- This topic has 19,164 replies, 120 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 1 month ago by
.
- Posts
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Feb. 14 2013,06:49) 1 John 4 NKJV
2 By this you know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God,3 and every spirit that does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God. And this is the spirit of the Antichrist…….
BRIEFLY explain what the bolded words, “has come in the flesh”, mean to you.
1. That Jesus was human being?
2. That Jesus existed as something other than a human being before “coming in the flesh”?
3. Other?
Mikeonly number two can be true ,for how many times Christ himself says this .
Mike……..you are slick I will give you that, by taking only part of the sentence you have quoted.
But I will give you “ALL” of it.
John said this ……”every spirit that does not confess thatJesus the Christ ( anointed one) has come in the flesh is not of God”
You see I do believe Jesus the Anointed one has came into existence as a flesh and blood human being, it is you who are saying he was “MORPHED” into a flesh being so who is the ones that do not believe Jesus came into existence as a human being.
Moreover who do you think John was talking about by saying that ,it was the Gnostic's , who believed and preached as you do that Jesus came from the GODS to straighten out this earth.
Peace and love to you and yours……………………gene
Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Feb. 14 2013,10:06) Mike……..you are slick I will give you that, by taking only part of the sentence you have quoted. But I will give you “ALL” of it.
John said this ……”every spirit that does not confess thatJesus the Christ ( anointed one) has come in the flesh is not of God”
You see I do believe Jesus the Anointed one has came into existence as a flesh and blood human being, it is you who are saying he was “MORPHED” into a flesh being so who is the ones that do not believe Jesus came into existence as a human being.
Moreover who do you think John was talking about by saying that ,it was the Gnostic's , who believed and preached as you do that Jesus came from the GODS to straighten out this earth.
Peace and love to you and yours……………………gene
GIt looks like your anointed one came from men ,many say (our Christ)that many would come under his name ,but we all know that those are men made anointed one ,,
Our Christ came as scriptures says he came not from among men ,but from God ,from above ,he was ,his,and still his the son of God almighty ,
And he did prove himself to be approved from God ,his miracles done through him prove this,
We know the scriptures tells the truth.
To all,
In English idiom, “in the flesh” means physically present.
It sounds much the same as in body/out of body.
In flesh (sarki) come
sarx: flesh
Original Word: σάρξ, σαρκός, ἡ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine
Transliteration: sarx
Phonetic Spelling: (sarx)
Short Definition: flesh, body
Definition: flesh, body, human nature, materiality; kindred.4561 sárksproperly, flesh (“carnal”), merely of human origin or empowerment.
4561 (sarks) is generally negative, referring to making decisions (actions) according to self – i.e. done apart from faith (independent from God's inworking). Thus what is “of the flesh (carnal)” is by definition displeasing to the Lord – even things that seem “respectable!” In short, flesh generally relates to unaided human effort, i.e. decisions (actions) that originate from self or are empowered by self. This is carnal (“of the flesh”) and proceeds out of the untouched (unchanged) part of us – i.e. what is not transformed by God.
http://biblesuite.com/greek/4561.htm
————
All of the occurrences of the word in scripture are HERE
Quote (2besee @ Feb. 14 2013,15:39) In flesh (sarki) come sarx: flesh
Original Word: σάρξ, σαρκός, ἡ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine
Transliteration: sarx
Phonetic Spelling: (sarx)
Short Definition: flesh, body
Definition: flesh, body, human nature, materiality; kindred.4561 sárksproperly, flesh (“carnal”), merely of human origin or empowerment.
4561 (sarks) is generally negative, referring to making decisions (actions) according to self – i.e. done apart from faith (independent from God's inworking). Thus what is “of the flesh (carnal)” is by definition displeasing to the Lord – even things that seem “respectable!” In short, flesh generally relates to unaided human effort, i.e. decisions (actions) that originate from self or are empowered by self. This is carnal (“of the flesh”) and proceeds out of the untouched (unchanged) part of us – i.e. what is not transformed by God.
http://biblesuite.com/greek/4561.htm
————
All of the occurrences of the word in scripture are HERE
good but that is not an answer just infoTerricca……..Let the people we are talking to respond to what we say, throwing up all kind of flack to change subject matter is not solving any thing here. Stay focused brother if you can?
Peace and love to you and yours…………………….gene
Funny you said that Gene, because I was just reading through the post, and Pierre took the words right out of my mouth on each occasion. In other words, he said exactly what I was thinking.
So far, it seems that you, Gene, believe #1 is the correct answer. Is that right?
And, like Pierre aptly pointed out, Kerwin and 2B have not even answered. They have skirted the issue by posting information about the word “sarx”, or “flesh”.
Kerwin, what is YOUR ANSWER? 2B, what is YOUR ANSWER?
(Gene, be patient for a day or two, until I get their answers, okay?)
peace,
mikeMike,
I tend to favor that Jesus was physical present as opposed to the idea that he was spirit being that appeared physically present.
So then, “has come in the flesh” just means he was a human being?
Why not just say that, Kerwin? Or just say, “#1”?
Please stop being “mysterious”, and DIRECTLY answer my question, okay?
Mike…….I absolutely believe Jesus was a flesh being and still is and was never anything else. He is a Son of Man and even said “when the “So of “man” comes” will he find faith on the earth and again and they shall see the sign of the son of man coming with great power and glory . He did no say when a “spirit morphed” or “spirit man”comes did he Mike?
Again as I have said over and over you people have no idea what a spirit .”IS”. Spirits are not persons the are personified in scriptures as persons but they themselves are not persons. They are what is “IN” a person.
Mike you people who believe Jesus preexisted as a GOD or little god or an Angel aren't even close to understanding the scriptures IMO.
Peace and love to you and yours………………………gene
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Feb. 15 2013,08:13) So then, “has come in the flesh” just means he was a human being? Why not just say that, Kerwin? Or just say, “#1”?
Please stop being “mysterious”, and DIRECTLY answer my question, okay?
Mike,In order to conclude that I would evidence that is not in that particular Scripture.
Jesus came as a man because other scriptures state he did. He is not an angel in human flesh.
Quote (kerwin @ Feb. 15 2013,12:13) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Feb. 15 2013,08:13) So then, “has come in the flesh” just means he was a human being? Why not just say that, Kerwin? Or just say, “#1”?
Please stop being “mysterious”, and DIRECTLY answer my question, okay?
Mike,In order to conclude that I would evidence that is not in that particular Scripture.
Jesus came as a man because other scriptures state he did. He is not an angel in human flesh.
K and GYou see with your believes you now have to interpret many scriptures in what they mean ,and so can not be taken at face value,
And this is wrong ,if everyone that has a believe interprets the scriptures in his own way then what
Well that is why we have all those religions sects ,and they deny the coming of the Christ into the flesh from heaven and so are Antichrist as John so said ,Reading the bible and then change what is written is NOT believing what is written that simple.
Quote (terraricca @ Feb. 15 2013,19:42) Quote (Kerwin @ Feb. 15 2013,12:13) mikeboll64,Feb. wrote:So then, “has come in the flesh” just means he was a human being?
Why not just say that, Kerwin? Or just say, “#1”?
Please stop being “mysterious”, and DIRECTLY answer my question, okay?
Mike,In order to conclude that I would evidence that is not in that particular Scripture.
Jesus came as a man because other scriptures state he did. He is not an angel in human flesh.
K and GYou see with your believes you now have to interpret many scriptures in what they mean ,and so can not be taken at face value,
And this is wrong ,if everyone that has a believe interprets the scriptures in his own way then what
Well that is why we have all those religions sects ,and they deny the coming of the Christ into the flesh from heaven and so are Antichrist as John so said ,Reading the bible and then change what is written is NOT believing what is written that simple.[/quote Terricca………..That is exactly what you and Mike do, add word to make scripture say what in fact it is not saying or leave off part of scriptures to make them mean what in fact they do not exactly say.
There are all kinds of scriptures that we have posted here showing Jesus linage was a human linage , Jesus even said himself he was the Root and offspring of King David and you people twist up that scriptures also by separating the word Root from Offspring , not even realizing Jesus in scripture is said to be from the roots of Jesse.
You people are bold to add words like in John 1:1 from the written word, “word”, to meaning Jesus, Not even realizing if John meant to say Jesus he would have written Jesus there, indeed you guys are very bold as you push your Preexistent Doctrines.
So please don't give us the garbage that we are twisting up scriptures when in fact no one does it better the you PREEXISTENCES , which include all the original Gnostic's and Trinitarians and Jw's and all who believe Jesus was a Big God or “Little god or an Angel people. You all tie with all those groups by your “PREEXISTENC DOCTRINES even if you try to seperate yourselfs from each others you can't becasue your fundimental teachings of PREEXISTENCE TIE YOU With them. IMO
peace and love to you and yours…………………………gene
Mike…….. So, Kerwin, 2besee, Marty, Martin, Chosenone, Astrie, not 3in 1, Frank, Adam, and I and others who have come and gone, all agree that Jesus was a flesh being who came into “EXISTENCE” at his berth in the Flesh as a Flesh being.
While you and Pierre and T8 and about a billion Catholics and Millions of Protestents and JW”S and (MOST) of all Christendom does agree with you too. There is Just a few who don't believe as you “ALL” do, and we are of them, NOW WHAT ? do you so-called “gods” big or little or angels, have up your sleeves now.
peace and love to you and yours……………………………………………..gene
Gene is right in many ways, the early church apparently fought against the Gnostic who believed if I remember rightly that Jesus was a god sent down from heaven…………but I need to look into that more first.
Denying the Father and the Son regarding Jesus who was a man, is not denying the Son who was the Spirit of God because a mans spirit is his own spirit and a part of him, where Jesus was a man. To say that Jesus and the Father are two Gods making up one God, is, in a way, denying the Father and the Son as separate (one God, the Father + one man, the Son Jesus (scripturally true) – instead making them one God, the Father + another God, the Son = two Gods that are one God (scriptural error)) and also denying the creative power of the Spirit of the one God and putting it instead on man.
The majority of Jews rejected the Son and so the complete verse could be speaking to those Jews who rejected the Son. But no. John said that “they came out from among us – they were with us but they went out from us” so they were part of “The Way” and they twisted the truth.
Just my thoughts, not saying they are true or not.
Quote (terraricca @ Feb. 15 2013,14:42) Quote (kerwin @ Feb. 15 2013,12:13) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Feb. 15 2013,08:13) So then, “has come in the flesh” just means he was a human being? Why not just say that, Kerwin? Or just say, “#1”?
Please stop being “mysterious”, and DIRECTLY answer my question, okay?
Mike,In order to conclude that I would evidence that is not in that particular Scripture.
Jesus came as a man because other scriptures state he did. He is not an angel in human flesh.
K and GYou see with your believes you now have to interpret many scriptures in what they mean ,and so can not be taken at face value,
And this is wrong ,if everyone that has a believe interprets the scriptures in his own way then what
Well that is why we have all those religions sects ,and they deny the coming of the Christ into the flesh from heaven and so are Antichrist as John so said ,Reading the bible and then change what is written is NOT believing what is written that simple.
T and all,First you claim Jesus was made flesh and now you claim Jesus came in the flesh. So which is it? Did Jesus come in the flesh or was he made flesh?
Hi Kerwin,
The Word became flesh. The Root (The Son according to His divinity) through the stump (Jesse's geneology) produced a shoot (the Son became flesh). He remained the Root and also became the Shoot.Hi All,
Though only Gene has answered my question directly, I'm going to assume that since Kerwin and 2B don't think Jesus existed as something else before he “came in the flesh”, that they vote for #1, ie: “has come in the flesh” is just an odd way of saying, “he was born like any other human being”.
1. Can you guys find and post an instance of these words being used to describe any other normal human being? (Please post the quote, or answer with a “NO”)
2. If the “antichrist” is one who simply doesn't believe Jesus of Nazareth ever existed as a man on earth, WHO then, is the “antichrist” that John warned about?
Because it seems to me that even Stu and the atheists believe that Jesus of Nazareth existed. Even secular historical accounts speak of the man, Jesus of Nazareth, right?
See what I mean? If “has come in the flesh” simply means, “he was a human being like anyone else”, then WHO in John's day WOULDN'T believe that Jesus, son of Mary and Joseph, actually lived? Everyone in Jerusalem and half the world knew about the man that many considered to be the Messiah, right?
So who then does that leave to be the “antichrist”? Which group of people refuse to believe that a man named Jesus of Nazareth existed at all? And do you really think it was this assumably small group of people that are the “antichrist”?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
