- This topic has 858 replies, 22 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 10 months ago by
.
- Posts
Hi davidl,
“don’t get confused by man-made beliefs..Satan also works in religion to get us caught up in the externals, and away from the deeper reality of spiritual truth found only in knowing Jesus Christ.”
Trinity is man made.
you said so.
Hi KW
“John takes the first four words of Scripture “In the beginning God..” and inserts Jesus in here as the Word..
God created the heaven and earth by his Word but the first mention is when he spoke and said “Let there be Light” and there was light.
Jesus was not conceived nor were those by which he originated, except for God. God had not yet made Adam.”
Of course Jesus did not exist.
You should not change WORD for JESUS
and ADD TO scripture
To those whose foundation of faith is the Trinity, then you need to hear this.
If any of you are not teaching the following as being what John the Apostle was teaching in his writings, then you are misrepresenting him.
John 20:30-31.
30 And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book:
31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name. “If you think that John was teaching the Trinity, then you are wrong. He was affirming what we already know and are persecuted for, that Jesus is the Son of God and the Messiah. The very same confession that the Father showed Peter and upon which Jesus built his Church. Any other foundation is built in vain and works built on another foundation will fall when it is shaken because the foundation is not solid.
You can debate me on this issue if you want, but realise that you are not really debating me.
To all.
Do you think your view on John 1:1 is sound and true?
Test your own view by comparing it another opening verse from John which says the same thing but is worded differently.
1 John 1:1-2
“That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon and touched with our hands, concerning the word of life and the life was manifested, and we saw it, and testify to it, and proclaim to you the eternal life that was with the Father and was made manifest to us”.If you view of John 1:1 does not align with 1 John 1:1-2, then you need to reassess.
Hi t8,
Yes John saw heard and touched the WORD OF LIFE
when he saw heard and touched the vessel Jesus.
Jesus now inseperable from the Word
Just as Thomas heard his Lord, and His God.
<hr />
HI T8,
THE WORD WAS MADE FLESH AND DWELLED AMONG US
Jesus was flesh from his conception. He dwelled among us from his birth
But the Word was with God from the beginning.
The Word was made flesh in Jesus at the Jordan
Hi t8,
Would you deny the wonderful obedience of Jesus?
There is no greater vessel.
From his decision to obey God, God takes over.
Flesh contributes nothing.
The Word was made flesh.
The Word that was with God.
Hi T8,
But his decision enabled all flesh human beings to join in the triumph and celebrate the victory forever.
Many many souls enlivened by the eternal Spirit.
Hi t8,
His soul and body made up that glorious vessel [2tim2.20f] as it does for us. We too have this treasure in earthen vessels[2cor4.7] and the work is of Christ, in God.
The heart and mind that make up the soul are transformed by renewal [rom 12 2. eph 4 13] according to the teaching and sanctification by the indwelling Spirit.
The body is replaced with a heavenly one that lasts.
T8,
Jesus (shell/body) + Word of God = Jesus Christ?
Jesus contributes more than his body. He is a human being and therefore contributes the inner and outer being of a human being, which is equivalent to the three part of a human: their body, soul, and spirit.
God’s Spirit contributes the very Word that is uttered by God.
Nick,
I do not believe John was inserting Jesus in the beginning, even in the way you say. I believe he was literally speaking about the Word of God. In many English language translation the Word of God is personalized but all I know that does that is the arbitrary choice of translators to translate the Koine Greek pronouns that we addressing the gender of the noun “word” to the English pronoun that addresses the gender of the subject. It is a choice in translation that is in the eye of the beholder.
In short there is no reason not to interpret the word “word” as meaning that what comes out of God’s mouth except that tradition tells us that it is the Christ. That tradition is made by Trinitarians. What confuses the issue is that the word of God did take on the characteristics of a a human being at the time it was made flesh. At a consequence Jesus took on the characteristics of the word of God.
The literal interpretation explains all the facts and is the simplest. The Spirit is implied by the presence of the Word of God but it is hidden.
DavidL,
Jesus said he was the Light of the world only as long as he was in the world.
He is the light and the way as those are his characteristics. He provides the path upon which his students sail and the light that keeps them from the reveals the rocks. Strive to get and stay on that narrow path.
I keep telling you all that John has a poetic writing style that has nothing to do with “the beginning” of time or creation as in genesis it is just a phrase John uses often:
John 15:27
and ye also bear witness, because ye have been with me from the beginning.Obviously the disciples weren’t at the creation, this is John’s style
John 8:25
They said therefore unto him, Who art thou? Jesus said unto them, Even that which I have also spoken unto you from the beginning.John 6:64
But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who it was that should betray him.1 John 2:7
Beloved, no new commandment write I unto you, but an old commandment which ye had from the beginning: the old commandment is the word which ye heard.2 John 1:6
And this is love, that we should walk after his commandments. This is the commandment, even as ye heard from the beginning, that ye should walk in it.Now Mark is much more literal:
Mark 1:1
The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God.John 1:1 is a poetic beginning of the Gospel that’s all it is folks
Mark 1:1
The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God;You are incorrect
bodhitharta,
Read:
And she shall bring forth a son: and thou shalt call his name JESUS. For he shall save his people from their sins.
NOW CAN YOU SEE THE DIFFERENCE?
I TELL YOU:
WHEN MARK WROTE THE GOSPEL, JESUS WAS ESTABLISHED:
AS JESUS CHRIST
also I always end my post as Jesus IT DOESN’T MEAN THAT JESUS IS NOT THE CHRIST!
THE WORD CHRIST STANDS FOR HIS GLORIFICATION AS GOD!
ANOINTED BY THE FATHER AS:
THE FATHER’S PRESENCE FOR ETERNITY!
HIS ONLY TRUE MANIFESTATION
THE FATHER IS WELL PLEASED THAT JESUS IS HIS GENUINE ABODE!
THE ONLY INVISIBLE/TANGIBLE GOD
Peace and love in Jesus
Charles
Mark 1:1
The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God;You are incorrect
bodhitharta,
Read:
And she shall bring forth a son: and thou shalt call his name JESUS. For he shall save his people from their sins.
NOW CAN YOU SEE THE DIFFERENCE?
I TELL YOU:
WHEN MARK WROTE THE GOSPEL, JESUS WAS ESTABLISHED:
AS JESUS CHRIST
Actually my post had to do with John using the term “In the beginning” it wasn’t about the name of Jesus. Once he is established as Jesus Christ there really is no other meaningful reference about when that occured
SO ONCE HE RESURRECTED AND MANIFESTED HIMSELF TO THEM,WHICH WAS VITAL FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE CHURCH, THEY ACCEPTED HIM FULLY, WITH THE NEW NAME AS:
JESUS CHRIST!
BEFORE HE WAS ONLY JESUS,NO?
BD,
THE ABOVE IS MY COMMENT, WHICH YOU POSTED!
Hereunder is your comment related to the above:
Matthew 1:16
And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.Matthew 1:18
Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.Mark 1:1
The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God;You are incorrect
NOW YOU HAVE JUST SAID:
Actually my post had to do with John using the term “In the beginning” it wasn’t about the name of Jesus. Once he is established as Jesus Christ there really is no other meaningful reference about when that occured
CAN YOU EXPLAIN YOUR POINT AGAIN SINCE I CANNOT QUITE UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU MEAN IN RELATION TO MY STATEMENT?
Peace and love in Jesus
Charles
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
