- This topic has 25,924 replies, 116 voices, and was last updated 12 hours, 46 minutes ago by
.
- Posts
Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 16 2013,01:52) Quote (kerwin @ June 14 2013,20:18) Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 15 2013,06:29)
1. The flour was made cake and was eaten by all.2. The “Flour-Made-Cake” (as a title or description) was eaten by all.
3. The “Flour-Made-Cake” AND was eaten by all.
Mike,I am using sense #2 and not #3.
But you can't use “sense #2”, Kerwin. The word AND is present as a conjunction between the two parts of John 1:14. To understand “sense #2”, you must REMOVE that word from the Greek text, thereby completely CHANGING the teaching.I know that you want to understand it as “sense #2”, but notice how I've REMOVED the word AND from “sense #2” on purpose……….. so it makes sense.
If you understand “Flour-Made-Cake” as a title or description, then we MUST remove the word AND – or else it would make no sense. But the word “and” IS in the Greek text of 1:14, which means that you are really claiming “sense #3”, whether you like it or not.
And since we can all easily see that #3 DOESN'T make any sense at all, and #2 requires us to REMOVE an important word from the Greek text, we are only left with #1.
I hope you can see this.
Mike,It is a change of English so it becomes “the Word made flesh lived among us…”. The rest is changed appropriately as well. Both are past tense but one is the result and the other is the action.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 17 2013,15:34) I think you are right, Pierre. As if me being a JW would somehow make the scriptures I post become lies or something. 
No 2B. I am not now a JW. I do not study with anyone except for you guys on this site. And I have no plans to become a JW.
Mike, have you studied with them in the past? Just wondering.By the way, do you see how as a moderater you once again agreed with a members trolling? Something is not right.
How can members discuss anything when trolls or similar harass other members and are fed by the moderator?
Quote (kerwin @ June 17 2013,09:52) Quote (terraricca @ June 17 2013,02:35) Quote (kerwin @ June 17 2013,02:04) Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 16 2013,22:10) 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?
Mike,Actually human beings literally come in the flesh. I see no evidence it is an indiom but it does seem to be an answer to those that taught Jesus was a spirit being and so did not come in the flesh.
and;Jn 1:30 This is the one I meant when I said, ‘A man who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.’
Ecc 12:7 and the dust returns to the ground it came from,
and the spirit returns to God who gave it.at what time his the spirit (?) given by God
T,The spirit spoken of in Ecclesiastes 12:7 comes and results in a man first becoming a living soul.
John 1:30 attest that Jesus, a human, is above John the Baptist because he has superior rank.
Kerwinwhy are you adding to scriptures ? scriptures do not say what you so nicely put forth ;
John 1:30 attest that Jesus, a human, is above John the Baptist because he has superior rank.
Jn 1:29 The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said, “Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!
Jn 1:30 This is the one I meant when I said, ‘A man who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.’
Jn 1:31 I myself did not know him, but the reason I came baptizing with water was that he might be revealed to Israel.”
Jn 1:32 Then John gave this testimony: “I saw the Spirit come down from heaven as a dove and remain on him.
Jn 1:33 I would not have known him, except that the one who sent me to baptize with water told me, ‘The man on whom you see the Spirit come down and remain is he who will baptize with the Holy Spirit.’
Jn 1:34 I have seen and I testify that this is the Son of God.”John does not say what you are claiming but that he existed before he existed and yet comes after him,
Now;
Quote The spirit spoken of in Ecclesiastes 12:7 comes and results in a man first becoming a living soul. this also is not what it says but what you want it to mean is it not ?
Ecc 12:7 and the dust returns to the ground it came from,
and the spirit returns to God who gave it.yeah your views are
??????Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 17 2013,13:36) Quote (2besee @ June 16 2013,19:54) Mike, READ THE EARLY CHURCH FATHERS. It is common knowledge.
I have no time for such things, 2B. It is you and Gene who make claims that the Gnostics didn't believe Jesus was a flesh human being. You should be able to show some proof of that claim.I'm not saying you're wrong – only that the first time I looked up “Gnostic beliefs about Jesus”, I couldn't find anything like what you've claimed.
Mike……..read it for yourself , go to the site Kerwin posted and read it. You like the gnostic's believe Jesus was transferred from another existence into a flesh or what appeared a flesh body. You like them believe Jesus was tranfurgered from a past state of existences to a different state of existence, you also believe Jesus is now a Spirit being no longer having a flesh body. If you Preexistences would be honest you would admit you believe a lot alike. IMOPeace and love…………………………gene
Quote (terraricca @ June 17 2013,19:55) Quote (kerwin @ June 17 2013,09:52) Quote (terraricca @ June 17 2013,02:35) Quote (kerwin @ June 17 2013,02:04) Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 16 2013,22:10) 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?
Mike,Actually human beings literally come in the flesh. I see no evidence it is an indiom but it does seem to be an answer to those that taught Jesus was a spirit being and so did not come in the flesh.
and;Jn 1:30 This is the one I meant when I said, ‘A man who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.’
Ecc 12:7 and the dust returns to the ground it came from,
and the spirit returns to God who gave it.at what time his the spirit (?) given by God
T,The spirit spoken of in Ecclesiastes 12:7 comes and results in a man first becoming a living soul.
John 1:30 attest that Jesus, a human, is above John the Baptist because he has superior rank.
Kerwinwhy are you adding to scriptures ? scriptures do not say what you so nicely put forth ;
John 1:30 attest that Jesus, a human, is above John the Baptist because he has superior rank.
Jn 1:29 The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said, “Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!
Jn 1:30 This is the one I meant when I said, ‘A man who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.’
Jn 1:31 I myself did not know him, but the reason I came baptizing with water was that he might be revealed to Israel.”
Jn 1:32 Then John gave this testimony: “I saw the Spirit come down from heaven as a dove and remain on him.
Jn 1:33 I would not have known him, except that the one who sent me to baptize with water told me, ‘The man on whom you see the Spirit come down and remain is he who will baptize with the Holy Spirit.’
Jn 1:34 I have seen and I testify that this is the Son of God.”John does not say what you are claiming but that he existed before he existed and yet comes after him,
Now;
Quote The spirit spoken of in Ecclesiastes 12:7 comes and results in a man first becoming a living soul. this also is not what it says but what you want it to mean is it not ?
Ecc 12:7 and the dust returns to the ground it came from,
and the spirit returns to God who gave it.yeah your views are
??????
T,Get a better translation as “pro'-tos” in John 1:30 means “: first, before, principal, most important”
Quote Aramaic Bible in Plain English (©2010)
“This is The One of whom I said: 'After me a man is coming and he was himself before me because he had priority over me.'”Quote (kerwin @ June 16 2013,21:09) Mike, You are mistaken as human beings come in the flesh just like I come in cloths.
Kerwin,The scriptures you posted speak about human beings being clothed in flesh bodies. (Actually, Paul was speaking about being clothed with our new spiritual (not flesh) bodies in heaven – but you get the point.)
The point is that Jesus was said to HAVE COME in the flesh. That phrase just isn't said about people who have never been anything BUT flesh.
Once AGAIN……………..
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”? (Please answer this question, Kerwin. This is the third or fourth time I've asked it.)
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? (Please answer these points, Kerwin.)
Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 18 2013,04:42) Quote (kerwin @ June 16 2013,21:09) Mike, You are mistaken as human beings come in the flesh just like I come in cloths.
Kerwin,The scriptures you posted speak about human beings being clothed in flesh bodies. (Actually, Paul was speaking about being clothed with our new spiritual (not flesh) bodies in heaven – but you get the point.)
The point is that Jesus was said to HAVE COME in the flesh. That phrase just isn't said about people who have never been anything BUT flesh.
Once AGAIN……………..
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”? (Please answer this question, Kerwin. This is the third or fourth time I've asked it.)
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? (Please answer these points, Kerwin.)
Mike,John is the only one that uses that phrase but the others express the same idea.
It is the soul that comes in the flesh and the soul is the essential person.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 18 2013,04:42) 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”?
Mike,All that passage tells us is that Jesus' soul came in the flesh. It do not tell us what kind of soul or for that matter what kind of flesh is being spoken of.
Mike,
Quote 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? (Please answer these points, Kerwin.) No. Philippians 2:6-8 uses “form of God” in the same context of “form of servant” and I know that hierarchy. That hierarchy is not spoken of in 1 John 1:30 or John 1:14. Roman 1:3 and Acts 2:30 speak of the origin of the flesh. Hebrews 2:14 places him in the same boat as other humans, in having had a mortal body.
Quote (kerwin @ June 16 2013,21:22) Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 17 2013,08:36) Quote (2besee @ June 16 2013,19:54) Mike, READ THE EARLY CHURCH FATHERS. It is common knowledge.
I have no time for such things, 2B. It is you and Gene who make claims that the Gnostics didn't believe Jesus was a flesh human being. You should be able to show some proof of that claim.I'm not saying you're wrong – only that the first time I looked up “Gnostic beliefs about Jesus”, I couldn't find anything like what you've claimed.
Mike,It is not all Gnostics that believed that only the Docetæ sects.
Kerwin,Your source says, The word Docetae which is best rendered by “Illusionists”, first occurs in a letter of Serapion, Bishop of Antioch (190-203) to the Church at Rhossos, where troubles had arisen about the public reading of the apocryphal Gospel of Peter.
Look at the date. That is way after John lived and died. Did this Docetæ group actually exist in the lifetime of John – so that he could have been referring to them?
And even if they did, does that discount the more plausible possibility that John was declaring that the long-awaited Messiah had indeed come in the flesh?
Does it discount the reality that John 1 and 1 John 1 both speak about a particular person (the Word) who WASN'T at first flesh, but then BECAME flesh (“CAME IN THE flesh”)?
To me, this seems to be quite a bit of reaching – just to “explain away” the phrase “has come in the flesh”. But the reality of it is that “explaining away” that one phrase still doesn't “explain away” all the other scriptures that clearly speak of Jesus being something other than human before being made in human likeness.
Quote (kerwin @ June 16 2013,22:14) Mike, It is a change of English so it becomes “the Word made flesh lived among us…”.
Nonsense, Kerwin. Nothing but pure, unadulterated nonsense.The word AND is in the Greek text. Therefore, any understanding you come up with MUST include the word AND.
You can't just REMOVE a very important conjunction from the Greek text because that conjunction makes it harder for you to “explain away” the teaching of John 1:14.
Who do you think you are to REMOVE WORDS from the inspired scriptures – just to suit your own desires?
Shame on you! If you must change the scriptures for your understanding to be achieved, then you – WITHOUT A DOUBT – have the WRONG understanding.
jammin will be so proud of you for this one! The “student” has finally written a Bible of his own – just like jammin's been asking you to do!
Quote (2besee @ June 16 2013,23:42) Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 17 2013,15:34) I think you are right, Pierre. As if me being a JW would somehow make the scriptures I post become lies or something. No 2B. I am not now a JW. I do not study with anyone except for you guys on this site. And I have no plans to become a JW.
Mike, have you studied with them in the past? Just wondering.
No you're NOT “just wondering”, 2B. You are trying to find a way to “eliminate” my points without having to actually deal with them. You figure that if I was a JW, you could jump on the popular bandwagon of JW haters, and answer any point I make with, “No wonder Mike's confused. He's been brainwashed by JW literature!” And then everyone else will say, “Oh! Well, if he's a JW, then the scriptures he posted can no longer be true!”So listen up: It is none of your business what, if any, religious affiliations I have. A scriptural truth is still a scriptural truth, whether it is told by a JW, an atheist, a Muslim, a Catholic, or even you.
Your battles have all been against scriptures, 2B. They have never been against me. So JW or not, YOU need to get yourself aligned with the scriptures and stop trying to find a way to avoid the good, SCRIPTURAL points I keep making against your claims.
Quote (2besee @ June 16 2013,23:42) By the way, do you see how as a moderater you once again agreed with a members trolling? Something is not right. How can members discuss anything when trolls or similar harass other members and are fed by the moderator?
Why is Pierre a “troll” in this case, 2B? You're more at fault this time for calling him a derogatory name. All he did was truthfully speak his mind – the same as I just did in my words above. What – did you think your attempt to move the discussion away from scripture and towards a JW personal attack was in disguise or something? Pierre and I easily saw your JW questions for what they were…….. a way to divert away from the scriptures, and put the focus on “the crazy beliefs of the cult known as the Jehovah's Witnesses”.2B, I am a Christian who believes exactly what I learn in the scriptures. That is all you really need to know about me.
Quote (Gene Balthrop @ June 17 2013,08:07) You like the gnostic's believe Jesus was transferred from another existence into a flesh or what appeared a flesh body. You like them believe Jesus was tranfurgered from a past state of existences to a different state of existence, you also believe Jesus is now a Spirit being no longer having a flesh body.
Well Gene,I DO believe Jesus was existing in the form of God (a NON-HUMAN form) before being made in the likeness of a human being……….. just like Paul clearly taught me.
And I DO believe that Jesus was REALLY “made flesh”…………. just like John clearly taught me.
And I DO believe that Jesus “became a life-giving SPIRIT”, because “flesh cannot inherit, nor enter, the kingdom of heaven”……………. just like Paul and Jesus taught me.
So if these are three things that Gnostics also believe, then you are correct that I have some things in common with them.
What of it? All of the above things I learned directly from CLEAR scriptural teachings.
(See 2B? This is why I don't want to discuss JWs. See how Gene is able to completely IGNORE the actual SCRIPTURES that teach those things I mentioned above – just by saying, “Ooohhhh! You believe like the Gnostics! Therefore you MUST BE WRONG!” In this way, he can just label me a Gnostic, and no longer worry about the trivial fact that everything I claim comes straight from the scriptures. NOW do you understand why I think your JW line of questioning is out of order?)
Quote (kerwin @ June 17 2013,16:47) Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 18 2013,04:42) Quote (kerwin @ June 16 2013,21:09) Mike, You are mistaken as human beings come in the flesh just like I come in cloths.
Kerwin,The scriptures you posted speak about human beings being clothed in flesh bodies. (Actually, Paul was speaking about being clothed with our new spiritual (not flesh) bodies in heaven – but you get the point.)
The point is that Jesus was said to HAVE COME in the flesh. That phrase just isn't said about people who have never been anything BUT flesh.
Once AGAIN……………..
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”? (Please answer this question, Kerwin. This is the third or fourth time I've asked it.)
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? (Please answer these points, Kerwin.)
Mike,John is the only one that uses that phrase but the others express the same idea.
It is the soul that comes in the flesh and the soul is the essential person.
Okay Kerwin,Before this discussion DRONES on and on, like many of our discussions, we'll just both agree that Jesus is the ONLY human being in the scriptures who was ever said to have “come in the flesh”.
One point for me.
Quote (kerwin @ June 17 2013,16:57) Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 18 2013,04:42) 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”?
Mike,All that passage tells us is that Jesus' soul came in the flesh. It do not tell us what kind of soul or for that matter what kind of flesh is being spoken of.
Hmmm………….Could you show me the word “soul” in Phil 2:6-8? I haven't noticed that word there before.
Quote (kerwin @ June 17 2013,17:10) Mike, Quote 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? (Please answer these points, Kerwin.) No. Philippians 2:6-8 uses “form of God” in the same context of “form of servant” and I know that hierarchy. That hierarchy is not spoken of in 1 John 1:30 or John 1:14. Roman 1:3 and Acts 2:30 speak of the origin of the flesh. Hebrews 2:14 places him in the same boat as other humans, in having had a mortal body.
Actually, Phil 2 tells how Jesus was existing in the form of God BEFORE being “made in the likeness of a human being”.John 1:14 speaks about a person called “the Word”, who WASN'T flesh at first, but then “BECAME flesh”.
Acts 2:30 and Romans 1:3 make it clear that Jesus was only a descendent of David “according to the flesh”……… an odd statement to make about someone who had never been anything BUT flesh.
And Hebrews 2:14 explains the REASON the Word had to BECOME flesh in the first place.
Kerwin, lately you have proven to all of us here that you are no longer a serious student of scripture – but instead a student of your own desires. You have shown your complete disrespect for the holy scriptures by blatantly changing the words in them so the teaching can come out “your way”.
I don't think I'll have a lot more to say to you from now on. You are a master at denial, and I have better things to do. You have become to me like jammin – always spouting things that directly contradict scriptures – and even changing those scriptural words when it suits you.
I wish you the best in your studies of scripture, and pray that God show you light in the process.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 18 2013,05:22) Quote (kerwin @ June 16 2013,22:14) Mike, It is a change of English so it becomes “the Word made flesh lived among us…”.
Nonsense, Kerwin. Nothing but pure, unadulterated nonsense.The word AND is in the Greek text. Therefore, any understanding you come up with MUST include the word AND.
You can't just REMOVE a very important conjunction from the Greek text because that conjunction makes it harder for you to “explain away” the teaching of John 1:14.
Who do you think you are to REMOVE WORDS from the inspired scriptures – just to suit your own desires?
Shame on you! If you must change the scriptures for your understanding to be achieved, then you – WITHOUT A DOUBT – have the WRONG understanding.
jammin will be so proud of you for this one! The “student” has finally written a Bible of his own – just like jammin's been asking you to do!
Mike,Translators remove and insert words in Scripture on a regular basis. They manipulate them in other ways as well.
On the other hand I am just expressing the same idea of a passage in a different grammatical context. When you change the grammar context even words can change.
I am not speaking in the grammatical sense of the passive “was made” but I am speaking in the grammatical sense of active “made” to express the results of the action and not the action itself.
Mike,
Quote Actually, Phil 2 tells how Jesus was existing in the form of God BEFORE being “made in the likeness of a human being”. It does not say that. The most you can say is that the flow hints that Jesus being in the form of God emptied himself and took on the form of a servant before becoming a human being.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
