- This topic has 25,924 replies, 116 voices, and was last updated 16 hours, 38 minutes ago by
.
- Posts
Quote (2besee @ June 14 2013,20:01) Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 15 2013,14:59) Quote (2besee @ June 14 2013,19:49) Galatians 4:6 “And because you are sons, God has sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, “Abba! Father!” Mike, what spirit was sent?
The spirit of God's Son, Jesus Christ. The one who many times in scripture called his God “Abba” and “Father”.It is with this same spirit that we cry out to our God, “Abba! Father!” – in the hope that our God will some day recognize us, not as children born of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God Himself.
Mike, no you are wrong. The Holy Spirit was sent.
So God sent the spirit OF the Holy Spirit into our hearts? Hmmm……..Mark 14:36
“Abba, Father,” he said, “everything is possible for you. Take this cup from me. Yet not what I will, but what you will.”Who said the above words, 2B? Jesus? Or the “Holy Spirit Son of God”?
Quote (kerwin @ June 14 2013,20:19) Mike, Just establishing a point at which we agree.
It's good there still are some, Kerwin. They seem to be getting fewer and farther between lately.Quote (kerwin @ June 14 2013,20:27) Charles, Every human being comes in the flesh since the soul comes in the flesh.
Case in point!Kerwin, since all humans ARE flesh, it is not common to say things like, “Billy the Kid came in the flesh on November 23rd, 1859.”
That is when he was born, but we don't call being born “coming in the flesh”, do we?
Have you considered that there actually IS a particular reason John said Jesus “came in the flesh”? Like perhaps he was existing in the form of God, and THEN “came in the flesh” (ie: “became human”) ?
Quote (2besee @ June 14 2013,23:53) Quote 1. Have you even considered that 2B purposely omits the first part of his second scripture – apparently in an effort to deceptively sway the masses? You are not saying that to me personally, Mike – but to God who showed me those words.
I don't doubt that it was God who led you to that verse, 2B. But I'm quite sure that God intended for you to read the ENTIRE verse – not just the second part of it. God was most likely leading you to the ENTIRE verse, to show you what I just showed you in my post to Kerwin, but YOUR PERSONAL DESIRES led you to ignore the first part of the verse – the part that was the reason for God leading you to that verse in the first place.God was trying to show you that those words apply to His Son JESUS – not to some imagined “Holy Spirit Son of God”. He is trying to help you out by showing you things like this, 2B. So try not to just pick and choose only the parts of what God showed you that fit into your pre-conceived doctrine.
2besee,June wrote:[/quote]
Quote He who says a word against the Son of man can be forgiven, but he who says a word against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, in this age or in the age to come.” 2 besee,
THE SON OF MAN , IS NOT THE SON OF GOD!
THE SON OF MAN IS JESUS AS ORDINARY MAN!
THAT'S WHY JESUS SAID SON OF MAN!
ALSO REALIZE THAT THE SON OF GOD, IS THE WORK OF THE HOLY SPIRIT!
THE WORD IS NOT THE SON OF MAN!
THE WORD IS THE TRIUNE GOD:
THE FATHER JESUS' SPIRIT
THE HOLY SPIRIT JESUS' SOUL
THE SON'S SPIRIT JESUS' FLESH BODY ONLY!
THEREFORE :
JESUS IN HIS SPIRIT, SOUL, AND BODY WAS GOD IN FLESH! THE SON OF THE SPIRIT GOD!
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE FATHER, AND HIS SON, WAS THAT JESUS HAD A SOUL AND A FLESH BODY! BUT THE FATHER WAS ONLY A SPIRIT!
BUT THROUGH JESUS HE POSSESSED FOR THE FIRST TIME EVER A SOUL AND A FLESH BODY
AND BECAME GOD OF ALL FLESH IN JESUS THOUGH!
Peace and love in Jesus
Charles
mikeboll64,June wrote:[/quote]
Quote Have you considered that there actually IS a particular reason John said Jesus “came in the flesh”? Like perhaps he was existing in the form of God, and THEN “came in the flesh” (ie: “became human”) ? Mike,
WELL SAID!
THAT'S WHAT I SAID AS WELL!
Peace and love in Jesus
Charles
Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 16 2013,02:08) Quote (kerwin @ June 14 2013,20:27) Charles, Every human being comes in the flesh since the soul comes in the flesh.
Case in point!Kerwin, since all humans ARE flesh, it is not common to say things like, “Billy the Kid came in the flesh on November 23rd, 1859.”
That is when he was born, but we don't call being born “coming in the flesh”, do we?
Have you considered that there actually IS a particular reason John said Jesus “came in the flesh”? Like perhaps he was existing in the form of God, and THEN “came in the flesh” (ie: “became human”) ?
Mike,It may be an idiom based on the culture of that time or it may be an anti-Gnostic teaching.
Mike,
The only reason that John speaks about Jesus coming in the flesh is because certain groups in that time were denying that Jesus Christ came in the flesh and they believed that he was a spirit only, and that includes after the resurrection. Today, we have the Jehovah's Witnesses who also claim that Jesus was risen as a spirit only. They deny the flesh resurrection. THAT is what John was alluding to.Did you not know that?
There are extensive writings detailing the early churches fight against Gnosticism (or “knowledge falsely so called”) and the Gnostics denial of the flesh. The early Church said that Jesus was flesh – real, and that Jesus was resurrected as flesh – real, not as an illusion, or not in appearance only. That is apparently what is meant by “came/coming in the flesh”.
kerwin and to all sniffing mosquito guys,
make your own bible and put in john 1.1 that the word is the HS.
stop making stories.
you should give proof and not unwritten stories.Quote (jammin @ June 16 2013,05:23) kerwin and to all sniffing mosquito guys, make your own bible and put in john 1.1 that the word is the HS.
stop making stories.
you should give proof and not unwritten stories.
Jammin,The Word is the Word in John 1:1.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 16 2013,09:11) Quote (2besee @ June 14 2013,23:53) Quote 1. Have you even considered that 2B purposely omits the first part of his second scripture – apparently in an effort to deceptively sway the masses? You are not saying that to me personally, Mike – but to God who showed me those words.
I don't doubt that it was God who led you to that verse, 2B. But I'm quite sure that God intended for you to read the ENTIRE verse – not just the second part of it. God was most likely leading you to the ENTIRE verse, to show you what I just showed you in my post to Kerwin, but YOUR PERSONAL DESIRES led you to ignore the first part of the verse – the part that was the reason for God leading you to that verse in the first place.God was trying to show you that those words apply to His Son JESUS – not to some imagined “Holy Spirit Son of God”. He is trying to help you out by showing you things like this, 2B. So try not to just pick and choose only the parts of what God showed you that fit into your pre-conceived doctrine.
Mike,Just as a recap, okay, sorry for the novel.
I surrendered all of my own ideas, and I asked God who Jesus was. I was shown that Jesus is the Holy Spirit. I told a close friend, and they told me that Jesus was NOT the Holy Spirit, and so I put it aside for a while. Some time after that a family member mentioned the eternal spirit, and that stuck on my mind.
Soon after, was the words “In the beginning was the word, the word was with God and the word was God”, I could not get that out if my head. Due to frustration, I prayed and asked God for the truth. Immediately, I was given the words “No one knows the thoughts of a man but the spirit that is in him, like wise, no one knows the mind of God but, the spirit of God” and then days later “Nobody knows the Father but the Son”. I was shown the connection.
I was amazed, but could not understand some things , and so asked. God showed me that the Disciples also did not know much – and they only understood when Jesus spoke plainly to them, I was shown that I have a whole lifetime to learn.I told another trinitarian relation what I was shown, and she gave me the verse which says “the Lord is the Spirit” and one verse led onto another. Then was the early church book “The Shepherd of Hermes”, which said the same thing as what I was shown – and the fact that the entire book was in the earliest time of the Church considered to be canon, and even read out loud in the earliest churches until it was dismissed from canon at the council of Nicea – and the only reason that they dismissed it as canon, though it WAS called canon, was NOT for its belief that the Son was the Holy Spirit – nor for its adoptionist type view of the Son of Man – that was not even mentioned at the council BUT because of its stance on repentance (or something related). The fact is that the early Church had no problem in the Spirit being the Son of God – it was never argued against.
As for the word “only begotten” or “ONLY Son” – I have shown you proof that it was not in the original Greek, but that fell on deaf ears.
I trust what was shown to me despite what anyone else may think, it matters not.
I am in the process of learning and I trust no man.
For me personally, the evidence would be in the fruit – and I know myself that I have changed a lot from what I was becoming.
I am not impressed, Mike, that you are using psychological tactics to try and sway another member towards your beliefs. You were speaking lies against them, and you know who the father of lies is, and it is to God you are answerable. I advise you, again, to stop.
Seek truth Mike.
Quote (2besee @ June 16 2013,08:33) Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 16 2013,09:11) Quote (2besee @ June 14 2013,23:53) Quote 1. Have you even considered that 2B purposely omits the first part of his second scripture – apparently in an effort to deceptively sway the masses? You are not saying that to me personally, Mike – but to God who showed me those words.
I don't doubt that it was God who led you to that verse, 2B. But I'm quite sure that God intended for you to read the ENTIRE verse – not just the second part of it. God was most likely leading you to the ENTIRE verse, to show you what I just showed you in my post to Kerwin, but YOUR PERSONAL DESIRES led you to ignore the first part of the verse – the part that was the reason for God leading you to that verse in the first place.God was trying to show you that those words apply to His Son JESUS – not to some imagined “Holy Spirit Son of God”. He is trying to help you out by showing you things like this, 2B. So try not to just pick and choose only the parts of what God showed you that fit into your pre-conceived doctrine.
Mike,Just as a recap, okay, sorry for the novel.
I surrendered all of my own ideas, and I asked God who Jesus was. I was shown that Jesus is the Holy Spirit. I told a close friend, and they told me that Jesus was NOT the Holy Spirit, and so I put it aside for a while. Some time after that a family member mentioned the eternal spirit, and that stuck on my mind.
Soon after, was the words “In the beginning was the word, the word was with God and the word was God”, I could not get that out if my head. Due to frustration, I prayed and asked God for the truth. Immediately, I was given the words “No one knows the thoughts of a man but the spirit that is in him, like wise, no one knows the mind of God but, the spirit of God” and then days later “Nobody knows the Father but the Son”. I was shown the connection.
I was amazed, but could not understand some things , and so asked. God showed me that the Disciples also did not know much – and they only understood when Jesus spoke plainly to them, I was shown that I have a whole lifetime to learn.I told another trinitarian relation what I was shown, and she gave me the verse which says “the Lord is the Spirit” and one verse led onto another. Then was the early church book “The Shepherd of Hermes”, which said the same thing as what I was shown – and the fact that the entire book was in the earliest time of the Church considered to be canon, and even read out loud in the earliest churches until it was dismissed from canon at the council of Nicea – and the only reason that they dismissed it as canon, though it WAS called canon, was NOT for its belief that the Son was the Holy Spirit – nor for its adoptionist type view of the Son of Man – that was not even mentioned at the council BUT because of its stance on repentance (or something related). The fact is that the early Church had no problem in the Spirit being the Son of God – it was never argued against.
As for the word “only begotten” or “ONLY Son” – I have shown you proof that it was not in the original Greek, but that fell on deaf ears.
I trust what was shown to me despite what anyone else may think, it matters not.
I am in the process of learning and I trust no man.
For me personally, the evidence would be in the fruit – and I know myself that I have changed a lot from what I was becoming.
I am not impressed, Mike, that you are using psychological tactics to try and sway another member towards your beliefs. You were speaking lies against them, and you know who the father of lies is, and it is to God you are answerable. I advise you, again, to stop.
Seek truth Mike.
2beeQuote I am in the process of learning and I trust no man. this I question
Quote I prayed and asked God for the truth. Immediately, I was given the words “No one knows the thoughts of a man but the spirit that is in him, like wise, no one knows the mind of God but, the spirit of God” and then days later “Nobody knows the Father but the Son”. I was shown the connection. I have understand that God cannot lie or contradict himself ,and so his written words to us mean truth ,as far as you say and talk ,your believe now as gone against the truth ,because you remodeling the scriptures to fit your new understanding ,worse you say that your info comes from God ,CAN GOD NOW LIE CAN HIS PROPHETS LIE WHEN UNDER THE DIRECTION OF THE HOLY SPIRIT THEY HAVE WRITTEN THE WORDS OF GOD
YOU SAY YOU DO NOT TRUST MEN ,THINK OF WHAT YOU SAY IF YOU DO NOT BELIEVE THE WRITTEN WORD OF GOD THEN WHO IS IT THAT YOU BELIEVE AND TRUST
IS IT NOT MEN IF NOT YOURSELF ,MANY HAVE CALLED “LORD ,LORD BUT WHAT DID CHRIST SAYS ABOUT THEM ?
Quote (kerwin @ June 16 2013,10:40) Quote (jammin @ June 16 2013,05:23) kerwin and to all sniffing mosquito guys, make your own bible and put in john 1.1 that the word is the HS.
stop making stories.
you should give proof and not unwritten stories.
Jammin,The Word is the Word in John 1:1.
and that WORD in john 1.1 is Christ.John 1:1
New Life Version (NLV)
Christ Lived Before the World Was Made1 The Word (Christ) was in the beginning. The Word was with God. The Word was God.
i will not accept if you say HS, UNLESS you can give me VERSION saying that the word in john 1.1 is the HS.
Quote (kerwin @ June 15 2013,16:20) Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 16 2013,02:08)
Kerwin, since all humans ARE flesh, it is not common to say things like, “Billy the Kid came in the flesh on November 23rd, 1859.”That is when he was born, but we don't call being born “coming in the flesh”, do we?
Mike,It may be an idiom based on the culture of that time or it may be an anti-Gnostic teaching.
If it is a cultural idiom, then we should be able to find some examples in scripture of regular human beings who were said to have “come in the flesh”, right?Are there any?
Also, did you even consider the possibility that John said those words for a very specific reason, such as: Jesus WAS INDEED existing in the form of God BEFORE “coming in the flesh”?
Are you unable to see how John's use of “has come in the flesh” matches EXACTLY with Phil 2:6-8? Or how it matches EXACTLY with John 1:14, Hebrews 2:14, Acts 2:30, and Romans 1:3?
Quote (2besee @ June 15 2013,20:33) Immediately, I was given the words “No one knows the thoughts of a man but the spirit that is in him, like wise, no one knows the mind of God but, the spirit of God” and then days later “Nobody knows the Father but the Son”. I was shown the connection.
I don't doubt you were shown these two things, 2B. But the “connection” between them is all of your own doing.It's more likely that God showed you these two OPPOSING scriptures to empty your head of the thought that Jesus is the Holy Spirit, but His attempt was lost on you.
The MAN Jesus Christ said the words, “Nobody knows the Father but the Son, and those to whom the Son reveals Him”.
It was the MAN Jesus Christ to whom the Father had given all things. And it was the MAN Jesus Christ who revealed the Father to the rest of us………… even those of us who have never received the gift of the Holy Spirit.
The “Son” in Matthew 11:27 is JESUS – not some imagined “Holy Spirit Son of God”.
Quote (2besee @ June 15 2013,20:33) The fact is that the early Church had no problem in the Spirit being the Son of God – it was never argued against.
Read the Creed, 2B.The early church fathers proclaim one Father, one Son, and one Holy Spirit.
They DON'T confess one Father, and TWO Sons, one of whom is the Holy Spirit.
Quote (2besee @ June 15 2013,20:33) I surrendered all of my own ideas, and I asked God who Jesus was. I was shown that Jesus is the Holy Spirit.
Luke 10:21
At that time Jesus, full of joy through the Holy Spirit, said, “I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children.How can “the Holy Spirit Son of God” be full of joy THROUGH “the Holy Spirit Son of God”?
2besee,June wrote:[/quote]
Quote I was shown that Jesus is the Holy Spirit. 2besee,
JESUS CANNOT BE THE HOLY SPIRIT!
JESUS IS THE SON OF GOD, AND SON OF MAN:
AS SON OF GOD:
HE HAD THE
SPIRIT OF THE FATHER
AS HIS SOUL HE HAD
THE HOLY SPIRIT
AS HIS FLESH BODY HE HAD
THE SON'S SPIRIT
AS SON OF MAN, WHEN HE WAS BORN, TILL HE WAS BAPTIZED!,
HE HAD SATAN'S SPIRIT IN HIS SOUL!
HE HAD THE HOLY SPIRIT AS HIS SOUL!
AND THE SON'S SPIRIT AS HIS FLESH BODY!
SO THE ONLY DIFFERENCE WAS THE SPIRIT!
THEN JOHN REMOVED SATAN'S SPIRIT ON BAPTIZM!
THEN THE FATHER OFFICIALLY FUNCTIONED IN HIS SOUL!
Peace and love in Jesus
Charles
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
