Justice
Justice

December 20th, 2014, 3:05 pm #21

Justice,

Greek word for seed is "sperma."

Men beget children, women bear them. The sperm fertilizes the egg.

Children are begotten of the Father, and born of the mother.

Ken is correct.
I understand Ken may be very knowledgeable on SPERM but this is how it happened.

"Now the birth of Jesus Christ was as follows: when His mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child by the Holy Spirit."
Quote
Share

Joined: July 29th, 2010, 2:32 pm

December 20th, 2014, 7:10 pm #22


Justice says

********************

May Christians Observe Holidays?

by Wayne Jackson


Is it wrong for Christians to celebrate some of the holidays popular in our society—like giving gifts at Christmas time, allowing children to go trick-or-treating at Halloween, or hunting eggs at Easter?

In considering this issue, several things should be kept in view.

A practice may have originated under certain circumstances but, eventually, have lost that significance—either in whole or at least significantly. There is Bible precedent for dealing with this principle.

Consider the practice of eating meat that had been sacrificed to idols previously—a very lively issue in the first century. Here is the background: A meat sacrifice would be made to an idol. After a certain portion was consumed in sacrificial flames (or by the priests), the balance would be sold as common food in the market. The controversy, therefore, arose: is this meat contaminated simply because it had some connection with an idol?

Paul’s answer is no (see 1 Corinthians 8:1-13). If one has “knowledge”—i.e., that an idol is “nothing”—and his conscience is not offended, he may eat of that meat. It is not contaminated merely by its former association.

Yet, there is this caution: if one is in an environment wherein some “weak” (i.e., without mature knowledge) brother is liable to be damaged, then it would be best to refrain in that instance, lest the weak brother’s conscience be wounded.

It would be wrong to partake religiously of a practice that compromises one’s fidelity to the truth. The apostle deals with such a matter in 1 Corinthians 10. If in a service where sacrifices were being offered to “demons” the Christian were to partake, i.e., have “communion” (koinonia—participation, fellowship), with those involved in the illicit worship, such clearly would be sinful (10:20-21).

To practice Christmas, Halloween, or Easter religiously would be unwarranted. To do so merely as a cultural custom would be a matter of personal judgment.

In Romans 14, Paul argues the general proposition that there will be different levels of knowledge among brethren and that, to a certain extent, these must be accommodated for the sake of Christian unity. For example, some, out of conviction, choose not to eat meats; others see nothing wrong with such a practice.

The apostle instructs that neither individual is to “set at naught” the other. No man is to create a law in areas of expediency and then demand that all others submit. If an overt act of transgression is not the issue, peace must prevail.

Most folks who are rather sensitive about these cultural practices are not consistent entirely in their own conduct. Consider, for example, the celebration of birthdays. In ancient Egypt, the birthdays of the Pharaohs were considered as “holy” days, with no work being done (McClintock and Strong 1969, 817). Moreover, as John Lightfoot noted: “The Jewish schools esteem the keeping of birthdays a part of idolatrous worship” (1979, 217).

Does this mean that if a man in this era gives his wife a birthday present or if we have a birthday party for a child we have compromised our faith? Surely no one will so allege.

What about the man who takes his wife out for dinner and gives her flowers on Valentine’s Day? Has he yielded to the Romish dogma regarding “Saint Valentine”? When we place flowers on the graves of our loved ones, is this the same as the Hindu practice of putting food on the graves of one’s ancestors? Does having a wedding ceremony in a church building imply that we endorse the Catholic notion that marriage is a “church sacrament”? Surely these queries must be answered negatively.

Practices can change with time and mean different things to different people. We must not compromise the truth, but neither are we permitted to make spiritual laws for others.
Jesus said I AM and not I WAS

Thus says the LORD, your Redeemer, and the one who formed you from the womb, "I, the LORD, am the maker of all things, stretching out the heavens by Myself and spreading out the earth all alone" (Isa. 44:24).

God was ALONE? Nope says theology 101a God had a son and a spirit god who breathed on the waters. So, The Spirit OF Christ (which always existed) just flat lied in the numerous passages to refute "the lying pen of the scribes."

"I am the LORD, and there is no other, besides Me, there is no God" (Isa. 45:5).

"I am the LORD, that is My name; I will not give my glory to another" (lsa. 42:8).


Jesus was begotten IN THE WOMB and therefore ginomai = to come to be, begin to exist

I AM in Greek:

eimi, In Prose eimi serves as FUTURE. to erkhomai, I shall go, shall come. to come or go come or go, the special senses being given by the context,

erkhomai loci, come to, arrive at, which comes or passes to a person by bequest, conveyance, arrived at that time of life,


Everything existed in the mind of God but it did not begin to be until it's own time.

The trinity treats the PHYSICAL JESUS as a member of the "god family." However, the statement is always "father, spirit and son" none of which are NAMES. The Son of God is defined by John and historic trinitarians as the ARTICULATED VOICE of God.

How he or we might have a spiritual existence is unknown but Jesus began to be when Jesus was born of the SPERM of Abraham protected from all of the Civil-Military-Clergy vowed to murder the prophets who were inspired or breathed upon by the Spirit OF Christ or meaning MESSIAH.

Jesus said that all of the power of God's planned purpose was vested in him.

WORD is never a "people." Word or Logos is God's PLAN or rational method:

In the beginning was the PLAN and the PLAN was God since He is wholly (holy) Spirit

Polytheists who deny the value of the work of the MAN Jesus Christ have the usual spiritual dislexia and read:

In the beginning was the Jesus, and the Jesus was with God

This is part of the predestined PLAN of blasphemers who confess that the Spirit or Mind of God was TOO DUMB to just say that:

"The godhead is God, Jesus and Holy Spirit mother."

The GOD FAMILY did not dwell inside of Jesus: Theotes means "the divine nature".



Last edited by Ken.Sublett on December 20th, 2014, 7:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Like
Share

Bill
Bill

December 20th, 2014, 7:51 pm #23



CM presents

Donnie and Ken

MOST CREATIVE AWARD

2014
Old Testament: "And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you" (Ex. 3:14 KJV).

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

These two passages are more evidence that God and Jesus are one and the same. Both refer to themselves as "I AM," which means eternal, never-ending.

Jesus is simply God made manifest in the flesh. God/Jesus as the Word became flesh and dwelt among us.

Therefore, God = Jesus = the Word.

Quote
Share

Joined: January 2nd, 2005, 6:45 am

December 21st, 2014, 12:35 am #24

Thanks Donnie, BTW that was a Justice exclusive. No links. We will reveal the runner up in this category very soon. (Spoiler Alert) it's all Greek to me.
[color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]Justice, thanks.

Reveal it very soon. I am anxiously waiting.

As long as the Scripture is on my side, instead of some ACQUIRED teaching from another human being or organization, there's nothing to worry about.[/color]
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 2nd, 2005, 6:45 am

December 21st, 2014, 12:44 am #25

Arianism is named for Arius, a teacher in the early 4th century A.D. One of the earliest and probably the most important item of debate among early Christians was the subject of Christ’s deity. Was Jesus truly God in the flesh or was Jesus a created being? Was Jesus God or just like God? Arius held that Jesus was created by God as the first act of creation, that Jesus was the crowning glory of all creation. Arianism, then, is the view that Jesus was a created being with divine attributes, but was not divine in and of Himself.

Arianism misunderstands references to Jesus’ being tired (John 4:6) and not knowing the date of His return (Matthew 24:36). Yes, it is difficult to understand how God could be tired and/or not know something, but relegating Jesus to a created being is not the answer. Jesus was fully God, but He was also fully human. Jesus did not become a human being until the incarnation. Therefore, Jesus’ limitations as a human being have no impact on His divine nature or eternality.

A second major misinterpretation in Arianism is the meaning of “firstborn” (Romans 8:29; Colossians 1:15-20). Arians understand “firstborn” in these verses to mean that Jesus was “born” or “created” as the first act of creation. This is not the case. Jesus Himself proclaimed His self-existence and eternality (John 8:58; 10:30). John 1:1-2 tells us that Jesus was “in the beginning with God.” In Bible times, the firstborn son of a family was held in great honor (Genesis 49:3; Exodus 11:5; 34:19; Numbers 3:40; Psalm 89:27; Jeremiah 31:9). It is in this sense that Jesus is God’s firstborn. Jesus is the preeminent member of God’s family. Jesus is the anointed one, the “Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace” (Isaiah 9:6).

After nearly a century of debate at various early church councils, the Christian church officially denounced Arianism as a false doctrine. Since that time, Arianism has never been accepted as a viable doctrine of the Christian faith. Arianism has not died, however. Arianism has continued throughout the centuries in varying forms. The Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons of today hold a very Arian-like position on Christ’s nature. Just as the early church did, we must denounce any and all attacks on the deity of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.


[color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]You forgot to name your source or link, Justice.

While I may not completely agree with Arius, he was much closer to the Scripture/truth than Constantine, the Pope, the Trinitarians, or any of the councils during his time.[/color]
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: July 29th, 2010, 2:32 pm

December 21st, 2014, 12:55 am #26

Jesus said I AM and not I WAS

Thus says the LORD, your Redeemer, and the one who formed you from the womb, "I, the LORD, am the maker of all things, stretching out the heavens by Myself and spreading out the earth all alone" (Isa. 44:24).

God was ALONE? Nope says theology 101a God had a son and a spirit god who breathed on the waters. So, The Spirit OF Christ (which always existed) just flat lied in the numerous passages to refute "the lying pen of the scribes."

"I am the LORD, and there is no other, besides Me, there is no God" (Isa. 45:5).

"I am the LORD, that is My name; I will not give my glory to another" (lsa. 42:8).


Jesus was begotten IN THE WOMB and therefore ginomai = to come to be, begin to exist

I AM in Greek:

eimi, In Prose eimi serves as FUTURE. to erkhomai, I shall go, shall come. to come or go come or go, the special senses being given by the context,

erkhomai loci, come to, arrive at, which comes or passes to a person by bequest, conveyance, arrived at that time of life,


Everything existed in the mind of God but it did not begin to be until it's own time.

The trinity treats the PHYSICAL JESUS as a member of the "god family." However, the statement is always "father, spirit and son" none of which are NAMES. The Son of God is defined by John and historic trinitarians as the ARTICULATED VOICE of God.

How he or we might have a spiritual existence is unknown but Jesus began to be when Jesus was born of the SPERM of Abraham protected from all of the Civil-Military-Clergy vowed to murder the prophets who were inspired or breathed upon by the Spirit OF Christ or meaning MESSIAH.

Jesus said that all of the power of God's planned purpose was vested in him.

WORD is never a "people." Word or Logos is God's PLAN or rational method:

In the beginning was the PLAN and the PLAN was God since He is wholly (holy) Spirit

Polytheists who deny the value of the work of the MAN Jesus Christ have the usual spiritual dislexia and read:

In the beginning was the Jesus, and the Jesus was with God

This is part of the predestined PLAN of blasphemers who confess that the Spirit or Mind of God was TOO DUMB to just say that:

"The godhead is God, Jesus and Holy Spirit mother."

The GOD FAMILY did not dwell inside of Jesus: Theotes means "the divine nature".



Before the KJV especially the Geneva Bible understood that when God speaks a WORD it is an IT and not a HIM.

Ex. 18:6 Geneva And he SAID to Moses, I thy father in law Iethro am come to thee, and thy wife and her two sonnes with her.

Ex. 18:6 He sent word (dabar, logos) to Moses, "', your father-in-law Jethro, am coming to you and your wife."

John 1:1 In the beginning was THAT Word, and THAT Word was with God, and THAT Word was God.
John 1:2 This same was in the beginning with God.
John 1:3 All things were made by IT, and without IT was made nothing that was made.
John 1:4 In IT was life, and that life was the light of men.
John 1:5 And that LIGHT shineth in the darkenesse, and the darkenesse comprehended IT not


And Jesus said:

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

Jesus said that the Father breathed (spirit) without metron (meter?) and He SPAKE only what He heard. The Israelites refused to LISTEN to God without a mediator and rose up to PLAY meaning the musical idolatry of the Egyptian trinity. This was a sin beyond redemption and the Jews were blind and deaf until ANOTHER prophet like moses came.

Deut. 18:18 I will raise up a prophet among their countrymen like you, and I will put MY wordS (dabar, logos) in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him.

Acts 7:37 This is that Moses, which said unto the children of Israel, A PROPHET shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear.


Trinitarians who never read the early history DENY that Jesus the ONE GOD THE FATHER MADE TO BE both Lord and Christ came FULLY IN THE FLESH which they gladly confess to the ANTIchrist charge. They want Mary, like Cherokee Sal to Rubel Shelly, to be a questionable lady and therefore they make Jesus to be half-flesh and half-divine. Yea, living and existing even before God made the promise to Abraham. They are neo-gnostics even lusting to gain knowledge by a course in spiritual formation or lectio-divina having lost connection with the HEAD and therefore having nothing for sale.

The old historic 4th ave (st) church in Franklin just procured their first lady preaching intern. She denounces Scripture as old tradition.

Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 2nd, 2005, 6:45 am

December 21st, 2014, 4:03 am #27

Justice, it is incomprehensible to Donnie and Ken that anyone would believe that Jesus was the Word Who was with God and was God in the beginning (i.e., Jesus = the Word = God), just as it is incomprehensible to us that Donnie and Ken would believe that Jesus is not eternal.
[color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]False. Bill's equation (Jesus = the Word = God), that is. Let's briefly examine John 1:1,14:
[/color]<ol>[*][color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]Bill's equation is fallacious in that "the Word" (LOGOS) is mentioned -- but not Jesus.
[/color]</li>[*][color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]Bill's equation is fallacious in that "God" (THEOS) is mentioned -- but not Jesus.
[/color]</li>[*][color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]Bill's equation is fallacious in that Jesus of Nazareth (ref. 21 times in NT) was not in the beginning.
[/color]</li>[*][color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]Bill's equation is fallacious in that it was the "LOGOS" and not "THEOS" that became flesh.
[/color]</li>[*][color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]Bill's equation is fallacious: that Jesus became Jesus.[/color]</li>[/list]
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 2nd, 2005, 6:45 am

December 21st, 2014, 4:51 am #28

Old Testament: "And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you" (Ex. 3:14 KJV).

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

These two passages are more evidence that God and Jesus are one and the same. Both refer to themselves as "I AM," which means eternal, never-ending.

Jesus is simply God made manifest in the flesh. God/Jesus as the Word became flesh and dwelt among us.

Therefore, God = Jesus = the Word.
[color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times](1) "I AM" is a name, God's name. Otherwise, "I am hath sent me unto you" would be grammatically incorrect. Rather, God the Father sent Moses to the Israelites. It was not Jesus of Nazareth who sent Moses to the Israelites.

(2) Context, Bill, in John 8:51-59. Jesus was definitely speaking of both: (1) God the Father and (2) Jesus himself as the Son of God. "I AM" being in reference to God the Father, Jesus simply said: Before Abraham was "I AM"; and Jesus did NOT say: "I was before Abraham."

Bill, I think you really do understand the difference between:

(1) Before Abraham was "I AM" [God]
---------------- and -----------------
(2) I was before Abraham.
[/color]
Quote
Like
Share

Bill
Bill

December 21st, 2014, 4:56 am #29

[color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]False. Bill's equation (Jesus = the Word = God), that is. Let's briefly examine John 1:1,14:
[/color]<ol>[*][color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]Bill's equation is fallacious in that "the Word" (LOGOS) is mentioned -- but not Jesus.
[/color]</li>[*][color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]Bill's equation is fallacious in that "God" (THEOS) is mentioned -- but not Jesus.
[/color]</li>[*][color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]Bill's equation is fallacious in that Jesus of Nazareth (ref. 21 times in NT) was not in the beginning.
[/color]</li>[*][color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]Bill's equation is fallacious in that it was the "LOGOS" and not "THEOS" that became flesh.
[/color]</li>[*][color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]Bill's equation is fallacious: that Jesus became Jesus.[/color]</li>[/list]
Some people are unable to comprehend the fact that God has the supreme ability to manifest Himself in more than one way. Back to John 1: The Word was with God and the Word was God in the beginning, meaning that the Word not only was present with God, but the Word was also God at the same time. If the Word was God, then God and the Word are obviously identical. Then God/the Word manifested Himself as a human man, who took on the name "Jesus," or God/the Word in the flesh. So if the Word and God are identical, and if God as the Word became Jesus, then God, the Word, and Jesus are also identical, one and the same. Thus, the Word and Jesus are simply different manifestations of God. After all, Jesus said that he who had seen Him had seen the Father, and that He and the Father are ONE.

God/the Word/Jesus in heaven became Jesus the man on earth. So for the benefit of Donnie and everyone else in doubt, yes, "Jesus became Jesus," just in a different manifestation.

God = Jesus = the Word is a perfectly believable equation, IF you can refrain from placing physical limitations upon God and IF you can believe that with God, all things are possible. Unfortunately, not everyone has enough faith to do that.
Quote
Share

Bill
Bill

December 21st, 2014, 5:07 am #30

[color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times](1) "I AM" is a name, God's name. Otherwise, "I am hath sent me unto you" would be grammatically incorrect. Rather, God the Father sent Moses to the Israelites. It was not Jesus of Nazareth who sent Moses to the Israelites.

(2) Context, Bill, in John 8:51-59. Jesus was definitely speaking of both: (1) God the Father and (2) Jesus himself as the Son of God. "I AM" being in reference to God the Father, Jesus simply said: Before Abraham was "I AM"; and Jesus did NOT say: "I was before Abraham."

Bill, I think you really do understand the difference between:

(1) Before Abraham was "I AM" [God]
---------------- and -----------------
(2) I was before Abraham.
[/color]
God/Jesus used the SAME wording about Himself when He talked to Moses in the Old Testament and when He talked to the Jews in the New Testament: "I AM". Those two words mean the same thing on both occasions: "I am eternal. I am forever."
Quote
Share