- This topic has 18,301 replies, 269 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 5 months ago by
.
- Posts
Hi Marty,
Do you not think it possible to change body forms? To go from a heavenly body to an earthly body?
We are hoping to change from an earthly body to a heavenly body. While in our new heavenly body we will be able to say that we existed in a time before we had that heavenly body if we have access to that memory. We expect that, right. We are hoping for a new body without creeks and brokeness. Why is it so hard to think that the Son of God changed from one bodily form to another and then stand before the Pharisees and declare that before Abraham was born, He existed. Of course the Pharisees couldn't understand this because the idea of that was supernatural and never before experienced. God is supernatural and can cause the supernatural to happen at any moment to fit His purpose. Why not morphing the body of His Son into the body of a human infant if it fit His purpose. Our bodies will all morphe into something else someday too!So, your answer to “Did Jesus exist as a man before his birth into this world through the virgin Mary?”…of course not…yet he did exist as a living being, a heavenly being. He even helped prepare this world that we live in now and is preparing the next place for us to live. If He can prepare the next place why do you think He couldn't have helped prepare this first place? Somewhere I remember reading one of you non-pre-existents saying why would God need help preparing the world? I ask you why is Jesus preparing the next place if His Father could do it without Him? I do believe that if anyone could prepare a world alone it would be the Father yet the Bible is clear that Jesus said that He was going to prepare a place for us.
John 14:1-3
” Do not let your heart be troubled; believe in God, believe also in Me. 2 “In My Father's house are many dwelling places; if it were not so, I would have told you; for I go to prepare a place for you.
NASUThat is parallelism to me.
First, the Son laid the foundation of the earth, created all things in the heavens and on the earth.
and now He is preparing another place for us. His Father isn't alone doing that and He wasn't alone preparing the earth the first time.
As I understand it, the Father was alone creating the place, “In the beginning God created the Heavens and the earth” formless and void then the Son was born and introduced as “Light” and from there the earth and heaven was prepared and took form i.e. dry land, seas, mountains, trees, animals, vegetation, sun, moon, stars, fish, man. He was a craftsman at His Father's side then and now…parallelism!God bless,
LUHi Kathi, good post. Did you ever wonder why God would create a void earth? And would the Angels shouted for joy for such a chaotic place? Of course this is just my thinking I can't prove it anywhere in the Bible. Just that in the beginning in John 1:1-18 Jesus through the power of the Holy Spirit created all beautiful. Then Lucifer sinned against God and was thrown down to earth, and made a mass of this earth. In God's plan He RECREATED this world and a beautiful garden for mankind to live in. ( Satan, the serpent was in the garden already)IMO He put us here before we can become Spirit being, above the Angels, to be tested. God wants children that obey him and worship Him from the heart. We have to become so disgusted of sin, that we will never sin again. In the meantime we are under the Blood of Christ and sin is not imputed to us. We are under grace and Eternal life is a free gift from God, by Faith in Christ Jesus, so nobody can boast. But John also tells us, if we think that we do not sin, the truth is not in us. All have fallen short of the glory of God. We are under the New Covenant.
Luke 22:20
Being in this body for 70 years, I am tired of all the sinful nature all around us. Looking back I can see how I have grown in Christ, but will we ever be completely be like Jesus Christ our Savior? He will have to clean me up completely, in order to use me, whatever He wants me to do. I submit to Him. Amen
Peace and Love IreneGod bless you and yours Kathi, we still have all that snow and we are lucky we still have electric power, some in Kentucky are without. Kentucky got most of the icy rain.
It is very beautiful, tho. The Kids are of School all week already. In fact I expect them in half an hour.Cindy –
I offer tis as a good starting place to understand Genesis and Creation.The Poetry of Genesis Chapter One
By Jeff A. Benner
When we read Genesis chapter one we usually see only one story there, but there are actually many stories. Why don't we see these multiple stories? Because we read the Hebrew Bible from a Modern Western thinkers point of view and not from an Ancient Eastern thinkers such as the Hebrews who wrote it. The Hebrews style of writing is prolific with a style of poetry unfamiliar to most readers of the Bible. This poetry is nothing like the poetry we are used to reading today and therefore it is invisible to us.The most common form of Hebrew poetry is called parallelism. Parallelism is when the writer says one thing in two or more different ways. The Psalms and Proverbs are filled with these such as the examples below.
Psalms 119:105 – “Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light for my path.” The first part of this verse is paralleled with the second part. This verse is not saying two different things, rather, one thing in two different ways.
Proverbs 3:1 – “My son, do not forget my teaching, and keep my commands in your heart.” Again the first part is paralleled with the second part.
Genesis 4:23 – Lamech said to his wives, “Adah and Zillah, listen to me; wives of Lamech, hear my words. I have killed a man for wounding me and a young man for injuring me.”
Let's break down what Lamech says; [Adah and Zillah, listen to me] = [wives of Lamech, hear my words] then he says; I have killed [a man for wounding me] = [a young man for injuring me]. Lamech did not wound one and injure another, but killed one person and says it two different ways.
Often we overlook what the Bible is telling us because we are not recognizing what the poetry of a passage is attempting to convey. For example look at Psalms 40:8; “I desire to do your will, O my God; your Torah is within my heart” Here we see that doing the will of God is the same thing as having the Torah within your heart.
Now let us look at the Creation story Parallels of Genesis chapter one.
Creation Story Number 1
The first story is found in Genesis 1.1 “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” The Hebrew word “bara” is a verb and is usually translated as “create”. To really understand what this word means let us look at another passage where this word is used.
1 Samuel 2.29 – Why do you scorn my sacrifice and offering that I prescribed for my dwelling? Why do you honor your sons more than me by fattening yourselves on the choice parts of every offering made by my people Israel?' The word “fattening” in the passage above is the Hebrew word “bara”. The noun form of this verb is “beriya” and can be found in Genesis 41.4 – “And the cows that were ugly and gaunt ate up the seven sleek, fat cows.” The word “fat” is the Hebrew word “beriya”.
The word “bara” does not mean, “create” (Hebrew actually has no word that meaning “create” in the sense of something out of nothing) but “to fatten”. If we take the literal definition of “bara” in Genesis 1.1 we have – In the beginning God fattened the heavens and the earth. What does this fattening of the heavens and earth mean? This verse is not showing the creation of the heaven and earth, but rather the fattening or filling up of it. Therefore, Genesis 1.1 is a condensed version of the whole creation story.
Creation Story Number 2
The second creation story paralleling Genesis 1.1 is Genesis 1.2 – “and the earth was unfilled and empty and darkness was over the face of the deep, and the Wind of God was hovering over the waters.” In this passage we see that the earth was formless and empty before it was filled up, then the Wind of God hovers over the waters of the earth. This hovering would be the action of the Wind of god filling up the earth.
The use of the word “and” at the beginning of this verse may cause some confusion due to an understanding of how this word is used in Hebrew. In English the word “and” in between verses one and two means that what happens in verse two occurs after what happens in verse one. In Hebrew, the word “and” is used in standard Hebrew poetry to link two statements as one. In other words, verse one is the same thing as verse two.
Creation Story Number 3
The third story is found in Genesis 1.3-5. “And God said, 'Let there be light', and there was light and God saw that the light was good and he separated the light from the darkness and God called the light 'day', and the darkness he called 'night' and there was evening, and there was morning, the first day”.
Hebrew, like English, has a word for one and a different word for first. The same is true for the words two and second, three and third, etc. As an example the Hebrew word for “three” is “shelosh”, and the Hebrew word for “third” is “sheliyshiy”. Days 2 – 7 use the Hebrew word for second, third, fourth, etc. We would assume that the “first” day would use the Hebrew word “reshon” meaning “first” in order to be consistent with the other six days, but instead we have the word “echad” meaning “one” or ” in unity”. The author is making a parallel with the “first” day and with all the days of creation. I believe this is because all seven days of the fattening of the earth are being united in this verse. The first day of creation is also a parallel with the whole of creation as the earth was in darkness and the act of filling the earth brought light to the earth.
Creation Story Number 4
The fourth creation story is found in Genesis 1.3-13. In these passages we have the first three days of creation. These are the days of separating. On the first day God separated light and darkness. On the second day God separated the waters above from the waters below forming the sky and the seas. On the third day God separated the land from the water forming dry land.
Creation Story Number 5
The fifth creation story is found in Genesis 1.14-31. In these passages we have the second set of three days of creation. On the fourth day God filled the light with the sun and the darkness with the moon and stars. On the fifth day God filled the sky with the birds and the sea with the fish. On the sixth day God filled the dry land with the animals and man. Notice the correlation between the first set of three days of separation with the second set of three days of filling.
Creation Story Number 6
The sixth story is the whole of Genesis chapter one. Though we have looked at five different stories of creation, they are all combined together to form one complete story of creation.
CONCLUSIONIt must be remembered that modern western thinkers view events in step logic. This is the idea that each event comes after the previous forming a series of events in a linear timeline. But, the Hebrews did not think in step logic but in block logic. This is the grouping together of similar ideas together and not in chronological order. Most people read Genesis chapter one from a step logic perspective or chronological, rather than from the block logic so prevalent in Hebrew poetry.
Quote (Cindy @ Jan. 30 2009,05:58) Hi Kathi, good post. Did you ever wonder why God would create a void earth? And would the Angels shouted for joy for such a chaotic place? Of course this is just my thinking I can't prove it anywhere in the Bible. Just that in the beginning in John 1:1-18 Jesus through the power of the Holy Spirit created all beautiful. Then Lucifer sinned against God and was thrown down to earth, and made a mass of this earth. In God's plan He RECREATED this world and a beautiful garden for mankind to live in. ( Satan, the serpent was in the garden already)IMO He put us here before we can become Spirit being, above the Angels, to be tested. God wants children that obey him and worship Him from the heart. We have to become so disgusted of sin, that we will never sin again. In the meantime we are under the Blood of Christ and sin is not imputed to us. We are under grace and Eternal life is a free gift from God, by Faith in Christ Jesus, so nobody can boast. But John also tells us, if we think that we do not sin, the truth is not in us. All have fallen short of the glory of God. We are under the New Covenant.
Luke 22:20
Being in this body for 70 years, I am tired of all the sinful nature all around us. Looking back I can see how I have grown in Christ, but will we ever be completely be like Jesus Christ our Savior? He will have to clean me up completely, in order to use me, whatever He wants me to do. I submit to Him. Amen
Peace and Love IreneGod bless you and yours Kathi, we still have all that snow and we are lucky we still have electric power, some in Kentucky are without. Kentucky got most of the icy rain.
It is very beautiful, tho. The Kids are of School all week already. In fact I expect them in half an hour.
Hi Irene,
Thanks!I can't say for sure why God created the earth and heavens void. Maybe there was a big bang that God used to create the realm of heaven and the place of earth and then the creation had to settle in before He brought a Son into life to help fill it. I think we can only speculate. I don't believe that it was filled and then became void after a revolt with Satan because everything was good even darkness. Also, the earth was covered with water and there would still be fish living and not have need to be created on day five. Just my opinion though. Thanks for asking. Stay warm.
Love, Kathi
Quote (Lightenup @ Jan. 30 2009,16:14) Hi Marty,
Do you not think it possible to change body forms? To go from a heavenly body to an earthly body?
We are hoping to change from an earthly body to a heavenly body. While in our new heavenly body we will be able to say that we existed in a time before we had that heavenly body if we have access to that memory. We expect that, right. We are hoping for a new body without creeks and brokeness. Why is it so hard to think that the Son of God changed from one bodily form to another and then stand before the Pharisees and declare that before Abraham was born, He existed. Of course the Pharisees couldn't understand this because the idea of that was supernatural and never before experienced. God is supernatural and can cause the supernatural to happen at any moment to fit His purpose. Why not morphing the body of His Son into the body of a human infant if it fit His purpose. Our bodies will all morphe into something else someday too!So, your answer to “Did Jesus exist as a man before his birth into this world through the virgin Mary?”…of course not…yet he did exist as a living being, a heavenly being. He even helped prepare this world that we live in now and is preparing the next place for us to live. If He can prepare the next place why do you think He couldn't have helped prepare this first place? Somewhere I remember reading one of you non-pre-existents saying why would God need help preparing the world? I ask you why is Jesus preparing the next place if His Father could do it without Him? I do believe that if anyone could prepare a world alone it would be the Father yet the Bible is clear that Jesus said that He was going to prepare a place for us.
John 14:1-3
” Do not let your heart be troubled; believe in God, believe also in Me. 2 “In My Father's house are many dwelling places; if it were not so, I would have told you; for I go to prepare a place for you.
NASUThat is parallelism to me.
First, the Son laid the foundation of the earth, created all things in the heavens and on the earth.
and now He is preparing another place for us. His Father isn't alone doing that and He wasn't alone preparing the earth the first time.
As I understand it, the Father was alone creating the place, “In the beginning God created the Heavens and the earth” formless and void then the Son was born and introduced as “Light” and from there the earth and heaven was prepared and took form i.e. dry land, seas, mountains, trees, animals, vegetation, sun, moon, stars, fish, man. He was a craftsman at His Father's side then and now…parallelism!God bless,
LU
Lightenup –You say –
As I understand it, the Father was alone creating the place, “In the beginning God created the Heavens and the earth” formless and void then the Son was born and introduced as “Light” and from there the earth and heaven was prepared and took form i.e. dry land, seas, mountains, trees, animals, vegetation, sun, moon, stars, fish, man. He was a craftsman at His Father's side then and now…parallelism!Reply –
I invite you to era my post on Creation. Perhaps some info from a ligitimate Hebrew scholar will make things more clear.Thanks Martian,
I have read that before…pure specuation on your Hebrew scholar's part, but thanks. BTW, light fills things, things don't fill light. The day one light doesn't fill the sun, moon and the stars. I can understand filling the earth with plants, animals, etc. but I can't agree with the concept of filling the light with the sun, moon and stars. I can understand filling the heaven with the sun, moon and stars but not filling the light. I would say that you can fill a space, or a realm but not light waves. Light waves are NOT something that gets filled nor does the absence of light waves get filled (darkness), light waves fill, not get filled. So, I don't agree with your scholar's speculation.I believe that it is entirely possible for the light of day one to refer to the Son of God who is called the “firstborn of all creation,” also, the logos in the beginning, “Let there be light” is the first logos spoken, also the Son of God is called the “Light of the world.” Also, God speaks of the Son who laid the foundation of the world in Hebrews and in Colossians it speaks of the Son as the one who created everything IN heaven and ON earth. The “Light” of day one appeared before there was anything IN heaven or ON earth, remember the earth was formless and void before that. The living logos in the beginning was the Son of God as the “Light” and that living logos became flesh according to John 1:1 and was WITH GOD (Yes, the Light was with God on day one and since the Son of God was begotten of God, that makes Him a begotten God…the logos WAS GOD).
LUQuote (Lightenup @ Jan. 31 2009,07:30) Thanks Martian,
I have read that before…pure specuation on your Hebrew scholar's part, but thanks. BTW, light fills things, things don't fill light. The day one light doesn't fill the sun, moon and the stars. I can understand filling the earth with plants, animals, etc. but I can't agree with the concept of filling the light with the sun, moon and stars. I can understand filling the heaven with the sun, moon and stars but not filling the light. I would say that you can fill a space, or a realm but not light waves. Light waves are NOT something that gets filled nor does the absence of light waves get filled (darkness), light waves fill, not get filled. So, I don't agree with your scholar's speculation.I believe that it is entirely possible for the light of day one to refer to the Son of God who is called the “firstborn of all creation,” also, the logos in the beginning, “Let there be light” is the first logos spoken, also the Son of God is called the “Light of the world.” Also, God speaks of the Son who laid the foundation of the world in Hebrews and in Colossians it speaks of the Son as the one who created everything IN heaven and ON earth. The “Light” of day one appeared before there was anything IN heaven or ON earth, remember the earth was formless and void before that. The living logos in the beginning was the Son of God as the “Light” and that living logos became flesh according to John 1:1 and was WITH GOD (Yes, the Light was with God on day one and since the Son of God was begotten of God, that makes Him a begotten God…the logos WAS GOD).
LU
If ypu choose to speculate on Genesis, that is your choice. I prefer to learn what the Hebrew really says and go by that.Quote (martian @ Jan. 30 2009,15:50) Quote (Lightenup @ Jan. 31 2009,07:30) Thanks Martian,
I have read that before…pure specuation on your Hebrew scholar's part, but thanks. BTW, light fills things, things don't fill light. The day one light doesn't fill the sun, moon and the stars. I can understand filling the earth with plants, animals, etc. but I can't agree with the concept of filling the light with the sun, moon and stars. I can understand filling the heaven with the sun, moon and stars but not filling the light. I would say that you can fill a space, or a realm but not light waves. Light waves are NOT something that gets filled nor does the absence of light waves get filled (darkness), light waves fill, not get filled. So, I don't agree with your scholar's speculation.I believe that it is entirely possible for the light of day one to refer to the Son of God who is called the “firstborn of all creation,” also, the logos in the beginning, “Let there be light” is the first logos spoken, also the Son of God is called the “Light of the world.” Also, God speaks of the Son who laid the foundation of the world in Hebrews and in Colossians it speaks of the Son as the one who created everything IN heaven and ON earth. The “Light” of day one appeared before there was anything IN heaven or ON earth, remember the earth was formless and void before that. The living logos in the beginning was the Son of God as the “Light” and that living logos became flesh according to John 1:1 and was WITH GOD (Yes, the Light was with God on day one and since the Son of God was begotten of God, that makes Him a begotten God…the logos WAS GOD).
LU
If ypu choose to speculate on Genesis, that is your choice. I prefer to learn what the Hebrew really says and go by that.
Fine Martian but you would have to go to Moses to really know that and even then, Moses, if in fact he wrote down the creation account didn't understand what he was writing since he was not an eye witness and never experienced the act of creation himself. Ask God, the Father or His Son, they were there. Someday we will know but not because we understand the Hebrew mindset. Not even the Hebrew mindset could spell out the events of creation for fact since no Hebrew existed during their occurance. I dare say that the creation account written in Hebrew was inspired by the mindset of God Himself since it was not an eyewitness account. Does God limit Himself to the Hebrew mindset? I think that you would have to have the mindset of God to understand the creation account, not the mindset of the ancient Hebrew.Quote (Lightenup @ Jan. 31 2009,08:37) Quote (martian @ Jan. 30 2009,15:50) Quote (Lightenup @ Jan. 31 2009,07:30) Thanks Martian,
I have read that before…pure specuation on your Hebrew scholar's part, but thanks. BTW, light fills things, things don't fill light. The day one light doesn't fill the sun, moon and the stars. I can understand filling the earth with plants, animals, etc. but I can't agree with the concept of filling the light with the sun, moon and stars. I can understand filling the heaven with the sun, moon and stars but not filling the light. I would say that you can fill a space, or a realm but not light waves. Light waves are NOT something that gets filled nor does the absence of light waves get filled (darkness), light waves fill, not get filled. So, I don't agree with your scholar's speculation.I believe that it is entirely possible for the light of day one to refer to the Son of God who is called the “firstborn of all creation,” also, the logos in the beginning, “Let there be light” is the first logos spoken, also the Son of God is called the “Light of the world.” Also, God speaks of the Son who laid the foundation of the world in Hebrews and in Colossians it speaks of the Son as the one who created everything IN heaven and ON earth. The “Light” of day one appeared before there was anything IN heaven or ON earth, remember the earth was formless and void before that. The living logos in the beginning was the Son of God as the “Light” and that living logos became flesh according to John 1:1 and was WITH GOD (Yes, the Light was with God on day one and since the Son of God was begotten of God, that makes Him a begotten God…the logos WAS GOD).
LU
If ypu choose to speculate on Genesis, that is your choice. I prefer to learn what the Hebrew really says and go by that.
Fine Martian but you would have to go to Moses to really know that and even then, Moses, if in fact he wrote down the creation account didn't understand what he was writing since he was not an eye witness and never experienced the act of creation himself. Ask God, the Father or His Son, they were there. Someday we will know but not because we understand the Hebrew mindset. Not even the Hebrew mindset could spell out the events of creation for fact since no Hebrew existed during their occurance. I dare say that the creation account written in Hebrew was inspired by the mindset of God Himself since it was not an eyewitness account. Does God limit Himself to the Hebrew mindset? I think that you would have to have the mindset of God to understand the creation account, not the mindset of the ancient Hebrew.
Well then let's just throw out the bool of Genesis. If it is not possible to really study it.Quote (martian @ Jan. 30 2009,05:46) Quote (thethinker @ Jan. 29 2009,19:38) Martian said: Quote I will get back to you on the John 5 issue. Martian, I am looking forward to it. As I said, I have been waiting for a Unitarian to overcome this.
God speed,
thinker
ThethinkerFor some reason you seem to think you have some authority to demand I answer your questions, while at the same time you post no sources for your theories.
You say –
You can tell me all day what your Hebrew sources say. I have Hebrew sources too. You are generalizing with the Hebrew language and not correctly exegeting it.Reply-
So post your sources that say image in Gen 1 does not mean form.You say –
Martian, I am looking forward to it. As I said, I have been waiting for a Unitarian to overcome this.Reply – I not appreciate being labeled and put in a category by you. I am not a Unitarian and never have been.
You say –
BTW, there is a rule of debate that says if a man does not reply to an argument then he concedes that argument by default. I have asked you several times to prove your theory that God cannot change in every way conceivable and you have repeatedly failed to reply. Therefore, you have conceded that there is no such teaching in Scripture.Reply –
You lean on a rule of debate to prove you are right? You claim that my reluctance in debating with you is because I have a weak case. Evolutionists win debates all the time simply because they are clever in debate tactics. Does that mean that evolution is true?I answered your question about YHWH meaning He exists. You posted opinion that it means “I will become” in such a way as to mean it exclusively. I posted sources that said in general it means He exists. Again opinion versus sources.
I already answered your question on the issue of form of God.
Martian,
I'm not interested in going back and forth with my Hebrew sources versus your Hebrew sources, I have been on the earth a long time now and have learned that men cannot be trusted. I told you that I question the way you exegete the Hebrew language. I told you before that I have Hebrew sources too that I could use. But I don't because I just want to just stick to the Scriptures.BTW, it is not my “opinion” that YHWH can become what He wants to become. I just told you what the Hebrew-English Interlinear said.
If you don't want me to call you a Unitarian then fine. I will avoid labels from now on. But if you called me a Trinitarian I would not mind. After all, if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck then it's a duck.I would appreciate it if we could just stick to the Bible.
cordially,
thinkerMartian said:
Quote I answered your question about YHWH meaning He exists. You posted opinion that it means “I will become” in such a way as to mean it exclusively. I posted sources that said in general it means He exists. Again opinion versus sources. Make up your mind Martian. Did YHWH say “I exist”, or did He say “I function”?
Quote I already answered your question on the issue of form of God. You have not answered my question from John 5:37. You have said that man as the image of God is in the form of God. But Jesus told the Jews that they have “neither heard [God's] voice or seen His form” (John 5:37). So Jesus was wrong.
I am not interested in your “sources” Martian. I have sources too. I earned my degree from two Bible colleges and then took several post graduate courses in Seminary. So I have a library of sources. I just want you to discuss the Bible with me. I don't give a hoot about your sources or mine.
Jesus told the Jews that they had not seen God's form. How could Jesus have said this if the very people He spoke to were God's form? It's a simple question. Yet you think it “demanding” of me to require a reply from you. You said that a pre-existent Jesus doesn't do us any good. But a mistaken Jesus doesn't do us any good either. Therefore, it is necessaery that you reconcile your definitions and your sources with what Jesus said. No degree in rocket science is needed to figure out the pertinence of my question. And I stick by the rule of debate. If you fail to reply then you concede by default.
blessings,
thinkerQuote (thethinker @ Jan. 31 2009,10:45) Martian said: Quote I answered your question about YHWH meaning He exists. You posted opinion that it means “I will become” in such a way as to mean it exclusively. I posted sources that said in general it means He exists. Again opinion versus sources. Make up your mind Martian. Did YHWH say “I exist”, or did He say “I function”?
Quote I already answered your question on the issue of form of God. You have not answered my question from John 5:37. You have said that man as the image of God is in the form of God. But Jesus told the Jews that they have “neither heard [God's] voice or seen His form” (John 5:37). So Jesus was wrong.
I am not interested in your “sources” Martian. I have sources too. I earned my degree from two Bible colleges and then took several post graduate courses in Seminary. So I have a library of sources. I just want you to discuss the Bible with me. I don't give a hoot about your sources or mine.
Jesus told the Jews that they had not seen God's form. How could Jesus have said this if the very people He spoke to were God's form? It's a simple question. Yet you think it “demanding” of me to require a reply from you. You said that a pre-existent Jesus doesn't do us any good. But a mistaken Jesus doesn't do us any good either. Therefore, it is necessaery that you reconcile your definitions and your sources with what Jesus said. No degree in rocket science is needed to figure out the pertinence of my question. And I stick by the rule of debate. If you fail to reply then you concede by default.
blessings,
thinker
Hi thethinker:If YHWH states: I will BECOME what I will become. Perhaps he was referring to Becoming the Father of our Lord.
Quote Hbr 1:5 For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son? Hi LU:
You say:
Quote Hi Marty,
Do you not think it possible to change body forms? To go from a heavenly body to an earthly body?
We are hoping to change from an earthly body to a heavenly body. While in our new heavenly body we will be able to say that we existed in a time before we had that heavenly body if we have access to that memory. We expect that, right. We are hoping for a new body without creeks and brokeness. Why is it so hard to think that the Son of God changed from one bodily form to another and then stand before the Pharisees and declare that before Abraham was born, He existed. Of course the Pharisees couldn't understand this because the idea of that was supernatural and never before experienced. God is supernatural and can cause the supernatural to happen at any moment to fit His purpose. Why not morphing the body of His Son into the body of a human infant if it fit His purpose. Our bodies will all morphe into something else someday too!Can you produce a scripture which states that Jesus pre-existed in a body before his virgin birth? And if there is such a thing, was he a man or an angel or just what? You cannot justify what you believe through speculation, and that is what you are doing here.
And you say:
Quote So, your answer to “Did Jesus exist as a man before his birth into this world through the virgin Mary?”…of course not…yet he did exist as a living being, a heavenly being. He even helped prepare this world that we live in now and is preparing the next place for us to live. If He can prepare the next place why do you think He couldn't have helped prepare this first place? Somewhere I remember reading one of you non-pre-existents saying why would God need help preparing the world? I ask you why is Jesus preparing the next place if His Father could do it without Him? I do believe that if anyone could prepare a world alone it would be the Father yet the Bible is clear that Jesus said that He was going to prepare a place for us. Genesis 1:1 states: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth”. And in Job 38, God speaking to Job, the scriptures state:
Quote Job 38:1 Then the LORD answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said, Job 38:2 Who [is] this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge?
Job 38:3 Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me.
Job 38:4 Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.
Job 38:5 Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?
Job 38:6 Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;
Job 38:7 When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?
He did apparently have help here:
Quote Gen 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. He states: “Let US make man in our image”, but He does not tell us to whom “US” refers.
You say:
Quote John 14:1-3 ” Do not let your heart be troubled; believe in God, believe also in Me. 2 “In My Father's house are many dwelling places; if it were not so, I would have told you; for I go to prepare a place for you.
NASUThat is parallelism to me.
First, the Son laid the foundation of the earth, created all things in the heavens and on the earth.
and now He is preparing another place for us. His Father isn't alone doing that and He wasn't alone preparing the earth the first time.
As I understand it, the Father was alone creating the place, “In the beginning God created the Heavens and the earth” formless and void then the Son was born and introduced as “Light” and from there the earth and heaven was prepared and took form i.e. dry land, seas, mountains, trees, animals, vegetation, sun, moon, stars, fish, man. He was a craftsman at His Father's side then and now…parallelism!God said “let there be light and there was light”, but light is not creating anything.
It may be that God tells Jesus that he laid the foundations of the earth and that the heavens are the works of his hands because God created all things with him as his heir in mind.
Quote Col 1:16 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: Quote Hbr 1:1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hbr 1:2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by [his] Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
Jesus existed as the Logos with God in the beginning. And so, how do you choose to define Logos?
In John 6, to continue, what I was saying in my previous post, Jesus had stated that he came down from heaven saying that he was the bread of life that gives life to the world, and he makes it clear that he is talking about the Word of God. We know that the Word of God came from God in that the scriptures state in Hebrews 1 that God in these last days has spoken to humanity through His Son, and in John 14, and elsewhere, Jesus makes it clear that he was obeying the Word of God as His Father taught him. Jesus said in John 14 that he who had seen him(through the works that he did in obedience to God) had seen the Father, and in Hebrews 1:3 Jesus is said to be the express image of God. The personality of a person is defined by the life that he lives, and so he that spirit that was formed in Jesus through obedience to the Word of God (the Logos) was with God in the beginning.
Love in Christ,
MartyQuote (thethinker @ Jan. 31 2009,09:28) Quote (martian @ Jan. 30 2009,05:46) Quote (thethinker @ Jan. 29 2009,19:38) Martian said: Quote I will get back to you on the John 5 issue. Martian, I am looking forward to it. As I said, I have been waiting for a Unitarian to overcome this.
God speed,
thinker
ThethinkerFor some reason you seem to think you have some authority to demand I answer your questions, while at the same time you post no sources for your theories.
You say –
You can tell me all day what your Hebrew sources say. I have Hebrew sources too. You are generalizing with the Hebrew language and not correctly exegeting it.Reply-
So post your sources that say image in Gen 1 does not mean form.You say –
Martian, I am looking forward to it. As I said, I have been waiting for a Unitarian to overcome this.Reply – I not appreciate being labeled and put in a category by you. I am not a Unitarian and never have been.
You say –
BTW, there is a rule of debate that says if a man does not reply to an argument then he concedes that argument by default. I have asked you several times to prove your theory that God cannot change in every way conceivable and you have repeatedly failed to reply. Therefore, you have conceded that there is no such teaching in Scripture.Reply –
You lean on a rule of debate to prove you are right? You claim that my reluctance in debating with you is because I have a weak case. Evolutionists win debates all the time simply because they are clever in debate tactics. Does that mean that evolution is true?I answered your question about YHWH meaning He exists. You posted opinion that it means “I will become” in such a way as to mean it exclusively. I posted sources that said in general it means He exists. Again opinion versus sources.
I already answered your question on the issue of form of God.
Martian,
I'm not interested in going back and forth with my Hebrew sources versus your Hebrew sources, I have been on the earth a long time now and have learned that men cannot be trusted. I told you that I question the way you exegete the Hebrew language. I told you before that I have Hebrew sources too that I could use. But I don't because I just want to just stick to the Scriptures.BTW, it is not my “opinion” that YHWH can become what He wants to become. I just told you what the Hebrew-English Interlinear said.
If you don't want me to call you a Unitarian then fine. I will avoid labels from now on. But if you called me a Trinitarian I would not mind. After all, if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck then it's a duck.I would appreciate it if we could just stick to the Bible.
cordially,
thinker
Should I now use your tactic? Is your refusal to prove your statements conceding that you have no proof?It seems odd to me that you claim that YHWH means “I will become”, yet you post no sources other then your opinion. Well I must admit that I prefer to take the opinion of someone that has actually studied Hebrew.
You claim a meaning for the Hebrew word YHWH and then refuse to prove from the Hebrew that you are correct. Then based on this mystery you pose another theory of a pre-existent Christ. Mystery upon mystery.
This is no different then the Trinitarians that build their doctrine upon mystery and poor study.You say –
BTW, it is not my “opinion” that YHWH can become what He wants to become. I just told you what the Hebrew-English Interlinear said.Reply –
Any study of ancient language is subject to mistake. The more sources that agree the more likely your conclusion is correct. There is something to be said for the credibility of sources too. One criteria is determining if the source has kept up with the latest in archeological research and discovery.
You say you do not trust men but you trust one interlinear. One interlinear written by men. Shouldn’t you say instead that you trust no men (or sources) that disagree with your theory? And it is theory and opinion unless a variety of respectable experts agree with it.You break the most basic of common principles used to interpret scripture. Do you actually use any principles of hermeneutics or do you just find some interlinear online and think you have done a deep and accurate study. This is typical of those that are only interested in doctrine rather then in truth.
You say-
I told you that I question the way you exegete the Hebrew language. I told you before that I have Hebrew sources too that I could use. But I don't because I just want to just stick to the Scriptures.Reply –
Understanding the Hebrew language is paramount to understanding the scriptures. Are you content to believe the English translators? I thought you did not trust men?
No one person can know everything about the languages in scripture. A person has to use sources. It is better to use many sources to avoid a prejudice. You cannot find only one that agrees with your doctrine and then pass that off as definitive proof.You say –
I would appreciate it if we could just stick to the Bible.Reply –
I have been sticking to the scriptures. The original words as penned by those who wrote them and understood within the culture and language in which they wrote.I find it very interesting that you make demands of me to answer your questions and then refuse to answer mine. Quite a contradiction don’t you think?
I am really not too concerned about all of this. This board is really no more then a computer game. I use it for entertainment purposes. The snow is almost melted around here and I will be able to get out again. I will not have as much time on here anyway.
I wish you no ill will but I cannot take what you say seriously without some credible back up for your opinions.
Blessings
martianQuote (Lightenup @ Jan. 31 2009,07:30) Thanks Martian,
I have read that before…pure specuation on your Hebrew scholar's part, but thanks. BTW, light fills things, things don't fill light. The day one light doesn't fill the sun, moon and the stars. I can understand filling the earth with plants, animals, etc. but I can't agree with the concept of filling the light with the sun, moon and stars. I can understand filling the heaven with the sun, moon and stars but not filling the light. I would say that you can fill a space, or a realm but not light waves. Light waves are NOT something that gets filled nor does the absence of light waves get filled (darkness), light waves fill, not get filled. So, I don't agree with your scholar's speculation.I believe that it is entirely possible for the light of day one to refer to the Son of God who is called the “firstborn of all creation,” also, the logos in the beginning, “Let there be light” is the first logos spoken, also the Son of God is called the “Light of the world.” Also, God speaks of the Son who laid the foundation of the world in Hebrews and in Colossians it speaks of the Son as the one who created everything IN heaven and ON earth. The “Light” of day one appeared before there was anything IN heaven or ON earth, remember the earth was formless and void before that. The living logos in the beginning was the Son of God as the “Light” and that living logos became flesh according to John 1:1 and was WITH GOD (Yes, the Light was with God on day one and since the Son of God was begotten of God, that makes Him a begotten God…the logos WAS GOD).
LU
So you claim that “light” in John 1 means Jesis and then say that “light in Genesis must mean Jesus too. According to your method of interpretation I have a few questions.John 14:6?Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.
Jesus says without doubt that He is the way. There fore I can assume (as you did with light) that anytime way is found in the OT it means Jesus?
Who is this Jesus of the Red Sea?
Numbers 21:4?Then they set out from Mount Hor by the (Jesus) way of the Red Sea, to go around the land of Edom; and the people became impatient because of the journey.
Deuteronomy 1:40?'But as for you, turn around and set out for the wilderness by the (Jesus) way to the Red Sea.'
OR, Who is this Jesus that stood contrary to the Angel of the Lord?
Numbers 22:32?The angel of the LORD said to him, “Why have you struck your donkey these three times? Behold, I have come out as an adversary, because your way was contrary to me.
Who is this Jesus of Gibeon?
2 Samuel 2:24?But Joab and Abishai pursued Abner, and when the sun was going down, they came to the hill of Ammah, which is in front of Giah by the way of the wilderness of Gibeon.
And who is this false Jesus?
Psalm 119:128?Therefore I esteem right all Your precepts concerning everything,I hate every false (Jesus) way.
You cannot just make assumptions about scripture because you are desperate to find proof for your doctrine of a pre-existent Christ.
Hi Marty,
You asked:Quote Can you produce a scripture which states that Jesus pre-existed in a body before his virgin birth? And if there is such a thing, was he a man or an angel or just what? You cannot justify what you believe through speculation, and that is what you are doing here. Heb 1:10
“YOU, LORD, IN THE BEGINNING LAID THE FOUNDATION OF THE EARTH,
AND THE HEAVENS ARE THE WORKS OF YOUR HANDS;
NASUHe has hands! Here in Isaiah it speaks of His right hand, also He speaks, also one can come near to Him.
Isa 48:12-16
“Listen to Me, O Jacob, even Israel whom I called;
I am He, I am the first, I am also the last.
13 “Surely My hand founded the earth,
And My right hand spread out the heavens;
When I call to them, they stand together.
14 ” Assemble, all of you, and listen!
Who among them has declared these things?
The LORD loves him; he will carry out His good pleasure on Babylon,
And His arm will be against the Chaldeans.
15 “I, even I, have spoken; indeed I have called him,
I have brought him, and He will make his ways successful.
16 ” Come near to Me, listen to this:
From the first I have not spoken in secret,
From the time it took place, I was there.
And now the Lord GOD has sent Me, and His Spirit.”
NASUWho is the “Me” and the “I” in the above passage Marty, not Cyrus that is the “Him.” Also, it is not the “Lord GOD” that is sending the “Him” and “His Spirit.” The answer is the Son of God as we see in Hebrews 1:10-12
Ps 102:1-103:1
A Prayer of the Afflicted when he is faint and pours out his complaint before the LORD.
Hear my prayer, O LORD! And let my cry for help come to You. 2 Do not hide Your face from me in the day of my distress; Incline Your ear to me; In the day when I call answer me quickly. 3 For my days have been consumed in smoke, And my bones have been scorched like a hearth. 4 My heart has been smitten like grass and has withered away, Indeed, I forget to eat my bread. 5 Because of the loudness of my groaning My bones cling to my flesh. 6 I resemble a pelican of the wilderness; I have become like an owl of the waste places. 7 I lie awake, I have become like a lonely bird on a housetop.
8 My enemies have reproached me all day long; Those who deride me have used my name as a curse. 9 For I have eaten ashes like bread And mingled my drink with weeping 10 Because of Your indignation and Your wrath, For You have lifted me up and cast me away. 11 My days are like a lengthened shadow, And I wither away like grass.
12 But You, O LORD, abide forever, And Your name to all generations. 13 You will arise and have compassion on Zion; For it is time to be gracious to her, For the appointed time has come. 14 Surely Your servants find pleasure in her stones And feel pity for her dust. 15 So the nations will fear the name of the LORD And all the kings of the earth Your glory. 16 For the LORD has built up Zion; He has appeared in His glory. 17 He has regarded the prayer of the destitute And has not despised their prayer.
18 This will be written for the generation to come, That a people yet to be created may praise the LORD. 19 For He looked down from His holy height; From heaven the LORD gazed upon the earth, 20 To hear the groaning of the prisoner, To set free those who were doomed to death, 21 That men may tell of the name of the LORD in Zion And His praise in Jerusalem, 22 When the peoples are gathered together, And the kingdoms, to serve the LORD.
23 He has weakened my strength in the way; He has shortened my days. 24 I say, “O my God, do not take me away in the midst of my days, Your years are throughout all generations. 25 “Of old You founded the earth, And the heavens are the work of Your hands. 26 ” Even they will perish, but You endure; And all of them will wear out like a garment; Like clothing You will change them and they will be changed. 27 “But You are the same, And Your years will not come to an end. 28 “The children of Your servants will continue, And their descendants will be established before You.”Now doesn't this sound alot like Hebrews 1:10-12
25 “Of old You founded the earth, And the heavens are the work of Your hands. 26 ” Even they will perish, but You endure; And all of them will wear out like a garment; Like clothing You will change them and they will be changed. 27 “But You are the same, And Your years will not come to an end.See for yourself:
Heb 1:8-128 But of the Son He says,
“YOUR THRONE, O GOD, IS FOREVER AND EVER,
AND THE RIGHTEOUS SCEPTER IS THE SCEPTER OF HIS KINGDOM.
9 “YOU HAVE LOVED RIGHTEOUSNESS AND HATED LAWLESSNESS;
THEREFORE GOD, YOUR GOD, HAS ANOINTED YOU
WITH THE OIL OF GLADNESS ABOVE YOUR COMPANIONS.”10 And,
“YOU, LORD, IN THE BEGINNING LAID THE FOUNDATION OF THE EARTH,
AND THE HEAVENS ARE THE WORKS OF YOUR HANDS;
11 THEY WILL PERISH, BUT YOU REMAIN;
AND THEY ALL WILL BECOME OLD LIKE A GARMENT,
12 AND LIKE A MANTLE YOU WILL ROLL THEM UP;
LIKE A GARMENT THEY WILL ALSO BE CHANGED.
BUT YOU ARE THE SAME,
AND YOUR YEARS WILL NOT COME TO AN END.”
NASUSo, to sum up, your question was:
[QUOTE] Can you produce a scripture which states that Jesus pre-existed in a body before his virgin birth? And if there is such a thing, was he a man or an angel or just what? You cannot justify what you believe through speculation, and that is what you are doing here.
[/QUOTEHe was the LORD that spread out the heavens and laid the foundation of the earth. This LORD has a God and Father with whom He has unity with and together they are our saving Lord and God. No man can be saved apart from the Son and the Father.
Not speculation, the Father Himself tells us that it was the Son that laid the foundation of the earth and the heavens are the works of His hands. Now, I believe that the Father can take credit for this also. They both played a part of this endeavor. The Father is the source, the Son is the master craftsman.
LU
PS The Son says that He is the “Light of the world” and He laid the foundation of the earth and the heavens are the works of His hands. Therefore the “Light of the world” did indeed prepare this world that we enjoy.
Martian,
You assume wrong.Quote There fore I can assume (as you did with light) that anytime way is found in the OT it means Jesus? Where did I say that anytime “light” is found in the OT it means Jesus?
I only spoke of the day one “light” as referring to the Son not anytime you see the word light. Good grief. That thinking of yours surely brings into question your thought process here, sorry. There are times throughout scripture that refer to the Son as the “Light” but certainly not ever time the word “light” is used. You are grasping for straws here.
LUQuote (Lightenup @ Feb. 01 2009,04:54) Martian,
You assume wrong.[QUOTE][/There fore I can assume (as you did with light) that anytime way is found in the OT it means Jesus?
QUOTE]Where did I say that anytime “light” is found in the OT it means Jesus?
I only spoke of the day one “light” as referring to the Son not anytime you see the word light. Good grief. That thinking of yours surely brings into question your thought process here, sorry. There are times throughout scripture that refer to the Son as the “Light” but certainly not ever time the word “light” is used. You are grasping for straws here.
LU
By what authority do you say that light in Gen 1 means light. Do you do it based on doctrine or do you have some scriptural evidence that proves light is equal to Jesus. It appears that you have a doctrine that you want to prove and you find a scripture that you can force fit into it and claim it as proof. You can't just decide it means this here and does not mean it there because you need some proof. Talk about “my” thought process?Quote (martian @ Feb. 01 2009,05:25) [quote=Lightenup,Feb. 01 2009,04:54]Martian,
You assume wrong.Quote [/There fore I can assume (as you did with light) that anytime way is found in the OT it means Jesus?
QUOTE]Where did I say that anytime “light” is found in the OT it means Jesus?
I only spoke of the day one “light” as referring to the Son not anytime you see the word light. Good grief. That thinking of yours surely brings into question your thought process here, sorry. There are times throughout scripture that refer to the Son as the “Light” but certainly not ever time the word “light” is used. You are grasping for straws here.
LU
By what authority do you say that light in Gen 1 means light. Do you do it based on doctrine or do you have some scriptural evidence that proves light is equal to Jesus. It appears that you have a doctrine that you want to prove and you find a scripture that you can force fit into it and claim it as proof. You can't just decide it means this here and does not mean it there because you need some proof. Talk about “my” thought process?
Sorry I missed typed in the previous post —
By what authority do you say that light in Gen 1 means a pre-existent Christ. Do you do it based on doctrine or do you have some scriptural evidence that proves light is equal to Jesus. It appears that you have a doctrine that you want to prove and you find a scripture that you can force fit into it and claim it as proof. You can't just decide it means this here and does not mean it there because you need some proof. You must have solid evidence to assume light means Jesus and that evidence has nothing to do with a pre-conceived idea of doctrine.
Talk about “my” thought process?Quote (thethinker @ Jan. 31 2009,10:45) Martian said: Quote I answered your question about YHWH meaning He exists. You posted opinion that it means “I will become” in such a way as to mean it exclusively. I posted sources that said in general it means He exists. Again opinion versus sources. Make up your mind Martian. Did YHWH say “I exist”, or did He say “I function”?
Quote I already answered your question on the issue of form of God. You have not answered my question from John 5:37. You have said that man as the image of God is in the form of God. But Jesus told the Jews that they have “neither heard [God's] voice or seen His form” (John 5:37). So Jesus was wrong.
I am not interested in your “sources” Martian. I have sources too. I earned my degree from two Bible colleges and then took several post graduate courses in Seminary. So I have a library of sources. I just want you to discuss the Bible with me. I don't give a hoot about your sources or mine.
Jesus told the Jews that they had not seen God's form. How could Jesus have said this if the very people He spoke to were God's form? It's a simple question. Yet you think it “demanding” of me to require a reply from you. You said that a pre-existent Jesus doesn't do us any good. But a mistaken Jesus doesn't do us any good either. Therefore, it is necessaery that you reconcile your definitions and your sources with what Jesus said. No degree in rocket science is needed to figure out the pertinence of my question. And I stick by the rule of debate. If you fail to reply then you concede by default.
blessings,
thinker
You say –
You have not answered my question from John 5:37. You have said that man as the image of God is in the form of God. But Jesus told the Jews that they have “neither heard [God's] voice or seen His form” (John 5:37). So Jesus was wrong.Reply –
I have said that the word Image in Genesis 1 means form. I have posted many sources to prove that. You have posted no sources to counter that so (according to your debate tactics) you must concede it to be true. This was in conjunction to my statement in Phil 2 about Jesus functioning as God. I posted a long post on how the Hebrews perceived or saw their world. Adam was born with dominion over the Earth. He was immature but had he not fallen he would have grown to be just like Jesus.
You say my conclusion contradicts John 5”37. So does Thomas when he says to Jesus “My Lord and my God.” This was before Christ was glorified and he was still in his Earthly flesh. Did Thomas actually see God?
So the question is – What did Thomas see that the Jewish leaders did not see?
Part of the key lies in the words of John. The words “seen” and “form” carry with them the concept of perception. Thomas finally perceived what was standing before him. Jesus stated that he would raise the Temple (himself) up in 3 days and Thomas now had the proof he needed to perceive that this human being was functioning as God. It was not about appearance it was about function.
The problem with the Jews in John 5 is that they could not perceive that this human was functioning as God. They refused to acknowledge that He functioned as God. They refused because to admit it would topple their little kingdom and power base they had long enjoyed. Jesus destroyed the myth that the pharasees were good leaders of Israel by functioning as God to the people. He showed how a proper Rabbi should function. He should function as God. With the character of God and because of that character he could be trusted with the power of God.
The whole context of John 5 is about their denying Christ as functioning as God. This is why He did miracle after miracle in front of them and they still refused to se it.
Look at the immediate context –36″But the testimony which I have is greater than the testimony of John; for the works which the Father has given Me to accomplish–the very works that I do–testify about Me, that the Father has sent Me.
(He does not speak about an appearance that he has portraying him as the Christ. He speaks about how he has functioned portraying the works of God. He talks about the works/functions as bearing witness of him.)
37″And the Father who sent Me, He has testified of Me. You have neither heard His voice at any time nor seen His form.
38″You do not have His word abiding in you, for you do not believe Him whom He sent.(They do not perceive what Jesus is saying or doing. They do not perceive that he is functioning (through his works) as God.
I find these next two verses interesting in light of what we have been discussing. There are those that insist on dissecting scripture and cannot perceive a normal human as able to function as God without tagging on some mystical formula or extra-human power of pre-existence.
39″You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me;
40and you are unwilling to come to Me so that you may have life.They refuse to come to the real Christ that they may be partakers of the divine nature and function as Christ did.
Phil 2, John 5 and Genesis 1 are all talking about the ability and necessity of man to function as God. Function with God’s character and with God’s power. When the first Adam failed, our loving Father sent a second Adam as an example for us to follow and as a sacrifice to buy us back the position as sons.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
