Examination of the incarnation doctrine.

[Ed J]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 02 2011,09:41)

Hi Edwardo, So why don't you use that same understanding for John 1:14-15?  From the time “The Word” is mentioned, there is no other subject mentioned.  Therefore, just like in my example, the “his” and “him” will both apply to the aforementioned subject. Just like you knew the “his” and “him” applied to Keith in my example, you should also know that the “his” and “him” apply to the Word in 14-15. What say you?

Hi Mike,

Verse 4 is when Jesus is brought in as the object,
yet the subject (“The Word”) continues until verse 14.
In verse 15 the subject switches to Jesus. I hope this helps.

God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

[kerwin]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 30 2011,06:00)

Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 29 2011,14:18) If I am correct then in his heart Mike has understood the noun “Word” to symbolize Jesus and so considers that part of English “the him” spoken of in John 1:14 while I see it as speaking of the noun phrase “The Word made flesh”. Kerwin, At least now you are addressing the POINT I was making.  My point was never about who was before whom, or who surpassed whom.  My point was about whom those words were said.  And in one verse, the words are said about “The Word”.  And in another, the same words are said about “Jesus”. I fear your last stand is going to be a brief one, Kerwin.  It is my contention that “The Word” is the subject, “became” or “was made” is the verb describing what the subject did, and “flesh” is the object of the verb. It is your contention that “The Word made flesh” is the noun phrase subject, and “dwelled among us” is the verb.  But your theory cannot be because of the conjunction “and” that follows the word “flesh”.  You cannot erase the word “and” to make your noun phrase jump directly to the verb “dwelled”. You want it to say, “The Word made flesh dwelled among us”, but it doesn't.  Instead, your noun phrase theory would actually say, “The Word made flesh AND dwelled among us”. It would be like your sample sentence saying, “I love you AND is often heard these days.” What now?

Mike,

I am not sure what you mean about the “and” but perhaps you are stating that “Word” is the subject of the sentence with “and” linking two actions associated with the subject. The possible flaw in that reasoning it that the verb “made” is speaking of an action performed on the subject while “dwelled” is speaking of an action performed by the subject and a list would be of the same type of verbs. You thus have two separate ideas and not one longer one which is why I believe the translators of the King James Version chose to put a comma previous to the conjunction joining those two verbs.

It is true that the Word has dwelt among us but it is also true that the Word was modified by being made flesh at that time. In the next clause we have that he, the Word made flesh who is dwelling among us “has the glory as of the only begotten”. The only begotten is modified by “of the Father, full of grace and truth.” The verb clauses are modifiers of the word with each modifier modifying what has gone before. By the time you get to John 1:15 the pronoun “him” is the Word modified by all the modifiers that have been added to it previously.

If I would ask you if it was the Word made flesh that was dwelling among the people of that time and has a glory like the glory of the only begotten of God that John was speaking of then you would agree. The difference between us is that you believe Jesus is the Word while I believe Jesus is the Word made flesh.

[kerwin]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 02 2011,04:45)

Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 30 2011,21:14) As simple as I can put it is that you have failed to make a connection between Jesus being called the Word of God in Revelations and the use of the word “Word” in John 1. John 1 also speaks of the “Word of God”, right Kerwin?  Because we know it doesn't speak of anyone else's “Word”, right? So if it is clear to all that John 1 speaks of “the Word of God”, and Jesus is actually called “the Word of God” by the same author, wouldn't you agree that's quite a coincidence?

Mike,

You are assuming that every mention of the Word of God is speaking of Jesus and yet you have no supporting evidence for that conclusion.  

If you are not assuming every mention of the Word of God is speaking of Jesus then why is the mention of the Word of God in John 1 speaking of Jesus while the mention of the Word of God in other passages is not.

The answer to that why is what lacks in the reasoning used by Pierre and others.

[kerwin]

Quote (terraricca @ Dec. 01 2011,09:26)

Quote (kerwin @ Dec. 01 2011,21:14) Quote (terraricca @ Nov. 30 2011,12:05) Quote (kerwin @ Nov. 30 2011,23:53) Pierre, Quote we did not look at John 1;1 only but to Rev 19:13 He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God. I understand that is the passage you use to support that the Word symbolizes Jesus in John 1 but you claim is invalid since it does not follow that the Word in John 1 symbolizes Jesus just because he is called the Word of God in Revelations 19.  You can repeat the claim forever and it is still not supported by a rational argument until you explain why it is certain the Word in John 1 symbolizes Jesus. Word simply means word, whether in John 1 or Revelations 19, though in the later it is used as part of one of Jesus’ many titles. Quote you still have not answered the questions; I thought I had, so please repeat them.  Thank you! Kerwin Do you read what you have written,? You should ,is a title a name ? And yes you have answered the questions ,thank you Pierre Pierre, What I write is clear but given that English is not your first language perhaps to complicated for you. As simple as I can put it is that you have failed to make a connection between Jesus being called the Word of God in Revelations and the use of the word “Word” in John 1. kerwin Jn 1:14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth. sins when can words written or spoken become flesh ?? if you do not understand the scriptures it is because you are not listning to Gods word but to men interpretation and their logic, God logic is not mens logic ;;in one way ;what God thinks is not what men thinks do you understand this ?? Pierre

Pierre,

See my post to Mike on the subject we are discussing.

God is logical but his logic is based on godliness.

Man, even when logical bases his logic on his bestial nature.

Same logic forms but different spirits expressing that logic.

[GeneBalthrop]

Kerwin………..just want to agree with you in this Spirit is indeed Intellects that control our logic, and they are indeed different Spirits and (intellects) derived from them and therefore different logics. It is crucial we come to understand what Spirits are. IMO

peace and love……………………………………………………………gene

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Ed J @ Dec. 01 2011,21:49)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 02 2011,09:41) Hi Edwardo, So why don't you use that same understanding for John 1:14-15?  From the time “The Word” is mentioned, there is no other subject mentioned.  Therefore, just like in my example, the “his” and “him” will both apply to the aforementioned subject. Just like you knew the “his” and “him” applied to Keith in my example, you should also know that the “his” and “him” apply to the Word in 14-15. What say you? Hi Mike, Verse 4 is when Jesus is brought in as the object, yet the subject (“The Word”) continues until verse 14. In verse 15 the subject switches to Jesus. I hope this helps. God bless Ed J (Joshua 22:34) http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

Then why did you KNOW I was asking a question about Keith in my sample?

Ed, you KNEW it because Keith was the last subject mentioned, and therefore you KNEW the “his” and “him” automatically referred back to that subject.

But in John 1:14-15, you want to changes the rules of grammar in order to form the scriptural words around what you already believe.

Ed, feel free to do this if you think that is the way to truth.  As for me, I will let the scriptures teach me instead of me teaching them what they should say.

[mikeboll64]

Quote (kerwin @ Dec. 02 2011,00:29)

If I would ask you if it was the Word made flesh that was dwelling among the people of that time and has a glory like the glory of the only begotten of God that John was speaking of then you would agree.   The difference between us is that you believe Jesus is the Word while I believe Jesus is the Word made flesh.

Actually Kerwin,

Our difference lies in the first line of verse 14.  You believe “the Word made flesh” is a noun phrase.  And that means that you really believe the first line speaks of “the Word THAT WAS made flesh”.

Is that correct, Kerwin?  Because it can only be two ways, as far as I can tell:

1.  The Word THAT WAS made flesh – as a noun phrase.

2.  The Word BECAME flesh – as a noun/verb/modifier phrase.

Which of these do you beleive?

[mikeboll64]

Quote (kerwin @ Dec. 02 2011,00:36)

John 1 also speaks of the “Word of God”, right Kerwin?  Because we know it doesn't speak of anyone else's “Word”, right? So if it is clear to all that John 1 speaks of “the Word of God”, and Jesus is actually called “the Word of God” by the same author, wouldn't you agree that's quite a coincidence?

Mike,

You are assuming that every mention of the Word of God is speaking of Jesus and yet you have no supporting evidence for that conclusion.  

If you are not assuming every mention of the Word of God is speaking of Jesus then why is the mention of the Word of God in John 1 speaking of Jesus while the mention of the Word of God in other passages is not.

The answer to that why is what lacks in the reasoning used by Pierre and others.[/quote]
Really Kerwin?

Why don't you tell me why “the Word of God” in Rev 19:13 is speaking about Jesus when other mentions of “the word of God” are not?

What supporting evidence do you have that Rev 19:13 speaks of a BEING, and not God's spoken words?

This is what you're asking me, in effect.  And here is my evidence:  The same author that calls Jesus “the Word of God” in Revelation also calls him the Word of God who became flesh, dwelled among us, had the glory of God's only begotten Son, and John the Baptist testified about him using very specific words that were later repeated about “Jesus”.

So let's break it down:
1.  John called Jesus the Word of God in Revelation.  Why would it be so odd for the same person to call him the Word of God in his gospel?

2.  The pronouns associated with “the Word” are all singular, masculine.

3.  Who else had the glory of God's only begotten Son?

4.  Who else did John the Baptist say those specific words about?

It seems that you like to do what Ed is doing.  You KNOW that verse 14 speaks of the Word.  But you want to switch from the Word to Jesus in the middle of the statement as if the words speak of two, when they really only speak of one.

[Ed J]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 04 2011,02:39)

Quote (Ed J @ Dec. 01 2011,21:49) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 02 2011,09:41) Hi Edwardo, So why don't you use that same understanding for John 1:14-15?  From the time “The Word” is mentioned, there is no other subject mentioned.  Therefore, just like in my example, the “his” and “him” will both apply to the aforementioned subject. Just like you knew the “his” and “him” applied to Keith in my example, you should also know that the “his” and “him” apply to the Word in 14-15. What say you? Hi Mike, Verse 4 is when Jesus is brought in as the object, yet the subject (“The Word”) continues until verse 14. In verse 15 the subject switches to Jesus. I hope this helps. God bless Ed J (Joshua 22:34) http://www.holycitybiblecode.org Then why did you KNOW I was asking a question about Keith in my sample? Ed, you KNEW it because Keith was the last subject mentioned, and therefore you KNEW the “his” and “him” automatically referred back to that subject. But in John 1:14-15, you want to changes the rules of grammar in order to form the scriptural words around what you already believe. Ed, feel free to do this if you think that is the way to truth.  As for me, I will let the scriptures teach me instead of me teaching them what they should say.

Hi Mike,

Is that your only attempt to debunk the truth, to say it doesn't follow the rules of grammar as you believe them?

God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

[Ed J]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 04 2011,02:50)

Quote (kerwin @ Dec. 02 2011,00:29) If I would ask you if it was the Word made flesh that was dwelling among the people of that time and has a glory like the glory of the only begotten of God that John was speaking of then you would agree.   The difference between us is that you believe Jesus is the Word while I believe Jesus is the Word made flesh. Actually Kerwin, Our difference lies in the first line of verse 14.  You believe “the Word made flesh” is a noun phrase.  And that means that you really believe the first line speaks of “the Word THAT WAS made flesh”. Is that correct, Kerwin?  Because it can only be two ways, as far as I can tell: 1.  The Word THAT WAS made flesh – as a noun phrase. 2.  The Word BECAME flesh – as a noun/verb/modifier phrase. Which of these do you beleive?

Hi Mike,

Are they both not saying the same thing?

God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

[Ed J]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 04 2011,02:58)

So let's break it down: 1.  John called Jesus the Word of God in Revelation.

Hi Mike,

Where?

God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

[mikeboll64]

Ed,

Was it not because of those very rules of grammar that you knew I was asking a question about Keith even though the word I used was “him”?

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Ed J @ Dec. 03 2011,10:48)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 04 2011,02:58) So let's break it down: 1.  John called Jesus the Word of God in Revelation.   Hi Mike, Where? God bless Ed J

Chapter 19, verse 13.

Ed, you are the ONLY one on this site that won't accept this clear teaching – because it doesn't fit into your own philosophy of what the scriptures teach.

I have painstakenly shown you your error in this matter, but you wouldn't accept it.

I have no more to say on the matter except that you stand alone on this issue, and you are wrong.

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Ed J @ Dec. 03 2011,10:47)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 04 2011,02:50) Quote (kerwin @ Dec. 02 2011,00:29) If I would ask you if it was the Word made flesh that was dwelling among the people of that time and has a glory like the glory of the only begotten of God that John was speaking of then you would agree.   The difference between us is that you believe Jesus is the Word while I believe Jesus is the Word made flesh. Actually Kerwin, Our difference lies in the first line of verse 14.  You believe “the Word made flesh” is a noun phrase.  And that means that you really believe the first line speaks of “the Word THAT WAS made flesh”. Is that correct, Kerwin?  Because it can only be two ways, as far as I can tell: 1.  The Word THAT WAS made flesh – as a noun phrase. 2.  The Word BECAME flesh – as a noun/verb/modifier phrase. Which of these do you beleive? Hi Mike, Are they both not saying the same thing? God bless Ed J

Ed,

Consider:

1.  The boy broke his leg and limped.  (Noun/verb/verb)

2.  The boy with the broken leg limped. (Noun phrase/verb)

So “NO”, they are not the same.

[Ed J]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 04 2011,04:02)

Ed, Was it not because of those very rules of grammar that you knew I was asking a question about Keith even though the word I used was “him”?

Hi Mike,

No, I really wasn't sure what you were talking about;
but I remembered you earlier used the term “worshiping Jesus”
(which is the name that Kieth goes by here), so I deduced you meant Kieth.

God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

[Ed J]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 04 2011,04:05)

Quote (Ed J @ Dec. 03 2011,10:48) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 04 2011,02:58) So let's break it down: 1.  John called Jesus the Word of God in Revelation.   Hi Mike, Where? God bless Ed J Chapter 19, verse 13.

Hi Mike,

The name Jesus is not mentioned there (Chapter 19, verse 13).
“The Word” is another name for God's HolySpirit. (John 6:63)

God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

[Ed J]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 04 2011,04:07)

Quote (Ed J @ Dec. 03 2011,10:47) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 04 2011,02:50) Quote (kerwin @ Dec. 02 2011,00:29) If I would ask you if it was the Word made flesh that was dwelling among the people of that time and has a glory like the glory of the only begotten of God that John was speaking of then you would agree.   The difference between us is that you believe Jesus is the Word while I believe Jesus is the Word made flesh. Actually Kerwin, Our difference lies in the first line of verse 14.  You believe “the Word made flesh” is a noun phrase.  And that means that you really believe the first line speaks of “the Word THAT WAS made flesh”. Is that correct, Kerwin?  Because it can only be two ways, as far as I can tell: 1.  The Word THAT WAS made flesh – as a noun phrase. 2.  The Word BECAME flesh – as a noun/verb/modifier phrase. Which of these do you beleive? Hi Mike, Are they both not saying the same thing? God bless Ed J Ed, Consider: 1.  The boy broke his leg and limped.  (Noun/verb/verb) 2.  The boy with the broken leg limped. (Noun phrase/verb) So “NO”, they are not the same.

Hi Mike,

They are not worded the same, but they sure do mean
exactly the same thing; do they not, yes or no?

God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Ed J @ Dec. 03 2011,11:58)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 04 2011,04:02) Ed, Was it not because of those very rules of grammar that you knew I was asking a question about Keith even though the word I used was “him”? Hi Mike, No, I really wasn't sure what you were talking about; but I remembered you earlier used the term “worshiping Jesus” (which is the name that Kieth goes by here), so I deduced you meant Kieth. God bless Ed J

YES ED!

What do you think I'm talking about here?

BECAUSE I earlier said “Worshipping Jesus”, you then KNEW that the “him” refered BACK to Worshipping Jesus.

Just like in 14-15. The Word is the subject mentioned. The name Jesus is nowhere to be seen. So the “his” and “him” OBVIOUSLY refer BACK to “the Word”.

SEE ED? YOUR OWN WORDS SAY YOU DEDUCED FROM THE RULES OF GRAMMAR THAT THE “HIM” REFERED TO KEITH. SO YOU SHOULD EASILY BE ABLE TO DEDUCE FROM THOSE SAME RULES OF GRAMMAR THAT THE “HIS” AND “HIM” REFER BACK TO THE WORD. I'M GROWING VERY TIRED OF PLAYING GAMES WITH YOU!

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Ed J @ Dec. 03 2011,12:09)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 04 2011,04:07) Quote (Ed J @ Dec. 03 2011,10:47) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 04 2011,02:50) Quote (kerwin @ Dec. 02 2011,00:29) If I would ask you if it was the Word made flesh that was dwelling among the people of that time and has a glory like the glory of the only begotten of God that John was speaking of then you would agree.   The difference between us is that you believe Jesus is the Word while I believe Jesus is the Word made flesh. Actually Kerwin, Our difference lies in the first line of verse 14.  You believe “the Word made flesh” is a noun phrase.  And that means that you really believe the first line speaks of “the Word THAT WAS made flesh”. Is that correct, Kerwin?  Because it can only be two ways, as far as I can tell: 1.  The Word THAT WAS made flesh – as a noun phrase. 2.  The Word BECAME flesh – as a noun/verb/modifier phrase. Which of these do you beleive? Hi Mike, Are they both not saying the same thing? God bless Ed J Ed, Consider: 1.  The boy broke his leg and limped.  (Noun/verb/verb) 2.  The boy with the broken leg limped. (Noun phrase/verb) So “NO”, they are not the same. Hi Mike, They are not worded the same, but they sure do mean exactly the same thing; do they not, yes or no? God bless Ed J

No Ed,

They don't.

[Ed J]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 04 2011,07:43)

Quote (Ed J @ Dec. 03 2011,11:58) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 04 2011,04:02) Ed, Was it not because of those very rules of grammar that you knew I was asking a question about Keith even though the word I used was “him”? Hi Mike, No, I really wasn't sure what you were talking about; but I remembered you earlier used the term “worshiping Jesus” (which is the name that Kieth goes by here), so I deduced you meant Kieth. God bless Ed J YES ED! What do you think I'm talking about here?   BECAUSE I earlier said “Worshipping Jesus”, you then KNEW that the “him” refered BACK to Worshipping Jesus. Just like in 14-15.  The Word is the subject mentioned.  The name Jesus is nowhere to be seen.  So the “his” and “him” OBVIOUSLY refer BACK to “the Word”. SEE ED?  YOUR OWN WORDS SAY YOU DEDUCED FROM THE RULES OF GRAMMAR THAT THE “HIM” REFERED TO KEITH.   SO YOU SHOULD EASILY BE ABLE TO DEDUCE FROM THOSE SAME RULES OF GRAMMAR THAT THE “HIS” AND “HIM” REFER BACK TO THE WORD.  I'M GROWING VERY TIRED OF PLAYING GAMES WITH YOU!

Hi Mike,

Would you rather play (less tiring) games with the others?

Like I said: it was not your use of grammar, but my
recollection of the user name “worshiping Jesus”,
that clued me in on who you may have meant.

God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

[Author]

Posts