- This topic has 3,120 replies, 19 voices, and was last updated 4 years, 7 months ago by
.
- Posts
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 25 2013,10:19) Quote (Wakeup @ Oct. 24 2013,16:51) Hi you all.
Mike/Terra/Kerwin/Gene/Marty/Carmel.
And whomsoever.Unravel this scripture before you make any comments
about the Word; and God.Isaiah 44:6 Thus saith the **LORD the King of Israel**,
**and his redeemer the LORD of hosts**;
** I am the first, and I am the last**;
**and beside me there is no God**.wakeup.
Done.Wakeup, is that scripture supposed to be telling us that the Father God Almighty used to dwell within the Father God Almighty, but then the Father God Almighty came out of the Father God Almighty and became a different being who was no longer the Father God Almighty?
Because THAT is exactly what YOU are teaching here. Sounds a little bizarre, don't you think?
Mike B.I know how you feel,but that is scripture.
I did not make that up.
I put it there for you guys to ponder.wakeup.
Quote (Wakeup @ Oct. 24 2013,17:32) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 25 2013,10:19)
Wakeup, is that scripture supposed to be telling us that the Father God Almighty used to dwell within the Father God Almighty, but then the Father God Almighty came out of the Father God Almighty and became a different being who was no longer the Father God Almighty?Because THAT is exactly what YOU are teaching here. Sounds a little bizarre, don't you think?
Mike B.I know how you feel,but that is scripture.
I did not make that up.
But Wakeup,If there is a way to understand a scripture that results in God the Father being INSIDE God the Father………….. and there is a DIFFERENT way to understand that same scripture WITHOUT concluding that God the Father used to be INSIDE God the Father………… which way will you understand that scripture?
The Bizarro World way? Or the way that DOESN'T make you sound like a blathering idiot?
Quote (Wakeup @ Oct. 24 2013,17:26) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 25 2013,10:11) Quote (Wakeup @ Oct. 24 2013,07:56)
The Word *WAS* God is when the Word is still in God's bosom.
And is the Word STILL God? YES or NO?
The Word can never be God.
Okay. I agree the Word can never be God.What I want to know is if you believe the Word USED TO BE the Father God Almighty Himself.
WAS the Word ever actually the BEING of God, Wakeup?
Quote (Wakeup @ Oct. 25 2013,04:51) Hi you all.
Mike/Terra/Kerwin/Gene/Marty/Carmel.
And whomsoever.Unravel this scripture before you make any comments
about the Word; and God.Isaiah 44:6 Thus saith the **LORD the King of Israel**,
**and his redeemer the LORD of hosts**;
** I am the first, and I am the last**;
**and beside me there is no God**.wakeup.
wakeupthis is my answer ;and the truth according to all the scriptures;
Isa 44:6 Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God.Isa 44:6 Thus saith the LORD(God almighty) the King of Israel, and his(God almighty) redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God.
God Almighty his THE KING AND THE REDEEMER OF ISRAEL AND SO ALSO THE LORD OF HOST ,
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 25 2013,10:46) Quote (Wakeup @ Oct. 24 2013,17:26) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 25 2013,10:11) Quote (Wakeup @ Oct. 24 2013,07:56)
The Word *WAS* God is when the Word is still in God's bosom.
And is the Word STILL God? YES or NO?
The Word can never be God.
Okay. I agree the Word can never be God.What I want to know is if you believe the Word USED TO BE the Father God Almighty Himself.
WAS the Word ever actually the BEING of God, Wakeup?
Mike B.God's Word is God's Word.
God is the *owner* of his Word,and all his qualities.
The word is NOT God.Just picture it.
Before the creation: God stands alone
with all His qualities inside him.
Just God alone,and empty space.He did not speak; he did not create.
He was just planning; putting the sketches together.
He made things, not by his bare hands,but by speaking.wakeup.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 25 2013,10:16) Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Oct. 24 2013,15:16) Quote (mikeboll @ 64) 1. Jesus is IN God. (John 17:21) 2. Jesus IS God.
Gene, do both of these statements mean the same thing? YES or NO?
So, knowing now how badly that one little word can twist a scriptural teaching, will you continue to ADD it to John 1:14? Or will you find a way to understand what John actually DID write in that verse?
Mike…….JESUS said clearly he was “IN” the Father and the Father was “IN” Him. How many times do I have to quote that for you. The answer to your number 1 question iS YES, God was also him reconciling the world unto HIMSELF.
So your answer to the first question: Do the two statements mean the same thing? -is “YES”? Hmmm……And your answer to my second question: Now that you know, will you continue to add your own words? – is also “YES”? Double Hmmmm………..
Okay Gene. I really have nothing more to say to you then. When you want to discuss 1:14 using ONLY the words that John wrote, hit me up. Until then, there is no reason for me to discuss scripture with a man who ALTERS the scriptures for his own personal gain.
Take care of yourself.
Mike…………No the two do not mean the same thing, and it is you who is altering scriptures to fit you false renditions because i can produce all kinds of scriptures that back up what i have said , it is you who do not except them, and alter them to fit you own personal views, I noticed you still have not answered this scripture i have posted over and over. But put your tail between you legs and run away when confronted with absolute scriptures. I believe it is you who was telling us Scripture don't mean emphatic statement which give you the ground to alter the text to fit you own rendition Not Me Mike as i recall. So when are you going to answer this scripture, i answered yours. even if it is not according to you renditions of them. So it is you turn now please answer the below as absolutely TRUE or FALSE?I cor 8:4…….. we know that there is not idol in the world and that there is “NO GOD, but “ONE” .
So what part of that scripture did i change Mike? To fit what i have been saying all along MIKE.
peace and love………………………………gene
Wakeup……….Your teaching the same teaching of the Gnostic's of John and Paul's day , they were false teachers trying to make Jesus appear as a disguised God from the Palora of the Gods, and said he only “appeared” here as a Human being for a shot time. Both John and Paul fought this teaching and John even said those who believed Jesus did not come in the flesh were Antichrists. And he meant came into existence as a Human being, not Morphed into one. IMO
Jesus was and still is a Pure human being he never existed before his berth on this earth , he is a man of the Loins of King Davis Just a Paul and others said said , he is and was a human being as he said 81 times, He was a SON OF MAN, And said he will return as a “SON OF MAN”. when the “SON OF MAN” returns, will he find faith on the earth or don't you remember that scripture, Jesus was never a Spirit being not now or ever will be either. Nor will we be Spirit Beings , even though we all have spirit “IN” us all we still are and will exist as flesh beings Just as Jesus now is.
Wakeup you have to get rid of your past wrong teachings and start over, or they will just hinder you as they do many here. IMO
peace nad love to you and yours………………………………………..gene
Gene B.
If you follow that teaching;you will find many contradictions
to scripture.JESUS SAID:
1.IF YOU ARE BORN OF THE FLESH;*YOU ARE FLESH*.
(there is no need to change this statement).2.IF YOU ARE BORN OF THE SPIRIT;*YOU ARE SPIRIT*
(there is no need to change this statement).3.YOU WILL BE AS THE ANGELS IN HEAVEN.
(and they are spirit creatures)4.FLESH AND BLOOD CAN NOT ENTER HEAVEN.
(there is no need to spin this statement).5.FLESH IS AS THE DUST OF THE EARTH.
(for dust you are and to dust shall you return).6.JESUS WAS MADE SO MUCH BETTER THAN THE ANGELS.
7.FLESH *IS NOT* SO MUCH BETTER THAN THE ANGELS.
8.YOU HAVE *TO EAT* MY FLESH TO HAVE LIFE.
(chew on his flesh?).9. JESUS LIVE BY THE FATHER;IS HE CHEWING ON HIS
FATHER?10. A SPIRIT HAS NO FLESH AND BONE AS I HAVE(Jesus).
(**A SPIRIT HAS NOT FLESH AND BONE**).
(**A SPIRIT HAS NO FLESH AND BONE**).
(no need to spin this statement).Is the Word of God made flesh; *OF FLESH*? Or *spirit* to flesh?
Are we to chew on Jesus flesh and bone,and drink his blood?
A quickening spirit; is that flesh and bone?
Is spirit also flesh? Is there no difference?
Are satan and his angels spirit; BUT Jesus flesh?
Is Micha'el the arc angel also flesh?
Is Gabri'el also flesh?
Only satan and his angels are spirit?Are the four beasts in heaven also flesh?
The fact is that angels can manifest into flesh at will.
They can appear as flesh, and eat mans food.
Do you need proof of this?
Why can't Jesus do this; in your opinion?Jesus appeared to his brethren in the flesh;*truly flesh* and bone, to show himself; and to be touched.
Angels can not be seen and touched by man; unless he made himself visible/flesh;*truly flesh*.Abraham saw the Lord and his angels in the flesh**INDEED**,they ate and drunk,and had a conversation.
Does that mean that they *must be* flesh and bone?
THERE IS NO SUCH AS GLORIFIED DUST OF THE EARTH.wakeup.
Wakeup,
Quote Jesus is a quickening spirit. That is not written in Scripture and the points where people think it is implied or hinted at by Scripture do not support a convincing argument.
Quote Jesus has flesh and bone after his resurrection. That is an explicit message of Scripture.
Quote He had flesh and bone;because he appeared
to them to be seen and touched.Are you claiming that despite fact Jesus explicitly stated that a spirit did not have flesh and bone like him that he was never the less a spirit. If so then you are either implying Jesus lied or that he was not making sense.
If, as I am convinced, Jesus was making sense and being truthful then Jesus was not a spirit as he had flesh and bone.
Quote (kerwin @ Oct. 23 2013,11:25) Wakeup,
Spirits do not have flesh and bone.
Is Jesus a spirit?
Jesus has flesh and bone after his resurrection.
Therefore Jesus cannot be a spirit.
He was made a little lower than the angels for a time. He was then taken up to the place where flesh and blond cannot inherit and was glorified. Now his hair is as white as snow and his eyes as a flame of fire.Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 25 2013,10:46) Quote (Wakeup @ Oct. 24 2013,17:26) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 25 2013,10:11) Quote (Wakeup @ Oct. 24 2013,07:56)
The Word *WAS* God is when the Word is still in God's bosom.
And is the Word STILL God? YES or NO?
The Word can never be God.
Okay. I agree the Word can never be God.What I want to know is if you believe the Word USED TO BE the Father God Almighty Himself.
WAS the Word ever actually the BEING of God, Wakeup?
Mike B.You will get there where the majority can not come.
Because of your persistence.
This can not be made clear with a few words.The Word is God's possession.
The Word is God's tool.
God's power is in his Word.
God does things by speaking out his Word.
All things are made BY THE SPOKEN WORD.Just picture yourself alone,and never said a word.
Your word is inside you;part of you.But you never ever spoke out.
Then you have an idea to create.First thing you do is bring out your word(only God can do this). Now your word is out of you, and you gave him a shape
like yourself.(you brought forth your word).
What ever you want to say, HE/WORD/YOUR IMAGE spoke.
And it is done.His name is *mikes word*.
He is not Mike; but mikes tool,always mikes tool/word.With Jesus, is just the same thing.
What ever his Father wanted said; Jesus spoke.
For HE is the word in the flesh.(God's mouth).
God's loud speaker; God spoke: and the loudspeaker utters
the words.
In the beginning: HE WAS the Word in spirit.Since He was made man;he has his own *human* mind.
He could obey, or disobey,it's his choice.
He obeyed,for He loved his Father.Now He sits next to His Father, and given *all* authority
Of which he did not have before. Now he has been promoted as God;(equal to God but still humble) and will be given his own kingdom and his throne in jerusalem,for a 1000yrs.
Although he is God/worshipped; he also has his God,our God.
(HE IS NOT THE FATHER)
There is only one God the Father: because He also came out of God as his Word.He is still part of God. He is still his tool,but glorified
to the most high;as to be worshipped,by all men and angels.
This is not easy to comprehend,therefore it's a mystery.wakeup
wakeup.
Quote (kerwin @ Oct. 26 2013,08:45) Wakeup, Quote Jesus is a quickening spirit. That is not written in Scripture and the points where people think it is implied or hinted at by Scripture do not support a convincing argument.
Quote Jesus has flesh and bone after his resurrection. That is an explicit message of Scripture.
Quote He had flesh and bone;because he appeared
to them to be seen and touched.Are you claiming that despite fact Jesus explicitly stated that a spirit did not have flesh and bone like him that he was never the less a spirit. If so then you are either implying Jesus lied or that he was not making sense.
If, as I am convinced, Jesus was making sense and being truthful then Jesus was not a spirit as he had flesh and bone.
Kerwin.You make me wonder.
I wonder if you are truly seeking or just having a conversation.JESUS SAID:
HERE;FEEL ME,
A SPIRIT HAS NO FLESH AND BONE.
ITS OBVIOUS THAT HE APPEARED AS FLESH AND BONE.
HE APPEARED *TRULY IN THE FLESH*.FOR WHEN HE WAS RESURRECTED,HE WAS MADE SPIRIT.
FOR HE WAS BORN AGAIN OF THE SPIRIT.
THEREFORE HE IS SPIRIT.
HE SAID: WHEN YOU ARE BORN OF THE SPIRIT
YOU ARE SPIRIT AS THE ANGELS.HE APPEARED IN THE FLESH,*TRULY FLESH*.
HOW CAN HE APPEAR IN SPIRIT,AND BE SEEN AND TOUCHED? HOW CAN THEY SEE HIS WOUNDS?THERE ARE *NO* SCRIPTURES SAYING THAT WE WILL BE RESURRECTED IN A GLORIFIED FLESH BODY.
GLORIFIED DUST OF THE EARTH.THE FIRST ADAM WAS MADE OF THE DUST.
THE SECOND ADAM WAS MADE A QUICKENING SPIRIT.
NOT QUICKENED FLESH,OR GLORIFIED FLESH,OR FLESH
WITH SPIRIT AS BLOOD.THIS IS NONSENSE MADE UP OF NONSENSE.
HERE IS THE SPIN,TO COVER THAT BIG BLACK HOLE
IN THEIR DOCTRINE.
BECAUSE FLESH AND BLOOD WILL LIVE IN THE KINGDOM.
AND CAN NOT FIT THIS IN THEIR PICTURE.wakeup.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 23 2013,10:57) That YES, Jesus WAS raised from the dead as flesh. But NO, Jesus can no longer consist of flesh. In Phil 3:21, Paul speaks of having his own lowly body transformed into a glorious new body like the one Jesus now has.
My educated guess is that the flesh Jesus was raised from the dead in was transformed upon his ascension to heaven.
I taught you well my son.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 24 2013,07:46) Quote (kerwin @ Oct. 22 2013,23:07) So these net scholars are saying that “they did not believe” does not mean “they did not believe” because of their reason for not believing. That does not sound like a credible claim by whoever voices it as I do not see God accepting that excuse for not believing.
They still could not believe it BECAUSE OF THEIR JOY, Kerwin. What were they JOYOUS about? Wasn't it the fact that they were REALIZING it WAS in fact Jesus? So they weren't LITERALLY still in disbelief.I looked at the winning numbers on my lottery ticket, and I couldn't believe it.
The Cardinals actually won a game? I can't believe it!
Get the picture? Do either of my examples speak of a LITERAL disbelief? Or are they rhetorical expressions of amazement?
If you can understand the things I've just said in this post, then you'll be able to understand what the NETNotes scholars were saying. If you can't, then there's not much I can do for you. I can't “show you my work”!
(Speaking of which, that is the same answer for your other post. If your brain doesn't allow you to understand the OBVIOUS fact that “took on flesh”, “came in the flesh”, “partook in flesh”, “was made flesh”, “was transformed into flesh” and many other variations can ALL be said about a spirit being who was later caused to dwell as a flesh being, then there is no “work” I can show you. I can't possibly SHOW you that other people's brains understand more than yours, can I?
Personally, I think you DO understand all nine of those statements I made. But you have an ax to grind here, and so you will continue to PRETEND like you can't understand these things. That's why you won't actually post the nine points, along with your YES or NO answer right beside each point. Because you KNOW everyone else on this site is going to be rolling their eyes in bewilderment at your denials. And you know that all of us on this site will KNOW you are denying them only because of your ax that needs grinding.
Ed J was a pro at that technique. We could tell him that water is wet, and he would PRETEND like he couldn't comprehend what we were saying. In that way, he could avoid ACKNOWLEDGING the obvious. I believe you are currently doing the same thing. At least Ed never asked me to “show my work” for how I concluded that water was wet.
)
Mike,The bottom line is these same net scholars translated spirit to ghost, and ghosts neither eat or can be touched.
I quoted plenty of experts who made the point that Jesus proved he was not a spirit.
This is what AKJV says ” And while they yet believed not for joy, and wondered” so according to it the disciples did not believe and wondered. Your examples does not use the same pattern. The correct pattern would be “While they did not yet believe the Cardinals won the game because of the joy and were wondering, they were told look at the scoreboard.” if we replace wondering with amazed we get “While they did not yet believe the Cardinals won the game because of the joy and were amazed, they were told look at the scoreboard.”
You use the same technique you accuse Ed of using and are using it at this time by claiming “they did not yet believe ” means “they did not yet believe” because of their reason for not believing.
Quote to regard with amazement, and with a suggestion of beginning to speculate on the matter” Note: thaumazó translated wonder.
Quote (Wakeup @ Oct. 25 2013,11:51) Hi you all.
Mike/Terra/Kerwin/Gene/Marty/Carmel.
And whomsoever.Unravel this scripture before you make any comments
about the Word; and God.Isaiah 44:6 Thus saith the **LORD the King of Israel**,
**and his redeemer the LORD of hosts**;
** I am the first, and I am the last**;
**and beside me there is no God**.wakeup.
Isaiah 44:6 Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his (Israels) redeemer the LORD of hosts, I am the first, and I am the last, and beside me there is no God.
This is saying that Yahweh, the Yahweh of hosts (the first and the last and only, besides whom there is no other God) is Israels King and redeemer.
Complete Jewish Bible
Thus says ADONAI, Isra’el’s King and Redeemer, ADONAI – Tzva’ot : “I am the first, and I am the last; besides me there is no God.Contemporary English Version
I am the LORD All-
Powerful,
the first and the last,
the one and only God.
Israel, I have rescued
you!
I am your King.Expanded Bible
The LORD, the king of Israel, is the LORD ·All- Powerful [Almighty; of Heaven’s Armies; of hosts], who saves Israel.
This is what he says: “I am the ·beginning and the end [first and the last].
·I am the only God
[There is no god but me].Names of God Bible
The Nations Form Idols,
But the LORD Formed Israel
Yahweh is Israel’s
Melek and Go’el .
He is Yahweh
Tsebaoth .
This is what Yahweh
says:
I am the first and the
last,
and there is no Elohim
except me.International Standard Version
This is what the LORD says, the King of Israel and its Redeemer— the LORD of the Heavenly Armies is his name— “I am the first and I am
the last, and apart from me there is no God.NET Bible
This is what the LORD, Israel's king, says, their protector, the LORD who commands armies: “I am the first and I am the last, there is no God but me.GOD'S WORD® Translation
The LORD is Israel's king and defender. He is the LORD of Armies. This is what the LORD says: I am the first and the last, and there is no God except me.New International Version
“This is what the LORD says– Israel's King and Redeemer, the LORD Almighty: I am the first and I am the last; apart from me there is no God.New Living Translation
This is what the LORD says–Israel's King and Redeemer, the LORD of Heaven's Armies: “I am the First and the Last; there is no other God.One God equals One God.
All,
“Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God”
This is talking about the spiritual person v the carnal person. Most people know that.
Irenaeus on the verse (2nd century)
https://studylight.org/his….nf01-63Enjoy!
So many to choose from.
Just choose one to your own taste.
But you will find contradictions in the long run.wakeup.
Quote (Wakeup @ Oct. 26 2013,17:50) So many to choose from.
Just choose one to your own taste.
But you will find contradictions in the long run.wakeup.
Wakeup,Do not hide these contradictions under a bush but show them that they may be seen.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 24 2013,07:50) Oh, and you also never answered this question from before: Kerwin, do you believe Satan's angels are spirit beings, but God's angels consist of flesh? YES or NO?
Mike,Yes, I believe that Satan and Michael are over hosts of corporeal creatures. Yes, Satan seems to also have non corporeal creatures working with him and it also seems reasonable Michael would as well.
Note: spirit is used to mean non-corporeal creature in at least some passages of Scripture.
Note: In English spirit can also mean corporeal but supernatural creature. This may differ from its Koine Greek equivalent.
Note: corporal means with a body, non-corporeal means without a body.Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 24 2013,07:49) Kerwin, Please address this part of a recent post from me to you:
And what about Judges 13:16, that they listed? Does the fact that the angel who came to Manoah REFUSED to eat mean he WAS a “spirit”, and therefore NOT made of “spiritual flesh”?
This is why I say you're adding your own imaginations into the scriptures, Kerwin. Surely I couldn't use 13:16 to prove that angels AREN'T flesh – just because that one refused to eat, right? So how can you prove that angels ARE flesh just because some of them DID eat?
Mike,Quote And what about Judges 13:16, that they listed? Does the fact that the angel who came to Manoah REFUSED to eat mean he WAS a “spirit”, and therefore NOT made of “spiritual flesh”? It means nothing except that Manoah did not persuade, or possibly even try to persuade, the angel to change his mind and that the angel did not eat.
I plan on doing more research on the angel that visited Manoah.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
