- This topic has 19,164 replies, 120 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 2 months ago by
.
- Posts
Hi t8,
Do you hear God in the words of Scripture?
Do you hear the Spirit in the words of Jesus Christ?
If not are you ready to teach yet?
Hi t8,
If you can hear the Spirit in his words can you tell what comes from the man and what comes from the Spirit?
the man said
“I thirst”
Hi KW,God blew into soil to create the first living soul and all men are sons of Adam.
The idea that the soul or spirit of a man was made before Adam is farfetched to say the least.
Hi,
When you read the book of Isaiah do you ascribe the words to the man or to God?
Why do you ascribe the words of Jesus to the man?
He too is a prophet as Acts says.
Hi t8:
You keep using the following scripture to support your belief in a pre-existent Jesus:
Phil 2:
5 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:
6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
By this scripture the Apostle Paul is teaching the church about humility and referring to the “mind of Jesus Christ”, and the scripture states “who being in the form of God…”. It is speaking of him as Jesus Christ not as pre-existent being. “Who being” is present tense.
It does not say “who having been in the form of God…” or “who used to be in the form of God…”Love in Christ,
MartyHi.
It is not sound teaching to say that a man existed in heaven before his conception and birth.
It shows that the voice of the Spirit is not recognised.
Hi T8,
Was the Word not with God?
Did the Word not speak through the mouth of Jesus?
You should know that I teach this, so why the questions as if I didn’t.
It would be like me asking you: “Nick is Jesus not the son of God?” to which you would be perplexed as to why ask such a question. You would think, does he think I do not believe that…
However, I think I know the reason for your post. I will reply to that reason in the next post.
Hi t8,
If you know and teach that the Holy Spirit spoke through Jesus then you should not be confused.
You would not teach that a man lived in heaven because the history given is not that of the man but the Spirit.
You would not consider an suggestion of pre existence of that man that you know who was conceived in and born of Mary
Hi Nick,
Is the truth not an attribute of God?
Did Jesus speak the truth?
Is Jesus ‘The Truth’ or not?Once you can distinguish between an attribute and a person, you will then realise that truth, life, and logos can be both an attribute and a person.
The name of a person or title of a person is often linked to an attribute.
Jesus often changed the names of his disciples to reflect this.
Thus the rock/stone is a quality as much as it was applied and named of Peter who is a person.
Perhaps you understand now. If not, let me know and I will try to explain it a different way. That way we can cut down on non-relevant questions.
You would not teach that a man lived in heaven…
Wrong Nick, I have never taught that.
He existed in the form of God, emptied himself, came in the flesh…
Try to make the posts relevant to what we teach. It will save a lot of time.
🙂
Hi T*,
You mean IS JESUS CHRIST the truth?
We need to focus away from the flesh.
The flesh contributes nothing
Hi T8,
Is the humanity of Peter the relevant issue?
Or is it not God working and speaking through the person that matters?
t8,
He existed in the form of God, emptied himself, came in the flesh…
That choice of words imply he had flesh before he came.
Hi T8,
It is great that you have decided to dialogue on this as clearly misunderstandings have arisen over time.
Hi,
So we need to go through the teachings of Jesus Christ in the knowledge that what is said by him comes from within him.
He is an earthen vessel that contains the treasure of the Spirit.
By this scripture the Apostle Paul is teaching the church about humility and referring to the “mind of Jesus Christ”, and the scripture states “who being in the form of God…”. It is speaking of him as Jesus Christ not as pre-existent being. “Who being” is present tense.
It does not say “who having been in the form of God…” or “who used to be in the form of God…”I can only conclude from your statement that you cannot hold to this view:
who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men.
Because you say that he is in the form of God as present and not past in the context of the verse. Thus why does it say that he emptied himself after that and then came in the flesh?
Other translations use ‘nature of God’ instead of ‘form of God’. We can see that he was one kind and emptied himself and became another kind. Whereas you are saying that he didn’t empty himself of that kind at all and then by that reason he neither could have COME in the flesh because he didn’t exist till he was flesh.
The Antichrist spirit denies that Jesus came in the flesh. While we all agree that he was a man of flesh, not all agree with the word ‘CAME’ in that verse. Did you then exist in the form of God, empty yourself, and then come in the flesh?
If Jesus is just a man like you in every way (except sin), then you and Jesus will be created and delivered the same way. Thus the description of him should apply to you too if he is just like you.
If he came in the flesh, but existed in the form of God then emptied himself in order to then be in the likeness of men, then there is a sequence here that you seem to disregard. I read the verse as it is in the sequence presented, whereas your view is telling me to disregard that and take on another meaning with no respect for the order presented here.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
