Home Christian Writings Supporting the Trinity Doctrine? – The Trinity Doctrine John 1:1 Page 436

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

Viewing 20 posts - 8,701 through 8,720 (of 26,009 total)
123…435436437…1,2991,3001,301
  • Author
    Posts
  • July 16, 2012 at 4:41 am#306053
    jammin
    Participant

    so your god is not God but god. nice answer boy LOL

    July 16, 2012 at 2:59 pm#306092
    Wakeup
    Participant

    Quote (jammin @ July 16 2012,15:41)
    so your god is not God but god. nice answer boy LOL


    Jammin.

    God is a spirit and his word is his living ,life giving word.
    all is made by the living word of God.
    That word BELONGS TO GOD.

    THAT LIVING WORD WAS MADE FLESH BY GOD.and he was named by God. and his name is called Jehoshuah,or Jesus.
    The living word, walking amongs men;eating ,drinking,suffering.But he is the one with the light,to give it to us.

    He is truly man;not half man and half God.he is truly flesh ,but with the spirit of God dwelling in him, in full.

    When he was resurrected by God,he was given a glorified body.(a spirit body),and now he is sitting next to God ,his father,waiting for his father to tell him the day and the hour to come back to earth with vengeance.

    If Jesus was not truly man,but half God and half man;then his sacrifice would have not been as a man suffering,but as a God suffering which is a big difference.

    A man truly feels pain; but if he is God also; then he could stop the pain whilst hanging on the cross,and just pretend that he feels pain,and not truly die. He must be truly man.

    wakeup.

    July 16, 2012 at 8:18 pm#306105
    Frank4YAHWEH
    Participant

    Quote (942767 @ July 16 2012,11:00)

    Quote (Frank4YAHWEH @ July 16 2012,10:50)

    Quote (Ed J @ July 14 2012,13:58)
    Hi Frank,

    When do you believe Yashua was begotten of by God?

    1. At conception/birth
    2. At baptism
    3. At resurrection?

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


    [VIDEOS] PT 1 MYTH DESTROYERS , THE VIRGIN BIRTH MYTH

    …


    Hi Frank:

    If the virgin birth of Jesus is a myth, then all of us are still in our sins, because the scripture states:

    Quote
    Rom 5:12 ¶ Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:  

    Do you believe the following scriptures?

    Quote
    Jhn 3:16   For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.  

    Jhn 3:17   For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.  

    Love in Christ,
    Marty


    Marty,

    Yahshua was and is a man, not “God”, “a god”, or “an angel.”

    Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to ALL men, because all sinned–

    We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; and Yahweh has laid on him [Yahshua] the iniquity [sin] of us all.

    [VIDEOS] PT 1 MYTH DESTROYERS , THE VIRGIN BIRTH MYTH

    …

    July 16, 2012 at 9:08 pm#306106
    Frank4YAHWEH
    Participant

    Did Yeshua the Messiah Pre-Exist?

    John D. Keyser

    Here is more evidence concerning the fable of the pre-existence of Yeshua the Messiah:

    First, we have to acknowledge that the church today cannot agree on the divinity/humanity of Yeshua. Some say that Yeshua is 50% God and 50% man. Yet others say that he is 100% man as well as 100% God. The last one is generally accepted by most. However, from a mathematical standpoint, 200% cannot go into 100%, and YEHOVAH God being the creator of the science of mathematics would not violate His own system of order!

    Secondly, if Yeshua pre-existed (other than in relation to YEHOVAH God Who was manifested in him), then Mary, his mother, would have to be too. Yeshua, being born of Mary, had to have her human genetic makeup in his being as well. If Mary did not pre-exist, how then did YEHOVAH go into the future and extract her genetic makeup, disassemble Yeshua and insert Mary's genetic code in him? Therefore, if Yeshua pre-existed, then Mary had to as well — prior to creation.

    If we would only look at YEHOVAH God's character in the Old Testament, we would clearly see its impossibility.

    o YEHOVAH cannot lie.
    o YEHOVAH cannot sin.
    o YEHOVAH does not break laws
    o YEHOVAH is pure, holy, righteous, etc.

    Now that we have established that, let us ask whether Mary was engaged or married at the time of her “impregnation.” If she was married when YEHOVAH “impregnated' her, He would have committed adultery, which is violation of the eighth commandment. Conversely, if she was only engaged/betrothed when YEHOVAH impregnated her, then He would have committed fornication. YEHOVAH God will definitely not commit adultery or fornication. There are more evidences of the NON-“virgin” birth of Yeshua throughout the Old and New Testaments.

    YEHOVAH God never does anything to his disciples, prophets, teachers, servants, etc. without first asking them if they would do it; how much more so in the incident of impregnating someone. The New Testament states that Yeshua was “born under the law”. This clearly is an indication that Yeshua was NOT conceived through fornication or adultery.

    Most of the Churches of God believe that Yeshua the Messiah was not really like us and that he walked a sinless life. The word “sinless” means “without missing the mark.” It does not mean that he did not misbehave as a child, or that he did not commit minor infractions. Rather than always justifying and rationalizing our sins and shortcomings with the excuse that Yeshua was able to live and walk as he did because he was THE son of YEHOVAH God, let us strive toward the mark that YEHOVAH God has set before us. Scripture tells us that Zechariah and his wife were BLAMELESS. Yeshua himself told a certain young man that he only lacked ONE thing. Even Paul said that he kept the law FLAWLESSLY. So where do we get the teaching that we cannot break our sinful nature and our old habits, etc? Could it be due to the teaching of the virgin birth and of the divinity of Yeshua the Messiah?

    Yeshua is indeed the firstborn from the dead. Indeed he is king and son of YEHOVAH God, but he is not God. Isaiah says that YEHOVAH God the Father will not share his glory with any man. Just because we are filled with the holy spirit does not make us God, but only sons of YEHOVAH God.

    We should all study John 17 from the Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures. The following is a literal translation taken from this Interlinear New Testament.

    John 17:4-5 — “I you glorified upon the earth, the work having perfected which you have given to me in order that I might do; and now glorify me you, Father, beside to yourself to the glory which I was having before of the of the world to be beside you.”

    World (2889) = kosmos = Arrangement / decoration

    Therefore, the word “world” means “decorated fallen system.” The affirmation is found in verse 6b, “you gave me out of the world.” If “world” means terra firma, Yeshua would have to take his disciples to another planet!

    Also verse 8b states that “they received and truly knew that I came out from beside you.” Notice that Yeshua did not come from the inside of YEHOVAH God (i.e. virgin birth).

    Let us now examine the following part of the verse: “with the glory I had before.”

    The Greek word meanings as taken from the Strong's Concordance are as follows:

    With (3844) = Near / from beside / in vicinity / proximity / on account

    Glory (1391) = Glory apparent / from 1380 = think

    That (3739) = Who / which / what / that

    Had (2192) = Hold / possession / ability / contiguity / relation / condition

    Before (4253) = Fore / in front / prior to / superior to

    With all the Greek word meanings, let us now reread John 17:4-6 in the correct context.

    4. You sent me, Yeshua, the anointed. I you glorified on the EARTH, the work finishing which you gave to me that I should do.

    5. And now glorify me Father with YOURSELF which I hold (we are the vessels that only hold YEHOVAH God's glory — just as Yeshua was, so are we) superior to my previous arrangements/decorations (that was his Adamic fallen nature, which YEHOVAH God renewed and anointed with the Christ (anointing).

    6. You, I revealed of your character to the men whom you gave to me out of the arrangement and decorations of the fallen system.

    The word “world” (1093) in verse 4, literally refers to terra firma.

    However, the word “world” in verse 6, means orderly arrangement/decorations, and it refers to the system, be it political or religious. It also refers to the present condition of man and the systems that we are subjected to. To prove this, we only need look at the root word (2865) the word “world” (2889), which means “to tend/carry off.”

    Again, our problem is that we read and attempt to understand Scripture using the word meanings taken from our English language dictionary. The Bible was not written in English, but was originally penned in Hebrew and Greek. Thus, we have to use the meanings of the words in the Hebrew and Greek languages. This is the only way to truly read and understand the spiritual matters contained in the Bible, which YEHOVAH God is trying to communicate to us, about our fallen spiritual condition and how to overcome it.

    Why then, has the teaching of the virgin birth and of the pre-existence of Yeshua the Messiah become the foundational teachings of Christianity and most of the Churches of God — and why has the belief of such become the litmus test of being a believer? Ephesians 2:8 and Hebrews 6:1-2 say NOTHING of these doctrines. Can you prove from the Old or New Testament that these doctrines are necessary for salvation and eternal life? Isaiah does NOT say “his names shall be called (Yeshua).” Throughout the Old Testament, it is stated that YEHOVAH God alone is salvation and He alone builds the house. YEHOVAH does not need any help from man to accomplish His goals.

    Another good example of this is the modern translation of 1 John 4:1-5. I have done a word study in the Interlinear Bible, leaving out the added words and putting in the correct meaning of the remaining words — and this is what I have come up with:

    Beloved, not every spirit believe, but test them, approve and examine these spirits (Isaiah 8:20; Hebrews 10:28-31). Watch their actions and words if of origin of God they came. If God builds the house it looks like Yeshua; from because many imposters, pretenders have left God and have gone into the arrangements and decorations of the religious system to provide for themselves and carry off spoils. (Jeremiah 2:13) What is of God's spirit is that one who covenants with Him (Psalm 25:10-14). God's salvation in the anointed ones exist in mind/soul (Luke 17:20-21). impostors of God have minds unrenewed (Romans 8:7). These are antichrist. The one who covenants not with God by the renewing of
    their mind are the antichrist which you heard now and is coming. For his servants are decorated and arranged which is their mark and image and number impressed on their minds (denominational markings by way of action and words).

    The summary of 1 John 4:1-5 is that the holy spirit is saying, if I am in your spirit, you will look and act like me. However, if you are adorned with the mark of the religious system, you will act like the system/denomination to which you belong. These verses have nothing to do with the Catholic teaching of the “Queen” Mary and her sexual relations with YEHOVAH God, which is rank heresy and comes from pagan mythology.

    The Bible teaches that there is ONE God (Deuteronomy 6:4); monotheism, NOT polytheism as the Catholic Church believes and teaches:

    (1) God the Father who is angry and is full of laws,

    (2) God the Holy Spirit who speaks for and obeys the “third” God,

    (3) Jesus, who is non-confrontational, non-judgmental, and who soothes and pacifies the angry Father God, thereby allowing his followers to be judged by a totally different standard than the saints of the Old Testament.

    They further teach of a fourth “god” — Satan, who has power equal to or greater than God, which they fear more than the first God.

    YEHOVAH God is the same yesterday, today and forever.
    SOURCE

    July 16, 2012 at 9:13 pm#306107
    Frank4YAHWEH
    Participant

    Yeshua the Messiah Did Not Pre-Exist!

    Did Yeshua the Messiah divest himelf of his previous identity, lose all his former knowledge, power and standing with YEHOVAH God — only to establish this all again after his resurrection? What for? What did it accomplish? Is such a belief logical? A careful consideration of scripture will reveal that the doctrine of pre-existence is both illogical and false!

    John D. Keyser

    Just who is Yeshua the Messiah?

    We state this question in the present tense, because although Yeshua the Messiah was crucified almost 2,000 years ago at the instigation of a Judean mob and the maladministration of Roman power, he lives today.

    And the fact that he lives is of the greatest significance to mankind.

    Paul, the one time inveterate opponent of Christianity, who was converted into its greatest advocate by the incontestable evidence of the Messiah's resurrection (1 Corinthians 15:10), explained it thus:

    “For he has set a Day when he will judge the inhabited world, and do it justly, by means of a MAN whom he has designated. And he has given public proof of it by resurrecting THIS MAN from the dead” (Acts 17:31 — Jewish New Testament).

    To judge the world is to rule it. Paul thus taught that the living Messiah is the assurance of YEHOVAH God that He will send the Messiah to set up His Kingdom on earth (Acts 1:11; 3:19-20). The Messiah is coming to change present conditions, and to reign as a king and High Priest under his Father YEHOVAH.

    Confusion Concerning the Messiah

    But who is Yeshua the Messiah? Eternal life is bound up in the answer to this question, as the quotation at the head of this article shows. Put the question to Jews, and they reply that he was the son of Joseph and Mary, and that he lived and died in Judea 2,000 years ago. Ask it of most clergymen, and they will state that he is the second person of a biune or triune God. Others, whilst rejecting the Trinitarian concept as unscriptural and illogical, teach that he pre-existed. Thus endless controversy has continued; even those who admit that he lives, violently disagree as to who he is.

    While the Jewish answer is technically correct, they completely rejected Yeshua as being the Messiah chosen by YEHOVAH God. The disciples were not liars, fools, mystics or charlatans. They comprised practical fishermen like Peter, hard-headed businessmen like Matthew, even skeptics like Thomas. Such men were not prepared to be misled by a rumor, but demanded concrete proof of the resurrection of the Messiah (John 20:24-29). We believe them, and reject the unbelieving attitude of the Jews and atheists.

    We not only set aside the skeptical attitude of the Jews and atheists; but we also repudiate the doctrine of the Trinity and the doctrine of a biune God. The concept of three Gods who are but one God is illogical and unscriptural. Similarly, the idea that two gods existed together from eternity is totally unscriptural. The word “Trinity” is not found in the Bible, but is a title manufactured to serve the cause of theology. On the other hand, the Bible teaches that the Messiah is subordinate to YEHOVAH God, thus:

    “There is ONE God, and one mediator between God and man, the MAN Christ Jesus” (1 Timothy 2:5).

    “ONE God, the Father . . . and one Lord, Jesus Christ” (1 Corinthians 8:6).

    “Now when everything has been subjected to the Son [the Messiah], then he will subject himself to God [YEHOVAH], who subjected everything to him; so that God [YEHOVAH] may be everything in everyone” (1 Corinthians 15:28 — Jewish New Testament).

    Did the Messiah Pre-exist?

    Although such a question, if asked of any other person, would be treated with the ridicule it deserves, it is seriously alleged of the Messiah.

    Yet the Bible clearly shows that the Messiah had no existence prior to his birth in Bethlehem, 2,000 years ago. He was born of Mary, his father being the carpenter Joseph from Nazareth, and thus was truly the son of man.

    From his parents, he derived the nature common to all mankind, but from YEHOVAH God he received spiritual proclivities that strengthened him to conquer the flesh:

    Great beyond all question is the formerly hidden truth underlying our faith: He was manifested physically and proved righteous spiritually, seen by angels and proclaimed among the nations, trusted throughout the world and raised up in glory to heaven (I Timothy 3:16, Jewish New Testament).

    He was executed as a criminal, but, in fact, never sinned, and therefore YEHOVAH God's justice demanded his resurrection (Acts 2:24). He was raised to immortality, and ascended into heaven, where he awaits the time to return and set up the reign of YEHOVAH God on this earth (Acts 3:19-23; Daniel 2:44).

    Nowhere is it suggested that he existed before his birth!

    Take, as an example, the opening verse of the New Testament:

    “The genealogy of Jesus Christ the SON of David, the SON of Abraham” (Matthew 1:1).

    If the Messiah lived in some form before Abraham and David, he was not their son, and the statement is false.

    We believe that the statement is true, and all Scripture agrees therewith. Consider the record of his early childhood:

    “And Yeshua grew both in wisdom and in stature, gaining favor both with other people and with God” (Luke 2:52 — Jewish New Testament).

    How can these words possibly apply to a pre-existent angel, or the second person of a Triune or Biune God? Could such a one increase in wisdom and in favor with YEHOVAH God? Assuming the impossible were true, and the Messiah pre-existed as an angel or a member of the god-head, on what grounds could it be said that he increased in favor with YEHOVAH merely because in his new state he grew from a baby to a youth!

    If the Messiah pre-existed, he must have divested himself of all previous identity, lost all his former knowledge, power and standing with YEHOVAH God, and had to establish this all again! What for? What did it accomplish? Is such belief logical? We shall show it is unscriptural!

    It is normal procedure for a child to “develop in wisdom and stature,” but where the Messiah differed from all before or since, was in his selection by YEHOVAH God Who “appointed [him] in advance for you,” and his exceptional predilection for spiritual things. This he received from YEHOVAH God Who became revealed in the Son (2 Corinthians 5:19; Isaiah 11:2-3; John 12:49), so that the Messiah could say with perfect truth, “before Abraham was I am.”

    The only sense in which it can be taught with truth that there was anything pre-existent about the Messiah is in relation to YEHOVAH God Who was manifested in him. In all that he did and said, there was the influence of YEHOVAH's spirit that was given him “without measure” (John 3:34). He is “the only begotten son” of YEHOVAH God after his resurrection (John 3:16), whom “the Lord made strong for Himself” (Psalm 80:17), in order that His ways might be revealed unto men.

    The Thread of Evidence Throughout The Bible

    Throughout the Old Testament the promise of the Messiah is proclaimed; throughout the New Testament the person of the Messiah is described.

    He was the “seed of the woman” promised from the beginning, to destroy the law of sin and death which was the product of the misguiding influence of the serpent (Gen. 3:15). The New Testament comments:

    “When the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth His son, made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law” (Galatians. 4:4).

    If the Messiah pre-existed, how could he be described as the “seed of the woman?”

    Abraham was taught: “In thy seed shall all nations be blessed” (Genesis 22:18).

    Paul commented: “And that SEED is Christ” (Galatians 3:16).

    Would
    Abraham imagine that his seed (son) existed before he did? Of course not! Where is there any evidence in Genesis that the Messiah was then living in any form? There is none!

    Moses, Israel's law-giver and leader, who typified the coming Law-giver and Leader (Yeshua the Messiah) told the Israelite nation:

    “The Lord thy God will raise up unto Thee a Prophet FROM THE MIDST OF THEE, OF THY BRETHREN, LIKE UNTO ME; unto him ye shall hearken” (Deuteronomy 18:5).

    In the New Testament, Peter quoted those very words and applied them to the Messiah (Acts 3:22; 7:37), and Paul taught:

    “Therefore, IN ALL THINGS he had to be made like his brethren . . . .” (Hebrews 2:17 — NKJV).

    Can the words of Moses above apply to a pre-existent angel or a member of the god-head? Could such a one be truthfully described as “raised up from the midst of thee,” “of thy brethren, like unto Moses?” Did the Messiah's brethren “pre-exist” in heaven alongside YEHOVAH God?

    Only a false theory could possibly make those words apply to a pre-existent angel or a god.

    The Messiah was the son of David, and David was told:

    “When thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, WHICH SHALL PROCEED OUT OF THY BOWELS, and I will establish his kingdom for ever. I WILL BE HIS FATHER, and he SHALL BE My son (2 Samuel 7:12-14).

    The prophecy relates to the Messiah, as the New Testament comment upon it makes abundantly clear (see Luke 1:32-33; Hebrews 1:5), and with that clearly established, note well the future tense used in relation to him. YEHOVAH God says: “I WILL BE his Father,” he “SHALL BE My son.” If the Messiah were already in existence, should not YEHOVAH have said: “I AM his Father,” “he IS My son”? Mary was told:

    “He shall be [not is!] great, and shall be [not is!] called the Son of the Highest; and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David; and he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end” (Luke 1:32-33).

    These words of the angel Gabriel state that the Messiah “SHALL BE called the Son of the Highest,” and he shall reign on the throne of “his father David.” Can these expressions apply to one already in existence?

    Consider also the preaching of the apostles. Did they proclaim belief in a pre-existent angel or god who had assumed human form? They did not. Listen to Peter's preaching:

    “David . . . being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the FRUIT OF HIS LOINS, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne” (Acts 2:30).

    Whom did David believe would sit upon his throne? An angel or god who was already in existence? No; he believed the one who would reign there would be “the fruit of his loins,” that is, a descendant. The boy born of Mary and Joseph was a descendant of David, not a pre-existent angel or god assuming human form!

    In short, YEHOVAH God revealed Himself in a man of His choosing who became the pattern for all those who would approach Him in hope of eternal life. YEHOVAH does not expect that such will attain unto the perfection they behold in the Son, but He does require of them that they build into their lives some of the divine characteristics that they see there revealed. By so doing, they develop a character worthy of perpetuation in a body of incorruptible glory in the Age to come (1 Corinthians 15:53-57).

    The theory that sets forth the Messiah as a pre-existent angel or a member of the god-head, however, destroys this pattern, and mystifies and distorts the beautiful doctrine of God-manifestation in the man Yeshua through the holy spirit.

    And remember that a correct understanding of the relationship of the Father and the Son is essential to salvation — “And eternal life is this: TO KNOW YOU, the ONE true God, and HIM WHOM YOU SENT, Yeshua the Messiah” (John 17:3).

    Is Not the Messiah the Firstborn?

    At this juncture the reader might try to point out Bible references that seem to give some support to the pre-existence theory. However, we are not ignorant of those passages, but proclaim that none of them give support to the theory if they are properly interpreted. It is unfortunately true, however, as the Bible itself states, that some take passages of Scripture that are “hard to be understood” and proceed to “wrest them unto their own destruction” (2 Peter 3:16).

    Such a reference is Colossians 1:15. It describes Yeshua the Messiah as “the firstborn of every creature,” and some have advanced this in support of the pre-existence theory. If the Messiah is firstborn, he must have existed before all others, they claim.

    But does not that set Scripture against Scripture? If he is literally “firstborn” in the sense implied by the theory, how can the Bible claim that he is the “son of Abraham and David” (Matthew 1:1)?

    And consider the statement itself: “first BORN of every creature.” Does not that demand a mother? Who was the mother who gave birth to him before all others?

    These difficulties are solved, and the passage simply and beautifully explained, when the Bible doctrine of the “firstborn” is understood. In the Bible, “firstborn” is a legal term, describing pre-eminence of position or status, though not necessarily of birth. There were special privileges granted the legal firstborn in a family. He represented his father, he acted as a priest, he received a double portion of the family inheritance (see Deuteronomy 21:17).

    But the law of YEHOVAH God provided that the eldest son of a family could forfeit his position as legal firstborn, if guilty of misconduct or inability to perform the necessary duties, and be supplanted by a younger son. In other words, it was not necessary for the Messiah to be the first of YEHOVAH's creation to be eligible for the position of legal firstborn.

    For example, consider 1 Chronicles 5:1:

    “Reuben the firstborn of Israel . . . but forasmuch as he defiled his father's bed, his birth right was given unto the sons of Joseph, and the genealogy is not to be reckoned after the birthright!”.

    Reuben's lewd conduct earned the rebuke of his father, who deposed him from his legal status of firstborn, and gave the position to a much younger son: Joseph.

    Other examples can be briefly mentioned: Ephraim was blessed as firstborn by Jacob, even though he was younger than Manasseh his brother (Genesis 48:14-19), and YEHOVAH endorsed the appointment by describing Ephraim as “His firstborn” (Jeremiah 31:9). Jacob was given the birthright over his older brother Esau (Genesis 25:32-34). Simri was appointed to the position even though he was younger in years than his brethren (1 Chronicles 26:10).

    These examples (and they could be multiplied many times over) clearly show that it was often the practice for a younger son to be elevated to the position of legal firstborn in a family. In fact, this was so common that the Mosaic Law prohibited the elevation of a younger son to this position on the mere whim of his father, because of favoritism. It commanded:

    “It shall be, when he maketh his sons to inherit that which he hath, that he may not make the son of the beloved firstborn before the son of the hated . . . ” (Deuteronomy 21:17).

    This prohibition shows that a legal firstborn could be a younger son, and therefore has a great bearing on the interpretation of Colossians 1:15.

    The Bible refers to two notable “sons of God”: Adam and the Messiah (see Luke 3:38). The “first Adam” forfeited the right of inheritance, the position of firstborn of the human race, because of sin; but YEHOVAH God raised up a younger Son (called in 1 Corinthians 15:45 “the last Adam”) whose complete obedience to the will of his Father proved him worthy of the preeminence. He was thus elevated to the positi
    on of firstborn of the human race, which means that he receives “a double portion of the inheritance,” and that he acts as priest in the family of YEHOVAH God. The Messiah is firstborn, not by fact of longevity (which confers no merit) but by virtue of his moral excellence.

    His elevation was predicted in the Old Testament. YEHOVAH declared concerning him: “I WILL [future tense] MAKE HIM My firstborn, higher than the kings of the earth” (Psalm 89:27).

    The use of the future tense in this prophecy shows that the Messiah is not the firstborn by birth but by appointment; otherwise YEHOVAH should have said, “He IS My firstborn.”

    The resurrection of the Messiah was the seal of the Father's approval on the Son (Romans 1: 1-4). This constituted him the Firstborn. Paul wrote: “He is . . . the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the pre-eminence” (Colossians 1:18), the “firstborn among many brethren” (Romans 8:29). The followers of the Messiah are also described as a “kind of firstfruits” to YEHOVAH God (James 1:18; Revelation 14:4), and as “the congregation of firstborns” (Hebrews 12:23 — Greek. See Diaglott). Therefore, if the title “firstborn” teaches the pre-existence of the Messiah, it must do so also in relation to his followers. All the privileges of the firstborn that rest on the Messiah, apply to a lesser extent to his followers. They will receive a double portion of inheritance in the Age to come, even immortality (1 Corinthians 15:52-54), and they will act as a royal-priesthood (Revelation 5:9-10) in relation to the mortal population that will remain (see Zechariah 14:16) during the period of the Messiah's millennial reign and that of the Father on this earth (Revelation 20:6).

    These expressions show conclusively that the apostle DID NOT mean, by his use of the term, that the Messiah pre-existed.

    Did the Messiah Create the Heavens?

    Some will remind us, however, that we have not disposed of all the difficulties contained in Colossians 1. For example, does it not reveal that the Messiah created all things? Paul taught:

    “For by him (i.e. Yeshua) 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” (Colossians 1:16).

    This seems conclusive evidence, for it appears to teach that the Messiah created even heaven. But a close examination of the passage will reveal that it teaches too much if this interpretation is pressed, for it claims that he created all things “in heaven.” That would include YEHOVAH God Himself, to say nothing of the angels!

    That is obviously neither logical nor Scriptural. What, then, does the verse mean? The Scriptures speak of heavens other than those that are above. For example, the prophet Isaiah speaks of “new heavens and a new earth” to be manifested in the future, which he describes as “Jerusalem a rejoicing and her people a joy” (Isaiah 65:17-18).

    The coming of the Messiah will result in the formation of these political “heavens.” The rulers who will reign therein will be followers of the Messiah, then made immortal, reigning “on the earth” (Revelation 5:9-10).

    Even now, a follower of the Messiah is elevated into a position of privilege in relation to YEHOVAH God and His Son, described as “the heavens in Christ” (Ephesians 1: 3 — see margin). Paul thus taught:

    “He hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places [the heavens] in Christ” (Ephesians 2:6 — Margin).

    These “heavens” have been brought into existence through the Messiah, and they are the precursors of the political “heavens” to be manifested in the age to come when he rules on earth. In them are found gradations of authority, described as thrones, dominions and so forth; some of which were visible then, and some of which are yet to be manifested, and, therefore, are as yet invisible.

    All will be revealed in the Age to come.

    The term “heaven,” therefore, often relates to a position of privilege or elevation. It is used to describe the present relationship of the Messiah's followers to the Father and the Son, as well as the authority that they will wield in the Kingdom that the Messiah will set up on earth — in which they will exercise gradations of power (see Luke 19:17-19).

    In Isaiah 65:17-18, the “heavens” constitute the rulers or government of the age to come, and the “earth” the ruled, or common people, as the prophet is careful to show (see v.18). The same interpretation is demanded for Colossians 1:16. The word in the Greek translated “by” is the preposition en. This is translated “because” in Matthew 26:33; Mark 14:27, but is more commonly rendered “in.” It signifies “in the sphere of” a person's influence or being. The R.S.V. and Revised Version translations of the Bible render Colossians 1:16 as “for in him were all things created.” It cannot be said that the material creation was created “in Christ,” and therefore the reference must be to the spiritual creation, as is further implied in v.18.

    Elsewhere, a person “in Christ” is described as a “new creature,” or “new creation” as the expression should be rendered (2 Corinthians 5:17; Galatians 6:15), and as the “things” that the Messiah is said to have created are “in him” it is obviously this “new creation” is what the apostle has in mind. The Messiah is the beginning of this new creation of YEHOVAH God (Revelation 3:14), leading the way to which his followers can attain (Philippians 3:21; 1 John 3:1-2), for what he is today they can become.

    To summarize, Colossians 1:16 DOES NOT teach the literal creation of the heavens and the earth by the Messiah, because:

    1. It conflicts with the testimony of the Old Testament which teaches that YEHOVAH God alone created the heavens and the earth.

    2. The heavens in question are “in Christ” which is only possible if they relate to spiritual things.

    3. Other expressions by the apostle align the “heavens” to positions of privilege in the Messiah.

    So Paul concludes: “He is before (Greek — superior to) all things, and by (Greek – en, in) him all things consist” (Colossians 1:17).

    The Greek word translated “consist” is sunistemi and signifies to “stand, or adhere, together.” The Messiah is the cohesive force of the NEW creation, and as such these words can be understood. But if the creation in question is interpreted to mean the literal creation, we must acknowledge that the Messiah holds all that together. Why, then, did it not disintegrate when he died? Obviously this interpretation is wrong, and as the context clearly shows, was never intended by Paul, who was writing of a spiritual creation in the Messiah.

    “I Am From Above” (John 8:23)

    This statement is often used to teach that the Messiah was in heaven before he came down to earth. The context of the verse, however, shows that this interpretation is incorrect. The Messiah declared to the Judeans: “Ye are from beneath: I am from above,” then, in explanation, he continued: “Ye are of this world; I am not of this world.” The Messiah was “from above” and “not of this world” because he manifested wisdom and characteristics that were of and from YEHOVAH God through the holy spirit.

    A man who “loves the world” is “from beneath,” or “earthy,” but one who has “the love of the Father” dwelling in him is “from above” (John 8:23). The Messiah told Nicodemus that a person must be “born from above” (John 3:3 — margin) if he would inherit the kingdom of YEHOVAH God. Such a one is begotten by the word of YEHOVAH (I Peter 1:23; 1 John 3:9-10), by a “wisdom that descendeth from above” (James 3:15-18). The character that he will develop is one molded by the Word that dwells in him (John 17:17), so that he can claim to be “from above” though he was ne
    ver literally in heaven.

    That is the sense in which the Messiah's words are to be understood. He was “not of this world” in the same sense as John exhorted believers to be “not of this world” (1 John 2:15). The Messiah-follower is expected to look beyond the earthly things of this world to the glory yet to be revealed, and to become mentally and morally changed by the influence (holy spirit) which is “from above.”

    The Messiah provided an example of this.

    “I Came Down From Heaven” (John 6:38)

    “This is a hard saying, who can understand it?” asked the disciples (v. 60). It was followed by one even more difficult: “What and if ye shall see the Son of Man ascend up where he was before?” So ridiculous did this sound to some of the Messiah's disciples that they left him (v. 66). And that conclusively proves that they knew nothing of the theory of a pre-existent Messiah.

    Moreover, consider the title the Messiah used. He described himself as “Son of Man.”

    Was the pre-existent one a Son of Man? Evidently he was if this reference is relied upon as proof of his supposed pre-existence.

    What did the Messiah mean by these difficult sayings?

    They appear at the end of a long conversation with the Judeans, based upon the giving of manna in the wilderness, and the circumstances provide the KEY to their meaning.

    The manna is described as “bread from heaven” (John 6:32), and the Messiah likened himself to anti-typical manna or “bread from heaven” (vv. 32-33). Does this description mean that the manna was manufactured in heaven, at the dwelling place of YEHOVAH God, and wafted down in a thick cloud every night through the limitless spaces above to the wilderness below? Or did YEHOVAH God send His spirit to earth, and there manufacture it?

    Undoubtedly the latter, as any reasonable person will concede.

    That is the sense, therefore, in which we must understand the Messiah's allusions to himself. Consider the circumstances of his birth. The angel told his mother:

    “The holy spirit shall come upon thee, the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee, therefore that holy thing that shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God” (Luke 1:35).

    The Messiah was “the only begotten Son of God” and therefore from above. Paul taught that “God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto Himself” (2 Corinthians 5:19). That which was in the Messiah (the spirit) had come down from heaven, and tabernacling in the flesh of the Messiah, ascended into heaven after his resurrection.

    That this is the true meaning is shown by the explanatory words of the Messiah himself. To the confused disciples he declared:

    “What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before? It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing” (John 6:62-63).

    YEHOVAH God, by His spirit, descended to earth to provide one of the human race capable of conquering sin (see Ps. 80:17), and having done so, He withdrew this one to heaven, having changed his nature from a body of flesh to one of spirit, for it should be clearly understood that a spirit being is corporeal (1 Corinthians 15:44-45). Thus the spirit ascended where it was before, though in a different form. It descended as the power of YEHOVAH God; it ascended as a Son of Man made immortal.

    In the Beginning Was the Word (John 1)

    John's Gospel commences with this statement, and goes on to state that this word was with God (YEHOVAH) and was God (YEHOVAH), and made all things (vv. 1-4). And because the title, Word of God, is applied by many to the Messiah in Revelation 19:13 (in actual fact this is applied to YEHOVAH God's Shekinah Glory — not the Messiah), it is claimed that these verses in John relate to a pre-existent Messiah.

    If this were so, however, it would make the Bible appear hopelessly contradictory, for such reference as: “I will be his Father, and He shall be my son,” “I will make him My firstborn,” “Jesus Christ the son of Abraham the son of David” are at variance with the teaching that represents the Messiah as already living.

    The Greek term translated “word” is Logos. It signifies the outward form of inward thought or reason, or the spoken word as illustrative of thought, wisdom and doctrine. Not only that, but it can also refer to YEHOVAH's Shekinah Glory.

    John is teaching that in the very beginning, YEHOVAH's purpose, wisdom or revelation (Shekinah Glory) had been in evidence. It was “with God” in that it emanated from him; it “was God” in that it represented Him to mankind. A similar expression is used by the Messiah in Matthew 26:28: “This is my blood” — that is, this represents my blood. Again in Matthew 13:20: “the same is he” signifies the same, “represents he.” “That rock was Christ” (1 Corinthians 10:4, it represented the Messiah); and it became the motive power of all that YEHOVAH God did, for all was made with it in mind, and it presented the hope of life to mankind (see John 1: 3-4).

    What John is stating, therefore, is that in the very beginning there existed the wisdom or purpose of YEHOVAH God (His Shekinah Glory), and that it was revealed unto men to provide a way of life.

    What did it proclaim?

    The coming of one of the human family who would overcome sin and give reality to the hope of life. The promise of this was stated from the beginning in the Word or Shekinah Glory of YEHOVAH God(e.g. Genesis 3:15).

    This Word, Wisdom or Shekinah Glory found its reality, its substance, its confirmation (Romans 15:8) in the person of the Messiah; therefore John taught:

    “According to [or by] the word [wisdom or Shekinah Glory] flesh was created; and dwelling among us — who are flesh — and we beholding his glory, was the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of honor and truth” (John 1:14).

    While the Word (wisdom, Shekinah Glory) created all flesh — including that of the Messiah — the Declaration of Divine wisdom found its substance and reality in the person of the Messiah. Before his advent, it was a mere Word or Promise, but when he became manifested, it became a person in the Judahite way of thinking.

    The person did not exist before the birth of the child Yeshua; but the promise and wisdom (Shekinah Glory) of YEHOVAH God always existed.

    That is the teaching of John. It does away with the embarrassment of teaching that an angel or a god became an embryo in the womb of a woman, as demanded by the theory of a pre-existent Messiah.

    We acknowledge that “Word” is personalized as “him”, in John 1:4, but that is a common Hebraism found throughout the Bible. Riches, Wisdom, Sin, and other subjects are similarly treated. Sometimes these are used to press the doctrine of pre-existence. For example, on several occasions, Jehovah's Witnesses have drawn attention to such passages as Proverbs 8:22, and applied them to their notion of a pre-existent Messiah. The passage reads:

    “The Lord possessed me in the beginning of His way, before His works of old.”

    The subject matter of the chapter is wisdom which is personified; but, unfortunately for the doctrine of the preexistent son, it is personified as a woman: “She standeth, she crieth” etc. (Proverbs 8:1-3).

    “The Glory I Had with Thee Before the World was” — John 17:5

    Do these words mean that the Messiah was personally with the Father from the very beginning? or are they expressive of the fact that YEHOVAH God, as a wise Architect (Hebrews 11:10), foresaw the glory of His completed plan?

    The latter without doubt! This is shown beyond question because of the use of similar language in the same manner.

    Thus Peter taught that the Messiah was “foreordained before the foundation of the world but was manifested in these last times for you”
    (1 Peter 1:20). John describes him as “the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world” (Revelation 13:8).

    Was the Messiah “slain from the foundation of the world?” Typically, yes, in the sacrifices provided; but literally, NO!

    In like manner, YEHOVAH God, who knows the end from the beginning, foresaw the glory of the Son and proclaimed it through the prophets. The ultimate glory of the Messiah was in the mind and purpose of the Father from the very beginning.

    He also provided for the ultimate glory of the Messiah's followers, so that the Messiah prayed:

    “The glory which Thou gavest me, I have given them” (John 17:22).

    Do the Messiah's followers possess his glory now? They do not, they are merely “in hope” of it (see Romans 5:2).

    How can the Messiah then claim to have given it to them? Only in the sense that he has provisionally bestowed it, foreknowing that they to whom it is given in promise will fulfill the conditions to ultimately receive it in reality.

    Thus, an accepted follower at the Messiah's coming could well speak to the Messiah as Yeshua prayed to the Father:

    “Glorify thou me with the glory that I had [in promise] with thee before [this millennial] world began!”

    YEHOVAH foreknows the completed purpose, and knowing that He will bring it to consummation, is able to “call those things which be not as though they are” (Romans 4:17). Paul taught:

    “God chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy, without blame before Him” (Ephesians 1:4).

    If John 17:5 proves the pre-existence of the Messiah, Ephesians 1:4 must prove the pre-existence of all who are followers of him!

    The same language is used of other men whom YEHOVAH God has used in a special way. Of Jeremiah it is written:

    “Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations” (Jeremiah 1:5).

    Does that prove the pre-existence of Jeremiah? If not, why should John 17:5 be used to teach the pre-existence of the Messiah, and so be made to conflict with many other references which clearly speak of him as the son of David born 2,000 years ago? Similar language is used of Paul (Galatians 1: 15) and others. When the Messiah returns, his accepted followers will be granted a glory similar to that bestowed upon the Son. They will be “conformed to the image of YEHOVAH's Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren” (Romans 8:29).

    Your Responsibility

    As the hope of eternal life is bound up in a correct understanding of the Father and Son (John 17:3), it is the responsibility of all to seek out the truth concerning these matters. It is very difficult to rid our minds of bias, but it is necessary if we would find the truth. Is it logical that an angel or a god should become a baby, and be compelled to learn all over again those things that once he knew? What purpose is served by this?

    No, the truth is simple, clear and logical. Yeshua the Messiah came into this world through a NORMAL birth, his father being Joseph and his mother, Mary. From his birth YEHOVAH's spirit strengthened him in his daily pilgrimage towards victory over sin. By so doing there was revealed the means of victory for each and every one of us: divine help and strength (Philippians 4:13). A careful consideration of Scripture will show that the doctrine of pre-existence is both illogical and false!
    SOURCE

    July 16, 2012 at 9:50 pm#306108
    terraricca
    Participant

    f

    Quote
    No, the truth is simple, clear and logical. Yeshua the Messiah came into this world through a NORMAL birth, his father being Joseph and his mother, Mary. From his birth YEHOVAH's spirit strengthened him in his daily pilgrimage towards victory over sin. By so doing there was revealed the means of victory for each and every one of us: divine help and strength (Philippians 4:13). A careful consideration of Scripture will show that the doctrine of pre-existence is both illogical and false!

    Phil 4:13 I can do all things through Him who strengthens me.
    Phil 4:14 Nevertheless, you have done well to share with me in my affliction.
    Phil 4:15 You yourselves also know, Philippians, that at the first preaching of the gospel, after I left Macedonia, no church shared with me in the matter of giving and receiving but you alone;
    Phil 4:16 for even in Thessalonica you sent a gift more than once for my needs.

    Phil 4:19 And my God will supply all your needs according to His riches in glory in Christ Jesus.
    Phil 4:20 Now to our God and Father be the glory forever and ever. Amen.
    Phil 4:21 Greet every saint in Christ Jesus. The brethren who are with me greet you.

    it is amazing how you quote scriptures ignorance is abundant in your circle

    July 17, 2012 at 12:05 am#306115
    942767
    Participant

    Quote (Frank4YAHWEH @ July 17 2012,07:18)

    Quote (942767 @ July 16 2012,11:00)

    Quote (Frank4YAHWEH @ July 16 2012,10:50)

    Quote (Ed J @ July 14 2012,13:58)
    Hi Frank,

    When do you believe Yashua was begotten of by God?

    1. At conception/birth
    2. At baptism
    3. At resurrection?

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


    [VIDEOS] PT 1 MYTH DESTROYERS , THE VIRGIN BIRTH MYTH

    …


    Hi Frank:

    If the virgin birth of Jesus is a myth, then all of us are still in our sins, because the scripture states:

    Quote
    Rom 5:12 ¶ Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:  

    Do you believe the following scriptures?

    Quote
    Jhn 3:16   For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.  

    Jhn 3:17   For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.  

    Love in Christ,
    Marty


    Marty,

    Yahshua was and is a man, not “God”, “a god”, or “an angel.”

    Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to ALL men, because all sinned–

    We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; and Yahweh has laid on him [Yahshua] the iniquity [sin] of us all.

    [VIDEOS] PT 1 MYTH DESTROYERS , THE VIRGIN BIRTH MYTH

    …


    Hi Frank:

    I agree that he was and is a man, but his Father is God. He was not born of the sperm of man. God did not become a man, but He has a Son who is His own flesh and blood, Yashua.

    The scripture states that all men have sinned, and we have the scriptures that state that Jesus obeyed God without sin even unto death on the cross, and so, the scriptures that state that all men have sinned are speaking of all men that were born from the sperm of man.

    The body of Christ is God's body, the temple of the Holy Ghost. God is a Spirit. And a person is defined by the life that he lives. Jesus is the last Adam and is the express image of God's person through the life that he lived and lives in obedience to God's Word.

    Quote
    Act 20:28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with HIS OWN BLOOD.

    Frank, the scriptures tell us how Jesus was conceived. The virgin birth is vital to God's plan for our salvation. He has provided the propitiation for our sins, and consequently, no man can boast that his salvation is based on his own righteousness.

    Love in Christ,
    Marty

    July 17, 2012 at 12:26 am#306118
    mikeboll64
    Blocked

    Quote (jammin @ July 15 2012,22:39)
    the man and a man. are they both created by nature???

    the god and a god, are they both created by nature?


    jammin,

    This is not that hard. The one and only Omniscient Creator of All Things did not beget the one and only Omniscient Creator of All Things. Instead, that Most High God begat a not quite as high god. That is why the second highest god in existence calls the Most High God “my God”.

    Think it out, man. Does God Almighty have a God of His own? YES or NO? (Because Jesus does.)

    July 17, 2012 at 12:45 am#306120
    mikeboll64
    Blocked

    Quote (942767 @ July 16 2012,18:05)
    Hi Frank:

    I agree that he was and is a man, but his Father is God. He was not born of the sperm of man.


    Do you see how this works, Marty?  First we start with people wanting Jesus to BE the very God he is the Son of, and the next thing you know, we have people worshipping Mary as the “Mother of God”.

    You are now witness to a similar chain of events unfolding with Frank.  When a person is so hell-bent on believing that Jesus be nothing more than a man EXACTLY like the rest of us, eventually that person is going to insist that Jesus has a human father just like the rest of us.  It was inevitable, just like someone putting it together that Mary must be the Mother of God if Jesus is God.  Whenever someone starts out with an unscriptural doctrine, eventually they have to keep twisting or ignoring other scriptures that refute that doctrine. Then they have to twist the scriptures that refute the twisting they just did to the last scripture. And so on and so on until the Mother of God is a human being. :)

    I'm glad you are seeing this first hand, and I hope you realize that it started with Frank's refusal to believe the scriptures that speak of the pre-existence of Jesus.  He WANTS Jesus to have been ONLY a man, and for him, insisting that Joseph is the biological father of Jesus is the next logical step.

    FRANK, listen up:

    Matthew 1
    24 When Joseph woke up, he did what the angel of the Lord had commanded him and took Mary home as his wife. 25 But he had no union with her until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus.

    Frank, do you believe this scripture?  YES or NO?

    Luke 1
    31 You will be with child and give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus.

    34 “How will this be,” Mary asked the angel, “since I am a virgin?”

    Frank, do you believe this scripture?  YES or NO?

    July 17, 2012 at 12:51 am#306121
    Frank4YAHWEH
    Participant

    Quote (942767 @ July 17 2012,11:05)

    Quote (Frank4YAHWEH @ July 17 2012,07:18)

    Quote (942767 @ July 16 2012,11:00)

    Quote (Frank4YAHWEH @ July 16 2012,10:50)

    Quote (Ed J @ July 14 2012,13:58)
    Hi Frank,

    When do you believe Yashua was begotten of by God?

    1. At conception/birth
    2. At baptism
    3. At resurrection?

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


    [VIDEOS] PT 1 MYTH DESTROYERS , THE VIRGIN BIRTH MYTH

    …


    Hi Frank:

    If the virgin birth of Jesus is a myth, then all of us are still in our sins, because the scripture states:

    Quote
    Rom 5:12 ¶ Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:  

    Do you believe the following scriptures?

    Quote
    Jhn 3:16   For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.  

    Jhn 3:17   For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.  

    Love in Christ,
    Marty


    Marty,

    Yahshua was and is a man, not “God”, “a god”, or “an angel.”

    Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to ALL men, because all sinned–

    We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; and Yahweh has laid on him [Yahshua] the iniquity [sin] of us all.

    [VIDEOS] PT 1 MYTH DESTROYERS , THE VIRGIN BIRTH MYTH

    …


    Hi Frank:

    I agree that he was and is a man, but his Father is God. He was not born of the sperm of man.  God did not become a man, but He has a Son who is His own flesh and blood, Yashua.

    The scripture states that all men have sinned, and we have the scriptures that state that Jesus obeyed God without sin even unto death on the cross, and so, the scriptures that state that all men have sinned are speaking of all men that were born from the sperm of man.

    The body of Christ is God's body, the temple of the Holy Ghost.  God is a Spirit.  And a person is defined by the life that he lives.  Jesus is the last Adam and is the express image of God's person through the life that he lived and lives in obedience to God's Word.

    Quote
    Act 20:28   Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with HIS OWN BLOOD.  

    Frank, the scriptures tell us how Jesus was conceived.  The virgin birth is vital to God's plan for our salvation.  He has provided the propitiation for our sins, and consequently, no man can boast that his salvation is based on his own righteousness.

    Love in Christ,
    Marty


    Marty,

    The problem with your approaching me with what you say the Scripture tells you is that the Scripture that I study does not tell me such foolishness that you believe. I do not believe in YOUR “God”. In fact, I am no mere “God” worshiper as you are.

    Did Yahshua Create Or Pre-exist His Birth?

    “Jesus IS God!”?

    …

    July 17, 2012 at 12:55 am#306122
    Frank4YAHWEH
    Participant

    Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 17 2012,11:45)

    Quote (942767 @ July 16 2012,18:05)
    Hi Frank:

    I agree that he was and is a man, but his Father is God. He was not born of the sperm of man.


    Do you see how this works, Marty?  First we start with people wanting Jesus to BE the very God he is the Son of, and the next thing you know, we have people worshipping Mary as the “Mother of God”.

    You are now witness to a similar chain of events unfolding with Frank.  When a person is so hell-bent on believing that Jesus be nothing more than a man EXACTLY like the rest of us, eventually that person is going to insist that Jesus has a human father just like the rest of us.  It was inevitable, just like someone putting it together that Mary must be the Mother of God if Jesus is God.  Whenever someone starts out with an unscriptural doctrine, eventually they have to keep twisting or ignoring other scriptures that refute that doctrine.  Then they have to twist the scriptures that refute the twisting they just did to the last scripture.  And so on and so on until the Mother of God is a human being.  :)

    I'm glad you are seeing this first hand, and I hope you realize that it started with Frank's refusal to believe the scriptures that speak of the pre-existence of Jesus.  He WANTS Jesus to have been ONLY a man, and for him, insisting that Joseph is the biological father of Jesus is the next logical step.

    FRANK, listen up:

    Matthew 1
    24 When Joseph woke up, he did what the angel of the Lord had commanded him and took Mary home as his wife. 25 But he had no union with her until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus.

    Frank, do you believe this scripture?  YES or NO?

    Luke 1
    31 You will be with child and give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus.

    34 “How will this be,” Mary asked the angel, “since I am a virgin?”

    Frank, do you believe this scripture?  YES or NO?


    Mike,

    You should know full well by now that I do not believe in your perversion of Scripture! :D

    July 17, 2012 at 1:19 am#306125
    Frank4YAHWEH
    Participant

    Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 17 2012,11:26)

    Quote (jammin @ July 15 2012,22:39)
    the man and a man. are they both created by nature???

    the god and a god, are they both created by nature?


    jammin,

    This is not that hard.  The one and only Omniscient Creator of All Things did not beget the one and only Omniscient Creator of All Things.  Instead, that Most High God begat a not quite as high god.  That is why the second highest god in existence calls the Most High God “my God”.

    Think it out, man.  Does God Almighty have a God of His own?  YES or NO?  (Because Jesus does.)


    Marty,

    Do you see how this works? You are a witness to it! You have Mike believing that his “God” begets a lesser “God” by having sexual relations with whatever he beliefs his “God” had sexual relation with up there in heaven and then this “lesser God” empties itself of being “a lesser God” and transforms itself into an embryo and enters an earthy woman's womb to be born as a man-child that has to grow and learn all over again as a man to be obedient to this “Greater God” that Mike so foolishly worships. :D

    July 17, 2012 at 1:44 am#306130
    Frank4YAHWEH
    Participant

    Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 17 2012,11:45)

    Quote (942767 @ July 16 2012,18:05)
    Hi Frank:

    I agree that he was and is a man, but his Father is God. He was not born of the sperm of man.


    Do you see how this works, Marty?  First we start with people wanting Jesus to BE the very God he is the Son of, and the next thing you know, we have people worshipping Mary as the “Mother of God”.

    You are now witness to a similar chain of events unfolding with Frank.  When a person is so hell-bent on believing that Jesus be nothing more than a man EXACTLY like the rest of us, eventually that person is going to insist that Jesus has a human father just like the rest of us.  It was inevitable, just like someone putting it together that Mary must be the Mother of God if Jesus is God.  Whenever someone starts out with an unscriptural doctrine, eventually they have to keep twisting or ignoring other scriptures that refute that doctrine.  Then they have to twist the scriptures that refute the twisting they just did to the last scripture.  And so on and so on until the Mother of God is a human being.  :)

    I'm glad you are seeing this first hand, and I hope you realize that it started with Frank's refusal to believe the scriptures that speak of the pre-existence of Jesus.  He WANTS Jesus to have been ONLY a man, and for him, insisting that Joseph is the biological father of Jesus is the next logical step.

    FRANK, listen up:

    Matthew 1
    24 When Joseph woke up, he did what the angel of the Lord had commanded him and took Mary home as his wife. 25 But he had no union with her until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus.

    Frank, do you believe this scripture?  YES or NO?

    Luke 1
    31 You will be with child and give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus.

    34 “How will this be,” Mary asked the angel, “since I am a virgin?”

    Frank, do you believe this scripture?  YES or NO?


    Mike,

    The fact is, I refuse to believe such foolishness for the simple fact that nowhere in Scripture does it ever speak of “the pre-existence of Jesus.” This is only spoken of by false prophets of deception that twist Father Yahweh's inspired prophetic word to their own destruction. The fact is also, Yahshua was a man or as he words it with his Hebrew upbringing “son of man”. In fact, he is recorded on one occasion in the so-called “New Testament” as giving reference to himself as “a man” as it is translated and it is said in this same section of Scripture that he had the same origin as all men. Certainly we as men did not pre-exist our birth as “lesser Gods”!  :D

    Did Yahshua Create Or Pre-exist His Birth?

    “Jesus IS God!”?

    …

    July 17, 2012 at 2:05 am#306135
    Ed J
    Participant

    Quote (Wakeup @ July 17 2012,01:59)
    Jammin.

    If Jesus was not truly man,but half God and half man;then his sacrifice would have not been as a man suffering,but as a God suffering which is a big difference.

    wakeup.


    Hi Wakeup,

    How exactly does 'a god' suffer?

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

    July 17, 2012 at 2:07 am#306136
    Ed J
    Participant

    Quote (Ed J @ July 14 2012,13:58)
    Hi Frank,

    When do you believe Yashua was begotten of by God?

    1. At conception/birth
    2. At baptism
    3. At resurrection?

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


    Frank?

    July 17, 2012 at 2:10 am#306137
    kerwin
    Participant

    Marty;

    Jesus' flesh and blood was not formed by the fusion of male and female gametes but his body was miraculously formed from a part of Mary.  

    Scripture does not call Jesus a half God; it calls him a man.

    Scripture calls him a descendant of David; as of flesh and blood. He is a descendant of Yahweh as for the Spirit.

    July 17, 2012 at 2:14 am#306138
    mikeboll64
    Blocked

    Quote (Frank4YAHWEH @ July 16 2012,19:44)
    ……….. in the so-called “New Testament”………


    Ahhhh! I wasn't aware that you didn't believe in the entire NT, Frank. I knew you like to pretend that John's gospel is suspect because what John teaches doesn't align with what you WANT to be the truth. But I didn't know your problem is with the entire NT.

    Well then, what use is it for someone who DOES believe the scriptures to debate with someone who doesn't?

    (It is interesting that all your enormous cut and paste jobs quote MANY NT scriptures. I suppose you only believe the ones that don't clearly contradict your flawed understanding, huh? :) )

    July 17, 2012 at 2:41 am#306143
    Frank4YAHWEH
    Participant

    Quote (Ed J @ July 17 2012,13:07)

    Quote (Ed J @ July 14 2012,13:58)
    Hi Frank,

    When do you believe Yashua was begotten of by God?

    1. At conception/birth
    2. At baptism
    3. At resurrection?

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


    Frank?


    Ed J? :D

    July 17, 2012 at 2:44 am#306144
    Frank4YAHWEH
    Participant

    Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 17 2012,13:14)

    Quote (Frank4YAHWEH @ July 16 2012,19:44)
    ……….. in the so-called “New Testament”………


    Ahhhh!  I wasn't aware that you didn't believe in the entire NT, Frank.  I knew you like to pretend that John's gospel is suspect because what John teaches doesn't align with what you WANT to be the truth.  But I didn't know your problem is with the entire NT.

    Well then, what use is it for someone who DOES believe the scriptures to debate with someone who doesn't?

    (It is interesting that all your enormous cut and paste jobs quote MANY NT scriptures.  I suppose you only believe the ones that don't clearly contradict your flawed understanding, huh?  :) )


    Mike,

    I do believe in the entire so-called “New Testament”. What it is that I do not believe in is your perversion of Father Yahweh's inspired prophetic word.

    July 17, 2012 at 2:52 am#306146
    Ed J
    Participant

    Quote (Frank4YAHWEH @ July 17 2012,13:41)

    Quote (Ed J @ July 17 2012,13:07)

    Quote (Ed J @ July 14 2012,13:58)
    Hi Frank,

    When do you believe Yashua was begotten of by God?

    1. At conception/birth
    2. At baptism
    3. At resurrection?

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


    Frank?


    Ed J?  :D


    #1, #2, or #3; – which do you believe?

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 20 posts - 8,701 through 8,720 (of 26,009 total)
123…435436437…1,2991,3001,301
  • 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