Preexistence

[Frank4YAHWEH]

To ALL,

Following is an excerpt from:

Jesus Did Not Pre-Exist

In The Beginning Was The Word (John 1)

John's Gospel commences with this statement, and goes on to state that this word was with God and was God, and made all things (vv. 1-4). And because the title, Word of God, is applied to the Lord Jesus in Revelation 19:13, it is claimed that these verses in John relate to a pre-existent Christ.

If this were so, however, it would make the Bible appear hopelessly contradictory, for such reference as: “I will be his Father, and He shall be my son,” “I will make him My firstborn,” “Jesus Christ the son of Abraham the son of David” are at variance with the teaching that represents Jesus as already living.

The Greek term translated “word” is logos. It signifies the outward form of inward thought or reason, or the spoken word as illustrative of thought, wisdom and doctrine.

John is teaching that in the very beginning, God's purpose, wisdom or revelation had been in evidence. It was “with God” in that it emanated from him; it “was God” in that it represented Him to mankind [a similar expression is used by Christ in Matthew 26:28: “This is my blood” — that is, this represents my blood. Again in Matthew 13:20: “the same is he” signifies the same, “represents he.” “That rock was Christ” (1 Cor. 10:4), it represented Christ]; and it became the motive power of all that God did, for all was made with it in mind, and it presented the hope of life to mankind (see John 1: 3-4).

What John is stating, therefore, is that in the very beginning there existed the wisdom or purpose of God, and that it was revealed unto men to provide a way of life.

What did it proclaim?

The coming of one who would overcome sin and give reality to the hope of life. The promise of this was stated from the beginning in the Word or Doctrine of God (e.g. Genesis 3:15).

This Word, Wisdom or Doctrine found its reality, its substance, its confirmation (Romans 15:8) in the person of the Lord Jesus Christ; therefore John taught:

“The word was made (Greek-ginomai “became”) flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth” (John 1:14).

The Word was made flesh, or became flesh, as it is expressed in the Greek. The Declaration of Divine wisdom found its substance and reality in the person of the Lord Jesus Christ. Before his advent, it was a mere Word or Promise, but when he became manifested, it became a person.

The person did not exist before the birth of the child Jesus; but the promise and wisdom of God always existed.

That is the teaching of John. It does away with the embarrassment of teaching that an angel became an embryo in the womb of a woman, as demanded by the theory of a pre-existent Jesus.

We acknowledge that “Word” is personalized as “him”, in John 1:4, but that is a common Hebraism found throughout the Bible. Riches, Wisdom, Sin, and other subjects are similarly treated. Sometimes these are used to press the doctrine of pre-existence. For example, on several occasions, Jehovah's Witnesses have drawn attention to such passages as Proverbs 8:22, and applied them to their notion of a pre-existent Jesus. The passage reads:

“The Lord possessed me in the beginning of His way, before His works of old.”

The subject matter of the chapter is wisdom which is personified; but, unfortunately for the doctrine of the preexistent son, it is personified as a woman: “She standeth, she crieth” etc. (Prov. 8:1-3).

Did Yahshua Create Or Pre-exist His Birth?

“Jesus IS God!”?

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Frank4YAHWEH @ Dec. 09 2011,14:45)

Mike, Would not Father Yahweh's word literally being separated from Him render Him speechless?

Well, there ya go then. If the the Father's word is ALWAYS with the Father, like YOUR head is ALWAYS with you, then John would have no reason to say, “and the Word was WITH the Father”, anymore that I would have a reason to say, “Frank's head was WITH Frank”.

Now do you see the point I'm making? Or do you even really care, Frank? I get the feeling that you are just here for kicks and giggles, and not to seriously discuss scriptures.

[Frank4YAHWEH]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 10 2011,12:46)

Quote (Frank4YAHWEH @ Dec. 09 2011,14:45) Mike, Would not Father Yahweh's word literally being separated from Him render Him speechless? Well, there ya go then.  If the the Father's word is ALWAYS with the Father, like YOUR head is ALWAYS with you, then John would have no reason to say, “and the Word was WITH the Father”, anymore that I would have a reason to say, “Frank's head was WITH Frank”. Now do you see the point I'm making?  Or do you even really care, Frank?  I get the feeling that you are just here for kicks and giggles, and not to seriously discuss scriptures.

Mike,

Yahchanan most certainly would have a reason to say “… and the word was with Yahweh …” just as he most certainly had a reason to say “… and the word was Yahweh.” He most certainly did not say '… and Jesus was with God and the word was Jesus.' as you deceptively teach.

No Mike, the truth is, I do not really care what point it is that you are trying to make, since your main point is to somehow place Yahshua in existence with Father Yahweh in the beginning as an actual being. As I have made known to you a number of times in this thread, I have no desire whatsoever to have a discussion with you about Scripture. I have been getting nothing but kicks and giggles from what it is that you say! Now, if you were really serious about discussing what Scripture actually says, I would most certainly care what you had to say, but since you say things that Scripture does not say, I most certainly do not care to seriously discuss Scripture with you.

Did Yahshua Create Or Pre-exist His Birth?

“Jesus IS God!”?

[Frank4YAHWEH]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 10 2011,12:46)

Quote (Frank4YAHWEH @ Dec. 09 2011,14:45) Mike, Would not Father Yahweh's word literally being separated from Him render Him speechless? Well, there ya go then.  If the the Father's word is ALWAYS with the Father, like YOUR head is ALWAYS with you, then John would have no reason to say, “and the Word was WITH the Father”, anymore that I would have a reason to say, “Frank's head was WITH Frank”. Now do you see the point I'm making?  Or do you even really care, Frank?  I get the feeling that you are just here for kicks and giggles, and not to seriously discuss scriptures.

Mike,

Yahchanan most certainly would have a reason to say “… and the word was with Yahweh …” just as he most certainly had a reason to say “… and the word was Yahweh.” He most certainly did not say '… and Jesus was with God and the word was Jesus.' as you deceptively teach.

No Mike, the truth is, I do not really care what point it is that you are trying to make, since your main point is to somehow place Yahshua in existence with Father Yahweh in the beginning as an actual being. As I have made known to you a number of times in this thread, I have no desire whatsoever to have a discussion with you about Scripture. I have been getting nothing but kicks and giggles from what it is that you say! Now, if you were really serious about discussing what Scripture actually says, I would most certainly care what you had to say, but since you say things that Scripture does not say, I most certainly do not care to seriously discuss Scripture with you.

Did Yahshua Create Or Pre-exist His Birth?

“Jesus IS God!”?

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Frank4YAHWEH @ Dec. 09 2011,20:56)

Mike, Yahchanan most certainly would have a reason to say “… and the word was with Yahweh …”

And just what was that reason, Frank?

Quote (Frank4YAHWEH @ Dec. 09 2011,20:56)

but since you say things that Scripture does not say, I most certainly do not care to seriously discuss Scripture with you.

 Says the man who just posted this:  “just as he most certainly had a reason to say “… and the word was Yahweh.”

Frank, what scripture says “and the word was YAHWEH“?  

[GeneBalthrop]

Mike……….Who do you think the LORD OUR GOD is if not Yahweh. Who was the Father Yahweh Jesus said was(IN) him?, was that not our GOD. if you need help to put it together here is a scripture that might help you. “Here O Israel the LORD (Yahweh) our “GOD” is ONE LORD Yahweh. Hope this helped you.

peace and lvoe……………………………………………………………..gene

[mikeboll64]

That's right Gene.  And Yahweh was identified in John 1:1 as “THE God” the Word was WITH.  The second mention of the word “theos” in 1:1 is not “THE theos”.  So here's what we KNOW about John 1:

1.  Whoever the Word was, he was a god who was WITH “THE God, Yahweh”.  (Yahweh cannot be WITH Himself)

2.  We know the Word was a PERSON, and not a thing, because of the many masculine pronouns associated with him.

3.  We also know the Word was a PERSON, because this Word became flesh, and lived among humans, having the glory of God's only begotten Son.

4.  We even know WHO this person was, because John the Baptist said the same words about the Word in 1:15 as he said about Jesus in 1:30.

5.  We further know from other scriptures that all things were created by God through “His Son”, and through “our Lord Jesus Christ”.  So we can add the fact that all things were created through “the Word” to those other facts we know, and come up with a safe conclusion that “the Word” is the same person as “God's Son”, who is the same person as “our Lord Jesus Christ” – the one through whom all things were created.   Which would explain why the Word had the glory of God's only begotten Son.

6.  Then we can conclude that “the Word” in John 1 is obviously “the Word of God”, because John sure wasn't talking about anyone else's “word”.  And that let's us also take Rev 19:13 into consideration, where we know it was Jesus Christ who was called “the Word of God” by the same Biblical writer.

See Gene?  This is how we use MANY different scriptures and facts to paint the true picture of what the scriptures actually teach.  This is also where you have much denying to do in order to keep your flawed, unscriptural doctrine.  

For example, you first have to claim that God Himself can be WITH God Himself – which is impossible unless there are TWO Gods.  

And you'll have to insist that the Word is an “IT”, despite the fact that EVERY pronoun associated with the Word is written in the singular, masculine form – indicating that “the Word” is a “HE”, not an “IT”.

And you'll have to start insisting that “through him” really means “for him”, despite the fact that Col 1:16 says all things were created both “through him” AND “for him”.

Then you'll have to claim that John started talking about the Word in 1:14, and then inexplicably switched subjects and started talking about Jesus, without even introducing Jesus.

Oh, and you'll have to claim that 1:14 says, “The Word came to be IN someone who was flesh”, despite the fact that it doesn't say those words.

But these are all things you've already done to keep your unscriptural doctrine Gene.  And I would be willing to bet money that eventually, you'll end up siding with Ed, and claiming that Rev 19:13 doesn't describe Jesus – just to eliminate another link to Jesus being “the Word” from John 1.

Because one thing I've noticed about people whose doctrines don't align with scripture is that as soon as one of their fellow believers takes the leap of nonsense, the others will soon follow, simply because the nonsensical words of the first one tickles their itching ears.

Think about it Gene.  At some point in history, one person had to utter the nonsensical words, “Hey, Jesus IS the God he is the Son of!”  And although those illogical words send red flares up in any sensible person's brain, it didn't take long before millions of other like-minded people, trying to make Jesus their God, just accepted those illogical words as making perfect sense.  

Let's watch and see.  I'll bet that soon you'll be denying that 19:13 is about Jesus – not because you believe it to be true, but because Ed's illogical words tickle your itching ears and tell you what you want to hear.

[mikeboll64]

Eddy?  Were you going to address the last two posts on page 204?

[terraricca]

Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Dec. 11 2011,08:25)

Mike……….Who do you think the LORD OUR GOD is if not Yahweh. Who was the Father Yahweh Jesus said was(IN) him?,  was that not our GOD. if you need help to put it together here is a scripture that might help you. “Here O Israel the LORD (Yahweh) our “GOD” is ONE LORD Yahweh. Hope this helped you. peace and lvoe……………………………………………………………..gene

gene

so after all you made Christ a MORPHED being ? I mean two in one

Pierre

[Ed J]

Quote (terraricca @ Dec. 09 2011,08:07)

Quote (Ed J @ Dec. 09 2011,08:30) Hi T8, here is yet more evidence…                        Lord: means owner. YHVH is “The Owner”(The LORD); Jesus is “owner”(Lord)      The HolySpirit is YHVH. (Lev.11:45/John 6:63)      The HolySpirit is “The Word”; Jesus “word”(the proof is listed). This PROOF really is not that difficult to understand… (Matt.18:16) In English, the significant number (74) is attributed to “JOSHUA”=74 and “Messiah”=74; also in the following: “JESUS”=74, “Cross”=74, “Gospel”=74, and even “English”=74. “Jesus Christ” (74×32) also factors 74 in Greek Theomatically: [Jesus] Ιησους=74(x12), [Christ] Χριστоς=74(x20). [Son of Man] υιος τον ανθρωπου=74(x40). “JESUS OF NAZARETH THE KING OF THE JEWS”=373 (John 19:19) This most popular phrase curiously adds up to the 74th prime number: 373. John 1:1 was written in Greek.     The word for “Word” in Greek is: [λογος] Lōgôs and [λογος] has a “Theomatic” value of 373; and [ [373 is the 74th prime number] ] “The Word” from the Greek is: [ο λογος] Hō Lōgôs [ο λογος] has a “Theomatic” value of 443; and [ [443 is the 86th prime number] ]. Here is a chart for you to see the “Bible Truth” that I refer to! …            English        ↔    Hebrew       ↔    Greek      “Word of God”  ↔      “God”         ↔ “Hō Lōgôs” “Word of God”(86) =   (אלהים](86]     = [ο λογος](86)th Prime          YHVH(63)      = ĔL-ō-Hêêm(63) = The Bible(63) God bless Ed J (Joshua 22:34) http://www.holycitybiblecode.org edj if you can show anyone that own anything or his a owner(i mean more than temporary ownership) before God ,you would impress me greatly Pierre

PIERRE,

My goal is not to impress man,
but to speak truth. (Gal.1:10 / Prob.8:7)

God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

[Proclaimer]

Good post Mike and I believe to be a true conclusion.
It is a case of having one's ears tickled as it is written.

This is how human nature works. You see it in sport.
Someone lives in New Zealand and they support the All Blacks.
Someone lives in Manchester and they support Manchester United.
Someone lives in New York and they support the Yankees (not from the States so might be a bad example).

A man has his doubts about what he was being taught in a church then reads what someone wrote that aligns on the point he had a problem with.
What does he do next, he swallows everything else that the person is writing and supports his doctrine as if he were supporting a sport team.
Once indoctrinated, he takes this doctrine and tries to indoctrinate others.

And one sure sign that you know this has happened is when you pose a serious but good question to them that infringes on their doctrine and they ignore you and point you back to their doctrine which doesn't answer the question.

In the end, not all are truth seekers.
Not all are like the Bereans who had a more noble character because of their respect for the truth in scripture.
It should be possible to reason with a reasonable person, but if you cannot, then you up against a brainwashed person.
It takes some serious work to unindoctrinate a person and often sound reason and scripture is not good enough for them anymore.

[Ed J]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 09 2011,09:30)

Quote (Ed J @ Dec. 08 2011,00:05) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 08 2011,08:13) Quote (Ed J @ Dec. 06 2011,17:39) 1) “The Word's” glory is exemplified in his only begotten son. Okay Ed, Let's follow this thought through.  YOU think that the Word is the Holy Spirit, which is God Himself, right? Why would the Word/Holy Spirit/God Himself have the glory of an only begotten OF God? Because the Word is what became flesh; and the Word is what had the glory of God's only begotten. You try to do what Gene does with 1:14.  You PRETEND that it says, “The Word CAME TO BE IN SOMEONE WHO WAS FLESH“.  And if 1:14 actually said that, you might have a point.  But 1:14 doesn't say that, Ed.  Instead, it tells us that the Word himself BECAME flesh – not CAME TO BE IN flesh. peace, mike Quote Let's follow this thought through.  YOU think that the Word is the Holy Spirit, Quote which is God Himself, right? Hi Mike, Let's focus on one part of this at a time; OK? Quote (adjusted) Why would the Word/Holy Spirit have the glory as of an only begotten OF God? Because God's glory then can be seen in the physical world; compare…       the glory as of the only begotten of the Father (John 1:14)       compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us. (Romans 8:18) God bless Ed J Ed, First of all…………NO!  Since you DO think that the Word IS the Holy Spirit which IS God Himself, then there's no need to separate anything. My question stands:  Why would God Himself have the glory of the only begotten OF God? Also, your answer……… Quote Because God's glory then can be seen in the physical world; compare… ………doesn't make a lick of sense.  If it was GOD'S GLORY, then why would they not have seen a glory as of GOD?  Why the glory as of an only begotten OF God?

Hi Mike,

“the glory of children are their fathers.” (Prob.17:6)

God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

[Ed J]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 09 2011,09:43)

Quote (Ed J @ Dec. 08 2011,00:23) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 08 2011,09:00) Show me where Christ is SPECIFICALLY mentioned in verse 14. Hi Mike, John 1:14 (KJV) And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the (word's) glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. Ed, You made MY point for me.  By your bolded words, you have clarified that you understand “the only begotten of the Father” is JESUS. Now, why in the world would the “Holy Spirit/God Himself” have the glory of Jesus?   Work it backwards, Ed.  The one who had the glory as of an only begotten is the one who made his dwelling among us.  And the one who made his dwelling among us is the one who became flesh.  And the one who became flesh is “The Word”. So if JESUS is the one who had the glory as of the only begotten from the Father, then JESUS is the one who made his dwelling among us.  And if JESUS is the one who made his dwelling among us, then JESUS is the one who became flesh.  And if JESUS is the one who became flesh, then JESUS is “The Word”. Ed, why would the Word's glory be the glory of God's only begotten Son?  Why would God's Holy Spirit, which you think is God Himself, have the glory of the only begotten Son OF God?

Hi Mike,

“the glory of children are their fathers.” (Prob.17:6)
For thine (YHVH) is the kingdom, and the power,
and the glory, for ever. (Matthew 6:13)

God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

[Ed J]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 09 2011,09:58)

Quote (Ed J @ Dec. 08 2011,00:24) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 08 2011,09:00) Ed, consider that this is one continuous sentence, strung together with the conjunction “AND”.  So what you are claiming is that John started a sentence about the Word, and without even ending his sentence, he started using pronouns to refer to a subject he hadn't even identified.  That's quite a stretch of the imagination, IMO. peace, mike Hi Mike, Were you not aware that others put in comas and sentence breaks, they were not in the original texts; I hope this helps. John 1:14 (KJV) And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the (word's) glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. Right you are, Ed.  So let's write it without the punctuation: THE WORD BECAME FLESH AND MADE HIS DWELLING AMONG US AND WE HAVE SEEN HIS GLORY THE GLORY OF THE ONLY BEGOTTEN FROM THE FATHER FULL OF GRACE AND TRUTH Notice how it is all one sentence strung together by two conjuntions………..just like I said.  I didn't mention any puncutation in that post to you, did I?   So please don't divert the topic…………….instead just address my point about how illogical it would have been for John to switch subjects in the middle of a sentence, using pronouns to refer to a new subject that he hadn't even yet mentioned.

Hi Mike,

Can there be two subjects in one sentence? (Link)

God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

[Ed J]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 09 2011,10:01)

Quote (Ed J @ Dec. 08 2011,08:37) Hi Gene, Explaining it to them is not good enough, they MUST see the evidence for themselves. And we've been waiting for that “evidence” for a long time, Ed.  When will you show it to us?

Hi Mike,

I have been showing you the evidence, but you continue to discount it.

God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

[Proclaimer]

Frank.

Both God and the Word are mentioned with the definite article. Except the last word God in John 1:1c.

This has implications and is meant to be understood in a certain way.
Your view of John 1:1 does not line up with the way it is written and indeed does not line up with the rest of John 1 and the rest of the book.

If we replace God and Logos for Man and Woman, then you can plainly see what you are teaching compared to what John 1:1 is really teaching.

Your teaching is the one on the left and scripture is the one on the right.

a) In the beginning was the woman, b) and the woman was with the man c) and the woman was the man

a) In the beginning was the woman, b) and the woman was with the man c) and the woman was man

In addition to the error you are making here, you also conveniently ignore the word WITH.

When you have to ignore stuff to keep your doctrine intact, then that is the time to relearn the truth.
And why be stubborn to learning a better way?
Don't let pride come before a fall.

The whole book was written for the purpose of telling us who Jesus is and you don't seem to be able to recognise Jesus in many of the verses in the Book of John.

If a person cannot recognise him in scripture, then what does that say about him knowing God and the one whom he sent?

[Ed J]

Quote (Frank4YAHWEH @ Dec. 10 2011,08:58)

To ALL, Following is an excerpt from: Jesus Did Not Pre-Exist In The Beginning Was The Word (John 1) John's Gospel commences with this statement, and goes on to state that this word was with God and was God, and made all things (vv. 1-4). And because the title, Word of God, is applied to the Lord Jesus in Revelation 19:13, it is claimed that these verses in John relate to a pre-existent Christ. If this were so, however, it would make the Bible appear hopelessly contradictory, for such reference as: “I will be his Father, and He shall be my son,” “I will make him My firstborn,” “Jesus Christ the son of Abraham the son of David” are at variance with the teaching that represents Jesus as already living. The Greek term translated “word” is logos. It signifies the outward form of inward thought or reason, or the spoken word as illustrative of thought, wisdom and doctrine. John is teaching that in the very beginning, God's purpose, wisdom or revelation had been in evidence. It was “with God” in that it emanated from him; it “was God” in that it represented Him to mankind [a similar expression is used by Christ in Matthew 26:28: “This is my blood” — that is, this represents my blood. Again in Matthew 13:20: “the same is he” signifies the same, “represents he.” “That rock was Christ” (1 Cor. 10:4), it represented Christ]; and it became the motive power of all that God did, for all was made with it in mind, and it presented the hope of life to mankind (see John 1: 3-4). What John is stating, therefore, is that in the very beginning there existed the wisdom or purpose of God, and that it was revealed unto men to provide a way of life. What did it proclaim? The coming of one who would overcome sin and give reality to the hope of life. The promise of this was stated from the beginning in the Word or Doctrine of God (e.g. Genesis 3:15). This Word, Wisdom or Doctrine found its reality, its substance, its confirmation (Romans 15:8) in the person of the Lord Jesus Christ; therefore John taught: “The word was made (Greek-ginomai “became”) flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth” (John 1:14). The Word was made flesh, or became flesh, as it is expressed in the Greek. The Declaration of Divine wisdom found its substance and reality in the person of the Lord Jesus Christ. Before his advent, it was a mere Word or Promise, but when he became manifested, it became a person. The person did not exist before the birth of the child Jesus; but the promise and wisdom of God always existed. That is the teaching of John. It does away with the embarrassment of teaching that an angel became an embryo in the womb of a woman, as demanded by the theory of a pre-existent Jesus. We acknowledge that “Word” is personalized as “him”, in John 1:4, but that is a common Hebraism found throughout the Bible. Riches, Wisdom, Sin, and other subjects are similarly treated. Sometimes these are used to press the doctrine of pre-existence. For example, on several occasions, Jehovah's Witnesses have drawn attention to such passages as Proverbs 8:22, and applied them to their notion of a pre-existent Jesus. The passage reads: “The Lord possessed me in the beginning of His way, before His works of old.” The subject matter of the chapter is wisdom which is personified; but, unfortunately for the doctrine of the preexistent son, it is personified as a woman: “She standeth, she crieth” etc. (Prov. 8:1-3). Did Yahshua Create Or Pre-exist His Birth? “Jesus IS God!”?

Hi Frank,

These are the verses that PROVE “The Word” is The HolySpirit”!

Zech.4:6
Zech.12:1

Matt.13:19
Mark 4:14
Mark13:11
Mark 13:19
Luke 3:2
Luke 8:11
John 12:49
John 14:24
John 17:6-8
John 17:14
Acts 4:31
Acts 10:36-38
Acts 10:44
Acts 11:15-16
Acts 13:4-5
Acts 13:47-49
Acts 17:11
Acts 20:32
Romans 9:5-6
Romans 10:17
1Cor. 12:8-9
1Cor. 14:36
2Cor. 5:19
2Cor. 6:6-7
Gal.6:6
Eph. 1:12-13
Eph. 5:26
Eph. 6:17
Phillip.2:16
1Tm.5:17-18
2Tm.2:11-15
2Tm.4:2
Hebrews 1:1-2
Hebrews 2:2-3
Hebrews 4:2-6
Hebrews 4:8-12
Hebrews 5:13-14
Hebrews 7:28
Hebrews 11:3
Hebrews 12:19
James 1:18
1Peter 1:21-23
1Peter 2:6-8
1John 2:7-10
Rev.1:2
Rev.1:9
Rev.19:11-16
Rev.20:4

Your brother
in Christ, Jesus.
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode

[Ed J]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 11 2011,02:18)

That's right Gene.  And Yahweh was identified in John 1:1 as “THE God” the Word was WITH.  The second mention of the word “theos” in 1:1 is not “THE theos”.  So here's what we KNOW about John 1: 1.  Whoever the Word was, he was a god who was WITH “THE God, Yahweh”.  (Yahweh cannot be WITH Himself) 2.  We know the Word was a PERSON, and not a thing, because of the many masculine pronouns associated with him. 3.  We also know the Word was a PERSON, because this Word became flesh, and lived among humans, having the glory of God's only begotten Son. 4.  We even know WHO this person was, because John the Baptist said the same words about the Word in 1:15 as he said about Jesus in 1:30. 5.  We further know from other scriptures that all things were created by God through “His Son”, and through “our Lord Jesus Christ”.  So we can add the fact that all things were created through “the Word” to those other facts we know, and come up with a safe conclusion that “the Word” is the same person as “God's Son”, who is the same person as “our Lord Jesus Christ” – the one through whom all things were created.   Which would explain why the Word had the glory of God's only begotten Son. 6.  Then we can conclude that “the Word” in John 1 is obviously “the Word of God”, because John sure wasn't talking about anyone else's “word”.  And that let's us also take Rev 19:13 into consideration, where we know it was Jesus Christ who was called “the Word of God” by the same Biblical writer. See Gene?  This is how we use MANY different scriptures and facts to paint the true picture of what the scriptures actually teach.  This is also where you have much denying to do in order to keep your flawed, unscriptural doctrine.   For example, you first have to claim that God Himself can be WITH God Himself – which is impossible unless there are TWO Gods.   And you'll have to insist that the Word is an “IT”, despite the fact that EVERY pronoun associated with the Word is written in the singular, masculine form – indicating that “the Word” is a “HE”, not an “IT”. And you'll have to start insisting that “through him” really means “for him”, despite the fact that Col 1:16 says all things were created both “through him” AND “for him”. Then you'll have to claim that John started talking about the Word in 1:14, and then inexplicably switched subjects and started talking about Jesus, without even introducing Jesus. Oh, and you'll have to claim that 1:14 says, “The Word came to be IN someone who was flesh”, despite the fact that it doesn't say those words. But these are all things you've already done to keep your unscriptural doctrine Gene.  And I would be willing to bet money that eventually, you'll end up siding with Ed, and claiming that Rev 19:13 doesn't describe Jesus – just to eliminate another link to Jesus being “the Word” from John 1. Because one thing I've noticed about people whose doctrines don't align with scripture is that as soon as one of their fellow believers takes the leap of nonsense, the others will soon follow, simply because the nonsensical words of the first one tickles their itching ears. Think about it Gene.  At some point in history, one person had to utter the nonsensical words, “Hey, Jesus IS the God he is the Son of!”  And although those illogical words send red flares up in any sensible person's brain, it didn't take long before millions of other like-minded people, trying to make Jesus their God, just accepted those illogical words as making perfect sense.   Let's watch and see.  I'll bet that soon you'll be denying that 19:13 is about Jesus – not because you believe it to be true, but because Ed's illogical words tickle your itching ears and tell you what you want to hear.

Hi Mike,

Thank you for realizing that my comprehensive view
of the Scriptures, takes all Scripture into account.

God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

[Ed J]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 11 2011,04:40)

Eddy?  Were you going to address the last two posts on page 204?

Hi Mike,

If I missed one, please re-post it; OK?

God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

[seekingtruth]

Ed,
I made it as far as John 17:6-8 but have not seen the proof you speak of on any verses so far, what version are you reading from?

Wm

[Author]

Posts