- This topic has 3,215 replies, 24 voices, and was last updated 4 years, 7 months ago by
.
- Posts
Mike,
Quote Where does Enoch teach that angels marry? 1 Enoch chapter 6
Quote 1. And it came to pass when the children of men had multiplied that in those days were born unto them beautiful and comely daughters. 2. And the angels, the children of the heaven, saw and lusted after them, and said to one another: 'Come, let us choose us wives from among the children of men and beget us children.' 3. And Semjâzâ, who was their leader, said unto them: 'I fear ye will not indeed agree to do this deed, and I alone shall have to pay the penalty of a great sin.
1) Angels lust after human women
2) In their lust they desire to marry them.
3 According to Jesus the lust itself is a sin so they a guilty even before Semjâzâ spoke to them.Quote Enoch 15 6But you from the beginning were made spiritual, possessing a life which is eternal, and not subject to death for ever.
7Therefore I made not wives for you, because, being spiritual, your dwelling is in heaven.
Adam was not subject to death when God made Eve for him as the wages of sin are death. It is Eve that through which temptation came to Adam and therefore sin that lead to death. God created Eve for Adam because Adam was alone without a helper, Genesis 2:18.
Some angels that were seen in a vision are female.
Quote Zechariah 5:9
King James Version (KJV)9Then lifted I up mine eyes, and looked, and, behold, there came out two women, and the wind was in their wings; for they had wings like the wings of a stork: and they lifted up the ephah between the earth and the heaven.
Quote Also, how does Enoch describe Sheol as contrasted to how Jesus describes it? 1 Enoch describes a Sheol with four sections while Jesus describes one with but two.
Jesus’ description is consistent with the idea that after death a man is subject to judgment while the description in 1 Enoch is not.
Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 05 2011,14:18) Mike, Quote (mikeboll @ 64) Where does Enoch teach that angels marry? 1 Enoch chapter 6
Quote 1. And it came to pass when the children of men had multiplied that in those days were born unto them beautiful and comely daughters. 2. And the angels, the children of the heaven, saw and lusted after them, and said to one another: 'Come, let us choose us wives from among the children of men and beget us children.
Kerwin, is it not for breaking the command that angels DON'T marry that these particular angels garnished the severe punishment of being kicked out of heaven forever and watching helplessly as the children they created were destroyed in the flood?Jesus did not mispeak, for he was talking about angels marrying angels. The words of Genesis 6:1-2 are almost identical to the words of Enoch 7:1-2, which you quoted.
And since the same exact thing is said in both Enoch and Genesis, I don't think this is the best example of Enoch being contradictory to scripture.
Quote Some angels that were seen in a vision are female.
I too believe that angels are made both male and female. But I believe they are each individually created by God through Jesus, and therefore don't marry or beget children of their own.Quote Quote (mikeboll @ 64) Also, how does Enoch describe Sheol as contrasted to how Jesus describes it? 1 Enoch describes a Sheol with four sections while Jesus describes one with but two.
Jesus’ description is consistent with the idea that after death a man is subject to judgment while the description in 1 Enoch is not.
And perhaps in reality there are 27 sections of Sheol, and Jesus described two while Enoch elaborated and described four. Can you quote Enoch's version compared side by side with Jesus' version? That way we can see if there really is a contradiction, or if Enoch just descibed the same Sheol a different way than Jesus did.mike
Mike,
Here are the four divisions of Sheol according to the manuscripts of 1 Enoch 22.
Quote 1) Quote And this division has been made for the spirits of the righteous, in which there is the bright spring of water. 2)
Quote And this has been made for sinners when they die and are buried in the earth and judgement has not been executed upon them in their lifetime. 11. Here their spirits shall be set apart in this great pain, till the great day of judgement, scourgings, and torments of the accursed for ever, so that (there maybe) retribution for their spirits. There He shall bind them for ever. 3)
Quote And this division has been made for the spirits of those who make their suit, who make disclosures concerning their destruction, when they were slain in the days of the sinners. 4)
Quote And this has been made for the spirits of men who shall not be righteous but sinners, who are godless, and of the lawless they shall be companions: but their spirits shall not be punished in the day of judgement nor shall they be raised from thence. According to the doctrine exposed in this description the sons of men sent to the fourth division will not be resurrected. This is what scripture states.
Quote Revelation 20:13
King James Version (KJV)13And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.
So what dead do Sheol and Death not surrender?
The second division contradicts the teaching that each man is subject to judgment after death.
Quote Hebrews 9:27
King James Version (KJV)27And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:
Those that repent, repent before they die since after that they are subject to judgment and there is no hope is Sheol.
The third sounds like some sinners get to argue their case before the God who knows all things. Perhaps that is possible, though it will not change the outcome. If so then all sinners, whether righteous or wicked, will get to argue their case so that God’s justice and mercy is clear to see.
We simply have too few manuscripts of 1 Enoch and there are those that have adulterated scripture for their own reasons in the past such as the Marcion bible.
Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 06 2011,05:26) Mike, Here are the four divisions of Sheol according to the manuscripts of 1 Enoch 22.
Quote 1) Quote And this division has been made for the spirits of the righteous, in which there is the bright spring of water. 2)
Quote And this has been made for sinners when they die and are buried in the earth and judgement has not been executed upon them in their lifetime. 11. Here their spirits shall be set apart in this great pain, till the great day of judgement, scourgings, and torments of the accursed for ever, so that (there maybe) retribution for their spirits. There He shall bind them for ever. 3)
Quote And this division has been made for the spirits of those who make their suit, who make disclosures concerning their destruction, when they were slain in the days of the sinners. 4)
Quote And this has been made for the spirits of men who shall not be righteous but sinners, who are godless, and of the lawless they shall be companions: but their spirits shall not be punished in the day of judgement nor shall they be raised from thence. According to the doctrine exposed in this description the sons of men sent to the fourth division will not be resurrected. This is what scripture states.
Quote Revelation 20:13
King James Version (KJV)13And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.
So what dead do Sheol and Death not surrender?
The second division contradicts the teaching that each man is subject to judgment after death.
Quote Hebrews 9:27
King James Version (KJV)27And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:
Those that repent, repent before they die since after that they are subject to judgment and there is no hope is Sheol.
The third sounds like some sinners get to argue their case before the God who knows all things. Perhaps that is possible, though it will not change the outcome. If so then all sinners, whether righteous or wicked, will get to argue their case so that God’s justice and mercy is clear to see.
We simply have too few manuscripts of 1 Enoch and there are those that have adulterated scripture for their own reasons in the past such as the Marcion bible.
Mike,I see that your argument that the fact Jesus addressed just two sections of Sheol in his parable that takes place their does not mean those are the only two that exist.
This part of the conversation should be in another thread but I do not have time to deal with too many topics on a regular basis so I may just stop instead of switching there.
I already stopped, Kerwin.
That's why I didn't reply to your last post. I know very little about the Book of Enoch; way too little to make any scriptural claims based upon it.I just though you might find it interesting that WHOEVER wrote Enoch (which by all accounts was written BEFORE Jesus became flesh) seemed to think that Jesus was with God way before he emptied himself to be made into the likeness of a human being.
And I thought Jack might find it interesting to know that whoever authored the Book of Enoch described Jesus – not as BEING God – but as being BESIDE God.
peace,
mikeQuote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 08 2011,03:31) I already stopped, Kerwin. That's why I didn't reply to your last post. I know very little about the Book of Enoch; way too little to make any scriptural claims based upon it.I just though you might find it interesting that WHOEVER wrote Enoch (which by all accounts was written BEFORE Jesus became flesh) seemed to think that Jesus was with God way before he emptied himself to be made into the likeness of a human being.
And I thought Jack might find it interesting to know that whoever authored the Book of Enoch described Jesus – not as BEING God – but as being BESIDE God.
peace,
mike
Mike,It is in deed interesting to look at the scriptural understandings of those of the time of Jesus and before. Sometimes it aids in giving us insights into the frame reference of the people that scripture was originally addressed to.
Like scripture I have a different frame of reference when reading Enoch than you do.
Kerwin,
Personally, I don't think you have any scriptural reason for believing that Jesus didn't pre-exist. I strongly believe, that like Gene and Marty, you just feel better about being able to follow him if you think of him as starting off just like you.
When I read, “I came down from heaven”, I don't have to start searching the lexicons to find out what other, obsolete meanings those Greek words could mean in a pinch. I don't have to read, “I had glory with God before the world was” and work hard at pretending it means “the thought of me in God's head had glory with God before the world was”. I can just accept the words of my Lord for what they say.
And when the one we all know is called “the Word of God” in Rev is called “the Word” in John – by the same exact author – and is said to have become flesh and dwelled among us having the glory of God's only begotten, I don't have to imagine an “unknown” only begotten of God. I already know who God's only begotten is, so for me it flows smoothly.
And when Phil 2 says that Jesus was existing in the form of God before emptying himself to be made into the likeness of a human being, I don't have to make absurd claims in an effort to make these scriptural words disappear.
I don't have to pretend that when Paul says “ALL things”, he really only means “NEW things” – because I know there is a perfectly good Greek word he could have used to convey “NEW things”.
These are all things you DO have to do, Kerwin. Because you've started off knowing what you want the scriptures to teach before you let them actually teach you, you have been at a loss ever since that time.
Discussing pre-existence with you is much like discussing scriptures with the Trinitarians. Have you ever read any of the trinity discussions on HN? If you have, you'll acknowledge that there are a lot of absurd claims made by people who are trying to force the scriptures to say what they want them to say – when what the scriptures really say is nowhere close to what they want them to say.
1. “I had glory alongside God before the earth was founded.”
2. “The thought of me in God's head had glory alongside God before the earth was founded.”
If you were able to look at this from the outside looking in, you'd not only be able to notice that Jesus taught us the former, not the latter. You'd also be able to see just how absurd and ridiculous it is for someone to even claim the latter. But you apparently cannot do that. I pray that someday you will be able to. I pray that you'll be reading scripture one day, and a verse I haven't even thought of as having to do with pre-existence just jumps right out at you and turns on the light.
peace,
mikeQuote (kerwin @ Nov. 04 2011,18:38) Quote (terraricca @ Nov. 03 2011,03:53) kerwin if your testing only cover your own views ,logic and opinions then why use the bible at all ,God should bow down to you
son of man ? look in Ezekiel it is common their because this is a prelude to the work that the Christ will perform.
Pierre,The book of Enoch contradicts the words of Jesus in that the later teacher angels do not marry nor are they given in marriage and Jesus describes a different version of Sheol.
That is two witnesses. Currently many of the 1 Enoch manuscripts are remnants with the most extent ones coming from Ethiopia. There is a 2 Enoch and a 3 Enoch that exist.
Kerwinso what ,make a choice either the scriptures or the book of Enoch ,
it is your choice ,
Pierre
Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 06 2011,06:18) Mike, Quote Where does Enoch teach that angels marry? 1 Enoch chapter 6
Quote 1. And it came to pass when the children of men had multiplied that in those days were born unto them beautiful and comely daughters. 2. And the angels, the children of the heaven, saw and lusted after them, and said to one another: 'Come, let us choose us wives from among the children of men and beget us children.' 3. And Semjâzâ, who was their leader, said unto them: 'I fear ye will not indeed agree to do this deed, and I alone shall have to pay the penalty of a great sin.
1) Angels lust after human women
2) In their lust they desire to marry them.
3 According to Jesus the lust itself is a sin so they a guilty even before Semjâzâ spoke to them.Quote Enoch 15 6But you from the beginning were made spiritual, possessing a life which is eternal, and not subject to death for ever.
7Therefore I made not wives for you, because, being spiritual, your dwelling is in heaven.
Adam was not subject to death when God made Eve for him as the wages of sin are death. It is Eve that through which temptation came to Adam and therefore sin that lead to death. God created Eve for Adam because Adam was alone without a helper, Genesis 2:18.
Some angels that were seen in a vision are female.
Quote Zechariah 5:9
King James Version (KJV)9Then lifted I up mine eyes, and looked, and, behold, there came out two women, and the wind was in their wings; for they had wings like the wings of a stork: and they lifted up the ephah between the earth and the heaven.
Quote Also, how does Enoch describe Sheol as contrasted to how Jesus describes it? 1 Enoch describes a Sheol with four sections while Jesus describes one with but two.
Jesus’ description is consistent with the idea that after death a man is subject to judgment while the description in 1 Enoch is not.
1st:
The “women” of Zec 5:9 are not angels, they are women in a vision. “Women” in Hebrew is “eesh-shaw” but angel in verse 10 is “mal-lawk.” They are not the same.There are no female angels in scripture.
2nd:
Jesus not only never sais luist is sin, he himself lusted.He said “with eputhumia” I have “epithumesa” to eat this passover with you.” [Luke 22:15]
“Epithumeia” is translated “lust” in James 1:15
“Then when epithumia hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.[James 1:15]
Lust is not sin until it fulfills its potential to bring out the evil within our desires. The desire itself is not bad, but continuing to persue it to its fulfillment is.
Paladin,
It is nice to hear from you.
Quote 1st:
The “women” of Zec 5:9 are not angels, they are women in a vision. “Women” in Hebrew is “eesh-shaw” but angel in verse 10 is “mal-lawk.” They are not the same.There are no female angels in scripture.
Are angels always called “ma-lawk” or are they sometimes called by their gender?
For example the two angels that visit Lot in Genesis 19 are called “iysh”.
I currently believe that such issues as the genders of angels are not critical to the message of salvation.
Quote 2nd:
Jesus not only never sais luist is sin, he himself lusted.He said “with eputhumia” I have “epithumesa” to eat this passover with you.” [Luke 22:15]
“Epithumeia” is translated “lust” in James 1:15
“Then when epithumia hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.[James 1:15]
Lust is not sin until it fulfills its potential to bring out the evil within our desires. The desire itself is not bad, but continuing to pursue it to its fulfillment is.
I may have inadvertently confused you as I was speaking using inferences based on conversation at hand.
You are correct that it is not sinful to be tempted by evil but the account Enoch tell of the angels going beyond being tempted and to the point of even making a compact to do evil in the sight of God. Jesus teaches us that even to fantasize of sinning it to sin in Matthew 5:28.
One can hear the sin without sinning but if one indulges in imagining doing the sin then they sin.
Unlike our discussion about what is testified of the gender(s) of angels I consider this discussion of temptation and sin to be critical to the gospel of righteousness through faith.
Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 13 2011,02:38)
Paladin,It is nice to hear from you.
Quote 1st:
The “women” of Zec 5:9 are not angels, they are women in a vision. “Women” in Hebrew is “eesh-shaw” but angel in verse 10 is “mal-lawk.” They are not the same.There are no female angels in scripture.
Are angels always called “ma-lawk” or are they sometimes called by their gender?
All males are “Ish” sometimes spelled “eesh.” All females are “ishi” sometimes spelled “eeshaw.”
Quote For example the two angels that visit Lot in Genesis 19 are called “iysh”. I currently believe that such issues as the genders of angels are not critical to the message of salvation.
Gen 2:21 And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; 22 And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man [120], made he a woman (Eesh-shaw) [802], and brought her unto the man (A-dam) [120]. 23 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my
flesh: she shall be called Woman (Ees-shaw) [802], because she was taken out of Man (Eesh) [376]. 24 Therefore shall a man (Eesh) [376] leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife (Eesh-shaw) [802]: and they shall be one flesh.Man is eesh; God is eesh; angels are eesh; the females of animals are eesh; females are eeshee (or eeshaw); female humans are eeshee (or eeshaw) because they were taken out of eesh.
As for any gendre issue, it only become an issue when someone insists God is genderless, or angels are mothers to spiritual beings. Then of course, there are some who make issue from the paintings and drawing of artists who depict angelic beings as “feminine” in appearance.
God is called “He” in scripture because “He” used pronouns to that effect; i.,e., Masculine singular.
Quote 2nd:
Jesus not only never said lust is sin, he himself lusted.He said “with eputhumia” I have “epithumesa” to eat this passover with you.” [Luke 22:15]
“Epithumeia” is translated “lust” in James 1:15
“Then when epithumia hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.[James 1:15]
Lust is not sin until it fulfills its potential to bring out the evil within our desires. The desire itself is not bad, but continuing to pursue it to its fulfillment is.
Quote I may have inadvertently confused you as I was speaking using inferences based on conversation at hand. You are correct that it is not sinful to be tempted by evil but the account Enoch tell of the angels going beyond being tempted and to the point of even making a compact to do evil in the sight of God. Jesus teaches us that even to fantasize of sinning it to sin in Matthew 5:28.
One can hear the sin without sinning but if one indulges in imagining doing the sin then they sin.
Jesus said in the reference you supplied, “If thy eye offend, pluck it out” or “cast it off” to save the body, which implies it is not the body that offends by the bearing of temptation, rather it is the means by which the temptation arrives at the body, i.,e., hearing, seeing, tasting, smelling, etc.
Jesus was not saying “if you lust for a woman it is as bad to think about it as it is to do it.” He was saying, “while it is only in your heart, that is the time to get rid of it, before it manages to become an action by the body.”
And you are correct, that to continue to endulge one's self in phantasies of an unholy nature, sin takes hold, we are taught that there are at least two types of sin; sin unto death, and sin not unto death. The sin in which one engages by persuit of
lustful image, or evil desire, leads to fulfillment, but until that desire is fulfilled, it is unrighteousness, and all unrighteousness is sin. but the response to unrighteousness that has not matured to the point of sin can be expiated by repentance, prayer, and determination to not persue that line of reasioning again.This is why it was said of Enoch “He pleased God” and he “was translated, that he should not taste death,” because all of his sins were of the “desire” level, of which he repented and sought through prayer, to control, and mostly succeeded.
His approach, in conjunction with the blood of Christ, made him acceptable unto God. And he did not die. Pretty neat for a human, in my estimation.
Quote Unlike our discussion about what is testified of the gender(s) of angels I consider this discussion of temptation and sin to be critical to the gospel of righteousness through faith. Agreed! Even Enoch had to repent, and there are none who can accuse him of anything contrary to God's laws, other than God himself, who testified of Enoch “he pleased God.”
Paladin,
Quote As for any gender issue, it only becomes an issue when someone insists God is genderless, or angels are mothers to spiritual beings. If the issue of gender in some way comes to effect the gospel of Christ then it becomes an critical issue.
Quote All males are “Ish” sometimes spelled “eesh.” All females are “ishi” sometimes spelled “eeshaw.” Man is eesh; God is eesh; angels are eesh; the females of animals are eesh; females are eeshee (or eeshaw); female humans are eeshee (or eeshaw) because they were taken out of eesh.
Strong’s 802 disagrees with you as they specifically state that the female of animals can be called “ishshah (ish-shaw').
Here is one scripture where it is so used.
Quote Genesis 7:2
King James Version (KJV)2Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male (iysh) and his female (ishshah): and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male (iysh) and his female (ishshah).
Quote Jesus was not saying “if you lust for a woman it is as bad to think about it as it is to do it.” He was saying, “while it is only in your heart, that is the time to get rid of it, before it manages to become an action by the body.” You are stretching on that one as what you state is not what those words Jesus spoke meant though you are correct that cutting sin off while it is still an idea is the example Jesus set for us.
What is the difference between an idea and a mental fantasy?
The way I understand it is that an idea is a conception “existing in the mind as a result of mental understanding, awareness, or activity” while a mental fantasy is “imagined sequence filling a psychological need”. I assure you if the need is from the sinful nature or the then the fantasy is a sin while just become aware of the possibility of sin does not.
Did Jesus fantasize about turning stone to bread or did he just have an idea about doing so?
The rest sounds good to my ear.
Note: Definitions from dictionary.reference.com.
Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 13 2011,11:47) [/quote]
Paladin,(P)
Quote As for any gender issue, it only becomes an issue when someone insists God is genderless, or angels are mothers to spiritual beings. (Ed) If the issue of gender in some way comes to effect the gospel of Christ then it becomes an critical issue.
(P)
Quote All males are “Ish” sometimes spelled “eesh.” All females are “ishi” sometimes spelled “eeshaw.” Man is eesh; God is eesh; angels are eesh; the females of animals are eesh; females are eeshee (or eeshaw); female humans are eeshee (or eeshaw) because they were taken out of eesh.
(Ed)Strong’s 802 disagrees with you as they specifically state that the female of animals can be called “ishshah (ish-shaw'). [/quote]
You are correct. Now you know why I do not post very often. My mind gets ahead of my typing.
(P)
Quote Jesus was not saying “if you lust for a woman it is as bad to think about it as it is to do it.” He was saying, “while it is only in your heart, that is the time to get rid of it, before it manages to become an action by the body.” (Ed) You are stretching on that one as what you state is not what those words Jesus spoke meant though you are correct that cutting sin off while it is still an idea is the example Jesus set for us.[/quote]
Not at all. Jesus knew that no one can control what thoughts can come into one's mind, but everyone can control what he/she does about it. And, when you spend more time working with God, the thought proccess comes more under one's control, to where the mischief thoughts are fewer and farther between.
(Ed)
Quote What is the difference between an idea and a mental fantasy? The way I understand it is that an idea is a conception
“existing in the mind as a result of mental understanding, awareness, or activity” while a mental fantasy is “imagined sequence filling a psychological need”. I assure you if the need is from the sinful nature or the then the fantasy is a sin while just become aware of the possibility of sin does not.It is the same difference as that between science fiction and science fantasy; i.e. one is possible while the other is not.
It does not require “possibility” for a thought to become sin. It requires fulfillment in some capacity or other to become a “sin unto death. Remember, “all unrightesouness is sin.” The difference is not in the thought, it is in the result; i.,e., “What did you do about it?” or “How did you handle it?”
Quote (Paladin @ Nov. 13 2011,20:25) It does not require “possibility” for a thought to become sin. It requires fulfillment in some capacity or other to become a “sin unto death. Remember, “all unrighteousness is sin.” The difference is not in the thought, it is in the result; i.,e., “What did you do about it?” or “How did you handle it?”
Paladin…….I agree with that statement, remember what God told Cain.
Gen 4:7………..> If you do well shall not you be accepted? and if you do not well, sin lies (Hebrew Couches like a lion getting read to pounce on its pray) at the door (of your heart), And unto you shall be his desire, and you shall rule over him.Sin in Hebrew thought, is depicted as a roaring Lion that goes about looking for it prey (US) so it can Kill it.
Yes Sin enters us thorough our hearts from the outside and we must learn to master it, and with God's help we can.
Jesus said ” to him that overcomes I will grant to sit with me in MY Kingdom even as I have overcome and sit down in my Fathers Kingdom.” IMO
peace and love to you and yours……………………………………gene
Paladin,
Quote You are correct. Now you know why I do not post very often. My mind gets ahead of my typing. We often learn by the doing which often means we also often make errors while we learn. God places limits on us to aid us in seeking his righteousness and his kingdom.
Quote Not at all. Jesus knew that no one can control what thoughts can come into one's mind, but everyone can control what he/she does about it. I agree with this statement of yours as the temptation to do evil is the idea that Satan puts into your mind even as the Evil One tempted Jesus during the later’s time in the desert. The sin comes when you take the idea that Satan placed into your mind and run with it even if you only perform that action in your mind much like a science fiction writer has an idea come into his head and then writes the story that goes with the idea.
I know from experience that though I cannot control the ideas that come into my head, with training and the power of God I can put a stop to working them out even in my thoughts.
Quote It does not require “possibility” for a thought to become sin. It requires fulfillment in some capacity or other to become a “sin unto death. To me the difference is that the idea is the concept and the mental fantasy is fulfilling that result in your imaginations.
Quote Remember, “all unrighteousness is sin.” The difference is not in the thought, it is in the result; i.,e., “What did you do about it?” or “How did you handle it?” Since all mental activity is thought I chose to use the word “idea” to represent the concept of sinning. Therefore if you meant the concept of sin when you stated thought then I agree with you.
Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 14 2011,06:07) I know from experience that though I cannot control the ideas that come into my head, with training and the power of God I can put a stop to working them out even in my thoughts.
Kerwin………..That is what overcoming is all about brother. It is “Mastering” those thoughts even as Jesus did in the Wilderness after receiving the Holy Spirit from God. Well put Kerwin IMOpeace and love to you and yours……………………………….gene
Hey all,
I think God has showed me a way to end the discussion about the pre-existence of Jesus once and for all.
29 The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said, “Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world! 30 This is the one I meant when I said, ‘A man who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.’
It is CRYSTAL CLEAR from these verses that JESUS is the one John said surpassed him because he was before him.
Are there any doubts so far that it was JESUS John said these words about?
15 John testifies concerning him. He cries out, saying, “This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.’”
Now we've already seen from verses 29 and 30, which I quoted above, that JESUS is the one about whom John says these words, right?
Is there any doubt that whoever is referred to as “him” in verse 15 is the same one referred to as “JESUS” in verse 29?
Now, we only have to find out who the “him” is in verse 15.
14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.
15 John testifies concerning him.
Again, it is CRYSTAL CLEAR that the pronoun “him” from verse 15 refers back to the subject of verse 14. And who is the subject of verse 14? Why, the Word of course.
So it is clear that it was “the Word” about whom John said, “He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me”. And in verse 29, it is made clear that the one John said these words about is JESUS. Therefore, Jesus IS the “him” from verse 15, and therefore “the Word” from verse 14.
Who among you can deny this teaching?
Hi Mike,
John 1 14 is about “The word's” glory “IN” Jesus, so this verse is about both.
And in verse 15 is about what the reason for all this. (see 2Cor.5:19)2 Cor. 5:19: To wit, that God(HolySpirit) was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them;
and hath committed unto us “The Word” of reconciliation.God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgEd,
Let's take this one step at a time, so we can see exactly where your understanding breaks down – ie: where you start adding your own thoughts into the scriptures. Please address each point individually.
29 The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said, “Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world! 30 This is the one I meant when I said, ‘A man who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.’
It is CRYSTAL CLEAR from these verses that JESUS is the one John said surpassed him because he was before him.
1) Ed, do you have any doubts so far that John said these words about JESUS?
15 John testifies concerning him. He cries out, saying, “This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.’”
Now we've already seen from verses 29 and 30, which I quoted above, that JESUS is the one about whom John says these words, right?
2) Ed, is there any doubt that whoever is referred to as “him” in verse 15 is the same one referred to as “JESUS” in verse 29?
If not, then we only have to find out who the “him” is in verse 15.
14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.
15 John testifies concerning him.
Again, it is CRYSTAL CLEAR that the pronouns “him” and “his” refer back to the subject of verse 14. And who is the subject of verse 14? Why, the Word of course.
3) Ed, do you agree that the pronouns “his” from verse 14 and “him” from verse 15 refer back to the subject of verse 14? YES or NO?
4) Ed, WHO is the subject of verse 14?
CONCLUSION:
It is clear from verses 14 and 15 that it was “the Word” about whom John said, “He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me”. And in verse 29, it is made clear that the one John said these words about is JESUS. Therefore, Jesus IS the “him” from verse 15, and therefore “the Word” from verse 14.5) Ed, can you deny this teaching?
I heartily invite Kerwin, Paladin, Gene, and Marty to also address this post – POINT BY POINT – so I can see exactly where any of you veer away from scripture, and start substituting common sense with your own twistings and imaginations.
Hi Mike,
By you trying to make Jesus the word, you have to many holes
with the rest of Scripture; why do you have so much trouble seeing this?
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.1. Do you deny that HolySpirit is God? (Acts 5:3-4, Matt.12:32, Luke 12:10)
2. Do you deny that the HolySpirit was with God in the beginning? (Genesis 1:2)
3. Do you deny that the HolySpirit was sent to us, giving us the glory that Jesus had?the glory as of the only begotten of the Father (John 1:14)
compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us. (Romans 8:18)1. Do you deny that the word fathered Jesus. (Hebrews 7:28)
2. Do you deny that the word fathers us? (1Pet.1:23, James 1:18)
3. Do you deny that Jesus said we were going to be one with them?God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org]http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
