JOHN 1:1 who is the WORD?

[journey42]

jammin,Aug. wrote:

[/quote]
Jammin,

Are you explaining to me?
I would like us to have a respectful conversation with each other? Is this possible?
I will address everything you say, respectfully.

Quote

God was manifest in the flesh. meaning, Christ who is God by nature became flesh. the body died.

Yes, this statement is true.  No denying what the scripture says.  
God was manifested in the flesh.
God's Word, his spirit, his godly qualities, his holiness, his wisdom, his power and righteousness was manifest in his Son.
But that still doesn't make Christ the Father,
It makes him exactly like his Father,
his replica, his mirror image.

Colossians 1:15   Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:

Quote

you are telling not the whole truth of the bible.

Is that so?, lets go into it more then.

Quote

i believe what the bible says,. Christ became flesh. he was GOD before he became flesh (phil 2.6) Philippians 2:6-7

Ok, lets look
Philippians 2:6   Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God.

Phillpians 2:7   But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and made in the likeness of men.

Again, of course Christ was in the form of God.  He has his Fathers qualities, his Father's righteousness, his Fathers holiness.  He obeys the Fathers will, so he is exactly like his Father, with the same purpose, drawing men unto him.
And he did not find that by being just like his Father, that he was stealing his Father's identity, or title, or position, no way, he always gave his Father the glory, not himself, and if we act like God, then it's not robbery either, but what the Father wants us to do, imitate Christ, as he imitated his Father.
Christ overcame in the flesh, by worshiping in the spirit.
This is our example, that we too can overcome the flesh,
just like Christ did till death,
our example remember,
that it can be done.
It is possible to achieve,
but we will never be perfect like Christ, without blemish
but we must try our hardest to rid those blemishes by obeying his Word.

“But made himself of no reputation” everything he did was for honouring his Father.  He made this clear.  He never once claimed he was the Father.

Now look at this New Living Translation that you use?
6 Though he was God,
   he did not think of equality with God
   as something to cling to.

Though he was God?
Pardon?
this is not what the scripture really says.

7 Instead, he gave up his divine privileges;
   he took the humble position of a slave
   and was born as a human being.

Ok, this one is not that different, but I don't like the way they use the word slave in this verse.  I don't think that was the descriptive word God intended.  

Your bible has changed the words compared to the faithful King James.  It has been cleverly rewritten to endorse the trinity doctrine.  The KJV is not endorsed in most churches.
Why Jammin?
Ask yourself?
Are you aware of the depths of Satan?
How he goes into the churches, even God's Holy word and corrupts the truth?
and inspires this new reprinted, revised version  to go mainstream.
Be aware of his tricks.
I'm glad you showed me your version, now I understand exactly why you believe what you believe and why you say the things you say.
I hope you can see this without getting angry.

[jammin]

Quote (limjunus @ Aug. 05 2012,23:06)

I will not deal with Jammin, any more except he will answer the existing questions of mine. He could not find the rightful answers, that's why he just ignore it. How come he has a gut to join with this discussion if he has not fully equip with the truth about God? Peace>

limjunus,

i already answered your questions. in fact, your NLT did not support your illusion that Christ is not God. why?

let me post phil 2.6 of NLT

Philippians 2:6

New Living Translation (NLT)

6 Though he was God,
   he did not think of equality with God
   as something to cling to.

Christ is God accrding to your favorite version NLT

you need to study hard and take more vitamins.

better luck next time boy

[jammin]

journey,

that is what the bible says. Christ is God.
phil 2.6 says that he was in the form of God, meaning he was GOD by nature

Philippians 2:6

Good News Translation (GNT)

6 He always had the nature of God,
but he did not think that by force he should try to remain[a] equal with God.

Geneva Study Bible

Who, being in the {d} form of God, {e} thought it not robbery to be {f} equal with God:

(d) Such as God himself is, and therefore God, for there is no one in all parts equal to God but God himself.

(e) Christ, that glorious and everlasting God, knew that he might rightfully and lawfully not appear in the base flesh of man, but remain with majesty fit for God: yet he chose rather to debase himself.

(f) If the Son is equal with the Father, then is there of necessity an equality, which Arrius that heretic denies: and if the Son is compared to the Father, then is there a distinction of persons, which Sabellius that heretic denies.

[jammin]

limjunus said:
I had my explanation why I said that the verse is equal with the OMG! do not divert the issue Jammin. I did not said that there is a translation of John 20:28 “OH MY GOD!”

———-
therefore you admit that it is just your illusion. LOL

study hard boy

[carmel]

Quote (limjunus @ Aug. 02 2012,16:50)

Now, Jammin has a gut to force me to answer his question and forgotten himself to answer mine. Here is Jammin post with question: “limjunus, you did not answer my question. ill repeat, do you believe the words of thomas to jesus?  yes or no?     MY ANSWER IS NO WITH YOUR TWISTING CONCLUSION. Limjunus respond: Jammin, do not force me to agree with your own understanding  and conclusion.  Thomas, did not address his saying to Jesus, but instead Thomas, is indirectly uttering that words as “MY LORD AND MY GOD! (OMG!) with his extremely sudden emotion and showing his complete guiltiness in opposing the doctrine of “resurrection”, a fundamental teaching of Jesus …. and the issue with Thomas, is not who is the one and only true God?  Thomas had knew it in the first place in John 17:1-3 and John 20:17. The issue with Thomas and that event is, did Jesus, really had raised from the dead by God? Thomas really do not believe with the resurrection doctrines” unless he could see, Jesus in person and the touch by his hands the implicated wounds.  When Jesus, personally proven the “resurrection doctrine” by himself, Thomas, shocked and extremely shouted “MY LORD MY GOD! as OMG! Try to read this again Jammin: “Here is the verse you are relying to:  John 20:28 “Thomas said to him, “My Lord and my God!” and your conclusion with it is, Jesus Christ is the Lord and God addressing to by Thomas? and here is the truth I am relying to: ” John 20:17 with the same version: “John 20:17 New International Reader's Version (NIRV) 17. Jesus said, “Do not hold on to me. I have not yet returned to the Father. Instead, go to those who believe in me. Tell them, 'I am returning to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.' “ Jammin, take note,  Jesus Christ is now spoken and addressing and pin-pointing-out that the One and only true God is his Father in heaven; clarifying, Thomas, that the Lord and God he had mentioned is for their Father and not to Jesus Christ, disregarding and removing your own conclusion with an indicator of false doctrine due with it's contradictory teaching. Conclusion  by Jammin with contradicting teaching: ” Thomas said that Jesus Christ is truly Lord and God and Jesus Christ opposing Jammin conclusion with John 20:28 by proclaiming that his Father is the One and only true God (John 20:17) Conclusion by limjunus without contradicting teaching: Thomas is addressing the Father directly and not Jesus Christ,… because Jesus Christ had informed already his disciples before the event that the One and only true God, is his Father and their Father, his God and their God  John 17:1-3 / 20:17 So, Jammin “The freedom of choice is a freedom of taste”  chose the contradicting teaching or without contradicting teaching? Peace!

Quote

and here is the truth I am relying to: ” John 20:17 with the same version:

Limjunus,

Permit me to interpret John 20:17 :

First I would like to say that KJV ,and other bibles, used the word ASCEND not return, which completely deviates believers.

Hereunder is a definition  of the word ascend, and it is placed in the third place, on the free dictionary.

By using the word returning, it is confirming that Jesus had to go to His Father IN THE SEVENTH HEAVEN to verify to Him His glorification, or promote him officially, otherwise He would not be fully glorified. Which to me is nonsense, for the simple reason that the Father Himself through the Holy Spirit raised Jesus, and don’t tell me that Almighty God needed to see His son, for something. He wouldn’t be ALMIGHTY AT ALL, WOULDN’T HE??

SO AGAIN NONSENSE!!!

So  this is a Definition which you should also consider in order to be able to assert YOURSELF that you are relying ON THE TRUTH:

ASCEND:

3. To rise from a lower level or station; advance: ascended from poverty to great wealth; ascend to the throne.

The BOULD are the ones which are the appropriate to be used in this context, for the simple reason, that they are referring to an advancement from a particular  LOW STATE to a higher ,OR HIGHEST STATE.

Something which Jesus  had accomplished then !!

Also the word  “TO” referring to:

Strong’s concordance under:

Word studies:

It says that it could mean

[4314 (prós) can mean “in view of,” or “in light of,

Now to verse 20:17

saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.

Jesus' first words were saith unto her, Touch me not

Why did Jesus refused to be touched?

Why didn't He waited longer in order to be touched???

Also  a few hours later He Himself entered the  apostles’ locked place and placed Himself in the midst of them??? (John 20:19:22)

Leave that for the time being, let’s carry on!!!

The next part it says:

for I am not yet ascended to my Father:

So, my interpretation IN RESPECT Of the word ASCEND ,defined  RAISE TO THE HIGHEST STATE and ,IN VIEW OF with regards to the word “TO”

SHOULD BE INTERPRETED:

I am not yet ascended to( IN THE HIGHEST STATE IN VIEW OF)  my Father. Which means that He Was just been resurrected and He is only in the STATE of the SPIRITUAL FLESH BODY. THE NEW ADAM!!!

WITHOUT ANY POWER, JUST A GLORIFIED BODY ONLY.

A NORMAL HUMAN BEING STATE,BUT GLORIFIED.

I would like to add, that ADAM TO BE , was also dead before he was created, but through extinction in the NORMAL process of nature as AN EVIL BEAST BEING,(LUCIFER’S SPIRIT) God then TRANSFORMED HIM, recreated him as THE FIRST CARNAL BEING!! MAN!!, and gave him the FIRST SOUL( JESUS’SPIRIT SUBSTANCE) DEMONSTRATED LOVE.
LOVE YOUR ENEMY!

So for a particular reason, temporary, He needed more time to become in the full highest state, in the power of the Father. So MOST LIKELY  Jesus, in order to shed LIGHT regarding the process of His glorification, He showed Himself primature,purposely to Magdalene. and prevented her to touch Him, first by not letting her recognize Him, and then by telling her not to touch Him. This presumably  was more for her sake rather ,since she was a mortal person ,and it would have been of a detriment to her.  

Now Jesus continued and said:

but go to my brethren,.

NOTICE:

He continued  with the word BUT, this made one aware that she couldn't touch Him then, in that moment in time, BUT later on, ALL would be able to!!

SO HE INSTRUCTED HER   “GO TO MY  BRETHREN”, NOW I feel that even the fact that He said “brethren”, it was only to indicate that  he was only in His soul and flesh glorified body yet, LIKE HOW ALL OF US WOULD EVENTUALLY BE ON THE LAST DAY. So Jesus through this statement made us aware that we will be raised like HIM since He used the word Brethren. This also was  the lowest state that Jesus was raised in, but as we could see at the end HE CONFIRMED THAT LATE
R HE WOULD ASCEND TO THE HIGHEST STATE OF THE FATHER through the insertion of the HOLY SPIRIT.

BUT WHY??  WHAT WAS THERE THAT PREVENTED JESUS FROM BEING FULLY IN THE POWER OF THE FATHER  AS WELL???

Now IN VIEW OF THAT ,I would be posting another, unless any of you is ready to have a go!!!!

NOW, WE COME TO THE CONTROVERSIAL CONCLUSION:

 and say unto them I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God

With the above statement therefore Jesus has confirmed this:

In respect to the definition of ASCEND, and TO :

This would be interpreted as:

AND SAY UNTO THEM:I (ascend) REACH the HIGHEST STATE, (to) IN VIEW OF. My Father and your Father, OBVIOUS SINCE HE  WAS ONLY GLORIFIED AS A HUMAN BEING,AND LATER HE WOULD BE  GLORIFIED IN HIS FATHER .SO HE WOULD BE THEIR FATHER, AS THE FATHER IS TO HIM,since without  Him THEY wouldn't have a Father GOD,SINCE HE AS MAN WOULD BE  UNITED AS ONE  WITH THE FATHER. AS SOON AS THE SPIRIT OF THE FATHER THROUGH THE HOLY SPIRIT ENTERS HIS SOUL.
He concluded
And IN VIEW OF my God, and your God, SO: AGAIN, ALSO OBVIOUS IN THE SAME WAY JESUS WOULD BE GLORIFIED IN GOD, THROUGH THE HOLY SPIRIT,HE WOULD BE  OUR GOD AS GOD  IS TO HIM, SINCE HE AS MAN WOULD BE UNITED AS ONE WITH GOD.

SO JESUS CHRIST IS:

GOD,FATHER,SON, AND BROTHER TO ALL OF US.WHETHER YOU BELIEVE IT OR NOT!! ALL IN HIM,ALL BY HIM,AND ALL FOR HIM

And became the TRUE GOD BOTH OF THE HEAVENS AND OF THE EARTH,BOTH OF THE SPIRITS AND OF THE FLESH. BOTH OF THE INVISIBLES AND VISIBLES, BOTH OF THE IMMORTALS AND MORTALS, BOTH OF THE HOLIES AND OF THE SINNERS.

ONLY IN JESUS GOD COULD BE TRUELY MANIFESTED IN OUR CREATION.

In that moment that this statement was pronounced by Jesus ,the Father from heaven was in His Highest Joy ever, for the simple reason that God waited millions, millions, and millions of millions of years to achieve MANHOOD.

God from Exodus 29:45  to Luke 1: 16 kept on saying I WILL BE THEIR GOD.

I WILL BE THEIR GOD, IN THEIR FLESH, IN THEIR GENERAL STATE,EVEN COMPLETELY THE MOST SINNER,AND DIE FOR THEM IN ORDER TO BE THEIR GOD FOR THEM IN MY OWN SUBSTANCE OF MY SON.

THE ONLY WAY TO BE!! ALPHA AND OMEGA THE TRUE GOD!!!

AND THE FATHER ACQUIRED FOR THE FIRST TIME EVER HIS OWN UNIQUE GOD, A GOD OF FLESH AND SPIRIT,TO RULE BOTH HEAVEN AND EARTH TILL THE END OF TIME.

HEBREWS 1:8 But to the Son: Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of justice is the sceptre of thy kingdom.

9 Thou hast loved justice, and hated iniquity: therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.

PEACE AND LOVE IN JESUS THE TRUE GOD.

CHARLES

[limjunus]

Quote (jammin @ Aug. 06 2012,00:30)

Quote (limjunus @ Aug. 05 2012,23:06) I will not deal with Jammin, any more except he will answer the existing questions of mine. He could not find the rightful answers, that's why he just ignore it. How come he has a gut to join with this discussion if he has not fully equip with the truth about God? Peace> limjunus, i already answered your questions. in fact, your NLT did not support your illusion that Christ is not God. why? let me post phil 2.6 of NLT Philippians 2:6 New Living Translation (NLT) 6 Though he was God,    he did not think of equality with God    as something to cling to. Christ is God accrding to your favorite version NLT you need to study hard and take more vitamins. better luck next time boy

YOU DID NOT ANSWER JAMMIN, UP THIS TIME.

1.) WHO SI THE ONE AND ONLY TRUE GOD, JESUS CHRIST, THE BEGOTTEN SON OF GOD, OR HIS FATHER WHO HAD BEGOTTEN HIM?

2.) HOW MANY TRUE GOD YOU HATH RECOGNIZED?

I did not see your answers, where?

[limjunus]

Quote (carmel @ Aug. 06 2012,00:51)

Quote (limjunus @ Aug. 02 2012,16:50) Now, Jammin has a gut to force me to answer his question and forgotten himself to answer mine. Here is Jammin post with question: “limjunus, you did not answer my question. ill repeat, do you believe the words of thomas to jesus?  yes or no?     MY ANSWER IS NO WITH YOUR TWISTING CONCLUSION. Limjunus respond: Jammin, do not force me to agree with your own understanding  and conclusion.  Thomas, did not address his saying to Jesus, but instead Thomas, is indirectly uttering that words as “MY LORD AND MY GOD! (OMG!) with his extremely sudden emotion and showing his complete guiltiness in opposing the doctrine of “resurrection”, a fundamental teaching of Jesus …. and the issue with Thomas, is not who is the one and only true God?  Thomas had knew it in the first place in John 17:1-3 and John 20:17. The issue with Thomas and that event is, did Jesus, really had raised from the dead by God? Thomas really do not believe with the resurrection doctrines” unless he could see, Jesus in person and the touch by his hands the implicated wounds.  When Jesus, personally proven the “resurrection doctrine” by himself, Thomas, shocked and extremely shouted “MY LORD MY GOD! as OMG! Try to read this again Jammin: “Here is the verse you are relying to:  John 20:28 “Thomas said to him, “My Lord and my God!” and your conclusion with it is, Jesus Christ is the Lord and God addressing to by Thomas? and here is the truth I am relying to: ” John 20:17 with the same version: “John 20:17 New International Reader's Version (NIRV) 17. Jesus said, “Do not hold on to me. I have not yet returned to the Father. Instead, go to those who believe in me. Tell them, 'I am returning to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.' “ Jammin, take note,  Jesus Christ is now spoken and addressing and pin-pointing-out that the One and only true God is his Father in heaven; clarifying, Thomas, that the Lord and God he had mentioned is for their Father and not to Jesus Christ, disregarding and removing your own conclusion with an indicator of false doctrine due with it's contradictory teaching. Conclusion  by Jammin with contradicting teaching: ” Thomas said that Jesus Christ is truly Lord and God and Jesus Christ opposing Jammin conclusion with John 20:28 by proclaiming that his Father is the One and only true God (John 20:17) Conclusion by limjunus without contradicting teaching: Thomas is addressing the Father directly and not Jesus Christ,… because Jesus Christ had informed already his disciples before the event that the One and only true God, is his Father and their Father, his God and their God  John 17:1-3 / 20:17 So, Jammin “The freedom of choice is a freedom of taste”  chose the contradicting teaching or without contradicting teaching? Peace! Quote and here is the truth I am relying to: ” John 20:17 with the same version: Limjunus, Permit me to interpret John 20:17 : First I would like to say that KJV ,and other bibles, used the word ASCEND not return, which completely deviates believers. Hereunder is a definition  of the word ascend, and it is placed in the third place, on the free dictionary. By using the word returning, it is confirming that Jesus had to go to His Father IN THE SEVENTH HEAVEN to verify to Him His glorification, or promote him officially, otherwise He would not be fully glorified. Which to me is nonsense, for the simple reason that the Father Himself through the Holy Spirit raised Jesus, and don’t tell me that Almighty God needed to see His son, for something. He wouldn’t be ALMIGHTY AT ALL, WOULDN’T HE?? SO AGAIN NONSENSE!!! So  this is a Definition which you should also consider in order to be able to assert YOURSELF that you are relying ON THE TRUTH: ASCEND: 3. To rise from a lower level or station; advance: ascended from poverty to great wealth; ascend to the throne. The BOULD are the ones which are the appropriate to be used in this context, for the simple reason, that they are referring to an advancement from a particular  LOW STATE to a higher ,OR HIGHEST STATE. Something which Jesus  had accomplished then !! Also the word  “TO” referring to: Strong’s concordance under: Word studies: It says that it could mean [4314 (prós) can mean “in view of,” or “in light of, Now to verse 20:17 saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. Jesus' first words were saith unto her, Touch me not Why did Jesus refused to be touched? Why didn't He waited longer in order to be touched??? Also  a few hours later He Himself entered the  apostles’ locked place and placed Himself in the midst of them??? (John 20:19:22) Leave that for the time being, let’s carry on!!! The next part it says: for I am not yet ascended to my Father: So, my interpretation IN RESPECT Of the word ASCEND ,defined  RAISE TO THE HIGHEST STATE and ,IN VIEW OF with regards to the word “TO” SHOULD BE INTERPRETED: I am not yet ascended to( IN THE HIGHEST STATE IN VIEW OF)  my Father. Which means that He Was just been resurrected and He is only in the STATE of the SPIRITUAL FLESH BODY. THE NEW ADAM!!! WITHOUT ANY POWER, JUST A GLORIFIED BODY ONLY. A NORMAL HUMAN BEING STATE,BUT GLORIFIED. I would like to add, that ADAM TO BE , was also dead before he was created, but through extinction in the NORMAL process of nature as AN EVIL BEAST BEING,(LUCIFER’S SPIRIT) God then TRANSFORMED HIM, recreated him as THE FIRST CARNAL BEING!! MAN!!, and gave him the FIRST SOUL( JESUS’SPIRIT SUBSTANCE) DEMONSTRATED LOVE. LOVE YOUR ENEMY! So for a particular reason, temporary, He needed more time to become in the full highest state, in the power of the Father. So MOST LIKELY  Jesus, in order to shed LIGHT regarding the process of His glorification, He showed Himself primature,purposely to Magdalene. and prevented her to touch Him, first by not letting her recognize Him, and then by telling her not to touch Him. This presumably  was more for her sake rather ,since she was a mortal person ,and it would have been of a detriment to her.   Now Jesus continued and said: but go to my brethren,. NOTICE: He continued  with the word BUT, this made one aware that she couldn't touch Him then, in that moment in time, BUT later on, ALL would be able to!! SO HE INSTRUCTED HER   “GO TO MY  BRETHREN”, NOW I feel that even the fact that He said “brethren”, it was only to indicate that  he was only in His soul and flesh glorified body yet, LIKE HOW ALL OF US WOULD EVENTUALLY BE ON THE LAST DAY. So Je sus through this statement made us aware that we will be raised like HIM since He used the word Brethren. This also was  the lowest state that Jesus was raised in, but as we could see at the end HE CONFIRMED THAT LATER HE WOULD ASCEND TO THE HIGHEST STATE OF THE FATHER through the insertion of the HOLY SPIRIT. BUT WHY??  WHAT WAS THERE THAT PREVENTED JESUS FROM BEING FULLY IN THE POWER OF THE FATHER  AS WELL??? Now IN VIEW OF THAT ,I would be posting another, unless any of you is ready to have a go!!!! NOW, WE COME TO THE CONTROVERSIAL CONCLUSION:  and say unto them I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God With the above statement therefore Jesus has confirmed this: In respect to the definition of ASCEND, and TO : This would be interpreted as: AND SAY UNTO THEM:I (ascend) REACH the HIGHEST STATE, (to) IN VIEW OF. My Father and your Father, OBVIOUS SINCE HE  WAS ONLY GLORIFIED AS A HUMAN BEING,AND LATER HE WOULD BE  GLORIFIED IN HIS FATHER .SO HE WOULD BE THEIR FATHER, AS THE FATHER IS TO HIM,since without  Him THEY wouldn't have a Father GOD,SINCE HE AS MAN WOULD BE  UNITED AS ONE  WITH THE FATHER. AS SOON AS THE SPIRIT OF THE FATHER THROUGH THE HOLY SPIRIT ENTERS HIS SOUL. He concluded And IN VIEW OF my God, and your God, SO: AGAIN, ALSO OBVIOUS IN THE SAME WAY JESUS WOULD BE GLORIFIED IN GOD, THROUGH THE HOLY SPIRIT,HE WOULD BE  OUR GOD AS GOD  IS TO HIM, SINCE HE AS MAN WOULD BE UNITED AS ONE WITH GOD. SO JESUS CHRIST IS: GOD,FATHER,SON, AND BROTHER TO ALL OF US.WHETHER YOU BELIEVE IT OR NOT!! ALL IN HIM,ALL BY HIM,AND ALL FOR HIM And became the TRUE GOD BOTH OF THE HEAVENS AND OF THE EARTH,BOTH OF THE SPIRITS AND OF THE FLESH. BOTH OF THE INVISIBLES AND VISIBLES, BOTH OF THE IMMORTALS AND MORTALS, BOTH OF THE HOLIES AND OF THE SINNERS. ONLY IN JESUS GOD COULD BE TRUELY MANIFESTED IN OUR CREATION. In that moment that this statement was pronounced by Jesus ,the Father from heaven was in His Highest Joy ever, for the simple reason that God waited millions, millions, and millions of millions of years to achieve MANHOOD. God from Exodus 29:45  to Luke 1: 16 kept on saying I WILL BE THEIR GOD. I WILL BE THEIR GOD, IN THEIR FLESH, IN THEIR GENERAL STATE,EVEN COMPLETELY THE MOST SINNER,AND DIE FOR THEM IN ORDER TO BE THEIR GOD FOR THEM IN MY OWN SUBSTANCE OF MY SON. THE ONLY WAY TO BE!! ALPHA AND OMEGA THE TRUE GOD!!! AND THE FATHER ACQUIRED FOR THE FIRST TIME EVER HIS OWN UNIQUE GOD, A GOD OF FLESH AND SPIRIT,TO RULE BOTH HEAVEN AND EARTH TILL THE END OF TIME. HEBREWS 1:8 But to the Son: Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of justice is the sceptre of thy kingdom. 9 Thou hast loved justice, and hated iniquity: therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows. PEACE AND LOVE IN JESUS THE TRUE GOD. CHARLES

:given your own conclusion. Jesus ascending to my Father,.. is mean to you that from human being into a Supreme being? If Jesus Christ is truly God, why need to be changed from truly God into truly God?

another confusion is, “if the begotten Son is truly God, why changing from Son God into a Father God?

Another confusion you have made is, “If Jesus Christ is truly God, who is the flesh and died?

Wow!

[journey42]

Quote (jammin @ Aug. 06 2012,00:39)

journey, that is what the bible says. Christ is God. phil 2.6 says that he was in the form of God, meaning he was GOD by nature Philippians 2:6 Good News Translation (GNT) 6 He always had the nature of God,      but he did not think that by force he should try to remain[a] equal with God. Geneva Study Bible Who, being in the {d} form of God, {e} thought it not robbery to be {f} equal with God: (d) Such as God himself is, and therefore God, for there is no one in all parts equal to God but God himself. (e) Christ, that glorious and everlasting God, knew that he might rightfully and lawfully not appear in the base flesh of man, but remain with majesty fit for God: yet he chose rather to debase himself. (f) If the Son is equal with the Father, then is there of necessity an equality, which Arrius that heretic denies: and if the Son is compared to the Father, then is there a distinction of persons, which Sabellius that heretic denies.

Jammin

Did you understand what I said to you?
The bible does not say Christ is God.
Your bible says that?
The good news translation is the same – revised, reworded
The Geneva study bible, is mens footnotes in there,
am I correct?
Theres so many versions, take your pick
Why don't you go to the original most trusted Word of God?
The King James Version

[carmel]

[/quote]

Quote

“If the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you

Edj,

YOUR WISDOM IS SURELY CORRUPTED,FILTHY,WORLDY AND MOST OF ALL HUMILIATING TO GOD HIMSELF.

WHY??

YOU HAVE JUST SAID THAT THE SAME SPIRIT WHICH QUICKEN CHRIST WOULD ALSO QUICHEN MINE.

BY ALL MEANS,I HAVE NO DOUBT ABOUT THAT,THAT'S WHY JESUS CAME.

BUT WHY JESUS HAD TO WAIT,OR RATHER GOD THE FATHER HAD TO WAIT ALL THESE BILLIONS IF NOT TRILLIONS,IF WE HAD TO START FROM  WHEN GOD WAS IN HIS GLORY ,TO ACHIEVE A HUMAN PERSON LIKE JESUS IN ORDER TO HAVE GOD'S SPIRIT IN FULL WITHIN???

DO YOU THINK SINCE ACCORDING TO YOUR CHILDISH WISDOM,JESUS RESURRECTED IN THREE DAYS ,WE FILTHY,CORRUPTED,BEINGS WOULDN'T HAVE ALSO DID SO ,BUT INSTEAD WE HAVE TO WAIT MILLIONS OF YEARS TILL ALL OUR STINKING,FILTHY MINDS AND FLESH BE HOLY???

HAVE YOU THE SLIGHTEST AWARENESS IF THE HOLY SPIRIT ENTERS YOUR CORRUPTED FLESH BODY IN FULL WHAT WOULD HAPPEN TO EDJ??? HE WILL DEFINITELY QUICKEN YOU FOR SURE,AND HOW!! THE WHOLE UNIVERSES WOULD NOTICE SOMETHING UNUSUAL INSTEAD, BUT NOT EDJ  FOR SURE.

WHO KNOWS A BLACK HOLE MABY???

OR GOD'S PARTICLE???

Peace and love in Jesus

Charles

[jammin]

Quote (limjunus @ Aug. 06 2012,01:04)

Quote (jammin @ Aug. 06 2012,00:30) Quote (limjunus @ Aug. 05 2012,23:06) I will not deal with Jammin, any more except he will answer the existing questions of mine. He could not find the rightful answers, that's why he just ignore it. How come he has a gut to join with this discussion if he has not fully equip with the truth about God? Peace> limjunus, i already answered your questions. in fact, your NLT did not support your illusion that Christ is not God. why? let me post phil 2.6 of NLT Philippians 2:6 New Living Translation (NLT) 6 Though he was God,    he did not think of equality with God    as something to cling to. Christ is God accrding to your favorite version NLT you need to study hard and take more vitamins. better luck next time boy YOU DID NOT ANSWER JAMMIN, UP THIS TIME. 1.) WHO SI THE ONE AND ONLY TRUE GOD, JESUS CHRIST, THE BEGOTTEN SON OF GOD, OR HIS FATHER WHO HAD BEGOTTEN HIM? 2.) HOW MANY TRUE GOD YOU HATH RECOGNIZED? I did not see your answers, where?

LOL

sorry boy but your favorite version says that Christ is GOD
LOL

study hard boy.

your stand is weak

[jammin]

Quote (journey42 @ Aug. 06 2012,01:22)

Quote (jammin @ Aug. 06 2012,00:39) journey, that is what the bible says. Christ is God. phil 2.6 says that he was in the form of God, meaning he was GOD by nature Philippians 2:6 Good News Translation (GNT) 6 He always had the nature of God,      but he did not think that by force he should try to remain[a] equal with God. Geneva Study Bible Who, being in the {d} form of God, {e} thought it not robbery to be {f} equal with God: (d) Such as God himself is, and therefore God, for there is no one in all parts equal to God but God himself. (e) Christ, that glorious and everlasting God, knew that he might rightfully and lawfully not appear in the base flesh of man, but remain with majesty fit for God: yet he chose rather to debase himself. (f) If the Son is equal with the Father, then is there of necessity an equality, which Arrius that heretic denies: and if the Son is compared to the Father, then is there a distinction of persons, which Sabellius that heretic denies. Jammin Did you understand what I said to you? The bible does not say Christ is God. Your bible says that? The good news translation is the same – revised, reworded The Geneva study bible, is mens footnotes in there, am I correct? Theres so many versions, take your pick Why don't you go to the original most trusted Word of God? The King James Version

are you sure??? that is just your illusion

let me post your favorite version KJV

1 Timothy 3:16

King James Version (KJV)

16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

your favorite version says that God mas manifest in the flesh. who is that God?? that God is the SON (christ) and not the father.

let me post again 1 tim 3.16
1 Timothy 3:16

Easy-to-Read Version (ERV)

16 Without a doubt, the secret of our life of worship is great:

Christ was shown to us in human form;

sorry boy but i believe what the bible says.
commentaries also support the phil 2.6 that Christ is God.

make your own bible

[mikeboll64]

Quote (jammin @ Aug. 04 2012,20:27)

your gods are not really God by nature. they are created.

They are not “my gods”, but gods that are clearly taught about in scripture. And yes, they were created by the God of all other gods, just as Jesus was created by that One.

As for the question you say I never answer, I've answered it a dozen times for you already. The nature of God Almighty is “spirit” – the same nature that Jesus and the OTHER spirit sons of God have.

When are YOU going to answer MY question, jammin?

When Paul says Jesus was existing in the form of God, what or who did Paul mean by the word “God”?

A. A SPECIES of beings?
B. One particular Being?

[mikeboll64]

Quote (journey42 @ Aug. 05 2012,06:28)

Quote (jammin @ Aug. 05 2012,15:38) God was manifest in the flesh. Yes, this statement is true.  No denying what the scripture says.   God was manifested in the flesh.

Hi journey,

As usual, I have been enjoying your posts.  Good stuff!  

But you should know the truth that 1 Timothy 3:16 doesn't actually say “GOD was manifest in the flesh”.

You can read about it on NETNotes if you'd like.  Just click on footnote #3 in the NET translation at the top of the page.  (Note that NETNotes was produced by 25 TRINITARIAN scholars – who would like nothing more than for it to say “God”.)

Here is some of the information you can read on that link:
The Byzantine text along with a few other witnesses read θεός (“God”) for ὅς (“who”).

Significantly, D* and virtually the entire Latin tradition read the neuter relative pronoun, ὅ (Jo, “which”), a reading that indirectly supports ὅς (who) since it could not easily have been generated if θεός (God) had been in the text. Thus, externally, there is no question as to what should be considered original: The Alexandrian and Western traditions are decidedly in favor of ὅς. Internally, the evidence is even stronger. What scribe would change θεός to ὅς intentionally?

It appears that sometime after the 2nd century the θεός reading came into existence, either via confusion with ὅς or as an intentional alteration to magnify Christ………..

Once it got in, this theologically rich reading was easily able to influence all the rest of the mss it came in contact with (including mss already written, such as א A C D). That this reading did not arise until after the 2nd century is evident from the Western reading, ὅ.

To argue that heretics tampered with the text here is self-defeating, for most of the Western fathers who quoted the verse with the relative pronoun were quite orthodox, strongly affirming the deity of Christ. They would have dearly loved such a reading as θεός. Further, had heretics introduced a variant to θεός, a far more natural choice would have been Χριστός (Cristos, “Christ”) or κύριος (kurios, “Lord”), since the text is self-evidently about Christ, but it is not self-evidently a proclamation of his deity.

The ms was ALTERED sometime after the 2nd century to say “GOD appeared in the flesh”.  The earlier ms don't have the word “GOD”.

And if you go to the page I linked, you'll notice that of the 9 translations listed, only the KJV and the NKJV have the word “GOD” in that verse.  The more recent translators, who had access to the older mss, have all translated as “HE appeared in the flesh”.

In other words, there was no writing by Paul that ever said “GOD appeared in the flesh”.  There is no writing by Paul to say that, because God never did appear in the flesh.  His Son did.

peace,
mike

[mikeboll64]

Quote (limjunus @ Aug. 05 2012,08:14)

:given your own conclusion. Jesus ascending to my Father,.. is mean to you that from human being into a Supreme being? If Jesus Christ is truly God, why need to be changed from truly God into truly God? another confusion is, “if the begotten Son is truly God, why changing from Son God into a Father God? Another confusion you have made is, “If Jesus Christ is truly God, who is the flesh and died?

Good points.

[Ed J]

Quote (carmel @ Aug. 06 2012,01:33)

Quote “If the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you Edj, YOUR WISDOM IS SURELY CORRUPTED,FILTHY,WORLDY AND MOST OF ALL HUMILIATING TO GOD HIMSELF.

Hi Charles,

That is Romans 8:11.

God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

[journey42]

Quote (jammin @ Aug. 06 2012,01:52)

Quote (journey42 @ Aug. 06 2012,01:22) Quote (jammin @ Aug. 06 2012,00:39) journey, that is what the bible says. Christ is God. phil 2.6 says that he was in the form of God, meaning he was GOD by nature Philippians 2:6 Good News Translation (GNT) 6 He always had the nature of God,      but he did not think that by force he should try to remain[a] equal with God. Geneva Study Bible Who, being in the {d} form of God, {e} thought it not robbery to be {f} equal with God: (d) Such as God himself is, and therefore God, for there is no one in all parts equal to God but God himself. (e) Christ, that glorious and everlasting God, knew that he might rightfully and lawfully not appear in the base flesh of man, but remain with majesty fit for God: yet he chose rather to debase himself. (f) If the Son is equal with the Father, then is there of necessity an equality, which Arrius that heretic denies: and if the Son is compared to the Father, then is there a distinction of persons, which Sabellius that heretic denies. Jammin Did you understand what I said to you? The bible does not say Christ is God. Your bible says that? The good news translation is the same – revised, reworded The Geneva study bible, is mens footnotes in there, am I correct? Theres so many versions, take your pick Why don't you go to the original most trusted Word of God? The King James Version are you sure??? that is just your illusion let me post your favorite version KJV 1 Timothy 3:16 King James Version (KJV) 16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory. your favorite version says that God mas manifest in the flesh. who is that God?? that God is the SON (christ) and not the father. let me post again 1 tim 3.16 1 Timothy 3:16 Easy-to-Read Version (ERV) 16 Without a doubt, the secret of our life of worship is great: Christ was shown to us in human form; sorry boy but i believe what the bible says. commentaries also support the phil 2.6 that Christ is God. make your own bible

Jammin,

God can also be manifested in you.
Do you believe this?

I can give a few examples

for example
Someone insults you, and is angry and instead
of you firing up and reacting violently and making the situation worse,
your use calm words to calm that person, or walk away without adding heat to the fire and nothing further develops,
then God will be manifest in you;

or a shop attendant accidentally gives you too much change
and you could quite easily keep that money without no-one ever knowing,
but instead when you realise, you walk right back into that store and give the money back
then God will be manifest in you.

or;
you find a wallet in the car park
you hand it in not knowing if that wallet will ever reach the owner
but it does, and the owner later thanks you and offers you a reward
but you refuse
then God will be manifest in you.

or;
you have a co-worker that has got it in for you, and reports to the boss for petty reasons, and wants you sacked,
but you keep your job
then  one day see that worker doing something against your boss, like taking a sickie, then you find out he was at the beach
and this particular day, you really needed him at work, and the workload was all put on you, and you got no thanks
and the boss was angry because you couldn't keep up with the orders, and starts doubting your experience
and you know if you report him, he's fired and you're free of him,
but you keep it to yourself
then God is manifest in you

You know that God says venegance is mine, I will repay
so you don't seek vengenance yourself, because you trust in his  Word, as you know God sees all things
Then God is manifest in you
but that does not make you God does it?
Cause he says that he will dwell inside us
if we refuse evil,
and he dwelt in Jesus also,
because he was obedient till death,
and the only advantage Jesus had was that he knew God's will,
but he was still in the flesh, and could of used his power to destroy them right there and there,
but he suffered, and endured their hatred instead
to show us, that if we learn't the Fathers will also,
then we can also overcome the same
then God will be manifest in us.

John 3:21   But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

John 9:3   Jesus answered, Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him.

John 14:21   He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.

John 17:6   I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word.

Romans 1:19   Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.

Jammin, can you see what manifest means?

[jammin]

mike,

you are making friends hahaha

journey,

in 1tim 3.16 using your favorite translation KJV., who is the GOD in 1 tim 3.16, father or son??

[jammin]

mike,
i answered already your question

based on the bible
phil 2.6 is nature.
God is nature.
that is what i can read in phil 2.6

do not put your words in the bible.

[kerwin]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 05 2012,00:04)

Quote (Frank4YAHWEH @ Aug. 04 2012,11:51) Jesus’ words, “the Father is in Me,” must have left a strong impression on Thomas. Indeed, they are the key to correctly understand what doubting Thomas later meant when he said to Jesus, “my God.” That is, Thomas acknowledged what Jesus had taught ten days prior, that God the Father is in Jesus. Frank, The part I quoted is the ONLY part of your huge cut and paste that actually addresses the point in question. All those words boil down to one little thing:  Your author has INTERPRETED those words to mean Thomas was talking to both Jesus AND “the Father in him”. Unfortunately, one cannot honestly come to that interpretation from the words Thomas said, or the surrounding context John wrote. As for the rest of the post, it is good scriptural information proving that Jesus is not God Almighty – but bears no light on the words Thomas spoke.

Mike,

His is a large post; but others also are making long posts. All of these reduce my enjoyment.

[limjunus]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 06 2012,03:07)

Quote (journey42 @ Aug. 05 2012,06:28) Quote (jammin @ Aug. 05 2012,15:38) God was manifest in the flesh. Yes, this statement is true.  No denying what the scripture says.   God was manifested in the flesh. Hi journey, As usual, I have been enjoying your posts.  Good stuff!   But you should know the truth that 1 Timothy 3:16 doesn't actually say “GOD was manifest in the flesh”. You can read about it on NETNotes if you'd like.  Just click on footnote #3 in the NET translation at the top of the page.  (Note that NETNotes was produced by 25 TRINITARIAN scholars – who would like nothing more than for it to say “God”.) Here is some of the information you can read on that link: The Byzantine text along with a few other witnesses read θεός (“God”) for ὅς (“who”). Significantly, D* and virtually the entire Latin tradition read the neuter relative pronoun, ὅ (Jo, “which”), a reading that indirectly supports ὅς (who) since it could not easily have been generated if θεός (God) had been in the text. Thus, externally, there is no question as to what should be considered original: The Alexandrian and Western traditions are decidedly in favor of ὅς. Internally, the evidence is even stronger. What scribe would change θεός to ὅς intentionally? It appears that sometime after the 2nd century the θεός reading came into existence, either via confusion with ὅς or as an intentional alteration to magnify Christ……….. Once it got in, this theologically rich reading was easily able to influence all the rest of the mss it came in contact with (including mss already written, such as א A C D). That this reading did not arise until after the 2nd century is evident from the Western reading, ὅ. To argue that heretics tampered with the text here is self-defeating, for most of the Western fathers who quoted the verse with the relative pronoun were quite orthodox, strongly affirming the deity of Christ. They would have dearly loved such a reading as θεός. Further, had heretics introduced a variant to θεός, a far more natural choice would have been Χριστός (Cristos, “Christ”) or κύριος (kurios, “Lord”), since the text is self-evidently about Christ, but it is not self-evidently a proclamation of his deity. The ms was ALTERED sometime after the 2nd century to say “GOD appeared in the flesh”.  The earlier ms don't have the word “GOD”. And if you go to the page I linked, you'll notice that of the 9 translations listed, only the KJV and the NKJV have the word “GOD” in that verse.  The more recent translators, who had access to the older mss, have all translated as “HE appeared in the flesh”. In other words, there was no writing by Paul that ever said “GOD appeared in the flesh”.  There is no writing by Paul to say that, because God never did appear in the flesh.  His Son did. peace, mike

Ura and Jammin Bible versions: “God appeared in the flesh… and died?…”

Mike Bible versions: “The Son of God appeared in the flesh…”

Other Bible versions: The begotten Son of God, died….”

Ura and Jammin Bible versions: “God appeared in the flesh and died then raised by God from the dead?…”

Limjunus Bible versions:

[Author]

Posts