- This topic has 25,959 replies, 116 voices, and was last updated 1 month ago by
.
- Posts
Hi Jammin,
So what the manuscripts say do not matter to you because you choose your own versions to suit your dogmas?Quote (jammin @ April 25 2012,21:23) that is the meaning of 2 cor 5.19
why dont you read the context well instead of doctoring the bible LOLpoor edj.
Hi Jammin,What are you trying to suggest?
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgQuote (mikeboll64 @ April 24 2012,09:46) Frank, I shot down two of your unscriptural sources last night. You and Nick must have been too busy “owning me” to respond to my rebuttals?
Let me refresh your mind:
Your source claimed that since manna didn't literally come down from heaven, then neither did Jesus. But manna is called “the bread of angels”. Do angels come to the wilderness and dig it up out of the earth? Has there ever been another time when honey flavored breadstuff manifested itself out of the ground? Has science discovered this “manna” hiding underground in the wilderness anywhere on earth?
Or could it be that God truly and literally sent this bread down from heaven?
The bottom line is that your source's whole theory relies on manna not literally coming down from heaven. How can they prove that? And if they can't, then their whole theory goes out the window, doesn't it?
Also, did you notice that these guys are desparately reaching for anything at all to cause “reasonable doubt” as to what Jesus' words meant. They KNOW he said he came down from heaven, but they simply don't WANT TO accept this, because they've already made up their minds that he didn't. And so instead of accepting what the clear words of their Lord actually say, they go searching for ANYTHING that can remotely cast a shadow of doubt.
They fell way short with the manna thing. And since manna did literally come down from heaven, do you think your source will now accept Jesus' words when he says he came down from heaven? Will you?
Mike,
You shot down nothing! You might have attempted to shoot, but you obviously were shooting blanks, since you have yet to show me in Scripture where it says that manna LITERALLY rained down from heaven. Note that this manna is not described as LITERALLY raining down from heaven, but instead it is described as appearing after the dew had gone up.
Then said Yahweh unto Moshe, Behold, I will rain bread from heaven for you; and the people shall go out and gather a certain rate every day, that I may prove them, whether they will walk in my law, or not. … And it came to pass, that at even the quails came up, and covered the camp: and in the morning the dew lay round about the host. And when the dew that lay was gone up, behold, upon the face of the wilderness [there lay] a small round thing, [as] small as the hoar frost on the ground (Exodus 16:4, 13-14).
It is quite obvious to me that when it is said that Yahweh said “Behold, I will rain bread from heaven for you …” that this was not written or said in a LITERAL sense in that they would actually see manna LITERALLY falling like rain from heaven, but that He was causing this to happen with His power (or authority) from His heavenly position. Note also that it says “…that at even the quails came up, and covered the camp.” Are we to conclude that these quails LITERALLY “came up” out of the ground simply because it says that they “came up”? Certainly not! Note what Moshe FIGURATIVELY says as follows:
And Moses spoke in the ears of all the congregation of Ysryl the words of this song, until they were ended:
Give ear, O you heavens, and I will speak; and hear, O earth, the words of my mouth. My doctrine shall drop as the rain, my speech shall distil as the dew, as the small rain upon the tender herb, and as the showers upon the grass: Because I will publish the name Yahweh: ascribe you greatness unto our Mighty One (Deuteronomy 31:30 – 31: 1-3).
Did Moshe's doctrinal word song LITERALLY fall from heaven like rain or did his speech LITERALLY distil as the dew, as the small rain upon the tender herb, and as the showers upon the grass? Certainly not!
As far as Psalm 78:25 saying: “Men ate the bread of angels; he sent them all the food they could eat.”, I take it from this that you have concluded that “angels” actually eat this same manna or bread, right? Well, if so, then you have jumped to a conclusion that this verse does not actually state, since it does not actually say “angels” eat this same bread or manna, but that it was “of” them. This could simply mean that Yahweh sent them to cause this manna to appear before the children of Ysryl. In this sense it could also be said it is “of” them.
Yes, you have been owned again for taking what is said in Scripture SO LITERALLY!
Quote (Frank4YAHWEH @ April 26 2012,08:07) Quote (mikeboll64 @ April 24 2012,09:46) Frank, I shot down two of your unscriptural sources last night. You and Nick must have been too busy “owning me” to respond to my rebuttals?
Let me refresh your mind:
Your source claimed that since manna didn't literally come down from heaven, then neither did Jesus. But manna is called “the bread of angels”. Do angels come to the wilderness and dig it up out of the earth? Has there ever been another time when honey flavored breadstuff manifested itself out of the ground? Has science discovered this “manna” hiding underground in the wilderness anywhere on earth?
Or could it be that God truly and literally sent this bread down from heaven?
The bottom line is that your source's whole theory relies on manna not literally coming down from heaven. How can they prove that? And if they can't, then their whole theory goes out the window, doesn't it?
Also, did you notice that these guys are desparately reaching for anything at all to cause “reasonable doubt” as to what Jesus' words meant. They KNOW he said he came down from heaven, but they simply don't WANT TO accept this, because they've already made up their minds that he didn't. And so instead of accepting what the clear words of their Lord actually say, they go searching for ANYTHING that can remotely cast a shadow of doubt.
They fell way short with the manna thing. And since manna did literally come down from heaven, do you think your source will now accept Jesus' words when he says he came down from heaven? Will you?
Mike,
You shot down nothing! You might have attempted to shoot, but you obviously were shooting blanks, since you have yet to show me in Scripture where it says that manna LITERALLY rained down from heaven. Note that this manna is not described as LITERALLY raining down from heaven, but instead it is described as appearing after the dew had gone up.
Then said Yahweh unto Moshe, Behold, I will rain bread from heaven for you; and the people shall go out and gather a certain rate every day, that I may prove them, whether they will walk in my law, or not. … And it came to pass, that at even the quails came up, and covered the camp: and in the morning the dew lay round about the host. And when the dew that lay was gone up, behold, upon the face of the wilderness [there lay] a small round thing, [as] small as the hoar frost on the ground (Exodus 16:4, 13-14).
It is quite obvious to me that when it is said that Yahweh said “Behold, I will rain bread from heaven for you …” that this was not written or said in a LITERAL sense in that they would actually see manna LITERALLY falling like rain from heaven, but that He was causing this to happen with His power (or authority) from His heavenly position. Note also that it says “…that at even the quails came up, and covered the camp.” Are we to conclude that these quails LITERALLY “came up” out of the ground simply because it says that they “came up”? Certainly not! Note what Moshe FIGURATIVELY says as follows:
And Moses spoke in the ears of all the congregation of Ysryl the words of this song, until they were ended:
Give ear, O you heavens, and I will speak; and hear, O earth, the words of my mouth. My doctrine shall drop as the rain, my speech shall distil as the dew, as the small rain upon the tender herb, and as the showers upon the grass: Because I will publish the name Yahweh: ascribe you greatness unto our Mighty One (Deuteronomy 31:30 – 31: 1-3).
Did Moshe's doctrinal word song LITERALLY fall from heaven like rain or did his speech LITERALLY distil as the dew, as the small rain upon the tender herb, and as the showers upon the grass? Certainly not!
As far as Psalm 78:25 saying: “Men ate the bread of angels; he sent them all the food they could eat.”, I take it from this that you have concluded that “angels” actually eat this same manna or bread, right? Well, if so, then you have jumped to a conclusion that this verse does not actually state, since it does not actually say “angels” eat this same bread or manna, but that it was “of” them. This could simply mean that Yahweh sent them to cause this manna to appear before the children of Ysryl. In this sense it could also be said it is “of” them.
Yes, you have been owned again for taking what is said in Scripture SO LITERALLY!
dO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT the God of Moses appears to be a mind changer…confirmed by latter covenant changes…the Need of…. preferences to faithful House leadership…All the words in the book can be written of God…but down hear! on earth God appears as if he is the mind changer….when a more Faithful leader arrives on earth…Gods In!! .. men cant survive the insanity of the God changing Mind….where… it resembles government control …an the historical veiw of God fear to run city”s with out revolt! power + power = overwelming victory….Hey, The Romans used the code to conquer Jesus…Look at disputes over bodies, an fears of railing acussations of disstruction…It is only wise to Judge the respect that has placed in the code of authority…that have in fact clear revealed themselves, challenged, questioned by Gods new favwrite.. as close as soon after the days they happened to rule….don't give your Life unto a code..tAKE CARE OF THE EARTH WHILE YOUR HERE!
Smile
Quote (Nick Hassan @ April 26 2012,08:14) Hi Frank,
The words are from the Spirit [of Christ] in Moses.[1 peter 1 10-12]
Nick,As usual, I have no idea what you are talking about!
Quote (charity @ April 26 2012,08:56) Quote (Frank4YAHWEH @ April 26 2012,08:07) Quote (mikeboll64 @ April 24 2012,09:46) Frank, I shot down two of your unscriptural sources last night. You and Nick must have been too busy “owning me” to respond to my rebuttals?
Let me refresh your mind:
Your source claimed that since manna didn't literally come down from heaven, then neither did Jesus. But manna is called “the bread of angels”. Do angels come to the wilderness and dig it up out of the earth? Has there ever been another time when honey flavored breadstuff manifested itself out of the ground? Has science discovered this “manna” hiding underground in the wilderness anywhere on earth?
Or could it be that God truly and literally sent this bread down from heaven?
The bottom line is that your source's whole theory relies on manna not literally coming down from heaven. How can they prove that? And if they can't, then their whole theory goes out the window, doesn't it?
Also, did you notice that these guys are desparately reaching for anything at all to cause “reasonable doubt” as to what Jesus' words meant. They KNOW he said he came down from heaven, but they simply don't WANT TO accept this, because they've already made up their minds that he didn't. And so instead of accepting what the clear words of their Lord actually say, they go searching for ANYTHING that can remotely cast a shadow of doubt.
They fell way short with the manna thing. And since manna did literally come down from heaven, do you think your source will now accept Jesus' words when he says he came down from heaven? Will you?
Mike,
You shot down nothing! You might have attempted to shoot, but you obviously were shooting blanks, since you have yet to show me in Scripture where it says that manna LITERALLY rained down from heaven. Note that this manna is not described as LITERALLY raining down from heaven, but instead it is described as appearing after the dew had gone up.
Then said Yahweh unto Moshe, Behold, I will rain bread from heaven for you; and the people shall go out and gather a certain rate every day, that I may prove them, whether they will walk in my law, or not. … And it came to pass, that at even the quails came up, and covered the camp: and in the morning the dew lay round about the host. And when the dew that lay was gone up, behold, upon the face of the wilderness [there lay] a small round thing, [as] small as the hoar frost on the ground (Exodus 16:4, 13-14).
It is quite obvious to me that when it is said that Yahweh said “Behold, I will rain bread from heaven for you …” that this was not written or said in a LITERAL sense in that they would actually see manna LITERALLY falling like rain from heaven, but that He was causing this to happen with His power (or authority) from His heavenly position. Note also that it says “…that at even the quails came up, and covered the camp.” Are we to conclude that these quails LITERALLY “came up” out of the ground simply because it says that they “came up”? Certainly not! Note what Moshe FIGURATIVELY says as follows:
And Moses spoke in the ears of all the congregation of Ysryl the words of this song, until they were ended:
Give ear, O you heavens, and I will speak; and hear, O earth, the words of my mouth. My doctrine shall drop as the rain, my speech shall distil as the dew, as the small rain upon the tender herb, and as the showers upon the grass: Because I will publish the name Yahweh: ascribe you greatness unto our Mighty One (Deuteronomy 31:30 – 31: 1-3).
Did Moshe's doctrinal word song LITERALLY fall from heaven like rain or did his speech LITERALLY distil as the dew, as the small rain upon the tender herb, and as the showers upon the grass? Certainly not!
As far as Psalm 78:25 saying: “Men ate the bread of angels; he sent them all the food they could eat.”, I take it from this that you have concluded that “angels” actually eat this same manna or bread, right? Well, if so, then you have jumped to a conclusion that this verse does not actually state, since it does not actually say “angels” eat this same bread or manna, but that it was “of” them. This could simply mean that Yahweh sent them to cause this manna to appear before the children of Ysryl. In this sense it could also be said it is “of” them.
Yes, you have been owned again for taking what is said in Scripture SO LITERALLY!
dO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT the God of Moses appears to be a mind changer…confirmed by latter covenant changes…the Need of…. preferences to faithful House leadership…All the words in the book can be written of God…but down hear! on earth God appears as if he is the mind changer….when a more Faithful leader arrives on earth…Look at disputes over bodies, an fears of railing acussations of disstruction…It is only wise to Judge the respect that has placed in the code of authority…that in fact clear reveal themselves as questioned as close as soon after the days they happened….don't give your Life unto a code..tAKE CARE OF THE EARTH WHILE YOUR HERE!
Smile
charity,I have no idea what you are taking about either!
cool! again in one sentence…you have to axe the last guy! to gain a lead to power an glory!John did well did well for himself…
Quote (Nick Hassan @ April 26 2012,09:14) Hi Frank,
Read the scripture.
Nick,I not only read the Scripture, but also study the Scripture and still as usual have no idea what you are talking about!
Quote (charity @ April 25 2012,18:19) jammin,April wrote:ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 1:14-18
14και ο λογος &%
Let me see…Jesus was meant to be the Son Of David! but some, including John were pritty much against Davids throne receiving any glory an honour, they would have had no choice other than to divert the notions of the original prophetic monarchy, accomplishing by hurling the whole thing into space an time in a spin, replacing his present lumination with the new divine Jesus… not to mention..after slaming his mouth closed, fearing an hearing no rebuke…hence.. that was pritty much powerful enough to conquer the promise of Davids statues ruling the jewish earth for the present days…. keeping the romans oppressing in place, feeding themselves off the flesh of the Jewish inheritance…
what a scuffle…which still didn't address the fact that only the soul lives forever…. In egypt it is the custom to preserve flesh, preserve mummies, an raise zombies…literal attempts are preformed in mere word resurrections?….of little power..matthew 24…if they rise not, then perhaps they also lie about Jesus…in the mere sentences an verse's apart all in one chapter.
Charity,Jesus is the Son of David as to the flesh and the Son of God as to the spirit. The Spirit of God within him is divine because she is God's Spirit.
Do you understand these things?
Quote (Nick Hassan @ April 26 2012,10:15) Hi Frank,
Moses is just a blessed and chosen vessel.
It is the Spirit that does all.
Nick,As usual, I still have no idea of what you are talking about!
YAHSHUA: A DESCENDANT OF DAVID
3/14/90There are those who deny that Yahshua came in the flesh. The Apostle John reported that these are anti-messiahs (2Jn.7). Many people cannot believe that Yahshua was really human.
Some refer to him as “God,” some as “God in the flesh,” etc. indicating the belief that he was not really human. Some have even indicated he was in no way genetically related to any human on earth – not one. But what do the Scriptures reveal? Let us decide now to believe the Scriptures, even though these may not support our presently held views.Yahshua: A Descendant of David
o Romans 1:1-4. Yahshua was physically the seed of David (KJV). When Yahshua arose from the dead, he was then declared to be the son of Yahweh.
o Mt. 1:1-17. Yahshua the Messiah, the son of David.
o Mt. 9:27. Yahshua, the son of David.
o Mt. 15:22. Yahshua, the son of David.
o Mt. 20:30-31. Yahshua, the son of David.
o Mt. 21:9. Yahshua, the son of David.
o Mt. 22:41-45. The promised Messiah is the son of David.
o Mk. 10:47-48. Yahshua, the son of David.
o Mk. 12:35-37. The promised Messiah is the son of David.
o Lk. 1:32. Mary's firstborn son will rule forever on the throne of his father David.
o Lk. 18:38. Yahshua, the son of David.
o Lk. 20:41-44. The promised Messiah is David's son.
o Jn. 7:42. The Messiah was from the seed of David.
o Acts 2:30-31. “Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that Yahweh had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of HIS LOINS, ACCORDING TO THE FLESH, he would raise up [the] Messiah to sit on [David's] throne; …” KJV).
o Acts 7:37. “A prophet shall Yahweh your Elohim raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto … [Moses], …” (Deut. 18:15). This was Yahshua.
o Jer. 32:15. A Branch shall spring from David and rule on David's throne (Verse 17).
o 2Tim. 2:18. Yahshua Messiah, “of the seed of David” (KJV).
o Rev. 5:5. [Yahshua] was the Lamb, the Root [descendant] of David.
o Rev. 22:16. Yahshua, the root and offspring of David.
o Acts 13:22-23Yahshua: A Descendant of Abraham
o Gal. 3:16. The Messiah was the offspring of Abraham (the seed of Abraham, KJV).
o Gal. 3:29. Therefore, if we belong to the Messiah, we too, are Abraham's offspring.
o Mt. 1:1-2. Yahshua the Messiah is the descendant of Abraham.
o Acts 3:25-26. Yahweh promised Abraham that his descendents would be a blessing to all the families of the earth. The main descendant spoken of is Yahshua the Messiah.
o Rom. 9:4-6. The Messiah is descended from the Israelite people, who are children of Abraham (Verses 6,7).
o Gal. 3:8. The Gospel (of Yahshua Messiah, verse 1) was preached to Abraham saying, “In you shall all nations be blessed.” This is a reference to Yahshua Messiah.
o Gen. 12:3. In Abraham (and his descendant, Yahshua) all nations will be blessed.
o Heb. 2:16. Yahweh is not concerned with angels, but with Yahshua and his brethren, the descendants (seed, KJV) of Abraham.Yahshua: A Descendant of Judah
o Heb. 7:14. For it is evident that our Savior descended from Judah.
o Mt. 1:1-2. Yahshua Messiah descended from Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Judah.
o Mt. 2:6. A prophecy: The Messiah was to come from the rulers of Judah and Israel.
o Rev. 5:5. Yahshua: the “Lion of the tribe of Judah.”Yahshua Was Truly Human: 100% Flesh & Blood
o Heb. 2:11. Yahshua had the same origin as his brethren (RSV & others).
o Heb. 2:14. Yahshua was flesh and blood and had the same nature as other men.
o Heb. 2:17. Yahshua was made like his brethren in every respect.
o Rom. 8:29. Yahshua was the firstborn (from the dead) among many brethren.
o Jn. 1:14. The angel of Yahweh spoke, and his word was made flesh (Lk. 1:26,31).
o Jn. 3:6. That which is born of the flesh IS flesh. Yahshua was born of fleshly Mary.
o Gal. 4:4. Yahshua was born of a woman.
o Jn. 6:51. Yahshua gave his (human) flesh so that we might have life.
o Acts 2:30. From David's LOINS, Yahshua was born ACCORDING TO THE FLESH (KJV).
o Rom. 1:3. Yahshua was the SEED of David, ACCORDING TO THE FLESH (KJV).
o Rom. 8:3. Yahshua was sent in the likeness of sinful flesh.
o Rom. 9:5. Yahshua was born according to the flesh (RSV).
o 2Cor. 5:16. The Messiah was once a fleshly human being.
o Eph. 2:15. Yahshua, by his flesh, abolished hostility between man and his Creator.
o Col. 1:21-22. Yahshua's fleshly body reconciled us to Yahweh.
o 1Tim. 3:16. Yahshua was manifested (made known) in the flesh.
o Heb. 5:7. In the days of his flesh, Yahshua offered prayers with loud cries and tears.
o Heb. 10:20. Through his flesh, Yahshua opened the way to everlasting life.
o 1Pet. 4:1. The Messiah suffered in the flesh for us.
o 1Jn. 4:2-3. Yahshua Messiah came in the flesh. All who deny this are led by the spirit of the anti-messiah.More than 80 times Yahshua is referred to as “the son of man,” as was Ezekiel the Prophet.
Yahshua: Son of Yahweh
But isn't Yahshua declared to be the “Son of Yahweh?” Indeed he is (Mt. 3:17; 4:3,6; 8:29; Lk. 1:32; Jn. 3:16; etc.). In a sense, all men are “sons of Yahweh,” including Adam (Lk. 3:38). In the wilderness, the people of Israel were declared to be “sons of Yahweh” (Deut. 14:1); and at a later time (Jer. 3:19). We are the son of Yahweh (Rom. 8:14,19,21; Gal. 3:26). Many Scriptures indicate that Yahweh is Israel's Father, so this makes Israelites the sons of Yahweh (Isa. 63:16; 64:8; Jer. 3:19; Mal. 1:6). Actually, we are today sons of Yahweh by faith, meaning we hope to become truly his sons (Gal. 3:26; Rom. 8:23-24). This will happen at the first resurrection (Lk. 20:34-37). It was also at his resurrection from the dead that Yahshua was declared to be truly the son of Yahweh, as Scriptures indicate: “… and designated Son of Yahweh … by his RESURRECTION FROM THE DEAD, …” (Rom. 1:4).
COME
“Yahshua is come in the flesh” (2 John 7)
come – … draw near; approach: … 3. to become visible, audible, perceptible, etc.; … 4. to arrive; 5. to issue from or forth from, as a source: … – Winston's Dictionary, Encyclopedia Edition
SOURCEQuote (kerwin @ April 24 2012,20:44) Quote (mikeboll64 @ April 25 2012,07:30) Let me try this again: Quote (Nick Hassan @ April 24 2012,04:27) The Word that said he proceeded forth and came from God[jn8.42]
John 13:3
Jesus knew that the Father had put all things under his power, and that he had come from God and was returning to God;Nick, did Jesus LITERALLY return to God? If so, then why not accept that he also LITERALLY came from God?
Did Jesus LITERALLY ascend to “where he was before”? If so, then why not accept that he also LITERALLY descended from there?
Try answering just the bolded, supersized ones with a DIRECT answer first.
Mike,Here are two Scriptures that answer your question.
James 1:17
King James Version (KJV)17Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.
Hebrews 11:6
King James Version (KJV)6But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.
Okay Kerwin.I take it that you DON'T believe Jesus literally came from God and literally went back to him (although I can't see how the scriptures you posted support your belief).
But I do believe those things. I believe that Jesus was existing in the form of God, but emptied himself to be made in the likeness of a human being. I believe he bore the title “the Word of God” long before John ever called him by that title in Revelation and his gospel. I believe this BEING called “the Word of God” became flesh, and dwelled on earth among men with the glory of God's only begotten Son – because he WAS God's only begotten Son even before he was made flesh.
I believe him when he says he came down from heaven. I understand that literally because he also said he would ascend to where he was before – and he did that literally. I believe that the PERSON Jesus did have glory alongside his God before the heavens, the earth, and everything in them were created through him, because he and many of his disciples attest to this fact.
I'm tired of fighting about this day in and day out. At the end of the day, just know one thing for sure, Kerwin: I can read the scriptures as they were written and easily conclude with my understanding of a pre-existent Jesus, while the non-preexisters seem to work hard to conform the scriptures to their understanding – often ending up with an unbelievable mish-mash of nonsensical explanations. And you know it is nonsensical mish-mash when each non-preexister scoffs at the other non-preexisters' unbelievable explanations. You all add to or twist many scriptures in an effort to force the scriptures to teach what you want them to teach, and all the while this non-preexister is rolling his eyes at the nonsense that non-preexister came up with to make a certain scripture that clearly sounds like it speaks of the pre-existence of Jesus NOT sound that way.
I'm just worn out. Know one last thing as well: Not one of you were able to come up with a single scripture that would prohibit the pre-existence of Jesus, or make it clear that he was never anything other than a human being. So while we point to over 50 scriptures that surely seem to speak of a pre-existent Jesus, at the end of the day all you have is your own personal belief that he didn't preexist – without a single shred of scriptural evidence to support that belief.
peace to you,
mike.
Mike said to Kerwin:Quote You all add to or twist many scriptures in an effort to force the scriptures to teach what you want them to teach…
Mike, you know the weakness in ones own character is what one sees in others as 'their' problem.Your brother
in Christ, Jesus.
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
holycitybiblecode.orgQuote (kerwin @ April 26 2012,10:49) Quote (charity @ April 25 2012,18:19) jammin,April wrote:ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 1:14-18
14και ο λογος &%
Let me see…Jesus was meant to be the Son Of David! but some, including John were pritty much against Davids throne receiving any glory an honour, they would have had no choice other than to divert the notions of the original prophetic monarchy, accomplishing by hurling the whole thing into space an time in a spin, replacing his present lumination with the new divine Jesus… not to mention..after slaming his mouth closed, fearing an hearing no rebuke…hence.. that was pritty much powerful enough to conquer the promise of Davids statues ruling the jewish earth for the present days…. keeping the romans oppressing in place, feeding themselves off the flesh of the Jewish inheritance…
what a scuffle…which still didn't address the fact that only the soul lives forever…. In egypt it is the custom to preserve flesh, preserve mummies, an raise zombies…literal attempts are preformed in mere word resurrections?….of little power..matthew 24…if they rise not, then perhaps they also lie about Jesus…in the mere sentences an verse's apart all in one chapter.
Charity,Jesus is the Son of David as to the flesh and the Son of God as to the spirit. The Spirit of God within him is divine because she is God's Spirit.
Do you understand these things?
yes I understand you very much so…the flesh an blood of kings is dragged along the ground in-order of becoming the royal God given choice. An that makes his spirit from above extra divine, part an part.have noticed the difference in family trees…they bust at Soloman An A nathan….the females family foriegn blood has all the right to fame an inheritance…..another 2000 year old the scuffle un resolved…
Quote (mikeboll64 @ April 26 2012,11:48) Quote (kerwin @ April 24 2012,20:44) Quote (mikeboll64 @ April 25 2012,07:30) Let me try this again: Quote (Nick Hassan @ April 24 2012,04:27) The Word that said he proceeded forth and came from God[jn8.42]
John 13:3
Jesus knew that the Father had put all things under his power, and that he had come from God and was returning to God;Nick, did Jesus LITERALLY return to God? If so, then why not accept that he also LITERALLY came from God?
Did Jesus LITERALLY ascend to “where he was before”? If so, then why not accept that he also LITERALLY descended from there?
Try answering just the bolded, supersized ones with a DIRECT answer first.
Mike,Here are two Scriptures that answer your question.
James 1:17
King James Version (KJV)17Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.
Hebrews 11:6
King James Version (KJV)6But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.
Okay Kerwin.I take it that you DON'T believe Jesus literally came from God and literally went back to him (although I can't see how the scriptures you posted support your belief).
But I do believe those things. I believe that Jesus was existing in the form of God, but emptied himself to be made in the likeness of a human being. I believe he bore the title “the Word of God” long before John ever called him by that title in Revelation and his gospel. I believe this BEING called “the Word of God” became flesh, and dwelled on earth among men with the glory of God's only begotten Son – because he WAS God's only begotten Son even before he was made flesh.
I believe him when he says he came down from heaven. I understand that literally because he also said he would ascend to where he was before – and he did that literally. I believe that the PERSON Jesus did have glory alongside his God before the heavens, the earth, and everything in them were created through him, because he and many of his disciples attest to this fact.
I'm tired of fighting about this day in and day out. At the end of the day, just know one thing for sure, Kerwin: I can read the scriptures as they were written and easily conclude with my understanding of a pre-existent Jesus, while the non-preexisters seem to work hard to conform the scriptures to their understanding – often ending up with an unbelievable mish-mash of nonsensical explanations. And you know it is nonsensical mish-mash when each non-preexister scoffs at the other non-preexisters' unbelievable explanations. You all add to or twist many scriptures in an effort to force the scriptures to teach what you want them to teach, and all the while this non-preexister is rolling his eyes at the nonsense that non-preexister came up with to make a certain scripture that clearly sounds like it speaks of the pre-existence of Jesus NOT sound that way.
I'm just worn out. Know one last thing as well: Not one of you were able to come up with a single scripture that would prohibit the pre-existence of Jesus, or make it clear that he was never anything other than a human being. So while we point to over 50 scriptures that surely seem to speak of a pre-existent Jesus, at the end of the day all you have is your own personal belief that he didn't – without a single shred of scriptural evidence to support that belief.
peace to you,
mike
Mike,You certainly do have a perverted belief concerning Father Yahweh's inspired prophetic word!
F
Quote You certainly do have a perverted belief concerning Father Yahweh's inspired prophetic word! what is it ? I would like to know , scriptures not your OPINION:laugh:Quote (terraricca @ April 26 2012,12:23) F Quote You certainly do have a perverted belief concerning Father Yahweh's inspired prophetic word! what is it ? I would like to know , scriptures not your OPINION:laugh:
Piear,Oh, I left you out! You are of the same opinion as Mike that Father Yahweh's word is an actual being, right?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
