- This topic has 274 replies, 26 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 5 months ago by
.
- Posts
Hi Oxy,
And just as you as a man have not appeared in several generations neither did Jesus?
It was just a fond opinion of yours?Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 13 2010,22:26) Hi Oxy,
And just as you as a man have not appeared in several generations neither did Jesus?
It was just a fond opinion of yours?
Jesus did not appear in several generations, but the Word of God spoke to people in the Old Testament in excess of 100 times before the Word was made flesh.I am fond of this teaching. It is more than an opinion Nick. God has taught me.
Hi Oxy,
Indeed the Spirit of Christ taught the prophets.[1Peter1.11]
So when you compared those verses did you find the HOLY SPIRIT can be called THE SPIRIT OF THE FATHER?Hi Oxy,
1Jn4.13
“By this we know that we abide in Him and He in us because He has given us of HIS SPIRIT”Oxy…….”THE SPIRIT OF CHRIST” is the spirit Jesus (the anoited) or Christos Had (IN) Him having recieved (IT) from GOD the Father. This Spirit is (NOT) HIS SPIRIT but God the FATHER'S SPIRIT. All who have this (SAME) SPIRIT (IN) them are sons of the LIVING GOD (NOW).
All son and daughters of GOD (NOW) share this (SAME) Spirit that Jesus Has (IN) him. There is (NO) Difference. Jesus did not exist pryer to his berth and we do not have any spirit that is of HIM in US. The Spirit that was (IN) Him is of GOD and (THAT) Spirit is the (SAME SPIRIT) all have who God the Father has given it to not one ounce of difference. IMO
peace and love………………..gene
Quote (Gene Balthrop @ June 14 2010,04:44) Oxy…….”THE SPIRIT OF CHRIST” is the spirit Jesus (the anoited) or Christos Had (IN) Him having recieved (IT) from GOD the Father. This Spirit is (NOT) HIS SPIRIT but God the FATHER'S SPIRIT. All who have this (SAME) SPIRIT (IN) them are sons of the LIVING GOD (NOW). All son and daughters of GOD (NOW) share this (SAME) Spirit that Jesus Has (IN) him. There is (NO) Difference. Jesus did not exist pryer to his berth and we do not have any spirit that is of HIM in US. The Spirit that was (IN) Him is of GOD and (THAT) Spirit is the (SAME SPIRIT) all have who God the Father has given it to not one ounce of difference. IMO
peace and love………………..gene
You are hard of hearing Gene… obviously have made up your mind in spite of the evidence I have shown you. Did you even take the time to consider what I wrote?I agree that Jesus (as Jesus) did not pre-exist, but the Word of God did from the beginning and was made flesh.
By the way.. the word (IT) is also correctly translated (HE)
Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 13 2010,22:32) Hi Oxy,
Indeed the Spirit of Christ taught the prophets.[1Peter1.11]
So when you compared those verses did you find the HOLY SPIRIT can be called THE SPIRIT OF THE FATHER?
The Holy Spirit is the spirit of the Father, but not the Father
He (the Holy Spirit) is also the Spirit of Christ, but is not Christ.Now answer me this.. if the Spirit in Christ was the Father, who spoke from the clouds?
Luk 9:35 And a voice came out of the cloud, saying, This is My Son, the Beloved, hear Him.
Hi Oxy,
God who is in heaven [Mt6]manifests in many ways in His creation.
God is not his Spirit though His Spirit is of Him and fully represents Him.Are you not a sharer of the Spirit of God[1cor2]?
Melchizedek cannot be a man having no family.
He cannot be God Himself and be a priest of God at the same time.
He cannot be an angel because an angel cannot be a priest.
But he could be the Word appearing as a man, because the Word is the High Priest of God.Hi Oxy,
Speculations keep on coming.
But you have a voice that tells you.
Why would Jesus become a priest of himself?Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 20 2010,16:13) Hi Oxy,
So you think he was a priest of the order of himself?
The Scripture is popinting out that Jesus was as Melchizedek, which is a pretty astute observation considering they were probably one and the same.Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 20 2010,16:57) Hi Oxy,
Speculating again?
How can you judge astuteness when you base it on opinion?
It was astute because it was recorded in Scripture, not because I was speculating.Quote (Oxy @ June 20 2010,22:59) Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 20 2010,16:57) Hi Oxy,
Speculating again?
How can you judge astuteness when you base it on opinion?
It was astute because it was recorded in Scripture, not because I was speculating.
Hi Oxy,Since people like word studies here it is for ASTUTE: Having or showing shrewdness and discernment, especially with respect to one's own concerns.
If you were to DEFINE characteristics of God would these be part of them?
No mother.
No father.
No genealogy.
No beginning of days.
No end of life.
Exists in perpetuity.
Righteous.The author of Hebrews went to great lengths to describe Melchizedek and “that's a fact, Jack!”
The rest of the comments made about him are just what Nick is saying, “speculation” IMO. hahaha
So, from the Scriptures Melchizedek has to be God BUT…. (insert your opinions here (eliminate, deny, and change what is written)).
I think in another post you asked who is Jesus instead of who is God.
The thread appears to want to invoke an argument where none exists. With the overwhelming preponderance of evidence this Melchizedek is God. The controversy is when the author uses the word “man” to describe God. Which lends itself over to us trying to define MAN. If God is in the world in a physical body, then what other “human” terminology would we use but “man”?
Logically, who would the “son of God” look like? Obviously his Father, no? Who is his Father? God….son of God. Next, where does “peace” exist but in Heaven?
Thus there “appears” to be ONE discrepancy amongst 8-10 facts pointing to Melchizedek as being God so where do the “scholars” divert the attention to? And because of this one they negate all of the others.
Who is the only “person” that Jesus would follow after? God, his Father. What priesthood is Jesus following after? The Order of Melchizedek. So, Melchizedek logically is Jesus' Father. Therefore, the people who say that Jesus is God and is following after himself are chasing their tails.
Now concerning if there is a God Most High is another consideration and one must ask who this is. If Melchizedek is God and is serving God Most High then the question to ponder or research is who is it?
Elohim is God Most High. Elohim consists of two essences (male and female; Gen 1:27) and Melchizedek is the male essence of Elohim. Gen 1:5 says that ONE “day” consists of two elements (essences) Evening and Morning. Gen 1:27 says that Elohim consists of two essences, Male and Female. Just as ONE DAY is not complete without the Morning OR Evening, ONE GOD is not complete without the Male OR Female. A problem in English is that we don't know which Hebrew term is being used for the word God.
“Eloah” is the root of the word Elohim which means god (noun, feminine) and “im” is the ending suffix meaning plurality and is masculine. I don't want you to be ignorant but “god” noun feminine is really “goddess” and is more correct, no? But someone here objected to talking about “goddess” and Gods. Elohim is neither. Elohim in this instance is referring to the ONE supreme being that consists of TWO essences (male and female) and it is God (elohim) who is doing the talking….Let US create man in OUR image…
All of our lives we have been taught lies and misconceptions because those who were teaching were taught likewise. Now that we have technology information is readily available to all who have computers and the internet and we don't have to accept the lies of others. All of us Greek/Hebrew scholars couldn't carry on a simple conversation in either language but are able to understand in part.
We studied and learned much about YHVH and argued whether it is Yahweh, Jehovah or some other variation; and whether it is a title or name. AND the debates go on. What is not recognized is that YHVH is the male essence of God (Elohim) and exists as a separate entity from the Holy Spirit and each one alone does not comprise Elohim just as Morning does not comprise a full day.
Looking at the BIG picture behind “GOD”:
Elohim = God Most High (noun, fem & masc, singural); yet consists of two essences male and female
YHVH = male essence; consists of two positions King and Priest. El = God (noun, masc, singular). NAME = Melchizedek
IMO YHVH is a title meaning Lord whereas Melchizedek is His name; and Elohim when talking about the supreme being with the two essences is a name….and in English would be capitalized to indicate a proper noun. Elohim in lower case letters would be addressing someone different than the supreme being Elohim (God). If Melchizedek is the male essence's name of God and He is a King then His obvious title would be “Lord” and you would address Him as YHVH Elohim, Lord God.
Holy Spirit = female essence; consists of 7 spirits
Logically if Jesus is the son of God (Elohim) and Elohim consists of two essences of male and female the male essence would be God, the Father and the female essence would be God, the Mother. However, since the female is spirit and is unseen so is her identity…unlike the Father who has a physical body and is seen. Everyone acknowledges that God, the Father exists and want to deny that God, the Holy Spirit exists as a complete and separate entity when addressing the concept of God.
The person who said that spirit = knowledge is only 1/7th correct as this is only ONE of the essences of the Holy Spirit. If that is his definition of spirit then he is missing a lot. Just as a person who thinks that God is only male/masculine is missing 50% of the equation and is wrong at least 50% of the time.
So, in my opinion it would be astute to know the Elohim of the Bible in order to correctly address topics correctly and spiritually without misleading or misguiding others.
Oxy, may God (Elohim) richly bless you,
David
David,
I formerly stated that you posted well. And such it was.
Since then you have nosedived in complete heretical jabberwocky.
Welcome to the home. Wasn't that a 'Eurovision Song contest contender'?
You will find sthat you are amongst deluded friends here and you are already fitting in nicely.
Too much internet research has divorced you from the true word of God in the Scriptures.
Even a simple verse as, 'In the image of God, he made them both, male and female', is taken out of context. It doesn't mean that God made them like his 'Male and female' image. It means God made both the male and the female in his image. That is, having the ability to create, design, think, do, undo, an awareness of 'self', loving, nurturing, caring with fluid reasoning, power, strength, authority over all below (The plants and animals, fauna and flora), etc. A 'Husbander'. That is 'the image of God'.
He did not make any other creature like man. Even as scientists try by 'exuding feelings and compassion' over an Ape that hugs it's offspring, or sn elephant that 'cries' over it's fallen offspring or other family member, it is quite clear that, for all that, it is all 'Herd Safety Instinct' and not wholegrade free will. Afterall, the elephant walks off afterwards leaving the fallen member to the jackalls, hyenas, vultures, and the ape soon swipes the child away with ferocity after a couple of years, if that. Do humans do that. Which animal builds, has 'selfawareness', designs, creates, builds…other than by instinct? And even, even, even if such one trait is found in one, it is only 'that one trait'. Humans have all. What 'power and authority' do they have?David, you have brought a new dimension in delusion to this forum.
I said, i think, i thought anyway, that you had found a home after all your wonderings but 'who' was it who brought you 'home'?
was it, by chance, an 'angel of light'??
David, I pretty much agree with your profound expository. There is another thought I have though. Melchizedek was a priest of the Most High God, which eliminates him from being the Most High, so what are the options? Personally, I believe Melchizedek was the Word of God. This would tie up the loose ends and make it more in line with Jesus being after the order of Melchizedek because Jesus was the Word made flesh, born as man whereas Melchizedek was not born, but appeared.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
