Who and why is enoch?

[Ed J]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 25 2014,13:07)

Quote (Ed J @ June 24 2014,02:59) Hi Mike, Would 'you' have us to believe that by Jesus these things “in Heaven” were created… 5. God himself Can you not see the flaw in 'your' assertion?     <– Will you please address this (1)Would YOU have us believe that YHVH created “God Himself”?  Can YOU now see the flaw in YOUR “rebuttal”?   Quote (Ed J @ June 24 2014,02:59) Sorry, but the original Greek has *NO* punctuation. You need to get the facts straight. Colossians 1:18 NET © He is the head of the body, the church, as well as the beginning, the firstborn 1  from among the dead, so that he himself may become first in all things. 2 Footnote #2: Grk:  “in order that he may become in all things, himself, first.” If it makes you understand it BETTER, then mentally take out all of the punctuation, and learn what I was teaching you from just the words themselves. (2)My point has been made……. whether or not the NET scholars added a little punctuation to make it easier for us to understand.  If you wish, you can address the POINT – instead of straining the gnat.

Hi Mike,

1) “Who is the image of the invisible God” (Col 1:15)
    If Col.1.16 is referring to Jesus, all things created would INCLUDE GOD;
    but if Col.1.16 is instead referring to God, all things would not include himself.
    If you could understand this concept, you would see it cannot be talking about Jesus.

2) No punctuation, no point.

Quote

Footnote #2: Grk:  “in order that he may become in all things, himself, first.” If it makes you understand it BETTER, then mentally take out all of the punctuation, and learn what I was teaching you from just the words themselves.

3) If Jesus is to become in all things, himself, first, then he was not that before, right?

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

[Ed J]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 25 2014,13:20)

JESUS is the firstborn of every creature for through JEHOVAH all things were created

Hi Mike,   yep, that's it!

“Who(Jesus) is the image of the invisible God(YHVH), (Jesus)the firstborn of every creature:
 For by him(YHVH – re-introduced in the previous verse as “the invisible God”, and the subject starting back in verse 12)
 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:”  (Col 1:15-16)

It makes sense because, that is in harmony with the rest of Scripture,
while your interpretation is NOT in harmony with the rest of Scripture.

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

[Ed J]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 25 2014,13:30)

(1) Please address the points in my post.  Tell me how you determined that “firstborn from the dead” is a LITERAL statement, but “firstborn of every creature” is NOT. (2) And how does your reasoning hold up against the knowledge that the actual Greek words were:  in order that he may become in all things, himself, first? In all things?  Or just in the “firstborn from the dead” thing?

Hi Mike,

1) I have already explained this to you, it's about Jesus Preeminence, not a SECRET created order.
   Adam was the first adam, and Jesus was the last adam, BUT Jesus has the Preeminence over Adam.
   And besides Adam was created, Jesus was born. So your first-created idea flies right out the window.

2) That part of the verse proves my point.

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

[Ed J]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 25 2014,13:30)

Quote (Ed J @ June 24 2014,03:22) Hi Mike,  You just don't get, do you? How does the first  t-h-i-n-g  created have PREEMINENCE?   Man was the LAST thing created (on Earth) and DOES HAVE preeminence. You're kidding me, right? That would mean that the LAST one to be raised from death to everlasting life would be the preeminent one.  Not Jesus, but the LAST one to be raised.  Is that how it really is? Come on Eddy.

Hi Mike,

Glad you are able to now see the inconstancy in your reasoning.  

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

[Ed J]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 25 2014,13:36)

Quote (Ed J @ June 24 2014,03:32) Your idea works here, Heaven was created before Earth and DOES HAVE preeminence          “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth”  (Gen 1:1) But, YOUR THEORY falls apart here, because “GRASS” was created before MAN, but Man has the preeminence           “And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass,  …And the earth brought forth grass,            …And the evening and the morning were the third day.”   (Gen 1:11…13) Good, you caught yourself so I didn't have to.   Just because a thing goes one way in one scripture doesn't mean that is ALWAYS the way it is.

Hi Mike,

Regarding God, are you suggesting he is inconsistent?

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

[Ed J]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 25 2014,13:36)

Why do you think they make such a big deal out of telling us that God loved us so much He gave up His FIRSTborn Son for us?

Hi Mike,

It instead says his “only-begotten Son”

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

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Ed J @ June 25 2014,08:53)

Hi Mike, “Who is the image of the invisible God” (Col 1:15)    If Col.1.16 is referring to Jesus, all things created would INCLUDE GOD;    but if Col.1.16 is instead referring to God, all things would not include himself.    If you could understand this concept, you would see it cannot be talking about Jesus.

You're getting there, Eddy.  

For example, when scripture says, God created EVERYTHING in heaven and on earth – we are smart enough to know that God didn't create HIMSELF, and therefore, the one they are talking about is the EXCEPTION to the “everything in heaven and earth”, right?

Likewise, when scripture says, ALL things came from God, and ALL things came through Jesus (1 Cor 8:6), we are also smart enough to know that the TWO they are talking about are the EXCEPTIONS to the “all things”, right?

For instance, we know that “God” didn't come “from God”, right?  And we know that “Jesus” didn't come “through Jesus”, right?

So there is an implied “other” in those teachings.  Just like in 1 Cor 15:27……….

For he “has put everything under his feet.” Now when it says that “everything” has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ.

See how the word “other” is clearly implied?  God didn't place HIMSELF under Jesus' feet, but all OTHER things, right?

Likewise, God didn't create HIMSELF, but all OTHER things in heaven and on earth.

And JESUS HIMSELF wasn't created through Jesus, but all OTHER things in heaven and on earth were created through him.

So, to answer your point – just remember Paul's words in 1 Cor 15:27, Ed.  Then you will know that when it says “all things in heaven and earth were created through Jesus”, it is clear that this does NOT include “God”, “God's throne”, “God's dominion”, etc.

It would have been nice for Paul to go through ALL of these kinds of scriptures, and place the “disclaimer” on them that he laid out in 1 Cor 15:27.  But then again, like he said in 15:27, “IT IS CLEAR that this doesn't include God Himself.”

In Paul's thinking, things like this SHOULD BE CLEAR to us all, Ed.

Quote (Ed J @ June 25 2014,08:53)

Grk:  “in order that he may become in all things, himself, first.” If Jesus is to become in all things, himself, first, then he was not that before, right?

Correct.  Jesus was already the firstborn of every creature who ever lived.  Then LATER, he became the firstborn from the dead, and the head of the church, etc.  These things all happened in order that he may become in ALL things, himself, first.

See?  He has been “first” in many, many things, from the moment God created him as the first of His works.   (Prov 8:22-25) But he needed to also become first in these latter day things as well, so that he may be first in ALL things…….. not just SOME things.

Ed, you are making good questions and points – for the most part.  I hope I've helped.  

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Ed J @ June 25 2014,09:04)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 25 2014,13:20) JESUS is the firstborn of every creature for through JEHOVAH all things were created Hi Mike,   yep, that's it! It makes sense because, that is in harmony with the rest of Scripture, while your interpretation is NOT in harmony with the rest of Scripture.

No it doesn't make sense, Ed. But then, I suspect you know that, don't you?

You haven't told me what it MEANS to say, Jesus is the firstborn BECAUSE God created all things.

What does that MEAN? WHY would God creating all things have ANYTHING AT ALL to do with Jesus being the firstborn? Please explain.

Also, you say my interpretation is NOT in harmony with the rest of scripture. Let's see…………

Hebrews 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;

1 Corinthians 8:6
But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

I would also add John 1:3 to the list, but then we would just end up arguing about whether or not Jesus was “the Word”. And we're already beginning to discuss that in the other thread.

So, even without John 1:3, are the two I listed above enough to make my interpretation of Col 1:16 “in harmony” with other scriptures?

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Ed J @ June 25 2014,09:22)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 25 2014,13:36) Quote (Ed J @ June 24 2014,03:32) Your idea works here, Heaven was created before Earth and DOES HAVE preeminence          “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth”  (Gen 1:1) But, YOUR THEORY falls apart here, because “GRASS” was created before MAN, but Man has the preeminence           “And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass,  …And the earth brought forth grass,            …And the evening and the morning were the third day.”   (Gen 1:11…13) Good, you caught yourself so I didn't have to.   Just because a thing goes one way in one scripture doesn't mean that is ALWAYS the way it is. Hi Mike, Regarding God, are you suggesting he is inconsistent?

Hmmmm……….. Aren't YOU the one who just listed two things that are “inconsistent”?

It was YOU who said heaven was first, and it is preeminent.

And it was YOU who said man was last, and he is preeminent.

So are YOU calling God “inconsistent”, Ed?  

Remember when I said in the other post how your questions and points were good – for the most part?

Posts like this are the reason I even had to add “for the most part” to the statement.

Let's keep it serious and in good faith, okay.  We don't have time for nonsense like those last couple of posts, right?

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Ed J @ June 25 2014,09:25)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 25 2014,13:36) Why do you think they make such a big deal out of telling us that God loved us so much He gave up His FIRSTborn Son for us?  Hi Mike, It instead says his “only-begotten Son”

I was thinking that Romans 8:32 said, “did not spare his FIRSTBORN Son” – but I was mistaken.

How about this one instead:

Hebrews 1:6 NET Bible
But when he again brings his firstborn into the world, he says, “Let all the angels of God worship him!”

Either way, it's not too important, since I'm sure you'll agree that Jesus was not God's LASTborn son, right? So your point that the LAST one (always) has the preeminence is null and void, right? Even YOU posted the thing about heaven being first and preeminent, so that should be enough to just forget you ever tried to make that point in the first place, right?

[Ed J]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 26 2014,12:54)

A) For instance, we know that “God” didn't come “from God”, right? B) And we know that “Jesus” didn't come “through Jesus”, right?

Hi Mike,

A) The HolySpirit, which is God, came from God; so I disagree with you in this.
B) That would fit the theory of execution, yes.

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

[Ed J]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 26 2014,12:54)

You're getting there, Eddy.   (1) And JESUS HIMSELF wasn't created through Jesus, but all OTHER things in heaven and on earth were created through him. (2)So, to answer your point – just remember Paul's words in 1 Cor 15:27, Ed.  Then you will know that when it says “all things in heaven and earth were created through Jesus”, it is clear that this does NOT include “God”, “God's throne”, “God's dominion”, etc. Quote (Ed J @ June 25 2014,08:53) Grk:  “in order that he may become in all things, himself, first.” If Jesus is to become in all things, himself, first, then he was not that before, right? (3)Correct.  Jesus was already the firstborn of every creature who ever lived.   (4)Ed, you are making good questions and points – for the most part.  I hope I've helped.

Hi Mike,

1) But it is not talking about Jesus, but The Father.
2) That's one reason it cannot be talking about Jesus.
3) Your statement is contradictory, you say you agree and then say the opposite.
4) Yes thank you! You are indeed helping provide the platform to get the truth out to an unknowing public.  

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

[Ed J]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 26 2014,13:04)

(1)WHY would God creating all things have ANYTHING AT ALL to do with Jesus being the firstborn?    Please explain. (2)Also, you say my interpretation is NOT in harmony with the rest of scripture.  Let's see………… Hebrews 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; 1 Corinthians 8:6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him. (3)I would also add John 1:3 to the list, but then we would just end up arguing about whether or not Jesus was “the Word”.  And we're already beginning to discuss that in the other thread. (4)So, even without John 1:3, are the two I listed above enough to make my interpretation of Col 1:16 “in harmony” with other scriptures?

Hi Mike,

1) It has to to with Jesus' crucifixion.
2) Correct
3) Don't know what point you are trying to make here?
4) It was because of Jesus' crucifixion God did these things,
    not by any physical labor by Jesus as you might be thinking.

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

[Ed J]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 26 2014,13:09)

Quote (Ed J @ June 25 2014,09:22) Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 25 2014,13:36) Quote (Ed J @ June 24 2014,03:32) Your idea works here, Heaven was created before Earth and DOES HAVE preeminence          “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth”  (Gen 1:1) But, YOUR THEORY falls apart here, because “GRASS” was created before MAN, but Man has the preeminence           “And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass,  …And the earth brought forth grass,            …And the evening and the morning were the third day.”   (Gen 1:11…13) Good, you caught yourself so I didn't have to.   Just because a thing goes one way in one scripture doesn't mean that is ALWAYS the way it is. Hi Mike, Regarding God, are you suggesting he is inconsistent? Hmmmm……….. Aren't YOU the one who just listed two things that are “inconsistent”? It was YOU who said heaven was first, and it is preeminent. And it was YOU who said man was last, and he is preeminent. So are YOU calling God “inconsistent”, Ed?

Hi Mike,

My point was that YOUR THEORY is inconstant, and therefore FAILS.
My point is: the first thing created has NO CONNECTION to preeminence.

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

[Ed J]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 26 2014,13:20)

Quote (Ed J @ June 25 2014,09:25) Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 25 2014,13:36) Why do you think they make such a big deal out of telling us that God loved us so much He gave up His FIRSTborn Son for us?  Hi Mike, It instead says his “only-begotten Son” (1) I was thinking that Romans 8:32 said, “did not spare his FIRSTBORN Son” – but I was mistaken. How about this one instead: Hebrews 1:6 NET Bible But when he again brings his firstborn into the world, he says, “Let all the angels of God worship him!” (2)Either way, it's not too important, (3)since I'm sure you'll agree that Jesus was not God's LASTborn son, right?  (4)So your point that the LAST one (always) has the preeminence is null and void, right?  (5)Even YOU posted the thing about heaven being first and preeminent, so that should be enough to just forget you ever tried to make that point in the first place, right?

Hi Mike,

1) Adam was God's first created Son, and Jesus was God's Firstborn Son.
2) Agreed; the point is Jesus' preeminence.
3) Correct
4) Wrong, my point was that YOUR THEORY FAILS!
5) Why, I explored your theory to see if had merit, and found that it did not.

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

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Ed J @ June 25 2014,20:48)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 26 2014,12:54) A) For instance, we know that “God” didn't come “from God”, right? B) And we know that “Jesus” didn't come “through Jesus”, right? Hi Mike, A) The HolySpirit, which is God, came from God; so I disagree with you in this. B) That would fit the theory of execution, yes.

A. How so? Surely God didn't CREATE His Holy Spirit, right? So in what way did the Holy Spirit “come from God”?

B.

[terraricca]

Quote (Wakeup @ June 16 2014,09:04)

Quote (terraricca @ June 16 2014,10:03) Quote (Wakeup @ June 16 2014,03:40) Quote (terraricca @ June 16 2014,05:16) I am more careful in my acceptance ;we may not conclude that the book of Enoch was accepted by the apostles base on the fact that there are a few quotes mention , I do believe what scriptures says about him ,and it make sens within all of the scriptures without have to consult the books so called Enoch 1 and 2 and in my understanding it is not the hungry spirit that should lead us but the search of the TRUTH IN GOD through his spirit of truth , that's the way I go , If you are truly hungry enough, you will want to know all things of God. wakeup. WUP IN MY 73 YEARS i HAVE EATEN LOST OF JUNK FOOD AND IT TOOK ME A WHILE TO GET RID OF THE HABIT AND THE CRAVING ; NOT ALL KNOWLEDGE EDIFICE UNDERSTAND THAT THE PHARISEES ALSO HAD THEIR OWN JUNK THAT THEY FED THE PEOPLE ,(TRADITION) EVEN THE APOSTLES HAD TO GET RID OF THAT KNOWLEDGE , pAUL IS A GOOD EXAMPLE FOR IT T. One should not judge the book of Enoch, as junk food. Because it is inspired by the same Holy Siprit. The Holy Spirit of the Holy Bible. wakeup.

W

I have said what I believe to be true ,and stand behind what I said ,

so you can believe what ever you want , i will not be guilty of your doing

[mikeboll64]

Okay, I can see I'll have to go slower.

Quote (Ed J @ June 25 2014,20:49)

But it is not talking about Jesus, but The Father.

Ed, do you UNDERSTAND that when scripture says God created EVERYTHING in heaven – it really means “everything OTHER THAN God Himself”?

If you DO understand that very simple concept, then you should likewise understand that when 1 Cor 8:6 says “ALL THINGS came through Jesus Christ” – it really means “all things OTHER THAN Jesus Christ himself”.

Do you understand these two things?  

Quote (Ed J @ June 25 2014,20:49)

That's one reason it cannot be talking about Jesus.

I didn't see a reason listed.  So tell me WHAT reason, please.

Quote (Ed J @ June 25 2014,20:49)

Your statement is contradictory, you say you agree and then say the opposite.

No………. I'm NOT saying the opposite at all.  For example, do you agree that Jesus was the first to have ever been created with God as a Father, and a human woman as a mother?  I assume you do.

So the fact that Jesus had ALREADY BEEN first in that category lends itself to what Paul was teaching in Col 1:16.  For example:  “He was the firstborn of every creature, he was the firstborn of God and a human woman, he was the first to have the Holy Spirit rest upon him in the form of a dove, he was the first to resurrect Lazarus from the dead.  So although Jesus was already first in MANY things, God ALSO made him the firstborn from the dead, and the head of the church, so that he might in ALL THINGS, become, himself, first.”

Do you understand now?  He is not saying Jesus WILL BECOME the firstborn of every creature, or the firstborn of God and a human woman, or the first to have the Holy Spirit rest on him like a dove.  Those were things that he was ALREADY the first in.  Paul was pointing out the last two things (firstborn from the dead and head of the church), and saying he was granted first place in these last two things so that he might become first in EVERYTHING.

Ed, you still haven't given me any VALID reason that you understand “firstborn from the dead” as a LITERAL statement, but refuse to understand “firstborn of every creature” as a literal statement as well.

What is the reason?

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Ed J @ June 25 2014,21:05)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 26 2014,13:04) WHY would God creating all things have ANYTHING AT ALL to do with Jesus being the firstborn?    Please explain. It has to do with Jesus' crucifixion.

Please explain.  

Quote (Ed J @ June 25 2014,21:05)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 26 2014,13:04) Also, you say my interpretation is NOT in harmony with the rest of scripture.  Let's see………… Hebrews 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; 1 Corinthians 8:6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him. Correct

Correct about what?  Don't those two scriptures I posted align with my Col 1:16 understanding that all things in heaven and earth were created through Jesus?

If not, WHY not?  They say the same thing as Col 1:16.

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Ed J @ June 25 2014,21:10)

Hi Mike, My point was that YOUR THEORY is inconstant, and therefore FAILS.

Please tell me what “my theory” was.

Quote (Ed J @ June 25 2014,21:10)

My point is: the first thing created has NO CONNECTION to preeminence.

Hmmm…………. NEVER?  What about the heaven thing YOU brought up?

What about the rights of the firstborn, as mentioned in Deuteronomy 21:16 and 1 Chronicles 5:1-2?

What about the firstborn rights Esau sold to Jacob?  If the firstborn had more rights, and a better inheritance in Hebrew culture, how can you say it has NO CONNECTION to preeminence?

[Author]

Posts