- This topic has 3,215 replies, 24 voices, and was last updated 4 years, 7 months ago by
.
- Posts
Quote (terraricca @ Mar. 07 2011,10:12) Quote (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
Paladin
2Co 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]
I am not aware of any references to the logos that are to a different logos than any other. “Logos” means concept, or idea, or word, or matter. It would not make any difference if it was the logos of Pierre, it would be the same logos, unless it tells us it was the logos of God.
The logos referenced in John 1:1 is the same logos referenced in all of scripture. And it can be corrupted, just as Paul tells us some were doing.
Paladin! I read what you said to Pierre. I would agree with you that in John1:1 it is just Logos. But that logos became flesh. He became the Spokesman of God The spoken Word of God. Noone has seen God or heard His voice, and it is always either Jesus or an Angel speaking. If we would not have this
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.
This shows it is Jesus. There is no other being that fits this description.
the Word of God and God are titles. Sorry ui think I already said that, right? well that is what I believe….Peace Irene
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Mar. 07 2011,12:02) 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.(Mike) Hi Paladin,
What I “scoff at” is your claim that a seed is an incarnate man.
Well Mike, that little indefinite article you placed in front of “man” kinda changes the equation. I think you know the difference between “a man” and “man.” If you were to kill a man while robbing him (no insult, bear with me for a moment) and while you waited for him to die, you had your hair cut, and your nails trimmed, and the sweat dropped off of you into a pool of moisture, then he died, and you left the scene, don't you suppose the sherriff could find you with all that DNA you left lying around?
Now consider, Mike, those nails you pared are not “a man,” but they are “man,” and with due proccess they can lead to “a man,” in this case, you, a particular man.
The hairs that fall from your head, the nails that pare from your fingers, the sweat that drops from your body, the blood that may fall from a cut, all are “man.” And what does that say for the seed that passes from generation to generation, in the form of DNA? The DNA that your parents passed to you, which they got from their parents, are “man,” all the way back to Adam. And all the way forward from Adam to YOU.
Now, you can not pass your DNA from one generation to another but for one way only, and that is the seed of begettal. Whether you want to consider it in the DNA stage, or the seed stage does not change the facts of the source, nor the evidence of the target, the story will remain the same, i.e., parent begat child, who grew up and begat child, who grew up and begat child in perpetuity. So, yes, I do claim the seed is man. And God claimed it also, when he said “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.” [Gal 3:16]
How else do you explain God's conversation jumping from Abraham to Christ, skipping over a thousand generations, unless it is through the passing of seed through DNA?
Quote And you shouldn't just “assume” things that I believe. That's fair. So is reciprocity.
Quote I have never thought, nor said, that “In the beginning” in John 1:1 referred to “eternity”. That's aslo fair. I did assume it.
Quote Jesus was not originally created eternal, or he couldn't have died. His God has now granted him immortality though. Well, depends upon what you know about “oikeeteerion.”
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.(Mike) 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.
My grandson's name is “Christian.” Does that automatically qualify him to be identified as “a Christian?” Or do you perceive a subtle difference here?
Jesus was not the logos. He was a man, the seed of Abraham, seed of Isaac, seed of Jacob, seed of Judah, seed of Jesse, seed of David, made of a woman, given a name
“Logos of God” which does not qualify him to be considered
“The logos of God.”“The logos of God” is defined by Paul when he said ” Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the logos of God; 26 Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints: 27 To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you” [Col 1:25-27]
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 remarksAgain, that's very vague. Could you expand on it so I know how I'm “misreading” John's introductory remarks?[/quote]
Well your first clue would be to see what it was in response to. See the following exchange in which the remark took place:
(Mike)
Quote Anyway, John 1:1-3 speaks of someone who had the title “the Word” being with God in the beginning. (Paladin) 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.[/quote]
So, my remark about you misreading John's gospel referenced your remark – “Anyway, John 1:1-3 speaks of someone who had the title “the Word” being with God in the beginning.”
John said nothing whatsoever about “someone who had the title “the word” being in the beginning with God.”
Quote (Paladin @ Mar. 06 2011,14:25)
As for the n
ame 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.(Mike) 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?
Because John tells us right there in the same Apokalypse in which he tells us there is going to be a new name given.
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.
Mike, you are becoming hard to talk to. You cannot even discerrn that there is a difference between God, and God's name? God himself placed his own logion above his own name, then placed everything under the feet of Jesus except God himself. Is that really all that hard to comprehend?
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,(Mike) You're looking for qualification in written scripture of a new name that “NO ONE BUT HE HIMSELF KNOWS”.
Nope. Found it. Not looking for it. John told us what it is going to be.
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.(Mike) I can't believe you even think there could be a name above the Name of Jehovah. Who is God's equal?
So what are you saying Mike, that God's name is equal to God?
Quote And again, you must not look for this name in scripture. Wasn't looking for it. Found it anyway when John revealed it.
Quote 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. And everyone who can read John's revelation.
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 was John unfit to untie?[/quopte]
You haven't understood anything I wrote, have you?
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.(Mike) 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.[/quote]
Wrong. Sometimes the reference is to logos, sometimes to reema, and sometimes to logion. Psalm 138:2 is a reference to logion, not logos.
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,
[/quote]Thanks for the correction.
2585 kaphleuw – Meaning: 1) to be a retailer, to peddle 2) to make money by selling anything 2a) to get sordid gain by dealing in anything, to do a thing for base gain 2b) to trade in the word of God 2b1) to try to get base gain by teaching divine truth 2c) to corrupt, to adulterate 2c1) peddlers were in the habit of adulterating their commodities for the sake of gain –
The translators chose the meaning “to corrupt” and I think I know what that means; therefore am in agreement in this case, with the translators, mainly because there were men corrupting the logos of God.
Quote 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? So you've decided John left out a few words defining “word” as “an actual spoken
word of God.” So you say John menat to write “In the beginning was the actual spoken word of God, and the actual spoken word of God was with God, and the actual spoken word of God was God.”[John 1:1]I don't think so.
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.”(Mike) 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.
I don't think even baby steps will help you Mike. You need to go back through and read the thread, becaus all of this has already been covered more than once.
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?[/quote]Listen very carefully Mike. “In the beginning was the logos” is not a reference to Jesus. It is a reference to a concept in the mind of God, explained by Paul as a reference to a man who no longer lives his own life, but submits to Christ so that Christ lives in him, and Paul calls this exercise in submission and life-living, “the logos of God.”
In 69 a.d. we are told by John Jesus was to be given the name “the logos of God.”
When in 96 a.d. John again writes, and references the logos that was in the beginning with God, and was God, and was with God, he also recalls that tt was a name given to Jesus, and after sixty years of the logos of god becoming lfesh in the lives of the saints who yielded themselves to Christ, John then applies the new name to Jesus AFTER HE TELLS US the logos became flesh, not before.
I think for you to understand what you read you would have had to start when you were a zygote. “Baby” would not even apply.
Paladin ……….. Brother, No matter how clear you put it they Just do not understand nor get it brother. It is as if a mental block has been placed there. It brings me great Joy when i see others who understand the truth of GOD Brother.IMO
peace and love to you and yours…………………………………..gene
Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Mar. 08 2011,00:51) Paladin ……….. Brother, No matter how clear you put it they Just do not understand nor get it brother. It is as if a mental block has been placed there. It brings me great Joy when i see others who understand the truth of GOD Brother.IMO peace and love to you and yours…………………………………..gene
Thank you Gene – and grace and hope to you and yours from me and minePaladin
you say;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.”
=============================
are you ussing the correction in the KJV or are you let the errors prove you point??
so that the ignorant can be misled ?like in 2Cor 2;17 ??
Pierre
Paladin
you say;Listen very carefully Mike. “In the beginning was the logos” is not a reference to Jesus. It is a reference to a concept in the mind of God, explained by Paul as a reference to a man who no longer lives his own life, but submits to Christ so that Christ lives in him, and Paul calls this exercise in submission and life-living, “the logos of God.”
============================================================
are you now saying that you know the mind of God ??and what is in it ??
The Logos” in John 1;1 is Christ it become clear in the fallowing verses;THE WORD is the spook person for all of God creation,
and this is the reflection that comes out of Paul,Peter,John written words,The Word of God was the first creation and will be the one who in the end closes the door by turn all thing even himself to God.
Pierre
Paladin! Tell me how does a Word logos become flesh, if it is not a person, as in this case. I gave you Rev. 19:13-16 which you did not respond to yet. Reading what you said to Mike. I was really surprised that the example you gave of a man, and man.
now consider, Mike, those nails you pared are not “a man,” but they are “man,” and with due proccess they can lead to “a man,” in this case, you, a particular man.(Quote)
The correct way is “a man, “but they are men,”
Sorry friend but in this case you are wrong. This proves it.
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.
There is no other being that fits this description….Peace Irene
PS The Word of God, Lord and LORD, King and God are all titles….
Quote (Paladin @ Mar. 07 2011,06:59) How else do you explain God's conversation jumping from Abraham to Christ, skipping over a thousand generations, unless it is through the passing of seed through DNA?
Paladin,You have suggested that you need “zygot” steps, because you are not yet ready for “baby steps”. Okay, I'll do the best I can.
Did YOU influence the DNA of your father? YES or NO?
Did your father influence YOUR DNA? YES or NO?Why in the world would you think to come FROM the DNA of Eve, Abraham, David and Mary, Jesus would have had to been a part OF that DNA as it moved down the generations? After all, YOU weren't a part of your own DNA as it moved down the generations from Adam and Eve, were you?
And why would you think being a part OF those generations of DNA would qualify Jesus as incarnate anyway?
Jesus was incarnated when he came from the womb of Mary. DNA is NOT an incarnate man, even IF, for some odd reason, Jesus had to be directly involved in the progression of DNA from Eve through Mary in order for God to say this Savior would come from their seed.
Let's become clear on this first point before I explain your many other misconceptions to you, okay?
mike
Paladin………..They just do not understand nor comprehend it , it truly is a wast of time brother.
peace and love to you and yours……………………………………….gene
Quote (terraricca @ Mar. 08 2011,02:10) Quote are you now saying that you know the mind of God ??and what is in it ?? “And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God. [Rom 12:2]
Quote The Logos” in John 1;1 is Christ it become clear in the fallowing verses;THE WORD is the spook person for all of God creation, and this is the reflection that comes out of Paul, Peter, John written words, That's not a verse, that's an opinion.
Quote The Word of God was the first creation and will be the one who in the end closes the door by turn all thing even himself to God. I don't even know what that means.
Pierre
Quote (Baker @ Mar. 08 2011,04:23) Paladin! Tell me how does a Word logos become flesh, if it is not a person, as in this case. I gave you Rev. 19:13-16 which you did not respond to yet. I have discussed Rev 19:12-13 several times on this thread.
Until you understand what I said, it is pointless to discuss further into the reference.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Mar. 08 2011,13:48) Quote Paladin, You have suggested that you need “zygot” steps, because you are not yet ready for “baby steps”. Okay, I'll do the best I can. Until you can learn to correctly quote my post, there is no point in continuing the discussion. Being “cute” won't win friends, but it certainly will influence people. You have managed to influence me with your childish responses. When you get it right, call again.
Quote (Paladin @ Mar. 11 2011,07:42) Quote (terraricca @ Mar. 08 2011,02:10) Quote are you now saying that you know the mind of God ??and what is in it ?? “And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God. [Rom 12:2]
Quote The Logos” in John 1;1 is Christ it become clear in the fallowing verses;THE WORD is the spook person for all of God creation, and this is the reflection that comes out of Paul, Peter, John written words, That's not a verse, that's an opinion.
Quote The Word of God was the first creation and will be the one who in the end closes the door by turn all thing even himself to God. I don't even know what that means.
Pierre
Paladinyou have been very selective in answering my many question by only respond to a few,
this would make me to re post those questions ,and I would like to know if you believe in the preexistence of Christ ,yes or no.
if no, in your answer then explain me why is that ?according to the scripture data base;please
Pierre
Quote (Paladin @ Mar. 10 2011,07:48) mikeboll64,Mar. wrote:[/quote]
Quote Paladin, You have suggested that you need “zygot” steps, because you are not yet ready for “baby steps”. Okay, I'll do the best I can. Until you can learn to correctly quote my post, there is no point in continuing the discussion. Being “cute” won't win friends, but it certainly will influence people. You have managed to influence me with your childish responses. When you get it right, call again.
Paladin,Did YOU influence the DNA of your father? YES or NO?
Did your father influence YOUR DNA? YES or NO?Why in the world would you think to come FROM the DNA of Eve, Abraham, David and Mary, Jesus would have had to been a part OF that DNA as it moved down the generations? After all, YOU weren't a part of your own DNA as it moved down the generations from Adam and Eve, were you?
And why would you think being a part OF those generations of DNA would qualify Jesus as incarnate anyway?
Jesus was incarnated when he came from the womb of Mary. DNA is NOT an incarnate man, even IF, for some odd reason, Jesus had to be directly involved in the progression of DNA from Eve through Mary in order for God to say this Savior would come from their seed.
Let's become clear on this first point before I explain your many other misconceptions to you, okay?
mike
Quote (Paladin @ Feb. 24 2011,18:29) If I understand this “Incarnation” trinity theory, you are telling me that Jesus preexisted with the Father in eternity, then “incarnated” by the Holy spirit in the womb of Mary. Scripture tells a far different story. At least three times in three different accounts, we are told that Jesus is the seed of Adam or the woman (Eve), in Messianic prophecies.
We are told of the seed promise beginning with Gen 3:15, where the woman is told “Thy seed” so the incarnation begins with this woman of prophecy. Then her progeny carry that seed, and passed it on through several generations till Abraham is specifically mentioned by name, as one in a long line of the “seed carriers.” He is promised that “through thy seed” all nations will be blessed. It is similar to the promise first made to “the woman” of Gen 3:15.
Then Abrahams line begins in turn, to carry that seed from father to son to son to son through a long line of seed carriers. It goes in promise through Isaac, Jacob/Israel, Judah, Jesse, David, Mary, of whom it is said Jesus “was made of a woman” just like the promise began way back in Gen 3:15.
If there is indeed an “incarnation” where did it take place. I contend it would have been in the woman of Gen 3:15, because each carrier of the seed would be “carnate” and the seed would be within, or “incarnate.”
The seed had to be passed from generation to generation, for each generation in turn would “excarnate” so the seed would have to have been passed prior to that “excarnation” event.
The passing of the seed is parammount to comprehension of the “incarnation” of the Christ.
Paladin,
Did you not consider John 1:1 and Collossians 1?Jesus created the world, which means he existed before the world began.
Or how about when Jesus said, “before abraham, i am” or something like that.
This has nothing to do with the Trinity.
Quote (terraricca @ Mar. 11 2011,02:52) Quote Paladin – you have been very selective in answering my many question by only respond to a few, I am 76 years old, and tire without warning. I begin cancer treatment in two weeks. I am having too much fun to abandon the obard, with all the new friends I see here. You happen to be one of them, so patience with me will be appreciated.
For all of my friends out there on the board, please pray for me, but do not waste your time felling sorry for me, as God has already blessed me beyond what I had a right to expect. And he still is. As for responding to the posts, As time permits and God wills.
Quote this would make me to re post those questions ,and I would like to know if you believe in the preexistence of Christ ,yes or no. if no, in your answer then explain me why is that? according to the scripture data base;please Christ pre-existed only in prophecy. I realize there are many who do not think of prophetic utterances as a “pre-existant” but I happen to do so; in the same way God said to Abraham, “I shall make you the father of many natiions” followed in the next verse by “A father of many nations I have made you.” God considered the promised Messiah to be as real as his promise; and so did Paul who said “God, who speaks of things not yet as thought they were.”
When Jesus said “Abraham rejoiced to see my day” He was not speaking of Jesus being with Abraham, he was speaking of Abraham's faith as he believed in the promise God made to him. “And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.” [Gal 3:8]
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Mar. 11 2011,11:55) Quote Did YOU influence the DNA of your father? YES or NO?
Did your father influence YOUR DNA? YES or NO?I do not think you understand my previous response. There is no way progeny can “influence” DNA except to pass it on to the next generation, as it is a directional thing, parent to progeny.
But, my friend, prophecy dealing with DNA certainly carries influence, as it delineates God'
To me, prophecy is history in reverse. History is prophecy fulfilled. Once God speaks something into prophecy, it is as good as done. The only thing that changes that sequence is when men repent, God also repents of the evil he intended to pour out upon them. It gets delayed till further evil by those men cause God to bring back the evil he preciously intended to do to them. Ninevah is one example of this. (Jonah was the prophet).
[quotye] DNA is NOT an incarnate man, even IF, for some odd reason, Jesus had to be directly involved in the progression of DNA from Eve through Mary in order for God to say this Savior would come from their seed.[/quote]
Right. BUT, man is comprised of his DNA which he got from his parents. All the prophecies of Messiah's seed line did was lock in whose DNA would produce the promised Messiah. And the only way the babe is “involved” is passively. All else is accomplished by God and the babe's mother; she serving as the vessel by which God keeps his promise.
Quote Let's become clear on this first point before I explain your many other misconceptions to you, okay? I'm clear, are you? If I fail to make myself clear, plese feel free to insist I try again. This stuff is important.
Quote (SimplyForgiven @ Mar. 11 2011,11:59) Quote (Paladin @ Feb. 24 2011,18:29) If I understand this “Incarnation” trinity theory, you are telling me that Jesus preexisted with the Father in eternity, then “incarnated” by the Holy spirit in the womb of Mary. Scripture tells a far different story. At least three times in three different accounts, we are told that Jesus is the seed of Adam or the woman (Eve), in Messianic prophecies.
We are told of the seed promise beginning with Gen 3:15, where the woman is told “Thy seed” so the incarnation begins with this woman of prophecy. Then her progeny carry that seed, and passed it on through several generations till Abraham is specifically mentioned by name, as one in a long line of the “seed carriers.” He is promised that “through thy seed” all nations will be blessed. It is similar to the promise first made to “the woman” of Gen 3:15.
Then Abrahams line begins in turn, to carry that seed from father to son to son to son through a long line of seed carriers. It goes in promise through Isaac, Jacob/Israel, Judah, Jesse, David, Mary, of whom it is said Jesus “was made of a woman” just like the promise began way back in Gen 3:15.
If there is indeed an “incarnation” where did it take place. I contend it would have been in the woman of Gen 3:15, because each carrier of the seed would be “carnate” and the seed would be within, or “incarnate.”
The seed had to be passed from generation to generation, for each generation in turn would “excarnate” so the seed would have to have been passed prior to that “excarnation” event.
The passing of the seed is parammount to comprehension of the “incarnation” of the Christ.
Quote
Paladin, did you not consider John 1:1 and Collossians 1?Hmmm!! How do I respond to a negative question.
If your question is “Did you consider” the answer is yes.
If your question is “did you not consider” the answer is no. I did not not consider.John 1:1 has nothing to do with Jesus. It is dealing with the logos, which was both God and with God. Jesus was not. When John said “And the logos was God” he used inconvertible terms, which means “ho logos” and “theos” are not interchangeable. The necessary consequence of this is, when “ho logos” became flesh[verse 14], “theos” did not.
Quote Jesus created the world, which means he existed before the world began. Nope! Jesus “made all things new” which references the new creation, not the original. Isaiah said “God (singular) monos [alone], created heaven and earth and all that is therein.” Jesus said when he and the Father are together, they are
“ouk monos” [not alone]; so if the Father “monos” created all things, where was Jesus?Quote Or how about when Jesus said, “before abraham, i am” or something like that. That's what Paul was talking about when he said “the Gospel was preached unto Abraham…” And what Jesus was talking about when he said “Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad.” [John 8:56] – It is simply that Abraham was told in prophecy, the gospel story, believed it , and rejoiced for happiness.
Quote This has nothing to do with the Trinity. Agreed! It has everything to do with the promised Messiah, Abraham's reaction to the prophecies, and the fulfillment thereof. There is no trinity.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
