- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Hi,
The term means enfleshment, God in flesh.The doctrine of the incarnation is originally from catholicism. It teaches that God came in flesh as Jesus. It says that God Himself came as Jesus. From before even being an infant in the stable he was God, learning from his earthly parents but showing no recorded Godly nature and powerful abilities till the age of 30.
It relates to trinity theory because they teach that the Son of God is not a true son. Instead “Son of God” is just a term to distinguish him from God the Father and God the Spirit, three equal persons in one being. It is, to them, a name only.
The so called person of “God the Son”, who is said not to have life in himself but be still one in being with the Father and the Spirit.
Anyone with a basic scriptural knowledge will recognise that there are major flaws in the doctrine but it is entirely consistent with the deceit of trinity theory.
I don't see any supportive evidence for that in the teachings of the God of creation.
Under Biblical theory each spirit gets one aeon to choose between right and wrong.Quote The doctrine of the incarnation is originally from catholicism. I believe you will find that this doctrine actually originates in eastern religions and was taught long before the Catholics came into power, before their crusades to deny, kill off,
discredit, qualitatively embrace, and then, set themselves apart from, the Christians.Biblically speaking it is a single lifetime regardless of the amount of time.
sorry I just used that word because my wife made me look it up for her studies a few days ago.
Hi,
The trinitarian position is that Christ is God, sent in the flesh of Mary. So no true conception. No relevance of the empowerment by the Holy Spirit at his baptism.Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 06 2006,04:02) learning from his earthly parents
HiIf Jesus really did exist before he was born at the start of the gospels (even if he wasn't God), then I think it's still pretty odd that he should learn from his parents.
Preexistence is closely linked with trinitarianism, and causes all sorts of problems.
Quote (Sammo @ May 16 2006,02:10) Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 06 2006,04:02) learning from his earthly parents
HiIf Jesus really did exist before he was born at the start of the gospels (even if he wasn't God), then I think it's still pretty odd that he should learn from his parents.
Preexistence is closely linked with trinitarianism, and causes all sorts of problems.
Hi Sammo,
Does any man know and understand anything when he is born?
Men have soul and spirit within their earthly bodies from before birth.Is Jesus like to us?
Why would we assume soul has the ability to fully be functional within an immature human body?
Does not all information learned not have to come through the senses in humans?
If he was like to us in all ways except partaking in sin why should he be different?Would that not make him unlike to us?
Truth has always been an irritation to men's minds.
Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 16 2006,02:38) Men have soul and spirit within their earthly bodies from before birth.
Hi NickWhat exactly do you mean when you say that?
Hi Sammo,
Man was created from dust.
Then God blew into Him the breath of God and he became a living being.[Gen 2.7]He is body, soul and spirit according to 1Thess
so soul and spirit come from the breath of God
which Adam and Eve passed on through the generations.Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 16 2006,03:42) Hi Sammo,
Man was created from dust.
Then God blew into Him the breath of God and he became a living being.[Gen 2.7]He is body, soul and spirit according to 1Thess
so soul and spirit come from the breath of God
which Adam and Eve passed on through the generations.
Hi NickWell, exactly – surely Adam didn't exist before God blew into him his breath? So why would anyone else exist before they were born?
Hi Sammo,
Are you arguing with the word of God?
[read it for yourself].“Remember man that thou art dust and unto dust thou shalt return” Gen 3
Nick,
We are dust… and have the life of God breathed into us… but not one of us existed before our time…
To the subject:
How is what you believe about Jesus', so called “conception” in Mary too different from the Trinity's incarnation, apart from the fact you say it was the Pre-existent Word and not a pre-existent 2nd Person of the Godhead that became flesh…If the Word was Begotten of God in distant past and this is when he became the Only Begotten Son of God, with the emphasis on God, not Son of… because there was no other involved you say and he was not born… Then he must be (almost) God – you are only the son of someone when you are born of them – an ape does not come from a human – a lesser being is not brought forth from a higher… no like follows like: if God begat the Son in the distant past, as you say, which I believe you have no scriptual basis for, then it follows that He must be like the one he was begotten of… especially as you say He was Spirit and as the Word, did not have a form. One has to deduce that if he came from God and no other, then He must be God the Son… but how did this happen…we are not given details for eternal existence of the Son… it is all speculation Nick…
If begotten does not mean “birth” showing his earthly existence and entry, like the other places where you see only begotten…ie: Isaac was the only begotten son of Abraham, same word in the greek is used for both of these… then we must assume that Isaac did not come via birth. Isaac was Abraham's only begotten son, not because he was his only child, because he was the only son born of promise and by miraculous conception… both were old codgers and could not have children – yet they had Isaac… He was begotten as were all the other children born to Abraham – but he alone of promise.
If you have a son, he is a little you. You are man, he will be man: he carries your dna… he has a body like yours, hands like yours, eyes like yours, thou different in colour or shape, they are eyes… How can you have a son and he not be like the father who he came from. – I agree you are not your son and your son is not you, but you are both human.
Ok so if the Word as you say was a pre-existent Spirit… that came down and inhabited a body… questions arrise…
Firstly : how was he conceived in the womb? I say again… a heavenly transplant for to already exist you have to be transplanted or you are reincarnated. You cannot conceive an already existent life. Maybe carry.
Conceive is to start life, to become pregnant not to grow an existing life… life starts at conception I think the expression goes… but not with Christ according to your belief… I think – correct me if I am wrong.
Secondly: how is he human… does becoming human only consist of taking on a body, for this is all he got if he exisited prior to coming? He was a ready made spirit that could not be contained and an eternal, immortal one at that… then he, shed that and somehow tented in a mortal body… was taught by his parents, grew in favour with God and men and learned by what he suffered – is that right?
Thirdly : how do you unlearn something you have learned as a master Creator and then have to start again as a baby in a womb – sounds again like reincarnation to me… where do you find this “principle” anywhere in scripture – is there any other life or even as a prophecy of the Messiah where this was stated? If not how can I believe that he pre-existed as a Son in eternity past… back to learning, when I get my new immortal body, I will know God better not less… and see him for who He is – for the image will be fully restored in me… in fact I will no longer be looking through a glass darkly.
Forthly : Why does it say in Matthew 1:1 this is the account of the ORIGIN of Jesus Christ… meaning what to you… the word there is not “geneology” but “origin”… the translation is confusing but the later versions are now puting origin back in – in the footnote mind but it is there at least…as it should have been form the origin-al. hehe.
or·i·gin n
1.a starting point or first cause (often used in the plural)
2.the thing from which something develops or the place where it comes from (often used in the plural)
3.the race, social class, or country that somebody belongs to or that somebody’s family comes from (often used in the plural)>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Have a good day, catch up later Nick
Hi A7,
Matt 1.1
” The book of the geneology of Jesus Christ, the Son of David, the Son of Abraham…”
Jesus was a man. This is his history'according to the flesh” It says nothing about his life as the Word of life who was with the Father in the beginning.
Christ can be spoken of
“according to the flesh” as man
or
“according to the Spirit of Holiness” as the Son of God[Rom 1. 1-4]Hi A7,
The same greek word is used to describe
the conception of John in Elizabeth
and
the conception of Jesus in Mary.No sammo,
According to the flesh Jesus partook of Mary's human nature and was “conceived”.John the baptist was a prophet sent from God as all the prophets were.
He was a man “conceived” in Elizabeth and he had no recorded previous history as a divine being who was with God in the beginning, as the Word of life did.
Rightly he said of the Word made flesh
“AFTER ME comes a MAN, who has a HIGHER RANK than I, because HE EXISTED before me”Hi Nick
You've lost me then. What's your point about the same word being used to describe the conceptions of Jesus and John?
———————–
“John bare witness of him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom I spake, He that cometh after me is preferred before me: for he was before me.”
G4413
πρῶτος
prōtos
pro'-tos
Contracted superlative of G4253; foremost (in time, place, order or importance): – before, beginning, best, chief (-est), first (of all), former.Hence “but many that are first (protos) shall be last; and the last shall be first (protos)” etc. Here protos clearly has to do with rank, not chronology.
So there are at least as equally valid ways to read John 1:15 that don't at all imply that Jesus existed before his birth.
Hi sammo,
There are almost always alternative translations for every word in scripture. We should not constantly seek them out as that might distort meaning surely?If you look in the forum on conception you will see the same greek word [4815] is used in Lk 1.31 and 2.21re Mary and Lk 1.36 re Elizabeth
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
