- This topic has 25,959 replies, 116 voices, and was last updated 1 month ago by
.
- Posts
t8 …
I hope you know and are aware that the whole of Proverbs 8 (not just 22 to 30) is simply talking about 'wisdom'.
Nothing more, Nothing less.Wisdom is no more a literal person or living being in this chapter than 'Prudence' is in (Prov 8:12) I wisdom dwell with prudence, and find out knowledge of witty inventions.
Also, 'wisdom' in this whole chapter is personified as 'a woman'
BTW To all JWs and those who adhere to their doctrines:
Proverbs 8 is not talking about Jesus at all!
It is simple talking about wisdom, using personification as well as other literary devices, to demonstrate the fact that GOD made all things 'by or through' His wisdom …
as stated elsewhere throughout Scripture e.g.(Jer 10:12) He hath made the earth by his power, he hath established the world by his wisdom, and hath stretched out the heavens by his discretion.
(Jer 51:15) He hath made the earth by his power, he hath established the world by his wisdom, and hath stretched out the heaven by his understanding.
(Psa 104:24) O YAHWEH, how manifold are thy works! in wisdom hast thou made them all: the earth is full of thy riches.
(Prov 3:19) YAHWEH by wisdom hath founded the earth; by understanding hath he established the heavens.I knew that you would say this, no surprises here.
If I believe that wisdom in God was given birth as the first of God works, then I do that knowing that I am quoting scripture. Also as far as I know 'prudence' wasn't given birth or begotten and therefore is spoken of as an attribute. But wisdom is spoken of as an attribute and then it changes once wisdom is given birth. There is a difference to an attribute (she) and then an attribute in God that is given birth. It even says 'I was the craftsman at his side'. So the female reference is used when talking about the attribute. But once wisdom is given birth as the first of God's works, then it mentions 'craftsman'.
All things that are good are from God, even wisdom. But if he gave birth to wisdom, I take that to mean that this attribute of God was conceived or came from God and I personally believe that to be Christ for Christ is the Logos who was WITH God and he is the firstborn and God made the worlds through him.
In the end that is what I believe and if I am wrong then it will not affect my salvation but I would need to apologise for teaching this because no lie is from God. But you need to prove to me that God didn't give birth to wisdom, that the scripture is saying something else to it's obvious meaning. But I do not believe that this is a foundational doctrine, so I have no problem if you have another view. I am just saying that you need to provide compelling evidence to what that scripture says is what you teach.
I personally believe that we are all created from inside God as an attribute of himself. Whether it is love, charity, peace or whatever attribute of God it is, we were created to personify his attributes. Our heavenly name or new name will reflect who we are, or what attribute we were created to shine. That is why we are made in God's image. It is together that we are the image of Christ who is the image of God. We are to reflect his attributes, the fruits of his Spirit and given the diverse giftings of God, together we can reflect a lot of God's attributes.
Our soul is who we are, spirit and flesh is what we are. I make a clear distinction between identity and nature. But I cannot see how your idea of Christ as being flesh in identity makes any sense. The 'Word became flesh', is that, he 'partook of flesh' or that 'he is flesh'? I know that Christ partook of flesh and it is of the antichrist spirit to say that Christ didn't come in the flesh. So who is Christ, if he came in the flesh?
Adam P, I seek the truth in all things within limitations of course, but I cannot hold to your view that Christ was created the moment he was born of Mary and that he is flesh and not divine. Your explanations just seem to dodge what many scriptures are saying.
There are a lot of scriptures that mention or hint at Christ exisiting before walking as a man. I cannot in good conscience write them all off or believe in the logic you have provided to write them off. A lot of your evidence and meanings of the words in the original language still do not write off that idea that Christ pre-existed. At most they offer a smaller possibility that they could be saying something else just as they could also (equally or more) mean what the translators have translated it to say.
E.g. the root and offspring of David scripture. Yours or RRs stance is that the word 'root' can also be used as 'shoot', yet all other references of this word are used in the context of 'root'. So why should that be the exception? And even a shoot becomes the trunk anyway. The branches grow from there. I find it hard to believe that the vine comes after the branches for example. Or how is it that if all things hold together in Christ, then what happened before he existed. Let me tell you what happened. There was no creation at all to speak of.
For the sake of the readers the scriptures I talk about regarding Christ being the firstborn (literally) and/or pre-existence from his earthly life can be found here:
https://heavennet.net/answers/answer31.htm
Also AdamP, do you have a comment on the Micah scripture?
thx
Micah speaks for itself.
His origins have been prophesied/spoken of from old, from ancient times i.e. as far back as the time of David, the time of Moses, even as far back as Gen 3.15, the coming of the Messiah has been spoken of.
This is what Micah is alluding to.This verse doesn't mean that Christ literally pre-existed.
Rather, his origins have been spoke of from ancient times.Micah 5:2 (NIV)
“But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans [ Or rulers ] of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins [ Hebrew goings out ] are from of old, from ancient times. [ Or from days of eternity ] “(KJV)
But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.(NASB)
“But as for (A)you, Bethlehem Ephrathah,
Too little to be among the clans of Judah,
From (B)you One will go forth for Me to be ruler in Israel
His goings forth are (D)from long ago,
From the days of eternity.”(YLT)
And thou, Beth-Lehem Ephratah, Little to be among the chiefs of Judah! From thee to Me he cometh forth — to be ruler in Israel, And his comings forth [are] of old, From the days of antiquity.mowtsa'ah
origin, place of going out from
origin
places of going out to or fromqedem
east, antiquity, front, that which is before, aforetime
front, from the front or east, in front, mount of the East
ancient time, aforetime, ancient, from of old, earliest time
anciently, of old (adverb)
beginningAgain AdamP in my opinion you seem to be ignoring the obvious because of your pre-defined belief.
It says that his ORIGIN is from ancient times. That seems very clear to me. I think you are dodging the obvious meaning again. You seem to have a tendency to go for the obscure meaning rather than the obvious. In this case the words 'spoken of' or 'prophecied' seem to be added in by you.
No matter how clear something is, a person can change or alter something if he wants to. The question is why do you want to? Is it not better to let truth speak for itself and learn humbly from God so that he can exhalt you, than try to mould truth into your way of seeing things?
I believe the pre existance of Messiah, the anointed one, was his predestination…he did not exist as divine son until he was begotten in flesh…his birth was his beginning…(Ps 2:7) YVAH speaks of the son & decrees “this day” have I begotten you
the word decree means “an appointment of time or space”…it denotes predestination & not pre existance
there is a belief that all was made in the spirit before it was made in the material world & that includes the spirits of men…I think that may be possible but that would mean that the spirit that pre existed with God became incarnate at birth…a spirit is not the same as a spirit body…angels are spirit bodies…(Ps 104) says that God made the angels spirits or spirit bodies…flesh & blood was made a living soul
a soul does not exist without the flesh body as the soul is the spirit & body as a whole…paul says in (2thes 5:23) that he prays that our “whole” body & spirit & soul be saved…the wholeness of body & spirit is soul…soul is the expression of body & spirit as a whole…
(2 cor 7:1) “let us cleanse ouselves from all filthiness of the flesh & spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God”…notice that paul doesnt mention the soul in this scripture…that is because the soul is the spirit & body as a whole
the spirit can be saved while the body is lost due to the corruption of the flesh…we reap what we sow & if we sow to the flesh we reap corruption…if the body is lost even though the spirit is saved due to faith in Jesus but walking in the works of the flesh then the soul is lost…
the soul is expression of body & spirit & if the body is destroyed in the lake of fire even though the spirit is saved then the expression of spirit & body is lost also, thus the soul is lost…this is the condition that Jesus refers to as outer darkness…
the spirit is saved from eternal damnation, but the body is destroyed, thus the expression of soul is lost…Jesus came to save the soul but the soul can be lost even with faith in Jesus…this is the result of sowing to the flesh…the works of the flesh will not inherit the kingdom, & only those who are led by the spirit are the sons of God (romans 8:14)
the place often spoken of by Jesus called outer darkness is overlooked & believed to be eternal damnation…I am inclined to believe that it refers to the expression of the soul being lost even though the spirit is saved
paul once spoke about a man in the church being turned over to satan for the destruction of the flesh that his soul may be saved…the man was a practicing believer who continued to sin
Hi Dora,
It appears that what you believe is not what scripture says:
Micah 5:2
“But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins are from of old, from ancient times. [ Or from days of eternity ] “Quote (t8 @ Jan. 23 2005,23:15) Hi Dora, It appears that what you believe is not what scripture says:
Micah 5:2
“But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins are from of old, from ancient times. [ Or from days of eternity ] “
(heb 1:1) “God, who at sundry times & in divers manners spoke in time past unto the fathers by the prophets”…it appears if you compare scritpture with scripture that “the ancient times” is speaking of what paul calls “time past” & refers to prophetic announcement of the coming Messiahdays of eternity is a contradiction in terms…days refers to time & eternity has no time
Hi Dora,
'decree' does not mean 'appointment' but 'decision' or 'determination' surely.The word is used in scripture not uncommonly[eg Acts 16 and 17] and you interpretation seems deceptive.
Predestination theory does not preclude the fact that the scriptures are perhaps meant to be interpreted literally.Man as soul=body and spirit is also unscriptural.
Man was made from dust and God blew into hiim the Breath of life and he became a living soul.
But he still was of Dust as God reminded him a few pages later.
“Remember man that though art dust and unto dust thou shalt return”Hi,
Ps 89.5
” The heavens will praise your wonders O Lord. Your faithfulness also IN THE ASSEMBLY OF THE HOLY ONES. For who in the skies is comparable to the Lord? Who AMONG THE SONS OF THE MIGHTY is like the Lord, a God greatly feared in the COUNCIL OF THE HOLY ONES and awesome ABOVE THOSE WHO ARE AROUND HIM”
Ex 15.11
“Who is like you AMONG THE GODS, O Lord”We know from Heb 1 that Yeshua is described as a God in Ps 45 and he is also mentioned in Ps 102 and 110.These scriptures clarify that certain others in heaven[so not men] are called gods in the OT.They are the sons of God of Jb 38
My question is do these two scriptures also relate to Yeshua? Surely the Father is not described as 'among the gods' or 'in the assembly of the holy ones' etc. His glory far exceeds theirs and is not comparable I would have thought.
What can others glean and share?
Hi,
1Jn 1f
“What WAS FROM THE BEGINNING,
what we have heard,
what we have seen with our eyes,
what we beheld and our hands handled, concerning THE WORD OF LIFE-
and the life was manifested and we have seen and bear witness and proclaim to you THE ETERNAL LIFE,
WHICH WAS WITH THE FATHER and was manifested to us-
what we have seen and heard we proclaim to you also,
that you may also have fellowship with us ;
and indeed our fellowship is with the Father,
and with His Son Jesus Christ.
And these things we write so that our joy may be complete”John's testimony about Jesus says it all.
Hi ,
Heb 7.1f
” For this Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of the Most High God, who met Abraham as he was returning from the slaughter of the kings and blessed him, to whom Abraham apportioned a part of all the spoils, was first of all, by translation of his name , king of righteousness, and then also king of Salem which is king of peace.
WITHOUT FATHER , WITHOUT MOTHER, WITHOUT GENEOLOGY, HAVING NEITHER BEGINNING OF DAYS NOR END OF LIFE BUT MADE LIKE THE SON OF GOD, he abides a priest perpetually”What does this say about the Son of God?
I say it says that the Son of God was begotten before time. He did not have a human father or mother then. He is the first and the last.
ps
Heb 10.5f
” Sacrifice and offering thou hast not desired but A BODY THOU HAST PREPARED FOR ME”If a body is prepared for Jesus then he must exist prior to the conception of that body surely?
Beware Heb 10.29
Hi,
1 Jn 4.2
” By this you know the Spirit of God;every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God”Who came in the flesh? Jesus Christ. So what you might say so did we and how does that make Jesus different? The difference is that Jesus existed as the Son of God before he came in the flesh or the above verse has no meaning.
4.15
” Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God ,God abides in him and he in God”Hi,
Adam Pastor has proposed that the Logos, who is the Son of God, does not exist. Would anyone else agree that Jesus was only the Son of Man and that Jesus was not with the Father in the beginning, was not sent from heaven by the Father and did not come in the flesh?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
