Conception in the greek language

Participant

Quote (terraricca @ Jan. 17 2010,07:52)

kerwin
were did i say the word religion or even make allusion to that

The word faith and the word religion have a definition in common. The way you used faith led me to the conclusion you were using the definition the two words have in common. If I was mistaken then I did not understand you correctly.

January 17, 2010 at 10:19 am#170601

Participant

Choosenone,

It was necessary that the children of Israel rejected Jesus before he came to the rest of the world but the message he preached to them is the same message preached to the nations. The largest difference between what Jesus teaches and what his students taught later is that the Spirit did not come until the after Jesus ascension and thus Jesus taught under the law.. Part of what he told was about the coming of the Spirit. Matthew 5:6 is one such scripture as walking by the Spirit fulfills the promise.

THE PROMISE:

Matthew 5:6(NIV) reads:

wrote:

THE FULLFILMENT

Galatians 5:16(NIV) reads:

Quote

So I say, live by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the sinful nature.

January 17, 2010 at 5:58 pm#170623

Participant

kerwin

faith does not imply religion;Heb 11:1 Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see.

were is religion here,religion is man made

January 17, 2010 at 9:50 pm#170635

Participant

kerwin.
You say “but the message he (Jesus) preached to them is the same message preached to the nations”. This is not true, the difference is…

Jesus taught “The Gospel of the Kingdom of God”, which was:

Jesus Christ is…Shepherd and King.
His gospel declares…Pardon and forgiveness.
He preached…To the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
Theme…Repent.
Scope…None, save the Jews.
Method…Exhortation.
Administration…Law
Justifying Factor… Non, Law cannot justify.
Security…He that endures to the end shall be saved.
Status…A Royal priesthood.

Paul, a minister to the nations, commisioned by Christ Jesus, taught…

The gospel of “the Grace of God”. Which is:

Christ Jesus is… Saviour and Head.
This Gospel Declares… Justification and Reconciliation.
Preached… For faith-obedience among all nations.
Theme…Be reconciled.
Scope… All who believe.
Method… Entreaty.
Administration… Grace.
Justifying Factor… A rightiousness of God, through Jesus Christs faith.
Security… There is now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus.
Status… We are Ambassadors of Christ.

Jesus message to “the lost sheep of the house of Isreal”, is quite different to that of His (Pauls, by Christ Jesus) ministry to the 'nations'.

Blessings.

January 18, 2010 at 8:23 am#170688

gollamudi

Participant

Quote (kerwin @ Jan. 16 2010,19:42)

Quote (gollamudi @ Jan. 16 2010,14:01)

So how is that process about brother Kerwin?
You mean to say Jesus was created in the womb of Mary?
Jesus was spcial creation of God like the first Adam?

I suppose you could say that. On the other hand he was probably closer to the creation of Eve since God made her from a part of Adam and Jesus had to have been descended from David through Mary. I assume God used he egg cell but I don't believe I can actually prove that with the evidence presented in scripture.

It is not actually that hard of a concept since God does that with species other than man. It is harder to figure out how it resulted in a male offspring. That would have taken a drastic change in the x chromosome as the y chromosome is smaller and structured differently. Still it is no harder to believe than the creation of Adam.

Hi brother Kerwin,
I always appreciate your honest confession on the issues that are not so clear in our Bible. But I want to ask you one thing; Is it so required for Jesus to be born of a Virgin without male involvement to be the son of God?

If God said to David in 2 Sam 7:12-14 that one of his descendents will be a son to Him, then why don't we straight away accept that God could father the descendent of david by way of adoption instead of literal fathering?

This could have avoided allegations of Jews on Jesus such as;
-no Virgin birth was prophesied by Isaiah
-God can not be literal flesh and blood father of any human being
-God could not invlove himself personally with human female to give birth to a demi-god

Please think over on these lines I am still oriented towards the Jewish views on Jesus' origins.

peace to you
adam

January 18, 2010 at 10:21 am#170693

Participant

Quote (chosenone @ Jan. 18 2010,03:50)

kerwin.
You say “but the message he (Jesus) preached to them is the same message preached to the nations”. This is not true, the difference is…

Jesus taught “The Gospel of the Kingdom of God”, which was:

Paul, a minister to the nations, commissioned by Christ Jesus, taught…

The gospel of “the Grace of God”. Which is:

Christ Jesus is… Saviour and Head.
This Gospel Declares… Justification and Reconciliation.
Preached… For faith-obedience among all nations.
Theme…Be reconciled.
Scope… All who believe.
Method… Entreaty.
Administration… Grace.
Justifying Factor… A righteousness of God, through Jesus Christs faith.
Security… There is now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus.
Status… We are Ambassadors of Christ.

Jesus message to “the lost sheep of the house of Isreal”, is quite different to that of His (Pauls, by Christ Jesus) ministry to the 'nations'.

Blessings.

You falsely claim Jesus preached a different gospel that Paul who states quite clearly that if anyone even an angel from heaven preaches a different gospel then let them stand eternally condemned, Galatians 1:8. So according to you Paul states that Jesus should stand eternally condemned. I am certainly not going to buy such utter nonsense that you are writing and I am surprised that you do.

Paul to the members of the Church in Rome teaches:

Romans 2:4-11(NIV) reads:

Quote

Or do you show contempt for the riches of his kindness, tolerance and patience, not realizing that God's kindness leads you toward repentance?

5But because of your stubbornness and your unrepentant heart, you are storing up wrath against yourself for the day of God's wrath, when his righteous judgment will be revealed. 6God “will give to each person according to what he has done.”[a] 7To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. 8But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger. 9There will be trouble and distress for every human being who does evil: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile; 10but glory, honor and peace for everyone who does good: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. 11For God does not show favoritism.

That sounded like a teaching on repentance to me. It is certainly not his only one. Of course repentance and being reconciled to God is one and the same thing as repentance is turning away from and when you turn away from evil you turn toward God and therefore reconciled with him.

It also seems you fail to realize that those that followed God under the Old Testament did so by grace even though Paul in his teachings uses examples from the Old Testament to show that is is God grace that saves us.

January 18, 2010 at 10:28 am#170694

Participant

Quote (gollamudi @ Jan. 18 2010,14:23)

Quote (kerwin @ Jan. 16 2010,19:42)

Quote (gollamudi @ Jan. 16 2010,14:01)

So how is that process about brother Kerwin?
You mean to say Jesus was created in the womb of Mary?
Jesus was spcial creation of God like the first Adam?

If God said to David in 2 Sam 7:12-14 that one of his descendents will be a son to Him, then why don't we straight away accept that God could father the descendant of David by way of adoption instead of literal fathering?

This could have avoided allegations of Jews on Jesus such as;
-no Virgin birth was prophesied by Isaiah
-God can not be literal flesh and blood father any human being
-God could not invlove himself personally with human female to give birth to a demi-god

Please think over on these lines I am still oriented towards the Jewish views on Jesus origins.

peace to you
adam

Most of those arguments by Jews are straw men arguments since I do not believe 1) God is the literal flesh and blood father any human being or 2) God involved himself personally with human female to give birth to a demi-god,

The third one “no Virgin birth was prophesied by Isaiah” is irrelevant. God does what God does whether or not he tells us in advance.

I do not know if adoption would fit the bill as I do not know how adoption was handled in the Jewish culture of the First Century A.D.

January 18, 2010 at 5:15 pm#170730

GeneBalthrop

Participant

Kerwin…….Adoption can work in this case, but i am not saying that is the case, but it could work in Jewish law a adopted Son was given full Inheritance status as i recall. But the problem here is that the Messiah was to come through lions of DAVID and it tends to mean a Physical decedent. Not sure how it would work any other way. The virgin Prophesy of IMMANUEL is relevant though sense it is used all the time by Churches to prove the Immaculate conception theory. IMO

January 18, 2010 at 7:26 pm#170745

Participant

Quote (kerwin @ Jan. 18 2010,21:21)

kerwin.
You misinterpert Galatians 1:8, notice it says … But if ever we also, or a messenger out of heaven, should be bringing an evangel to you beside that which we bring to you, let him be anathema!
“Beside that which WE bring to you…” He is saying that evangel in which “he” brings by the authority granted him by Christ Jesus, which is “the Gospel of Grace”, which is not the same as “the Gospel of the Kingdom” taught by Jesus to Israel (and them only).

Remember, Jesus taught Israel, and them only, obedience to the “Law”. Their entrance into the Kingdom was depedant on keeping the Law. Since they could not do that, they even crucified Him, God abondoned them (Israel) and turned to the 'Nations'. (Acts13:46 … Being bold, both Paul and Barnabas, say, “To you first (Israel) was it necessary that the word of God be spoken. Yet, since, in fact, you are thrusting it away, and are judging yourselves not worthy of eonian life, lo! we are turning to the nations.

May I add, Israel was under the “Law”, brought down by Moses from God, their entrance into the kingdom was by obedience of the “Law”. Even you must know by now that we are not under “law” but under “Grace”. It is very obvious that the message of Jesus to Israel is NOT the same as the message by Paul (by the authority if Jesus) given to the all nations.

Hope this clears it up for you.

Blessings.

January 19, 2010 at 2:48 am#170806

Participant

Choosenone wrote:

Quote

You misinterpert Galatians 1:8, notice it says … But if ever we also, or a messenger out of heaven, should be bringing an evangel to you beside that which we bring to you, let him be anathema!
“Beside that which WE bring to you…” He is saying that evangel in which “he” brings by the authority granted him by Christ Jesus, which is “the Gospel of Grace”, which is not the same as “the Gospel of the Kingdom” taught by Jesus to Israel (and them only).

I had to read what you said twice to figure out your point. Did you even read my point? I ask because you are implying the point that Paul condemns Jesus. I stated that was absurd.

In other words Paul believes that Jesus preached the same message of gospel that he, Paul and others, preached at first. There is only one gospel and even that is a fulfillment of the law. I do admit that Jesus was looking forward to what would be established while Paul was telling what was established.

You appear ignorant of scripture if you do not think Paul preached a gospel of the Kingdom as it is written:

Galatian 5:21(NIV) reads:

Quote

and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.

As for the Gospel of Grace it is the same as existed under the Law of Mosses. Belief in Jesus and thus his promises and teachings is merely a way to keep what is yours by the right of being God’s offspring.

Jonah 2:8(NIV) reads:

Quote

“Those who cling to worthless idols
forfeit the grace that could be theirs.

Choosenone wrote:

Quote

Remember, Jesus taught Israel, and them only, obedience to the “Law”. Their entrance into the Kingdom was dependant on keeping the Law.

I remember it is also written to those under the Law that the “righteous live by faith“.

Habakkup 2:4(NIV) reads:

Quote

“See, he is puffed up;
his desires are not upright—
but the righteous will live by his faith

January 19, 2010 at 5:29 am#170838

Participant

kerwin.
Saved by obedience to the law, and saved by the “Grace of God”, are two different things.
As shown by Israel, they were not able to obey the law, God turned away from them. We are now saved by the “Grace of God”, not by anything we can do, (obedience). Christ Jesus took the sins of the world on Himself, and paid our penalty, He “Justified” all humanity in Gods eyes. All this by Gods “Grace”, not of our “works”.
Two different Gospels.

Blessings

PS. I think I will rest from any more discussion on this subject, I'm sure we will not agree, so we can agree to disagree.

January 19, 2010 at 6:01 am#170842

Participant

Quote (chosenone @ Jan. 19 2010,11:29)

Blessings

PS. I think I will rest from any more discussion on this subject, I'm sure we will not agree, so we can agree to disagree.

Did you notice that Jonah 2:8 clearly states the disobedient forfeit the grace of God?

January 19, 2010 at 5:32 pm#170885

Participant

CO
Paul explain it already no one could be saved by the law ,the law just emplified you sinning condition
Christ sacrifice took this away so now you sins have been remosed if you stop sinning or at the least you start walking in God s direction and going forward to meet with christ

January 20, 2010 at 1:39 am#170936

Participant

Kerwin.

You said …”Did you notice that Jonah 2:8 clearly states the disobedient forfeit the grace of God?”

Did you know… that when that scripture was written, it was to Israel still under the “Old Covenant” while still under the “Law”? So, of course, any disobedience of the “Law” would be sin.
Also, I don't know which translation you use, but the NKJV does not use the word “grace”, which in my opinion would be an incorrect translation.

Gods' “Covenant of Grace”, was preached by Paul to the nations, commissioned by Jesus after His sacrifice, ressurrection, and ascention.

We are not under “Law”, but under “Grace”. You must correctly cut the 'word of truth'. (2.Tim2:15)

Blessings.

January 20, 2010 at 2:06 am#170941

Participant

CO
do you know that Jonah was send by God to Nineveh ,the city of gentiles ,
so what your point is God not the God of all men.??

January 20, 2010 at 2:43 am#170949

Participant

Quote (terraricca @ Jan. 20 2010,13:06)

CO
do you know that Jonah was send by God to Nineveh ,the city of gentiles ,
so what your point is God not the God of all men.?

Hi Terraricca.

Eph.2:11-12 …11 Wherefore, remember that once you, the nations in flesh — who are termed 'Uncircumcision' by those termed 'Circumcision,' in flesh, made by hands —
12 that you were, in that era, apart from Christ, being alienated from the citizenship of Israel, and guests of the promise covenants, having no expectation, and without God in the world.

Hope this answers your question.

Blessings, Jerry.

January 20, 2010 at 5:23 am#170955

Participant

hi CO
i wanted to point out the quote to Kerwin.
but yes you right and wrong ,God is the God to all men ,and this is why i show you Jonah and Nineveh.
you right because God follow his plan,and at that time the law was in effect and the circumcision ,and yes no one else had the true God .

other person have received miracle and they were gentiles ,in the time of the prophets.

you know the difference between being under the law or under the grace.??

January 20, 2010 at 5:28 am#170956