@ Berean,

Let’s go back to Genesis 1:26, the “us” and “our” in the creation of man. Your belief tells you it’s Jesus, the Jews understood it was the heavenly hosts to whom God was speaking. Who’s correct, you or the Jews? You reject the idea the God of the universe would dare speak to his heavenly creation and assert by speaking to them HE was…[Read more]

@ Proclaimer,

For me there is only a right and wrong, no maybe; it’s black and white, no gray; pick a side of the fence, can’t exist on both sides at the same time nor straddle it; and there is no middle of the road. So the truth will never be in the middle. If you want to call it “extreme”, so be it; I call it a truth or a lie.

Neither example…[Read more]

@ Berean,

“The real “nuts and bolts” of this entire conversation comes down to whether or not we understand scripture from a Jewish or a Nicean perspective.”

Which perspective are you using to understand scripture? The Adventists “belief” page mimics the Nicean Creed, case and point. Then to use a blanket statement of those who don’t believe the…[Read more]

@ Proclaimer,

This entire conversation is a circle, it’s the same argument for the last 20 years. One side pitted against the other and both sides having the mindset of “I’m right and your wrong.” Always repeating the same thing. Either Christ preexisted or he didn’t; one belief is wrong and the other correct, both can’t be right.

The real “nuts…[Read more]

@ Camel and Gene,

Why are we making this so difficult? There is NOTHING spiritual about the John 14:24. The whole summation of what Christ is teaching are the words which he is speaking; These words he speaks, come from one source; so grammatically the singular can be used – “the word of God”. So we are going to beat each other up over gramm…[Read more]

@ Berean,

This is almost painful.

What I said was Rev 19:13 allusions back to Isa 63:2,3 – meaning it references back to, there’s a connection.

How can one single out a portion of a verse and use that for the basis of their understanding, if only a small portion is looked at (copy/paste theology) how can one see the wider picture? Now y…[Read more]

@Berean,

You are picking and choosing verses or parts of verses to support your religion. It’s like reading every other paragraph or starting in the middle of a book. You cannot possible hope to understand the story. We cannot use a “copy/paste” theology to understand what scripture is telling us! Thus your focus on a single part of a verse and s…[Read more]

@Berean,

We need to backup this bus, are you really saying Isa 63:2,3 is a reference to Jesus’ ministry!??!!?!? Read verse 1, who is being judge here? Edom is…again!! Who is Edom? Edom is Esau (Gen 36:8), the nation of Edom is from Esau, Esau is Jacob’s brother, the son of Isaac. If this reference of God’s vengeance on Edom is speaking of Chris…[Read more]

@ Berean,

You may disagree with my assertion of whom is being spoken of, but looking at the verse prior “…He has names written and a name written which no one knows but he himself.” (WEB) Most translations do not have “has names written”; however, I find this interesting that it is inserted here. Who is known by many names? God or Jesus?…[Read more]

@ Berean,

Singing of John 1:1-14 doesn’t change the meaning of what is written.

Rev 1:1 – not sure where you are going with this.

Rev 19:13 – are we understanding this correctly, YOU added Jesus in parentheses to emphasis the “he” is “Jesus”. This verse allusions back to Isaiah 63:2,3 and speaks of God’s day of vengeance. So who is it really be…[Read more]

@ Proclaimer,

You are almost there, you are right at the edge and all you need to do is step out of the religious box. In vs. 14 “the word became flesh”; flesh is what the “word” became and that flesh is Jesus. However, with our superior modern understanding (never mind what the Jews believed and understood) and through the use of Greek philoso…[Read more]

To everyone,

Do we know the origins of the word “logos”? It was coined by the Greek philosopher Heraclitus around 600-500BC. He invented the word to “explain the divine reason or plan which coordinates a changing universe.” “Logos” isn’t an everyday word used to say “word” in the Greek, “lexi” is. Yet for the last 20 years people here have been…[Read more]

As I am playing catch up and reading through the earlier comments, PLEASE read from the beginning of Proverbs 8 and continuing into chapter 9. Solomon is speaking of wisdom and wisdom alone. Wisdom is referred to as a “she”…think about it. Wisdom is what Solomon prayed for and God blessed him with it and everything earthly that comes with it.…[Read more]

@ Proclaimer,
reply to #942714

I am not rejecting the aforementioned scriptures, I’m questioning our understanding of them. Do we understand them in the context and perspective of which they have been written or are we understanding them with our modernistic minds of what other people have told us these scriptures mean?

You reject the trinity d…[Read more]

@ Berean,

You said, “I do not rely on these verses for the origins of Jesus…” Even though it states in virtually every translation Christ was “foreknown”, “foreordained”, or “before known”. By rejecting the content of these verses and the meaning of foreknown, it would mean those in Rom 8:26 all existed in heaven before beginning this li…[Read more]

@ Berean,

So you are explicitly disregarding the verse in I Peter because it doesn’t agree with your theology? Perplexed how one can ignore what “foreknown/foreordain” means, especially when it comes from a disciple that Christ walked, talked, and taught for 3.5 years? You say the Jewish understanding is a must, but I’m starting to think it real…[Read more]

@ Berean,

Our understanding of Micah 5:2 is quite different. This passage for you is evidence to the “preexistence” of Christ. What it actually speaks of is a ruler who’s origins were foreknown from the beginning.

The Aramaic translation puts this verse in another perspective:

And you, Bethlehem Ephratah, though you are little among the thous…[Read more]

@ Berean, you state in reference to Col 1:16-17:

“BECAUSE BY HIM WERE ALL THINGS CREATED ….(see v. 16-17)
In other words CHRIST ORIGINALLY HAD TO BE OUR CREATOR IN ORDER TO BE OUR REDEEMER”

Please scripturally support Jesus is our creator and “had” to be “in order” to be our redeemer.

Psalm 33 (read the entire chapter). Jesus is the creator…[Read more]

…to conclude,

The question that almost got me kicked out of a church: Why do we believe what we believe? Answer: Because we were told what to believe and why would we question it, the source comes from a pastor, the one “called by God” into “the ministry”. We treat our doctrines and traditions as though they’re infallible, words from God; bu…[Read more]

…continued from previous post,

We can’t all be right and the other guy wrong because our beliefs conflict. Is the believed doctrine supported by scripture or not? If scripture does not support, has to be manipulated, or man’s “read between the line” interpretation must be used to achieve the doctrine, it’s a lie and cannot remain in the chu…[Read more]