- This topic has 3,215 replies, 24 voices, and was last updated 4 years, 7 months ago by
.
- Posts
Quote (Ed J @ Mar. 16 2011,09:40) Quote (Paladin @ Mar. 16 2011,09:30) Ed wrote:Quote 5) ONLY through Mary's linage! (Luke 3:23-31)
…Son of Man!
This Post reminds me of the Posts that Terraricca(Pierre) makes!
You have NOT explained why you posted those Scriptures?Witnessing to a worldwide audience in behalf of YHVH!
יהוה האלהים (JEHOVAH GOD) YÄ-hä-vā hä ĔL-ō-Hêêm!
Ed J (Isaiah 49:16 / Isaiah 60:14 / Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org (Ecl.9:12-16)
I thought it was obvious!Quote
“Only through Mary's lineage?”To correct a statement with which I disagree.
Hi Paladin,
The clarity with which you present the text of scripture, the meaning of the words in Greek and English and the grammatical rules of these languages shows to me that your truly are a bible scholar. I for one appreciate very much what you are doing here. To be honest I read your posts and alot of other threads on this web-site before I decided that I would like to join this site and it was yours that convinced me. When you said something along the lines of you have to begin at the beginning and understand things in chronological order you had my attention, because it made sense to me that God would reveal things to us in a way that we would understand. He is God and loves us more than we can know after all. I am not sharing these thoughts to puff you up, merely to express my appreciation for your high quality work and method. Paladin…thank you. You sir are a blessing.Respectfully,
WispringQuote (Wispring @ Mar. 16 2011,04:25) Hi Mike,
I know this question is directed towards Paladin:Quote I have not seen an answer to my question about who the “one man” is in Romans 5, and the scriptures you posted today surely don't answer my question. I want a NAME of the “one man” in Romans 5 – can you list the NAME of that person? But, i think he is going to respond with something like since Eve was created(neither of them were born in the usual way into the world) from Adam's side/rib then that qualifies them both as being one man. Such that the sin of eating the apple first which Eve did could easily could easily be said to have been done by Adam as well since Eve was a clone of Adam as it were. Having said that, I will like you wait for him to respond for himself. I could be quite wrong about this.
God bless you and yours,
Wispring
You may be right………we'll see.
If he DOES respond that way, I'll ask for the NAME of this “one man” who is apparently “AdamEve”. Because I don't recall reading that particular NAME in scripture.
mike
Quote (Paladin @ Mar. 16 2011,08:13)
God promised Jesus glory, before the world was created;
Where did you read that? What I have read has Jesus asking his God to glorify him with the glory “I HAD ALONGSIDE YOU BEFORE THE WORLD EXISTED”.You must think Jesus had glory alongside God as a DNA before the world, and therefore Adam, even existed?
It's hard to play “interpretation games” with John 17:5, because Jesus CLEARLY says that HE HIMSELF HAD this glory already before the world existed. He most definitely doesn't say “the glory YOU PROMISED ME before the world existed”, right?
Quote (Paladin @ Mar. 16 2011,08:13)
Jesus was foreordained to be the sacrificial lamb before the foundation of the world;
“Foreordained” does not mean “already happened”. This is where you and I differ in our understandings. You take the prophesies as if they have LITERALLY already happened, I don't. Is 9:6 speaks of a child who HAS BEEN BORN. But Jesus wasn't LITRALLY born until 700 years later.Just because God can traverse through time and speak of future things from a “happened in the past” perspective does not mean those things have actually happened from OUR POINT OF VIEW.
When God speaks of the seed of Eve, it doesn't mean Jesus started “EXISTING” as a living being within Eve's DNA right then. It only means that sometime in the future, a Messiah will be born FROM her seed – if you take that scripture to be a Messianic prophecy in the first place. And Jesus was born from her seed…………ACCORDING TO THE FLESH.
mike
Quote (Paladin @ Mar. 17 2011,08:13) mikeboll64,Mar. wrote:[/quote]
(M)Quote I agree with Paladin that to be “begotten” means that Jesus did have a beginning. I don't agree with him that his beginning was in the seed of Adam. I believe his beginning was before all the ages, as taught in Micah 5:2. Hello Mike; Perhaps it is simply that I have failed to properly explain the issue. Perhaps not. I will try again.
Before any effor twas put into creating anything, God brought forth wisdom, with whom he colaborated in the creation. But there were several other things he did, just as any master builder makes blueprints and lays out a material list, and counts the cost of material, labor, property purchase, and a host of other considerations prior to building, so also God preplanned according to foreknowledge and determinate counsel; He laid down the qualifications for certain classes of people; i.e., faithful, unfaithful, good, evil, etc.
He qualified certain types of persons to become members in his kingdom, before the kingdom ever existed.
Consider, a man begins to plan for marriage, and dreams of progeny in whom he intends to invest a good part of his life, as well as his goods, and his abilities. He wants his children to be cared for in case of his demise, so he plans accordingly.
He writes a will delineating what goes to who, what happens to his goods if his children abandon their mother to her fate, or if they remain faithful to their duties and care for her; Who gets the largest portion of what part; and who gets a lessor portion of some and a larger portion of some other; all the little details of balancing fairness with provision; justice with love; sternness with love.
God determined to provide a sacrifice for sin, based upon a fact that had not happened at the time he made the provision; i.e., man had not fallen, because God had not made man yet. God provided for every possible outcome; if Adam sinned and Eve did not; if Eve sinned and Adam did not; if neither parent sinned, but their progeny did. id Adam and Eve sinned but their offspring did not; all possibilities were provided for.
God promised Jesus glory, before the world was created; God hid his wisdom for our glory before he created the world; We were chosen in Christ before God created the world; We were given by God, works to perform, before he created the world; We were given purpose and grace in Christ, before God created the world; We were given the promise of eternal life before God created the world; Jesus was foreordained to be the sacrificial lamb before the foundation of the world; God loved Jesus before the foundation of the world. All these things were already set to happen, before the world was even begun in creation. God's forethought and planning, translated into promise, made all the preplanned things as real as God's word can make them, simply because he said it, it was so.
Adam and Eve were introduced into the equation in the garden, and instructed concerning what was allowed and what was not allowed. If they remained faithful, there would be no need for the sin sacrifice, for them; If they remained faithful, and their progeny remained faithful, there would never have been a Messiah come to serve as a sacrifice for sin that never took place. God provided for all possibilities.
And when man failed to remain faithful, God gave them hope in the form of prophecies, beginning with Gen 3:15, and culminating in the closing pages of the old testament. All through the old testament God enhanced his children's understanding, by providing them with more clues as to the identity of Messiah, but without ever telling them precisely what to look for, because if he had spoken clearly, Satan would have known, and he would not have killed Jesus; thus thwarting God's plan for man's salvation.
God told the Jews enough in the Hebrew scripture, to lead them to Christ. He then told “the rest of the story” in a Greek account, and gave it to the Hebrew people for safe keeping until the Gentiles began to come into the kingdom.
God introduced himself to Abraham as a single-person-God; he introduced himself to Moses as a single-person-single being. He introduced himself to his prophets using singular nouns, pronouns, definite article, adjectives and verbs.
And he put all that planning into fruition as he began with planning, and moved on to creating, and continued with sustaining what he had put into reality.
The prophets spoke of ancient mountains, ancient landmarks; ancient boundaries, and property markers, as well as ancient civilizations, and other things that were of a very old age, and Micah also spoke of ancient things, using the same language the other prophets used, referencing things that were created, like mountains and landmarks, and used the term “ow-lam” to describe something of a very old age.
When Micah said “his goings forth are from of old, from everlasting” he used that word “ow-lam” which means way back before your known ancestors. He is speaking of prophecies, as far back in time as Gen 3:15. He is not speaking of eternity. Mountains and landmarks and civilizations were not around in eternity. There is nothing in Micah's writings to suggest Jesus was in existance other than in prophecy. The same holds true of all the prophets.
When Eve was deceived and transgressed, and shared her transgression with Adam, Messiah began to exist when God pronounced the first Messianic prophecy in Gen 3:15. And Messiah existed in prophecy all the way down to the New Testament times, when he became real when “Jesus began to be about thirty years of age” and began his life's mission. And the rest is history.
PaladinI like your presentation well done ,but my knowledge of scriptures tell me that God is the same and your presentation does not include a major event the floodand the reason for it.
also about Christ;1Co 15:47 The first man was of the dust of the earth, the second man from heaven
Col 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation
Jn 17:24 “Father, I want those you have given me to be with me where I am, and to see my glory, the glory you have given me because you loved me before the creation of the world.
Jn 1:9 The true light that gives light to every man was coming into the world.
Jn 1:10 He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him.and others,
so your story does not say that Christ came from above ,why??
Pierre
Hi Paladin.
I might as well answer all your posts in one so i dont waste precious space.Quote If by “warrents” you mean scripture references, I will try to remember that.
Yes. just stating and idea or an explaination is not technical proof.Quote You quoted my statement, and asked a question: – Quote 1. “John 1:1 has nothing to do with Jesus”
(Why?) Because it is talking about the logos, not a man.Then you asked “what man do you refer to” as though you don't know,
Quote What Man do you refer too? Because i Dont believe Jesus to be solely a Man. Then you made a statement that shows you very well did know what man I referred to –
Quote And how can you say that John 1:1 has nothing to do with Jesus when the very same chapter context is about Jesus. Are you playing word games with me?
Not At all.
Im asking clear legit questions in which i want answers too.
The reason why is because I have no idea what you believe.
(You have no idea what i believe either)
I dont want to assume or imply things that you dont mean.
Therefore i ask questions for the sake of clarification.
Im assuming (breaking my own rule) in my second statement that you are reffereing to Jesus, (though i dont believe him to be solely a man)
Which is why i questioned it in my first.
Why dont you answer the question?
Or let me rephrase it.
What man are you reffering to since Jesus is not just a Man, and John 1:1 context is about Jesus who is the Topic of the whole gospel.Quote Is God a spider? No? Who told you that? You see SF, we go by what scripture says, not by the silence thereof. The scripture says [John 1:1] “In the beginning was the logos and the logos was with God, and the logos was God.” But you say – “In the beginning was Jesus, and Jesus was with God, and Jesus was God.”
Then you ask me “who told you” that Jesus was not in the beginning with God and was God?
Nobody has to tell me that. Do you have a verse that tells you that Jesus was in the beginning with God and was God?
Is my God a spider? of course not. Is YOUR God a spider?
You shouldnt take things so likely, because there are many who believe that Spiders are gods, and so did many worship Animals in one point in time.
Again, This is also a question to learn more about you.
Obvisouly your either A) being taught from someone else or some other doctrine or B) your leaning on your own interpretation on your studies on langauge.Why are you taking things so likely, your really shoudnt.
Your getting cocky about serious questions.
I believe that Jesus was in the beginning and is God because the bible say so.
You see we are both claiming that we are learning from what the bible says, so OBVIOUSLY we need warrrents to prove our cliams.I do have a verse that states that 1.) Jesus was in the begining and 2) Is called God, and the image of God several times and is ONE with God. (which some i have already displayed in my last post)
Dont lean on one scripture.
You should be learning from “someone” because the bible claims not to “lean on your own understanding”
but instead rely on God, and how he intends things to be.Quote Just because I only referenced one scripture does not mean I draw a conclusion based only on one scripture. “I will declare the decree, this day have I begotten thee” [Psalm 2:7] Luke tells of the resurrection of Jesus, and ties it to this 2nd Psalm, in Acts 13 -[Acts 13:22-33]
Who do you think Jesus Christ is? Just a Man?
I can also use what Paul says to prove my point.
6Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
7But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:
8And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.
Look, clearly the bible doesnt speak as the day that Jesus was born as the “beginning” of his existence. So what Day is this?I can clearly accept both scriptures, can you?
Also check this out.
Hebrew 1:5 For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?
You should read the context of this day my friend.Quote Why don't you do a little research online and get back to the issue after you learn the terminology? I was not intending to give a seminar on the subject.
Thats not the point. My question again is legit, based on the reasoning that the Writers did not have the same terminology as we did or unless you can prove otherwise.By what Rule or by what warrent can Love not Be God?
Or the Word NOT be God?or even add flesh, why can the flesh not be the word?
Quote Then you missed the point of my use of Isaiah. I showed you that Isaiah used singular nouns and also used “monos” and explained its significance. You cannot just take the part you agree with and ignore the rest of it and think you have answered the question. You have actually evaded the question.
Talk about being evasive…
I asked you two questions and you totally avoided it.
Nevertheless ill answer yours.I didnt avoid anything but because of your own ignorance in my beliefs you dont understand how I totally agree with Isaiah account of creation (which by the way is only ONE verse)
Let me explain. You mentioned elohim as singular and “monos” as alone. IMO I totally agree that God created alone because I believe that Jesus IS God is one entity or one being.
In other words I dont believe that God or Jesus are seperate being but one and the same, which means this fullfills Isaiah account that God (singular) infact created (alone).So why argue against something i believe in.
Questions you “evaded”
1.Can you prove that Jesus is “SOLELY involved in the New Creation”
2.Can you tell me where God was when he created the heavens and t
he earth alone?Let me ask more questions:
IF You believe that God is ALONE created, than WHERE was JEsus? did Paul and John lie about Jesus participating in the creation process?
Another verse to consider: Hebrews 1:2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
Who made the worlds?Quote Just because you ignore what I post does not mean it is not posted. “All” only means “every one” if it is not controlled by limiting paramaters. Col 1:16 has limiting parameters that tells us the scope and limit of the verse.
“For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible,whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:” [Col 1:16]
That little phrase “Whether they be” is a limiting parameter telling us that the “all things” is a reference to “thrones or dominions, or principalities, or powers” and nothing else is included in the reference.
Actually the Greak Doesnt express “whether they be”
So the limiting paramerters is a myth, or your imagination.
ειτε(1535)
Pronunciation: i'-teh
1) if … if 2) whether … or
In other words that “little phrase” doesnt really exist, and only by translation that it does.So i wouldnt make a whole doctrine based on a little phrase.
Also the context differs with you.
Read the rest:
17And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
18And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.
19For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell;
20And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven.
Hey, and also note that Pauls say he is “before all things“.
What do you know, another pre-existing evidence of Jesus.
Point is that the Context dropps your claims.
And you have no way of tieing this to only the new creation.(Before I continue with your posts
You Didnt answer theses questions:
1.”Im just repeating what you just stated. You said 'Ha logos' and 'theos' are not interchangable. MY question is why would John use non-interchangable terms to describe the beginning?”
2.So you admit to denying other parts to scripture?
3.Did you not understand that its IN CHRIST JESUS, before the world began. It didnt say the Father or God, or whatever your theology is?)Quote I will try again to explain it. You cannot (despite your best efforts) begin at the back of the book and correct the front of the book. That is what you are doing when you try to explain Gen 1 in the light of John 1. If you begin at Gen 1 and study scriptures front to back, ending with John's gospel (It was the last book written) you will learn it the way God inspired it to be written.
(This is another example how you ignored Eph 3:9 and used an excuse rather to explain why thats untrue or why you disagree. Theory over Scripture doesnt hold)
A Book? What makes you think the order of this book is legit? maybe you should do more research on that yourself.
Did you not know that there are other books that were considered part of the bible? Also what makes you think that Davids psalms comes AFTER his story? why not during.
Why is the book of Job placed where it is, when we have no idea from what decade that book comes from?
How about Acts? and the epistles of Paul?
IF there is a Chronogical order to this “book” dont you think Pauls epistles should be within Acts? Nobody has to start reading the bible exactly from the beginning to the end, because you must take it ALL into account when interpreting scripture.It makes no LOGICAL sense that you would read The bible like ANY book, when the bible is INDIVIDUAL writings from MANY different writers that were GROUPED togethor by a group of guys.
What Im saying is that if all scripture is suppose to be in agreement so than the BACK should match the FRONT, not that any order matters to God almighty.
In fact NO ONE understood the FRONT of the book, UNTIL Jesus came which is in the BACK of the book.The book of hebrews and romans is that explaination of the Old Testament.
Are you God? if not, so how are so sure he intended it to be read that way? if that were true that How come many followers of Christ didnt GET IT when they KNEW very well the FRONT of the book?
I find this diversive. You think this makes some kind of logical sense when it doesnt. Treat the Word of God like any book, when in fact hebrews 4:12 states that this WORD is LIVING.
That should tell you that the power of Gods word is beyond english words of interpretation and ink.Quote Did you forget “that which is begotten of the spirit is spirit?” [John 3:6] I don't think spirit has seed resulting in flesh.
You mean with the context that Jesus is from Heaven?
13And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.
16For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
17For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be savedAnd you do understand that Jesus was talking abuot being Born again right? Yet Jesus came in the LIKENESS of Men.
Quote You won't find anywhere I uses “nope!” where it is not accompanied with the explanation as to why I said “nope!” Same applies to “Not at all.”
You gave an explaination without any warrents which makes your cliams speculations.
I still do find you closed minded. I hope that changes.Quote Then why did Jesus pray with strong crying and tears for God to let the cup pass from him? Because he didn't care? Really?
“Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared; 8 Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered; 9 And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;” [Heb 5:7-9]
Why did Jesus weep to be saved from death?
Why did Jesus have to learn obedience, if he was God?
And why did Jesus have to be made perfect, if he was God?
Actually thats not what i said, and you took it out of context.
This is what i said:
I dont believe Jesus cared very much if they were going to kill him or no
t. What Jesus was worried about (and sweated blood because of it) is the Wrath of God, not the Wrath of Man.
Did you forget that? what Cup do you think Jesus was referring too when he prayed?
The Cup that holds his BLOOD?
Fear God, not man my friend.So clearly you skipped the rest of my response.
1. I believe that Jesus in his physical state was limited which meant taking the wrath of God on his body (not spirit) meant to suffer.
2. Jesus was Perfect which through his suffering he was obedient. In other words, continueing to do the will of God through suffering means obedience. He fullfilled, and took action which mean obedience. Doesnt mean he was ever disobeident.
3. He was always perfect, the perfect lamb, the perfect sacrafice.Quote Nope! That has not happened. I use negation, with accompanying explanations. Your claim that I couldn't refute your “clear evidence” shows that you are not reading what you are responding to.
LOL………. oh gosh..
I see your “NOPE” again, the unbeatable arguement of the ages.
Explainations without warrents are meaningless.
I can explain how Greeks had many gods, and who Zeus is not that its true at all.so your NOPE logic, accomponied by “your interpretation” doesnt drop anything.
IF you dont believe in “mans” interpretation of scripture, why do you expect others to even listen to yours?Quote And there is plenty of testimony in the new testament that shows Jesus is a man who knows he is not God equal with God. “If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself.” [John 7:17]; ” But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, which I have heard of God” [John 8:40]; and many many more.
All that stuff you wrote, had nothing to do with our posts.
what happend to
“Your claim that I couldn't refute your “clear evidence” shows that you are not reading what you are responding to.Here are a few of the verses I have posted that nobody deals with”
You say “nobody” deals with?
When (until now) did your bring this up in our previous posts?
So what your saying doesnt make any sense.
and by the way, I already responded my belief and how Isaiah fits into it, so again i agree with those terms.Again:
If anything I strongly believe that God cannot be explained because he is unknowable, and only knowable through Christ Jesus our Lord.
And ill Hold on to Ephesians 3:9
(And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:)
As my main proof text that Jesus Created.I have answered your questions, I hope you quit taking me for granted and answer with a little cup of seriousness.
Stop feeding me “what you think” and how we must read cover to cover for “understanding” rather Give me scriptural proof along with your explanation.its great to give a explaination, but without proof or any evidence than its empty and vague.
Quote (Paladin @ Mar. 17 2011,03:29) Paladin ……….Good Post right on brother. Eve was indeed the first to transgress the command of GOD, not Adam. And the first (BORN) man to sin was not Adam or Eve Either but CAIN was the first (BORN) of mankind to Sin.Adam and Eve were Created beings and Not Born beings but Cain was the first Born human being. And what is also interesting is that you don't see the word Sin mentioned anywhere until We get to Cain. the “mark” put on him may have been the first human born of man to have sinned. Jesus when addressing this said your Farther (satan) was a Lier and a Murderer in the beginning. Could this referring to Cain? Good post brother.
peace and love to you and yours…………………………gene[/quote]
Speculationssssssssssssssssssssssthe bible says that sin entered through Adam, and that Eve was a transgressor.
dude stop adding to the bible its not nessary.[/quote]
You should read what is posted, not sound bytes from a quote.
Paladin,
Actually i was responding to Gene, not to you.
I didnt even read your response.Perhaps i should have written his name on top.
Just to let you know.Quote (Wispring @ Mar. 16 2011,05:05) Hi Ed,
I have yet to read in the bible that an image has been broken. I did, however, read this:Thank you and God bless you and yours.
Hey Wispring?I was the one talking about the “broken image”
So did you mean this post towards me and posted Ed J's name in accident?
Just askin.
Quote (Wispring @ Mar. 16 2011,05:05) “Hi SF,
Yes I did. Forgive me. I am new to this posting stuff.
With Love and Respect,
Wispring”Hi Ed,
I have yet to read in the bible that an image has been broken. I did, however, read this:9:6 “Whoever sheds human blood, 16
by other humans 17
must his blood be shed;
for in God’s image 18
God 19 has made humankind.” (Gen 9:6)
As to the purpose of Jesus dying, I thought it would be best to get that answer from Jesus himself, due to the fact that Jesus would know his own purpose and mission given to him from God. Let's see…These are the verses that I found that relate directly to the purpose of Jesus dying.
Matthew 16:21 (King James Version)
Matthew 26:26-28 (King James Version)
Mark 8:31 (King James Version)
Mark 10:32-34 (King James Version)
Mark 14:22-25 (King James Version)
Luke 18:31-33 (King James Version)
Luke 22:19-20 (King James Version)
John 10:14-18 (King James Version)
John 12:23-36 (King James Version)
John 16:7 (King James Version)
John 17:1-5 (King James Version)John 17
So, to the best of my understanding Jesus's purpose in dying was:1.) For the remission of sins as is stated in Matthew. (Matthew 26:28)
2.) To serve as a witness(?) to the new testament as stated in Mark and Luke. (Mark 14:24), (Luke 22:20)
3.) To show that Jesus been given the power from God to lay down his life and take it again. (John 10:18)
4.) To show that upon being lifted up he would draw all men to him. (John 12:32
5.) To send the Spirit of Truth/Holy Ghost/Comforter/Counselor. (John 16:7)
6.) To be able to give eternal life to all that God had given him with the power given to him from God.(John 17:2)Thank you Ed for asking that question. I personally find it rewarding and instructional to have to organize my thoughts and type them out in matters such as these. Just so you do not get the idea that I am self-righteous these to following verses fairly well describe how I think of myself in regards to Jesus's teachings.
Luke 18:13 (King James Version)
(This is me, I have no delusions that i am not a sinner)Luke 17:10 (King James Version)
(This is also me I am only trying to do my duty and serve God participating in these forums. I know for a fact I will not always be right according to scripture my hope and prayer is to be right with God.)
Thank you and God bless you and yours.
hi Wispring,
Its all good, dont worry about it.Well, in reference to the broken image.
Those literal words are not found in the bible.
but we have broken his Covenant, and have “fallen short” therefore there must be a perfect standard that we must have fallen short of, in order to be imperfect.Though I do find your post a bit confusing…because im not sure what your responding to exactly.
(never mind i figured it out)
Romans 5:17
For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)Romans 5:21
That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.Romans 3:10
As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
11There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.
12They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.
23For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
24Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
25Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;
26To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.
I believe its much more than that.
The point of Jesus Christ death is because there is not one righteous, and because though one man all were captive in Sin, also through one perfect righeous man can all be freed from that slavery.Read the Epistles of Paul, because he was a great scholar and connected the OT with his writings very well.
Likewise, I understand you.
But our duty to serve God comes from him, and not what we think it is.
As you stated Jesus draws men near.
Therefore its not by our own will that you will serve based on your own good intentions but by Gods holy will.
Only Jesus can have you right with God my friend.
We cannot do it ourselves.May you be blessed as well.
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Mar. 15 2011,09:16) Quote (SimplyForgiven @ Mar. 13 2011,12:44) Im just repeating what you just stated. You said “Ha logos” and “theos” are not interchangable. MY question is why would John use non-interchangable terms to describe the beginning?
DennisonThis is a very fair and good question. John could have used any other word besides “theos”.
WJ
Only if John was writing without inspiration from God. It helps to remember whose message it was. John was not at liberty to use words that meant something different than those selected by the Holy spirit.Or do you not believe verbal isnpiration to be the standard for new testament scripture?
As for John's use of “Theos,” is there any other word that offers the same understanding when applied as John applied Theos, and with the same grammatical application as John used?
Quote (Wispring @ Mar. 15 2011,14:06) Hi everyone,
I do not believe God is of the male gender because he created
them both man and women in his image. I use the male term to refer to God in spoken and written communication because it is easier and traditional.Hello W; The reasons God is considered “He” are several.
1) The male pronoun “He” was not originated by men, but was dictated by God to the authors selected by Him.
2) The Hebrew word for male is “eesh” –
The Hebrew word for female is “eeshaw.”
Gen 2:23 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman (Eeshaw) [802], because she was taken out of Man (Eesh) [376].
(NOTE: The numbers in []'s reference Strong's numbering system)God calls himself “eesh;” angels are “eesh;” male animals are “eesh” and male humans are “eesh;” females of animal and human species are “eeshaw.” There are no “eeshaw” angels.
Gen 2:23 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman (Eeshaw) [802], because she was taken out of Man (Eesh) [376].
Gen 2:24 Therefore shall a man (Eesh) [376] leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife (Eeshaw) [802]: and they shall be one flesh.
Gen 4:1 And the man (A-dam)[120] knew Eve his wife (Eeshaw) [802]; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man (Eesh) [376] from the LORD.
Gen 7:2 Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the (Eesh) male and his (Eeshaw) female…”
That probably explains why Jesus said “In heaven they shall be like the angels, neither married nor given in marriage..”
It would also explain why the sons of God of Genesis six left their first estate to cohabit with the daughters of men. It was a new experience they had to taste for themselves.
God most definitely is Male; men are the image and glory of God, women are the glory of the man
I read your post with diligence, and appreciate the agreement in understanding you present. I also realize that the agreement is not between you and I, but is between you and scripture, and me and scripture, as it is the scripture we hold in common, not a doctrine.
It is encouraging.
Some on this board seem to think it is a sign of weakness to express agreement with others, but I consider it a sign of agreement with scripture shared by others.
Grace and hope to the house of you and yours from the house of me and mine.
To those on the board who suggested it, this “preview post” thing seems to help. Thanks!
Quote (Ed J @ Mar. 16 2011,09:47) Quote (Paladin @ Mar. 16 2011,09:41) Quote (Ed J @ Mar. 16 2011,09:28) Quote Hi Paladin,
You address Luke 20:41-44 and I will answer your question; deal?Nope! I will answer your question, but since you do not understand what I am saying, it matters not whether you respond to my question or not.
Quote Luke 20:41-44 And he said unto them, How say they that Christ is David's son? And David himself saith in the book of Psalms, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, Till I make thine enemies thy footstool. David therefore calleth him Lord, how is he then his son?
Because David knew that God had promised him that of his loins one would come that would be his Lord, as resurrected Christ.
For David speaketh concerning him,
“I foresaw the Lord always before my face, for he is on my right hand, that I should not be moved: 26 Therefore did my heart rejoice, and my tongue was glad; moreover also my flesh shall rest in hope: 27 Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption. 28 Thou hast made known to me the ways of life; thou shalt make me full of joy with thy countenance.”29 Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day. 30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; 31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. 32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.
33 Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear.
34 For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, 35 Until I make thy foes thy footstool. 36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.”
Hi Paladin,The promise YHVH made to David was fulfilled
through Mary's father's lineage listed in Luke 3:23-33.God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
I fail to see any new information in your post.“Which was the son of Melea, which was the son of Menan, which was the son of Mattatha, which was the son of Nathan, which was the son of David,” [Luke 3:31]
Quote (Wispring @ Mar. 16 2011,11:21) To all and especially Paladin,
I came to this thread to learn from Paladin. I have no desire engage in any scriptural-based debate in this thread and will steadfastly refuse to do so from here on out. I hope I am making my mind and intentions perfectly clear on this point. Thank you and may God bless you and yours.
For that endorsement, I must list you among my friends. BUT, what will you do when I learn something from those with whom I am in disagreement? What will you do if I acknowledge something they offer, that I have not previously considered, and am consequently compelled to re-evaluate a previous conclusion?May I offer a comment, intended to help a friend? If you came to this board to learn from Paladin, that puts the pressure upon Paladin that he cannot be wrong. Paladin, as well as those with whom I am in disagreement, knows that is an untenable position.
How much rather we agree, we are both seeking truth of God's word. Sometimes I learn from my detractors, because God sends me there to learn humility. He reminds me of two things.st, I do not have all truth, and second, sometimes my detractors understand a particular perspective better than I do.
God works indeed in mysterious ways, my friend, and I never turn down a lesson learned from a supposed “enemy.” Please, keep your eyes open to truth regardless from whence it comes, or you may well miss something the Holy spirit sent you here to learn, not necessarily from Paladin.
Even a sister on the board makes me do my homework betimes, and is appreciated, though it may appear I am continually in disagreement with her, she is not my enemy, nor are others with whom I am in disagreement. I suspect all on the board are attempting to teach truth. some are even willing to learn it. A Few even persue it.
I will eagerly read all responses, and sometimes, if I think I can clear up a previous vague response, I will try again.
Thanks again for the accolade, but please, my friend, be caustious with praise. It can lead to mistakes not intended. I might even be led to believe my own rhetoric over what scripture actually says, and some on the board are very astute at pointing out misreading scripture.
You are very welcome, as I need all the friends I can get, but come as a brother to learn from all, and we will be even better friends.
Hope and grace from me and my house to you and your house.
Quote (SimplyForgiven @ Mar. 16 2011,12:25) Paladin,
Are you going to respond to my post?
Just askin
Hey SF. If you only posted one post, I responded. If you posted more than one, which one are you asking about?I have my plate full, but am open to guidance.
Quote (Paladin @ Mar. 17 2011,21:32) Quote (Wispring @ Mar. 16 2011,11:21) To all and especially Paladin,
I came to this thread to learn from Paladin. I have no desire engage in any scriptural-based debate in this thread and will steadfastly refuse to do so from here on out. I hope I am making my mind and intentions perfectly clear on this point. Thank you and may God bless you and yours.
For that endorsement, I must list you among my friends. BUT, what will you do when I learn something from those with whom I am in disagreement? What will you do if I acknowledge something they offer, that I have not previously considered, and am consequently compelled to re-evaluate a previous conclusion?May I offer a comment, intended to help a friend? If you came to this board to learn from Paladin, that puts the pressure upon Paladin that he cannot be wrong. Paladin, as well as those with whom I am in disagreement, knows that is an untenable position.
How much rather we agree, we are both seeking truth of God's word. Sometimes I learn from my detractors, because God sends me there to learn humility. He reminds me of two things.st, I do not have all truth, and second, sometimes my detractors understand a particular perspective better than I do.
God works indeed in mysterious ways, my friend, and I never turn down a lesson learned from a supposed “enemy.” Please, keep your eyes open to truth regardless from whence it comes, or you may well miss something the Holy spirit sent you here to learn, not necessarily from Paladin.
Even a sister on the board makes me do my homework betimes, and is appreciated, though it may appear I am continually in disagreement with her, she is not my enemy, nor are others with whom I am in disagreement. I suspect all on the board are attempting to teach truth. some are even willing to learn it. A Few even persue it.
I will eagerly read all responses, and sometimes, if I think I can clear up a previous vague response, I will try again.
Thanks again for the accolade, but please, my friend, be caustious with praise. It can lead to mistakes not intended. I might even be led to believe my own rhetoric over what scripture actually says, and some on the board are very astute at pointing out misreading scripture.
You are very welcome, as I need all the friends I can get, but come as a brother to learn from all, and we will be even better friends.
Hope and grace from me and my house to you and your house.
Paladin,Thats very good advice.
And very wise of you.That is alot of pressure.
Maybe i have pre-judged you based on misunderstandings, which is why i ask so many questions so that we can come to a “understanding” though we may disagree.Quote (Paladin @ Mar. 17 2011,21:37) Quote (SimplyForgiven @ Mar. 16 2011,12:25) Paladin,
Are you going to respond to my post?
Just askin
Hey SF. If you only posted one post, I responded. If you posted more than one, which one are you asking about?I have my plate full, but am open to guidance.
Dont worry about it you already responded to it.Quote (Paladin @ Mar. 15 2011,17:12)
You are reading what took place in the garden, not out in the world.“So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.” [Gen 1:27]
(Mike) So your understanding of this is that Adam and Eve were one being and were called “HIM”?
Gen 1:27 “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.”
Genesis 5:2 “Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.”I thought I had already said that. Sorry.
Quote (Paladin @ Mar. 15 2011,17:12)
Let me ask you Mike, do you think Satan will not be tossed thereunto?(mike) YES……..no wait, NO………um……………
That is worded funny! I absolutely believe that Satan will be tossed into the abyss. Why? Because if God said it, then it is AS GOOD AS DONE. Get it? That is a metaphor. It doesn't mean it's already happened yet. Paladin, haven't you ever heard the expressions “done deal” or “consider it done”? “Hey, can you help me move this weekend?” “Consider it done!” It doesn't mean dude has ALREADY helped dude move, right?
Correct! But just because some scholar figured out thousands of years ago (or maybe last week) that if God says a thing, it is as real as reality can get, and he names it a metaphor, it somehow softens the result to a lessor reality, God did not name it “metaphor” but “My words”. When God supplied prophetic language to teach men hope through Messianic promises, Messiah was not any less real than the day Jesus walked the streets of Jerusalem on his way to the temple.
Your example is dealing with dudes and dudettes, whose promises may very well be just that, unfilfilled but promised; my example is dealing with the unaltered words of the sovereign God. His words will become reality in activity just as they begin relaity in promise.
Quote (Paladin @ Mar. 15 2011,17:12)
As to your question, it seems I am not the only one on the board with short term memopry problems, as I have only recently answered that question.(Mike) I have not seen an answer to my question about who the “one man” is in Romans 5, and the scriptures you posted today surely don't answer my question. I want a NAME of the “one man” in Romans 5 – can you list the NAME of that person?
Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: 13 For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless death reigned from [1st clue] Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of [2nd clue]Adam's transgression(Eve was in the transgression), who is the figure of him that was to come. 15 But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many. 16 And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification. 17 For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ. 18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. 19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.” [Rom 5:12-19]
A-D-A-M as in “Adam” – “male and female made he them, and called their name Adam.”[Gen 5:2] (I would have declared I posted this before)
“Eve was in the transgression, being deceived” – I was sure I posted this. “She ate, and gave to her husband and he did eat” (Are you sure this was not posted before?)
Hope this clears up that problem.
grace and hope to you and yours Mike.
Quote (SimplyForgiven @ Mar. 18 2011,03:42) Quote (Paladin @ Mar. 17 2011,21:32) “~Snip~” for brevity Quote (Wispring @ Mar. 16 2011,11:21) “~Snip~” for brevity Paladin,
Thats very good advice.
And very wise of you.That is alot of pressure.
Maybe i have pre-judged you based on misunderstandings, which is why i ask so many questions so that we can come to a “understanding” though we may disagree.Thank you SF.
Much of the time I detect what is frustration, while some may think it bullying or worse.
Frustration is the one thing common to all posters as we strive to make ourselves clear, and we cannot understand why others do not see what we are saying.
Then of course, sometimes others do see what we are saying, and simply do not agree.
WoW! What a conundrum.
Grace and Hope, SF, to your house from mine
Hi everyone and Paladin,
I appreciate the feedback. To be clear, I am certain that everyone here has something to teach me with regards to the gospel truth. This is a thread that was started by Paladin so I meant that I am learning from Paladin in this thread. I am not learning from Paladin alone. Every response to Paladin's posts I also read.Bottom line, he started the read, he is the focal point of my learning experience in this thread. He is one of the few posters to reveal the meanings of the words in the Hebrew and Greek texts.This speaks to me of a mature,scholarly, and thoughtful approach. Just to ease your mind Paladin
I am certain you do not hold 'All Truth' or hold the 'keys to heaven', I know I don't. I know Jesus and God do. I was giving you an 'atta boy' with my post. I have no doctrine(codified set of beliefs). I am merely wanting to understand scripture better. I have ideas in my mind as a result of reading the scripture, but, they are not 'set in stone'. I will share with you one of my beliefs. I believe that God is experiencing his creation in part through the minds of the creatures he gave the ability to have thought processes. Only God know all things from beginning to end. I have had to re-evaluate and re-think things all my life based on new experiences, evidences, facts, and revelations, this process isn't likely to stop any time soon I hope, If it does then I have stopped my own mental and spiritual learning process. God forbid! So, Paladin, I hope this takes any undue pressure off of you from statements I made concerning you. I am really enjoying learning the basics of Greek by the way.With Love and Respect,
Wispring
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
