- This topic has 19,164 replies, 120 voices, and was last updated 1 year ago by
.
- Posts
Quote (Not3in1 @ Oct. 15 2007,01:29) Quote (kejonn @ Oct. 14 2007,14:21) Quote (Not3in1 @ Oct. 13 2007,20:31) Quote (kenrch @ Oct. 14 2007,02:02) The Father used Mary as HE used the earth to create life. That's what makes Jesus the second Adam. Born without sin.
Bro,Can you elaborate on this for me? How did he use Mary? Thanks.
Not3,Here's something, and it just recently occurred to me. Read John 3 and keep the virgin birth of Yeshua in mind. Do so with an open mind and heart and I think the Spirit may tell you something.
Kevin,
I'm still curious what you found. Will you share it with me, please? Thanks, Mandy
I must be going soon, but Morningstar is heading in the right direction I think. Just remember that the Gospel of John is very symbolic.Not3in1: Mandy, you mentioned that Jesus didn't need to be born again in order to see the kingdom of God, but the he merely instructed others of their necessity. May I encourage you to consider prayerfully – and research wise – what the meaning of the saying Jesus spoke [at a time period WELL AFTER he had been baptized of John] when Jesus said, “I have a baptism to be baptized of, and Oh how I straightened until it be accomplished!”
I don't understand how Jesus could be any more than the first Adam and His sacrifice be valid?
Was Jesus a “supernatural” human? If so then Satan was tempting God? Was the first Adam God?
Isn't this speaking “after” His resurrection?
1Co 15:42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption:
1Co 15:43 It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power:
1Co 15:44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.1Co 15:45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
1Co 15:46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.
1Co 15:47 The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven.
1Co 15:48 As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly.
1Co 15:49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.
The first Adam walked with God the second Adam was filled with God. So Satan tempts the flesh. Unlike the first Adam the second Adam~ the son of MAN~obeyed God and did not submit to His flesh.
Over and over the son of man said He could do nothing! That doesn't sound “supernatural”. If the flesh of the son of man was supernatural and unlike a regular human then His sacrifice is not valid.
Hey give me a supernatural body and lets see what I can do?
If Jesus preexisted then He was Michael the archangel. As far as I know Michael is the only one mentioned in scripture that is close to being a preexisted Jesus.
God breathed life into the first Adam and Adam became the first living human soul. He wasn't walking mud was he? He became flesh. I the beginning was the Word according to strong Word means “thought”. If you have a thought I believe it is safe to say a plan. So in the beginning God had the thought of the son of man, a second Adam, and we IN HIM.
Eph 1:4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:
Eph 1:5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,Jesus the son of man was the only human walking the earth who had no sin just as Adam walked the earth with no sin before his fall.
Was the first Adam “a” only son of the Creator? Created with no sin just as Jesus.We are forgiven of our sin. That is, our sin is forgotten and IF FORGOTTEN then our sin ceased to exist. The Father gives sin NO THOUGHT.
God sustains all of us If the Father were to clear His mind of you and I then we would not exist. Just as you have things in your mind that you do not constantly think about BUT is still there in your mind SO it is with the Father HE has everything…the universe and everything in it is in the Father's mind.
God “calls” things that are not as though they are and once He does that then what ever He calls comes into existence.
Heb 11:3 By faith we understand that the universe was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things that are visible.
2Co 4:18 as we look not to the things that are seen but to the things that are unseen. For the things that are seen are transient, but the things that are unseen are eternal.
Rom 4:17 (As it is written, I have made thee a father of many nations,) before him whom he believed, even God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were. [/U
Quote (Morningstar @ Oct. 15 2007,19:36) Quote (Not3in1 @ Oct. 15 2007,19:14) Being born-again flesh counts for nothing, MS. Flesh gives birth to flesh, and flesh and blood will not inherit the Kingdom.
I was simply guessing at what Kevin wanted you to see in John 3.
Gottcha
Thank you…..
Quote (PatBiglane @ Oct. 16 2007,00:42) when Jesus said, “I have a baptism to be baptized of, and Oh how I straightened until it be accomplished!”
Can you tell me, please, where this is in scripture? Thanks so much for all your insight. I am listening closely…..Quote (kejonn @ Oct. 16 2007,00:15) Quote (Not3in1 @ Oct. 15 2007,01:29) Quote (kejonn @ Oct. 14 2007,14:21) Quote (Not3in1 @ Oct. 13 2007,20:31) Quote (kenrch @ Oct. 14 2007,02:02) The Father used Mary as HE used the earth to create life. That's what makes Jesus the second Adam. Born without sin.
Bro,Can you elaborate on this for me? How did he use Mary? Thanks.
Not3,Here's something, and it just recently occurred to me. Read John 3 and keep the virgin birth of Yeshua in mind. Do so with an open mind and heart and I think the Spirit may tell you something.
Kevin,
I'm still curious what you found. Will you share it with me, please? Thanks, Mandy
I must be going soon, but Morningstar is heading in the right direction I think. Just remember that the Gospel of John is very symbolic.
MorningStar's explaination would require that Jesus be preexistent (firstborn) and then born of Mary.Kevin, I don't believe this is something you embrace, unless of course you are changing your view (you're allowed to do that
)When you have time, I'd still love to hear what YOU found! You have me on pins and needles waiting to hear. Ha!
T8…..> you've totally misunderstood what i was saying. Where did i say I had the Form of God, but if i have the Spirit of God then i have the (Nature) of God in me, like Jesus did. “Let this mind be in you which was in Christ Jesus our Lord”, that mind is the mind of God,”For He (GOD) works in us to WILL and do His Pleasure”, The spirit of God is the Nature of GOD in us. It say's “being transformed by the renewing of you minds.Your nature is the way you think.
I will even go futher and say if you don't have the nature of God in you, you are none of His. Howsoever has not the Spirit of God is none of His. What do you think the nature of God is if it's not the spirit we recieved. And if we have recieved it then its in Us, or do you think Jesus had a different Spirit then God Gives us.
No where did i say i preexisted in any form that i know of at lest, except in the forknowledge or predestination of God perhaps, even that i am not sure of.
You saying i am speaking as a Trinitarian is simply untrue, Infact you are more in line with there thinking then I, because you believe in an incarnated Jesus, I don't, and have expressed that many times here.
You took what i wrote and changed it to come out the way you wanted it to. If you believe Jesus preexisted in some other form and was incarnated in to flesh thats you right to 99% of christanity does also. I personally do not believe He did.
I as well a Kejonn, and Ken, and others Have shown direct scriptures that backup our claim that Jesus came into existence through the way the LORD said he would, If you choose to read into scripture what is not spicifially said, then that your problem.
thats just the way i see it t8…….peace to you…..gene
Quote (kenrch @ Oct. 16 2007,01:38) Over and over the son of man said He could do nothing! That doesn't sound “supernatural”. If the flesh of the son of man was supernatural and unlike a regular human then His sacrifice is not valid.
Why was his sacrifice not valid?Jesus bore in his flesh the totality of our sins, and his body was sacrificed once and for all.
Here is a question for you, Ken, as I have been following your posts here (some good stuff) – what makes you think that Jesus is just a man? Remember that he had a human for a mother, but his father is God Almighty! What would that combination produce? Thanks.
Quote (t8 @ Oct. 15 2007,22:15) We go from physical to spiritual and that means that we are not being humbled so to speak, but will be exalted in God's time. For the spiritual body is greater than the physical. Christ emptied himself and partook of the flesh. He made himself nothing.
Hi t8,
This above quote is of some interest to me because it appears that your first sentences are saying one thing, while your last sentence about Christ seems to say another? I know that you believe that Jesus preexisted in a spirit form – I am correct to believe this, right? And if you do hold to this belief, your above quote is misleading.You say that the physical comes first, then the spiritual. But according to your Jesus, the spiritual came first, then the physical, then back to the spiritual again. It appears there is an extra step in your theory? I offer that the extra step is the preexistent Jesus.
1 Corinthians 15:43-46, in part
…..it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body.The spiritual did not come first, but the natural, and after that the spiritual.
It appears to me that the scriptures say the natural came first *then* the spiritual. While you contend that the spiritual came first *then* the natural (because you say that Jesus existed as a spirit before coming to be a man). This is an opposite teaching of the above scriptures. I may be confused, and ask that you clarify for me and others. Thanks, brother.
Quote (Not3in1 @ Oct. 16 2007,04:36) Quote (kenrch @ Oct. 16 2007,01:38) Over and over the son of man said He could do nothing! That doesn't sound “supernatural”. If the flesh of the son of man was supernatural and unlike a regular human then His sacrifice is not valid.
Why was his sacrifice not valid?Jesus bore in his flesh the totality of our sins, and his body was sacrificed once and for all.
Here is a question for you, Ken, as I have been following your posts here (some good stuff) – what makes you think that Jesus is just a man? Remember that he had a human for a mother, but his father is God Almighty! What would that combination produce? Thanks.
MandyGod and man!
Not man and something else.
Quote You still have not addressed Luke 1:35.
Kejonn;Per your request, Luke 1:35 “… and he shall be called the Son of God.” Gabriel is telling Mary the child she is to bear will be called the Son of God. What else would he be called? He is the Son of God.
I've proposed a few scriptures to you as well, including but not limited to the following;
John 1:15, 30 “After me cometh a man that is preferred before me because he was before me.”
John 6 Jesus says he came down from heaven five times. You say don't take this literally. He could have come down in the form of an adult, but for the scripture to be fulfilled he was made of a woman. He was incarnated by the Holy Spirit, just as the Father and Son are incarnate in us by the Holy Spirit. Jesus ends the passage by stating he would ascend up to where he was before.
Question- If Christ did not pre-exist and he was going back to where he was before, where could he go if he didn't exist?
Jesus told Mary Magnelene that he was ascending to his Father, but you say he wasn't there before. How is that? Do any of the apostles state when the Lord comes we are going to where we were before?
Perhaps the truth that could uncloud the issue would be to ask a simple question. How many origins can any person have? The entire book of John has a few themes wolven throughout, so I'll name a few.
Who sent Jesus Christ? I'm sure we agree the Father sent him. Jesus said he came by commandment to perform the work of God.
What was the purpose of Christ? Everlasting Life for those who believe.
Where was Christ going after his work on earth was complete? Back to the Father. He said he knew where he came from. If he didn't pre-exist how would he know that.
Who was Jesus Christ? I believe that you will agree he is the Son of God.
Where did he come from? I contend that a person only has one origin. This issue was addressed by Christ many times. He always answered the Father sent him from heaven. He came down from heaven, he is above all, etc. How come he never mentions his virgin birth? I contend it was because that was not his origin. Jesus cannot have more than one origin. On the occasion in John where Jesus' mother tells him they are out of wine, do you remember his response? Woman what do I have to do with you, my hour is not yet come. Why did John believe that this was important to write? I believe it was because with respect to the origin of Christ, Jesus wanted to make it clear his origin was from heaven not from the earth.
When he came to earth that was not his origin. John the Baptist said he that is of the earth is earthly, but he said he that came from above is above all and speaks the words of God. The only reasonable interpretation of John the Baptist is that he believed Christ pre-existed. There's nothing ambiguous here. Paul writes similar scriptures in Corinthians
When Jesus spoke in types and parables he gave interpretations to his disciples. When they misunderstood what he meant, the scriptures provide that they understood not. For instance, when they asked him who he was requesting another sign, he responded, “Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up.” The scripture says they understood not that he spoke of the temple of his body. Or, beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, they thought it was because they forgot bread. Jesus said the leaven was the hypocrisy of the Pharisees. These issues are clarified in scripture.
When Jesus said he came down from heaven. They murmered and said we know his mother and father, how is is that he came down from heaven? They understood what he said and posed the same question I have for you, how can he originate from earth and heaven, too. There is no indication in scripture that this was a type not to be taken for truth.
When he spoke of eating his flesh and blood, he explained the words I speak unto you are spirit and life. What Jesus was teaching was first to believe what he said and to grow by the word.
He ends the passage by stating he will be returning to where he was before.Again, if he wasn't in heaven before where did he return to. If his origin is in Mary, Nicodemus posed a question that is a little amusing, Can a man enter a second time into his mother's womb? You haven't suggested that, but that is the only other option, or the foreknowledge of God. We all existed in the foreknowledge of God, even those who don't believe, but none of the apostles claim that we are returning to where we were before suggesting any of us pre-existed.
If he did not pre-exist in the bosom of the Father, why does John say he did? Jesus himself says he is the only one that has ever seen God. When was that if he didn't pre-exist? There's no foreknowledge there.
He's on the right hand of the throne of God now.
Take Care
Steven
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Oct. 16 2007,04:56) Quote (Not3in1 @ Oct. 16 2007,04:36) Quote (kenrch @ Oct. 16 2007,01:38) Over and over the son of man said He could do nothing! That doesn't sound “supernatural”. If the flesh of the son of man was supernatural and unlike a regular human then His sacrifice is not valid.
Why was his sacrifice not valid?Jesus bore in his flesh the totality of our sins, and his body was sacrificed once and for all.
Here is a question for you, Ken, as I have been following your posts here (some good stuff) – what makes you think that Jesus is just a man? Remember that he had a human for a mother, but his father is God Almighty! What would that combination produce? Thanks.
MandyGod and man!
Not man and something else.
Your answer is a bit confusing. Do you mean that within Jesus there is God AND man and they are co-existing together? I believe this is the incarnation belief. It is not mine. I don't believe scripture supports this theory either.Quote (Not3in1 @ Oct. 16 2007,05:11) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Oct. 16 2007,04:56) Quote (Not3in1 @ Oct. 16 2007,04:36) Quote (kenrch @ Oct. 16 2007,01:38) Over and over the son of man said He could do nothing! That doesn't sound “supernatural”. If the flesh of the son of man was supernatural and unlike a regular human then His sacrifice is not valid.
Why was his sacrifice not valid?Jesus bore in his flesh the totality of our sins, and his body was sacrificed once and for all.
Here is a question for you, Ken, as I have been following your posts here (some good stuff) – what makes you think that Jesus is just a man? Remember that he had a human for a mother, but his father is God Almighty! What would that combination produce? Thanks.
MandyGod and man!
Not man and something else.
Your answer is a bit confusing. Do you mean that within Jesus there is God AND man and they are co-existing together? I believe this is the incarnation belief. It is not mine. I don't believe scripture supports this theory either.
MandyYou know what I mean.
You are not being very clear as to what Jesus is. You are arguing that Jesus is not a mere man, but that he is something else. Like t8 you are being vague as to what he is.
Since God by his Spirit caused Mary to concieve then what part of the conception is God? What does that make Jesus?
If you say a 'Son of God” then he is no different than us right?
Steve,
Luke 1:35 is not just “and he shall be called the Son of God”.
(ESV) And the angel answered her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy–the Son of God.
(ISV) The angel answered her, “The Holy Spirit will come over you, and the power of the Most High will cover you. Therefore, the child will be holy and will be called the Son of God.
(KJV) And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God
(NASB) The angel answered and said to her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; and for that reason the holy Child shall be called the Son of God.
(WNT) The angel answered, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; and for this reason your holy offspring will be called 'the Son of God.'
In each case, the connecting word or phrase, “therefore” or “and for that reason” points back to why he would be called the Son of God: because of the conception of the Holy Spirit and Mary. And before you say that the conception was not mention in Luke, again, you must balance scripture and not form theology in isolation.
Mat 1:20 But when he had considered this, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, “Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife; for the Child who has been conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit.
Luke 1:35 does NOT– nor does Mat 1:20 — say “the Son of God will be injected into Mary”. In Luke 1:35, the angel says that he shall be (future tense because he had not been born yet) called the Son of God, not that he IS the Son of God.
You are so dead set on believing he was the Son of God before he camse that you won't even read what is plainly written in Luke 1:35.
Hi Kejonn;
Thank you for your response. It's not that I'm dead set against believing that Jesus was not the Son of God prior. I base my belief upon what I believe to be clearer evidence that Jesus was the Son of God prior based on all the scriptures cited in John by John the Baptist, Jesus, and the apostles.
Again, if he wasn't in heaven prior, to what state did he return? I believe that's a weightier question that deserves serious consideration because Christ spoke so much about who he was and where he was from and where he was returning.
Nonetheless, there are many people that contend that Jesus did not come down from heaven, or that he was above all, or that he existed prior as the Son of God, or that he was the Lord from heaven.
Some do not even believe in worshipping Jesus as the Son of God, or that Christ is our savior because Isaiah says only God is our Savior.
I contend if he did not exist prior as the Son of God, then he did not exist prior.
Take Care
Steven
Quote (Mr. Steve @ Oct. 15 2007,12:07) Quote You still have not addressed Luke 1:35.
Kejonn;Per your request, Luke 1:35 “… and he shall be called the Son of God.” Gabriel is telling Mary the child she is to bear will be called the Son of God. What else would he be called? He is the Son of God.
I've proposed a few scriptures to you as well, including but not limited to the following;
John 1:15, 30 “After me cometh a man that is preferred before me because he was before me.”
Already answered.Quote John 6 Jesus says he came down from heaven five times. You say don't take this literally. He could have come down in the form of an adult, but for the scripture to be fulfilled he was made of a woman. He was incarnated by the Holy Spirit, just as the Father and Son are incarnate in us by the Holy Spirit. Jesus ends the passage by stating he would ascend up to where he was before.
No, he was not incarnated, he was conceived. Those two words are not the same. Were you incarnated or conceived?And the second part of your explanation is not comparable. Jesus and God are NOT incarnate in us. You speak of this, but you've provided no evidence of them being “incarnate” in us. I really think you are looking for a different word but have yet to find it and are therefore using “incarnate” erroneously.
Quote Question- If Christ did not pre-exist and he was going back to where he was before, where could he go if he didn't exist?
Already answered. The context of this passage is his resurrection. Even so, you purport that Yeshua was the Son of God beforee his birth. Why then did he specifically choose “Son of Man” in John 6:62?Joh 6:62 “What then if you see the Son of Man ascending to where He was before?
In light of this verse, will you then say that he was “Son of Man” before he was inserted into Mary's womb? But he was “Son of Man” before he died, and he was again “Son of Man” afte the resurrection AND in heaven!
Mat 26:64 Jesus said to him, “You have said so. But I tell you, from now on you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven.”
Quote Jesus told Mary Magnelene that he was ascending to his Father, but you say he wasn't there before. How is that? Do any of the apostles state when the Lord comes we are going to where we were before?
Already explained many times.Quote Perhaps the truth that could uncloud the issue would be to ask a simple question. How many origins can any person have? The entire book of John has a few themes wolven throughout, so I'll name a few. Who sent Jesus Christ? I'm sure we agree the Father sent him. Jesus said he came by commandment to perform the work of God.
What was the purpose of Christ? Everlasting Life for those who believe.
Where was Christ going after his work on earth was complete? Back to the Father. He said he knew where he came from. If he didn't pre-exist how would he know that.
Well, let's see…the Holy Spirit is of God, God is in heaven…I think that he could have figured it out rather easily, don't you?Quote Who was Jesus Christ? I believe that you will agree he is the Son of God. Where did he come from? I contend that a person only has one origin. This issue was addressed by Christ many times. He always answered the Father sent him from heaven. He came down from heaven, he is above all, etc. How come he never mentions his virgin birth?
Why? Who knows. Why do you avoid his virgin birth? It is part of scripture too. It seems to be the one part of the life of Yeshua that you want to ignore because “conception” is involved, and not “incarnation”.Quote I contend it was because that was not his origin. Jesus cannot have more than one origin. On the occasion in John where Jesus' mother tells him they are out of wine, do you remember his response? Woman what do I have to do with you, my hour is not yet come. Why did John believe that this was important to write? I believe it was because with respect to the origin of Christ, Jesus wanted to make it clear his origin was from heaven not from the earth.
And it was. Is the Holy Spirit and the Father from earth, or heaven? But you like to neglect Mary being his mother. Do you believe ALL of the Bible, or just the parts that support your theology? Paul doesn't ignore it.Rom 1:3 concerning His Son, who was born of a descendant of David according to the flesh,
Gal 4:4 But when the fullness of the time came, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the Law
Quote When he came to earth that was not his origin. John the Baptist said he that is of the earth is earthly, but he said he that came from above is above all and speaks the words of God. The only reasonable interpretation of John the Baptist is that he believed Christ pre-existed. There's nothing ambiguous here. Paul writes similar scriptures in Corinthians
What you mean to say is that in your mind the only reasonable interpretation is this. That is because this is what you are convinced of, so that is what you see. No problem with that. But in doing so, you are still neglecting the whole of the Bible. And since the Holy Spirit and God ARE from above, then being born of the Holy Spirit is from above! I don't know why you struggle with the fact that Yeshua had a human mother but not a human father.Quote When Jesus spoke in types and parables he gave interpretations to his disciples. When they misunderstood what he meant, the scriptures provide that they understood not. For instance, when they asked him who he was requesting another sign, he responded, “Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up.” The scripture says they understood not that he spoke of the temple of
his body. Or, beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, they thought it was because they forgot bread. Jesus said the leaven was the hypocrisy of the Pharisees. These issues are clarified in scripture.
As they did not understand the John 6 passage. Look:Joh 6:60 Therefore many of His disciples, when they heard this said, “This is a difficult statement; who can listen to it?”
Joh 6:61 But Jesus, conscious that His disciples grumbled at this, said to them, “Does this cause you to stumble?
Joh 6:62 “What then if you see the Son of Man ascending to where He was before?
Joh 6:63 “It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life.When was Yeshua given life by the Spirit? Upon resurrection! His Father raised him up on the third day and restored his life. The same word used for “ascend”, “anabaino” is also used when Yeshua came up from the baptismal waters
Mat 3:16 After being baptized, Jesus came up [“anabaino”] immediately from the water; and behold, the heavens were opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove and lighting on Him,
Don't forget that baptism is a symbol for death of our own self and resurrection to the new.
Quote When Jesus said he came down from heaven. They murmered and said we know his mother and father, how is is that he came down from heaven? They understood what he said and posed the same question I have for you, how can he originate from earth and heaven, too. There is no indication in scripture that this was a type not to be taken for truth.
Which passage was this? You are often not forthcoming with scripture references.Quote When he spoke of eating his flesh and blood, he explained the words I speak unto you are spirit and life. What Jesus was teaching was first to believe what he said and to grow by the word.
He ends the passage by stating he will be returning to where he was before.
Where was his flesh and blood sacrificed? Would this mean anything if Yeshua had not died for our sins and was then resurrected?Quote Again, if he wasn't in heaven before where did he return to. If his origin is in Mary, Nicodemus posed a question that is a little amusing, Can a man enter a second time into his mother's womb? You haven't suggested that, but that is the only other option, or the foreknowledge of God. We all existed in the foreknowledge of God, even those who don't believe, but none of the apostles claim that we are returning to where we were before suggesting any of us pre-existed.
That is because — and I can't understand that you don't see that no other living being has ever been physically conceived of a woman and the Holy Spirit, but ignore to your hearts content — his earthly conception was by the Holy Spirit of God from heaven. Can you name me another who had this type of conception?Quote If he did not pre-exist in the bosom of the Father, why does John say he did? Jesus himself says he is the only one that has ever seen God. When was that if he didn't pre-exist? There's no foreknowledge there.
John never said that. Here is what he saidJoh 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
When did John write this? Was Yeshua not already in heaven? It does not say “the only begotten Son, who was in the bosom of the Father”. It is “IS in the bosom of the Father”.
Quote He's on the right hand of the throne of God now. Take Care
Steven
Yep, but where do you find anywhere in scripture where he was on the right hand of the throne of God before his birth? Only through eisegesis can you even imply this.2Ch 18:18 And Micaiah said, “Therefore hear the word of the LORD: I saw the LORD sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing on his right hand and on his left.
Quote (Mr. Steve @ Oct. 15 2007,13:55) Hi Kejonn; Thank you for your response. It's not that I'm dead set against believing that Jesus was not the Son of God prior. I base my belief upon what I believe to be clearer evidence that Jesus was the Son of God prior based on all the scriptures cited in John by John the Baptist, Jesus, and the apostles.
Again, if he wasn't in heaven prior, to what state did he return? I believe that's a weightier question that deserves serious consideration because Christ spoke so much about who he was and where he was from and where he was returning.
Nonetheless, there are many people that contend that Jesus did not come down from heaven, or that he was above all, or that he existed prior as the Son of God, or that he was the Lord from heaven.
Some do not even believe in worshipping Jesus as the Son of God, or that Christ is our savior because Isaiah says only God is our Savior.
I contend if he did not exist prior as the Son of God, then he did not exist prior.
Take Care
Steven
Hi Steve,But the only issue is that you don't have any scriptural evidence to support that he was the Son of God prior to his birth. That's where the rubber meets the road. In fact, some want to say Proverbs 8:22 is speaking of the pre-existent Yeshua as wisdom, but look closer
Pro 8:1 Does not wisdom call, And understanding lift up her voice?
Pro 8:2 On top of the heights beside the way, Where the paths meet, she takes her stand;
Pro 8:3 Beside the gates, at the opening to the city, At the entrance of the doors, she cries out:Can a son be called “she”? Of course, angels don't have sex, nor would other spiritual beings, but “son” is most certainly masculine while wisdom appears to be feminine.
Quote (Mr. Steve @ Oct. 16 2007,06:55) Hi Kejonn; Thank you for your response. It's not that I'm dead set against believing that Jesus was not the Son of God prior. I base my belief upon what I believe to be clearer evidence that Jesus was the Son of God prior based on all the scriptures cited in John by John the Baptist, Jesus, and the apostles.
Again, if he wasn't in heaven prior, to what state did he return? I believe that's a weightier question that deserves serious consideration because Christ spoke so much about who he was and where he was from and where he was returning.
Nonetheless, there are many people that contend that Jesus did not come down from heaven, or that he was above all, or that he existed prior as the Son of God, or that he was the Lord from heaven.
Some do not even believe in worshipping Jesus as the Son of God, or that Christ is our savior because Isaiah says only God is our Savior.
I contend if he did not exist prior as the Son of God, then he did not exist prior.
Take Care
Steven
mr steveAh, but then you would have to ditch your understanding of a boat load of scriptures and in my opinion read into them all kinds of things like Jesus was just a thought or a plan with the Father.
It is true as kejonn has told t8 that to believe in a pre-existent Christ to reconcile all of the scriptures that Yeshua must be God.
For truly the scriptures declare “God only”, “alone”, “by himself”, is our Saviour and the creator of all things.
But rather believe that Jesus is God as scriptures call him in John 1:1 and 20:28 Etc men would rather reason that he did not pre-exist and that he is the “god” of the New heavens and New earth that he is creating.
Take your pick. Trinitarianism or Unitarianism. But Henotheism has all kinds of holes in it.
Of course I believe “Unitarainism” does to, for to believe Yeshua is the “god” of the New Heavens and New earth would be Polytheism as well.
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Oct. 16 2007,06:15) Quote (Not3in1 @ Oct. 16 2007,05:11) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Oct. 16 2007,04:56) Quote (Not3in1 @ Oct. 16 2007,04:36) Quote (kenrch @ Oct. 16 2007,01:38) Over and over the son of man said He could do nothing! That doesn't sound “supernatural”. If the flesh of the son of man was supernatural and unlike a regular human then His sacrifice is not valid.
Why was his sacrifice not valid?Jesus bore in his flesh the totality of our sins, and his body was sacrificed once and for all.
Here is a question for you, Ken, as I have been following your posts here (some good stuff) – what makes you think that Jesus is just a man? Remember that he had a human for a mother, but his father is God Almighty! What would that combination produce? Thanks.
MandyGod and man!
Not man and something else.
Your answer is a bit confusing. Do you mean that within Jesus there is God AND man and they are co-existing together? I believe this is the incarnation belief. It is not mine. I don't believe scripture supports this theory either.
MandyYou know what I mean.
You are not being very clear as to what Jesus is. You are arguing that Jesus is not a mere man, but that he is something else. Like t8 you are being vague as to what he is.
Since God by his Spirit caused Mary to concieve then what part of the conception is God? What does that make Jesus?
If you say a 'Son of God” then he is no different than us right?
WJ,I'm sorry. I thought that I have been clear all along on who and what I believe Jesus to be. But I will certainly give a little recap here….
I believe that Jesus is the only literal Son of God, for he was conceived in Mary by God's holy spirit. Therefore, because Jesus underwent a true conception, he is a combination of God and Mary. He is not God, or soley God in nature. He is not soley man in nature. He is a combination of his parents just like you and me. He is a divine man. I've shown this many times, and I'm sure you haven't missed it?
God+God=God
God+Man=Divine Man
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
