- This topic has 19,164 replies, 120 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 1 month ago by
.
- Posts
Quote (seek and you will find @ June 01 2008,03:08) Quote (Lightenup @ June 01 2008,18:19) Hey Mandy,
It couldn't be just any body that the Son of God took. Just any old body would have had the sin passed into it from the earthly father. Jesus could not have had a body with the inherited sin.Just my opinion.
And about the cookies, why don't you come to the bbq for my son's graduation and help yourself:) I'd love to have you.
Kathi
Can I come too. In Spirit I will be there. Please tell your Son
Congratulation from Georg and Irene
What did He graduated from High School or College?Peace and Love Georg and Irene
Hi Irene,
Yes certainly you can come and you can bring your boyfriend too
You might pray for the rain to stop though. The party is at 1:30.Love, K
I didn't make sugarless cookies though but the pork bbq doesn't have any sugar if you leave off the sauce.
lightenup………Adam the (SON) of God. He was a uniquely (begotten) SON>0f GOD. And not Adam but also Eve was uniquely (Begotten)
All things are begotten of God. Jesus was uniquely Begotten and so was Adam and Eve, And all things are a Creation of ONE GOD.
Except God Himself. He is the ONLY ONE that is not Begotten. Begotten simply came into being through and were all physically begotten and spiritually begotten also. Making a big deal out of the word begotten is foolishness.
IMO……….gene
Quote (Gene Balthrop @ June 02 2008,02:56) lightenupAll things are begotten of God. Jesus was uniquely Begotten and so was Adam and Eve, And all things are a Creation of ONE GOD.
This is true.Might I add that while Adam and Eve are unique and created by God, Jesus is the firsborn (and only born) of God.
Jesus is the new creation.
He was thus from birth, not the Jordan, according to the gospels.
Quote (Lightenup @ June 01 2008,18:19) Hey Mandy,
It couldn't be just any body that the Son of God took. Just any old body would have had the sin passed into it from the earthly father. Jesus could not have had a body with the inherited sin.Just my opinion.
And about the cookies, why don't you come to the bbq for my son's graduation and help yourself:) I'd love to have you.
Kathi
Great explaination, thank you.However Nick's theory about Jesus surrounds the idea of him being re-born or inhabited by God's spirit at the Jordan. Meaning, Jesus was a mere “vessel” which God took over, so to speak, or worked through? It's unclear, exactly. The dogma takes a while to work.
With his idea, any body would have done. Any body could have been reborn at the Jordan and filled with God's spirit. There was no need for special conceptions and a virgin. His theory is actually a lot less work for God, if you think about it.
But your saying that in fact, it was important for Jesus to be conceived by God and Mary. Your reason is that he would not have sin passed on to him in this way. But are you forgetting that he was born of a women (mankind). And not just any women – a women who was under the Law.
This is where it gets muddy for those who do not believe God conceived a literal son with Mary. In order to hold to your belief, you must deny that Jesus was actually conceived as the gospels teach. You MUST apply a different definition to conception.
Conception is the fusing of two sources. DNA is mixed and divided. A new individual (never before on any scene) is the product of both parents. Any other definition won't due and isn't one that anyone on earth recognizes. We know God by his creation. This is how we know him. He wouldn't mess with that, imo.
Thanks for listening,
MandyQuote (Nick Hassan @ June 01 2008,17:05) Hi 94,
So Adam did not exist when he was begotten [does scripture say so?]
and Jesus was already a man when he was?
Hi Nick:I don't understand why you are asking me this. Please explain.
Hi not3,
Did the Spirit not rest on Jesus at the Jordan, in the form of a dove after he was water baptised?
We follow him.Quote (Gene Balthrop @ June 01 2008,17:01) 94…….from my studies in the past the term (only begotten) should be rendered as (Uniquely Begotten), the first Adam was also uniquely begotten of God and the Second Adam also was uniquely begotten of God, but none the less (begotten) Which means brought forth by the hand of God. Adam was the first Man born of God as it says and Jesus was the second Man born of God both were unique compared to normal humanity. But non the less pure Human beings, one was given the holy spirit and begotten of God as a son on the day he was baptized,Just as it say's “(This Day) (I) GOD Have begotten you not some time in the distant past as trinitarians would have you believe.
The other, the first Adam will receive the Holy Spirit later,and become a spiritual son of God just as Jesus is.
IMO……………..gene
Hi ,
Only Jesus, and Isaac, are spoken of in the bible as MONOGENES.Quote (Gene Balthrop @ June 01 2008,17:01) 94…….from my studies in the past the term (only begotten) should be rendered as (Uniquely Begotten), the first Adam was also uniquely begotten of God and the Second Adam also was uniquely begotten of God, but none the less (begotten) Which means brought forth by the hand of God. Adam was the first Man born of God as it says and Jesus was the second Man born of God both were unique compared to normal humanity. But non the less pure Human beings, one was given the holy spirit and begotten of God as a son on the day he was baptized,Just as it say's “(This Day) (I) GOD Have begotten you not some time in the distant past as trinitarians would have you believe.
The other, the first Adam will receive the Holy Spirit later,and become a spiritual son of God just as Jesus is.
IMO……………..gene
Hi 94,
Sorry, should have been GB.
Jesus was of the sinful estate of Mary's human lineage.We follow the overcomer of sin, Jesus, and we too are called overcomers in Revelation.
Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 02 2008,06:38) Hi not3,
Did the Spirit not rest on Jesus at the Jordan, in the form of a dove after he was water baptised?
We follow him.
Agreed.But this isn't entirely what you believe about Jesus, God's Spirit, and the Jordan. You have a whole dogma surrounding Jesus' baptism that you have deduced from scripture.
In my opinion, your ideas deny Jesus' origin and person.
I follow the same man the disciples followed. The Son of the living God. You seem to follow a sort of vessel-slash-incarnation of a God.
We can also attain the fullness of God in Christ. If your theory is true and Jesus was only a vessel by which God worked, then we would also only be a vessel in which God works. But we are more than that, aren't we? We are human beings with our wills, minds, personalities. If God overtook Jesus at the Jordan, he no longer could act on his own but would be subject to what took him over.
We are not like that, nor was Jesus, imo.
Again, we seem to be getting a bit off topic, imo.
Quote (Lightenup @ June 01 2008,16:11) Hi 94,
Good for you to actually look it up in the interlinear and see for yourself that John 1:18 says “only begotten God”. It is good for you to pray about it. I don't imagine that you will hear anything unless you put your notions on the altar and give Him reign to show you what He wants to show you.God bless you, 94
Hi Lightenup:I have mentioned elsewhere that as part of my morning prayer I ask God every day that if I am teaching anything that is not His Word or if I am doing anything that is not His will that he correct me.
I certainly do not want to mislead anyone, and I am sure you do not either, and my concern is not seeking to prove everyone else wrong and to be right at the expense of the unity of the church.
I am not a Greek scholar, and I am sure there are many who participate in this forum who are better educated than me,
and perhaps, some that are more intelligent than me. I have made many mistakes in my walk with the Lord and he has corrected me many times. So then, God has shown me that he will use be as a bishop in the church not because I have never made a mistake but because I have endured correction. In fact I have made some very stupid mistakes, but because of this in the position of a bishop perhaps the very fact that I have made mistakes like this it will keep me in the spirit of humility.Also, God has shown me to always approach someone with whom I have a difference in understanding of scripture with the attitude that maybe it is I that could be wrong. If I am wrong, I want God to correct me quickly.
Let me summarize what I believe that you and others are saying about the subject of pre-existence. Correct me if I am wrong on any of this. If I am going to be corrected, I have to begin by understanding what you believe.
You say that the Logos cannot be a plan because it is a noun that is showing action rather than a plan that is being acted upon. Others have said that the way that was is used in this scripture it denotes continuous existence. Is this what you believe so far? In essence what I understand you to say, is that the Logos was a begotten God who was present with God in the beginning. It was he who created everything in the universe for himself. It was he who laid the foundation of the earth. He was in the form of God and equal with God but did not let this equality with God go to his head. As a Son of God he did not relinquish being God but humbled himself and was begotten of God as a man and obeyed God without sin even unto death on the cross so that we could be reconciled to God. He is now at the right hand of God as God the Son in the position as head of the church.
Is that what you believe?
Mandy! What you are saying is true, however before that happened, He who was called the Spokes-word of God did exist as a Spirit being. That is the glory that He gave up and became a mere Man. It takes nothing away from either theory. Not only that all of the scriptures fit like a glove. The trinitarians always forget that God is a title and not that there were two Almighty Gods who is above all. Especially in Ancient times there were many Gods. God of Silver, God of Gold, the God of this world (Satan). etc. And the Almighty God has a name. The translators were to scarred to say His name, because they stood in ah of Him. So all are called God or Lord. But notice something that at times Lord is spelled in all Capital Letters. When it is capiltalized it is always the Almighty God (Jehovah) , small is the Word in the O.T. and Jesus in N.T. Also all were created by Jesus through the power of the Father. While Jesus came forth from God the Father, and not mud. We are all descendants of Adam. Jesus was born of or by the Holy Spirit. Maria was only a vessel that was used to give birth to the Human part of Jesus. Jesus had God's Holy Spirit in Him full strength. He was taught be the Father. I believe that is the only way Humanity could be saved. All Humans have sinned and have fallen short of the glory of God. God needed a perfect sacrifice to save us all. Also that the lineage would be fulfilled through Maria, who was of the tribe of Judah.
Also if you do not agree that Jesus preexisted, please explain to me how and from where did God send His Son from. John 3:17 God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that through Him all might be saved.
Mandy there are really to many Scriptures not to say that He was not there before the world was. In the end times another Jesus is being taught, So I wonder!!!!! When you listen to all the Songs today, who are they worshipping, mostly Jesus. When the Father says that He is a jealous God, I again wonder, if He would like that, that all ignore His name so much? I know that there is a scripture that says that if you worship Jesus you worship the Father, again I wonder, was that added?
So much to study and ponder, I will always Love you even tho we disagree in some.
Peace and Love IreneQuote (Not3in1 @ June 02 2008,07:16) Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 02 2008,06:38) Hi not3,
Did the Spirit not rest on Jesus at the Jordan, in the form of a dove after he was water baptised?
We follow him.
Agreed.But this isn't entirely what you believe about Jesus, God's Spirit, and the Jordan. You have a whole dogma surrounding Jesus' baptism that you have deduced from scripture.
In my opinion, your ideas deny Jesus' origin and person.
I follow the same man the disciples followed. The Son of the living God. You seem to follow a sort of vessel-slash-incarnation of a God.
We can also attain the fullness of God in Christ. If your theory is true and Jesus was only a vessel by which God worked, then we would also only be a vessel in which God works. But we are more than that, aren't we? We are human beings with our wills, minds, personalities. If God overtook Jesus at the Jordan, he no longer could act on his own but would be subject to what took him over.
We are not like that, nor was Jesus, imo.
Again, we seem to be getting a bit off topic, imo.
Hi not3,
Jesus submitted his will to that of the Father working through him. Even in Gethsemene we see the struggles this caused him. He was made perfect through suffering and was a son disciplined and taught by his Father.We too must be led by the Spirit so that the will of God is done through us on earth.
I do not disagree with what you have written above, Nick.
However this does not describe your Jordan theories.
Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 02 2008,08:25) Hi not3,
Jordan theories?
Yes, we are all aware of them.
Even the newbies have picked up on your beloved terms, “vessel”, “monogenes” and being reborn at the Jordan.
It's all good. Just a different idea altogether on the person of Jesus.
Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 02 2008,08:57) Hi not3,
Are you not a vessel for God as Spirit?
Of course I am.But I am also more than, “…a body prepared….”.
I was conceived fully by my parents and I am a product of their combined DNA.
Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 02 2008,11:31) Hi not3,
So the one who is son of God and son of man is truly your brother.
He was made like me in every way – he has flesh and blood.But I will not receive my adoption and inheritance with Jesus until I follow the firstborn in resurrection.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
