Who is this Jesus?

[Ramblinrose]

t8
We interpret scripture differently because of what we each believe.  This will not change, no matter how many verses we throw at eachother.  I will defend what I believe just as you will defend what you believe.  Conflict is the only thing that will result and I value the friendship that we have established too much to go down that road.

Nick Hassan
You continually insult those with different views to yours.  What you hope to achieve by this I have no idea.

For the above reasons I will not continue in this discussion.

Adam Pastor
Whilst we differ on who fathered Yahshua, I respect what you believe. As your view on the 'seed' does interest me and I am open to learning and understanding more on this subject I will contact you privately.  Also, thank you for 'stepping up to the plate to bat' on the pre-existence subject.

God Bless

[NickHassan]

Hey RR,
If you hold too tight to false doctrine then when that doctrine is attacked you may feel singed.
“The word of God is living and effective ,sharper than any two edged sword”
You are not the target. You are precious to God.

[Proclaimer]

To RR,

Quote

I will defend what I believe just as you will defend what you believe.

But you are not defending what you believe by walking away.

But we should always have an answer for what we believe. If we do not, then we should be open to change as we admit by not having an answer that we are not sure and complete in our understanding of what is truth.

If we agree that we should all be happy and each should believe what we want and different beliefs are OK, then how is that different from the world that we live in?

How is the truth put on a hill to shine for all men to see when we live and act as the world does?  

As much as I like unity and friends, I cannot compromise truth as that only creates a false unity and people who tolerate each other. The Kingdom of God is greater than that. The Kingdom of God is about us being one and one with both God and his son. One in spirit and yes even doctrine. The Kingdom is not like this world and it is not of it either. For this world is a supermarket of doctrines of demons and men. But we should be walking on the path of truth.

Yahshua's mission of teaching truth to us who are hard of hearing, not only required incredible patience, but his never give up attitude changed everything in the end. No person has had an effect on this world like Yahshua. He didn't accept anything that was contrary to truth and let's face it RR, one of us is wrong here or both. We both cannot be right with regards to Yahshua, so why give up helping me if you believe that you have the truth and why should I give up? That is not love. Love never gives up.

The truth is actually more important than you and me being friends. The Kingdom of God is not only about giving truth to set people free, but it is also about defending truth from deception.

For all will be made subject to Christ and placed under his footstool. Every doctrine, argument and teaching that is contrary to truth will be put under Christ's feet. When all enemies have been made subject to Christ, God will be able to dwell in all.

I do not accept giving up when people teach differently. We need to work this out together and we will do that if we are of the truth. The only thing that can get in the way of learning the truth by helping out each other is pride.

You stated on a number of occasions your belief in order to get people to follow what you belief. Therefore you are also responsible to give an answer to what you believe and to also be accountable to what you believe.

[Adam Pastor]

Greetings t8
I have perused your board well over a year now
So I am fully aware that you and other contributors subscribe to the Arian viewpoint. Like I said earlier, quite a while back, I presented the viewpoint of the notional/ideal pre-existence of the Messiah … it wasn't well receive.
I left it as that!! I frequent this board quite a bit, and see the response given to others who subscribe to my viewpoint. I therefore, hadn't seen any inclination to ECHO what has already been said. However, seeing that RR, roped me into this conversation, I responded;

Been told it is false doctrine & lies
Oh Well. Can't say I am surprised.

For the sake of completeness, I will make the following comments on certain verses, as listed below,
for what it is worth …

If anyone, is willing to be Berean about the subject, they are more than welcome to email me on this subject, and I will do my best to answer questions and/or point to other info on the subject
There would be no point in me continuing this subject on this thread. So this should be my last words on this subject here.

• John 1:1-4
  Were you aware that the majority of English Bibles before the KJV, translated John 1:1-4 as follows …
  (John 1:1-4)  In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by it; and without it was not any thing made that was made. 4 In it was life; and the life was the light of men.

  That's right … it
  This is how William Tyndale translated John 1:1-4.
  He understood that the prologue was speaking of GOD's word … GOD's word is an it e.g.
  1) (Isa 55:11)  So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: (Isa 55:11)  So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.
  2) (Psa 33:6)  By the word of YAHWEH were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth.
  (Psa 33:9)  For he spake, and it  was done; he commanded, and it stood fast.

  Tyndale's Bible, Matthews' Bible, the Geneva Bible, The Bishop's Bible, etc all translated John 1:1-4 as shown above; before, sadly, trinitarian bias prevailed, and the KJV translators copied the Rheims NT translation, and replaced it with him.
  Consequently then, the majority of Bible Readers read Jesus into these verses
  To quote Colin Brown …
  

  Quote

  It is a common but patent misreading of the opening of John’s Gospel to read it as if it said: “In the beginning was the Son, and the Son was with God and the Son was God.”

   

  And that is basically the problem! Patent Misreading!

  However, the fact yet remains, that John 1:1-4 is simply speaking about Almighty GOD's powerful spoken word; just as Psalms 33:6,9; 2 Pet 3:5, Heb 11:3, Psalm 147:15, Isa 55:11, etc are speaking of Almighty GOD's word; and are not speaking of the Messiah.
  In the fulness of time however, the word/logos of GOD was made flesh resulting in the person of Jesus of Nazareth, the Messiah.

• John 1:15
  This verse is meant in the sense of pre-eminence & priority.
  John was saying that the one who was to follow him, is above him hence before him,
  because he is John's superior.
  Therefore, although the Messiah was born after John, Jesus being the Messiah, is John's superior … John's Lord … Elizabeth's Lord [Luke 1:43] … the Lord Messiah [Luke 2:11, Col 3:24]
  Being the Lord Messiah, therefore, Jesus is before (in the sense of pre-eminence) John.

• John 6:38
  To COME DOWN FROM HEAVEN is a synonym for
  “COME FROM GOD” or “ORDAINED/SENT FROM GOD” or “OF GOD”
  To describe something being 'given from GOD' or being 'sent from GOD', the phrase “(COME DOWN) FROM HEAVEN” is used e.g.
  (Mat 21:25-26) The baptism of John, whence was it? FROM HEAVEN, or of men? And they reasoned with themselves, saying, If we shall say, FROM HEAVEN; he will say unto us, Why did ye not then believe him? 26 But if we shall say, OF MEN; we fear the people; for all hold John as a prophet.

  John, a man SENT FROM GOD [John 1:6] and his baptism … they DID NOT literally descend from heaven, did they? Yet his baptism is described as being “FROM HEAVEN”! In like manner, Jesus describes himself as “COME DOWN FROM HEAVEN”; i.e. he is the Just One, he is That Prophet [Deut 18.18-19] ordained and sent FROM GOD. … and in that sense, the Messiah is the true bread from Heaven

  Those who rejected John's baptism, weren't not rejecting a man-made baptism; they were rejecting a 'heavenly baptism' i.e. a baptism ORDAINED OF GOD, a baptism SENT FROM GOD.

  In like manner those who reject Messiah Jesus, are not just rejecting just 'any man'; they are rejecting the 'heavenly man' [1 Cor 15.47] i.e. the MAN SENT FROM GOD, the MAN that GOD ORDAINED to be 'Lord of all'; His Firstborn, His Only-Begotten Son.

• John 8:58
  1) First, let me deal with the trinitarian argument that GOD's name was being used

  The Greek OT (aka LXX) is quoted extensively in the NT; that is why many OT quotes (e.g. Acts 8:32ff, Book of Hebs, etc) differ in their wording from our OTs.

  The Apostles quoted this Greek OT many times. They obviously had no problem with it … plus they quoted it as they were inspired by the holy spirit.

  Now for hundreds of years trinitarian propaganda have made a false connection between Exo 3.14 and John 8.58.
  Here apparently, Jesus was calling himself the 'I AM' of Exo 3.14!!

  Since, the Gospels are written in Greek, if John was indeed narrating a quote from Exo 3.14 … he would have recorded the title that GOD used in Exo 3.14. In the Greek text, GOD is not called 'Ego Eimi'
  GOD in Exo 3.14 of the Greek OT states 'Ego Eimi HO ON' …'I am the LIVING ONE'.
  GOD calls Himself, HO ON.
  'HO ON' meaning 'THE LIVING ONE'.

  If Jesus therefore, was claiming before his audience, to be the ONE GOD using Exo 3.14, he would have said …
  “Before Abraham, Ego Eimi HO ON”
  or
  “Before Abraham, HO ON”

  Nope! Jesus simply said ego eimi … I am he
  ego eimi … I am he is generally, the equivalent to the wording … It is me!! … It's me!!

  Here are some examples of this usage …

  (John 4:25-26) The woman saith unto him, I know that Messias cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things. 26 Jesus saith unto her, I that speak unto thee am he.

  Messias is coming … Jesus answers … It's me!!

  (John 8:24) I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.

  If you don't believe that It's me!! … you will die in your sins.
  Me who? The Messiah.

  Let's for argument sake, following the logic that Jesus was claiming to be the 'I AM' of Exo 3.14 … we'll look at this verse again, the way most trinitarians look at it …
  (John 8:24-25) I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that
  I AM [of Exo 3.14], ye shall die in your sins. 25 Then said they unto him, Who art thou? And Jesus saith unto them, Even the same that I said unto you from the beginning.

  Now look at this. If Jesus indeed was claiming to be the 'I AM' of Exo 3.14 i.e. YAHWEH GOD ALMIGHTY; then why would his audience ask Who art thou? i.e. Who are you?
  That would be a silly question!!! He just said who he was, didn't he!!! … If saying 'I AM' meant he was GOD!! Hmmm!

  No! Jesus said “if you don't believe that It's me!! … you will die in your sins.” They therefore asked, Me Who? i.e. Who are you?
  So, Jesus by using 2 little words, I am … ego eimi wasn't calling himself by some title or by some name. NO! He was emphasizing, It's me!! They asked, who are you?
  Note, Christ's answer: Even the same that I said unto you from the beginning.

  If Jesus by saying I am … ego eimi, was claiming to be Almighty GOD, then where did Jesus EVER SAY from the beginning of his ministry, from BEFORE John 8.24, that he was Almighty GOD? I ask you again, WHERE!!!!
  However, from the beginning of his ministry, Jesus made many Messianic claims … he claimed to be the Son of GOD … he claimed to be the One that GOD through the prophets, claimed would come, he claimed to be the Coming Messiah … FROM THE BEGINNING!

  [For other examples of ego eimi being used as the equiv. of It's me … see John 9:8-9 (the blind man), 13:19, 18:5-8, as well as the next two]

  2) Now John 8:28, 58 …

  (John 8:28 ) Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things.

  When I am crucified, then you will know that It's me!! … then you would know that I am the Messiah, & I do nothing of myself.

  (John 8:58 ) Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.

  Before Abraham was, It's me!! Me who? The Messiah.
  In other words, before Abraham came into being, Jesus of Nazareth was FORE-ORDAINED to be the Messiah.
  (1 Pet 1:20) Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you

  Note, Jesus never said that he saw Abraham, nor that Abraham saw him! Think about that!!

  I am … Ego Eimi is a phrase of emphasis on identification.
  This is how it was used in John 8:53ff … note the question … (John 8:53) Art thou greater than our father Abraham, which is dead? and the prophets are dead: whom makest thou thyself?
  WHOM DO YOU MAKE YOURSELF TO BE??

  From that point onwards, Jesus was answering their question.
  Jesus was making himself out to be the Messiah, the Messiah foreordained to come into this world, long before Abraham came into existence. The same Messiah, that Abraham rejoiced to see his day, the Day of the Messiah, and saw it by faith [Heb 11.13]; when the Gospel was preached to him [Gal 3.8-9,16]
  Therefore, being the Messiah, Jesus was indeed, greater than Abraham & the prophets!

  3)A quote from H. H. Wendt
  

  Quote

  The saying in John 8:58, ‘Before Abraham came to be, I am’ was prompted by the fact that Jesus’ opponents had countered his remark in v. 51 by saying that Jesus was not greater than Abraham or the prophets (v. 52). As the Messiah commissioned by God Jesus is conscious of being in fact superior to Abraham and the prophets. For this reason he replies (according to the intervening words, v. 54ff) that Abraham had ‘seen his day,’ i.e., the entrance of Jesus on his historical ministry, and ‘had rejoiced to see’ that day. And Jesus strengthens his argument by adding the statement, which sounded strange to the Jews, that he had even been ‘before Abraham’ (v. 58). This last saying must be understood in connection with v. 56. Jesus speaks in vv. 55, 56 and 58 as if his present ministry on earth stretches back to the time of Abraham and even before. His sayings were perceived by the Jews in this sense and rejected as nonsense. But Jesus obviously did not (in v. 56) mean that Abraham had actually experienced Jesus’ appearance on earth and seen it literally. Jesus was referring to Abraham’s spiritual vision of his appearance on earth, by which Abraham, at the birth of Isaac, had foreseen at the same time the promised Messiah, and had rejoiced at the future prospect of the greater one (the Messiah) who would be Israel’s descendant. Jesus’ reference to his existence before Abraham’s birth must be understood in the same sense. There is no sudden heavenly preexistence of the Messiah here: the reference is again obviously to his earthly existence. And this earthly existence is precisely the existence of the Messiah. As such, it was not only present in Abraham’s mind, but even before his time, as the subject of God’s foreordination and foresight. The sort of preexistence Jesus has in mind is ‘ideal’ [in the world of ideas and plans]. In accordance with this consciousness of being the Messiah preordained from the beginning, Jesus can indeed make the claim to be greater than Abraham and the prophets.

• John 17:5
  Messiah Jesus is asking the Father for the glory that had been laid up for him before the foundation of the world
  Hence, in this sense, the Son had glory with the Father before the world was. It was foreordained, reserved glory, reserved for the Son. He in this verse, prays for it.
  To quote another writer …
  
  

  Quote

  John 17:5 does not say “Give me back” or “Restore to me the glory I had…” as some paraphrase versions tell you. … Jewish ways of thinking and speaking, and not 20th-century use of language, must govern our reading of the first century Jewish documents we know as the New Testament. The immediate context of any given saying of Jesus is also of prime importance. What do we learn about “glory” in John 17? 1. The same glory which the Father has given Jesus, Jesus has already given to disciples who are not yet even born. “The glory which you [Father] have given me I have given to them [the ones who are later going to be converted by the Apostles, v.20]” (v. 22). 2. The glory discussed in John 17 is the glory of the future Kingdom of Jesus which the disciples are going to see in the future. In other words it is Jesus’ future glory which he desires to share with his disciples. John 17:24: “Father, I desire that that they also, whom you have given me, be with me where I am, in order that they may behold my glory which you have given me.” 3. The glory which Jesus requests for himself is the glory he expects to receive as the reward for his completed Messianic work: “Father, the hour has come; glorify your Son…I glorified You on earth, having accomplished the work which You gave me to do, and now glorify Me together with Yourself with the glory which I had with you before the world was.” It is clear that the glory in question is glory which “has been given” but which is not yet possessed by Jesus or the disciples. It is glory which “has been given” even to disciples who are not yet even born! It is glory in prospect. The glory which Jesus desires to have as the reward of his work is the glory which he “had” as a gift in God’s intention and plan before the world was. What “has been given” is the same as what is in one’s possession, but it is a possession promised for the future and granted in the Plan of God. The meaning of Jesus’ prayer to the Father is this: “Give me now the glory in your company which I had stored up with you as your prospective gift for me on the completion of my work.” We might compare the case of Jeremiah whose appointment to the office of prophet was given to him before he was born. He “had” that office prior to birth as a gift in God’s intention (Jer. 1:5).

  
  A quote from H. H. Wendt
  

  Quote

  In John 17:5 Jesus asks the Father to give him now the heavenly glory which he had with the Father before the world was. The conclusion that because Jesus possessed a preexistent glory in heaven he must also have preexisted personally in heaven is taken too hastily. This is proven by Matt. 6:20 (‘Lay up for yourselves treasure in heaven’), 25:34 (‘Come, you blessed by my Father, inherit the Kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world’), Col. 1:5 (‘the hope which is laid up for you in heaven about which you heard in the word of Truth, the Gospel’), and I Pet. 1:4 (‘an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, which does not fade away, reserved in heaven for you’). Thus a reward can also be thought of as preexistent in heaven. Such a reward is destined for human beings and already held in store, to be awarded to them at the end of their life. So it is with heavenly glory which Jesus requests. He is not asking for a return to an earlier heavenly condition. Rather he asks God to give him now, at the end of his work as Messiah on earth (v. 4), the heavenly reward which God had appointed from eternity for him, as Messiah. As the Messiah and Son he knows he has been loved and foreordained by the Father from eternity (v. 24). Both John 8:58 and 17:5 are concerned with God’s predetermination of the Messiah

• Colossians 1:16 For by/Gk en/in him 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/Gk dia him, and for him:
  Colossians 1:17 And he is before/Gk pro/above [as in 1 Pet 4:8 same Gk word] all things, and by/en him all things consist.

  Paul especially has the new creation (i.e. the new heavens and the new earth to come) in view; and he is proclaiming the awesome truth that Almighty GOD had created all these things IN His Son; they were ALL created for the Son and with the Son in view.
  Compare (Eph 1:10) That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:
  Compare (Eph 2:10) For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus …

  Note how the translators in Col 1:16 translated the Greek word en as in when it comes to 'heaven and earth'; yet translate the same Gk word en as by when speaking of Jesus; therefore giving the false impression that there is another 'creator' (i.e. the trinitarians' so-called God the Son, the 2nd person of a trinity!, or the Arians' pre-existing demiurge/architect)
  In other words, the translators were influenced by their theology, their concept of the Godhead which is of man's device [Acts 17:29]

  Nevertheless, GOD created all things IN Jesus NOT BY Jesus!

  Paul was no trinitarian/arian, and believed that GOD the Father was the sole Creator, and that Jesus, was the Messiah, GOD's Servant. [cp. Isa 42:1, Matt 12:18]. Jesus being GOD's Chosen One, Paul is presenting Jesus' status in the scheme of GOD's [new] creation. GOD has created all thrones, dominions, principalities, powers; which shall be manifested in the Age to come, IN Jesus the Messiah, His Son. Because of this, Jesus therefore is above or before in pre-eminence & priority, all these things & through/dia him all these things consist!
  Jesus is highly exalted, being the very object of GOD's Creation. Jesus is Lord over GOD's Creation … nevertheless GOD is still the Creator.

• Hebrews 1:2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he [GOD] hath appointed heir of all things, by/dia whom also he [GOD] made the worlds/aiones/ages;

  Almighty GOD created the ages with the Son in view. The Messianic ages to come were created with the Messiah, GOD's Son in mind.
  Incidentally, Heb 1:1-2 should put to rest the doctrine that somehow Jesus literally pre-existed his birth! Because it was not until these last days that GOD began to speak through His Son! Before that it was through angels, dreams & visions, etc.
  Why is that? Could it be simply that Jesus had not yet existed since he wasn't born yet! Simple, isn't it!!

• YOU ARE A SOUL … YOU DO NOT HAVE A SOUL RESIDING IN YOUR FLESH OR OTHERWISE

  It maybe this kind of thinking … i.e. that within us resides a [immortal] soul; which leads people to think of Jesus as a pre-existing being, since (as the Greek Church Fathers taught) 'as the Logos', his soul pre-existed his birth.

  This is where the error creeps in. The Greeks especially Plato, taught that mankind are 'ethereal, incorporeal souls' imprisoned in a body! And at the point of death, the soul lives on, disembodied!
  The Scriptures however teach no such thing!
  YOU DON'T HAVE A SOUL! YOU ARE A SOUL. THE SOUL IS YOU. YOU ARE THAT SOUL!
  PERSON=SOUL, SOUL=PERSON!
  GOD SAVES YOUR SOUL = GOD SAVES YOU
  YOU ARE THAT SOUL!

  SOULS DIE! SOULS therefore are MORTAL. SOULS CAN BE TOUCHED.
  HENCE 'SOUL=PERSON' (7 persons/souls Gen 46:25; 70 souls/persons Exo 1:5; 3000 persons/souls Acts 2:41; etc)
  It wasn't 3000 non-corporeals that were baptized. NO! It was 3000 persons i.e. 3000 souls!

  The Scriptures teach that MANKIND ARE SOULS! When a man dies, the whole man dies. In the resurrection, the whole man shall be resurrected. In other words … THE SOUL DIES! THE SOUL SHALL RISE AGAIN! THE SOUL SHALL BE RESURRECTED!
  BECAUSE THE SOUL = 'THE WHOLE MAN'

  Sadly, the KJV translators obscured these facts. Both men and animals are called living souls They obscured this fact by translating nephesh, Strong's 5315; as 'soul' in Gen 2:7 and translating it as 'creature' in Gen 1:21,24, 2:19, etc.
  Of course, the main difference between us and animals, is that man is made IN THE IMAGE OF GOD. But the fact yet remains that we are just as mortal as the animals, and BOTH mankind and animals ARE SOULS!

  Note: In Gen 2:7, man did not have a soul, they weren't given a soul. No! Man became a LIVING SOUL
  Hence, before GOD breathed into Adam, Adam was A LIFELESS SOUL
  GOD breathed into Adam and Adam changed from a lifeless corporeal soul into a living corporeal soul/nephesh.
  Mankind therefore are souls. There is no distinction. Man is NOT dichotomous.

  When we breathe our last breath, therefore, we then become dead souls. Hence the OT taught
  (Num 19:11) He that toucheth the dead nephesh of any man shall be unclean seven days.
  (Num 19:13) Whosoever toucheth the dead nephesh of any man that is dead …
  (Num 19:16) And whosoever toucheth one that is slain with a sword in the open f
  ields, or a dead nephesh …
  Et Cetera

  Again, see how the KJV translators obscured the fact (by translating nephesh as 'body') that when we die we become DEAD SOULS!!!
  DEAD SOULS can be seen, touched and handled, because
  A DEAD SOUL = A DEAD PERSON!
  WE DIE … WE BECOME DEAD SOULS … DEAD SOULS ARE THEN BURIED … THAT DEAD SOUL'S BODY SEES CORRUPTION! THAT DEAD SOUL SLEEPS IN THE DUST OF THE EARTH AWAITING THE RESURRECTION!

  THEREFORE, In the Resurrection, the DEAD i.e. DEAD SOULS will NOT be NAKED/UNCLOTHED i.e. they will NOT be disembodied in the Resurrection! NO! We do not exist outside of our bodies. We do not live outside of our bodies. That is Greek philosophy! NO!
  The scriptures teach, even as Paul was teaching, that the whole man dies, and the whole man will live & be embodied again in the resurrection. The bodies of dead souls/persons are destroyed/dissolved in death, but in the resurrection, the dead will not be naked/disembodied; they will be clothed again but this time with an incorruptible body!

  The scriptures do NOT teach that we are dichotomous or trichotomous.
  The scriptures teach that we are a 'holistic, monistic whole'
  The whole man/soul dies … the whole man/soul shall rise again at the last day!
  Therefore,
  Messiah Jesus was a human being, a soul, like Adam, like any of us. He began in the womb of Mary hence he, his soul, began in the womb of Mary, that is, he became a living soul in the womb of Mary.
  Being mortal, when he died … he, his soul, died
  He did not however, remain dead long enough to see corruption, hence 'he', his soul, was not left in Hades/Sheol i.e. GOD raised Messiah Jesus from the dead.
  Now Messiah Jesus … that is, since GOD raised him from the dead …
  Now Messiah Jesus …
  is the first immortal man … the first immortal human … the first immortal soul …
  being the firstfruits of them that slept.

PLEASE NOTE: My usage of CAPS throughout this post is for emphasis only! I am not shouting at anyone
On this subject, Nuff said
Those interested are free to email me  

[Proclaimer]

Quote (Adam Pastor @ Nov. 09 2004,10:35)

John 1:1-4 Were you aware that the majority of English Bibles before the KJV, translated John 1:1-4 as follows … (John 1:1-4)  In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by it; and without it was not any thing made that was made. 4 In it was life; and the life was the light of men. That's right … it

Hi Adam,

I haven't read all your post yet, but I will. But for the first part I have quoted.

I would first of all like to point out that the article is present before the word 'Logos' just as it is before the word God in John 1:1. With the sole exception of the last word for god.

The article is used to denote a person like 'the Jesus'. So God is a person and so is the Logos. But the Logos was god (no article), meaning that he Logos was like God or divine, (Not Divine or the Divine).

Both the article and the fact that the Logos is spoken of as divine (in nature) speaks of an expression that is with God rather than in God. It even says that the Word was with God in the beginning

I can easily believe that not all translators picked that one up.

I will reply regarding the rest of your post, and I hope that you will mine. Maybe you have already, but I would like to see you explain how this flesh that the Logos has supposedly become is an actual person.

As far as I am aware to be a man is to have human nature, but you need an idenity in order to partake of a nature. I have an identity that is not my flesh and so do you. I am man in nature and my soul in identity. That is why we can partake of divine nature. It is not our human nature that will be partaking, rather it will be us. We will be transformed from the physical body to a spiritual one.

I just cannot see where your teaching gives Jesus a seperate identity to God. You seem to be saying that he (Yahshua) is flesh only. But flesh on it's own is dead, unless it has a living soul. How do you explain Yahshua's soul? Does he have one? How is it that this flesh is a person whilst not being God. Who is Yahshua? You seem to have explained what he is and I do not agree, but I ask you who he is.

[NickHassan]

Hi Adam Pastor,
In your teaching on scripture analysis you forgot one even more basic principle and that is the “simplicity principle”.
Jesus said in Mk 10 14
” Let the children come to me and do not hinder them. It is to just such as these that the kingdom of God belongs. I assure you that whoever does not accept the reign of God like a little child shall not take part in it”
and in Mt 11.25
“Father, Lord of heaven and earth, to you I offer praise for what you have hidden from the clever you have revealed to the merest children”
Surely he was saying when children are old enough to understand the simple basics of the gospel they are old enough to come to salvation [and we must become like them]and the simplest facts are the most important ones.
My grandson of 3 may not be able to understand nuclear physics but he knows what love is.
When his dad says “don't do that” he doesn't say ” Not now, or not here, or not this way, or not ever?” Keep it simple. John the Baptist came to make straight the way of the Lord and your teachers seem to want to make it convoluted.

He also said to the clever scribes and pharisees
“Blind guides!You strain out the gnat and swallow the camel”

If a recipe reads that cow's milk or yak's milk are alternatives we should not immediately search for a yak as your teachers seem to.

Paul warned in 1Cor 1 27″ God chose those whom the world considers absurd to shame the wise ”
and 1 Cor 3 18″ Let no man delude himself. If any one of you thinks he is wise uin a worldly way he had better become a fool. In that way he will be really wise. For the wisdom of this world is absurdity with God”

Why choose the obscure interpretation over the plain? Why choose the unlikely explanation over the obvious? Why take the alternative route over the direct?

Why follow men? If you choose to do that ok but your posts have to be challenged lest others drink from the muddied water.
“Every plant my Father did not plant will be pulled out”

[NickHassan]

ps.
Mk 10.37″ Whoever welcomes a child such as this for my sake welcomes me.And whoever welcomes me, welcomes not me but Him who SENT me”
v 42″ but it would be better if anyone who LEADS ASTRAY one of these SIMPLE BELIEVERS were to be plunged in the sea with a great millstone fastened around his neck”

It may be better to put up with a little perceived abuse from God's servants than to face this greater risk?Tough Love ?

Interestingly the same fate awaits the Whore of Babylon
Rev 18.21″ A powerful angel picked up a stone like a huge millstone and hurled it into the sea and said' Babylon the great city shall be cast down like this ,with violence,and nevermore be found!…you lead all nations astray by your sorcery'”

[Anonymous]

hey adam,

i completely didn't pick up on that being a quote… sorry!! too much pride, i hate to admit… but i guess i'm repaid by looking foolish!! haha…

yeh, i understand what you're saying… in a sense i agree – i don't think that jesus the man (or the name) pre-existed his birth… but as the logos, do you think that he was “aware”? do you think he was the “son of god”?

cheers,

nate.

[NickHassan]

Hey Adam Pastor.
The Arian viewpoint says that Jesus was created . I do not accept that . He was begotten in the beginning and everything in the Universe was created through him.

[Proclaimer]

Hi Nick,

I know that Trinitarians and JWs say that Arianism teaches that Jesus was created. I also know that JWs claim to be Arians and they do indeed teach that, But I haven't actually seen the proof that Arius taught that. I know that he argued that Jesus was begotten, but what he also said I am not sure.

If he did argue that Jesus was created then he represented the other side of Greek thinking which said that everything was either created or non-created. This model caused debate when trying to put Jesus into it and hence the stances that Athanasius and Arius held.

But are Arius's writings available or does history record his teachings.

It would be interesting to know.

[Proclaimer]

Some interesting stuff regarding Arius from Wikipedia (an Open Source encyclopaedia).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arian

[Proclaimer]

To Adam Pastor,

Quote (Adam Pastor @ Nov. 10 2004,05:35)

I have perused your board well over a year now So I am fully aware that you and other contributors subscribe to the Arian viewpoint. Like I said earlier, quite a while back, I presented the viewpoint of the notional/ideal pre-existence of the Messiah … it wasn't well receive. I left it as that!! I frequent this board quite a bit, and see the response given to others who subscribe to my viewpoint. I therefore, hadn't seen any inclination to ECHO what has already been said. However, seeing that RR, roped me into this conversation, I responded;

That's cool. I can appreciate your reasoning here.

I come here to learn and to teach and I consider myself to be open regarding what others say. In order for me to believe in a doctrine, I need to see it displayed or taught in scripture. I also rely on the witness of the Spirit to lead me and teach me all things.

As time goes on, I find myself understanding more, as I love to search things out, especially something as precious as wisdom and truth. I am not a *****rian of any kind, I am simply seeking truth each day and that is my path. So in order to learn I have to be open as I do not have all the truth now and I hope to be learning more about God for all eternity.

That said I can usually tell (after a while) if the person I am talking to is genuine about learning and seeking truth, or whether they have their own agenda to push above truth. Such people just end up wasting others time and they spend their time as mere men judging and trying to force people into creeds, denominations or other man made systems. They like to label their victims and then are quick to condemn the label. I hope that such people will look foolish to the eyes of the readers when the truth of scripture is measured against their words.

On the otherhand I can also see that many genuine and honest people who are just fed up with all the deception that tries to overcome them on a daily basis. When they hear a strange teaching it could be considered quite a normal reaction to perhaps think that deception is knocking at the door again and most of the time they are right. Sometimes being honest means that we show our true feelings and speak what is on our heart.

I guess what I am trying to say is that if you are a genuine truth seeker and not a 'I believe this and no scripture will talk me out of it' person, then I can work with you and study with you.

I get frustrated just as Jesus did at people who already have a belief and will not even trade it for truth when it is presented clearly. For what do such people hope to achieve by doing this. For such people I may rebuke only in order to show them that truth is not a game but a very serious matter. I sometimes end discussions with such people as any light I may give them becomes like pearls being cast to the swine and I am only laying up judgement for them by continuing to give them precious truth whilst they continue to step all over it. In saying this however it hasn't happened with that many people, but even these people's questions can deserve an answer for the sake of those readers who come here.

I would like to consider myself a patient person with others as I know we all come from different backgrounds and we have different gifts. So I hope to continue talking with you on this subject and I hope that you will be honest and I will too.

I also expect that when either of us say something or teach something that we should be there to back it up rather than say it and then run. I am not interested in the doctrine of those who will not let themselves be accountable nor those who run away when they run out of ideas or feel that they cannot defend what they believe in. For such people were never interested in the truth in the first place.

OK, all that said, I will take your points one at a time and judge them with other scriptures and teachings. This may take some time but I feel that it will be a good thing to do, especially considering that there seems to be a number of people who hold to Mr Buzzards teachings and others who's quotes are used when teaching that the son of God didn't pre-exist his partaking of the flesh.

I hope you can bear with me when at times I may be constructing an argument and the point you made seems to be taking a beating. I do this not to you personally, but to your words in order to prove something. Just as gold is heated up in the fire and beated, I may do that to your teaching to see if it is gold or if it will burn up.

I suppose in time your real character will start to show and mine too as this dialogue takes place and I hope that we
both benefit greatly from this conversation.

So thanks for your input so far and I will start posting replies to the points you have made and I hope to start soon.

[NickHassan]

Hi Adam Pastor,
When God created man it says in Gen 2.7 He
1 “formed man from the dust of the ground, and “
2 ” breathed into his nostrils the breath of life”
According to you man is a soul. Then what was man before the breath of God was breathed into him?

In 1 Sam 28.11ff When the medium was instructed by Saul to “Bring up Samuel for me” and she did, then what happened? Did Samuel appear? Did he have a body such as could be seen by Saul? Could Samuel still speak and prophesy? Where was Samuel's body? Where did Samuel rise from?

When we are raised do we still have our original bodies? Scripture says otherwise in 12 Cor 15.

Why does 2 Thess 5.23 talk of men as 'body,soul and spirit'?

Why did Jesus separate body and soul when he said not to fear those who can destroy the body but not kill the soul?

Why does Job 33.18,24,28,30 talk of man's soul going to the “pit”as also in Ps 16.10

What is Jesus talking about in Lk 16 when he describes the state of men who have died but are yet alive?

How can we be” passed over from death to life” as Jesus described in Jn 5.24 and how can the dead “hear” as in the next verse if our souls and the Spirit still living in us is dead? Romans 8 .11 says that the Spirit indwells us and will raise us up on the last day.Are you saying that is not true and the Spirit leaves us ,or are you [unintentionally]insulting the Spirit and saying he dies too when we die?

Your “back to the future ” view of the descriptions of the Logos prior to him partaking of flesh mean that all references are allegorised as referring to future events-thus distorting scripture. It does raise a problem too. How can Jesus be the firstborn Son if other sons of God are seen prior to the creation of earth in Jb 38.7 and also prior to the physical birth of Jesus in Jb 1 and 2?

Your teachings raise question after question and do not illuminate. However you are sincere and I apologise for any personal hurt.

[NickHassan]

Hi Adam Pastor,
“Come from God” is not a symonym for “Come down from heaven” . One relates to who appointed and the other from whence he came surely?
Jn 3.13″ and no one has ascended into heaven but he who descended from heaven, even the Son of Man”
Jn 6.33″ For the bread of God is that which come down out of heaven..”
38″ For I have come down from heaven..”
50″ This is the bread which comes down out of heaven..”
62″What then if you should behold the Son of Man ascending to where he was before?”
Jn 8.23″ You are from below. I am from above.You are of this world, I am not of this world”

Did Abraham die? Jesus said in Jn 8.56″ Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day: and he saw it and was glad”
And Mt 22.32″ Have you not read that which was spoken by God,saying 'I am the God of Abraham,and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob' God is not the God of the dead but of the living.”
Jesus says that they still live, but their bodies are dead?

You take words from one context then insert them in other contexts as nate has said thus corrupting the true meaning.

[Proclaimer]

To Adam Pastor,

(thx for your posts Nick).

I will take each point you have made and will also add in scriptures that you haven't mentioned in order to give a full account.

At this stage I would like to point out that you have given an explanation for a lot of scriptures that on the surface or due to translational bias say that Jesus pre-existed. Now I can understand that some scriptures say one thing and when studied in their context they say another. This can happen because of an inadequate translation or even bias translation. Also other reasons such as cultural and knowledge of events that we may be unaware of today. However when it comes to Yahshua's pre-existence, it is mentioned in many different ways with many different words and they all seem to be in agreement that Yashua pre-existed.

So to believe your argument suggests to me that I have to accept that all these references appear to say that he pre-existed but that he didn't really because of this reason or that. Now that is a lot of reasons is it not?

If you say that this is due to translational bias then why couldn't these people hide the the fact that God is one and yet be successful in making people believe that Jesus pre-existed. It seems to me that todays bibles have a lot of evidence that shows that God is one and that Jesus is not that one God, but his son.

I know that some verses were added and I know that some verses are interpretted toward the bias of the translator, but even under those external forces, no one has successfully hidden the fact that God is one and that Yahshua is not that God but came from him. Even other truths can be easily extracted because bias translators have not successfully hidden a major them or doctrine, only certain verses here and there. Yet for some strange reason they have successfully mis-interpretted every scripture when it comes to Yahshua's pre-existence. That includes all or most translations too.

So I first of all appeal to you ability to reason and ask you to see why we and others may be sceptical of your arguments. I mean I can accept some scriptures may need further explanation to show that they are not saying what they appear to say. But what are the chances of a whole doctrine/theme of which all the involved scriptures needing to be further interpretted. It just seems to me to be a very big a stretch of the imagination or a huge coincedence.

Perhaps it is just as simple as believing what those scriptures appear to say when read simply. This is how I read them and when I do dig further (such as what I did with RamblinRoses interpretation of the root and offspring of David) I still find the same meaning.

However in the name of Yahshua I will take each reason you give as a possibility in order to remain teachable and to not become hard in my heart. So I would like to start with a scripture I read about 5 minutes before making this post. A scripture that you may or may not have mentioned.

Philippians 2:7-8
But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:
8  And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

If we anaylise this scripture it seems to be quite obvious on the surface that Yahshua did the following:

[NickHassan]

Hi Adam Pastor,
You say that God has created thrones, dominations principalities and powers which will be manifested in the Age to come. I disagree.
When we are born again into Jesus then we are, in him, above these rulings spirits and sitting at the right hand of God. These are for “children held in bondage under the elemental things of the world” but we are now sons of God and brothers of Jesus.
Yes these were created by the Lord as shown in Coll 1.16
“For in him all things were created ,both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible,whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities..”
Paul made this freedom from the law and it's rulers plain in Galations ch 4.1-9 and in verse 8-9 says
” However at that time ,when you did not know God ,you were slaves to those which by nature are not gods. But now that you have come to know God ,or rather be known by God, how is it that you want to turn back to the weak and worthless elemental things to which you desire to be enslaved all over again?”
and in Coll 2.15 Paul says
“When he had disarmed the rulers and authorities ,he made a public display of them, having triumphed over them through him”
So surely these are of the old order and law and not to come?

[NickHassan]

Hi Adam Pastor,
Yes God's word can be the breath of God, a command, a plan or a decree. Men on earth have heard His voice not infrequently in the bible. That does not change the fact that men have also seen the Word of God, the Son of God who became Son of Man.

Yes 3000 souls were added as they are more important than their containers, weak bodies which are destined to be destroyed.
Yes a soul can die. But not until the second death.

[NickHassan]

Hi Pastor Adam,
I am confused . You say Jesus ,who you say was a soul, died…and yet you say he was an immortal soul. Does immortal not mean cannot die??

[NickHassan]

Hi Pastor Adam and Ramblinrose.
In Mt 8.The centurion said to Jesus” If I give one man the order 'dismissed', off he goes. If I say to another 'come here ' he comes .If I say to my slave ' do this ' he does it”
The issues are
Over 40 times in the NT Jesus says he was sent by the Father. How can a servant be “sent” unless that servant exists… and can hear… and can understand …and obey the order?
If Jesus did not exist as the Logos then how could he be sent? Surely you do not mean that Jesus being conceived in Mary's womb was the meaning of all these verses about being sent? A fetus cannot understand or obey. If that is what you believe then in what way was Jesus obedient in going to do the Father's will?

[NickHassan]

Hi Adam Pastor,
1Jn 3.8
“The man who sins belongs to the devil, because the devil is a sinner from the beginning. It was to destroy the devil's works that the Son of God revealed himself”

Satan existed before Adam was created.

Are you saying the Son of God did not exist then?
Or are you saying Jesus Christ is not the Son of God?

1Jn 2 “This is how you can recognise God's Spirit:every spirit that acknowledges Jesus Christ come IN the flesh belongs to God”
It does not say, as to seem to imply, that he came AS flesh but says IN the flesh. There is a difference.

[Author]

Posts