- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Mike,
I felt an obligation to post why I believe that your methods of interpretation are dishonest and inaccurate. To my target audience I have done that. Because of your indoctrination into the world of dishonest bible study I know I will never change YOUR mind. I feel no more obligation to engage with you farther. That would truly be casting pearls before swine.
I do pray someday you will come out of the darkness and see a brighter and more wonderful gospel but the choices are yours to make.Jesus was a full human being – except that he was SINLESS – only difference.
Jesus came as Man to show us how man can live sinless life.
But also to show us that there was a way for SINFUL man to attain empathy through himself and sympathy through God.
Jesus came to Shepherd those who believe in him and the testament he brought from his Father into the sheep pen-fold of the father's kingdom.
In this regard, he had to be made like a Son of man, subject to the natural elements and to the laws of man, albeit that God' laws (COMMON SENSE!!) over rule man's laws.
Jesus always referred to himself as “Son of Man” to emphasise the point. The only point about being 'seeded' by the Holy Spirit was so that he would be Sinless – since sin comes via the Father's 'seed' (Note: It was Eve that first committed the 'SIN' in the garden of Eden but it was Adam who was found guilty of the sin because it was Adam that God gave the lead in the command and the woman was taken out of Adam and was 'cleaves' to Adam, she being his estranged part to make Adam WHOLE as God had made him.)
RAISE THE BAR, people – why are you all slumbering!
Mike,
How was Adam the same as us despite the fact he does not have a human father? What about Eve? What about a cloned female human?
In other words does the method of a human beings conception change the fact that they are a “normal” human being?
According to me it does not but it seem you are trying to argue it does. I am simply providing examples that showed your premise that all human beings that do not have a biological human father are not “normal” human beings.
I will let you define what you consider “normal”.
To use logical reasoning to counter my argument you have to either explain why all those not having a biological human father are not “normal” human beings or change you “all” argument to a “some” and then make your case why Jesus is one of the “some”. Can you do that? That last is a direct question.
Quote (martian @ Aug. 01 2010,04:23) Mike,
I felt an obligation to post why I believe that your methods of interpretation are dishonest and inaccurate. To my target audience I have done that. Because of your indoctrination into the world of dishonest bible study I know I will never change YOUR mind. I feel no more obligation to engage with you farther. That would truly be casting pearls before swine.
I do pray someday you will come out of the darkness and see a brighter and more wonderful gospel but the choices are yours to make.
No, actually Martian, as soon as I started to break down the pre-existent thread into separate scriptures, you immediately started with your claims that you can't possibly debate someone who won't post how he came to his understanding in a list.This is a clear diversion designed to take the focus away from the fact that you can't possibly answer the scripture in a sensible way.
You see, I even tried to call Phil 2 a stalemate in spite of the fact that all of your arguments center on making the Greek words mean one of their less used, more abstract definitions. And not ONE of you gave any reason at all why they couldn't mean the more popular and much more used definition.
So you end up insisting that “form” ABSOLUTELY means this, without even CONSIDERING it could also mean that. And I'm not worried about that, because this is the first of many scriptures I'll start a topic about. And by the time we get to the last one, it will become clear this first one is more likely to be interpreted using the more popular definitions of the word, not some abstract, poetic meaning.
I'm waiting for you answer in John 6:62.
mike
Quote (kerwin @ Aug. 01 2010,06:18) How was Adam the same as us despite the fact he does not have a human father? What about Eve? What about a cloned female human?
Hi Kerwin,Who said Adam was the same as us? He and Eve and Jesus were obviously different than Abel, Cain, and every single one of us.
Besides, this thread is about whether or not Jesus pre-existed. The only reason any of us are discussing whether Jesus was the same as us is because most of you have that reason for ignoring scriptures. Your whole basis for denying Jesus' pre-existence is your wish to have Jesus be exactly like us. Well, he wasn't. He didn't have a human father like we all do. So move on to why he couldn't have pre-existed like scripture says.
mike
Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 24 2010,15:21) Hi Marty, Glad you joined in!
You and barley and Gene all have the same basic “rebuttal” of Phil 2. But I haven't seen any of you answer the question that both Kathi and I have asked:
If he WAS in human form while he was “in the form of God”, then how could he “make himself nothing” by “being made in human form”?
John 5:37 says,
You have never heard his voice nor seen his form,Do you notice Jesus doesn't say “no one has seen his form”? He says “YOU” haven't seen his form. And in Deut 4:12 and 4:15, God talks about how “people” never saw him take any form. But does that mean he doesn't have a spirit “form”? Maybe all angels and God and any other spiritual creatures that might exist have individual distiguishable “forms” that humans just can't see.
mike
Hi Mike:Is the scripture to which you refer?
KJV Phil 2
Quote 7But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: By the authority that God had given him as His Son and His Christ, he was in the “form of God”, but he did not let this “go to his head”. The scripture states that “he made himself not reputation”, but became like us in every way allowing himself to be tempted in every way in order that he might overcome sin, and so,
Quote Hebrews 5:5So also Christ glorified not himself to be made an high priest; but he that said unto him, Thou art my Son, to day have I begotten thee. 6As he saith also in another place, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.
7Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared;
8Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;
9And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;
You say:
Quote Maybe all angels and God and any other spiritual creatures that might exist have individual distiguishable “forms” that humans just can't see. That is speculation, but the point is that “how is “FORMS” THAT HUMANS CAN'T SEE” supposed to be an example of humility THAT I CAN SEE AND FOLLOW?
Love in Christ,
MartyMIke……you say scripture says Jesus (PREEXISTED) His berth Please post that for all of us to see. I have yet see the word PREEXISTED in any scripture. I take it you have not read the Posted Article Martian ask you to read. Why not just read it and commit on it, It clearly shows how the Hebrews thought about a preconceived Plans of God as it it actually existed. I beginning you are not really approaching this preexisting subject with an open mind it seem you have already made up your mind and will not even consider alternate views.
peace and love ………………………gene
Mike,
Your point is irrelevant since it does not change the fact that Jesus is a human being just like Adam, Cain, and we are. I can not argue that any human being is exactly like another but as far as being tempted we are all tempted by evil no matter how we were conceived.
You may though be trying to make another point and that is that a human being that preexists his own conception is still a human being.
That brings up the question of what the scriptural definition of human being is. I am of the opinion a human being is at the minimum the combination of a human soul and a human body but I have not tested that hypothesis. It is plausible that the human soul does preexist their formation in their mother's womb.
The reason that it is important to believe that Jesus is a human being just like us is that you must believe that Jesus was “tempted in every way, just as we are—yet was without sin”, Hebrews 4:15
Quote (942767 @ Aug. 01 2010,14:04) By the authority that God had given him as His Son and His Christ, he was in the “form of God”, but he did not let this “go to his head”. The scripture states that “he made himself not reputation”, but became like us in every way allowing himself to be tempted in every way in order that he might overcome sin, and so,
Hi Marty,I wish at least one of you guys would just answer to the scripture. The last five words say he WAS MADE in human likeness. The Greek word used is “ginomai”, which is the root of the “genes” part of “monogenes”. And “monogenes” means “only begotten”.
So it basically says that he WAS in the form or nature of God, but emptied himself to be BEGOTTEN in human likeness.
This is one clear example of what the passage COULD ACTUALLY MEAN. No matter how you slice and dice the Greek words, you cannot escape the fact that it COULD ACTUALLY MEAN what I've just posted.
So what it all boils down to for you guys is because you DON'T WANT IT TO MEAN THIS for your own selfish reasons of Christ having to be exactly like us, you won't even entertain the POSSIBILITY THAT IT COULD MEAN THIS.
And that's nothing but denial, considering the other scriptures that support this very meaning of Phil 2.
One question to all of you: IS THERE ANY SCRIPTURAL REASON THAT THE GREEK WORDS COULD NOT POSSIBLY MEAN WHAT I UNDERSTAND THEM TO MEAN? YES OR NO.
I am very aware that they also could have a different meaning, and I've called this thread a stalemate in an effort to move on to some of the many other scriptures that support my understanding. But you won't let this one go. So now I ask for each and every one of you for your honesty. Could the Greek words POSSIBLY mean my understanding of Phil 2? If not, show why it is IMPOSSIBLE.
mike
Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Aug. 01 2010,15:01) MIke……you say scripture says Jesus (PREEXISTED) His berth Please post that for all of us to see. I have yet see the word PREEXISTED in any scripture.
Hi Gene,Scripture also doesn't specifically say God “pre-existed” the creation of the world either. Yet we know He did, right? We know by other words and phrases……..some of which are also used of Jesus.
Do me a favor and DIRECTLY and HONESTLY answer the bolded question I just posted in my reply to Marty.
If you all answer honestly, we can call Phil a stalemate and move forward.
mike
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 02 2010,04:23) Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Aug. 01 2010,15:01) MIke……you say scripture says Jesus (PREEXISTED) His berth Please post that for all of us to see. I have yet see the word PREEXISTED in any scripture.
Hi Gene,Scripture also doesn't specifically say God “pre-existed” the creation of the world either. Yet we know He did, right? We know by other words and phrases……..some of which are also used of Jesus.
Do me a favor and DIRECTLY and HONESTLY answer the bolded question I just posted in my reply to Marty.
If you all answer honestly, we can call Phil a stalemate and move forward.
mike
Mike………WE are told GOD was (IN) the beginning, That has to mean He preexisted, We are also told God Created all the world and everything in it, by Himself and alone .Isa 44:24……> Thus says the LORD, thy reedemer, and he that formed you from the womb, (I) am the LORD that makes (ALL) things; that streached forth the heavens (ALONE); that spreads abroad the earth by (MYSELF).
This proved GOD (ALONE) takes credit for (ALL) Creation. I have yet to see a scriptures that says Jesus existed as a (BEING) of any kind or that Jesus was in the Beginning . Only forcing the text of John 1:1 can anyone draw that conclusion. Tell us where did Jesus ever say (HE) created anything at all.
Mike we can call Philippians a stalemate as far as getting you to understand it in the right context. But the facts are non the less you have failed to make it stand as a proof text to support you preexistence teachings. IMO
peace and love to you and yours…………………….gene
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 02 2010,04:18) Quote (942767 @ Aug. 01 2010,14:04) By the authority that God had given him as His Son and His Christ, he was in the “form of God”, but he did not let this “go to his head”. The scripture states that “he made himself not reputation”, but became like us in every way allowing himself to be tempted in every way in order that he might overcome sin, and so,
Hi Marty,I wish at least one of you guys would just answer to the scripture. The last five words say he WAS MADE in human likeness. The Greek word used is “ginomai”, which is the root of the “genes” part of “monogenes”. And “monogenes” means “only begotten”.
So it basically says that he WAS in the form or nature of God, but emptied himself to be BEGOTTEN in human likeness.
This is one clear example of what the passage COULD ACTUALLY MEAN. No matter how you slice and dice the Greek words, you cannot escape the fact that it COULD ACTUALLY MEAN what I've just posted.
So what it all boils down to for you guys is because you DON'T WANT IT TO MEAN THIS for your own selfish reasons of Christ having to be exactly like us, you won't even entertain the POSSIBILITY THAT IT COULD MEAN THIS.
And that's nothing but denial, considering the other scriptures that support this very meaning of Phil 2.
One question to all of you: IS THERE ANY SCRIPTURAL REASON THAT THE GREEK WORDS COULD NOT POSSIBLY MEAN WHAT I UNDERSTAND THEM TO MEAN? YES OR NO.
I am very aware that they also could have a different meaning, and I've called this thread a stalemate in an effort to move on to some of the many other scriptures that support my understanding. But you won't let this one go. So now I ask for each and every one of you for your honesty. Could the Greek words POSSIBLY mean my understanding of Phil 2? If not, show why it is IMPOSSIBLE.
mike
Hi Mike:Maybe the following scripture will help:
Quote 2.Romans 8:3
For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:He was conceived of the Holy Ghost and was not any old ordinary man. He was the “Only Begotten Son of the Living God”, but he did not set himself apart from us because of this, but he became just like any ordinary man. That is what this means and not that he existed as some spiritual being and then allowed himself to be begotten of human flesh.
Mike, please think. How could this be. The scripture states that the Holy Ghost overshadowed Mary and she conceived.
How do you explain what you are suggesting in light of this?Love in Christ,
MartyHi Mike:
Also,
Quote 1.Hebrews 10:5
Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not,but a body hast thou prepared me:
Love in Christ,
MartyMarty,
You make a statement that is either true or untrue depending on what you mean by “extraordinary” human being. You state that Jesus is an “extraordinary” human being because he is the “Only Begotten Son of the Living God”. If you mean “extraordinary” in the same sense that any President of the U.S. would be considered to be “extraordinary” compared with the ordinary non-President of the U.S. then I agree. Jesus was the “Only Begotten Son of the Living God” because God elected him to be just like the citizens of the U.S. elects their Presidents. That is why he is called the Chosen One in Luke 23:35 by those who did not believe it was so. If you also want to state that Jesus despite being tempted just as any other human being had an extraordinary character or spirit and so resisted all that temptation then I also agree. I also am convinced that we can get that same character/spirit by obeying all Jesus’ teachings and so entering and living according to the dictates of the new covenant.
It is my belief that the evil one has thrown the meaning of the clause “the Only Begotten Son of the Living God” into dispute and thus I believe we need to be clear what we mean by it. I though, am but a student and so not fully educated in the word of God so all I can state is what I believe at this time is correct. I believe that the clause “The Only Begotten Son of the Living God” means that Jesus Is the exact representation of God’s righteousness and holiness in the human race because he loves as God loves and thus never sinned though tempted by evil just like other human beings. There is no other human being that can claim that honor.
To support my point those who receive and live according to the Spirit are called sons of God and according to scripture no one living by the spirit will sin even when tempted by evil. In other words to sin you must stop living by the spirit even if you stop temporarily. This is true though in the past all human beings but Jesus have sinned.
Edited because I previously posted another post to this thread instead of the apropriate thread and I did not want to waste space.
Quote (kerwin @ Aug. 03 2010,15:34) Marty, You make a statement that is either true or untrue depending on what you mean by “extraordinary” human being. You state that Jesus is an “extraordinary” human being because he is the “Only Begotten Son of the Living God”. If you mean “extraordinary” in the same sense that any President of the U.S. would be considered to be “extraordinary” compared with the ordinary non-President of the U.S. then I agree. Jesus was the “Only Begotten Son of the Living God” because God elected him to be just like the citizens of the U.S. elects their Presidents. That is why he is called the Chosen One in Luke 23:35 by those who did not believe it was so. If you also want to state that Jesus despite being tempted just as any other human being had an extraordinary character or spirit and so resisted all that temptation then I also agree. I also am convinced that we can get that same character/spirit by obeying all Jesus’ teachings and so entering and living according to the dictates of the new covenant.
It is my belief that the evil one has thrown the meaning of the clause “the Only Begotten Son of the Living God” into dispute and thus I believe we need to be clear what we mean by it. I though, am but a student and so not fully educated in the word of God so all I can state is what I believe at this time is correct. I believe that the clause “The Only Begotten Son of the Living God” means that Jesus Is the exact representation of God’s righteousness and holiness in the human race because he loves as God loves and thus never sinned though tempted by evil just like other human beings. There is no other human being that can claim that honor.
To support my point those who receive and live according to the Spirit are called sons of God and according to scripture no one living by the spirit will sin even when tempted by evil. In other words to sin you must stop living by the spirit even if you stop temporarily. This is true though in the past all human beings but Jesus have sinned.
Edited because I previously posted another post to this thread instead of the apropriate thread and I did not want to waste space.
Kerwin,I appreciate your well thought out post.
barley
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 02 2010,04:18) Quote (942767 @ Aug. 01 2010,14:04) By the authority that God had given him as His Son and His Christ, he was in the “form of God”, but he did not let this “go to his head”. The scripture states that “he made himself not reputation”, but became like us in every way allowing himself to be tempted in every way in order that he might overcome sin, and so,
Hi Marty,I wish at least one of you guys would just answer to the scripture. The last five words say he WAS MADE in human likeness. The Greek word used is “ginomai”, which is the root of the “genes” part of “monogenes”. And “monogenes” means “only begotten”.
So it basically says that he WAS in the form or nature of God, but emptied himself to be BEGOTTEN in human likeness.
This is one clear example of what the passage COULD ACTUALLY MEAN. No matter how you slice and dice the Greek words, you cannot escape the fact that it COULD ACTUALLY MEAN what I've just posted.
So what it all boils down to for you guys is because you DON'T WANT IT TO MEAN THIS for your own selfish reasons of Christ having to be exactly like us, you won't even entertain the POSSIBILITY THAT IT COULD MEAN THIS.
And that's nothing but denial, considering the other scriptures that support this very meaning of Phil 2.
One question to all of you: IS THERE ANY SCRIPTURAL REASON THAT THE GREEK WORDS COULD NOT POSSIBLY MEAN WHAT I UNDERSTAND THEM TO MEAN? YES OR NO.
I am very aware that they also could have a different meaning, and I've called this thread a stalemate in an effort to move on to some of the many other scriptures that support my understanding. But you won't let this one go. So now I ask for each and every one of you for your honesty. Could the Greek words POSSIBLY mean my understanding of Phil 2? If not, show why it is IMPOSSIBLE.
mike
Mikeboll64,You have persisted in suggesting that others and myself have evaded your question. You have posted the following several times:
“If he WAS in human form while he was “in the form of God”, then how could he “make himself nothing” by “being made in human form”?”
Your question is very leading and that is the problem. I do not think that you see it as a leading question.
It reminds me of the question, “Are you still beating your wife?”
The structure of this question requires a yes or no answer only. The question already had found the husband guilty of beating his wife. However, what if he has never hurt his wife, let alone beat his wife? How is the man to answer this?
Your question puts similar restraints on anyone who answers, then you get to pounce on them when they do not answer your question directly.
Please excuse my bluntness, but, whether you knew it or not, whether you realized it or not, basically your question is deceitful and dishonest and does not not deserve an answer.
1. For instance, “If he WAS in human form ” What is with the word “IF”? Jesus Christ is, IS human, there is no if.
2. Likewise, “WAS”. Jesus Christ is, even now, in the present, in human form. He has the resurrected human form. But we all shall be changed and we will have a body like his. He has the ultimate human form, which we will have also.
Already, you have two premises which are false.
3. Likewise, “If he WAS in human form while he was “in the form of God” Likewise,, Philippians does not say “Who was in the form of God.” It says, “Who, being in the form of God” the word, “being” is present tense, not past tense. Another false premise.
4. Then you say, “make himself nothing”. Where does it say in Philippians that he “make himself nothing”?
Yes, in the NIV, it says made himself nothing. What a “dungfilled” version. Other versions say, made himself of no reputation”, KJV. Or, “But stripped himself [of all privileges and rightful dignity],” Amplified. “but emptied himself” NAS.
These three agree in concept. Why does the NIV say “make himself nothing”? Nothing, what does nothing mean? A thing of no value, use or importance?
How would you define “nothing”? I cannot answer a question that I do not understand.
Is that nothing as in, not anything. A space totally void of all matter?
5. Likewise, “being made in human form”? Again, a false premise. Philippians does not say, “being made in human form.” It says,” was made in the likeness of men”.
You have injected at least five false premises in your question, then scold those who don't answer to your satisfaction?
You need to remove your head from that place where the son of God does not shine and read the scriptures.
barley
Hi barley,
Whoo Hoo! FINALLY A RESPONSE TO WHAT THIS THREAD IS ACTUALLY ABOUT!
You said:
Quote It reminds me of the question, “Are you still beating your wife?”
A very simple answer would be, “I have never beaten my wife sir, so your question is invalid.”
You said:
Quote 1. For instance, “If he WAS in human form ” What is with the word “IF”? Jesus Christ is, IS human, there is no if.
Well, since the “wife beating” question apparently threw you for a loop, I guess I should have been clearer with my question. Let's change it to, “Since you assert that Jesus WAS already in human form……”You said:
Quote 2. Likewise, “WAS”. Jesus Christ is, even now, in the present, in human form.
Okay, again I'll clarify. We'll change it to, “Since you assert that Jesus WAS already on earth in human form…….”You said:
Quote 3. Likewise, “If he WAS in human form while he was “in the form of God” Likewise,, Philippians does not say “Who was in the form of God.” It says, “Who, being in the form of God” the word, “being” is present tense, not past tense. Another false premise.
I assure you, they are not “false premises, just maybe not written clearly enough for you to understand what I meant. And even though the Greek word “huparcho” means “to begin”, and therefore the verse actually reads, “Who beginning in the form of God…..”, we'll change it to, “while being in the form of God……” just to keep you happy.You said:
Quote 4. Then you say, “make himself nothing”. Where does it say in Philippians that he “make himself nothing”? Yes, in the NIV, it says made himself nothing. What a “dungfilled” version. Other versions say, made himself of no reputation”, KJV. Or, “But stripped himself [of all privileges and rightful dignity],” Amplified. “but emptied himself” NAS.
Okay, let's go with “…..emptied himself…..”. Because while the Greek word “kenoo” does actually mean…….
1) to empty, make empty 2) to make void 2a) deprive of force, render useless, of no effect
……..its first definition is “to empty”, and you apparently like that one better. You said:
Quote 5. Likewise, “being made in human form”? Again, a false premise. Philippians does not say, “being made in human form.” It says,” was made in the likeness of men”. We'll split the difference on this one. The Greek word “anthropos” does actually mean “a human being”. So let's keep the “human being”, but change the “being made” to “was made”, because the “being” and “was” is just added for the benefit of the English readers anyway.
So what did we end up with? Here is my new, revised, bolded question that I would love for ANY of you to actually answer directly now that barley has set me straight on my grammar skills:
Since you assert that Jesus was already on earth in human form while “being in the form of God”, how is it that he emptied himself and was made in the likeness of a human being?
Before I post my second DIRECT question that nobody answered, let me repost the verses with some other, equally valid definitions of the Greek words.
Who, beginning in the form of God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but emptied himself, and took on the form of a slave, and was begotten in the likeness of a human being.”
Now every word I used above is a valid definition of the actual Greek word used. Knowing this, please answer my second question DIRECTLY.
IS THERE ANY SCRIPTURAL REASON THAT THE GREEK WORDS COULD NOT POSSIBLY MEAN WHAT I UNDERSTAND THEM TO MEAN? YES OR NO. If the answer is “NO”, please tell me why it is IMPOSSIBLE.
mike
Quote (SimplyForgiven @ Aug. 02 2010,20:41) Mike,
I think it means he existed before flesh.
That was the topic right? nothing further?
Hi Dennison,And I agree. Do you have any supporting words WHY you think what you think?
It's okay if you don't.
mike
Mike………..Paul was talking about a (existence of a past event) when Jesus existed on earth before his assent He existed in the (form or nature ) of God because God was (IN) Him , but he did not try to be equal with Him because he was a man and not a GOD and He Know that even though GOD was (IN) HIM. So he took the position as a Servant because that what he was, He did not seek an equality with GOD and thereby (ROBBING) GOD of his Glory, Just as it says “I HAVE GLORIFIED (YOU) ON THE EARTH” < NOT HIMSELF.
When are you going to accept these things, you are holding on tho a preconceived Ideology fostered by preexistences and is not scripturally factual. You trying it use this as some proof text is in error brother.
You have lost this one now go on the the next text to support your beliefs in Jesus preexistence brother.
peace and love to you and yours Mike…………………………..gene
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
