Preexistence

[Not3in1]

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 04 2008,17:03)

I believe that Mary did contribute her DNA.

Spiritual preexisting son + human DNA = What?

[Lightenup]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Aug. 04 2008,00:55)

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 04 2008,16:26) Quote (Nick Hassan @ Aug. 03 2008,23:38) Hi LU, If it was Jesus was he a man before becoming a man? Was Jesus the Lord of Abraham before he had been appointed Lord? Hi Nick, I think that the Son of God could “appear” as a man without actually being a man before Mary' conception.  I think that angels could also appear as men without being a men in actuality. Ge 18:2 When he lifted up his eyes and looked, behold, three men were standing opposite him; and when he saw them, he ran from the tent door to meet them and bowed himself to the earth… Read on to find out that these that appeared as men were two angels and one that represented Yahweh. I believe that Jesus was the Lord of Abraham.  I do not think that He was “appointed” as Lord.  That is not scriptural as far as I can see.  Why would someone that was God from the beginning need to be appointed lord anyway?  John 1:1 LU Hi LU, Was Jesus a spokeman for God before he walked the earth? Certainly many times angels spoke for God and appeared as men but why take this by inference to include Jesus?  What COULD happen needs a lot more support before we say it DID.   The baby in the manger was not any form of god in disguise. He emptied himslef to be just like us. It was only by his anointing that he became Lord and mouthpiece for God by God's Spirit.  Acts 10.38

Hi Nick,
Actually alot of support is good but not necessary to be able to say it is so. The Holy Spirit leads us into truth and gives us discernment. The Holy Spirit is what is necessary.

Quote

The baby in the manger was not any form of god in disguise. He emptied himslef to be just like us. It was only by his anointing that he became Lord and mouthpiece for God by God's Spirit. Acts 10.38

When did the “word” that became flesh stop being God? He emptied Himself of privileges not his nature.

Where does scripture say that He “became” Lord?

LU

[Lightenup]

Quote (Not3in1 @ Aug. 04 2008,01:11)

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 04 2008,17:03) I believe that Mary did contribute her DNA. Spiritual preexisting son + human DNA = What?

The begotten God within the confines of a human body yet without the curse of sin attached.

I'm tired, I can't play anymore tonight
Good night!
Kathi

[NickHassan]

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 04 2008,17:19)

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Aug. 04 2008,00:55) Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 04 2008,16:26) Quote (Nick Hassan @ Aug. 03 2008,23:38) Hi LU, If it was Jesus was he a man before becoming a man? Was Jesus the Lord of Abraham before he had been appointed Lord? Hi Nick, I think that the Son of God could “appear” as a man without actually being a man before Mary' conception.  I think that angels could also appear as men without being a men in actuality. Ge 18:2 When he lifted up his eyes and looked, behold, three men were standing opposite him; and when he saw them, he ran from the tent door to meet them and bowed himself to the earth… Read on to find out that these that appeared as men were two angels and one that represented Yahweh. I believe that Jesus was the Lord of Abraham.  I do not think that He was “appointed” as Lord.  That is not scriptural as far as I can see.  Why would someone that was God from the beginning need to be appointed lord anyway?  John 1:1 LU Hi LU, Was Jesus a spokeman for God before he walked the earth? Certainly many times angels spoke for God and appeared as men but why take this by inference to include Jesus?  What COULD happen needs a lot more support before we say it DID.   The baby in the manger was not any form of god in disguise. He emptied himslef to be just like us. It was only by his anointing that he became Lord and mouthpiece for God by God's Spirit.  Acts 10.38 Hi Nick, Actually alot of support is good but not necessary to be able to say it is so.  The Holy Spirit leads us into truth and gives us discernment.  The Holy Spirit is what is necessary. Quote The baby in the manger was not any form of god in disguise. He emptied himslef to be just like us. It was only by his anointing that he became Lord and mouthpiece for God by God's Spirit.  Acts 10.38 When did the “word” that became flesh stop being God?  He emptied Himself of privileges not his nature. Where does scripture say that He “became” Lord? LU

Hi LU,
Hmmm.
Relying on personal inspiration withourt scriptural support?
Col2.

He is not the God, Who is our God, that he was with.

Acts 2:36
Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made the same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.

[Not3in1]

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 04 2008,17:28)

Quote (Not3in1 @ Aug. 04 2008,01:11) Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 04 2008,17:03) I believe that Mary did contribute her DNA. Spiritual preexisting son + human DNA = What? The begotten God within the confines of a human body yet without the curse of sin attached. I'm tired, I can't play anymore tonight Good night! Kathi

Kathi,

Well, thanks for playing as long as you did. I believe that some of your theories don't pan out all the way, as I'm sure you have some opinions about my ideas.

Mainly I think that the more we complicate scripture the further from the truth we get. Sure, certain passages seem to go with other's but it's only a guess at best. There is also the leading of the holy Spirit of God, however this must also be carefully considered when proclaiming the absolute truth. Even John the Baptist had wondered if he heard correctly concerning the Messiah……..

I'm signing off for a few days – much love to all my brother's and sister's in Christ.
Mandy

[Proclaimer]

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 04 2008,15:18)

Hi Mandy, Yes, I believe it is quite possible that Abraham saw His day and it was in a looking forward to His day kinda way.  It was not that part of the passage that was my main argument for pre-existense however that is what you focused your response on. However, I do believe that He really saw the Son of God when He appeared as a man with two others that were angels that appeared as men right before the story of Sodom and Gomorrah.  There He passed on God's words to Him about the promise of a son for Abraham and Sarah.  The three of them were referred as three “men” but we know that two of them were angels. Read about this in Gen 18:2 When he lifted up his eyes and looked, behold, three men were standing opposite him; and when he saw them, he ran from the tent door to meet them and bowed himself to the earth… You will see that the two men are angels if you keep reading and the other man is called Yahweh.  I believe that is the Son of God who came in His Father's name. Now read John 8 38 “I speak the things which I have seen with My Father; therefore you also do the things which you heard from your father.” 39 They answered and said to Him, “Abraham is our father.” Jesus *said to them, “If you are Abraham's children, do the deeds of Abraham. 40 “But as it is, you are seeking to kill Me, a man who has told you the truth, which I heard from God; this Abraham did not do. Did you notice that last line “this Abraham did not do”.  What didn't he do?  He didn't seek to kill Him when He appeared as a man in the name of Yahweh and told Abraham the truth which He heard from God. IMO And now regarding John 8:57-59 the pre-existence part: 57 So the Jews said to Him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?” 58 Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am.” 59 Therefore they picked  up stones to throw at Him, but Jesus hid Himself and went out of the temple. Just before this passage Jesus makes it quite clear that He doesn't glorify Himself yet He makes very BIG statements like before Abraham was born, I existed or “I am”.  He did that as a follow-up of their comment “you are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?”  Now wouldn't that be a perfect time to explain if He was speaking of a vision or such of Himself?  But no, He didn't did He, in fact He one upped them with a loftier statement.   I find it impossible to believe that Jesus would lead them to that lofty opinion of Himself if it weren't so.  He knew that they were thinking of His age and not a plan of Himself.  His response was that He was there (in an active way, doing the action himself) before Abraham was born. What I find humorous is that Adam thinks you are proving  non-pre-existense with your post. (It's obvious he is easily convinced when he wants to be).  No use of the word “plan” or “foreknowledge” clearly listed here at all.  You mention that nothing is clearly speaking pre-existence here without really addressing verse 58.  That was my main point that showed pre-existense.  Did you mean to miss that main point?  By the way, that verse is to use your own words, “is normally considered by theologians” to show Christ's deity.  So you pick and choose when you throw that “is normally considered by theologians” stuff when it is convenient to your beliefs and not when it disagrees with you. IMO And please explain “unconditional precedence.” Sorry if I ruffled any feathers I'm just a little frustrated.  I can imagine how Christ must have felt. Kathi

Hi LU.

I agree that a good case can be made that a pre-existent Yeshua visited the creation that God gave him.

The one who walked with Adam and the one who appeared in the Old Testament who was called wonderful and other such descriptions could well be Yeshua before he came in the flesh as a man.

But it is one of those things that is not explicitly taught but you could say is taught by pattern. The Pharisees didn't know who Jesus was and they read the scriptures probably daily, so it wasn't explicitly taught that this certain person in the OT was the son of God or the second only to God.

Whatever the case, I think we are free to have opinions on that. Either opinion doesn't warrant any kind of division with another. Not saying that you are doing that, but making a general point for anyone who reads here.

[gollamudi]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Aug. 04 2008,16:55)

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 04 2008,16:26) Quote (Nick Hassan @ Aug. 03 2008,23:38) Hi LU, If it was Jesus was he a man before becoming a man? Was Jesus the Lord of Abraham before he had been appointed Lord? Hi Nick, I think that the Son of God could “appear” as a man without actually being a man before Mary' conception.  I think that angels could also appear as men without being a men in actuality. Ge 18:2 When he lifted up his eyes and looked, behold, three men were standing opposite him; and when he saw them, he ran from the tent door to meet them and bowed himself to the earth… Read on to find out that these that appeared as men were two angels and one that represented Yahweh. I believe that Jesus was the Lord of Abraham.  I do not think that He was “appointed” as Lord.  That is not scriptural as far as I can see.  Why would someone that was God from the beginning need to be appointed lord anyway?  John 1:1 LU Hi LU, Was Jesus a spokeman for God before he walked the earth? Certainly many times angels spoke for God and appeared as men but why take this by inference to include Jesus?  What COULD happen needs a lot more support before we say it DID.   The baby in the manger was not any form of god in disguise. He emptied himslef to be just like us. It was only by his anointing that he became Lord and mouthpiece for God by God's Spirit.  Acts 10.38

Hi brother Nick,
That's wonderful post in deed. Baby Jesus was not any begotten God. He was a man like you and me But received anointing as Messiah or Christ at Jordan by the Holy Spirit. He became Lord of living and dead on his resurrection IMO.

Thanks and blessings
Adam

[gollamudi]

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 04 2008,16:15)

Quote (gollamudi @ Aug. 03 2008,10:11) Hi Sis Kathi, Do you think we who born are of our parents are not created beings? Do think Jesus birth different from ours in what way? Do think Jesus who was born to a human mother, a begotten God? How can a God be born to his creation? You question to me regarding manipulation of scriptures 'yes' I say three times that scribes and translators changed the texts as per their wish and will not according to God's will. If you want you can read the book “Misquoting Jesus” by  Bart Ehrman. It gives full picture on “Who changed the bible?” Please answer the queries of Irene/Georg on Col 1:12-17 what is meant by “Jesus was the first born all created things of this universe”? Your belief of Jesus being born and not created first before the foundations of the world from God is baseless on scriptures. Either you have to agree with the trinitarians by saying that the Son coexisting with Father from eternity uncreated or you have to believe Arianism/JW which says that son had beginning by first created before all thing by the Father God. Your way of telling begotten not created is like the slogan of the Trinitarians but the origins like the Arians by saying that the  son is having a begining. I can clearly get what you believe which is not so difficult to grasp my sis. Please understand God from the view point of a Jewish origin not from our pagan origin. Thanks and blessings Adam Hi Adam, Quote Do you think we who born are of our parents are not created beings? Mankind was created, yes.  Adam and Eve were formed from dirt and a rib. The rest of humanity is a reproduction of that creation and born of women.  Definitly the part of us that lies in a coffin after our death was created initially on the sixth day of creation, the other part, our inner man goes on to live in a heavenly body and is not part of our DNA from what I can tell.  No chromosones linked to the “inner” man from my limited understanding. Quote Do think Jesus birth different from ours in what way? The actual birth from Mary, not different.  Out popped the weasel as WJ might put it. Quote Do think Jesus who was born to a human mother, a begotten God? Yes, even from before the world was, He was the only begotten God.  Mary didn't give birth to God, she gave birth to a man that the already existing begotten God came to dwell within. Quote How can a God be born to his creation? He was not born “to” his creation, He was the firstborn “of” creation. I think that I have that book “Misquoting Jesus”, I will have to dig it up from a pile of resources. Do you think it to be impossible for God to reproduce one of His own kind?  That is what begotten implies “of its own kind”.  I believe that result is the begotten God, a Son for God Himself.  The Son was the first to receive life of all the living.  That is what I believe “firstborn of all creation” means. Hope that answers all your questions. Kathi

Hi Sis Kathi,
Thanks for your patience in responding my posts. I appreciate your sinceority in answering my questions. I don't want to trouble you more. My humble request to you is please don't make Jesus another (begotten) God because it makes God of the Bible into polytheism. Jesus is none but a vessel for that one God to reveal Himself fully to us but not any preexisting begotten God. He is our complete example in our christian life, first born of all sons and daughters to be born after him to our One heavenly Father, our God (Rom 8:29)

29 ” For those he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, so that he might be the firstborn among many brothers”.

There will be no difference between Jesus and other children of God in resurrection. We will be joint heirs in heavenly blessings with our elder brother Jesus. God always remain One and only can never become two or three even after Jesus glorification forget about his preexistence. That's all I wanted to say.

Thanks and love to you
Adam

[NickHassan]

Hi GM,
Polytheism has to do with worshiping many gods, or so called gods. [1Cor8]

[Lightenup]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Aug. 04 2008,01:56)

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 04 2008,17:19) Quote (Nick Hassan @ Aug. 04 2008,00:55) Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 04 2008,16:26) Quote (Nick Hassan @ Aug. 03 2008,23:38) Hi LU, If it was Jesus was he a man before becoming a man? Was Jesus the Lord of Abraham before he had been appointed Lord? Hi Nick, I think that the Son of God could “appear” as a man without actually being a man before Mary' conception.  I think that angels could also appear as men without being a men in actuality. Ge 18:2 When he lifted up his eyes and looked, behold, three men were standing opposite him; and when he saw them, he ran from the tent door to meet them and bowed himself to the earth… Read on to find out that these that appeared as men were two angels and one that represented Yahweh. I believe that Jesus was the Lord of Abraham.  I do not think that He was “appointed” as Lord.  That is not scriptural as far as I can see.  Why would someone that was God from the beginning need to be appointed lord anyway?  John 1:1 LU Hi LU, Was Jesus a spokeman for God before he walked the earth? Certainly many times angels spoke for God and appeared as men but why take this by inference to include Jesus?  What COULD happen needs a lot more support before we say it DID.   The baby in the manger was not any form of god in disguise. He emptied himslef to be just like us. It was only by his anointing that he became Lord and mouthpiece for God by God's Spirit.  Acts 10.38 Hi Nick, Actually alot of support is good but not necessary to be able to say it is so.  The Holy Spirit leads us into truth and gives us discernment.  The Holy Spirit is what is necessary. Quote The baby in the manger was not any form of god in disguise. He emptied himslef to be just like us. It was only by his anointing that he became Lord and mouthpiece for God by God's Spirit.  Acts 10.38 When did the “word” that became flesh stop being God?  He emptied Himself of privileges not his nature. Where does scripture say that He “became” Lord? LU Hi LU, Hmmm. Relying on personal inspiration withourt scriptural support? Col2. He is not the God, Who is our God, that he was with. Acts 2:36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made the same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.

Hi Nick,

I heard inspiration whispered in my ear and I have given much scriptural support for the understanding that I have been given. Now I proclaim it.

26 “Therefore do not fear them, for there is nothing concealed that will not be revealed, or hidden that will not be known. 27 “What I tell you in the darkness, speak in the light; and what you hear whispered in your ear, proclaim upon the housetops.

Your right, we shouldn't rely on personal inspiration without scriptural support. We need to test it with scripture. I have and haven't been convinced otherwise yet.

Your right again, He is not the God that He was with. He was the begotten God who was with God, His Father. So many times I have made this distinction on here.

Acts 2:36
No mention of “appointed as Lord” although He definetly was made Lord and Christ.

Here we see Simeon proclaim that He saw the Lord's Christ. He wasn't appointed “Christ”, He was the Christ even as a baby.

Luke 2:25-40

25 And there was a man in Jerusalem whose name was Simeon; and this man was righteous and devout, looking for the consolation of Israel; and the Holy Spirit was upon him. 26 And it had been revealed to him by the Holy Spirit that he would not see death before he had seen the Lord's Christ. 27 And he came in the Spirit into the temple; and when the parents brought in the child Jesus, to carry out for Him the custom of the Law, 28 then he took Him into his arms, and blessed God, and said, 29 “Now Lord, You are releasing Your bond-servant to depart in peace, According to Your word; 30 For my eyes have seen Your salvation, 31 Which You have prepared in the presence of all peoples, 32 A LIGHT OF REVELATION TO THE GENTILES, And the glory of Your people Israel.”

LU

[Lightenup]

Quote (t8 @ Aug. 04 2008,04:40)

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 04 2008,15:18) Hi Mandy, Yes, I believe it is quite possible that Abraham saw His day and it was in a looking forward to His day kinda way.  It was not that part of the passage that was my main argument for pre-existense however that is what you focused your response on. However, I do believe that He really saw the Son of God when He appeared as a man with two others that were angels that appeared as men right before the story of Sodom and Gomorrah.  There He passed on God's words to Him about the promise of a son for Abraham and Sarah.  The three of them were referred as three “men” but we know that two of them were angels. Read about this in Gen 18:2 When he lifted up his eyes and looked, behold, three men were standing opposite him; and when he saw them, he ran from the tent door to meet them and bowed himself to the earth… You will see that the two men are angels if you keep reading and the other man is called Yahweh.  I believe that is the Son of God who came in His Father's name. Now read John 8 38 “I speak the things which I have seen with My Father; therefore you also do the things which you heard from your father.” 39 They answered and said to Him, “Abraham is our father.” Jesus *said to them, “If you are Abraham's children, do the deeds of Abraham. 40 “But as it is, you are seeking to kill Me, a man who has told you the truth, which I heard from God; this Abraham did not do. Did you notice that last line “this Abraham did not do”.  What didn't he do?  He didn't seek to kill Him when He appeared as a man in the name of Yahweh and told Abraham the truth which He heard from God. IMO And now regarding John 8:57-59 the pre-existence part: 57 So the Jews said to Him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?” 58 Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am.” 59 Therefore they picked  up stones to throw at Him, but Jesus hid Himself and went out of the temple. Just before this passage Jesus makes it quite clear that He doesn't glorify Himself yet He makes very BIG statements like before Abraham was born, I existed or “I am”.  He did that as a follow-up of their comment “you are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?”  Now wouldn't that be a perfect time to explain if He was speaking of a vision or such of Himself?  But no, He didn't did He, in fact He one upped them with a loftier statement.   I find it impossible to believe that Jesus would lead them to that lofty opinion of Himself if it weren't so.  He knew that they were thinking of His age and not a plan of Himself.  His response was that He was there (in an active way, doing the action himself) before Abraham was born. What I find humorous is that Adam thinks you are proving  non-pre-existense with your post. (It's obvious he is easily convinced when he wants to be).  No use of the word “plan” or “foreknowledge” clearly listed here at all.  You mention that nothing is clearly speaking pre-existence here without really addressing verse 58.  That was my main point that showed pre-existense.  Did you mean to miss that main point?  By the way, that verse is to use your own words, “is normally considered by theologians” to show Christ's deity.  So you pick and choose when you throw that “is normally considered by theologians” stuff when it is convenient to your beliefs and not when it disagrees with you. IMO And please explain “unconditional precedence.” Sorry if I ruffled any feathers I'm just a little frustrated.  I can imagine how Christ must have felt. Kathi Hi LU. I agree that a good case can be made that a pre-existent Yeshua visited the creation that God gave him. The one who walked with Adam and the one who appeared in the Old Testament who was called wonderful and other such descriptions could well be Yeshua before he came in the flesh as a man. But it is one of those things that is not explicitly taught but you could say is taught by pattern. The Pharisees didn't know who Jesus was and they read the scriptures probably daily, so it wasn't explicitly taught that this certain person in the OT was the son of God or the second only to God. Whatever the case, I think we are free to have opinions on that. Either opinion doesn't warrant any kind of division with another. Not saying that you are doing that, but making a general point for anyone who reads here.

Amen t8.

It seems that God just gives us “clues” to the treasure in this case. If we refuse to follow the clues because they are not written as in a clear enough way for us, we will not find the treasure. Insisting on only relying on clear scripture takes faith of the unseen and the guidance of the Holy Spirit out of the picture, IMO

LU

[Irene]

Just want to say this, that I find it so amazing, no matter what kind of explanation of how you think and can prove that Jesus preexsisted, those that believe otherwise will do so no matter what. Taking all apart in disbelieve is not having faith. There are certain Scriptures that are very clear, that Jesus preexsisted. But that does not matter to those that do not believe. It is almost like the trinity, how many pages are there to explain. This tread has over 300 pages already.  IMO If God's Holy Spirit does not show you, one will never understand, no matter how many Scriptures we will put in front for them.
No offence to anybody, O.K. I love all of you.
Peace and Love Irene

[Not3in1]

Quote (Irene @ Aug. 05 2008,04:56)

Taking all apart in disbelieve is not having faith. There are certain Scriptures that are very clear, that Jesus preexsisted.

Sure, I understand your frustration in not being able to prove the preexistence of Jesus. You may think that the verses you provide are “clear” but if they were there would be no divisions. Or do you think there would still remain division because some would choose to disbelieve something that is clear? That doesn't seem logical to me, but everyone has their right to believe whatever they choose.

“Disbelieving is not having faith.” you say. I don't disbelieve scripture. However I do disbelieve some of the interpretations of scriptures – does that still mean I don't have faith? Or I just don't have faith in your particular brand of faith? You see how it gets a bit sticky when you proclaim that other brother's and sister's don't have faith OR the correct faith.

I know you love me, Irene. I've felt your honest caring and your prayers. I hope you know I feel the same for you. But we can't just assume that our way and knowledge is 100% correct and other's are lost. There is too much room for error with that line of thinking. To be honest, we won't know until we see him face-to-face, imo. We may be shocked to learn just what qualifies someone to be a child of God. Until then, patience of one another and less pointing of the finger would be helpful.

We were going to leave on our vacation this morning but have decided to wait until after work. So I have some more time to spend here. It's been nice to bat some ideas around.

Chat soon,
Mandy

[Not3in1]

Quote (gollamudi @ Aug. 04 2008,20:54)

There will be no difference between Jesus and other children of God in resurrection. We will be joint heirs in heavenly blessings with our elder brother Jesus.

Brother Adam,

You say, “There will be no difference between Jesus and other children of God in resurrection…..”. What insight! What simple truth! This begs the question, “Why?”

There has been a lot of talk lately about Jesus being the firstborn of all creation. The camp is divided into two groups that I can see.
1.) The preexistent camp believes that this “firstborn over creation” means that Jesus was begotten of God alone in the heavens. Thus he was firstborn over the creation we are a part of now.

2.) The non-preexistent camp believes that this “firstborn over all creation” is speaking to the coming creation where Jesus certainly IS the firstborn!

There are many scriptures used to prove both sides. I won't get into that here. You can think of them right now in your head, I'm sure.

My point is what would be the point to Jesus being the firstborn of THIS creation? So he helped in creation – so what? So everything came through him – so what does that do for us? It doesn't really matter how it came to be, the fact is that we are here and we are enjoying it. Right? There are no special things that we gain by having Jesus created before us, and helping his Father out in the creating business.

However, we do gain something if Jesus is the firstborn from the *new* creation and from the dead.

No question that Jesus was the first to be born of God and a virgin. No question he was the first and last to have this status – the only begotten Son of God. Even when we follow Christ in resurrection and receive our adoption as sons, we will still only be adopted sons. To be sure, we will have “co-heir” status and full rights as son's and daughter's, but as adopted son's and daughter's. There is a difference here for those who will recognize it.

There can only EVER be ONE begotten Son of God. But we will follow him. Our natures will be changed to reflect his nature. Our family status will change to reflect his status, though we be adopted God has seen fit to qualify us as children and we will receive our inheritence. Praise God!

Jesus as the firstborn of THIS creation affords us what?

Jesus as the firstborn of the creation to come affords us our future sonship and eternal life.

Of course this is all my opinion and how I see things. I welcome input as I am still fine-tuning what it is that I believe. God is so patient! His patience means salvation. Praise God!

Love,
Mandy

[NickHassan]

Hi not3,
You say
“No question that Jesus was the first to be born of God and a virgin. No question he was the first and last to have this status – the only begotten Son of God…..There can only EVER be ONE begotten Son of God. “

So does this view of MONOGENES allow him to be begotten also of Mary?

[NickHassan]

Hi,
Jesus is the beloved Son.
That love goes way back.

Matthew 12:18
” BEHOLD, MY SERVANT WHOM I HAVE CHOSEN; MY BELOVED IN WHOM MY SOUL is WELL-PLEASED; I WILL PUT MY SPIRIT UPON HIM, AND HE SHALL PROCLAIM JUSTICE TO THE GENTILES.

Mark 12:6
“He had one more to send, a beloved son; he sent him last of all to them, saying, 'They will respect my son.'

Luke 20:13
“The owner of the vineyard said, 'What shall I do? I will send my beloved son; perhaps they will respect him.'

John 17:24
“Father, I desire that they also, whom You have given Me, be with Me where I am, so that they may see My glory which You have given Me, for You loved Me before the foundation of the world.

Ephesians 1:6
to the praise of the glory of His grace, which He freely bestowed on us in the Beloved.

Colossians 1:13
For He rescued us from the domain of darkness, and transferred us to the kingdom of His beloved Son,

[Not3in1]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Aug. 05 2008,09:13)

Hi not3, You say “No question that Jesus was the first to be born of God and a virgin.  No question he was the first and last to have this status – the only begotten Son of God…..There can only EVER be ONE begotten Son of God. “ So does this view of MONOGENES allow him to be begotten also of Mary?

Hi Nick,

I guess the honest answer to your question would be that I don't know?

Um, the holy Spirit of God and Mary *together* conceived Jesus (as we know the man, Jesus). It was both of their contributions that begat this child. This special circumstance will never be repeated again. Jesus an “only” child. One of a kind.

However, as I explained above, we are qualified and will follow after death and resurrection.

Mandy

[Not3in1]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Aug. 05 2008,10:29)

John 17:24 “Father, I desire that they also, whom You have given Me, be with Me where I am, so that they may see My glory which You have given Me, for You loved Me before the foundation of the world.

This verse along with the other's you quoted states so nicely how the Father loved his *future* son even before he was born. He planned everything around him. He created everything through his eventual arrival. All is for him. And because of that – we also get to partake.

Before the foundations of my family with Dan, I also loved my children that were not born yet.

As for the glory, Jesus is the only begotten Son and that glory is all HIS – there will be no other.

[NickHassan]

Hi not3,
You loved your future children?

[Not3in1]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Aug. 05 2008,11:24)

Hi not3, You loved your future children?

Sure.

I loved them so much that I made plans for their arrival. Dan and I created beautiful nurseries, we bought saving bonds, we started a college fund. We even bought a car with the idea that we were going to need more space for kid gear!

Our words (and plans) came into being when we held our children. The word became flesh and dwelled among us…

[Author]

Posts