:chuckle:Last I looked, became meant became (and I checked with Bill Clinton on this to make sure
:chuckle:Last I looked, became meant became (and I checked with Bill Clinton on this to make sure
This thread is a complete waste of time. You are basing your entire argument on one verse (Jn. 6:62) which you have misunderstood in a way that I have never seen before
Pete
This thread is a complete waste of time. You are basing your entire argument on one verse (Jn. 6:62) which you have misunderstood in a way that I have never seen before.
Then tell me exactly how I misrepresented what is said here:
"What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?" (Jn.6:62).
Here the pronoun "he" must refer to "the Son of Man" so before He came to earth He was in heaven as the Son of Man. You are unable to explain why the Lord Jesus would say such a thing if He wasn't Man before He came to the earth.
We can also see the same teaching here:
"And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven" (Jn.3:13).
The Lord Jesus came down from heaven as the Son of Man.
So tell me exactly how I misrepresented what is said in those two verses.
Then tell me exactly how I misrepresented what is said here:
"What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?" (Jn.6:62).
Here the pronoun "he" must refer to "the Son of Man" so before He came to earth He was in heaven as the Son of Man. You are unable to explain why the Lord Jesus would say such a thing if He wasn't Man before He came to the earth.
We can also see the same teaching here:
"And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven" (Jn.3:13).
The Lord Jesus came down from heaven as the Son of Man.
So tell me exactly how I misrepresented what is said in those two verses.