- This topic has 1,478 replies, 55 voices, and was last updated 2 years, 8 months ago by Proclaimer.
- AuthorPosts
- April 20, 2007 at 4:43 am#49803Not3in1Participant
This is the thing, it couldn't have been emptied from him – not that which I am speaking of. Let me explain:
You believe in a pre-existent, spiritual person that was alive with God before all time.
This spirit person was “what” was “conceived” in Mary.
However, when this spirit person was conceived in Mary………..this spirit person CHANGED, because Mary “added” her part to the baby that was being formed inside of her (true conception). So, Mary added to this already existing person – altering this person – into a new person.
Is this correct?
April 20, 2007 at 4:46 am#49806NickHassanParticipantHi not3,
Mary gave of her womb and her genes as women do so that with God's help the Son of God could have a body prepared for him.
We too live in a tent body.
2Cor 5
'1For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.2For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven:
3If so be that being clothed we shall not be found naked”
April 20, 2007 at 4:51 am#49809kenrchParticipantQuote (Nick Hassan @ April 20 2007,16:46) Hi not3,
Mary gave of her womb and her genes as women do so that with God's help the Son of God could have a body prepared for him.
We too live in a tent body.
2Cor 5
'1For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.2For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven:
3If so be that being clothed we shall not be found naked”
So we were spirit beings also? That's what the Mormons believe.April 20, 2007 at 4:55 am#49810Not3in1ParticipantMary gave of her womb and her genes as women do so that with God's help the Son of God could have a body prepared for him.
*************
Nick, you are really sending me around the bush, here. If the above is what you really believe, than you DO believe Mary was a surragate mother. In another place you denied this.If Mary was just the “body” that housed this pre-existent, spirit being…………then Mary never TRULY “conceived.”
April 20, 2007 at 4:57 am#49811Not3in1ParticipantNick,
See the “God in the flesh” thread to see exactly where we left off on this subject……April 20, 2007 at 4:58 am#49812NickHassanParticipantHi not3,
Scripture says she conceived Jesus.
Mary was his true mother so he is son of man and David.April 20, 2007 at 5:03 am#49813Not3in1ParticipantA true Mother, Nick, contributes to the child growing in her womb. You cannot have it both ways, I'm afraid.
A. Either Mary conceived, and contributed to the baby and it alters your pre-existent spirit person. OR
B. She is a surragate mother and did not alter the baby Jesus because she was only the body.A or B?
April 20, 2007 at 5:07 am#49814NickHassanParticipantHi not3,
She was his true mother and his genes were half of hers.
Spirit beings are soul and spirit so partaking of flesh does not alter them except to add outer man[flesh].
We too are inner man and outer man.
Rom7
“22For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:23But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.
24O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?
25I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.”
April 20, 2007 at 5:18 am#49821Not3in1ParticipantOK, now we are getting somewhere.
If your pre-existent, spirit being took on flesh AND also took on genes from Mary (now a combination of God and Mary)……this pre-existent, spirit person is no longer the SAME PERSON that was “with” God in the beginning.
Put differently – we have the pre-existent Jesus – and we have the conceived Jesus. TWO, very DIFFERENT Jesus'.
I've read your “spirit, soul and flesh” ideas. And Nick, the thing is, when a child is “conceived,” they are not “just” taking on flesh. They are being “woven” together into a new person. A new person. A person which also has a spirit and a soul that is unique to them according to who is conceiving them. We don't come with a set spirit and then just add things on like an ala' carte lunch line. Do you see where I'm going with this?
April 20, 2007 at 5:34 am#49823NickHassanParticipantHi not3,
Because he is like us he can be considered from two perspectives-inner and outer man-flesh and spirit.
Rom 1
“1Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God,2(Which he had promised afore by his prophets in the holy scriptures,)
3Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;
4And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:
5By whom we have received grace and apostleship, for obedience to the faith among all nations, for his name:
6Among whom are ye also the called of Jesus Christ:”
2cor 5
” 16Therefore from now on we recognize no one according to the flesh; even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, yet now we know Him in this way no longer.”April 20, 2007 at 5:55 am#49831Not3in1ParticipantNick, I believe you are pulling a “Tim2” and piecing scriptures together to affirm your theories. But I will look at these verses a bit more in depth, and post again tomorrow. I am fading quickly as it is getting late here.
But you cannot separate the “flesh” from everything else as you are wanting these scriptures to say. Flesh would have been joined with everything else in Mary's womb (if it be a “true” conception, and a a “true” birth). In other words, not just SKIN.
The “inner” and the “outer” were joined!!!!!!!!
Until tomorrow, thanks Nick.
April 20, 2007 at 6:26 am#49834NickHassanParticipantQuote (Not3in1 @ April 20 2007,17:18) OK, now we are getting somewhere. If your pre-existent, spirit being took on flesh AND also took on genes from Mary (now a combination of God and Mary)……this pre-existent, spirit person is no longer the SAME PERSON that was “with” God in the beginning.
Put differently – we have the pre-existent Jesus – and we have the conceived Jesus. TWO, very DIFFERENT Jesus'.
I've read your “spirit, soul and flesh” ideas. And Nick, the thing is, when a child is “conceived,” they are not “just” taking on flesh. They are being “woven” together into a new person. A new person. A person which also has a spirit and a soul that is unique to them according to who is conceiving them. We don't come with a set spirit and then just add things on like an ala' carte lunch line. Do you see where I'm going with this?
Hi not3,
God has given us little that I have found on the process detail-just the beginning situation-a spirit being- and the end result-a man like us.April 20, 2007 at 6:29 pm#49884Not3in1ParticipantHi Nick,
The absence of information should lead us to draw on knowledge that we already have, and put together ideas with clear information we have at our finger tips. Clear information like the conception process, the birthing process, and what both of those actions brings into existence. Also, the fact that none of us can remember a pre-existing life AND that scripture does not lend itself to this idea for us OR for Jesus (not clearly, anyway).
I believe we should use caution when believing something that doesn't line up with clear logic OR examples that God has given us in our lives and the world. When we put together ideas that are foreign to our existence, we end up in a realm that we cannot relate to. I don't believe God would throw us simple-minded (he knows we are just dust) men a curve ball. He WANTS us to understand. He wants us to know. He wanted to be a part of us so that we could be family…..that's why he sent his Son. The WAY he sent his Son. Just my thoughts here.
April 20, 2007 at 6:36 pm#49889NickHassanParticipantHi Not3,
Where does scripture show God sending His son and where has the Son come from?
Christ, though like us in every way except sin, did know his unique origins.
We should not force scripture to say that because he was like us he could not have had unique origins lest we call him a liar.April 20, 2007 at 7:57 pm#49901Worshipping JesusParticipantQuote (Not3in1 @ April 20 2007,17:03) A true Mother, Nick, contributes to the child growing in her womb. You cannot have it both ways, I'm afraid. A. Either Mary conceived, and contributed to the baby and it alters your pre-existent spirit person. OR
B. She is a surragate mother and did not alter the baby Jesus because she was only the body.A or B?
not3How come it has to be either way?
Why do you have to understand the genetics of the Miraculous birth of the Monogenes, Unique Son of God.
Dosnt the word *Unique* mean anything?
Is it possible for God who says nothing is to hard for him, or nothing is impossible for him, to come in a body prepared for him as the scriptures proclaim?
Is it possible not3?
Why wouldnt one of the most important events in the history of man be magnificent, and surrounded by miraculous events?
If the virgin birth means Christ is no different than you and I, then why the virgin birth?
Why didnt God just pick a husband and wife like Joseph and Mary and say your first born will be special, he will save his people from their sins his name shall be Jesus?
Then cause Jesus to be filled with the Holy Spirit from his mothers womb like John the Baptist?
Instead the Father said to Yeshua go and the Word/God was made flesh and dwelt among us.
This is an unambiguous truth found in scriptures, that Jesus the Lord from heaven came into this world to offer his body as a living sacrifice, the Lamb of God, perfect, Holy and without sin, for without the shedding of blood their could be no forgiveness of sin and the lamb had to be spotless.
Only God could do this!
Exod 12:5
*Your lamb shall be without blemish*, a male of the first year: ye shall take it out from the sheep, or from the goats:Heb 10:
4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.
5 *Wherefore when he cometh into the world*, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, *but a body hast thou prepared me*:
6 In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure.
7 *Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God*.
8 Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law;
9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.Jn 1:1.2
1 That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life;
2 (For the *life* was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;)The “Life” Yeshua was manifested that was with the Father in the beginning.
To often men are using human reason to interpret scripture and trying to use human logic rather than accepting the Scriptures for what they say and letting the scriptures by the Holy Spirit speak to them!
IMHO
April 20, 2007 at 8:01 pm#49902NickHassanParticipantHi W,
Christ is the Lord
and he is from heaven.
He is the Lord from heaven.
That does not make him our God.
God still is in heaven and He sent His Son.April 20, 2007 at 10:40 pm#49911Not3in1ParticipantHow come it has to be either way?
*************Because I was talking with Nick only, and we were trying to narrow down his belief system so that I could understand.
I understand that Trinitarians view this differently. Nick and I are not Trinitarians. Thanks.
April 21, 2007 at 12:02 am#49915NickHassanParticipantHi W,
No conversations here are private and your input is always welcome.
We work slowly towards unity.April 23, 2007 at 12:54 am#50155Not3in1ParticipantI didn't mean to exclude anyone, of course. I only meant to say that I was trying to understand NICK'S point of view. And because I was trying to understand his point of view, I was concentrating on his responses only. Thanks.
May 19, 2007 at 7:37 pm#52616NickHassanParticipanttopical
- AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.