- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Nov. 20 2011,12:53) Not that any man (including Jesus) has seen the Father (why because he is Spirit), now notice carefully Mike, save he which is (of GOD), another word HIS SPIRIT (INTELLECT) he (HAS) SEEN THE FATHER:
Gene,Are you saying that Jesus' “higher spirit intellect” was able to see God when no one else could?
Mike …………YES IN HIS MINDS EYE, Just as all who SEE GOD Do likewise. God is a Spirit you can not see him. You simply do not believe Jesus or John when he said “ no man has seen God at any time
John 1:18……> No man has seen God (AT ANY TIME), the only begotten Son, Which is in the bosom of the Father, he has declared him
Now what part of that Mike you don't understand.
To all,
Here are two Bizzaro world doctrines.
1} Some teach that a father is his own son.
2} Some teach that a child exists before his mother.
If you choose to believe either of those I question how you can call any doctrine Bizzaro world doctrines without pointing at your own teachings.
From what I've seen here the definition of bizarro should be: any doctrine(s) held by those who disagree with you.
Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Nov. 28 2011,21:09) Mike …………YES IN HIS MINDS EYE, Just as all who SEE GOD Do likewise. God is a Spirit you can not see him. You simply do not believe Jesus or John when he said “ no man has seen God at any time John 1:18……> No man has seen God (AT ANY TIME), the only begotten Son, Which is in the bosom of the Father, he has declared him
Now what part of that Mike you don't understand.
Did any of Jesus' Apostles see God in their mind's eye, Gene?Quote (seekingtruth @ Nov. 29 2011,08:41) From what I've seen here the definition of bizarro should be: any doctrine(s) held by those who disagree with you.
With who?Mike,
It was a general declaration to all, myself included. Is there anyone here who hasn't had their beliefs declared “bizzaro”? Ours were, as I know you believe like me in the pre-existence of Jesus. In confronting what I believe to be false teachings I tend to error on the side of grace, that may not always be right, while you tend to be very aggressive however that also may not be appropriate in some cases.Don't get me wrong I believe in establishing sound doctrine, but believe little can be gained by belittling, mocking or declaring damnation to those of opposing views. I prefer those with whom we can reason together.
My opinion
WmQuote (kerwin @ Nov. 30 2011,06:32) To all, Here are two Bizzaro world doctrines.
1} Some teach that a father is his own son.
2} Some teach that a child exists before his mother.
If you choose to believe either of those I question how you can call any doctrine Bizzaro world doctrines without pointing at your own teachings.
KerwinYou have not come to know God,at the resurrection the children will be resurrected before their father
pierre
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 30 2011,12:32) Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Nov. 28 2011,21:09) Mike …………YES IN HIS MINDS EYE, Just as all who SEE GOD Do likewise. God is a Spirit you can not see him. You simply do not believe Jesus or John when he said “ no man has seen God at any time John 1:18……> No man has seen God (AT ANY TIME), the only begotten Son, Which is in the bosom of the Father, he has declared him
Now what part of that Mike you don't understand.
Did any of Jesus' Apostles see God in their mind's eye, Gene?
Mike………..Absolutely they saw the Father in there Minds, Just as I also see him constantly in my mind and in the creation also. In fact if a person can't see God with the “eye of their understanding” Who are you praying to them?Mike i have quoted clear scriptures showing this so your disagreement is with scriptures not Me. IMO
peace and Love………………………………….gene
Quote (seekingtruth @ Nov. 29 2011,20:54) I prefer those with whom we can reason together.
I agree with the majority of your post, Wm. And I will do my part to work on the belittling aspect.But, what do you suppose we do when we are discussing scripture with someone who is opposed to reasoning together?
It seems that you'd prefer to let people like Kerwin, Gene, Marty, Frank, and Paladin be free to keep posting unscriptural things about our Lord and Savior never being anything but a man just like us.
I try to show scriptures that prove their doctrine to be unscriptural. Yet, many of them won't actually discuss those scriptures with me. (Look over the last 4 or 5 pages of the Pre-existence 2 thread to see what I mean.) Instead, they just keep posting the same tired, unscriptural nonsense and pretending that they don't hear me or something. What then, Wm? What would you have me do?
peace,
mikeMike,
I wish I could tell you with any certainty how to respond to what is believed to be false teaching, I'm only offering my opinion on showing love for one another. I feel we actually make it harder for someone to be swayed when we confront in a manner that basically states “I'm smarter than you, listen to me”, rather I believe we should point out reasons to believe differently, out of concern for the other person. God told one of the prophets (Jeremiah I think) that he was not responsible for what others decided to do, only that he spoke the warning.Galatians 6:1
Brothers and sisters, if someone is caught in a sin, you who live by the Spirit should restore that person gently. But watch yourselves, or you also may be tempted.2 Timothy 2:25
Opponents must be gently instructed, in the hope that God will grant them repentance leading them to a knowledge of the truth,Hebrews 5:2
He is able to deal gently with those who are ignorant and are going astray, since he himself is subject to weakness.My opinion – Wm
Mike………….Jesus was like us completely in the sense of being a human “BEING” and never another type of Being at all. As far as him being Born by a EARTHLY FATHER his was NOT in that sense ONLY, Just as ADAM was NOT Born like we are. In that sense they both were unique even Eve was uniquely Born also. But Jesus' unique Berth did not preclude Him from being a 100 % Man who came into his existence by his berth on the earth just as we did,in fact he is even called the “SECOND (MAN) ADAM, and Not from a “PREEXISTENT STATE OF BEING All the above who you say did not give clear scriptures to prove this is simply not true we all have , it is your scriptures that cane be taken all kinds of ways and disagrees with the “ORIGINAL TESTAMENT” which was translated by predisposed TRINITARIANS and and Gnostic's who derive their teachings from the Greeks and other pagan sources. Paul plainly said to us all, if what is said or even written as far as that goes is not in line with the scriptures “OF THE ORIGINAL TESTAMENT”, because that is all they had ” it should be questioned and not believed.
We have all struggled with pain and suffering to get you and T8 and Pierre and Irene to at least “try” to see and understand what we are saying to you all. Were are not saying we know it all but this one thing we do all know Jesus did not preexist His berth on the earth as a sentinel BEING. I am sure we all agree with that at least, Paladin , Marty, Martian, Not3inone, Kerwin, Kjeion, and there were even more then that trying to get you guy's to come out of those wrong teachings, even Nick Our former Moderator know Jesus was not a son of God before his berth on this earth he did not agree with T8 i believe and so he left the site. Again i am not saying we agree on everything but Jesus' Preexistence as a Sentinel Being i believe all we do. Frank has given you some very strong material and his web site is full of material offered not only by him but many Scholars , who are not of any preexistent teachings. You need to think about some of these thing we have been saying, they are in aliment with the “ORIGINAL WORD OF GOD”. IMO
peace and love to you and yours……………………………………………………………….gene
Okay Gene,
I am willing to GENTLY discuss the whole issue with you, one point at a time. I'll make the first point, and AFTER you DIRECTLY address it, then you can make your first point.
Gene, John the Baptist says very specific words about the Lord he came to pave the way for. In verses 29-30, John says those words about JESUS. In verses 14-15, John says those same exact words about THE WORD.
Gene, if Jesus is not the Word, then how do you explain John saying this very specific thing about both THE WORD and JESUS?
Here you go Wm. You can moderate our discussion with gentleness, making sure we both act accoding to scriptural teachings on behavior.
Mike………..You need to first post those very “SPECIFIC WORDS” John Said first and lets look at those WORD specifically> I assume you are referring to the words in John 1:30 which is a repeat of John 1:15. I have already completely explained them before. but i will do it again.
John 1:30…….> This is he of whom I Said (in verse 15) , After me comes a Man which is preferred before me: for he was before me.
Preferred (ghim'-om-ahee) a prolonged and middle form o a primary verb; to cause to be (“gen”-erate), that is, (reflexively) to (BECOME)(come into being)……> a word translated over 80 different ways in the New Testament, all with different meanings.
Now lets look at the word (Before)… em'-pros-then ….> ; in front of (in place [literally or figuratively] or time:-against, at, before , (in presence, sight) of. translated 7 different ways in the New testement
Now let look at the Other word translated here as Before…….> pro'-tos…> foremost (in time, place. order, or importance:- before, beginning, best, chief (-est), first (of all) former.
translated 7 different ways. in the New Testament.Mike i am not going into John 1:15 becasue it is just a repeat of John 1:30……You have sleected three words that are totally translated 94 different way and not so much ad one of them inferr a PREEXISTENT BEING at all, Only a Man who was to come spoken about long before and therefore given a preference over Johns Position and status on this earth. Non of that deals with a preexistent being at all Mike.
Mike this is why Paul warned us to compare what was said (or written) later with the “ORIGINAL TESTAMENT” and in the “ORIGINAL TESTAMENT” THERE IS NO MENTION OF ANY PREEXISTENT BEING to come into existence at a later time in history as a sentinel being of any kind.
peace and love……………………………………gene
Hi Gene,
I believe you are missing the point. I'm not making any claim about “preferred” or “before” or “surpassed”. I'm simply pointing out that the same exact words were said about someone called “The Word” in 14-15, and about someone called “Jesus” in 29-30.
Do you see what I'm saying? I'm not arguing the meaning OF the words said. I'm just pointing out that the same exact statement was said about Jesus and about the Word.
Why do you think that is?
Mike……………Problem is you are switching the subject matter, the context of those scriptures , were as you say ” not talking about any word but the MAN Jesus not the Word Jesus they have no connection at all, and just because you assume it's has some connection, or is related somehow does not make it so, right Mike?, and is not that same as if it were really saying that or for that matter even relating to it. That is you perceptions based on your leaning and assumptions, and your reaching for some connecting evidence, we simply need to see scriptures dealing with our question of Jesus' preexistence. Jesus is no Word of GOD he is a Man who relayed GOD the FATHERS words to us, just as did the Prophets who also relayed GOD'S words to us by the same Spirit of GOD (IN) them also in their day. There is not Difference between them an Jesus as Far as a Man GOES. WE are told the prophets moved as the Spirit of God guided them and So did the Man Jesus. Jesus only uniqueness was How he was BORN, Just as Adam's and Eve uniqueness was also unique , But none of that made any preexistent Being nor any different then the rest of humanity. Mike i am telling you this whole Preexistent thing is wrong completely wrong. Please read some of what Frank has posted it;s right on, and excellent study material. At least give it a Chance, that is not asking to much now is it?
peace and love…………………………………………………………………………..
……geneQuote (Gene Balthrop @ Dec. 01 2011,16:32)
Please read some of what Frank has posted it;s right on, and excellent study material. At least give it a Chance, that is not asking to much now is it?
Gene, I HAVE read it. I even took one of his first long posts apart piece by piece and showed him where what his author said differed from what the scriptures said.Remember? I even made a post to you trying to point YOUR attention to the discrepancies. Remember now? The dude's name was Fairchild.
So I HAVE read what he posted. And if you want to, I will take each and every quote he's posted apart with you, bit by bit, and show you how the author is letting his own pre-conceived notions get in the way of what the scriptures actually say. (Not to mention that many of the things said in those quotes are things we pre-existers agree with anyway. For example, they say, “Jesus didn't pre-exist, because he was born of Mary”. But we agree he was born of Mary. The problem is that being born of Mary ACCORDING TO THE FLESH does not exclude him from pre-existing BEFORE he was born of Mary. Many of the statements in Frank's quoted material are just like that, Gene. So let me know if you want to discuss those quotes one claim at a time with me.)
Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Dec. 01 2011,16:32)
Mike……………Problem is you are switching the subject matter, the context of those scriptures , were as you say ” not talking about any word but the MAN Jesus not the Word Jesus they have no connection at all………
I'm not doing that at all, Gene. Look:14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.
15 John testifies concerning him and he cries out, saying, “This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.’”
Gene, according to the two verses I just posted, who did John the Baptist say those words about?
Quote (t8 @ June 20 2011,17:08) Another gibberish doctrine is the one that says that the Roman Catholic Church is the original church. How is that when the Body of Christ which is called the Church in scripture started with Jesus which was obviously some time in the first century or less, and the Roman Catholic Church came centuries later.
If anything, you could make the argument that she was one of the first denominations, but not the Church.
t8 Fist of all I don't know why i thought you believed in the trinity, sorry…. But as far as the Catholic Church goes, it was one of the first Churches after the first three centuries of prosecution of the Christians. They worshiped underground… It was Constantine who
issued an edit permitting all Christians to worship openly…. The Universal Church was the first Roman Catholic Church….. Also the start of the trinity…. It was Quintus Septimus Tertullian who first came up with it, and Constantine made it into law…
The Catholic Church then persecuted all that went against them….
Torture Chambers are still visible in the Churches in Europe… One in our Hometown Basilica in Rheine Germany, a very beautiful Church… No Bibles were available either and anyone who was found with one was persecuted and died….Sorry to say that we belonged to that Church until George was 47 ad i was 46 years old…. We never read the Bible then…. Surprise, surprise when we finally started to read the Bible…and the rest is History…..
Peace and Love Irene
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
