Examination of the incarnation doctrine.

Blocked

Quote (Gene Balthrop @ July 10 2011,10:32)

Problem here is Mike and the other preexistences and Trinitarians whole house of cards come crashing down if they admit to the truth.

Really Gene? I hope you are ready to eat those words if and when Paladin ever mans up and answers the simple question I've been asking him.

Speaking of which, where is YOUR answer to the question? Little men like you don't actually answer questions, do they Gene? No, they slink around the sidelines of the issue saying “I agree with you” when they don't have a clue as to what they're really agreeing with. They just know they want to be on the team that ends up with the same conclusion they've already made their minds up to be the right one – whether the truth supports that conclusion or not. How disappointing it must be to be you Gene.

July 11, 2011 at 9:21 am#251935

Paladin

Participant

Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 11 2011,03:58)

Quote (Gene Balthrop @ July 10 2011,10:32)

Problem here is Mike and the other preexistences and Trinitarians whole house of cards come crashing down if they admit to the truth.

Really Gene? I hope you are ready to eat those words if and when Paladin ever mans up and answers the simple question I've been asking him.

Mike, I apologize for my responses to you of late, fro they do not represent the image of God in me when I say some of the things I have said lately.

I will explain, though the explanation does not escuse, I think you are owed my best, not my worst.

I have had Radiation treatments, as you know, but this goes way beyond the treatments, all the way to medical malpractice. I am consulting an attorney, who wants to meet with me nexct week, so I may be online, or I may stay off till my anger cools.

I have re-read my responses to you and am appalled at the language I haave posted. “Stupid” is not a word I consider applicable to you, yet I see it in several of my recent posts.

Aggravating maybe; “stupid”, never.

I will try to catch up on some of the posts I have missed, and will try to once more reflect the image of God as I post to the image of God on the board.

Please, all, be patient, and forgive, and let us be gentle as toward a brother.

July 11, 2011 at 11:28 am#251942

Participant

Paladin! I am so sorry to hear what you have gone through…….I hope and pray all will turn out good, and you will return to good health. My Husband had to go through Radiation also when He had cancer, but now He is cancer free. I wish you the best….
We will pray for you…..
Peace and Love Irene

July 11, 2011 at 1:05 pm#251953

Participant

Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 11 2011,03:58)

Quote (Gene Balthrop @ July 10 2011,10:32)

Problem here is Mike and the other preexistences and Trinitarians whole house of cards come crashing down if they admit to the truth.

Really Gene? I hope you are ready to eat those words if and when Paladin ever mans up and answers the simple question I've been asking him.

Mike………The only “LITTLE MAN HERE IS YOU” that is obvious according to your words and i have answered you ignorant questions many times as other here have also , but you seem to be so ignorant and unable to understand those answers you are simply blind and appear unable to understand them. I also notice “LITTLE MAN You seem to alway agree with your fellow Preexistence and Kiss UP to T8 becasue he runs this site. So if i were you “LITTLE MAN” I would not accuse anyone Here , when you appear to be the biggest suck up here. IMO

July 12, 2011 at 1:32 am#252033

Blocked

Quote (Paladin @ July 11 2011,03:21)

Aggravating maybe; “stupid”, never.

Good! Then I'm doing my job!

Quote (Paladin @ July 11 2011,03:21)

I will try to catch up on some of the posts I have missed,

I'm only waiting for the answer to one question, and one question ONLY. In fact, I'm about to rephrase that question for Gene in my next post, so you can answer the rephrased one……………when you feel up to it.

Quote (Paladin @ July 11 2011,03:21)

Please, all, be patient, and forgive, and let us be gentle as toward a brother.

Thanks for the apology. All is forgiven. I have also been harsh and also ask for forgiveness.

Paladin, I told you a month ago that I was walking away from you because you bring out the worst in me. But I shouldn't ever let someone else have control of MY feelings like that. I have learned to deal with Istari on this same issue. In time, I will learn to not let YOU aggrivate me either.

It is frustrating when I'm merely asking a simple question, and the other, afraid of what his answer will mean, avoids and diverts from that simple question.

I do hope you will DIRECTLY answer the rephrased question, so we can move on. And even perhaps to a new, better level of communication between us.

May God be with you in your time of trial,
mike

July 12, 2011 at 1:42 am#252037

Blocked

Quote (Gene Balthrop @ July 11 2011,07:05)

i have answered you ignorant questions many times

Hi Gene,

There are no ignorant questions – only ignorant answers. I learned that in school years ago.

Here is a new “double question” for ya:

Gene, Paladin and Marty: Does the imperfect tense of “echo” in Matthew 27:16 prohibit the custody of Barabbas from having come to an end in the past? YES or NO?

If not, then is there any GRAMMATICAL reason that the same imperfect tense of “echo” in John 17:5 would prohibit the glory of Jesus from having come to an end in the past? YES or NO?

July 12, 2011 at 4:25 am#252081

Participant

Mike………..Sorry your teacher was wrong as you are there are ignorant question as well as ignorant answers. But that does tell us a lot about you thinking though. As far as you question goes it was answered by me and others also. the Mat 27:18 …> Has a qualifier that dates it in the context of the rest of the sentence, “THEN” dates the time and therefore and Had (echo) is (IRRELEVANT) to the time, but is related to the condition of Barabbas. I realize you are unable to percieve that Mike.

Jesus was given the glory from God before he ever was born in fact it was a “FOREORDAINED” Glory as Peter said it was, the word Echo only does specifically say “THAT GLORY” a specific GLORY was in effect before the World ever existed it was in the Plan an will of God the Father before Jesus eve came into existence.

But you can't understand that because your are predisposed to believe Jesus preexisted his berth on earth, so that belief blocks this from sinking into you mind. IMO

Your playing a shall game Mike

July 12, 2011 at 2:47 pm#252119

942767

Participant

Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 12 2011,12:42)

Quote (Gene Balthrop @ July 11 2011,07:05)

i have answered you ignorant questions many times

Hi Gene,

There are no ignorant questions – only ignorant answers. I learned that in school years ago.

Here is a new “double question” for ya:

Gene, Paladin and Marty: Does the imperfect tense of “echo” in Matthew 27:16 prohibit the custody of Barabbas from having come to an end in the past? YES or NO?

If not, then is there any GRAMMATICAL reason that the same imperfect tense of “echo” in John 17:5 would prohibit the glory of Jesus from having come to an end in the past? YES or NO?

Hi Mike:

This is the scripture pertaining to Barabbas imprisonment:

Quote

Mat 27:16 And they had then a notable prisoner, called Barabbas.

Matthew is viewing this from a historical perspective, and in this scripture “had” echo is imperfect tense which implies continual action. Notice there is a qualifiying word “had then”.

Barabbas was released from this continual action of imprisonment. And so, the answer to your first question is, “No”.

The scripture that you are trying to compare to this question relative to Barabbas does not relate in that it is a scripture which is a statement of fact by Jesus.

Here is the scripture:

Quote

17:4 I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.

Jhn 17:5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.

Notice that there are qualifying words here as well, Jesus states “and now” glorify thou me, but you are trying to add the word “again” with the glory which I had with thee before the world was. That word is not there.

But no, it the fact that the word had “echo” was used would not prohibit Jesus glory coming to an end in the past, but there is nothing in the scriptures showing this as there is in the case of Barabbas. And the words “glorify me me again” or anew are not in that scripture, and so, to add this is speculation.

Love in Christ,
Marty

July 12, 2011 at 3:08 pm#252122

Participant

Marty………You are right, Jesus' glory was a “foreordained” Glory, but was not realized until it happened and it did not happen before his berth into existence on this earth, even though it was Prophesied. Mike and his co-hearts are trying to say (AGAIN), as if he already had that Glory in a actual past existence . As you say pure “SPECULATION” On thier part.

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

July 13, 2011 at 1:50 am#252177

Blocked

Quote (942767 @ July 12 2011,08:47)

MAY GOD BLESS YOU, Marty!

Thank you, thank you, thank you!

After weeks of this, I FINALLY got an honest answer to my very simple question – and I am thrilled!

Marty, you are correct that there is NOTHING at all about the imperfect tense of “echo” that would prohibit Jesus from speaking of a glory he had in the past. Therefore, Paladin's claim that there IS some “prohibiting factor” was a false claim.

DO YOU HEAR THAT GENE? ARE YOU EATING YOUR WORDS YET? WAS PALADIN SIMPLY TELLING ME THE TRUTH AND I WOULDN'T CONSIDER IT? OR WAS I TELLING THE TRUTH THE WHOLE TIME AND NONE OF YOU WOULD CONSIDER IT? I SURE HOPE THOSE WORDS TASTE GOOD, LITTLE MAN!

I knew it was a false claim. Paladin knew it. It seems that even you knew it, Marty. So why did I have to jump through so many hoops and weave my way through so many mazes of diversions just to get this simple answer of “NO”? This is NOT how a scriptural discussion should be. One should be able to ask a very simple and direct question, and IMMEDIATELY get the simple and direct answer from the person(s) he asked. It should have NEVER taken me WEEKS of mind-numbing rhetoric just to finally have one of you guys post what has been the ONLY answer to the question all along.

But thank you for answering it. Now, if I may, I'll address your “qualifiers”. First, the word “NOW” does not qualify the imperfect tense of “echo”, but the word “doxazo” (glorify).

The phase “before the world existed” is what qualifies “echo” as referring to a glory in the past. But let's think this out for a minute, Marty:

Your claim is that there was no end to this glory because it “was a done deal”. If there was no end to the glory Jesus was having, then why would he ask to be glorified NOW with a glory he was already having at that time?

Please DIRECTLY and PROMPTLY answer this bolded question, Marty. If you keep answering mine and I keep answering yours in a timely and honest manner, we will have the best discussion I've ever had on HN. Even if we end up disagreeing, our questions and points will have been addressed in a clear and straightforward manner.

peace, love, and thanks again for the answer,
mike

July 13, 2011 at 2:20 am#252182

Participant

Mike, good job….finally got an answer….. lets see if Marty continues doing so….I hope He will…. for all involved. That is the way all Brethren should do….
Peace and love Irene:)

July 13, 2011 at 4:53 am#252228

Blocked

Thanks Irene!

I think that whole fiasco took about 5 years off my life – just from angry stress alone!

July 13, 2011 at 1:10 pm#252262

Participant

Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 13 2011,15:53)

Thanks Irene!

I think that whole fiasco took about 5 years off my life – just from angry stress alone!

Mike! I know what you mean, we are all human beings with feelings.
I start singing in order to combat that angry feeling and it works for me……
Take care….Irene

July 13, 2011 at 2:07 pm#252263

Participant

Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 13 2011,12:50)

Quote (942767 @ July 12 2011,08:47)

MAY GOD BLESS YOU, Marty!

Thank you, thank you, thank you!

After weeks of this, I FINALLY got an honest answer to my very simple question – and I am thrilled!

But thank you for answering it. Now, if I may, I'll address your “qualifiers”. First, the word “NOW” does not qualify the imperfect tense of “echo”, but the word “doxazo” (glorify).

The phase “before the world existed” is what qualifies “echo” as referring to a glory in the past. But let's think this out for a minute, Marty:

peace, love, and thanks again for the answer,
mike

Mike …………..Your problem (IS) You can't tell if this Glory was a Preexisting foreordained Glory given Jesus in the PLAN and WILL of Almighty God, now if you truly want to be HONEST Then answer that question LITTLE MAN , Fact is i knew all along Paladin was heading into trouble with You about this “echo” thing. Now i will ask you your same question does what is written in Matt, PROHIBIT THAT GLORY FROM BEING A “FOREORDAINED GLORY” OR ((NOT) ?] See anyone can play that stupid game LITTLE MAN.

Fact is Mike you have proven nothing, what Paladin was doing was putting all other scriptures into play in drawing his decisions Like the “LOGOS” being GOD'S Spirit that was (IN) Jesus and in Us also. Your smoking Mirrors mean and prove nothing Mike except you lack of “TRUE” scriptural Knowledge. But i realize you can't help that it is simply in your predisposition and belief in the preexistence doctrines you were traind to believe a long time ago as Irene and Pierre and T8 were. You guys have never honestly question those false teaching and are stuck in them. IMO

You people force the text to say what in FACT it does NOT SAY and then you zero in on a single word to cause doubt by saying does it specifically means that in any other text but refuse to read it in context to the rest of the sentence. Tell us Mike do you see the word JESUS (IN) JOHN 1:1 , let me answer that for you , NO YOU OR ANYONE ELSE DON'T But you people simply FORCE THE TEXT TO SAY WHAT IN FACT IS NOT EVEN THERE. Right LITTLE MAN Mike lets be honest you are just playing a shell game and presenting smoking mirrors here. Your 'MYSTERY RELIGION ” that we are told to come out of is all you people have. IMO

July 13, 2011 at 2:38 pm#252265

942767

Participant

Hi Mike:

You say:

Quote

Your claim is that there was no end to this glory because it “was a done deal”. If there was no end to the glory Jesus was having, then why would he ask to be glorified NOW with a glory he was already having at that time?

I have already answered this question by saying that he had it by faith. It was a “done deal” from the beginning in that God had forseen that in Jesus his plan for humanity would be fulfilled, and that he would exalt Jesus to His right hand as the head of the church upon the completion of His ministry on earth. He had this glory by “faith” to be manifest in God's timing, and so Jesus says,

Jhn 17:5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.

It is the same principal with me. God has promised me that He will use me as a Bishop or overseer in the church. I have this position by faith because God has spoken to me and I believe what He has said, and this will be manifest in His timing.

“Faith”, Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness

And so, quit accusing me of not answering your questions. I have answered, but apparently, you do not understand what is being said.

Love in Christ,
Marty

July 14, 2011 at 12:43 am#252343

Blocked

Quote (942767 @ July 13 2011,08:38)

He had this glory by “faith” to be manifest in God's timing,

So your understanding is that God had FOREORDAINED a glory for Jesus before the world was even created? And 17:5 represents Jesus asking for that glory, (which he knew about through faith), to be manifested upon him?

Is that correct Marty?

July 14, 2011 at 1:21 am#252351

Blocked

Quote (Gene Balthrop @ July 13 2011,08:07)

Fact is i knew all along Paladin was heading into trouble with You about this “echo” thing.

So you KNEW all along that Paladin's claim about the imperfect tense of “echo” prohibiting Jesus from speaking of a past glory was WRONG? You KNEW his claim was wrong the whole time I was pulling out my hair trying to just have someone acknowledge that his claim was wrong? You KNEW that I was speaking the TRUTH the whole time, and yet STILL posted those insulting things about me not wanting to consider the truth that PALADIN was showing ME?

All I can even say is: WOW GENE!

I can't believe you made those posts to and about ME the whole time you knew that I was the one being honest about the disagreement we were having. That says ALOT about who you are, Gene.

Quote (Gene Balthrop @ July 13 2011,08:07)

Now i will ask you your same question does what is written in Matt, PROHIBIT THAT GLORY FROM BEING A “FOREORDAINED GLORY” OR ((NOT) ?] See anyone can play that stupid game LITTLE MAN.

No Gene, it does not. As Paladin has posted and I have agreed IMMEDIATELY, the imperfect tense of a word, IN AND OF ITSELF, says NOTHING about whether that action has ever ceased.

See how that's done, Gene? You asked a direct question, and I IMMEDIATELY gave you an HONEST and DIRECT answer. I didn't make you jump through hoops for weeks by pretending I didn't understand your words, or pretending that you didn't ask me in a proper way, or by diverting from your actual question with a huge post about OTHER Greek grammar rules that have NOTHING at all to do with the simple question you asked me.

You asked, and I immediately answered, right? Let's see if you and Paladin can also play by those rules in the future, okay? Then we can actually get somewhere in the discussion.

Quote (Gene Balthrop @ July 13 2011,08:07)

You people force the text to say what in FACT it does NOT SAY

You have GOT TO BE kidding me! It is YOU who ADDS the word (IN) into 1:14, FORCING the text to say something completely DIFFERENT than what it really says.

It is YOU who changes “Root of” to “FROM the roots of”, FORCING the text to say something completely DIFFERENT that what it really says.

Quote (Gene Balthrop @ July 13 2011,08:07)

Tell us Mike do you see the word JESUS (IN) JOHN 1:1

Gene, who did Jesus say will come back on the clouds? He didn't specifically say “JESUS”, did he? He said “the Son of Man”, right? Yet you are smart enough to know that by “Son of Man”, it MEANS “Jesus”, right? I can't help it if you AREN'T also smart enough to add the fact that Jesus IS called “The Word of God” in Revelation to the facts that “the Word” BECAME FLESH, and DWELLED AMONG US, and HAD THE GLORY OF AN ONLY BEGOTTEN SON FROM THE FATHER.

If YOU don't know from this very easy teaching that the Word who became flesh and through WHOM (not “through WHICH) the universe was created refers to Jesus, even though it doesn't spell out the word “Jesus” for you, then you are lost.

And Gene, don't for a minute think that I believe you DON'T understand this. We all KNOW that you DO understand it. We also know that you must PRETEND that you just can't grasp this very easy teaching in order to keep your flawed doctrine.

Quote (Gene Balthrop @ July 13 2011,08:07)

Mike lets be honest you are just playing a shell game and presenting smoking mirrors here.

Says the man who just ADMITTED he knew I was right the whole time he was posting crap about me being wrong! Gene, this one post of yours has just showed all of us who is willing to play shell games and present smoke and mirrors. It is YOU who is willing to be dishonest and deceitful in order to “save” your doctrine from falling by the wayside.

Gene, it will fall nonetheless – with OR without your cooperation or honesty.

July 14, 2011 at 2:37 am#252361

Participant

Gene! John does say in John 1:14 that the Word of God is the only begotten of the Father.

Jhn 1:14 ¶ And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

And also in

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.
God The Word of God, Hing, Lord and LORD are all titles.

I do believe that the only begotten is who became Jesus…..but of course you would not believe this, its the truth….But only YOU know the truth….Peace Irene

July 14, 2011 at 3:12 pm#252417