Can you explain?

[Molly]

What 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

[Molly]

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;

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.

[Molly]

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. 

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.

[Nathan]

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!

[Pierac]

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. 

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.

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

[Craig]

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.

[Molly]

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

[Pierac]

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:

[reFORMer]

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?

[Roy Monis]

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)


Roy   UK

[Roy Monis]

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;

Cannot 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? "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). 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

[Nathan]

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.

[Craig]

We 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.

[Roy Monis]

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.

Hi! Brother Nathan

You do like speaking in riddles, the problem is I don't understand riddles.

I understand this and accept it

I 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

I 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.

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

. 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, 

That 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,

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.

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.

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 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;

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?

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://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll68/roymonis/peace.gif)

Roy   UK

[Nathan]

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. 

[Pierac]

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

[Molly]

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.

[Pierac]

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

[Molly]

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.

[Pierac]

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

[reFORMer]

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.

[Roy Monis]

Hi! Paul

To 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

[Roy Monis]

Hi! Paul

Who 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)
Roy   UK

[Molly]

'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

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.

He's changing the physics of his creation! :mshock:

[Roy Monis]

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)
Roy   UK