Home Christian Writings Supporting the Trinity Doctrine? – The Trinity Doctrine John 1:1 Page 24

John 1:1

John 1:1 says the Word was God. Does that mean that Jesus is God because he is the Word?
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

a) In the beginning was the Word, (en arch hn o logoV)
b) and the Word was with God, (kai o logoV hn proV ton qeon)
c) and the Word was God. (kai qeoV hn o logoV).

John 1:1b says that the Word was with God and John 1:1c says that the Word was God, so how can the Word be God and be with God at the same time? Well part of the answer to discovering the meaning of this verse is found in 1 John 1:1-2

“That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon and touched with our hands, concerning the word of life and the life was manifested, and we saw it, and testify to it, and proclaim to you the eternal life that was with the Father and was made manifest to us”.

First when we read 1John 1:2, it suggests to us that the God in John1:1b is the Father himself.

Secondly, we see In John 1:1c, the last word God is missing the definite article, (THE). The definite article is before all other instances of the word ‘God’ and ‘Logos’ in John 1:1. (e.g., the Word, The God.), yet is absent in the last mention of God. Read on because this can be significant as you are about to find out.

Greek sentence construction affirms that if a noun doesn’t have a preceding article, (THE) it can be read as an adjective (a predicate adjective); and if such a noun does have a preceding article it should be considered a noun (a predicate nominative). Understanding this is a game changer. Scholars see the benefit of the rule for affirming the deity of Christ in John 1:1, but haven’t made the difference clear regarding the difference between identity and nature or definite and qualitative. Don’t worry if this makes no sense to you. It will.

Look at the difference between these two sentences.

1) You are an angel
2) You are THE angel.

Notice how the first one is using the word angel in a qualitative way while the second is definite. Hence the term ‘definite article’.

In John 1:1, all instances of the word ‘God” are preceded by the definite article ‘THE’, except the last one.

So it literally says:

John1:1
a) In the beginning was THE God.
b) THE Word was with THE God
c) And THE Word was god.

Why is the last word not capitalised? Where Greek uses the definite article in English we capitalise the word. e.g., the god = God.

So it is grammatically correct to read John 1:1c with a qualitative sense rather reading it as identifying the Word as God himself. It is not only grammatically correct to read it this way, it is also theologically correct because if we read it as THE Theos, then that would be saying that the Logos is exclusively God even to the exclusion of the Father. Now we have two good reasons for reading the last word ‘god/theos’ as qualitative and not as THE God or God.

In rebuttal to this, some say that God in the New Testament doesn’t always have a preceding definite article which is true, however looking at the verse contextually, we understand that there is clearly two being spoken of, i.e., one God and one called the Word with is clearly another who is next to God and is not that God he is with.

Let’s look at Adam and Eve as an example of two beings that were with each other. Before I give an example, it is important for you at this point to understand that the Hebrew word for ‘man’ is ‘adam’. This means that qualitatively, Adam and Eve are both adam. This is similar to the word theos which is translated as the ‘God’ & god. The absence of the definite article can qualify just as the word adam qualifies. As I said before, in English we use capitals to denote when being definite. So the difference between ‘Adam’ and ‘adam’ is that Adam refers to a specific man called Adam while the latter could refer to him as well as Eve and any other member of mankind. This is clearly stated in scripture in Genesis 1:27:

So God created man (adam) in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.

The word for man is adam, so it says: God created ‘adam’ male and female. So saying that ‘Eve is adam’ is a true saying.

In English, If I said “John is the man”, then I am identifying John as  a definite and particular person of the human race. But if I omit the definite article and say “John is man,” then I do not identify him, I classify him. I say “John is human; he belongs to the sphere/nature of man.” Can you see the difference now?

To understand how the article can make a big difference to a piece of text, look at this example. Have a guess as to which one is correct.

a) In the beginning was THE woman
b) and THE woman was with THE man
c) and THE Woman was THE man

a) In the beginning was THE woman
b) and THE woman was with THE man
c) and THE Woman was man

The correct one is the second example because it is saying that the woman belongs to mankind or man. Look at the next example:

a) Tools were used by man.
b) Tools were used by the man.

See how the first example is talking about mankind whereas the second example is talking of a specific man.

In other words the word ‘man’ can be used as an attribute or to describe one’s nature. It is not always used to identify a particular person and it can even refer to more than one person.

Now let’s have a look at the above example, but using Adam and Eve instead. Notice in English that we do not have the definite article preceding Adam or Eve, because capitalising both Adam and Eve leads us to view these words in a definite sense, the same way that Greek requires the definite article. Essentially THE adam/man in Greek is the same as Adam in English.

a) In the beginning was Eve,
b) and Eve was with Adam
c) and Eve was Adam

a) In the beginning was Eve,
b) and Eve was with Adam
c) and Eve was adam

Notice that the second example is still the correct one.

To further understand the important difference between identity and nature, take a look at John 6:70. When speaking of his betrayer Judas Iscariot, Jesus said, “One of you is a devil.” Did Jesus mean that Judas is actually Satan the Devil? No! He merely meant to say that Judas is like (class) a devil, or that he had the qualities or nature of a/the devil. The word “devil” here has no article in the Greek as you have probably guessed, but most translators deem it necessary to add the indefinite article “a” to complete the thought in English even though it is not present in Greek or any Greek. Greek has no indefinite articles, (a,an).

So Judas wasn’t Satan himself, rather he was diabolical, like the Devil. He had the qualities of the Devil. But that doesn’t rule out the fact that Satan is the Devil because it is not actually saying that Judas was the Devil himself. Rather Judas thought as the Devil; and acted as the Devil. He was not the Devil (definite), (Satan is); he was not an actual devil or demon, he was a devil (qualitative). He was one who had the mental disposition, the nature, of the Devil, who is Satan. So it is with John 1:1c.

The Logos was God has no definite article. It is really saying, The Logos was god. This is why the New English Bible and the Revised English Bible translate John 1:1 as “what God was, the Word was.” The TEV (1976) translates it, “the Word was the same as God.” Goodspeed translates this, “the Word was divine.” And Moffatt translates this, “the logos was divine.”

So what kind of being is Jesus then if the Word was theos (without the definite article)? The answer according to John 1:1 is that he must be a divine being if Jesus is the Word of God that was with God. In other words he is a being with God’s nature. A son possessing the nature of his Father. Not just an image, but THE image of God. He is the prototype, the firstborn. He is the mystery that was hidden but has been revealed in our time. He is all these things, but he is not THE God that he is the son of. That God is exclusively the Father and there are many scriptures to prove that which we will look at later in this page.

Many think that the word ‘theos’ and ‘elohim’ always refer to YHWH. They take instances of their choosing to try and prove that Christ is YHWH. In their ignorance they cannot see that there are indeed many god (theos) and many lords, but for true believers there is one God (theos) the Father.

In fact, the word ‘theos’ and ‘elohim’ in scripture are used in reference to God (YHWH), Christ, Man, angels, Satan and idols. So when we see the word ‘theos’ or ‘elohim’, we should ask ourselves what kind of god is being referenced. The god of this age? The Most High God? The Almighty God? The mighty god? A false god? A human? An angel? We must also understand that the word ‘theos’ proceeded by the article (the) is talking of a noun and without the article, it can be an adjective or used to describe or qualify.

Let us now look at some quotes from scholars and writers that understand this. NOTE: this is not an endorsement with all that these authors have written, rather I am appealing to their view regarding John 1:1.

One prominent scholar called Origen is sometimes quoted by Trinitarians who appeal to his wisdom for other purposes. However, they avoid this particular quotation for obvious reasons. Origen wrote in the early 200’s A.D and was a noted expert in Koine Greek.

“We next notice John’s use of the article [“the”] in these sentences. He does not write without care in this respect, nor is he unfamiliar with the niceties of the Greek tongue. In some cases he uses the article, and in some he omits it. He adds the article to the Word, but to the name of theos he adds it sometimes only. He uses the article, when the name of theos refers to the uncreated cause of all things, and omits it when the Word is named theos. Does the same difference which we observe between theos with the article and theos without it prevail also between the Word with it and without it? We must enquire into this. As the theos who is over all is theos with the article not without it, so the Word is the source of that reason (Logos) which dwells in every reasonable creature; the reason which is in each creature is not, like the former called par excellence the Word. Now there are many who are sincerely concerned about religion, and who fall here into great perplexity. They are afraid that they may be proclaiming two theos [gods] and their fear drives them into doctrines which are false and wicked. Either they deny that the Son has a distinct nature of His own besides that of the Father, and make Him whom they call the Son to be theos all but the name, or they deny divinity of the Son, giving Him a separate existence of His own, and making His sphere of essence fall outside that of the Father, so that they are separable from each other. To such persons we have to say that “the theos” on the one hand is Autotheos [God of himself] and so the Saviour says in His prayer to the Father, “That they may know Thee the only true theos [God]; “but that all beyond the theos [God] is made theos by participation in His deity, and is not to be called simply “theos” but rather “the theos “. And thus the first-born of all creation, who is the first to be with the theos , and to attract to Himself deity, is a being of more exalted rank than the other theos [gods] beside Him, of which theos is the theos [God], as it is written, “The theos [God] of theos [gods], the Lord, hath spoken and called the earth.” It was by the offices of the first-born that they became theos [gods], for He drew from the theos [God] in generous measure that they should be made theos [gods], and He communicated it to them according to His own bounty. The true theos [God], then, is “the theos ,” [“the God” as opposed to “god”] and those who are formed after Him are theos [such as the Son of God], images, as it were, of Him the prototype. But the archetypal image, again, of all these images is the word of the theos [God], who was in the beginning, and who by being with the theos [God] is at all times deity, not possessing that of Himself, but by His being with the Father, and not continuing to be theos , if we should think of this, except by remaining always in uninterrupted contemplation of the depths of the Father.”
(Origen’s Commentary on the Gospel of John, Book II, 2)

“Irenaeus [in the second century] could still interpret MK. Xiii, 32 in the following manner: the Son confessed not to know that which only the Father knew; hence ‘ we learn from himself that the Father is over all’, as he who is greater also than the Son. But the Nicene theologians had now suddenly to deny that Jesus could have said such a thing about the Son. In the long-recognized scriptural testimony for the Logos-doctrine provided by Prov. Viii, 22 ff. The exegetes of the second and third centuries had found the creation of the preexistent Logos-Christ set forth without dispute and equivocation. But now, when the Arians also interpreted the passage in this way, the interpretation was suddenly reckoned as false…. A theologian such as Tertullian by virtue of his Subordinationist manner of thinking, could confidently on occasion maintain that, before all creation, God the Father had been originally ‘alone’, and thus there was a time when ‘the Son was not’. When he did so, within the Church of his day such a statement did not inevitably provoke a controversy, and indeed there was none about it. But now, when Arius said the same thing in almost the same words, he raised thereby in the Church a mighty uproar, and such a view was condemned as heresy in the anathemas of Nicaea.” e.a.]
-pp. 155-8. The Formation of Christian Dogma, by Martin Werner, D.D.

When the writers of the New Testament speak of God they mean the God and Father of Our Lord Jesus Christ. When they speak of Jesus Christ, they do not speak of him, nor think of him as God. He is God’s Christ, God’s Son, God’s Wisdom, God’s Word. Even the prologue to St. John {John 1:1-18} which comes nearest to the Nicene Doctrine, must be read in the light of the pronounced subordinationism of the Gospel as a whole; and the Prologue is less explicit in Greek with the anarthrous theos [the word “god” at John 1:1c without the article] than it appears in English… The adoring exclamation of St. Thomas “my Lord and my god” (Joh. xx. 28) is still not quite the same as an address to Christ as being without qualification [limitation] God, and it must be balanced by the words of the risen Christ himself to Mary Magdalene (verse. 17) “Go unto my brethren and say to them, I ascend unto my Father and your Father, and my God and your God.” Jesus Christ is frequently spoken of in the Ignation Epistles as “our God”, “my God”, but probably never as “God” without qualification.
– John Martin Creed in The Divinity of Jesus Christ.

The word for “god” in Greek is QEOS. In John 1:1 the last occurrence of QEOS is called “a predicate noun” or, “a predicate nominative”. Such a noun tells us something about the subject, instead of telling what the subject is doing. This use of QEOS has reference to the subject, the Word, and does not have the article preceding it; it is anarthrous. This indicates that it is not definite. That is to say, it does not tell what position or office or rank the subject (the Word) occupies. The verb HN “was” follows the predicate noun QEOS; this is another factor in identifying QEOS here as qualitative. This discloses the quality or character of the Word. Of course, the gentleman up above disagrees with me, and he has used Moulton and Colwell to buttress his argument. But what have other Grammarians said about this same type of construction? There is no basis for regarding the predicate theos as definite. In John 1:1 I think that the qualitative force of the predicate [noun] is so prominent that the noun cannot be regarded as definite.
-Philip Harner, Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 92:1, 1973, pp. 85, 7.

We must, then take Theos, without the article, in the indefinite [“qualitative” would have been a better word choice] sense of a divine nature or a divine being, as distinguished from the definite absolute God [the Father], ho Theos, the authotheos [selfgod] of Origen. Thus the Theos of John [1:1c] answers to “the image of God” of Paul, Col. 1:15.
-G. Lucke, “Dissertation on the Logos”, quoted by John Wilson in, Unitarian Principles Confirmed by Trinitarian Testimonies, p. 428.

As mentioned in the Note on 1c, the Prologue’s “The Word was God” offers a difficulty because there is no article before theos. Does this imply that “god” means less when predicated of the Word than it does when used as a name for the Father? Once again the reader must divest himself of a post-Nicene understanding of the vocabulary involved.
-Raymond E. Brown, The Anchor Bible, p. 25.

The most natural reading of John 1:1 shows that there are two being mentioned (not three): God and a second who was ‘theos’. They are not presented as two coequal persons in a Binity or Trinity. What we really have is one with the character of THEOS who is with TON THEOS (the God), thus he cannot be the God he is with! The LOGOS is unique however. He/it is identified further in the gospel as “a son from a father, begotten, as a visible being verses the unseen God, Now, without redefining the word THEOS we need to explain how we can have two who are both referred to as “theos.” Either there were two equal Gods or persons called God, or it is talking about a godlike one that is with the Almighty God. When we read all the scriptures we see that the scriptures including the Book of John backs up the last view, that the Father is greater than the Son; that the Father is the only God and the Son is the image of The God.

So what conclusion are we to draw from John 1:1 and the Book of John? In John’s own words he explains the conclusion for his Book. This conclusion is not the Trinity Doctrine. Read the verse below to see what the conclusion is.

John 20:30-31.
30 And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book:
31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name. “

So John wrote this gospel so that we may come to the conclusion that Jesus is truly the Christ and the Son of God. In addition to this important truth we are also told that we may receive life through his name. The Trinity Doctrine is not the conclusion that one should draw from this writing. Belief that Jesus is the Christ and the Son is the foundation of true faith and Jesus built his Church on this truth. The Trinity Doctrine is not that foundation, rather it is another foundation.

So why don’t translations of the bible translate John 1:1 as the Word was divine. Well first of all it is not incorrect to say that the Word was god, but Trinitarians translators say the Word was God which makes readers think that Jesus is the God (the person). However, in order to bring out the true meaning, some translations actually use the word ‘divine’. See below:

“In the beginning the Word existed. The Word was with God, and the Word was divine.”
An American Translation, Edgar Goodspeed and J. M. Powis Smith, The University of Chicago Press, p. 173

“The Logos (word) existed in the very beginning, and the Logos was with God, the Logos was divine”
by Dr. James Moffatt

So the idea that Jesus Christ is God is often and supposedly supported by John 1:1. However the rest of John’s Gospel makes careful distinctions between Jesus and his Father as well as Jesus and God. This same distinction and separation is found throughout the rest of the New Testament too. The New Testament actually goes much further than merely distinguishing and separating the two. In John 17:3 Jesus, in prayer to his Father, refers to him as “the only true God”. In John 20:17 the resurrected Jesus refers to his Father as “my Father, and your Father; and… my God, and your God.” In I Corinthians 8:6 the Apostle Paul says of Christians, “to us there is but one God, the Father.” In I Timothy 2:5 Paul states, “For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.” In Ephesians 1:17 Paul refers to the Father as “the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory.” And in Revelation 3:12 the resurrected and glorified Jesus says, “Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.”

We must also remember that the judges of Israel were called gods/theos. This doesn’t mean that they were part of God or part of the Trinity, it just means that they had authority given to them by God. It is also written that we can partake of divine nature, so that could also make us divine just as partaking in flesh makes us man. It must be noted though, that being divine or partaking in divine nature is different to actually being the Divine himself.

Also see John 10:34-35:
34 Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, I have said you are gods” (theos).
35 If he called them gods (theos), to whom the word of God (ho theos) came, and the Scripture cannot be broken,

2 Peter 1:4
Through these he has given us his very great and precious promises, so that through them you may participate in the divine nature and escape the corruption in the world caused by evil desires.

Also Jesus said that he was one with his Father and he also prayed that we would be one with them. See John 17:21
that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me.

We humans were intended to share in the divine nature too, yet we are not the God. John 1:1 shows us that the Word was god (divine), not (the Word was/is the God, Yahweh) which many seem to think it says. The Word came from God, is of God, is like God, and this is consistent with the scriptures we have looked at thus far. 1 Corinthians 11:3 reinforces this statement because the word “head” in the Greek is translated “from”, source or authority. Remember that the woman came from Man and Man came from Christ and Christ came from God. This is the divine order.

Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.

Jesus Christ is the Word of God, Jesus wasn’t created, rather the Word was born from God in eternity and that is why Jesus is called the Only Begotten of the Father. (John 1:14) (John 1:18) (John 3:16 ) (John 3:18 ) (1 John 4:9 ). The word begotten means (only child, single of its kind). Notice that our spirits are born from God, but through his Word, and our spirits will go back to God who gave it (Ecclesiastes 12:7) . But Jesus was not begotten through the Word because he is the Word, this is why Jesus is unique because he is the only one begotten of the Father and therefore he is the image of his Father. That is why he is called the Image of God and the Firstborn of all creation (Colossians 1:15) and it is also why the Bible says in (Hebrews 1:5) For to which of the angels did God ever say, “You are my Son; today I have become your Father” Or again, “I will be his Father, and he will be my Son”

Unlike his Father who is the invisible Spirit, Jesus does have a body and is visible. Jesus was born from God. We must remember that although his Father is greater than himself, he is also not just a man like us. Yes he partook of flesh and came as a man like us, but he also existed in the form of God as the Word or Logos. We are told that he resides between God and Man and as a man he is our mediator to God. It was indeed the Word that became flesh. God did not  become flesh, instead God resided in Christ who came in the flesh. So just like us, God can be in us who are made of flesh, but God himself did not become flesh. God is not a man and never will be a man. It was the Word who came to us as a man and it was the Word that all things  were created though. See John 1:3.
Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.

And to compliment the fact that God made all things through his Word, and that Jesus is the Word of God, even ignoring the fact that Jesus wears a title, “The Word of God” as recorded in the Book of Revelation, we are specifically told, that God created everything through Jesus Christ. See :Hebrews 1:2
but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe. 

So Jesus was begotten not created and again, this is why he is called God’s only begotten Son and this is why he is unique. He is seated at the right hand of God and situated between God & Man. This is also why he is the only mediator between God & Man and the only name under heaven whereby Man can be saved. God made creation through him and for him and God redeemed creation through him too. God cannot fellowship with sin that is why he sent his Son into the world, so he could bring us back to himself through his mediator. Jesus came from God and he was in the beginning with God. So what does it mean when it says ‘beginning’? The Greek word for beginning, in John 1:1 “In the beginning was the Word” is ‘arche’ and this word means the following:

1) beginning, origin
2) the person or thing that commences, the first person or thing in a series, the leader
3) that by which anything begins to be, the origin, the active cause
4) the extremity of a thing
4a) of the corners of a sail
5) the first place, principality, rule, magistracy
5a) of angels and demons

Below I will show you a verse where the word “beginning” or ‘arche’ is also mentioned and I think you will agree that it is rather obvious from this verse that it does not mean eternity or eternal. The verse is John 8:44
You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desire. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him.

Just for good measure, I will also throw in the first verse in the bible, which also uses the word beginning (note that this a Hebrew word). I am sure we can all agree that the earth has not been in existence for all of eternity.

Genesis 1:1
In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

Certainly if we read John 1:1 correctly and in context with all scripture, we see that it is not teaching that God is a Trinity.

← Go back to ‘Supporting the Trinity Doctrine‘.

Discussion

  • This topic has 25,990 replies, 117 voices, and was last updated 49 minutes ago by LU.
Viewing 20 posts - 461 through 480 (of 25,991 total)
123…232425…1,2981,2991,300
  • Author
    Posts
  • May 6, 2007 at 8:29 am#51491
    Oxy
    Participant

    Quote (kenrch @ May 06 2007,11:05)
    No Oxy Jesus wasn't confused He knew that He had the Spirit of Jehovah.  He knew that when the Holy Spirit filled Him with Joy that it was the Father.

    Luk 10:21  In that hour the Holy Spirit filled Jesus with joy. Jesus said, “I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, for hiding these things from wise and intelligent people and revealing them to little children. Yes, Father, this is what pleased you.

    It is you my friend that is confused. You think that the Father IF HE HAD another PERSON other than His Son He would not give that person a name?!  Every being ever created has a name!  You DISHONOR the Holy Spirit by saying he has no name.  Even my dog has a name!

    It is amazing how blind you pretend to be in order to keep your “new” tradition which isn't new at all.  A child of the Harlot.  Sorry but that's what you do you keep and defend her doctrines.  When the Holy Spirit tells you “HIS” name let me know.  Oh! He doesn't have one that's right!  Sad very sad that the harlot has even stolen your common sense.

    IHN,

    Ken


    Far out Ken, I can't believe you. Do you really think you're right? I don't know what to say to you any more.

    Look mate, you just stick with your beliefs ok? Just don't try and put them on me.

    May 6, 2007 at 8:36 am#51493
    Oxy
    Participant

    I'm outta here

    May 6, 2007 at 9:10 am#51495
    Is 1:18
    Participant

    Quote (Oxy @ May 06 2007,20:29)

    Quote (kenrch @ May 06 2007,11:05)
    No Oxy Jesus wasn't confused He knew that He had the Spirit of Jehovah.  He knew that when the Holy Spirit filled Him with Joy that it was the Father.

    Luk 10:21  In that hour the Holy Spirit filled Jesus with joy. Jesus said, “I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, for hiding these things from wise and intelligent people and revealing them to little children. Yes, Father, this is what pleased you.

    It is you my friend that is confused. You think that the Father IF HE HAD another PERSON other than His Son He would not give that person a name?!  Every being ever created has a name!  You DISHONOR the Holy Spirit by saying he has no name.  Even my dog has a name!

    It is amazing how blind you pretend to be in order to keep your “new” tradition which isn't new at all.  A child of the Harlot.  Sorry but that's what you do you keep and defend her doctrines.  When the Holy Spirit tells you “HIS” name let me know.  Oh! He doesn't have one that's right!  Sad very sad that the harlot has even stolen your common sense.

    IHN,

    Ken


    Far out Ken, I can't believe you. Do you really think you're right?  I don't know what to say to you any more.

    Look mate, you just stick with your beliefs ok?  Just don't try and put them on me.


    Yes, I agree with Oxy here, that was out of line Ken. Quite unusual to see you do that. Oxy was right to feel affronted by what you wrote IMO, you went too far….

    May 6, 2007 at 2:45 pm#51522
    kenrch
    Participant

    Quote (Oxy @ May 06 2007,20:29)

    Quote (kenrch @ May 06 2007,11:05)
    No Oxy Jesus wasn't confused He knew that He had the Spirit of Jehovah.  He knew that when the Holy Spirit filled Him with Joy that it was the Father.

    Luk 10:21  In that hour the Holy Spirit filled Jesus with joy. Jesus said, “I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, for hiding these things from wise and intelligent people and revealing them to little children. Yes, Father, this is what pleased you.

    It is you my friend that is confused. You think that the Father IF HE HAD another PERSON other than His Son He would not give that person a name?!  Every being ever created has a name!  You DISHONOR the Holy Spirit by saying he has no name.  Even my dog has a name!

    It is amazing how blind you pretend to be in order to keep your “new” tradition which isn't new at all.  A child of the Harlot.  Sorry but that's what you do you keep and defend her doctrines.  When the Holy Spirit tells you “HIS” name let me know.  Oh! He doesn't have one that's right!  Sad very sad that the harlot has even stolen your common sense.

    IHN,

    Ken


    Far out Ken, I can't believe you. Do you really think you're right?  I don't know what to say to you any more.

    Look mate, you just stick with your beliefs ok?  Just don't try and put them on me.


    You got it mate. Just don't try to teach the doctrine of the Harlot as truth even though you have sugar coated it by saying one is greater than the other it's still the Harlot's teaching at the root.

    You should listen to the end time message Rev.18:4.

    IHN&L,

    Ken :)

    May 6, 2007 at 3:01 pm#51523
    kenrch
    Participant

    Quote (Is 1:18 @ May 06 2007,21:10)

    Quote (Oxy @ May 06 2007,20:29)

    Quote (kenrch @ May 06 2007,11:05)
    No Oxy Jesus wasn't confused He knew that He had the Spirit of Jehovah.  He knew that when the Holy Spirit filled Him with Joy that it was the Father.

    Luk 10:21  In that hour the Holy Spirit filled Jesus with joy. Jesus said, “I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, for hiding these things from wise and intelligent people and revealing them to little children. Yes, Father, this is what pleased you.

    It is you my friend that is confused. You think that the Father IF HE HAD another PERSON other than His Son He would not give that person a name?!  Every being ever created has a name!  You DISHONOR the Holy Spirit by saying he has no name.  Even my dog has a name!

    It is amazing how blind you pretend to be in order to keep your “new” tradition which isn't new at all.  A child of the Harlot.  Sorry but that's what you do you keep and defend her doctrines.  When the Holy Spirit tells you “HIS” name let me know.  Oh! He doesn't have one that's right!  Sad very sad that the harlot has even stolen your common sense.

    IHN,

    Ken


    Far out Ken, I can't believe you. Do you really think you're right?  I don't know what to say to you any more.

    Look mate, you just stick with your beliefs ok?  Just don't try and put them on me.


    Yes, I agree with Oxy here, that was out of line Ken. Quite unusual to see you do that. Oxy was right to feel affronted  by what you wrote IMO, you went too far….


    The truth is always out of line IS :) Anything that goes against the Harlot and the world is out of line.

    The truth IS that Satan has twisted his own doctrine in order to keep people captive and slaves to the Harlot. I have no problem with anyone who wants to believe the Harlot but I can't just sit and let anyone TEACH a sugar coated altered teaching of Satan. Obiviously people were doubting the Trinity doctrine so Satan just made an adjustment.

    IHN,

    Ken

    May 26, 2007 at 10:36 pm#53256
    Not3in1
    Participant

    WJ – is it possible for you to transfer some of your posts over to this thread? I'm not sure how to do that yet? Thanks.

    May 26, 2007 at 10:45 pm#53258
    942767
    Participant

    942767

    Group: Associate Member
    Posts: 558
    Joined: Sep. 2006  Posted: May 20 2007,03:22  

    ——————————————————————————–
    John 1      
    1:1
    In the beginning was the Word (Logos, from Strong's Concordance: “embodies a conception or idea” and the Word(Logos) was with God(these two parts of the verse just indicate that God had and idea or a plan), and the Word was God(and whatever the idea, it was Theos (God)).

    The question here is what was the idea?  And it is explained in the following two verses.

    1:2
    The same was in the beginning with God.  
    1:3
    All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

    (The idea was to make all that was made as described in Genesis record of the the creation with him(Jesus) in mind.)  Gen.1:26
    And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.  
    1:27
    So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.  
    1:28
    And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.  
    1:29
    And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.  
    1:30
    And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life *, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.  
    1:31
    And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

    Col.  1:15
    Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:  
    1:16
    For by 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 him, and for him:

    Hebrews 1      
    1:1
    God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,  
    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;  
    1:3
    Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, 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;  

    John 1:4
    In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

    15:45
    And so it is written, The first man Adam was made * a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit(live-giving).

    I hope that this helps.

    God Bless

    May 26, 2007 at 11:54 pm#53261
    942767
    Participant

    Hi:

    I came across the following scripture and I thought it would help to support my viewpoint:

    Isaiah 46:9 Remember the former things, those of long ago; I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me. 10 I make known the end from the beginning, from ancient times, what is still to come. I say: My purpose will stand, and I will do all that I please. 11 From the east I summon a bird of prey; from a far-off land, a man to fulfill my purpose. What I have said, that will I bring about; what I have planned, that will I do. 12 Listen to me, you stubborn-hearted, you who are far from righteousness. 13 I am bringing my righteousness near, it is not far away; and my salvation will not be delayed. I will grant salvation to Zion, my splendor to Israel.

    God Bless

    May 27, 2007 at 5:46 am#53265
    Worshipping Jesus
    Participant

    Quote (942767 @ May 21 2007,04:30)

    Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 20 2007,07:18)

    Quote (942767 @ May 20 2007,03:22)
    John 1      
    1:1
    In the beginning was the Word (Logos, from Strong's Concordance: “embodies a conception or idea” and the Word(Logos) was with God(these two parts of the verse just indicate that God had and idea or a plan), and the Word was God(and whatever the idea, it was Theos (God)).

    The question here is what was the idea?  And it is explained in the following two verses.


    Hi 94,
    Strong's is not the bible.
    Does any heavenly being have a body except the man from heaven?
    Is an 'embodied idea' still within the being or with that being?


    Hi Nick:

    I have given my understanding on this subject, and I have closed this with “I hope that this helps”.

    If it doesn't help you perhaps someone else will be helped by this.

    Obviously, you don't agree with my understanding on this, and so, if you understand it differently, give us your understanding.  I didn't say that I was right although I believe that I am otherwise I wouldn't be teaching this way, but if you can show me by the scriptures that what I am teaching is not correct, I will be happy to accept my correction.

    I know that Stong's is not in the bible, but many a time the definition of a word helps us to grasp the meaning of what is being said such as the name Abraham meaning “father of a multitude” for example.

    Anyway, I have given you my understanding maybe it will help someone.

    God Bless


    94

    A thought or a plan cannot reason to do the will of God!

    Heb

    10:
    5 *Wherefore when he cometh into the world*, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, *but a body hast thou prepared me*:
    6 In burnt offerings and [sacrifices] for sin thou hast had no pleasure.
    7 Then said I, Lo, *I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God*.

    9 Then said he, *Lo, I come to do thy will, O God*.

    Compare with…

    Jn 6:38
    For *I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will*, but the will of him that sent me.

    6:51
    *I am the living bread which came down from heaven*: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.

    6:58
    This is that bread which *came down from heaven*: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever.

    Jn 17:5
    And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which *I had with thee before the world was*.

    1 Jn 1:1,2
    That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the *Word of life*;
    (For the *life was manifested* (not a thought or a plan), and we have seen , and bear witness, and shew unto you that *eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;)

    Jn 1:1
    In the beginning was the Word, and the *Word was with God*, and the *Word was God*.

    Jesus the “Eternal Life” that was with the Father was not just some thought “in God”, for a thought or a plan cannot be “With God”!

    Neither can a thought or plan be God!

    :O

    May 27, 2007 at 5:48 am#53266
    Worshipping Jesus
    Participant

    Quote (WorshippingJesus @ May 24 2007,06:06)

    Quote (942767 @ May 21 2007,04:30)

    Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 20 2007,07:18)

    Quote (942767 @ May 20 2007,03:22)
    John 1      
    1:1
    In the beginning was the Word (Logos, from Strong's Concordance: “embodies a conception or idea” and the Word(Logos) was with God(these two parts of the verse just indicate that God had and idea or a plan), and the Word was God(and whatever the idea, it was Theos (God)).

    The question here is what was the idea?  And it is explained in the following two verses.


    Hi 94,
    Strong's is not the bible.
    Does any heavenly being have a body except the man from heaven?
    Is an 'embodied idea' still within the being or with that being?


    Hi Nick:

    I have given my understanding on this subject, and I have closed this with “I hope that this helps”.

    If it doesn't help you perhaps someone else will be helped by this.

    Obviously, you don't agree with my understanding on this, and so, if you understand it differently, give us your understanding.  I didn't say that I was right although I believe that I am otherwise I wouldn't be teaching this way, but if you can show me by the scriptures that what I am teaching is not correct, I will be happy to accept my correction.

    I know that Stong's is not in the bible, but many a time the definition of a word helps us to grasp the meaning of what is being said such as the name Abraham meaning “father of a multitude” for example.

    Anyway, I have given you my understanding maybe it will help someone.

    God Bless


    94

    A thought or a plan cannot reason to do the will of God!

    Heb

    10:
    5 *Wherefore when he cometh into the world*, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, *but a body hast thou prepared me*:
    6 In burnt offerings and [sacrifices] for sin thou hast had no pleasure.
    7 Then said I, Lo, *I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God*.

    9 Then said he, *Lo, I come to do thy will, O God*.

    Compare with…

    Jn 6:38
    For *I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will*, but the will of him that sent me.

    6:51
    *I am the living bread which came down from heaven*: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.

    6:58
    This is that bread which *came down from heaven*: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever.

    Jn 17:5
    And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which *I had with thee before the world was*.

    1 Jn 1:1,2
    That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the *Word of life*;
    (For the *life was manifested* (not a thought or a plan), and we have seen , and bear witness, and shew unto you that *eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;)

    Jn 1:1
    In the beginning was the Word, and the *Word was with God*, and the *Word was God*.

    Jesus the “Eternal Life” that was with the Father was not just some thought “in God”, for a thought or a plan cannot be “With God”!

    Neither can a thought or plan be God!

    :O


    Hi WJ:

    You say:

    A thought or a plan cannot reason to do the will of God!

    True, but God began implementing his plan from the beginning creating all that is in the world with him in mind, and then,

    John 1:14
    And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, * (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

    Here he can reason to do the will of God, and the gospel of Luke gives us a glimpse of this saying,

    Luke 2:43
    And when they had fulfilled the days, as they returned, the child Jesus tarried behind in Jerusalem; and Joseph and his mother knew not of it.  
    2:44
    But they, supposing him to have been in the company, went a day's journey; and they sought him among their kinsfolk and * * acquaintance.  
    2:45
    And when they found him not, they turned back again to Jerusalem, seeking him.  
    2:46
    And it came to pass, that after three days they found him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the doctors, both hearing them, and asking them questions.  
    2:47
    And all that heard him were astonished at his understanding and answers.  
    2:48
    And when they saw him, they were amazed: and his mother said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? behold, thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing.  
    2:49
    And he said unto them, How is it that ye sought me? wist ye not that I MUST BE ABOUT MY FATHER'S BUSINESS?  

    Hebrews 10:
    5 *WHEREFORE WHEN HE COMETH INTO THE WORLD(he said the following when he came into the world, and obviously that was not when he was an infant as what Luke shows us above was when Jesus was about 12 years of age)*, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, *but a body hast thou prepared me(the ME here has to be the Word of God)*:
    6 In burnt offerings and [sacrifices] for sin thou hast had no pleasure.
    7 Then said I, Lo, *I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God*.

    9 Then said he, *Lo, I come to do thy will, O God*.

    Then you ask me to compare the following scriptures:

    Jn 6:38
    For *I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will*, but the will of him that sent me.

    6:51
    *I am the living bread which came down from heaven*: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.

    6:58
    This is that bread which *came down from heaven*: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever.

    All of the above makes reference to the Word of God that came from the Father to humanity through Jesus.  Jesus applied the Word of God to his life and became that “life-giving spirit.  He is the bread of life.

    You quote the following:

    Jn 17:5
    And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which *I had with thee before the world was*[/

    John 17:24
    Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; THAT THEY MAY BEHOLD MY GLORY, WHICH THOU HAST GIVEN ME: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world. (This verse explains what Jesus meant in John 17:5.  The “Glory” that Jesus had with the Father before the world was was a part of God's plan and was given to hi
    m at this time)

    You quote:

    1 Jn 1:1,2
    [i]That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the [b]*Word of life*    ;
    (For the *life was manifested* (not a thought or a plan), and we have seen , and bear witness, and shew unto you that *eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;)

    My response: (For the life was manifested) This is the same as I have already explained in the God's plan for eternal life was made manifest through the Lord Jesus.

    Jn 1:1
    In the beginning was the Word, and the *Word was with God*, and the *Word was God*.

    Jesus the “Eternal Life” that was with the Father was not just some thought “in God”, for a thought or a plan cannot be “With God”! ( I don't understand your reasoning here.  Why can't a plan for eternal life be with God?)

    Neither can a thought or plan be God!(Neither do I understand your reasoning here.  The plan was to make man in his image and Jesus is the express image of his person.)

    I have given you my understanding of John 1:1f and I have to believe that this is correct.  

    God Bless

    May 27, 2007 at 5:50 am#53267
    Worshipping Jesus
    Participant

    Quote (942767 @ May 25 2007,13:05)

    Quote (WorshippingJesus @ May 24 2007,06:06)

    Quote (942767 @ May 21 2007,04:30)

    Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 20 2007,07:18)

    Quote (942767 @ May 20 2007,03:22)
    John 1      
    1:1
    In the beginning was the Word (Logos, from Strong's Concordance: “embodies a conception or idea” and the Word(Logos) was with God(these two parts of the verse just indicate that God had and idea or a plan), and the Word was God(and whatever the idea, it was Theos (God)).

    The question here is what was the idea?  And it is explained in the following two verses.


    Hi 94,
    Strong's is not the bible.
    Does any heavenly being have a body except the man from heaven?
    Is an 'embodied idea' still within the being or with that being?


    Hi Nick:

    I have given my understanding on this subject, and I have closed this with “I hope that this helps”.

    If it doesn't help you perhaps someone else will be helped by this.

    Obviously, you don't agree with my understanding on this, and so, if you understand it differently, give us your understanding.  I didn't say that I was right although I believe that I am otherwise I wouldn't be teaching this way, but if you can show me by the scriptures that what I am teaching is not correct, I will be happy to accept my correction.

    I know that Stong's is not in the bible, but many a time the definition of a word helps us to grasp the meaning of what is being said such as the name Abraham meaning “father of a multitude” for example.

    Anyway, I have given you my understanding maybe it will help someone.

    God Bless


    94

    A thought or a plan cannot reason to do the will of God!

    Heb

    10:
    5 *Wherefore when he cometh into the world*, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, *but a body hast thou prepared me*:
    6 In burnt offerings and [sacrifices] for sin thou hast had no pleasure.
    7 Then said I, Lo, *I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God*.

    9 Then said he, *Lo, I come to do thy will, O God*.

    Compare with…

    Jn 6:38
    For *I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will*, but the will of him that sent me.

    6:51
    *I am the living bread which came down from heaven*: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.

    6:58
    This is that bread which *came down from heaven*: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever.

    Jn 17:5
    And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which *I had with thee before the world was*.

    1 Jn 1:1,2
    That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the *Word of life*;
    (For the *life was manifested* (not a thought or a plan), and we have seen , and bear witness, and shew unto you that *eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;)

    Jn 1:1
    In the beginning was the Word, and the *Word was with God*, and the *Word was God*.

    Jesus the “Eternal Life” that was with the Father was not just some thought “in God”, for a thought or a plan cannot be “With God”!

    Neither can a thought or plan be God!

    :O


    Hi WJ:

    You say:

    A thought or a plan cannot reason to do the will of God!

    True, but God began implementing his plan from the beginning creating all that is in the world with him in mind, and then,

    John 1:14
    And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, * (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

    Here he can reason to do the will of God, and the gospel of Luke gives us a glimpse of this saying,

    Luke 2:43
    And when they had fulfilled the days, as they returned, the child Jesus tarried behind in Jerusalem; and Joseph and his mother knew not of it.  
    2:44
    But they, supposing him to have been in the company, went a day's journey; and they sought him among their kinsfolk and * * acquaintance.  
    2:45
    And when they found him not, they turned back again to Jerusalem, seeking him.  
    2:46
    And it came to pass, that after three days they found him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the doctors, both hearing them, and asking them questions.  
    2:47
    And all that heard him were astonished at his understanding and answers.  
    2:48
    And when they saw him, they were amazed: and his mother said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? behold, thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing.  
    2:49
    And he said unto them, How is it that ye sought me? wist ye not that I MUST BE ABOUT MY FATHER'S BUSINESS?  

    Hebrews 10:
    5 *WHEREFORE WHEN HE COMETH INTO THE WORLD(he said the following when he came into the world, and obviously that was not when he was an infant as what Luke shows us above was when Jesus was about 12 years of age)*, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, *but a body hast thou prepared me(the ME here has to be the Word of God)*:
    6 In burnt offerings and [sacrifices] for sin thou hast had no pleasure.
    7 Then said I, Lo, *I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God*.

    9 Then said he, *Lo, I come to do thy will, O God*.

    Then you ask me to compare the following scriptures:

    Jn 6:38
    For *I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will*, but the will of him that sent me.

    6:51
    *I am the living bread which came down from heaven*: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.

    6:58
    This is that bread which *came down from heaven*: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever.

    All of the above makes reference to the Word of God that came from the Father to humanity through Jesus.  Jesus applied the Word of God to his life and became that “life-giving spirit.  He is the bread of life.

    You quote the following:

    Jn 17:5
    And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which *I had with thee before the world was*[/

    John 17:24
    Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; THAT THEY MAY BEHOLD MY GLORY, WHICH THOU HAST GIVEN ME: for th
    ou lovedst me before the foundation of the world. (This verse explains what Jesus meant in John 17:5.  The “Glory” that Jesus had with the Father before the world was was a part of God's plan and was given to him at this time)

    You quote:

    1 Jn 1:1,2
    [i]That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the [b]*Word of life*    ;
    (For the *life was manifested* (not a thought or a plan), and we have seen , and bear witness, and shew unto you that *eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;)

    My response: (For the life was manifested) This is the same as I have already explained in the God's plan for eternal life was made manifest through the Lord Jesus.

    Jn 1:1
    In the beginning was the Word, and the *Word was with God*, and the *Word was God*.

    Jesus the “Eternal Life” that was with the Father was not just some thought “in God”, for a thought or a plan cannot be “With God”! ( I don't understand your reasoning here.  Why can't a plan for eternal life be with God?)

    Neither can a thought or plan be God!(Neither do I understand your reasoning here.  The plan was to make man in his image and Jesus is the express image of his person.)

    I have given you my understanding of John 1:1f and I have to believe that this is correct.  

    God Bless


    94

    You say…

    Quote

    All of the above makes reference to the Word of God that came from the Father to humanity through Jesus.  Jesus applied the Word of God to his life and became that “life-giving spirit.  He is the bread of life.

    The problem you have with these scriptures is that Jesus did not say the Word came down from heaven, he said “I” came down from heaven.

    Jn 6:38
    For *I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will*, but the will of him that sent me.

    6:51
    *I am the living bread which came down from heaven*: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.

    6:58
    This is that bread which *came down from heaven*: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever.

    Jn 17:5
    And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which *I had with thee before the world was*.

    Also…

    It is clear that the scriptures proclaim that Yeshua made the descision to come into the world before his body was prepared.

    10:
    5 *Wherefore when he cometh into the world*, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, *but a body hast thou prepared me*:
    6 In burnt offerings and [sacrifices] for sin thou hast had no pleasure.
    7 Then said I, Lo, *I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God*.

    9 Then said he, *Lo, I come to do thy will, O God*.

    In my opinion you are grossely misinterpreting these scriptures in order to support your anti prexistant view of Yeshua before he took on the likeness of sinfull flesh.

    Jn 6:38
    For *I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will*, but the will of him that sent me.

    Jesus said plainly “I” came down from heaven, to do the will of the Father who sent him!

    IMO this is unambiguouos!

    :O

    May 27, 2007 at 5:52 am#53268
    Worshipping Jesus
    Participant

    Posted: May 25 2007,13:59

    Hi WJ:

    You say:

    94

    You say…Quote  

    All of the above makes reference to the Word of God that came from the Father to humanity through Jesus.  Jesus applied the Word of God to his life and became that “life-giving spirit.  He is the bread of life.

    The problem you have with these scriptures is that Jesus did not say the Word came down from heaven, he said “I” came down from heaven.

    John 6:31
    Our fathers did eat manna in the desert; as it is written, He gave them bread from heaven to eat.  
    6:32
    Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Moses gave you not that bread from heaven; but my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven.  
    6:33
    For the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world.

    What in your opinion is “the bread of God”?

    May 27, 2007 at 5:55 am#53269
    Worshipping Jesus
    Participant

    Quote (942767 @ May 25 2007,13:59)
    Hi WJ:

    You say:

    94

    You say…Quote  

    All of the above makes reference to the Word of God that came from the Father to humanity through Jesus.  Jesus applied the Word of God to his life and became that “life-giving spirit.  He is the bread of life.

    The problem you have with these scriptures is that Jesus did not say the Word came down from heaven, he said “I” came down from heaven.

    John 6:31
    Our fathers did eat manna in the desert; as it is written, He gave them bread from heaven to eat.  
    6:32
    Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Moses gave you not that bread from heaven; but my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven.  
    6:33
    For the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world.

    What in your opinion is “the bread of God”?


    94

    The bread of God is a person!

    6:33
    For the bread of God *is he* which “cometh down” from heaven, and giveth life unto the world.

    Again, Jesus never gives any inclination anywhere in the scriptures that he was just a “thought or a plan” of God.

    He was with the Father in the begining.

    Jn 17:5
    And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which *I had with thee before the world was*.

    kai nun docason me su, pater, para seautw th doch h eixon (5707) pro tou ton kosmon einai (5750) para soi.

    eixon (to have, to hold) pro (before) tou ton (the) kosmon  (world) einai (was)

    And now, O Father, glorify (5657) thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had (5707) with thee before the world was (5750) .

    A thought or plan cannot hold or have the Glory of God before the world was. Not to mention you are saying the thought and plan is God!

    This is why John wrote the first chapter of John ascribing over 40 personal pronouns to Jesus the “Word”.

    Then John confirms who this “Word” that was with God and was God is…

    1 Jn 1:1,2
    That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the *Word of life*;
    (For the *life was manifested* (not a thought or a plan), and we have seen , and bear witness, and shew unto you that *eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;)

    I believe John ascribed the word “Logos” to Jesus because of his vision of the Apocalypse.

    Rev 19:13
    And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called *The Word (Logos) of God*.

    Revelations was written around 70 AD whereas The Gospel of John was written around 80s or 90s. AD.

    94, please help me to understand how you interpret these scriptures different.

    Jn 6:38
    For *I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will*, but the will of him that sent me.

    6:51
    *I am the living bread which came down from heaven*: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.

    6:58
    This is that bread which *came down from heaven*: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever.

    Jn 17:5
    And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which *I had with thee before the world was*.

    Not to mention Paul says…

    Col 1:17
    And *he is before all things*, and by him all things consist.

    This is not a thought or a plan! Its a “He”!

    ???

    May 27, 2007 at 5:56 am#53270
    Worshipping Jesus
    Participant

    Quote (Not3in1 @ May 26 2007,05:11)
    This is not a thought or a plan! Its a “He”!
    ************************************

    Surely God knew his Son would be a “he.”  Interesting note here:  Men determine the sex of the child during conception (they carry the gene for girl/boy).

    I've answered a lot of these scriptures given in the conception thread and others.  I won't bother going through them again.  Suffice it to say that these scriptures given by WJ can have other implications.  How you interpret them depends on which priori you come to the scriptures with.


    Not3

    The problem you have is there is nothing in these scriptures that indicate he “”would be”, it is very plain that he “was and is”!

    Col 1:17 KJV
    *And he is before all things, and by him all things consist*.

    NLT
    *He existed before everything else began, and he holds all creation together. *

    Heb 10:
    5 *Wherefore when he cometh into the world*, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, *but a body hast thou prepared me*:
    6 In burnt offerings and [sacrifices] for sin thou hast had no pleasure.
    7 Then said I, Lo, *I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God*.

    9 Then said he, *Lo, I come to do thy will, O God*.

    Compare with…

    Jn 6:38
    For *I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will*, but the will of him that sent me.

    6:51
    *I am the living bread which came down from heaven*: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.

    6:58
    This is that bread which *came down from heaven*: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever.

    Jn 17:5
    And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which *I had with thee before the world was*.

    1 Jn 1:1,2
    That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the *Word of life*;
    (For the *life was manifested* (not a thought or a plan), and we have seen , and bear witness, and shew unto you that *eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;)

    Jn 1:1
    In the beginning was the Word, and the *Word was with God*, and the *Word was God*.

    You claim to accept the scriptures as they are without reading into them, yet you try to force your anti-prexistent view on these scriptures.

    Maybe you could break them down and give me your understanding of them.

    Because I do not believe Jesus and the Apostles meant what you and 94 and AP and martian and Unisage believe about Yeshua as a thought or plan, and none of you have presented any credible evidence to this fact.

    Blessings!  :)

    May 27, 2007 at 5:57 am#53271
    Worshipping Jesus
    Participant

    Quote (942767 @ May 26 2007,09:38)
    Hi WJ:

    You say in response to my question:

    94

    The bread of God is a person!

    6:33
    For the bread of God *is he* which “cometh down” from heaven, and giveth life unto the world.

    6:51
    *I am the living bread which came down from heaven*: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.

    The Jews were having a little difficulty understanding what Jesus meant by the statement “the bread that I will give is my flesh”, also.

    6:52
    The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat ?  
    6:53
    Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.  
    6:54
    Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.  
    6:55
    For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.  

    6:60
    Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it?  
    6:61
    When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you?  
    6:62
    What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?  

    Then Jesus explains to the Apostles what he meant by the statement about eating his flesh:

    6:63
    It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh * * profiteth nothing: THE WORDS THAT I SPEAK TO YOU, they are spirit, and they are life.

    And so the bread of God is the Word of God that came to humanity through Him.  But his body also came down from heaven it that he was conceived of the Holy Ghost.  I believe that I heard you say in another thread that “spirit is the real person”.  It is what Jesus did in the body that gives us the opportunity for eternal life.  Hebrews 5:8
    Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;  
    5:9
    And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;

    God Bless


    94

    You say…

    Quote
    6:63
    It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh * * profiteth nothing: THE WORDS THAT I SPEAK TO YOU, they are spirit, and they are life.

    And so the bread of God is the Word of God that came to humanity through Him.

    You are close, however you are adding to what Jesus said.

    Jesus said…

    6:51
    *I am the living bread which came down from heaven*: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.

    The reason Jesus “words” are Spirit and life is because he is the **Word**, and out of him proceeds the words of Eternal life as Peter said!

    He is the Eternal Life that was with the Father. Jn 1:1,2.

    Jesus didnt mean to literally eat of his flesh and his Blood.

    It was his Word (body,flesh) and his Spirit (blood,water).

    This is why he said…

    Jn 7:37
    In the last day, that great [day] of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, *If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink*.

    And I might reiterate here that no mere man or anointed Prophet could give men to drink of the Spirit.

    Again Jesus 'is” the Bread of Life.

    Many men spoke the word of God, so did that mean they were also “The Bread of God”?

    Again, he didnt say “I bring you the bread of God, by speaking the words of God to you”.

    *I am the bread that came down from heaven!*

    Rev 19:13
    And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called *The Word of God*.

    Jesus is not the result of a spoken word from God.

    Jesus is the Word!

    Jn 1:
    1 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 him*; and *without him* was not any thing made that was made.

    94, I guess we will have to agree to disagree because I see nothing in John ch 6 that even hints that Jesus was saying that he is the “Thought or plan” of God.

    There is two realitys in the universe, created and uncreated, God and creation.

    Since by Jesus *all things were made* and *without him was not anything made that was made*, then that puts Jesus in the uncreated God catagory!

    :)

    May 27, 2007 at 6:03 am#53272
    Worshipping Jesus
    Participant

    Quote (942767 @ May 26 2007,11:59)

    Quote (WorshippingJesus @ May 26 2007,10:45)

    Quote (942767 @ May 26 2007,09:38)
    Hi WJ:

    You say in response to my question:

    94

    The bread of God is a person!

    6:33
    For the bread of God *is he* which “cometh down” from heaven, and giveth life unto the world.

    6:51
    *I am the living bread which came down from heaven*: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.

    The Jews were having a little difficulty understanding what Jesus meant by the statement “the bread that I will give is my flesh”, also.

    6:52
    The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat ?  
    6:53
    Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.  
    6:54
    Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.  
    6:55
    For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.  

    6:60
    Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it?  
    6:61
    When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you?  
    6:62
    What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?  

    Then Jesus explains to the Apostles what he meant by the statement about eating his flesh:

    6:63
    It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh * * profiteth nothing: THE WORDS THAT I SPEAK TO YOU, they are spirit, and they are life.

    And so the bread of God is the Word of God that came to humanity through Him.  But his body also came down from heaven it that he was conceived of the Holy Ghost.  I believe that I heard you say in another thread that “spirit is the real person”.  It is what Jesus did in the body that gives us the opportunity for eternal life.  Hebrews 5:8
    Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;  
    5:9
    And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;

    God Bless


    94

    You say…

    Quote
    6:63
    It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh * * profiteth nothing: THE WORDS THAT I SPEAK TO YOU, they are spirit, and they are life.

    And so the bread of God is the Word of God that came to humanity through Him.

    You are close, however you are adding to what Jesus said.

    Jesus said…

    6:51
    *I am the living bread which came down from heaven*: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.

    The reason Jesus “words” are Spirit and life is because he is the **Word**, and out of him proceeds the words of Eternal life as Peter said!

    He is the Eternal Life that was with the Father. Jn 1:1,2.

    Jesus didnt mean to literally eat of his flesh and his Blood.

    It was his Word (body,flesh) and his Spirit (blood,water).

    This is why he said…

    Jn 7:37
    In the last day, that great [day] of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, *If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink*.

    And I might reiterate here that no mere man or anointed Prophet could give men to drink of the Spirit.

    Again Jesus 'is” the Bread of Life.

    Many men spoke the word of God, so did that mean they were also “The Bread of God”?

    Again, he didnt say “I bring you the bread of God, by speaking the words of God to you”.

    *I am the bread that came down from heaven!*

    Rev 19:13
    And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called *The Word of God*.

    Jesus is not the result of a spoken word from God.

    Jesus is the Word!

    Jn 1:
    1 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 him*; and *without him* was not any thing made that was made.

    94, I guess we will have to agree to disagree because I see nothing in John ch 6 that even hints that Jesus was saying that he is the “Thought or plan” of God.

    There is two realitys in the universe, created and uncreated, God and creation.

    Since by Jesus *all things were made* and *without him was not anything made that was made*, then that puts Jesus in the uncreated God catagory!

    :)


    No WJ:

    Sorry, you accuse me of adding to Jesus said, but I believe that it is you that is adding to what he said.  Jesus came from heaven in two ways: he was conceived of the Holy Ghost, and so the prophetic Word of God  became a reality, when he was born, and so, the scripture says, John 1:14
    And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, * (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

    Secondly, the Word of God that he taught and that he obeyed came from God, and so from heaven. John 14:10
    Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.

    John 6:68
    Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go ? thou hast the words of eternal life.

    15:45
    And so it is written, The first man Adam was made * a living soul; THE LAST ADAM  WAS MADE A QUICKENING SPIRIT.

    If Jesus was made a life giving spirit as he learned obedience by the suffering that he endured having obeyed God without sin even unto death on the cross, how could he pre-exist his advent on earth.  He was born into the world an infant just like all of us, and his personality was developed as he applied the Word of God to his life in this World.  God made man in his own image and Jesus manifested God's character through the life that he lived while here on earth.  He was born into the world and became the person that he is in this world.

    God Bless


    94

    I will address your other points. But I would like for you to give me your understanding of the following scriptures.

    John 6:
    60 Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it?
    61 When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you?

    Do you think they were offended at Jesus saying he was the fullfilment of the word of God or the “Thought and plan of God?”

    No they were offended because he said *he was the bread of life that came down from heaven*

    And that they had to eat his flesh and drink his blood, which means eat his words and drink his Spirit.

    Jesus is the Word and the Spirit&#
    33; Jn 1:1, Rev 19:13, Jn 7:37, 2 Cor 3:17.

    62 *What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before*?

    This scripture is in context where Jesus said *he (not a thought or plan) came down from heaven*.

    Can Jesus go back to being a thought or a plan?

    Jesus is apparantly a liar. How could he go back to where he was?

    If a thought and plan of God has been fulfilled in John 1:14. how does he reverse this prophetic event?

    You deny every possible rule of interpretation and hermeneutics if you interpret this scripture as meaning anything else than what Jesus plainly says.

    Jn 6:50
    *This is the bread which cometh down from heaven*, that a man may eat thereof, and not die.

    Jn 6:51
    I am the *living bread* which came down from heaven:

    A thought and a plan is not living, and a thought and a plan is not an “I Am”, and a thought and a plan does not come down from heaven, and surely a thought and a plan does not go up to heaven where it came from!

    Jn 6:62
    *What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before*?

    Please explain!

    ???

    May 27, 2007 at 6:06 am#53273
    Worshipping Jesus
    Participant

    94

    You say…

    Quote

    Hi WJ:

    First, what offended the Jews is that Jesus was talking about eating his flesh and drinking his blood.

    John 6:52
    The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat ?

    And the following scripture says that some of his disciples were also did not understand what he meant by this according to the following scripture:

    John 6:60
    Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it?

    In fact some of the disciples quit following him because they did not understand about eating his flesh and drinking his blood according to the following scriptue:

    John 6:66
    From that time many of his disciples went back *, and walked no more with him.

    But Jesus explains to the those disciples who are continuing to follow him what he meant in the following scripture:

    John 6:63
    It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh * * profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

    And so, when Jesus states:  Jn 6:62
    *What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before*?

    He explains this also by John 6:61 and he is talking about eating the Words that he is teaching.  The Spirit of the Son is eternal, God knew what he would teach his Son when he came into the world.  We know his body did not exist before he was born of the Virgin Mary, but talks also about drinking his blood, and of course this the remedy for sin, and so I don't see a problem with him saying “what if I ascend where I was before”.  He is talking about the spirit.  It is the life that a person lives in the body that defines who that person is, and so Jesus is the living bread, that is the word of God applied to his life by which he lives and by which we also live if we believe and obey his commandments.

    And so, the Logos (concept or idea) of conceiving a Son from a virgin was with God in the beginning and the Word or the Spirit that would be formed within him when he came into the world was with God in the beginning.  This the life-giving spirit that Jesus would become.

    Saying that Jesus existed with God in any other way does not make any sense at all.

    God Bless

    I will respond shortly!

    :)

    May 27, 2007 at 6:11 am#53274
    Not3in1
    Participant

    And so, the Logos (concept or idea) of conceiving a Son from a virgin was with God in the beginning and the Word or the Spirit that would be formed within him when he came into the world was with God in the beginning. This the life-giving spirit that Jesus would become.

    Saying that Jesus existed with God in any other way does not make any sense at all.
    ***********************

    94, I agree. I am working on my post for this thread. I've been doing a little studying (uh-oh) and will respond soon. I also watched the movie, “Nativity” tonight and just bawled like a baby. It was pretty fitting for the topic of conversations I've been having lately on these boards. John 1:1 ties into the “conception” and “virgin birth” threads -it's all related. Anyway, I'm excited to study this some more. You and WJ have started this thread off strong!

    May 27, 2007 at 7:26 am#53279
    Worshipping Jesus
    Participant

    94

    You say…

    Quote

    First, what offended the Jews is that Jesus was talking about eating his flesh and drinking his blood.

    John 6:52
    The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat ?

    Not only did I say that but I also said…

    Quote

    No they were offended because he said *he was the bread of life that came down from heaven*

    And that they had to eat his flesh and drink his blood, which means eat his words and drink his Spirit.

    Jesus is the Word and the Spirit! Jn 1:1, Rev 19:13, Jn 7:37, 2 Cor 3:17.

    Now lets see what the scriptures says…

    Jn 6:33
    For the bread of God is *he which cometh down from heaven*, and giveth life unto the world.
    38 For *I came down from heaven*, not to do mine own will (see Heb 10:5-9), but the will of him that sent me
    39 And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.
    40 and this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.
    41 *the Jews then murmured at him*, because he said, I am the bread which *came down from heaven*.

    So they were not just murmuring over eating his flesh and blood, but that he said “He came down from heaven”.
    This is why he goes on to say…

    Jn 6:
    60 Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, *This is an hard saying; who can hear it*?
    61 When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you?
    62 *What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before*?

    66  From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.

    So it was both the eating of his flesh and the drinking of his blood and his claiming to come down from heaven that offended them and was hard for them to recieve!

    You say…

    Quote

    We know his body did not exist before he was born of the Virgin Mary, but talks also about drinking his blood, and of course this the remedy for sin, and so I don't see a problem with him saying “what if I ascend where I was before”.  He is talking about the spirit.

    Look closer 94.

    Jesus did not say “what and if ye shall see the Spirit ascend up where it was”! Or the thought or the plan!

    He said…

    *What and if ye shall see the **Son of man**  ascend up where **he was before**?

    This is plain and needs no explaining away into some ethereal nothingness of a “Thought or a plan”.

    Sorry. Can you tell me how John 1:1 through John 1:51, out of 51 verses the translators used over 40 personal pronouns ascribing them to Jesus, if the Apostle John meant the Word was not a person? ???  

    I leave you with a quote to martian who I think is an Alias “m42” namely.

    So let me see you say you accept their use of the term. You mean you think the 600+ scholars interpreted “The word was with God” and the “Word was God” and they did not believe Yeshua was the Word? Why didn’t they just say so instead of using around 40 pronouns in John ch 1 referring to the Word. Why didn’t they translate it like this…

    Jn 1:
    1 In the beginning was the idea or plan, and the idea or plan was with God, and the idea or plan was God.
    2 The same idea or plan 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.
    10 It was in the world, and the world was made by it, and the world knew it not.
    11 It came unto its own, and its own received it not.
    12 But as many as received it, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on its name:
    14 And the idea or plan was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld its glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

    I don’t know of any translation that reads like that, do you?

    Again, Paul also didn’t indicate Jesus was just a thought or plan in the beginning when he said…

    Col 1:
    16  *For by 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 him, and for him:  
    17 And *he is before all things, and by him all things consist*.

    Here is five personal pronouns in two verses speaking of Yeshua’s preexistence before “ALL” things!

    BTW. You quoted..

    1 Cor 15:45
    And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam [was made] a quickening spirit.

    Notice the brakets for “was made”. Added by the translators.

    Look at this verse in its context and a better rendering of the verse would be…

    1 Cor 15: YLT
    45 so also it hath been written, `The first man Adam became a living creature,' the *last Adam is for a life-giving spirit*,
    46 but that which is spiritual is not first, but that which was natural, afterwards that which is spiritual.
    47 The first man is out of the earth, earthy; *the second man is the Lord out of heaven*;

    Jesus is and was the Eternal life that was with the Father, 1 Jn 1:1,2, and he is the Lord from heaven!

    Blessings!

    May 27, 2007 at 7:40 am#53282
    NickHassan
    Participant

    Hi 94
    You say
    “John 1
    1:1
    In the beginning was the Word (Logos, from Strong's Concordance: “embodies a conception or idea” and the Word(Logos) was with God(these two parts of the verse just indicate that God had and idea or a plan), and the Word was God(and whatever the idea, it was Theos (God)).”

    So you scripture base is Strongs?

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 20 posts - 461 through 480 (of 25,991 total)
123…232425…1,2981,2991,300
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

 

CREATE NEW TOPIC
ACTIVE TOPICS
POPULAR TOPICS
SITE SEARCH
SUPPORT US
REGISTER

Recent Replies

ALL REPLIES →

© 1999 - 2026 Heaven Net

Log in with your credentials

or    

Forgot your details?

Create Account