The Trinity Doctrine

Participant

To t8,

The ‘I AM’ refers to the eternal Spirit God. Jesus in turn was refering to the indwelling Spirit within Himself, not His humanity.

Again, I feel I must make this most vital point clear:

With regards to scripture related to Jesus having the Divine attributes and prerogatives eg: creator, pre-existence, etc; THIS IS THE SPIRIT OF GOD INDWELLING HIM, NOT HIS HUMANITY!

Do not forget that there is an inexplicable ‘Dual-Nature’ to Jesus.

Always keep this in mind, and you will find that all scripture, regarding Jesus, will harmonize totally, whether OT or NT.

(Edited by GJG at 5:23 am on Aug. 12, 2003)

August 12, 2003 at 10:13 am#15566

Participant

So if Jesus was referring to God's Spirit and not his humanity, then who or what is Jesus in your opinion? He is obviously not that Eternal Spirit and the flesh is his humanity.

What is the his part?

August 12, 2003 at 10:50 am#15585

Participant

Quote

Quote: from t8 on 5:13 am on Aug. 12, 2003
So if Jesus was referring to God’s Spirit and not his humanity, then who or what is Jesus in your opinion? He is obviously not that Eternal Spirit and the flesh is <b>his</b> humanity.

What is the <b>his</b> part?

To t8,

The purpose of the Sonship was as follows:

– That He might become our redeemer: The necessity of the atonement demanded that there be a sinless sacrifice,

Heb2:14 Since the children have flesh and blood, He too shared in their humanity so that by His death He might destroy him who holds the power of death-that is, the devil.

– That He might become our mediator: Our mediator knows our weaknesses through His omniscience, and also by way of actual experience,

Heb4:15 For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympothize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are-yet was without sin

– That He might become our King: In order to have a kingdom, there must be a King. He reigns now in our hearts, but soon He shall come to reign on this earth,

Matt26:64 "Yes, it is as you say," Jesus replied. "But I say to all of you: In the future you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven."

– That He might be our Judge:

Acts17:31 For He has set a day when He will judge the world with justice by the man He has appointed. He has given proof of this to all men by raising Him from the dead.

August 12, 2003 at 11:08 am#15361

Participant

Hi all,

Well done to all regarding the ‘name of God’ posts.:)

My question: With all the information available, both past and present, WHAT ‘ONE NAME’ IS THE NAME OF GOD?

Does God have a personal name?

Please give simple reasoning, both scriptural & logical.

August 12, 2003 at 2:07 pm#15413

Participant

To GJG,

Sorry what I mean is, not who is Jesus, rather what is he?

If he has the eternal Spirit of God dwelling inside him, then he cannot be that Spirit itself. If he has a body/flesh/humanity clothing him, then he cannot be the body either.

What actually is he according to this view point?

e.g is he also a Spirit, or a soul, or what?

Just not clear about this part of your view.

Thx

August 12, 2003 at 7:45 pm#15641

http://www.focusonthekingdom.org/57.htm

Participant

Hi t8

I previously examined what you believed and so I was aware that you believed in a literal pre-existence of Christ. However, the bible teaches that Jesus was begotten. 'Begotten' does not depict a transition of 'a being' from one form to another! NO. Both Matthew and Luke was describing the BEGINNING/GENESIS of Jesus the Messiah.

As for John 5:30 … well John was SENT FROM GOD [John 1:6] yet we know that he definitely did NOT preexist in heaven or elsewhere, nor did he come from heaven. To be SENT FROM GOD is to be commissioned by Him. There is no need to think of 'literal pre-existence' in this context.
Likewise, Jeremiah was foreordained & commissioned 'a prophet' before he was even conceived! Jere 1:5. Yet he never literally pre-existed, however, he was foreordained in the plan and mind of GOD. So it is with Jesus. Like Jeremiah and John, he was commissioned and foreordained! He 'existed' in the plan of GOD in the same sense that Jeremiah did; he was foreordained long before Abraham, hence he was
'forordained before Abraham as the Messiah' … he was henceforth 'before Abraham' – John 8:56.
Yet it wasn't until the fulness of time that he was conceived and came into being.

Most modern day readers get confused about what the 'word' is in John 1:1-4, because they see the word 'him' in John 1:3-4! However, the fact is that the original translator of the scriptures into English, William Tyndale, translated John 1:1-4 as follows

(John 1:1-4) 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 it; and without it was not any thing made that was made. 4 In it was life; and the life was the light of men.

Did you get that? 'word' was NOT capitalised and it is depicted as … an 'it'! That's right?
Tyndale understood that John was NOT talking about another being alongside Almighty GOD; John was talking about GOD's [spoken] word. John was alluding to Genesis 1.
All things came into being via GOD's word. The word of GOD is not a person. IT is … God's word!! GOD said IT and IT came to pass (cp. Psalms 33:6,9; Isa 55:11). In fact the majority of all the English bibles that followed Tyndale, i.e. Coverdale's, Bishop's Bible, the Great Bible, the Geneva Bible, etc all translated John 1:1-4 using it! Hence a 17th century reader of the Bible would NOT have jumped to the erroneous conclusion that Jesus is being spoken of in John 1:1-4; since they would have seen the pronoun it! It is not until verse 14 that the word of GOD was made flesh in the person of Jesus of Nazareth, the Messiah.
GOD's word became flesh.
IT became flesh!

T8, I could try & answer your queries concerning John 1:1, 8:58 & 17:5; however, I believe I have found a writer who does a far better job of articulating what I believe and why I
believe it! His name is Anthony Buzzard.

Here are some articles that I definitely recommend :-

Concerning John 8:58 and whether the 'Son of GOD' preexisted, have a read of this excellent article,
“Gabriel Was Not a Trinitarian: Recovering the Biblical Son of God”
which can be found at

Concerning Preexistence, have look at: The Nature of Preexistence in the New Testament

http://www.mindspring.com/~anthonybuzzard/preexist.htm

For a more in-depth discussion concerning the 'word' & John 1:1 have a look at

John 1:1 Caveat Lector (Reader Beware)

http://www.mindspring.com/~anthonybuzzard/john1.htm

Hope these are of some help to you

Yours In Christ, Adam Pastor

August 12, 2003 at 11:43 pm#15326

Larry Gibbons

Participant

To Adam Pastor:

Thanks for your post. You note that Adon is used some 30 times to refer to Almighty God, citing Joshua 3:13, and four others. Would it be too much trouble to list all 30? I would like to review them. I do not profess to be expert in either Hebrew or Greek but have had to rely on Strong’s. You mention both adon and adoni. Actually, I find Strong’s using not adon but adown, one and the same I believe, but what about adoni? You mention that both are assigned the same number 113, so how do you differentiate between them? Does the latter come from the Masoretic text? If so, can you give me some help on this?
Regarding Psalm 110, it seems to me Adon if referring to Christ could be legitimately capitalized without doing harm to the truth. I see it so in other versions, even the NASV. Even without checking the Greek, this verse to me obviously discerns between the Father and His Son.
I think you will find fascinating the two Hebrew word couplings that are each translated Lord God in the O.T., Adonai Jehovah and Jehovah Elohiym. The latter, capitalized LORD God, is associated in Exodus 3:15, 16 with the way God intended to be remembered to all generations. Israel looked for the promised Messiah; the Church awaits Christ. On the other hand, when capitalized Lord GOD, the father is invariably in view. Isaiah 61:1 illustrates how helpful this can be: “The Spirit of the Lord GOD [the Father] is upon Me, Because the LORD has anointed Me [obviously the Son] To preach good tidings to the poor, he very scripture Jesus used to announce the beginning of his ministry at Nazareth.
Incidentally, I visited your webpage referenced in your post; it’s interesting that you used the same theme in Front Page that I chose for the subweb of my website:
http://thehighwaytoheaven.com
In our own distinctive ways we seem to be choosing a very similar approach.
I pray God blesses this forum to help us all to expose false doctrine and to arrive at a more accurate understanding of John 17:3 with all the scripture that attests to that.

I just happened to see your last post regarding how the word (no capital W) was not a him but an it. You expressed this very effectively and clearly, and I want to thank you. I looked at what Buzzard had to say and can only give him high marks. This is interesting inasmuch as I disagree strongly with his conclusions in another area. I am always reminded of the Lord’s injunction to “Prove all things and hold fast to what is good.”

August 13, 2003 at 1:55 am#15457

http://www.mindspring.com/~anthonybuzzard/adonai.htm

Participant

To Larry Gibbons:

YOU: You note that Adon is used some 30 times to refer to Almighty God, citing Joshua 3:13, and four others. Would it be too much trouble to list all 30? I would like to review them.

ME: I rather not! I think this word occurs over 200 times (Strong’s search declares that the word numbered 113, occurs 331 times, i.e. both adon & adoni)

It would be a case of going through each occurrence, seeing where it is translate case-sensitively ‘Lord’ and checking the context, whether it is indeed a ref. to GOD!

Sorry! I’ll check to see if it is recorded in any of my books/refs. I believe I quote the number 30 from a source by Anthony Buzzard . You could try emailing him to see if he has the 30 written down, [email protected].
[If he does, could you please send me a copy! 🙂 Please!]
Hope this helps!

YOU: Actually, I find Strong’s using not adon but adown, one and the same I believe, but what about adoni? You mention that both are assigned the same number 113, so how do you differentiate between them? Does the latter come from the Masoretic text? If so, can you give me some help on this?

Yep, Adown=Adon

Adon & Adoni are from the Masoretic text. In fact our entire Old Testament is based upon the Masoretic text.

Adoni is given a distinctive suffix from Adonai, for the apparent purpose of differentiating between refs. to man and refs. to Deity.

I am no Hebrew scholar, however, I can forward to you some articles which go into this in greater detail.

http://www.mindspring.com/~anthonybuzzard/adoni.htm

http://www.mindspring.com/~anthonybuzzard/BD86.htm

ME: Regarding Psalm 110, it seems to me Adon if referring to Christ could be legitimately capitalized without doing harm to the truth.

YOU: Sadly my brother, this is where great harm is done in regards to ‘our english’ bibles.

You see, generally most bible readers know that when you see the word ‘Lord’ in that letter-case, it means ADONAI, the title given solely to Almighty GOD. Hence, when they read Psalms 110:1, they read it as if it is saying (Psa 110:1) The LORD said unto my Adonai …

They immediately jump to the conclusion that ‘Lord’ = ‘Adonai’; and since it is speaking of Jesus, and Adonai is solely used in regards to DEITY; they therefore (erroneously) conclude that Jesus must be ‘GOD THE SON’, the 2nd person of a so-called trinity!!

If you do a search right now on the internet using Psalms 110:1, you will come across many websites that assume that the second word ‘Lord’ in Psalms 110:1 is Adonai, thus Jesus is Almighty GOD!

Most people do not know Hebrew, and why should they? They have a bible. They trust that the translators have done the best job! So in all sincerity, they assume that Jesus must be GOD, because he is called ‘Lord’ in Psalms 110:1, and Lord they assume is Adonai!

And so the error continues to be propagated.
(You find the same error in many bible commentaries and study notes)

Other bibles such as RV, RSV, NRSV, etc have corrected this error, since realising that the Hebrew word is ‘adoni’ and NOT ‘adonai’; however, the majority have not done this, hence, the error is propagated.

YOU: I visited your webpage referenced in your post; it’s interesting that you used the same theme in Front Page that I chose for the subweb of my website:
http://thehighwaytoheaven.com

Please note: http://www.planetkc.com/stm/lord,_lord,_lord.htm
is not my website. Its Phil Maxwell and Eric!
Over 3 years ago, I wrote that article concerning "LORD, Lord, lord" & posted it on their discussion board. He liked it and asked if it could be placed on his website. I therefore like to refer people to that website, in order for people of like precious faith, can network together.
Oh! I am saying that to say it was Phil that did the design, not me! You and him have a similar approach to ‘art’ 🙂

Adam Pastor

August 13, 2003 at 4:33 am#15474

Larry Gibbons

Participant

T8, concerning your post relating to the supposed pre-existence of Christ, I think you state the question well when you ask in what form did the word exist. I think Pastor Adam has answered this in the same respect that I would, and his link to the Anthony Buzzard webpage is well worth time reading.

Proverbs chapter 8 that personifies wisdom is significant, I believe. Rather than equating this with Christ, I’m compelled to think it really speaks of God’s word in John 1, that is, rather than referring only to Christ, it points us to God who is the eternal and original source of all wisdom. If Christ were somehow pre-existent as the word, it must be because he was in God’s thought and plan for His creation from the beginning. Otherwise, let me ask in what form Christ could have pre-existed as the word. We both agree he did not exist as God. Then, was he some kind of spirit or perhaps an angel? Ephesians 4:4 rules out the spirit possibility, and I must ask how an angel could become a man any more than God could.

Allow me once more to quote from an article on the subweb of my website that looks at John 1:1-4 in a new light. I must credit a certain John Bland who has called attention to how the Trinitarian disposition of the translators affected how this passage is rendered in our Bibles.

The definitions of the original Greek words are enlightening. We make no claim to be linguists or expert in Greek, although Bland appears to be knowledgeable, so we encourage you to check Strong’s dictionary for the meanings in full, but for now we present them briefly as best we understand:

logos: According to Strong’s Dictionary: “Something said (including the thought); by implication, a topic (subject or discourse).”
Since this is so, might not the Word (logos) be God’s total message or plan of redemption as revealed from Genesis to Revelation? Read Proverbs 8 where the mindset of God is personified as wisdom.

The word Logos is used in a wide variety of ways, so we do well to study its meaning. First, the phrase, "Word of God," appears repeatedly in the KJV throughout the New Testament, almost always translated from the words, "logos" and "theos." It is used only four times in the Old Testament, first in I Samuel 9:27 where the prophet requested Saul to, "stand thou still a while, that I may shew thee the word of God." We might ask if he presented the gospel or more specific instructions for the king.

However, most often (over 400 times), in the Old Testament, we see God making His will known to the prophets and others by the phrase, "thus saith the LORD." By such expressions, God can be seen unfolding His will progressively in accord with Hebrews 1:1, "God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets. has in these last days spoken to us by His Son," This being true, when we read in John 1:1, "In the beginning was the Word," should we not be exceedingly careful about what is meant? Note that it is not until John 1:14 that we read, "the Word [Logos] became flesh," embodying through the life of Christ the full expression of God’s plan and message.

pros: “A preposition of direction; forward to, i.e. toward”
As opposed to “pros” the Greek word “meta” would more accurately convey the meaning of the word with generally understood as “being along side of.” Instead, “pros” carries the idea of “with regard to” or “pertaining to.”

dia: “Denoting the channel of an act; through”
Many times this word, even when applying to Christ, is rendered “through” rather than “by”; it seems strange that is isn’t so translated here.

ginomai: “To cause to be; to become (come into being);…to come to pass”
Appearing four times in verse 3, it is translated as “made” rather than simply to come into existence through Christ, who the word “dia” implies was the channel God used.

If we free ourselves from preconceptions and keep these definitions in mind together with problems the translators faced in dealing with the manuscripts a second look at the passage is quite enlightening. We begin to understand why certain words were capitalized. We see how the use of pronouns appropriate to the gender of the subject, the use or non-use of the definite article depended on the translators’ Trinitarian presumptions. With this in mind and endeavoring to obey the rules of grammar, as well as the importance of context, John 1:1-4 can very legitimately be as follows:

John 1:1 In the beginning was the plan, and the plan was with regard to God, and the plan was God [that is, the plan originated with God, was about Him, and was consummated in Him.]

2 The same was in the beginning with regard to God.

3 All things came to pass through it; and without it not any thing came to pass that came into being.

4 In it was life; and the life was the light of men.

What a change a few words can make by taking them at face value without bias! We can see the passage is in harmony with God’s foreordained will and purpose to secure our redemption and glorify His name. Before the heavens and the earth were created, He decreed every step in how He would progressively reveal Himself from Genesis through Revelation, from Eden through the Millennium to the Day of God. Here we see the relevance of His words in Isaiah 46:10 ”Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure.”

T8, I hope this is helpful.

August 13, 2003 at 10:34 am#15327

Participant

Quote

Quote: from t8 on 9:07 am on Aug. 12, 2003
To GJG,

Sorry what I mean is, not who is Jesus, rather what is he?

If he has the eternal Spirit of God dwelling inside him, then he cannot be that Spirit itself. If he has a body/flesh/humanity clothing him, then he cannot be the body either.

What actually is he according to this view point?

e.g is he also a Spirit, or a soul, or what?

Just not clear about this part of your view.

Thx

Thx 4 ur reply t8,

Interesting question!

The flesh of Jesus was made of the same created substance that Adam was made of. We know Adam became a living being when God placed a soul within that carbon based substance:

Gen 2:7 And God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

Jesus however, due to Divine conception, was a carbon based being that had the Spirit of God dwelling within:

Luke1:35 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.

Creation itself cannot contain God, yet this Divinely conceived created substance, also has the substance of full Deity within:

Col2:8 For in Christ all the fulness of the Deity lives in bodily form.

This is without a doubt, the only time that the invisible eternal substance of God, clothed Himself with substance from His own creation:

Col1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.

This in effect, becomes the only moment in all creation, that God Himself makes the following statement possible:

"God has forordained His own PERSONAL name".

Man’s limited attempts at putting a personal name to the uncreated invisible God becomes self evident when one discovers that there are many ‘titles’ in the Bible which point to only one name:

Acts4:12 Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.

This is confirmed when we understand that although His Spirit (Father) was indeed greater than His flesh, only one name in all creation has been given complete authority over the greatest plan of all; Salvation:

"JESUS"

This is all the evidence we need to know, in order to understand that all previous supposed names, are simply titles to WHAT God is. We now know WHO God is!

Think about it. I am a father, a son, a brother, a cousin etc. All these titles are indeed WHAT I am. However, were I asked "WHO are you?", I would give the very same name as the name I would write on a formal document: birth certificate, cheque etc. Why? Because:

"it is my PERSONAL NAME that holds the authority, nothing else and nothing less!"

The ‘created substance’ that was the flesh of Jesus, was simply required, to achieve a purpose, that the invisible, uncreated, eternal substance, could not:

"To become the embodiment of prophecy"

Larry Gibbons explains Jesus revealing the invisible God extremely well, in a previous post.

This sinless flesh of Jesus has now been Glorified, taken up to heaven to be in His rightful place of authority.

Indeed this Jesus is: Perfect man(fully human) and Very God! This dual-nature of the man Christ Jesus is correct scriptual teaching.

Just my thoughts,

As always, I am open to reproof and correction:)

(Edited by GJG at 4:33 pm on Aug. 14, 2003)

August 13, 2003 at 1:26 pm#15311

Participant

To Larry, Adam Pastor & GJG,

I still have serious doubts that Jesus existed only from his birth as a Man. I want to challenge you with the following argument. My motivation here is to search for the truth and understand it. I am sure you can appreciate that.

If the Word became Flesh, then why would flesh make the Word an actual person/personality? I mean flesh is just a container or a vessel. Is it not?

Flesh doesn't have a will or a mind, it is nothing more than a machine.

I think Jesus is actually the Word itself and he was clothed in flesh and the fact that Jesus is a person with his own will can only mean that the Word has a will.

I know that I have flesh, but I am not that flesh, I am a soul.

Revelation 6:9
When he opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain because of the word of God and the testimony they had maintained.

So John actually saw the souls of men. They probably are visible in the Spiritual Realm. Souls are who we really are.

Matthew 10:28
Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in ####.

Our soul is OUR life.

Mark 8:35
For whoever wants to save his life[ 8:35 The Greek word means either life or soul; also in verse 36.] will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me and for the gospel will save it.

Now as I understand it, a man is made up of a body, soul and spirit.

1 Thessalonians 5:23
May God himself, the God of peace, sanctify you through and through. May your whole spirit, soul and body be kept blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Now my body is the vessel, but my soul is who I am. The spirit is the part of me that gives me life, but it isn't me. The spirit makes my soul live.

Genesis 2:7
And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

Now here are the Greek words for Spirit, Soul and Body.

Spirit=pneuma (Strongs #4151), breath, ghost, mind.
Soul=psuche (Strongs #5590), spirit, breath, (t8 note: where we get the english word physce).
Body=soma (Strongs #4983),body.

The Strongs points out that Spirit and Soul are distinguished by one meaning soul and the other vitality and the fact that the scriptures use both Spirit and Soul in the same sentence shows us that there is a difference.

e.g Hebrews 4:12
For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

The Spirit comes from God.

Ecclesiastes 12:7
Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.

So if Jesus were a man, then he too would have a Spirit Soul and Body, otherwise he wouldn't really be a man in the sense that we are. If Jesus is just the Spirit of God and a body, then perhaps one could argue that Jesus is inferior to us. After all, the Spirit resides in us and we have bodies, but neither of those things are actually us. We are souls.

So Jesus Spirit comes from God, his body came from Mary made possible by the Power of God's Spirit then surely he must have a soul/life of his own, that is neither Spirit or Flesh.

John 5:26
For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself;

Now the above scripture shows us that the Son has life in himself and we have to ask the question, when did he recieve this life? Well I have a list of scriptures that show that Jesus existed before his birth as a man.

Corinthians 10:1-4
1 For I do not want you to be ignorant of the fact, brothers, that our forefathers were all under the cloud and that they all passed through the sea.
2 They were all baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea.
3 They all ate the same spiritual food
4 and drank the same spiritual drink; for they drank from the spiritual rock that accompanied them, and that rock was Christ.
Colossians 1:14-19
14 In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:
15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.
19 For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell;
Note that part “And he is before all things.” It uses the word “he”, not “it”. Other references like “him” and “who” are note worthy.
John 17:1-5
Father, the hour has come; glorify thy Son that the Son may glorify thee, since thou hast given him power over all flesh, to give eternal life to all whom thou hast given him. And this is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent. I glorified thee on earth, having accomplished the work which thou gavest me to do; and now, Father, glorify thou me in thy own presence with the glory which I had with thee before the world was made.
Again, the Strongs defines GLORY as glory = dignity, honour, praise, worship, magnificence (Strongs # 1391 = 'doxa' and Strongs # 1392 for glorify). But this word has it's root in the Greek word 'dokeo' (Strongs # 1380) which means 'to think', be of reputation.
John 8:58
“I tell you the truth,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!”

To me at least John 8:58 is very compelling proof of pre existence and is in harmony with the other scriptures that talk about US and OUR, in the Pentateuch

Now we know that Yahweh said “I am who I am” when he was relating to Moses that he is the existing one and we also know that trintarinas take this verse way out of context, but if Jesus says 'I am', to my mind he is saying that he existed. Of course I do not believe that he has existed for all eternity, rather he came from God before the worlds were made (born) and we came from Christ

Now it is also interesting to note that we also have been born of God and this has nothing to do with our birth on earth. So maybe Jesus was born from God like we are. The new birth.
Born of the Spirit

In Genesis 1:26
And God said, Let us make man in OUR image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

So whoever God was talking to here, pre dated Adam and I think that we all believe that God was talking to his Word. But I cannot understand how one can believe that God was talking to a thought that didn't exist. I personally do not talk to my thoughts, but if I have a thought that I think is from God, then I will converse with God. Conversation by it's very definition is to relate to another. So we can converse only with a person or any other living thing.

For me to accept your view, I would have to conclude that God was speaking to himself, (his own thought) and then at a later date he made that thought come alive by providing a body. But the body is not what gives us life, it is the Spirit of God that gives life and
if the Spirit gives life to the body, then is Jesus the Spirit or the Body? I don't think he is either the Spirit or the Body, or both combined.

So to summarize the above, I think that GJG, Larry and Adam Pastor all hold a similar view that Jesus is a man, made up of God's Spirit and flesh. But I don't think that this fits too well with Jesus becoming a man. That is if man is defined as having a Spirit, Soul and Body.

I also cannot understand how the Spirit of God (God) can inhabit flesh and somehow be a different person to God by reason of the flesh. We would have to assume that it is actually God himself kind of limiting himself in a body, which results in a kind of amnesia too. e.g

Matthew 24:36
But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.

I could maybe accept that God's Spirit gave life to the Word which inhabited a human body, but the scriptures above show that Christ existed before his birth as a man. So my conclusion so far is that God's Spirit gave the Word life, but this happened before his birth as a man.

Below are more challenging scriptures to consider.

John 6:53
Jesus said to them, “I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.

Here we can see that the flesh was OF him. Not actually him.

1 John 4:2
This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God,

Here we can see that Jesus Christ CAME in the flesh. So he could not be that flesh.

2 John 1:7
Many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist.

So it is obviously essential that we believe that he indeed came in the flesh. I just offer a thought here. Would a person who believed that Jesus was the flesh be in danger of not believing that Jesus CAME in the flesh. Same with a person who believed that God came in the flesh (Trinity & Oneness).

To conclude this part I would like to point out the following: the Word/Logos means the spoken word (including the thought), as you have pointed out. But in the Strongs it also says “Divine Expression” and we know full well from Pauls teachings that Jesus is the “Image of God”, which to me sounds like the same thing. But Jesus IS the Divine Expression/Image of the Invisible God now, and we are all in agreement that he
most certainly exists now. So if he was the Divine Expression before the worlds were made, then that at least opens the possibility that he could have existed. (He Was, I am).

To Adam Pastor, you say that “No man pre-exists his own conception, and that includes the man Christ Jesus.

Yes I agree that Jesus was not a man before he was conceived through Mary, rather he pre existed as the Word. The Word had not become a man or to put it another way, he was not clothed in flesh yet.

You also said “”Therefore before Abraham came into existence, GOD foreordained that Jesus of Nazareth was to be the Messiah (cp. 1 Pet 1:20).

In that sense, i.e. in the mind of GOD, Jesus was before Abraham.”

But Jesus said I am. 'ego eimi' and in all other instances of 'ego eimi' in scripture, it is used in the following context, I exist, or here is me, or it is me.

e.g In Luke 1:19, the angel Gabriel said, “Ego eimi Gabriel.” In John 9:9, the blind man whose sight was restored by Jesus said, “Ego eimi.”In Acts 10:21, Peter said, “Behold, ego eimi (I am) he whom ye seek.”

So these other examples are used to denote a real person and I cannot accept right now that you can say “I am” to mean a thought that hasn't come into existence.

You say that IT (thing, not a person) became flesh! But this definition means that the flesh must be the key to making IT live, and I think that a body doesn't give a thought life.

Later I hope to offer some comments on the writings that you kindly pointed me toward.

TO GJG,
You say that the 'I AM' refers to the eternal Spirit God. So you hold to the view that Jesus wasn't a man, in the sense of a Body, Soul and Spirit. You deny that Jesus had a soul, self, life of his own. You also hold the view that when Jesus said not my will but thine, it was the flesh talking to the eternal Spirit.

So I can only conclude that you deny that Jesus has his own life/soul.

John 5:26
For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself;

I also cannot reason how flesh can have a mind of it's own or how the Spirit of God can have a different mind to God.

You see I am a soul and my soul is swayed by the leading of the Spirit in me and the urges of the flesh around me, and my soul chooses which to follow. Therefore my will exists as part of my soul. Is this not the same with Christ? because he came in the likeness of sinful flesh, (although without sin).

Now when Jesus said not my will but yours, it was certainly not the flesh talking to the Spirit because flesh doesn't have a will as much as a car has intelligence. A car needs a driver just as a body will die when the soul leaves the body. So where does the will of Christ come from?

We know his will is different to Gods will (but he chooses to align his will with God and in that sense he is one with God) and we know that flesh doesn't have a mind/will rather a nature/urges/desires. So again, where does the will of Christ reside?

To Larry Gibbons

Your quote: “Otherwise, let me ask in what form Christ could have pre-existed as the word. We both agree he did not exist as God. Then, was he some kind of spirit or perhaps an angel? Ephesians 4:4 rules out the spirit possibility, and I must ask how an angel could become a man any more than God could.”

Well we know that Angels can become men (the 3 visitors proves that) and many other accounts. It is possible that the Lord Jesus was the Angel of the Lord, who is mentioned throughout the Old Testament.

Acts:7:30-39
that an Angel of the Lord appeared to Moses through whom God spoke and this is the same Angel who spoke to Moses on Mount Sinai and passed on the living words (The Law) to Moses.

Corinthians 10:1-4
1 For I do not want you to be ignorant of the fact, brothers, that our forefathers were all under the cloud and that they all passed through the sea.
2 They were all baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea.
3 They all ate the same spiritual food
4 and drank the same spiritual drink; for they drank from the spiritual rock that accompanied them, and that rock was Christ.

Exodus 23
20 “See, I am sending an angel ahead of you to guard you along the way and to bring you to the place I have prepared.
21 Pay attention to him and listen to what he says. Do not rebel against him; he will not forgive your rebellion, since my Name is in him.

Possibly the name Yeshua which comes from the name Yahweh. Yeshua is where we get the name Jesus.

To All,

I would also like to finish by quoting Hebrews 4:12 again.
For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

Now this verse also contains the term Word of God/Logos and this word is being used in the sense that you are talking about.

But at the time this verse was written, the Word had already become flesh and now it is being used in the conceptual sense that you say it was in John 1.

So maybe we have a thing and then we have the personification of that thing.

e.g Jesus is the Way (street)
Jesus is the lifeJesus is the truth.

So if Jesus didn't pre exist, then can we say that truth didn't exist before Jesus.
If Jesus didn't exist pre 2000 years ago (approx), then did life exist before that.
If Jesus didn't exist before his birth as a man on earth, then how could the Angels know the invisible God?

I want to conclude with my reason for challenging all things. It's really about learning the truth and has nothing to do with the reputations of men. I only challenge in order to test if something is so.

BTW, I do not expect a speedy reply from anyone. I know writing these Posts takes time and I am happy for this to progress at a slower pace if need be. I know that we all have lives and responsibilites to attend to and I think in the next few weeks that I myself will have less time than I do now, so if I don't reply promptly, it is not because I have given up searching.

Thx

August 13, 2003 at 4:17 pm#15394

http://www.mindspring.com/~anthonybuzzard/john1.htm

Participant

''t8″

'Flesh' in this context means 'humanity and/or human' not 'body'

God's spoken word became 'human'

The hu(man) whose name was Jesus, is what GOD's spoken word became.

Hence when John uses the word 'flesh' in 1 John 4:2, he is speaking against those (esp. the Gnostics) who denied that Jesus came (or was born) into this world 'totally human'!

The spoken word became a human being. That human being was Jesus. That's all that 'flesh' means in John 1:14.

However, before GOD's word became flesh … well … it is GOD's word; and a word is NOT a person, no matter how you want to splice it!
Neither LOGOS nor DABAR/DAVAR ever means 'a person'
They mean 'word,plan,commandment,decree', etc

(Isa 55:11) So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.

Now look at (Psa 147:15) He sendeth forth his commandment upon earth: his word runneth very swiftly.

Now, the Psalmist is simply speaking about GOD's word in action; he does not imagine a 'literal person' running! No! The Psalmist is 'personifying GOD's spoken word/commandment' to relate to the reader that when GOD speaks, things happen!

Likewise, (Prov 8:1) Doth not wisdom cry? and understanding put forth her voice?

Solomon doesn't believe that GOD's wisdom is literally a woman. NO! He is 'personifying wisdom as a woman' (under the inspiration of GOD) in order to relate to the reader how important WISDOM is in our lives;
even Almighty GOD created all things by WISDOM! That's how important WISDOM is.

Please note, these Hebrew writers would use standard literary devices such as 'personification' to relate a message and to make a point. When personifying, the reader is NOT meant to take the 'personification' literally e.g. Psalm 147:15, Prov 8:1
and even John chapter 1!

You could say from John 1:1 right up to verse 13, John is 'personifying the word of GOD'.
However, at verse 14, the 'literary personification' becomes a literal human being,
namely Jesus, GOD's only-begotten Son.

Again, I truly encourage you to look at those articles I pointed out, especially

John 1:1 Caveat Lector (Reader Beware)

Have a good read … be 'Berean' about it … check it out.
I am confident that your questions would be answered.
And hopefully you will see what the monotheist John was saying.

Remember, the writers of the NT were Hebraic monotheists. They may have wrote in Greek, however they thought in Hebrew. They were conveying Hebrew thinking using the Greek language. This must always be taken in consideration.

The NT church believers, were not trinitarian neither were they arian. They believed in solely ONE GOD, YAHWEH, who created all things by Himself, alone. (Isa 44:24, 45:12, etc)

They simply had NO concept of a pre-existing being who would one day become a man and be the Messiah! This way of thinking came later, way after the Apostles had died, and was championed by Arius.

This thinking is 'Greek' not 'Hebraic'
When the Jews would speak of something 'pre-existing', it always meant that it 'pre-existed' in the mind of GOD.

The Jews speak of seven things existed before the foundation of the world in their writings.

Some other Jewish writings spoke of Moses being 'pre-existed' before the world. What they meant by this, was that GOD had 'foreordained' Moses for his purpose as their mediator, long before the world was created. However, they never literally believed that Moses (pre-)existed in Heaven!
(Compare 1 Pet 1:20-21 in regards to Jesus. He was foreordained before, but he was NOT manifested UNTIL he was born!)

Always remember, the NT writers were Hebrew. The Bible is a Hebrew book. It needs to be read with a Hebrew mindset. The NT writers were conveying Hebrew ideas using Greek words. The NT writers and speakers are not meant to be understood in with a Greek mindset.

This includes Jesus, the Apostle John and Paul! Always remember they are Jews. They wrote and/or spoke as Jews from the Jewish Scriptures.

'Literal pre-existence' is NOT a Jewish concept. It is a Greek (Platonic) concept!

August 14, 2003 at 3:48 am#15362

Larry Gibbons

Participant

T8, Last week I had done a search for the word flesh and developed a file that appears below. Perhaps it will be helpful to you in the discussion about the nature of Jesus at his birth.

4561. sarx sarx, sarx
Search for 4561 in KJV

probably from the base of 4563; flesh (as stripped of the skin), i.e. (strictly) the meat of an animal (as food), or (by extension) the body (as opposed to the soul (or spirit), or as the symbol of what is external, or as the means of kindred), or (by implication) human nature (with its frailties (physically or morally) and passions), or (specially), a human being (as such):–carnal(-ly, + -ly minded), flesh(-ly)

Verses from N.T. illustrating different usages of the same word:

Matt. 16:17 Flesh and blood hast not revealed this to you (human nature)
Matt. 19:5 The two were made one flesh (not one body but of one kindred spirit)
Matt. 24:22 …there should no flesh be saved (a human being)
Matt. 26:41 …the spirit is willing but the flesh is weak (human nature)
Luke 24:39 …for a spirit hath not flesh and bones (the meat (flesh) of the body)
John 1:14 …the word was made flesh (a human being)
John 6:51 …the bread that I will give is my flesh (the body)
John 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing (human nature)
John 8:15 Ye judge after the flesh (symbol of what is external)
Rom. 7:5 For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death. (a human’s carnal nature)
Rom. 7:18 …in my flesh, dwelleth no good thing: (a human’s carnal nature)

Frankly, the Bible’s use of the word flesh has always seemed pretty clear to me, even without Strong’s. You emphasize the important of context, and I think if we study this in context, the scripture is quite straightforward.

Since Jesus was born fully man (sans sin), isn’t this so that he could become identified with us and we with him. That being true, should it be so hard for us to understand his nature. While he is the firstborn, we are his brethren rejoicing in the promise that we will be conformed to his image just as he was an expression of God. You and I were made in the image of God, made from the dust of the ground and given life by him. We have each been born a second time by God’s spirit to be freed from the blindness within us. Just as Jesus grew in wisdom and stature, so, too, have we, and, yes, we have been annointed, too, even if not in the same measure. Some of the concerns you list cause me to think you may be working at all this a bit too hard. I find that often I just have to back away and wait for God to clear up all my brain strain. Amen?

In fact, I’m going to take a breather myself. I think we all may be trying to slice things a bit too fine.

August 14, 2003 at 6:56 am#15267

Participant

To Larry & Adam,

Nature = Strongs #5449 – growth, lineal, descent.

Larry I think nature is not a will and a will is where we make decisions. Rather the will decides which nature to be lead/inspired by and our salvation depends on what nature we choose.

Romans 8:5
Those who live according to the sinful nature have their minds set on what that nature desires; but those who live in accordance with the Spirit have their minds set on what the Spirit desires.

Therfore we are the meat in the sandwich. WE choose which nature to follow. If my will resided in human nature, then human nature would never choose God's Spirit. No I am independant of either nature, but I choose which one I will grow from.

Romans 8:9
You, however, are controlled not by the sinful nature but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ.

The human nature is not who we are, rather it is something we inherit.

Philippians 2:6
Who, being in very nature[ 2:6 Or in the form of] God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,

We know that Jesus partook of human nature, but he also partook of the nature of God. Yet Jesus is not God and he is not the human nature either. Rather he partook of them. Jesus is a person with his own will.

I believe that Jesus is the Word and the Word resided in God. But could the Word have had a will of his own? So he was born as a seperate will from God, but chose to align with Gods will, after all are not we like this. The statement “Not my will but God's will” is not one nature talking to another. It is Jesus/personality choosing his Father's will over his own.

Matt. 16:17
Flesh and blood hast not revealed this to YOU (human nature)

So human nature has not revealed this to you. It was the Father who revealed this truth. But what is the YOU that Jesus was referring to? It couldn't be the human nature surely. I think Jesus was referring to the mind/soul/personality. The real Peter.

You say that I may be working too hard at this, well that is not a bad thing. To be zealous is to be hot, rather than luke warm or cold and I certainly am not making a mountain out of a molehill. I am seeking the truth and testing what I think is truth.

Now I quoted 5 scriptures that show that Jesus pre existed and I feel that regardless of how you see John 1, these scriptures are strong enough to stand on their own. I feel that you have ignored them in the same fashion that those who believe in the trinity ignore scripture, that doesn't line up with their pre defined belief.

I absolutely respect your right to believe whatever you want, but I at least owe the readers an explanation as to why I cannot promote the idea that Christ never existed before his birth on earth, when a number of scriptures says otherwise. And I certainly do not want to
encourage the readers to ignore scripture just because it doesn't line up with an idea.

I have always promoted reading scripture to find truth, rather than start with a belief and make scripture line up with that belief.

Adam Pastor's comment “That human being was Jesus” is true. But what is a human being. Is not a human a soul inside a body with the spirit giving life to the soul. If so, then Jesus must have a soul/personality of his own, surely?

Also I am not sure what exactly Arius believed, but I was under the impression that the Nicean creed deals with Jesus Christ as the only-gotten son of God, begotten from the Father before all the ages and it specifically states the belief that Christ was begotten and not made because Arius believed otherwise. I think that I sway to the Nicean creed on this point. But I still hold the view that creeds were a very bad idea and therfore I probably shouldn't even resort to a creed in my writing, but I have done so, to maybe point out something about Arius's beliefs.

Anyway I have demonstrated from scripture the following points that talk about Jesus pre existance. These verses are talking about Jesus himself, not an IT.

That Jesus Christ accompanied Moses and the Jews in the Exodus, (Corinthians 10:4).

That he was before all things, (Colossians 1:17).

That Jesus died and returned to the glory which he had with God before the world was made, (John 17:5).

That Jesus told the Jews that he existed before Abraham, (John 8:58).

Now if we look at John 1, it says the Word was with God in the beginning, not in God. And there is nothing in that verse that rules out the possibility that God gave life to the Word before he clothed the word in flesh/human nature. Couple that with the verses I have quoted and I do not see any argument against Jesus pre existance, rather I see verses that support it.

Matthew 22
41 While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them,
42 “What do you think about the Christ? 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.

August 14, 2003 at 11:45 am#15242

Participant

Greetings 't8'

YOU:Is not a human a soul inside a body with the spirit giving life to the soul. If so, then Jesus must have a soul/personality of his own, surely?

ME: Ah! I see now! This is where the confusion is.

Your definition of 'man' is not correct.
Man does NOT have a soul? Man is a soul.
YOU ARE A SOUL! YOU DON'T HAVE A SOUL.

YOU ARE THE SOUL! A PERSON = A SOUL!

God made Adam a 'living' soul. [Gen 2:7]
Before GOD breathed into him, the breath of life, Adam was a 'lifeless' soul!

The Hebrew scriptures do NOT divide us up into 2 or 3 parts – this thinking comes from the Greeks.

You are a soul. Even animals are called souls. Animals are souls, even as mankind are souls.
This truth has subtly been hidden by the KJV translators by translating the Hebrew word nephesh (Strong's 5315) as 'soul', when speaking of Adam (Gen 2:7); and translated nephesh as 'creature' when speaking of animals in Gen 1:20,21,24.
Gen 1:20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving nephesh that hath life …
Gen 1:21 And God created great whales, and every living nephesh that moveth …
Gen 1:24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living nephesh after his kind …

Hence giving readers the false impression to this very day, that men 'have souls' and animals don't.
NO! What the scriptures teach is that BOTH mankind and animals ARE SOULS.
BOTH were made 'living souls'
BOTH share common mortality, Eccl 3:19-20

Yes, the great difference is that mankind are made
'in the image of GOD' unlike the animals.
We most definitely differ from animals in this great regard. However, the scriptures teach that BOTH mankind and animals ARE SOULS and that when we die, the 'whole of us' die.
If you please, BODY,SOUL & THE SPIRIT (of man) DIES – THE WHOLE MAN DIES i.e. SOULS DIE!

The KJV translators hid this truth. And as such many people sincerely believe that there is a 'immaterial, immortal' part of us, called 'the soul' that lives on when 'the body dies'. Hence, the body is a container/vessel of 'this (immortal) soul'. This is NOT scriptural.
This comes from Plato (who in fact taught that our souls pre-existed our births). He taught that the body is a prison of this 'immortal spark' in us called the soul. Hence, at death, the body dies whilst the soul escapes & goes to heaven!!

This is Greek philosophy (Col 2:8) which has prevailed to this very day. Hence, we are taught that 'man' is dichotomous or trichotomous.

Even Justin Martyr warned around 150AD, that …

QUOTE
“If You Are Fallen In with Some Who Are Called Believers In Christ, Who Say There is No Resurrection of the Dead and That Their Souls When They Die Are Taken To Heaven, Do Not Imagine That They Are True Believers! (i.e. That They Are Christians!)“
[Dialogue with Trypho, ch. 80.]

Justin Martyr was witnessing this unbiblical, philosophical teaching (c. 150AD) and opposed it; yet now it is common 'orthodox christian' teaching, that when one dies, 'their souls' go to heaven!

By believing in a immaterial part of man called 'a soul' it was then easy for the Greek/Hellenistic philosophical 'christians' of the 2nd/3rd century who mixed Platonism with Christianity, to teach that Jesus pre-existed i.e. his soul was the Logos/Word that was with GOD; and therefore when he was born, the Logos/(the soul of Jesus) was clothed in flesh; and at Jesus' death, the body died whilst the Logos/(Jesus' soul) left the body and lived on.

Hence the 'concept of a pre-existing Jesus' was born!
Arianism/Trinitarianism was born!
Birthed out of Greek/Platonic Philosophy and NOT from the Hebrew Scriptures.
Both taught a 'pre-existing' Jesus. And out of this came all the controversies concerning the 'nature of Jesus' that came to a head in 325 AD.

NO! The scriptures do not teach that we have souls. The scriptures teach that we are souls,, both mankind and animalkind. However, mankind of course, are made in the image of GOD. Immortality is a gift from GOD to mankind, that we must seek after, Roms. 2:7.

We are souls. Persons are souls.
3000 souls means 3000 persons. [e.g. Gen 46:18, 26-27; Exo 1:5, Acts 2:41, etc]

Our life is also called 'soul'.
To lose your life = to lose your soul
To save someone's life = to save someone's soul
To lay down your life = to lay down your soul
This is the only sense where you can say you have 'soul' since you have 'life'.

The 'soul' is you … not a part of you.

Hence …

When someone dies = a soul dies
When someone lives = a soul lives.
To kill someone is 'to kill a soul'

Men die = souls die.
Men shall be resurrected = souls shall be resurrected.

The Hebrew scriptures teach that 'mankind' is one 'holistic whole'.
The 'whole man' dies, the 'whole man' shall be resurrected.

Scriptures speaks of 'dead souls' e.g. Nums 6:6
he shall come at no dead nephesh.
(see how cleverly the KJV translators chose to translate nephesh as 'body'; hence the reader would not read dead soul; which aided in propagating the false teaching that your soul cannot die)

Souls die [Ezek 18:4] Souls are destroyed [Ezek 22:27]
Hence people die, people are destroyed.

The whole man dies, the whole man is mortal, that is, body, soul and spirit (of man, 1 Cor 2:11) is mortal.
The whole package dies. Every part of us is mortal. When we die, 'our breath' returns to GOD. [Eccl 12:7]

So, the man Christ Jesus died according to the scriptures [1 Cor 15:3] His death was like any other death. No part of him lived on
He was totally human. He had no 'immortal part' in him. He had no 'pre-existent' part. He was totally dead for 3 days/nights. He was a dead soul for 3 days/nights until GOD raised him from the dead and gave him immortality. Hence, Jesus is the firstborn from the dead [Col 1:18, Rev 1:5,1 Cor 15:23].

He is NOW an immortal person/soul, even like the saints will be on that Great Resurrection Day.

[Please note: The Greek equiv. to nephesh is psuche, Strong's 5590, generally translated 'life']

So, John 1:14 :-
the word of GOD became human … the word of GOD was made human, in the person of Jesus the Messiah. The man Christ Jesus is what the 'word of GOD' became.

Hence, the word of GOD became a living soul, namely Jesus of Nazareth.

By returning to the Hebraic Scriptural teachings about man, mortality, birth, death and resurrection, we will then have a clearer understanding of who Jesus is.

Matthew and Luke were detailing the birth [genesis – Matt 1:18] of Jesus the Messiah.
They had absolutely no concept of a pre-existing Jesus.
The angel Gabriel said [Luke 1:35] The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: For this reason precisely (dio kai) that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.
It was for that reason, i.e. the supernatural miraculous conception of Jesus without the aid of man, why Jesus was to be called 'The Son of GOD'

Neither was John contradicting Matthew or Luke. John had no concept of a pre-existing Messiah. He spoke of 'the Messiah' being foreordained in the counsel of GOD's plan. And even portrayed Jesus as being fully aware that he was foreordained to be the Messiah according to GOD's determinate counsel and foreknowledge, before the foundation of the world e.g. John 8:56-58. This is in full compliance to Jewish thinki
ng.

However, John did not teach a 'literal' pre-existing Jesus.
No! He describe the conception of Jesus, as being the result of what GOD's spoken word became!

Hope this helps

August 14, 2003 at 12:34 pm#15295

Participant

To Adam Pastor,

Regarding your quote below:

Your definition of 'man' is not correct.
Man does NOT have a soul? Man is a soul.
YOU ARE A SOUL! YOU DON'T HAVE A SOUL. YOU ARE THE SOUL! A PERSON = A SOUL!

Are you kidding! I have tried to say this very thing to you in the last 2 Posts. That we are a soul. The body is the vehicle and the Spirit makes our soul live. Please read my last 2 posts again and you will see this is exactly the point I was making.

The confusion is not my Post at all, rather that you didn't read it properly or didn't understand what you read.

Next: I never said that animals do not have souls. I know that they do. They couldn't just be a body.

If you re-read my posts you will see that I equate the person to a soul. This was my very point and I made it many times in many different ways. I am surprised that you didn't understand that.

Here are some quotes from my last Post:

Is not a human a soul inside a body with the spirit giving life to the soul.

If read properly it says that we are the soul.

Quotes from my Post before that were even more explicit.

1) So John actually saw the souls of men. They probably are visible in the Spiritual Realm. Souls are who we really are.

2) Our soul is OUR life.

3) Now my body is the vessel, but my soul is who I am. The spirit is the part of me that gives me life, but it isn't me. The spirit makes my soul live.

Anyway maybe I am wrong, but I get the feeling that you are more interested in being right than actually seeking the truth in all things. I only think this because you try to correct me with the same thing that I was actually saying.

The other possibility is that you didn't read the last 2 posts properly and therefore you may be too quick to Post replies.

Now I have spent the last 30 or less pages in this discussion dealing with some people who have a belief and are not willing to even look at scriptures that prove them otherwise. Most of those people have been trinitarians and Oneness, and I know that it is human nature/pride to defend ones current belief. But it would be good to talk to people who are humble enough to look at all the scriptures and are willing to change if the scriptures say otherwise. I try to make this humility and search for truth an important part of my belief/faith, so that I can align my will with God's in the same way that Jesus does. After all I believed in the Trinity once and it was certainly pretty scary in a heretical sense to actually not believe that anymore and to suffer the rejection that goes with this decision. I believe that it was God who lead me here, so I stirve to trust him more than myself, but I do not always live up to this ideal.

As you can imagine, I do not want to give up now and I am sure that there is much more to learn and being humble is how I will learn as God resists the proud and he also reveals his truths to the innocent.

Now I am interested in conversing with you more in this Forum because I have learned some things that I didn't know before with regards to the Hebrew (Although I do need to actually check it out for myself), and who knows, maybe I can show you a few things too. So don't get me wrong here. I am not trying to discourage you. But I feel that I needed point this out and to say what I said.

August 14, 2003 at 4:25 pm#15273

Participant

OK!

Point taken!

August 14, 2003 at 9:40 pm#15196

Participant

I have learnt something new!!

Jesus was indeed fully man as you pointed out.

And also Very God.

The "Dual-Nature" of the man-Christ Jesus is the key to it all!

August 14, 2003 at 11:15 pm#15187

Participant

I agree GJG, he had/has 2 natures.

Philippians 2:6
Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,

John 1:14
The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only,[ 1:14 Or the Only Begotten] who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.

So upon conception into this world, the Word had 2 natures.

We who are saved also have 2 natures because we have been born again.

1 Peter 1:23
For you have been born again, not of perishable seed, but of imperishable, through the living and enduring word of God.

Romans 8 (Life Through the Spirit )

1 Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus
2 because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set me free from the law of sin and death.
3 For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the sinful nature, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in sinful man,
4 in order that the righteous requirements of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the sinful nature but according to the Spirit.
5 Those who live according to the sinful nature have their minds set on what that nature desires; but those who live in accordance with the Spirit have their minds set on what the Spirit desires.
6 The mind of sinful man is death, but the mind controlled by the Spirit is life and peace;
7 the sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God's law, nor can it do so.
8 Those controlled by the sinful nature cannot please God.
9 You, however, are controlled not by the sinful nature but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ.
10 But if Christ is in you, your body is dead because of sin, yet your spirit is alive because of righteousness.
11 And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit, who lives in you.
12 Therefore, brothers, we have an obligation–but it is not to the sinful nature, to live according to it.
13 For if you live according to the sinful nature, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live,
14 because those who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God.
15 For you did not receive a spirit that makes you a slave again to fear, but you received the Spirit of sonship. And by him we cry, “Abba, Father.”
16 The Spirit himself testifies with our spirit that we are God's children.
17 Now if we are children, then we are heirs–heirs of God and co-heirs with Christ, if indeed we share in his sufferings in order that we may also share in his glory.

I suppose the question I am researching at the moment is did the Word exist/have God's nature before his conception. How important this is, I am not sure. But I feel compelled to learn the truth about this, just as I was compelled to learn that God is one.

At the moment I believe that he did exist, because of these scriptures.
1Corinthians 10:1-4
Colossians 1:14-19
John 17:1-5
John 8:58

August 14, 2003 at 11:58 pm#15296