Did john say god became flesh? or was it satan at

[NickHassan]

Hi TT and WJ,
You take this equality idea too far when you suggest Jesus is above God.
Besides it is against equality.

We await your next work in showing equality between God and His own Spirit too.
How foolish are the vain thoughts of carnal men.

[bodhitharta]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 16 2009,12:46)

Hi TT and WJ, You take this equality idea too far when you suggest Jesus is above God. Besides it is against equality. We await your next work in showing equality between God and His own Spirit too. How foolish are the vain thoughts of carnal men.

Nick you believe that Jesus is above God, You have decided that God cannot send anyone after Jesus, how could God be so limited?

[NickHassan]

Hi BD,
No I do not but others do.
Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God.
Why would God have second thoughts and sent another with postscripts?

[bodhitharta]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 16 2009,13:02)

Hi BD, No I do not but others do. Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God. Why would God have second thoughts and sent another with postscripts?

Why did God send others before Jesus and anyone after him?

[NickHassan]

Hi BD,
It is finished.

[bodhitharta]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 16 2009,13:28)

Hi BD, It is finished.

Then why did God send someone after Jesus?

Was Jesus finished his mission or was all the missions of God finished?

[NickHassan]

Hi BD,
Christ was in them.
A mag nificent plan of God.
When the blood of Jesus was poured out his Holy Spirit was given to men and this promise still holds.
Killing Jesus only unleashed a flood of renewed men in the same Spirit to continue that work till the end comes.

join in.

[bodhitharta]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 16 2009,15:39)

Hi BD, Christ was in them. A mag nificent plan of God. When the blood of Jesus was poured out his Holy Spirit was given to men and this promise still holds. Killing Jesus only unleashed a flood of renewed men in the same Spirit to continue that work till the end comes. join in.

So this Holy Spirit was forbidden to Arabs?

What about this verse?

Romans 10:20 (King James Version)

20 But Esaias is very bold, and saith, I was found of them that sought me not; I was made manifest unto them that asked not after me

Nick I must say in this instance you are wrong but keep digging so you may find the truth.

[NickHassan]

Hi BD,
Read Acts 2.39 .
This promise is to all who repent.

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 15 2009,20:46)

Hi TT and WJ, You take this equality idea too far when you suggest Jesus is above God. Besides it is against equality. We await your next work in showing equality between God and His own Spirit too. How foolish are the vain thoughts of carnal men.

NH

Why do you not say anything about PDs denial that Jesus was the Word that was with God and came in the flesh? Or that Jesus preexisted his natural birth. You believe those things don't you?

Are you biased here or just afraid to address PD?

Look at my post, I didn't say that Jesus is above the Father. I said what the word says, that he has magnified his Word above his own name and yet has magnified Jesus name above every name making his name equal to the Word!

So there you go missrepresenting us again. Shall you keep on bearing false witness about others words on this board?

Why don't you have a few colored blocks next to your name?

Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 15 2009,20:46)

We await your next work in showing equality between God and His own Spirit too. How foolish are the vain thoughts of carnal men.

Why what do you mean NH? Is God not equal to his own Spirit?

God is Spirit, so how many Spirits do you have?

Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. 2 Cor 3:17

WJ

[bodhitharta]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 16 2009,16:24)

Hi BD, Read Acts 2.39 . This promise is to all who repent.

Isaiah 59
1Behold, the LORD's hand is not shortened, that it cannot save; neither his ear heavy, that it cannot hear:

Who is it that saves Nick? You are starting to sound like a trinitarian

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (bodhitharta @ June 16 2009,00:58)

Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 16 2009,16:24) Hi BD, Read Acts 2.39 . This promise is to all who repent. Isaiah 59 1Behold, the LORD's hand is not shortened, that it cannot save; neither his ear heavy, that it cannot hear: Who is it that saves Nick? You are starting to sound like a trinitarian

Hi BD

Whats that supposed to mean?

WJ

[bodhitharta]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 16 2009,17:15)

Quote (bodhitharta @ June 16 2009,00:58) Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 16 2009,16:24) Hi BD, Read Acts 2.39 . This promise is to all who repent. Isaiah 59 1Behold, the LORD's hand is not shortened, that it cannot save; neither his ear heavy, that it cannot hear: Who is it that saves Nick? You are starting to sound like a trinitarian Hi BD Whats that supposed to mean? WJ

Nick believe that God cannot make a move without Jesus

[NickHassan]

Quote (bodhitharta @ June 16 2009,16:58)

Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 16 2009,16:24) Hi BD, Read Acts 2.39 . This promise is to all who repent. Isaiah 59 1Behold, the LORD's hand is not shortened, that it cannot save; neither his ear heavy, that it cannot hear: Who is it that saves Nick? You are starting to sound like a trinitarian

Hi BD,
You reject the Lordship of Jesus Christ?
Why abuse those who accept it?

[Paladin]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 16 2009,11:13)

Hi PD Quote (Paladin @ June 12 2009,16:32) Do you see it? The mystery revealed and now expressed – is- “Christ in you” and- that this CONCEPT of “Christ in you” is CALLED the “logos of God.” And THAT is a direct quote from scripture so you have no argument of “ambiguity” to offer, unless you wish to take on the scriptures themselves. I can continue to quote scripture in rebuttal all day long. No I do not see it. I see what you are saying, and that is not a direct quote from scripture. I have become its servant by the commission God gave me to present to you the word of God in its fullness- the mystery that has been kept hidden for ages and generations, but is now disclosed to the saints. To them God has chosen to make known among the Gentiles the glorious riches of this mystery, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory. Col 1:25-27 NIV of which I became a minister according to the stewardship from God which was given to me for you, to fulfill the word of God, the mystery which has been hidden from ages and from generations, but now has been revealed to His saints. To them God willed to make known what are the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles: which [fn] is Christ in you, the hope of glory. NKJV Of {this church} I was made a minister according to the stewardship from God bestowed on me for your benefit, so that I might fully carry out the preaching of the word of God, that is,} the mystery which has been hidden from the {past} ages and generations, but has now been manifested to His saints, to whom God willed to make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory. NASB Where are the words… Quote (Paladin @ June 12 2009,16:32) The mystery revealed and now expressed – is- “Christ in you” and- that this CONCEPT of “Christ in you” is CALLED the “logos of God.” The message Paul is bringing them by the preaching of the ‘Logos of God” is that Christ is in them and that was the mystery that was kept secret from past ages and generations. Jesus (God) has come to live in us by his Spirit. The mystery that was kept secret is God now lives “in” his people. Christ in us the Hope of Glory. The Concept of Christ in us is not called the “logos of God”, those are your words. Paul said… Examine yourselves to see whether you are in the faith; test yourselves. Do you not realize that “CHRIST JESUS IS IN YOU–unless, of course, you fail the test”? 2 Cor 13:5 for I know that through your prayers and the help given by “THE SPIRIT OF JESUS CHRIST, what has happened to me will turn out for my deliverance.* According to my earnest expectation and my hope, that in nothing I shall be ashamed, but that with all boldness, as always, so now also “CHRIST SHALL BE MAGNIFIED IN MY BODY”, whether it be by life, or by death.. Phil 1:9, 10 The Mystery was Jesus being magnified in our bodies. God coming and making residence “in” his people was a concept that was not understood by the Hebrews or found in the Torah or Tanakh, and in fact the Angels desired to look into those things. Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow. UNTO WHOM IT WAS REVEALED, that not unto themselves, but unto us they did minister the things, which are now reported unto you by them that have “preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven“; which things the angels desire to look into.  1 Peter 1:11, 12 Can you see it yet? The Apostles use the terms Spirit of Christ and Spirit of God synonymously. That is because they are the “One Spirit” that we have been made to drink of. (Rom 8:9, 10, 1 Cor 12:13) The Mystery is the Spirit of Christ, the Spirit of God would graft us in to the vine  (Rom 11:15, 16) The Mystery is made known by the preaching of Jesus Christ and is made manifest, by the scriptures of the prophets, which is Christ in us the hope of Glory! (Rom 16:25, 26) The Mystery is the wisdom of God, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory: and none of the princes of the world knew. (1 Cor 2:7, 8) The Mystery is “That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ”… (Eph 1:10) The Mystery is “That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel”…  and that from the beginning of the world it was hid in God who created all things by Jesus Christ. Eph 3:4-9 The Mystery is how that Christ who is the head of his Body the Church is one with the church as a husband and wife is one flesh. Eph 5:31-33 But none of these say that the “CONCEPT of “Christ in you” is CALLED the “logos of God”. Christ in us is the Mystery and the “Logos of God” is the revelation of that mystery! Quote (Paladin @ June 12 2009,16:32) I was speaking of the logos of God, not the logos of Christ. That is a different thing. The logos of Christ is comprised of the logos given by the Father to the son, in the form of reema, and which Jesus preached, and the believers believed, accepted, and obeyed. The “logos of God” as presented by John, is a far different thing. So what are you saying, that the “Word Jesus preached” is not the same “Word that John and the Apostles preached”? Where are the scriptures that distinguish the “Logos of God” from the “Logos of Christ”? That is merely more of your own inference.  Are you saying that Jesus words are not the Word of God? How about the Gospel of Christ which is the Gospel of God, (Mk 1:1, Rom 1:1, 1:16, 15:16, 2 Cor 4:4, 9:13, 11:7, 1 Thess 2:2, 2:8, 9, 3:2, 2 Thess 1:8, 1 Pet 4:17. Notice how Paul uses the terms synonymously. Is the Gospel of God, the Gospel of Christ the Word of God or not? There is no distinction between the ‘Logos” Word and the “Rhema” Word in the scriptures. Paul and the Apostles make no distinction between the two because the following scriptures show that the “Logos” and the “Rhema” is preached… Now when they had gone throughout Phrygia and the region of Galatia, and were forbidden of the Holy Ghost to “PREACH THE WORD, (LOGOS)” in Asia, Acts 16:6 But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, [even] in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the “WORD, (RHEMA) OF FAITH, WHICH WE PREACH”; Rom 10:8 ”Preach the word, (Logos)”; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. 2 Tim 4:2 Where is the distinction in the above verses? Quote (Paladin @ June 12 2009,16:32) God placed his word above his name  “for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name.” [Psa 138:2] And he promised to give Jesus a name above every name “Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:” [Phil 2:9] But you should finish the quote… Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: “THAT AT THE NAME OF JESUS every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and [things] under the earth; And that EVERY TONGUE SHOULD CONFESS THAT JESUS CHRIST IS LORD, to the glory of God the Father”. Since we see that the “Word of God” is a name, and Jesus has been given that “name”, (John 1:1, 1 John 1:1-3, Rev 19:13), then when the Father exalted Jesus name above every name he is also making Jesus equal to the ‘Word”, (Ps 138:2) What does that tell you? He has exalted Jesus name above his own name. Quote (Paladin @ June 12 2009,16:32) God placed his word above his name  “for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name.” [Psa 138:2] And he promised to give Jesus a name above every name “Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:” [Phil 2:9] “His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself. 13 And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The logos of God.” [Rev 19:12-13] And this “new name” was not a name pulled from eternity, but was “NEW, not previously known –  “Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my kainos [new] name.” [Rev 3:12] kainos = 2537 kainos   Meaning:  1) new 1a) as respects form 1a1) recently made, fresh, recent, unused, unworn 1b) as  respects substance 1b1) of a new kind, unprecedented, novel, uncommon, unheard of. So this is not a name from eternity, such as would be “in the beginning” of creation, but rather is a concept introduced “in the beginning” of the gospel ministry of Jesus Christ. Oh I see, you think that the “Logos of God” is the “New name”, so by that you have deduced that John 1:1 is talking about the New Creation. Well then why didn’t they (Jesus and the Apostles) say so??? First of all Jesus says… He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To him who overcomes, I will give some of the hidden manna. I will also give him a white stone with a new name written on it, “KNOWN ONLY TO HIM WHO RECEIVES IT”. Rev 2:17 But I see that you left this verse out. Jesus clearly says that the new name written on the stone is NOT KNOWN to anyone except the one who receives it. So if it is the “Word of God” then how come we know it? So the “new name” cannot be the “Word of God”. The terms “New name” are only found twice in Revelation and your assumptions are at best ambiguous. Secondly, the term New Creation, ‘kainos ktisis’ is used of Paul in two places and is dealing with our new man that is born again by the Spirit. ( 2 Cor 5:17, Gal 6:15). The first heavens and first earth has not yet passed away, (2Peter 3:10-12), so the New heavens and new earth has not come yet. Paul wrote his epistles way before John. And John doesn’t even use the term “new creation” ‘kainos ktisis’, does he? Quote (Paladin @ June 12 2009,16:32) Jesus agrees with this version, because he spoke accordingly – Did he? Where does Jesus ever use the term “‘kainos ktisis’ New creation? Quote (Paladin @ June 12 2009,16:32) John wrote of the beginning of creation – Revelation 3:14 And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the [ee arxee tees ktisews tou theou] beginning of the creation of God; Mark, Peter, and yes, even John had already had experience referencing the “beginning of creation.” They already knew from prior authorship and from inspiration, how to express “arxees ktisews” if the beginning of creation is what they want to express. If the “new creation” is what they wanted to express they would have used the word “kainos” with the word “archē” or “arxees kainos ktisews”, but they didn’t which leaves you guessing what they wanted to express, and of course that is what you have done. The words ‘kainos ktisis’ New creation is not there. Don’t you think that John and Jesus knew what the “New creation” was to them, because later in the book of Revelation John writes… And I saw a new (kainos) heaven and a new (kainos) earth: “for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea”. Rev 21:1 I still see a sea, don’t you? And apparently they forgot to notify Peter of this “new revelation” when he wrote… Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new (kainos) heavens and a new (kainos) earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness. 2 Peter 3:13 Quote (Paladin @ June 12 2009,16:32) But John made two changes when he wrote his gospel. 1). He wrote [en arxee] and left off [ktisews] which he had previously expressed, because he now has a different [arxee] in mind. Just how do you jump to the conclusion that because John didn’t write ‘creation’ (ktisis) with the word ‘beginning’ that he is talking about a new creation, ‘kainos ktisis’? John uses the word archē for beginning many times where it is obvious he is not speaking of the “New creation” ‘kainos ktisis’. (John 2:11, John 8:44, 1 John 3:8). Jesus also said… I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty. Rev 1:8 And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely. Rev 21:6 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last. Rev 22:13 If Jesus is meaning here that he is the beginning of the “New Creation” then why didn’t he mention it? Also if this is the beginning of the “New Creation” then why does he say that he is the end of it? Is the New creation going to end! So obviously Jesus u se or the word “archē” (beginning) is not referring to the “New Heavens and New Earth for the first heavens and the first earth must pass away and melt with fervent heat and that hasn’t happened yet has it? (2 Peter 3:10-12) Quote (Paladin @ June 12 2009,16:32) It is the same [arxee] he references in John 15:27 “And ye also shall bear witness, because ye have been with me from the [arxees] beginning.” It is the same [arxee] he references in John 16:4 “But these things have I told you, that when the time shall come, ye may remember that I told you of them. And these things I said not unto you at the [arxees] beginning, because I was with you.” John is here recording Jesus own testimony. Do you really think Jesus doesn't know how to reference “arxees ktisews?” Or do you really think John is not being inspired by the Holy Spirit to write what he means to express? Of course Jesus would know how to reference “arxees ktisews” (beginning creation), but he didn’t because he was not referring to the “arxees ktisews”, he is simply referring to the beginning of his ministry. Do you think Jesus would know how to reference ‘kainos ktisis’ if he meant the “New Creation”? Quote (Paladin @ June 12 2009,16:32) I think you mean Rev 19:15 “And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.” Nothing indicates the “sword” of this verse to reference the “logos” but rather, reema, because the only time “sword” was referenced as a “word of God” it was “reema” – “And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the reema of God:” [Eph 6:17] The logos  is “sharper than any two edged sword” therefore, the sword coming out of his mouth is not the logos.” Didn't you even READ my post? I addressed this above. Nothing in the verse says that it isn’t the “Word of God coming out of his mouth either! Would you say that the words proceeding out of the mouth of Jesus is less than the words of the Apostles? Now when they had gone throughout Phrygia and the region of Galatia, and were forbidden of the Holy Ghost to “PREACH THE WORD, (LOGOS)” in Asia, Acts 16:6 But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, [even] in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the “WORD, (RHEMA) OF FAITH, WHICH WE PREACH”; Rom 10:8 ”Preach the word, (Logos)”; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. 2 Tim 4:2 How about the use of the word “Rhema here… And have tasted the “good word (Rhema) of God“, and the powers of the world to come, Heb 6:5 Notice it say “The Powers of the World to come’. Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by “the word (Rhema) of God“, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear. Heb 11:3 Where is the distinction in the above verses? Blessings WJ

PART ONE – For Brevity

PART ONE
Perhaps I am remiss because I did not place capital letters at the bottom of my post indicating KJV. All my posts reference the King James Version, unless I note a difference, like when I reference the Hebrew or the Septuagint, in which case, I try to remember to make note of such.

And using NIV to respond to KJV and then claiming KJV is not scripture is disingenuous.

(Paladin)

Quote

Quote (Paladin @ June 12 2009,16:32) Do you see it? The mystery revealed and now expressed – is- “Christ in you” and- that this CONCEPT of “Christ in you” is CALLED the “logos of God.” (WJ) I see what you are saying, and that is not a direct quote from scripture. (P) Col 1:25 “Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the LOGOS OF GOD; 26 Even the MYSTERY which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but NOW is MADE MANIFEST to his saints: 27 To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; WHICH IS CHRIST IN YOU, the hope of glory:” [KING JAMES VERSION] (WJ) Quote Where are the words… Paladin,June wrote: The mystery revealed and now expressed – is- “Christ in you” and- that this CONCEPT of “Christ in you” is CALLED the “logos of God.” (WJ) The message Paul is bringing them by the preaching of the ‘Logos of God” is that Christ is in them and that was the mystery that was kept secret from past ages and generations. Jesus (God) has come to live in us by his Spirit. The mystery that was kept secret is God now lives “in” his people. Christ in us the Hope of Glory. The Concept of Christ in us is not called the “logos of God”, those are your words. (P) One more time – What was Paul's ministry? To fully preach the logos of God. Col 1:25 “Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the LOGOS OF GOD; What did Paul preach when he fully preached the logos of God? See that little word “EVEN?” That is a device used by the translators to tell you that in fully preaching the logos of God, he is preaching what was contained in a mystery for ages and generations, Fully preach “logos of God, EVEN the mystery. Paul says the logos of God and the mystery are one and the same. 26 “Even the MYSTERY which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but NOW is MADE MANIFEST to his saints: 27 To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; WHICH IS CHRIST IN YOU, the hope of glory:” [KING JAMES VERSION] (WJ) But none of these say that the “CONCEPT of “Christ in you” is CALLED the “logos of God”.

(P) Why do you now put “Concept” in quotation marks? Are you trying to say that I claim “concept” is a quote from scripture? Concept is my own word, just as you use “mystery” to describe many things in scripture that are not so described in the scriptures themselves. While I am in agreement tha tmany of your references were indeed mysterious to the prophets and saints, I do not agree that adding “mystery” to the scriptural account is correct.

That is why I was careful to NOT place “CONCEPT” in quotation marks. I did not want to be understood to say “concept” was part of the scripture quote. Now YOU put it in quotation marks right along with the scripture quote, and it is misleading. Please! If you ar
e simply trying to show emphasis, try capital letters. Or bold, or italics, or anything but (“”'s).

Quote (Paladin @ June 12 2009,16:32)

I was speaking of the logos of God, not the logos of Christ. That is a different thing. The logos of Christ is comprised of the logos given by the Father to the son, in the form of reema, and which Jesus preached, and the believers believed, accepted, and obeyed. The “logos of God” as presented by John, is a far different thing. (WJ) So what are you saying, that the “Word Jesus preached” is not the same “Word that John and the Apostles preached”?

Yes! Jesus preached primarily to the nation of Israel, to bring the children back to the father. He introduced the new earth as a new and living way, of spiritual application, to the Jews, compared to their old way of law and commandments. He did not concentrate on the resurrection and ascension except when addressing his disciples. He told them many things he only preached in parables to the Jews.

But the Apostles preached Jesus Christ, crucified, resurrected, ascended, and sitting at the right hand of God. Not the same thing at all.

(WJ)

Quote

Where are the scriptures that distinguish the “Logos of God” from the “Logos of Christ”?

Col 3:16 The logos of Christ dwelling in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord.

Where is the “logos of Christ” as referencing the logos spoken by Jesus? The ONLY reference that has “Logos of Christ is a reference to Jesus being the logos dwelling in you. In the verse you referenced, there is no word “let” in the Greek, but rather it says simple “The logos belonging to the Christ [“Christ” is possessive] dwelling in you richly…” Dwell is imperative present active, and should be understood in the same way as “teaching,” “admonishing,” and “singing.” All are imperative present active, and there is no Greek provision for “let” in the verse. “Let dwell” actually violates the intent of the Greek. You could just as well have “having the logos, the Christ dwelling in you…” and it would be truer to the Greek of the verse.

If you examine the Greek of the text you will find that the translators took other liberties also, such as replacing “Christ” in Col 3:15 with “God.” If that isn't a trinitarian bias, I don't know what it is. It is corrected in the RSV and the NIV.

(WJ)

Quote

That is merely more of your own inference. Are you saying that Jesus words are not the Word of God?

I am saying the message Jesus preached to the nation of Israel was different than the message preached by the apostles to the whole world; yet both came from God. Just one example: The Jews had to understand the change from the works of the law of Moses, to works of faith, while the Gentile nations had to be made to understand that there are works which God designed for his saints to be busy in doing, and they never had to be weaned from the works of the law of Moses. James and Paul dealt with those issues, each addressing that part of the house of God that was appropriate to their ministry.

(WJ)

Quote

There is no distinction between the ‘Logos” Word and the “Rhema” Word in the scriptures. Paul and the Apostles make no distinction between the two because the following scriptures show that the “Logos” and the “Rhema” is preached…

(P) Sure there is. Did you not read my post? The sword of the spirit is the reema of God, while the logos is sharper than any two-edged sword.

Eph 6:14 Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of righteousness; 15 And your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace; 16 Above all, taking the shield of faith, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked. 17 And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the reema of God:

Heb 4:12 For the logos of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

The difference is, if you know the written reema of God in depth, you can correctly mount an effective offense and an effective defense against any opponent; but, if you know the concepts behind the reema, which is the logos, you can even mount a pre-emptive strike against the spiritual enemies before they even get off the ground. Why? Because you know the concepts behind the words. You know the ideas in the mind of God that are revealed by the written words and can plan ahead of the opponent. A thorough knowledge of logos will go further towards defeating one who only has the reema. Usually because not all the logos is evidenced by a surface scanning of the reema. Logos is found by going much deeper than surface scanning. One must be in the spirit to discern the deeper things of God.

It should be understood that by saying that, I am NOT claiming a spiritual insight for myself while denying it in you. I am simply responding to your question as to a difference between logos and reema. And the reason Paul and others reference both, is because both are essential, but that does not make them synonymous. Just as food and water are both essential for life, but they are not the same.

When Jesus read the scriptures in the synagogue and in the temple, he read the reema, then preached logos to them. He gave them the meaning that to them was actually hidden in the reema. Just as Paul preached reema about the seed of Abraham, but revealed logos when he explained about the seed as of one, which is Christ. THAT information was hidden in the Hebrew of the old covenant. It was not even evident in the Septuagint, but was revealed in the reading and explanation of Paul to the Gentile nations.

Quote (Paladin @ June 12 2009,16:32)

God placed his word above his name “for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name.” [Psa 138:2] And he promised to give Jesus a name above every name “Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:” [Phil 2:9] (WJ) But you should finish the quote… Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: “THAT AT THE NAME OF JESUS every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and [things] under the earth; And that EVERY TONGUE SHOULD CONFESS THAT JESUS CHRIST IS LORD, to the glory of God the Father”. Since we see that the “Word of God” is a name, and Jesus has been given that “name”, (John 1:1, 1 John 1:1-3, Rev 19:13), then when the Father exalted Jesus name above every name he is also making Jesus equal to the ‘Word”, (Ps 138:2) What does that tell you? He has exalted Jesus name above his own name.

Phil 2:10 That at the onomati [name] of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;

(P) Very good WJ; Now, understand what Paul is saying. If you will look in your Greek primer, you will find that onomati [name] is dative, which places it as Direct object; while “Jesus” Ieesou is genitive, which is Possessive.
This indicates that it is not the name Jesus, but the name BELONGING TO Jesus, which is “logos of God” which name was given to him in accord with Rev 3:12, and 19:12-13

Rev 3:12 “Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.”

Rev 19:12 “His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself. 13 And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.”

It is the name that was given to Jesus, and now belongs to him, therefore is called “the name of Jesus,” or more correctly, “the name belonging to Jesus” in Paul's letter to Philippi.

Quote (Paladin @ June 12 2009,16:32)

God placed his word above his name “for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name.” [Psa 138:2] And he promised to give Jesus a name above every name “Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:” [Phil 2:9] “His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself. 13 And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The logos of God.” [Rev 19:12-13] And this “new name” was not a name pulled from eternity, but was “NEW, not previously known – “Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my kainos [new] name.” [Rev 3:12] kainos = 2537 kainos Meaning: 1) new 1a) as respects form 1a1) recently made, fresh, recent, unused, unworn 1b) as respects substance 1b1) of a new kind, unprecedented, novel, uncommon, unheard of. So this is not a name from eternity, such as would be “in the beginning” of creation, but rather is a concept introduced “in the beginning” of the gospel ministry of Jesus Christ. (wj) Oh I see, you think that the “Logos of God” is the “New name”, so by that you have deduced that John 1:1 is talking about the New Creation. Well then why didn’t they (Jesus and the Apostles) say so???

THEY DID! The fact that you understand Christianity from John 1:1 to Revelation changes everything because everything is in the wrong place for it to be understood correctly. The Apokolypse is in the middle of the revelation of inspiration, while John is at the end, not the beginning. THAT is why everything is toppsy turvy and upside down.

And the “new name” is not the only reason I have for understanding it that way. Jesus himself said the disciples were “with him at the beginning.” HE identified John's “beginning” as the “beginning of the gospel” of Jesus' own ministry. “And ye also shall bear witness, because ye have been with me from the beginning.” -John 15:27

“But these things have I told you, that when the time shall come, ye may remember that I told you of them. And these things I said not unto you at the beginning, because I was with you.” -John 16:4

[GeneBalthrop]

Paladin…………Good post brother. Giving us a greater depth of understanding is truely encouraging, use the talents GOD has given you, it edify's us all.

peace and love to you and yours………………….gene

[bodhitharta]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 16 2009,19:52)

Quote (bodhitharta @ June 16 2009,16:58) Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 16 2009,16:24) Hi BD, Read Acts 2.39 . This promise is to all who repent. Isaiah 59 1Behold, the LORD's hand is not shortened, that it cannot save; neither his ear heavy, that it cannot hear: Who is it that saves Nick? You are starting to sound like a trinitarian Hi BD, You reject the Lordship of Jesus Christ? Why abuse those who accept it?

God forbid that I should abuse anyone.

Is Your Lord, Lord Jesus or Lord God or both?

[Paladin]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 16 2009,11:41)

Hi PD Quote (Paladin @ June 12 2009,16:32) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 12 2009,14:59) The problem with your theory is that the chronologies of the written scriptures are disputed and therefore it would be a slippery slope to build a doctrine on. Oh, well, thank goodness trinitarianism isn't “disputed.” Talk about a double standard! And speak of “building a doctrine on “a slippery slope???” Are you kidding me? I built nothing. I simply offered scripture in the chronological order in which it was revealed. No “doctrine,” no “creed,” no appeal to “My scholar is better than your scholar.” As for there being any “dispute” over the chronology, WHERE is it? The ONLY place I find it is in the threads I post. Of course, I do not consider a sentence that says “It may have been written even later” to be  dispute. That isn't even a disagreement. And offering alternate dates is neither dispute nor disagreement either. If it says “That cannot be because,” with a reason for a given date to be improbable or impossible, then you have a dispute. Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 12 2009,14:59) Secondly, we do not know for sure what information the Apostles shared or what letters or Gospels certain ones read or had in their possession in their time. Proof of this is the fact that Paul never speaks of John, John never speaks of Paul and Peter and as far as I know none of them quoted the Gospels or spoke of them. Peter references Paul's epistles and writings as “scriptures.”  II Pet 3:15 “And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; 16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also THE OTHER SCRIPTURES, unto their own destruction.” But it really doesn't matter, the Old Testament authors didn't spend a lot of time quoting each other, but no one questions their authenticity because of it. If they had, then you would be accusing them of plagiarism. I never said Peter didn’t reference Paul did I? But I did say that None of them reference John and John doesn’t reference them. So the point you are making that they had the revelation in common “Paul and John” about the Mystery being the “Word of God” is a red herring and is nothing more than inference. Also John, that I know of didn’t use the word “Mystery” in referring to “Christ in us” either did he? [/quote] And as far as the disputed chronologies of the written scriptures go, here is some facts about that… Matthew The date of the gospel is not precisely known. The majority of scholars date the gospel between the years 70 and 100. Mark There are differing opinions as to how late Mark could have been written. Most scholars agree with the Two-source hypothesis that proposes that Mark was one of the sources for the other Synoptic Gospels, Matthew and Luke; according to this viewpoint the latest possible date for Mark depends on the dating of Matthew and Luke. A wide range of recent critical scholars believe that Mark was written at the earliest after the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 Luke Some scholars place the date c 80-90. The terminus ad quem, or latest possible date, for Luke is bound by the earliest papyri manuscripts that contains portions of Luke (late 2nd/early 3rd century)[39] and the mid to late 2nd century writings that quote or reference Luke. John Most scholars agree on a range of c. 90–100[29] for when the gospel was written, though dates as early as the 60s or as late as the 140s have been advanced by a small number of scholars Romans The majority of scholars writing on Romans propose the letter was written in late 55/early 56 or late 56/early 57.[7] Early 58 and early 55 both have some support, while Luedemann argues for a date as early as 51/52 (or 54/55) following on from Knox who proposed 53-54. Luedemann is the only serious challenge to the consensus of mid to late 50s. Colosians The letter is supposed (or intended) to be written by Paul at Rome during his first imprisonment there (Acts 28:16, 30), probably in the spring of AD 57, or, as some scholars think, 62, soon after he had written his Epistle to Ephesians. 1 John In the Christian New Testament, the First Epistle of John is the fourth catholic or “general” epistle. Written in Ephesus about AD 100-110, Revelation According to early tradition, the writing of this book took place near the very end of Domitian's reign, around 95 or 96. Others contend for an earlier date, 68 or 69, in the reign of Nero or shortly thereafter.[16] The majority of modern scholars also use these dates.[17] Those who are in favor of the later date appeal to the external testimony of the Christian father Irenaeus (d. 185), who stated that he had received information relative to this book from those who had seen John face to face. He says that “it was not seen very long time since, but almost in our day, towards the end of Domitian's reign” (A.H. 5.30.3), who according to Eusebius had started the persecution referred to in the book; however, recent scholars dispute that the book is situated in a time of ongoing persecution and have also doubted the reality of a large-scale Domitian persecution.[18] According to Epiphanius of Salamis, the Revelation of John was written in the time of Claudius (PG, XLI 909-910). Some exegetes (Paul Touilleux, Albert Gelin, André Feuillet) distinguish two dates: publication (under Domitian) and date of the visions (under Vespasian). Various editors would have a hand in the formation of the document, according to these theories. The dating of the work is still widely debated in the scholarly community. Look them up for yourself. They are found here… Blessings WJ

I do not understand your controversy about the chronology.

My own chronology is pretty close to what you offer, adn I see nothing to dispute.

I have –

45 a.d……………..JAMES

48 a.d……………..GALATIANS

50 a.d……………..1ST THESSALONIANS

51 a.d……………..2ND THESSALONIANS

52 a.d……………..MATHEW

54 a.d……………..1ST CORINTHIANS

55 a.d……………..2ND CORINTHIANS

56 a.d……………..ROMANS

58 a.d……………..LUKE

60 a.d……………..COLOSSIANS

60 a.d……………..EPHESIANS

60 a.d……………..PHILEMON

61 a.d……………..PHILIPPIANS

61 a.d……………..ACTS OF APOSTLES

64/65………………1ST TIMOTHY; TITUS; 1ST PETER

67 a.d……………..2ND
PETER

68 a.d……………..2ND TIMOTHY

68 a.d……………..HEBREWS

69 a.d……………..APOKALYPSE OF JOHN

69 a.d……………..MARK

75 a.d……………..JUDE

85-90……………..1ST JOHN; 2ND JOHN; 3RD JOHN

96 a.d……………..GOSPEL OF JOHN

How does this change anything in my OP?

(WJ)

Quote

So the point you are making that they had the revelation in common “Paul and John” about the Mystery being the “Word of God” is a red herring and is nothing more than inference. Also John, that I know of didn’t use the word “Mystery” in referring to “Christ in us” either did he?

You know what that kind of argument reminds me of? On another board I was in a debate on the issue of evolution. My opponent kept trying to insist that the similarities between species DNA was proof of a common ancestry.

I finally reminded him that in the beginning God separated the dry land from the sea, which was proof of a common DNA pool, and that common similarities was not proof od a common ancester, it is proof of a common creator. He never came back.

Do you know why the Apostles did not quote each other? Because they had a common source, called inspiration of the Holy Spirit. They did not copy each other in spite what
“scholarship” claims. They did not need to. Luke being the only exception, and He aknowledges his work was not his own, but he was also inspired by the Holy Spirit.

Some “Scholars” have way too much time on their hands and set out to destroy instead of building up the family of the house of God. They dispute everything on the principle of “you can't prove it so my guess is as good as your guess.”

Your chronology based on scholars guesses changes nothing of my OP, so why the dispute to begin with?

[KangarooJack]

Quote (bodhitharta @ June 16 2009,16:58)

Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 16 2009,16:24) Hi BD, Read Acts 2.39 . This promise is to all who repent. Isaiah 59 1Behold, the LORD's hand is not shortened, that it cannot save; neither his ear heavy, that it cannot hear: Who is it that saves Nick? You are starting to sound like a trinitarian

“You shall call His name Jesus for HE SHALL SAVE His people from their sins” (Luke 1:31).

No explanation needed.

thinker

[NickHassan]

Quote (bodhitharta @ June 17 2009,05:24)

Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 16 2009,19:52) Quote (bodhitharta @ June 16 2009,16:58) Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 16 2009,16:24) Hi BD, Read Acts 2.39 . This promise is to all who repent. Isaiah 59 1Behold, the LORD's hand is not shortened, that it cannot save; neither his ear heavy, that it cannot hear: Who is it that saves Nick? You are starting to sound like a trinitarian Hi BD, You reject the Lordship of Jesus Christ? Why abuse those who accept it? God forbid that I should abuse anyone. Is Your Lord, Lord Jesus or Lord God or both?

Hi BD,
If you were one with the vine you would know he was your Lord.
he is the mediator with our father, and his father, God.

1 Cor 8

[Author]

Posts