- This topic has 25,959 replies, 116 voices, and was last updated 1 month ago by
.
- Posts
Maybe I would rewrite it like this:
He is the unique expression, as a human being, of the Wisdom of God. It was the Wisdom of God which existed from the beginning, and that Wisdom became a person at the conception of Jesus.Still lacking….. However my example that I have shared before also works: using my son (Nathan) and his father (Dan) as examples.
In the beginning was Nathan, and Nathan was with Dan, and Nathan was Dan. Nathan was in the beginning with Dan.
How was Nathan “with” Dan before he was born? The same way Jesus was “with” his Father before he was born.
Quote (Not3in1 @ May 29 2007,18:45) Maybe I would rewrite it like this:
He is the unique expression, as a human being, of the Wisdom of God. It was the Wisdom of God which existed from the beginning, and that Wisdom became a person at the conception of Jesus.
Hi not3,
Many have thought so from Prov8 and Christ is shown in scripture to be the Wisdom of God, but prov 8 shows in fact that Wisdom is inherent in all creation. The monogenes Son is more than wisdom. He is the unique beloved Son.Hi Not3,
Loins and all that stuff.
Heb 7
” 5And verily they that are of the sons of Levi, who receive the office of the priesthood, have a commandment to take tithes of the people according to the law, that is, of their brethren, though they come out of the loins of Abraham:6But he whose descent is not counted from them received tithes of Abraham, and blessed him that had the promises.
7And without all contradiction the less is blessed of the better.
8And here men that die receive tithes; but there he receiveth them, of whom it is witnessed that he liveth.
9And as I may so say, Levi also, who receiveth tithes, payed tithes in Abraham.
10For he was yet in the loins of his father, when Melchisedec met him. “
God had a living relationship with the Word-more than being in the loins.
He is the beloved son sent into the vineyard of God.In John 1:1 it states “. . . kai theos en ho logos”. This is usually translated as “. . . and the Word was God.”
The original word order in Greek, however, is “. . . and God was the Word.”
If when the predicate nominative precedes the verb and subject in Greek as it is the case here, the predicate nominative (in this case “theos”) it cannot grammatically have a definite article. If it did have a definite article, then its position in the sentence would make it the subject of the sentence.
Also however, when the predicate nominative precedes the verb and subject in the Greek, then the grammatical and stylistic effect is to emphasize the meaning of the predicate nominative and to give it the added effect of being a very forceful adjective.
So the statement in John 1:1 means that the Word, which is Jesus, is God–not just “a god,” like the Jehovah's Witnesses highly biased NWT suggests.
John 1:1 literally translated reads: “In beginning was the word, and the word was with the God, and God was the word.”
Notice that it says “God was the word.” This is the actual word for word translation. It is not saying that “a god was the word.” as the corrupted NWT states. That wouldn't make sense. Let's break it down into three statements.
“In beginning was the word…”
(en arche en ho logos)
A very simple statement that the Word was already there in the beginning.“and the word was with the God…”
(kai ho logos en pros ton theon)
This same Word was with God.“and God was the word.”
(kai theos en ho logos)
— Properly translated as “and the Word was God.”Joh 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, This obviously identifies Jesus as The Word (Jehovah God)
The Gospel of John emphasizes the divinity of Christ from beginning to end. It starts with John 1:1 and climaxes in Thomas’ confession of faith when he says “My Lord and my God” (John 20:28).
In other words, John’s Gospel begins by declaring Jesus Christ to be God the Word in flesh and to be fully divine and concludes with.
Joh 20:28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.
The scripture plainly says ~Word~ not Son, not even being.
God's Word that HE used to create everything was in the beginning~Surprised?~ God speaks things into existance.
Rom 4:17 (As it is written, I have made thee a father of many nations,) before him whom he believed, even God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were.
Big Surprise uh!
Gen 1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
So in the beginning (of creation) there was the Word (God spoke) This word that God used was (Naturally) With God.
Because the Word came FROM GOD that word was God.
The Word that God used became flesh with a little help from Mary.
Whatever the Father thought, Jesus spoke.Joh 8:28 Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things.
Joh 12:49 For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak.
Joh 5:19 Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.
Luk 12:10 And everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but the one who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven.
The Word said that it is God who tells Him what to say. Does the Holy Spirit sometimes tell you what to say?
Luk 12:12 for the Holy Spirit will teach you in that very hour what you ought to say.”
Luk 10:21 In that same hour he rejoiced in the Holy Spirit and said, “I thank you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that you have hidden these things from the wise and understanding and revealed them to little children; yes, Father, for such was your gracious will.
Jesus was the result of the Father's creation of the word to become human.
The Word became flesh. And dwelt among us!
Joh 1:14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.
Jesus was the result of the word becoming flesh. Jesus being the very WORD of God certianly had the Spirit without measure.
Is thought an unspoken word?
IHN&L,
Ken
Quote (Cult Buster @ May 30 2007,00:46) In John 1:1 it states “. . . kai theos en ho logos”. This is usually translated as “. . . and the Word was God.” The original word order in Greek, however, is “. . . and God was the Word.”
If when the predicate nominative precedes the verb and subject in Greek as it is the case here, the predicate nominative (in this case “theos”) it cannot grammatically have a definite article. If it did have a definite article, then its position in the sentence would make it the subject of the sentence.
Also however, when the predicate nominative precedes the verb and subject in the Greek, then the grammatical and stylistic effect is to emphasize the meaning of the predicate nominative and to give it the added effect of being a very forceful adjective.
Hi CB,There is no english translation for Logos. No Greek scholar will deny strict idea of the Logos being a person. Remember that “Logos” is a NOUN (person, place OR thing). In Latin, the Logos can mean “reason.” Even the great Tertullian believed the Logos to mean the wisdom and mind of God!
If the Logos can be interpreted as a thing, such as an idea or plan, wouldn't it be fair to say that your interpretation is only one way to see it?
Quote (Cult Buster @ May 30 2007,00:46) Notice that it says “God was the word.” This is the actual word for word translation.
Again, because there is no english counter for Logos, we are to assume that “word” is Jesus? So in the quote above you are asserting that “God was Jesus.”? Is this correct? This sounds wrong to my ears for many reasons. Can God be spoken of in past tense?Quote (Cult Buster @ May 30 2007,00:46) John 1:1 literally translated reads: “In beginning was the word, and the word was with the God, and God was the word.”
Because LOGOS is a noun (a person, place or thing), let's try something for fun.Let's replace Logos with “candy.”
In the beginning was candy, and candy was with God, and God was candy.
Now let's also use the Trinitarian way of understanding “God” and replace some words to see if they make sense.
In the beginning was God the Son, and God the Son was with God the Father – God the Son – and God the Holy Spirit, and God the Father – God the Son – and God the Holy Spirit was God the Son.
OR….
In the beginning was Jesus, and Jesus was the Father, and the Father was Jesus.
The scary point I'm trying to make is that if words mean anything, one must be careful about choosing what Logos means. There are a variety of meanings attached to it's word. Scholars debate this heavily. Shouldn't we (I'm assuming none of us are famed scholars), consider and dig out all possibilities?
When we feel free to substitute the meaning of Logos to what “we” feel it means, or use the “God-by-deduction” method… sometimes scripture becomes a mess!
Hi Not3,
John told us that the Word had become flesh and he had seen his glory, the glory of the only begotten. If the Word became flesh then the Word existed prior to becoming flesh, and that Word was with the Father as three verses tell us. So it seems pretty clear that Christ is that glorious being who was with God. Christ on earth prior to the Jordan had no obvious glory as Is 53 shows, so that glory, which he asked his Father to give him back, precedes his birth. Again Rev 19 seems to show the son of Man returning as the man from heaven and he has the Word written on him as identification as the king of kings.Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 30 2007,05:37) If the Word became flesh then the Word existed prior to becoming flesh
You are chosing that the Logos means Jesus. OK, but look at what you are saying when the Word became flesh.What the Word BECAME is flesh…….
This only implies that “Jesus” existed prior to becoming flesh becaus you want it to. You have to read this into the passage, for it does not say anything of the kind.
Again, “Logos/the Word” has other meanings as I have shown. What about those meanings? Should we simply erase the possibilities of those meanings because they do not line up with our theology? I don't know….
Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 30 2007,05:37) So it seems pretty clear that Christ is that glorious being who was with God. Christ on earth prior to the Jordan had no obvious glory as Is 53 shows, so that glory, which he asked his Father to give him back, precedes his birth.
John 1:14
“…….and we have seen is glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father….”When Jesus was born he received glory according to above verse.
Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 30 2007,05:37) Again Rev 19 seems to show the son of Man returning as the man from heaven and he has the Word written on him as identification as the king of kings.
Rev. 19:13 shows that “The Word of God” is a name for Jesus. Whether God's word is written, spoken, or made flesh, it makes God known. As you know, Jesus has many names. Also, the “word/Word” of God is used in many ways to mean various things.Quote (Not3in1 @ May 30 2007,06:06) Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 30 2007,05:37) So it seems pretty clear that Christ is that glorious being who was with God. Christ on earth prior to the Jordan had no obvious glory as Is 53 shows, so that glory, which he asked his Father to give him back, precedes his birth.
John 1:14
“…….and we have seen is glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father….”When Jesus was born he received glory according to above verse.
Hi Not3,
Not so in my opinion
Jn1
” 14And 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.15John 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.
16And of his fulness have all we received, and grace for grace.
17For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.
18No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.”
John the Baptist, the older cousin, said Christ was before him, and the verse aligns with 2Peter1
“16For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty.
17For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
18And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount.”
and Matt 17
” 1And after six days Jesus taketh Peter, James, and John his brother, and bringeth them up into an high mountain apart,2And was transfigured before them: and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light.
3And, behold, there appeared unto them Moses and Elias talking with him.
4Then answered Peter, and said unto Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias.
5While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.
6And when the disciples heard it, they fell on their face, and were sore afraid.
7And Jesus came and touched them, and said, Arise, and be not afraid. “
So that glory was shown on the mountain. It certainly was never shown prior to the Jordan according to Is 53.
Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 30 2007,07:08) 15John 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. And….
So that glory was shown on the mountain. It certainly was never shown prior to the Jordan according to Is 53.
Of course as the word/Word/Jesus/Plan the Christ was “before” John because God existed before John. Christ was derived from God. And because the Word (or whatever) existed “with” God and “was” God, it goes without saying that such would be before the Baptist.Question: if Jesus existed prior to his birth, and thus he was before John in the sense of age – how old was Jesus before he was re-incarnated into the Logos?
Jesus was stamped with glory the minute he arrived on the scene. The very fact that he is the offspring of God gives him glory. Would you deny the Son of God glory at this birth? Those who came to pay him homage certainly did not.
When a son of Royalty is born, they are automatically deemed Princes with all the rights on that sonship. Jesus is no different. When he received the Spirit without measure, he was given “access” to power and knowledge. Much like the coming-of-age Prince would be included in his Father's affairs from that point on. Certainly as a babe, the Prince could not take over for his Father? Certainly as a toddler, Jesus could not minister and carry out his duties as Savior of the world. The Father saw Jesus was ready at his baptism and called him into service – giving him the tools he needed. This makes sense to me. Am I completely off track here?
Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 30 2007,07:08) Quote (Not3in1 @ May 30 2007,06:06) Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 30 2007,05:37) So it seems pretty clear that Christ is that glorious being who was with God. Christ on earth prior to the Jordan had no obvious glory as Is 53 shows, so that glory, which he asked his Father to give him back, precedes his birth.
John 1:14
“…….and we have seen is glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father….”When Jesus was born he received glory according to above verse.
Hi Not3,
Not so in my opinion
Jn1
” 14And 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.15John 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.
16And of his fulness have all we received, and grace for grace.
17For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.
18No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.”
John the Baptist, the older cousin, said Christ was before him, and the verse aligns with 2Peter1
“16For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty.
17For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
18And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount.”
and Matt 17
” 1And after six days Jesus taketh Peter, James, and John his brother, and bringeth them up into an high mountain apart,2And was transfigured before them: and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light.
3And, behold, there appeared unto them Moses and Elias talking with him.
4Then answered Peter, and said unto Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias.
5While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.
6And when the disciples heard it, they fell on their face, and were sore afraid.
7And Jesus came and touched them, and said, Arise, and be not afraid. “
So that glory was shown on the mountain. It certainly was never shown prior to the Jordan according to Is 53.
NHYou say…
Quote
Hi Not3,
Not so in my opinion
Jn1
” 14And 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.15John 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.
16And of his fulness have all we received, and grace for grace.
17For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.
18No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.”
Good point. Also since no man had seen God at any time and Jesus was also man and had seen God, then the question would be when did he see God?
Before he came in the flesh or after he took on the likeness of of sinfull flesh and being found in the form of man?
Also since no man had seen God at any time and Jesus was also man and had seen God, then the question would be when did he see God?
*************************************************************
WJ, the verse doesn't say that Jesus saw God, it says “…..he hath declared him.” Jesus made God known. Because no one had seen the Father – Jesus made him known. Anyway, that's my take.Quote (WorshippingJesus @ May 30 2007,07:40) Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 30 2007,07:08) Quote (Not3in1 @ May 30 2007,06:06) Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 30 2007,05:37) So it seems pretty clear that Christ is that glorious being who was with God. Christ on earth prior to the Jordan had no obvious glory as Is 53 shows, so that glory, which he asked his Father to give him back, precedes his birth.
John 1:14
“…….and we have seen is glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father….”When Jesus was born he received glory according to above verse.
Hi Not3,
Not so in my opinion
Jn1
” 14And 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.15John 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.
16And of his fulness have all we received, and grace for grace.
17For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.
18No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.”
John the Baptist, the older cousin, said Christ was before him, and the verse aligns with 2Peter1
“16For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty.
17For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
18And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount.”
and Matt 17
” 1And after six days Jesus taketh Peter, James, and John his brother, and bringeth them up into an high mountain apart,2And was transfigured before them: and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light.
3And, behold, there appeared unto them Moses and Elias talking with him.
4Then answered Peter, and said unto Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias.
5While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.
6And when the disciples heard it, they fell on their face, and were sore afraid.
7And Jesus came and touched them, and said, Arise, and be not afraid. “
So that glory was shown on the mountain. It certainly was never shown prior to the Jordan according to Is 53.
NHYou say…
Quote
Hi Not3,
Not so in my opinion
Jn1
” 14And 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.15John 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.
16And of his fulness have all we received, and grace for grace.
17For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.
18No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.”
Good point. Also since no man had seen God at any time and Jesus was also man and had seen God, then the question would be when did he see God?
Before he came in the flesh or after he took on the likeness of of sinfull flesh and being found in the form of man?
Indeed W.94
You say…
Quote
And my response is that I have not changed any of the scripture at all but I did use a definition in Stong's concordance for the word Logos. I don't believe that Jesus existed as a sentient person before he was born of a virgin. I know that I am not a scholar and I respect all the work that they did in translating the scriptures from the original language into English so that I can understand the scriptures, but when I have a question about something in the scriptures, I go to God and ask Him for understanding, and so I am not limited because I am not a scholar. God answers my prayers.First of all as you know greek words just like words in any language can have more than one meaning.
For instance…
look at the Greek word “aggelos” , which means…
a messenger, envoy, one who is sent, an angel, a messenger from GodAlmost exclusively the word is translated “Angels” and literally refers to Angels. 186 times you will find the word in the NT scriptures of that 179 times it is “Angels” and 7 times it is translated messenger.
Example…
Matt 1:20
But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel (aggelos) of the LORD appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.Luke 7:27,28
This is he, of whom it is written, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee.
For I say unto you, Among those that are born of women there is not a greater prophet than John the Baptist: but he that is least in the kingdom of God is greater than he.So do you think the translators should have held to the 179 times the context for “aggelos” was speaking of Angels and interpreted Luke 7:27,28 as an Angel from God. However we know John was not an Angel for he was born of a woman. Unless you believe like the JWS that Angels can take on human flesh.
So the point being because the strongs concordance shows the meaning of Logos as being a saying or plan in no way means it has to be exclusively used in that way.
John 1:1 and 1 Jn 1:1,2 and Rev. 19:13 and Lk 16:2 and Phil 4:7 shows the word logos used in a different way.
You say you havn’t changed any scripture and yet you changed the meaning that the translators brought out or what the inspired writters wanted to convey.
So am I to understand that you believe and trust your own judgment and ability to hear from God first, even if it contradicts the scriptures and what is written by more than 600 translators?
You say…
Quote I disagree with you on this point. He spoke of drinking his blood which we know is not literal, but it is the remedy for sin. Also, he ascended into heaven in his body after he had shed his blood and had risen from the dead, and so why would you say it was not pertinent to his coming down from heaven or returning back to heaven?
Because trying to make the case that Jesus could not have pre-existed without a body therefore he could not have come down from heaven is not what John or Jesus meant when he said…Jn 6:62
What and if ye shall see the *Son of man ascend up where he was before*?You say…
Quote 1 Cor 15: YLT
45 so also it hath been written, `The first man Adam became a living creature,' the *last Adam is for a life-giving spirit*,
46 but that which is spiritual is not first, but that which was natural, afterwards that which is spiritual.
47 The first man is out of the earth, earthy; *the second man is the Lord out of heaven*;And by the above scripture are you saying that Jesus was already perfected when he came into the world? What about Hebrews 5:8-9 which states:5:8
Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;
5:9
And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;Absolutely! How could he make attonement for us unless he was the perfect sinless Lamb of God?
Surely you are not incinuating Jesus was not perfect? He is and was the Spotless Lamb of God, the perfect sacrifice.
Gods law demanded the sacrifice be without spot or blemish.
Exod 12:5
Your lamb shall be without blemish, a male of the first year: ye shall take it out from the sheep, or from the goats:Jn 14:30
Hereafter I will not talk much with you: for the prince of this world cometh, and *hath nothing in me*.Heb 4:15
For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, *yet without sin*.Do you think the writer of Hebrews would write he had no sin and then in the next chapter say he needed perfecting?
Heb 5:
8 Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;
9 And being made *perfect*, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;He was tempted like we were and learned what it was to be a man and submit in obedience through his sufferings
“Perfect” Greek, ‘teleioo’ which means;
1) to make perfect, complete
a) to carry through completely, to accomplish, finish, bring to an end
2) to complete (perfect)
a) add what is yet wanting in order to render a thing full
b) to be found perfect
3) to bring to the end (goal) proposed
4) to accomplish
a) bring to a close or fulfilment by event
1)of the prophecies of the scripturesHe carried out completely the will of the Father and fulfilled all the scriptures concerning himself so he could be a our Faithful High Priest after the order of Melchisedec. Jesus was the perfect sinless Lamb , the only perfecting he needed was the carrying out of the Fathers will.
You say…
Quote
I believe that God made every thing that he made with Jesus and we who are his disciples in mind. He is God's heir and we are joint heirs with him.Hebrews 1
1:1
God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
1:2
Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;You didn’t answer my question.
Do you believe Paul and John believed what you say, that he did not pre-exist his coming in the flesh?
Notice the “By whom” he made the worlds in Heb 1:2?
And again what is your explanation for all the pronouns ascribed to Jesus in a pre-existant state?
The word “with” (Gr. pros) in Jn. 1.1 means “to, towards” when used with the accusative as it is here (Thayer, p.541). The word is generally translated “to” or “toward” (NKJV) or “unto” (KJV; see John 1:29,42,47; 2:3; 3:2,4,20,26). So this phrase cannot be referring to “something said” or a thought or a plan of God.
Blessings!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
