- This topic has 3,215 replies, 24 voices, and was last updated 4 years, 7 months ago by
.
- Posts
Quote (Paladin @ Mar. 06 2011,19:04) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Mar. 06 2011,10:48) [/quote] Quote (Paladin @ Mar. 05 2011,16:27) Therefore, the “incarnation” of Jesus began with Adam, according to the geneologies in the new testament, and began with “the woman” of Gen 3:15 according to the messianic prophecies. This completely destroys the trinitarian perspective that Jesus was “incarnated” at his birth from Mary. Hey Paladin,
I'm all for “destroying trinitarian perspectives”!
But we must be thinking of “incarnate” differently. The following is the first definition from Dictionary.com:embodied in flesh; given a body, especially a human, form: a devil incarnate.
Their example of “a devil incarnate” refers to a living person, not a “seed” that is still thousands of years away from becoming a flesh and blood person.
I understand Jesus to be “incarnated” when he began to have flesh of his own, which would have been as a fetus in Mary. But I could also understand it to mean the day he was born in the flesh. Either would work for me.
But I'm not on board with you that Jesus was “incarnated” in the days of Adam and Eve…………..or in the days of Abraham. Nor do I see how Jesus being “incarnated” in the days of Eve would make any difference to the trinitarians. It doesn't answer their claim that Jesus was God Almighty, but came in the flesh as a man. Isn't their claim the same no matter WHEN you move the time of incarnation to?
Maybe I'm missing something?
You are correct Mike, in that I introduced the concept of Christ in eternity; however, the incarnation of Christ from eternity was the theme of the OP. I sometimes have difficulty stating clearly, the issue. Thanks you for pointing out the truth of the matter.
The issue I should have raised, is actually one of the personification of prophecy; i.e., Look to Gen 17:4-5 for the issue personified [incarnated].
“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.
In this simple two-verse statement, God demonstrates for all time, the power of his prophetic word. Paul expresses it this way: “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.”[ Rom 4:17]
Paul encapsulates the two-verse issue very succinctly, in one verse; i.e., When God pronounces a thing in prophecy, it becomes as true as though it is already reality, even if it is scheduled to happen thousands of years into the future.
My issue is how to personify the prophecy of Gen 17:4-5, which is the reality of the fulfillment of the seed promise personified in Gal 3:16 – “Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.”
This fulfillment in Christ did not begin with Mat 1:20, but in Gen 17:4-5, when in two verses he progressed from “Shall make” to “have made” and “called those things which were not, as though they were.”[Rom 4:17][Gal 3:16]
I am trying to show that the personification described in John 1:1-3,14 has nothing to do with the incarnation of Jesus. It is about a different personification altogether.
In my stumbling, bumbling way, I am trying to make evident that the logos of John's writing is not the man Jesus, and John never says it is. In fact, it was John who explained in another place [Rev 3:12][Rev 19:12-13] that “The logos of God” is to be a new name given to Christ at some later time.
The Greek word “kainon” translated “new” means not previously known, or used. It was not applied to Jesus at his birth, (called “incarnation” by trinitarians), but was still a new name previously unknown when John wrote the Apokalypse in 69 a.d., some 39 years after the birth of Jesus.
I don't know how much you know about the ancient New Testament manuscripts, but they were produced by inspiration of the Holy Spirit in a certain chronological order, about which we are told to “Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the logos of truth.”[II Tim 2:15]. Paul also tells us
“For we are not as many, which corrupt the logos of God…”[II Cor 2:17].This doctrine of trinity began long before the council of Chalcedon in 451, andhad its roots in the corrupting of the logos of God while Paul was still alive to warn against it. But the Early Church Fathers were enticed by Satan to change the chronologicla order of the manuscripts, so that hwnever new converts came in to be instructed from the scriptures, it was not in the order in which the holy Spiorit inspired them to be written. It was changed, by placing the four gospels first, then the Acts of the Apoistles, followed by the epistles of Paul, etc.
This radically alterred forever, the way the new converts were taught about the logos of God, corrupting its true application from scripture into a false teaching and resulting in the murder of thousands of saints as they fought for centuries to halt the progress of Satan's aggenda.
Paul wrote in 48 a.d. “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]
And
“My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you,” [Gal 4:19]
Do you see it Mike? Paul is preaching a concept of Christ being formed in the saint, living in the saint. This concept paul preaches to the whole world. It must be important and significant, don't you think? Wait till you see what Paul names this concept.
Later, in 55 a.d., Paul wrote “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?”
See the pattern of sound doctrine being developed? “…in doctrine shewing uncorruptness…”[Titus 2:7]
See the pattern of sound doctrine being corrupted? “For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;” [II Tim 4:3]
See Satan's aggenda progress here Mike? First, the teachers corrupt the logos, then the students seek out teachers that have abandoned the true doctrine. And how did they abandon it? by changing the order of the manuscriptts. First, they placed Mathew's gospel in the front so they could claim Peter as the teacher to the Gentiles, and as the authority who decides what is truth and what is not. Then they placed John at the front (4th gospel) to show the logos as the personified pre-existant Christ.
But Paul continued as he teaches in a different chronology –
In 60 a.d. he wrote – “And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wic
ked works, yet now hath he reconciled 22 In the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight: 23 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;” [Col 1:21-23]Paul said they were not to move away from the hope of the gospel, which was preached to every creature under heaven. He has warned about teachers who currupt the logos of God; he has warned about new converts searching out these false teachers, to tickle their itching ears; and he has defined “the logos of God” and it's personification, in the following statement
“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 fully preach 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, the hope of glory:” [Col 1:21-27]
John then (69 a.d.) tells us “the logos of God” is to be a new name given to Jesus at some undisclosed time. When John in 96 a.d. writes his gospel, he is reminded of this by inspiration of the Holy spirit, and applies this as a name to Jesus, it is not what and who Jesus is, it is a name given to him as a reminder to us, that when we submit our life to Jesus, so that it is no longer I that live, but Christ lives in me, the logos of God (the concept of Christ living in me) is personified again, and is so every time a new saint submits his life to the “New and living way” of Christ in me.
No other apostle could have applied this name to jesus, because it was not applied at his birth, which they covered in their accounts, but John wrote over sixty years after the fact, and knew about the “new name” and its personification in the lives of the saints. “And the logos became flesh and dwelled among us.”
John's reference to “in the beginning” was the same beginning referenced by Jesus whan he said – “But these things have I told you, that when the time shall come, ye may remember that I told you of them. And these things I said not unto you at the beginning, because I was with you.” [Johnn 16:4]
The “logos of God” must be separated in Christian's minds or they will forever waste their time wrestling with trinity doctrine and corrupting the logos of God,
I hope this lengthy post clears up the issue of the incarnation of Messiah beginning in Gen 17 rather than in John 1.
Quote peace and love, mike And grace and hope to you Mike.
Paladin! Incarnation simple means in the flesh. Jesus became a man by Maria. Jesus is The Word of God. A title just like God is. Both have other names. I do agree that the promise of the Messiah comes through all generation. But not from all eternity. I doubt that Jesus knew that God chose Him when God brought forth His only begotten Son. I know you don't believe Proverbs talks about Jesus, but I do and so do others.
In John 17 Jesus asked His Father to go back to the glory (endoxazo') which they had before the world was. In verse 4 He said I have finished the work(arzah) which you gave me. I noticed
that in the Greek and in German you have dots which the English language does not have.
Also in
Hbr 1:5 ¶ For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?
Hbr 1:6 And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.
Hbr 1:7 And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire.
Hbr 1:8 But unto the Son [he saith], Thy throne, O God, [is] for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness [is] the sceptre of thy kingdom.Hbr 1:9 Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, [even] thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.
Hbr 1:10 And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands:
These Scriptures teach us a lot. First that Almighty God calls Jesus God, and that Jesus created all by the power of Almighty God. All these Scriptures go with
John 1:1-14
Rev. 19:13-16
Prov. 8:22-30There are also LORD and Lord. Meaning LORD being Jehovah God and lord being Yeshua……Jesus….
I will continue my Study on the Greek. Hopefully I will understand it soon…..My old mind rather stay with English, which since 1955 I learned. Still know my Homelands language German. Gutten tag mein Herr, bis spaeter….Irene
Paladin………..We had a Poster here Named Martian and he brought out that also that in the Hebrew mind set , when God said some thing it was as if it had already occurred. Like you brought out where GOD told Abraham he made (past tense) Abraham a father of many nations. When God prophesies something it is as if it were already done. Jesus was that prophesied SEED to come spoken to Abraham and also to Eve and indeed it did not take place until it took place though.
Peter said it correctly i believe, he said “Jesus was 'FOREORDAINED” (BUT) was “MANIFESTED” in our time”. to me is accurate portrayal of Jesus. He was not a “PREEXISTING BEING” as Trinitarian and PREEXISTENCES think. These teaching's work to SEPARATE Jesus from his EXACT Identity with Us as Human begins, it destroys the very foundation of our relationship with God and Jesus and as John said it is the Spirit (intellect) of Antichrist, it also creates the Man of SIN mentioned in 2 Ths 2. The “MAN of SIN” is not a real person it is the FALSE “IMAGE” or a LIE of PORTRAYING Jesus as a GOD, or demigod or some super angle of some kind who was “INCARNATED” OR MORPHED into a Human being.
Any way i am glad your are here to help clarify up some of these things.
Peace and love to you and yours………………………………………gene
Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Mar. 07 2011,01:59) Paladin………..We had a Poster here Named Martian and he brought out that also that in the Hebrew mind set , when God said some thing it was as if it had already occurred. Like you brought out where GOD told Abraham he made (past tense) Abraham a father of many nations. When God prophesies something it is as if it were already done. Jesus was that prophesied SEED to come spoken to Abraham and also to Eve and indeed it did not take place until it took place though. Peter said it correctly i believe, he said “Jesus was 'FOREORDAINED” (BUT) was “MANIFESTED” in our time”. to me is accurate portrayal of Jesus. He was not a “PREEXISTING BEING” as Trinitarian and PREEXISTENCES think. These teaching's work to SEPARATE Jesus from his EXACT Identity with Us as Human begins, it destroys the very foundation of our relationship with God and Jesus and as John said it is the Spirit (intellect) of Antichrist, it also creates the Man of SIN mentioned in 2 Ths 2. The “MAN of SIN” is not a real person it is the FALSE “IMAGE” or a LIE of PORTRAYING Jesus as a GOD, or demigod or some super angle of some kind who was “INCARNATED” OR MORPHED into a Human being.
Any way i am glad your are here to help clarify up some of these things.
Peace and love to you and yours………………………………………gene
Well my friend, you seem to have a pretty good grasp of things. Keep up the studies.And grace and hope to you.
Quote (Baker @ Mar. 07 2011,01:57) Quote (Paladin @ Mar. 06 2011,19:04) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Mar. 06 2011,10:48) Quote (Paladin @ Mar. 05 2011,16:27) Therefore, the “incarnation” of Jesus began with Adam, according to the geneologies in the new testament, and began with “the woman” of Gen 3:15 according to the messianic prophecies. This completely destroys the trinitarian perspective that Jesus was “incarnated” at his birth from Mary. Hey Paladin,
I'm all for “destroying trinitarian perspectives”!
But we must be thinking of “incarnate” differently. The following is the first definition from Dictionary.com:embodied in flesh; given a body, especially a human, form: a devil incarnate.
Their example of “a devil incarnate” refers to a living person, not a “seed” that is still thousands of years away from becoming a flesh and blood person.
I understand Jesus to be “incarnated” when he began to have flesh of his own, which would have been as a fetus in Mary. But I could also understand it to mean the day he was born in the flesh. Either would work for me.
But I'm not on board with you that Jesus was “incarnated” in the days of Adam and Eve…………..or in the days of Abraham. Nor do I see how Jesus being “incarnated” in the days of Eve would make any difference to the trinitarians. It doesn't answer their claim that Jesus was God Almighty, but came in the flesh as a man. Isn't their claim the same no matter WHEN you move the time of incarnation to?
Maybe I'm missing something?
You are correct Mike, in that I introduced the concept of Christ in eternity; however, the incarnation of Christ from eternity was the theme of the OP. I sometimes have difficulty stating clearly, the issue. Thanks you for pointing out the truth of the matter.
The issue I should have raised, is actually one of the personification of prophecy; i.e., Look to Gen 17:4-5 for the issue personified [incarnated].
“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.
In this simple two-verse statement, God demonstrates for all time, the power of his prophetic word. Paul expresses it this way: “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.”[ Rom 4:17]
Paul encapsulates the two-verse issue very succinctly, in one verse; i.e., When God pronounces a thing in prophecy, it becomes as true as though it is already reality, even if it is scheduled to happen thousands of years into the future.
My issue is how to personify the prophecy of Gen 17:4-5, which is the reality of the fulfillment of the seed promise personified in Gal 3:16 – “Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.”
This fulfillment in Christ did not begin with Mat 1:20, but in Gen 17:4-5, when in two verses he progressed from “Shall make” to “have made” and “called those things which were not, as though they were.”[Rom 4:17][Gal 3:16]
I am trying to show that the personification described in John 1:1-3,14 has nothing to do with the incarnation of Jesus. It is about a different personification altogether.
In my stumbling, bumbling way, I am trying to make evident that the logos of John's writing is not the man Jesus, and John never says it is. In fact, it was John who explained in another place [Rev 3:12][Rev 19:12-13] that “The logos of God” is to be a new name given to Christ at some later time.
The Greek word “kainon” translated “new” means not previously known, or used. It was not applied to Jesus at his birth, (called “incarnation” by trinitarians), but was still a new name previously unknown when John wrote the Apokalypse in 69 a.d., some 39 years after the birth of Jesus.
I don't know how much you know about the ancient New Testament manuscripts, but they were produced by inspiration of the Holy Spirit in a certain chronological order, about which we are told to “Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the logos of truth.”[II Tim 2:15]. Paul also tells us
“For we are not as many, which corrupt the logos of God…”[II Cor 2:17].This doctrine of trinity began long before the council of Chalcedon in 451, andhad its roots in the corrupting of the logos of God while Paul was still alive to warn against it. But the Early Church Fathers were enticed by Satan to change the chronologicla order of the manuscripts, so that hwnever new converts came in to be instructed from the scriptures, it was not in the order in which the holy Spiorit inspired them to be written. It was changed, by placing the four gospels first, then the Acts of the Apoistles, followed by the epistles of Paul, etc.
This radically alterred forever, the way the new converts were taught about the logos of God, corrupting its true application from scripture into a false teaching and resulting in the murder of thousands of saints as they fought for centuries to halt the progress of Satan's aggenda.
Paul wrote in 48 a.d. “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]
And
“My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you,” [Gal 4:19]
Do you see it Mike? Paul is preaching a concept of Christ being formed in the saint, living in the saint. This concept paul preaches to the whole world. It must be important and significant, don't you think? Wait till you see what Paul names this concept.
Later, in 55 a.d., Paul wrote “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?”
See the pattern of sound doctrine being developed? “…in doctrine shewing uncorruptness…”[Titus 2:7]
See the pattern of sound doctrine being corrupted? “For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;” [II Tim 4:3]
See Satan's aggenda progress here Mike? First, the teachers corrupt the logos, then the students seek out teachers that have abandoned the true doctrine. And how did they abandon it? by changing the order of the manuscriptts. First, they placed Mathew's gospel in the front so they could claim Peter as the teacher to the Gentiles, and as the authority who decides what is truth and what is not. Then they pla
ced John at the front (4th gospel) to show the logos as the personified pre-existant Christ.But Paul continued as he teaches in a different chronology –
In 60 a.d. he wrote – “And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled 22 In the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight: 23 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;” [Col 1:21-23]Paul said they were not to move away from the hope of the gospel, which was preached to every creature under heaven. He has warned about teachers who currupt the logos of God; he has warned about new converts searching out these false teachers, to tickle their itching ears; and he has defined “the logos of God” and it's personification, in the following statement
“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 fully preach 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, the hope of glory:” [Col 1:21-27]
John then (69 a.d.) tells us “the logos of God” is to be a new name given to Jesus at some undisclosed time. When John in 96 a.d. writes his gospel, he is reminded of this by inspiration of the Holy spirit, and applies this as a name to Jesus, it is not what and who Jesus is, it is a name given to him as a reminder to us, that when we submit our life to Jesus, so that it is no longer I that live, but Christ lives in me, the logos of God (the concept of Christ living in me) is personified again, and is so every time a new saint submits his life to the “New and living way” of Christ in me.
No other apostle could have applied this name to jesus, because it was not applied at his birth, which they covered in their accounts, but John wrote over sixty years after the fact, and knew about the “new name” and its personification in the lives of the saints. “And the logos became flesh and dwelled among us.”
John's reference to “in the beginning” was the same beginning referenced by Jesus whan he said – “But these things have I told you, that when the time shall come, ye may remember that I told you of them. And these things I said not unto you at the beginning, because I was with you.” [Johnn 16:4]
The “logos of God” must be separated in Christian's minds or they will forever waste their time wrestling with trinity doctrine and corrupting the logos of God,
I hope this lengthy post clears up the issue of the incarnation of Messiah beginning in Gen 17 rather than in John 1.
Quote peace and love, mike And grace and hope to you Mike.[/quote]
Paladin! Incarnation simple means in the flesh. Jesus became a man by Maria. Jesus is The Word of God. A title just like God is. Both have other names. I do agree that the promise of the Messiah comes through all generation. But not from all eternity. I doubt that Jesus knew that God chose Him when God brought forth His only begotten Son. I know you don't believe Proverbs talks about Jesus, but I do and so do others.
In John 17 Jesus asked His Father to go back to the glory (endoxazo') which they had before the world was. In verse 4 He said I have finished the work(arzah) which you gave me. I noticed
that in the Greek and in German you have dots which the English language does not have.
Also in
Hbr 1:5 ¶ For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?
Hbr 1:6 And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.
Hbr 1:7 And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire.
Hbr 1:8 But unto the Son [he saith], Thy throne, O God, [is] for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness [is] the sceptre of thy kingdom.Hbr 1:9 Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, [even] thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.
Hbr 1:10 And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands:
These Scriptures teach us a lot. First that Almighty God calls Jesus God, and that Jesus created all by the power of Almighty God. All these Scriptures go with
John 1:1-14
Rev. 19:13-16
Prov. 8:22-30There are also LORD and Lord. Meaning LORD being Jehovah God and lord being Yeshua……Jesus….
I will continue my Study on the Greek. Hopefully I will understand it soon…..My old mind rather stay with English, which since 1955 I learned. Still know my Homelands language German. Gutten tag mein Herr, bis spaeter….Irene
I cannot at this time go into all the problems with your post dear sister, because time forbids, and space limits. I think if you will check out the issues already discussed on my posts, your plate will be sufficiently full for a little while.Grace and hope to you and yours from me and mine.
Quote (Paladin @ Mar. 06 2011,02:04)
I hope this lengthy post clears up the issue of the incarnation of Messiah beginning in Gen 17 rather than in John 1.
Well, it IS lengthy, I'll grant you that!
And I understand that when God speaks of some future happening, it is like it is already accomplished, because God says, “whatever I say will be fulfilled”. (Ezekiel 12:28)But we must keep this in perspective. God foretold about His coming messiah Cyrus 400 years before he was born. But I believe it to be a far stretch to assert that Cyrus actually began to live or exist 400 years before he was born.
Quote (Paladin @ Mar. 06 2011,02:04)
John then (69 a.d.) tells us “the logos of God” is to be a new name given to Jesus at some undisclosed time. When John in 96 a.d. writes his gospel, he is reminded of this by inspiration of the Holy spirit, and applies this as a name to Jesus,
I realize Revelation was written years before John's Gospel. But I believe you are mistaken, because “Word of God” is not the new name Jesus has been given.Revelation 19
12 His eyes are like blazing fire, and on his head are many crowns. He has a name written on him that no one knows but he himself. 13 He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God.16 On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written:
KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS.Jesus has been called by many names throughout scripture. The Word of God is one of those names we DO know about. But you are confusing this name with his new name that he will write on those who overcome. (Rev 3:12) The “Word of God” is not this NEW name, that “NO ONE KNOWS BUT HE HIMSELF”.
Paladin, Jesus was the main spokesman of his God. And as such, he had the title “Word of God”. In fact, the spokesmen for the ancient kings of a country called Abyssinia were called by the title “the word of the king”. I'm sure there are more instances of this, but I haven't really looked into it, because I am convinced that “Word of God” is a title implying Jesus is God's main spokesman, out of the many He has sent.
Anyway, John 1:1-3 speaks of someone who had the title “the Word” being with God in the beginning. And 1:14 clearly says this Word became flesh. John the Baptist spoke of being unfit to untie the sandal of this Word. The Word IS Jesus, as we know. And inspired scripture tell us that this Word was with God in the beginning, and then became flesh. Later, this Word asks God to glorify HIM with the glory HE had at God's side before the creation of the world.
mike
Mike………What you are not getting is, you are not saying the Words Jesus Spoke are GOD'S Words, you and others are saying HE (IS) the WORD of GOD, trying to give Jesus a status (EQUAL TO GOD). Being called the word of GOD is quite different then (BEING) the WORD of GOD, Jesus plainly said the Words he told us (WERE NOT “HIS” WORDS). God's words (ARE) GOD'S Words, (NOT) Jesus' WORDS, Just as your Word are not MY words BUT YOUR WORDS. It is no difference if I or YOU or any one else QUOTES GOD'S WORDS they still are GOD”S WORDS. The Word of GOD did Not BECOME FLESH (IT) came to be (IN) a Flesh Man Jesus the Christ. Your tied to that way of thinking because you believe Jesus Preexisted His Berth as a BEING before he was ever born and you false belief that Jesus was the one GOD created everything Through so you add to that false belief you idea that Jesus was (the) word of GOD.
Mike you have no idea how your Preexistence thinking screws up you thinking about Jesus as OUR true Brother and as a PURE HUMAN BEING the first from MAN KIND to inherit eternal Life by overcoming and attaining to the resurrection from the DEAD. Can't you even reason that if he already had eternal life in some past preexistence he would not have DIED in the first place. HE Attained to his eternal Life Position he did not have it until he attained it.
Mike Paladin is right on this and i don't rally think the truth is what you are really seeking here but as Irene and Terricca, your just trying to bulldog your way through this because i believe you just can't except that you are truly wrong except on you own terms. That is all you and Irene and Tericca's responces do is drive away true Scholarship from this site. IMO
gene
Mike………..As i said better you keep quite and let people think you a fool the to open your mouth and show them your really are one right “LITTLE MAN”?
gene
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Mar. 07 2011,02:50) Quote (Paladin @ Mar. 06 2011,02:04)
I hope this lengthy post clears up the issue of the incarnation of Messiah beginning in Gen 17 rather than in John 1.
Well, it IS lengthy, I'll grant you that! And I understand that when God speaks of some future happening, it is like it is already accomplished, because God says, “whatever I say will be fulfilled”. (Ezekiel 12:28)But we must keep this in perspective. God foretold about His coming messiah Cyrus 400 years before he was born. But I believe it to be a far stretch to assert that Cyrus actually began to live or exist 400 years before he was born.[/quote]
What do you mean “we must keep this in perspective?” THAT was “a perspective” I was giving you. I do not see why you scoff at a couple of thousand years or so of seed passing from generation to generation, and it becomes a “keep it in perspective” scenario, but you have no problem with “in the beginning was” referencing eternity. no “perspective” there at all.
Quote (Paladin @ Mar. 06 2011,02:04)
John then (69 a.d.) tells us “the logos of God” is to be a new name given to Jesus at some undisclosed time. When John in 96 a.d. writes his gospel, he is reminded of this by inspiration of the Holy spirit, and applies this as a name to Jesus,I realize Revelation was written years before John's Gospel. But I believe you are mistaken, because “Word of God” is not the new name Jesus has been given.
Revelation 19:12 His eyes are like blazing fire, and on his head are many crowns. He has a name written on him that no one knows but he himself. 13 He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God.
16 On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written:
KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS.Jesus has been called by many names throughout scripture. The Word of God is one of those names we DO know about. But you are confusing this name with his new name that he will write on those who overcome. (Rev 3:12) The “Word of God” is not this NEW name, that “NO ONE KNOWS BUT HE HIMSELF”.
Paladin, Jesus was the main spokesman of his God. And as such, he had the title “Word of God”. In fact, the spokesmen for the ancient kings of a country called Abyssinia were called by the title “the word of the king”. I'm sure there are more instances of this, but I haven't really looked into it, because I am convinced that “Word of God” is a title implying Jesus is God's main spokesman, out of the many He has sent.
Anyway, John 1:1-3 speaks of someone who had the title
“the Word” being with God in the beginning. [/quote]Absolutely positively not. Nothing is said in John's gospel about “In the beginning was the name logos of God.” John is speaking about the logos, not a name “logos.” Nor did John say “In the beginning was the title “logos.” John said “in the beginning was the logos. And Jesus was with the disciples “in the beginning” so we know it was not the creation beginning, but the gospel beginning.
Besides losing all “perspective” from the standpoint of what scripture actually says, your “perspective” is not a perspective, it is a total misread of John's introductory remarks.
As for the name which is above every name, it has to be something to do with the logion of god, which means it is either logos or reema; because the logion is the oracles of God, which includes both the concepts and ideas, as well as the written account of inspired scripture. God placed his logion above his own name. [Psa 138:2] Nothing else in scripture ever makes this connection. The logion of God is the only thing about which is said, it was placed above God's own name. It therefore is the only thing that qualifies to serve as a name which is above every name, which was given to Jesus, according to Phil 2:9-10 – Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: 10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;”
“name of Jesus” in verse 10 is not the name “Jesus” but
“Jesus” is in the genitive, therefore, references a name
“belonging to” Jesus; a name he was given, and which is above every name, which means it must be a name somewhere referenced in scripture above the very name of Jehovah itself. Nothing else in scripture qualifies.Quote And 1:14 clearly says this Word became flesh. John the Baptist spoke of being unfit to untie the sandal of this Word. The Word IS Jesus, as we know. You have just rewritten scripture my friend, for John says no such thing as you have put into the record. When John references the shoe latchet he is answering the Jews question as to why he came baptizing in Jordan.
He told the crowd that it was so he could recognize the man God was sending. “Watch for the sign” he was told. It had nothing to do with the logos, which was already accounted for by Paul's writings over thirty years prior to John's writings.
(see previous posts)You really should understand, my friend, the “logos of God” was being corrupted [II Cor 2:17]; Jesus was never corrupted.
Quote And inspired scripture tell us that this Word was with God in the beginning, and then became flesh. Later, this Word asks God to glorify HIM with the glory HE had at God's side before the creation of the world. You have no verse anywhere in scripture where “this Word asks God to glorify HIM with the glory HE had at God's side before the creation of the world.”
No scripture ever calls Jesus the logos. He was given a name that was higher than the name Jehovah, and “the logos of God” was the only name referenced in scripture that qualified, and was given to Jesus as a name, previously unknown.
Paladin
you say;You really should understand, my friend, the “logos of God” was being corrupted [II Cor 2:17]; Jesus was never corrupted.
2Co 2:17 Unlike so many, we do not peddle the word of God for profit. On the contrary, in Christ we speak before God with sincerity, like men sent from God.
how is that ??Pierre
Baker,Mar. wrote:[/quote]
Hello again dear sister. I have more time now and will try to express why your post is not accurately presenting truth.Quote Paladin! Incarnation simple means in the flesh. Actually my friend, “carnal” means “in the flesh” – incarnation means “to become” or “to be made flesh.”
Quote I know you don't believe Proverbs talks about Jesus, but I do and so do others. You have no reason to believe any such thing. If you mean to say that I do not believe Proverb 8 references Jesus, you would be correct, but that is not the only proverb. If you mean I do not believe there are any Messianic proverbs, you would be in error, because I do not know all the Messianic connections in scripture yet. Some of them may be in Proverbs. Until I resolve it, I do not believe nor disbelieve it.
There is no point in dealing with the Messianic prophecies fulfilled in the new Teatament until you acknowledge the truth of the old testament passages I covered in earlier posts that show why the new testament cannot be saying “God is plural,” and “Jesus is God, co-equal with the Father.”
All that does is swap scriptural teaching with doctrine. No one ever gets anywhere doing that. If God wanted us to understand the claims made for the new testament before we understand what is possible in the old, he would have written the new first, but he did not do that. So, dear sister, we must first have a good working klnowledge of the old covenant, which covers both testaments, before we can understand the new testament. (By the way, both
“testament” and “covenant” are translated from the same Greek word, so once more we must rely on the translators understanding, which contributes to a great deal of stress.)Quote There are also LORD and Lord. Meaning LORD being Jehovah God and lord being Yeshua……Jesus…. Nope! Not what it means. It means men have more influence over what we are supposed to understand than God does. The use of capital and small letters was not in the original manuscripts, nor was punctuation, nor chapter and verse divisions. All of those things were added much later.
Quote I will continue my Study on the Greek. Hopefully I will understand it soon…..My old mind rather stay with English, which since 1955 I learned. Still know my Homelands language German. Gutten tag mein Herr, bis spaeter….Irene You might appreciate my stepmother who is from Germany. She is two years older than I and is quite a person. I have learned to love her dearly as a friend. (She makes me spaetzel when I go to Vermont)
I will continue to study English as well as Greek and Hebrew. And no, English is not a foreign language to me, it is a continually modifying language, and requires continual adaptation for me to know what the younger generation is talking about. Sometimes the kids sound like they are speaking from another world.
Grace and hope to you and yours from me and mine
Quote (Paladin @ Mar. 07 2011,08:22) Baker,Mar. wrote:[/quote]
Hello again dear sister. I have more time now and will try to express why your post is not accurately presenting truth.Quote Paladin! Incarnation simple means in the flesh. Actually my friend, “carnal” means “in the flesh” – incarnation means “to become” or “to be made flesh.”
Quote I know you don't believe Proverbs talks about Jesus, but I do and so do others. You have no reason to believe any such thing. If you mean to say that I do not believe Proverb 8 references Jesus, you would be correct, but that is not the only proverb. If you mean I do not believe there are any Messianic proverbs, you would be in error, because I do not know all the Messianic connections in scripture yet. Some of them may be in Proverbs. Until I resolve it, I do not believe nor disbelieve it.
There is no point in dealing with the Messianic prophecies fulfilled in the new Teatament until you acknowledge the truth of the old testament passages I covered in earlier posts that show why the new testament cannot be saying “God is plural,” and “Jesus is God, co-equal with the Father.”
All that does is swap scriptural teaching with doctrine. No one ever gets anywhere doing that. If God wanted us to understand the claims made for the new testament before we understand what is possible in the old, he would have written the new first, but he did not do that. So, dear sister, we must first have a good working klnowledge of the old covenant, which covers both testaments, before we can understand the new testament. (By the way, both
“testament” and “covenant” are translated from the same Greek word, so once more we must rely on the translators understanding, which contributes to a great deal of stress.)Quote There are also LORD and Lord. Meaning LORD being Jehovah God and lord being Yeshua……Jesus…. Nope! Not what it means. It means men have more influence over what we are supposed to understand than God does. The use of capital and small letters was not in the original manuscripts, nor was punctuation, nor chapter and verse divisions. All of those things were added much later.
Quote I will continue my Study on the Greek. Hopefully I will understand it soon…..My old mind rather stay with English, which since 1955 I learned. Still know my Homelands language German. Gutten tag mein Herr, bis spaeter….Irene You might appreciate my stepmother who is from Germany. She is two years older than I and is quite a person. I have learned to love her dearly as a friend. (She makes me spaetzel when I go to Vermont)
I will continue to study English as well as Greek and Hebrew. And no, English is not a foreign language to me, it is a continually modifying language, and requires continual adaptation for me to know what the younger generation is talking about. Sometimes the kids sound like they are speaking from another world.
Grace and hope to you and yours from me and mine
Paladin! I have studied the Old Covenant the Ten Commandments in
Exd 34:27 ¶ And the LORD said unto Moses, Write thou these words: for after the tenor of these words I have made a covenant with thee and with Israel.Exd 34:28 And he was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments.
Exd 31:16 Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the sabbath, to observe the sabbath throughout their generations, [for] a perpetual covenant.
Exd 31:17 It [is] a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for [in] six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed.
I am showing you this because most think that the Sabbath is a direct Commandment for us, which it is not, unless you are a Jew.Luk 22:20 Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup [is] the new Covenant in my blood, which is shed for you.
Then Jesus gave us the great Commandments in
Mat 22:36 Master, which [is] the great commandment in the law?Mat 22:37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
Mat 22:38 This is the first and great commandment.
Mat 22:39 And the second [is] like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
Mat 22:40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
In the footnotes of our Rye Study Bible it says that the Translators used LORD and Lord, because they did not want to use Gods name in vain….I agree on that, because pronouncing and translating Scriptures into English is not easy. So my friend maybe you need to consider instead.
Besides giving us the great Commandments Jesus also magnified the Law on the Sermon on the Mount.
One more thing, it is God's Holy Spirit that shows us the truth, I have compared so many different Bibles, and find that both the KJV and the Rye Study Bible of KJ comes the closest to the Geek and Hebrew translations, and that is why we use those…..As far as incarnation is, I had goggled it and it said this
Incarnation means “out of flesh born.” Born of flesh. In our Ransom House Dictionary it said this
1 an incarnate being or form.
3 assumption of human form or nature as by a divine being: incarnation of God.
Peace IreneQuote (terraricca @ Mar. 07 2011,07:42) Paladin you say;You really should understand, my friend, the “logos of God” was being corrupted [II Cor 2:17]; Jesus was never corrupted.
2Co 2:17 Unlike so many, we do not peddle the word of God for profit. On the contrary, in Christ we speak before God with sincerity, like men sent from God.
how is that ??Pierre
Not KJVQuote (Paladin @ Mar. 05 2011,00:29) Quote (Baker @ Mar. 04 2011,20:43) [/quote] Quote (Paladin @ Mar. 04 2011,20:29) Gene wrote:Quote Paladin………..Have you thought of this, If (ONE)GOD were a composite of SEVEN SPIRITS As revelations seems to indicate would that not meet the singular,plural concept of GOD also. Also we have Scripture where Jesus said in Prayer “FOR THOU ART THE (ONLY) TRUE GOD.” I think of that reference in the same perspective as when I speak of “spirits of Camphor.” It is not that Camphor has a plurality of spirits, but rather it is a reference to the elementary basis of a substance.
“The seven spirits of God” is simply a way of referrencing the fact that God, who is spirit, is not limited to where He is able to go, or how many times He can share himself with his creation. Remember, the number seven is used to reference completion or perfection.
When God “pours forth of his spirit” upon all mankind, he still can “pour out his spirit on the prophets” without diminishing Himself. I think tha tis what that is about.
Quote I did a word study once on the word GOD and a Hebrew Scholar named Jeff Beanner in his research said the ancient Pictorial language of the ancient Hebrews showed the word for God as a Head of a OX with a Staff beside it. The OX represent (POWERS) and the Staff was something they lend on for support. So the word seem to imply Power to force or forge and while men can posses some of that power it is God the Father alone who posses it all. The ALL MIGHTY GOD or POWER. Would like to know you thoughts on this brother.
That perspective displays very well, the difference between
“El Shaddai” (El Jehovah God) and El Gibbowr (son of the virgin); i.e., the difference between “mighty God” of Isaiah, and “almighty God” of Genesis etc.Quote peace and love to you and yours…….gene And grace and hope to you and yours from me and mine
(I)
Quote With that I agree. God has no limits. To limit God is not
The self-existing one.
The everlasting one
The Immortal one.
God does not depend on any one or any thing. He has always existed.1Ti 1:17 Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, [be] honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen.
That reminds me of the Proverbs when some think it is Wisdom in
Pro 8:22 ¶ The LORD possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old. 23 I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was. 24 When [there were] no depths, I was brought forth; when [there were] no fountains abounding with water. 25 Before the mountains were settled, before the hills was I brought forth: 26 While as yet he had not made the earth, nor the fields, nor the highest part of the dust of the world. 27 When he prepared the heavens, I [was] there: when he set a compass upon the face of the depth: 28 When he established the clouds above: when he strengthened the fountains of the deep: 29 When he gave to the sea his decree, that the waters should not pass his commandment: when he appointed the foundations of the earth: 30 Then I was by him, [as] one brought up [with him]: and I was daily [his] delight, rejoicing always before him;
The KJV says in verse 30 “Then I was beside Him, as a master Craftsman. etc.”
That also shows that Jesus preexisted His birth on earth.
(P) “Then I was by him, as one brought up with him: and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him;” [Prov 8:30 KJV]
I don't see it.
Jesus was not wisdom in the eighth Proverb. Paul tells us that Jesus was made wisdom by the Father, but only to Christians; which tells us two things; He was not already wisdom, and he is not wisdom to all the world. Wisdom in the eighth proverb is wisdom to the whole earth, having been involved with the creation thereof.
That this is true is easily confirmed – Jesus was made wisdom – I Cor 1:30] and that he was made wisdom “to us” (Christians) I Cor 1:30] and that he increased in wisdom, while a lad [Luke 2:52] certainly should settle that issue. Wisdom cannot increase in wisdom.
Quote Peace and love Irene And grace and hope to you and yours from me and mine
Paladin, I brought this up, because in my last previous post here you don't exactly believe in Proverbs 8:22-30. Especially verse 30. I don't believe that Jesus was made wisdom, or God for that matter, but had wisdom. Could Jesus not have wisdom to begin with? We do believe that Jesus was a master craftsman, and God's delight daily….periphrasis…8:30 ואהיה אצלו אמון ואהיה שעשעים יום יום משׁחקת לפניו בכל עת
and it is in the Hebrew.
I see it because there are different Scriptures that has taught us that Jesus was un Heaven with His Father, before the world was.
Also as far as LORD and Lord is concerned the trinitarian don't like it, because it shows a different person and not the same all three in one. It would have to say LORD to all three Father, Son and Holy Spirit. And it does not….
Peace IreneQuote (Paladin @ Mar. 07 2011,16:57) Quote (terraricca @ Mar. 07 2011,07:42) Paladin you say;You really should understand, my friend, the “logos of God” was being corrupted [II Cor 2:17]; Jesus was never corrupted.
2Co 2:17 Unlike so many, we do not peddle the word of God for profit. On the contrary, in Christ we speak before God with sincerity, like men sent from God.
how is that ??Pierre
Not KJV
Paladin2Co 2:17 For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ
is this Logos the same than John 1;1??
Pierre
Quote (Baker @ Mar. 07 2011,09:44) Quote Paladin! I have studied the Old Covenant the Ten Commandments in Exd 34:27 ¶ And the LORD said unto Moses, Write thou these words: for after the tenor of these words I have made a covenant with thee and with Israel. Exd 34:28 And he was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments.
Exd 31:16 Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the sabbath to observe the sabbath throughout their generations, [for] a perpetual covenant.
Exd 31:17 It [is] a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for [in] six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed.
I am showing you this because most think that the Sabbath is a direct Commandment for us, which it is not, unless you are a Jew.
Thank you my friend. It shows you care about salvation for others. Did you know the ten commandment law of Moses was not part of the Abrahamic covenant? None of the laws given at Sinai were part of the covenant with Abraham. They are the covenant given by God to the children of Israel as they came out of Egypt.
The new covenant is a continuation of the covenant God made with Abraham, in which the seed of abraham [Christ] is to bless all nations.
Quote In the footnotes of our Rye Study Bible it says that the Translators used LORD and Lord, because they did not want to use Gods name in vain….I agree on that, because pronouncing and translating Scriptures into English is not easy. So my friend maybe you need to consider instead. Only if that were true. The truth is, the entire bible was effected by the decision to use capital letters when the translators had a doctrine to support or establish. If it was limited to only those references to Lord and LORD, I might agree with you. But even the punctuation is misplaced in some passages to establish a doctrinal issue.
Look at the difference between two versions of Rom 9:5, when the comma is placed differently – Romans 9:5 “Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever.”
Romans 9:5
Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all God blessed, for ever.Quote Besides giving us the great Commandments Jesus also magnified the Law on the Sermon on the Mount. Reference please!
Quote One more thing, it is God's Holy Spirit that shows us the truth, I have compared so many different Bibles, and find that both the KJV and the Rye Study Bible of KJ comes the closest to the Greek and Hebrew translations, and that is why we use those….. I use the KJV because I know where many of its errors are, as well as archaic words that no longer have meaning, like for example “rereward.”
Quote As far as incarnation is, I had goggled it and it said this
Incarnation means “out of flesh born.” Born of flesh. In our Ransom House Dictionary it said this
1 an incarnate being or form.
3 assumption of human form or nature as by a divine being: incarnation of God.I don't disagree with that, I just don't think it goes far enough to define a word, and treat it as though the dictionary definition is scripture. I think we are in agreement mostly, on that issue.
Quote Peace Irene And grace and hope
Quote (Paladin @ Mar. 06 2011,14:25)
What do you mean “we must keep this in perspective?” THAT was “a perspective” I was giving you. I do not see why you scoff at a couple of thousand years or so of seed passing from generation to generation, and it becomes a “keep it in perspective” scenario, but you have no problem with “in the beginning was” referencing eternity. no “perspective” there at all.
Hi Paladin,What I “scoff at” is your claim that a seed is an incarnate man. And you shouldn't just “assume” things that I believe. I have never thought, nor said, that “In the beginning” in John 1:1 referred to “eternity”. Jesus was not originally created eternal, or he couldn't have died. His God has now granted him immortality though.
Quote (Paladin @ Mar. 06 2011,14:25)
Absolutely positively not.
About WHAT?
You posted 6 paragraphs from me, and then gave me this vague answer.Quote (Paladin @ Mar. 06 2011,14:25)
Nothing is said in John's gospel about “In the beginning was the name logos of God.” John is speaking about the logos, not a name “logos.” Nor did John say “In the beginning was the title “logos.” John said “in the beginning was the logos. And Jesus was with the disciples “in the beginning” so we know it was not the creation beginning, but the gospel beginning.
Sorry, I have no clue what you're talking about, or why you're differentiating between “logos” and “someone called logos”. It's like saying Genesis 1:1 doesn't refer to someone “called” or “titled” God, but to God.Quote (Paladin @ Mar. 06 2011,14:25)
Besides losing all “perspective” from the standpoint of what scripture actually says, your “perspective” is not a perspective, it is a total misread of John's introductory remarks
Again, that's very vague. Could you expand on it so I know how I'm “misreading” John's introductory remarks?Quote (Paladin @ Mar. 06 2011,14:25)
As for the name which is above every name, it has to be something to do with the logion of god, which means it is either logos or reema; because the logion is the oracles of God, which includes both the concepts and ideas, as well as the written account of inspired scripture.
And how do you know this? Unless you are one who has already overcome the great tribulation and have had that new name of Jesus written on you, then how would you know anything about that name?Quote (Paladin @ Mar. 06 2011,14:25)
God placed his logion above his own name. [Psa 138:2] Nothing else in scripture ever makes this connection. The logion of God is the only thing about which is said, it was placed above God's own name.
Surely you must be kidding? There is NOTHING above God's own Name. Psalm 138:2 has been the subject of much debate, but here are the Greek words from the LXX:emegalunav epi pan onoma to logion sou
They mean: magnify over every name the word of you
Do you see it? Those words say the same thing that these following words say:
Philippians 2:9
Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him [The Word] the name that is above every name,But if you think “above every name” includes God Himself, take a hint from 1 Corinthians 15:27:
For he “has put everything under his feet.” Now when it says that “everything” has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ.
Quote (Paladin @ Mar. 06 2011,14:25)
It therefore is the only thing that qualifies to serve as a name which is above every name, which was given to Jesus,
You're looking for qualification in written scripture of a new name that “NO ONE BUT HE HIMSELF KNOWS”.Quote (Paladin @ Mar. 06 2011,14:25)
a name he was given, and which is above every name, which means it must be a name somewhere referenced in scripture above the very name of Jehovah itself. Nothing else in scripture qualifies.
I can't believe you even think there could be a name above the Name of Jehovah. Who is God's equal?And again, you must not look for this name in scripture. No one but Jesus (and obviously the One who gave it to him) even will know that name until it is written on those who overcome the great tribulation.
Quote (Paladin @ Mar. 06 2011,14:25)
You have just rewritten scripture my friend, for John says no such thing as you have put into the record. When John references the shoe latchet he is answering the Jews question as to why he came baptizing in Jordan.14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.
15 (John testified concerning him. He cried out, saying, “This is the one I spoke about when I said, ‘He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.’”)
27 He is the one who comes after me, the straps of whose sandals I am not worthy to untie.”
Paladin, what “word” became flesh and was seen to have the glory of an only begotten son from a father? What “word” did John say had surpassed him because he was before him? What “word's” sandals w
as John unfit to untie?Quote (Paladin @ Mar. 06 2011,14:25)
You really should understand, my friend, the “logos of God” was being corrupted [II Cor 2:17]; Jesus was never corrupted.
And you should really understand the different meanings of “word”. Many times it referred to the spoken or written words of God. Sometimes, it referred to the title given to the head spokesman of God. You have brought to our attention another instance of this in Psalm 138:2.And the KJV version of 2 Cor 2:17 is wrong. They have corrected it in the NKJV. The word “corrupt” is not in the Greek. The NIV version that Pierre posted for you is correct, as is his assertion that the “word” in this passage is not to be confused with “The Word of God”. An actual spoken “word” of God cannot become flesh and have the glory of His only Son, could it?
Quote (Paladin @ Mar. 06 2011,14:25)
You have no verse anywhere in scripture where “this Word asks God to glorify HIM with the glory HE had at God's side before the creation of the world.”
Well, let's take this in baby steps then………….so we are sure we understand each other. Because if you don't think the “logos” in John 1:1 and 1:14 is Jesus, then I am very interested to understand who it is that you think became flesh and dwelled among us with the glory of an only begotten son.Quote (Paladin @ Mar. 06 2011,14:25)
No scripture ever calls Jesus the logos. He was given a name that was higher than the name Jehovah, and “the logos of God” was the only name referenced in scripture that qualified, and was given to Jesus as a name, previously unknown.
You seem to contradict yourself many times in this post, as shown by this last quote. First you say he WASN'T called “the logos”, but then you say “the logos” is the name given to Jesus.Perhaps you were distracted when you wrote this post?
mike
Paladin, I do agree that some Bibles differ from each other, so what do we do? I think when you can compare more then one Scripture that are the same, then I would go by that Scripture. Even those Greek and Hebrew Translations come in the Original Transcripts. That makes me wonder. Georg says let the Holy Spirit of God teach you. Pray about it too…….We all have to stand before God, and the Translator's to…I know of the punctuation problem. Take the Scripture when Jesus was on the Cross..
Luk 23:43 And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.
Here the coma should be after To day, rather then before. Since all still sleep in their graves; So is the thief….
Peace Irene
Quote (Baker @ Mar. 07 2011,10:08) Quote (Paladin @ Mar. 05 2011,00:29) Quote (Baker @ Mar. 04 2011,20:43) Quote (Paladin @ Mar. 04 2011,20:29) Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Mar. 04 2011,02:20) Quote Paladin………..Have you thought of this, If (ONE)GOD were a composite of SEVEN SPIRITS As revelations seems to indicate would that not meet the singular,plural concept of GOD also. Also we have Scripture where Jesus said in Prayer “FOR THOU ART THE (ONLY) TRUE GOD.” I think of that reference in the same perspective as when I speak of “spirits of Camphor.” It is not that Camphor has a plurality of spirits, but rather it is a reference to the elementary basis of a substance.
“The seven spirits of God” is simply a way of referrencing the fact that God, who is spirit, is not limited to where He is able to go, or how many times He can share himself with his creation. Remember, the number seven is used to reference completion or perfection.
When God “pours forth of his spirit” upon all mankind, he still can “pour out his spirit on the prophets” without diminishing Himself. I think tha tis what that is about.
Quote I did a word study once on the word GOD and a Hebrew Scholar named Jeff Beanner in his research said the ancient Pictorial language of the ancient Hebrews showed the word for God as a Head of a OX with a Staff beside it. The OX represent (POWERS) and the Staff was something they lend on for support. So the word seem to imply Power to force or forge and while men can posses some of that power it is God the Father alone who posses it all. The ALL MIGHTY GOD or POWER. Would like to know you thoughts on this brother.
That perspective displays very well, the difference between
“El Shaddai” (El Jehovah God) and El Gibbowr (son of the virgin); i.e., the difference between “mighty God” of Isaiah, and “almighty God” of Genesis etc.Quote peace and love to you and yours…….gene And grace and hope to you and yours from me and mine
(I)
Quote With that I agree. God has no limits. To limit God is not
The self-existing one.
The everlasting one
The Immortal one.
God does not depend on any one or any thing. He has always existed.1Ti 1:17 Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, [be] honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen.
That reminds me of the Proverbs when some think it is Wisdom in
Pro 8:22 ¶ The LORD possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old. 23 I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was. 24 When [there were] no depths, I was brought forth; when [there were] no fountains abounding with water. 25 Before the mountains were settled, before the hills was I brought forth: 26 While as yet he had not made the earth, nor the fields, nor the highest part of the dust of the world. 27 When he prepared the heavens, I [was] there: when he set a compass upon the face of the depth: 28 When he established the clouds above: when he strengthened the fountains of the deep: 29 When he gave to the sea his decree, that the waters should not pass his commandment: when he appointed the foundations of the earth: 30 Then I was by him, [as] one brought up [with him]: and I was daily [his] delight, rejoicing always before him;
The KJV says in verse 30 “Then I was beside Him, as a master Craftsman. etc.”
That also shows that Jesus preexisted His birth on earth.
(P) “Then I was by him, as one brought up with him: and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him;” [Prov 8:30 KJV]
I don't see it.
Jesus was not wisdom in the eighth Proverb. Paul tells us that Jesus was made wisdom by the Father, but only to Christians; which tells us two things; He was not already wisdom, and he is not wisdom to all the world. Wisdom in the eighth proverb is wisdom to the whole earth, having been involved with the creation thereof.
That this is true is easily confirmed – Jesus was made wisdom – I Cor 1:30] and that he was made wisdom “to us” (Christians) I Cor 1:30] and that he increased in wisdom, while a lad [Luke 2:52] certainly should settle that issue. Wisdom cannot increase in wisdom.
Quote Peace and love Irene And grace and hope to you and yours from me and mine
Paladin, I brought this up, because in my last previous post here you don't exactly believe in Proverbs 8:22-30. Especially verse 30. I don't believe that Jesus was made wisdom, or God for that matter, but had wisdom. Could Jesus not have wisdom to begin with? [/quote]How can wisdom increase in wisdom?
“And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man”[Luke 2:52]How can you deny Jesus was made wisdom?
“But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption:”Quote Peace Irene And grace and hope
Paladin!
1Cr 1:30 But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption:
Made unto us wisdom, is not the same then if you say Jesus was made wisdom. He had wisdom for us so we have Jesus as an example to follow. If you want wisdom, ask for it, and God will give it…..
Peace Irene
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
