- This topic has 19,164 replies, 120 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 2 months ago by
.
- Posts
Dear Nick,
You say”John did not say that.” But oh yes he did Jn12 :41 KJV “These things said Esias when he his glory and spake of him” The glory John claims Isaiah saw is Christ.It matters not what translation you read the meaning is the same
Just read it in the context please.It’s not hard to figure out. You accuse me of “presumption” while at the same time you perhaps accuse St John of being a false prophet? maybe he is if he disagrees with you.
Even Gene says the Spirit of Christ is God and therefore preexisted,so why is it wrong to say that when Isaiah saw God he saw Christ as John says?
Hi Andrew,
So the context is the now context and not the context of the vision of Isaiah?
Why would you presume that?
I don’t presume anything. Are we not talking of what John says about Isaiah’s vision ? If you choose your interpretation over John’s then so be it.As I said before maybe St John is wrong in your eyes and that does seem to be the case.
As I already told you Nick, it’s plain and simple in the context. It’s all about Jesus not the Father or Jehovah or Yahweh. It’s referring to Jesus ! deny it all you wish but it doesn’t change the fact of what St John says.
John 12:37 But though he had done so many miracles before them, yet they believed not on him:
John 12:38 That the saying of Esaias the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spake, Lord, who hath believed our report? and to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed?
John 12:39 Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias said again,
John 12:40 He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them.
John 12:41 These things said Esaias, when he saw his glory, and spake of him
Who did the Jews refuse to believe in vs 37,was it Jesus? If you deny it you just deny what it simply says. And why would you do that?
Hi Andrew,
Funny that Isaiah 6 does not mention Jesus but you confidently say he was there?
We both know that Jesus was not conceived, born or named when Isaiah had his vision.
How can you claim context in view of these facts?
How funny of you to say that Nick when we are talking about John. Sure Isaiah doesn’t mention Jesus and I agree with that 100%. You have to change the topic/scripture, because you know you are wrong when it comes to what John’s gospel says. !!! As I said before you disagree with John so why can’t you be honest enough to admit it? Do you fear eternal flame? I seem to recall someone on here years ago who rejected St John’s gospel and all here including you were trying to convince them otherwise.Do you recall that? I’m sure in your holy ghost memory and wisdom you don’t. Surprise,surprise,surprise!
Funny that Isaiah doesn’t mention Jesus but John’s gospel seems to think Isaiah saw Jesus! Are you laughing Nick?
Hi Andrew,
With the lack of supporting evidence for your theory why would you not think that John was speaking of Isaiah seeing a vision of God ?
The vision bears a remarkable resemblance to the vision John saw in Rev 4.
Mere coincidence you think?
If so then perhaps you will have to say Jesus had a heavenly existence with his own private divine throne and Angels etc.
Is that where this is heading?
Two gods?
Don’t fear Nick since I understand you are really a man of the elemental spirits as I am too. It’s all good and I love you my friend. We are all in this revelation together.
God honoureth the humble but resisteth the proud. Therefore he brought forth his humble son from ancient age.
Hi Andrew,
So you think that your supposition from Jn 12 can stand alone as some sort of evidence for your theory?
When are you going to take the subject seriously?
Oh please,it’s you who doesn’t take it seriously and plainly deny what the revelation of scripture says. And to think I started to feel sympathy on your stupidity and outright lies. All you can do is dodge what St John says to keep your new doctrines intact. Do you recall your former modalistic beliefs? I know you do and that should not have much problem with St John 12. But as it is now you are only a self deceiver since you deceive nobody else,just agree with other religionists of your type.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
