Examination of the incarnation doctrine.

[terraricca]

Quote (942767 @ April 10 2011,20:59)

Hi: Paladin stated and I agree that: Quote Jesus is not the logos of God. “The logos of God” is not a person That is to say that the Logos of God is not a sentient person, but comes from Almighty God.  Therefore, In the beginning was the Logos, and the Logos was with God, and the Logos was God. This defines God's plan to make man in His own image by His Word as man learns to put that Word into practice in His daily living, that is the man's spirit is formed through obedience to God's Word, and thus reflecting God's character. The first man was made a living soul, like God in that he has a mind, a will and emotions. The scriptures state that Jesus is the express image of God's person, but he was not that at his birth.  He was born as an infant into this world, a man child, a living soul with a mind a will and emotions, and at the age of 12 we see him discussing the scriptures with the scribes, and the scriptures state that grew in wisdom, and stature and in favor with God and man, and at the age of 30, he received the baptism of the Holy Spirit, and we hear God saying, “This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased”. And the scriptures state, that though he were a Son of God, he humbled himself and became obedient even unto death on the cross, and the scriptures state that he was confirmed to be the Son of God through the spirit of holiness. He is the last Adam, the culmination of God's plan for humanity.  The scriptures state that God made all things by him and for him, and without him was nothing made that was made.  He is the basis for the whole of creation, but he is not the creator. The following scripture which sister Irene uses to promote the pre-existence of Jesus states: Quote Revelation 19:13 And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God. This states that: “his name is called The Word of God”, and not that “he is called “The Word of God”.  When the scripture states “his name is called”, it referring to his character and his authority as the head of the church, and the judge of the living and the dead.  This what he has become through the perfect obedience to God's Word. I also would like to point out the following scripture: Quote 1 Corinthians 10 1Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; 2And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea; 3And did all eat the same spiritual meat; 4And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ. Love in Christ, Marty

Marty

do you ever ask yourself if God in the beginning was alone he would not need words or a communicator but then start to create ,so just before he start to create ,We know he is spirit,right ,so invisible right ,but is first creation would be the “communicator” to all other creation ,no??

and would be also made something less spirit with some other abilities to bring forth a different creation ,no??

is this not what we see in all of creation,?

Christ is and always as been the in between being ,from God to creation.

Pierre

[Baker]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ April 10 2011,03:07)

Quote (Baker @ April 09 2011,07:47) But I am glad you think that Rev. 19 is talking about Jesus.  Now what I can't understand then that You don't believe John !;1-14 is talking about Jesus also!!!! It is the same Jesus!!!!! Peace and Love Irene Bravo, Irene!

Yeh, Mike! A lot of good it did though. But thanks for the compliment….. I find it amazing that one can believe Rev. 19 to be Jesus, but when John 1:1 says that The Word became flesh it isn't Jesus. And then we have Col. it to be the New Creation, and not the firstborn of all creation. I see a pattern here…. a denial and adding of Scriptures. Getting real tired of that.
Firstborn of all creation, in Rev. 3:14 and Col. 1:15 to say it is the New Creation, is dead wrong…… The New creation, is not what those Scriptures are saying. There is nothing moreI can say to them…..
Peace and Love Irene

[terraricca]

all

it does not say one of his sons

Gal 4:4 But when the time had fully come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under law,
Gal 4:5 to redeem those under law, that we might receive the full rights of sons.
Gal 4:6 Because you are sons, God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, the Spirit who calls out, “Abba, Father.”
Gal 4:7 So you are no longer a slave, but a son; and since you are a son, God has made you also an heir.

Pierre

[Paladin]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ April 10 2011,03:03)

Paladin,April wrote: ”Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the logos of God; 26 Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints: 27 To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you,” [Col 1:25-27] “… Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.” [Gal 2:20] (Mike) Hi Paladin, Let's add the last scripture of Gal 2 that you omitted:

o.k. – If you will admit to “omitting” Gen 6:3.

Also, I wonder how long it will be till you begin to quote your own words as though they originated in my post???

(Mike)

Quote

Gal 2:21 I do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing!” Was this abstract “activity of Christ” brutally tortured, ridiculed, and KILLED?  You can't claim Paul is speaking of “an activity” when he finishes his thoughts about Christ by saying he DIED.  Nor can an “activity” be “born in Bethelehem”.  Nor can an activity “BECOME flesh, dwell among us, and have a visible glory of an only begotten Son from the Father”.

If you say so Mike. Oh, and by the way, You did say so, because those are no my words you have in quotes. you will not find them in any of my posts. When you reword the question so I can understand what you are asking, i.e., don't quote me with saying what I did not say, I will try to respond.

(Mike)

Quote

You are out there, man.  And you post too much “extras” that really have nothing to do with the topic.  Keep it short and to the point and tell me how this “activity” died, according to Paul.

Hey Brother, its your terminology and your reference, you tell me.

First you complain I post too mush extras that are off topic, then ask me to post more to your extra that is off topic. You ask me to keep it short and to the point, then expand the point with your own terminology and theology. How exactly can I do both? How can I keep it short and on topic and answer your off topic expansion?

[Paladin]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ April 10 2011,12:41)

[/quote] Quote (Gene Balthrop @ April 09 2011,12:14) Mike………My post to Paladin was sincere and was not meant for you or anyone else to Use as a Personal put down by ridiculing him (Mike) But it was you, Gene, who pointed out this particular error in his theory. No error pointed out Mike, just a question to clear up something not previously covered. (MIKE) Quote I had noticed it among the other errors, but did not approach the subject in my last post.  I chose not to bring this point up because for every word I type, Paladin seems to type 100. Because if I keep it short, you do not comprehend. I have to go back and repeat, or correct your misquotes [remember all that stuff you posted about me adding Jesus' name to something you called “activity,” and had it looking like quotes from my post? It requires so many words just to straighten out your messes. (Mike) Quote I must pick and choose my rebuttals from among the many points I could rebut, or else I end up coming back to a million word post. (This is not a slam against Paladin, btw. And how could in notbe? You not only call my work “errors” when you have not proved it; but you even cast dispersion on the number of words it takes me to make things plain to you. You accuse me of “omitting” verses that I see no need to include, as though I am somehow being evasive over an issue relevant to the discussion. (Mike) Quote He is allowed to post with as many or few words as he likes.  It is more a comment about the fact that I personally don't like dealing with long, drawn out posts.  Too many points end up lost in the many words if the posts and rebuttals reach epic proportions. Did it ever occur to you to take one issue at a time? Break the post down into several responses? (Mike) Anyway, YOU brought up this particular error, Gene.  I only pointed out that his whole theory about Christ being “an activity” if full of similar errors.

No he didn't Mike, he asked for clarification of something not previously covered. He did not ask about any “error.” You are again making issues that do not exist except in your posts. “Error” was not in Gene's question to me. And “I have not nor ever have had a “theory about Christ being an activity;” another thing exclusively found in your posts.

[GeneBalthrop]

Quote (942767 @ April 10 2011,13:59)

Hi: Paladin stated and I agree that: Quote Jesus is not the logos of God. “The logos of God” is not a person That is to say that the Logos of God is not a sentient person, but comes from Almighty God.  Therefore, In the beginning was the Logos, and the Logos was with God, and the Logos was God. This defines God's plan to make man in His own image by His Word as man learns to put that Word into practice in His daily living, that is the man's spirit is formed through obedience to God's Word, and thus reflecting God's character. The first man was made a living soul, like God in that he has a mind, a will and emotions. The scriptures state that Jesus is the express image of God's person, but he was not that at his birth.  He was born as an infant into this world, a man child, a living soul with a mind a will and emotions, and at the age of 12 we see him discussing the scriptures with the scribes, and the scriptures state that grew in wisdom, and stature and in favor with God and man, and at the age of 30, he received the baptism of the Holy Spirit, and we hear God saying, “This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased”. And the scriptures state, that though he were a Son of God, he humbled himself and became obedient even unto death on the cross, and the scriptures state that he was confirmed to be the Son of God through the spirit of holiness. He is the last Adam, the culmination of God's plan for humanity.  The scriptures state that God made all things by him and for him, and without him was nothing made that was made.  He is the basis for the whole of creation, but he is not the creator. The following scripture which sister Irene uses to promote the pre-existence of Jesus states: Quote Revelation 19:13 And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God. This states that: “his name is called The Word of God”, and not that “he is called “The Word of God”.  When the scripture states “his name is called”, it referring to his character and his authority as the head of the church, and the judge of the living and the dead.  This what he has become through the perfect obedience to God's Word. I also would like to point out the following scripture: Quote 1 Corinthians 10 1Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; 2And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea; 3And did all eat the same spiritual meat; 4And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ. Love in Christ, Marty

Marty………..1000% right brother. How clear thing are when view through the truth of GOD Brother. The word of GOD is GOD Just as our Word are us. And as we study them we are taking into our hearts His words like seed planted in a field of human hearts and we go about our business and soon the seeds begin to take root first a little blade the the small head of wheat and we do not know how because the earth  or (heart) brings forth of itself and when it reaches maturity we are harvested into the kingdom of GOD.

“THAT GOD MAY BE ALL AND IN YOU ALL'” how?,   by his words “for man shall not live by bread alone but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God”. God and his word is one and the same .

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

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Baker @ April 09 2011,21:28)

Yeh, Mike!  A lot of good it did though. But thanks for the compliment….. I find it amazing that one can believe Rev. 19 to be Jesus, but when John 1:1 says that The Word became flesh it isn't Jesus.

I feel your pain, Irene!  

And this Word in 1:1 not only became flesh, but dwelled among mankind, and had the glory of an only begotten Son from the Father.  John the Baptist was unfit to even untie the sandal of this Word.

I wonder how many literal spoken words of God wear sandals?    

peace to you Georg,
mike

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Paladin @ April 10 2011,07:32)

(Mike) Quote Gal 2:21 I do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing!” Was this abstract “activity of Christ” brutally tortured, ridiculed, and KILLED?  You can't claim Paul is speaking of “an activity” when he finishes his thoughts about Christ by saying he DIED.  Nor can an “activity” be “born in Bethelehem”.  Nor can an activity “BECOME flesh, dwell among us, and have a visible glory of an only begotten Son from the Father”. If you say so Mike. Oh, and by the way, You did say so, because those are no my words you have in quotes. you will not find them in any of my posts. When you reword the question so I can understand what you are asking, i.e., don't quote me with saying what I did not say, I will try to respond.

Hi Paladin,

These are your own words from the 5th post down on page 168:

Quote

“Christ” is not the logos of God, Mike, but the activity known as “Christ living in you.” So it is improper to say “christ is the logos” when the truth is “Christ living in you” is “the logos of God.”

Now that I've showed you I quoted your own words, would you be so kind to tell me how an “activity” was ridiculed, tortured, and killed?

mike

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Paladin @ April 10 2011,07:56)

No he didn't Mike, he asked for clarification of something not previously covered. He did not ask about any “error.”

Gene asked for clarification on something he noticed was an error in your theory. He might not have said the word “error”, but it is an error in your theory nonetheless. And Gene wasn't the only one that picked up on this error, but he was the first one to mention it on the thread.

And we'll all be waiting on the edge of our seats for your “clarification”, I'm sure.

mike

[mikeboll64]

Hey Marty, Gene and Paladin,

Is it your contention that the Word of God proceeds directly from God to each of us who accept it, and it then works at forming us into something that is closer to the image of God Himself? Is it your contention that this Word of God, which is not a sentient being, can come into us the same way it came into Jesus?

Or am I understanding you wrong?

mike

[Wispring]

Hi Everyone,
  Hey! This thread has evolved/progressed and become a discussion of a topic that is better suited for the thread that Gene started called The word of God. What do you say to migraiting to that thread in the interest of thread name topic coherency? There we can explore the power and glory of the Word/words of God in a thread name that is topical. After all the name of this thread is “Examination of the 'incarnation' doctrine.
  I sometimes think of the Word/words of God as a pattern and being the Master Pattern Theme Maker. So all things conforms to a pattern of God. The first word he spoke in the bible is “Let there be Light; and there was light”. Thank God the first thing God provided in a universe that is in many ways perceived with light with the one thing we need to read Word/words, unless, of course we are blind; then we read by touch. Even better!
  What say you folks? Better seved in the other thread or continuance in this thread. I cast my vote for the the other thread, but, will humbly aquiesce to the conversation remaining here.

                                                  With Love and Respect,
                                                              Wispring

[Paladin]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ April 11 2011,02:02)

Quote (Paladin @ April 10 2011,07:32) (Mike) Quote Gal 2:21 I do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing!” Was this abstract “activity of Christ” brutally tortured, ridiculed, and KILLED?  You can't claim Paul is speaking of “an activity” when he finishes his thoughts about Christ by saying he DIED.  Nor can an “activity” be “born in Bethelehem”.  Nor can an activity “BECOME flesh, dwell among us, and have a visible glory of an only begotten Son from the Father”. If you say so Mike. Oh, and by the way, You did say so, because those are no my words you have in quotes. you will not find them in any of my posts. When you reword the question so I can understand what you are asking, i.e., don't quote me with saying what I did not say, I will try to respond. Hi Paladin, These are your own words from the 5th post down on page 168: Quote “Christ” is not the logos of God, Mike, but the activity known as “Christ living in you.” So it is improper to say “christ is the logos” when the truth is “Christ living in you” is “the logos of God.” Now that I've showed you I quoted your own words, would you be so kind to tell me how an “activity” was ridiculed, tortured, and killed? mike

Mike, I am going to credit you with coming up with a quote I forgot I had made, however, (knew that was coming, didn't you?) it was not the quote of what I said that you posted. It was your assessment of what my quote meant.

I said nothing about “Christ” is an activity, which is what you are claiming.

Look again at what I said, then compare it with your assessment of my post:

Quote

“Christ” is not the logos of God, Mike, but the activity known as “Christ living in you.” So it is improper to say “christ is the logos” when the truth is “Christ living in you” is “the logos of God.”

Now Mike, take a deep breath, and read reeeal s-l-o-w.
“Christ” is not “the logos of God.” “The logos of God” is an activity of Christ living in you.

Your quote –

Quote

Was this abstract “activity of Christ” brutally tortured, ridiculed, and KILLED?  You can't claim Paul is speaking of “an activity” when he finishes his thoughts about Christ by saying he DIED.  Nor can an “activity” be “born in Bethelehem”.  Nor can an activity “BECOME flesh, dwell among us, and have a visible glory of an only begotten Son from the Father”

has cost me a full day of research and stress. I said nothing whatoever about some
“abstract activity of Christ,” which is what I said is not in my posts, and it is not.

And I said nothing about Paul speaking of an activity while thinking about the dying Christ. And I said nothing about “The Logos Of God” being born in bethlehem. Your post was a complete disaster as far as correctly representing what I said.

Will you please quit editorializing what I say and passing it off as quotes?

[Baker]

Question, Paladin. Since you don't believe john 1:1-14 is talking about Jesus, who is it then that became flesh? And don't give me that the verse 14 is not in the original transcript, because I did find it in the Greek.
Irene

[Paladin]

Quote (Wispring @ April 11 2011,11:08)

Hi Everyone,   Hey! This thread has evolved/progressed and become a discussion of a topic that is better suited for the thread that Gene started called The word of God. What do you say to migraiting to that thread in the interest of thread name topic coherency? There we can explore the power and glory of the Word/words of God in a thread name that is topical. After all the name of this thread is “Examination of the 'incarnation' doctrine.   I sometimes think of the Word/words of God as a pattern and being the Master Pattern Theme Maker. So all things conforms to a pattern of God. The first word he spoke in the bible is “Let there be Light; and there was light”. Thank God the first thing God provided in a universe that is in many ways perceived with light with the one thing we need to read Word/words, unless, of course we are blind; then we read by touch. Even better!   What say you folks? Better seved in the other thread or continuance in this thread. I cast my vote for the the other thread, but, will humbly aquiesce to the conversation remaining here.                                                   With Love and Respect,                                                               Wispring

Because one of the proof-texts is used to prove pre-existent Jesus was God and incarnated as the logos of God
according to John 1:14; and that is the subject matter of the OP.

[Paladin]

Quote (Baker @ April 11 2011,11:18)

Question, Paladin.  Since you don't believe john 1:1-14 is talking about Jesus, who is it then that became flesh?  And don't give me that the verse 14 is not in the original transcript, because I did find it in the Greek. Irene

And don't you pretend I ever said the verse is not in the original manuscript.

And I don't know why you claim you “found it” when it has been plastered all over the thread.

[GeneBalthrop]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ April 11 2011,02:12)

Hey Marty, Gene and Paladin, Is it your contention that the Word of God proceeds directly from God to each of us who accept it, and it then works at forming us into something that is closer to the image of God Himself?  Is it your contention that this Word of God, which is not a sentient being, can come into us the same way it came into Jesus? Or am I understanding you wrong? mike

Mike…………That is the way i see it brother. I believe God is very much active and present (IN) his words. “THE words i am telling you are spirit and are life. Just that simple Mike. IMO

peace and love………………………………….gene

[GeneBalthrop]

Quote (Wispring @ April 11 2011,11:08)

Hi Everyone,   Hey! This thread has evolved/progressed and become a discussion of a topic that is better suited for the thread that Gene started called The word of God. What do you say to migraiting to that thread in the interest of thread name topic coherency? There we can explore the power and glory of the Word/words of God in a thread name that is topical. After all the name of this thread is “Examination of the 'incarnation' doctrine.   I sometimes think of the Word/words of God as a pattern and being the Master Pattern Theme Maker. So all things conforms to a pattern of God. The first word he spoke in the bible is “Let there be Light; and there was light”. Thank God the first thing God provided in a universe that is in many ways perceived with light with the one thing we need to read Word/words, unless, of course we are blind; then we read by touch. Even better!   What say you folks? Better seved in the other thread or continuance in this thread. I cast my vote for the the other thread, but, will humbly aquiesce to the conversation remaining here.                                                   With Love and Respect,                                                               Wispring

Wispring ………That is why i started that thread because i believe the Word of GOD is GOD'S very expression of GOD itself it is how we learn to IMAGE God, and this is how he comes to live in us and Jesus was through His Words Which are SPIRIT,  His words are what Life is and they are HOLY (set apart) SPIRITS (intellects) they form in our minds a New way to think , ” being transformed by the   renewing of your minds“, and again “let this mind be in you that was in Jesus also” and again “if that mind be in you as it was in Jesus Christ our lord it shall also quicken your mortal body.

It is all about the WORD OF GOD. IMO

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

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Paladin @ April 10 2011,18:11)

“Christ” is not “the logos of God.” “The logos of God” is an activity of Christ living in you.

So this “activity” BECAME flesh and had the glory of an only begotten Son from the Father?

mike

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Gene Balthrop @ April 10 2011,19:44)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ April 11 2011,02:12) Hey Marty, Gene and Paladin, Is it your contention that the Word of God proceeds directly from God to each of us who accept it, and it then works at forming us into something that is closer to the image of God Himself?  Is it your contention that this Word of God, which is not a sentient being, can come into us the same way it came into Jesus? Or am I understanding you wrong? mike Mike…………That is the way i see it brother. I believe God is very much active and present (IN) his words. “THE words i am telling you are spirit and are life. Just that simple Mike. IMO peace and love………………………………….gene

Okay Gene,

That's how I was understanding it. But tell me why we even need Jesus then.

mike

[Baker]

Quote (Paladin @ April 08 2011,16:04)

Quote (Baker @ April 08 2011,09:58) [/quote] Paladin!  I talked to Georg who is very knowledgeable in Scriptures.  I hope I can explain to you what Paul really means.  First of all there is no contradiction. 1 Corinth. 15 talks about the resurrection. But dear sister, Jesus did not “become a man” in John 1:14. Do you see “Ieesous” anywhere in the verse? The only reason there is even a mention of Jesus at all in John's first chapter, is because John tied his gospel [96 a.d.] to the person of Christ in [69 a.d.] revelation 3:12 and in 19:12-13 with reference to the new name he is to be given, as “the logos of God.” Jesus was not “the logos of God” in 30 a.d; He was not “The logos of God” in 33 a.d. when he was ascended. and he was not “the Logos of God” in 69 a.d., when John prophecies about his gift-name. John is speaking in 1:14 about an event in the life of a personification, and recalling his remarks he wrote in 69 a.d, about Jesus, here ties the two events together. But the personification of the logos of God takes place, according to Paul, everytime some saint or other, so lives hi slife that he can say “I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.” [Gal 2:20] When this saint aknowledges “Christ Jesus” in his life, the logos of God is personified in the life of that saint. And “we behold the glory as of the only begotten son of God” all over again, in that saint, through Christ living in him. And neither you nor George has yet explained how it is Adam predated Christ, other than to claim he pre-existed Abraham, and became flesh in John 1:14, which John does not say. And to claim Christ pre-existent, AND incarnated, defies scripture; and denies everything Paul had to say about “Christ living in me” whichis the personification clearly referenced in John 1:14. Paul spent a lifetime convincing the saints about this subject of “Jesus Christ living in me” and said, “My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you,” [Gal 4:19] Paul told the saints in Corinth [55 a.d.] “Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?” [II Cor 13:5] And in 60 a.d, Paul explains about a mystery, now revealed, named “The Logos Of God” and what it is – ” If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister; 24 Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body's sake, which is the church: 25 Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the logos of God; 6 Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints: 27 To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory” [Col 1:23-27] Now, dear sister, if you will follow the clues provided in the underlined and bolded words, you will see a pattern found only in Paul's preahcing, which later is picked up by John who explains Paul's understanding of “The Logos Of God” and ties it to Jesus, not at Jesus' birth, but to “Jesus Christ lives in you” and John explains why it is “the hope of Glory” excpressed by Paul, as John expresses in 1:14 “we beheld his glory, as of an only begotten son of God” Do you know the reason John uses [&# 969;&# 962;] in 1:14? Why does John speak of “Glory AS OF…” instead of saying “We beheld his glory, the glory of the only begotten son of God?” Because John  is not speaking of Jesus, he is speaking of the saint in whom Jesus is dwelling, “and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten son of God” precisel;y because it is not Jesus of whom he speaks, but the saint in whom Jesus is dwelling in 96 a.d, when John is writing of the event. Quote Jhn 1:14 ¶ And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.   Jhn 1:15 John bare witness of him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom I spake, He that cometh after me is preferred before me: for he was before me. Right! In 96 a.d., John, the brother of Jesus, is writing about way back in 30 a.d, John the Baptist bore witness of the Christ, “the only begotten of the father”. He is not saying Jesus is the logos, he is saying the glory of one who has Christ living in him, shows the glory as of the only begotten of the father, of whom John bore witness. John has John the baptist saying “this was he of whom I spake” rather than “this is he of whom I spake,” because John is speaking of a past event, not telling his gospel in the present. John uses [&# 951;&# 957;] which is imperfect indicative, used twice in the verse; “this was he…” and “He was before me. You really need to pay attention to the verbs dear sister. And I would appeal to George to learn this also, as he is teaching you, as well he should. This is why I did not prefer to post to you without George, because he might underswtand it differently if he sees it for himself, rather than getting it from you second hand. And this is not any kind of denouncement of either you or George, it is simply a fact of life. No one tells a fact nearly as well as one can read for one's self. It is much easier to appeal to George through the posting screen, than through another's eyes. Quote We should also look at Rev. 19 that explains to us that The Word of God is the one that became Jesus.  So many just don't want to believe it. Because that is not what happened dear sister. My grandson, at birth, received a name; that name was “Christian,” And he received the name “Christian” which was his name and still is, and when he was baptized into Christ, he received another name altogether, and that name was “Christian,” because now, he belongs to Christ. “The word of God is the one who became Jesus” is wrong. Jesus received a name, “The logos of God” but it was not who and what he was; it was a name recieved. Just as my grandson “Christian” was not “a Christian” until he accepted, obeyed, and became “a Christian.” He was already “Christian” when he became “a Christian.” Jesus was already a man ascended to God's right hand when he received a name “The Logos Of God.” He was already “Jesus” and was already dead and resurrected, when he received this name “The Logos Of God.” Quote I have ask ed so many times ir there is another being that fits that description. I know, dear sister, because I have responded so many times. Quote Do you believe it is Jesus who will come again as The Word of God? When I see my Grandson, am I looking at “Christian” or “a Christian?” Both are names, one given at his birth, the other given at his birth into Christ. Quote Also God, The Word of God are all titles…. With all these Scriptures, there is no doubt in my mind that Jesus Yeshua who was with His Father Almighty God before the world was.. ( John 17:5) Sorry Paladin, we're not on the same page.  I hope that God shows us all the truth.  I will again ask God for wisdom.  BTW I did so before I explained to you 1 Corinth, 15, and I am certain that if I am wrong God will show me so…… Peace and Love Irene But dear sister, that is what he sent me to the board to do, and you hang onto doctrines instead of truth. If you turn loose from doctrines and cling to Paul's own teaching, verified by John, you will see it. Watch for Paul's words “Christ living in you” throughout Paul's writings and try to explain them any other way. I will be waiting to hear from you. Go in grace and in hope of glory as you allow “Christ Jesus to live in you,” so others can “behold his glory as of an only begotten son of God.”

Paladin! This is were you said to me that John 1:14 is not Jesus becoming flesh…..sorry I thought you said it was not in the lexi, which BTW it isn't…. but it is in the Greek.
I do believe that Jesus became flesh in verse 14. I believe it is Jesus in both scriptures in John 1 and Rev. 19…..
Peace and Love irene

[Author]

Posts