- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (Istari @ April 24 2011,12:17)
Mike,
The point of saying 'Firstborn' is to emphasise that firstborn from the other 'Borns' else just say 'One and Only'.
But Jesus is NOT the “one and only” son God has, so we couldn't really say that. He is the first son that God ever “brought forth” out of many, therefore the “firstborn of all creation”, and the ONLY one said to be begotten directly of God Himself, whereas all others were “born” OF God THROUGH Jesus.Quote (Istari @ April 24 2011,12:17)
Do you agree that FIRSTBORN indicates the idea of OTHERS in a way that ONE AND ONLY does not?
Yes or no…(Only joking! please answer as you please)
Yes, I think Jesus IS the Word in John 1:1.mike
Quote (Baker @ April 24 2011,12:41) Mike! I like to answer Istari's question, don't be upset. The Angels were created next, through Jesus. They too are called the Son's of God. There are ranks as far as the Angels are concerned. The cherubs or Archangels are higher then the regular Angels, But all are called the Son's of God, Michael, Gabriel and Lucifer, who became Satan. The Bible doesn't reveal who came next, of the Angels…. But Jesus is the firstborn…. Just like we have a firstborn Son.
Peace and Love Irene
Good answer Irene.I was working on posting something similar and you posted while I was still working on my post.
You don't need my permission to answer any point on any thread………….unless it's a debate thread. 
Quote (Istari @ April 24 2011,12:19) And Mike, did you intend to answer my other questions in that same post two above this one? I'm fascinated to hear what you have to say regarding them.
Okay,I'll answer one more of your questions………….but that's it until you DIRECTLY answer mine about taking the fact that we don't know who the second is as a reason to exclude Jesus from being the first.
Discussions are “give and take” Istari. I'm not about to DIRECTLY answer YOUR questions while your “answers” to mine are long posts filled with fluff and your every thought about what the scriptures teach. I also want DIRECT answers to my questions, okay?
Quote (Istari @ April 24 2011,09:07) Was Jesus HEIR to God before he came as Man? Prove it from Scriptures – Mike.
Colossians 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 have been created through him and for him.All things were created FOR him Istari. If that's not an “heir”, then I don't know what is.
mike
So Mike,
You won't answer my question but insist others answer yours.
Posting a nonsense answer does not qualify as an answer especially from you who insists on Direct answers because you already know what you WANT The other person to say.Why are you avoiding verses that state Heir to God rather than imply what you suggest.
Is there some reason you avoid them?You made a statement about the possibility of Firstborn being Jesus and DEMAND an answer as if it meant anything at all: ok, yes, Jesus COULD Be said to be FIRSTBORN OVER ALL CREATION, Firstborn from the dead… Yes!
For Firstborn can also mean 'The Most loved of the Father' and NOT necessarily the first born by creation order.And why did you not answer both question but insist I also 'answer yours' even though it didn't seem like a question in the first place. Why the tit for tat?
Ok, and I also DID ANSWER YOU.. You just never read it…
It also seems that your arguments are getting very woolly as you are now saying there were other Begotten Sons of God CREATED through Jesus – that is perposterous!
That means that Mankind was also created through Jesus, everything was created through Jesus…
Mike, only one question: what exactly does 'Created THROUGH JESUS' mean?
Quote (mikeboll64 @ April 25 2011,05:53) Quote (Istari @ April 24 2011,12:17)
Do you agree that FIRSTBORN indicates the idea of OTHERS in a way that ONE AND ONLY does not?
Yes or no…(Only joking! please answer as you please)
Yes, I think Jesus IS the Word in John 1:1.mike
Mike,
Do you consider that this is an answer TO THE QUESTION?What is the relationship of your answer to the question?
Irene and Mike,
This whole Firstborn then raises another question that Mike has brought up…
If all things were created through Jesus then WHAT WAS SATAN's BEEF ABOUT WANTING TO BE WORSHIPPED – to be like God?
What did Satan do to imagine HE deserved such accolade?
(was he Satan before he BECAME Satan – yet we speak of him as only such – God even says he was a Mankiller from the BEGINNING… did God create a sinful Angel – a demon, did God, through Jesus, create the Satan – or did he BECOME the Satan when he allowed Sin to grow in him… If so then when was THE BEGINNING?Quote (Istari @ April 24 2011,13:43)
Posting a nonsense answer does not qualify as an answer especially from you who insists on Direct answers because you already know what you WANT The other person to say.
Ahhhhh! So you DID get my point? Think about that the next time you're ready to make fun of the way I do things around here, okay? When I specify “YES or NO?”, it is because I DON'T want a big, fluff-filled post relating to everything the responder thinks the scriptures teach. I want a DIRECT and HONEST and PROMPT answer to my very DIRECT question.David has given me accolades for my ability to get Keith to finally admit things he hasn't before. It takes time, patience, and very strategic questions in order to “FORCE” the truth out of someone who knows it, but is an expert at diverting from it as long as he can.
Even Princess, who doesn't care for me too much, voiced her thoughts that she now understands why I do it the way I do, and praised my “perseverance” as an “admiral quality”.
Take a brief scan of the “One question for Keith” thread I started. Look how my carefully worded questions, (which sometimes might seem to the untrained eye as if I'm asking the same thing over and over), have lead him around full circle and caught him up in his own words.
Take a gander at the last two pages of the “Freak Greek” thread and see how things are coming full circle there also. In fact, pay attention to that thread in the coming days, for there is much more about to happen. And notice what I posted to Keith in the second to the last page – about just because HE doesn't see where I'm going doesn't mean that I haven't known the entire game plan from the beginning.
Are you getting the point here, Istari? I KNOW what I'm doing and I KNOW the fruits that will come of it. And I am the one getting results with Keith, not YOU. I am the one causing him to say words out of his own mouth that come back to trap him later, not YOU.
My point is that I don't care how YOU choose to do things here, but who are YOU to suggest how I should and shouldn't do them? I'm getting results my way. Are you?
Leave the way I post out of our discussions of scripture from now on, okay? It is really none of your business how I do it, and I personally think I'm doing a way better job of it than you are. So stick to your own way, and leave me to my own way from now on, okay?
Now……………I answered your point about “heir” with a scripture as requested. And I will answer ONE from this post:
Quote (Istari @ April 24 2011,13:43)
Firstborn can also mean 'The Most loved of the Father' and NOT necessarily the first born by creation order.
Name a scripture where a “firstborn” wasn't the one born first. (I'll let you in on my game plan ahead of time: Once you list that scripture, I'll ask you how you know this particular “firstborn” isn't the “one born first”.)Oh, what the heck, I'll just play out my whole hand so you know how my brain works:
Istari: Well, David is called the “firstborn” of the kings of earth, even though we know he was not the first one of them.
Mike: And how do we know this?
Istari: Well, the scriptures list many other kings prior to David, but more importantly, Saul was the first king of God's chosen people because scripture says so.
Mike: So we know that “firstborn” doesn't really mean the first one in the case of David because “other scriptures say so”, right?
Istari: Right.
Mike: And what exact scripture eliminates the default meaning of “firstborn” when it comes to Jesus? What scripture teaches us that another was born first, but then was REPLACED by Jesus?
How's that Istari? Does it seem like I know what I'm doing? If it doesn't seem that way to you, then you are entitled to your own opinion, and I am entitled to keep on keeping on with the way I prefer to do things, okay?
mike
Quote (Istari @ April 24 2011,14:08) Irene and Mike, This whole Firstborn then raises another question that Mike has brought up…
If all things were created through Jesus then WHAT WAS SATAN's BEEF ABOUT WANTING TO BE WORSHIPPED – to be like God?
Quote Irene and Mike, This whole Firstborn then raises another question that Mike has brought up…
If all things were created through Jesus then WHAT WAS SATAN's BEEF ABOUT WANTING TO BE WORSHIPPED – to be like God?
Istari,I realize that you don't enjoy “tit for tat”, for it encumbers you and restrains you from your preferred method of posting: Miles and miles of “The World According to JA” with no reason to ever show scriptural support for your understanding.
But I DO prefer “tit for tat”, and so that is the way I will do it, okay? I've now answered two of your direct points with direct answers. You say you have answered my first point, but I see your answer as more of a “side-bar” to avoid answering the actual point. I would like a CLEAR and DIRECT answer to this point before I answer any more of your questions:
Istari, is the fact that we don't know who the second born is a solid reason to just assume that Jesus isn't the literal firstborn of all creation? YES or NO?
mike
Istari,
Was Adam the first “firstborn of all creation” that Jesus “replaced”?
Were all things really created through Adam?
I think not.
mike
I meant that answer to your previous post.
Adam, was FIRST BORN SON OF GOD in the Flesh.
Jesus is the Second born son of God in the flesh
But Jesus became the FIRSTBORN by virtue of Adam sinning.
Who was the first born of Abraham?
Who is the Firstborn of Abraham?Mike, you just refusing to use the term FIRSTBORN as in Rank…fir why?
See you keep asking the same question over and over and over making claims that the opponent did not answer you – yet it is you that lists deceiving answer when you are questioned.
You ask suppositions and demand direct answer… And even when I answered you TWICE NOW you still post the same question as if there is something you are going get from it!
Only a fool would answer 'yes or no' to your questions because such is to be led by the tongue, hence my joke to you (by the way, why did you highlight that joke – were you hurt by it – did THAT hurt you? Do you have a monopoly on 'yes or no'?)
Moreover, you are posting against hardened others so long you treat everyone now the same… You taint everyone with the thought that they are being deceiving towards you – make a note – a big one in your brain that I (JustAskin/Istari) have NO THOUGHT OF DECEPTIVE ANSWER NOR A NEED TO RUN FROM YOUR QUESTIONS.
Your idea that I run from you is based on others AND you simple desire to WANT TO THINK THAT… it is merely smokescreen, slinging mud and hoping it sticks…
I have NEVER found anything you say hard to reply to.
I can't always answer all your queries – is that running away?
I missed a post – is that running away?
I didn't say what you want me to say – is that running away?
I ignore a pointless post – is that running away?
You make a statement – is that running away?Mike, stop tarring everyone with the same brush.
You copy other people's style – and that accusative style you picked up from WJ and KJ.
Play their game against them – you said – but you didn't realise you would get caught in the same snare they did!!Quote (mikeboll64 @ April 25 2011,07:50) Istari, Was Adam the first “firstborn of all creation” that Jesus “replaced”?
Were all things really created through Adam?
I think not.
mike
Mike,Do you have a cognition problem?
I said: ADAM: first born Son of God in the flesh…
Why are you stressing the issue?
I should write: 'yes or no' here. But I'm not you!!
Why do you change the emphasis on the question you asked when you get a valid reply!!
How many times do I have to write out : 'Son of God' to you?
The TRUE SON OF GOD is as Jesus is NOW, as he is in his Glorified state that Adam would have become if he had not sinned.
This means FIRSTBORN OVER ALL CREATION – he is the head of all creation ( And by the way – creation here is only Mankind – not the Animals for even the animals and angels were created before the GREATEST CREATION creation of ALL – mankind!)Mike, what was Gods plan for Mankind and through whom was it fulfilled?
Was it not a Man? Jesus?
Who did God make his Heir – was it not a Man – Jesus Christ?
Quote (Istari @ April 24 2011,15:04)
meant that answer to your previous post.Adam, was FIRST BORN SON OF GOD in the Flesh.
Jesus is the Second born son of God in the flesh
No, because many others between Adam and Jesus were also sons of God in the flesh. Do you deny this?Istari, I understand what you claim: That Adam was God's “firstborn” (as in “most loved or whatever”) of the flesh sons of God and that Jesus replaced him thereby becoming God's “firstborn” (as in “most loved” or whatever) of the flesh sons of God.
Is this it?
mike
And I'm STILL waiting for the answer to my question:
Istari, is the fact that we don't know who the second born is a solid reason to just assume that Jesus isn't the literal firstborn of all creation? YES or NO?
mike
If anyone else is reading this thread can you look back and point out how many times I have answered Mike on his question above.
I cannot figure why be is asking again and again and again nor what he hopes to achieve from a suggestive question.
Perhaps I should fall to the level of his opponents that he is used to and just say 'yes' or 'no' to appease him with complete disregard to the implication of the response.
Ok, Mike, here it is AGAIN…
The fact that we do not know who the Second born of creation is DOES NOT exclude Jesus from being the First born– but neither does it CONFIRM IT – so we are still at a stalemate.
Throughout Scriptures, the message that is shown is that the firstborn is never the blessed one.
For what purpose are these FRACTALS given to us?
Additionally, scriptures says: The first shall be last – and the last shall be firstWho was First (Sinless) Son of God: Adam
Who was the Last (Sinless) Son of God: Jesus
Who is NOW the FIRST (True-Begotten) SON OF GOD: JesusMike,
I don't understand how you say that Jesus created the Spirit Sons of God?
As much as you say 'Through Jesus' it still stands that Jesus was then the auctioneer of the creation of the Spirit Sons…Mike, how Would/Could that happen – Spirit comes from God alone! How could Jesus create other Spirit creatures?
Spirits are INTELLIGENCE with Power… What you are suggesting amounts almost to an omnipotent and omniscient Jesus – bordering on Trinitarianism!!Mike, do you ACTUALLY BELIEVE THAT? really? Dont answer – please – just think about it?
Jesus, I believe, certainly had high glory with God his Father – And – may well have been Gods favoured Son (This is my belief) from among his Sons as shown from fractals but it is still left to say what Satan's role was in all this!
If Satan (the Angel who became known as Satan) was created by Jesus, how in heavens name could he ever contemplate a desire to be God?
The Scriptures says, 'Though Jesus was in the Form of God, he did not seek to make himself equal to God'
To even begin to think of making yourself God would imply that you were of such high status of powr and had such knowledge that even a mustard seed of a thought could grow, and of such influence that a THIRD of the heavenly host rallied to your side…Mike, in a powerful family unit, who might be the one who might instigate such a rebellion?
Mike, who but the FIRST BORN…
Check what is said about David's family: didn't David's eldest brother rebel when he found out that he was not to be anointed by Samuel? In effect, that necrotic bow down to David in time?
And Joseph: did his brethren not BOW DOWN TO him:
And Jesus, 'Let All the Angels of heaven worship him' – this includes Michael, Gabriel, Lucifer, all of them…For the older shall serve the younger…
Quote (mikeboll64 @ April 25 2011,08:29) Quote (Istari @ April 24 2011,15:04)
meant that answer to your previous post.Adam, was FIRST BORN SON OF GOD in the Flesh.
Jesus is the Second born son of God in the flesh
No, because many others between Adam and Jesus were also sons of God in the flesh. Do you deny this?Istari, I understand what you claim: That Adam was God's “firstborn” (as in “most loved or whatever”) of the flesh sons of God and that Jesus replaced him thereby becoming God's “firstborn” (as in “most loved” or whatever) of the flesh sons of God.
Is this it?
mike
Mike,
You ask silly questions…Sinless Sons of God – no!
Why are you like this Mokeboll64?
Dp you never quit. This is why people here don't like you. No matter answer they give you, you find some trivial nonpoint to make back to them.
What do you want?
Mike, all you do is cause people to laugh at you by posting silly answer back to you – god – I feel like that now bit I won't!
Do you really want me to answer such a silly question that you will no doubt lost again in big black letters saying 'Answer me – yes or no'.
Mike, is this crazy question time!
I might even start reporting frivolous and ANTAGONISTIC questions from you
Quote (Istari @ April 24 2011,19:01)
Ok, Mike, here it is AGAIN…
The fact that we do not know who the Second born of creation is DOES NOT exclude Jesus from being the First born
Thank you so much for your direct answer to my question. If you think you posted this answer before, then please copy and paste it so I can see that I messed up by asking an answered question…………..for this is the first time I'VE noticed that you actually addressed the point of the question.And now that you have, you can surely see that your “if Jesus is the first, who's the second” point is useless and really a “non-point”, right? Bam! One senseless point down, one million to go.
Quote (Istari @ April 24 2011,19:01)
Mike,
I don't understand how you say that Jesus created the Spirit Sons of God?
As much as you say 'Through Jesus' it still stands that Jesus was then the auctioneer of the creation of the Spirit Sons…
Istari, I don't have the info needed to go into further details about it. We know that God alone created all, and that He did this through Jesus. That's all I can claim because that's all that's allowed for us to know at this time.But just because you can't get your human brain around it doesn't give you the right to claim it isn't so. Scripture says that not one thing came into existence without Jesus. Scripture says that even the invisible things in the heavens were created through him. Both of these statements would include Satan………….unless you have a scripture that would exclude him. Do you?
Quote (Istari @ April 24 2011,19:01)
If Satan (the Angel who became known as Satan) was created by Jesus, how in heavens name could he ever contemplate a desire to be God?
Are you kidding? Even Caesars and Pharaohs thought themselves to be gods…………….AND THEY WERE JUST MEN. Why would Satan be immune from this “god-complex” just because Jesus existed before him?
Btw, stop claiming that angels will worship Jesus. The scriptures don't say anyone is to be worshipped except God alone. You rely too much on your KJV and too little on the available resources such as NETNotes.
mike
Quote (Istari @ April 24 2011,19:10) Quote (mikeboll64 @ April 25 2011,08:29) Quote (Istari @ April 24 2011,15:04)
meant that answer to your previous post.Adam, was FIRST BORN SON OF GOD in the Flesh.
Jesus is the Second born son of God in the flesh
No, because many others between Adam and Jesus were also sons of God in the flesh. Do you deny this?Istari, I understand what you claim: That Adam was God's “firstborn” (as in “most loved or whatever”) of the flesh sons of God and that Jesus replaced him thereby becoming God's “firstborn” (as in “most loved” or whatever) of the flesh sons of God.
Is this it?
mike
Mike,
You ask silly questions…Sinless Sons of God – no!
Why are you like this Mokeboll64?
Dp you never quit. This is why people here don't like you. No matter answer they give you, you find some trivial nonpoint to make back to them.
What do you want?
Mike, all you do is cause people to laugh at you by posting silly answer back to you – god – I feel like that now bit I won't!
Do you really want me to answer such a silly question that you will no doubt lost again in big black letters saying 'Answer me – yes or no'.
Mike, is this crazy question time!
I might even start reporting frivolous and ANTAGONISTIC questions from you
What is your problem? I'm simply trying to understand if I'm understanding you correctly.Do I have it right? Is this what you're claiming?
(Btw, for someone who breaks so many of HN's rules, you sure seem to do a lot of tattle telling.)
mike
Mike,
Not the 'is this it' but the 'do you deny it'…
This is pointless – this is speculative questioning that is designed to provocate – which is your skill.
There was no need for the comeback – such questioning can never lead to resution as it simply invokes trivial speculation.If everyone responded with speculation ever time some one set them a question where would we be.. Do you agree or deny that this might be so? Answer Yes or No!
See, that was pointless, and one might as well bore a hole in ones Tongue and let another lead you with a rope through it. Mike, you cannot (Should not) do that – we can (Should) answer in anyway that is honest – or NOT AT ALL – no one can DEMAND an answer.
Even Jesus did not DEMAND an answer from his antagonist but let their SILENCE speak their answer
AND, there was no deception in Jesus' question – NOR, His Answers, even when he answered a question with another question, the question contained his critical or directive answer.When a question is answered well and judiciously, why proffer pointless triviallity just to get your own back… Mike, this just causes aggravation – it doesn't make you smart – just vindictive – self justifying and intolerant, over-insistent, and self-seeking!
You are ready to BLOCK/Tile people because you hold the power to do that – you hold a smoking gun – and this fuels your desire to use it – a sword of Damacless over the heads of everyone in this forum – I don't believe this is what t8 designed a MODERATOR to be!
And did not Jesus break the rules of the Jews that strangled them and left them impotent to the harse and overbearing penalties of the bloodstained swords of their overseers – the Romans: the law and the taskmaster.
The raging rows you have with WJ, KJ and SF – what are they to you then – they appeal to you because you feel you can overcome them so it's FUN.
Mike, to us reading them, you get a very different perspective – and it ain't FUN.
The Anger in those posts is frightening – yet you seem to love it.
Why? Because you can best them – I don't know if you know it but they are ONLY LAUGHING AT YOU.Step back, Mike, step back from the 'Personal' in those threads and you will see them posting nonesense to you for A LAUGH. you are caught up in the flow so much that you don't notice – mike, they are the real 'enemy' but you take them as 'friends' – or perhaps argument is all you really seek!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
