July 9, 2015 at 3:42 pm #800832
Do you doubt the work of the Spirit of God?July 9, 2015 at 4:28 pm #800840
Philo and John are Jews and they may have come up with there similar words independently as they were derived from the same Jewish subculture. There teaching are parallel in some places but differ in others.
Philo used wording the made the logos appear to be a being when he was not teaching it was and John has been said to do the same. Elsewhere in Scripture the same type of writing is used but few mistake the word as being referred to as being a being in those passages.
John is being fairly literal in his words though we have been taught to view them from a non-Jewish perspective and so stumble until the Spirit teaches us better. He does use the idea that the word that comes from the mouth of God has the ability to take on the attribute of humanity which some may find difficult to understand even in the best circumstances. Another difficult to understand idea is his claim that the word that comes out of the mouth of God has the attributes of God. These hard to understand words and our viewpoint that has been shaped by out culture and teachings make an obstacle to the true understanding of the passage.
Jesus did not exist before he was conceived; as some absurdly claim. No one exists before they are made of a woman. Nowhere in Scripture does it say he did but that teaching, like the teaching he is God is based on passages where the words are open to interpretation. It is not open to interpretation that he was conceived of a woman just John the Baptist and many other human beings are also said to be conceived of a woman. There are even two genealogies for him.July 9, 2015 at 9:59 pm #800849
If Jesus is God then I will worship Him as the only God. If Jesus is the Son of God then I will worship Him as the Son of God. I do not worship two Gods because the Father and Son are as one. We do not KNOW all things. We are only stupid humans! Whatever is truth God alone has. God IS truth, and God is love. I will be like a child and will pray to the Father and will love the Son. And whatever God wants to show me God will show me in His own time.July 9, 2015 at 10:59 pm #800857
We do not know all things but if we do not know the gospel then we are lost. The fact Jesus is not God, but instead is a human being is important to the gospel. If your faith in that knowledge is weak seek to strengthen it and all other teachings related to the gospel.July 10, 2015 at 2:08 am #800860GeneBalthropParticipant
- Topics started 42
- Total replies 16,604
Kerwin……True, if a person does not see Jesus as a pure human being, comming into existence at his berth on this earth through Mary his human mother, then they simply do not know the true Jesus’ human example to all humanity, nor can they relate or identify with him in any true human sense. IMO
peace and love to you and yours. ………………geneJuly 10, 2015 at 10:18 am #800867
The use of the word true may be taken wrong by some but I agree the idea that Jesus serves as an example because he is like his brothers.July 10, 2015 at 2:46 pm #800870
Kerwin and Gene, what do you do with this verse if Jesus is just a man (still) and you follow him?
This is what the LORD says: “Cursed is the one who trusts in man, who draws strength from mere flesh and whose heart turns away from the LORD. Jer 17.5July 10, 2015 at 4:29 pm #800872
I do not trust in human effort but in the power of God. The human being Jesus Christ is the way to access that power by following his teachings to receive the Spirit and then to continue following them to live by the Spirit.
Jesus does not save us from our sins by his but by the power of the Spirit that raised him from the dead. He also saves by his sacrifice and teachings which are both fruits of the Spirit.
Just like the Hebrews did not win a battle by the strength of arms but only by the will of God so too Jesus does not save us by his own efforts but by the power of God.
Scripture teaches us God placed his Spirit on Jesus Son of David just as it teaches us he places his Spirit on those that believe through faith in Jesus Anointed.July 10, 2015 at 9:25 pm #800875
Jesus was a mere man.
It is the transformation of a mere man to Jesus Christ that should catch our attention.July 10, 2015 at 10:18 pm #800878
Nick, exactly. He is no longer a mere man then is he.July 10, 2015 at 10:24 pm #800879
I hear you Kerwin but Christ Jesus is no longer a mere man. Or do you believe like Gene that He is?July 11, 2015 at 1:14 am #800885GeneBalthropParticipant
- Topics started 42
- Total replies 16,604
Miia……”when THE SON OF “MAN” RETURNS, will he find faith on the earth?”.
And again, “the words i am telling you are NOT “MY” WORDS, but the WORDS OF “HIM “THAT SENT ME.”,
and again, ” the SON OF MAN, can do NOTHING OF HIMSELF, the Father who is “IN” HIM, “HE” DOES THE WORKS”.
peace and love to you and yours. ………………geneJuly 11, 2015 at 4:46 am #800889
I believe God and God states he is still the man that mediates between God and mankind. (1 Timothy 2:5)
And that is the bottom line we either believe what God says or we do not and if we do not then many invent things to excuse their unbelief.July 11, 2015 at 4:47 am #800890
No human being with the Spirit is a mere man.July 11, 2015 at 7:07 am #800894
He is the man from heaven.
1 cor15July 11, 2015 at 7:54 am #800895
No, he is not the man from heaven. The man from heaven is the breath of God while man of earth is the man God shaped from the earth. Paul uses the two man imagery in other but men base there understanding on the words of the AV of the KJV which are from manuscripts no longer deemed to be creditable.
1 Corinthians 15:47Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)
47 The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven.
1 Corinthians 15:47New English Translation (NET Bible)
47 The first man is from the earth, made of dust; the second man is from heaven.
The NET is based on older manuscripts but a teaching based on the newer less creditable manuscripts is still taught and believed by many.July 11, 2015 at 9:13 am #800896
And you are the arbiter of credibility?
Older and fewer is more reliable than more recent and more common?July 11, 2015 at 10:19 am #800897
I was not a translator for the NET or other versions that determined the later manuscripts were less creditable. There are other passages in the later manuscripts that are suspect as well which is why they change text types as more earlier manuscripts became available.July 11, 2015 at 11:49 am #800898
The jury is out on this one.July 11, 2015 at 4:37 pm #800908
Not really, but new information made change opinions.
It is certainly not wise to use a teaching that may have been inserted by unbelievers as evidence of anything.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.