Right Divider
Body part
The Bible explicitly describes that. The Bible does NOT say that the "logos spirit son" took over the man Jesus. That is a LIE that you keep repeating.
Fallacious logic again.
Some of us have many more than you.
Did God become flesh?
- Thread starter Jacob
- Start date
- Status
keypurr
Well-known member
Your blind RD
keypurr
Well-known member
Don't mean to confuse your more than you are Doc but you have no clue how deep my understanding of scripture goes. The true son at the creation is the express image of Heb 1:3. God is a spirit so his express image is also a spirit. God created a body to hold that spirit in a form we can accept in trying to understand him. Read Heb 10, see where a body was prepared for the true son that came from above. How was God in Jesus? The express image is a created FORM of God, not God himself, his logos a spirit with the fullness of his Father.
Right Divider
Body part
Another FALSE statement with bad "English". You're consistent.
Idolater
"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
I think we need to be careful when we try to understand Scripture. It isn't as if we have in Scripture the raw materials from which to construct the Christian faith. The Christian faith stands apart from Scripture. Scripture witnesses to the Christian faith. Especially in the earliest days of the Church, the only Scripture was the Septuagint LXX, the Old Testament, translated into the common language of the day, Greek.
The LXX is the Old Testament in the 73-book Christian Bible.
And the Scripture isn't the only source for what the Christian faith was, and because none of us believe that it has changed, what it still is today. The fact is that the Christian faith is specific, it is not amorphous, and its boundaries are not vague. The Apostles believed the Christian faith, and they taught the Christian faith, and the Church believed, practiced, and lived the Christian faith.
So evidence outside of Scripture ought to tell us about the Christian faith. It's not to say that sources outside of Scripture are on the same level of authority as Scripture, it's to say that both Scripture and other reliable sources are both testifying to the one Christian faith, and so long as what outside sources are saying doesn't conflict with Scripture, there's no justified reason to doubt them.
We also read in Scripture that of all the first Christians, there were some who knew what the Apostles taught much more intimately than the rest, they spent time with the Apostles, and the Apostles made them 'bishops' through the imposition of their own hands. So when we survey history, and we find bishops who are saying something, we are justified in placing more weight on their testimony than upon someone who was not as privy to the Apostles' teachings.
For example, Clement was a bishop who wrote a letter to the church in Corinth. Ignatius was a bishop who wrote to seven different churches. Clement lived during the Apostolic era, and it is possible even that he was mentioned in one of Paul's epistles. Ignatius was the third bishop of the church in Antioch, he didn't live very long after the Apostolic era. We don't take these letters as authoritatively as Scripture, not naked and by themselves, but they do testify to the one Christian faith, and we are justified in drawing from them as we integrate together all of the evidence into our understanding, not just of Scripture, of the one Christian faith.
Right Divider
Body part
There is so much wrong with that paragraph that it's just ridiculous.
Idolater
"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
lol. Thanks for 'checking in.'
Right Divider
Body part
Your statement above is wrong and stupid.... sorry to be the one to have to tell you.
Idolater
"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
No it isn't. The first New Testament book wasn't written until AD 50, and the whole New Testament wasn't finished until AD 70 at earliest. Besides which, the whole New Testament wasn't commonly available to the whole Church for many years after each of its books was written.
And if you mean instead, that there were the Old Testament scriptures available in Hebrew instead of in Greek, fine, I concede. That concerned only those of Israel who could read Hebrew, but not the Hellenistic Jews and the Pagans/Gentiles, who read Greek.
Right Divider
Body part
That is EXACTLY what I meant.
And you think that a lot of Pagans were interested in the OT?
And just how, EXACTLY, do you know that the Hellenistic Jews did not know Hebrew?
Idolater
"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
I only know that the Old Testament quotations in the New Testament are from the LXX, including in Hebrews; which was written to, Hebrews.
Right Divider
Body part
Some are and some are not.
7djengo7
This space intentionally left blank
In another thread, when I asked if, in a peculiar phrase you had written in a peculiar way, you were hinting at the number, 666, and at an association between that number, and Rome, your response was:
Which, of course, I don't know how to interpret other than to think that you must be coming from a preterist point of view, seeing as how you would associate Revelation's number of the beast with the Roman emperor, Nero, who died in A.D. 68.
But, if you say that the NT "wasn't finished until AD 70 at earliest", what do you say, specifically, about John's Revelation? Was it not the last NT book finished? And, if you agree that it was so, AND you think that "the whole New Testament wasn't finished until AD 70 at earliest", then to be logically consistent, you must conclude that Revelation, itself, "wasn't finished until AD 70 at earliest". But, of course, if Revelation wasn't finished until A.D. 70, or later, then your association of the emperor Nero with Revelation's number of the beast is, indeed, quite strange. Obviously, if Revelation was written after the A.D. 68 death of Nero, then, indeed, Revelation's prophecy involving 666, the number of the beast, is not a prophecy about Nero.
glorydaz
Well-known member
Rosenritter
New member
1 Timothy 3:16 KJV
(16) And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.
keypurr
Well-known member
I admit my "English" is bad but so were the English translators. I understand your not open to see things you fail to understand.
keypurr
Well-known member
Thank you, we both know that YHWH is the only true God.
keypurr
Well-known member
Lets look at again Doc.
Php 2:5 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:
See what was IN Jesus Christ.
Php 2:6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
It was a FORM of God, not God but a form of God. Now consider what the express image would be? Is not God a spirit? God (YHWH) is NOT a creation, but the express image is. YHWH gave this IMAGE the power of his fullness, IT/HE is a created godlike creature. Col 1:15, Heb 1:3
Php 2:7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was :
Php 2:8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.
That spirit became flesh in the body prepared for IT/HIM. That body was Jesus, they became one in pirit nd flesh. Jesus was anointed with the spirit son. Heb 10:5
Php 2:9 Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:
Php 2:10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;
Php 2:11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
YHWH made him Lord of all creation, but he is still in subjection to his GOD.
It goes much deeper Doc and Christ is very much our Lord, but only his Father is our God.
keypurr
Well-known member
Your first paragraph is in error.
Check out this site: https://www.thearamaicscriptures.com
The Greek was taken from the Aramaic. It is worth your exploring, the Eastern church has the oldest of m/s.
Last edited:
keypurr
Well-known member
One true God and one god (a god), a form of God was IN Jesus.
It came to him as a dove. That is when Jesus was anointed with the spirit son, logos, an became the Christ.
Christ means anointed of God, God anointed Jesus with the express image of himself. Aform of himself, firstborn of all creation.
Last edited:
- Status