- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 15 2010,13:53) Quote (Baker @ Nov. 15 2010,11:08) I was just reading this. I get rather upset when someone says that Georg is uneducated. Well ,let me tell you. I think in spite of all He has more understanding then some on here. He has taught Himself. It is never right to say something personal….
Hi Irene,Yeah, Martian and KJ were pretty nasty in their posts. JA is running a close third place to them now. Why must people try to deride others? I mean, if you disagree about what the scripture is saying, then just disagree. Why make it a personal attack? Not cool at all.
peace and love,
mike
Hi Mike! This is of the subject, however, since you did not answer me on the Poll about the creed, I would like for you to go back and answer about the catholic church. It is still on my mind…..Thanks….IreneQuote (WorshippingJesus @ Aug. 14 2010,08:43) Hi all! It has been claimed by some that the majority on this forum believed that Jesus was begotten before the ages or time
But isn't that what the Trinity Doctrine claims? Or are you a heretic too?Romans 1: 3-4 states that Jesusnwas declared Son of God when he was raised from the dead, as is easily discernible from the three verses in various scripture books which state, 'You are my Son, today, I have begotten you'.
The question to ask here is: 'Why…'
Why did God say this of Jesus? Why the declaration?…obvious…because Jesus had overcome all, triumphed over sin and death, and achieved the highest state of righteousness, next to God himself, proved to be so, a 'True Son of God'…therefore, God to him, 'You are my [True] Son…'
Is Jesus called 'Angel of God' in the Old Testament?
Yes…(Who disagrees with this? Mikeboll?) therefore if Jesus is an 'Angel' how is he a [true] Son of God in the same way that he after he is risen, for did he not achieve a better position than that which he left…and if better then he was not already in the highest position prior to coming as man.Know this then, Jesus was 'a son of God', the most righteous and most beloved by the father, God Almighty.
But remember the verse, 'for the Prince, while he is young, is no different to a servant for the purpose of living under the law. But when he has matured, he is assured of his inheritance'
So, Jesus, while he was in heaven, was no different to a servant but he came to earth to redeem mankind from sin and learn to abide by the law so in all things he knows our state.
And when he has overcome, then he is raised, matured, ready to receive his inheritance.
And further, Jesus is raised higher than the Angels and is made 'better than the Angels by virtue of having a better name than them…the name above all names (Note, it can't be 'God' because God Himself says there were none before him and there will be none formed after him)
So, if Jesus acquires a name that makes him better than the Angels, what name did he have before that wasn't higher than the Angels…i.e. That was the sames as the Angels?
And Angels are.. Messengers for God, Ministers to God, Servants of God.
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Aug. 15 2010,02:19) Quote (Baker @ Aug. 14 2010,03:35) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Aug. 14 2010,08:43) Hi all! It has been claimed by some that the majority on this forum believed that Jesus was begotten before the ages or time as the Only Begotten Son of God born from Gods own body through procreation.
When was Jesus “begotten”?
What say you?
WJ
The son (the Word/Jesus) was not procreated, he was created. Jesus himself said, he is the beginning of God's “CREATION”, Rev. 3:14.
You can read about “His” beginning in Prov. 8:22-30.Georg
So God created his own word?So what did God use to create the Word since the Word was used in the creating of all things?
Was God ever without his Word?
Thats like saying there was a time that God did not have thoughts or reason. Foolishness!
WJ
WJ What, come on you know that The Word of God became flesh.You really think that I buy your ignoring statement? I know that you believe that the Word of God is Jesus. However you ignore that The Word of God or Jesus was created. He was the firstborn of all creation…. My Husband does not know you to well, but I do…….Just to needle a person, that is very much uncalled for….. Don't play the ignoring member …..You are not….Irene
WJ Sorry that I put my last post up to you. I did not remember that Georg had already answered them. Should have gone on reading I guess. However I still believe that Jesus was created. I just thought about something. Jesus is the Son of God. Did your Son come after you? Yes, of course and so did Jesus….So at one point He had to be brought forth by Almighty God…I believe those Scriptures in Col, 1:15 and Rev.3:14 shows that He is the firstborn of all creation….Irene
Quote (Baker @ Nov. 16 2010,03:06) Hi Mike! This is of the subject, however, since you did not answer me on the Poll about the creed, I would like for you to go back and answer about the catholic church. It is still on my mind…..Thanks….Irene
Hi Irene,Yeah, I've been sidetracked lately. But I did repond to your post last night and will look for your response tonight.
Thanks for keeping me honest!
peace and love,
mikeQuote (JustAskin @ Nov. 16 2010,09:38) Romans 1: 3-4 states that Jesusnwas declared Son of God when he was raised from the dead, as is easily discernible from the three verses in various scripture books which state, 'You are my Son, today, I have begotten you'.
Hi JA,I hear you loud an clear. But slow down dude. Take it a point at a time.
And first, you must stop paraphrasing Romans 1. It does NOT say that is when Jesus is declared “the Son of God”. It says that when he was raised, he was declared “the Son of God WITH POWER”.
If you leave out the “WITH POWER”, then the scripture would make no sense. It would say that Jesus became the Son of God when he was raised, as if he wasn't already the Son of God before that time. And you also are implying that “begotten” somehow means “Jesus was then given power”. You are using apple verses to support your orange verse.
Look for my response to Shimmer about Acts 13. But be cautious, for there will be ONE OR TWO DIRECT QUESTIONS asked.
mike
Quote (shimmer @ Nov. 15 2010,19:45) Mike, The second Psalm is clearly the day Jesus was risen from the dead. Listen to what scripture says, no-one else, no dictionary, no word study… just scripture,
Now that's what I'm talking about Shimmer! Just scripture!Okay, here's some scripture for you:
Matthew 22:41-46 NIV
41 While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them, 42 “What do you think about the Messiah? Whose son is he?”
“The son of David,” they replied.43 He said to them, “How is it then that David, speaking by the Spirit, calls him ‘Lord’? For he says,
44 “‘The Lord said to my Lord:
“Sit at my right hand
until I put your enemies
under your feet.”’45 If then David calls him ‘Lord,’ how can he be his son?” 46 No one could say a word in reply, and from that day on no one dared to ask him any more questions.
Are you understanding the importance here? The Pharisees were the EXPERTS in the Law and the Prophets. They knew the OT inside and out. In fact, I read somewhere that the privileged few who wanted to follow a Rabbi or become a Pharisee were chosen at about 8 years old. By the time they were 12 years old, they had to have the five books of Moses MEMORIZED WORD FOR WORD……..or they were dropped from the “program”.
My point here is that even these experts in the OT were not expecting God's own Son to be the Messiah. They were expecting just a regular human from the line of David – someone like the prophets of old. They were expecting a human being that God would work through and that's it. They were not expecting God to send His own Son FROM heaven as this anticipated Messiah.
And Jesus knew this. And that was the point behind him asking the above questions. He was trying to hint to them that this Messiah was not only the Branch of David, but also the Root.
Are you with me so far? Don't worry, this is leading up to the Acts 13 verses you quoted, but I don't want to move too fast. All I want you to understand for right now is that the Pharisees, who were the experts, were clueless to the fact that the Messiah would be anything other than a mere man, let alone the Son of God sent from heaven.
Are you good with this so far?
peace and love,
mikeHi Mike. Yeah I understand so far. They were expecting Messiah to be a man only, not one from Heaven. Not a son of God from Heaven.
Quote (SimplyForgiven @ Oct. 06 2010,12:43) Quote (Ed J @ Oct. 03 2010,09:06) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Sep. 23 2010,06:36) t8 All things came into being through Him, and “APART FROM HIM NOTHING CAME INTO BEING THAT HAS COME INTO BEING“. John 1:3
WJ
Hi WJ,Why do you assume this verse appertains to Jesus?
14 And the Word was made 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.
Hi SF,The Word took up residence in Jesus at his baptism,
that's what John 1:14 refers to. Does that trouble you?God bless
Ed J
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgHi Shimmer, i'm loving your posts so much…
Yes, and I'm not sure what Mike is gargling at, but you rightly say, 'A Son of God'.
From the mouth of the innocent…
Mike,
You going off on a tangent…
Romans 1, irrespective…i wrote from memory, someone has already pointed out the error in the quote.
Yes, and they too tried to claim that the 'with power' somehow makes such a difference that it refutes all i said.
Not so, the point is, it states clearly, the time at which God DeCLARED his TRUE SON, the true Sonship, of which Scriptures now says, 'He is the Firstborn over All creation….the head of the Church', this is present-future…for the Saints, Elders, the Apostle, the Disciples, et al, the 'We' of Scriptures, will become like him, like Jesus, TRUE Sons of God, begotten Sons of God, as the Scriptures say, 'The Image of God'.
Mike, we not talking a photo image here…you look too much towards human example..Look to the Spirit.
The 'Image of God' means 'Righteousness, All Powerfull, All knowkedgeable, Impartial, All loving, Almighty, Judiscious, All Wise…', things that Angels are not in context, and mankind has only limited amounts of (thank God for that in man's sinful state)It has been outlined, the three states of 'Sonship' but you make no comment, just dismiss truth, seeking only where you might claim a lie, and failing that…for there is no lie to find, errors, maybe, but errors may only lead to a lie, but not be a lie itself…so thanks for, and others, alerting me to the error. 'Son of God with Power'. Actually, it even sounds better….
Remember, Jesus, before his death called himself, 'Son of God' but also said, 'What of it…'
Would Jesus say, now, 'What of it?'
I think not, Mikeboll….and why not, Mikeboll?
Quote (shimmer @ Nov. 16 2010,17:38) Hi Mike. Yeah I understand so far. They were expecting Messiah to be a man only, not one from Heaven. Not a son of God from Heaven.
Good Shimmer. I'm tired………..it's late. I'll continue tomorrow.peace and love,
mikeQuote (JustAskin @ Nov. 16 2010,20:07) Mike, You going off on a tangent…
Hello kettle? Yeah, this is the pot. YOU'RE BLACK!Be patient JA. You'll know where I'm going with this tomorrow. Then you and Shimmer can either agree or disagree. But at least hear me out first.
mike
Quote (shimmer @ Nov. 16 2010,17:38) Hi Mike. Yeah I understand so far. They were expecting Messiah to be a man only, not one from Heaven. Not a son of God from Heaven.
Hi Shimmer and JA,Matthew 16:15-18 NIV
15 “But what about you?” he asked. “Who do you say I am?”16 Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”
17 Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven. 18 And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.
Okay, so we know the Jews were not expecting the Messiah to be the literal Son of God sent from heaven. And here we see how big of a deal it is when God reveals this information to Peter. Jesus says he will build his entire church around this revelation from God to Peter.
The other Apostles EVER SO SLOWLY started to believe that Jesus was the literal Son of God who came down from heaven. And over time, many of the disciples also understood. But this was just a very small handful of people who had this understanding. The vast majority of the population still had no clue that he was the Messiah, let alone the literal Son of God who came down from heaven. This clueless “vast majority” is the group of people that Paul preached to. And what were Paul's two main teachings that he tried to get across to this “vast majority”?
Acts 9 NIV
Saul spent several days with the disciples in Damascus. 20 At once he began to preach in the synagogues that Jesus is the Son of God.22 Yet Saul grew more and more powerful and baffled the Jews living in Damascus by proving that Jesus is the Messiah.
Paul used the OT scriptures to reason with people and to prove that this Jesus that they had crucified was in fact the promised Messiah. Guess what else he used OT scriptures to prove? That's right – that “Jesus is the Son of God” – just like verse 20 above says.
So now you have the background Shimmer. Now maybe you can read Acts 13 in a broader light. I urge you to re-read Acts 13:16-48. I will highlight some of it for you now.
Verse 22 speaks of King David.
23 says that Jesus is the Savior of Israel from the line of David that God had promised. You see Shimmer? God had never promised to the ancestors that someday He would figuratively “beget” someone as His “Son”. He promised a Messiah – a Savior of Israel. This is “the promise to the ancestors” that God had fulfilled that Paul speaks of in verses 32 and 33.
In verse 27, Paul refers to scripture that foretold years ago about the death of Jesus, and says those who killed him actually fulfilled those old prophecies.
Throughout the rest of the speech, Paul uses scripture after scripture to prove that Jesus IS the one who was written about all those years ago by all those different people.
Paul was on a mission to prove two things Shimmer. One, that Jesus IS the promised Messiah, and two, that Jesus is the real live Son of the living God.
So while the wording is a little awkward in verse 33, Paul doesn't refer to the Psalm 2:7 to say “THIS” was the day that God begot Jesus, but only to scripturally prove that Jesus WAS that begotten Son of God mentioned all those years ago.
Paul used many OT scriptures to prove that Jesus was the Messiah, for there are many. But he used Psalm 2:7 over and over to prove that this Messiah was also the literal Son of the living God, for there aren't that many other scriptures he could have used to prove this. In fact, he only uses one other one in all his letters and speeches.
Verse 32 says that God had fulfilled a promise to the ancestors by raising Jesus. You have to ask yourself honestly, “What promise did Jesus fulfill?” There was never an “appointed” begotten Son promised by God, but there was a Messiah promised.
Now, if you add this knowledge to John 3:16, in which Jesus says he already IS the only begotten Son that God SENT INTO the world, bells should be ringing. And if you add that to John saying that God sent His only begotten Son into the world as a sacrifice, red flags should be waving. Jesus wasn't “sacrificed” for us AFTER he was raised from the dead. It would make no sense for John to say God sacrificed His only begotten Son if he wasn't God's only begotten Son BEFORE he was sacrificed.
Thanks for your patience guys. Take it for what it's worth to you.
peace and love,
mikeall
Mt 21:33 “Listen to another parable: There was a landowner who planted a vineyard. He put a wall around it, dug a winepress in it and built a watchtower. Then he rented the vineyard to some farmers and went away on a journey.
Mt 21:34 When the harvest time approached, he sent his servants to the tenants to collect his fruit.
Mt 21:35 “The tenants seized his servants; they beat one, killed another, and stoned a third.
Mt 21:36 Then he sent other servants to them, more than the first time, and the tenants treated them the same way.
Mt 21:37 Last of all, he sent his son to them. ‘They will respect my son,’ he said.
Mt 21:38 “But when the tenants saw the son, they said to each other, ‘This is the heir. Come, let’s kill him and take his inheritance.’
Mt 21:39 So they took him and threw him out of the vineyard and killed him.
Mt 21:40 “Therefore, when the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those tenants?”
Mt 21:41 “He will bring those wretches to a wretched end,” they replied, “and he will rent the vineyard to other tenants, who will give him his share of the crop at harvest time.”
Mt 21:42 Jesus said to them, “Have you never read in the Scriptures:
“ ‘The stone the builders rejected
has become the capstone;
the Lord has done this,
and it is marvelous in our eyes’ ?
Mt 21:43 “Therefore I tell you that the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people who will produce its fruit.
Mt 21:44 He who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces, but he on whom it falls will be crushedQuote (JustAskin @ Nov. 16 2010,21:48) Hi Shimmer, i'm loving your posts so much… Yes, and I'm not sure what Mike is gargling at, but you rightly say, 'A Son of God'.
From the mouth of the innocent…
JA, I havent been feeling much when I have been posting lately, now I feel better….. I feel more again, I know why I was not doing well… its OK now. What about you ?Quote (mikeboll64 @ Nov. 18 2010,14:35) Quote (shimmer @ Nov. 16 2010,17:38) Hi Mike. Yeah I understand so far. They were expecting Messiah to be a man only, not one from Heaven. Not a son of God from Heaven.
Hi Shimmer and JA,Matthew 16:15-18 NIV
15 “But what about you?” he asked. “Who do you say I am?”16 Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”
17 Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven. 18 And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.
Okay, so we know the Jews were not expecting the Messiah to be the literal Son of God sent from heaven. And here we see how big of a deal it is when God reveals this information to Peter. Jesus says he will build his entire church around this revelation from God to Peter.
The other Apostles EVER SO SLOWLY started to believe that Jesus was the literal Son of God who came down from heaven. And over time, many of the disciples also understood. But this was just a very small handful of people who had this understanding. The vast majority of the population still had no clue that he was the Messiah, let alone the literal Son of God who came down from heaven. This clueless “vast majority” is the group of people that Paul preached to. And what were Paul's two main teachings that he tried to get across to this “vast majority”?
Acts 9 NIV
Saul spent several days with the disciples in Damascus. 20 At once he began to preach in the synagogues that Jesus is the Son of God.22 Yet Saul grew more and more powerful and baffled the Jews living in Damascus by proving that Jesus is the Messiah.
Paul used the OT scriptures to reason with people and to prove that this Jesus that they had crucified was in fact the promised Messiah. Guess what else he used OT scriptures to prove? That's right – that “Jesus is the Son of God” – just like verse 20 above says.
So now you have the background Shimmer. Now maybe you can read Acts 13 in a broader light. I urge you to re-read Acts 13:16-48. I will highlight some of it for you now.
Verse 22 speaks of King David.
23 says that Jesus is the Savior of Israel from the line of David that God had promised. You see Shimmer? God had never promised to the ancestors that someday He would figuratively “beget” someone as His “Son”. He promised a Messiah – a Savior of Israel. This is “the promise to the ancestors” that God had fulfilled that Paul speaks of in verses 32 and 33.
In verse 27, Paul refers to scripture that foretold years ago about the death of Jesus, and says those who killed him actually fulfilled those old prophecies.
Throughout the rest of the speech, Paul uses scripture after scripture to prove that Jesus IS the one who was written about all those years ago by all those different people.
Paul was on a mission to prove two things Shimmer. One, that Jesus IS the promised Messiah, and two, that Jesus is the real live Son of the living God.
So while the wording is a little awkward in verse 33, Paul doesn't refer to the Psalm 2:7 to say “THIS” was the day that God begot Jesus, but only to scripturally prove that Jesus WAS that begotten Son of God mentioned all those years ago.
Paul used many OT scriptures to prove that Jesus was the Messiah, for there are many. But he used Psalm 2:7 over and over to prove that this Messiah was also the literal Son of the living God, for there aren't that many other scriptures he could have used to prove this. In fact, he only uses one other one in all his letters and speeches.
Verse 32 says that God had fulfilled a promise to the ancestors by raising Jesus. You have to ask yourself honestly, “What promise did Jesus fulfill?” There was never an “appointed” begotten Son promised by God, but there was a Messiah promised.
Now, if you add this knowledge to John 3:16, in which Jesus says he already IS the only begotten Son that God SENT INTO the world, bells should be ringing. And if you add that to John saying that God sent His only begotten Son into the world as a sacrifice, red flags should be waving. Jesus wasn't “sacrificed” for us AFTER he was raised from the dead. It would make no sense for John to say God sacrificed His only begotten Son if he wasn't God's only begotten Son BEFORE he was sacrificed.
Thanks for your patience guys. Take it for what it's worth to you.
peace and love,
mike
Thankyou Mike.Mike, I have no idea what any of this has to do with our faith, really. When was Jesus 'begotten' well…….why ? Jesus is the only begotten Son……I give up thinking about it now…..He just is the only begotten son of God…..thats all we need to know.
Mike, maybe its me ?
Years ago I went through this, searching, in all the wrong places as im sure you know. True spirituality with God is to listen and learn with God. Leaning on God …..not our own understanding…. To be spiritually in tune. Have you felt this ? You would have right ? The more you think about something, the more confusing it becomes.
Dont you find that ?
Hi Shimmer,
No, I don't think I become more confused, but more educated. When I first got here, and Keith and Jack were hammering me with trinity “proofs”, there were a few times that I was stumbled by what they said. But never for more than a day or two. Then I was always somehow just led to the scriptures that always made it clear again.
I feel I am spiritually led to all of my scriptural understandings Shimmer. Like I said before, to me it wouldn't make one difference if God was a trinity, or if Jesus didn't pre-exist, or if he was only “figuratively” begotten when he was raised. I would worship whatever God(s) the scriptures told me to in whatever way they told me to.
But scripture is the ONLY thing we have to test what the spirit is telling us. And scripture keeps clearly confirming what the spirit is telling me in the first place.
I understand how you can think it doesn't really matter when Jesus was begotten, and how. And you're right………….to a point. But consider this: WJ MUST have it be a “figurative” begetting after he was raised, or else it would mean his God #2 had a beginning. And he can't have that, so he is forced to just invent other meanings of scriptures. And to me it's just not right for him to mis-instruct others about what scripture says just so his doctrine will fit into those scriptures.
And I strongly believe that JA wouldn't even be arguing the point………IF he didn't NEED it to be a “figurative” begetting to support his fractal scripture thing. Because if Jesus was literally begotten by his God in the beginning, then he was greater than any of the angels who were created through him, and therefore Satan couldn't have been #1 until he messed up, because Jesus would have always been #1.
And this is why I get defensive – because I know what drives these people to corrupt the clearly written scriptures in the first place. It is nothing but their own personal opinions – as if they amount to anything compared to the words of God. But I'm done with all that anger stuff now. I have made a promise to myself and to God.
It's the same with the pre-existent thing. Do you realize that it is only Gene and Kerwin and Martian's WISH for Jesus to have been exactly like us that drive their willingness to simply ignore over 30 scriptures that teach the pre-existence of Jesus? I get defensive because they're not just looking at one scripture that could be taken this way or that way and debating which way it should be. No, they're putting their man-made wish OVER God's inspired words and brutally twisting many, many scriptures into non-sensical words. And since I know where their denial stems from, I take it even more personally for some reason. I start thinking, “Who are they to think their personal agendas are worth more than God's words?”
Anyway, aside from Jesus being the only begotten Son of God who was sent into the world and given by God as a sacrifice for us all, you won't find one early church father or early Christian writer anywhere that thought Jesus was “figuratively” begotten when he was raised. They all agreed that he was begotten “before the worlds”, or “before all the ages”.
Shimmer, I don't want to say “Lord, Lord” and have Jesus say, “Go away, I never knew you.” It's important to me to know who God is and worship Him ONLY. It's important to me to know who my Lord and King is also. And it's important to me that if all the scriptures and even outside sources point to Christ being begotten in the beginning as the firstborn of all creation, then that's how I will understand it and teach it. 100% free of any personal agendas.
peace and love,
mikeHi Mike,
Yes… I had all those debates YEARS ago. I would argue with people for hours every day, really, it was an obsession, I nearly lost family because of it, I put people OFF what they believed…thank goodness only temporary…I was driving them up the wall, searcheing scripture etc 24 hours a day, its ALL I talked about, ALL I thought about, now look at me.
As I was saying to Kerwin, Im past that. I have what I consider my truth, which is basically what this site is about, Im not interested in debating, Im not interested in studying, Why am I here ? I dont…know…really…I wanted to help people, I dont go to church…..so I guess thats why.
Whatever anyones got to say which is not what I know………… example God begat God…Numbers etc, well, to me thats not what I NEED to know so I cant be bothered with it. ……….Then I see everyone else converstaing about these things, theres people I like here, so I feel I have to say something ? Then I have to say something again…………then I have to reply to five different replies……damn….now im getting really confused !
So thats me. Debating with bod I enjoyed. I was supposed to be doing that.
I see some here as you say with agendas, some have what they consider 'special revelations given by God'….and yes they will do anything to keep what they believe as true…iv seen it all before.
You seem to be doing alright though.
Hope this makes sense, its really late here now.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
