What does it mean that Jesus came in the flesh?

[Wakeup]

EDj.

 

God’s Spirit is Go’s Spirit; God’s Word is God’s Word.

God’s righteousness is God’s righteousness.

God’s love is God’s love.

No others involved.

 

wakeup.

[Ed J]

Hi Wakeup,

Then you agree that God’s word is not God’s son?

___________
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

[Ed J]

Ed wrote:

Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God,
SO THAT THINGS WHICH ARE SEEN WERE NOT MADE OF THINGS WHICH DO APPEAR.
(Heb 11:3)

That that which is seen should not take its origin from things which appear.[/size]
Meaning, since Jesus did appear, he could not have taken his origin from himself.

Hi Mike,

Heb 11:3 clearly says “The Word” created the worlds,
and also “The Word” cannot possibly be Jesus. It is a shame
that YOU cannot see that this is what this verse *IS* really saying.

___________
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

[GeneBalthrop]

T8…….Jesus  is said to be the SECOND Adam , Seeing some say, He Created Adam. Did he create himself, as another ADAM also?,  If ALL things were created BY him and For him , then that would also have to include the second Adam also, after all,  ALL means ALL, right? I am not saying you believe that , because I don’t think you do, but some he seem to.

 

peace and love to you and yours……………………gene

[GeneBalthrop]

Wakeup……..Check out the Word LORD used there and you will find it is ADONIA,  ( YAHWEH ) the  ALL mighty GOD,  Not Lord ADONI, a human ruler or magistrate  Jesus is called in scripture Adoni, NOT ADONIA,

need proof , …… The LORD (ADONIA) said unto my Lord (Adoni) set on my right hand until I ( ADONIA) make your enemies your foot stool.

This is where your getting the words LORD and Lord  confused , they are not the same words not do they have the same meanings, one is  GOD  ALL MIGHTY the other is a HUMAN RULER.  Check it out Wakeup.

 

peace and love to you and yours………………….Gene

[Wakeup]

Hi Gene.

 

Do you really need a library to understand that scripture?

The Lord(God) said unto my Lord (Jesus).

David’s Lord is Jesus. How can David be the father of Jesus?

How can Mary be the mother of Jesus? HE also is Mary’s Lord.

 

wakeup.

[Wakeup]

Edj.

 

What? How did you work that one out?

If God’s Word is God’s Word.Then The son is also God’s.

For He is the Word of God which is God’s Word.

Too much of that stuff again?  😀

[Wakeup]

Hu Geneb.

 

Every word that you Speak has Spirit in it.

The spirit does give an effect on people.

Good words make one happy; bad words make one angree.

All we say will be on record.

 

Wakeup.

[Proclaimer]

@terraricca

Yes “the word” is the only one created directly by God ;and for this Christ his the ONLY ONE BEGOTTEN SON OF GOD ;IF HE WAS NOT THE ONLY ONE CREATED BY GOD ;<HE WOULD NOT BE THE ONLY ONE BEGOTTEN SON OF GOD >for God created many other sons

this is what Paul means;Col 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation

then goes on saying ;Col 1:16 For through him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created through him and for him.

for God as used his son ,his only son ,son of his nature,a son at his image, to create all other things through him but also for him,

Paul goes on saying ;Col 1:17 He is before all things, and in him all things hold together.THIS CONFIRM WHAT IS ALREADY SAID .

Col 1:18 <AND> he is the head of the body, the church……; THIS IS A PLUS TO ALL HE ALREADY IS ,

WHY DID GOD DO THIS ?;Col 1:19 For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him,(CHRIST HIS SON)

AND YES ;Jn 1:14 “The Word”(JESUS) became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.

ALL THIS IS THE TRUTH

The only thing is, it actually doesn’t say anywhere there that he was created. But scripture repeats that he is the only begotten. Thus, there might be something to this. People believe Jesus is God when it actually doesn’t say he is. They assume that. People believe that Jesus started existence as a man even though it doesn’t say that either. They assume it. You assume that he was created, but it doesn’t say that.

[Proclaimer]

@EdJ

Are you suggesting that the term “only begotten” refers to a special preexistent state.
There is no evidence to suggest that is what the term means at all; unless you have some,
do you? Why can’t it instead simply mean that Jesus had no human biological father?

In Hebrews Isaac is referred to as Abraham’s only begotten son. (ref. Heb 11:17)
Yet we know, Abraham also had a son named Ismael, who by the way
was the FIRSTBORN. So the term only begotten CANNOT mean firstbor

Only begotten of the Father means only born of the Father. Which makes sense when you consider that the head of man is Christ, and the head of Christ is God. He came from God while creation came from God through the Word.

[Proclaimer]

@GeneBalthrop

T8…… If you say while we may reach the fullness of Christ and the say CHRIST reached the fullness of God , you are incorrect, there is no scripture that I recall that say’s christ Jesus reached the fullness of God. While God did dwell IN HIM, that in no way is saying the he (Jesus) ever reached to the FULLNESS of GOD. In fact Jesus himself said the Father was GREATER then HE WAS.

Yes of course God is greater than his son. Jesus told us so. However, while we reflect God in part, Jesus reflects his full glory. God has not spared his glory from us. It is revealed through his son.

Colossians 2:
For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form,

Hebrews 1:3
The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven.

2 Corinthians 4:6
For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.

[Proclaimer]

@GeneBalthrop

T8…….Jesus is said to be the SECOND Adam , Seeing some say, He Created Adam. Did he create himself, as another ADAM also?, If ALL things were created BY him and For him , then that would also have to include the second Adam also, after all, ALL means ALL, right? I am not saying you believe that , because I don’t think you do, but some he seem to.

This is why we believe that he came in the flesh. He partook of flesh. He partook of the creation that was made through him. Why? He became like us to save us. Now we can be like him because of his sacrifice. God loved us and provided a way for us.

He existed in the form of God, emptied himself, partook of flesh, died for us, rose from the dead, and is now at the right-hand of the majesty on high in the glory that he had with him before the cosmos began.

[Proclaimer]

@mikeboll64

I read your last post. This is my reply to that.

1. The word ‘create’ in scripture is used of ‘man’. Where is that same word used of the ‘Word’ or ‘Jesus’ before coming in the flesh?
2. Yes we are begotten of God, this is the hope that we have. But that doesn’t negate that we were created or made by God through his Word etc. It just means that we have the birth that Jesus had, but in a reverse order to him. We partake of flesh followed by the spiritual body. Whereas Jesus existed in the form of God, emptied himself, and partook of flesh.
3. If Jesus was the first work of God, then he came 100% from God with no other derivative like us. Thus being begotten by God is an apt description for his origin.
4. You believe the Word was created and you have as much proof as those who say that Jesus is God.
5. You cannot believe that Jesus is the only begotten of the Father. Because that would mean that he is the only created of the Father in your view, and we both know that God created us and all men. By reason of your teaching here, Jesus is the only created of God. We both know this is not true, so on that point alone, you need to dig deeper regarding this topic.

[Proclaimer]

Also, you absolutely do not believe the following:

Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 

You basically say that Jesus is excluded by reason of common sense. The problem is that it doesn’t mention the exclusion you speak of, and worse, it then makes an even bigger statement making your view all the more harder to defend when it says, “without him nothing was made that was made”.

Clearly you says that Jesus was made. But that verse completely contradicts your view. I can say implicitly that without him nothing was made that has been made. You cannot say this is true. One exception to any absolute statement makes the statement untrue. e.g., It is no different to saying that God is invisible and no man has seen him (as it is written) but then saying except when he is visible. You then have to wonder why even make such a statement when it disproves itself. What is the point.

So clearly you do not believe  “without Jesus nothing was made that was made” whereas I do believe this.

Then you give the example of Adam. He is a man and all men were created through him. But not all men were created through Adam. Adam was not created through Adam as you imply. But the definition of a man is not all that is begotten by human parents even if it is 99.99999999999999999 % correct. The head of man is Christ and that would go for Adam too. Thus he is created, but he is the only one to not be begotten by human parents.

The second Adam is also not directly begotten from human parents. Yet he was a man. God created man in his own image. What does Adam not having human parents have to do with Jesus being begotten of his Father anyway?

[terraricca]

{The only thing is, it actually doesn’t say anywhere there that he was created. But scripture repeats that he is the only begotten. Thus, there might be something to this. People believe Jesus is God when it actually doesn’t say he is. They assume that. People believe that Jesus started existence as a man even though it doesn’t say that either. They assume it. You assume that he was created, but it doesn’t say that.}

may be ; Col 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.

Pr 8:22 “The LORD brought me forth as the first of his works,
before his deeds of old;
Pr 8:23 I was appointed from eternity,
from the beginning

Eze 28:15 You were blameless in your ways
from the day you were created (SATAN)
till wickedness was found in you.

those scriptures tells me that at one point God did not created ,and that there was a first time with a first thing ,right ? what was that first thing ? according to Paul it was Christ ,the son of God,
it also seem to be the case in Proverb 8;22

and according to EZE satan was also created long before other things ,

and also John1;1 and others that there was a beginning and at that beginning it started with one first creation ;the creation of the only son of God ,

by removing this view ,we destroy all truth in the entire scriptures ,

[mikeboll64]

kerwin wrote:

Being as Jesus is the word given the characteristics of a person it follows that anything Jesus did the word did. The question is whether Jesus did anything the word did before the word was given the characteristics of a person. It is possible Scripture does credit him with doing such things.

Kerwin,

Everything you say amounts to: “The Word was Jesus on earth”. And this is also what I believe.

[mikeboll64]

mikeboll64 wrote:

So a sacrificial demigod? Superior to the angels? A second, lesser god? The first begotten Son of God? Sounds to me like Philo was right on the money, Kerwin.

kerwin wrote:

It is known Philo used philosophical allegory in his writing and referring to a non-person as a person is one thing that can be done when using it.

So the fact that Philo, on occasion, used metaphorical language is proof to you that all the above things he said about the logos being person really mean the logos WASN’T a person?

Why do you reach for ANYTHING except for the most logical and sensible way words can be understood? No matter, Philo and I believe that the Word WAS INDEED God’s first begotten Son. And as such, he was a second lesser god who was nevertheless still superior to the many other gods (angels) that God then created through that firstborn one.

[terraricca]

t8

{Then you give the example of Adam. He is a man and all men were created through him. But not all men were created through Adam. Adam was not created through Adam as you imply. But the definition of a man is not all that is begotten by human parents even if it is 99.99999999999999999 % correct. The head of man is Christ and that would go for Adam too. Thus he is created, but he is the only one to not be begotten by human parents.}

when it says all humans have been created through Adam this is true but this is from ADAM and beyond ,so not including Adam

[mikeboll64]

Ed J wrote:

Hi Mike,

Heb 11:3 clearly says “The Word” created the worlds,
and also “The Word” cannot possibly be Jesus. It is a shame
that YOU cannot see that this is what this verse *IS* really saying.

Hi Ed,

Hebrews 11:3 NKJV ©
By faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that the things which are seen were not made of things which are visible.

NETNotes says:

The Greek phrasing emphasizes this point by negating the opposite: “so that what is seen did not come into being from things that are visible.”

The KJV’s rendering of, “things which do appear” is not as accurate. But I’ll use another scripture to prove that claim to you:

1 John 1
1 That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life;

2 (For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us)

So “the Word”, which was invisible, was later MANIFESTED unto them, and they SAW IT with their own eyes. In other words, “the Word” DID “appear”.

So perhaps it is you who doesn’t quite understand Heb 11:3, Ed.

[mikeboll64]

t8 wrote:

Also, you absolutely do not believe the following:

Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.

Hi t8,

I can see that I’m going to have to go point at a time here. I will once again explain to you that the Greek word translated as “made” in the version you quoted above is “ginomai”. And “ginomai” means: to become, i.e. to come into existence, begin to be, receive being. I will also point you to my last post to Ed, which is right above this post.

First, notice the blue NKJV quote at the top of the page. It says, in part, “things which are seen were not made of things which are visible”.

Now, notice the green NETNote below that blue NKJV scripture. It tells us that the GREEK words actually mean, “so that what is seen did not come into being from things that are visible.”

Why does the NETNote literally translate as, come into being? Because, as I showed you twice before, and once again in this very post, the Greek word “ginomai” actually MEANS, to become, i.e. to come into existence.

So I have only one question for you (one that you already answered a week ago):

Did the Word COME INTO EXISTENCE? YES or NO?

[Author]

Posts