John 1

[Lightenup]

Hi Irene,
God created it formless and void because He wanted His Son to form it and fill it. God was the source, the Son brought it to fulfillment. Don't read a story into it that is not there.

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 08 2010,18:41)

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 09 2010,08:44) As you can tell, to be made finished is one of the definitions.   Now let's see how the heavens and the earth were not yet finished until after day one when Light came. Hi Kathi, I can live with that.  Let's see if anyone else has any reason why your revelation isn't short of inspired.  I sure don't.   peace and love, mike

Mike

Because when it says “Through him all things were made; without him NOTHING WAS MADE THAT HAS BEEN MADE.” John 1:3

Would also include the Moleculor structure of the “earth” that existed without form and void.

The “atom” is part of the all things and could not have been “unfinished” in verse 2 of Genesis before the light, when the earth had a deep and the waters existed, as Kathi claims.

Would Kathi claim that the “waters” and the “Deep” in verse 2 of Genesis was before Jesus?

Were the waters “Incomplete”?

Her theory falls apart because these things existed with the “atoms” before her proposed idea of Jesus being “born” by the Father Speaking a word.

John 1:3 says without him “NOTHING” CAME INTO EXISTENCE” YET THERE WAS SOMETHING IN EXISTENCE.

WJ

[KangarooJack]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Aug. 11 2010,05:18)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 08 2010,18:41) Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 09 2010,08:44) As you can tell, to be made finished is one of the definitions.   Now let's see how the heavens and the earth were not yet finished until after day one when Light came. Hi Kathi, I can live with that.  Let's see if anyone else has any reason why your revelation isn't short of inspired.  I sure don't.   peace and love, mike Mike Because when it says “Through him all things were made; without him NOTHING WAS MADE THAT HAS BEEN MADE.” John 1:3 Would also include the Moleculor structure of the “earth” that existed without form an void. The “atom” is part of the all things and could not have been “unfinished” in verse 2 of Genesis before the lighT, when the earth had a deep and the waters existed. Would Kathi claim that the “waters” and the “Deep” in verse 2 of Genesis was before Jesus? Were the waters “Incomplete”? Her theory falls apart because these things existed with the “atoms” before her proposed idea of Jesus being “born” by the Father Speaking a word. John 1:3 says without him “NOTHING” CAME INTO EXISTENCE” YET THERE WAS SOMETHING IN EXISTENCE. WJ

Keith,

You are correct. The Greek literally says that without Him “not one thing has COME INTO BEING that has come into being.”

That shoots Kathi's “inspired revelation” to hades doesn't it?

Jack

[KangarooJack]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Aug. 11 2010,05:18)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 08 2010,18:41) Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 09 2010,08:44) As you can tell, to be made finished is one of the definitions.   Now let's see how the heavens and the earth were not yet finished until after day one when Light came. Hi Kathi, I can live with that.  Let's see if anyone else has any reason why your revelation isn't short of inspired.  I sure don't.   peace and love, mike Mike Because when it says “Through him all things were made; without him NOTHING WAS MADE THAT HAS BEEN MADE.” John 1:3 Would also include the Moleculor structure of the “earth” that existed without form an void. The “atom” is part of the all things and could not have been “unfinished” in verse 2 of Genesis before the lighT, when the earth had a deep and the waters existed. Would Kathi claim that the “waters” and the “Deep” in verse 2 of Genesis was before Jesus? Were the waters “Incomplete”? Her theory falls apart because these things existed with the “atoms” before her proposed idea of Jesus being “born” by the Father Speaking a word. John 1:3 says without him “NOTHING” CAME INTO EXISTENCE” YET THERE WAS SOMETHING IN EXISTENCE. WJ

Keith,

Also Hebrews 1:10 says that Jesus laid the foundation of the earth. About this Albert Barnes said,

Quote

The meaning here is, that the Son of God was the original creator or founder of the universe. He did not merely arrange it out of preexisting materials, but brought it into existence by His own word and power. Barnes on Hebrews p. 43.

According to Kathi Jesus came into existence AFTER the original creation of the heavens and the earth while the earth was still without form and void. If this was the case then He could not have laid the foundation of the earth which according to Hebrews 1:10 He clearly did.

Jack

[Lightenup]

Roo,
Coming into being means a finished existence, not an unfinished existence.

Foundations were being laid when the seas were being marked out, day 3. Read Proverbs 8.

[Lightenup]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Aug. 10 2010,13:18)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 08 2010,18:41) Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 09 2010,08:44) As you can tell, to be made finished is one of the definitions.   Now let's see how the heavens and the earth were not yet finished until after day one when Light came. Hi Kathi, I can live with that.  Let's see if anyone else has any reason why your revelation isn't short of inspired.  I sure don't.   peace and love, mike Mike Because when it says “Through him all things were made; without him NOTHING WAS MADE THAT HAS BEEN MADE.” John 1:3 Would also include the Moleculor structure of the “earth” that existed without form and void. The “atom” is part of the all things and could not have been “unfinished” in verse 2 of Genesis before the light, when the earth had a deep and the waters existed, as Kathi claims. Would Kathi claim that the “waters” and the “Deep” in verse 2 of Genesis was before Jesus? Were the waters “Incomplete”? Her theory falls apart because these things existed with the “atoms” before her proposed idea of Jesus being “born” by the Father Speaking a word. John 1:3 says without him “NOTHING” CAME INTO EXISTENCE” YET THERE WAS SOMETHING IN EXISTENCE. WJ

Keith,

Like you were there or something. The Father is the source, therefore the elementary things were from him.

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 10 2010,15:13)

Roo, Coming into being means a finished existence, not an unfinished existence.   Foundations were being laid when the seas were being marked out, day 3. Read Proverbs 8.

Kathi

Were the “atoms” that the water was composed of “complete” for they are part of the “all things were made by him and “nothing came into existence without him”.

Which would put Jesus before the light wouldn't it?

WJ

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 10 2010,15:16)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Aug. 10 2010,13:18) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 08 2010,18:41) Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 09 2010,08:44) As you can tell, to be made finished is one of the definitions.   Now let's see how the heavens and the earth were not yet finished until after day one when Light came. Hi Kathi, I can live with that.  Let's see if anyone else has any reason why your revelation isn't short of inspired.  I sure don't.   peace and love, mike Mike Because when it says “Through him all things were made; without him NOTHING WAS MADE THAT HAS BEEN MADE.” John 1:3 Would also include the Moleculor structure of the “earth” that existed without form and void. The “atom” is part of the all things and could not have been “unfinished” in verse 2 of Genesis before the light, when the earth had a deep and the waters existed, as Kathi claims. Would Kathi claim that the “waters” and the “Deep” in verse 2 of Genesis was before Jesus? Were the waters “Incomplete”? Her theory falls apart because these things existed with the “atoms” before her proposed idea of Jesus being “born” by the Father Speaking a word. John 1:3 says without him “NOTHING” CAME INTO EXISTENCE” YET THERE WAS SOMETHING IN EXISTENCE. WJ Keith, Like you were there or something.  The Father is the source, therefore the elementary things were from him.

Kathi

Talking about “circular”.

No I wasn't there Kathi and neither was you, but I doi understand plain english and believe that “Nothing” including the “waters” came into being without Jesus.

WJ

[Lightenup]

Keith, so then you would say that the Father came into being from Jesus…just saying if you take the stand that nothing means absolutely nothing.

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 10 2010,15:38)

Keith, so then you would say that the Father came into being from Jesus…just saying if you take the stand that nothing means absolutely nothing.

Kathi

No because verse 1 and 2 of John 1:1 makes it clear that Jesus was with the Father before all things. So the Father and Jesus is not included in the “All things” that came into existence in verse 3.

Context Kathi!

WJ

[KangarooJack]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Aug. 11 2010,07:47)

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 10 2010,15:38) Keith, so then you would say that the Father came into being from Jesus…just saying if you take the stand that nothing means absolutely nothing. Kathi No because verse 1 and 2 of John 1:1 makes it clear that Jesus was with the Father before all things. So the Father and Jesus is not included in the “All things” that came into existence in verse 3. Context Kathi! WJ

In Hebrews 1:10 the Father spoke to the Son saying, “You Lord, in the beginning laid the foundations of the earth….”

The foundations of the earth were in place BEFORE the time Kathi says that Christ came into the picture. Christ was “IN THE [very] BEGINNING” with God.

the Roo

[Lightenup]

Roo,
Day 3 is in the beginning.

[Lightenup]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Aug. 10 2010,15:47)

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 10 2010,15:38) Keith, so then you would say that the Father came into being from Jesus…just saying if you take the stand that nothing means absolutely nothing. Kathi No because verse 1 and 2 of John 1:1 makes it clear that Jesus was with the Father before all things. So the Father and Jesus is not included in the “All things” that came into existence in verse 3. Context Kathi! WJ

Keith,
Since not one of us was there, it is one of those things that you can't prove what is meant by 'all things.' In Colossians 1 we see that He created all things in heaven and on earth and I'm fine with the all things not being all inclusive. He did finish the earth and he did finish the waters after day one.

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ Aug. 11 2010,05:46)

That shoots Kathi's “inspired revelation” to hades doesn't it?

Hey Jack,

Is there a reason you have to say it so degradingly and harshly? Just asking.

mike

[RokkaMan]

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 11 2010,12:31)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Aug. 10 2010,15:47) Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 10 2010,15:38) Keith, so then you would say that the Father came into being from Jesus…just saying if you take the stand that nothing means absolutely nothing. Kathi No because verse 1 and 2 of John 1:1 makes it clear that Jesus was with the Father before all things. So the Father and Jesus is not included in the “All things” that came into existence in verse 3. Context Kathi! WJ Keith, Since not one of us was there, it is one of those things that you can't prove what is meant by 'all things.'  In Colossians 1 we see that He created all things in heaven and on earth and I'm fine with the all things not being all inclusive.  He did finish the earth and he did finish the waters after day one.

What is The Word of God?

God revealed.

God expressed.

God perceived.

————-

Is what is revealed, expressed, or perceived the totality of the being itself?

No, absolutely not.

————–

So if Jesus existed as The Word of God…
is he The Totality and Source of all things which is The Father?

No, absolutely not.

—————

Is he God then?

—————
Yes absolutely.

because what God does, says, expresses, reveals, or allows us to perceive…

would be an act of His Word….The Word of God.

—————

The Word of God is the highest anyone or anything can possibly perceive OF THE FATHER.

YHVH The Father himself is unknowable…too vast, eternal, and infinity to be perceived.

—————

So if we only can know him through his Word.

Then his Word is the closest thing we can know to be God, even though our mind is to reserve and understand that what is REVEALED comes from THE REVEALER.

—————

Now if we accept that The Word of God is Jesus Christ.

Then we know that he is God revealed.

Whatever is revealed, is subject to that of the revealer.

So when we identify that YHVH is The Father…
we should also identify that His Word, is the son…

a son comes from the loins of his father and is subject to his father.

Jesus Christ > The Word of God > God Revealed…

comes from the very fabric or essence of YHVH and is subject to YHVH.

———-

For us this is confusing, but the bible explains this over and over yet we all miss the target.

Jesus Christ is NOT YHVH.
YHVH IS HIS GOD.

but Jesus Christ is in fact, God Revealed.

———-

YHVH = The Source.
The Word = The Source Revealed.

us as children can only perceive what is revealed.

So if you're confused that Jesus Christ is actually YHVH, then you are wrong….

he is EVERYTHING YHVH (keyword) REVEALS about himself.

So Jesus Christ is king of kings and lord of lords indeed.
he is definately The alpha and the omega.

He never had a beginning or will ever have an end.

They are one in the same.
————

[Anonymous]

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 11 2010,04:49)

Hi Irene, God created it formless and void because He wanted His Son to form it and fill it.  God was the source, the Son brought it to fulfillment.  Don't read a story into it that is not there.

Kathi, that is just as much your interpetation as mine when I say that the earth could have been created before Genesis…. There is no Scripture other then that Jesus created all by the power of Jehovah God. Through Him and for him….I guess, one day we will all know what is right and what isn't…We just don't have any explanation why we have all those Skeletons. And it kinda makes sense to me that the earth existed longer then2000 years….Genesis talks about Giants and the Angels that married Human Woman. But it will never happen again….
Take care…..Peace and Love Irene

[Anonymous]

Rokkaman! The Word of God became flesh in John 1:14, so that could not have been just a thought or plan of God. Why He is called The Word of God, I believe that it was who became Jesus that said something in the Old Test. times. He was the firstborn of all creation and in Rev. 1913-16 explains it that He was…And as The Word of God He will return, as KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS….
Peace Irene

[Ed J]

Quote (Brian @ Aug. 14 2010,02:58)

Rokkaman!  The Word of God became flesh in John 1:14, so that could not have been just a thought or plan of God.  Why He is called The Word of God, I believe that it was who became Jesus that said something in the Old Test. times.  He was the firstborn of all creation and in Rev. 1913-16 explains it that He was…And as The Word of God He will return, as KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS…. Peace Irene

Hi Irene,

Why do you keep bolstering the traditions of men? (Matt.15:5-9)
The systems of religion and traditions of men communicate…
distortions of truth, confusion of mind, and distractions of spirit.

            “HolySpirit“ = “Father: The Word“  … (Click Here)

John 14:24  He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and
“The Word” which ye hear is not mine, but the Father's which sent me.
John 12:49 For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me,
he gave me a commandment, what I(Jesus) should say, and what I should speak.

“The Word” is (אלהים) “GOD” (John 1:1)! Jesus is “A Word”!
“The Word” (Hō Lōgôs) [ο λογος]=443 is the 86th prime
meaning [אלהים=86] “GOD” ĔL-ō-Hêêm=63 (YHVH=63)!

The “HolySpirit” is “The Word”(of God)!
              Hebrew↔Greek
            (86)אלהים=ο λογος(86th Prime)
(ĔL-ō-Hêêm)God=The Word(Hō Lōgôs)

(Lōgôs) [λογος]=373 means “Word”, and 373 is the 74th Prime Number!
(Hō Lōgôs) [ο λογος]=443 means “The Word” and 443 is the 86th Prime Number. (John 1:1)
“God Word”=86 and אלהים=86 ĔL-ō-Hêêm both equal 86 and ĔL-ō-Hêêm=63 means “YHVH”=63.

In English, the significant number (74) is attributed to JOSHUA=74, Messiah=74;
also in the following: JESUS=74, Cross=74, Gospel=74, עד=74, and even English=74.
Jesus Christ (74×32) also factors 74 in Greek Theomatically:
[Jesus] Ιησους=74(x12), [Christ] Χριστоς=74(x20).
[Son of Man] υιος τον ανθρωπου=74(x40).

This symbol ( > ) means GREATER THAN in mathematics
The pieces fit together perfectly: “The Word” (86) > “Word” (74).
In English it's comparable to (The LORD JEHOVAH) > (Lord Jesus=74) is the “God Son”=74!
                                                          “The Owner” > “Owner “
                                                                JEHOVAH > Jesus
                                                                          86 > 74

Witnessing to the world in behalf of YHVH (Psalm 45:17)
יהוה האלהים (JEHOVAH GOD) YÄ-hä-vā  hä ĔL-ō-Hêêm!
Ed J (AKJV Joshua 22:34 / Isaiah 60:13-15)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

[RokkaMan]

The Word of God belongs to God, yes…

That's why it's The Word OF

It doesn't BELONG to Jesus Christ because Jesus IS The Word of God… he belongs to his Father YHVH.

Irene said nothing wrong, fact 90% of what she said is scripture.

Plus the whole purpose of The Word of God is to REVEAL God…

which is why Jesus said he is not to speak of himself, but of The Father.

and all those numbers clutter your text…it's hard to read your point.

[davidbfun]

Quote (RokkaMan @ Aug. 14 2010,17:32)

The Word of God belongs to God, yes… That's why it's The Word OF It doesn't BELONG to Jesus Christ because Jesus IS The Word of God… he belongs to his Father YHVH. Irene said nothing wrong, fact 90% of what she said is scripture. Plus the whole purpose of The Word of God is to REVEAL God… which is why Jesus said he is not to speak of himself, but of The Father. and all those numbers clutter your text…it's hard to read your point.

Hello RM,

This is talking about John 1 not the ambiguous “word of God”.

This Word refers to Jesus and is not part of YHWH but is with YHWH.

The Professor

[Author]

Posts