- This topic has 3,215 replies, 24 voices, and was last updated 4 years, 7 months ago by
.
- Posts
To me it seemed like a whole bunch of words that in the end, still didn't give a different meaning to “I came down from heaven” than the only obvious one.
Paladin, we don't need a lesson in the Greek language…………unless there is something in your post that makes “I came down from heaven” mean something other than “I came down from heaven”. The Jews Jesus said this to seemed to understand that he was saying he came down from heaven…………..why don't you?
mike
Quote (kerwin @ May 06 2011,13:08) Confusion is not necessary bad as to admit it means you are admitting you have more to learn from God. To clear up your confusion need to test what you hear and make sure it conforms to seeking God and his kingdom. Anything else comes from the Devil.
Kerwin,Iv looked at this from all different views,
Too confusing though!
Simplified, the Son of God came down from Heaven.
I believe Him.
Confusion can be good, as I found with the eternal hell doctrine. But it was eating at me emotionally so it was different. This confusion over pre-existance however was different again, and to me, was not good, and all I had to do was return to what God showed me way back, and it was all in scripture. Jesus came down from Heaven, the details we don't know.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ May 06 2011,14:16) To me it seemed like a whole bunch of words that in the end, still didn't give a different meaning to “I came down from heaven” than the only obvious one. Paladin, we don't need a lesson in the Greek language…………unless there is something in your post that makes “I came down from heaven” mean something other than “I came down from heaven”. The Jews Jesus said this to seemed to understand that he was saying he came down from heaven…………..why don't you?
mike
Mike! I agree with you. All I see in His post was a bunch of words, that did not clarify anything else. Shimmer puts it this way,
“Simplifies, the Son of God came down from Heaven.” You said before a Child can understand it. So why can't Paladin and others?
?? Georg, “God has blinded their eyes to it.”….
Peace IreneQuote (mikeboll64 @ May 06 2011,14:16) To me it seemed like a whole bunch of words that in the end, still didn't give a different meaning to “I came down from heaven” than the only obvious one. Paladin, we don't need a lesson in the Greek language…………unless there is something in your post that makes “I came down from heaven” mean something other than “I came down from heaven”. The Jews Jesus said this to seemed to understand that he was saying he came down from heaven…………..why don't you?
mike
Well, let's go back to a previous lesson you ignored, and see if you will answer it this time.The baptism of John – from heaven, or of men? Whence cometh it?
Quote (Paladin @ May 06 2011,12:25) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ May 01 2011,02:06) Hi All
To deny the preexistence of Jesus is to deny a very basic fundamental truth. There are way to many scriptures that one has to explain away or give some ethereal interpretation to the text when it is obvious a litteral interpretation of the text is what is meant by the writers.
Are you aware of the meaning of “ethereal” WJ? It means to define in “out of this world terms.” It is a reference to a realm beyond earth, of almost a fairy-story quality.”
Now, WJ, please tell me how a “pre-existant” Jesus is somehow not “ethereal.” You are trying to convince us he is from outside the world, “ethereal” by definition. I would say you are correct on that one, WJ. It certainly gives an
“ethereal” explanation to the scriptures.It is unfortunate you have chosen to attack the Greek of those with whom you disagree, because your application of Greek in your statement is almost totally wrong.
First you give a translation of a Greek text, instead of the Greek or some part thereof.
Quote John 6:38-40For “I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will“, but the will of him who sent me; and this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up at the last day. For this is the will of my Father, that every one who sees the Son and believes in him should have eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. Then you mount an attack upon those with whom you disagree, by characterizing them as “men who know nothing of the construction of the Greek have set out to make themselves greater than the truth.”
You attempt to make your case without making your case, but simply asserting it;
Quote It is obvious what Jesus meant, but men who know nothing of the construction of the Greek have set out to make themselves greater than the truth by misinterpreting the clear meaning of the text in which the authors intended and which the translators translated. You fail to explain that in many cases it is the translators who are at fault, rather than the authors.
Then you formulate your attack by assertion, with no evidence from the Greek text, which from your argument, we would expect to see some examples therefrom.
And you throw in terminology without explaining what it means. “Unitarian” interpretation, for example, means exactly what?
Quote The Greek construction of the text concerning the preexistence of Jesus does not allow for a “Unitarian” interpretation. Quote The Greek for “I have come” is Strong's G2597 – katabaino… There are at least 33 Greek words that are translated “come” in one form or another, and nearly sixty compound meanings formed by other Greek words.[anabainw;aperxomai;apobainw;ginomai;deuro;deute;dierxomai;einai;eiserxomai;ektoreuo
mai;enisteemi;ezerxomai;eperxomai;epibainw;epiporeuomai;erxomai;esomai;esti;ephisteemi;eek
w;katantaw;katerxomai;paraginomai;pareimi;parerxomai;paristeemi;proserxomai;sunerxomai;phe
rw;phthavw;xwrew;wn; plus many compound forms translated “come” in one context or another. And none of them are translated “I have come.”
My copy of Strong's concordance shows under #2597 – katabainw – to descend (lit. or fig.) – come (get, go, step) down, descend, fall (down).
[NOTE: in those instances in which “w” is printed in Greek words, it isa interlinear form of the Greek letter omega; many folks put in its place a letter omicron (o) with a dash over the top, but I haven't figured out my keybord well enough to try putting 'o' with a – on top.
Anyway, Strong's # and definition is not too big a deal, because there are so many editions, some with corrections, some with abbreviated information, I do not make it a test of fellowship over a Strong's definition. I just posted it becasue it is different from what you posted. I am not even saying you are wrong on this, only that my copy of Strong's says otherwise.
“Katabaino” actually means to come down (like descending a staircase) or fall down. If you type into bible program's word processor “I have come” you will not get “katabaino” as a preferred Greek source. You will get “erxomai.” So it is a little misleading to say “The Greek for “I have come” is Strong's
“katabaino.”Quote The Greek for “I have come” is Strong's G2597 – katabaino which is defined… 1) to go down, come down, descend
a) the place from which one has come down from
b) to come down“In every place the word is used it is referring to a literal action by a person and not an abstract “thought or plan”“.
Then please explain Mat 7:25 & 7:27 [rain]; 11:23 a city; Luke 8:23, a storm; & 9:54 fire; Acts 8:26, a highway; 10:11 & 11:5 – a certain vessel; or James 1:17 gifts from God; or Rev 3:12 a city, or 12:12, the devil. Tell us who this person is in each reference, that “came down.”
Quote
katabaino is in the “perfect” tense, and the “active voice” and the “indicative” mood!Again, a misleading statement. “katabebeeka” is the perfect, indicative, active form of katabaino. It is found in two verses in the new testament; John 6:38 and John 6:42 And only in two verses
Quote “The perfect tense” in Greek corresponds to the perfect tense in English, and describes “an action” which is viewed as having been completed in the past, once and for all, not needing to be repeated. The Greek “perfect” references a completed action, with results that carry into the present. The Greek “perfect” tense has no exact equivalent in English. [This is not all there is to say about the Greek “perfect” – it is all that applies to this report]
Quote Jesus' last cry from the cross, TETELESTAI (“It is finished!”) is a good example of the perfect te
nse used in this sense, namely “It [the atonement] has been accomplished, completely, once and for all time.”Certain antiquated verb forms in Greek, such as those related to seeing (eidw) or knowing (oida) will use the perfect tense in a manner equivalent to the normal past tense. These few cases are exception to the normal rule and do not alter the normal connotation of the perfect tense stated above.
Greek past tense or english past tense? There is no Greek past tense.
Quote “The active voice” represents the subject as the doer or performer of the action. e.g., in the sentence, “The boy hit the ball,” the boy performs the action. “The indicative mood” is a simple statement of fact. If an action really occurs or has occurred or will occur, it will be rendered in the indicative mood.
”For I came down (katabaino) from heaven”, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me. John 6:38
John 6:38 For I katabebeeka [came down] from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.
[katabebeeka indicative perfect active form of (katabainw) -1s]Quote The same word is used here… And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God “descending (katabaino,)” like a dove, and lighting upon him: Matt 3:16
Not by a long shot –
Mat 3:16 And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God katabainon [descending] like a dove, and lighting upon him: [katabainon = present active participle accusative neuter form of katabainw]
It is not the same form of the same word. And since it is the same root word, it is not improper to reference it as the “same word” but for one thing. You introduced the tense and mood and voice, so you should have stuck to words of the same tense and mood and voice when you say it is the same word. You cannot make a broad statement about a root word, and apply it to words that differ in form. It is misleading.
Quote And here… And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord “(descended (katabaino )” from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it. Matt 28:2
This is now twice you claim “The same word is used here…” when it is not the same word. It is another form of the same word, because they share a root, but the form changes and when the form changes so does the meaning.
Mat 28:2 “And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord katabas [descended] from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it.” Correct translation would actually be.. “for the angel of the Lord, descending and rolling back the stone…”
“Descending” and “rolling” are both participles, and in English that translates to a verb of (“-ing”) (as compared with (ed); i.e., rolling not rolled, descending, not descended.And it is aorist active,not perfect active, so it is not saying the same thing. The “perfect” tense is telling us that the result of the perfect tense is carried over to the present. The aorist simply tells us the action took place.
Quote Was the Holy Spirit and the Angel a “thought or plan” come down from heaven? Or did they really descend from heaven? Jesus said plainly that he came “From God” and “went to God”.
Jesus knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands, and that “he was come from God, and went to God“; John 13:3
Again the Greek word come is in the “active voice” meaning Jesus did the action, and it is the indicative mood which means “the action really occurred”.
But the verb is not in the “perfect” tense, it is aorist.
Consider another verse in which the verb is in the perfect tense – “There was a man sent from God…” – “Sent” is from the Greek “apestalmenos,” which is the perfect passive form of the Greek participle (“-ing” word equivalent to (being sent) form of apostellw. (There's that “w” that is pronounced like long o).
This man was being sent from God, and the result influenced the present, from a completed action.
Quote When Jesus ascended to heaven., it was Jesus that did the ascending! The scriptures do not tell us the Father took him to heaven! Excuse me! The scriptures do not tell us the Father took Jesus to heaven? Is not Eph 1:20 part of the scriptures?
Ephesians 1:20 Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places,WHO DID IT?
That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him: 18 The eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints, 19 And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power,WHAT DID HE DO?
20 Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, 21 Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come: 22 And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church, 23 Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all.2:1 And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;
2 Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:
3 Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.
4 But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us,WHAT DID HE DO WITH US?
5 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, by grace ye are saved;
6 And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:[Eph 1:17-2:6]Quote
Jesus words were clear, for he never said or even in the slightest way implied that he was or came from a plan or thought of the Father!SOUNDS LIKE A PLAN TO ME
“As for me, behold, my covenant is with thee, and thou shalt be a father of many nations. 5 Neither shall thy name any more be called Abram, but thy name shall be Abraham; for a father of many nations have I made thee.[Gen 17:4-5]
SOUNDS LIKE A PLAN TO ME
“As it is written, I have made thee a father of many nations, before him whom he believed, even God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were. 18 Who against hope believed in hope, that he might become the father of many nations, according to that which was spoken, So shall thy seed be. 19 And being not weak in faith, he considered not his own body now dead, when he was about an hundred years old, neither yet the deadness of Sara's womb: 20 He staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief; but was strong in faith, giving glory to God; 21 And being fully persuaded that, what he had promised, he was able also to perform.” [Rom 4:17-21]SOUNDS LIKE A PLAN TO ME
“The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken; 18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. 19 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.” [Deut 18:15,18-19]SOUNDS LIKE JOHN KNEW OF THE PLAN
“And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No. 25 And they asked him, and said unto him, Why baptizest thou then, if thou be not that Christ, nor Elias, neither that prophet?” [John 1:21-25]SOUNDS LIKE THE EARLY PREACHERS KNEW OF THE PLAN OF GOD
“For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you. 23 And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people. 24 Yea, and all the prophets from Samuel and those that follow after, as many as have spoken, have likewise foretold of these days.” [Acts 3:22-24]Quote Jesus puts the nail in the coffin for those who questioned what he was saying by the following words… What and if ye shall see the Son of man “ascend up where he was before”? John 6:62
Again the word “Ascend” is in the present tense and active voice which means that Jesus is doing the action.
Jesus is going to “WHERE HE WAS BEFORE”!
John 6:62 What and if ye [behold] the Son of man [ascending] where he was [at first]?
ye behold…[Greek thewreete = present active subjunctive]
at first….[Greek proteron = comparative adjective]This is the same word used by Paul “Ye know how through infirmity of the flesh I preached the gospel unto you at the first.” [Gal 4:13]
And again the author of Hebrews uses it this way – “Seeing therefore it remaineth that some must enter therein, and they to whom it was first preached entered not in because of unbelief:”
[Heb 4:6]And
“Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people's: for this he did once, when he offered up himself.” [Heb 7:27]
Now, notice, I did not say it is never translated “before,” I am simply showing you how, in my opinion, it is more consistant to use it in keeping with how it is used in these passages.
The reason it needs to be understood this way, is because Paul's explanation of Jesus ascending and descending uses it this way –
“Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men. 9 (Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth? 10 He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.” [Eph 4:8-10] [NOTE: “proteron is not found in some manuscripts in this passage]
“Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye [thewrew] see me have.” [Luke 24:39] Jesus himself testifies to his witnesses, as to how he wants them to perceive his resurrection, not “blepo” nor “eidw” – but “thewrew” – which is what he asked them way back in John 6:62
Quote Was he returning to a “plan or thought” or was he returning to the Father in heaven from where he came from and to the Glory that he had with the Father before the foundation of the world. Not according to his own testimony in Luke 24:39; he was returning to the Apostles where he spent some forty days and nights with them, explaining to them all that the prophets and Moses had written about him. “The former treatise have I made, O Theophilus, of all that Jesus began both to do and teach, 2 Until the day in which he was taken up, after that he through the Holy Ghost had given commandments unto the apostles whom he had chosen: 3 To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God:” [Acts 1:1-3]
I will save the rest of this for another time, or forget it in the interest of staying with my OP.
Paladin…………An excellent presentation brother. Your Scholarship in the Greek language is truly need here to help straighten out some wrong concepts here, and perhaps will help us all come to a more excellent understand of God's Words.peace and love to you and yours Paladin……………………gene
Quote (Paladin @ May 07 2011,06:32) Quote (mikeboll64 @ May 06 2011,14:16) To me it seemed like a whole bunch of words that in the end, still didn't give a different meaning to “I came down from heaven” than the only obvious one. Paladin, we don't need a lesson in the Greek language…………unless there is something in your post that makes “I came down from heaven” mean something other than “I came down from heaven”. The Jews Jesus said this to seemed to understand that he was saying he came down from heaven…………..why don't you?
mike
Well, let's go back to a previous lesson you ignored, and see if you will answer it this time.The baptism of John – from heaven, or of men? Whence cometh it?
paladinMk 11:30 John’s baptism—was it from heaven, or from men? Tell me!”
so it was requested by heaven that he come to baptize,to fulfill scriptures,
but john was not from heaven or from above ,or came down,and his father was not God.
Pierre
Quote (Paladin @ May 06 2011,12:25) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ May 01 2011,02:06) Hi All
To deny the preexistence of Jesus is to deny a very basic fundamental truth. There are way to many scriptures that one has to explain away or give some ethereal interpretation to the text when it is obvious a litteral interpretation of the text is what is meant by the writers.
Are you aware of the meaning of “ethereal” WJ? It means to define in “out of this world terms.” It is a reference to a realm beyond earth, of almost a fairy-story quality.”
Now, WJ, please tell me how a “pre-existant” Jesus is somehow not “ethereal.” You are trying to convince us he is from outside the world, “ethereal” by definition. I would say you are correct on that one, WJ. It certainly gives an
“ethereal” explanation to the scriptures.It is unfortunate you have chosen to attack the Greek of those with whom you disagree, because your application of Greek in your statement is almost totally wrong.
First you give a translation of a Greek text, instead of the Greek or some part thereof.
Quote John 6:38-40For “I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will“, but the will of him who sent me; and this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up at the last day. For this is the will of my Father, that every one who sees the Son and believes in him should have eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. Then you mount an attack upon those with whom you disagree, by characterizing them as “men who know nothing of the construction of the Greek have set out to make themselves greater than the truth.”
You attempt to make your case without making your case, but simply asserting it;
Quote It is obvious what Jesus meant, but men who know nothing of the construction of the Greek have set out to make themselves greater than the truth by misinterpreting the clear meaning of the text in which the authors intended and which the translators translated. You fail to explain that in many cases it is the translators who are at fault, rather than the authors.
Then you formulate your attack by assertion, with no evidence from the Greek text, which from your argument, we would expect to see some examples therefrom.
And you throw in terminology without explaining what it means. “Unitarian” interpretation, for example, means exactly what?
Quote The Greek construction of the text concerning the preexistence of Jesus does not allow for a “Unitarian” interpretation. Quote The Greek for “I have come” is Strong's G2597 – katabaino… There are at least 33 Greek words that are translated “come” in one form or another, and nearly sixty compound meanings formed by other Greek words.[anabainw;aperxomai;apobainw;ginomai;deuro;deute;dierxomai;einai;eiserxomai;ektoreuo
mai;enisteemi;ezerxomai;eperxomai;epibainw;epiporeuomai;erxomai;esomai;esti;ephisteemi;eek
w;katantaw;katerxomai;paraginomai;pareimi;parerxomai;paristeemi;proserxomai;sunerxomai;phe
rw;phthavw;xwrew;wn; plus many compound forms translated “come” in one context or another. And none of them are translated “I have come.”
My copy of Strong's concordance shows under #2597 – katabainw – to descend (lit. or fig.) – come (get, go, step) down, descend, fall (down).
[NOTE: in those instances in which “w” is printed in Greek words, it isa interlinear form of the Greek letter omega; many folks put in its place a letter omicron (o) with a dash over the top, but I haven't figured out my keybord well enough to try putting 'o' with a – on top.
Anyway, Strong's # and definition is not too big a deal, because there are so many editions, some with corrections, some with abbreviated information, I do not make it a test of fellowship over a Strong's definition. I just posted it becasue it is different from what you posted. I am not even saying you are wrong on this, only that my copy of Strong's says otherwise.
“Katabaino” actually means to come down (like descending a staircase) or fall down. If you type into bible program's word processor “I have come” you will not get “katabaino” as a preferred Greek source. You will get “erxomai.” So it is a little misleading to say “The Greek for “I have come” is Strong's
“katabaino.”Quote The Greek for “I have come” is Strong's G2597 – katabaino which is defined… 1) to go down, come down, descend
a) the place from which one has come down from
b) to come down“In every place the word is used it is referring to a literal action by a person and not an abstract “thought or plan”“.
Then please explain Mat 7:25 & 7:27 [rain]; 11:23 a city; Luke 8:23, a storm; & 9:54 fire; Acts 8:26, a highway; 10:11 & 11:5 – a certain vessel; or James 1:17 gifts from God; or Rev 3:12 a city, or 12:12, the devil. Tell us who this person is in each reference, that “came down.”
Quote
katabaino is in the “perfect” tense, and the “active voice” and the “indicative” mood!Again, a misleading statement. “katabebeeka” is the perfect, indicative, active form of katabaino. It is found in two verses in the new testament; John 6:38 and John 6:42 And only in two verses
Quote “The perfect tense” in Greek corresponds to the perfect tense in English, and describes “an action” which is viewed as having been completed in the past, once and for all, not needing to be repeated. The Greek “perfect” references a completed action, with results that carry into the present. The Greek “perfect” tense has no exact equivalent in English. [This is not all there is to say about the Greek “perfect” – it is all that applies to this report]
Quote Jesus' last cry from the cross, TETELESTAI (“It is finished!”) is a good example of the perfect te
nse used in this sense, namely “It [the atonement] has been accomplished, completely, once and for all time.”Certain antiquated verb forms in Greek, such as those related to seeing (eidw) or knowing (oida) will use the perfect tense in a manner equivalent to the normal past tense. These few cases are exception to the normal rule and do not alter the normal connotation of the perfect tense stated above.
Greek past tense or english past tense? There is no Greek past tense.
Quote “The active voice” represents the subject as the doer or performer of the action. e.g., in the sentence, “The boy hit the ball,” the boy performs the action. “The indicative mood” is a simple statement of fact. If an action really occurs or has occurred or will occur, it will be rendered in the indicative mood.
”For I came down (katabaino) from heaven”, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me. John 6:38
John 6:38 For I katabebeeka [came down] from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.
[katabebeeka indicative perfect active form of (katabainw) -1s]Quote The same word is used here… And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God “descending (katabaino,)” like a dove, and lighting upon him: Matt 3:16
Not by a long shot –
Mat 3:16 And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God katabainon [descending] like a dove, and lighting upon him: [katabainon = present active participle accusative neuter form of katabainw]
It is not the same form of the same word. And since it is the same root word, it is not improper to reference it as the “same word” but for one thing. You introduced the tense and mood and voice, so you should have stuck to words of the same tense and mood and voice when you say it is the same word. You cannot make a broad statement about a root word, and apply it to words that differ in form. It is misleading.
Quote And here… And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord “(descended (katabaino )” from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it. Matt 28:2
This is now twice you claim “The same word is used here…” when it is not the same word. It is another form of the same word, because they share a root, but the form changes and when the form changes so does the meaning.
Mat 28:2 “And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord katabas [descended] from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it.” Correct translation would actually be.. “for the angel of the Lord, descending and rolling back the stone…”
“Descending” and “rolling” are both participles, and in English that translates to a verb of (“-ing”) (as compared with (ed); i.e., rolling not rolled, descending, not descended.And it is aorist active,not perfect active, so it is not saying the same thing. The “perfect” tense is telling us that the result of the perfect tense is carried over to the present. The aorist simply tells us the action took place.
Quote Was the Holy Spirit and the Angel a “thought or plan” come down from heaven? Or did they really descend from heaven? Jesus said plainly that he came “From God” and “went to God”.
Jesus knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands, and that “he was come from God, and went to God“; John 13:3
Again the Greek word come is in the “active voice” meaning Jesus did the action, and it is the indicative mood which means “the action really occurred”.
But the verb is not in the “perfect” tense, it is aorist.
Consider another verse in which the verb is in the perfect tense – “There was a man sent from God…” – “Sent” is from the Greek “apestalmenos,” which is the perfect passive form of the Greek participle (“-ing” word equivalent to (being sent) form of apostellw. (There's that “w” that is pronounced like long o).
This man was being sent from God, and the result influenced the present, from a completed action.
Quote When Jesus ascended to heaven., it was Jesus that did the ascending! The scriptures do not tell us the Father took him to heaven! Excuse me! The scriptures do not tell us the Father took Jesus to heaven? Is not Eph 1:20 part of the scriptures?
Ephesians 1:20 Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places,WHO DID IT?
That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him: 18 The eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints, 19 And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power,WHAT DID HE DO?
20 Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, 21 Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come: 22 And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church, 23 Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all.2:1 And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;
2 Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:
3 Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.
4 But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us,WHAT DID HE DO WITH US?
5 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, by grace ye are saved;
6 And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:[Eph 1:17-2:6]Quote
Jesus words were clear, for he never said or even in the slightest way implied that he was or came from a plan or thought of the Father!SOUNDS LIKE A PLAN TO ME
“As for me, behold, my covenant is with thee, and thou shalt be a father of many nations. 5 Neither shall thy name any more be called Abram, but thy name shall be Abraham; for a father of many nations have I made thee.[Gen 17:4-5]
SOUNDS LIKE A PLAN TO ME
“As it is written, I have made thee a father of many nations, before him whom he believed, even God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were. 18 Who against hope believed in hope, that he might become the father of many nations, according to that which was spoken, So shall thy seed be. 19 And being not weak in faith, he considered not his own body now dead, when he was about an hundred years old, neither yet the deadness of Sara's womb: 20 He staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief; but was strong in faith, giving glory to God; 21 And being fully persuaded that, what he had promised, he was able also to perform.” [Rom 4:17-21]SOUNDS LIKE A PLAN TO ME
“The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken; 18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. 19 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.” [Deut 18:15,18-19]SOUNDS LIKE JOHN KNEW OF THE PLAN
“And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No. 25 And they asked him, and said unto him, Why baptizest thou then, if thou be not that Christ, nor Elias, neither that prophet?” [John 1:21-25]SOUNDS LIKE THE EARLY PREACHERS KNEW OF THE PLAN OF GOD
“For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you. 23 And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people. 24 Yea, and all the prophets from Samuel and those that follow after, as many as have spoken, have likewise foretold of these days.” [Acts 3:22-24]Quote Jesus puts the nail in the coffin for those who questioned what he was saying by the following words… What and if ye shall see the Son of man “ascend up where he was before”? John 6:62
Again the word “Ascend” is in the present tense and active voice which means that Jesus is doing the action.
Jesus is going to “WHERE HE WAS BEFORE”!
John 6:62 What and if ye [behold] the Son of man [ascending] where he was [at first]?
ye behold…[Greek thewreete = present active subjunctive]
at first….[Greek proteron = comparative adjective]This is the same word used by Paul “Ye know how through infirmity of the flesh I preached the gospel unto you at the first.” [Gal 4:13]
And again the author of Hebrews uses it this way – “Seeing therefore it remaineth that some must enter therein, and they to whom it was first preached entered not in because of unbelief:”
[Heb 4:6]And
“Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people's: for this he did once, when he offered up himself.” [Heb 7:27]
Now, notice, I did not say it is never translated “before,” I am simply showing you how, in my opinion, it is more consistant to use it in keeping with how it is used in these passages.
The reason it needs to be understood this way, is because Paul's explanation of Jesus ascending and descending uses it this way –
“Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men. 9 (Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth? 10 He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.” [Eph 4:8-10] [NOTE: “proteron is not found in some manuscripts in this passage]
“Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye [thewrew] see me have.” [Luke 24:39] Jesus himself testifies to his witnesses, as to how he wants them to perceive his resurrection, not “blepo” nor “eidw” – but “thewrew” – which is what he asked them way back in John 6:62
Quote Was he returning to a “plan or thought” or was he returning to the Father in heaven from where he came from and to the Glory that he had with the Father before the foundation of the world. Not according to his own testimony in Luke 24:39; he was returning to the Apostles where he spent some forty days and nights with them, explaining to them all that the prophets and Moses had written about him. “The former treatise have I made, O Theophilus, of all that Jesus began both to do and teach, 2 Until the day in which he was taken up, after that he through the Holy Ghost had given commandments unto the apostles whom he had chosen: 3 To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God:” [Acts 1:1-3]
I will save the rest of this for another time, or forget it in the interest of staying with my OP.
Hi Paladin:Thanks for this post my brother and my friend.
Well, Keith is right in saying that I am not a Greek Scholar, and so, if I have a question about something in the scriptures, I have to go to God in prayer and ask him what he meant by the scriptures in question, which is what I do, and I know that if I am wrong in what I teach, He will correct me. He will always answer my prayers so that I will not teach anything that is not correct. And I am very happy that He does.
He has answered my prayer through you by this post.
Love in Christ,
MartyQuote (shimmer @ May 06 2011,12:18) Quote (kerwin @ May 06 2011,13:08) Confusion is not necessary bad as to admit it means you are admitting you have more to learn from God. To clear up your confusion need to test what you hear and make sure it conforms to seeking God and his kingdom. Anything else comes from the Devil.
Kerwin,Iv looked at this from all different views,
Too confusing though!
Simplified, the Son of God came down from Heaven.
I believe Him.
Confusion can be good, as I found with the eternal hell doctrine. But it was eating at me emotionally so it was different. This confusion over pre-existance however was different again, and to me, was not good, and all I had to do was return to what God showed me way back, and it was all in scripture. Jesus came down from Heaven, the details we don't know.
Shimmer,The debate is actually over whether Jesus is a human being or a spiritual being. Some argue that he is a spiritual being that transformed into a spiritual being.
I am convinced it is an important issue because it bears on having faith that a human being can put on a new man created like God in true righteousness and holiness.
edited to spell out more clearly what I previously implied.
Quote (kerwin @ May 07 2011,13:33) Quote (shimmer @ May 06 2011,12:18) Quote (kerwin @ May 06 2011,13:08) Confusion is not necessary bad as to admit it means you are admitting you have more to learn from God. To clear up your confusion need to test what you hear and make sure it conforms to seeking God and his kingdom. Anything else comes from the Devil.
Kerwin,Iv looked at this from all different views,
Too confusing though!
Simplified, the Son of God came down from Heaven.
I believe Him.
Confusion can be good, as I found with the eternal hell doctrine. But it was eating at me emotionally so it was different. This confusion over pre-existance however was different again, and to me, was not good, and all I had to do was return to what God showed me way back, and it was all in scripture. Jesus came down from Heaven, the details we don't know.
Shimmer,The debate is actually over whether Jesus is a human being or a spiritual being. Some argue that he is a spiritual being that transformed into a spiritual being.
I am convinced it is an important issue because it bears on having faith that a human being can put on a new man created like God in true righteousness and holiness.
edited to spell out more clearly what I previously implied.
Kerwinpay attention when you read this parable ;
Mt 21:33 “Listen to another parable: There was a landowner who planted a vineyard. He put a wall around it, dug a winepress in it and built a watchtower. Then he rented the vineyard to some farmers and went away on a journey.
Mt 21:34 When the harvest time approached, he sent his servants to the tenants to collect his fruit.
Mt 21:35 “The tenants seized his servants; they beat one, killed another, and stoned a third.
Mt 21:36 Then he sent other servants to them, more than the first time, and the tenants treated them the same way.
Mt 21:37 Last of all, he sent his son to them. ‘They will respect my son,’ he said.
Mt 21:38 “But when the tenants saw the son, they said to each other, ‘This is the heir. Come, let’s kill him and take his inheritance.’
Mt 21:39 So they took him and threw him out of the vineyard and killed him.
Mt 21:40 “Therefore, when the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those tenants?”
Mt 21:41 “He will bring those wretches to a wretched end,” they replied, “and he will rent the vineyard to other tenants, who will give him his share of the crop at harvest time.”
Mt 21:42 Jesus said to them, “Have you never read in the Scriptures:
“ ‘The stone the builders rejected
has become the capstone;
the Lord has done this,
and it is marvelous in our eyes’ ?
Mt 21:43 “Therefore I tell you that the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people who will produce its fruit.
Mt 21:44 He who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces, but he on whom it falls will be crushed.”did you find understanding ?
Pierre
Marty and Kerwin! I read tyour posts, and in no way is anything settled. just because someone comes and says He knows Greek, doesn't make it so. you both can check out on the internet to the Blue Letter Bible and it will tell you the Greek or the Hebrew. And I did so. It is not what Paladin is saying…..I also caught Him in a contradiction of Scriptures. since that is the case, I will not believe what He says….The 50 Scriptures that prove the preexisting of Jesus is real, to deny it is not of God….Period
Peace IreneQuote (Baker @ May 06 2011,12:11) Marty!
Jhn 1:1 ¶ In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.Does this say in the beginning was the Word? And the Word was God?
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.
And the Word was made flesh.
Before Jesus came down from Heaven, He was called the Word and God.
Rev 19:13 And he [was] clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.
Rev 19:14 And the armies [which were] in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
Rev 19:15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.
Rev 19:16 And he hath on [his] vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.
And His name is called the Word of God. Just like you are called Marty. When I write Marty. do I mean Mike? No…. The reason God called the Word of God Jesus when He became flesh, is because of what Jesus means, Emmanuel God with us.
And the Word of God in Rev. is the same being then in John 1…..I also believe the reason why He is called the Word of God, because when the Bible states God said, it is Jesus the Word of God. Mr. Armstrong puts it this way. He is the Spoken Word of God, or the Spokesman of God….Peace Irene
Hi Mrs:You say:
Quote Before Jesus came down from Heaven, He was called the Word and God. This is an assumption on your part. There is not scripture which states this.
And you say:
Quote Mr. Armstrong puts it this way. He is the Spoken Word of God, or the Spokesman of God…. The scriptures state it this way:
Quote Hebrews 1
1God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,2Hath 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;
Quote Acts 1
1The former treatise have I made, O Theophilus, of all that Jesus began both to do and teach,2Until the day in which he was taken up, after that he through the Holy Ghost had given commandments unto the apostles whom he had chosen:
And so, he himself is not the Word of God in that God spoke to humanity through him, but his “name is called” the Word of God because he through the works of obedience to God's Word he has manifested God's character through his life and death, and he has been exalted to the right hand of the Father and watches over God's Word which he obeyed without sin unto death to perform it.
And you say:
Quote And His name is called the Word of God. Just like you are called Marty. When I write Marty. do I mean Mike? No…. The reason God called the Word of God Jesus when He became flesh, is because of what Jesus means, Emmanuel God with us. The meaning of the name “Jesus” is YHWH is salvation. The scripture states: “They shall call his name” Emmanuel. Which is interpreted to mean “God with us”. We have seen God's character manifest through his life and death.
Love in Christ,
MartyMarty
Quote The meaning of the name “Jesus” is YHWH is salvation. The scripture states: “They shall call his name” Emmanuel. Which is interpreted to mean “God with us”. We have seen God's character manifest through his life and death. Love in Christ,
MartyGod can not be manifested in any way in dead
Pierre
Quote (terraricca @ May 07 2011,10:00) Marty Quote The meaning of the name “Jesus” is YHWH is salvation. The scripture states: “They shall call his name” Emmanuel. Which is interpreted to mean “God with us”. We have seen God's character manifest through his life and death. Love in Christ,
MartyGod can not be manifested in any way in dead
Pierre
Hi Pierre:God's character was manifested through Jesus suffering on the cross and his death because it was God that he was obeying.
No, God Himself did not and cannot die. He is eternal.
Love in Christ,
MartyMarty! You say that in Rev. 19 it is Jesus, but not in John 1:1-14 its not? Is that what you are saying???
Jhn 1:1 ¶ In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.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.
notice what it says ” the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth….Who is it that became flesh, if not Jesus….???
What I can't understand is that you say it is Jesus in Rev.19 but not in John 1….why???
Not my assumption, but Scripture…..what you are doing is adding, what it doesn't say at all….The only thing we agree on is that Jesus is Emmanuel….
Peace Irene
Quote (Baker @ May 07 2011,11:10) Marty! You say that in Rev. 19 it is Jesus, but not in John 1:1-14 its not? Is that what you are saying???
Jhn 1:1 ¶ In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.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.
notice what it says ” the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth….Who is it that became flesh, if not Jesus….???
What I can't understand is that you say it is Jesus in Rev.19 but not in John 1….why???
Not my assumption, but Scripture…..what you are doing is adding, what it doesn't say at all….The only thing we agree on is that Jesus is Emmanuel….
Peace Irene
Hi Mrs:John 1 states: In the beginning was the Word (Logos) and the Word (Logos) was with God, and the Word (Logos) was God.
As you have stated you can go to Blueletterbible.org, and look up the defintion of a word used in scripture. As I have already stated, I am not a Greek scholar, but sometimes it is necessary to know the definition of the Greek Word in order to understand what the scripture means, and so look up the definition of “the Word” and see if you can understand the scripture.
Jesus is the “basis” for the whole of creation, and God made every thing that he made knowing that him his whole plan for humanity would be fulfilled, and so the Word in John 1 pertains to him. It is all about him, but he is not the Word. In John 1:14 the prophetic sayings pertaining to him became a reality or became flesh.
In Revelation 19:13, the scripture states that “His Name” is called the Word of God, and it does not say that he is the Word of God. The Word of God is that which God has spoken, and the scriptures in Hebrews 1 state that God has spoken to humanity through His Son in these last days. Jesus obeyed the Word of God without sin even unto death on the cross. “His name” is called refers to the character or spirit of Jesus which was formed by God in him through perfect obedience to His Word. And since he obeyed God's Word without sin even unto death on the cross, it is through this same Word that he is a life-giving spirit, and it is by this Word that he will judge the living and the dead.
Maybe the following scriptures will help you to understand what I am stating:
Quote Hbr 5:7 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; Hbr 5:8 Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;
Hbr 5:9 And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;
Quote Phl 2:8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. Phl 2:9 Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:
Phl 2:10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of [things] in heaven, and [things] in earth, and [things] under the earth;
Phl 2:11 And [that] every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ [is] Lord, to the glory of God the Father
Quote Act 10:36 The word which [God] sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ: (he is Lord of all:) Act 10:37 That word, , ye know, which was published throughout all Judaea, and began from Galilee, after the baptism which John preached;
Act 10:38 How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.
Act 10:39 And we are witnesses of all things which he did both in the land of the Jews, and in Jerusalem; whom they slew and hanged on a tree:
Act 10:40 Him God raised up the third day, and shewed him openly;
Act 10:41 Not to all the people, but unto witnesses chosen before of God, [even] to us, who did eat and drink with him after he rose from the dead.
Act 10:42 And he commanded us to preach unto the people, and to testify that it is he which was ordained of God [to be] the Judge of quick and dead.
Love in Christ,
MartyQuote (942767 @ May 07 2011,17:10) Quote (terraricca @ May 07 2011,10:00) Marty Quote The meaning of the name “Jesus” is YHWH is salvation. The scripture states: “They shall call his name” Emmanuel. Which is interpreted to mean “God with us”. We have seen God's character manifest through his life and death. Love in Christ,
MartyGod can not be manifested in any way in dead
Pierre
Hi Pierre:God's character was manifested through Jesus suffering on the cross and his death because it was God that he was obeying.
No, God Himself did not and cannot die. He is eternal.
Love in Christ,
Marty
Martyit was not the character of God but of Christ that was put to the test,faithful until dead.
Pierre
Marty
Quote In Revelation 19:13, the scripture states that “His Name” is called the Word of God, and it does not say that he is the Word of God. The Word of God is that which God has spoken, and the scriptures in Hebrews 1 state that God has spoken to humanity through His Son in these last days. Jesus obeyed the Word of God without sin even unto death on the cross. “His name” is called refers to the character or spirit of Jesus which was formed by God in him through perfect obedience to His Word. And since he obeyed God's Word without sin even unto death on the cross, it is through this same Word that he is a life-giving spirit, and it is by this Word that he will judge the living and the dead. were do you get those explanations?
wen you father or mother look at you at your birth his name ,will be called Marty, right or this is not right?
Pierre
Quote (Paladin @ May 06 2011,06:32) Quote (mikeboll64 @ May 06 2011,14:16) To me it seemed like a whole bunch of words that in the end, still didn't give a different meaning to “I came down from heaven” than the only obvious one. Paladin, we don't need a lesson in the Greek language…………unless there is something in your post that makes “I came down from heaven” mean something other than “I came down from heaven”. The Jews Jesus said this to seemed to understand that he was saying he came down from heaven…………..why don't you?
mike
Well, let's go back to a previous lesson you ignored, and see if you will answer it this time.The baptism of John – from heaven, or of men? Whence cometh it?
Hi Paladin,The only Greek lesson I remember discussing with you was the one where I showed you to be mistaken about God magnifying His Word over His own name. I don't remember being asked this current question before, but the answer is “FROM HEAVEN”. (See how that's done, Paladin? Someone asks a direct question, and the other actually answers it. Try the answering part sometime, okay? Because I believe you've “ignored” many of my direct questions.)
As far as your last post, I'm still wondering…………out of all the different Greek words, tenses and forms you went on about, which specific word or form changed the meaning of the words “I came down from heaven”?
I did notice that you showed a definition of “descended” instead of “came down from”, but that only strengthens our case – because it shows a DIRECT correlation between Jesus saying he DESCENDED from heaven, and then implying that he would later ASCEND to where he was before.
So…………..which part of your Greek lesson makes “I came down from heaven” mean something else? I would ask Gene and Marty the same thing, since they both praised your post. Maybe they saw something I missed?
peace,
mikeQuote (terraricca @ May 07 2011,02:03) Quote (kerwin @ May 07 2011,13:33) Quote (shimmer @ May 06 2011,12:18) Quote (kerwin @ May 06 2011,13:08) Confusion is not necessary bad as to admit it means you are admitting you have more to learn from God. To clear up your confusion need to test what you hear and make sure it conforms to seeking God and his kingdom. Anything else comes from the Devil.
Kerwin,Iv looked at this from all different views,
Too confusing though!
Simplified, the Son of God came down from Heaven.
I believe Him.
Confusion can be good, as I found with the eternal hell doctrine. But it was eating at me emotionally so it was different. This confusion over pre-existance however was different again, and to me, was not good, and all I had to do was return to what God showed me way back, and it was all in scripture. Jesus came down from Heaven, the details we don't know.
Shimmer,The debate is actually over whether Jesus is a human being or a spiritual being. Some argue that he is a spiritual being that transformed into a spiritual being.
I am convinced it is an important issue because it bears on having faith that a human being can put on a new man created like God in true righteousness and holiness.
edited to spell out more clearly what I previously implied.
Kerwinpay attention when you read this parable ;
Mt 21:33 “Listen to another parable: There was a landowner who planted a vineyard. He put a wall around it, dug a winepress in it and built a watchtower. Then he rented the vineyard to some farmers and went away on a journey.
Mt 21:34 When the harvest time approached, he sent his servants to the tenants to collect his fruit.
Mt 21:35 “The tenants seized his servants; they beat one, killed another, and stoned a third.
Mt 21:36 Then he sent other servants to them, more than the first time, and the tenants treated them the same way.
Mt 21:37 Last of all, he sent his son to them. ‘They will respect my son,’ he said.
Mt 21:38 “But when the tenants saw the son, they said to each other, ‘This is the heir. Come, let’s kill him and take his inheritance.’
Mt 21:39 So they took him and threw him out of the vineyard and killed him.
Mt 21:40 “Therefore, when the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those tenants?”
Mt 21:41 “He will bring those wretches to a wretched end,” they replied, “and he will rent the vineyard to other tenants, who will give him his share of the crop at harvest time.”
Mt 21:42 Jesus said to them, “Have you never read in the Scriptures:
“ ‘The stone the builders rejected
has become the capstone;
the Lord has done this,
and it is marvelous in our eyes’ ?
Mt 21:43 “Therefore I tell you that the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people who will produce its fruit.
Mt 21:44 He who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces, but he on whom it falls will be crushed.”did you find understanding ?
Pierre
Quote Luke 20(NIV, c.2011) 9Then began he to speak to the people this parable; A certain man planted a vineyard, and let it forth to husbandmen, and went into a far country for a long time.
10And at the season he sent a servant to the husbandmen, that they should give him of the fruit of the vineyard: but the husbandmen beat him, and sent him away empty.
11And again he sent another servant: and they beat him also, and entreated him shamefully, and sent him away empty.
12And again he sent a third: and they wounded him also, and cast him out.
13Then said the lord of the vineyard, What shall I do? I will send my beloved son: it may be they will reverence him when they see him.
14But when the husbandmen saw him, they reasoned among themselves, saying, This is the heir: come, let us kill him, that the inheritance may be ours.
15So they cast him out of the vineyard, and killed him. What therefore shall the lord of the vineyard do unto them?
16He shall come and destroy these husbandmen, and shall give the vineyard to others. And when they heard it, they said, God forbid.
Even the people understood it.
Quote (kerwin @ May 07 2011,19:45) Quote (terraricca @ May 07 2011,02:03) Quote (kerwin @ May 07 2011,13:33) Quote (shimmer @ May 06 2011,12:18) Quote (kerwin @ May 06 2011,13:08) Confusion is not necessary bad as to admit it means you are admitting you have more to learn from God. To clear up your confusion need to test what you hear and make sure it conforms to seeking God and his kingdom. Anything else comes from the Devil.
Kerwin,Iv looked at this from all different views,
Too confusing though!
Simplified, the Son of God came down from Heaven.
I believe Him.
Confusion can be good, as I found with the eternal hell doctrine. But it was eating at me emotionally so it was different. This confusion over pre-existance however was different again, and to me, was not good, and all I had to do was return to what God showed me way back, and it was all in scripture. Jesus came down from Heaven, the details we don't know.
Shimmer,The debate is actually over whether Jesus is a human being or a spiritual being. Some argue that he is a spiritual being that transformed into a spiritual being.
I am convinced it is an important issue because it bears on having faith that a human being can put on a new man created like God in true righteousness and holiness.
edited to spell out more clearly what I previously implied.
Kerwinpay attention when you read this parable ;
Mt 21:33 “Listen to another parable: There was a landowner who planted a vineyard. He put a wall around it, dug a winepress in it and built a watchtower. Then he rented the vineyard to some farmers and went away on a journey.
Mt 21:34 When the harvest time approached, he sent his servants to the tenants to collect his fruit.
Mt 21:35 “The tenants seized his servants; they beat one, killed another, and stoned a third.
Mt 21:36 Then he sent other servants to them, more than the first time, and the tenants treated them the same way.
Mt 21:37 Last of all, he sent his son to them. ‘They will respect my son,’ he said.
Mt 21:38 “But when the tenants saw the son, they said to each other, ‘This is the heir. Come, let’s kill him and take his inheritance.’
Mt 21:39 So they took him and threw him out of the vineyard and killed him.
Mt 21:40 “Therefore, when the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those tenants?”
Mt 21:41 “He will bring those wretches to a wretched end,” they replied, “and he will rent the vineyard to other tenants, who will give him his share of the crop at harvest time.”
Mt 21:42 Jesus said to them, “Have you never read in the Scriptures:
“ ‘The stone the builders rejected
has become the capstone;
the Lord has done this,
and it is marvelous in our eyes’ ?
Mt 21:43 “Therefore I tell you that the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people who will produce its fruit.
Mt 21:44 He who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces, but he on whom it falls will be crushed.”did you find understanding ?
Pierre
Quote Luke 20(NIV, c.2011) 9Then began he to speak to the people this parable; A certain man planted a vineyard, and let it forth to husbandmen, and went into a far country for a long time.
10And at the season he sent a servant to the husbandmen, that they should give him of the fruit of the vineyard: but the husbandmen beat him, and sent him away empty.
11And again he sent another servant: and they beat him also, and entreated him shamefully, and sent him away empty.
12And again he sent a third: and they wounded him also, and cast him out.
13Then said the lord of the vineyard, What shall I do? I will send my beloved son: it may be they will reverence him when they see him.
14But when the husbandmen saw him, they reasoned among themselves, saying, This is the heir: come, let us kill him, that the inheritance may be ours.
15So they cast him out of the vineyard, and killed him. What therefore shall the lord of the vineyard do unto them?
16He shall come and destroy these husbandmen, and shall give the vineyard to others. And when they heard it, they said, God forbid.
Even the people understood it.
Kerwinwhat you think Christ was explaining?
Pierre
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
