Who is this Jesus?

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Lightenup @ May 23 2013,22:23)

Is the word 'Almighty' in the original manuscripts? Yes or no?

No.  Why?  Are you implying that perhaps Paul was speaking of the blood of someone OTHER THAN “Almighty God”?  YES or NO?

Quote (Lightenup @ May 23 2013,22:23)

Is the word 'Father' in the original manuscripts? Yes or no?

Nope.  

Quote (Lightenup @ May 23 2013,22:23)

If not, then theos could refer to the only begotten theos as it seems to in John 1:1c.

Doubtful.  Perhaps you could show me a different scripture where Paul UNDENIABLY calls the only begotten god by the title “theos”.  (The word “UNDENIABLY” counts Titus 2:13 out, since it most obviously means “the coming OF our great God, and OF our Savior, Jesus Christ”.  So you'll have to find a different scripture than that.  Can you do it?)

Quote (Lightenup @ May 23 2013,22:23)

Is it grammatically correct for that verse to say 'with His own blood?' Yes or no?

It is ONE of the grammatical possibilities.  It is not the most obvious possibility when considered within the entire context of what Paul consistently taught in his writings.

Kathi, Jehovah Himself (not “Themselves”) foretold through Isaiah that Jesus would be called “mighty god”, right?  So even IF you kick and scream and throw a tantrum insisting that “the blood of his own” refers to Jesus as the “god” who bought the church with his own blood, it STILL does not make Jesus the very Almighty God who brought him forth into existence and SENT him into the world for this very purpose.  It STILL does not make Jesus the very God that he is the servant, prophet, lamb, priest, angel, and son OF.  Do you understand this?

Now, along with my questions in this post, please address my Hebrews 9 points from the last post.

[mikeboll64]

Quote (4Thomas @ May 26 2013,19:26)

A true Son is the same as a true father, except they are different persons this is common sense………..

Hi Daniel,

It's also common sense that a father and son are not the same BEING – wouldn't you agree?

[mikeboll64]

Abe,

I'm still waiting. In YOUR OWN words, tell me what it means that Paul said he didn't receive his gospel from any man, but instead from Jesus Christ.

[4Thomas]

Quote (terraricca @ May 27 2013,12:55)

Quote (4Thomas @ May 27 2013,07:26) Quote (terraricca @ May 25 2013,00:28) daniel Quote Life in the Son and in his name Daniel lets be true ;live his given by God almighty to all of his creation  even to the son ; but wen Adam descender at the time of Noah God was ready to destroy all of creation,wipe them all off;  BUT SOMEONE INTERCEDED FOR THEM ;JUST AS MOSES INTERCEDED FOR ISRAEL AT HIS TIME THIS BEING THAT INTERCEDED WAS NO OTHER THAN “THE WORD OF GOD ” JESUS CHRIST THE SON OF GOD, AND YES WE CAN SAY THAT HE FROM THEN ON ,HOLDS OUR LIVES IN HIS HAND , AND WEN HE CAME TO GIVE UP HIS LIVE ,THEN HE COULD GIVE LIVE TO WHOM HE WANT TO GIVE LIVE ,THIS WAS WHAT GOD AS SAID .AND THE POWERS HE RECEIVED FROM HIS FATHER WAS FOR THAT PURPOSE,AMEN Hi Sorry i haven't had a chance to reply and I'm sorry if I quoted you wrong I honestly have only ever teached what i truly believe, i don't understand what you where saying in some of your earlier posts about my posts? Sorry. Please tell me what you are trying to teach me. What is it that you believe, *what* is the Son. What was Jesus before he came in the flesh please show me the scriptures. A true Son is the same as a true father, except they are different persons this is common sense they are one because the Father isn't a women and didn't give birth to the Son as a baby and need to teach him to crawl etc. The Son is the expressed image (his very substance of the Father) Is the father like the moon (just a rock in sapce ) or is he like a Sun (that expresses his glory) Life in the Son and in his name Daniel Daniel I will try not to say lies,and miss lay you, I do not teach but scriptures do,Do You Beleive the scriptures Christ according to scriptures he was an Angel and after he died he returned to be one,but he became the second to his father

Hi,

Please show me the scriptures then that show Jesus was a angel and I will show you the scriptures that teach he is God, the Son has the same nature as his Father. Every true Father and true Son have the same nature the only difference is they are different persons.

The thing is, I believe the Father is more like the Sun (in the sky which expresses its glory)
I don't believe the Father is static like the moon which is just a rock in space.

See i don't believe the Father gave birth to the Son like a women does… but instead as he is Almighty and eternally almighty he displays this power in the eternal generation of his Son.
The Son is from the Father and the Father never ever needs to prove himself because all things the Son has is from the Father (eternally) so when the Son creates the universe, galaxies, the billions of stars and the earth and its wonder, no one can deny the Father because the Father is the source FROM whom his Son is *from* – this is why scripture teaches all things are created by the Son

If you can explain to me how the Sun could exist without expressing its glory with all the Light that reaches us and sustains our worlds growth and energy, then that would explain how the Father was at some stage not a Father.
But this concept is not logical. Because the Sun could not be a Sun if we couldn't see it, imagine if I told you there is this massive star much much bigger than our Sun and it located right next to our moon – But you can't see it because it hasn't expressed [fathered] its glory. Now I wouldn't expect you to believe me would I.

See Jesus is the expressed glory and the very same substance of the Father. The Father is Father and hes not revealed as a women who gives birth but instead he is revealed as unapprochable light. That which is expreesed being almightly in glory and power cannot be disapated.

Yes I believe in the scriptures.

There are many who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, that have gone out into the world – But what is the Jesus you believe that came in the flesh please show me *what* he was with scripture before he took flesh.

If you still believe Jesus is a angel please show me because I have been asking multiple times.

Life and love in the Son and in his name
Daniel

[4Thomas]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ May 28 2013,11:47)

Quote (4Thomas @ May 26 2013,19:26) A true Son is the same as a true father, except they are different persons this is common sense……….. Hi Daniel, It's also common sense that a father and son are not the same BEING – wouldn't you agree?

Hi Mike,
100% different persons but the thing is if your Son came from you alone and not from his Mother also then it would be impossible to gentically tell you apart. You would have the exact same genitics and exact dna but you would be different persons yet your Son would be from the same being. and that being is from you. Think of it as multiplication from glory to glory. 1×1 One being but that being is expressed.

See Jesus is from the Father alone and the Father is not static, i believe the Son is the expressed image of the Father. When you see the Son you see the Father. He hid his glory for us in his flesh

Matthew 17
1After six days Jesus took with him Peter, James and John the brother of James, and led them up a high mountain by themselves. 2There he was transfigured before them. His face shone like the sun, and his clothes became as white as the light.

Life in the Son and in his name
Daniel

[4Thomas]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ May 27 2013,05:50)

Hi Daniel, I just found this thread………… sorry.   Instead of starting with Galatians, let me see if we can nip this in the bud right from the start.  You said in the other thread that you believe that the rock in 1 Cor 10:4 was Jesus Christ. Is this correct?

Hi Mike,
Yes

Life in the Son and in his name
Daniel

[terraricca]

Quote (4Thomas @ May 28 2013,06:51)

Quote (terraricca @ May 27 2013,12:55) Quote (4Thomas @ May 27 2013,07:26) Quote (terraricca @ May 25 2013,00:28) daniel Quote Life in the Son and in his name Daniel lets be true ;live his given by God almighty to all of his creation  even to the son ; but wen Adam descender at the time of Noah God was ready to destroy all of creation,wipe them all off;  BUT SOMEONE INTERCEDED FOR THEM ;JUST AS MOSES INTERCEDED FOR ISRAEL AT HIS TIME THIS BEING THAT INTERCEDED WAS NO OTHER THAN “THE WORD OF GOD ” JESUS CHRIST THE SON OF GOD, AND YES WE CAN SAY THAT HE FROM THEN ON ,HOLDS OUR LIVES IN HIS HAND , AND WEN HE CAME TO GIVE UP HIS LIVE ,THEN HE COULD GIVE LIVE TO WHOM HE WANT TO GIVE LIVE ,THIS WAS WHAT GOD AS SAID .AND THE POWERS HE RECEIVED FROM HIS FATHER WAS FOR THAT PURPOSE,AMEN Hi Sorry i haven't had a chance to reply and I'm sorry if I quoted you wrong I honestly have only ever teached what i truly believe, i don't understand what you where saying in some of your earlier posts about my posts? Sorry. Please tell me what you are trying to teach me. What is it that you believe, *what* is the Son. What was Jesus before he came in the flesh please show me the scriptures. A true Son is the same as a true father, except they are different persons this is common sense they are one because the Father isn't a women and didn't give birth to the Son as a baby and need to teach him to crawl etc. The Son is the expressed image (his very substance of the Father) Is the father like the moon (just a rock in sapce ) or is he like a Sun (that expresses his glory) Life in the Son and in his name Daniel Daniel I will try not to say lies,and miss lay you, I do not teach but scriptures do,Do You Beleive the scriptures Christ according to scriptures he was an Angel and after he died he returned to be one,but he became the second to his father Hi, Please show me the scriptures then that show Jesus was a angel and I will show you the scriptures that teach he is God, the Son has the same nature as his Father. Every true Father and true Son have the same nature the only difference is they are different persons. The thing is, I believe the Father is more like the Sun (in the sky which expresses its glory) I don't believe the Father is static like the moon which is just a rock in space. See i don't believe the Father gave birth to the Son like a women does… but instead as he is Almighty and eternally almighty he displays this power in the eternal generation of his Son. The Son is from the Father and the Father never ever needs to prove himself because all things the Son has is from the Father (eternally) so when the Son creates the universe, galaxies, the billions of stars and the earth and its wonder, no one can deny the Father because the Father is the source FROM whom his Son is *from* – this is why scripture teaches all things are created by the Son If you can explain to me how the Sun could exist without expressing its glory with all the Light that reaches us and sustains our worlds growth and energy, then that would explain how the Father was at some stage not a Father. But this concept is not logical. Because the Sun could not be a Sun if we couldn't see it, imagine if I told you there is this massive star much much bigger than our Sun and it located right next to our moon – But you can't see it because it hasn't expressed [fathered] its glory. Now I wouldn't expect you to believe me would I. See Jesus is the expressed glory and the very same substance of the Father. The Father is Father and hes not revealed as a women who gives birth but instead he is revealed as unapprochable light. That which is expreesed being almightly in glory and power cannot be disapated. Yes I believe in the scriptures. There are many who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, that have gone out into the world – But what is the Jesus you believe that came in the flesh please show me *what* he was with scripture before he took flesh. If you still believe Jesus is a angel please show me because I have been asking multiple times. Life and love in the Son and in his name Daniel

daniel

Quote

Please show me the scriptures then that show Jesus was a angel and I will show you the scriptures that teach he is God, the Son has the same nature as his Father. Every true Father and true Son have the same nature the only difference is they are different persons.

if God as a son ;it does not matter how he created him ,WHAT YOU HAVE TO KEEP IN MIND IS WERE WAS HIS SON PRIOR TO HIS CREATION AND WHO ELSE WAS PRESENT

PRIOR ;THE SON DID NOT EXIST ;SO GOD WAS ALONE.

AT THE CREATION OF THE SON NO ONE WAS THERE EXCEPT THE FATHER

A CREATION IS NOT LIKE GIVEN BIRTH FROM A FEMALE GENDER ,

Col 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.
Col 1:16 For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him.

WHAT WOULD YOU SAY IS CALLED THE FIRST OF GOD CREATION ;A ANGEL MEANING A SPIRIT BEING

NOW THE GLORY OF THE SON IS DOING HIS FATHER 'S WILL ,THE GLORY OF THE FATHER IS GIVEN TO HIM BY THE SON PERFORMING HIS WILL,AND SO IT IS FOR ANY ONE OF US THAT REPENT IT IS DONE FOR THE GLORY OF THE SON BECAUSE WE HAVE BELIEVED THAT HE HIS THE SON OF GOD ,JUST LIKE GOD AS SAID IT .

Quote

There are many who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, that have gone out into the world

Jn 1:4 In him was life, and that life was the light of men.

PLEASE EXPLAIN THIS VERSE TO ME

i GET TO YOUR OTHER QUESTION
S LATER ;

[mikeboll64]

Quote (4Thomas @ May 27 2013,19:15)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ May 27 2013,05:50) You said in the other thread that you believe that the rock in 1 Cor 10:4 was Jesus Christ. Is this correct? Yes

And are you aware that this one who accompanied the Israelites in the wilderness was an angel of Jehovah? (Exodus 14:19; 23:20-23)

[mikeboll64]

Quote (4Thomas @ May 27 2013,19:10)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ May 28 2013,11:47) Hi Daniel, It's also common sense that a father and son are not the same BEING – wouldn't you agree? Hi Mike, ………if your Son came from you alone and not from his Mother also then it would be impossible to gentically tell you apart. You would have the exact same genitics and exact dna but you would be different persons yet your Son would be from the same being…………..

FROM the same being?  I agree that Jesus is FROM God, Daniel.  But you claim that Jesus IS the same being – not “FROM the same being”, as you've just written.

[Lightenup]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ May 24 2013,19:09)

Quote (Lightenup @ May 23 2013,22:23) Is the word 'Almighty' in the original manuscripts? Yes or no? Is the word 'Father' in the original manuscripts? Yes or no? If not, then theos could refer to the only begotten theos as it seems to in John 1:1c. Kathi, Let's take a little stroll down Hebrews 9 for a second……….. 14 How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that we may serve the living God! 1.  Who is the one who offered his blood for us?  “God”?  Or “Christ”? 2.  Does that statement make it clear enough that Paul* considered “Christ” to be someone other than “God”? 24 For Christ did not enter a sanctuary made with human hands that was only a copy of the true one; he entered heaven itself, now to appear for us in God’s presence. I included verse 24 as confirmation that Paul* indeed knows the difference between our Lord, Jesus Christ, and our God, Jehovah.  Unlike you, he doesn't confuse the two. Perhaps you and I could do a debate where we go through every sentence in scripture that Paul ever wrote or said.  One by one, we could decide if Paul thought Jesus was “God”, or someone other than “God”. What do you say?  Are you brave enough send your doctrine to the front lines of the battle?  Or is it safer for you to let your doctrine remain a sniper – taking pot-shots at a lone scripture here, and a lone scripture there – but forever remaining far removed from the epicenter of the battle?  Let me know. * I believe Paul is the one who wrote the letter to the Hebrews.

Mike,
WHO did the purchasing with the blood in this verse?

Rev 5
9 They were singing a new song: “You are worthy to take the scroll and to open its seals because you were killed, and at the cost of your own blood you have purchased for God persons from every tribe, language, people, and nation.

Did the theos of John 1:1c purchase persons from every tribe, language, people, and nation for the God of John 1:1b? Or did the theos from John 1:1b purchase them?

This is really quite simple, Mike. This verse really settles the matter. There is no way in the world that you can twist that “you” to mean the one called God in v. 9 above. The 'you' is written in the second person and applies to Christ who WE ALREADY ARE AWARE THAT HE IS ALSO THEOS,  SPECIFICALLY THE THEOS OF JOHN 1;1c.

Your questions:

Quote

1.  Who is the one who offered his blood for us?  “God”?  Or “Christ”?

Christ, the God of John 1:1c, not the God of John 1:1b.

Quote

2.  Does that statement make it clear enough that Paul* considered “Christ” to be someone other than “God”?

It has clearly been established that the God of John 1:1b is someone other than the God of John 1:1c, Mike. It has also clearly been established that the God of John 1:1c is Christ, Mike.

Sometimes He is called Christ and sometimes He is called God. Just because you find a verse where He is called Christ does not mean He is not the God of John 1:1c anymore.

Quote

Perhaps you could show me a different scripture where Paul UNDENIABLY calls the only begotten god by the title “theos”.

Hebrews 1
8But about the Son he says,

“Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever;

a scepter of justice will be the scepter of your kingdom.

9You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness;

therefore God, your God, has set you above your companions

by anointing you with the oil of joy.”

Quote

No.  Why?  Are you implying that perhaps Paul was speaking of the blood of someone OTHER THAN “Almighty God”?  YES or NO?

NO, I was meeting you where you are and realizing that you need to take baby steps here.

Quote

It is ONE of the grammatical possibilities.  It is not the most obvious possibility when considered within the entire context of what Paul consistently taught in his writings.

Rev 5:9 makes it CLEAR as to whom did the purchasing with the blood.

Quote

Kathi, Jehovah Himself (not “Themselves”) foretold through Isaiah that Jesus would be called “mighty god”, right?  So even IF you kick and scream and throw a tantrum insisting that “the blood of his own” refers to Jesus as the “god” who bought the church with his own blood, it STILL does not make Jesus the very Almighty God who brought him forth into existence and SENT him into the world for this very purpose.  It STILL does not make Jesus the very God that he is the servant, prophet, lamb, priest, angel, and son OF.  Do you understand this?

Jehovah the FATHER sent Jehovah the Son, obviously the Son did not send the son. Jesus (Jehovah the Son) is the servant of Jehovah the Father. “Do YOU understand this?”

Now have we finally settled who did the purchasing with the blood? Yes or No? If Yes, Mike tell me who it was that did the purchasing.

[4Thomas]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ May 28 2013,13:12)

Quote (4Thomas @ May 27 2013,19:10) Quote (mikeboll64 @ May 28 2013,11:47) Hi Daniel, It's also common sense that a father and son are not the same BEING – wouldn't you agree? Hi Mike, ………if your Son came from you alone and not from his Mother also then it would be impossible to gentically tell you apart. You would have the exact same genitics and exact dna but you would be different persons yet your Son would be from the same being………….. FROM the same being?  I agree that Jesus is FROM God, Daniel.  But you claim that Jesus IS the same being – not “FROM the same being”, as you've just written.

Hi Mike,
this is what I said

100% different persons but the thing is if your Son came from you alone and not from his Mother also then it would be impossible to gentically tell you apart. You would have the exact same genitics and exact dna but you would be different persons yet your Son would be from the same being. and that being is from you. Think of it as multiplication from glory to glory. 1×1 One being but that being is expressed.

>>> Let me explain this<<<
What I mean here is that everything originates from the one being the Father, like the expressed Sun rays that sustain all life in our world come from the Sun. I guess to be clearer I should have said from one substance.

See Jesus is from the Father alone and the Father is not static, i believe the Son is the expressed image of the Father. When you see the Son you see the Father.

Mike, Jesus is the only true Son, all other Sons are created by Jesus so they are different, their are different classes of angles and arch angels have their own angels. Way did lucifier draw away 1/3 of the angels? Is this perhaps that there was three arch angels, Gabriel, Michael and Lucifier.

Gabriel is clearly the messanger angel
Michael is clearly the warrior angel.

Would you agree with this statement?

Again imagine seeing someone have a debate – where they were trying to argue that your Son wasn't a human but a messanger of a human.

I have faith in you mike and I know you understand what I am saying. I will answer your question in the other thread tomorrow.

Life and Love in the Son and in his name.
Daniel

[terraricca]

Daniel

Quote

If you can explain to me how the Sun could exist without expressing its glory with all the Light that reaches us and sustains our worlds growth and energy, then that would explain how the Father was at some stage not a Father.

how can God almighty be compered against his own creation

the glory of ALL CREATION TESTIFY ABOUT GOD ALMIGHTY ;BUT NOT THE WAY YOU SAY IT ;IT IS THE WAY IT WORKS THAT THE GLORY IS SHOWN ;BIG DIFFERENCE ,

YOUR BELIEVE AS EXPLAIN TO ME LACKS OF PROFOUND KNOWLEDGE OF GOD'S OWN WAY'S ,YOU ALSO FORGOT THE REASON FOR GOD'S CREATION ,

[4Thomas]

Quote (terraricca @ May 29 2013,10:49)

Daniel Quote If you can explain to me how the Sun could exist without expressing its glory with all the Light that reaches us and sustains our worlds growth and energy, then that would explain how the Father was at some stage not a Father. how can God almighty be compered against his own creation the glory of ALL CREATION TESTIFY ABOUT GOD ALMIGHTY ;BUT NOT THE WAY YOU SAY IT ;IT IS THE WAY IT WORKS THAT THE GLORY IS SHOWN ;BIG DIFFERENCE , YOUR BELIEVE AS EXPLAIN TO ME LACKS OF PROFOUND KNOWLEDGE OF GOD'S OWN WAY'S ,YOU ALSO FORGOT THE REASON FOR GOD'S CREATION ,

Hi,
Here it goes,

1: The only true Son is the same as a true Father except they are different persons. A true Son is the image of his Father.  

2: The Father is no chick and didn't give birth to the Son like a women.

3: The SCRIPTURES reveal CLEARLY that Jesus is the expressed imagine of the Father.

New International Version (©2011)
Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.

See nothing was made that had been made without the Son.

See your God wasn't eteranlly Father, my Father is eternally Father, he is eternally Almightly BECAUSE he eternally generates his Son from glory to glory. My father expresses himself! So every example will full short of the power of God but I have choosen the most powerful thing that sustains our life to reveal the Fathers glory.

The Son is the testament of the Fathers glory, the Son is THE LORD OF GLORY, the expressed image

THIS IS WHAT SCRIPTURE TEACHES

Heb 1:3  
Who being the BRIGHTNESS OF HIS GLORY,
and the EXPRESS IMAGE [Exact representation]
of his PERSON [Essence/Substance],
and UPHOLDING ALL THINGS
BY THE WORD OF HIS POWER,
when he had BY HIMSELF PURGED OUR SINS,
sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;

Read this and I really truly pray you understand!
Scripture is clear you are without excuse because his eternal power and divine nature is revealed and understood by what I'm trying to teach you.

Romans 1:20
New International Version (NIV)

20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

All the translations imply the exact same thing.

Rom 1:20  For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, BEING UNDERSTOOD BY THE THINGS THAT ARE MADE, even his eternal power and GODHEAD; so that they are without excuse:

The Word who scripture teaches is God the creator became flesh but he wasn't a corruptible man, this is sinful to make THE Saviour a corruptible man.

Rom 1:23  And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God INTO AN IMAGE MADE LIKE TO CORRUPTIBLE MAN, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
Rom 1:25  Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the CREATOR [G2936], who is blessed for ever. Amen.

Who was everything created by? What is someone called who creates things especially the galaxies and universe and heaven and ALL the angels? Its the exact same greek word.

Col 1:16  For by him were ALL things CREATED [G2936], …….. all things were CREATED[G2936] by him, and for him:

So we are created by him and ****FOR**** him

You honestly need to let go of your manmade teachings and serve the creator rather than the organisation who is feeding this angel stuff to you. Who is more important your organisation/church or Jesus?

If you still wont believe why can't you show me the scriptures that teach Jesus was a angel creature?? It really makes me wonder but my hope is in the Holy Spirit that he will reveal that Jesus is not a false god or a un-named creature angel.

Is there a forum on here that teaches what Blasphemy Against The Holy Spirit is? I will go and check because i getting quite concerned.

Life in the Son, choose life, there is no condemantion in the Son

Daniel

[4Thomas]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ May 28 2013,12:53)

Quote (4Thomas @ May 27 2013,19:15) Quote (mikeboll64 @ May 27 2013,05:50) You said in the other thread that you believe that the rock in 1 Cor 10:4 was Jesus Christ. Is this correct? Yes And are you aware that this one who accompanied the Israelites in the wilderness was an angel of Jehovah?  (Exodus 14:19; 23:20-23)

Hi Mike,
So what, where does it say the rock in the Old testament is an angel?

Life in the Son and in his name

Daniel

[mikeboll64]

Wait………… so you think “the rock that accompanied them” is someone other than the angel that accompanied them?

You think both Christ AND an angel of Jehovah accompanied the Israelites in the wilderness?

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Lightenup @ May 27 2013,20:43)

This is really quite simple, Mike. This verse really settles the matter. There is no way in the world that you can twist that “you” to mean the one called God in v. 9 above.

Revelation 5:9 And they sang a new song, saying:

“You are worthy to take the scroll
   and to open its seals,
because you were slain,
   and with your blood you purchased for God
   persons from every tribe and language and people and nation.
10 You have made them to be a kingdom and priests to serve our God,
   and they will reign on the earth.”

You are correct that this one passage should settle the matter once and for all……… WITHOUT any “twisting” from me.

Do you notice how the “Lamb” is distinguished as someone OTHER THAN “our God”?  So who is the “God” of the four creatures and the 24 elders who sang that song?  Is it the Lamb?  Or someone else?

Also notice how the Lamb, with HIS blood, purchased men FOR “our God”.  Are you able to understand this?

See, “God” did not purchase men with HIS OWN blood.  Instead, “God” SENT a sacrificial lamb into the world to purchase men FOR “our God” with his (the Lamb's) blood.

Also notice how the same things are taught in Hebrews 9, Kathi.  Paul doesn't say “God” purchased men with HIS OWN blood in Heb 9, does he?  Nope.  Instead, he teaches about “the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit, offered himself unblemished to God“.  Are you able to see that once again, the Lamb/Christ is the one who offered his blood, while “God” is someone OTHER THAN “the Lamb/Christ”.

Why do you suppose Christ is so often and so consistently mentioned in scripture as someone OTHER THAN “God”?

And why do you suppose there is NO MENTION WHATSOEVER of our “Gods”?  Have you ever read a scripture that says we are to worship only our Gods?  Have you read one where it is said that our Gods created all things?  Do the four creatures and the 24 elders sing about priests who will serve their Gods (plural)?  Or do they sing about priests who will serve their God (singular)?  (Also notice that in their song, they INCLUDE the Lamb when they say “our God”.  Their God is the God of the Lamb as well.)

So now that we know the above things, and we also know that the Greek words in Acts 20:28 are “with the blood of his own”, and that those words could either refer to God buying men with his own blood, or they could refer to God buying men with the blood of his own SON………… which way should a REASONABLE person understand it?

We have now discussed two completely separate scriptures (one of which YOU brought up) that distinguish the one who shed blood FROM the one called “God”.  So if the Greek words in Acts 20:28 make that same distinction a possibility, shouldn't we use the context of these other scriptures as our guide – and understand Acts the same way as we understand the other two?  That is, after all, the SENSIBLE thing to do, right?

So, since I know that being SENSIBLE is not a strong point for those who consider the Son of God to BE the very God he is the Son of, nor is it a strong point for those of us who have imagined a SECOND Almighty God, I will add this last part:

Kathi, we were told by Jehovah through Isaiah that the servant He was going to send into the world would be called a mighty god.  So (are you listening here?) EVEN IF Titus 2:13, and Acts 20:28, and John 1:1, and Hebrews 1:8-9 all called God's anointed one a god……….. SO WHAT?  Being called a god in scripture does NOT equate with being THE Almighty God who created all things, does it?

So I think it's great that Jesus is called a god in scripture.  He is, after all, the SECOND most powerful being in existence, right?  And he is, after all, the firstborn Son of the Most High God, right?  Surely the firstborn of the MOST HIGH God would also be “a god”, right?

So what you really need to show is that any writer of scripture thought Jesus was the MOST HIGH God.  And that is why I offered you the challenge to go through all of Paul's writings first to find out if he thought that.  After Paul, we can go through any of the other writers of scripture and see if they all knew that the Christ OF “the Most High God” was someone OTHER THAN “the Most High God”.

Let me know if you are willing to undertake this task with me.

Until then, if you take anything at all away from this post, take this:  Rev 5:9, that YOU brought up, is yet ANOTHER scripture that distinguishes Jesus FROM “our God”.  It is another scripture that clearly specifies that we were bought, not with the blood of “our God”, but with the blood of someone OTHER THAN “our God”.

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Lightenup @ May 27 2013,20:43)

Now have we finally settled who did the purchasing with the blood? Yes or No? If Yes, Mike tell me who it was that did the purchasing.

Yes, I believe we did, Kathi.

The one who bought men FOR GOD with his blood was someone OTHER THAN “our God”.

Are we in agreement?

[mikeboll64]

Quote (4Thomas @ May 28 2013,00:23)

What I mean here is that everything originates from the one being the Father………

Agreed.  And that “everything” includes God's firstborn Son.

Daniel, even the words “firstborn” and “son” should be a dead giveaway.  

Quote (4Thomas @ May 28 2013,00:23)

Again imagine seeing someone have a debate – where they were trying to argue that your Son wasn't a human but a messanger of a human.

Okay, let's tweak your scenario to put it in the right context.

Let's say I was the ONE and ONLY President of the United States of America.  In that case, one could argue that my son was a “human being”.  And one could argue that my son was a “messenger of a human being”.  One could even argue that my son was one of the many messengers of the President of the United States.

What they COULDN'T sensibly argue is that my son is the very same one and only President of the United States that he was the SON OF.

Understand?

Picture God as the ONE and ONLY President of the Entire Universe. Jesus cannot possibly BE the President that he is the Son of.

[mikeboll64]

Quote (4Thomas @ May 28 2013,18:59)

The SCRIPTURES reveal CLEARLY that Jesus is the expressed imagine of the Father.

Daniel,

For anyone to be the “express image” of someone, they must be someone OTHER THAN that person.

Have you ever heard the expression “spitting image”?  As in, Johnny is the spitting image of his father?  It means the same thing.

Scriptures tell us that Jesus is the spitting image of his God.  But just like Johnny can't actually BE the one whose spitting image he is, neither can Jesus.

For example, we could sensibly say, Daniel is the spitting image of Mike.  But we COULDN'T sensibly say, Daniel is the spitting image of Daniel.

Get it?  For someone to be the spitting image OF someone, they have to be someone OTHER THAN that person whose image they share.

[Lightenup]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ May 28 2013,21:16)

Quote (Lightenup @ May 27 2013,20:43) Now have we finally settled who did the purchasing with the blood? Yes or No? If Yes, Mike tell me who it was that did the purchasing. Yes, I believe we did, Kathi. The one who bought men FOR GOD with his blood was someone OTHER THAN “our God”. Are we in agreement?

Mike,
The God who bought men with His blood for His Father is my God along with His Father. You should meet Him and He can be your God also.

As far as a debate with you, maybe sometime but I have too many going right now.

[Author]

Posts