Questions about Jesus

[NickHassan]

Hi W,
None.
But looking at Acts 10 I have yet to hear you explain this verse.

“38How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.”

Did God anoint God with God??

[TimothyVI]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Mar. 19 2007,19:41)

TimothyVI You forgot to mention the part where he was in the form of God and thought it not Robbery to be equal to God.

Hi WorshippingJesus,

I didn't foget. It was in one of my posts, you just must have missed it.

That scripture has been translated differently in other versions of the bible. Other versions say that being in the form of God was not even something that Jesus wanted to grasp.

Phl 2:6 who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped,

Tim

[Not3in1]

I think I have already given my understanding of John 1:1, so I will move on from there to verse 3: The opening of John reveals this simple truth in a beautiful way – In the beginning there was one God, who had reason, purpose and a plan, which was, by its very nature and origin, divine. It was through and on account of this reason, plan and purpose that everything was made. Nothing was made outside its scope. Then, this plan became flesh in the person of Jesus Christ and tabernacled among us.

Understanding the opening of John this way fits with the whole of scripture and is entirely acceptable from a translation standpoint.

Verse 14 we have touched on a bit already, however let me say again that for me, the “Word” is the wisdom, plan or purpose of God and the Word “became flesh” as Jesus Christ. To make John 1:14 support the Trinity, there must first be proof that Jesus existed before he was born and was called “the Word.” I do not believe that such proof exists. There is a large body of evidence, however, that Jesus was foreknown by God, and that the “the Word” refers to God's plan or purpose. I contend that the meaning of the verse is straightforward. God had a plan (the Word) and that plan became flesh when Jesus was conceived. Thus, Jesus became “the Word in the flesh.”

This does take us back to the subject of pre-existence. And I would like to make a bold statement here – I believe that this doctrine of pre-existence has done more to weaken the foundation of the rational core of the Christian faith than have all the assaults of so-called “heretics” put together.

Some of the reasons why I make this statement are, aside from it's mythological character, the “incarnation” creates other problems; the bible explicitly states that “God is not a man,” (Num. 23:19), which defines two distinct categories, God and man. In terms of symbolic logic, it could be stated in this way: P is not Q. If Q, then not P. If God is not a man, then if someone is a “man,” he cannot be “God.”

Jesus makes clear reference to two distinct categories in John 3:6 when he says that “the flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit.” Jesus clearly declared God to be “spirit” (John 4:24). Note that he did not say, “I am spirit,” or “God is flesh.” By placing “God” in the category of “spirit,” when he himself is clearly a man of flesh and blood, Jesus effectively excluded any possibility that he was God. If God, being spirit, can incarnate himself as a man, then the clear scriptural distinction between flesh and blood disintegrates.

The assertion that Jesus was God in human flesh nullifies the absolute necessity of Christ's obedience, because, as God, no temptation he faced would have been genuine. That includes if Jesus was only “half” tempted in his “human” nature. I do not have the benefit of a “divine” side and a “human” side – neither did Jesus. Because clearly, the divine side would dominate.

Another unsolvable problem caused by the “incarnation” is that it destroys the plan that God established of a first Adam and a last Adam. Romans 5:12-19 clearly defines a critical, logical parallel between Adam and Jesus Christ in the context of the redemption of mankind. A major consequence of the doctrine that God became man is that it destroys this key parallel, for Adam is hardly comparable to an eternally pre-existent being. Take a look at this stark contrast between Adam and Jesus:
Two Adams
Two created beings
Two sons of God
Two men
Two gardens
Two temptations
Two choices
Two attitudes
Two decisions
Two results
Two races

Again, food for thought. More later…

[NickHassan]

Hi Not 3,
Was the PLAN of God with God?
Did the PLAN decide to empty himself and come?
A WORD is not a PLAN.
A word is expressed while a PLAN is just an idea.
The WORD was expressed into being as the monogenes son and then sent into the world.

[TimothyVI]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Mar. 19 2007,19:21)

Quote (TimothyVI @ Mar. 19 2007,18:06) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Mar. 19 2007,16:32) 1 Cor 15:47 The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven. Hi Worshipping Jesus, Since Jesus was generated by God, who is in heaven, through Mary, and God is His Father. Then Jesus is the Lord from heaven. I have no problem with that. Tim TimothyVI You are grossely miss-interpreting the scripture. Look at its context. How do yo come to this conclusion In light of Jn 1:1 and many other scriptures that show he pre-existed his natural birth?

Hi WorshippingJesus,

In another post I told you how I came to this conclusion in light of Jn 1:1.
For almost 1600 years after Christ died, Jn 1:1 did not read the way that you have printed it. If it is your wish to believe the changed interpretation, then that is what you must believe.

I would not begin to attempt to change your thinking. I merely answered your question.

God bless,

Tim

[TimothyVI]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Mar. 19 2007,22:31)

Hi Not 3, Was the PLAN of God with God? Did the PLAN decide to empty himself and come? A WORD is not a PLAN. A word is expressed while a PLAN is just an idea. The WORD was expressed into being as the monogenes son and then sent into the world.

You are partially right Nick,
But John did not say word, John said logos.
Try to understand the deeper Hebrew meaning of logos.

Tim

[NickHassan]

Hi Tim,
How did it read for the first 1600 years?

[Not3in1]

Hi Nick,
Yes, God had a plan. My own Father had a plan (that someday he would have children – me!). God had in mind that he would have Jesus in the future.

The “logos” is God's expression, his communication of himself, just as a spoken word is the expression of the inner and unseen thoughts of a person. So, “logos” includes the idea of “plan,” “purpose,” “wisdom” and even “power.” “Logos” is the term that God uses to represent his purpose for this new creation, which was eventually realized in the person of Jesus.

The translation of “logos” as “word” is a good one-word translation of it's meaning, but it falls short of illuminating the richness of “logos” in its Greek usage, a richness that sheds light on both the purpose of God and the person of Jesus.

[NickHassan]

Hi not 3
“Isaiah 45:23
I have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of my mouth in righteousness, and shall not return, That unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear”
Plan?

[Not3in1]

Nick, I'm sorry but I don't understand your question regarding the passage in Isaiah?

[TimothyVI]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Mar. 19 2007,22:38)

Hi Tim, How did it read for the first 1600 years?

Hi Nick,

For almost 1600 years after Jesus died, John 1 read like this.

1. In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and God was the word.
2.The same was in the beginning with God.
3.All things were made by it; and without it was not anything made that was made.

You notice that the “w” is not capitalized. And in Jn1:3 the word is referenced as it. This is the way the scriptures were written and understood until the Catholic KJV of the bible rewrote it. Then all they had to do was add the Holy Spirit as another being and they had a trinity.

Tim

[TimothyVI]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Mar. 19 2007,22:45)

Hi not 3 “Isaiah 45:23 I have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of my mouth in righteousness, and shall not return, That unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear” Plan?

Hi Nick,

Your post was to not3in1 but if I may offer an opinion.

In Is 45:23, word is from the Hebrew word dabar, which means literally word,or spoken word. It doesn't carry the same meaning of the Greek word logos. So it does not mean plan, which is what you were inferring.

Tim

[Not3in1]

Ah-ha, thanks Tim. Now I understand what Nick was after. And yes, I agree with you. Thanks so much for your thoughtful posts.

[Not3in1]

Say, Tim, what is the name of the translation you are referring to from the 1600's?

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Mar. 19 2007,21:32)

Hi W, None. But looking at Acts 10 I have yet to hear you explain this verse. “38How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.” Did God anoint God with God??

NH

The Word/God (the Lord from heaven) who came down from heaven took on likeness of sinful flesh and was born the man Christ Jesus, then he baptised at the Jordan to fulfill all righteousness at which tim the Spirit(third person of the trinity) descended “upon” him and the Father(first person of the trinity)spoke from heaven saying this is my Beloved Son in whom I am well pleased.

So you have the Father, Son and Holy Spirit present at his baptism!

By the way NH, do you think that Jesus needed to be water baptised? Did he have to repent? It was to fulfill all righteousness.

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (TimothyVI @ Mar. 19 2007,22:21)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Mar. 19 2007,19:41) TimothyVI You forgot to mention the part where he was in the form of God and thought it not Robbery to be equal to God. Hi WorshippingJesus, I didn't foget. It was in one of my posts, you just must have missed it. That scripture has been translated differently in other versions of the bible. Other versions say that being in the form of God was not even something that Jesus wanted to grasp. Phl 2:6   who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped,   Tim

My point is he was in the Form of God!

[NickHassan]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Mar. 19 2007,23:12)

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Mar. 19 2007,21:32) Hi W, None. But looking at Acts 10 I have yet to hear you explain this verse. “38How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.” Did God anoint God with God?? NH The Word/God (the Lord from heaven) who came down from heaven took on likeness of sinful flesh and was born the man Christ Jesus, then he baptised at the Jordan to fulfill all righteousness at which tim the Spirit(third person of the trinity) descended “upon” him and the Father(first person of the trinity)spoke from heaven saying this is my Beloved Son in whom I am well pleased. So you have the Father, Son and Holy Spirit present at his baptism! By the way NH, do you think that Jesus needed to be water baptised? Did he have to repent? It was to fulfill all righteousness.

Hi W,
Why should God need to be anointed?
What did God lack that another person in God had to top God up?
Why should a person be used to anoint another person?

[TimothyVI]

Quote (Not3in1 @ Mar. 19 2007,23:07)

Say, Tim, what is the name of the translation you are referring to from the 1600's?

Hi not3in1,

In all of these earlier bibles, Tyndale 1525, Tyndale 1534, Matthew's Bible 1537, The Great Bible 1539, The Geneva Bible 1560, the Bishop's Bible (1568) …
all had 'it' in John 1:3-4, instead of Him.
After the Catholic Rheims NT was printed in 1582 with him in Jn.1:3-4 it appears that the KJV translators followed that trend … placed 'him' in vv. 3-4; starting with the KJV 1611, and thus, the patent misreading continues today.

Bless you,

Tim

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (Not3in1 @ Mar. 19 2007,22:28)

I think I have already given my understanding of John 1:1, so I will move on from there to verse 3:  The opening of John reveals this simple truth in a beautiful way – In the beginning there was one God, who had reason, purpose and a plan, which was, by its very nature and origin, divine.  It was through and on account of this reason, plan and purpose that everything was made.  Nothing was made outside its scope.  Then, this plan became flesh in the person of Jesus Christ and tabernacled among us. Understanding the opening of John this way fits with the whole of scripture and is entirely acceptable from a translation standpoint. Verse 14 we have touched on a bit already, however let me say again that for me, the “Word” is the wisdom, plan or purpose of God and the Word “became flesh” as Jesus Christ.  To make John 1:14 support the Trinity, there must first be proof that Jesus existed before he was born and was called “the Word.”  I do not believe that such proof exists.  There is a large body of evidence, however, that Jesus was foreknown by God, and that the “the Word” refers to God's plan or purpose.  I contend that the meaning of the verse is straightforward.  God had a plan (the Word) and that plan became flesh when Jesus was conceived.  Thus, Jesus became “the Word in the flesh.” This does take us back to the subject of pre-existence.  And I would like to make a bold statement here – I believe that this doctrine of pre-existence has done more to weaken the foundation of the rational core of the Christian faith than have all the assaults of so-called “heretics” put together. Some of the reasons why I make this statement are, aside from it's mythological character, the “incarnation” creates other problems; the bible explicitly states that “God is not a man,” (Num. 23:19), which defines two distinct categories, God and man.  In terms of symbolic logic, it could be stated in this way:  P is not Q.  If Q, then not P.  If God is not a man, then if someone is a “man,” he cannot be “God.”   Jesus makes clear reference to two distinct categories in John 3:6 when he says that “the flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit.”  Jesus clearly declared God to be “spirit” (John 4:24).  Note that he did not say, “I am spirit,” or “God is flesh.”  By placing “God” in the category of “spirit,” when he himself is clearly a man of flesh and blood, Jesus effectively excluded any possibility that he was God.  If God, being spirit, can incarnate himself as a man, then the clear scriptural distinction between flesh and blood disintegrates. The assertion that Jesus was God in human flesh nullifies the absolute necessity of Christ's obedience, because, as God, no temptation he faced would have been genuine.  That includes if Jesus was only “half” tempted in his “human” nature.  I do not have the benefit of a “divine” side and a “human” side – neither did Jesus.  Because clearly, the divine side would dominate. Another unsolvable problem caused by the “incarnation” is that it destroys the plan that God established of a first Adam and a last Adam.  Romans 5:12-19 clearly defines a critical, logical parallel between Adam and Jesus Christ in the context of the redemption of mankind.  A major consequence of the doctrine that God became man is that it destroys this key parallel, for Adam is hardly comparable to an eternally pre-existent being.  Take a look at this stark contrast between Adam and Jesus: Two Adams Two created beings Two sons of God Two men Two gardens Two temptations Two choices Two attitudes Two decisions Two results Two races Again, food for thought.  More later…

Not3in1

Let me make a bold statement here. I believe that to deny Jesus the creator the Glory and honour due his name as One with the Father has done more harm to the body of Christ than any.

I will go one step further, If Jesus was just a thought and a plan then why does it say..

“All Things were made by him and for him and without him nothing was made that was made.”

You are reinventing the scriptures. For none of the translators over 500 scholars interprets Jn 1:1-3 as you do.

So if you dont mind could you show me your credentials as a Hebrew and Greek scholar or some credible evidence that your interpretation is true.

Untill then I will believe what is written!

Jn 1:1-4
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 The same was in the beginning with God.
3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

[TimothyVI]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Mar. 19 2007,23:13)

Quote (TimothyVI @ Mar. 19 2007,22:21) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Mar. 19 2007,19:41) TimothyVI You forgot to mention the part where he was in the form of God and thought it not Robbery to be equal to God. Hi WorshippingJesus, I didn't foget. It was in one of my posts, you just must have missed it. That scripture has been translated differently in other versions of the bible. Other versions say that being in the form of God was not even something that Jesus wanted to grasp. Phl 2:6   who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped,   Tim My point is he was in the Form of God!

HI WorshippingJesus,

Yes.

Tim

[Author]

Posts