and I believe that is good and needs to be discussed civilly and reasonably.
Though, as I said before, what does Jesus being created or begotten, have to do with Universal Salvation?
Quote from: SOTWThough, as I said before, what does Jesus being created or begotten, have to do with Universal Salvation?
Maybe a better question would be--what does it have to do with salvation?
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 30, 2008, 01:56:41 PM
##############
Hi! Pierac
1.......Your quote Joh 1:1 In the beginnynge was the worde and the worde
was with God: and the worde was God. 2 The same was in the beginnynge with
God.
Old English but what matter, it's the same, the only difference being you left out the vs.18
which adds meaning to what appears to be an enigma.
As far as the heresy goes I refuse to answer and request you remove it off my thread.
"And I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse, and He who sat on
it is called Faithful and True, and in righteousness He judges and wages war. His eyes
are a flame of fire, and on His head are many diadems; and He has a name written on
Him which no one knows except Himself. He is clothed with a robe dipped in blood,
and His name is called The Word of God." (Rev.19:11-13).
The Word/Son of God is our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and to refer to Him as "IT" is
blasphemy of the highest order. (You need your mouth washing out with something
stronger than fullers soap, may I suggest arsenic). I believe some of the blasphemers
were justly rewarded on earth but yet to face the purifying wrath of God.
2..........Your quote: And now our modern Concordant Literal Version:
Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the word, and the word was toward God, and God was
the word. "
There is nothing new in this it is the same thing except for the missing vs.18. What it is saying to me is; The Word was in the beginning and the Word was toward God. This can only mean that God the Father was the beginning, and that the Word which was toward Him was in the beginning which was God/Father, and that the Word itself was God/Son. NOTHING DIFFERENT other than the heresy. I've dealt with it enough so kindly remove all of it or will someone kindly show me how I can do Mr Pierac the honour.
Thank you for your response but I don't suffer heresies and blasphemy too kindly, please take it elsewhere. Your deep study is putting you under a deep delusion; "For this reason God will send upon them a deluding influence so that they will believe what is false, in order that they all may be judged who did not believe the truth, but took pleasure in wickedness." (2Thess.2:11-12)
url=http://www.glitter-graphics.com](http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif)[/url]
Not "IT" You Blasphemer!
Peace!
Roy UK.
So your saying Tyndale and the translators of the Bishops, Geneva and the Concordant Literal bible Versions are all blasphemers? I forgive you because you obviously did not read my post. The logos was called an "it" not Jesus. Also I did not write the definitions for "Logos"
Logos - 1. Denotes an
internal reasoning process,
plan, or intention, as well as an external word. 2. The
expression of thought. As embodying a conception or idea
(
New American Bible (footnote) &
Vine's Expository Dictionary).
According to
Liddell and Scott Greek Lexicon, it also means:
Logos - the inward thought which is expressed in the spoken word.
BTW, You were the one who asked "Was Jesus Created or Born?" And
according to Christendom your question alone is blasphemous! So don't ask blasphemous questions and not to expect non-traditional answers. The Administrator allowed this thread to continue so I added my two cents. If my post are too strong then
I will respect your wishes and will not add as it is your thread. However, you did ask, so don't be so shocked when someone answers.
So, I'm sorry for freaking you out, as I believe in only one God, the Father.(Joh 17:1-3) Who sent his only
begotten son for the salvation of the world. The whole world!
Again sorry,
Paul
Quote from: SOtW on August 30, 2008, 07:50:46 PM
Hey Roy,
I am one for discussion. Unforuntately, I find no benefit to just calling out a person's beliefs as heresy and so much to refuse them discussion as a result of it. I know you believe Arianism is heresy, but at the same time the same going around telling people this is heresy is not going to help them understand the why, how and what this heresy is. I have had many disagreements with Pierac concerning the Trinity and it doesn't go anywhere but the discussion usually isn't for changing minds of those with the positions but to give those reading the discussion informed decisions. Don't need to use the same fallacy which is used against you, against another person.
People have thrown out the baby with the bathwater since accepting the UR/CU and so everything has become open discussion even the things that were once considered heresy, because Universalism has been called heresy and so now free of this label, what other things which were called heresy are not? I still retain that not everything we learned in Christianity was false, but there are some who question it all now and I believe that is good and needs to be discussed civilly and reasonably.
Though, as I said before, what does Jesus being created or begotten, have to do with Universal Salvation?
Hi! SOtW
I fully concur with what you have said and thank you for your kind and wise advice. I was wrong not to have read all of Pierac's post before going off the top. But I could not control my emotions when I thought my Lord was being reduced to an IT. I will read his full post and answer it in a civil manner as you so wisely suggest.
Thank you brother, you're a friend.
Peace!(http://dl.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1551/1551031u6k25jgwzu.png) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Quote from: Molly on August 30, 2008, 08:26:46 PM
Quote from: SOTWThough, as I said before, what does Jesus being created or begotten, have to do with Universal Salvation?
Maybe a better question would be--what does it have to do with salvation?
How can a created being, a man, save me?
8Then Peter, filled with the Holy Ghost, said unto them, Ye rulers of the people, and elders of Israel,
9If we this day be examined of the good deed done to the impotent man, by what means he is made whole;
10Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole.
11This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner.
12Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.--Acts 4
Only God can save me.
I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour.--Isa 43
Isaiah 45:21
Tell ye, and bring them near; yea, let them take counsel together: who hath declared this from ancient time? who hath told it from that time? have not I the LORD? and there is no God else beside me;
a just God and a Saviour; there is none beside me.O, Lord Jesus! My Lord and my God!
Quote from: Pierac on August 30, 2008, 08:43:28 PM
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 30, 2008, 01:56:41 PM
##############
Hi! Pierac
1.......Your quote Joh 1:1 In the beginnynge was the worde and the worde
was with God: and the worde was God. 2 The same was in the beginnynge with
God.
Old English but what matter, it's the same, the only difference being you left out the vs.18
which adds meaning to what appears to be an enigma.
As far as the heresy goes I refuse to answer and request you remove it off my thread.
"And I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse, and He who sat on
it is called Faithful and True, and in righteousness He judges and wages war. His eyes
are a flame of fire, and on His head are many diadems; and He has a name written on
Him which no one knows except Himself. He is clothed with a robe dipped in blood,
and His name is called The Word of God." (Rev.19:11-13).
The Word/Son of God is our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and to refer to Him as "IT" is
blasphemy of the highest order. (You need your mouth washing out with something
stronger than fullers soap, may I suggest arsenic). I believe some of the blasphemers
were justly rewarded on earth but yet to face the purifying wrath of God.
2..........Your quote: And now our modern Concordant Literal Version:
Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the word, and the word was toward God, and God was
the word. "
There is nothing new in this it is the same thing except for the missing vs.18. What it is saying to me is; The Word was in the beginning and the Word was toward God. This can only mean that God the Father was the beginning, and that the Word which was toward Him was in the beginning which was God/Father, and that the Word itself was God/Son. NOTHING DIFFERENT other than the heresy. I've dealt with it enough so kindly remove all of it or will someone kindly show me how I can do Mr Pierac the honour.
Thank you for your response but I don't suffer heresies and blasphemy too kindly, please take it elsewhere. Your deep study is putting you under a deep delusion; "For this reason God will send upon them a deluding influence so that they will believe what is false, in order that they all may be judged who did not believe the truth, but took pleasure in wickedness." (2Thess.2:11-12)
url=http://www.glitter-graphics.com](http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif)[/url]
Not "IT" You Blasphemer!
Peace!
Roy UK.
So your saying Tyndale and the translators of the Bishops, Geneva and the Concordant Literal bible Versions are all blasphemers? I forgive you because you obviously did not read my post. The logos was called an "it" not Jesus. Also I did not write the definitions for "Logos"
Logos - 1. Denotes an internal reasoning process, plan, or intention, as well as an external word. 2. The expression of thought. As embodying a conception or idea
(New American Bible (footnote) & Vine's Expository Dictionary).
According to Liddell and Scott Greek Lexicon, it also means:
Logos - the inward thought which is expressed in the spoken word.
BTW, You were the one who asked "Was Jesus Created or Born?" And according to Christendom your question alone is blasphemous! So don't ask blasphemous questions and not to expect non-traditional answers. The Administrator allowed this thread to continue so I added my two cents. If my post are too strong then I will respect your wishes and will not add as it is your thread. However, you did ask, so don't be so shocked when someone answers.
So, I'm sorry for freaking you out, as I believe in only one God, the Father.(Joh 17:1-3) Who sent his only begotten son for the salvation of the world. The whole world!
Again sorry,
Paul
Hi! Paul
Forgive me brother for my ignorance at attempting to upbraid you without reading your full post. I was too shocked to think that you were reducing my Lord to an
IT.I will now follow brother SOtW's advice and answer you in a more civil manner if I may?
Your quote;
QuoteTherefore, it's pronoun -"he" in our English translations - is a matter of interpretation, not translation. Did John write concerning "the word" that "he" was in the beginning with God or did he write concerning "the word" that "it" was in the beginning with God?
Let us read it; "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God
. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through
Him, and apart from
Him nothing came into being that has come into being." (Jn.1:1-3).
Now if I understand you correctly you are saying that the pronouns He & Him are a matter of interpretation not translation. You ask did John write that
He was in the beginning or did he write that
IT was in the beginning. Well for the answer let's skip a few verses and go down, what does one read there? "No one has seen God at any time; the
only begotten God who is in the
bosom of the Father, He has explained Him." (Jn. 1.18).
So what must John have meant when he wrote that verse?
He or
IT? Now the Son of Gog does not appear to be an
IT to me, does it to you?
Your post is a very long one so I'll have to answer it in short bursts. And I'll start by asking you for a short response as to what you make of the above. Once that is settled we can in all civility continue to the end of your long post.
My purpose in this is to ensure that I'm building my new house on a firm foundation or it is going to fall, like the one I built in Babylon. The only True foundation is the True Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God and Saviour of OF THE WHOLE WORLD. I am not trying to push my belief down anyone's throat. Everyone appears to be busy putting the roof on their house with all the trimmings and not paying attention to the basic foundation on which they are building. That is purely my line of thought that you may find of interest.
Peace!
(http://dl.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1551/1551031u6k25jgwzu.png) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK.
Quote from: Molly on August 30, 2008, 08:26:46 PM
Quote from: SOTWThough, as I said before, what does Jesus being created or begotten, have to do with Universal Salvation?
Maybe a better question would be--what does it have to do with salvation?
Hi! Molly
What does whether Jesus Christ was Begotten or created got to do with salvation? There are many false christs in the world today;
"for false Christs and false prophets will arise, and will show signs and wonders, in order to lead astray, if possible, the elect. But take heed; behold, I have told you everything in advance." (Mark 13:22-23). It doesn't have anything at all to do with salvation or universal salvation, but I was under the impression that our aim was to achieve the first resurrection of the chosen. If it is, then the True Jesus matters a great deal without Him you have no chance at all.
"Jesus *said to him, 'I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.'" (Jn.14:6).
I personally want to try and be in the first resurrection if at all possible even if no one else wishes to. The false christ will not get me to the first resurrection that's for a cert;
"For this reason God will send upon them a deluding influence so that they will believe what is false, in order that they all may be judged who did not believe the truth, but took pleasure in wickedness." (2Thess.2:11-12).
Peace!
Roy UK
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 31, 2008, 03:59:46 PM
Quote from: Pierac on August 30, 2008, 08:43:28 PM
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 30, 2008, 01:56:41 PM
##############
Hi! Pierac
1.......Your quote Joh 1:1 In the beginnynge was the worde and the worde
was with God: and the worde was God. 2 The same was in the beginnynge with
God.
Old English but what matter, it's the same, the only difference being you left out the vs.18
which adds meaning to what appears to be an enigma.
As far as the heresy goes I refuse to answer and request you remove it off my thread.
"And I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse, and He who sat on
it is called Faithful and True, and in righteousness He judges and wages war. His eyes
are a flame of fire, and on His head are many diadems; and He has a name written on
Him which no one knows except Himself. He is clothed with a robe dipped in blood,
and His name is called The Word of God." (Rev.19:11-13).
The Word/Son of God is our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and to refer to Him as "IT" is
blasphemy of the highest order. (You need your mouth washing out with something
stronger than fullers soap, may I suggest arsenic). I believe some of the blasphemers
were justly rewarded on earth but yet to face the purifying wrath of God.
2..........Your quote: And now our modern Concordant Literal Version:
Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the word, and the word was toward God, and God was
the word. "
There is nothing new in this it is the same thing except for the missing vs.18. What it is saying to me is; The Word was in the beginning and the Word was toward God. This can only mean that God the Father was the beginning, and that the Word which was toward Him was in the beginning which was God/Father, and that the Word itself was God/Son. NOTHING DIFFERENT other than the heresy. I've dealt with it enough so kindly remove all of it or will someone kindly show me how I can do Mr Pierac the honour.
Thank you for your response but I don't suffer heresies and blasphemy too kindly, please take it elsewhere. Your deep study is putting you under a deep delusion; "For this reason God will send upon them a deluding influence so that they will believe what is false, in order that they all may be judged who did not believe the truth, but took pleasure in wickedness." (2Thess.2:11-12)
url=http://www.glitter-graphics.com](http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif)[/url]
Not "IT" You Blasphemer!
Peace!
Roy UK.
So your saying Tyndale and the translators of the Bishops, Geneva and the Concordant Literal bible Versions are all blasphemers? I forgive you because you obviously did not read my post. The logos was called an "it" not Jesus. Also I did not write the definitions for "Logos"
Logos - 1. Denotes an internal reasoning process, plan, or intention, as well as an external word. 2. The expression of thought. As embodying a conception or idea
(New American Bible (footnote) & Vine's Expository Dictionary).
According to Liddell and Scott Greek Lexicon, it also means:
Logos - the inward thought which is expressed in the spoken word.
BTW, You were the one who asked "Was Jesus Created or Born?" And according to Christendom your question alone is blasphemous! So don't ask blasphemous questions and not to expect non-traditional answers. The Administrator allowed this thread to continue so I added my two cents. If my post are too strong then I will respect your wishes and will not add as it is your thread. However, you did ask, so don't be so shocked when someone answers.
So, I'm sorry for freaking you out, as I believe in only one God, the Father.(Joh 17:1-3) Who sent his only begotten son for the salvation of the world. The whole world!
Again sorry,
Paul
Hi! Paul
Forgive me brother for my ignorance at attempting to upbraid you without reading your full post. I was too shocked to think that you were reducing my Lord to an IT.
I will now follow brother SOtW's advice and answer you in a more civil manner if I may?
Your quote; QuoteTherefore, it's pronoun -"he" in our English translations - is a matter of interpretation, not translation. Did John write concerning "the word" that "he" was in the beginning with God or did he write concerning "the word" that "it" was in the beginning with God?
Let us read it; "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being." (Jn.1:1-3).
Now if I understand you correctly you are saying that the pronouns He & Him are a matter of interpretation not translation. You ask did John write that He was in the beginning or did he write that IT was in the beginning. Well for the answer let's skip a few verses and go down, what does one read there? "No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him." (Jn. 1.18).
So what must John have meant when he wrote that verse? He or IT? Now the Son of Gog does not appear to be an IT to me, does it to you?
Your post is a very long one so I'll have to answer it in short bursts. And I'll start by asking you for a short response as to what you make of the above. Once that is settled we can in all civility continue to the end of your long post.
My purpose in this is to ensure that I'm building my new house on a firm foundation or it is going to fall, like the one I built in Babylon. The only True foundation is the True Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God and Saviour of OF THE WHOLE WORLD. I am not trying to push my belief down anyone's throat. Everyone appears to be busy putting the roof on their house with all the trimmings and not paying attention to the basic foundation on which they are building. That is purely my line of thought that you may find of interest.
Peace! (http://dl.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1551/1551031u6k25jgwzu.png) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK.
Hi! Paul
It doesn't appear as though I've received a reply to my last post to you, but regardless I'll continue to answer the rest of the questions you pose in your long email.
Let me start this by giving an account of myself. I am quite unlike you in that I do not do any intense study of the Bible. I do not have a string of theological letters such as A.B., M.Div., D.D.,D.Sac.Let., PhD., Litt.D., D.Sac.Theol., or D.Humane Let. My credentials are a simple DDJ which stands for double dunce joker. I add my intellect to the dung heap where it belongs when it comes to matters of God.
I have read Genesis to Revelation many dozens of times and made three passages of Scripture idols of my heart, (Jn.14:26) witnessed by (1Jn.2:27) with the clear warning in (1Jn.2:26). All this is followed by sincere prayer for my Lord to guide my fingers on the key board as they are presently doing. Pure faith, brother nothing else. My reference to the Bible is when I have to quote a passage accurately.
If you had followed my posts as you have said, you'll be aware of the fact that I draw a distinction between Jesus the man and Christ the Word. Jesus the man was created but Christ the Word was begotten. I'll explain; you say logos was the word
IT and not
He. Now pray explain to me how an
IT can speak with the Father? "Therefore, when He comes into the world, He says, 'Sacrifice and offering You have not desired,
But a body You have prepared for Me; In whole burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin You have taken no pleasure. Then
I said, 'Behold, I have come (In the scroll of the book it is
written of Me) To do
Your will, O God.'" (Heb.10:5-7)?
This tells me that the Word was the only begotten Son in His Father's bosom who was commanded by His Father to speak the Logos/word to start creation; " Let there Be Light!" Christ is both the Son of God and the Logos, they both demand capitalization and they are both
HE not
IT.Now where does Jesus come in? Many millennial after the 6 creation days the Word/Logos enter the body that was prepared for Him and the Father's Spirit impregnated Mary, and Joseph was commanded by the Father through the archangel Gabriel to name the Child Jesus. That is the story in accord with the Bible. Not some fancy idol of man's creation but the actual Son of God/Word/Logos/Christ. And witness to that statement; "You are My Son, Today I have begotten You"?
And again, "I will be a Father to Him And He shall be a Son to Me"?
And when He again brings the firstborn into the world, He says, "And let all the angels of God worship Him."" (Heb.1:5:6).
Now when Jesus comes into the world as Christ/Son of God/Logos/Word the Father once again
(And Again this time when He comes into the newly created world ) gives birth to Him a second time. We will all one day be begotten sons and daughters of the Living God through His Son Jesus Christ. [color=red
]Begotten [/color]of the Father through Christ and
not created.This I think answers your full email to me and I apologize for my hasty reaction to it. Regarding Tynedale and the rest, yes, I have no doubt they were blasphemers and will have to answer to the Lord in due season.
Bless you brother.
Peace!(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll68/roymonis/peace.gif)
Roy UK
Quote from: Roy Monis on August 31, 2008, 04:51:53 PM
I personally want to try and be in the first resurrection if at all possible even if no one else wishes to. The false christ will not get me to the first resurrection that's for a cert; "For this reason God will send upon them a deluding influence so that they will believe what is false, in order that they all may be judged who did not believe the truth, but took pleasure in wickedness." (2Thess.2:11-12).
(http://dl5.glitter-graphics.net/pub/208/208685lx80ugxhil.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Peace!
Roy UK
God will send upon them--*a deluding influence*--that they might be judged ---*who did not believe the truth*--but took pleasure in wickedness.
What a powerful and accurate description of our society today.
This is the condemnation, that the light has come into the world--but men preferred darkness--because all their deeds--*were evil.*
They hide from the light and pursue their evil ways, and thereby judge themselves by falling under a powerful deluding influence that blocks out the truth--about everything!
The mind without Christ is totally insane!
QuoteThe mind without Christ is totally insane!
good call
Molly Luk 6:11 And they were
filled with madness; and communed one with another what they might do to Jesus.
madness ''the violent rage '' relating to bitterness Adams breath the nostrils [ anger of the face ]
i looked into this also with the ''mark'' charagma the alliance and agreement with one another against Christ Jesus
it is a mindset to me anyways or the right mind the healing from Jesus Christ the WORD /SON of God is life
Luk 8:35 Then they went out to see what was done; and came to Jesus, and found the man, out of whom the devils were departed, sitting at the feet of Jesus, clothed, and in his right mind: and they were afraid.
I love the studies they go so much deeper and higher than the surface of things
peace ... rr
Quote from: rosered on September 01, 2008, 06:55:46 PM
QuoteThe mind without Christ is totally insane!
good call
Molly Luk 6:11 And they were filled with madness; and communed one with another what they might do to Jesus.
madness "the violent rage " relating to bitterness Adams breath the nostrils [ anger of the face ]
i looked into this also with the "mark" charagma the alliance and agreement with one another against Christ Jesus
it is a mindset to me anyways or the right mind the healing from Jesus Christ the WORD /SON of God is life
Luk 8:35 Then they went out to see what was done; and came to Jesus, and found the man, out of whom the devils were departed, sitting at the feet of Jesus, clothed, and in his right mind: and they were afraid.
I love the studies they go so much deeper and higher than the surface of things
peace ... rr
Hi! IT
'Tis true that the mind without Christ is madness, but there are several christs in the world today, which of them is the real one? There can only be the one answer The Word/Logos/only begotten Son of the Father/God....Jesus Christ. Any other christ is madder than just plain madness. Don't you think?
My long thread is all about this very simple but vital issue; who do we worship the only begotten Son of God/Word/Christ/Logos or do we worship a created creature, a man made idol-christ, which is all the rage at the moment?
Whilst in Babylon I built my house on the spiritual sand along the sea shore, but when the tide of humanity came in, it moved the sand from under it and my house collapsed, it was built on a created false christ. Then I built my new house on the Rock and when the tide of humanity came up against it, I cried out to my God; "....on the lake, and they began to be swamped and to be in danger. They came to Jesus and woke Him up, saying, "Master, Master, we are perishing!" And He got up and rebuked the wind and the surging waves, and they stopped, and it became calm." (Luke8:24). "And He said to them,
"Where is your faith?" (Luke :8:25). "They were fearful and amazed, saying to one another, "Who then is this, that He commands even the winds and the water, and they obey Him?" (Luke 8:25).
This is the God I worship the One who; " commands even the winds and the water, and they obey Him?" Jesus Christ/Word/Logos/Son of God/GOD.
Peace!(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Hi Roy , rr here or rosered , it looks Like IT dont it LOL....... :gangel:
i Have just read an article
called the " unforgiving watershed"
by John Loeffler
it was an eye opener for sure ..
God being outside the Box makes it hard for us whom are inside the box [ His Creation] knowing the TRUTH & Grace by faith
except for the time /point in Hand when He did Send Himself inside the Box as His Son
the WORD OF GOD / JESUS CHRIST to me is knowing the Father and SON His Love if they do not speak of this part they are definatly antichrists [ against the annointed One ] those having the Spirit of Christ/prophecy have the same witness and testimony as Jesus Christ come to deliver seed [and birth new] ...within our hearts and minds
SEEING HERE HOW EASY IT WAS FOR JOHN TO FALL down here ! :mshock:
and worship angels /stars hosts of heaven deut 4;19???
there is that warning in the old testimony /witness .... so , the WORD OF GOD humbles me greatly , i am not clever or crafty , I am very simple really and Jesus ministry in john 17 Jesus prayer was that the gospel be preached to all by the twelve and the gathering to Himself by those sent as well by GOD /WORD OF GOD ..
Rev 19:10 And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See [thou do it] not: I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy. fortelling /revealing Light /knowledge of Him ...
Peace r r aka rosered
Quote from: rosered on September 01, 2008, 09:27:05 PM
Hi Roy , rr here or rosered , it looks Like IT dont it LOL....... :gangel:
i Have just read an article
called the " unforgiving watershed"
by John Loeffler
it was an eye opener for sure ..
God being outside the Box makes it hard for us whom are inside the box [ His Creation] knowing the TRUTH & Grace by faith
except for the time /point in Hand when He did Send Himself inside the Box as His Son
the WORD OF GOD / JESUS CHRIST to me is knowing the Father and SON His Love if they do not speak of this part they are definatly antichrists [ against the annointed One ] those having the Spirit of Christ/prophecy have the same witness and testimony as Jesus Christ come to deliver seed [and birth new] ...within our hearts and minds
SEEING HERE HOW EASY IT WAS FOR JOHN TO FALL down here ! :mshock:
and worship angels /stars hosts of heaven deut 4;19???
there is that warning in the old testimony /witness .... so , the WORD OF GOD humbles me greatly , i am not clever or crafty , I am very simple really and Jesus ministry in john 17 Jesus prayer was that the gospel be preached to all by the twelve and the gathering to Himself by those sent as well by GOD /WORD OF GOD ..
Rev 19:10 And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See [thou do it] not: I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy. fortelling /revealing Light /knowledge of Him ...
Peace r r aka rosered
Hi! rr
My apologies brother, s.....oooo...ry! Please forgive.
Yes I have read that article and it's similarity to my thread is remarkable. On several occasions I have tried to make the point that (1Jn.1-3) was referring to a period way ahead of creation itself as explained by the box analogy. Here we are with God and nothing else, difficult to imagine but true just the same. The beginning of everything was God who is eternal. The Word we are told was in the beginning which is God so the Word was in God, finally we are told that the Word itself is God. All this is outside the box as the author calls it. At the Father's command, the
Word is born and declares the
spoken Word/Logos of the
Father's will "Let there be light" Now we have the box and everything in it being created by
His Son/Word/Logos/Christ. The Son/Word/God born of the Father all the rest created. Jesus is as yet 6 creation days/ages and several millennium of being born.
The next begotten/birth is Jesus Christ and then us the sons and daughters of God,
(Born Again) through our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. (John 1:1-5) and (Heb.1,5,10). Like Christ we are
"Born" and not
created."Just as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news of good things! However,
they did not all heed the good news; for Isaiah says,
"Lord, who has believed our report?" So
faith comes from
hearing, and hearing by the
word of Christ." (Rom.10:15-17)
Humans, such as, theologians and intellectuals spend a lifetime in deep concentrated study of the Word of God. They use the physical (intellect) which is enmity toward God to interpret the spiritual which is toward God. The result is like Babel the Lord sends a "...and with all the deception of wickedness for those who perish,
because they did not receive the love of the truth so as to be saved. For this reason God will
send upon them a deluding influence so that they will
believe what is false, in order that they all may be judged who did
not believe the truth, but took pleasure in wickedness." (2Thess.2:10-12).
God gives us the only spiritual way to Him in "
Trust in the Lord with all your heart and do not lean on
your own understanding." (Pro.3:5) And a stern warning; "There is a way which
seems right to a man, But its end is the
way of death." (Pro.14:12). Repeated in (Pro.16:25) to emphasize it's importance. But yet again; "
"Lord, who has believed our report?" Man has to learn to cast his intellect in the dung heap and begin to lean and trust in God. The Scriptures tell us very plainly how this can be done. "These things I have spoken to you while abiding with you.
"But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you." (Jn.14:25-26). Witnessed by "As for you, the anointing which you received from Him abides in you, and you have
no need for anyone to teach you; but as
His anointing teaches you about all things, and is true and is not a lie, and just as it has taught you, you abide in Him. " (1Jn.2:27). With the
the very clear warning "These things I have written to you concerning those who are t
rying to deceive you." (1Jn.2:26).
Peace!(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll68/roymonis/peace.gif)
Roy UK
Quote from: Roy Morris"These things I have written to you concerning those who are trying to deceive you." (1Jn.2:26).
Who are "those trying to deceive you"? The whole world is being deceived, so we look to media, politicians, world leaders, religious leaders, all leaders everywhere as the deceivers.
...Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: ...(Rev 12)
We are to be-- in the world, not of it --for a reason.
We have been given the Spirit of truth. He will show you all truth.
But, first, you have to look for it.
And, only with Christ--he is our touchstone, our foundation, our witness to the truth.
God is not in all the storm and drama of the world, but in the quietness.
11And he said, Go forth, and stand upon the mount before the LORD. And, behold, the LORD passed by, and a great and strong wind rent the mountains, and brake in pieces the rocks before the LORD; but the LORD was not in the wind: and after the wind an earthquake; but the LORD was not in the earthquake:
12And after the earthquake a fire; but the LORD was not in the fire: and after the fire a still small voice. 13
And it was so, when Elijah heard it, that he wrapped his face in his mantle, and went out,
and stood in the entering in of the cave. And, behold, there came a voice unto him, and said, What doest thou here, Elijah?
--1Kings 19
"cave"H4631
מערה
me‛ârâh
meh-aw-raw'
From H5783; a cavern (as dark): - cave, den, hole.
H5783עוּר
‛ûr
oor
A primitive root; to (be) bare: -
be made naked.
QuoteH5783
עוּר
‛ûr
oor
A primitive root; to (be) bare: - be made naked.
Rootword fallacy, not relevant.
Quote from: SOtW on September 02, 2008, 04:44:28 PM
QuoteH5783
עוּר
‛ûr
oor
A primitive root; to (be) bare: - be made naked.
Rootword fallacy, not relevant.
It is relevant to *me.*
I love using the roots when they so clearly elucidate the depth of the meaning of the passage.
Because why else does he wrap his face in the mantle if not for the fact that we stand naked before God?
"mantle"H155
אדּרת
'adderethad-deh'-reth
Feminine of H117; something ample (as a large vine, a wide dress); also the same as H145: -
garment, glory, goodly, mantle,
robe.It's important for me to know these things for my prophecy 101 course.
2Cor 5
2For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven:
3If so be that being clothed we shall not be found naked.
Quote from: Molly on September 02, 2008, 02:58:26 PM
Quote from: Roy Morris"These things I have written to you concerning those who are trying to deceive you." (1Jn.2:26).
Who are "those trying to deceive you"? The whole world is being deceived, so we look to media, politicians, world leaders, religious leaders, all leaders everywhere as the deceivers.
...Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: ...(Rev 12)
We are to be-- in the world, not of it --for a reason.
We have been given the Spirit of truth. He will show you all truth.
But, first, you have to look for it.
And, only with Christ--he is our touchstone, our foundation, our witness to the truth.
God is not in all the storm and drama of the world, but in the quietness.
11And he said, Go forth, and stand upon the mount before the LORD. And, behold, the LORD passed by, and a great and strong wind rent the mountains, and brake in pieces the rocks before the LORD; but the LORD was not in the wind: and after the wind an earthquake; but the LORD was not in the earthquake:
12And after the earthquake a fire; but the LORD was not in the fire: and after the fire a still small voice.
13And it was so, when Elijah heard it, that he wrapped his face in his mantle, and went out, and stood in the entering in of the cave. And, behold, there came a voice unto him, and said, What doest thou here, Elijah?
--1Kings 19
"cave"
H4631
מערה
me‛ârâh
meh-aw-raw'
From H5783; a cavern (as dark): - cave, den, hole.
H5783
עוּר
‛ûr
oor
A primitive root; to (be) bare: - be made naked.
Hi! Molly
No, love, the problem for those who are in Christ, is nothing to do with the media and the world in general, we are in the world as of necessity but not of the world. Our problem is from within our midst, it is they who are trying to deceive us into thinking their way and believing their belief,
exchanging the truth for
what is false; "Children, it is the last hour; and just as you heard that antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have appeared; from this we know that it is the last hour. They went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but they went out, so that it would be shown that they all are not of us. But you have an anointing from the Holy One, and you all know. I have not written to you because you do not know the truth, but because you do know it, and because no lie is of the truth." (1Jn.2:18-21).
It is the antichrist, those who promote a false christ, who teach false doctrines, the doctrines of men, that we are warned against. These are they who are trying to deceive us not the world, we are not of the world. They are ruled by their head and not by their heart.
"The words of wise men are like goads, and masters of these collections are like well-driven nails; they are given by one Shepherd. But beyond this, my son, be warned: the writing of many books is endless, and excessive devotion to books is wearying to the body. The conclusion, when all has been heard, is: fear God and keep His commandments, because this applies to every person. For God will bring every act to judgment, everything which is hidden, whether it is good or evil." (Eccl.12:11-14).
Man's brain, his intellect, is physical and designed to deal with matters concerning the physical world in which he lives and it serves that purpose admirably, but God speaks to the heart in the quiet seclusion of your inner room, that gentle quiet inner voice which we in Christ are all too familiar with. It is that voice that we must trust;
"Trust in the Lord with all your heart And do not lean on your own understanding." (Pro.3:5). It is this quiet voice that we must obey and not those of the false teachers who are trying to deceive us.
Peace!
(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif)Roy UK
I understand you believe them relevant to you. At the same time, it has been demonstrated by UR and non-UR theologians and linguists that root words do have relevance to what is being said, since it is the usage of the word weighs far more than the etymology of the word. When we speak the things of God, it is not the root word of the individual words that matter, it is the meaning of the words which are said, which matters. This word, is for the listener, not specifically to you Molly, since you find it relevant regardless of anything else.
The picture I see in this passage was one that really illuminated so many other things. Things like the fact that we see this great prophet of all prophets who had just killed 400 false prophets after God manifested in a most impressive manner by consuming his sacrifice as well as the water that filled the trenches round about in such a dramatic fashion . .after this great feat . . .Elijah comes completely unglued at the challenge of a woman. He not only runs to hide, but he gives up his ministry and his life. . .he just gives it all up and is ready for death.
This angel comes, "wakes him up" feeds him . . .and he rolls over and goes back to sleep . . . the angel had to come a second time, wake him up, feed him and then led him for 40 days . . .here's the kicker for me . . .the moment Elijah arrives "to where the angel led him" God asks . ."Dude . . .what are you doing here?"
The entire journey was the wrong way. It was ordained by God, led by the messenger of God . .and it was the wrong way. Why? Because God then instructed him to "go back the way you came". Another clue to the deeper problem was Elijah's act of burying his face into his cloak. . . The ointing was "on" Elijah, his identity was in this cloak. He buries his face . . .your face is what other's identify you by. Every time I see "face" in Scripture, it speaks to me of one's identity. I cry out for seeing Jesus face-to-face.
What that really means is, that my identity becomes "His" identity.
Where Elijah lost it was when he put his identity into the ministry, rather than into God and the ministry could not give him life enough to sustain him. I've also always felt that the number 40 is linked to birthing as it takes a woman 40 weeks from conception to birth . . .Romans 1:20, God uses natural things to manifest spiritual principles. This time, for me, it birthed Elisha . . a son that Elijah was able to pass in an inheritance into through which Elisha performed twice as many miracles as did Elijah.
At any rate, the act of Elijah burying his face into his mantle is to me a picture of one who has their identity buried in their ministry . . . God is not in the natural manifestations . . .they are simply tools used to further his purposes. Interesting also that Elijah didn't find God in law, even though, this is the same place where Moses received the tablets . . . but it was in the "voice" of silence. I see this is a story of a man who God realigns his identity. It's not in what I see . . .but in who I hear.
Quote from: SOtW on September 02, 2008, 06:18:03 PM
I understand you believe them relevant to you. At the same time, it has been demonstrated by UR and non-UR theologians and linguists that root words do have relevance to what is being said, since it is the usage of the word weighs far more than the etymology of the word. When we speak the things of God, it is not the root word of the individual words that matter, it is the meaning of the words which are said, which matters. This word, is for the listener, not specifically to you Molly, since you find it relevant regardless of anything else.
All of our English words come from root words, and those who would be proficient in the English language do well to study them.
Main Entry:
pro·fi·cientFunction: adjective
Pronunciation: -sh&nt
Etymology:
Latin proficient-, proficiens, present participle of
proficere to go forward, accomplish, from pro- forward + facere to make -- more at PRO- , do
: well advanced in an art, occupation, or branch of knowledge
- proficient noun
- pro·fi·cient·ly adverb
synonyms PROFICIENT , ADEPT , SKILLED , SKILLFUL , EXPERT mean having great knowledge and experience in a trade or profession.
Quote from: NathanWhat that really means is, that my identity becomes "His" identity.
Yes, like the glory on Moses' face after he speaks with God.
But, Elijah's mantle is very important; it has an important spiritual meaning regarding relationship to God, don't you think? Again, the theme of covering our nakedness with the right garment. This word has so much importance that we use it symbolically in our own language to describe the passing of power from one to another.
And, later, we will watch Elisha taking up the mantle of Elijah,literally.
12And Elisha saw it, and he cried, My father, my father, the chariot of Israel, and the horsemen thereof. And he saw him no more: and he took hold of his own clothes, and rent them in two pieces.
13He took up also the mantle of Elijah that fell from him, and went back, and stood by the bank of Jordan;
14And he took the mantle of Elijah that fell from him, and smote the waters, and said, Where is the LORD God of Elijah? and when he also had smitten the waters, they parted hither and thither: and Elisha went over. 2Kings 2
Quote from: Roy MorrisOur problem is from within our midst, it is they who are trying to deceive us into thinking their way and believing their belief, exchanging the truth for what is false;
I don't disagree. Maybe I should have made it clearer that I feel it is the false teaching of the antichrist that makes us so easily deceived by the rampant deception of the world. Because, after all, it is his world--and he was a liar and a murderer from the beginning.
Quote from: NathanI've also always felt that the number 40 is linked to birthing as it takes a woman 40 weeks from conception to birth . . .Romans 1:20, God uses natural things to manifest spiritual principles. This time, for me, it birthed Elisha . . a son that Elijah was able to pass in an inheritance into through which Elisha performed twice as many miracles as did Elijah.
A lot like Jesus, yes?
Mark 1:13
And he was there in the wilderness forty days, tempted of Satan; and was with the wild beasts; and the angels ministered unto him.
Yup! There I see that the gospel message was birthed through the ministry of Christ. He was on the earth 40 days after the resurrection . . .picture of the birthing of the church in the upper room.
And to the being clothed . . .going back to Genesis, it was the tree of knowledge that exposed the nakedness. It is the tree of life that issues us robes of white. Our nakedness is purified through Christ.
Elisha used the mantle to strike the water . . .the water being a picture of the spirit, was activated through the actions of faith. The mantle there was the same thing in Elisha's hands as it was in Elijah's, yet you don't here anything more about it as Elisha's ministry coninues to mature. His identity was in the mantle giver more than the covering of the mantle itself.
The ministry of the mantle . . .Good Stuff!
Quote from: Roy Monis on September 01, 2008, 01:49:05 PM
Hi! Paul
It doesn't appear as though I've received a reply to my last post to you, but regardless I'll continue to answer the rest of the questions you pose in your long email.
Let me start this by giving an account of myself. I am quite unlike you in that I do not do any intense study of the Bible. I do not have a string of theological letters such as A.B., M.Div., D.D.,D.Sac.Let., PhD., Litt.D., D.Sac.Theol., or D.Humane Let. My credentials are a simple DDJ which stands for double dunce joker. I add my intellect to the dung heap where it belongs when it comes to matters of God.
I have read Genesis to Revelation many dozens of times and made three passages of Scripture idols of my heart, (Jn.14:26) witnessed by (1Jn.2:27) with the clear warning in (1Jn.2:26). All this is followed by sincere prayer for my Lord to guide my fingers on the key board as they are presently doing. Pure faith, brother nothing else. My reference to the Bible is when I have to quote a passage accurately.
If you had followed my posts as you have said, you'll be aware of the fact that I draw a distinction between Jesus the man and Christ the Word. Jesus the man was created but Christ the Word was begotten. I'll explain; you say logos was the word IT and not He. Now pray explain to me how an IT can speak with the Father? "Therefore, when He comes into the world, He says, 'Sacrifice and offering You have not desired, But a body You have prepared for Me; In whole burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin You have taken no pleasure. Then I said, 'Behold, I have come (In the scroll of the book it is written of Me) To do Your will, O God.'" (Heb.10:5-7)?
This tells me that the Word was the only begotten Son in His Father's bosom who was commanded by His Father to speak the Logos/word to start creation; " Let there Be Light!" Christ is both the Son of God and the Logos, they both demand capitalization and they are both HE not IT.
Now where does Jesus come in? Many millennial after the 6 creation days the Word/Logos enter the body that was prepared for Him and the Father's Spirit impregnated Mary, and Joseph was commanded by the Father through the archangel Gabriel to name the Child Jesus. That is the story in accord with the Bible. Not some fancy idol of man's creation but the actual Son of God/Word/Logos/Christ. And witness to that statement; "You are My Son, Today I have begotten You"? And again, "I will be a Father to Him And He shall be a Son to Me"? And when He again brings the firstborn into the world, He says, "And let all the angels of God worship Him."" (Heb.1:5:6).
Now when Jesus comes into the world as Christ/Son of God/Logos/Word the Father once again (And Again this time when He comes into the newly created world ) gives birth to Him a second time. We will all one day be begotten sons and daughters of the Living God through His Son Jesus Christ. [color=red]Begotten [/color]of the Father through Christ and not created.
This I think answers your full email to me and I apologize for my hasty reaction to it. Regarding Tynedale and the rest, yes, I have no doubt they were blasphemers and will have to answer to the Lord in due season.
Bless you brother.
Peace!(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll68/roymonis/peace.gif)
Roy UK
Hi Roy,
I did not respond because it would only have added more "shocking data." Jesus specificly gave the command not to divide over docterine. You were clearly upset over my post so I figured it best to keep quite.
QuoteThis tells me that the Word was the only begotten Son in His Father's bosom who was commanded by His Father to speak the Logos/word to start creation; " Let there Be Light!" Christ is both the Son of God and the Logos, they both demand capitalization and they are both HE not IT.
I will review some non threathening info. First, the word
Logos means Plan, internal thought process, etc... If your wife and you had a
Logos to have a baby, then your
logos would become flesh the day your child was born. So does this make your baby the actual
logos? No
"I also saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their testimony to Jesus and for the word (
logos) of God."
Notice that they were beheaded for their testimony to Jesus AND for the logos of God. Jesus and the word of God are not the same thing. Word of God in this verse means God's plan of salvation for us (New American Bible), i.e. the kingdom of God message.
Now don't freak but I'm going to show you some scripture.
Acts 17:31 – "
God has overlooked the times of ignorance, but now He demands that all people everywhere repent because
He has established a day on which He will judge the world with justice through a MAN He has appointed, and
He has provided confirmation for all by raising him from the dead.
God will judge the world through the one Lord/Master ("a Man") His Son the second Adam, whom He has appointed. This man Jesus will be our mediator. "For there is one God and one mediator also between God and men,
the MAN Christ Jesus." (1 Tim2:5)
I think it best I stop here. Just ask your self a few questions. Who's the one appointing, and who's the one being called a man decades after His resurrection.
Who raised up this man? "The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom you had put to death by hanging Him on a cross. (Act 5:30).
Do you want me to stay away or do you have questions? I do not want to offend you.
BTW, I only have 2 letters behind my name and only at work. R.N. (Registered Nurse)
Paul
Quote from: Molly on September 02, 2008, 07:04:54 PM
Quote from: SOtW on September 02, 2008, 06:18:03 PM
I understand you believe them relevant to you. At the same time, it has been demonstrated by UR and non-UR theologians and linguists that root words do have relevance to what is being said, since it is the usage of the word weighs far more than the etymology of the word. When we speak the things of God, it is not the root word of the individual words that matter, it is the meaning of the words which are said, which matters. This word, is for the listener, not specifically to you Molly, since you find it relevant regardless of anything else.
All of our English words come from root words, and those who would be proficient in the English language do well to study them.
Main Entry: pro·fi·cient
Function: adjective
Pronunciation: -sh&nt
Etymology: Latin proficient-, proficiens, present participle of proficere to go forward, accomplish, from pro- forward + facere to make -- more at PRO- , do
: well advanced in an art, occupation, or branch of knowledge
- proficient noun
- pro·fi·cient·ly adverb
synonyms PROFICIENT , ADEPT , SKILLED , SKILLFUL , EXPERT mean having great knowledge and experience in a trade or profession.
Yes, I understand. It doesn't matter the root word however, it is what the word meant when it was used. We have gone through this numerous times, I am quite alright with you using root words, but cautioning others to take it with grain of salt.
Pierac, why doesn't Jesus correct Thomas when Thomas calls him "LORD" and "God"?
27Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing.
28And Thomas answered and said unto him, My LORD and my God.
29Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.
--John 20
Quote from: Molly on September 03, 2008, 12:18:28 AM
Pierac, why doesn't Jesus correct Thomas when Thomas calls him "LORD" and "God"?
27Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing.
28And Thomas answered and said unto him, My LORD and my God.
29Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.
--John 20
Hi Molly,
I want to get permission from Roy before I answer, it's his thread! And what I have to say is not what most want to hear, but I can tell you to keep reading in John. Just two more verses, and John tells you why he wrote this story. No one ever wants to read verse 31 when telling this story. :thumbsup:
Paul
Peace, and until I hear from Roy, you will have to wait. :boyheart:
JESUS -- BORN OR BUILT?
Once the posts get this many it's hard to catch up from page one on what all's been said. I lack an interest in the topic of the original post as several others here have noted concerning themselves, at least from the perspective of questions like, "How significant is it in determining our walk with God? Cannot a person hold either view and know Him?" I suppose ideally there may be ultimate practical differences, certain outcomes varying according to ones position on this; but, just what in particular can be enumerated from direct observation? Surely I might one day better perceive the distinctives in honor from God and our reflecting His character; but, for now we tread a boggy field of speculation. What has been observable in my experience, however, are such differences as: between those walking with a living God Who works wonders and those who say the gifts of the Spirit have ceased; or, those who are lead of the Spirit in free participation as members of the body of Christ in their meetings and those who sit down and shut up again as audiences for the paid professional privileged few on stage.
Really, the attitude of the heart, which is what God looks upon, is other than this largely surface language quibble, like this ridiculous "it vs. him" thing. Even though we have that distinction in English we still refer to persons as "its." "How's the baby, dear? "oh, it's sleeping." Your hand is part of you, yet one may say, "Get it off my shoulder." We commonly refer to our's or others' bodies as "it." King James refers to the Holy Spirit both as both it and Him (and in 1 John 2:27 which our brother Monis finds so foundational.) But that's English. Have we evaluated our speaking of an angel as an "it." They don't seem to be properly offended.
The Koine Greek only has one pronoun,
auto, for which CLV has SAME for the keyword. It is not masculine, feminine, or even what could be called neuter as a comparative category like German has
das,
die or,
dien (though it is technically neuter.) It is a blank, all occasion pronoun that refers to the nearest preceding noun, period. It makes no difference whether the preceding noun is masculine, feminine or neuter. (Just try arguing this with Spanish language die hards!) In the knowledge of which, the big hubbub over exclusively "he" to honor the Holy Spirit is the sound of numerous ignorant lips flappin' in the wind. Well, I've been there, done that too.
It also seems reasonable to sexlessly objectify anything so exalted as God, if not in all of His aspects. How great and glorious is God the Spirit! How could we box Him into male sexuality!? An example is in Luke 15 where is first the parable of the Shepherd saving the 99 +1 (= 100 %) of the Sheep. Jesus the Son is the good and great Shepherd. The last of the three parables is of a father with two sons. What of the middle parable? It is about a woman who lost a coin. Paul, beginning to pray for us to know the whole new world that opens up in the love of God, says, "For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named..." (Eph 3:14-15) So what of this celestial family in Luke 15? Father, son and...Spirit is feminine in both Hebrew and Greek.
(Instead of a mention of something I intended, I've created all this preceding bloat as so often happens. Like stopping by the store for a loaf of bead and a gallon of milk! We end up hours later with a trunkfull of bargains and necessities. Well, we should be thankful. I'd rather be speechless from too much to know what to chose to say than from nothing to say. From the looks of this post I probably shouldn't worry about being speechless.)
Anyway, I read a half dozen or so pages, looked for my understanding and didn't find it, so I thought I'd mention it here.
Jesus is both begotten and born on the one hand and created on the other. In the Old Covenant, we are to hear God's words so as to do (Hebrew,
asah) them, but the word for doing is "to construct," which is what we are doing within (while not comprehensively as what God's logos is to Him, yet bit by bit in faithfulness as He provides.) This is also the word God uses When He says, "Let us
make (
asah) man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion..." It is also written, "So God
created man in his own image, in the image of God
created he him; male and female
created he them." "Create" (Hebrew,
bara) here is the same for all he made in the last three days of creation, having spoken into existence the first three. Yet this
Adam is called
son of God. (Luke 3:38) The Hebrew word for son
ben is derived from
banah, "to build." There's so much here!
Is a lamb a part of Creation or Divine uncreated life? Yet the reality was in the mind of God before creation. When made it portrays the Divine nature such that we can speak of the lamb of God and know more about what is meant. He emptied Himself, what many "deeper life" teachers love to reference, The
Kenosis (loc.cit., Philippians 2:5-8) The whole realm we call the world,
cosmos, what we call "creation" Jesus entered as one of it's creatures. He said of Himself that He descended from above, coming down out of the celestials and that He was, at the time He spoke in Israel of old, even at that time in the heavens. This becomes relevant to our experience when the Holy Spirit takes up residence within and we begin making the same confessions.
A point in this matter is the Law God gave through Moses condemns to death by stoning participants in bestiality. The Shepherd may not lie with the sheep. But notice how in Psalm 23 there is a transition into sitting at His table. Then ultimately union in His house. If God would have a bride, and regards us even in our low estate in this body of humiliation as His bride, then what species are we?
your brother, James Rohde
P.S. Sorry I haven't read all the posts yet. Possibly this is all old stuff somebody already said better. Let me know?
Quote from: Pierac on September 03, 2008, 03:35:19 AM
Quote from: Molly on September 03, 2008, 12:18:28 AM
Pierac, why doesn't Jesus correct Thomas when Thomas calls him "LORD" and "God"?
27Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing.
28And Thomas answered and said unto him, My LORD and my God.
29Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.
--John 20
Hi Molly,
I want to get permission from Roy before I answer, it's his thread! And what I have to say is not what most want to hear, but I can tell you to keep reading in John. Just two more verses, and John tells you why he wrote this story. No one ever wants to read verse 31 when telling this story. :thumbsup:
Paul
Peace, and until I hear from Roy, you will have to wait. :boyheart:
Hi! Paul
You have my permission to answer Molly. Go right ahead, I'm listening and learning as always.
I never get shocked nor do I freak out of anything, so you go right ahead and say all you like. I did apologize, if you recollect, for being hasty when my Lord was called an IT. But it is up to me, under His guidance, to prove you wrong with the help of those who see Him in the same light as I do.
(http://dl.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1551/1551031u6k25jgwzu.png) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Quote from: reFORMer on September 03, 2008, 08:33:28 AM
JESUS -- BORN OR BUILT?
Once the posts get this many it's hard to catch up from page one on what all's been said. I lack an interest in the topic of the original post as several others here have noted concerning themselves, at least from the perspective of questions like, "How significant is it in determining our walk with God? Cannot a person hold either view and know Him?" I suppose ideally there may be ultimate practical differences, certain outcomes varying according to ones position on this; but, just what in particular can be enumerated from direct observation? Surely I might one day better perceive the distinctives in honor from God and our reflecting His character; but, for now we tread a boggy field of speculation. What has been observable in my experience, however, are such differences as: between those walking with a living God Who works wonders and those who say the gifts of the Spirit have ceased; or, those who are lead of the Spirit in free participation as members of the body of Christ in their meetings and those who sit down and shut up again as audiences for the paid professional privileged few on stage.
Really, the attitude of the heart, which is what God looks upon, is other than this largely surface language quibble, like this ridiculous "it vs. him" thing. Even though we have that distinction in English we still refer to persons as "its." "How's the baby, dear? "oh, it's sleeping." Your hand is part of you, yet one may say, "Get it off my shoulder." We commonly refer to our's or others' bodies as "it." King James refers to the Holy Spirit both as both it and Him (and in 1 John 2:27 which our brother Monis finds so foundational.) But that's English. Have we evaluated our speaking of an angel as an "it." They don't seem to be properly offended.
The Koine Greek only has one pronoun, auto, for which CLV has SAME for the keyword. It is not masculine, feminine, or even what could be called neuter as a comparative category like German has das, die or, dien (though it is technically neuter.) It is a blank, all occasion pronoun that refers to the nearest preceding noun, period. It makes no difference whether the preceding noun is masculine, feminine or neuter. (Just try arguing this with Spanish language die hards!) In the knowledge of which, the big hubbub over exclusively "he" to honor the Holy Spirit is the sound of numerous ignorant lips flappin' in the wind. Well, I've been there, done that too.
It also seems reasonable to sexlessly objectify anything so exalted as God, if not in all of His aspects. How great and glorious is God the Spirit! How could we box Him into male sexuality!? An example is in Luke 15 where is first the parable of the Shepherd saving the 99 +1 (= 100 %) of the Sheep. Jesus the Son is the good and great Shepherd. The last of the three parables is of a father with two sons. What of the middle parable? It is about a woman who lost a coin. Paul, beginning to pray for us to know the whole new world that opens up in the love of God, says, "For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named..." (Eph 3:14-15) So what of this celestial family in Luke 15? Father, son and...Spirit is feminine in both Hebrew and Greek.
(Instead of a mention of something I intended, I've created all this preceding bloat as so often happens. Like stopping by the store for a loaf of bead and a gallon of milk! We end up hours later with a trunkfull of bargains and necessities. Well, we should be thankful. I'd rather be speechless from too much to know what to chose to say than from nothing to say. From the looks of this post I probably shouldn't worry about being speechless.)
Anyway, I read a half dozen or so pages, looked for my understanding and didn't find it, so I thought I'd mention it here.
Jesus is both begotten and born on the one hand and created on the other. In the Old Covenant, we are to hear God's words so as to do (Hebrew, asah) them, but the word for doing is "to construct," which is what we are doing within (while not comprehensively as what God's logos is to Him, yet bit by bit in faithfulness as He provides.) This is also the word God uses When He says, "Let us make (asah) man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion..." It is also written, "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them." "Create" (Hebrew, bara) here is the same for all he made in the last three days of creation, having spoken into existence the first three. Yet this Adam is called son of God. (Luke 3:38) The Hebrew word for son ben is derived from banah, "to build." There's so much here!
Is a lamb a part of Creation or Divine uncreated life? Yet the reality was in the mind of God before creation. When made it portrays the Divine nature such that we can speak of the lamb of God and know more about what is meant. He emptied Himself, what many "deeper life" teachers love to reference, The Kenosis (loc.cit., Philippians 2:5-8) The whole realm we call the world, cosmos, what we call "creation" Jesus entered as one of it's creatures. He said of Himself that He descended from above, coming down out of the celestials and that He was, at the time He spoke in Israel of old, even at that time in the heavens. This becomes relevant to our experience when the Holy Spirit takes up residence within and we begin making the same confessions.
A point in this matter is the Law God gave through Moses condemns to death by stoning participants in bestiality. The Shepherd may not lie with the sheep. But notice how in Psalm 23 there is a transition into sitting at His table. Then ultimately union in His house. If God would have a bride, and regards us even in our low estate in this body of humiliation as His bride, then what species are we?
your brother, James Rohde
P.S. Sorry I haven't read all the posts yet. Possibly this is all old stuff somebody already said better. Let me know?
Hi! Brother Rohde
You ask;
QuoteCannot a person hold either view and know Him?"
My answer to that is a categorical "NO". To build a house one must build on a firm foundation, such as, a Rock/Christ/Word/Son of God/God is to know Him. To build on any other antichrist is to build on sand and deception and not know Him/.
Did you say that you'd read my posts? If you did then, in my humble opinion, you missed the point completely. I am not as highly educated as you appear to be, but I rely on my heart and that little voice within and not on my head. The two are enmity to one another. In my heart sits Christ in my head sits the world and we are told; "Do not love the world nor the things in the world.
If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the boastful pride of life, is not from the Father, but is from the world. The world is passing away, and also its lusts; but the one who does the will of God lives forever." (1Jn.2:15-17).
The Scriptures were given for a purpose, "All Scripture is inspired by God and
profitable for teaching, for
reproof, for
correction, for
training in righteousness; so that the
man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work." (2Tim.3:16-17). I believe that these were given for our edification, Do you?
Just look round at the hundreds of denominations, sects etc. under the umbrella of Christianity and you'll see before your very eyes the result of the havoc created in the body of Christ through man's super intellect? Does play with the knowledge of various interpretations of the Bible, Strong's Concordances, Hebrew, Greek, German, French, Spanish languages serve any useful purpose other than destroy Christ's once perfect Body? Is this something to be proud of or to be thoroughly ashamed of? Or is there something to be learned from it? Who should be doing the learning, the dumb dupe like me who approaches God in all humility devoid of intellect, or the super intellectual like yourself?
The whole topic was based on whether Christ was Begotten or Created? I said that in the beginning the Word was
begotten of the Father/God and that the Word was God in accord with (Jn.1:1-3). At this stage Jesus was very likely in the master plan as we all are, but not as yet on the agenda. So it all started with the Father giving birth to the Word/Son and the Son speaking the words/logos of the Father to begin creation.
Lost in the jungle of theological and highly intellectual brains is the simplicity of the Bible. What is wrong with seeing the written word as it stands with spiritual eyes and not with the carnal disruptive thinking of the intellect. Who should the true believer put his trust in the intellect of man (which is foolishness in the sight of God) "For the wisdom of this world is foolishness before God. For it is written, "He is the one who catches the wise in their craftiness"; and again, "The Lord knows the reasonings of the wise, that they are useless." (1Cor.3:19-20). Do these intellectuals not believe God? Or have they set themselves up as god?
The command is "Therefore,
come out from their midst and be separate," says the Lord. And do not touch what is unclean; And I will welcome you. And I will be a father to you, And you shall be sons and daughters to Me," Says the Lord Almighty." (2Cor.6:17-18). Indeed many of us have done that, but unfortunately as in the case when Jesus founded His Church on the Rock (the present established conglomeration calling itself Christian) and called His disciples out of the old Church. So now He is calling us out of yet another corrupted one, but sadly as happened before when the intellectuals from the old establishment invaded the new reducing it to what we can see of it now, they are once again threatening to invade the new call out. There seems to be no getting away from them.
Have we discarded the Scriptures altogether? Do we not believe that it says Jesus was begotten, as was Christ for the second time? "Y
ou are My Son, Today I have
begotten You"? And again, "I will be a Father to Him and He shall be a Son to Me"? And
when He again brings the firstborn into the world, He says, "And let all the angels of God worship Him." (Heb.1:5-6). The first time was before creation itself, now the second time Jesus/Christ/Word/Son of God is begotten into the world and not created.
Do you not believe the Scripture when you see it with carnal and spiritual eyes or do you see it with carnal eyes only? I am a simple and humble man and will follow the leading of my God and ignore the intellectual word that corrupts.
(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll68/roymonis/peace.gif)
Roy UK
Roy, I know you're very passionate about this, and I don't want to take away from what you sense God has shown you. But it seems in a sense you're telling everyone . .or warning everyone, that the God they think they're pursuing isn't "really" God, it's just a form of God their imaginations have conjured up. That just seems like a dangerous and lonely road to take that may or may not be all that necessary.
We do know that no one comes to Christ on their own volition, but they are "called". We also know that one can create a form of Christ that is not the true Christ through religious conformity. Which is partly what you're saying as near as I can tell. But unless I'm reading you wrong . .which I may very well be doing . . .but it's almost like you're not convinced we're pursuing the same Christ that you are and if we're not, then we're in jeapordy of living a counterfeit life.
There are times when it's probably more affective to plant your seeds and let them grow on their own rather than over water the soil after the seed is planted. I do understand your intentions, I'm the same way with some of mine in other areas. But "if" he who is in me is greater than he who is not, then the fear of following the wrong Christ shouldn't be that big of a factor due to the fact that the Holy Spirit would guide us away from the darkness and keep us aligned with the light, yes?
Just a thought.
QuoteWe do know that no one comes to Christ on their own volition
Actually they do, because Christ came to them first. Everyone has a choice to come to Christ by their own volition when the choice is presented to them. Not everyone chooses to come to Christ, unless He has called them first. Even Jesus chose the twelve, but one did not choose Jesus. Paul said God has reconciled all mankind to him, but implored them to be reconciled to God.
I say this, despite my experience in which most people would say, I had no choice to believe because like Paul I have seen Jesus and at an age where I had no other choice but to believe what I was seeing. As long as we live, however, we always have choice.
Quote from: Nathan on September 03, 2008, 05:09:39 PM
Roy, I know you're very passionate about this, and I don't want to take away from what you sense God has shown you. QuoteQuoteBut it seems in a sense you're telling everyone . .or warning everyone, that the God they think they're pursuing isn't "really" God, it's just a form of God their imaginations have conjured up
. That just seems like a dangerous and lonely road to take that may or may not be all that necessary.
We do know that no one comes to Christ on their own volition, but they are "called". We also know that one can create a form of Christ that is not the true Christ through religious conformity. Which is partly what you're saying as near as I can tell. But unless I'm reading you wrong . .which I may very well be doing . . .but it's almost like you're not convinced we're pursuing the same Christ that you are and if we're not, then we're in jeapordy of living a counterfeit life.
There are times when it's probably more affective to plant your seeds and let them grow on their own rather than over water the soil after the seed is planted. I do understand your intentions, I'm the same way with some of mine in other areas. But "if" he who is in me is greater than he who is not, then the fear of following the wrong Christ shouldn't be that big of a factor due to the fact that the Holy Spirit would guide us away from the darkness and keep us aligned with the light, yes?
Just a thought.
Hi! Brother Nathan
You do like speaking in riddles, the problem is I don't understand riddles.
I understand this and accept it
QuoteI know you're very passionate about this, and I don't want to take away from what you sense God has shown you.
. I am passionate about this particular topic. And
QuoteI don't want to take away from what you sense God has shown you.
. That is something you will never succeed in doing, brother, while there is breath in my body.
QuoteBut it seems in a sense you're telling everyone . .or warning everyone, that the God they think they're pursuing isn't "really" God, it's just a form of God their imaginations have conjured up
. Why do you keep insisting that I'm telling everyone. I'm telling no one, have I told you anything or tried to persuade you about anything?
If I'm asked to give an account of what and why I believe a certain thing I just give the enquirer my opinion, I don't try to force it on them. If they disagree and quote a point on which they disagree I address that point, that's all I'm doing. Read my posts right through and point out to me where I tried to persuade anyone to do anything contrary to their own belief? I've critiqued their view and given my reason for it nothing more and nothing less. I did go over the top once when my Lord was called an IT, that was a spontaneous reaction for which I apologized.
There you go again, it's you telling me,
QuoteThat just seems like a dangerous and lonely road to take that may or may not be all that necessary
. I see nothing dangerous in believing in what I do, if it is to others then that's their problem, not mine.
Have I knocked on your door and persuaded you to accept my version of Christ? Yet you seem to imply that,
QuoteWe do know that no one comes to Christ on their own volition, but they are "called". We also know that one can create a form of Christ that is not the true Christ through religious conformity.
Why do you do this? Is it because you want me to accept your version? I've no idea what you mean by religious conformity If quoting from the scriptures and abiding by God's commandments is religious conformity then I'm guilty as I've nothing else to put my trust in, certainly not man. So I think you ought to back off a bit.
You have it right for once.
QuoteWhich is partly what you're saying as near as I can tell. But unless I'm reading you wrong . .which I may very well be doing . . .but it's almost like you're not convinced we're pursuing the same Christ that you are and if we're not, then we're in jeopardy of living a counterfeit life
.
Yes that is what I'm saying but I'm not forcing or trying to persuade you to believe it, it is my opinion. If you're pursuing the created Christ then in my opinion. yes, you're not pursuing the true Christ and in jeopardy of living a counterfeit life you should be aware of the fact that there is only one way to the Father and that is through His only begotten Son the True Jesus Christ."I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me." (Jn.14:6). Spoken by Christ Himself. Why don't you read your Scriptures and believe what you read.
The answer to your last quote is very simple;
QuoteBut "if" he who is in me is greater than he who is not, then the fear of following the wrong Christ shouldn't be that big of a factor due to the fact that the Holy Spirit would guide us away from the darkness and keep us aligned with the light, yes?
If you believe in the false christ then the true Christ who leads to the Father is just not in you. "...and those who are in the
flesh cannot please God. However, you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit,
if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. But if anyone
does not have the Spirit of Christ, he
does not belong to Him. If Christ is in you, though the body is dead because of sin, yet the spirit is alive because of righteousnes." (Rom.8:8-10). If you believe in a false christ (antichrist) you are still in the flesh and not in the Spirit of Christ and hence no part of Him. Notice the
IF, because the SPIRIT only exists in the true CHRIST not in the false one who is still in the flesh.
This is the Word of God speaking, brother, not Roy Monis
(http://dl8.glitter-graphics.net/pub/557/557578p45a2i8xuy.jpg)[/url
(http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll68/roymonis/peace.gif)
Roy UK
All right, I was just sharing what I see from where I am, I meant no harm by any of it and had not intentions to pick a fight. I apologize for my ignorance.
Thanks Roy, :thumbsup:
Ok Molly, now remember, Thomas was not answering a question, but making a statement immediately after seeing something shocking. Think of it in a more modern way. "Oh my God," Look it's Jesus!
Yes, that was a joke so no quoting it! :pointlaugh:
This is why Jesus did not rebuke Thomas when he fell at his feet and worshiped the risen Lord. Not because Jesus knew himself to be Jehovah God and this fact had finally dawned on Thomas. Rather, it was homage it proffered to Jesus as God's ordained Messiah. Jesus can be worshiped as the Lord Messiah. In fact, this is clearly what the writer John means by reporting this incident, for the very next two verses say that these things "have been written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ (Messiah), the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in his name" (John 20:31). To say that Thomas was worshiping Jesus as Almighty God is to directly contradict John's own stated purpose for writing his whole Gospel. When Thomas fell at Jesus' feet and worshiped him, Thomas was at last recognizing that the resurrected Jesus was the long promised Lord Messiah. Thomas' language it was steeped in Old Testament concepts.
Remember when David stepped out of the cave and call to King Saul, "My Lord and my King" (1 Sam. 24:9)? In the same way King Messiah is to be worshiped and adored by his bride: "Then the King will desire your beauty; because he is your Lord, bow down to him" (Ps.45:11). Thomas' language is in the same Hebrew tradition. He means the same thing. Thomas is addressing the rightful king of Israel, the now risen and victorious Lord. We just have to think like first century Jews steeped in their Old Testament prophets! "A Savior has been born for you who is Messiah and Lord" (Luke 2:11). The wise men believe the infant Jesus was the King of Israel they brought their gifts of gold, frankincense and myrrh to worship him: "Where is the one who has been born King of the Jews? We saw his star in the East and have come to worship him They bowed down and worshiped him" (Matt. 2:2, 11). "God has made him both Lord and Messiah, this Jesus whom you crucified" (Acts 2:36). Worship is offered to Jesus because he is the Messiah, the Son of God, the King of Israel. We have already seen that in Jewish understanding, the word "God" can refer to one who represents the Almighty God (Exodus 7:1, etc.). The King of Israel could be called "god" because he represented God to the people. Thomas knew the Old Testament prophecies that the Messiah was to be called "god" for he was to represent Jehovah perfectly. Thomas' worship was that of a Jew deeply grounded in the Old Testament faith that God is one Jehovah and that the Messiah is also called "god" in a relative and royal rather than an absolute sense. Psalm 45:7 says of the Messiah, "You have loved righteousness, and hated wickedness; therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of joy above your fellows."
Evidently this anointed one has a God above him: Jehovah is he is God. Come to think of it, isn't this what Jesus himself said just a few verses before he received Thomas' worship? "Stop clinging to me: for I have not yet ascended to the father; but go to my brethren, and say to them, 'I ascend to my Father and your Father, and my God and your God'" (John 20:17).
Exalted in heaven right now Jesus still calls the Lord God Almighty "my God" and "my Father" (Rev. 3:2, 5, 12). The Lord God is still called "his Godand Father" (Rev. 1:6). In the Revelation there is always "our God" and "His Christ" (Rev. 12:10; 20:6) or "the Lord God, the Almighty, and the lamb" (Rev. 6:16; 21:22; 21:1, 3). Yes, in good Hebrew understanding, Thomas' worship preserves this Biblical distinction:
Lord and Messiah = Lord and king= Lord and god
Jesus' creed is that his Father is "the only true God" and that he himself is the Messiah whom that one God has commissioned. He defines this knowledge as "eternal life." (John 17:3). In all matters because on that great and unique day in the age to come, "Every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that Jesus the Messiah is Lord, to the glory of God the Father" (Phil. 2:10-11). The worship we give to our glorious Lord Jesus Christ is worship that is ultimately given to his God and our God, to his Father and our Father.
Peace,
Paul
Matthew 2:11
And when they were come into the house, they saw the young child with Mary his mother, and fell down, and worshipped him: and when they had opened their treasures, they presented unto him gifts; gold, and frankincense and myrrh.
1When he was come down from the mountain, great multitudes followed him.
2And, behold, there came a leper and worshipped him, saying, Lord, if thou wilt, thou canst make me clean.
--Mat 8
18While he spake these things unto them, behold, there came a certain ruler, and worshipped him, saying, My daughter is even now dead: but come and lay thy hand upon her, and she shall live.
19And Jesus arose, and followed him, and so did his disciples.
--Mat 8
9And as they went to tell his disciples, behold, Jesus met them, saying, All hail. And they came and held him by the feet, and worshipped him.
--Mat 28
16Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them.
17And when they saw him, they worshipped him: but some doubted.
--Mat 28
51And it came to pass, while he blessed them, he was parted from them, and carried up into heaven.
52And they worshipped him, and returned to Jerusalem with great joy:
53And were continually in the temple, praising and blessing God. Amen.
--Luke 24
33Then they that were in the ship came and worshipped him, saying, Of a truth thou art the Son of God.
34And when they were gone over, they came into the land of Gennesaret.
--Mat 14
Never once does Jesus rebuke anyone for worshipping him.
Revelation 22
8And I John saw these things, and heard them. And when I had heard and seen, I fell down to worship before the feet of the angel which shewed me these things.
9Then saith he unto me, See thou do it not: for I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren the prophets, and of them which keep the sayings of this book: worship God.
Hi Molly, :boyheart:
Worship
If we may let our Lord and King have the final word. Jesus plainly states, "the true worshipers shall worship the Father in spirit and truth; for such people the Father seeks to be his worshipers. God is spirit; and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth" (John 4:23-24). Who does Jesus declare are the "true worshipers"? He insists, "the true worshipers shall worship the Father" If we would be amongst the true worshipers we must be with Jesus worshiping this Father. Evidently, those who worship "God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Ghost, three persons in one God," Are not said by Jesus to be the true worshippers. Those who worship the Father as the "only true God" are. The worshipper of the One God, the Father, as Jesus' own affirmation that he is the true worshipper.
This is the biblical pattern throughout. The so-called Lord's prayer, the model prayer, teaches us to "pray in this way: our Father who art in heaven"(Matt. 6:9). This pattern of prayer and worship prescribed by our Lord Jesus is followed and sanctioned by every example given in Scripture. See the following:
"Now may the God who gives perseverance and encouragement grant you to be of the same mind with one another according to Christ Jesus; that with one accord you may with one voice glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ" (Rom.15:5-6).
" For this reason I bow my knees before the Father," (Eph 3:14)
" giving thanks always and for everything to God the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, " (Eph 5:20)
" We always thank God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, when we pray for you, " ( Col 1:3 )
"giving thanks to the Father, who has qualified you to share in the inheritance of the saints in light." (Col 1:12)
"And whatever you do, in word or deed, do everything in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father "through" him." (Col 3:17)
This list is by no means exhaustive. But it is sufficient to show that we are, with our Lord Jesus, to worship and pray to the Father. This is the usual pattern of prayer and worship in the New Testament. They prayed to the one God through the name or authority of Jesus Christ. They evidently were not aware that the Holy Spirit was God (a third person), for wherein all the pages of the Bible to the Saints pray to the Holy Spirit? And where in all the pages of Scripture do the worshipers of God sing to the Holy Spirit as is the general custom within Christendom today? What about those passages where the Lord Jesus is worship? Or where the Lord Jesus is pray to?
Surely this is proof positive that Jesus is God because only God is to be worshiped? (The words of Jesus are often used to substantiate this belief: "You shall worship the Lord your God, and serve him only" (Matt. 4:10), as though Jesus meant: "I am the Lord your God, worship only me." But this meaning is totally incongruous and has no parallel in the New Testament record.) Then, of course, there is God the Father's own directive to the Angels concerning Jesus the son of God: "and let all the Angels of God worship him" (Heb. 1:6). The fact that Jesus is worship by Thomas as he falls at his feet and honors him with the confession, "My Lord and my God!" Too many presents the final proof that Jesus is God (John 20:28).
To all of this there is a very simple solution. Once again it comes back to a failure to understand biblical culture; a failure to read the Bible through Hebrew eyes. In the Old Testament in main Hebrew word for worship is shachah. It occurs about 170 times but the surprising thing is that only about half of this number relate to the worship of God as God. This fact is hidden in our English translations. The translators prefer to say "bow down to" or "revere" when shachah refers to homage paid to noble persons, whether Angels or men, but say "worship" when God is the object. This is a false distinction the original texts does not support. Here are just a view examples:
Lot "worshiped" the two strangers who looked like normal travelers as they entered Sodom (Gen. 19:1).
Abraham "worshipped" the Gentile leaders of the land where he lived (Gen. 23:7).
Jacob "worshipped" his older brother Esau (Gen. 33:3).
Joseph's brothers "worshipped" him (Gen. 43:26).
Ruth "worshipped" Boaz (Ruth 2:10).
David "worshipped" Jonathan (1 Sam. 20:41).
David "worshipped" King Saul (1 Sam. 24:8).
Mephibosheth fell on his face and "worshipped" David (2 Sam. 9:6).
Abigail "worshipped" David the outlaw (1 Sam 25:23, 41).
The whole congregation "worshipped" the King (1 Chron. 9:20).
These are just a few instances of the many that could be cited to show the reluctance of the translators to consistently translate shachah as "worship" when worship of important persons was obviously a common feature of Hebrew culture. In Scripture worship is offered to God and to men. There is no special word in the Old Testament for "worship" reserved exclusively for God. But there is a reluctance to translate this one-word consistently. If you looked up your English translations of the above verses you will find that you do not use the "w" word. They prefer to say "bowed down" or "revered" or "pay homage to" instead of "worshiped." This inconsistency of translation has created the false impression that only God can be worshiped.
So then, how do we explain this in light of the clear command that we are to worship God the Father alone as both the first commandment and Jesus himself command? Is this a contradiction after all? No way. The answer is that whenever men "worshiped" other men it was a relative worship. In most of the examples above it is clear that the ones worshiped were God's representatives. Once again we are back to the principle of Jewish agency. The Israelites had no difficulty in offering this proportional or relative worship to the ones who came in Gods Name, with God's message. It is obvious that the first commandment "You must not bow yourself down [shachah] to them nor serve them" is not a prohibition against a relative worship of those worthy of it. If this was the case then obviously all these Old Testament godly men and women sinned greatly. God even promises a coming day when He will make our enemies "to come and worship at your feet, and to know that I have loved you" (Rev. 3:9). Such worship of the Saints at God's degree is clearly a relative and proportional worship. It is perfectly legitimate to give honor to whom honor is due. This is why many Jews felt no impropriety in "worshiping" Jesus in the Gospels because they recognized him as a prophet of God, or the Messiah sent from God. But it is preposterous to think these good people believe Jesus was Jehovah God just because they worshiped him. When they saw and heard the mighty works of Jesus they glorified God through him (Matt. 9:8; 11:27; 28:18; Luke 7:16; 9:11; 10:22). This fits the whole will of the New Testament teaching that it is God the Father who is to receive glory through His son Jesus (Eph. 1:3, 6, 12; 1 Pet. 1:3; Heb. 13:15, etc.). Christ's exaltation is the means to a higher end. For through him all worship is ultimately directed to God and Father.
To worship him (Jesus) as Lord Messiah is thus a divinely pleasing but subordinate or relative worship. It is instructive to read that in the coming Kingdom the Lord Jesus will orchestrate the worship of his brethren in the ultimate praise of his Father. He will "proclaim" the Name of God to his "brothers" and he will "in the mist of the congregation singing your praise" (Heb. 2:12). There, in that glorious Kingdom, Jesus Christ will continue to be a joyful worshiper of God his absolutely. All other divinely appointed worship is homage to persons who are not God himself. Jesus is among those worthy of such worship for he is worshiped as the one Messiah, God's supreme son and agent.
Jesus knew the prophecy: "Worship the Lord with reverence, and do homage to the Son" (Ps. 2: 11-12). Jesus knew God his Father had decreed "Let all the Angels of God worship him" (Psalms 97:7). Jesus knew that the angelic messengers of Jehovah had in the past received relative worship from God-pleasing men and women. Jesus knew that of the one true God could be addressed as though they were God. And Jesus knew he was the Son and ultimately agent of God, so how much greater his destiny! As the "only begotten Son" whom the father had "sealed" and commissioned he knew that whoever honored him honored the Father also. This was his Father's decree (Psalms 2:11-12; 97:7).
Psalms 2:11-12 Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling. 12 Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and you perish in the way, for his wrath is quickly kindled. Blessed are all who take refuge in him.
Psalms 97:7 All worshipers of images are put to shame, who make their boast in worthless idols; worship him, all you gods!
2Co 4:4 the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.
I already covered John's story about Thomas, so do you want to know about Jewish Agency? It's very very important in knowing how God works through His creation! Very important! Really, I can't stress enough how important!
Paul
Hebrews 1:6
And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.
Not quite the same as Ruth 'worshipping' Boaz, although Boaz is the shadow of the kinsman redeemer.
Yes, I'd like to hear more about agency, I know it's very important.
Agency
By Greg Deuble
The foundation of our Bible is the OT. It contains the first three-quarters of our Bible. It stands to reason that if we misunderstand this Hebrew foundation then we construct a system of error. The art of successful reading is generally to let the last quarter of a book agree with the first three-quarters. As the grand finale of the Bible, the NT agrees with and is consistent with its OT heritage. It might sound like an over-simplification to say that the Bible is a Hebrew book and must be approached through "Hebrew eyes;" however, it was written within the culture and thought-forms of the Middle East. In order to understand its message we must become familiar with the thought-forms, the idioms, the culture and the customs of those who lived in Biblical times. Every sincere reader of the Bible understands this. Doing it is the challenge.
H. N. Snaith in his book, "The Distinctive Ideas of the Old Testament," writes "Christianity itself has tended to suffer from a translation out of the Prophets and into Plato." (p161) "Our position is that the reinterpretation of Biblical theology in terms of the ideas of the Greek philosophers has been both a widespread throughout the centuries and everywhere destructive to the essence of the Christian faith." (p187.). Snaith also makes this remark that if his "thesis" is correct: "then neither Catholic nor Protestant theology is based on Biblical theology. In each case we have a denomination of Christian theology by Greek thought We hold that there can be no right (theology) until we have come to a clear view of the distinctive ideas of both Old and New Testaments and their differences from the pagan ideas which have so largely dominated Christian thought." (p188.).
With the passing of many centuries since Scriptures were written much of the original intent has been buried under the accretions of generations of human tradition.According to Mr. Deuble a lot of Bible confusion can be cleared up by understanding "The Principle of Agency."
A common feature of the Hebrew Bible is the concept (some even call it the "law") of Jewish agency. All Old Testament scholars and commentators recognize that in Jewish custom whenever a superior commissioned an agent to act on his behalf, the agent was regarded as the person himself. This is well expressed in the Encyclopedia of the Jewish religion.
Thus in Hebrew custom whenever an agent was sent to act for his master it was as though that lord himself was acting and speaking. An equivalent in our culture to the Jewish custom of agency would be one who is authorized to act as Power of Attorney, or more strongly one who is given Enduring Power of Attorney. Such an agent has virtually unlimited powers to act on behalf of the one who appointed him.
Let's look at one of the stories in the Old Testament with this new mindset. In the story of Moses and the burning bush in Exodus 3, "who" is it who appears to Moses and talked to him? My answer once was typical of the vast majority in the Church. Of course it was God himself, Yahweh, who spoke to Moses. After all, the text states that "'God' called to him from the midst of the bush and 'said', 'Moses, Moses!'" (v4). Verse 6 is even more convincing when the same speaker says, "'I am' the 'God' of your father, 'the God' of Abraham, 'the God' of Isaac, and 'the God' of Jacob.' Then Moses hid his face, for he was afraid to look at 'God'." Surely it was Jehovah God himself who appear to Moses and who personally spoke? But what do we make of verse 2 that prefaces this narrative by stating that "'the angel of the LORD' appeared" to Moses from the midst of the brush? Many scholars have declared this angel to be God himself, even the pre-existing Christ. They make much of the definitive article and point out that this was a particular angel not just any angel.
This is a fancy bit of footwork that disregards the Hebrew text as we shall see. If we turn to the New Testament's commentary on this incident, we will see how Hebrews understood their own Scriptures.
Let us now turn to answer our question: Who is it who appears to Moses and talks to him? The martyr Stephen was a man "filled with the Holy Spirit." Let's listen to his commentary on the burning bush incident. He clearly states that it was "an angel who appeared to him in the wilderness of Mount Sinai, in the flame of a burning bush" (Acts 7:30) As Moses approached this phenomenon, "there came the voice of the Lord: I am the God of your father. The Lord said to him, 'Take off the sandals from your feet, for the place on which you are standing is holy ground. (31-33).
Quite clearly this is an example of agency. It is an angel who appears to Moses and it is the angel who speaks. But note that this angel evens speaks for God in the first person. The angel of the Lord says, "I am God." The angel is distinguished from God yet identified with him. In Hebrew eyes, it is perfectly natural to consider the agent as the person himself. In Hebrew thought, homage given to God's agent or representative is homage ultimately given to God Himself.
Let's look at just one more example. In Acts 12, the apostle Peter is in jail about to be executed. But while he was asleep, "behold, an angel of the Lord suddenly appeared, and a light shone in the cell; and he struck Peter's side and roused him, saying, 'Get up quickly.' And his chains fell off his hands. And the angel said to him, 'Gird yourself and put on your sandals and follow me'" (Acts 12:7-8). Peter thought he was dreaming. As he followed the angel past the guards, out through the iron gate which "opened for them by itself," Peter "did not know what was being 'done by the "angel"' was real, but thought he was seeing a vision"(v.9). Now the Church was meeting in a house and praying for Peter's release. Peter started banging on the house door and Rhoda, the servant girl went to open the door Once Peter was eventually inside you can imagine the stir in that place. Peter motions with his hand for everyone to be quiet. He told them his incredible story. And what did he say? "He described to them how 'the LORD' had led him out of prison" (v.17).
So who really did get Peter out of jail? The angel or the Lord? The text says both did. But we know that the Lord sent the angel to do the actual work. To the Hebrew mind, it was really the Lord who rescued Peter.
There are many such OT examples. An agent of God is actually referred to as God, or the Lord himself. In Genesis 31:11-13 Jacobs said to his wives, "'The angel' of God 'said' to me in a dream'I am the God' of Bethel." Here is an angel speaking as though he was God Himself. He speaks in the first person: "I am the God of Bethel." Jacob was comfortable with this concept of agency.
In the next chapter, Jacob wrestled with "a man" until dawn, but he says he had "seen God face to face" (Gen 32:24-30). So was at this time when God appear to Jacob as a man? Perhaps as some have suggested it was actually the Lord Jesus himself, as the second member of the triune God, who wrestled with Jacob.
Not at all according to Hosea 12:3-4 which says, "As a man he [Jacob] struggled with God; he struggled with "the angel" and overcame him. So the one who is called both "a man" and "God" in Genesis is identified as an angel in Hosea. This is a perfect example of Jewish agency where the agent is considered as the principal.
There is another instance of agency in Exodus 7. God tells Moses he will make him "God to Pharaoh, and your brother Aaron shall be your prophet" (Exodus 7:1). Moses is to stand before the king of Egypt with the full authority and backing of heaven itself. Then God says, By this you shall know that I am the LORD: behold, I will strike the water that is in the Nile with the staff that is in "My hand", and it shall be turned to blood" (v.17). But observe carefully that just two verses later the LORD says to Moses, "Say to Aaron, take your staff and stretch out your hand over the waters of Egypt that they may become blood" (v.19). God says He Himself will strike the waters with the staff in His own hand. Yet, it was Aaron's hand that actually held the rod. Aaron is standing as God's agent in the very place of God himself. There is identification of the agent with his Principle. In Biblical terms, Moses and Aaron are "God" (Heb. elohim) to Pharaoh!
Sometimes this concept of agency has caused the translators of our Bible difficulties. The Hebrew word for "God"(elohim) has a wide range of meanings. Depending on context, it can mean the Supreme Deity, or "a god" or "gods" or even "angels" or human "judges." This difficulty is reflected in verses like Exodus 21:6
The KJV reads "Then his master shall bring him unto the judges;"
The NIV reads "then his master must take him before the judges."
But
The NASB reads "then his master shall bring him to God"
So too the RSV "then his master shall bring him to God"
Clearly, because the judges of Israel represented God as His agents, they are called "God," elohim. As the slave gave his vow before these representatives of God, he was in fact making a binding vow before Jehovah. The agents were as God.
Another example that we have time for in this brief overview, is in Judges 6:11-22. "The angel of the LORD came and sat under the oak tree while Gideon was threshing wheat". As 'the angel of the LORD appeared to him,' he greeted Gideon with the words, "The LORD is with you, O valiant warrior." We can hear Gideon's disbelief when he says to the angel, "Oh my lord, if the LORD is with us, why then has all this happened to us?" Now notice a change in the text at Judges 6:14: "And the LORD looked at him and said, 'Go in this your strength and deliver Israel from the hand of Midian. Have not I sent you?" At this point Gideon murmurs and throws up excuses as to why he could not rescue Israel from their enemies. "But the LORD said to him, 'Surely I will be with you, and you shall defeat Midian as one man.'" Notice how the angel who is speaking on God's behalf actually uses the first person personal pronoun. And the text clearly says that when the angel looked at Gideon it was God himself who looked at him: And the LORD looked at him." Gideon is not confused regarding who he is looking at or who is speaking to him. For as "the angel of the LORD vanished from his site," he exclaimed, "I have seen the angel of the LORD face-to-face." (V.22). We know that the angel of the LORD is the agent and not literally God, because the Scriptures are absolutely clear that no one has ever seen God himself (John 1:18; 1 Tim 6:16; 1 John 4:12). Many scholars have failed to take this very Hebrew way of looking at things into account. They have literally identified the angel of the LORD with God Himself. All confusion is dissipated when we understand the Jewish law of agency: "a person's agent is regarded as the person himself."
There is one last very clear OT example of Hebrew Principle of Agency. It comes from Deuteronomy 29. Moses summons all of Israel and says to them, "You have seen all that the Lord did before your eyes in the land of Egypt to Pharaoh and all his servants and all his land; the great trials which your eyes have seen, those great signs and wonders" (v.2-3).
Moses continues to recite for the people all that God has done for them. But notice that in verse 6, while still reciting all God's wonders, Moses suddenly changes to the first person and says, "You have not eaten bread, nor have you drunk wine or strong drink, in order that you might know that I am the LORD your God." It is obvious that God himself is not personally speaking to the people. Moses is preaching. But Moses as the agent of God can speak as though he is the Lord himself. What is happening here? God is speaking through His man, His appointed representative. Therefore, he can move from speaking in the third person, "the LORD did this and that for you" to the first person: "I am the LORD your God doing this and that."
Knowing this principle helps us with other apparent difficulties, even seeming contradictions through the Scriptures. Lets look at one New Testament example. The story that has created a problem to many minds is the one concerning the healing of the Centurion's servant. In Matthew's account (Matt 8:5-13), it is the Centurion himself who comes to Jesus and begs him to heal his servant. The Centurion himself says, "Lord, my servant is lying paralyzed at home, suffering great pain" (v.6).
However, the parallel account in Luke (Luke 7:1-10) states that the Centurion did not personally go and speak to Jesus. He actually sent or commissioned as his agents "some Jewish elders." These Jewish elders pleaded with Jesus on behalf of the Centurion saying, "He is worthy for you to grant this to him; for he loves our nation, and it was he who built us our synagogue" (v.4-5)
So who actually went to Jesus here? Did these gospel writers get confused? Are the detractors perhaps right to say that the Bible is full of errors and contradictions? Not at all! The difficulty is cleared up when we understand the Hebrew mind behind these Scriptures. The answer to who actually stood before Jesus is the elders. They had been sent by the Centurion. Matthew in typical Hebrew idiom has the Centurion himself there and speaking in the first person before Jesus. The agent is as the principal himself.
Jesus claimed to represent God like no other before or after him. He claimed to be the unique spokesman for God his Father and to speak the ultimate words of God. He claimed to act in total accord and harmony with God like no other. He claimed to be the Son of God, the Christ or Messiah, and the agent of the Father. The NT claims that he who sees Jesus sees the Father. He who hears Jesus the Son hears the words of God Himself.
The New Testament puts this theory about the angel of the Lord being Jesus in his preexistence to rest in Hebrews 1: "God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, in these last days has spoken to us in His Son" (v 1-2). So, the Son of God "did not speak" in the Old Testament days! Back in those days God spoke in various ways and only in "portions," whether by vision or by prophet or by angel. It is only since Jesus Christ was brought into existence at birth and appeared "in these last days" that we have heard God speak "in his Son." This is axiomatic. Jesus Christ was not God's messenger before his appearance as a man, born of Mary in history. Look at the scriptures:
Act 7:38 "This is the one (Moses) who was in the congregation in the wilderness together with the angel who was speaking to him on Mount Sinai, and who was with our fathers; and he received living oracles to pass on to you.
Act 7:53 you who received the law as ordained by angels, and yet did not keep it."
Gal 3:19 Why the Law then? It was added because of transgressions, having been ordained through angels by the agency of a mediator, until the seed would come to whom the promise had been made.
Heb 2:2 For if the word spoken through angels proved unalterable, and every transgression and disobedience received a just penalty,
Now let's review one last example and look at Exodus 23:20-23. Notice 'my name is in him!' (agency)
"Behold, I send an angel before thee, to keep thee by the way ... Take ye heed of him, and hearken unto his voice; provoke him not (be not rebellious against him): for he will not pardon your transgression; for my name is in him" "But if you truly obey his voice and do all that I say, then I will be an enemy to your enemies and an adversary to your adversaries. "For My angel will go before you... (Exodus 23:20-23).
In this passage the angel was to be for Israel in the place of God; he was to speak God's words, and judge them. In fact the angel expressed God's name; he was God for them. Now if this was true of an angel of the Lord, how much more of the Son of God himself? Hence these sayings:
"This is life eternal, that they might know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent ... I (Jesus) have manifested thy name unto (the disciples) ... Holy Father, keep in thy name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, even as we are one" (John 17:3,6,11).
"I and my Father are one" (John 10:30).
Jesus, then, enjoyed a unity of mind and Spirit with the Father, so that he could say, "He that hath seen me hath seen the Father" (John 14:9). For the disciples Jesus was in the place of God; he spoke God's words, proclaimed God's truth, and pronounced His judgements.
Hebrews 1:1 makes more sense now:
God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, 2 in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world (ages).
[The Net bible adds... The temporal (ages) came to be used of the spatial (what exists in those time periods). See Heb_11:3 for the same usage.]
Heb 11:3 By faith we understand that the worlds (ages) were prepared by the word (ρημα G4487) of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things which are visible.
Jesus had every right to claim to be God because God was in Him doing His works.
"Jesus the Nazarene, a man attested to you by God with miracles and wonders and signs which god performed through (dia) him in your midst" (Acts 2:22).
Paul
With all this worship of agents of God, which Paul speaks of civil governors as being, I'm surprised the early Church in the Roman Empire were so ignorant of "Jewish" ways as to worthlessly throw away theirs lives rather than offer incense to the Ceasar as a god. Should it prove I can't become enough of an overcomer that they can't touch me, if it comes down to it, I hope God will hold me enough so I can die for Him in a similar rejection of false worship, perhaps because of not taking their "mark" to buy and sell.
John 14:7-31
7 If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.
8 Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.
9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?
10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.
11 Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake.
12 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.
13 And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son.
14 If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it.
15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.
16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;
17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.
18 I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.
19 Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also.
20 At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you.
21 He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.
22 Judas saith unto him, not Iscariot, Lord, how is it that thou wilt manifest thyself unto us, and not unto the world?
23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.
24 He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father's which sent me.
25 These things have I spoken unto you, being yet present with you.
26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
27 Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid.
28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.
29 And now I have told you before it come to pass, that, when it is come to pass, ye might believe.
30 Hereafter I will not talk much with you: for the prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me.
31 But that the world may know that I love the Father; and as the Father gave me commandment, even so I do. Arise, let us go hence.
Jesus is the manifestation God. I call out the name "Jesus" and the Holy Spirit answers to it. Jesus says, " I came in my Father's name..." What is the Father's name? JESUS! The problem I have is that He says we would be one with Him, even as He and the Father are one. So, it's not refusing the Son, and for some the Spirit also, from being aspects of God that concerns me about the "Trinity" doctrine. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are God, but, that is too limiting to what is revealed in Scripture, because He is in the process of making us a part of Himself. Thereafter He will go even farther, becoming the all in all.
Hi! Paul
QuoteTo say that Thomas was worshiping Jesus as Almighty God is to directly contradict John's own stated purpose for writing his whole Gospel.
Pray tell, what does Son of God mean? Is He God or is He not? Who mentioned anything about Almighty God the Father. We are taking here about His Son who is also God by right of birth.
Thomas recognized Him not as flesh Jesus but as God, the risen Christ/Messiah, and hence had to worship Him. "And when He again
brings the firstborn into the world, He says, "And let all the angels of God worship Him." (Heb.1:6). This is Christ in the flesh, Jesus, and the angels were commanded to worship Him, the Father's only begotten Son/God.
It is quite evident that the Scriptures can be twisted to meet individual needs. For example what does the Scripture say about love of the things of this world, such as, lust of the flesh? It is enmity toward God. "Do not love the world nor the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world,
the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the boastful pride of life, is not from the Father, but is from the world. (1Jn.2:15-16).
But what does the twisted version say? Back to the garden of Eden, "Now the serpent was more crafty than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. And he said to the woman,
"Indeed, has God said, 'You shall not eat from any tree of the garden'?" The woman said to the serpent, "From the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat; but from the fruit of the
tree which is in the middle of the garden, God has said,
'You shall not eat from it or touch it, or you will die.' " The serpent said to the woman,
"You surely will not die! "For God knows that in the day you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil." When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was desirable to make one wise, she took from its fruit and ate; and she gave also to her husband with her, and he ate." (Gen.3:1-6).
And so the argument goes "If God did not intend you to lust for the flesh, why did He provide you and Adam with the equipment and the uncontrollable urge to indulge in it if He didn't intend you to use it? Of course He meant you to use it, so go ahead you just misunderstood what He said." So Eve gave to Adam and they both ate.
Brother keep with the Word of God and stop dodging round corners to make your point.
(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll68/roymonis/peace.gif)
Roy UK
Hi! Paul
QuoteWho does Jesus declare are the "true worshipers"? He insists, "the true worshipers shall worship the Father" I
'Tis true what you say, but who is Jesus? "
I and the
Father are
one." (Jn.10:30). ONE GOD.
(http://dl.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1551/1551031u6k25jgwzu.png) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Quote from: Roy Morris'Tis true what you say, but who is Jesus? "I and the Father are one." (Jn.10:30). ONE GOD.
23Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also. --John 2:23
Quote from: ReformerJesus is the manifestation God. I call out the name "Jesus" and the Holy Spirit answers to it. Jesus says, " I came in my Father's name..." What is the Father's name? JESUS! The problem I have is that He says we would be one with Him, even as He and the Father are one. So, it's not refusing the Son, and for some the Spirit also, from being aspects of God that concerns me about the "Trinity" doctrine. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are God, but, that is too limiting to what is revealed in Scripture, because He is in the process of making us a part of Himself. Thereafter He will go even farther, becoming the all in all.
He's changing the physics of his creation! :mshock:
Hi! Paul
Do we really need all this deep intellectual study which takes us further away from the truth rather than draw s nearer to it. Has not 2000 years of Christian history served any real purpose in the theologians and intellectuals mindset? Are they so blinded by the god of this world not to be able to see the destruction they have caused to the body of Christ? Shame on you and those of your ilk.
God has warned us, but over 2000 years no one has obeyed and learned the lesson, and it continues into the present time. When are we
going to wake up and take heed to His warning?
Paul, highly skilled in the knowledge of the Hebrew Scriptures calls all head knowledge, rubbish. "More than that, I count all things to be loss in view of the surpassing value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and
count them but rubbish so that I may gain Christ." (Phil.3:8).
God also calls it rubbish ""Let no
man deceive himself. If any man among you
thinks that he is wise in this age, he
must become foolish, so that he
may become wise. For the
wisdom of this world is foolishness before God. For it is written, "He is the one who catches the wise in their craftiness"; and again,
"The Lord knows the reasonings of the wise, that they are useless."" (1Cor.3:18-20).
The only answer lies in the Scriptures we have and obedience to His command ; "But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a
matter of one's own interpretation."(2Pet.1:20). If we witness Scripture with Scripture and Spiritual with Spiritual to arrive at the truth then we have the truth and don't need any man's intellectual arguments to oppose it.
So thank you very much Paul.
(http://dl.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1551/1551031u6k25jgwzu.png) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Hi! Paul
It would take me a lifetime to answer all your lengthy post, and I don't have that much time to spare so I'll just pick on one quote.
Quote"Behold, I am going to send an angel before you to guard you along the way and to bring you into the place which I have prepared. "Be on your guard before him and obey his voice; do not be rebellious toward him, for he will not pardon your transgression, since My name is in him." (Ex.23:20-21).
I don't follow you. In what way is the angel, messenger, not the Son of God, Jehovah? all heavenly bodies are angels, some ministering, some archangels for special occasions and on this important mission a leader, His Son, God, still an angel but of lower rank than the Father. "For to which of the angels did He ever say, "You are My Son, Today I have begotten You"? (Heb,1:5). He is the only begotten Son, the leader of the pack as it were, with the most important of all the Father's messengers. The Son of God/Jehovah the angel of the OT, CHRIST. "...and all drank the same spiritual drink, for they were drinking from a spiritual rock which followed them; and the rock was Christ." (1Cor.10:4).
You tell us to read the Scriptures and fail to follow your own advice. Where do you get all your heresies from? From your deep study the Hebrew language is it?
You intellectuals corrupted the Babylon that we have come out of, are you so blood thirsty that you want to corrupt us in our new habitat as well?
I hope we who have heard the voice of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and Come Out of Babylon, heed the past mistakes and keep clear of the all intellectuals like you and keep the Body of Christ pure for once..
WE want Jesus Christ the Son of God/Jehovah/Word/Leader. "Do not be called leaders; for
One is your
Leader, that is,
Christ." (Matt.23:10).
(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll68/roymonis/peace.gif)
Roy UK
Quote from: Roy MorrisI don't follow you. In what way is the angel, messenger, not the Son of God, Jehovah? all heavenly bodies are angels, some ministering, some archangels for special occasions and on this important mission a leader, His Son, God, still an angel but of lower rank than the Father. "For to which of the angels did He ever say, "You are My Son, Today I have begotten You"? (Heb,1:5). He is the only begotten Son, the leader of the pack as it were, with the most important of all the Father's messengers. The Son of God/Jehovah the angel of the OT, CHRIST. "...and all drank the same spiritual drink, for they were drinking from a spiritual rock which followed them; and the rock was Christ." (1Cor.10:4).
Hi Roy, Can you explain to me what you just said here? I can't understand your wording.
Quote from: Molly on September 04, 2008, 07:06:35 PM
Quote from: Roy MorrisI don't follow you. In what way is the angel, messenger, not the Son of God, Jehovah? all heavenly bodies are angels, some ministering, some archangels for special occasions and on this important mission a leader, His Son, God, still an angel but of lower rank than the Father. "For to which of the angels did He ever say, "You are My Son, Today I have begotten You"? (Heb,1:5). He is the only begotten Son, the leader of the pack as it were, with the most important of all the Father's messengers. The Son of God/Jehovah the angel of the OT, CHRIST. "...and all drank the same spiritual drink, for they were drinking from a spiritual rock which followed them; and the rock was Christ." (1Cor.10:4).
Hi Roy, Can you explain to me what you just said here? I can't understand your wording.
Hi! Molly
It will be a pleasure to explain what I mean.
From my understanding of the various stories in the Bible I gather that God is Spirit and like Him His Son and all the heavenly bodies are spirit. The Father uses these heavenly bodies as messengers in a varying range of importance as we see in Revelation. The highest ranking angels are the archangels Michael and Gabriel who were sent on the important missions, such as, to the prophets of old and Daniel in the OT, and the news of the birth of John the Baptist to Zacharias and the birth of Jesus to Mary. But for the awesome tasks of creation, leading His chosen people out of bondage, and the salvation of all mankind there was only one messenger who was able to accomplish those tasks as the leader and that was His own only begotten Son/Word/Christ/God by right of birth.
Of all the heavenly bodies His Son/Word/Christ/Leader was the only One capable of guaranteed success in the accomplishment of such awesome tasks since only God has the power to create something out of nothing.
"Do not be called leaders; for One is your Leader, that is, Christ." (Matt.23:10).
I can assure you there are Scriptures, and I'm sure you are aware of them, that can prove all the points I have mentioned.
I hope that helps?
(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif)(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll68/roymonis/peace.gif)
Roy UK
Quote from: RoyHi! Paul
We are taking here about His Son who is also God by right of birth.
Then so is Adam, the Son of God. But everyone would agree, Adam is not God.Quote from: RoyPray tell, what does Son of God mean?
Son of God - This title for Jesus has been given meanings and attributes that were never intended. People have erroneously used the human father-son relationship to describe this title of Jesus'. They have thought that since a human son has the actual essence (made of the same matter) of his father, that therefore, this title implies that Jesus being the Son of God is of the same essence of God. This conclusion will lead you right into the Doctrine of the Trinity. This is the formula they adopted at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD when they said:
"The Son is of the same substance as the Father."It was at this council that Jesus was first made God. The Holy Spirit interestingly enough was
not included in the formula. It was included
fifty-six years later at another council. Let's see what this title really means:
Son of God - In the Old Testament Israel is described as God's first-born (
Exodus 4:22) and is called His son. There is therefore precedence for calling the Messiah
"Son of God" for he is Israel's representative par excellence (ZEB, vol.4, pg.203-204).
"Son of God"/ denotes an intimate relationship with the Father. It is obvious that sonship must not be understood in a crude pagan way. This bears out Dalman's contention that the Hebrew concept of "son" does not denote an extensive circle of relationships" (ZEB, vol.4, pg. 205). Adam was called the "son of God" (Luke 3:38), God calls King Solomon His "son" in 1 Chronicles 28:6.
For Paul, "Son of God" is essentially a Christological description expressing "the Son's solidarity with God" (ZEB, vol.4, pg.204). Closeness to the Father is the basic meaning of "Son of God" (Ibid). This closeness was a relationship that was shared by God's anointed kings of Israel. Since Jesus is the ideal king of Israel, he is naturally the ideal Son of God. This is how the term came to be synonymous with Messiah and king of Israel. They are all different ways of saying the same thing.
The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible vol. 4 pg. 204 states:
"The last chapter of the first epistle of John makes every possible emphasis upon the principle that Sonship is the mark of Messiahship. The same is the case with the fourth gospel where the Son of God is synonymous with Messiah and occurs more frequently than any other title. Haenchen maintains that the same equation:
Messiah = Son of God = Son of Man
applies to Mark's gospel. The same can be said of the rest of the New Testament."
Aspects of Monotheism pg.90 states:
"The notion that the Davidic king was the son of God is well established in the Hebrew Bible in 2 Samuel 7:14 and in Psalm 2:7. It was only natural then that the coming messianic king should also be regarded as the Son of God. To say that the king was the son of God, however, does not necessarily imply divinization."
This is the meaning of the title "Son of God." Messiah = Son of God = king of Israel = Son of Man. The Messiah does have the closest and most intimate relationship with the Father. Let's take a look at some verses to confirm this.
"The kings of the earth rise up, and the princes conspire together against the LORD and His anointed (Messiah)"... "I myself have set up my king on Zion (Israel)"... "The LORD said to me, "You are my son" (Psalm 2:2,6-7).
Here we see God speaking of the Messiah using all three titles; Messiah, king of Zion, and son.
"He first found his own brother and told him, "We have found the Messiah"..."Rabbi, you are the Son of God: you are the King of Israel" (John 1:41& 49).
John cannot be clearer on this title; the Son of God is the King of Israel. This is the Jewish meaning of "Son of God." Any other definition will take away from the true meaning of the title into something that was never intended by its Jewish author.
Quote from: Roy'Tis true what you say, but who is Jesus? "I and the Father are one." (Jn.10:30). ONE GOD.
John 17:22
"The glory which You have given Me I have given to them, that they may be one, just as We are one;One God? Or one in Mind and Spirit.
Paul
this helped me to see more clearly
2Sa 6:2 And David arose, and went with all the people that [were] with him from Baale of Judah, to bring up from thence the ark of God, whose name is called by the name of the LORD of hosts that dwelleth [between] the cherubims.
Use in the Bible: Jehovah and Elohim occur with Sabaoth over 285 times. It is most frequently used in Jeremiah and Isaiah. Jehovah Sabaoth is first used in 1Sa 1:3.
Variant spellings: None
TWOT Reference: 1865a, 1865b
Strong's Reference: 6635
Jehovah Sabaoth in the Septuagint: kurios sabaôth — the Lord of hosts (sabaôth: Gr. transliteration of Heb. "hosts")
Meaning and Derivation: Jehovah is translated as "The Existing One" or "Lord." The chief meaning of Jehovah is derived from the Hebrew word Havah meaning "to be" or "to exist." It also suggests "to become" or specifically "to become known" - this denotes a God who reveals Himself unceasingly. Sabaoth (se bâ'ôt) means "armies" or "hosts." Jehovah Sabaoth can be translated as "The Lord of Armies" (1Sa 1:3). This name denotes His universal sovereignty over every army, both spiritual and earthly. The Lord of Hosts is the king of all heaven and earth. (Psa 24:9-10; Psa 84:3; Isa 6:5).
Further references of the name Jehovah Sabaoth in the Old Testament: 1Sa 1:11; 1Sa 17:45; 2Sa 6:18; 2Sa 7:27; 1Ki 19:14; 2Ki 3:14; 1Ch 11:9; Psa 24:10; Psa 48:8; Psa 80:4; Psa 80:19; Psa 84:3; Isa 1:24; Isa 3:15; Isa 5:16; Isa 6:5; Isa 9:19; Isa 10:26; Isa 14:22; Jer 9:15; Jer 48:1; Hsa 12:5; Amo 3:13; Mic 4:4; Nah 3:5; Hag 2:6; Zec 1:3; Mal 1:6; Hab 2:13; Zep 2:9
also read all of Jude here is 14It was of these people, moreover, that Enoch in the seventh [generation] from Adam prophesied when he said, Behold, the Lord comes with His myriads of holy ones (ten thousands of His saints)
15To execute judgment upon all and to convict all the impious (unholy ones) of all their ungodly deeds which they have committed [in such an] ungodly [way], and of all the severe (abusive, jarring) things which ungodly sinners have spoken against Him.
for convience
God bless peace rosered
One God? Or one in Mind and Spirit.
For me, I am a spirit, that has a soul, that lives in a body . .you can't separate one from the other without affecting all three . . . I see God to be the same way. He is the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, you can't divide one from the other two without bringing disorder to all three.
Many prophecies indicated that the Coming One would arise from the "seed," the stock of humanity, in a particular from Abrahamic and Davidic stock. The Messiah would be from the biological chain within the human family, specifically of Jewish pedigree.
Moses himself said: "The Lord your God will rise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your own countrymen [literally, brothers]; you shall listen to him" (Deut.18:15).
In this passage, Moses predicts that the coming Messiah would be a person "like me," raised up from "among" the people of Israel, and that God would not speak to the people directly, because they were afraid that if God spoke without a mediator they would die (V16).
The coming "prophet" would be a man of whom it is said that God would "put his word in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him. And it shall come about whoever will not listen to My words which he shall speak in My name, I Myself will require it of him" (v. 18-19). To say that the Messiah is God Himself is to contradict the whole point of this prophecy.
For it announces that the ultimate spokesman for God is expressly not God but a human being. The New Testament says that Jesus is the one who fulfilled this prophecy (Acts 3:22; 7:37). Understandably, no Jew who believe theses Scriptures ever imagined that the baby born in Bethlehem was going to be Jehovah himself come as a human baby.
Jesus claimed to be this Messiah
"Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son CAN DO NOTHING OF HIMSELF, but what He sees the Father do: for what things so ever He does, these also does the Son likewise"
"For I have not spoken of Myself; but the Father which sent Me, He gave me commandment WHAT I should say, and WHAT I should speak" (John 12:49).
Now remember Moses...
Deu 18:17 "The LORD said to me, 'They have spoken well. 'I will raise up a prophet from among their countrymen like you (Moses), and I will put My words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him.
Is this not what Jesus did and said? This is not talking about sending "God in the flesh"!
Generally when Trinitarians say "God," they mean the combination of all three persons, Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit. If they want to refer to one specific member of the Trinity they will use the corresponding name such as "the Son" etc.
Okay, one set up verse. Trinitarians will agree that there is only one God who is called Yahweh. The problem is that they include Jesus as a member of Yahweh. But for now, let's agree that the only God is Yahweh.
Isaiah 45:5 – "I am the LORD (YHWH) and there is no other, there is no God besides me."
This is pretty simple. YHWH is the ONLY God. So far, so good, I think we all can agree.
Exodus 3:15 – "Thus shall you say to the Israelites: The LORD (YHWH), the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, the God of Jacob, has sent me to you." Okay, the God of your fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob is the LORD (YHWH).
The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob = YHWH. Again, we can all agree
Acts 3:13 – "The God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, the God of our ancestors, has glorified his servant Jesus."
Does this verse imply that Jesus is the God of Abraham etc.? Of course not! Just read it. The God of Abraham glorified who? Himself? No! He glorified his servant Jesus. This is not difficult. Jesus is obviously not the God of Abraham etc. He is the God of Abraham's SERVANT. Who is the God of Abraham? YHWH. And YHWH is who? The ONLY God. So Jesus is not God? Of course not. He is God's anointed. Look...
Acts 10:38 – "How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and power. He went about doing good and healing all oppressed by the devil, for God was with him."
Who anointed Jesus? It doesn't say "the" Father anointed Jesus, it says GOD. You can obviously see that Jesus is not the God that anointed him. If I said, "The king anointed Tom," would you think that it meant that Tom is the king? Of course not. Jesus is the servant whom God anointed to do his will. That is the whole purpose of anointing someone, to give them the wisdom and power that they will need in order to serve God. Does it make sense to you that God would anoint God with God? Let's look at a Messianic prophecy in the Old Testament.
Isaiah 61:1 – "The spirit of the Lord God is upon me, because the LORD (YHWH) has anointed me."
By reading this verse it is plainly clear that the person who is being anointed is not YHWH. YHWH is anointing this individual. Now watch how Jesus uses this verse to refer to himself. Jesus uses this verse to say that he is the one that the Scripture spoke about. That he is the one whom YHWH has anointed. Who is YHWH by the way? That's right, the ONLY God.
Luke 4:18-21 – "He (Jesus) unrolled the scroll and found the passage where it was written: 'The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me,'...He (Jesus) said to them, 'Today this Scripture passage is fulfilled in your hearing."
Okay now, don't freak out, this is simple. Look at Isaiah 61:1, YHWH anoints someone other than YHWH. Jesus in Luke claims that he is that person whom YHWH has anointed. Next!
1 Cor. 8:6 – "Yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom all things are and for whom we exist, and one Lord (This Lord is not a translation of YHWH, it is kyrios i.e. master, king etc.) Jesus Christ."
It doesn't get any easier than this. Who is the one God? The FATHER! That's it, period! The Father is the only one who is considered God. Jesus is our Lord (master, king). You will always see that the only one who is referred to as God is the Father. From the passage above, do you honestly read that and come away with the fact that Jesus is the one God? It is obvious that the one Lord is not the one God. Only the Father is God. It never says, "Peace from God the Father and God the Son." Why not? Didn't the Apostles know that the Son is God? Not even close! Look at the following:
1 Cor. 1:3 – "Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ."
2 Cor. 1:2 – "Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ."
Philippians 1:2 – "Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ."
1 Thessalonians 3:13 – "To be blameless in holiness before our God and Father at the coming of our Lord Jesus."
2 Thessalonians 1:2 – "Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ."
Philippians 4:20 – To our God and Father, glory for ever and ever. Amen."
Collosians 1:2 – "Peace from God our Father."
Ephesians 4:6 – "One God and Father of all."
1 Timothy 1:2 – "Peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord."
2 Timothy 1:2 – "Peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord."
Galatians 1:3 "Peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ."
So who is the ONLY one who is referred to as God? That's right, the Father. There is no way that in these sentences you can come out with the idea that Jesus is God. They always say, "peace from God AND, I repeat, AND the Lord Jesus Christ." They are separate individuals. Jesus Christ is not considered by any stretch of the imagination, "God" by these authors.
If I said,
"Peace from George our president and the chief of staff Joshua."
"Peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ." (for comparison)
Is there anyway that you would read the verse above and come away thinking that Joshua, the chief of staff is the president? No way! But wait, it gets even better.
In these next verses, Jesus, who many claim is fully God at ALL times, has a God. How can this be? These must all be typos.
1 Peter 1:3 – "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ."
2 Cor. 1:3 – "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ."
2 Cor. 11:31 – "The God and Father of the Lord Jesus knows, he who is blessed forever, that I do not lie."
Revelation 1:6 – "Who has made us into a kingdom, priests for his God and Father."
Ephesians 1:3 – "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ."
Ephesians 1:17 – "That the God of our Lord, the Father of glory."
Wow! The Apostles must have messed up here? Don't they know that Jesus is God? How can God have a God? He can't. That's why when I ask this question to pastors the only answer they can give me is that it's a mystery. Do you know how naïve and gullible that sounds?
These verses above are not profound theological statements. They are for the most part just greetings. No one has ever disputed these verses. Just read them! "Yes!" Read them and ask why, it reads God and Father of the Lord Jesus over and over again.
The Messiah is supposed to have a God because he needs to be anointed by God in order to do wonders and signs on behalf of God. Let's look at Micah 5:3 which is a Messianic prophecy:
Micah 5:3 – "He shall stand firm and shepherd his flock by the strength of the LORD (YHWH), in the majestic name of the LORD, HIS GOD."
The Christ will have a God? Yes! Who will it be? Look at the verse above, YHWH. Does Jesus know that he is supposed to have a God? Of course he knows! Look below, these verses are all Jesus speaking:
John 20:17 - "I am going to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God."
Matthew 27:46 - "My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?"
Revelation 3:12 - "Him who overcomes I will make a pillar in the temple of my God. Never again will he leave it. I will write on him the name of my God and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which is coming down out of heaven from my God."
Revelation 3:2 - "For I have not found your works complete in the sight of my God."
So Jesus did know that he has a God. As sure as bees buzz. Jesus really needed his God in order to resurrect.
Hebrews 13:20 – "May the God of peace, who brought up from the dead the great shepherd of the sheep by the blood of the eternal covenant."
Acts 5:30 – "The God of our ancestors raised Jesus."
Who raised the great shepherd from the dead? The God of peace, the God of our ancestors (which we covered earlier). The Trinitarian alternative is that God raised himself from the dead. But how can God raise himself if he is dead. Then God was not really dead. For that matter, how can you kill God?
Do you honestly read that verse and think that the great shepherd is God? Remember Micah? The shepherd has a God called YHWH.
Micah 5:3 – "He shall stand firm and shepherd his flock by the strength of the LORD (YHWH), in the majestic name of the LORD, HIS GOD."
By the way, what happened to the Holy Spirit in all these greetings? I guess he must have been the least favorite of the Apostles because he's not mentioned even once in those verses. I wonder why?
In the same way you are crucified with Christ . . .it's a mystery to the mind, but that doesn't make it untrue. I am dead, but yet shall I live. My spirit brings life to by mind, to my body even. Just because Jesus manifested in the flesh, doesn't mean he was separated from God. Rather than focus on the dividing of Christ, perhaps it's more beneficial to focus on the oneness between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. If you have seen the Son, you have seen the Father because they are . .not two, but one. It's not a bad thing to disagree, the body of Christ is full of opposites . .it has to be . . .otherwise there would be no balance. Ever see someone go through life with two left arms? One must be opposite of the other for balance to manifest. Unity is not about being conformed to one line of thought, it's more about laying down myself in order to allow others to come in. In this way, everyone benefits and everyone grows.
Quote from: PieracIf I said,
"Peace from George our president and the chief of staff Joshua."
"Peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ." (for comparison)
Titus 1:4
To Titus, mine own son after the common faith: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour.This identifies the Lord Jesus Christ as our Saviour.
But, look what YHWH says--
Isaiah 43:3
For I am the LORD thy God, the Holy One of Israel, thy Saviour: I gave Egypt for thy ransom, Ethiopia and Seba for thee.Isaiah 43:11
I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour.YHWH says He is the Saviour. How does that work, Pierac?
Psalm 106:21
They forgat God their saviour, which had done great things in Egypt;
Quote from: PieracActs 5:30 – "The God of our ancestors raised Jesus."
Who raised the great shepherd from the dead? The God of peace, the God of our ancestors (which we covered earlier). The Trinitarian alternative is that God raised himself from the dead. But how can God raise himself if he is dead. Then God was not really dead. For that matter, how can you kill God?
Do you honestly read that verse and think that the great shepherd is God? Remember Micah? The shepherd has a God called YHWH.
Who is raising people from the dead on the last day? Jesus.
John 6:40
And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.Who raised Jesus from the dead? Jesus.
18No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down myself. I have power to lay it down,
and I have power to take it up again. This commandment have I received of my Father.
You say the God of ancestors, the God of peace raised the great Shepherd from the dead.
Who is that?
...and his name shall be called Wonderful Counselor, the mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.--Isa 9:6
Quote from: Molly
18No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it up again. This commandment have I received of my Father.
Hi Molly,
The verse above is (John 10:18). and if you read all of the verse it says "No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. how, and why did Jesus have this power? read the rest of the verse. This commandment have I received of my Father". There is the answer.
Jesus also said "of mine own self I can do nothing". Jesus was flesh, a man, human, just like the rest of us. He was also the Son of God which made Him seperate from us. While Jesus was in the flesh he was powerless without God the Father, just like we are powerless without Christ.
CHB
Quote from: Mollyon Today at 05:00:11 PM
Who is raising people from the dead on the last day? Jesus.
John 6:40
And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.
Who raised Jesus from the dead? Jesus.
18No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it up again. This commandment have I received of my Father.
You say the God of ancestors, the God of peace raised the great Shepherd from the dead.
Who is that?
Molly, slow down and read what you just posted! Quote from: Molly
18No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it up again. This commandment have I received of my Father.
Read the source sister. My God and Your God, My Father, and Your Father! Yep, it's suppose to be in red, And it's red because Jesus said it! So go back and read your quote in context! This commandment have I received of my Father.Moses himself said:
"The Lord your God will rise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your own countrymen [literally, brothers]; you shall listen to him" (Deut.18:15).
In this passage, Moses predicts that the coming Messiah would be a person "like me," raised up from "among" the people of Israel, and that
God would not speak to the people directly, because they were afraid that if God spoke without a mediator they would die (V16).
The coming "prophet" would be a man of whom it is said that God would "put his word in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him. And it shall come about whoever will not listen to
My words which he shall speak in My name,
I Myself will require it of him" (v. 18-19).
To say that the Messiah is God Himself is to contradict the whole point of this prophecy.For it announces that the ultimate spokesman for God is expressly not God but a human being. The New Testament says that Jesus is the one who fulfilled this prophecy (Acts 3:22; 7:37). Understandably, no Jew who believe theses Scriptures ever imagined that the baby born in Bethlehem was going to be Jehovah himself come as a human baby.
Jesus claimed to be this Messiah"Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son CAN DO NOTHING OF HIMSELF, but what He sees the Father do: for what things so ever He does, these also does the Son likewise""For I have not spoken of Myself; but the Father which sent Me, He gave me commandment WHAT I should say, and WHAT I should speak" (John 12:49).
Now remember Moses...Deu 18:17 "The LORD said to me, 'They have spoken well. 'I will raise up a prophet from among their countrymen like you (Moses), and I will put My words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him.
Is this not what Jesus did and said? This is not talking about sending "God in the flesh"! So Molly, Who raised Jesus? Jesus Himself or The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob? What saith the scriptures? Act 5:30 "
The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom you had put to death by hanging Him on a cross.
Jesus is raising no one, with out the permission of His father. Joh 6:44
"No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day.Yes, Jesus will raise them but who's the source of it all? Now ask your self, How does Jesus raise them, if he can not raise Himself? Act 2:33 Being therefore exalted at the right hand of God, and
having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit,
he has poured out this that you yourselves are seeing and hearing.
Do you see it now? Who is it that is giving Jesus the power to raise the dead? Yes, Molly His Father, and our Father! Jesus' God and our God!
I'm a life long, die hard Trinitarian. But lately, as I've been considering it, I have to wonder. Too much isn't adding up. Just the preponderance of passages that speak of the Father alone as God have to make you stop and think.
But, Pierac, I can't get over one thing (well, two really). If Jesus is not Yaweh, then who do you say that he is? We know he's not an angel. Is he just a man chosen by God to be the Messiah? What made this man able to live in perfect unity with God when no other man has ever been able to? And if he is only a man, how is his blood sacrifice enough to cover the sins of the whole world? How can he bring me into perfect union with the Divine Father if he, himself is not Divinity become human?
Quote from: rosered on September 04, 2008, 10:26:48 PM
this helped me to see more clearly
2Sa 6:2 And David arose, and went with all the people that [were] with him from Baale of Judah, to bring up from thence the ark of God, whose name is called by the name of the LORD of hosts that dwelleth [between] the cherubims.
Use in the Bible: Jehovah and Elohim occur with Sabaoth over 285 times. It is most frequently used in Jeremiah and Isaiah. Jehovah Sabaoth is first used in 1Sa 1:3.
Variant spellings: None
TWOT Reference: 1865a, 1865b
Strong's Reference: 6635
Jehovah Sabaoth in the Septuagint: kurios sabaôth — the Lord of hosts (sabaôth: Gr. transliteration of Heb. "hosts")
Meaning and Derivation: Jehovah is translated as "The Existing One" or "Lord." The chief meaning of Jehovah is derived from the Hebrew word Havah meaning "to be" or "to exist." It also suggests "to become" or specifically "to become known" - this denotes a God who reveals Himself unceasingly. Sabaoth (se bâ'ôt) means "armies" or "hosts." Jehovah Sabaoth can be translated as "The Lord of Armies" (1Sa 1:3). This name denotes His universal sovereignty over every army, both spiritual and earthly. The Lord of Hosts is the king of all heaven and earth. (Psa 24:9-10; Psa 84:3; Isa 6:5).
Further references of the name Jehovah Sabaoth in the Old Testament: 1Sa 1:11; 1Sa 17:45; 2Sa 6:18; 2Sa 7:27; 1Ki 19:14; 2Ki 3:14; 1Ch 11:9; Psa 24:10; Psa 48:8; Psa 80:4; Psa 80:19; Psa 84:3; Isa 1:24; Isa 3:15; Isa 5:16; Isa 6:5; Isa 9:19; Isa 10:26; Isa 14:22; Jer 9:15; Jer 48:1; Hsa 12:5; Amo 3:13; Mic 4:4; Nah 3:5; Hag 2:6; Zec 1:3; Mal 1:6; Hab 2:13; Zep 2:9
also read all of Jude here is 14It was of these people, moreover, that Enoch in the seventh [generation] from Adam prophesied when he said, Behold, the Lord comes with His myriads of holy ones (ten thousands of His saints)
15To execute judgment upon all and to convict all the impious (unholy ones) of all their ungodly deeds which they have committed [in such an] ungodly [way], and of all the severe (abusive, jarring) things which ungodly sinners have spoken against Him.
for convience
God bless peace rosered
Allow me to help you with this word
Elohim!
ElohimElohim has been a very confusing word for many people. The word
elohim is used various ways in Scripture. It is not only used to describe the Almighty, but also individual pagan gods and even mighty human beings.
Elohim may be translated as God, god, angels, judges, or even a human being who stands as God's representative or agent. For example, the sons of Heth address Abraham as "a mighty prince," the word for "mighty" being
elohim (Genesis 23:6). Some translations have Abraham here being called "Prince of God." Take another instance. In Exodus 4, the Lord tells Moses that he "shall be as God" (elohim) to his brother Aaron. Moses will have God's words in his mouth, and will stand as God's representative before Aaron.
Here is a case where an individual human is called
elohim. Again in Exodus 7:1, the Lord says to Moses, "See, I make you God [
elohim] to Pharaoh." No one dares to suggest that there is a plurality of persons within Moses because he is called
elohim, that is, God's representative. The pagan god Dagon is also called
elohim in the Hebrew Bible. The Philistines lamented that the God of Israel was harshly treating "Dagon our God [
elohim]" (1 Sam. 5:7). Dagon was a single pagan deity. The same holds true for the single pagan god called Chemosh: "Do you not possess what Chemosh your god [
elohim] gives you to possess?" (Jud. 11:24). The same for the single deity called Baal.
The Hebrew language has many examples of words which are plural but whose meaning is singular. In Genesis 23, Abraham's wife Sarah dies. The Hebrew text says, "the lives [plural] of Sarah were 127 years" (v. 1). Even the plural verb that accompanies the pronoun does not mean Sarah lived multiple lives. The Hebrews never taught reincarnation or plurality of personhood. Another example of this kind of anomaly in the Hebrew language is found in Genesis 43. After Joseph wept to see his brothers, we read that Joseph "washed his faces" (plural). This is another instance where in the Hebrew language the plural noun functions as a singular noun with a singular meaning, unless, of course, Joseph was a multi-faced human being! The same occurs in Genesis 16:8 where Hagar flees from "the faces" (plural) of her mistress Sarah. These are "anomalies" of the Hebrew language that are clearly understood by Hebrew scholars who rightly translate to a singular form in English.
The better explanation is that the Hebrews used a form of speech called "the plural of majesty." Put simply this means that someone whose position was warrant of dignity was spoken in this way as giving a sign of honor. The plural acted as a means of intensification:
Elohim must rather be explained as an intensive plural, denoting greatness and majesty.
Whenever the word
elohim refers to the God of Israel the Septuagint uses
the singular and not the plural. From Genesis 1:1 consistently right through, this holds true. The Hebrews who translated their own scriptures into Greek simply had no idea that their God could be more than one individual, or a multiple personal Being! This is true too when we come to the New Testament. The New Testament nowhere hints at a plurality in the meaning of
elohim when it reproduces references to the One God as
ho theos, the One God.
Peace,
Paul
Quote from: Pleroo on September 05, 2008, 01:25:29 AM
But, Pierac, I can't get over one thing (well, two really). If Jesus is not Yaweh, then who do you say that he is? We know he's not an angel. Is he just a man chosen by God to be the Messiah? What made this man able to live in perfect unity with God when no other man has ever been able to? And if he is only a man, how is his blood sacrifice enough to cover the sins of the whole world? How can he bring me into perfect union with the Divine Father if he, himself is not Divinity become human?
No my friend, Jesus is no random man, as Adam is no random man. These two are the Sons of God. Both chosen to fulfill God's purpose! (Luke 9:35)
1Co 15:45 So also it is written, "The first MAN, Adam, BECAME A LIVING SOUL." The last Adam became a life-giving spirit.
In order to weed out the tradition of men when reading this verse, you must note the word "Became." This verse does not read "was" as some may see. Jesus the second Adam
Became (some texts read "was made" but you get the idea) a life-giving Spirit. How you might ask? By God of course!
Jesus is the promised Messiah (that means "anointed one" in Hebrew or "Christ" in the Greek). Jesus is the Son of God conceived in Mary's womb. Gabriel even tells us why Jesus is call the Son of God!
Luk 1:35 The angel answered and said to her, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you;
and for that reason the holy
Child shall be called the Son of God.
Stop and read this verse again but this time note the phrase "and for that reason"
Yep, for that reason the holy Child shall be called the Son of GodWait, what is that reason? Because Jesus is really God? No, but because "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you" So where does anyone get the idea that Jesus must be "God" born as a baby?
Did not anyone listen to Jesus or read Paul?
On the authority of Jesus himself we know that the categories of "flesh" and "spirit" are never to be confused or intermingled, though the course of God's Spirit can impact our world. Jesus said,
"That which is born of flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is Spirit" (John 3:6). And
"God is Spirit." The doctrine of the incarnation confuses these categories. What God has separated man has joined together! One of the charges that the apostle Paul levels at simple man is that we have
"exchange the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man" (Romans 1:23). Has it ever dawned on us as we sit in church listening to how the glorious Creator made Himself into a man that we could be guilty of this very same thing? The doctrine of the incarnation has reduced the incorruptible God to our own corruptible image. We are made in God's image, not the other way around. It would be more appropriate to put this contrast in starker terms. The defining characteristic of the Creator God is his absolute holiness. God is utterly different from and so utterly transcendent over His creation that any confusion.
One must ask why do you believe what you believe?
Did you formally believe in hell because others told you to believe in hell? If so why do you believe Jesus is God? Is it because others told you to believe? What saith the scriptures?
Here is a list of the people who claim that Jesus is the
Son of God, and then those who claim that he is
God the Son. I will keep it simple and not list the verses that claim that Jesus is the Messiah, the Christ, the Son of Man, or the king of Israel. All these titles are synonymous.
Son of God God Himself refers to Jesus as His Son: Mt 2: 15, 3:17, 17: 5, Mk 1: 11, 9: 7, Lk 9: 35
Jesus says that he is the Son of God: Mt 26: 63, Lk 22: 70, Jn 5: 25, 10: 36, 19: 7
The angel Gabriel says Jesus is the Son of God: Luke 1: 35
Peter says that Jesus is the Son of God: Mt 16: 16
John the Apostle says Jesus is the Son of God: Jn 20: 31, 1 Jn 3: 23, 4: 15, 5:5
All the Apostles say Jesus is the Son of God: Mt 14: 33, Jn 6: 69
John the Baptist says Jesus is the Son of God: Jn 1: 34
John Mark says Jesus is the Son of God: Mk 1: 1
Paul says Jesus is the Son of God: Acts 9: 20, Rom 1: 4, 1 Cor 1: 9, 2 Cor 1:19, Gal 2: 20, Heb 4: 14
Nathanael says Jesus is the Son of God: Jn 1: 49
Demons say Jesus is the Son of God: Mt 8: 29, Mk 3: 11, 5: 7, Lk 4: 41, 8: 28
The Centurion says Jesus is the Son of God: Mt 27: 54, Mk 15: 39
Now, let's look at all the massive scripture that teaches Jesus is God the Son!
God the SonOops
Nobody.So why do you believe Jesus is "God the Son?" Maybe the same reason you once believed in Hell?
Don't let me or anyone else tell you what to believe, seek the Spirit and search the scriptures for yourself!
Paul
Hi Paul,
Perhaps you are right that there isn't a verse phrased as you presented; "God the Son"
But on the other hand there is no verse that calls Christ "The Second Begotten Son Of God" either.
We don't have a verse that calls Adam the First Begotten Son.
Joh 1:14 And the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
Joh 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Joh 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
1Jn 4:9 In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him.
There is more to add to the following but what Paul wrote here sums it up for me;
Col 1:15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
Col 1:16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him and for him:
Col 1:17 And he is before all things and by him all things consist.
Peace,
RM
Hi Paul I knew that it could mean God , or gods (el-o-heem')
1) (plural)
a) rulers, judges
b) divine ones
c) angels
d) gods
2) (plural intensive - singular meaning)
a) god, goddess
b) godlike one
c) works or special possessions of God
d) the (true) God
e) God
Psa 82:6 I have said, Ye [are] gods; and all of you [are] children of the most High.
God, Judge, Creator
Use in the Bible: : In the Old Testament Elohim occurs over 2000 times. Elohim is first used in Gen 1:1.
Variant spellings: None
TWOT Reference: 93c
Strong's Reference: 0430
Elohim in the Septuagint: theos — the standard Greek word for god, "a transcendent being who exercises extraordinary control in human affairs or is responsible for bestowal of unusual benefits" (BDAG). It specifically refers to the monotheistic God of Israel.
Meaning and Derivation: Elohim is translated as "God." The derivation of the name Elohim is debatable to most scholars. Some believe it derived from 'êl which, in turn, originates from the root word, 'wl (which means "strong"). Others think that Elohim is derived from another two roots: 'lh (which means "god") in conjunction with 'elôah (which means "fear"). And still others presume that both 'êl and Elohim come from 'eloah.
this proof is a matter of faith , I have seen it be said Jesus CHrist is the WORD OF GOD mainfested/revealed SPIRIT &TRUTH
as Jesus Christ told us that the Father seeks those to worrship Him in Spirit & Truth and I believe that Is Jesus Christ the name
that God Gave us to to be saved by with and through
I looked into the greek for the old psalms calling them eloim
and the new it is theos gr 2316
1) a god or goddess, a general name of deities or divinities
2) the Godhead, trinity
a) God the Father, the first person in the trinity
b) Christ, the second person of the trinity
c) Holy Spirit, the third person in the trinity
3) spoken of the only and true God
a) refers to the things of God
b) his counsels, interests, things due to him
4) whatever can in any respect be likened unto God, or resemble him in any way
a) God's representative or viceregent
1) of magistrates and judges
Jhn 10:30 I and [my] Father are one.
Jhn 10:33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.
Jhn 10:34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?
I believe this is just me though
that the SPIRIT OF THE FATHER & THE SON IS the Holy Spirit working
the way Paul Speaks here makes me think that and the way and titus 3 ;5 regeration by the SEED /WORD OF GOD to grow within our hearts
making the Christ /annoiting the very hope of glory to God within you as well ..
Tts 3:5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;
IT was when Jesus Christ come back from the realm of the dead being the Lord also of the dead that He breathed on them and they received the Holy Ghost/Spirit the POWER from on High .. to retain or remit sin making them apart of alos the LIVING BODY OF CHRIST ..in the place Im thinking of
Rom 8:9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.
just some reasons I think that the SPIRIT amd Truth are the very power in the WORD OF GOD /Jesus Christ the first begotten from the dead
I hope this did not confuse the matter even more
God bless &peace rosered
Quote from: riverman on September 05, 2008, 02:59:33 AM
Hi Paul,
Perhaps you are right that there isn't a verse phrased as you presented; "God the Son"
But on the other hand there is no verse that calls Christ "The Second Begotten Son Of God" either.
We don't have a verse that calls Adam the First Begotten Son.
Joh 1:14 And the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
Joh 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Joh 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
1Jn 4:9 In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him.
There is more to add to the following but what Paul wrote here sums it up for me;
Col 1:15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
Col 1:16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him and for him:
Col 1:17 And he is before all things and by him all things consist.
Peace,
RM
Hi Joe, I'm trying to post the truth and keep the peace at the same time. Not so easy if your truth does not alway agree with others! I enjoy your scripture post but have no idea what it means to you? For example...
Joh 1:14 And the Word (
Logos) was made flesh and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten (created) of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
So you just posted a verse that reads the "Logos" (God's
"plan", "internal reasoning") was made flesh and dwelt among us. Yep, just like your
logos to have a child was made flesh the day your child was born, and dwelt among you, So does that make your child 'you', just because "it" was your
logos in the beginning? No. Now we need to look at the word Begotten! Begotten means you have a beginning! God is eternal and has no beginning! Even the
logos has a beginning! (Yep, In the beginning!) So, again, God has no beginning! If one wants to get really silly they can always go with "eternally begotten" Now, that's a real oxymoron! :thumbsup:
Next you posted...
Joh 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
Again, I'm not sure what your saying. Are you saying Jesus is not God because people actually saw him? (I'll be fair, Probably not)! Here's that darn begotten word again!
Well, all this verse is saying is that Jesus the "begotten son" hath declared the Father. (You will note it's only the Father too! No Holy Spirit or Trinity being declared?)
Next you posted...
Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only
begotten Son, that
whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Well, you more or less supported my understanding! I believe Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and not God, So what does scripture have to say of my belief? How do I stand? Let's see...
1Jo 4:15 Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God,
God abides in him, and he in God. and
1Jo 5:10 The one who believes in the Son of God has the testimony in himself; the one who does not believe God has made Him a liar,
because he has not believed in the testimony that God has given concerning His Son.
Well, I believe Jesus is "the Son of God" and "the testimony that God has given concerning His Son". I would suggest some here think Jesus is God and "has not believed in the testimony that God has given concerning His Son"?
Quote from: rivermanThere is more to add to the following but what Paul wrote here sums it up for me;
Col 1:15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
If I said I had an image of a Porsche in my driveway, how many of you would be impressed. Remember, we are not to worship images! (John 4:23)Quote from: RivermanCol 1:16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him and for him:
Read this verse again, (IN Heaven) and (upON the Earth) This is not a creation verse, but one of thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers! All given by God the Father! Just look at all the adjectives next to Jesus name! (Given, granted, appointed, heir, chosen, etc..) So back to my original point, if you use scripture, tell me what it means to you!
Paul
Quote from: PieracTo say that the Messiah is God Himself is to contradict the whole point of this prophecy.
Quote from: PieracNow, let's look at all the massive scripture that teaches Jesus is God the Son!
19Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
20For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made,
even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
--Romans 1
8Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
9For in him dwelleth
all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. ---Col 2
Pierac, have you answered my question about the Saviour, yet? If you did, I didn't see it.
How can Jesus be the Saviour, how can there be no other name by which we will be saved, if the LORD God says he is the Saviour and there is none beside him?
9For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead...John 14:7
If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also:
and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.
Quote from: Molly on September 05, 2008, 05:35:09 AM
Quote from: PieracTo say that the Messiah is God Himself is to contradict the whole point of this prophecy.
Quote from: PieracNow, let's look at all the massive scripture that teaches Jesus is God the Son!
19Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
20For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
--Romans 1
8Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
9For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
9For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead...
Yes, I agree! This is what being anointed means! "Jesus the Nazarene,
a man attested to you
by God with
miracles and wonders and signs which god performed through him in your midst" (Acts 2:22).
Now reading this verse, tell me who preformed the miracles and wonders and signs? Was it Jesus or God which performed through him? "You know of Jesus of Nazareth, how
God anointed Him with the Holy Spirit and with power, and how
He went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil,
for God was with Him. (Act 10:38)
There is a big difference between actually being God and having God with you! Ok Molly, to your question, and sorry as I did miss it earlier! Quote from: mollyPierac, have you answered my question about the Saviour, yet? If you did, I didn't see it.
How can Jesus be the Saviour, how can there be no other name by which we will be saved, if the LORD God says he is the Saviour and there is none beside him?
Is God the only Savior?I imagine by now you may be arguing with me and saying something like this: Well, if Jesus is not God in human flesh what you do say to the Scriptures that say only God can save? After all, God says, "I, even I, am the LORD; and there is no Savior besides me" (Isaiah 40 3:11). If Jesus is not God and there are two saviors! And this is something the Bible here clearly excludes.
We have already seen a strong argument against the idea that God became man in order to redeem us is that there is not one single O.T. prophecy that supports it. Not one verse foretells that God himself was going to become a man in order to save us. The opposite is the case. The prophets predicted a
human being who would under God's anointing Spirit rescue us.Wherein lies the solution? Ah, let's now read this through a Hebrew understanding and see what a difference it makes. Remember that dictum the Jews had about the law of agency where "the agent is as the principal himself"?
It applies right here.Let's go back to Exodus 23. Remember that I used this chapter earlier to illustrate the Hebrew law of agency. We saw that the angel of the Lord acted in God's stead. What the angel did and said was really what God himself did and said, for "My name is in him" (v. 21). In verse 23 Jehovah explained, "For
My angel will go before you and bring you into the land of the Amorites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Canaanites, the Hivities and the Jebusites; and
I will completely destroy them." The angel was the instrument through whom God destroyed the enemies.
Now let's proceed on in the chapter. God says to the Israelites, "
I will send my terror ahead of you
I will make all your enemies turn their backs to you. And
I will send hornets ahead of you, that they may drive out the Hivities, the Canaanites, and the Hittites before you" (v. 27-28).
To our understanding this sounds as if the LORD himself is going to do the work. But when we come to verse 31: "
I will deliver the inhabitants of the land into your hand, and you will drive them out before you." So God expects
the Israelites to drive their enemies out. Is there a contradiction here? Will God Himself drive out their enemies or will the Israelites do it? We note the principle again and again. Got says He will act when in fact He is going to empower his angels and his people to do the work.
This kind of talk has a thorough Hebrew feel about it. Actions that are directly ascribed to God are in fact carried out by his commissioned agents. Take another instance: "in the LORD he saved them by the hand of Jeroboam" (2 Kings 14:27).
Once again we observe the clear distinction between God who is the ultimate
Author of deliverance and his appointed
agent who in this case was King Jeroboam. Or take this verse: "therefore you did deliver them into the hands of the oppressors who oppressed them. But when they cry to You in the time of their distress, You did hear from heaven, and according to Your great compassion You did give them deliverers who
delivered them from the hand of their it oppressors" (Nehemiah 9:27).
Graeser, the author of
One God and One Lord, p.363. Writes:
God, Christ and others are referred to as "saviors," but that clearly does not make them identical. The term "Savior" is used of many people in the Bible. This is hard to see in the English versions because, when it is used of men, the translators almost always translated as "deliverer." This in and of itself shows that modern translators have a Trinitarian bias that was not in the original languages. The only reason to translate the same word as "Savior" when it applies to God or Christ, but as "deliverer" when it applies to men, is to make the terms seem unique to God and Jesus when in fact it is not. This is a good example of how the actual meaning of Scriptures can be obscured if the translators are not careful or if they are theologically biased.Is often been argued that the very name Jesus, which means "Yahweh saves," prove Jesus is Jehovah because "he will save his people from their sins" (Matt 1:21). But the logic is not consistently applied because the O.T. name Joshua means "Yahweh saves." I have never yet heard someone who believes in the deity of Christ argue that Joshua was God in the flesh. We know that the O.T. Joshua was God appointed man to deliver Israel. As Joshua and Israel went forth in obedience to his word God save them. Just so, in the matter of our salvation, God sent forth his son into battle. Through Jesus God has saved us. This is why both God and Jesus are called Savior. But the Bible never loses sight of the fact that God the Father is the ultimate
Author of our salvation
through (
dia) his son.
This same line of reasoning applies to the healing of the paralytic in Mark 2. This is one of the most commonly appealed to Scriptures that allegedly proves that Jesus must be God, because "only God can forgive sins" (v.7). When Jesus pronounced the man forgiven/healed, the Pharisees say that Jesus is "blaspheming" because he is claiming to be God. But a little careful attention to detail will show that Jesus is not claiming deity.
He is rather claiming "authority." He says, "But that you may know that
the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins" (v.10). The parallel account in Matthew's report is that once the people saw Jesus healed a paralytic, "they were filled with awe, and glorified God,
who had given such authority to men" ( Matt 9:8).
We note that Jesus is claiming to be "the Son of Man," that is, the human Messiah, with a God given right to pronounce forgiveness. Not too much later Jesus invested other men-his apostles-with the same authority to forgive sins: "If you forgive the sins of any, their sins have been forgiven them; he to retain the sins of any, they have been retained" (John 20:23). If only God can forgive sins, then God and Jesus
and the apostles are all God! Besides, there is no teaching anywhere in the Bible that says only God can forgive. Even Christians are commanded to forgive each other sin (Eph. 4:32; Col. 3:13). The fact that the Pharisees say that only God can forgive sins does not make this an established Biblical doctrine. The Pharisees often had wrong doctrine and were often corrected by our Lord Jesus. This was one such occasion.
Those who believe that Jesus can only be our Savior if he is God sometimes appeal to the prophecy from Jeremiah 23: (In his days Judah will be saved, and Israel will dwell securely; and this is his name by which he will be called, 'The LORD our righteousness'" (Jer. 23:6).
Does this not say that the coming Savior will be "The LORD our righteousness," that is, God himself? This is easily answered when we note that a few chapters later we have this prophecy in Jeremiah 33: "in those days Judah shall be saved and Jerusalem shall dwell in safety; and this is the name by which she shall be called: the LORD is our righteousness' (v.16). Here the city of Jerusalem is given the very same title as the coming redeemer earlier. I have never yet heard anyone argue that the city of Jerusalem must also be God himself because it bears the same title as Jehovah. Hebrew understanding is needed to avoid the confusion.
This is why it is fallacious to reason that because Jesus is called the "king of kings and the Lord of Lords" (Rev. 19:16) he must necessarily be Almighty God Himself. The fact that Artaxerxes is called "king of kings" and that God himself calls Nebuchadnezzar "king of kings" does not put these men in the same league as Messiah Jesus, nor mean they have the same nature as him. The designation "king of kings" is obviously a very Hebrew way of speaking that has nothing to do with the equivalency of nature. The Hebrews could also speak of a "servant of servants," which simply means to the lowest of the low (Gen 9:25). In the book of Daniel God addresses Nebuchadnezzar: "You, O king, are the king of kings, to whom the God of heaven has given the kingdom, the power, the strength, and the glory" (Dan. 2:37).
In the same Hebrew fashion, when Scriptures designate Jesus Christ as "the king of kings, and the Lord of Lords" the message conveyed is that God has also given him the Kingdom, the power, the strength, and the glory of the Age to Come. Equality of being with the God who gives the Kingdom does not come into the equation, for either Nebuchadnezzar or Jesus. If, as already noted, to share the same nomenclature as God does not prove literal identity with God himself, the same holds true for the sharing of the same titles. Whilst Jesus may share the title "king of kings and Lord of Lords" with God his Father, there is one title reserved uniquely for the Father God. No other individual, including the Lord Jesus, is ever called by the title "God of gods" (Deut. 10:17). This title, as well as "the Lord God" (Rev. 1:8), is always reserved for the one true God, who is the Father.
Paul
Okay, what about Jesus' pre-existance? If you've already covered this, I didn't see it. I have seen your answer to the idea that all things were not created through him (although, so far, that seems to me to be your weakest argument). But when he says that before Abraham was, I am, doesn't that indicate he existed before him? That may not indicate that Jesus is Yaweh, but it does seem to indicate something beyond mere mortal man. Again, he's not an angel so there's got to be something more here.
And, in spite of what you've said, John 1 and Col 1 still seem to pretty clearly point to him as having been the one through whom all things were created. (While much of what you're saying makes sense to me, I've tried to see that particular part of the argument from your point of view and it's simply not sitting right.) Again, even if the Son is not Yaweh these things indicate he is something beyond a man, even a man annointed by God.
Quote from: PieracYes, I agree! This is what being anointed means!
Not exactly. I might be anointed but I am not
all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.King Saul was anointed but he was not
all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.Paul was anointed but he was not
all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
Quote from: Pleroo on September 05, 2008, 07:18:04 AM
Okay, what about Jesus' pre-existance? If you've already covered this, I didn't see it. I have seen your answer to the idea that all things were not created through him (although, so far, that seems to me to be your weakest argument). But when he says that before Abraham was, I am, doesn't that indicate he existed before him? That may not indicate that Jesus is Yaweh, but it does seem to indicate something beyond mere mortal man. Again, he's not an angel so there's got to be something more here.
And, in spite of what you've said, John 1 and Col 1 still seem to pretty clearly point to him as having been the one through whom all things were created. (While much of what you're saying makes sense to me, I've tried to see that particular part of the argument from your point of view and it's simply not sitting right.) Again, even if the Son is not Yaweh these things indicate he is something beyond a man, even a man annointed by God.
I agree.
Quote from: PieracWe have already seen a strong argument against the idea that God became man in order to redeem us is that there is not one single O.T. prophecy that supports it
Psalm 20:6
Now I know that the LORD saves his anointed; he answers him from his holy heaven with the saving power of his right hand.Psalm 48:10
According to thy name, O God, so is thy praise unto the ends of the earth: thy right hand is full of righteousness.Acts 7:55
But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God,
and Jesus standing on the right hand of God,Isa 9:6
6For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.Quote from: PieracGod, Christ and others are referred to as "saviors," but that clearly does not make them identical. The term "Savior" is used of many people in the Bible. This is hard to see in the English versions because, when it is used of men, the translators almost always translated as "deliverer." This in and of itself shows that modern translators have a Trinitarian bias that was not in the original languages. The only reason to translate the same word as "Savior" when it applies to God or Christ, but as "deliverer" when it applies to men, is to make the terms seem unique to God and Jesus when in fact it is not. This is a good example of how the actual meaning of Scriptures can be obscured if the translators are not careful or if they are theologically biased.
So you wish to claim that Jesus is just one of many 'saviours'?
12Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved. --Acts 4
There is no salvation
in any other....Had Luke never heard of YHWH? Had Luke never heard of El Elyon?
There is
no other name...whereby we must be savedSame question--do these writers not know how to write unambiguously? Did they really mean to overlook the Saviour of the Old Testament who declares he is the only Saviour? Is this a new religion?
Philippians 2:9
Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name,
The name of Jesus is above the name of YHWH, above the name of Jehovah?
Psalm 148:13
Let them praise the name of the LORD, for his name alone is exalted; his splendor is above the earth and the heavens.
Quote from: Molly on September 05, 2008, 07:45:44 AM
Quote from: PieracYes, I agree! This is what being anointed means!
Not exactly. I might be anointed but I am not all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
King Saul was anointed but he was not all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
Paul was anointed but he was not all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
How do you know?
Quote from: Pierac on September 05, 2008, 08:43:29 AM
Quote from: Molly on September 05, 2008, 07:45:44 AM
Quote from: PieracYes, I agree! This is what being anointed means!
Not exactly. I might be anointed but I am not all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
King Saul was anointed but he was not all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
Paul was anointed but he was not all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
How do you know?
Because I know what he looks like, and so far the above mentioned fall short of his glory.
John 14:7
If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.
Quote from: Pleroo on September 05, 2008, 07:18:04 AM
Okay, what about Jesus' pre-existance? If you've already covered this, I didn't see it. I have seen your answer to the idea that all things were not created through him (although, so far, that seems to me to be your weakest argument). But when he says that before Abraham was, I am, doesn't that indicate he existed before him? That may not indicate that Jesus is Yaweh, but it does seem to indicate something beyond mere mortal man. Again, he's not an angel so there's got to be something more here.
And, in spite of what you've said, John 1 and Col 1 still seem to pretty clearly point to him as having been the one through whom all things were created. (While much of what you're saying makes sense to me, I've tried to see that particular part of the argument from your point of view and it's simply not sitting right.) Again, even if the Son is not Yaweh these things indicate he is something beyond a man, even a man annointed by God.
Now your talking! This is exactly where I had my problem too! Sorry, but you have to wait until tomorrow. It takes 1 to 2 hours to put together a post, and it's late and I'm tired! :happytired:
Paul
Hey Molly,
It's getting late but I have one simple question. What does it mean to be filled with the Spirit? What comes to your mind when I ask that? How are we filled with the Spirit?
Thanks,
Paul
Isaiah 45:15
Verily thou art a God that hidest thyself, O God of Israel, the Saviour.
Luke 2:11
For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord.
Luke 1
41And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost:
42And she spake out with a loud voice, and said, Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb.
When Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit, not a whole lot out of the ordinary happened, except--she saw the truth and spoke the truth. The babe, John, also saw the truth, expressing his joy by leaping in his mother's womb.
Quote from: PieracFor it announces that the ultimate spokesman for God is expressly not God but a human being. The New Testament says that Jesus is the one who fulfilled this prophecy (Acts 3:22; 7:37). Understandably, no Jew who believe theses Scriptures ever imagined that the baby born in Bethlehem was going to be Jehovah himself come as a human baby.
"No Jew---ever imagined that the baby born in Bethlehem was going to be Jehovah himself come as a baby."
That's one of the reasons they missed him.
John 10
33 "We are not stoning you for any of these," replied the Jews, "but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God." They also must have missed this prophecy, too--
Matthew 1:23
Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.Proverbs 30:4
Who has ascended heaven and come down?
Who has gathered up the wind in the hollow of his hand?
Who has wrapped the waters in his garment?
Who was established all the extremeties of the earth?
What is his name or his son's name, if you know it?
Quote from: PieracThe doctrine of the incarnation confuses these categories. What God has separated man has joined together! One of the charges that the apostle Paul levels at simple man is that we have "exchange the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man" (Romans 1:23). Has it ever dawned on us as we sit in church listening to how the glorious Creator made Himself into a man that we could be guilty of this very same thing? The doctrine of the incarnation has reduced the incorruptible God to our own corruptible image.
Psalm 16:10
For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.John 2:19
Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days
I will raise it up.1Cor 15
53For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.
54So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory. John 20
15Jesus saith unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? whom seekest thou? She, supposing him to be the gardener, saith unto him, Sir, if thou have borne him hence, tell me where thou hast laid him, and I will take him away.
16Jesus saith unto her, Mary. She turned herself, and saith unto him, Rabboni; which is to say, Master.
Hi! Paul
QuoteSon of God - This title for Jesus has been given meanings and attributes that were never intended. People have erroneously used the human father-son relationship to describe this title of Jesus'. They have thought that since a human son has the actual essence (made of the same matter) of his father, that therefore, this title implies that Jesus being the Son of God is of the same essence of God. This conclusion will lead you right into the Doctrine of the Trinity. This is the formula they adopted at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD when they said:
What's stopping you publishing your own version of the Bible, Paul, you will very likely be able to add yet more erroneous meanings to the Father Son relationship?
The Holy Scriptures as we have them are quite sufficient with the aid of Him, Christ within in, to overcome any shortcomings that the well meaning translators may be responsible for. Do we need your intellectual expertise? NO we don't! God before man every time!
QuoteHi! Paul. We are taking here about His Son who is also God by right of birth.
Then so is Adam, the Son of God. But everyone would agree, Adam is not God.
With all your intellectual power you are failing to make sense, brother. The Son of God was
begotten by the Father, had you forgotten?
Adam was created out of the clay. And who created Adam if not the Son? The Son is the Potter and Adam is but the clay. A big enough difference I should think even for big thinkers. "On the contrary, who are you,
O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, "Why did you make me like this," will it? Or
does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use? (Rom.9:20-21).
Please get real!
Have we not been told that the Father's predestined plan for the human race is that we all be sons of God in the making, hence Israel, Adam and everyone else is a prospective son of God in due season. But the Firstborn is special, He is the Leader, the Father's spokesman the Logos. He is God in the image of His Father. Adam, Israel and eventually we will be
begotten sons of the Father, Born Again through His Son/Jehovah/Word/Christ/ Jesus. And may I add we will be Begotten, Born Again and not as you would have it created. "Do not be called leaders; for
One is your
Leader, that is,
Christ." (Matt.23:10)
It all ads up, brother, it's your excessive devotion to books that's your trouble, try trusting God. "
Trust in the Lord with all your heart And do not lean on
your own understanding." (pro.3:5). And obey to His warning; "There is a way which
seems right to a man, But its end is
the way of death" (Pro.14:12)
(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll68/roymonis/peace.gif)
Roy UK
Hi! Brother rr
Quotethis helped me to see more clearly
You have lost me, brother. See what more clearly?
(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK :boyheart: :boyheart: :boyheart:
Hi! Nathan
QuoteOne God? Or one in Mind and Spirit.
For me, I am a spirit, that has a soul, that lives in a body . .you can't separate one from the other without affecting all three . . . I see God to be the same way. He is the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, you can't divide one from the other two without bringing disorder to all three.
The carnal soul, spirit and body can be separated, and they are at death. The soul goes to sleep in sheol, the body returns to the dust from whence it was taken and the spirit returns to God from whence it came. God is eternal, no beginning and no end. The Son is the Image of the Father, a clone if you like within the Father and the Father's Spirit is in both. ONE GOD.
"I and the Father are one" (Jn.10:30).
Where there is no death there can be no separation.
We will all be, in some future season, in God. Inseparable and still ONE GOD.
(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
(http://dl.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1551/1551031u6k25jgwzu.png) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Hi! Brother Paul
You will soon be in need of a new Bible, because I just can't keep up with the deluge of questions you pose in a single email. I will answer the first five, and if you need the rest answering please post in any number of shorter emails.
QuoteMoses himself said: "The Lord your God will rise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your own countrymen [literally, brothers]; you shall listen to him" (Deut.18:15).
I see nothing unusual about that. Moses was just a man, flesh and blood. So what was Jesus other than just a man, flesh and blood? "So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you
eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His
blood, you have no life in yourselves. He who eats
My flesh and drinks
My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. For My flesh is true food, and
My blood is true drink. He who eats
My flesh and drinks
My blood abides in Me, and I in him. As the living Father sent Me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats Me, he also will live because of Me. This is the bread which came down out of heaven; not as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live forever." (Jn.6:53-58).
Now I hope you understand that this is figurative language and that Jesus wasn't presenting Himself as a ready meal. This is just to prove that He was flesh and blood just like Moses, so where's the problem?
Quote"Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son CAN DO NOTHING OF HIMSELF, but what He sees the Father do: for what things so ever He does, these also does the Son likewise
Unlike Moses who had the Spirit of God in Him, which is no different to us who are in Christ. Jesus actually had the only Begotten Son of God/Word/Jehovah/Christ in His physical body. A big, big difference. One Moses the man acting for God under the supervision of His Son, Jehovah, whilst the promised prophet was actually Jehovah/Christ/Word/Son Himself doing the will of His Father. A lesson in obedience which we fail to learn, the
Son can do nothing of Himself. He does what He is told to do. Why? Oh! Why? do we not follow His marvelous example, I often wonder?
Quote"For I have not spoken of Myself; but the Father which sent Me, He gave me commandment WHAT I should say, and WHAT I should speak" (John 12:49).
He gave us commandments too, but do the likes of you and I and the rest obey them like He did? I speak like a fool, of course we do???
QuoteNow remember Moses...Deu 18:17 "The LORD said to me, 'They have spoken well. 'I will raise up a prophet from among their countrymen like you (Moses), and I will put My words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him.
Is it possible that I could forget Moses after this? Believe me I never will. And as we have already seen, so He did and so it was dutifully executed by the only Person in the flesh, the Word/Christ/Jehovah/Son of God -
Jesus Christ our Lord who possessed the power and ability to accomplish the will of His Father. "I saw in the right hand of Him who sat on the throne a book written inside and on the back, sealed up with seven seals. And I saw a strong angel proclaiming with a loud voice, "
Who is worthy to open the book and to break its seals?" And
no one in heaven or on the earth or under the earth was able to open the book or to look into it. Then I began to weep greatly because no one was found worthy to open the book or to look into it; and one of the elders *said to me, "Stop weeping; behold, the
Lion that is from the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has overcome so as to open the book and its seven seals." And I saw between the throne (with the four living creatures) and the elders
a Lamb standing, as if slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God, sent out into all the earth. And
He came and took the book out of the right hand of Him who sat on the throne. When He had taken the book, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each one holding a harp and golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints." (Rev.5:1-8).
Do you believe all this figurative language, Paul? I do and it makes sense and confirms all that I read between these sacred pages.
(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK (http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll68/roymonis/peace.gif)
Quote from: PieracThe doctrine of the incarnation has reduced the incorruptible God to our own corruptible image.
9But we see Jesus,
who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.
Hebrews 2:10
For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings.11For both he that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all of one:
for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren,12Saying, I will declare thy name unto my brethren, in the midst of the church will I sing praise unto thee.
13And again, I will put my trust in him. And again,
Behold I and the children which God hath given me. 14Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood,
he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;
15
And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.
16For verily he took not on him the nature of angels;
but he took on him the seed of Abraham. 17Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.
18For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted.
Quote from: Pleroo on September 05, 2008, 01:25:29 AM
I'm a life long, die hard Trinitarian. But lately, as I've been considering it, I have to wonder. Too much isn't adding up. Just the preponderance of passages that speak of the Father alone as God have to make you stop and think.
But, Pierac, I can't get over one thing (well, two really). If Jesus is not Yaweh, then who do you say that he is? We know he's not an angel. Is he just a man chosen by God to be the Messiah? What made this man able to live in perfect unity with God when no other man has ever been able to? And if he is only a man, how is his blood sacrifice enough to cover the sins of the whole world? How can he bring me into perfect union with the Divine Father if he, himself is not Divinity become human?
Hi! Pleroo
The idea of a Trinity is not feasible for the simple reason that we are told that Mary conceived by The Holy Spirit; "But when he had considered this, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, "Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife; for the
Child who has been
conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit. "She will bear a Son; and you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins." (Matt.1:20-21). This makes the Holy Spirit the father of Jesus, but Jesus Himself never once acknowledged this, and repeatedly called the Father His Father. Moreover there is no mention anywhere in the Bible of a God the Holy Spirit. At the final consummation: "For He has put all things in subjection under His feet. But when He says, "All things are put in subjection," it is evident that He is excepted who put all things in subjection to Him. When all things are subjected to Him, then the Son Himself also will be subjected to the One who subjected all things to Him, so that God may be all in all." (1Cor.15 :27- 28). Even here there is no mention of a God the Holy Spirit.
As regards where Jehovah is concerned we are told He is the God of our ancestors and that it was this Jehovah who was the Rock that followed them from which they drank, and that this Rock was Christ. "...and all drank the same spiritual drink, for they were drinking from a spiritual rock which followed them; and the rock was Christ." (1Cor.10:4)
What is an angel? ...An angel is a messenger, an ambassador, a representative, a spokesman, a servant of the Sovereign Almighty God the Father. John 1:1-3 tells us that the Word is from the very beginning in the Father and that the Word is the only begotten God (vs.18). So when the Word comes forth from the Father to obey His command and speak His word/logos, He is the Father's first Spokesman/Son/Ambassador/Angel/Jehovah/God who created all things and is the God of our ancestors in the wilderness and our God also, Jesus Christ the Son of God in the flesh who has now returned to the Father having started the process of doing His will.
Heresies abound, don't be deceived, antichrists are in plentiful supply these latter days.
(http://dl4.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1298/1298544e42yk3c624.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll68/roymonis/peace.gif)
Roy UK
Quote from: Pierac"He first found his own brother and told him, "We have found the Messiah"..."Rabbi, you are the Son of God: you are the King of Israel" (John 1:41& 49).
John cannot be clearer on this title; the Son of God is the King of Israel. This is the Jewish meaning of "Son of God." Any other definition will take away from the true meaning of the title into something that was never intended by its Jewish author.
And, what does Jesus say to them? Hi, yes I am he, nice to meet you?
He names Simon, Cephas--Peter. He tells Nathaniel that he is without guile, and makes this bold statement to them--calling himself the Son of Adam--
...Verily, verily, I say unto you, Hereafter ye shall see heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of man.--John 1
But the high priest goes nuts concerning Jesus' claim to be the Son of God.
61But he held his peace, and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked him, and said unto him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?
62And Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.
63Then the high priest rent his clothes, and saith, What need we any further witnesses?
64Ye have heard the blasphemy: what think ye? And they all condemned him to be guilty of death. --Mark 14
It is clear the high priest knew Jesus was claiming divinity--hence the charge of blasphemy.
Hi! Paul
If you are quoting a Scripture please keep to it as in the Scriptures and don't add to or take away from to suit your purpose. From which Bible is this quote taken from?
QuoteJoh 1:14 And the Word (Logos) was made flesh and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten (created) of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
This is the correct quote from the three Bibles that I have just for reference for people like you.
"And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth." (Jn.1:14) Where is the mention of the logos or the created (Paul inventions I do believe). We are interested in the search for truth not lies and deceit. And why the brackets and why the
OF the Father when it's
FROM the Father. it makes a big difference to the meaning.
Your interpretations are decidedly unreliable, brother, and you need to pay closer attention to the words.
(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll68/roymonis/peace.gif)
Roy UK
Quote from: Roy Monis on September 05, 2008, 07:08:12 PM
Hi! Pleroo
The idea of a Trinity is not feasible for the simple reason that we are told that Mary conceived by The Holy Spirit; "But when he had considered this, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, "Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife; for the Child who has been conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit. "She will bear a Son; and you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins." (Matt.1:20-21). This makes the Holy Spirit the father of Jesus, but Jesus Himself never once acknowledged this, and repeatedly called the Father His Father. Moreover there is no mention anywhere in the Bible of a God the Holy Spirit. At the final consummation: "For He has put all things in subjection under His feet. But when He says, "All things are put in subjection," it is evident that He is excepted who put all things in subjection to Him. When all things are subjected to Him, then the Son Himself also will be subjected to the One who subjected all things to Him, so that God may be all in all." (1Cor.15 :27- 28). Even here there is no mention of a God the Holy Spirit.
It was questions about the Holy Spirit as a 3rd person of the Trinity that first made me start reconsidering the veracity of the doctrine. And I'm still in the process of working through those questions, as well.
QuoteAs regards where Jehovah is concerned we are told He is the God of our ancestors and that it was this Jehovah who was the Rock that followed them from which they drank, and that this Rock was Christ. "...and all drank the same spiritual drink, for they were drinking from a spiritual rock which followed them; and the rock was Christ." (1Cor.10:4)
I see where it says that Jesus was that rock, but not where it says Jehovah was. So, while I think that passage seems to pertain to the preexistance of Christ, I'm not
sure that it
necessariy proves that He is Jehovah.
QuoteWhat is an angel? ...An angel is a messenger, an ambassador, a representative, a spokesman, a servant of the Sovereign Almighty God the Father. John 1:1-3 tells us that the Word is from the very beginning in the Father and that the Word is the only begotten God (vs.18). So when the Word comes forth from the Father to obey His command and speak His word/logos, He is the Father's first Spokesman/Son/Ambassador/Angel/Jehovah/God who created all things and is the God of our ancestors in the wilderness and our God also, Jesus Christ the Son of God in the flesh who has now returned to the Father having started the process of doing His will.
I understand that angel can mean messenger and I should have been more precise in the way I worded what I said. My belief is that Jesus is not one of the
created heavenly beings that we refer to as angels.
Quote
Heresies abound, don't be deceived, antichrists are in plentiful supply these latter days.
I fervently pray that I will not be. But if I had not put aside my fears about being deceived I would never have been brought to see what the Bible says about UR. I feel I must also approach
this subject with a mind that is open and I suppose that leaves me wide open to being deceived. I'll have to trust that God can guard me.
Hi! Paul
QuoteActs 5:30 – "The God of our ancestors raised Jesus."
Quite true! But who was the God of our ancestors? Was it not Jehovah? And was it not Jehovah the Rock that followed them in the wilderness from which they drank? And is that Rock not Christ of the NT. "...and all drank the same spiritual drink, for they were drinking from a spiritual rock which followed them; and the rock was Christ." (1Cor.10:4).
So the power that raised Jesus was the power of Christ/God/Jehovah from the Father that He possessed from conception.
(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll68/roymonis/peace.gif)
Roy UK
Hi! Paul
QuoteRead the source sister. My God and Your God, My Father, and Your Father! Yep, it's suppose to be in red, And it's red because Jesus said it! So go back and read your quote in context! This commandment have I received of my Father.
Where did you get this source from, please quote the Scripture?
(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll68/roymonis/peace.gif)
Roy UK
Quote from: Roy Monis on September 05, 2008, 09:43:09 PM
Hi! Paul
QuoteRead the source sister. My God and Your God, My Father, and Your Father! Yep, it's suppose to be in red, And it's red because Jesus said it! So go back and read your quote in context! This commandment have I received of my Father.
Where did you get this source from, please quote the Scripture?
(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll68/roymonis/peace.gif)
Roy UK
Sorry Roy, here's the verse
John 20:17 Jesus said to her, "Stop clinging to Me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, 'I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God.'"
Paul
Quote from: Roy Monis on September 05, 2008, 09:19:17 PM
Hi! Paul
QuoteActs 5:30 – "The God of our ancestors raised Jesus."
Quite true! But who was the God of our ancestors? Was it not Jehovah? And was it not Jehovah the Rock that followed them in the wilderness from which they drank? And is that Rock not Christ of the NT. "...and all drank the same spiritual drink, for they were drinking from a spiritual rock which followed them; and the rock was Christ." (1Cor.10:4).
So the power that raised Jesus was the power of Christ/God/Jehovah from the Father that He possessed from conception.
(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll68/roymonis/peace.gif)
Roy UK
9I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire.
10A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him: thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him: the judgment was set, and the books were opened. --Daniel 7
12And I turned to see the voice that spake with me. And being turned, I saw seven golden candlesticks;
13And in the midst of the seven candlesticks one like unto
the Son of man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle.
14
His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as
a flame of fire; 15And his feet like unto fine brass,
as if they burned in a furnace; and his voice as the sound of many waters.
16And he had in his right hand seven stars:
and out of his mouth went a sharp twoedged sword: and his countenance was as the sun shineth in his strength.
17And when I saw him, I fell at his feet as dead. And he laid his right hand upon me, saying unto me, Fear not;
I am the first and the last: 18 I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death. --Revelation 1
John 1:36
And looking upon Jesus as he walked, he saith, Behold the Lamb of God!
Quote from: Roy Monis on September 05, 2008, 02:14:29 PM
Hi! Brother rr
Quotethis helped me to see more clearly
You have lost me, brother. See what more clearly?
(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK :boyheart: :boyheart: :boyheart:
Hi Roy you need the rest of the post LOL... hee hee
I have made a couple here on this thread ..
the NAME OF THE WORD OF GOD is Jesus Christ
SPIRIT AND TRUTH
IS GOD I know thats a broad statment
but true none the less
and the HOLY SPIRIT
IS THE WORD OF GOD /Jesus Christ and the Father /God working within us
this is my simple point on these matters
hope that helps , them 2 or 3 posts I made were the scripture [substance] I have gathered this from as well as Holy Spirit witness
confirming this in my own heart :)
God bless peace rr
Quote from: Molly
["No Jew---ever imagined that the baby born in Bethlehem was going to be Jehovah
himself come as a baby."
That's one of the reasons they missed him.
They missed him because they wanted the Messiah only as a Savior King to rid them of Rome. Quote from: MollyJohn 10 33 "We are not stoning you for any of these," replied the Jews, "but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God."
They also must have missed this prophecy, too—
Jesus corrects their mistake 3 verses later...Joh 10:35 "If he called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken), 36 do you say of Him, whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, 'You are blaspheming,' because I said, 'I am the Son of God'? And as you can see later in Chapter 19 they actually got the message and corrected their earlier mistake...Joh 19:7 The Jews answered him, "We have a law, and by that law He ought to die
because He made Himself out to be the Son of God."
Quote from: MollyMatthew 1:23
Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.
Jesus was a very common name. So how many "God with us" do you think there were?
Paul
Quote from: Pierac on September 05, 2008, 09:51:38 PM
Quote from: Roy Monis on September 05, 2008, 09:43:09 PM
Hi! Paul
QuoteRead the source sister. My God and Your God, My Father, and Your Father! Yep, it's suppose to be in red, And it's red because Jesus said it! So go back and read your quote in context! This commandment have I received of my Father.
Where did you get this source from, please quote the Scripture?
(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll68/roymonis/peace.gif)
Roy UK
Sorry Roy, here's the verse
John 20:17 Jesus said to her, "Stop clinging to Me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, 'I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God.'"
Paul
What is the Father's name, Pierac? Does Jesus ever call him by name?
Quote from: CHB on September 05, 2008, 12:45:38 AM
Quote from: Molly
18No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it up again. This commandment have I received of my Father.
Hi Molly,
The verse above is (John 10:18). and if you read all of the verse it says "No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. how, and why did Jesus have this power? read the rest of the verse. This commandment have I received of my Father". There is the answer.
Jesus also said "of mine own self I can do nothing". Jesus was flesh, a man, human, just like the rest of us. He was also the Son of God which made Him seperate from us. While Jesus was in the flesh he was powerless without God the Father, just like we are powerless without Christ.
CHB
Hi! CHB
Have we forgotten that the Holy Spirit impregnated Mary with the Word/Son/Christ/logos/God in the body of the flesh - Jesus the man. He was in possession of that commandment so He had the power to raise Himself in accord with the authority from the Father. He could do nothing of Himself but the Father's word/logos which He was in possession of, raised Him. The very same logos that He used to create the universe and all that there is.
If I have a password for my documents, then using that password on any computer anywhere in the world will enable me to access my files. Very much the same thing, the password comes from the source. If I give it to my son then he will be able to do the same with it.
(http://dl.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1551/1551031u6k25jgwzu.png) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Quote from: PieracAnd as you can see later in Chapter 19 they actually got the message and corrected their earlier mistake...
Joh 19:7 The Jews answered him, "We have a law, and by that law He ought to die because He made Himself out to be the Son of God."
well, if they have a law that he ought to die because he makes himself out to be the Son of God, then how do you justify your earlier statement that this is an accepted title for the Messiah?
In fact, they rightly perceived that he was claiming divinity--the penalty for which was death.
John 10:33
The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.
Quote from: Pleroo on September 05, 2008, 07:18:04 AM
Okay, what about Jesus' pre-existance? If you've already covered this, I didn't see it. I have seen your answer to the idea that all things were not created through him (although, so far, that seems to me to be your weakest argument). But when he says that before Abraham was, I am, doesn't that indicate he existed before him? That may not indicate that Jesus is Yaweh, but it does seem to indicate something beyond mere mortal man. Again, he's not an angel so there's got to be something more here.
And, in spite of what you've said, John 1 and Col 1 still seem to pretty clearly point to him as having been the one through whom all things were created. (While much of what you're saying makes sense to me, I've tried to see that particular part of the argument from your point of view and it's simply not sitting right.) Again, even if the Son is not Yaweh these things indicate he is something beyond a man, even a man annointed by God.
Ok Pleroo, It's going to take more than one post to cover this. No problem as I already have the data at hand...
Christ the Head of the New CreationThe various popular English translation are at odds as to whether the Son is "the first-born
over all creation" (as in the NIV and NK JV), thus first in rank, or whether he is "the firstborn
of all creation" (which reflects a literal translation of the genitive case, as in the KJV, RV and NASB), meaning first in time, which would refer to Christ being the first-created being of creation.
We evidently need the wider context to determine which nuance fits best. It is clear that Paul continues his line of thought in the next verse, as he uses the conjunction "for": "For in Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities- all things have been created through him and for him" (v.16).
Jesus never claimed credit for the original Genesis creation of the heavens and the earth. He was in no doubt that the universe was God's handiwork.
Mat 19:4 He answered, "Have you not read that
he (God) who created them from the beginning made them male and female,
Remember Jesus has a God"Blessed be
God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ (1 Peter 1:3). Yet for us there is but one God, the Father, (1Co 8:6)
Mar 13:19 For in those days there will be such tribulation as has not been from the beginning of
the creation that God (my Father) created until now, and never will be.
Observe in Colossians 1 that "all things" created
are not "the heavens and the earth" as per Genesis 1:1, but rather "all things
in the heavens and
[up]on the earth." These things are defined as "thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities." Evidently, Jesus has been given authority to restructure the arrangements of angels as well as being the agent for the creation of the body of Christ on earth, the Church.
This is the thought as we soon shall see in Hebrews 1 where the Angels are told to worship the Son. It is also the thought that Peter mentions in 1 Peter 3:21-22 where, after "the resurrection of Jesus Christ, who he is at the right hand of God, having gone into heaven, after angels and authorities and powers had been subjected to him, " it is the new Messianic order that God has brought in through Christ the Son that is under discussion. Just before his ascension into heaven at the father's right hand of power, Jesus declares that "all authority in heaven and on earth has
been given to me" (Matt.28:18). His resurrection has Jesus a new status, "far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this age, but also in the one to come" (Eph.1:21).
All of this is to reiterate that this hymn of praise concerns the
new order of things that now exist since the resurrection of the Son. An eschatological shift of the ages has begun with Christ's exaltation to the Father's right hand. God has "put all things in subjection under his [the resurrected Christ's] feet" (Eph. 1-22). Paul repeats this thought in the next chapter of Colossians: "and he is the head over [or of] all rule and authority" (Col 2:10). In the words we looked at in Philippians 2, God has rewarded Jesus' obedient death on the cross by highly exalting him, and bestowing on him "the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee shall bow, of those who are in heaven, and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father" (Phil 2:8-10).
It is highly significant that in verse 18 Jesus attains to a supreme position, meaning that it he did not have it already.
Thus he cannot have preexisted as God. If he did his final status would be more of a demotion than the promotion described by Paul.
If Jesus was God in the flesh then it is impossible to be a man. He would have been something entirely else. Not a man. This is why Jesus has to learn wisdom, Luke 2:40, Luke 2:52. God is all knowing. He does not need to learn anything. Paul tells us Jesus is a priest after the order of Melchizedek, and something else.
Heb 5:6 "You are a priest forever, after the order of Melchizedek." 5 In the days of his flesh, Jesus offered up prayers and supplications, with loud cries and tears, to him who was able to save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverence. 8
Although he was a son, he learned obedience through what he suffered.
It is an insult to say that God learned obedience! Jesus learned obedience because he was a man, a man like you and me
not a hybrid. Most fail to understand the concept of Agency. When you kiss the Agent of the one sent, you are actually kissing the one whom the Agent represents. When you worship Jesus you are actually worshiping the One who sent Him. Thus Jesus comments
NASB Joh 8:42 Jesus said to them, "If God were your Father, you would love Me, for I proceeded forth and have come from God,
for I have not even come on My own initiative, but He sent Me.
Joh 12:49 "For I did not speak on My own initiative,
but the Father Himself who sent Me has given Me a commandment as to what to say and what to speak.
There is no God in the flesh hybrid (
Theos aner) in these verses.
If Jesus is already God in the flesh then He can not have a God because it would be two Gods not one. Yet, scripture clearly tell us he does have a God, both before and after His resurrection. Philippians 4:20; Ephesians 4:6; John 20:17; Matthew 27:46; Revelation 3:12; Revelation 3:2.
One issue is God can not die. So if Jesus was God then he would have had to pretend to die and thus there would not be any forgiveness of sin because he really didn't die.
Let's see who can forgive sins. Mat 9:2 And they brought to Him a paralytic lying on a bed. Seeing their faith, Jesus said to the paralytic, "Take courage, son; your sins are forgiven."
Mat 9:6 "But so that you may know that the Son of Man
has authority on earth to forgive sins"--then He said to the paralytic, "Get up, pick up your bed and go home."
Mar 2:7 "Why does this man speak that way? He is blaspheming; who can forgive sins but God alone?"
John 20:21 So Jesus said to them again, "Peace be with you;
as the Father has sent Me, I also send you." 22 And when He had said this, He breathed on them and said to them,
"Receive the Holy Spirit. 23
"If you forgive the sins of any, their sins have been forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they have been retained." Jesus never forgave sins before He was anointed with God's Spirit. And now the Apostles have the ability to forgive sins, once again only after Jesus gave them the Holy Spirit. The Apostles are now Agents of Jesus the Christ and "have authority on earth to forgive sins". How? Because
as the Father has sent Me, I also send youPaul
Part two
Christ the First-born of all the creation
The word "first-born" comes to the New Testament with a rich heritage. The Hebrews had a custom of conferring special birthright privileges on their oldest sons. The eldest son of a father would receive the double portion of the family's inheritance. The well-known story of Jacob tricking his father Isaac into conferring on him - rather than on the first-born-Esau all the family blessing is typical of this culture (Gen 27:32). There is a deeper nuance to the meaning of this word "first-born." The Greek word for "first" can mean either a first in time or first in status, regardless of birth position. The "first-born" may designate one who is given the honor of chief rank, that is, the first place. This usage can also be found in the Hebrew Bible, as when Jacob summons his son to bequeath his patriarchal blessing on them, he designates Reuben as "my first-born" preeminent in dignity and preeminent in power. (Gen 40 9:3)
Although Reubin is "first-born" in time, the prominent idea is his status in dignity. This is clearly the meaning in Jeremiah 31:9 where God calls Ephraim his "first-born" even though Ephraim's brother, Manasseh, was the elder of the two. Or when God calls Israel his first-born son in Exodus 4:22 and commands Pharaoh to "let my son go that he may worship me." (v.23) The concept has to do with Israel's precedence in importance over Egypt as far as God's plans were concerned. The classic instance of this idea of pre-eminence of rank is in the Messianic Psalms 89 where God, in glowing words, speaks of the coming promise Davidic king, the Lord Messiah:
Psa 89:26 He shall cry to me, 'You are my Father, my God, and the Rock of my salvation.' 27 And I will make him the firstborn, the highest of the kings of the earth. 28 My steadfast love I will keep for him forever, and my covenant will stand firm for him. 29 I will establish his offspring forever and his throne as the days of the heavens.
In the spirit of prophecy, God announces that this king's superior position is a matter of appointment, not the time of birth. Furthermore, God makes his appointed king "the highest [in status and rank] of the kings of the earth." Thus, when the apostle applies the term "first-born" to the son of God in Colossians 1, he is using a well-known OT Messianic description. In fact, the expression is repeated a few verses later, where Paul writes, "He is also head of the body, the church; and he is the beginning, the first-born from the dead" (v.18). The different qualifier here is noteworthy. Whereas in verse 15 the Son is the "first-born" of all creation," here the Son is the "first-born from the dead." If we take into account the Hebrew literary style of parallelism, where the same idea is repeated but in slightly modified form, it is quite reasonable to suggest that the qualifiers "of all creation" and "from the dead" means the same thing.
The thought is clearly that Jesus the son of God is the first man of God's new creation, because he is the first man ever to be raised to immortality. Christ return is the beginning of the eschatological resurrection. His resurrection is the promise and the guarantee that God's new order of reality has begun. The church is that new community in prospect. This confirms that the subject matter under discussion is not the Genesis creation of the heavens and the earth, but rather the creation of the church, the body of believers who constitute God's new humanity, the New Man(kind). For this reason, he is the beginning (arche which has an ambivalence, and can mean either the ruler or chief, or origin or beginning, v. 18) Either way, Jesus as the first-raised from the dead is the origin of God's new creation, and he is in consequence of this priority and resurrection also the highest in rank "so that he himself might come to have first place in everything" (v.18). However, whether we take the term firstborn to mean first in relation to time or first in relation to rank, this much is at least clear, that taken in its natural sense, the expression and firstborn excludes the notion of an uncreated, eternal being.
To be born requires a beginning. In order to verify our findings so far, we must look at the second part of the phrase that the son is "the first-born of all creation." As shown in my last post.
Mar 16:15 And He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation.
Paul
Pierac, I think you are rightly perceiving Jesus as the prototype son. He is the firstborn of many brothers.
What is actually happening here? The divinity of all the fulness of the Godhead has entered the human body of flesh and blood--the Word became flesh and walked among us.
The Light has come into the world--in flesh and blood, walking on the feet of man.
But, that's not the end of it. Because for him to be the captain of our salvation, he must conquer the death of the body--he must reverse the law of physics as we know it.
Thus, the resurrected Christ is the first of a new creation--but he has resurrected himself--because who could do this, if not God?
I am not intending to resurrect myself. God, in the person of the Lord Jesus Christ will do that--he has so promised me.
John 6:54
Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.
Hi Molly ,
in the old testimony we have many names , and it being so casually tossed around , it seems to have lost its zeal , being marred beyond recognition
and Jesus Christ is called many things Lamb of GOD ,good shepherd tree of LIFE THE WIDSOM OF GOD etc ..
but the name Jesus Christ is the revealing of salvation to mankind
here is my proofs /stance , why I believe this as a truth
Isa 62:2 And the Gentiles shall see thy righteousness, and all kings thy glory: and thou shalt be called by a new name, which the mouth of the LORD shall name.
to me it is the SON OF GOD / JESUS CHRIST/WORD OF GOD first begotten from the dead ..
Rev 2:17 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the hidden manna, and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth [it].
To me the WORD OF GOD on the white stoney heart[ours ] ...
Rev 3:12 Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, [which is] new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and [I will write upon him] my new name.
Act 19:20 So mightily grew the word of God and prevailed.
2Ti 2:9 Wherein I suffer trouble, as an evil doer, [even] unto bonds; but the word of God is not bound.
remember the bounding of the grave clothes ?
THE napkin on the face in aplace of its own ? [HEAD uncovered now ] which is jesus Christ to me revealed to all ..the gift of faith in Christ the annoited and Holy One
Rom 10:17 So then faith [cometh] by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.
1Cr 14:36 What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only? seeing this Holy Spirit also shdowing over the many born again from the point of [ heaven open]
1Pe 1:23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God,/JESUS CHRIST /SAVIOR ANNOINTED which liveth and abideth for ever.
and the power of God/SON OF GOD JESUS CHRIST being the SWORD /WORD THAT proceeds out of HIS MOUTH
Hbr 4:12 For the word of God [is] quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and [is] a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
Rev 6:9 And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held:
within them its the Spirit of prophecy Jesus Christ testinony /witness /will
Hbr 9:16 For where a testament [is], there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.
Hbr 9:17 For a testament [is] of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.
Testator1 Strong's Number: 1303 Greek: diatithemi
"to arrange, dispose," is used only in the Middle Voice in the NT; in Hbr 9:16,17, the present participle with the article, lit., "the (one) making a testament (or covenant)," virtually a noun, "the testator" (the covenanting one); it is used of "making a covenant" in Hbr 8:10; 10:16; Act 3:25. In "covenant-making," the sacrifice of a victim was customary ( Gen 15:10; Jer 34:18,19). He who "made a covenant" did so at the cost of a life. While the terminology in Hbr 9:16,17 has the appearance of being appropriate to the circumstances of making a will, there is excellent reason for adhering to the meaning "covenant-making." The rendering "the death of the testator" would make Christ a Testator, which He was not. He did not die simply that the terms of a testamentary disposition might be fulfilled for the heirs. Here He who is "the Mediator of a new covenant" ( Hbr 9:15) is Himself the Victim whose death was necessary. The idea of "making a will" destroys the argument of Hbr 9:18. In spite of various advocacies of the idea of a will, the weight of evidence is confirmatory of what Hatch, in Essays in Biblical Greek, p. 48, says: "There can be little doubt that the word (diatheke) must be invariably taken in this sense of 'covenant' in the NT, and especially in a book so impregnated with the language of the Sept. as the Epistle to the Hebrews" (see also Westcott, and W. F. Moulton). We may render somewhat literally thus: "For where a covenant (is), a death (is) necessary to be brought in of the one covenanting; for a covenant over dead ones (victims) is sure, since never has it force when the one covenanting lives' [Christ being especially in view]. The writer is speaking from a Jewish point of view, not from that of the Greeks. "To adduce the fact that in the case of wills the death of the testator is the condition of validity, is, of course, no proof at all that a death is necessary to make a covenant valid. ... To support his argument, proving the necessity of Christ's death, the writer adduces the general law that he who makes a covenant does so at the expense of life" (Marcus Dods). See APPOINT, MAKE. 1) to arrange, dispose of, one's own affairs
a) of something that belongs to one
b) to dispose of by will, make a testament
2) to make a covenant, enter into a covenant, with one
ALIVE for ever more ......... this is when the rubber meets the road
Rev 19:13 And he [was] clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.
Rev 20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and [I saw] the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received [his] mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
these are the numerous scriptures that speak of the'' same things'' again and again and to whom it come into and out of same witness within us all whom believe and given the gift of faith
Act 15:27 We have sent therefore Judas and Silas, who shall also tell [you] the same things by mouth:Sparkletooth:.
Rom 2:1 Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things.
Eph 6:9 And, ye masters, do the same things unto them, forbearing threatening: knowing that your Master also is in heaven; neither is there respect of persons with him.
Phl 3:1 Finally, my brethren, rejoice in the Lord. To write the same things to you, to me indeed [is] not grievous, but for you [it is] safe.
peace and God bless rr
Hi! Paul
Thank you brother.
QuoteJohn 20:17 Jesus said to her, "Stop clinging to Me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, 'I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God.'"
Absolutely true the Father is Jesus' Father and Mary's Father as He was Jesus' God and her God. He was still on earth and not ascended to the Father at that point. And even so the Father is still His God even after He ascends and He is God to His Father. We learn this from; [color blue]"But of the Son He says, "
Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, And the righteous scepter is the scepter of His kingdom. You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness; Therefore
God, Your God, has anointed You With the oil of gladness above Your companions." [/color] (Heb.1:8-9).
So the Father is God and the Son is God, but still ONE GOD.
(http://dl.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1551/1551031u6k25jgwzu.png) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Quote from: PieracThe Greek word for "first" can mean either a first in time or first in status, regardless of birth position. The "first-born" may designate one who is given the honor of chief rank, that is, the first place. This usage can also be found in the Hebrew Bible, as when Jacob summons his son to bequeath his patriarchal blessing on them, he designates Reuben as "my first-born" preeminent in dignity and preeminent in power. (Gen 40 9:3)
Yes, but God flips this on its head, doesn't he, Pierac?
Adam is the first son. Israel is the first son. Ishmael is the first son. Esau is the first son.
But who is pre-eminent in all these cases? The second son.
The elder shall serve the younger--God has flipped the law on its head.
Quote from: Molly on September 05, 2008, 10:37:06 PM
Quote from: PieracThe Greek word for "first" can mean either a first in time or first in status, regardless of birth position. The "first-born" may designate one who is given the honor of chief rank, that is, the first place. This usage can also be found in the Hebrew Bible, as when Jacob summons his son to bequeath his patriarchal blessing on them, he designates Reuben as "my first-born" preeminent in dignity and preeminent in power. (Gen 40 9:3)
Yes, but God flips this on its head, doesn't he, Pierac?
Adam is the first son. Israel is the first son. Ishmael is the first son. Esau is the first son.
But who is pre-eminent in all these cases? The second son.
The elder shall serve the younger--God has flipped the law on its head.
:thumbsup:
Quote from: rrHbr 9:16 For where a testament [is], there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.
Hbr 9:17 For a testament [is] of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.
Paul is talking like a lawyer here. If I make a will, it is just an unenforceable piece of paper until I die. Then it goes into effect and my beneficiaries inherit.
If I make a will, and somebody else dies, my beneficiaries do not inherit anything.
Since Jesus Christ is the one who died, that also makes him the one who made the testament in the first place--God. The Lord Jesus must be the testator of the will.
Otherwise, as co-inheritor of this will, I will receive nothing, because he's the one who died.
19 If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable. 20But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept.
--1Cor 15
The resurrected Christ is my inheritance.
Quote from: Molly on September 05, 2008, 10:37:06 PM
Quote from: PieracThe Greek word for "first" can mean either a first in time or first in status, regardless of birth position. The "first-born" may designate one who is given the honor of chief rank, that is, the first place. This usage can also be found in the Hebrew Bible, as when Jacob summons his son to bequeath his patriarchal blessing on them, he designates Reuben as "my first-born" preeminent in dignity and preeminent in power. (Gen 40 9:3)
Yes, but God flips this on its head, doesn't he, Pierac?
Adam is the first son. Israel is the first son. Ishmael is the first son. Esau is the first son.
But who is pre-eminent in all these cases? The second son.
The elder shall serve the younger--God has flipped the law on its head.
Yes, Adam had to come first.
Paul
Hi Pleroo, :hihat: On another forum a fellow who has the same beliefs as myself posted this below... I though it might be helpful in understanding certain verses, that could very easily be taken the wrong way. BTW, Thanks for the P.M.'s :thumbsup:
Quote1Co 8:6 yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all things and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we exist through Him.
Speaks for itself.
He received a honest question in turn.
Quote
What's the main difference in "of whom" and "by whom" in the context of this passage?
Here is my reply, hopfully it will help explain certain verses that use "Through" (
dia) and "by" (
dia) in scripture...
Hello STP, The answer is in the little word "by" better known in the Greek as "
Dia"
G1223
διάdia; a prim. prep.; through,
on account of,
because of: - account (4), after (2), afterward (1), always *(2), because (111), between *(1), briefly *(1), charge *(1), constantly (1), continually *(6), during (1), forever *(1), gives (1), means (3), over (1), presence (1), reason (40), sake (41), sakes (5), since (1), so then *(1), so *(1), therefore *(16), this reason *(1), this *(1), though (1), through (225),
through the agency (1), through *(1), view (2), way (3), what (1), why (3), why *(27).
And the little word "of" better known in the Greek as
ek1537
εκ, εξ
ek ex
ek, ex
A primary preposition denoting origin (the point whence motion or action proceeds), from, out (of place, time or cause; literally or figuratively; direct or remote): - after, among, X are, at betwixt (-yond), by (
the means of), exceedingly, (+ abundantly above), for (-th), from (among, forth, up), + grudgingly, + heartily, X heavenly, X hereby, + very highly, in, . . . ly, (because, by reason) of, off (from), on, out among (from, of), over, since, X thenceforth, through, X unto, X vehemently, with (-out). Often used in composition, with the same general import; often of completion.
Dia is the "preposition of attendant circumstances" and signifies instrumental agency. Put simply, this means that
dia denotes the means by which an action is accomplished. And Scripture tells us that God the originator is bringing His purpose, His
logos to fulfillment
through Jesus Christ. Jesus is the Agent, the Mediator of God's master plan. Jesus is always seen as secondary, or subordinate to the Father. There are occasional exceptions to this general use of the preposition
dia. Sometimes blessings are said to come to us through God (e.g. 1 Cor 1:9; Heb.2: 10). But usually there is a clear distinction made between God's initiating activity and the means through which God brings that activity to pass. The prepositions used of God's action are
hypo and
ek which point to primary causation or origin.
Let's cement this idea in our minds by looking at one or two verses that highlight the difference: "yet for us there is but one God, the father, from [
ek, 'out from' ] whom are all things, and we exist for [
eis, 'to' ] Him; and one lord, Jesus Christ, through [
dia] him" (1Cor.8:6).
Prepositions are the signposts that point out the direction of a passage.
Ek indicates something coming out from its source or origin, and indicates motion from the interior. In other words, all things came out from the loving heart of God, or God's "interior", so to speak.
This agrees with Genesis 1:1 which says, "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth".
Both verses say that the source of "all things" is the one true God, the Creator of the heavens and the earth and the Father of the Lord Jesus Christ. In contradistinction to this "one God and Father" out of Whom all things originate, the "one Lord, Jesus Messiah" is giving the preposition
dia which means "through."
In other words, Jesus is God's agent through whom God accomplishes His plan for our lives. This is a consistent pattern all the way through the N.T. God the Father is the source, the origin of all blessings, and Jesus His Son brings those blessings of salvation to us:
"Now all these things are
from God, who reconciled us to himself
through Christ" (2 Cor.5:18).
"God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ... has blessed us... in Christ. He predestined us to adoption as sons
through Jesus Christ
to himself" (Eph.1:3-5).
"For
God has not destined us for wrath, but for obtaining salvation
through our Lord Jesus Christ" (1 Thess.5:9).
"
God will judge the secrets of men
through Christ Jesus" (Rom. 2:16).
"For
God... has saved us, and called us... according to His own purpose and grace which was granted us
in Christ Jesus from all eternity" (2 Tim 1:9).
"Blessed be
God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who
has caused us to be born-again to a living hope
through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead" (1 Peter 1:3).
"To the only
God our Savior,
through Jesus Christ our Lord, be glory, majesty, dominion and authority, before all time and now and forever. Amen" (Jude 25).
"Jesus the Nazarene,
a man attested to you
by God with miracles and wonders and signs
which god performed through him in your midst" (Acts 2:22).
Joh 14:10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but
the Father that dwelleth in me,
he doeth the works.
Paul tell us in 1Co 8:6 yet
for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist,
and one Lord, Jesus Christ,
through(
dia) whom are all things and
through (
dia) whom we exist.
Just look at how the Message Bible words it...
1Co 8:6 They say--again, quite rightly--that
there is only one God the Father,
that everything comes from him, and that he wants us to live for him. Also, they say that
there is only one Master--Jesus the Messiah--
and that everything is for his sake, including us. Yes. It's true.
The Message Bible may be a little simplistic but you get the picture.
So always God
the Father is the source and origin of all works, deeds and salvation which come to us through the mediatorship of his son.
From Him comes all to us
through our Lord Jesus Christ so that
to God the Father made all the praise be directed. The Father is the sole origin and Creator of "all things." In contrast, Jesus is the Father's commissioned Lord Messiah through whom God's plan for the world is coming to completion. The whole Bible from cover to cover categorically states that God created the universe and all the ages with Jesus Christ at the center of his eternal purpose. Jesus is the
diameter running all the way through.
So that is the difference between "of whom" and "by whom."
Paul
Quote from: Molly on September 05, 2008, 10:55:30 PM
Quote from: rrHbr 9:16 For where a testament [is], there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.
Hbr 9:17 For a testament [is] of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.
Paul is talking like a lawyer here. If I make a will, it is just an unenforceable piece of paper until I die. Then it goes into effect and my beneficiaries inherit.
If I make a will, and somebody else dies, my beneficiaries do not inherit anything.
Since Jesus Christ is the one who died, that also makes him the one who made the testament in the first place--God. The Lord Jesus must be the testator of the will.
Otherwise, as co-inheritor of this will, I will receive nothing, because he's the one who died.
19 If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable.
20But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept.
--1Cor 15
The resurrected Christ is my inheritance.
Thanks Molly ,
yes He is ......... We are now alive through Him to God ,serving the Lord and GOD Now we go back and Look at how many times its the Lord God created and makes all things hummm
reading all of Matt 22 says more but , here
But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken unto
you by God, saying,
Mat 22:32 I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob?
God is not the God of the dead, but
of the living.And when the multitude heard [this], they were astonished at
his doctrine.
now we are seeing the LORD JESUS CHRIST here to David ..through the eternal SPIRIT
Mat 22:42 Saying, What think
ye of Christ? whose son is he? They say unto him, [The Son] of David. He saith unto them, How then doth David
in spirit call him Lord, saying,The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool?
the Eternal Spirit again is able to call Jesus Christ LORD , by Davids spirit
Hbr 9:14 How much more shall the
blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works
to serve the living God? the ''ETERNAL SPIRIT ''
to me its about keeping a clean conscience before the Lord
Rom 14:9 For to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that he might
be Lord both of the dead and living.
peace and grace rr
If Jesus and the Father were the same being why do all the apostles begin their epistles with "peace from God our Father AND the lord Jesus Christ"?
(Gal. 1:1) Paul and apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, AND God the Father, who raised Him (Jesus) from the dead.
(James 1:1) a servant of God AND of the Lord Jesus Christ.
If Jesus and the Father were one and the same why referr to two beings in all of the epistles?
One question for those who believe Jesus and the Father are the same being?
While Jesus was dead who was running things? Can God the Father die? Who was in the tomb?
CHB
Quote from: CHB on September 06, 2008, 02:54:07 AM
If Jesus and the Father were the same being why do all the apostles begin their epistles with "peace from God our Father AND the lord Jesus Christ"?
Because the Father is God in Heaven, and our Lord Jesus Christ was God on descended to earth. The distinction was placed because God was still in heaven, even though He became flesh and dwelt amongst us. It is One and same God.
Let me repeat, God is heaven the Father and God who lowered Himself and took on the image of man, is Jesus Christ.
Honestly, it is not that hard to understand.
Quote from: SOtW on September 06, 2008, 03:25:57 AM
Let me repeat, God is heaven the Father and God who lowered Himself and took on the image of man, is Jesus Christ.
Honestly, it is not that hard to understand.
When has God ever lowered Himself? Impossible!
I have a question, Was Jesus fully God and fully man?
Quote from: Pierac on September 05, 2008, 02:08:21 AM
Son of God
God Himself refers to Jesus as His Son: Mt 2: 15, 3:17, 17: 5, Mk 1: 11, 9: 7, Lk 9: 35
Jesus says that he is the Son of God: Mt 26: 63, Lk 22: 70, Jn 5: 25, 10: 36, 19: 7
The angel Gabriel says Jesus is the Son of God: Luke 1: 35
Peter says that Jesus is the Son of God: Mt 16: 16
John the Apostle says Jesus is the Son of God: Jn 20: 31, 1 Jn 3: 23, 4: 15, 5:5
All the Apostles say Jesus is the Son of God: Mt 14: 33, Jn 6: 69
John the Baptist says Jesus is the Son of God: Jn 1: 34
John Mark says Jesus is the Son of God: Mk 1: 1
Paul says Jesus is the Son of God: Acts 9: 20, Rom 1: 4, 1 Cor 1: 9, 2 Cor 1:19, Gal 2: 20, Heb 4: 14
Nathanael says Jesus is the Son of God: Jn 1: 49
Demons say Jesus is the Son of God: Mt 8: 29, Mk 3: 11, 5: 7, Lk 4: 41, 8: 28
The Centurion says Jesus is the Son of God: Mt 27: 54, Mk 15: 39
Now, let's look at all the massive scripture that teaches Jesus is God the Son!
God the Son
Oops Nobody.
So why do you believe Jesus is "God the Son?" Maybe the same reason you once believed in Hell? Don't let me or anyone else tell you what to believe, seek the Spirit and search the scriptures for yourself!
God the Son
Oops Nobody.
Paul
Oops
You left this out!Jesus as GodJesus Christ as God=============
CertainlyJohn 1:1
John 20:28
Very probablyRomans 9:5
Titus 2:13
Hebrews 1:8 (Psalm 45:7-8)
2 Peter 1:1
ProbablyJohn 1:18
PossiblyActs 20:28
Hebrews 1:9
1 John 5:20
other textsMatthew 1:23
John 17:3
Galatians 2:20
Ephesians 5:5
Colossians 2:2
2 Thessalonians 1:12
1 Timothy 3:16
(The preceding is from a book called
Jesus As God. It is a hardback still packed with other books of mine so I can't tell you the authors. It is one of the most exacting scrutinys of the language of any text I've ever come across,
uber technical linguistics. The results, above, I had written a copy of in my CLV N.T.)
"Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us." Matthew 1:23
"Yet to the Son: 'Your throne, O God, is into the eon of the eon...'" Hebrews 1:8
P.S. Jesus is God become man (
kenosis), dead and buried. Then He raised and ascended back into the right hand of God.
Quote from: PieracWhen has God ever lowered Himself? Impossible!
Paul, did you even take time to actually think about what you just wrote, before writing it?
Luke 1:37 "For nothing is impossible with God."
Anyways,
John 3:13No one has ever gone into heaven except
the one who came from heaven—the Son of Man.
1 Corinthians 15:47 The first man was of the dust of the earth,
the second man from heaven.
Philippians 2:5-7Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus: Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself nothing,
taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness.Romans 9:5The forefathers are theirs, and from them,
by physical descent, came the Messiah, who is God over all, blessed forever. Amen.
Titus 2:13Looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of
our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus.
2 Peter 1:1Simeon Peter, a slave and an apostle of Jesus Christ: To those who have obtained a faith of equal privilege with ours through
the righteousness of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ.etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.
Quote from: reFORMer on September 06, 2008, 06:21:44 AM
Jesus Christ as God
=============
Certainly
John 1:1
John 20:28
Very probably
Romans 9:5
Titus 2:13
Hebrews 1:8 (Psalm 45:7-8)
2 Peter 1:1
Probably
John 1:18
Possibly
Acts 20:28
Hebrews 1:9
1 John 5:20
other texts
Matthew 1:23
John 17:3
Galatians 2:20
Ephesians 5:5
Colossians 2:2
2 Thessalonians 1:12
1 Timothy 3:16
(The preceding is from a book called Jesus As God. It is a hardback still packed with other books of mine so I can't tell you the authors. It is one of the most exacting scrutinys of the language of any text I've ever come across, uber technical linguistics. The results, above, I had written a copy of in my CLV N.T.)
"Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us." Matthew 1:23
"Yet to the Son: 'Your throne, O God, is into the eon of the eon...'" Hebrews 1:8
P.S. Jesus is God become man (kenosis), dead and buried. Then He raised and ascended back into the right hand of God.
Due to time/space restraints (pun intended) Let's just deal with your "
Certainly"
John 1:1
In the beginning was the word, and the word was toward God, and God was the word. "
Ok reFORMer, thank you for your input. I'm sure your sincere and love the lord as I! So why do you see the "word" as being God Almighty! and I do not? Could it be because you follow the traditions of men? First you let emotion, cloud your understanding!
Simply put God has no beginning, but the "word" (Logos) here clearly does! So, I will leave it to you to figure it out! Yes, eternity has no beginning, but the "word" (Logos) does! (John 1:1) :mshock:
John 20:28 And Thomas answered and said to Him,
"My Lord and my God!"I already covered this, keep reading just three more simple verses, as to why John wrote this!
Joh 20:31 Yet these are written
that you should be believing that Jesus is the Christ,
the Son of God, and that, believing, you may have life eonian in His name."
Yep, the Son of God and
NOT God, just like I have been showing!
Paul
Quote from: PieracJohn 20:21 So Jesus said to them again, "Peace be with you; as the Father has sent Me, I also send you." 22 And when He had said this, He breathed on them and said to them,"Receive the Holy Spirit.
7And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
--Gen 2
Quote from: SOtW on September 06, 2008, 07:03:53 AM
Quote from: PieracWhen has God ever lowered Himself? Impossible!
Paul, did you even take time to actually think about what you just wrote, before writing it?
Luke 1:37 "For nothing is impossible with God."
Anyways,
John 3:13
No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven—the Son of Man.
1 Corinthians 15:47 The first man was of the dust of the earth, the second man from heaven.
Philippians 2:5-7
Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus: Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness.
Romans 9:5
The forefathers are theirs, and from them, by physical descent, came the Messiah, who is God over all, blessed forever. Amen.
Titus 2:13
Looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus.
2 Peter 1:1
Simeon Peter, a slave and an apostle of Jesus Christ: To those who have obtained a faith of equal privilege with ours through the righteousness of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ.
etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.
All I'm asking is do you agree with the Chalcedon Creed. Therefore, following the holy fathers, we all with one accord teach men to acknowledge one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, at once complete in Godhead and complete in manhood, truly God and truly man, consisting also of a reasonable soul and body; of one substance with the Father as regards his Godhead, and at the same time of one substance with us as regards his manhood; like us in all respects, apart from sin; as regards his Godhead, begotten of the Father before the ages, but yet as regards his manhood begotten, bearer; one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten, recognized in two natures, without confusion, without change, without division, without separation; the distinction of natures being in no way annulled by the union, but rather the characteristics of each nature being preserved and coming together to form one person and subsistence, not as parted or separated into two persons, but one and the same Son and Only-begotten God the Word, Lord Jesus Christ; even as the prophets from earliest times spoke of him, and our Lord Jesus Christ himself taught us, and the creed of the fathers has handed down to us.A simple Yes or No will do. Just want to understand where you stand.
Paul
Quote from: Molly on September 06, 2008, 07:38:43 AM
Quote from: PieracJohn 20:21 So Jesus said to them again, "Peace be with you; as the Father has sent Me, I also send you." 22 And when He had said this, He breathed on them and said to them,"Receive the Holy Spirit.
7And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
--Gen 2
Molly Molly,
your missing the whole point! "as the Father has sent Me, I also send you." The Father is the source of it all!
Quote from: Pierac on September 06, 2008, 07:33:16 AM
Due to time/space restraints (pun intended) Let's just deal with your "Certainly"
John 1:1 In the beginning was the word, and the word was toward God, and God was the word. "
Ok reFORMer, thank you for your input. I'm sure your sincere and love the lord as I! So why do you see the "word" as being God Almighty! and I do not? Could it be because you follow the traditions of men? First you let emotion, cloud your understanding! Simply put God has no beginning, but the "word" (Logos) here clearly does! So, I will leave it to you to figure it out! Yes, eternity has no beginning, but the "word" (Logos) does! (John 1:1) :mshock:
Is my word me? If I'm around the corner of the house and you don't see me, when I yell at you is it me talking to you? While I am in Georgia on the east side of the continent, on the computer I call my sister in California, is she really talking to me? My body is here but my word is in California. We have true fellowship. Even more so if our images are sent over the internet live to one another. Like Jesus says, "He that has seen me has seen the Father." Jesus says, "Lo, I and the little children who are given Me by God! (Heb 2:13) As also Isaiah says He shall be called, "...the everlasting Father..."
"Word"
G3056
λόγος
logos
log'-os
From G3004; something said (including the thought); by implication a topic (subject of discourse), also reasoning (the mental faculty) or motive; by extension a computation; specifically (with the article in John) the Divine Expression (that is, Christ): - account, cause, communication, X concerning, doctrine, fame, X have to do, intent, matter, mouth, preaching, question, reason, + reckon, remove, say (-ing), shew, X speaker, speech, talk, thing, + none of these things move me, tidings, treatise, utterance, word, work.
Can I be separated from my thoughts? Can I be separated from my mind? Doesn't the thought precede the word?
The Divine Expression--the mind of Christ--
John 1:18
No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
No man has seen the Father because the Father is Spirit--but when that Spirit, indeed all the fulness of the Godhead, is contained within the body of the Lord Jesus Christ, you have seen the Father and now you know him.
John 14:7
If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.
Hi! Brother Pleroo
QuoteI see where it says that Jesus was that rock, but not where it says Jehovah was. So, while I think that passage seems to pertain to the preexistance of Christ, I'm not sure that it necessariy proves that He is Jehovah./quote]
You read it wrong, brother, it doesn't say Jesus was the Rock. Christ was the Rock, Jesus the man is yet in the future. Christ is the Word/Jehovah/Son of God/God of our ancestors.
QuoteI understand that angel can mean messenger and I should have been more precise in the way I worded what I said. My belief is that Jesus is not one of the created heavenly beings that we refer to as angels
Angels can mean not just ordinary messengers but can have various degrees of importance, such as, archangels, ambassadors, etc. etc. Messages of minor importance were given by angels; messages of joy and good news was delivered by archangels, such as Gabriel to Daniel, Zacharias and Mary; messages that were beyond the power of the archangels are delivered by the only One with power and authority capable of guaranteed success, namely, His only Begotten Son/Word/Jehovah/Christ/God. For only God has the power to create something out of nothing. This feat is beyond the power of a simple created being. Logos was the spoken word that Jehovah/Word was commanded by the Father to speak to start creation; "Let there be light." When Mary conceived by the Holy Spirit then Jehovah/Christ/Word/Son of God/God (all the same Entity) was implanted into the body of the flesh man Jesus. It was then that Jesus the man became Christ/God subject only to His Father. His Father's Spokesman. [color= red]"I can do nothing on My own initiative. As I hear, I judge; and My judgment is just, because I do not seek My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me." [/color] (Jn.5:30)
QuoteI fervently pray that I will not be. But if I had not put aside my fears about being deceived I would never have been brought to see what the Bible says about UR. I feel I must also approach this subject with a mind that is open and I suppose that leaves me wide open to being deceived. I'll have to trust that God can guard me.
I will also be praying for you and humbly ask you to pray for me also as I face the same threat from the innumerable antichrists in our midst. This is the time to clothe oneself in the armour of God, as we'll sure need it.
(http://dl8.glitter-graphics.net/pub/206/206938s9pnr6xz6d.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll68/roymonis/peace.gif)
Roy UK
Hi! rosered
I'll call you rosered brother because rr looks too much like it, if you don't mind? I'll be able to sleep better knowing I haven't offended you. :laughing7: :laughing7: :boyheart: :boyheart:
Quotethe NAME OF THE WORD OF GOD is Jesus Christ
I can't fault that, it is our Lord's new name; "He is clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of God." (Rev.19:13).
QuoteSPIRIT AND TRUTH IS GOD I know thats a broad statment
That is also Jesus Christ/God "I am the way, and the
truth, and the
life; no one comes to the Father but through Me." (Jn.14:6). The Spirit is life.
QuoteHOLY SPIRIT IS THE WORD OF GOD /Jesus Christ and the Father /God working within us
In this case I believe that the the word of God is the logos which is the command given to Christ by which to started the creation work. The Holy Spirit is the Father and Son actually within us; "If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and
make Our abode with him." (Jn.14:23). A good analogy would be to look at it in this carnal way; we are in the air around us and the air around us is also in us.
I hope that helps brother. Just my opinion but pretty sound judging by the Scriptures.
(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll68/roymonis/peace.gif)
Roy UK
Hi! Paul
QuoteJesus was a very common name. So how many "God with us" do you think there were?
Indeed "Jesus" was a very common name but it wasn't the name "Jesus" that translates "God with us". If you look more closely you'll very plainly see that the name "Emmanuel" means "God with us" and Emmanuel was not a very common name in those days.
Sorry to butt in Molly.
(http://dl.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1551/1551031u6k25jgwzu.png)[/url
Roy UK (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Quote from: Pierac on September 05, 2008, 04:44:39 AM
Quote from: riverman on September 05, 2008, 02:59:33 AM
Hi Paul,
Perhaps you are right that there isn't a verse phrased as you presented; "God the Son"
But on the other hand there is no verse that calls Christ "The Second Begotten Son Of God" either.
We don't have a verse that calls Adam the First Begotten Son.
Joh 1:14 And the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
Joh 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Joh 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
1Jn 4:9 In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him.
There is more to add to the following but what Paul wrote here sums it up for me;
Col 1:15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
Col 1:16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him and for him:
Col 1:17 And he is before all things and by him all things consist.
Peace,
RM
Hi Joe, I'm trying to post the truth and keep the peace at the same time. Not so easy if your truth does not alway agree with others! I enjoy your scripture post but have no idea what it means to you? For example...
Joh 1:14 And the Word (Logos) was made flesh and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten (created) of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
So you just posted a verse that reads the "Logos" (God's "plan", "internal reasoning") was made flesh and dwelt among us. Yep, just like your logos to have a child was made flesh the day your child was born, and dwelt among you, So does that make your child 'you', just because "it" was your logos in the beginning? No. Now we need to look at the word Begotten! Begotten means you have a beginning! God is eternal and has no beginning! Even the logos has a beginning! (Yep, In the beginning!) So, again, God has no beginning! If one wants to get really silly they can always go with "eternally begotten" Now, that's a real oxymoron! :thumbsup:
Next you posted... Joh 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
Again, I'm not sure what your saying. Are you saying Jesus is not God because people actually saw him? (I'll be fair, Probably not)! Here's that darn begotten word again!
Well, all this verse is saying is that Jesus the "begotten son" hath declared the Father. (You will note it's only the Father too! No Holy Spirit or Trinity being declared?)
Next you posted... Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Well, you more or less supported my understanding! I believe Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and not God, So what does scripture have to say of my belief? How do I stand? Let's see...
1Jo 4:15 Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him, and he in God. and 1Jo 5:10 The one who believes in the Son of God has the testimony in himself; the one who does not believe God has made Him a liar, because he has not believed in the testimony that God has given concerning His Son.
Well, I believe Jesus is "the Son of God" and "the testimony that God has given concerning His Son". I would suggest some here think Jesus is God and "has not believed in the testimony that God has given concerning His Son"?
Quote from: rivermanThere is more to add to the following but what Paul wrote here sums it up for me;
Col 1:15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
If I said I had an image of a Porsche in my driveway, how many of you would be impressed. Remember, we are not to worship images! (John 4:23)
Quote from: RivermanCol 1:16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him and for him:
Read this verse again, (IN Heaven) and (upON the Earth) This is not a creation verse, but one of thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers! All given by God the Father! Just look at all the adjectives next to Jesus name! (Given, granted, appointed, heir, chosen, etc..)
So back to my original point, if you use scripture, tell me what it means to you!
Paul
Hi Paul,
My point was that Christ is presently the
only Son (capital S). Let's set aside the begotten part for now, He is the only Son, Adam is a son.
Same thing with Lord, there are many lords, only One Lord, kings, One King, etc.
That was the distinction I was making, sorry for being unclear.
Peace to you,
RM
Hi! Paul
QuoteThe various popular English translation are at odds as to whether the Son is "the first-born over all creation" (as in the NIV and NK JV), thus first in rank, or whether he is "the firstborn of all creation" (which reflects a literal translation of the genitive case, as in the KJV, RV and NASB), meaning first in time, which would refer to Christ being the first-created being of creation.
I'm just a simple guy, please explain. What does "Only Begotten Son" mean in any language? A Son who has been with the Father from the very beginning? The Son who is God? That's what my Bible is saying to me. Are you saying it's a load of rubbish? "I
n the beginning was the
Word, and the
Word was with God, and the
Word was God. He was
in the beginning with God. All things
came into being through Him, and
apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being." (Jn.1:1-3)
"And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the
only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth." (Jn.1:14).
"No one has seen God at any time; the
only begotten God who is in the
bosom of the Father, He has explained Him." (Jn.1:18).
Where on earth can you in your carnal wisdom, which God has a high respect for, come up with the idea that the Word/begotten God was created? We are told by a reliable source, much more reliable than the one we are dealing with presently, that all things were created by this Word/God who we now know by several names, such as, Son/Jehovah/Christ etc. etc.
Jesus, unlike you or I, was a very humble man and though He knew that He was the Creator of the universe and all things in it, He never entertained the thought of ever boasting about it, hence there is no mention of Him making such a claim.
Are you inferring that these three Bibles that I have are a load of rubbish and your earthly wisdom is right?
Be real, brother! "The Preacher sought to find delightful words and to
write words of truth correctly. The
words of wise men are like goads, and masters of these collections are like well-driven nails; they are
given by one Shepherd. But beyond this, my son,
be warned: the writing of
many books is endless, and
excessive devotion to books is wearying to the body. The conclusion, when all has been heard, is:
fear God and keep His
commandments, because this applies to every person. For
God will bring every act to judgment, everything which is hidden, whether it is good or evil." (Eccl.12:10-14).
(http://dl5.glitter-graphics.net/pub/208/208685lx80ugxhil.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll68/roymonis/peace.gif)
Roy UK
Hi! Paul
QuoteChrist the Head of the New Creation
What's has all this quote of yours and the entire Bible that follows got to do with the simple question that is being discussed? Is Christ/Word/God/Jehovah the Son of God, born of the Father and an inherent part of the Father or was He created a creature. If He was created then who is lying you or Christ?
(http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll68/roymonis/peace.gif)
Roy UK
Hi Paul
Wasting time and space again with your part 2.
QuoteChrist the First-born of all the creation
You're off topic, come back to earth we're down here discussing a simple issue, I repeat; What has your long epistle got to do with the simple topic under discussion? Begotten doesn't mean first-born, in matters not first, middle or last. And it
doesn't say only begotten of creation, that's what Paul says. What the
Bible says only begotten of the Father. That's what the Bible says so let's be right.
This is the short answer we want of you, not the contents of the Bible. It's not surprising that it takes you so long to formulate your posts.
(http://dl2.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1511/1511412qrs1otgogu.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Hi! Paul
QuoteTo be born requires a beginning. In order to verify our findings so far, we must look at the second part of the phrase that the son is "the first-born of all creation." As shown in my last post.
Mar 16:15 And He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation.
Once again I beg to differ. To be born in this unique instance does not need a beginning if
it is the beginning. "
In the beginning was the Word, and the
Word was with God, and the Word was God.
He was in the beginning with God." (Jn.1:1-2)
Please pay attention to the words, they are the words of God not mine.
He was the
only begotten of the Father not the
first-born of all creation
This is what we are discussing:
Is Jesus God or not?
This is the heading of the Chapter
Do we believe it or don't we?
The Deity of Jesus Christ
Born of the Father and not created by Him[/center]
(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
A lot of the proof passages that I'm seeing posted here for Jesus being Jehovah are ones I've seen convincingly rebutted elsewhere, either as having been blatantly mistranslated or being taken out of context. Then there are some passages which I can see being used, legitimately, by either side of the argument.
The thing I keep coming back to are the many passages that equate the Father alone with Jehovah. That's awfully compelling evidence, to me. It was like truly seeing for the first time that all would be alive in Christ. The Bible flat out says it, but as an ETer, I never really saw it. Same in this instance. The Bible flat out says that the Father is God ... He's our God, and He's Jesus' God. Jesus , himself, says that the Father is the only true God. But, as a Trinitarian I never "saw" those passages before.
But, Pierac, your arguments on John 1 are confusing to me. At one point you're saying that the Word is just a concept, an idea and does not actually refer to the person, Jesus Christ, and that Jesus is simply a man whose existance began at physical birth. At other times, you seem to be saying the opposite ... that, yes, the Word is Jesus and that proves he can't be God because He has a beginning whose existance began at or before creation. Could you please clarify for me exactly what it is you're saying?
Because, to me, it seems very clear that this is referring to Jesus as the Word which existed with God from the beginning (which in my mind, doesn't necessarily preclude his existance prior to that). And, as such, John 1:1 also declares Him to be god. Not THE God, perhaps, but not A god, either. Just, god. [At least, that's what seems to be indicated by the fact that the definite article isn't used there in the Greek. It's not "ho theos", but simply, "theos".] What does that mean exactly? What does it mean that the Word (Jesus, from my point of view) is god, but perhaps not THE God?
Any thoughts?
Hi! rosered
I have been banging my head against a brick wall trying to get this very point in your excellent post over as plainly and simply as I possibly could but as Isaiah said; "This was to fulfill the word of Isaiah the prophet which he spoke: "Lord, who has believed our report? And to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed." (Jn.12:38).
Amen!
(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Hi! Paul
Quote
So always God the Father is the source and origin of all works, deeds and salvation which come to us through the mediatorship of his son. From Him comes all to us through our Lord Jesus Christ so that to God the Father made all the praise be directed. The Father is the sole origin and Creator of "all things."
Forgive me for disfiguring your quote. I agree and have never disputed the fact that all things proceed from the Father including His Son the Mediator but that's as far as it goes. The Father is not the Creator, the Mediator/Word who receives the command/logos comes forth from the Father and He does the creation. He is the Creator/Christ of all things with all power and authority/logos from His Father. This is what the Word of God is very plainly saying.
(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Quote from: PieracMolly Molly,
your missing the whole point! "as the Father has sent Me, I also send you." The Father is the source of it all!
Yes, and what is in the bosom of the Father? Jesus!
The heart is in the bosom.
What are the Father's thoughts, words, intentions, motives and deeds? Jesus!
The mind contains thoughts, words, intentions, motives, and deeds.
The Lord Jesus Christ--the heart and mind of the Father!--the heart and mind of God!
John 14:7
If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.
Hi! reFORMer
QuoteOops You left this out! Jesus as God
Hi! Buddie I like that and all that followed, but I'm afraid Jesus is not going to get His Body back just yet, too many antichrists about and they use the wisdom of man to twist things to suit themselves forgetting what God thinks of it; "Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you thinks that he is wise in this age, he must become foolish, so that he may become wise. For the
wisdom of this world is foolishness before God. For it is written, "He is the one who catches the wise in their craftiness"; and again, "The Lord knows the reasonings of the wise, that they are useless." (1Cor.3:18-20).
The Lord wasn't kidding when He threatened to do what we can witness He's done. "...and with all the d
eception of wickedness for those who perish, because they
did not receive the love of the truth so as to be saved. For this reason God will send upon them a deluding influence so that
they will believe what is false, in order that they all may be
judged who did not believe the truth, but took pleasure in wickedness." (2Thess.2:10-12).
The Lord does have a sense of humour. This reminds me of Elijah and the prophets of Baal "It came about at noon, that Elijah mocked them and said, "Call out with a l
oud voice, for he is a god; either
he is occupied or gone aside, or is
on a journey, or perhaps he is
asleep and needs to be awakened." (1Kings 18:27).
Good post brother.
(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/117/117193tdajxe3wh8.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Quote from: PlerooThe thing I keep coming back to are the many passages that equate the Father alone with Jehovah. That's awfully compelling evidence, to me. It was like truly seeing for the first time that all would be alive in Christ. The Bible flat out says it, but as an ETer, I never really saw it. Same in this instance. The Bible flat out says that the Father is God ... He's our God, and He's Jesus' God. Jesus , himself, says that the Father is the only true God. But, as a Trinitarian I never "saw" those passages before.
I have been in both schools of thought [actually there is more than one, Arianism (Jesus is just a man), Modelism (Jesus is the Father), Trinitarian (Jesus is God) and more].
The problem is understanding that God is not limited to cause and effect, God didn't leave heaven when He became a man and dwelt among us. For some reason this escapes people and they think that God works in the same sphere of power and knowledge that a man works and thinks.
Let me explain as simple as possible, what Jesus is.
There is no lie, when I say He is a man and that doesn't mean He was not God. When God became a man, that is what He became. That is why He did not pray to Himself even though He is from Heaven, but to the only God in Heaven, His Father because that is where He came from.
1 Corinthians 15:47The first man was of the dust of the earth, the second man from heaven.
John 3:13No one has ever gone into heaven except the one [the man] who came from heaven—the Son of Man.
John 1:1-2In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word
was God. He was with God in the beginning.
God in Heaven is the Father. Jesus Christ is the God in Heaven, who became a man and emptied Himself of who He was, God. Therefore, anytime Jesus spoke concerning God, He could only speak of the Father because that is where God is, and where Jesus was from. Only God is in Heaven, there is only man who came from Heaven, Jesus Christ.
1 Corinthians 15:47The first man was of the dust of the earth, the second man from heaven.
Philippians 2:5-8Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus: Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, so made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. Being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death—even death on a cross!
Trinitarian doctrine is flawed, Modelism doctrine is flawed, Arianism doctrine is flawed.
What remains, Jesus did not come from
our earthly father, Adam. Jesus came from His Heavenly Father, God. That makes Him completely different than anything ever before or after Him. Whether Jesus was created or not is not really an issue when we understand this. Jesus did not come from the dust of the earth therefore since He was not from dust, to dust did He not return. That is why Jesus could not be created, but begotten. Jesus
was God and being that He
was God, He could not be created, only born.
This is the flaw of Pierac's position. He is unable to see it because of the same reason you could not see what you saw while under a particular position.
Quote from: SOtW on September 06, 2008, 07:03:53 AM
Quote from: PieracWhen has God ever lowered Himself? Impossible!
Paul, did you even take time to actually think about what you just wrote, before writing it?
Luke 1:37 "For nothing is impossible with God."
Anyways,
John 3:13
No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven—the Son of Man.
1 Corinthians 15:47 The first man was of the dust of the earth, the second man from heaven.
Philippians 2:5-7
Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus: Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness.
Romans 9:5
The forefathers are theirs, and from them, by physical descent, came the Messiah, who is God over all, blessed forever. Amen.
Titus 2:13
Looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus.
2 Peter 1:1
Simeon Peter, a slave and an apostle of Jesus Christ: To those who have obtained a faith of equal privilege with ours through the righteousness of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ.
etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.
Hi! SOtW
QuoteLuke 1:37[/b] "For nothing is impossible with God."
Great post brother, but will it do any good? I pray "Lord the brick wall in front of me is so very thick and the head you have given me is so very small and tender. Strengthen it please, Lord. Amen!"
(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif)Roy UK
When Jesus walked this earth, he did a lot of things for our benefit, for the fulfillment of scripture. He is the Way, and he was therefore explicit in his actions so that we would know and could follow him.
For instance, when he comes to the river Jordan to be baptised by John the Baptist, John is --like--are you kidding me? :mshock: I'm not worthy to tie your shoe laces and you want me to baptise you? :mshock: But, Jesus insists because this is for our benefit, for the fulfillment of scripture. So to say that Jesus was just another anointed man misses the point.
13Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to Jordan unto John, to be baptized of him.
14But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me?
15And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him.
--Mat 3
Here is an article that explains what God is. The thing most people get confused with is Jesus being referred to as God but Jesus Himself called the Jew's God also (John 10:34) "Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said Ye, are God's"?
Does that make the Jew's God the Father? No, neither does calling Jesus God make Him God the Father. There is ONE God the Father and there is ONE Lord Jesus Christ which is also referred to as God. Why? because He is God the Father's Son.
Just What is God
http://www.askelm.com/essentials/ess039.htm
CHB
Quote from: SOtW on September 06, 2008, 08:30:33 PM
There is no lie, when I say He is a man and that doesn't mean He was not God. When God became a man, that is what He became. That is why He did not pray to Himself even though He is from Heaven, but to the only God in Heaven, His Father because that is where He came from.
QuoteWhat remains, Jesus did not come from our earthly father, Adam. Jesus came from His Heavenly Father, God. That makes Him completely different than anything ever before or after Him. Whether Jesus was created or not is not really an issue when we understand this. Jesus did not come from the dust of the earth therefore since He was not from dust, to dust did He not return. That is why Jesus could not be created, but begotten. Jesus was God and being that He was God, He could not be created, only born.
This is the flaw of Pierac's position. He is unable to see it because of the same reason you could not see what you saw while under a particular position.
Okay, I think I understand what you're saying, but let me be absolutely sure. You're proposing that the Christ
was God but once he became human (Jesus), he was
no longer God?
Quote from: CHBThe thing most people get confused with is Jesus being referred to as God but Jesus Himself called the Jew's God also (John 10:34) "Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said Ye, are God's"?
Yes, CHB, that's from Psalm 82--"gods"--small g.
6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High. But, there is a caveat, lest we get too proud--
7But ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes. And, Jesus took it one step further--he raised himself after death--
8Arise, O God, judge the earth: for thou shalt inherit all nations.--Psalm 82
Quote from: Molly
Yes, and what is in the bosom of the Father? Jesus!
The heart is in the bosom.
If Jesus being in the bosom of the Father makes Him the Father, would that make the beggar in Luke 16 Abraham? (Luke 16:22)
CHB
Quote from: CHB on September 06, 2008, 09:46:01 PM
Quote from: Molly
Yes, and what is in the bosom of the Father? Jesus!
The heart is in the bosom.
If Jesus being in the bosom of the Father makes Him the Father, would that make the beggar in Luke 16 Abraham? (Luke 16:22)
CHB
Yes.
Galatians 3:16
Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.
Quote from: Molly
Yes, CHB, that's from Psalm 82--"gods"--small g.
There are
many gods and
many lords. Why is that word even used if there is only ONE God? (1Cor.8:5)
(Psalms 86:8) Among the gods there is none like unto thee, OLord.
Even though there are
many gods the Father is the one above all the other gods, just like your Father is the head of your household.
To understand God look at the creation and how it operates.
CHB
Quote from: Molly on September 06, 2008, 09:55:18 PM
Quote from: CHB on September 06, 2008, 09:46:01 PM
Quote from: Molly
Yes, and what is in the bosom of the Father? Jesus!
The heart is in the bosom.
If Jesus being in the bosom of the Father makes Him the Father, would that make the beggar in Luke 16 Abraham? (Luke 16:22)
CHB
Yes.
Galatians 3:16
Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.
I think you missed my point Molly.
Yes, we will
all be one at some point in time but we will also be individuals, so was the beggar different from Abraham.
CHB
QuoteThere are many gods and many lords. Why is that word even used if there is only ONE God? (1Cor.8:5)
Yes.
All those with the seed of Christ are 'gods' and 'lords'
But there is only one at the top--one King, one God, one LORD.
15And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.
16And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written,
KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.--Rev 19
Praise Yah! Halleluyah!
Quote from: Molly
But there is only one at the top--one King, one God, one LORD
Yes, and that is God the Father. Jesus said "my Father is
greater than I". Could Jesus be greater than Himself?
CHB
Quote from: chbI think you missed my point Molly.
Yes, we will all be one at some point in time but we are totally different people now, so was the beggar different from Abraham.
CHB
No, I didn't miss your point. Did you miss God's point?
4As for me, behold, my covenant is with thee, and thou shalt be a father of many nations.
5Neither shall thy name any more be called Abram, but thy name shall be Abraham; for a father of many nations have I made thee.
6And I will make thee exceeding fruitful, and I will make nations of thee, and kings shall come out of thee.
7And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee.
--Gen 17
Quote from: CHB on September 06, 2008, 10:10:22 PM
Quote from: Molly
But there is only one at the top--one King, one God, one LORD
Yes, and that is God the Father. Jesus said "my Father is greater than I". Could Jesus be greater than Himself?
CHB
Yes.
9But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man. 10For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings.
11For both he that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all of one: for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren,
12Saying, I will declare thy name unto my brethren, in the midst of the church will I sing praise unto thee.
13And again, I will put my trust in him. And again, Behold I and the children which God hath given me.
14
Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;
15And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.
16For verily he took not on him the nature of angels;
but he took on him the seed of Abraham. --Hebrews 2
willieH: Howdy sports fans... :hithere:
QuoteWhen has God ever lowered Himself? Impossible!
Paul, did you even take time to actually think about what you just wrote, before writing it?
Luke 1:37 "For nothing is impossible with God."
That NOTHING is IMPOSSIBLE with GOD, does not mean He shall do ALL things which appear to us, ...IMPOSSIBLE...
Nor shall He react to ANY of our proposals of IMPOSSIBILITY... so as to "show off" and astound us... He shall easily display this to us by HIS Originations within His PURPOSE for us...
To deduce something IMPOSSIBLE is to observe that it cannot be done or accomplished by FINITES... from a FINITE perspective...
GOD has never and will never LOWER Himself, even though He could do so if He should decide to... (this is as the proposal of Him "creating a rock to heavy for him to lift")
There is a REASON
YHVH is known as FATHER and
CHRIST is His SON... the FATHER preceeds the SON... yet is completely INVESTED IN Him... as the EXPRESSION of the FATHER...
JESUS is not His own ORIGIN... He is the EXPRESSION of the ONE which is SELF-EXISTENT...
JESUS and ANY OTHER SON... are only
SONS because they have a FATHER...
The reverse can be also
truly stated (the Father is a Father because He has Sons), ...but the FATHER is CAUSE for the existence of the SON (and subsequent sons), and concerning CAUSE, the reverse cannot be
truly stated...
The WORD lived in the Heart of the FATHER, but until expressed... was NOT available to any except the FATHER... and was OUTWARDLY manifested BY the FATHER'S decision to SPEAK...
PeaCe...
...willieH :happygrin:
Quote from: Pleroo on September 06, 2008, 09:39:57 PM
Okay, I think I understand what you're saying, but let me be absolutely sure. You're proposing that the Christ was God but once he became human (Jesus), he was no longer God?
Right. That is what Scripture says. He became a man, in order that He make all mankind Children of God. So when He returns to God, God will be all in all because we will be with Him.
Quote from: WillieHTo deduce something IMPOSSIBLE is to observe that it cannot be done or accomplished by FINITES... from a FINITE perspective...
Right, that is what I said earlier when I said,
Quote from: SOtW on September 06, 2008, 08:30:33 PMThe problem is understanding that God is not limited to cause and effect, God didn't leave heaven when He became a man and dwelt among us. For some reason this escapes people and they think that God works in the same sphere of power and knowledge that a man works and thinks.
Now...
Quote from: WillieHGOD has never and will never LOWER Himself, even though He could do so if He should decide to...
You are reasoning as Finite when you say "God will never LOWER Himself even though He could do so if He should decide to." because He did and Jesus is His Name. Yes, God lowered Himself. Jesus is His Name.
Quote from: SOtW on September 06, 2008, 08:30:33 PMThere is no lie, when I say He is a man and that doesn't mean He was not God. When God became a man, that is what He became. That is why He did not pray to Himself even though He is from Heaven, but to the only God in Heaven, His Father because that is where the Son came from.
Very simple to understand and it no longer takes an infinite mind to recognize it. Flesh is born of flesh, and spirit was born of Spirit. The first man is dust and to dust he returns, and so are all who born of him. The second Man is Spirit and to Spirit he returns, and so are all those born of Him.
John 4:24 God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth."
John 14:6a Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life.
Jesus's origin is not dust like the rest of mankind. His Origin is God. His Origin is God, He was God made and manifest in the Flesh taking upon himself the image of mankind. God, the Infinite, considering equality to God something that could not be comprehended by man the finite empted Himself of His very nature of God and became a man and dwelt among us. So where as we are dust who must bear the image of God but know not God, God bears the image of mankind so that we may know Him. The conclusion is so that we may know God will be all in all, we in Him as He is in us.
Man--God has turned himself inside out to reconcile us to him and everyone is going---pffffft!
:mblush: :laughing7:
Quote from: SOtW on September 06, 2008, 10:35:58 PM
Quote from: Pleroo on September 06, 2008, 09:39:57 PM
Okay, I think I understand what you're saying, but let me be absolutely sure. You're proposing that the Christ was God but once he became human (Jesus), he was no longer God?
Right. That is what Scripture says. He became a man, in order that He make all mankind Children of God. So when He returns to God, God will be all in all because we will be with Him.
Okay, thanks. Then let me have you clarify this for me, if you don't mind.
You said:
QuoteThere is no lie, when I say He is a man and that doesn't mean He was not God. When God became a man, that is what He became. That is why He did not pray to Himself even though He is from Heaven, but to the only God in Heaven, His Father because that is where He came from.
You said He (Jesus, God become man) did not pray to Himself (God, the Father in heaven), indicating that prior to Jesus' birth, he and the Father were one in the same, right?
But John 1:1 says that Jesus was the Word and the Word was WITH God (the Father in heaven). Even before Jesus' birth he is described as being WITH God, not actually
being God (the Father).
How do you reconcile that?
Thanks for your patience.
Quote from: CHB on September 06, 2008, 09:36:37 PM
Here is an article that explains what God is. The thing most people get confused with is Jesus being referred to as God but Jesus Himself called the Jew's God also (John 10:34) "Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said Ye, are God's"?
Does that make the Jew's God the Father? No, neither does calling Jesus God make Him God the Father. There is ONE God the Father and there is ONE Lord Jesus Christ which is also referred to as God. Why? because He is God the Father's Son.
Just What is God
http://www.askelm.com/essentials/ess039.htm
CHB
I read the article. If I were to say I accepted this as the truth (not anywhere near sure what I believe yet) would you mind answering a question for me? How do we know, then, when the Bible is referring to the "head" God (the Father) and when it is referring to the "headquarters" God? Or do we always know?
And, also, since this idea of a headquarters God, or a pluarlity of beings that made up God, is supposedly (I don't mean "supposedly" disparagingly, I'm just not convinced yet) based on what the Hebrew language inicates, why wouldn't that belief be the prevailing belief within the Jewish community?
Quote from: willieH on September 06, 2008, 10:31:39 PM
willieH: Howdy sports fans... :hithere:
Would you believe that not long before you posted this I asked myself, "Where is Willie when you need him?" :laughing7: I was hoping you would weigh in on this thread, knowing that you had a different view than the Trinitarian view.
Quote from: PlerooBut John 1:1 says that Jesus was the Word and the Word was WITH God (the Father in heaven). Even before Jesus' birth he is described as being WITH God, not actually being God (the Father).
How do you reconcile that?
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
John 1:1 is written the same way as Genesis 1:1 is written.
Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
It is a complete summary of both what was, and is and is to come in one sentence. It is what we like to say in the Screen play business, a Log Line.
Definition: Log Line
Answers the question: What is your story about?
So John 1:1 like Genesis 1:1, is the Log Line, it is telling us what this story is about.
John 1:1 is telling us both what was, and is and is to come. What Jesus was prior to becoming man, what he was when He was man and what He was after His death and resurrection.
Quote from: RoyI'm just a simple guy, please explain. What does "Only Begotten Son" mean in any language?
The the words means "one-of-a-kind" and is reserved for Jesus in the Johannine literature of the NT. While all Christians are children of God (τέκνα θεοῦ, tekna theou), Jesus is God's Son in a unique, one-of-a-kind sense. The word is used in this way in all its uses in the Gospel of John (Joh_1:14; Joh_1:18; Joh_3:16, and Joh_3:18). Quote from: RoyA Son who has been with the Father from the very beginning? The Son who is God? That's what my Bible is saying to me. Are you saying it's a load of rubbish? "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being." (Jn.1:1-3)
Roy, I already showed you, Your translation has added bias. You can thank the KJV translators for that! CLV Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the word, and the word was toward God, and God was the word. " 2 This was in the beginning toward God. 3 All came into being through
it, and apart from
it not even one thing came into being which has come into being." 4 In
it was life, and the life was the light of men."
Now let's break it down this verse: In the Beginning (Just before Genesis) God had a plan, will, or idea. It was present in his mind, and God's plan or will possessed all the attributes of God. You must understand what it means to be God! God is ETERNAL. That which is without beginning or end! The word (Logos) was in the Beginning..G746 beginning
αρχή
archēThayer Definition:
1) beginning, origin
2) the person or thing that commences, the first person or thing in a series, the leader
3) that by which anything begins to be, the origin, the active cause
God can not be "In the beginning" as God has no beginning.
FYI...tn Grk "in the bosom of" (an idiom for closeness or nearness; cf. L&N 34.18; BDAG 556 s.v. κόλπος 1).
Quote from: RoyAnd it doesn't say only begotten of creation, that's what Paul says. What the Bible says only begotten of the Father.
Webster Dictonary e-sword:
Begotten
BEGOT', BEGOT'TEN, pp. of get.
Procreated;
generated.
Yes, Roy Jesus was begotten. Jesus has a beginning, as he was Procreated; generated; created. GOD has no beginning. Quote from: RoyJesus, unlike you or I, was a very humble man and though He knew that He was the Creator of the universe and all things in it, He never entertained the thought of ever boasting about it, hence there is no mention of Him making such a claim.
Roy this is simply not true, Jesus tells us who the Creator of the universe is.Jesus never claimed credit for the original Genesis creation of the heavens and the earth.
Because He was in no doubt that the universe was God's handiwork.
Mat 19:4 He answered,
"Have you not read that he (God) who created them from the beginning made them male and female, Remember Jesus has a God "Blessed be
God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ (1 Peter 1:3). Yet for us there is but one God, the Father, (1Co 8:6)
Mar 13:19 For in those days there will be such tribulation as has not been from the beginning of the creation that God (my Father) created until now, and never will be. Jesus said "he" not "me" or "we." Jesus knew who created it all, because He came to reveal Him.
Paul
Quote from: plerooBut, Pierac, your arguments on John 1 are confusing to me. At one point you're saying that the Word is just a concept, an idea and does not actually refer to the person, Jesus Christ, and that Jesus is simply a man whose existance began at physical birth. At other times, you seem to be saying the opposite ... that, yes, the Word is Jesus and that proves he can't be God because He has a beginning whose existance began at or before creation. Could you please clarify for me exactly what it is you're saying?
Ok, If your husband and yourself had a plan (Logos, or Word) to have a baby. Your baby would be that logos in the flesh the day he or she is born. Your child would always be your logos in the flesh, but would that make your baby the actual Logos you had within you? No.Just look at some of the definitions of Logos beyond Word. Logos - 1. Denotes an internal reasoning process,
plan, or
intention, as well as an external word. 2. The
expression of thought. As embodying a
[/b]conception[/b] or
idea (
New American Bible (footnote) &
Vine's Expository Dictionary).
According to
Liddell and Scott Greek Lexicon, it also means:
Logos - the
inward thought which is expressed in the spoken word.
So Jesus is the Logos in the flesh but he's not the Logos, as the Logos is an "it" Concordant
Literal Version John 1:1 In the beginning was the word, and the word was toward God, and God was the word. " 2 This was in the beginning toward God. All came into being through
it, and apart from
it not even one thing came into being which has come into being."
Hope this helps?
Paul
15Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
16For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
17And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
18And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.
--Col 1
All things were created by and for Jesus.
6But one in a certain place testified, saying, What is man, that thou art mindful of him? or the son of man that thou visitest him?
9But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.
10For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings.
--Hebrews 2
Quote from: PieracLogos - the inward thought which is expressed in the spoken word.
So Jesus is the Logos in the flesh but he's not the Logos, as the Logos is an "it"
How does this even make sense to you?
The Logos is an 'it'?
The mind of God is an 'it'?
The thoughts of God are 'it'?
The words of God are 'it'?
When God thinks and speaks--'it' is what happens--
3And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. -Gen 1'
Quote from: Molly on September 07, 2008, 04:30:11 AM
15Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
16For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
17And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
18And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.
--Col 1
All things were created by and for Jesus.
6But one in a certain place testified, saying, What is man, that thou art mindful of him? or the son of man that thou visitest him?
9But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.
10For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings.
--Hebrews 2
And Pierac, the Concordant version which you are using to say that the Word is an it, confirms that HE not IT was the one through whom all things came to being, right in John 1:
10 In the world He was,
and the world came into being through Him, and the world knew Him not. 11 To His own He came, and those who are His own accepted Him not.
12 Yet whoever obtained Him, to them He gives the right to become children of God, to those who are believing in His name,
13 who were begotten, not of bloods, neither of the will of the flesh, neither of the will of a man, but of God.
Quote from: CraigWhat remains, Jesus did not come from our earthly father, Adam. Jesus came from His Heavenly Father, God. That makes Him completely different than anything ever before or after Him. Whether Jesus was created or not is not really an issue when we understand this. Jesus did not come from the dust of the earth therefore since He was not from dust, to dust did He not return. That is why Jesus could not be created, but begotten. Jesus was God and being that He was God, He could not be created, only born.
Craig, there is a flaw in your logic as begotten and created mean the same thing. Webster:
BegottenBEGOT', BEGOT'TEN, pp. of get. Procreated; generated.
GeneratedGEN'ERATED, pp. Begotten; engendered; procreated; produced; formed.
There was a time the Son of God did not exist.
Quote from: PieracThere was a time the Son of God did not exist.
Maybe at a time when God's mind was a total blank, since Jesus is the Word of God.
Pleroo, Molly, are you reading my post? I already covered "by him" and "Through him"
Quote from: Pierac on September 06, 2008, 01:18:57 AM
Hi Pleroo, :hihat: On another forum a fellow who has the same beliefs as myself posted this below... I though it might be helpful in understanding certain verses, that could very easily be taken the wrong way. BTW, Thanks for the P.M.'s :thumbsup:
Quote1Co 8:6 yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all things and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we exist through Him.
Speaks for itself.
He received a honest question in turn.
Quote
What's the main difference in "of whom" and "by whom" in the context of this passage?
Here is my reply, hopfully it will help explain certain verses that use "Through" (dia) and "by" (dia) in scripture...
Hello STP, The answer is in the little word "by" better known in the Greek as "Dia"
G1223
διά
dia; a prim. prep.; through, on account of, because of: - account (4), after (2), afterward (1), always *(2), because (111), between *(1), briefly *(1), charge *(1), constantly (1), continually *(6), during (1), forever *(1), gives (1), means (3), over (1), presence (1), reason (40), sake (41), sakes (5), since (1), so then *(1), so *(1), therefore *(16), this reason *(1), this *(1), though (1), through (225), through the agency (1), through *(1), view (2), way (3), what (1), why (3), why *(27).
And the little word "of" better known in the Greek as ek
1537
εκ, εξ
ek ex
ek, ex
A primary preposition denoting origin (the point whence motion or action proceeds), from, out (of place, time or cause; literally or figuratively; direct or remote): - after, among, X are, at betwixt (-yond), by (the means of), exceedingly, (+ abundantly above), for (-th), from (among, forth, up), + grudgingly, + heartily, X heavenly, X hereby, + very highly, in, . . . ly, (because, by reason) of, off (from), on, out among (from, of), over, since, X thenceforth, through, X unto, X vehemently, with (-out). Often used in composition, with the same general import; often of completion.
Dia is the "preposition of attendant circumstances" and signifies instrumental agency. Put simply, this means that dia denotes the means by which an action is accomplished. And Scripture tells us that God the originator is bringing His purpose, His logos to fulfillment through Jesus Christ. Jesus is the Agent, the Mediator of God's master plan. Jesus is always seen as secondary, or subordinate to the Father. There are occasional exceptions to this general use of the preposition dia. Sometimes blessings are said to come to us through God (e.g. 1 Cor 1:9; Heb.2: 10). But usually there is a clear distinction made between God's initiating activity and the means through which God brings that activity to pass. The prepositions used of God's action are hypo and ek which point to primary causation or origin.
Let's cement this idea in our minds by looking at one or two verses that highlight the difference: "yet for us there is but one God, the father, from [ek, 'out from' ] whom are all things, and we exist for [ eis, 'to' ] Him; and one lord, Jesus Christ, through [dia] him" (1Cor.8:6).
Prepositions are the signposts that point out the direction of a passage. Ek indicates something coming out from its source or origin, and indicates motion from the interior. In other words, all things came out from the loving heart of God, or God's "interior", so to speak.
This agrees with Genesis 1:1 which says, "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth". Both verses say that the source of "all things" is the one true God, the Creator of the heavens and the earth and the Father of the Lord Jesus Christ. In contradistinction to this "one God and Father" out of Whom all things originate, the "one Lord, Jesus Messiah" is giving the preposition dia which means "through."
In other words, Jesus is God's agent through whom God accomplishes His plan for our lives. This is a consistent pattern all the way through the N.T. God the Father is the source, the origin of all blessings, and Jesus His Son brings those blessings of salvation to us:
"Now all these things are from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ" (2 Cor.5:18).
"God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ... has blessed us... in Christ. He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to himself" (Eph.1:3-5).
"For God has not destined us for wrath, but for obtaining salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ" (1 Thess.5:9).
"God will judge the secrets of men through Christ Jesus" (Rom. 2:16).
"For God... has saved us, and called us... according to His own purpose and grace which was granted us in Christ Jesus from all eternity" (2 Tim 1:9).
"Blessed be God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has caused us to be born-again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead" (1 Peter 1:3).
"To the only God our Savior, through Jesus Christ our Lord, be glory, majesty, dominion and authority, before all time and now and forever. Amen" (Jude 25).
"Jesus the Nazarene, a man attested to you by God with miracles and wonders and signs which god performed through him in your midst" (Acts 2:22).
Joh 14:10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.
Paul tell us in 1Co 8:6 yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through(dia) whom are all things and through (dia) whom we exist.
Just look at how the Message Bible words it...
1Co 8:6 They say--again, quite rightly--that there is only one God the Father, that everything comes from him, and that he wants us to live for him. Also, they say that there is only one Master--Jesus the Messiah--and that everything is for his sake, including us. Yes. It's true.
The Message Bible may be a little simplistic but you get the picture.
So always God the Father is the source and origin of all works, deeds and salvation which come to us through the mediatorship of his son. From Him comes all to us through our Lord Jesus Christ so that to God the Father made all the praise be directed. The Father is the sole origin and Creator of "all things." In contrast, Jesus is the Father's commissioned Lord Messiah through whom God's plan for the world is coming to completion. The whole Bible from cover to cover categorically states that God created the universe and all the ages with Jesus Christ at the center of his eternal purpose. Jesus is the diameter running all the way through.
So that is the difference between "of whom" and "by whom."
Paul
Pierac, --Regarding your word, 'dia'--
Why do you think the Father has to create all things through the Lord Jesus Christ?
I mean --he's God--why can't he circumvent Christ and create directly?
Why can't he create through something or someone else?
Quote from: Molly on September 07, 2008, 05:07:23 AM
Quote from: PieracThere was a time the Son of God did not exist.
Maybe at a time when God's mind was a total blank, since Jesus is the Word of God.
Then how many Gods do we have? TWO GODS?By Juan Baixeras From the start of Judaism and later Christianity, the most famous aspect and unique characteristic of the two religions is the fact that they were, and still are monotheistic. Christianity is really the continuation of Judaism. Both religions believe in one, and only one unbegotten God, creator of the universe. There are no other gods in these two faiths.
Isaiah 44:6 -
"Thus says the LORD... there is no God but me." Isaiah 45:5 -
"I am the LORD and there is no other, there is no God besides me." Isaiah 45:6 -
"Men may know that there is none besides me. I am the LORD, there is no other." No one will contest that to a Jew or a Christian, there is only one God. Anything else would simply be considered polytheism. The majority of Christianity believes in one God, but a God that is plural in makeup. There are three persons that constitute this one God. They are three, but yet, they are still all the one God. There is: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit.
In this paper we will be concerned primarily with Trinitarian Christianity's view of God. Specifically, God the Son.
We all know that God the Son has a Father (God the Father). But the question that must be asked and answered is: can God the Son have a God? Every pastor that I have ever asked this question to has always said "Of course not!" But is that the answer given in Scripture? No, on the contrary. As you will see, the prophesied Messiah in the Old Testament is said to have a God. Then you will see that Jesus the Messiah fulfills those prophesies because he most definitely has a God. If you come to the conclusion that Jesus has a God, then it might be time to rethink and research the Doctrine of the Trinity. Because if God the Son has a God, then there are TWO GODS!
To make this as simple as possible, I am not going to list the huge amount of Scriptures which have God (not "Father") and Jesus in the same sentence, or Scriptures that have God speaking to Jesus, or Jesus speaking to God. We will only be concerned with Scriptures that prove that Jesus has a God.
OLD TESTAMENT MESSIANIC PROPHESIES Psalm 89:26-28 -
"He (the Messiah) shall say of me. "You are my father, my God, my rock, my savior". And I will make him the firstborn." Micah 5:3-4 -
"He (the Messiah) shall stand firm and shepherd his flock by the strength of the LORD, in the Majestic name of the LORD, his God." Psalm 22:10-11 -
"To you I was committed at birth. From my mother's womb you are my God." NEW TESTAMENT Jesus Speaking:John 20:17 -
"I am going to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God." Matthew 27:46 -
"My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?" Revelation 3:12 -
"Him who overcomes I will make a pillar in the temple of my God. Never again will he leave it. I will write on him the name of my God and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which is coming down out of heaven from my God." Note, this is a post resurrection verse, and Jesus has a God, So how many God's do we have? Revelation 3:2 -
"for I have not found your works complete in the sight of my God." Paul: Ephesians 1:3 -
"Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ." Ephesians 1:17 -
"I keep asking that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the glorious Father..."2 Corinthians 1:3 -
"Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ."2 Corinthians 11:31 -
"The God and Father of the Lord Jesus Christ knows, He who is blessed forever, that I do not lie."Romans 15:6 -
"that with one accord you may with one voice glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ." Peter: 1 Peter 1:3 -
"Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ." John:Revelation 1:6 -
"To him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood, who has made us into a kingdom, priests for his God and Father." When one reads the preceding verses, there is one thing that is a fact. That Jesus Christ has a God. Jesus speaks of his God, Peter Paul and John mention the God of Jesus Christ. Are they all mistaken? Are we to believe that all these verses are misprints? Are we to suppose that theologians several centuries after Christ knew more about Jesus than Jesus and his Apostles? There is no way around it.
Jesus always did and does at this very moment have a God!The
New American Bible in a section discussing biblical revelation says,
"It is the very same God who reveals Himself in so many richly divergent ways on every page of the Scriptures. The God of Abraham and Moses and David is the God of Jesus of Nazareth." How many God's are there?
Paul
Quote from: Pierac on September 07, 2008, 05:08:18 AM
Pleroo, Molly, are you reading my post? I already covered "by him" and "Through him"
Yes, I read that, and maybe I'm just really daft, but I don't understand what that has to do with what you and I were discussing. I'm not denying that the creation was accomplished
through the Son. But you are saying that Jesus did not pre-exist as the Word, since the Word was not a who but a what (an IT). Yet, in the Concordant version it says that the creation came into being BY the Word, and in verse 10 of that chapter in says that it came into being BY HIM. That is my point, not whether or not the Son created anything, but that he existed as a WHO, not just as an idea or a plan or an IT.
Quote from: PieracThen how many Gods do we have?
TWO GODS?
No, there aren't two Gods.
There is one God.
But our one God has many names.
He names himself as a description--
YHWHHe names himself for people--
The God of Abraham, Isaac, and JacobHe names himself for events--the God of Bethel--
El BethelBut, his highest name is for his work of salvation--God's salvation--
Y'shua12 Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved. --Acts 4
Philippians 2:9
Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name,...30 I and my Father are one.
--John 10
Quote from: Molly on September 07, 2008, 05:20:38 AM
Pierac, --Regarding your word, 'dia'--
Why do you think the Father has to create all things through the Lord Jesus Christ?
I mean --he's God--why can't he circumvent Christ and create directly?
Why can't he create through something or someone else?
Jesus did not exist when God created the universe.
Mat 19:4 He answered, "Have you not read that
he (God) who created them from the beginning made them male and female,
Mar 13:19 For in those days there will be such tribulation as has not been from the beginning of
the creation that God (my Father) created until now, and never will be.
Dia=
"On account of" "Because of"So Pleroo, read it as all things were created not "by" or "through" BUT "on account of" Jesus. Just like the simplistic Message Bible reads...
Message Bible 1Co 8:6 They say--again, quite rightly--that there is
only one God the Father, that everything comes from him, and that he wants us to live for him. Also, they say that there is
only one Master--Jesus the Messiah--
and that everything is for his sake, including us. Yes. It's true.
Paul
Quote from: SOtW on September 06, 2008, 11:23:31 PM
Quote from: PlerooBut John 1:1 says that Jesus was the Word and the Word was WITH God (the Father in heaven). Even before Jesus' birth he is described as being WITH God, not actually being God (the Father).
How do you reconcile that?
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
John 1:1 is written the same way as Genesis 1:1 is written.
Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
It is a complete summary of both what was, and is and is to come in one sentence. It is what we like to say in the Screen play business, a Log Line.
Definition: Log Line
Answers the question: What is your story about?
So John 1:1 like Genesis 1:1, is the Log Line, it is telling us what this story is about.
John 1:1 is telling us both what was, and is and is to come. What Jesus was prior to becoming man, what he was when He was man and what He was after His death and resurrection.
Okay, log line, I can see that as a possibility. However, if Jesus is God's word, that doesn't actually make him God. What I speak isn't me, although it represents me.
:sigh: I'm afraid, as simple as you say this is, I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around it.
Karl Kuschel gives a good commentary on Adolf Harnack's understanding of pre-existent Christology.
"In 1885 Adolf Harnack wrote with the first volume of his History of Dogma how in great historical sweeps he had begun to narrate the history of both an advanced (the Old Testament to the 'gospel') and a decline (the combination of the 'gospel' with Greek metaphysics), finally ending with the history of a dissolution: the shattering of dogma by Martin Luther and the church as a community of pure (undogmatic) position and faith.
Harnack attempted step-by-step to reconstruct the 'origins of apostolic-catholic doctrine' from its beginnings in scripture. Given the wealth of material, we shall limit ourselves to the development of the idea of pre-existence.
Anyone who wants to understand the challenge of the History of Dogma to any christological orthodoxy must, like Harnack, be disturbed by a crucial break in the history of Christianity.
On the one hand there is the Jew Jesus of Nazareth who proclaimed the kingdom of God, the forgiveness of sins and the better righteousness, who put at the centre of his proclamation not his person but God, whom he called his 'Father'. From a particular point of time in his activity, Jesus had become aware of himself as the Messiah destined by God-on the basis of his unique, into relationship to God. Jesus' assurance of his Son ship and messiahship is grounded in his unique knowledge of God, is intimate awareness of God-a mystery which cannot be explained or fandomed from outside. Jesus himself stressed his unique relationship to God 'not through disclosures about the mystery of his person but through the disclosure of the Father, the impact of his life and interpretation of his death'.
On the other hand, however according to Harnack precisely this happens in the second century on: the mystery of the person of Jesus was unveiled. Now-after the New Testament period-in the time of the Apostolic Fathers in the early Christian apologist his spiritual climate had already changed completely. After the controversy with Gnosticism and Marcionism a 'fixation and gradual Hellenization of Christianity as a doctrine' set in.
From the second century on, a dangerous Hellenization took place in Christianity, thus delivering Christianity over to philosophical cosmological and speculatives systems of thought.
What does it mean for the development of the christology of preexistence? Harnack saw that Apostolic Fathers like Barnabas, Clement and Ignatius had already put forward a 'pneumatic christology'; their view had been that Jesus is the supreme heavenly spiritual being alongside God, who appeared on earth, lived a human life and after the completion of his work return to heaven.
What was the consequence of such a 'pneumatic christology'? Jesus Christ was now increasingly torn from his Jewish-Old Testament roots and 'transplanted to Hellenistic and cosmological soil'. According to Harnack, 'even in his pre-existent state Christ is an independent power existing alongside God. The pre-existence does not refer to his whole appearance, but only to a part of his essence; it does not primarily serve to glorify the wisdom and power of God... but glorifies Christ and thereby threatens the monarchy of God.'
'Taking for granted the transference of the concept of Son to the pre-existent Christ, the Apologists make possible the rise of the christological problem in the fourth century; they shifted the starting point of christological thought (from the historical Christ back into pre-existence), and overshadowed the life of Jesus with the incarnation; they associated christology with cosmology, but they could not connected with soteriology.
So what was Harnack decisive point: if we look at the development of christology, at how the one who proclaim the kingdom of God became a kind of heavenly being; now the intimate, mysterious personal relationship between Jesus of Nazareth and God became a theory about the divine and human natures; how the simple gospel came to be dissolved in a philosophical theory; how the monarchy of God was now threatened by the appearance of an independent heavenly Christ alongside God, we can tell the history of this christology only as a history of loss: as apostasy from its origins, as a displacing of the historical Jesus by the pre-existent Christ; as an intellectualist, speculative, cosmological alienation from the original proclamation of Jesus."
Quote from: Pierac on September 07, 2008, 06:03:06 AM
So Pleroo, read it as all things were created not "by" or "through" BUT "on account of" Jesus. Just like the simplistic Message Bible reads...[/color]
Message Bible 1Co 8:6 They say--again, quite rightly--that there is only one God the Father, that everything comes from him, and that he wants us to live for him. Also, they say that there is only one Master--Jesus the Messiah--and that everything is for his sake, including us. Yes. It's true.
Paul
Ah, okay! Finally I get what you're saying and now I can begin to look at Scripture and see if it bears out that what you're saying is true. Thanks for your patience. :icon_flower:
Quote from: PieracJesus did not exist when God created the universe.
Mat 19:4 He answered, "Have you not read that he (God) who created them from the beginning made them male and female,
:mshock:
So what is this all about?--Since it's all talking about Jesus--
16
For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers:
all things were created by him, and for him: 17
And he is before all things, and by him all things consist. --Col 1
10.He was in the world,
and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.
--John 1, KJV, 1611
001:001 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
001:002 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things,
by whom also he made the worlds; --Heb 1
Quote from: PieracSo what was Harnack decisive point: if we look at the development of christology, at how the one who proclaim the kingdom of God became a kind of heavenly being; now the intimate, mysterious personal relationship between Jesus of Nazareth and God became a theory about the divine and human natures; how the simple gospel came to be dissolved in a philosophical theory; how the monarchy of God was now threatened by the appearance of an independent heavenly Christ alongside God, we can tell the history of this christology only as a history of loss: as apostasy from its origins, as a displacing of the historical Jesus by the pre-existent Christ; as an intellectualist, speculative, cosmological alienation from the original proclamation of Jesus."
wow. Talk about antichrist...
I have "an intimate, mysterious personal relationship" [with] God, but I guarantee you, I'm not going to save you.
Quote from: Molly on September 07, 2008, 06:44:25 AM
Quote from: PieracSo what was Harnack decisive point: if we look at the development of christology, at how the one who proclaim the kingdom of God became a kind of heavenly being; now the intimate, mysterious personal relationship between Jesus of Nazareth and God became a theory about the divine and human natures; how the simple gospel came to be dissolved in a philosophical theory; how the monarchy of God was now threatened by the appearance of an independent heavenly Christ alongside God, we can tell the history of this christology only as a history of loss: as apostasy from its origins, as a displacing of the historical Jesus by the pre-existent Christ; as an intellectualist, speculative, cosmological alienation from the original proclamation of Jesus."
wow. Talk about antichrist...
Definitely different from how I've always read my Bible. This quote seems to announce that Jesus received worship both before and after His resurrection in apparent total apostacy from the will of the Father. Saying He was only being worshipped as anointed one doesn't work for me 'cause I'm equally as much an anointed one too 'cause I'm His joint-heir seated alongside of Him, according to Romans, 2Corinthians, Ephesians, and 1John, and I'm not entitled to worship and don't want it by any remote stretch. Yet, I'm equally as much "Son of God" according to John 1:12, Romans, Galatians, and 1John. Jesus is God in a special sense above every other Son of God.
Quote from: PlerooOkay, log line, I can see that as a possibility. However, if Jesus is God's word, that doesn't actually make him God. What I speak isn't me, although it represents me.
:sigh: I'm afraid, as simple as you say this is, I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around it.
What is so difficult? There is many Scriptures that tell us that He was God. He isn't God any more, has not been God since He chose to become a man but He is still God manifest in the flesh and the image of the invisible God.
The infinite, omnipotent, omniscient God descended to earth, emptied himself of the omnipotence, omniscience and became finite taking upon Himself image and likeness of a man. That image and likeness of man, and His Name was to be called, Jesus.
God still remains infinite, omnipotent, omniscient even though He became flesh and dwelt amongst us. Jesus calls Him His Father because that is where Jesus came from and the Father is God, while Jesus is now a man.
Before this, there was only God. But because of this, we now have God the Father and His Son, the Man, Jesus.
NOTE: IMPORTANT DETAILSo now, Jesus is the Christ, there is no other Christ. We aren't little Christs, there is not 'Christ Spirit' or cosmic Christ. Jesus, the man, is the Messiah, the one and only Christ. This detail is important, and if you don't have this detail you will not get it correct. It is because of this detail, there is no mistaking that Jesus was God, because Salvation only comes through the Lord and this is how God had said it would be done. Isaiah 12:2Surely God is my salvation; I will trust and not be afraid. The LORD, the LORD [
yes, this is not a typo], is my strength and my song; he has become my salvation."
Acts 4:12 "And
there is salvation in no one else; for there is
no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved."
Isaiah 45:22Turn to Me and be saved, all the ends of the earth;
For I am God, and there is no other. I have sworn by Myself, The Word has gone forth from My mouth in righteousness and will not turn back, that
to Me every knee will bow, every tongue will swear allegiance.
Philippians 2:10-11That at
the name of Jesus every knee should bow,in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that
Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
Deuteronomy 6:13"You shall fear
only the LORD your God; and you shall worship Him and
swear by His Name.So either Jesus was God and became flesh and dwelt among us, or He is an impostor.
Imposter: –noun
a person who practices deception under an assumed character, identity, or name.
:icon_flower: Never mind.
Quote from: SOtW on September 07, 2008, 07:23:16 AMWhat is so difficult?
Well, if this was all so easy, I guess we wouldn't be having such a lengthy discussion about it with so many differing views. :laughing7: Sorry, it may be simple to you, but it's not to me. :mblush:
Quote from: Pleroo on September 07, 2008, 07:29:57 AM
Quote from: SOtW on September 07, 2008, 07:23:16 AMWhat is so difficult?
Well, if this was all so easy, I guess we wouldn't be having such a lengthy discussion about it with so many differing views. :laughing7: Sorry, it may be simple to you, but it's not to me. :mblush:
I am still trying to find out why it is so difficult to understand. This is not factitious or sarcasm, I never use those terms. I need you to tell me why this is difficult for you to understand. The only thing that prevents understanding is presupposition and presumption and I need to know what this is.
Quote from: SOtW on September 07, 2008, 07:32:05 AM
I am still trying to find out why it is so difficult to understand. This is not factitious or sarcasm, I never use those terms. I need you to tell me why this is difficult for you to understand. The only thing that prevents understanding is presupposition and presumption and I need to know what this is.
Ah, okay, sorry. I didn't realize you were asking me to explain.
I'm not sure I have the brain power anymore tonight to try to word my difficulty differently than I did in my earlier post. I'll give it another shot tomorrow, okay?
Quote from: Pleroo on September 07, 2008, 07:29:57 AM
Quote from: SOtW on September 07, 2008, 07:23:16 AMWhat is so difficult?
Well, if this was all so easy, I guess we wouldn't be having such a lengthy discussion about it with so many differing views.
Christologythe branch of theology that studies the personality, attitudes, and life of Christ. — adoptionismthe 8th-century heretical doctrine that Christ in His human nature was the son of God only by adoption; that in His spiritual nature, however, He was truly God's son. Also adoptianism. — adoptionist, n., adj.
Arianisma 4th-century doctrine, considered heretical by orthodox Christian-ity, that Christ was merely the noblest of men and, being of a different sub-stance, was not the son of God. Cf. heteroousianism, psilanthropism. — Arian, n., adj. — Arianistic, Arianistical, adj.
Eutychianism
Monophysitism. — Eutychian, n.
heteroousianisma position in the 4th-century controversy over Christ's nature, asserting that He and God were of different natures; Arianism. Also spelled heterousianism. — heteroousian, n., adj.
psilanthropismthe doctrine that Christ was merely a human being. Cf. Arianism. — psilanthropist, n. — psilanthropic, adj.
Athanasianismthe teachings of Athanasius, 4th-century bishop of Alexandria, asserting that Christ is of the same substance as God; adopted by the Council of Nicea as orthodox doctrine. Also called homoousianism, homoiousianism. — Athanasian, n., adj.
autotheismthe Calvinist doctrine of the separate existence of God the Son, derived from Calvin's assertion that Christ took His person from God, but not His substance. — autotheist, n. — autotheistic, adj.
Docetismthe teaching of an early heretical sect asserting that Christ's body was not human or material, but celestial in substance. — Docetic, adj.
Dyophysitisma 5th-century doctrine that Christ had a dual nature, the divine and the human, united perfectly in Him, but not inextricably blended. Cf. Monophysitism. — Dyophysite, n. — Dyophysitic, adj.
Dyothelitism, Dyotheletismthe doctrine that Christ had two wills, the human and the divine. Cf. Monothelitism. Also Dyothetism. — Dyothelite, Dyothelete, n.
homoiousianisma position in the 4th-century controversy over Christ's nature, asserting that He and God were of similar, but not the same, natures; semi-Arianism. Also homoeanism. — homoiousian, n., adj.
homoousianisma position in the 4th-century controversy over Christ's nature, asserting that He and God are of the same nature; Athanasianism. — homoousian, n., adj.
Julianismthe heretical theory of Julian, 6th-century bishop of Halicarnassus, who took the extreme Monophysite position that Christ's human nature had been subsumed in and altered by the divine. — Julianist, n.
kenoticismthe theological concept that, through His incarnation, Christ humbled or emptied Himself and became a servant for man's sake. — kenosis, kenoticist, n. — kenotic, adj.
Monophysitisma 5th-century heresy concerning the nature of Christ, asserting that He had only a divine nature or that the human and divine made one composite nature. Cf. Dyophysitism. — Monophysite, n., adj. — Monophysitic, Monophysitical, adj.
Monothelitism, Monotheletisma heretical position of the 7th century that Christ's human will had been superseded by the divine. Also Monothelism. — Monothelite, Monothelete, n. — Monothelitic, Monotheletic, adj.
Nestorianisma 5th-century heresy concerning Christ's nature, asserting that the human and divine were in harmony but separate and that Mary should be considered the Mother of Christ, not of God. — Nestorian, n., adj.
Patripassianisma heretical, monophysitic concept of the 2nd and 3rd centuries that held that, in the Crucifixion, the Father suffered equally with the Son. — Patripassian, Patripassianist, n.
Paulianisma 3rd-century heresy concerning the nature of Christ, denying the divine by asserting that Christ was inspired by God and was not a person in the Trinity. — Paulian, Paulianist, n.
Phantasiasta member of an early Christian sect that denied the reality of Christ's body.
Trinitarianismthe orthodox Christian belief that God exists as the Trinity of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Cf. unitarianism. — trinitarian, n., adj.
Unitarianismthe doctrines of those, including the Unitarian denomination, who hold that God exists only in one person. Cf. trinitarianism. — unitarian, n.,adj.
Quote from: martincisneros on September 07, 2008, 07:07:12 AM
Quote from: Molly on September 07, 2008, 06:44:25 AM
Quote from: PieracSo what was Harnack decisive point: if we look at the development of christology, at how the one who proclaim the kingdom of God became a kind of heavenly being; now the intimate, mysterious personal relationship between Jesus of Nazareth and God became a theory about the divine and human natures; how the simple gospel came to be dissolved in a philosophical theory; how the monarchy of God was now threatened by the appearance of an independent heavenly Christ alongside God, we can tell the history of this christology only as a history of loss: as apostasy from its origins, as a displacing of the historical Jesus by the pre-existent Christ; as an intellectualist, speculative, cosmological alienation from the original proclamation of Jesus."
wow. Talk about antichrist...
Definitely different from how I've always read my Bible. This quote seems to announce that Jesus received worship both before and after His resurrection in apparent total apostacy from the will of the Father. Saying He was only being worshipped as anointed one doesn't work for me 'cause I'm equally as much an anointed one too 'cause I'm His joint-heir seated alongside of Him, according to Romans, 2Corinthians, Ephesians, and 1John, and I'm not entitled to worship and don't want it by any remote stretch. Yet, I'm equally as much "Son of God" according to John 1:12, Romans, Galatians, and 1John. Jesus is God in a special sense above every other Son of God.
Your not reading it correctly. He is not speaking of worship. He is talking about Trinitarians creating theories, and ripping the Messiah out history and placing the Messiah in the cosmological realm pre-birth. As the idea of a pre-exist Jesus puts an independent heavenly Messiah alongside God. Creating two Gods! Also important, this makes Jesus pre-existence not refer to his whole appearance, but only to a part of his essence. . Meaning what exactly pre-existed? The Messiah is a historical person in history, key point is person! So if Jesus the Man was not with God from the beginning, what part of his essence was? Did the pre-existent Messiah have a mind/soul?
Then you have the post resurrection problem of a pre-exist Messiah, is Jesus now a man for the rest of eternity? So pre-existence we have 2 God's and post resurrection we have One God and one fully God and fully man?
Quote from: Pleroo on September 07, 2008, 07:29:57 AM
Quote from: SOtW on September 07, 2008, 07:23:16 AMWhat is so difficult?
Well, if this was all so easy, I guess we wouldn't be having such a lengthy discussion about it with so many differing views. :laughing7: Sorry, it may be simple to you, but it's not to me. :mblush:
I've had to dump so much over the last 7 years that I'm willing to scrutinize this subject as well. So much that "I thought that I knew," but my thinking is less shaped by tradition these days than by the Scriptures, but I'd have to say that I still lean towards a type of Trinitarianism that's sorta too Biblical for either Catholics or Calvinists to be comfortable with. I do recognize "subordination" in what Romans calls the "Godhead." Jesus said that the Father was greater than Himself, and that the Holy Spirit was submissive to everything that Jesus would say. But I don't have a problem with referring to each as God since the Holy Spirit is the only Emmanuel of this present eon, with brief exceptions of when you run alongside of something where Jesus in His High Priestly ministry winds up manifesting as the God/Man in our midst for various purposes as we're pursuing our king/priest duties in this eon. A High Priest is essentially useless if He's bound for an entire age to another world. The book of Hebrews indicates that His activities as High Priest were limited while the earthly Temple was still standing, but that ended roughly 1938 years ago. He comes and goes pretty much as He pleases, as many people with Near Death Experiences or in some Charismatic services around the world can attest, though He's not "officially" back until the New Earth. He's the Head of the Body of Christ that's both in the heavens and in the earth. And while this may seem to weaken my original post a few minutes ago, I don't believe that it does. It's true that His being in all of us isn't unique to Him since we're all inside of one another.
Talk about a basis for a transdemensional conversation! But right now, there's few subjects that I'm extremely dogmatic about while I'm still in a really long season of rechecking that everything that I believe actually lines up with the Scriptures. This isn't one of those subjects. All I can share is how I've understood this up until now. It's hard for me not to believe in the pre-existance of Jesus Christ while still believing in my own from too many numerous passages and things that have come to light through my own relationship with my Lord. Jesus pretty much prayed in John 17 to be reclothed with the glory that He had before the present world was. And He chose us in Him before the beginning of time. Colossians 1 says that all things were created "in Him" as though the body of the universe fit inside of His gut, in a more profound way than just having it in His heart, sympathizing with it, or feeling some mystic connection with it.
Quote from: Pleroo on September 06, 2008, 06:52:25 PM
The thing I keep coming back to are the many passages that equate the Father alone with Jehovah. That's awfully compelling evidence, to me. It was like truly seeing for the first time that all would be alive in Christ. The Bible flat out says it, but as an ETer, I never really saw it. Same in this instance. The Bible flat out says that the Father is God ... He's our God, and He's Jesus' God. Jesus , himself, says that the Father is the only true God. But, as a Trinitarian I never "saw" those passages before.
Isaiah (12:2) says Yahweh is become my Jesus (Yeshuah). That the power of the Highest overshadowed Mary to cause her pregnancy makes El-Elyon the Father of Jesus. Jesus is Yahweh.
QuoteThen you have the post resurrection problem of a pre-exist Messiah, is Jesus now a man for the rest of eternity? So pre-existence we have 2 God's and post resurrection we have One God and one fully God and fully man?
There is a presumption in that rebuttal, that doesn't exist to refute but you insist on it anyways.
2 Surely God is my salvation;
I will trust and not be afraid.
The LORD, the LORD, is my strength and my song;
he has become my salvation."
--Isa 12
"my salvation"
Y'shû‛âh
Quote from: Molly on September 07, 2008, 07:54:30 AM
2 Surely God is my salvation;
I will trust and not be afraid.
The LORD, the LORD, is my strength and my song;
he has become my salvation."
--Isa 12
"my salvation"
Y'shû‛âh
Now that is using definitions properly!
Surely God is my salvation; I will trust and not be afraid.
The LORD, the LORD, is my strength and my song; he has become my salvation."
God, Yeshuwah, trust, awe, Jehovah, Jehovah, might, song, Yeshuwah
Hi Pleroo,
Quote from: plerooThe thing I keep coming back to are the many passages that equate the Father alone with Jehovah. That's awfully compelling evidence, to me. It was like truly seeing for the first time that all would be alive in Christ. The Bible flat out says it, but as an ETer, I never really saw it. Same in this instance. The Bible flat out says that the Father is God ... He's our God, and He's Jesus' God. Jesus , himself, says that the Father is the only true God. But, as a Trinitarian I never "saw" those passages before.
Just what does the Old Testament teach us about who and what God is?Psalms 110:1 is an
important O.T. verse that Has God telling us His relationship to His Son.
The LORD says to my Lord: "Sit at My right hand Until I make Your enemies a footstool for Your feet." (Psa 110:1) A Psalm of David.
Psalms 110:1 is a unusual verse. It is referred to in the New Testament 23 times and is thus quoted much more often than any other verse from the Old Testament.
It's importance must not be overlooked. It is a psalm that tells us the relationship between God and Jesus. Psalms 110:1 is a divine utterance although poorly translated if your version leaves out the original word "oracle". It is "the oracle of Yahweh" (the One God of the Hebrew Bible, of Judaism and New Testament Christianity) to David's lord who is the Messiah, spoken of here 1000 years before he came into existence in the womb of the Virgin Mary.
I want to bring attention to the fact that David's lord is not David's Lord. There should be no capital on the word "lord." The Revised Version of the Bible (1881) corrected the misleading error of other translations which put (and still wrongly put) a capitol L on lord in that verse. He is not Lord God, because the word in the inspired text is not the word for Deity, but the word for human superior- a human lord, not a Lord who is himself God,
but a lord who is the supremely exalted, unique agent of the one God.
The Hebrew word for the status of the son of God and Psalms 110:1 is
adoni. This word occurs 195 times in the Hebrew Bible and never refers to God. When God is described as "the Lord" (capital L) a different word,
Adonai, appears. Thus the Bible makes a careful distinction between God and man. God is the Lord God (
Adonai), or when his personal name is used, Yahweh, and Jesus is his unique, sinless, virginally conceived human son (
adoni, my lord, Luke 1:43; 2:11).
Adonai is found 449 times in the Old Testament and distinguishes the One God from all others.
Adonai is not the word describing the son of God, Jesus, in Psalms 110:1.
adoni appears 195 times and refers only to a human (or occasionally an angelic)
lord, that is, someone who is not God. This should cut through a lot of complicated post Biblical argumentation and create a making which in subtle ways that secures the simple and most basic Biblical truth, that God is a single person and that the Messiah is the second Adam, "the Man Messiah" (1 Tim. 2:5).
Let's have a look at a few Old Testament verses that show us the clear distinction alluded to here. In Genesis 15:2, Abraham prays to God and says, "O LORD, God [
Adonai Yahweh], what will you give me, since I am childless?" In another prayer Abraham's servant addresses God: "O LORD, God of my
lord Abraham, please grant me success today" (Gen. 24:12). The second word for "my lord" here is adoni which according to any standard Hebrew lexicon means "Lord," "Master," or "owner." Another example is found in David's speech to his men after he had cut off the hem of King Saul's robe and his conscience bothered him: "So he said to his men, far be it from me because of the Lord[here the word is
Yahweh, Lord God] that I should do this thing to my lord [
adoni]."
The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, page 157. states "The form
Adoni ('my lord'), a royal title (Sam. 29:8), is to be carefully distinguished from the divine title
Adonai ('Lord') used of Yahweh.
Adonai the special plural form [the divine title] distinguishes it from
adoni [with short vowel] = 'my lords.'"
Hastings Dictionary of the Bible, vol. 3, page 137. States "lord in the Old Testament is used to translate
Adonai when applied to the Divine Being. The [Hebrew] word has a suffix [with a special pointing] presumably for the sake of distinction... between divine and human appellative."
If David the Psalmist had expected the Messiah to be the Lord God he would
not have used "my lord" (
adoni), but the term used exclusively for the one God, Jehovah-
Adonai. Unfortunately, though, many English translations which faithfully preserved this distinction elsewhere capitalize the second "lord" only in Psalms 110:1. This gives a misleading impression that the word is a divine title.
Both the Pharisees and Jesus knew that this inspired verse was crucial in the understanding of the identity of the promised Messiah. Jesus quoted it to show the Messiah would be both the son (descendent) of King David and David's "lord" (see Matt. 22:41-46; Mark 12:35-37; Luke 20:41-44). This key verse, then, quoted more than any other in the New Testament, authorizes the title "lord" for Jesus.
Failure to understand this distinction has led to the erroneous idea that whenever the New Testament calls Jesus "Lord" it means he is the Lord God of the Old Testament.Paul
Quote from: SOtW on September 07, 2008, 07:54:25 AM
QuoteThen you have the post resurrection problem of a pre-exist Messiah, is Jesus now a man for the rest of eternity? So pre-existence we have 2 God's and post resurrection we have One God and one fully God and fully man?
There is a presumption in that rebuttal, that doesn't exist to refute but you insist on it anyways.
It's more of a question than rebuttal.
Quote from: Pierac on September 07, 2008, 08:12:38 AM
Quote from: SOtW on September 07, 2008, 07:54:25 AM
QuoteThen you have the post resurrection problem of a pre-exist Messiah, is Jesus now a man for the rest of eternity? So pre-existence we have 2 God's and post resurrection we have One God and one fully God and fully man?
There is a presumption in that rebuttal, that doesn't exist to refute but you insist on it anyways.
It's more of a question than rebuttal.
You used it as your rebuttal, therefore that is what it is. The issue remains, your question has no relevance since you are applying a finite logic to an infinite God, since quantity assumes God is created and not Creator therefore pre-existence does not mean multiplicity.
Quote from: Pierac on September 07, 2008, 04:27:22 AM
Quote from: plerooBut, Pierac, your arguments on John 1 are confusing to me. At one point you're saying that the Word is just a concept, an idea and does not actually refer to the person, Jesus Christ, and that Jesus is simply a man whose existance began at physical birth. At other times, you seem to be saying the opposite ... that, yes, the Word is Jesus and that proves he can't be God because He has a beginning whose existance began at or before creation. Could you please clarify for me exactly what it is you're saying?
Ok, If your husband and yourself had a plan (Logos, or Word) to have a baby. Your baby would be that logos in the flesh the day he or she is born. Your child would always be your logos in the flesh, but would that make your baby the actual Logos you had within you? No.
Just look at some of the definitions of Logos beyond Word.
Logos - 1. Denotes an internal reasoning process, plan, or intention, as well as an external word. 2. The expression of thought. As embodying a
[/b]conception[/b] or idea (New American Bible (footnote) & Vine's Expository Dictionary).
According to Liddell and Scott Greek Lexicon, it also means:
Logos - the inward thought which is expressed in the spoken word.
So Jesus is the Logos in the flesh but he's not the Logos, as the Logos is an "it"
Concordant Literal Version John 1:1 In the beginning was the word, and the word was toward God, and God was the word. " 2 This was in the beginning toward God. All came into being through it, and apart from it not even one thing came into being which has come into being."
Hope this helps?
Paul
"God was the Word" (Jn 1:1) "And the Word was made flesh and tabernacled among us" (Jn 1:14)
Two paragraphs excerpted from my first post (p.155, #360) on this thread:
The Koine Greek only has one pronoun,
auto, for which CLV has SAME for the keyword. It is not masculine, feminine, or even what could be called neuter as a comparative category like German has
das,
die or,
dien (though it is technically neuter.) It is a blank, all occasion pronoun that refers to the nearest preceding noun, period. It makes no difference whether the preceding noun is masculine, feminine or neuter. (Just try arguing this with Spanish language die hards!) In the knowledge of which, the big hubbub over exclusively "he" to honor the Holy Spirit is the sound of numerous ignorant lips flappin' in the wind. Well, I've been there, done that too.
Jesus is both begotten and born on the one hand and created on the other. In the Old Covenant, we are to hear God's words so as to do (Hebrew,
asah) them, but the word for doing is "to construct," which is what we are doing within (while not comprehensively as what God's logos is to Him, yet bit by bit in faithfulness as He provides.) This is also the word God uses When He says, "Let us
make (
asah) man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion..." It is also written, "So God
created man in his own image, in the image of God
created he him; male and female
created he them." "Create" (Hebrew,
bara) here is the same for all he made in the last three days of creation, having spoken into existence the first three. Yet this
Adam is called
son of God. (Luke 3:38) The Hebrew word for son
ben is derived from
banah, "to build." There's so much here!
Quote from: reFORMer on September 07, 2008, 08:20:19 AM
(Just try arguing this with Spanish language die hards!)
¿Qué?
I want to run a quick little poll.
Is the resurrected Jesus
a. A Man
b. God
c. fully God and fully man
I'm thinking there will be a pretty equal split between B. and C. ?
Ok edit's made per Craigs request.
Quote from: Pierac on September 07, 2008, 08:30:11 AM
I want to run a quick little poll.
Is the resurrected Jesus
a. A Man
b. God only
c. Still fully God and fully man
I'm thinking there will be a pretty equal split between B. and C. ?
The options should be:
Is the resurrected Jesus
1. A Man
2. God
3. Fully God and Fully Man.
4. Other.
Remove the presupposition, since adding "only" and "still" is to manipulate the options to fit your presupposition rather than an honest poll.
He is 1, 2 and 3.
Quote from: SOtW on September 07, 2008, 08:19:14 AM
Quote from: Pierac on September 07, 2008, 08:12:38 AM
Quote from: SOtW on September 07, 2008, 07:54:25 AM
QuoteThen you have the post resurrection problem of a pre-exist Messiah, is Jesus now a man for the rest of eternity? So pre-existence we have 2 God's and post resurrection we have One God and one fully God and fully man?
There is a presumption in that rebuttal, that doesn't exist to refute but you insist on it anyways.
It's more of a question than rebuttal.
You used it as your rebuttal, therefore that is what it is. The issue remains, your question has no relevance since you are applying a finite logic to an infinite God, since quantity assumes God is created and not Creator therefore pre-existence does not mean multiplicity.
DEFINITION OF THE COUNCIL OF CHALCEDON (451 AD)
Therefore, following the holy fathers, we all with one accord teach men to acknowledge one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, at once complete in Godhead and complete in manhood, truly God and truly man, consisting also of a reasonable soul and body; of one substance with the Father as regards his Godhead, and at the same time of one substance with us as regards his manhood; like us in all respects, apart from sin; as regards his Godhead, begotten of the Father before the ages, but yet as regards his manhood begotten, bearer; one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten, recognized in two natures, without confusion, without change, without division, without separation; the distinction of natures being in no way annulled by the union, but rather the characteristics of each nature being preserved and coming together to form one person and subsistence, not as parted or separated into two persons, but one and the same Son and Only-begotten God the Word, Lord Jesus Christ; even as the prophets from earliest times spoke of him, and our Lord Jesus Christ himself taught us, and the creed of the fathers has handed down to us.Craig,
You never answered my question, Do you agree with this creed? I don't remember you being much of a creed person, but do you agree with what they write? If I remember correctly too from our previous discussions you don't hold the "traditional" Trinity view. So what do you not agree with in this creed? I'm pretty sure "All" denominations that confess the Trinity accept this creed. What part do you not agree, if there even is a part you don't agree?
Paul
Quote from: PieracThe LORD says to my Lord: "Sit at My right hand Until I make Your enemies a footstool for Your feet." (Psa 110:1) A Psalm of David.
A couple of questions about this.
Why does David call Jesus, 'my Lord'?
Why doesn't David call Jehovah, 'my LORD'?
Does David just pay obeisance to Jesus?
Another question--Jesus uses this verse to show his pre-existence to the Pharisees, asking them how he can be both David's son and Lord. Doesn't this ruin your idea that there is no pre-existence?
Finally, Stephen sees this literally, causing the Pharisees to stone him (they are such pleasant people :msealed:). This Jesus he sees is in heaven literally standing at the right hand of God. What's Jesus doing in heaven at the throne of God? Is he an angel now?
55But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God,
56And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God. --Acts 7
Quote from: SOtW on September 07, 2008, 08:45:13 AM
The options should be:
1. A Man
2. God
3. Fully God and Fully Man.
Remove the presupposition, since adding "only" and "still" is to manipulate the options to fit your presupposition rather than an honest poll.
He is 1, 2 and 3.
Sometimes I've thought Craig was nit picking just a bit, but I have to agree on this one. And wasn't the conversation for at least the last few posts about whether or not He was God Himself or just Son of God? (I was personally concluding that He was and is both, as well as the last Adam.) Or did I completely misunderstand you, and were you attempting [
to clarify] an Arian argument?? Or did the conversation go beyond that point already and I honestly missed the transition??? My attention span does that sometimes if I'm not careful. And where I'm at, it's sneaking towards 1am.
(S #136) Adonai (masc., used exclusively of God)
(S # 113) Adon (masc., carries nuances of authority rather than ownership) frequently used with (S #3068) IEUE, eg., Ex 34:23; Jos 3:13; Isa 1:24
BOTH are used of God!
QuoteCraig,
You never answered my question, Do you agree with this creed? I don't remember you being much of a creed person, but do you agree with what they write? If I remember correctly too from our previous discussions you don't hold the "traditional" Trinity view. So what do you not agree with in this creed? I'm pretty sure "All" denominations that confess the Trinity accept this creed. What part do you not agree, if there even is a part you don't agree?
Paul
I hold the "traditional" view of the Nicene Creed of 325.We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father [the only-begotten; that is, of the essence of the Father, God of God], Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father; by whom all things were made [both in heaven and on earth]; who for us men, and for our salvation, came down and was incarnate and was made man; he suffered, and the third day he rose again, ascended into heaven; from thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead. And in the Holy Ghost. And whosoever shall say that there was a time when the Son of God was not, or that before he was begotten he was not, or that he was made of things that were not, or that he is of a different substance or essence [from the Father] or that he is a creature, or subject to change or conversion--all that so say, the Catholic and Apostolic Church anathematizes them.
Whether the Chalcedon council adopted the Nicene, or adapted the Nicene Creed. I hold to the Nicene Creed of 325, a 125 years before the Council of Chalcedon. So I won't go through the parts of the Council of Chalcedon I agree with and do not since the Nicene Creed hold precedence.
Quote from: martincisneros on September 07, 2008, 08:54:11 AM
Quote from: SOtW on September 07, 2008, 08:45:13 AM
The options should be:
1. A Man
2. God
3. Fully God and Fully Man.
Remove the presupposition, since adding "only" and "still" is to manipulate the options to fit your presupposition rather than an honest poll.
He is 1, 2 and 3.
Sometimes I've thought Craig was nit picking just a bit, but I have to agree on this one. And wasn't the conversation for at least the last few posts about whether or not He was God Himself or just Son of God? (I was personally concluding that He was and is both, as well as the last Adam.) Or did I completely misunderstand you, and were you attempting [to clarify] an Arian argument?? Or did the conversation go beyond that point already and I honestly missed the transition??? My attention span does that sometimes if I'm not careful. And where I'm at, it's sneaking towards 1am.
What I understand is God became human (Adam man,
homo sapien), died, raised from dead as NEW man (Christ the Lord from heaven,
homo novae) something God already, and is entering into Divinity, something to be finished when God becomes all in all; and that He is including us, "...members of His body, bone of His bone, flesh of His flesh," (Eph 5) something to be also finished when God is all in all. This is a kind of over simplification.
Quote from: Pierac on September 07, 2008, 08:46:48 AM
DEFINITION OF THE COUNCIL OF CHALCEDON (451 AD)
...as regards his Godhead, begotten of the Father before the ages
Not too sure where they got this, unless they're saying that Proverbs 8 is talking about Jesus.
Quote from: Pierac on September 07, 2008, 08:46:48 AM
recognized in two natures, without confusion, without change, without division, without separation; the distinction of natures being in no way annulled by the union, but rather the characteristics of each nature being preserved and coming together to form one person and subsistence,
This part gets dangerously close to being an allusion to the Essene doctrine of the two souls that each person is supposedly supposed to have, that some say that James is affirming in his book in talking about bitter water and sweet coming from the same source while affirming that these things ought not to be. Lord Jesus doesn't have two natures any more than I do. "Nature" implies what you are at your core both by the seed you came from and by what you've been nurtured into. I know it says "without confusion...without division," but it still teeters on the Gnostic. "But rather the characteristics of each nature being preserved..." still implies something that can be swayed by sin and that lacks in perfection. I could argue the opposite of what I'm saying from this very passage because of the grayness in it that I'm uncomfortable with, that I don't believe that the Scriptures have.
Quote from: Pierac on September 07, 2008, 08:46:48 AM
even as the prophets from earliest times spoke of him, and our Lord Jesus Christ himself taught us.
There are hints of this in the prophets about His pre-crucified glory because He was to be tempted in all points as we are, yet without sin. Which means that temptation isn't a sin. Took me years to notice that because of all of the preaching that I heard when I was a little kid that was sooo filled with condemnation that if you ever had anything to overcome then your very process of overcoming was somehow sinful with how warped what I heard preached was. However, I find nothing of this "begotten before the ages" and "two natures" in the teachings of my Lord Jesus, and neither do I find hints of "two natures" in Christ's risen glory through the Words of either Jesus or the Apostles and Prophets, unless you want to say that 1John 4:17 points to His two natures in His post resurrection state. Then and then alone, hanging on that one verse, I might be able to buy it for reasons too controversial to get into on these boards, and I mean that advisedly. Some of it has to do with the fact that we're one Body with Christ and that in a certain sense He's still overcoming through us. Other subjects get too long-winded for my tastes these days. I hate not being able to talk face to face!
Quote from: reFORMer on September 07, 2008, 09:04:22 AM
(S #136) Adonai (masc., used exclusively of God)
(S # 113) Adon (masc., carries nuances of authority rather than ownership) frequently used with (S #3068) IEUE, eg., Ex 34:23; Jos 3:13; Isa 1:24
BOTH are used of God!
Exodus 34
23Thrice in the year shall all your menchildren appear before
the LORD God, the God of Israel.LORD=Adon
Jos 3:13
13And it shall come to pass, as soon as the soles of the feet of the priests that bear the ark of the LORD,
the LORD of all the earth, shall rest in the waters of Jordan, that the waters of Jordan shall be cut off from the waters that come down from above; and they shall stand upon an heap.
LORD=Adon
Isa 1:24
24Therefore saith the
LORD, the LORD of hosts,
the mighty One of Israel, Ah, I will ease me of mine adversaries, and avenge me of mine enemies:
LORD=Adon
Psalm 110:1
The LORD said unto my
Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.
Lord=Adon
Psalm 99:5
Exalt ye the LORD our God, and worship at his footstool; for he is holy.LORD=Y'hovah
Quote from: martincisneros on September 07, 2008, 08:54:11 AM
Sometimes I've thought Craig was nit picking just a bit, but I have to agree on this one. And wasn't the conversation for at least the last few posts about whether or not He was God Himself or just Son of God? (I was personally concluding that He was and is both, as well as the last Adam.) Or did I completely misunderstand you, and were you attempting [to clarify] an Arian argument?? Or did the conversation go beyond that point already and I honestly missed the transition??? My attention span does that sometimes if I'm not careful. And where I'm at, it's sneaking towards 1am.
When it comes to apologetics, there is no such thing as nitpicking ;). Words hold meanings, and the ways words are assembled to make a sentence hold pretense, proposition, and presupposition.
You are also not wrong about the strange transition that just happened. I can only gather that seeing that his particular branch of reasoning was quickly losing strength, he jumped to a multiplicity of God dilemma in a pre-existant, post-resurrection Jesus to confuse the issue.
Quote from: SOtW on September 07, 2008, 09:10:46 AM
I hold the "traditional" view of the Nicene Creed of 325.
We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father [the only-begotten; that is, of the essence of the Father, God of God], Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father; by whom all things were made [both in heaven and on earth]; who for us men, and for our salvation, came down and was incarnate and was made man; he suffered, and the third day he rose again, ascended into heaven; from thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead. And in the Holy Ghost. And whosoever shall say that there was a time when the Son of God was not, or that before he was begotten he was not, or that he was made of things that were not, or that he is of a different substance or essence [from the Father] or that he is a creature, or subject to change or conversion--all that so say, the Catholic and Apostolic Church anathematizes them.
I'm more comfortable with this creed as well. The chalcedon creed was written too soon, or too within the season of when the Church started majorly apostacizing with ET and other issues. Perhaps that's a small part of the grayness that I see in it, but I feel the brightest light from the Nicene Creed. At the end of the day, it's still largely about what we get from our own anointings as well as from the Scriptures.
Quote from: reFORMer on September 07, 2008, 09:13:33 AM
Quote from: martincisneros on September 07, 2008, 08:54:11 AM
Quote from: SOtW on September 07, 2008, 08:45:13 AM
The options should be:
1. A Man
2. God
3. Fully God and Fully Man.
Remove the presupposition, since adding "only" and "still" is to manipulate the options to fit your presupposition rather than an honest poll.
He is 1, 2 and 3.
Sometimes I've thought Craig was nit picking just a bit, but I have to agree on this one. And wasn't the conversation for at least the last few posts about whether or not He was God Himself or just Son of God? (I was personally concluding that He was and is both, as well as the last Adam.) Or did I completely misunderstand you, and were you attempting [to clarify] an Arian argument?? Or did the conversation go beyond that point already and I honestly missed the transition??? My attention span does that sometimes if I'm not careful. And where I'm at, it's sneaking towards 1am.
What I understand is God became human (Adam man, homo sapien), died, raised from dead as NEW man (Christ the Lord from heaven, homo novae) something God already, and is entering into Divinity, something to be finished when God becomes all in all; and that He is including us, "...members of His body, bone of His bone, flesh of His flesh," (Eph 5) something to be also finished when God is all in all.
:thumbsup:
QuoteThis is a kind of over simplification.
Yep.
Another relevant though distinct issue is the Spirit of God. I believe he/she/it is God and an emanation of God similar to Jesus being God and an emanation of God: God manifests as Spirit substance and God manifests as physical substance Jesus.
When this discussion arose previously I put the following in a post and everybody acted as if it wasn't there. While easily a seperate thread, it bears relevance on this thread here too...
John 17...
21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:
23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.
24 Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world.
Not only is Jesus the Father in human expression, the Spirit Who is God answers to the name Jesus. What's more, the name of God is on us. Think about that please. That we are the flesh of God in the earth (Eph 5:30), "bone of His bone," is why the exact words calling God "trinity, triune, or three-in-one" are missing from the Holy Scriptures. It isn't because of less, but more as God.
Revelation 3:12 Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.
John 10...
33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.
34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?
Psalm 82:6 I have said, Ye are gods (Elohim); and all of you are children of the most High (El-Elyon).
1Corinthians 6:17 But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.
1Corinthians 12:12 For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ.
Hebrews 2:10 For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings.
11 For both he that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all of one: for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren,
Not to pursue it exhaustively, but to go one step beyond...
Not just as a destiny, "that God may be all in all;" (1 Cor 15:28) but, as a present reality, "The All, and in all is Christ." (Col 3:11) We are members of "The All." We sit as Him on the Great White Throne.
---James Rohde
Quote from: reFORMer on September 07, 2008, 09:13:33 AM
Quote from: martincisneros on September 07, 2008, 08:54:11 AM
Quote from: SOtW on September 07, 2008, 08:45:13 AM
The options should be:
1. A Man
2. God
3. Fully God and Fully Man.
Remove the presupposition, since adding "only" and "still" is to manipulate the options to fit your presupposition rather than an honest poll.
He is 1, 2 and 3.
Sometimes I've thought Craig was nit picking just a bit, but I have to agree on this one. And wasn't the conversation for at least the last few posts about whether or not He was God Himself or just Son of God? (I was personally concluding that He was and is both, as well as the last Adam.) Or did I completely misunderstand you, and were you attempting [to clarify] an Arian argument?? Or did the conversation go beyond that point already and I honestly missed the transition??? My attention span does that sometimes if I'm not careful. And where I'm at, it's sneaking towards 1am.
What I understand is God became human (Adam man, homo sapien), died, raised from dead as NEW man (Christ the Lord from heaven, homo novae) something God already, and is entering into Divinity, something to be finished when God becomes all in all; and that He is including us, "...members of His body, bone of His bone, flesh of His flesh," (Eph 5) something to be also finished when God is all in all. This is a kind of over simplification.
Hence the dragging part--as he is lifted up he drags the rest of creation with him.
What Pierac is overlooking, I think, is this is all part of the creation process, and it's still ongoing. This is how God is creating through Jesus.
Quote from: reFORMerNot to pursue it exhaustively, but to go one step beyond...
Not just as a destiny, "that God may be all in all;" (1 Cor 15:28) but, as a present reality, "The All, and in all is Christ." (Col 3:11) We are members of "The All." We sit as Him on the Great White Throne.
Yep. I touch on this but haven't expanded on it either.
Quote from: SOtW on September 06, 2008, 10:35:58 PM
Right. That is what Scripture says. He became a man, in order that He make all mankind Children of God. So when He returns to God, God will be all in all because we will be with Him.
Craig
To believe what is contained in The Apostles' Creed has been universally sufficient for 2,000 years to be accepted as a member of the Church. Of all the religions of the world, The Faith of the largest percentage of humanity is herein expressed. With full committment of faith I heartily confess these truths from which I consider my life and it's enjoyment to come. This is the basis of my experience of God and any hope for the future, both personally and for the rest of mankind.
The Apostles' Creed
1. I believe in God the Father, Almighty
2. And in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord;
3. Who was born by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary,
4. Was crucified under Pontius Pilate and was buried; He descended into hell:
5. The third day he rose from the dead;
6. He ascended into heaven, and sits at the right hand of the Father;
7. From thence he shall come to judge the living and the dead.
8. And in the Holy Ghost;
9. The Holy Universal Church;
10. The forgiveness of sins;
11. The resurrection of the flesh.
Older than the official "Apostles' Creed
This form of the Apostles' Creed called Roman is older by 300 years than the Recieved. (Though the phrase, "He descended into hell" is not in it, it is in the Received Apostles' Creed, and the same for the change from "body" to "flesh," which is older, in point 11) Though existing even earlier in fragmentary form, it is the oldest of the the three or four earliest. By calling them the ecumenical creeds, "We understand the doctrinal confessions of ancient Christianity, which are to this day either formally or tacitly acknowledged in the Greek, the Latin, and the Evangelical Protestant Churches, and form a bond of union between them. . . These three or four creeds contain, in brief popular outline, the fundamental articles of the Christian faith, as necessary and sufficient for salvation."— The Creeds of Christendom by Philip Schaff. He also points out that the Apostles' Creed, "Together with the Lord's Prayer and the Ten Commandments, was incorporated in the Lutheran, the Genevan, the Heidelberg, and other standard Catechisms." The Ten Commandments are also part of my faith, being spoken by God directly in the hearing of all the people, unlike the rest of what we call The Law of Moses. They are as absolute, producing reward or punishment, in the moral realm as the law of gravity does in it's realm.
It is important to point out that you can look in vain in The Apostles', the Nicene, and the Athanasian Creed, including the christological statement of Chalcedon (451) for even a hint that everlasting torment is considered a part of The Faith. In fact, for at least the first 500 years of Church history it is easily demonstrated to be a minority opinion, of which this evidence of the ecumenical Creeds is a part.
I agree with the Apostle's Creed, indeed. It holds more precedence than the Nicene Creed. I find the Nicene Creed of 325 does not contradict the Apostle's Creed. There is even a difference between the Nicene Creed of 325 and the Nicene-Constantinople of 381. The Nicene Creed was actually the specifically the Apostle's creed forumlated to combat the Arian Heresy, which did not arise until the late 3rd Century/ early 4th Century.
Quote from: reFORMer on September 07, 2008, 09:35:32 AM
To believe what is contained in The Apostles' Creed has been universally sufficient for 2,000 years to be accepted as a member of the Church. Of all the religions of the world, The Faith of the largest percentage of humanity is herein expressed. With full committment of faith I heartily confess these truths from which I consider my life and it's enjoyment to come. This is the basis of my experience of God and any hope for the future, both personally and for the rest of mankind.
The Apostles' Creed
1. I believe in God the Father, Almighty
2. And in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord;
3. Who was born by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary,
4. Was crucified under Pontius Pilate and was buried; He descended into hell:
5. The third day he rose from the dead;
6. He ascended into heaven, and sits at the right hand of the Father;
7. From thence he shall come to judge the living and the dead.
8. And in the Holy Ghost;
9. The Holy Universal Church;
10. The forgiveness of sins;
11. The resurrection of the flesh.
Older than the official "Apostles' Creed
This form of the Apostles' Creed called Roman is older by 300 years than the Recieved. (Though the phrase, "He descended into hell" is not in it, it is in the Received Apostles' Creed, and the same for the change from "body" to "flesh" in point 11) Though existing even earlier in fragmentary form, it is the oldest of the the three or four earliest. By calling them the ecumenical creeds, "We understand the doctrinal confessions of ancient Christianity, which are to this day either formally or tacitly acknowledged in the Greek, the Latin, and the Evangelical Protestant Churches, and form a bond of union between them. . . These three or four creeds contain, in brief popular outline, the fundamental articles of the Christian faith, as necessary and sufficient for salvation."— The Creeds of Christendom by Philip Schaff. He also points out that the Apostles' Creed, "Together with the Lord's Prayer and the Ten Commandments, was incorporated in the Lutheran, the Genevan, the Heidelberg, and other standard Catechisms." The Ten Commandments are also part of my faith, being spoken by God directly in the hearing of all the people, unlike the rest of what we call The Law of Moses. They are as absolute, producing reward or punishment, in the moral realm as the law of gravity does in it's realm.
It is important to point out that you can look in vain in The Apostles', the Nicene, and the Athanasian Creed, including the christological statement of Chalcedon (451) for even a hint that everlasting torment is considered a part of The Faith. In fact, for at least the first 500 years of Church history it is easily demonstrated to be a minority opinion, of which this evidence of the ecumenical Creeds is a part.
:goodpost: All I could remember of the Apostles' Creed was the Rich Mullens version of it (which I totally love and believe), and I'm too lazy at nearly 2am, my Central time zone, to google it :laughing7:
What is the descended into Hell part from?
I thought he told the thief he would be with him this day in Paradise.
Forgive, my ignorance on this.
Quote from: martincisnerosJesus pretty much prayed in John 17 to be reclothed with the glory that He had before the present world was.
5And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was. --John 17
Quote from: Molly on September 07, 2008, 09:44:18 AM
What is the descended into Hell part from?
I thought he told the thief he would be with him this day in Paradise.
Forgive, my ignorance on this.
I'm not sure what to think about it, right now, since I'm lacking any real belief in Hell right now. If it's originally from the Greek word "Hades," then it's saying that He descended into the grave. Otherwise, in Peter's writings it says that He took the Gospel to those that were disobedent in the days of Noah, so that although they're judged in the flesh, for the deeds of the flesh, now they can live for God through a belief in what Christ proclaimed to them. The way I used to reconcile it, before things became sooo complicated with looking over the Greek on every single thing, is that the Scriptures say that "by Himself He purged our sins." So, the Holy Spirit had to have left at some point for a brief season so that He could cry "My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me." Holy Spirit takes the two men that died with Jesus into paradise, while Jesus goes and does whatever needed to be done. Some believe that He bore some punishment for us, having been made sin for us and then later justified in the spirit, while others believe that He simply went about His preaching ministry until His resurrection.
Quote from: Molly on September 07, 2008, 09:44:18 AM
What is the descended into Hell part from?
I thought he told the thief he would be with him this day in Paradise.
Forgive, my ignorance on this.
I probably should've transliterated it as
hades but when I originaly posted it in answer to ETers it seemed more pungent to use the English word "hell" which is how the books usually have it.
1 Peter 3:18-22...
18 For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:
19 By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;
20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.
21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:
22 Who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God; angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him.
I Peter 4:5-6...
5 Who shall give account to him that is ready to judge the quick and the dead.
6 For for this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit
Forgive me, but I have to leave for now.
James Rohde
Quote from: martincisnerosJesus pretty much prayed in John 17 to be reclothed with the glory that He had before the present world was.
Exactly. As I eluded but have not expanded, just like reFORMer, about what happens in the Resurrection when God is all in all.
Will somebody please explain this to me? Why it has to be this way? This makes my head spin.
1 Corinthians 15:21
For since by man [Adam] came death, by man [Adam] came also the resurrection of the dead.
Quote from: Molly on September 07, 2008, 10:09:46 AM
Will somebody please explain this to me? Why it has to be this way? This makes my head spin.
1 Corinthians 15:21
For since by man [Adam] came death, by man [Adam] came also the resurrection of the dead.
For since by Adam came death, by the Last Adam came also the resurrection of the dead. What's hard about that? LOL!
You could also read it in the way that you seem to have, because it was Adam that fell, but it was also Adam that believed the promise that in his Seed the serpent's seed would have it's head crushed. He evidently clung ferociously to that promise for however long he lived after his fall, if it was the whole of 930 years after the fall or 900 years of it, or 929 years of it. A lot of people look at Joshua and Caleb having held on to God's promise for 40 years. What if you held on to something for over 900 years that you never saw in your lifetime? Think you might have a special place in the heart of God over that??
But essentially, verse 21 of 1Corinthians 15 ties into the 22nd verse that:
As in Adam (i.e. as in Adam's death) all men die (because all were in Adam when he died), so also in Christ (i.e. in Christ's death) all men are made alive (because they were accounted as being in Him when He died).
Romans 5 goes a little further into this with the disobedience of the one that died brought death to all, and the obedience of the one that died brought life to all. The one and the many equal the all in that chapter, so that it's not a contradiction that it says in two back to back verses that all and the many are made righteous. 2Corinthians 5:21 says that He was made to be sin for us, so that we'd be made the righteousness of God in Him. The question to ask of that verse is how many was He made to be sin for? Not how many does He have to wrestle in the Kingdom, as though He were wrestling with Jacob all night.
1Corinthians 15 and Mark 4 say that God chose the sowing and reaping method to overcome sin and death in the universe. People's view of sowing and reaping is generally bent towards the wicked side and only seeing calamity, when every good thing that comes to us is from sowing and reaping as well. The problem that often comes is not knowing where the seed to a particular kindness in our lives was sown. This covers generational issues, the intercessions of the saints, and Jesus in His High Priestly ministry, along with all of the seed that He sowed in His earthly ministry that He's probably still reaping harvests from.
Quote from: Molly on September 05, 2008, 10:24:13 PM
Pierac, I think you are rightly perceiving Jesus as the prototype son. He is the firstborn of many brothers.
What is actually happening here? The divinity of all the fulness of the Godhead has entered the human body of flesh and blood--the Word became flesh and walked among us.
The Light has come into the world--in flesh and blood, walking on the feet of man.
But, that's not the end of it. Because for him to be the captain of our salvation, he must conquer the death of the body--he must reverse the law of physics as we know it.
Thus, the resurrected Christ is the first of a new creation--but he has resurrected himself--because who could do this, if not God?
I am not intending to resurrect myself. God, in the person of the Lord Jesus Christ will do that--he has so promised me.
John 6:54
Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.
[/quote
Hi! Molly
I agree, Jesus Christ is the first-born in the flesh of us all, prospective sons and daughters of God. We are all being lead to the Father by our elder Brother Jesus Christ who is; "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me." (Jn.14:6).
(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Quote from: SOtW on September 06, 2008, 03:25:57 AM
Quote from: CHB on September 06, 2008, 02:54:07 AM
If Jesus and the Father were the same being why do all the apostles begin their epistles with "peace from God our Father AND the lord Jesus Christ"?
Because the Father is God in Heaven, and our Lord Jesus Christ was God on descended to earth. The distinction was placed because God was still in heaven, even though He became flesh and dwelt amongst us. It is One and same God.
Let me repeat, God is heaven the Father and God who lowered Himself and took on the image of man, is Jesus Christ.
Honestly, it is not that hard to understand.
Hi! SOtW
This is how I understand it. "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the
Word was God.
He was in the beginning with God.......And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth........No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him." (Jn.1:1-3; 14; 18).
"He was in the beginning with God." Tells me that there are two entities present the
Word and God. Then we are told that the
Word also is God. Still two entities and both God. Then in Vs.14 we are told that the
Word/God became flesh. This means that there are two Gods, one in heaven the Father and the other on earth the Word/Son. But Jesus tells us
"I and the Father are One" (Jn.10:30).
Now in Vs.18 this problem is cleared up. Here we are told that the
Word/Son was in the Father's bosom, in other words the Father was carrying the Son. With being a one parent situation the Son would inherit the identical character traits of the Father,
a snap shot image or clone of the Father but subject to Him by virtue of being the Son. Still ONE GOD.
For example; at the consummation of the ages when the Son hands the kingdom including us to the Father; "For He has put all things in subjection under His feet. But when He says, "
All things are put in subjection," it is evident that He is excepted who put all things in subjection to Him. When all things are subjected to Him,
then the Son Himself also will be subjected to the One who subjected all things to Him, so that God may be all in all." (1Cor.15:27-28), how many Gods will there be? Will there be billions upon billions of Gods or just the ONE GOD?
The Father is eternally ONE GOD and all things are in Him and of Him. At this moment in time there is but the Word/Son/Christ/God in the family of the Father, but at the consummation of the ages the family will have grown and He will still be the Father, ONE GOD of a very large family. All worship goes to the Father/Son because they are One.
"I and the Father are One" (Jn.10:30).
This is how I see it brother and the nitpicking over the Father being the One God is so very unnecessary.
(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/117/117193tdajxe3wh8.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Hi! Paul
What Bible are you quoting from since my three agree with this wording "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
He was in the beginning with God." (Jn.1:1-3).
QuoteDue to time/space restraints (pun intended) Let's just deal with your "Certainly"
John 1:1 In the beginning was the word, and the word was toward God, and God was the word. "
Why have you left out "He was in the beginning with God."? Have you some good reason for this? Is it not in your Bible? And what about (Jn.1:18), "No one has seen God at any time; the
only begotten God who is in the
bosom of the Father, He has explained Him." Does your Bible not have this verse in it?
You can't base your argument on one word juggled scriptural verse and leave out all the other supporting verses, that is real naughty, the last time that happened to me was in Babylon and I told them what to do with it as I'm telling you now. Keep to the Scriptures.
In your view the Father/God was the Word who became flesh, well if that's what you think, then pray tell which Father was the Word/Jesus Christ praying to
"Father, if You are willing, remove this cup from Me; yet not My will, but Yours be done." (Luke 22:42)? and a dozen or so other places, surely not to Himself?
Be real brother! Give Christ His body back as reFORMer has requested.
(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Quote from: reFORMer on September 07, 2008, 09:13:33 AM
What I understand is God became human (Adam man, homo sapien), died, raised from dead as NEW man (Christ the Lord from heaven, homo novae) something God already, and is entering into Divinity, something to be finished when God becomes all in all; and that He is including us, "...members of His body, bone of His bone, flesh of His flesh," (Eph 5) something to be also finished when God is all in all. This is a kind of over simplification.
I believe this to be the case. God became human in the first Adam and is revealing His glory in us as we are being raised from the realm of death/darkness into a new man.
Hi! Paul
I appreciate you asking this question of SOTW but forgiv the intrusion and allow me to add my bit.
QuoteTherefore, following the holy fathers, we all with one accord teach men to acknowledge one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, at once complete in Godhead and complete in manhood, truly God and truly man, consisting also of a reasonable soul and body; of one substance with the Father as regards his Godhead, and at the same time of one substance with us as regards his manhood; like us in all respects, apart from sin; as regards his Godhead, begotten of the Father before the ages, but yet as regards his manhood begotten, bearer; one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten, recognized in two natures, without confusion, without change, without division, without separation; the distinction of natures being in no way annulled by the union, but rather the characteristics of each nature being preserved and coming together to form one person and subsistence, not as parted or separated into two persons, but one and the same Son and Only-begotten God the Word, Lord Jesus Christ; even as the prophets from earliest times spoke of him, and our Lord Jesus Christ himself taught us, and the creed of the fathers has handed down to us.
Except for the words substance, nature, persons which are carnal and worldly because the Father is Spirit and so is Christ. They do not have substance or nature, they are identical cloned Spirit Entities. Other than that I believe I accept all the rest of it.
It is clearly emphasized here that Jesus Christ/Word/Son was
Begotten but
not created the basis of the original discussion. And that satisfies me, does it not you?
(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Hi! Paul
Reference this quote to reFORMer
QuoteOk reFORMer, thank you for your input. I'm sure your sincere and love the lord as I! So why do you see the "word" as being God Almighty! and I do not? Could it be because you follow the traditions of men? First you let emotion, cloud your understanding! Simply put God has no beginning, but the "word" (Logos) here clearly does! So, I will leave it to you to figure it out! Yes, eternity has no beginning, but the "word" (Logos) does! (John 1:1) :mshock:
Who told you that the Word was the logos? There is no mention of of it. Let's read it carefully for once; "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
He was in the beginning with God"..........."No one has seen God at any time; the
only begotten God who is in the
bosom of the Father, He has explained Him." (Jn.1:1-3, 18).
He was in the beginning with God, this is the Word that you say is the logos. Who pray is the begotten God in the bosom of the Father?
Be real!
(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Quote from: Roy Monis on September 07, 2008, 03:19:42 PM
Hi! Paul
Reference this quote to reFORMer QuoteOk reFORMer, thank you for your input. I'm sure your sincere and love the lord as I! So why do you see the "word" as being God Almighty! and I do not? Could it be because you follow the traditions of men? First you let emotion, cloud your understanding! Simply put God has no beginning, but the "word" (Logos) here clearly does! So, I will leave it to you to figure it out! Yes, eternity has no beginning, but the "word" (Logos) does! (John 1:1) :mshock:
Who told you that the Word was the logos? There is no mention of of it. Let's read it carefully for once; "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God"..........."No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him." (Jn.1:1-3, 18).
He was in the beginning with God, this is the Word that you say is the logos. Who pray is the begotten God in the bosom of the Father?
Be real!
(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
The quote you made Roy was something written by Pierac. My answer on p.18, #446 was:
Is my word me? If I'm around the corner of the house and you don't see me, when I yell at you is it me talking to you? While I am in Georgia on the east side of the continent, on the computer I call my sister in California, is she really talking to me? My body is here but my word is in California. We have true fellowship. Even more so if our images are sent over the internet live to one another. Like Jesus says, "He that has seen me has seen the Father." Jesus says, "Lo, I and the little children who are given Me by God! (Heb 2:13) As also Isaiah says He shall be called, "...the everlasting Father..."
Quote from: firstborn888 on September 07, 2008, 02:38:43 PM
Quote from: reFORMer on September 07, 2008, 09:13:33 AM
What I understand is God became human (Adam man, homo sapien), died, raised from dead as NEW man (Christ the Lord from heaven, homo novae) something God already, and is entering into Divinity, something to be finished when God becomes all in all; and that He is including us, "...members of His body, bone of His bone, flesh of His flesh," (Eph 5) something to be also finished when God is all in all. This is a kind of over simplification.
I believe this to be the case. God became human in the first Adam and is revealing His glory in us as we are being raised from the realm of death/darkness into a new man.
So are you guys saying Adam was God?
Hi! SOtW
Your quote brother and quite correct.
QuoteWhat remains, Jesus did not come from our earthly father, Adam. Jesus came from His Heavenly Father, God. That makes Him completely different than anything ever before or after Him. Whether Jesus was created or not is not really an issue when we understand this. Jesus did not come from the dust of the earth therefore since He was not from dust, to dust did He not return. That is why Jesus could not be created, but begotten. Jesus was God and being that He was God, He could not be created, only born.
The body that Jesus occupied was not of the dust of the earth as ours are, we are told that it was specially prepared from above; "Sacrifice and offering You have not desired, But a
body You have prepared for Me; In whole burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin You have taken no pleasure. "Then I said, 'Behold, I have come (In the scroll of the book it is written of Me)
To do Your will, O God.' " (Heb.10:5-7).
(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Quote from: CHB on September 06, 2008, 09:36:37 PM
Here is an article that explains what God is. The thing most people get confused with is Jesus being referred to as God but Jesus Himself called the Jew's God also (John 10:34) "Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said Ye, are God's"?
Does that make the Jew's God the Father? No, neither does calling Jesus God make Him God the Father. There is ONE God the Father and there is ONE Lord Jesus Christ which is also referred to as God. Why? because He is God the Father's Son.
Just What is God
http://www.askelm.com/essentials/ess039.htm
CHB
Hi! CHB
Correction brother! Your quote;
QuoteThere is ONE God the Father and there is ONE Lord Jesus Christ which is also referred to as God. Why? because He is God the Father's Son.
Not just referred to as God! HE IS GOD! "No one has seen God at any time; the
only begotten God who is in the bosom of the
Father, He has
explained Him." (Jn.1:18)
(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Quote from: Pleroo on September 06, 2008, 09:39:57 PM
Quote from: SOtW on September 06, 2008, 08:30:33 PM
There is no lie, when I say He is a man and that doesn't mean He was not God. When God became a man, that is what He became. That is why He did not pray to Himself even though He is from Heaven, but to the only God in Heaven, His Father because that is where He came from.
QuoteWhat remains, Jesus did not come from our earthly father, Adam. Jesus came from His Heavenly Father, God. That makes Him completely different than anything ever before or after Him. Whether Jesus was created or not is not really an issue when we understand this. Jesus did not come from the dust of the earth therefore since He was not from dust, to dust did He not return. That is why Jesus could not be created, but begotten. Jesus was God and being that He was God, He could not be created, only born.
This is the flaw of Pierac's position. He is unable to see it because of the same reason you could not see what you saw while under a particular position.
Okay, I think I understand what you're saying, but let me be absolutely sure. You're proposing that the Christ was God but once he became human (Jesus), he was no longer God?
Hi! Pleroo
No brother, wrong! Jesus Christ was Christ/Jehovah/Word/God in the flesh, not of the dust of the earth like ours but a heavenly body specially prepared for Him. "....who,
although He existed in the form of God, did not
regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but
emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the
likeness of men. Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross." (Phil.2:6-8).
He is very much God and very much man at the same time.
(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Quote from: Roy Monis on September 07, 2008, 05:20:08 PM
Hi! CHB
Correction brother! Your quote; QuoteThere is ONE God the Father and there is ONE Lord Jesus Christ which is also referred to as God. Why? because He is God the Father's Son.
Not just referred to as God! HE IS GOD! "No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him." (Jn.1:18)
(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
From what I've read, there is indication that there was a corruption of the text at John 1:18 which originated in the Alexandrian manuscripts. Other manuscripts say "only begotten Son" not "only begotten God". And that fits with the rest of John's gospel, since he always refers to Jesus either as the "begotten Son", or "begotten of the Father", and never anywhere else as "only begotten God".
Quote from: Roy Monis on September 07, 2008, 05:41:05 PM
Hi! Pleroo
No brother, wrong! Jesus Christ was Christ/Jehovah/Word/God in the flesh, not of the dust of the earth like ours but a heavenly body specially prepared for Him. "....who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross." (Phil.2:6-8).
He is very much God and very much man at the same time.
(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Except that that passage would seem to indicate the exact opposite of what you're saying. He emptied himself, to the point where he could die. Can God die?
Quote from: CHB on September 06, 2008, 09:46:01 PM
Quote from: Molly
Yes, and what is in the bosom of the Father? Jesus!
The heart is in the bosom.
If Jesus being in the bosom of the Father makes Him the Father, would that make the beggar in Luke 16 Abraham? (Luke 16:22)
CHB
Hi! CHB
What does bosom mean? Does it not mean a close intimate relationship? Like husband and wife, father and son/daughter or mother and son/daughter. In like manner the Son whom we are told was in the very beginning with the Father had the same close intimate relationship with His Son. That doesn't make the Son/Jesus the Father. They are two separate entities with identical character traits which makes them One. But the Son by virtue of being the Son and receiving all power and authority from the Father is subject to the Father.
(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Quote from: Molly on September 07, 2008, 10:09:46 AM
Will somebody please explain this to me? Why it has to be this way? This makes my head spin.
1 Corinthians 15:21
For since by man [Adam] came death, by man [Adam] came also the resurrection of the dead.
1 Corinthians 15:21
For since by man [Adam] came death, by man [Jesus] came also the resurrection of the dead.
by =
diaDia = "On account of" "Because of"
Quote from: CHB on September 06, 2008, 10:00:34 PM
Quote from: Molly
Yes, CHB, that's from Psalm 82--"gods"--small g.
There are many gods and many lords. Why is that word even used if there is only ONE God? (1Cor.8:5)
(Psalms 86:8) Among the gods there is none like unto thee, OLord.
Even though there are many gods the Father is the one above all the other gods, just like your Father is the head of your household.
To understand God look at the creation and how it operates.
CHB
Hi! CHB
Those many gods you mention are idols, man made creations, which some are trying to reduce Jesus Christ to. Baal of the OT is an example, people have what they call lucky charms and such, these are all idols. Holding on to the idea of the Babylonian belief that man possesses a free-will independent of God's preordained will is an idol of the heart. Everything in the spiritual world that you believe in other than God and His Word are idols. Nothing occurs that is not caused by God/Father. He is the cause of every effect that we assume we done of our own volition.
All is of God.(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Quote from: Roy Monis on September 07, 2008, 05:41:05 PM
He is very much God and very much man at the same time.
Roy UK
Hey Roy, you are going to have clarify what you mean by this. Do you believe, while Jesus was born to us, that during those 33 years, He was actually omnipotent and omniscient? Or that He was God who became a man and lived like a man and like a man in every way but did not sin? In other words, by the very fact Jesus is God, by the fact He was God.
Quote from: CHB on September 06, 2008, 10:10:22 PM
Quote from: Molly
But there is only one at the top--one King, one God, one LORD
Yes, and that is God the Father. Jesus said "my Father is greater than I". Could Jesus be greater than Himself?
CHB
[/quote/]
Hi! CHB
The Father/God is Sovereign God Almighty, Jesus/Christ/The Word of God is King of kings and Lord of lords. All the chosen/elect who make it to the first resurrection will be kings, princes, priests, judges etc.etc "The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were completed. This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy is the one who has a part in the first resurrection; over these the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with Him for a thousand years." (Rev.20:5-6). All the rest will come through the consuming fire of God in the second resurrection will be children of God, gods little g . Not to be confused with the man made idols of the world which is no more.
(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Quote from: Roy Monis on September 07, 2008, 03:19:42 PM
He was in the beginning with God, this is the Word that you say is the logos. Who pray is the begotten God in the bosom of the Father?
Be real!
Roy UK
Roy, God has no Beginning, so even being with God at the beginning (Genesis) creation does not make one God. The Angels were present too, and no one claims they are God! In fact God even used the term "us" when speaking to them. Let "US" make man in our own image. So are you going to add the Angels to the God head?
God = has NO beginning!
Begotten = has a beginning!
Begotten God = Oxymoron.
It is a well contested variant reading, and one that would not be accepted in any intelligent field of study except Theology. It's the same as saying, "Putting a square peg into a round hole."
I can't make it any clearer, You can't be the one true GOD if your begotten, only a small "g" god by appointment. Just like the scriptures say...
He was appointed heir...
My chosen one! ...
He was commanded...
He learned obediance...
He was given...
John 8:40 "But as it is, you are seeking to kill Me,
a man who has told you the truth,
which I heard from God; this Abraham did not do.
Roy, why would Jesus who you claim is fully God and fully man need to hear the truth from God? Oxymoron?
Roy, I didn't start with my present belief, I once believed in the trinity like you, just like I once believe in Hell. I have move on. The Trinity is taught by Man. No one could come to it's conclusion by only reading the Bible. This is why it took hundreds of years to develop. It developed among men! Men who were willing to kill other Christians who disagreed with their personal view of it, and this is how it was shaped
When Christianity started spreading, the leaders of the churches were now Gentiles who had converted to Christianity. These people, for the most part, had been educated in Greek philosophies in their schools and universities. As educated persons, they of course wanted to find a place for their new religious beliefs within the philosophical framework they had already acquired. So when they read Hebrew Scriptures, they could not help injecting Greek philosophical meanings into them.
The Encyclopedia Britannica says concerning Christian Platonist:
"They did not believe that truth could conflict with truth and were confident that all that was rationally certain in Platonic speculation would prove to be in perfect accordance with the Christian revelation. Their unhistorical approach and unscholarly methods of exegesis of texts, both pagan and Christian, facilitated this confidence."There was also the felt need of some Christians with Greek philosophical training to express Christianity in those terms, both for their own intellectual satisfaction and in order to convert educated pagans.
What is needed today is to remove all the Greek influence from what is called modern day Christianity, and return to the Christianity that was preached by Jesus and his Apostles.
The Council of Nicaea, in 325 AD., made
"Jesus of the same substance as God." This is not the Trinitarian doctrine we know of today, but it was a start. Fifty-six years later, at the Council of Constantinople in 381 AD., the Holy Spirit was added to the formula, bringing to life the modern day Trinity. One can easily see that even at Nicaea the Trinity was not an established doctrine by the absence of the Holy Spirit. Trinitarians will argue that the belief in a triune God was there from the Apostles, and that it was formalized as dogma at Nicaea and Constantinople. But the fact is that the New Testament does not anywhere teach the doctrine of the Trinity. The Doctrine of the Trinity, was not an established doctrine from Apostolic times, but a slowly developing idea that took over three hundred years to formalize.
325 AD - Constantine convenes the Council of Nicaea in order to develop a statement of faith that can unify the church. The Nicene Creed is written, declaring that
"the Father and the Son are of the same substance" (homoousios). Emperor Constantine who was also the high priest of the pagan religion of the Unconquered Sun presided over this council. According to the
Encyclopedia Britannica:
"Constantine himself presided, actively guiding the discussions and personally proposed the crucial formula expressing the relationship of Christ to God in the creed issued by the council. "of one substance with the Father." The American Academic Encyclopedia states:
"Although this was not Constantine's first attempt to reconcile factions in Christianity, it was the first time he had used the imperial office to IMPOSE a settlement." At the end of this council, Constantine sided with Athanasius over Arius and exiled Arius to Illyria.
328 AD - Athanasius becomes bishop of Alexandria.
328 AD - Constantine recalls Arius from Illyria.
335 AD - Constantine now sides with Arius and exiles Athanasius to Trier.
337 AD - A new emperor, Contantius, orders the return of Athanasius to Alexandria.
339 AD - Athanasius flees Alexandria in anticipation of being expelled.
341 AD - Two councils are held in Antioch this year. During this council, the
First, Second, and
Third Arian Confessions are written, thereby beginning the attempt to produce a formal doctrine of faith to oppose the Nicene Creed.
343 AD - At the Council of Sardica, Eastern Bishops demand the removal of Athanasius.
346 AD - Athanasius is restored to Alexandria.
351 AD - A second anti - Nicene council is held in Sirmium.
353 AD - A council is held at Aries during Autumn that is directed against Athanasius.
355 AD - A council is held in Milan. Athanasius is again condemned.
356 AD - Athanasius is deposed on February 8th, beginning his third exile.
357 AD - Third Council of Sirmium is convened.
Both homoousios and homoiousios are avoided as unbiblical, and it is agreed that the Father is greater than His subordinate Son[/u].
359 AD - The Synod of Seleucia is held which affirms that Christ is "like the Father," It does not however, specify how the Son is like the Father.
361 AD - A council is held in Antioch to affirm Arius' positions.
380 AD - Emperor Theodosius the Great declares Christianity the official state religion of the empire.
381 AD - The First Council of Constantinople is held to review the controversy since Nicaea. Emperor Theodosius the Great establishes the creed of Nicaea as the standard for his realm. The Nicene Creed is re-evaluated and accepted with the addition of clauses on the Holy Spirit and other matters. (History of Arian Controversy)
In 380 AD Emperor Thedosius declares Christianity the state religion. One can come to the conclusion that whichever way Theodosius favors, is the way in which it is going to end. This is exactly what happened next. In 381 AD the struggle was finally ended by the current emperor, Theodosius the Great, who favored the Nicene position. Just like at Nicaea, the EMPEROR again decided it. The emperors were dictating the theology of the church. The big difference now was that there was not going to be any more changing sides. It was now the state religion. You cannot make Christianity the state religion and then change its beliefs every few years, it would undermine its credibility as the true faith. The Trinity was now the orthodox position, and the state was willing to back it up. Debates however, would continue for years to come.
Pierac--
The second Adam, Jesus, was the Lord from heaven.
What meaning does this have for you?
1 Corinthians 15:47
The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from heaven.
Hi! Brother SOtW
I don't understand this quote of yours;
QuoteThere is no lie, when I say He is a man and that doesn't mean He was not God. When God became a man, that is what He became. That is why He did not pray to Himself even though He is from Heaven, but to the only God in Heaven, His Father because that is where the Son came from.
You say God became man. The man I presume is Jesus and Jesus is the Word/the Son of God. So what has that to do with the Father, He is still in heaven not on earth. Mary conceived the Word/Christ/Son of God in the body of Jesus By the Father's Spirit. "But when he had considered this, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, "Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife; for the Child who has been conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit." (Matt.1:20). So if I understand the Scriptures correctly it is Jesus/Christ/Son of God who is praying to the Father. Yes, His own Son in the form of man to accomplish His Father's will and die for the salvation of all mankind. It is He, fully man and fully God who has divested Himself of His right to Deity, who is praying to His Father/God on our behalf. Otherwise how can Jesus claim to be the Son of God?
(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Quote from: Pleroo on September 06, 2008, 11:09:18 PM
Quote from: SOtW on September 06, 2008, 10:35:58 PM
Quote from: Pleroo on September 06, 2008, 09:39:57 PM
Okay, I think I understand what you're saying, but let me be absolutely sure. You're proposing that the Christ was God but once he became human (Jesus), he was no longer God?
Right. That is what Scripture says. He became a man, in order that He make all mankind Children of God. So when He returns to God, God will be all in all because we will be with Him.
Okay, thanks. Then let me have you clarify this for me, if you don't mind.
You said:
QuoteThere is no lie, when I say He is a man and that doesn't mean He was not God. When God became a man, that is what He became. That is why He did not pray to Himself even though He is from Heaven, but to the only God in Heaven, His Father because that is where He came from.
You said He (Jesus, God become man) did not pray to Himself (God, the Father in heaven), indicating that prior to Jesus' birth, he and the Father were one in the same, right?
But John 1:1 says that Jesus was the Word and the Word was WITH God (the Father in heaven). Even before Jesus' birth he is described as being WITH God, not actually being God (the Father).
How do you reconcile that?
Thanks for your patience.
Hi! Pleroo
That's absolutely right and I've been saying that over the past 450 odd replies, as Isaiah said "Who has
believed our message? And to whom has the arm of the
Lord been revealed? (Isa.53:1).
(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
Quote from: Molly on September 07, 2008, 07:25:42 PM
Pierac--
The second Adam, Jesus, was the Lord from heaven.
What meaning does this have for you?
1 Corinthians 15:47
The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from heaven.
Hi Molly,
1Corinthians 15:35 - 58 is speaking concerning the Resurrection Body .
35 But someone will ask, "How are the dead raised? With what kind of body do they come?"...
1Co 15:45 Thus it is written, "The first man Adam
became a living being"; the last Adam
became a life-giving spirit.
1Co 15:48 Like the one made of dust, so too are those made of dust, and
like the one from heaven,
so too those who are heavenly. (us)
The source is always God, Adam became a living being just as Jesus became a life giving spirit. Note it does not read Adam "was" a living being or Jesus "was" a life giving Spirit, but that they became, and the source of course is God.
God is our Father and Jesus' Father, Jesus is God's Son and our brother. When we are raised, we will be like Him (Jesus) our brother. (Jesus is our brother not our God.)
Paul
But that's not what it says, Pierac--
It says the second [Adam]--that is, Jesus-- IS the Lord from heaven.
How is he the Lord from heaven?
Quote from: Roy Monis on September 07, 2008, 06:31:48 PM
Quote from: CHB on September 06, 2008, 10:00:34 PM
Quote from: Molly
Yes, CHB, that's from Psalm 82--"gods"--small g.
There are many gods and many lords. Why is that word even used if there is only ONE God? (1Cor.8:5)
(Psalms 86:8) Among the gods there is none like unto thee, OLord.
Even though there are many gods the Father is the one above all the other gods, just like your Father is the head of your household.
To understand God look at the creation and how it operates.
CHB
Hi! CHB
Those many gods you mention are idols, man made creations, which some are trying to reduce Jesus Christ to. Baal of the OT is an example, people have what they call lucky charms and such, these are all idols. Holding on to the idea of the Babylonian belief that man possesses a free-will independent of God's preordained will is an idol of the heart. Everything in the spiritual world that you believe in other than God and His Word are idols. Nothing occurs that is not caused by God/Father. He is the cause of every effect that we assume we done of our own volition.
All is of God.
(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
I tried for a few hours to get back on the forum yesterday evening but finally gave up and went to bed. I see the thread has kept moving I don't know where to start.
Roy, I never said man had a free will, I am with you on "all is of God". That is why we are all gods, even the idols because they wouldn't exist without God letting them exist. Nothing exist outside of God. I do believe Jesus was our creator but the Father was Jesus's creator.
We are all sons of God, therefore we are gods just like Jesus called the Jew's gods because he knew they were sons of God. Jesus said why do you want to kill me for saying I am the Son of God when I Myself called you gods.
If your Father was a Smith all of His children would be Smith's, right?
Read the article, "Just What is God". None of us are our own Father like some are trying to say about Jesus. That reminds me of a song "I,m My Own Grandpa". :laughing7:
If Jesus was His own Father why did Paul say that the head of Christ was God?
If Jesus came
FROM God and
returned to God. If Jesus prayed
to the Father honoured
the Father. If Jesus recieved his instructions
from the Father. Jesus said "the Father
sent me. Jesus said "ye have neither heard His {Father} voice
at any time, nor seen his shape. Lots of people saw Jesus and heard his voice. Jesus said,
"I am come in my Father's name". Jesus said "all that the Father
giveth me" If Jesus was the Father why the need to
give him anything? If Jesus was the Father why did he say "of mine own self I can do nothing"?
For what it's worth, here is how I see the whole thing in as few words as possible.
There was God the Father who has no beginning or end, who bore or created God the Son, who later became Jesus. God the Son, before he became Jesus was the beginning of the Father's creation. God the Son, before he became Jesus, was the creator of all things by the power of the Father. God the Son emptied Himself, became
human and died for the world. He did all of this by the power of God the Father, and he says this Himself many many times, by His own words this is proven.
CHB
CHB
Quote from: Molly on September 07, 2008, 09:04:19 PM
But that's not what it says, Pierac--
It says the second [Adam]--that is, Jesus-- IS the Lord from heaven.
How is he the Lord from heaven?
The same as you and I are from heaven...
1Co 15:48 Like the one made of dust, so too are those made of dust,
and like the one from heaven,
so too those who are heavenly.
Let's see how the scriptures speak of such things...
Jewish "Ideal" PreexistenceIn the English language, and certainly the way young people speak, we often speak about something that happened in the past as though it is happening in the present. For instance, a witness to a bank robbery might say, "And here I am standing in line minding my own business, when bursting through the door comes as a hooded bank robber. He tells us all to get on the floor. He waves his gun around and threatens us. Then he goes up to the teller and yells, 'Give me the money!'" We understand the events described occurred in the past, even though the narrative is in the present. Speaking of past events in the present is a peculiarity of the English language.
Most languages have peculiarities. The Hebrew mind and language has a peculiarity that English speakers are not accustomed to. They do the opposite of what I have just described. They often use the past tense or the present tense to speak of events yet future. The reason is that the Jews believed that whatever was determined in the mind of God existed before it came to be in history. God is the God who calls the things which do not exist as (already) existing (Rom. 4:17). God promised Abraham that He would give him the promised land and that he would be the father of many descendents. So sure is the fulfillment that sometimes the predictive language is in the past tense, as though it were already accomplished: "To your descendents I "have given" this land" (Gen 15:18). It came to be a common feature of Hebrew thinking that whatever God had decreed already preexisted (in plan and purpose) before it materialized on earth. "When the Jews wished to designate something as predestined, he spoke of it as already existing in heaven.
Scripture tells us that Jesus Christ "was foreknown before the foundation of the world, but has appeared in these last times" for our sakes who believe in God's word (1Pet. 1:20). This does not mean that Jesus personally preexisted his appearance on earth, because in the same chapter we find that Christians have also been in the "foreknowledge of God the Father" (1Pet. 1:2). The words "foreknowledge" and "foreknown," noun and verb, are exactly alike. Peter uses precisely the same idea to refer to both Christians and Jesus. Christians do not preexisted heaven before our birth on earth nor did Jesus.
Similarly, the Bible speaks of Jesus as the Lamb of God who was crucified before the world began (Rev.13:8). Every Bible reader of course knows that Jesus was crucified under Pontius Pilate in Palestine in the first century. But God ordained his crucifixion to happen before he even created the universe. Therefore, in God's mind, and in the Hebrew understanding, that which came to be had already been. The prophetic future was spoken of in the past tense. What God has decreed, He says is as good as done.
In John 17, Jesus prays just before his arrest in the garden, "I glorify You on the earth, having accomplished the work which You have given me to do. And now, glorify me together with Yourself, Father, with the glory which I had with You before the world was." (v.4-5) If ever there was a statement that proved the personal preexistence of Jesus with the Father in heaven before he came to earth, surely this is it. Once again, we must caution against haste, for "In Biblical ways of speaking and thinking one may 'have' something which is promised in God's plan before one actually has its."
We have already seen this principle in operation, where God's plan of promises are spoken in the "prophetic past tense." God promised Abraham, "I have given you this land." God says to Christians, "You are seated with Christ in the heavenlies; you are already glorified (Eph. 2:6; Rom.8:30). We have these things already in the plan and purpose of God -- even though we do not (yet) have them! Scripture tells us that we have eternal life as a present possession, even though clearly we await the day of our entrance into the life of the Age to come, whether by resurrection for those already dead, or the rapture of the living, when Christ returns. God calls the things that are not as though they already exist (Rom. 4:17). Clearly, in Hebrew thinking, the glory which Jesus had "with" God before the world was, it is the glory that it was present in God's mind and purpose from the beginning.
When we examine the rest of Jesus' prayer, it becomes quite clear that the glory Jesus claimed to have had "with the father before the world was" is a glory in prospect. Jesus is using the peculiar Hebrew way of thinking and speaking by which the past tense is employed to speak of the future.
To confirm this all we need to do is follow Jesus' prayer through. Jesus speaks as though he has already accomplished his work: he says I have "accomplished a work which you have gave me to do" (v.4). Quite obviously he has not actually finish the work because his crucifixion has not yet happened, and his cry from the cross, "It is finished," has not yet been uttered. Next, Jesus speaks as though the disciples have already fully glorified him (through their preaching ministry) even though the resurrection has not yet happened: he prays, "I have been glorified in them" (v.10). Jesus also says "I am no more in the world" (v.11) even though he clearly is still in the world. In his own mind, he is already, by faith in the father's promise, sitting in heaven having been resurrected. Jesus says he has already sent the disciples into the world to preach: he prays, "I have sent them into the world" (v.18), even though this did not fully happen until after the resurrection. Jesus prays for his disciples, and "for those also who[will] believed in me through their word" (v.20). That is, he prays for subsequent generations of Christians who will come to faith in Christ down the track. He prays that "the glory which You have given me I have given to them (v.22). He prays that all these believers "which you have given me" (the whole future community of faith) may behold my glory, which You have given me; for You did love [choose] me before the foundation of the world (v.24).
One day the Lord Jesus at his second coming will say to his own people, "Come, you who are blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world" (Matt 25:34). In Paul's language this hope is "laid up for you in heaven" which means it is in God's promise and plan and is certain of fulfillment (Col. 1:5). This hope is so certain that Paul can even speak of Christians as
already glorified (Romans 8:29–30, noting the past tense). Indeed, this plan hatched in God's mind "according to His own purpose in grace which was granted us in Christ Jesus from all eternity" (2 Tim 1:9). Dunn, in his book,
Christology in the Making p238 adds: "The gift was
purposed 'ages ago,' unless we are to take it that the actual giving and receiving, 'us' and 'Christ Jesus' were all alike preexistent." This hope of Christians entering into the age to come was "promised long ages ago" (Tit 1:2). Dunn continues p238. "Here it is even clearer that what is thought of as happening "ages ago" is God's promise; and it is that promise of eternal life which has been manifested. Indeed, the text says it is his word that he has manifested - that is, not Christ the Logos, but the word of promise, fulfilled in Christ and offered now back in the
kerygma [ message]. In other words, we are back where we started – Christ as the content of the word of preaching, the embodiment of the predetermined plan of salvation, the fulfillment of the divine purpose."
Quote from: SOtW on September 06, 2008, 11:23:31 PM
Quote from: PlerooBut John 1:1 says that Jesus was the Word and the Word was WITH God (the Father in heaven). Even before Jesus' birth he is described as being WITH God, not actually being God (the Father).
How do you reconcile that?
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
John 1:1 is written the same way as Genesis 1:1 is written.
Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
It is a complete summary of both what was, and is and is to come in one sentence. It is what we like to say in the Screen play business, a Log Line.
Definition: Log Line
Answers the question: What is your story about?
So John 1:1 like Genesis 1:1, is the Log Line, it is telling us what this story is about.
John 1:1 is telling us both what was, and is and is to come. What Jesus was prior to becoming man, what he was when He was man and what He was after His death and resurrection.
Hi SOtW
Spot on!
1.... What He was
2.....What He is
3...What He will be
V V V
God the Son/Word God/Word/man God the Son/Word V V V
Back with Father In flesh on earth Back with the Father (http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) Roy UK
Don't forget.. the Word was God...Roy
Hi! Paul
Your quote;
QuoteCLV Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the word, and the word was toward God, and God was the word. " 2 This was in the beginning toward God. 3 All came into being through it, and apart from it not even one thing came into being which has come into being." 4 In it was life, and the life was the light of men.
Why should we accept the CLV with its
IT heresy? If the KJV, NASV, and the InterLinear are all biased in what way is the CLV an exception? And why do you just give one verse to prove its authenticity "But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of
one's own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God." (2Pet.1:20-21). Let us
have a witness. So here it is now explain this to me. "No one has seen God at any time; the only
begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him." (Jn.1:18).
(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy Uk
Quote from: Pleroo on September 07, 2008, 05:42:05 PM
Quote from: Roy Monis on September 07, 2008, 05:20:08 PM
Hi! CHB
Correction brother! Your quote; QuoteThere is ONE God the Father and there is ONE Lord Jesus Christ which is also referred to as God. Why? because He is God the Father's Son.
Not just referred to as God! HE IS GOD! "No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him." (Jn.1:18)
(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy UK
From what I've read, there is indication that there was a corruption of the text at John 1:18 which originated in the Alexandrian manuscripts. Other manuscripts say "only begotten Son" not "only begotten God". And that fits with the rest of John's gospel, since he always refers to Jesus either as the "begotten Son", or "begotten of the Father", and never anywhere else as "only begotten God".
Amen sister Pieroo! Glad to see you back here at TM!
JESUS is a SON... a SON is an OFFSPRING... Everyone noting Him as GOD in and of Himself, is clinging to TRADITION...
Over and again
YHVH in the OT, noted HIMSELF ALONE as GOD... Plainly and repeatedly (especially in
Isaiah 41:4 / 43:10-11 / 44:8 / 44:24 / 45:7 / 45:18 / 45:22 / 46:9)... using SINGULAR references to Himself, with I, me, mine, continuosly throughout the OT... and BLATANTLY/PLAINLY noting Himself as GOD
ALONE...
BABYLON (the system of TRADITION), is that which makes the WORD, inert and powerless by its insistence of ITSELF (
Matt 15:6 / Mk 7:13)
JESUS over and over noted that GOD is GOD as did His Apostles, ...and deferred His due GLORY to HIM... As did His Apostles...
Also,
JESUS in His last WORDS, called out:
MY GOD, MY GOD, why hast THOU forsaken ME... differentiating Himself from
HIS GOD...
BABYLON's children shall argue against this... but the ELECT shall not succumb to their CONFUSED claims, and they each shall COME OUT from beneath the CONTROL of BABYLON, into the LIGHT of the ONLY GOD and FATHER of ALL...
YHVH...
Which LIGHT is borne by HIS
SON...
JESUS CHRIST...
PeacE...
...willieH :Sparkletooth:
willieH: Hi Roy... :hithere:
This issue is a never ending
"merry-go-round", but one that is
VERY pertinent...
ONENESS is the TRUTH and destiny of MAN...
It is shown in marriage, what begins as ONE, then by GOD enacting NATURE becomes TWO. Then when the SPIRIT of GOD comes upon
them and brings them together,
THEY again become ONE...
UNITY is the goal and MAJESTY of the SPIRITUAL...
The DIVIDED system and HOUSE of BABYLON shall not see this...
For when ALL are reconciled...
ALL are become
ONE...
It is our multiple destiny to become ONE... which is the permeation of
YHVH... who ALONE is GOD, and Scripture states
YHVH to be so...
That said...
Quote from: Roy Monis on September 07, 2008, 10:27:53 PM
Hi! Paul
Your quote;QuoteCLV Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the word, and the word was toward God, and God was the word. " 2 This was in the beginning toward God. 3 All came into being through it, and apart from it not even one thing came into being which has come into being." 4 In it was life, and the life was the light of men.
Why should we accept the CLV with its IT heresy? If the KJV, NASV, and the InterLinear are all biased in what way is the CLV an exception? And why do you just give one verse to prove its authenticity "But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God." (2Pet.1:20-21). Let us have a witness. So here it is now explain this to me. "No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him." (Jn.1:18).
(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif) (http://www.glitter-graphics.com)
Roy Uk
Hey Roy... He, she, or it, ...are
pronouns which when assigned by translators VALIDLY, do so as CONTEXT denotes a platform that has previously identified the substitutional term... This context does not DO this... so concerning the
LOGOS, ..."IT" is just as viable a platform as "HE"...
GOD is without "gender",
YHVH is the Creator of GENDER... Male and female
CREATED He GOD, them -
Gen 1:27...
To demand or assign "CREATED gender" to GOD is to pull our Creator
down to our LEVEL, which is of FLESH... by equating
YHVH to be subject to "fleshly" demands... such as noting GOD as
HE, instead of as GOD, FATHER, or by name, ...
YHVH...
YHVH created BOTH MALE & FEMALE within MAN as IS noted in
Gen 1:27... and interestingly enough each HUMAN has BOTH Male and Female elements within...
Gen 1:27 should actually read: So GOD created MAN in
GOD's [not his] image, in the image of GOD created
GOD [not he] Him, ...Male AND Female, CREATED
GOD [not he] ...THEM.
That
CHRIST was born
male is due to the HOLINESS demands of a FIRST BORN Male OPENING the WOMB, (
Luke 2:23 / Ex 13:2 / Numb 3:13) which is being
purposed as HOLY unto
YHVH ...set aside for a WORK which GOD has particularly PURPOSED, ...and that MAN was first represented by a MASCULINE entity in ADAM... which was a NATURAL shadow of the SPIRITUAL to follow... and thusly, followed in MASCULINITY...
"MAN" is considered MALE
and FEMALE... not just MALE...
LITERAL observation of verses such as
1 Tim 4:9-11 could note that
WOMEN are saved by some other means other than GOD...
PeacE...
...willieH :Sparkletooth:
Roy, I do understandings my beliefs are hard for you, it's always difficult to over come the tradition of men, as we have done with the concept of hell. Ok, here's your multiple witness
Here is what the scriptures shows the one true God sounds like...
Isa 46:10 Declaring the end from the beginning, And from ancient times things which have not been done, Saying, 'My purpose will be established, And I will accomplish all My good pleasure';
Phi 2:13 for it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure.
Psa 115:3 But our God is in the heavens; He does whatever He pleases.
Pro 16:1 We humans make plans, but the LORD (yehōwāh) has the final word.
Now here is what an 'anointed' begotten Son of God sounds like...
"Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son CAN DO NOTHING OF HIMSELF, but what He sees the Father do: for what things so ever He does, these also does the Son likewise" (John 5:19).
"I can of mine own self DO NOTHING: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the father which has sent Me" (John 5:30).
"For I came down from heaven, not to do Mine Own will, but the will of Him that sent me"(John 6:38 ).
"For I have not spoken of Myself; but the Father which sent Me, He (God) gave me commandment WHAT I should say, and WHAT I should speak" (John 12:49).
"He that loves Me not keeps not My sayings: and the word which ye hear is NOT MINE, but the Father's which sent Me" (John 14:24).
Mar 10:18 And Jesus said to him, "Why do you call Me good? No one is good except God alone.
It all matches with what Jesus says about Himself:
John 8:40 "But as it is, you are seeking to kill Me, a man who has told you the truth, which I heard from God; this Abraham did not do.
"Now all these things are from God, who reconciled us to himself through (dia) "the anointed one" (2 Cor.5:18 ).
It really does read "from God" and "to Himself!" But How? "dia Christ"! ("on account of" "because of")
"For God... has saved us, and called us... according to His own purpose and grace which was granted us in Christ Jesus from all eternity" (2 Tim 1:9).
Second witness that it is God.
"To the only God our Savior, through (dia) Jesus Christ our Lord, be glory, majesty, dominion and authority, before all time and now and forever. Amen" (Jude 25).
You see "to the only God our savior" God is the one saving us through (dia) his Son, but it is God doing the saving!
"Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise Him; He has put Him to grief: When you shall make His soul an offering for sin..." (Isa. 53:10).
God said that He would "make" the soul of Jesus an offering for sin. So God is doing the "making," and it is God doing the saving, just like the verses testify above. With this knowledge you get a better picture of who Jesus is. He is the only begotten Son of God! The chosen one who was made an offering for sin, and the only way to the Father! There is no other way!
Jesus is our mediator, and Paul calls our risen mediator a man.
1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,
God also tells us He is going to take this man (Jesus) [whom he has appointed], and at an appointed time judge the world in righteousness.
Act 17:30 "Therefore having overlooked the times of ignorance, God is now declaring to men that all people everywhere should repent, 31 because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed ; and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead."
God also tells us in this verse He has provided proof Jesus was this man by raising him from the dead."
When will people learn to quit using lies and fallacy to prove what they think is right and true. This is the kind of non-sense that comes because of it.
Quote from: WillieHJESUS is a SON... a SON is an OFFSPRING... Everyone noting Him as GOD in and of Himself, is clinging to TRADITION...
BABYLON (the system of TRADITION), is that which makes the WORD, inert and powerless by its insistence of ITSELF (Matt 15:6 / Mk 7:13)
What WillieH is saying everyone is that anything that has TRADITION is wrong. The existence of God is tradtion, the resurrection of the dead is tradition, salvation is in tradition and therefore if what WillieH is saying folks, is that if you is that if you believe anything that is found in tradition, you are living a lie. Therefore WillieH is saying you believe in a lie from the beginning. He is saying God doesn't exist, Jesus did not come and die and raise from the dead, or that there is any salvation. The reason, once again, is because these things are CLINGING TO TRADITION. Even WillieH has nullified everything he believes by his own words as well. So don't take it to hard.
Quote from: Roy Monis on September 07, 2008, 05:41:05 PM
Hi! Pleroo
No brother, wrong! Jesus Christ was Christ/Jehovah/Word/God in the flesh, not of the dust of the earth like ours but a heavenly body specially prepared for Him. "....who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross." (Phil.2:6-8).
He is very much God and very much man at the same time.
Roy UK
Roy, both you and Craig have expressed belief in the
"kenotic doctrine." Many Trinitarians use Phil.2:6-8 to show how Jesus became a man, and gave up his deity. The problem is it completely goes against the Chalcedon Creed which you both agreed with.
Chalcedon Creed (451 AD)
Therefore, following the holy fathers, we all with one accord teach men to acknowledge one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, at once complete in Godhead and complete in manhood,
truly God and truly man, consisting also of a reasonable soul and body;
of one substance with the Father as regards his Godhead, and at the same time of one substance with us as regards his manhood; like us in all respects, apart from sin; as regards his Godhead, begotten of the Father before the ages, but yet as regards his manhood begotten, bearer; one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten, recognized in
two natures, without confusion,
without change, without division, without separation; the distinction of natures being in no way annulled by the union, but rather the characteristics of each nature being preserved and coming together to form one person and subsistence,
not as parted or separated into two persons, but one and the same Son and Only-begotten God the Word, Lord Jesus Christ; even as the prophets from earliest times spoke of him, and our Lord Jesus Christ himself taught us, and the creed of the fathers has handed down to us.
This shows how little people understand their creeds. People try to use the "kenotic doctrine" it in defense of the trinity. But it is in total contradiction to the Chalcedon Creed. The Kenotic Doctrine says that Jesus emptied himself of his deity. Well, you can simply read in the Chalcedon Creed that it defines Jesus' nature as fully God and fully man at all times, without division, without separation. You cannot say that you believe in the trinity and use this excuse. If you subscribe to the kenotic doctrine, then you have already rejected the trinity. You cannot be both.
Even the Pope, who we all know is a Trinitarian agrees. In 1951 at the 1500 anniversary of the Council of Chalcedon wrote the following:
There is another enemy of the faith of Chalcedon, widely diffused outside the fold of the Catholic religion. This is an opinion for which a rashly and falsely understood sentence of St. Paul's Epistle to the Philippians (2:7), supplies a basis and a shape. This is called the kenotic doctrine, and according to it, they imagine that the divinity was taken away from the Word in Christ. It is a wicked invention, equally to be condemned with the Docetism opposed to it. It reduces the whole mystery of the Incarnation and Redemption to empty the bloodless imaginations. Encyclical of Pope Pius the 12th on the Council of Chalcedon September 8, 1951 (paragraph 29).
You also create another problem, a very BIG problem. If the second part of the Godhead becomes a man, then so does the first part! (
two natures, without confusion, without change, without division, without separation). One can not become flesh with out the other. This Chalcedon doctrine has God the Father also becoming a man. Heresy of the highest order!
When you combine all the creeds you can see theological mental gymnastics at it's best.
My belief is easier... The LORD our God is one! ... No mental gymnastics required!
Quote from: Pierac on September 08, 2008, 12:34:46 AM
Quote from: Roy Monis on September 07, 2008, 05:41:05 PM
Roy, both you and Craig have expressed belief in the "kenotic doctrine." Many Trinitarians use Phil.2:6-8 to show how Jesus became a man, and gave up his deity. The problem is it completely goes against the Chalcedon Creed which you both agreed with.
Why do you lie? Pierac, show us anywhere where I said I agreed with the Chalcedon Creed?
Basically, this thread is starting to lose it's civil tone and I'm not sure how to reclaim it. It's one of the subjects that Gary did not want on the boards, but as long as everything was civil and it wasn't turning into a playground fight, then I was tolerating it. It's nearly 25 pages long. Surely by now there's a sampling of the views of many of the people on the boards. It was a subject that I was hoping would sorta go away on it's own. A few honest questions turned into a few more, and that was fine. But the fruitfulness of where this is going is questionable now. A few people have been reporting posts with increasing regularity from this thread and when you use the "report post" feature on the posts, Gary's still listed in the administrative section of the boards as an administrator, so he gets a copy of all of those. If all went according to plan, then he had hip replacement surgery this past Friday. Not sure when he'd be back with his normal routine, checking email, etc. I don't want him to have 50 emails about this one thread to ask me about why I allowed the thread to start with. He might already have 50. He forwarded one of the complaints to me this past week and his only comment was "Whine. Whine." If we're going to ever p.o. Gary, then I want it to be 'cause 75 ETers joined the boards all at once and it turned into an absolute free for all on a dozen threads about ET, so that it's at least the actual purpose of the boards that got a little out of hand, kapish?
Quote from: willieH on September 07, 2008, 11:43:43 PM
This issue is a never ending "merry-go-round",...
Yup!
I want to keep everyone that we have, so just a quick reminder about some of the rules, from this other page on the rules board:
http://www.tentmaker.org/forum/index.php?topic=2693.0 (http://www.tentmaker.org/forum/index.php?topic=2693.0)
QuoteFor these one warning will be given and then if repeated, you will be banned without further explanation. The ban may be of time duration but rather expect it to be permanent.
...
4. Calling out any member's views/opinions as stupid, dumb, crazy etc. viz. insults.
5. Public criticism of moderation decisions.
6. Starting a new thread of a similar topic as one that is recently locked.
They were the rules that I inherited when I became admin this past May. Though I may eventually choose to reword a few things, ""when I have time,"" I [generally] like the rules that we have in place because they [essentially and for the most part] are just defined standards of conduct that keep the place civil.
Quote from: SOtW on September 08, 2008, 12:42:15 AM
Quote from: Pierac on September 08, 2008, 12:34:46 AM
Quote from: Roy Monis on September 07, 2008, 05:41:05 PM
Roy, both you and Craig have expressed belief in the "kenotic doctrine." Many Trinitarians use Phil.2:6-8 to show how Jesus became a man, and gave up his deity. The problem is it completely goes against the Chalcedon Creed which you both agreed with.
Why do you lie? Pierac, show us anywhere where I said I agreed with the Chalcedon Creed?
No lie, just an honest mistake. I know you did not hold the traditional view so I should have check the creeds and dates. There are sooo many. You were Ok with the Nicene Creed 325. However, you do teach the
"kenotic doctrine." Sorry for the mistake, Just wanted to correct this error and let everyone know you did not accept the Chalcedon Creed. My Bad! :mblush: