- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Hi,
Malcolm seems to accept that Jesus Christ was a Son of God, but that “Son of Man” is only a title.
What do others think?Hi,
It hinges on whether Mary is the true mother of Jesus and whether or not he was conceived in her just as John was conceived in Elizabeth, in my view.If so he is truly Son of Man. If not is scripture not truth?
If Jesus says he is Son of man, without qualification as only being a title, should we not believe him? Why is it offensive to say he was truly one of us? Scripture says he was like to us in all ways except sin.
Is it a residue of the old 'God the Son' falsehood where some said God had to die for us, a greater being for the lesser beings, men?
Hi,
The sacrificial lamb is taken from among the flock. He is fully representative of the flock as is the first fruits fully representative of the crop. The scapegoat must be a true goat. The High Priest is a normal man like any other.
Heb 9.13f
” For if the blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkling those who have been defiled sanctify for the cleansing of the flesh , how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself WITHOUT BLEMISH, cleanse your conscience from dead worls to serve the living God”So was his being without blemish according to his conception or birth, or according to him never having sinned?
I think the second.Hi, Matt 4.10
“Begone Satan !For it is written
'You shall worship the Lord your God and serve Him only'
Then the devil left him..”
Is this the victory over sin achieved by Jesus by the Word of God?Hi,
Nobody is recorded as addressing Jesus as “Son of man”.
He is called the “son of God” and “son of David”
So how could it be a title?He, however, very frequently referred to himself as “son of Man”.
We would have said “I”where he used the term.Why did he do so?
Was he not reinforcing to men that he was truly one of them, a representative from their own stock, one that they could follow?Hi ,
“Son of Man ” occurs often in the OT, nearly 100 times in Ezekiel alone.
Since “Adam” and “Man” are the same Hebrew word could, or should, some of them be translated
“Son of Adam” ?Hi,
So looking at “son of Man”in the OT.
Every time Ezekiel is called “Son of Man,” it is “adam” [120]
There are many Hebrew options for “man “,
including “enosh” [582]
and “enash [606],
plus
[2670],[376],[2145],[1397],[970],[7916],[2795],[5288],[1368],[1419],[2896a][1121].[6223],[
2491a],[1800b],[2205], [3532],[6260],[8163b]Psalm 8.4
“What is man [582] that Thou dost…and the son of man[120]that Thou dost..”Ps 144..3
“O Lord. what is man [120] that thou dost…Or the son of man[582]that Thou dost..”A complete reversal!
Dan 7.13
“One like a son of man [606] was coming..”Dan 8.17
“”Son of Man [120], understand that the…”Certainly those with “son of man using ” 120 “adam”, may be clearer if translated as Adam. After all what is the difference between a man and A son of man? All men are sons of men except Adam and it may relieve the repetitious aspect? We have one word that has at least 22 possible forms in Hebrew. What knowledge are we losing here?
What do others think?
Am I stepping out of translational idiom here?You cannot have or rightfully hold a title unless the office and role that the title pertains to actually applies to you. You could deceitfully hold a title in an attempt to gain credibility, as an imposter and an impersonator, but you would not be rightfully holding that title in this case.
You cannot hold the title father unless you are actually also a father in role and office, either by adoption of a child or by the begetting of a child.
You cannot have the title son unless you actually are a son, once again either by legal adoption or as a result of your father and mother begetting you.
You couldn't rightfully hold the title of chief architect if you are not actually the one chiefly responsible for the architecture of whatever it is you are chief architect of. The title given, if rightfully held, implies a certain aptitude and ability to competently fulfill the office and role that is associated with that title.
In the example of the title father, the implication is that the person holding this title is at least responsible for the act of that son becoming a son, be it by adoption or by natural birth. If that title is elaborated upon 'natural father' then the qualification required for this to hold true is that the one claiming to be the father was responsible for begetting that son, by means of a physical union with a woman.
Another example of a modified title might be say 'father of the Bauhaus movement', in this example the meaning of father is now modified to mean, the begetter of children in the sense of being responsible for the inspiration of a generation of people who collectively form what is termed the Bauhaus movement.So when exploring titles such as those held by Messiah: Son of Man, Son of God, Son of David – we need to also be aware that Jesus Christ was not just Son of God by tltle but also by fact. He was OF God, His origins were Divine.
The title Son of Man – denotes more than just any normal man and therefore every single man. Not all who bear the title man can bear the title son of man. Now this is a statement that is appalling to many, abhorrent to those who hold to the traditional understanding that Son of Man is simply another way of saying man. But it does not make sense for it to mean this. The use of the title throughout the entire scriptures shows beyond a doubt that a distinction is made between man and son of man. So that, although many statements made concerning man can also be made as true concerning son of man. Equally as true is the fact that many statements made concerning son of man are not true of man in general.
NUMBERS 23:19
God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?This is the very first time this title “Son of Man” is used in the bible. From it we learn that God is not a man, John 4:24 in fact confirms this telling us God is a Spirit. We also learn that as a result of God not being a man – He therefore does not lie – indeed cannot lie as He is the Spirit of Truth. Also we learn that the Son of Man is not a man either, and therefore needs not to repent. Now many apply this exclusively to Jesus as the Son of Man, but in fact it applies equally well to anyone who is appointed a prophet by God. They are a prophet from birth, before any repentance or even knowledge of the need for such. And also a prophet who speaks in the power (authority) of his office does not need to repent of what they say, as Son of Man, for it is not them that speaks but God.
So the very first scripture to mention this term “Son of Man” boldly declares to us that the man who holds that office son of man, is not a man when in the office of son of man. Yet obviously a prophet is also just a man.
JOB 25:6
How much less man, that is a worm? and the son of man, which is a worm?This fact is brought home in the scripture above which is also the second time the term “Son of Man” is used in the bible. Yet a distinction is made between man and the son of man.
JOB 35:8
Thy wickedness may hurt a man as thou art; and thy righteousness may profit the son of man.Once again this denotes a difference between man and son of man, this form of stating a condition relative to man and then son of man is consistent in many instances of this term.
So as we have said previously, the term Son of Man as a title refers to not just a man, although it is true that a man must be present for the office of prophet to operate through the one bearing the title son of man.
It refers to God in man, to the Divine office of prophecy which is nothing less than God speaking through a man. When we understand this important fact, then every instance of the title in the old testament fits and makes sense relative to this truth.
If we are to hold the opinion that son of man is just a fancy way of saying man then we run into problems beginning with the very first instance of the term.
For if God is not a man and the son of man is not a man as the verse in Numbers clearly states then this directly contradicts this definition of the term.
So in concluding this exhaustive look at the use of the term son of man in the old testament we restate the fact that one who bears the title Son of Man is of necessity a man, and as such subject to all the limitations of a mortal man, yet the office of prophet which is indicated by the title Son of Man is more than a man, it is God in a man. Jesus was a man as we are, yet if he was just a man as we are and no more then he could not have also been the means by which God is our Savior.When examining the title of Son of God on the other hand we find that there is also a very real application to an actual son, an offspring in the truest sense of the word. For God says of this son 'you are My Son and today I have begotten you!' Letting us know that the Son of God is begotten of God, even as any son of God is. This gives us a dual usage to the term son of god, it can be referring to the person or it can be referring to an office of the person – namely priesthood. And truly there can be no son of god priestly office if the he is not God's begotten son, God's life through the lifestream of a progeny.
Challenge: to those who claim Son of Man is not a title that refers to a prophet. Show me one place where it is used to refer to a person who is not a prophet!
The fact is that there is no specific instance of any person being referred to as 'son of man', who was not a prophet.
Also all of the non-specific usages of the term are in conjunction with a similar statement concerning man or a man, such as 'what is man … and what is the son of man…'.
This man – son of man couplet is consistent throughout all.
Taken with the fact that the first instance of the term serves extremely well in identifying the son of man as NOT A MAN that he should repent, showing he is more than a man, but is God in a man – in other words the office of prophet.
Then it is very clear that the biblical evidence is in.
Why should we therefore consider what the scholars declare by knowledge of language to be the definition of this term – when it contradicts both the biblical definition of the term and also the biblical usage.
To do so is to refuse the meaning revealed by God in His Word in favor of the wisdom of men.Of course it goes without saying that this is in my humble opinion…
Hi Malcolm,
So to test your words
1 The,a, _
2 son
3 of
4 man1 Only Christ is called “The” Son of Man in the New Testament.
Acts 7.56 Stephen said
“Behold I see the heavens opened up and THE Son of Man standing at the right hand of God”
states that it is Jesus he saw.If it had said “a Son of man” the meaning would have been entirely different. Compare Dan 7 but there we know it is Jesus because no other men are in heaven.
In the OT it is a different kettle of fish and in my view we should be wary of assuming the term as it appears in Job,Jer,Ps as relating to Jesus.
Looking at some you have quoted only KJV and ASV translate;
Numbers 23.19 as “The son of man” .All the others I think, including the new KJV ,say “a son of man”. So does it mean Jesus ? I do not think so.
Job 35.8 As far as I can see none translate it as “the son of Man” so no doubt it does not refer to Jesus.
Job 25.6 All but NIV say “The” son of man. Given the context I doubt if it refers to Jesus as he would be called a worm.
2 Son. Are all prophets sons of men? No.
Joel 2.28 and Acts 2.17
“..and your sons and your DAUGHTERS shall prophesy.
Acts 21.9
“..virgin DAUGHTERS who were prophetesses..”Are all sons of men Prophets. No.
We are all sons of men as sons of Adam.
I believe Jesus is also a son of Adam, but your view is that he is a new creation, and defined as a son of man by scripture and that too is a valid view.
Angels to are even described as men in the bible.
The two witnesses of Rev 11 prophesy but are not shown to necesarily be men. NIV translates them as men but without valid scriptural cause.3 OF
Means “from” or “derived from”. In my view to be a son of man one needs to be from the dust and the seed of Adam. we disagree.4 MAN as above
Likewise we are all sons of God in a way through Adam but not all men are priests.
Quote Only Christ is called “The” Son of Man in the New Testament.
Acts 7.56 Stephen said
“Behold I see the heavens opened up and THE Son of Man standing at the right hand of God”
states that it is Jesus he saw.If it had said “a Son of man” the meaning would have been entirely different. Compare Dan 7 but there we know it is Jesus because no other men are in heaven.
Of course it was THE Son of Man, he was THAT prophet – the one Moses spoke of – the one spoken of in Daniel, so of course THE Son of Man identifies that one the Messiah.
Quote 2 Son. Are all prophets sons of men? No.
Joel 2.28 and Acts 2.17
“..and your sons and your DAUGHTERS shall prophesy.
Acts 21.9
“..virgin DAUGHTERS who were prophetesses..”We are also called kings and priests in the NT does that apply to male and female? or just male? We are designated the Bride of Christ (male and female) and told there is neither male or female, Jew or Greek in this Kingdom of which we are a part.
1 Cor 14 also shows that the use of the word prophecy in the new testament is not the same as the traditional sense of a prophet in the OT.
Verse 3 tells us that he that prophesies speaks to edify, exhort and comfort.
1 Cor 14:27-32 also applies the term prophet to one who speaks in an unknown tongue, qualifying that there must be an interpreter for the gift to be of any effect.
So the term prophet as translated in the NT is rather loose. Apparently referring to preachers and those with the gift of speaking in tongues.Quote Are all sons of men Prophets. No.
We are all sons of men as sons of Adam.Are we Nick? show me where it says we are ALL sons of men the the Bible, or for that matter where that term is applied personally to anyone who was not a prophet.
Quote In the OT it is a different kettle of fish and in my view we should be wary of assuming the term as it appears in Job,Jer,Ps as relating to Jesus. It may or may not refer to Jesus, it matters not as the testimony that Jesus gave is the spirit of prophecy.(Rev 19:10) So it was God working in all.(Heb 1:1)
Quote Likewise we are all sons of God in a way through Adam but not all men are priests. I would beg to differ on that one Nick, potentially some are sons of god, but not all.
Many are sons of perdition, sons of the evil one, of their father the Devil.Hi Malcolm,
Matt 24.29f
“But immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give it's light, and the stars will fall from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds with power and great glory”4592 Sign;semeion=Sign, signs, miracle,distinguishing mark.
What signs did Jesus talk about? the sign of Jonah. Can't see how that would fit unless it relates to the resurrection, but that is spoken of later in the verse.
Is it to do the a sign in the heavens as spoken of in Rev 12.1,3 and 15.1?
Gen 1.14
“Then God said
'Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night, and let them be for SIGNS and for seasons and for days and years”
There was such a sign in the heavens when the Son of God was born, a star which only the pagan astrologers noted. Perhaps this star or one related to his name in the heavens may produce again such a sign . Could it relate to it? I do not know. Who can help?Hi Malcolm,
In response to your question.
We are all chldren of Adam.
Lk 3.38
“…the son of Enosh, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God”In Athens Paul said to the pagan crowd in Acts 17.28
“for in Him we live and move and exist, as even some of your poets have said
'For we also are His children'
Being then the children of God, we ought not to think that the Divine Nature is like gold or silver or stone..”Hi Malcolm,
1Cor 14.27 tells of those who speak in tongues. They are not prophets as the gifts are separate and the speaking of prophets in the assembly is spoken of in v 29.
1Cor 14.13
Now I wish that you all spoke in tongues, but veven more that you would prophesy; and gretaer is the one who prophesies that one who speaks in tongues..”v13f”therefore let one who speaks in a tongue pray that he may interpret…I desire to speak 5 words with my mind ..that 10,000 words ina tongue”
Hi Malcolm,
Rev 19.10
“..for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy”
Surely this means that all the word of God is from the Spirit of Christ. He is the bread of life.
1Peter 1.10
“As to this salvation, the prophets who prophesied of the grace that would come to you made careful searches and enquiries, seeking to know what person or time the Spirit of Christ within them was indicating as He predicted the sufferings of Christ and the glories to follow.”Likewise 2 Peter 1.20f and 1Cor 10.4
The words of the prophets always line up with the Word of God and vice versa.
Quote In response to your question.
We are all chldren of Adam.
Lk 3.38
“…the son of Enosh, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God”
In Athens Paul said to the pagan crowd in Acts 17.28
“for in Him we live and move and exist, as even some of your poets have said
'For we also are His children'
Being then the children of God, we ought not to think that the Divine Nature is like gold or silver or stone..”EPHESIANS 2:2
Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:
Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.Children of the disobedient one (Satan – the apposer)
We were once also Children of wrath – how? By nature – by the natural birth
But now we are children of His Spirit by the rebirth.EPHESIANS 5:6
Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience.How can we be the children OF disobedience and the children of God? Jesus tells us that a wicked and perverted generation seeks a sign and will receive none but the sign of Jonah.
He tells of how the Queen of the south shall rise up and judge that generation that rejected him. Yet we are also told that the believer is not judged, has passed from judgment, and from death into life and liberty.
What is a generation? – in one sense of the word it is a lineage…MATTHEW 3:7
But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?John the Baptist is calling them serpent seed, and Jesus agreed with him in this.
MATTHEW 12:34
O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.In fact Jesus was quite strong in his teaching of this fact.
JOHN 8:39-41
They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham.
But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, which I have heard of God: this did not Abraham.
Ye do the deeds of your father. Then said they to him, We be not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God.Now really, we cannot say that all men are sons of god, when Jesus says otherwise here. So when Paul says to those Greeks on Mars hill 'we are all his offspring' he is quoting their poets, and assuming the best for his listeners.
But these men here fully understood what Jesus was implying, they responded defensively by saying we were not born of fornication. Now what does that mean? We are of God, not of fornication….JOHN 8:44
Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.If we are going to believe that Satan is not just a symbol or a concept but an actual being – then we must also believe what is said of this being.
I JOHN 3:12
Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother. And wherefore slew he him? Because his own works were evil, and his brother's righteous.Who is 'that wicked one' spoken of here? Adam? Hardly – how can the bible call Adam the son of God in one place and that wicked one in another. For if Adam is that wicked one then he is the Devil, or at least his son.
MATTHEW 13:19
When any one heareth the word of the kingdom, and understandeth it not, then cometh the wicked one, and catcheth away that which was sown in his heart. This is he which received seed by the way side.I JOHN 5:18
We know that whosoever is born of God sinneth not; but he that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not.Surely the wicked one spoken of here is not Adam but the Devil.
MATTHEW 13:38
The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one;This wicked one has children, Cain was one, Judas was one, the Pharisees were also of this generation.
We are all children of Adam? Are we? – I hope WE are – but are all men children of Adam? Cain's lineage is not even counted with Adam, but is separate entirely – why?
Disinheritance some might say
Because he murdered his brother (Judges 9:24) would disprove this
Abimelech was still recorded in the regular lineage.
Esau also lost his inheritance of birthright yet was still recorded as the son of Isaac. Many men in the old testament disgraced their parents yet were still recorded as to parentage without omissions.
The OT is unique as a historical record in that it does not omit the unfavorable details of its writers people.
Nowhere does it say that Cain was the son of Adam. Why?Quote Rev 19.10
“..for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy”
Surely this means that all the word of God is from the Spirit of Christ. He is the bread of life.
1Peter 1.10
“As to this salvation, the prophets who prophesied of the grace that would come to you made careful searches and enquiries, seeking to know what person or time the Spirit of Christ within them was indicating as He predicted the sufferings of Christ and the glories to follow.”
Likewise 2 Peter 1.20f and 1Cor 10.4
The words of the prophets always line up with the Word of God and vice versa.Amen to that.
Quote 1Cor 14.27 tells of those who speak in tongues. They are not prophets as the gifts are separate and the speaking of prophets in the assembly is spoken of in v 29.
1Cor 14.13
Now I wish that you all spoke in tongues, but even more that you would prophesy; and greater is the one who prophesies that one who speaks in tongues..”
v13f”therefore let one who speaks in a tongue pray that he may interpret…I desire to speak 5 words with my mind ..than 10,000 words in a tongue”You are right Nick Heb 1:1 explains that God operated to declare His Word in the past primarily in prophets (insomuch as the voice of God was heard this way) in these last days in His Son – by whom we have redemption and now are called his body.
I CORINTHIANS 12:28
And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.What we are looking at here is a gift of prophecy which is different from an OT prophet.
A gift of prophecy can be on one member one time and on another next time, and it has to be judged and confirmed to be of the right spirit.
The Greek word used for prophet means an interpretor of oracles or hidden things.
As Paul declared we preach the hidden mysteries of God.
The NT usage of the word here denotes a ministry somewhat different from that of the OT prophets.Paul had a lot of trouble with the Church at Corinth and was constantly having to correct them. In this case in the matter of the gifts of speaking in tongues and prophecy. It appears that history repeats itself from time to time. For Paul here spends a lot of time to sort out this matter of the gift of tongues. Firstly placing it as the least of the ministries that God had set in the Church.
In this century there was a similar problem arising, where many of the Oneness Pentecostal movement wrote into their doctrine that to speak in tongues was the initial evidence of the holy spirit baptism – a grave error indeed.I CORINTHIANS 14:1-5
Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy.
For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.
But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort.
He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.
I would that ye all spake with tongues, but rather that ye prophesied: for greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying.– Unknown tongues edify the speaker only
– Prophecy edifies the hearers also
– Paul's desire was that all spoke in tongues, but rather that all prophesied.
Reason : prophecy is greater because it edifies all.
Exception : if the one speaking in tongues interprets the words he speaks so all are edified.
I CORINTHIANS 14:6
Now, brethren, if I come unto you speaking with tongues, what shall I profit you, except I shall speak to you either by revelation, or by knowledge, or by prophesying, or by doctrine?How are they going to speak to the Church by revelation or knowledge or prophesying when speaking in tongues? If they interpret it afterwards.
So revelation, knowledge and prophecy can all come by speaking in tongues as long as the speaker or another interprets afterwards.I CORINTHIANS 14:13
Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret.So when unknown tongues are spoken they are of no use unless one interprets the words.
I CORINTHIANS 14:21
In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.
Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.So Paul is dealing with the tongues of other lips, as was seen on the day of Pentecost in the book of Acts chapter 2, when the Holy Spirit fell upon the believers gathered in the upper room and they went out into the street speaking in the tongues of other lips. The people who had gathered there from many places all understood them in their own tongues. And Peter stood up and interpreted this to be Joel 2:28.
Also we have record of prophets of the more traditional order of the OT such as Agabus, yet we do not have any recorded books of these prophet's writings, as in the OT.
Hi Malcolm,
Acts is scripture and Paul was filled with the Spirit of Christ,and every one of his written words are as if they came out of the mouth of Jesus Christ.So according to the flesh all men are sons of God. But the flesh is condemned and we only have a few years to find the waters flowing up to salvation before the cord breaks and the bucket falls to the bottom of the well[Eccl]
The problem with the Pharisees and all men is the inside of the vessel, not the flesh. That is why Peter said baptism was not a washing of dirt from the body but the pledge to God from a cleansed conscience. Sin dwelled within the cup. Sin and Satan, ruled men from within. They naturally followed Satan, the god of this world, and thus he was their true father.
Paul is a magnificent example of how to use situations to win as many for Christ. He reaped a small harvest in Athens as well.
Quote Acts is scripture and Paul was filled with the Spirit of Christ,and every one of his written words are as if they came out of the mouth of Jesus Christ. So are the words that declare that there are children of the wicked one, is God the wicked one?
Quote So according to the flesh all men are sons of God. According to the flesh? I thought that according to the flesh we are condemned. Is the flesh predestinated?
I PETER 1:8-9
Whom having not seen, ye love; in whom, though now ye see him not, yet believing, ye rejoice with joy unspeakable and full of glory:
Receiving the end of your faith, even the salvation of your souls.Having received the end of our faith, the salvation of our flesh? – SOUL
We receive the earnest of our salvation – the salvation of our souls by His Spirit – sealed by the Holy Spirit baptism.EPHESIANS 1:13-14
In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,
Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory.The flesh is dead because of sin but the spirit is life, so if the spirit is life and the body is dead, what about the soul? It is saved – how? By the Spirit. I read that the natural man (flesh) is enmity with God. That in me that is in my flesh is no good thing.
Quote But the flesh is condemned and we only have a few years to find the waters flowing up to salvation before the cord breaks and the bucket falls to the bottom of the well[Eccl] We will receive a fully restored body at the day of redemption, but for now we receive the earnest, the down-payment which is the salvation of our souls, that part that is a son of God. The place where the Word of God can find its resting place, and we find an anchor within the veil. Jesus said of the religious leaders and teachers in his day, 'you have no place in you for the word of God'. They had no soul predestinated of God, they were OF their father the wicked one.
Quote The problem with the Pharisees and all men is the inside of the vessel, not the flesh. That is why Peter said baptism was not a washing of dirt from the body but the pledge to God from a cleansed conscience. Sin dwelled within the cup. Sin and Satan, ruled men from within. They naturally followed Satan, the god of this world, and thus he was their true father. The flesh is already condemned because of the transgression in Eden. The earth was cursed for Adam's sake. So you are right the issue is the inside of the cup. The soul brought forth in this fallen flesh is alienated from God, cut off by the sinful flesh nature. That is why a nature change is required on the inside to restore that soul from a fallen condition to a redeemed soul, seed of God.
But not all men have such a redeemable soul, not all are the children of the Kingdom. Many are the children of the wicked one.ROMANS 8:28-30
And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.
For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.
Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.Quote Sin and Satan, ruled men from within. They naturally followed Satan, the god of this world, and thus he was their true father. Our TRUE father – that is a big statement – if Satan is our true father then God can have no part in us.
At best Satan is our god, our dungeon keeper, our first husband – before our salvation.EPHESIANS 2:2
Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:
Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.This says we were children of wrath by our flesh nature, not that we were the children of the disobedient one. We were disobedient children by a fallen nature. Not children OF the disobedient one.
II PETER 2:12-14
But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption;
And shall receive the reward of unrighteousness, as they that count it pleasure to riot in the day time. Spots they are and blemishes, sporting themselves with their own deceivings while they feast with you;
Having eyes full of adultery, and that cannot cease from sin; beguiling unstable souls: an heart they have exercised with covetous practices; cursed children:Made to be taken and destroyed, who made them? What for? These are the children of the curse, the children of the wicked one.
God is not willing that any perish but that all might be saved, however not all are willing to be saved, not all want to receive the free gift of grace, believe it and be saved. Why are they not willing? There is no place in them for his word.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
