What does it mean ...

[John317]

OK, I understand totally where you are coming from. No problem, friend.

Just keep coming back and talking and sharing.

I have to go eat now and will be back later tonight. Thanks for a good exchange.

[BibleShockers]

>>>OK, let's try that and see if it makes any difference in the meaning,

I AM before Abraham's coming.

GINESTHAI - it means "coming to be." In terms of a human, we can say "his birth." No time is implied by the aorist infinitive but in common usage it often is future. To make the point, I am including below EVERY example of this particular verb in this mood:

Mt 20:26 But it shall not be so among you: but whosoever will be <1096> (5635) great among you, let him be your minister;

Mt 24:6 And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass <1096> (5635), but the end is not yet.

Mt 26:54 But how then shall the scriptures be fulfilled, that thus it must be <1096> (5635)?

Mr 1:17 And Jesus said unto them, Come ye after me, and I will make you to become <1096> (5635) fishers of men.

Mr 10:43 But so shall it not be among you: but whosoever will be <1096> (5635) great among you, shall be your minister:

Mr 10:44 And whosoever of you will be <1096> (5635) the chiefest, shall be servant of all.

Mr 13:7 And when ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars, be ye not troubled: for such things must needs be <1096> (5635); but the end shall not be yet.

Lu 3:22 And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice came <1096> (5635) from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased.

Lu 9:36 And when the voice was past <1096> (5635), Jesus was found alone. And they kept it close, and told no man in those days any of those things which they had seen.

Lu 21:9 But when ye shall hear of wars and commotions, be not terrified: for these things must first come to pass <1096> (5635); but the end is not by and by.

Lu 23:24 And Pilate gave sentence that it should be as <1096> (5635) they required.

Joh 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become <1096> (5635) the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

Joh 3:9 Nicodemus answered and said unto him, How can these things be <1096> (5635)?

Joh 5:6 When Jesus saw him lie, and knew that he had been now a long time in that case, he saith unto him, Wilt thou be made <1096> (5635) whole?

Joh 8:58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was <1096> (5635), I am.

Joh 9:27 He answered them, I have told you already, and ye did not hear: wherefore would ye hear it again? will ye also be <1096> (5635) his disciples?

Joh 13:19 Now I tell you before it come <1096> (5635), that, when it is come to pass, ye may believe that I am he.

Joh 14:29 And now I have told you before it come to pass <1096> (5635), that, when it is come to pass, ye might believe.

Ac 1:22 Beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be ordained <1096> (5635) to be a witness with us of his resurrection.

Ac 4:28 For to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done <1096> (5635).

Ac 7:39 To whom our fathers would not obey <1096> (5635), but thrust him from them, and in their hearts turned back again into Egypt,

Ac 10:40 Him God raised up the third day, and shewed <1096> (5635) him openly;

Ac 19:21 After these things were ended, Paul purposed in the spirit, when he had passed through Macedonia and Achaia, to go to Jerusalem, saying, After I have been <1096> (5635) there, I must also see Rome.

Ac 20:16 For Paul had determined to sail by Ephesus, because he would not spend the time in Asia: for he hasted, if it were possible for him, to be <1096> (5635) at Jerusalem the day of Pentecost.

Ac 22:17 And it came to pass, that, when I was come again to Jerusalem, even while I prayed in the temple, I was <1096> (5635) in a trance;

Ac 26:28 Then Agrippa said unto Paul, Almost thou persuadest me to be <1096> (5635) a Christian.

Ac 26:29 And Paul said, I would to God, that not only thou, but also all that hear me this day, were <1096> (5635) both almost, and altogether such as I am, except these bonds.

Ac 27:16 And running under a certain island which is called Clauda, we had much work to come by <1096> (5635) the boat:

Ac 27:29 Then fearing lest we should have fallen upon rocks, they cast four anchors out of the stern, and wished <1096> (5635) for the day.

Ro 4:18 Who against hope believed in hope, that he might become <1096> (5635) the father of many nations, according to that which was spoken, So shall thy seed be.

Ro 7:4 Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married <1096> (5635) to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.

1Co 7:21 Art thou called being a servant? care not for it: but if thou mayest be made <1096> (5635) free, use it rather.

Php 1:13 So that my bonds in Christ are <1096> (5635) manifest in all the palace, and in all other places;

Php 3:21 Who shall change our vile body, that it may be <1096> (5635) fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself.

1Th 1:7 So that ye were <1096> (5635) ensamples to all that believe in Macedonia and Achaia.

Re 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass <1096> (5635); and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:

Re 4:1 After this I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me; which said, Come up hither, and I will shew thee things which must be <1096> (5635) hereafter.

Re 22:6 And he said unto me, These sayings are faithful and true: and the Lord God of the holy prophets sent his angel to shew unto his servants the things which must shortly be done <1096> (5635).

Can you see how so many instances (if not all) refer to future events?

>>>I AM before Abraham was.

NO. The aorist infinitive will not support "was."

>>>I AM before Abraham was born.

Since "I am" has time, the aorist infinitive must FOLLOW.

>>>Any significant difference? I fail to see it. If you see it, please point it out.

The present verb EIMI dictates the perspective. Though Greek has no "tense" per se, the aspect of the present verb says that it is speaking about the past, the present and into the forseeable future. "I am" is present. Hence GINESTHAI must follow suit: "I am **before** (accented by word order) Abraham's birth."

>>>Three questions:

1) Why did the Jews pick up rocks to stone Jesus if all he was meaning was that Abraham looked forward to Jesus' time?

I don't answer why questions. They did, that much I know.

>>>2) Did not the Jews claim that they wanted to kill Jesus because he was claiming to be equal with God?

**John** made that claim:

Joh 5:18 Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.

To my thinking, saying that God is one's father is NOT a claim to equality. Don't you claim that God is your father?

>>>3) Do you not see a connection between the "I AM" of John 5: 58 and Exodus 3: 14. (See LXX at Exodus 3: 14 and compare with Greek of NT.)

NONE. Ex 3:14 in Greek reads like this:

14 And God spoke to Moses, saying, I am THE BEING; and he said, Thus shall ye say to the children of Israel, THE BEING has sent me to you.

The capitalized words are "hO WN" - "the being."

Bill

[BibleShockers]

>>>OK, yes, those are good verses, but I think I can give you several dozen more like them, proving without question that he lived before He was born as a human.

While I've been around the block a few times, I still learn something new every day!

>>>1) Why do you think this baby did not have a human father but had the Holy Spirit as His father? Mary was a virgin-- never having had sexual intercourse with a man.

"spirit" is to me a bogus term. "Holy Spirit" was not the father of Jesus - God was - possibly by intercourse with Miriam - the text may be euphemistic. But whatever, Jesus was born of [a woman who was] the seed of David, yes? But his flesh did not descend from David but was "from above." So, whatever all of this means, he still begins in 3 BCE.

>>>2) What does Luke 1: 43 mean when Elizabeth calls Mary the "mother of my Lord"?

Jesus was uniquely generated and was destined to become lord.

>>>3) Why is the baby called "Christ the Lord" from birth? (Luke 2: 11)

John also was born with a mission. So was Jeremiah.

>>>4) If He is not really the Lord and if He did not know from experience what God was like before coming to this world, how do you know He knows what God is like? What if "God" is only telling Jesus something that is not true?

The idea is that God indwelled Jesus by his breath:

Ac 10:38 How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.

>>5) If God only sent a proxy and someone made for dying, how does that show us that God Himself is loving?

I've wondered about the concept of a "cost" to God in givin his son and that is why I wonder if he isn't understood to have impregnated Miriam himself.

Lu 1:35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost [breath] shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.

That sounds a bit like sex to me.

Bill Ross

[John317]

John3:17-- >>>1) Why do you think this baby did not have a human father but had the Holy Spirit as His father? Mary was a virgin-- never having had sexual intercourse with a man.

Quote:

Bill Ross-- "spirit" is to me a bogus term. "Holy Spirit" was not the father of Jesus - God was - possibly by intercourse with Miriam - the text may be euphemistic. But whatever, Jesus was born of [a woman who was] the seed of David, yes? But his flesh did not descend from David but was "from above." So, whatever all of this means, he still begins in 3 BCE.

So, then, you believe that God the Father had sex with Mary?

As you study the New Testament about the Holy Spirit, what do you think it's saying? Are you saying you don't believe the translation "Holy Spirit" is correct?

[BibleShockers]

>>>.......As you study the New Testament about the Holy Spirit, what do you think it's saying? Are you saying you don't believe the translation "Holy Spirit" is correct?

In 1611, the translators opted for "Holy Ghost." The word "ghost" was Saxon for "breath." The word "spirit" was coined from the Latin word for breath: "spiritus."

This all goes back to Genesis:

Ge 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

The idea of "spirit" as some immaterial matter is very recent and post-biblical.

Bill Ross

[John317]

>>>OK, let's try that and see if it makes any difference in the meaning,

I AM before Abraham's coming.

GINESTHAI - it means "coming to be." In terms of a human, we can say "his birth." No time is implied by the aorist infinitive but in common usage it often is future.

The word is 2nd Aorist middle infinitive, the same as used in John 1: 12.

Notice above that "no time is implied by the aorist infinitive". This is very important.

The infinitive is not a mood. That is where you are making your mistake here. It has no necessary reference to time. The text books say, "The infinitive does not have within itself any significance of time."

Therefore, it is not speaking of any specific reference point in time. It is merely talking about the time of Abraham's birth, when he came into existence.

Unless a person has had quite a bit of training and practice in translation, it would be wise to accept the overwhelming number of translations by professionals and the lexicons, instead of wasting a lot of time trying to figure out how to translate a word differently than the way it is given in all the authoritative sources.

In the case of this word, Ginesthai, for instance, all of the translations render it basically the same way. Here in John 8: 58, it means "came into existence."

Give me the name of a translation that gives it as you believe "ginesthai" should read in this verse. Here again are some of the best translations of that verse:

1) Young's Literal, "Jesus said to them, `Verily, verily, I say to you, Before Abraham's coming -- I am.'"

2) John Darby's Translation: Jesus said to them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.

3) New American Standard: Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am."

4) Amplified Version: Jesus replied, I assure you, most solemnly I tell you, before Abraham was born, I AM.

5) New King James Version: Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.”

6) New English Standard Version: Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am."

7) New International Version: "I tell you the truth," Jesus answered, "before Abraham was born, I am!"

Do you believe all the above translations are invalid and unacceptable grammatically?

[John317]

>>>.......As you study the New Testament about the Holy Spirit, what do you think it's saying? Are you saying you don't believe the translation "Holy Spirit" is correct?

In 1611, the translators opted for "Holy Ghost." The word "ghost" was Saxon for "breath." The word "spirit" was coined from the Latin word for breath: "spiritus."

This all goes back to Genesis:

Ge 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

The idea of "spirit" as some immaterial matter is very recent and post-biblical.

Bill Ross

You're still not telling me what you believe the Holy Spirit is or how you believe it should be translated and understood. Who is the Holy Spirit in the whole New Testament, for instance, in verses such as Acts 1: 8 and Acts 5: 3,4?

Are you indwelt and led by the Holy Spirit? Have you been born of the Spirit?

[John317]

JOHN3:17-->>>In John 8: 58, Jesus actually and literally said, "Before Abraham was, I AM."

[John317]

John3:17-- >>>Do you believe in Ellen White's writings at all?

Quote:

Bill Ross-- As I tell my sons, I don't believe in anything that you have to ask "Do you believe in...?" To the degree that evidence supports her understandings I accept them, but no further.

Would you say the same thing if someone asked you, "Do you believe in God?"? Or "do you believe in the Bible?"

How much of her writings have you read, and are you enjoying them? I hope you are.

My own personal favorites are Steps To Christ and The Desire of Ages.

[John317]

JOHN3:17-- >>>The divine nature of Christ was not tempted, true.

Quote:

BILL ROSS-- Is there any scripture on which you base this or does it just flow out of Trinitarian assumptions?

Wondering if you have read very much from the viewpoint of Trinitarians? For instance, have you read much in Systematic Theologies?

How about the book, 28 Fundamental Beliefs of the Seventh-day Adventist Church?

It says in various places in the Bible that God cannot be tempted with evil. That would mean that the divine nature of Christ was not tempted with evil. James 1: 13

But Jesus was also fully human, and as a man Jesus was tempted in all points just as you and I are. Heb. 4: 15.

Quote:

BILL ROSS-- With the exception of not having to contend with sinful flesh.

He inherited the same nature that Mary inherited. His humanity was related to David and Abraham and the fallen Adam. He dealt with real temptations. He was of the seed of David; He was the Branch. He was the "Son of man," or Son of Adam. He loved that name because of what it means for mankind, for all who put their hope and faith in Him as Savior and Lord (Owner, Master).

Compare Hebrews 4:15 and James 1: 14, 15 and Matt. 4: 1-11.

[John317]

JOHN3:17-- >>>Here's the definition of a phrase: "A phrase is a group of related words that is used as single part of speech and DOES NOT contain a verb and its subject." (English Grammar and Composition, p. 69.)

"The great God" does not qualify as a phrase at all, and therefore it is not a phrase of any kind.

Quote:

BILL ROSS-- Yes it does. The words are related by tradition and form a single substantive.

Documentary evidence? References for this view?

However, even if we agree that it is a single substantive-- for which idea I see no evidence-- it would not change the significance of the sentence. The rule of grammar does not state that if one of the personal nouns (in this case, "our great God") is a single substantive, then it refers to two different people. Both God and Savior refer to one person, Jesus Christ.

All the text books for teaching the language say so, as well as the vast majority and the best of modern translations.

What shall we do-- tell the professors and all the thousands of professional translators that they do not know what they are talking about?

Have you studied or heard of Rotherham's Emphasized Bible? That is one of the best and more accurate translations of both the Hebrew and the Greek.

I generally use about 5 translations in my personal study, and it is one of them. Wonderful work.

[John317]

JOHN3:17--- >>They are of the same case, and are separated by the word "and". Therefore, by the rules of Greek grammar, they refer to the same person.

Quote:

Bill Ross- But the phrase is a substantive not a noun.

At first you said it was "a phrase." Then you said it was a title. Now you say it is a substantive and not a noun.

It is certainly a noun, but it really doesn't matter. Even if we were to say it is a substantive, it doesn't change the way it should be translated.

Have you ever read any text on Koine grammar which says that if the word is a substantive, then Granville Sharps rule does not apply?

Is "our great God" a singular substantive, in your view? In other words, does "our great God" refer to more than one person?

Read how the text books describe the rule of grammar:

>>>Here is the rule as stated in a Greek grammar text used in universities where Greek grammar is taught by the best experts in Koine Greek:

"With nouns connected by kai. The following rule by Granville Sharp of a century back still proves to be true: 'When the copulative kai connects two nouns of the same case, if the article ho or any of its cases precedes the first of the said nouns or participles, and is not repeated before the second noun or participle, the latter always relates to the same person that is expressed or described by the first noun or participle; i.e., it denotes a farther description of the first-named person.'

tou kuriou kai soteeros Ieesou Christou

Of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. 2 Peter 2:20

[John317]

JAMES3:17-- >>>The article here indicates that Jesus is both Lord and Savior. So in 2 Peter 1: 1 tou theou hmov kai soteeros Ieesou christou mean that Jesus is our God and Savior.

Quote:

BILL ROSS-- I'm glad you brought this up. Notice that this sentence also uses a technical term: "the righteousness of God":

1 ¶ Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ:

So it is speaking of the faith (the righteousness of God) and our savior. Two distinct things.

A phrase (substantive) + a noun is NOT the same thing as a noun + a noun.

Let's take this nice and slow and not rush through it.

Are not "tou theou" and "soteeros Ieesou Christou" all genitive nouns? In other words, are those nouns not both of the same case? And are they not joined by the conjunction kai?

Do not those two nouns share a single definite article which precedes the first substantive but not the second?

Are not "pistin" and "dikaiosuvee" both of a difference case than the "God" and "Savior Jesus Christ"? Are they not accusative and dative, in that order?

That being the situation, the "faith" and "the righteousness" have nothing whatsoever to do the application of the rule, and consequently do not change anything.

It is talking about the righteousness that is possessed by One person, namely, Jesus Christ. The text is saying, then, that Jesus Christ is both our God and Savior. He it is who possesses this righteousness, or right-doing-ness.

This righteousness He offers to us as a gift when we accept Him for who He is, our Savior and Lord and God, just as Thomas did.

Jesus said, "If you do not believe that I AM, you will die in your sins." John 8: 24.

[John317]

JOHN3:17-- >>>Do you believe that Jesus existed before He was born as a human?

Quote:

BILL ROSS--- No.

Please explain 1 Cor. 10: 9. There it says that the children Israel tempted Christ in the wilderness and were therefore destroyed by serpents.

The majority of ancient Greek manuscripts, as well as the oldest manuscript of that text, reads "Christ," not "Lord." See Critical Text as well as Majority Text, especially the evidence of ms. P46, which is dated to 200 AD.

Who does Ps. 106: 14 say the children of Israel tested in the desert?

Read the story in Numbers 21: 6 ff.

Then compare John 3: 13-16.

Who does Jesus mean when He speaks of "He who came down from heaven"? Is He not speaking of Himself?

[John317]

JOHN3:17--- >>>If you do not believe that Jesus Christ existed in any way before being born as a human, what do you do with such texts as John 17: 5; 16: 28; 1: 2, 10; Phil. 2: 5-8; Col. 1: 16; and Hebrews 1: 2?

Quote:

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

This says that God had a glory laid up before the world.

Echo-- imperfect indicative active, meaning to have, to hold, to possess. It does not say that God laid glory up before the world. Christ says, plainly, "glory which I possessed and held with you."

The words "with you" refer to spatial proximity. Compare John 8: 38.

Check out the meaning of these words in any standard Greek-English Lexicon.

When you say it means "God had a glory laid up before the world," you are using words that mean something altogether different from what the text actually says. The text has Jesus saying to God, "the glory which I possessed or held or had with you before the world began."

[John317]

....Your turn... what do you make of this?:

Mt 1:16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

Bill Ross

Are you asking about this because it appears to be saying that Jesus was born of Joseph?

If so, that is most certainly not what the text says. It is saying Jesus was born of Mary. How do we know? Because the word "whom" is feminine case, the same case as "Mary", and proving that it is talking about Mary and not about her husband Joseph, which, of course, is in the masculine case. Extremely important difference.

[Fausto]

Yeah, since when do men give birth?

[BibleShockers]

>>>The word is 2nd Aorist middle infinitive, the same as used in John 1: 12.

Right. And note that it is not translated "power to became."

12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

>>>Notice above that "no time is implied by the aorist infinitive". This is very important.

Right. Many people see aorist and think it maps to a past tense, something I call "the aorist fallacy," because it **usually** refers to an action in the past. But this construct seems to me to **usually** refer to an action in the future. But the verb itself has no time, as you say.

>>>The infinitive is not a mood. That is where you are making your mistake here. It has no necessary reference to time.

I think you are referring to "tense" rather than "mood."

>>>The text books say, "The infinitive does not have within itself any significance of time."

Therefore, it is not speaking of any specific reference point in time. It is merely talking about the time of Abraham's birth, when he came into existence.

Or when he comes to be in the future, since Jesus, presently, is before that evernt. Abraham will be born again.

>>>Unless a person has had quite a bit of training and practice in translation, it would be wise to accept the overwhelming number of translations by professionals and the lexicons, instead of wasting a lot of time trying to figure out how to translate a word differently than the way it is given in all the authoritative sources.

Sorry, I disagree. "I'm from Missouri."

>>>In the case of this word, Ginesthai, for instance, all of the translations render it basically the same way. Here in John 8: 58, it means "came into existence."

You are assigning it tense. That is incorrect as you just labored to show!

>>>Give me the name of a translation that gives it as you believe "ginesthai" should read in this verse. Here again are some of the best translations of that verse:

1) Young's Literal, "Jesus said to them, `Verily, verily, I say to you, Before Abraham's coming -- I am.'"

What a ridiculous rendering. What justification do you provide for putting "I am" at the end of the sentence?! That is just goofy! Other than that, the rendering is fine.

>>>2) John Darby's Translation: Jesus said to them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.

"Was" is not a valid translation for GINESQAI.

>>>3) New American Standard: Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am."

Ditto.

>>>4) Amplified Version: Jesus replied, I assure you, most solemnly I tell you, before Abraham was born, I AM.

Ditto.

>>>5) New King James Version: Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.”

Ditto.

>>>6) New English Standard Version: Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am."

Ditto.

>>>7) New International Version: "I tell you the truth," Jesus answered, "before Abraham was born, I am!"

Ditto. All Trinitarian Bibles are manipulated.

>>>Do you believe all the above translations are invalid and unacceptable grammatically?

No. Nor should you. You showed that "was" is not a correct rendering of GINESQAI and you know yourself that you don't replicate Greek word order directly.

My rendering is the correct one:

"I am before Abraham is born."

Bill Ross

[BibleShockers]

>>>You're still not telling me what you believe the Holy Spirit is or how you believe it should be translated and understood.

First of all, the capitals don't belong. And in many cases, the definite article does not belong.

The ancients believed that the breath was an intelligent organ, not just a physical medium. This goes back to the time when God breathed into the clay statue of himself the breath of life and man became a self-aware person. Breath was conceived as life giving, self-awareness giving and the divine spark.

RUASCH and PNEUMA should in every case be translated "breath."

>>>Who is the Holy Spirit in the whole New Testament, for instance, in verses such as Acts 1: 8 and Acts 5: 3,4?

Notice a couple of things:

* when the breath came, it made this sound: "whoosh." It was the sound of a rushing, mighty wind. Moving air. It was the divine breath.

* when the breath entered them, it gave them "utterance." Utterance here is the ability to speak. That is what breath does. And they spoke in languages. Again, this all the function of breath.

I read Acts 5:3 a bit differently... I read it like this:

3 But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to fake holy breath, and to keep back part of the price of the land?

>>>Are you indwelt and led by the Holy Spirit? Have you been born of the Spirit?

There is no "the Holy Spirit."

I was very religious until I finally understood "the Bible."

Bill Ross

[BibleShockers]

>>>Would you say the same thing if someone asked you, "Do you believe in God?"? Or "do you believe in the Bible?"

Yes.

>>>How much of her writings have you read, and are you enjoying them? I hope you are.

My own personal favorites are Steps To Christ and The Desire of Ages.

I glanced at some of her writings once, and that is all, and I didn't enjoy them.

Bill Ross

[BibleShockers]

>>>He inherited the same nature that Mary inherited. His humanity was related to David and Abraham and the fallen Adam. He dealt with real temptations. He was of the seed of David; He was the Branch. He was the "Son of man," or Son of Adam. He loved that name because of what it means for mankind, for all who put their hope and faith in Him as Savior and Lord (Owner, Master).

Compare Hebrews 4:15 and James 1: 14, 15 and Matt. 4: 1-11.

Paul taught that sin lives in the muscles. So he referred to the flesh as "sinful flesh." Jesus is said to not have that, but came in the "likeness of" sinful flesh. But his flesh was from above.

However, I believe we are led to understand that Jesus sinned. He was beset with moral weakness and can thus sympathize with sinners. But, he died to sin and is now free of it forever.

That is how I read it.

Bill Ross

[BibleShockers]

>>>...It is talking about the righteousness that is possessed by One person, namely, Jesus Christ. The text is saying, then, that Jesus Christ is both our God and Savior. He it is who possesses this righteousness, or right-doing-ness. This righteousness He offers to us as a gift when we accept Him for who He is, our Savior and Lord and God, just as Thomas did.

Jesus said, "If you do not believe that I AM, you will die in your sins." John 8: 24.

So in your view, the "righteousness" here is Jesus' right-doing-ness, which Jesus gives as a gift when we accept him as savior and God? This is not the Biblical gospel. This is the modern evangelical gospel, but not the Biblical one.

The "righteousness of God" is not "the right-doing-ness of Jesus." It is a technical term for justification on the basis of faith, and it is God that justifies, not Jesus:

Ro 1:17 For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by [on account of] faith.

Ro 3:5 But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God unrighteous who taketh vengeance? (I speak as a man)

Ro 3:21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;

Ro 3:22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:

Ro 10:3 For they being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.

2Co 5:21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

Jas 1:20 For the wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God.

2Pe 1:1 Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ:

Note that God is the justifier, not Jesus:

Ro 8:33 Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God’s elect? It is God that justifieth.

Jesus justifies no one except God:

Ro 3:26 To declare, I say, at this time his [God's own] righteousness: that he [God] might be just[ified], ***and the justifier*** of him which believeth in Jesus.

1Jo 1:9 If we confess our sins, he [God] is faithful and just[ified] to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

So "the righteousness of God" is NOT the "right-doing-ness of Jesus." Once you get that, you can see what Peter was talking about.

2Pe 1:1 ¶ Simeon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to those who did obtain a like precious faith with us in:

* the righteousness of God (justification by God on account of faith)

* and Saviour Jesus Christ (believing God raised him from the dead)

Bill Ross

[BibleShockers]

>>>Please explain 1 Cor. 10: 9. There it says that the children Israel tempted Christ in the wilderness and were therefore destroyed by serpents.

The majority of ancient Greek manuscripts, as well as the oldest manuscript of that text, reads "Christ," not "Lord." See Critical Text as well as Majority Text, especially the evidence of ms. P46, which is dated to 200 AD.

Who does Ps. 106: 14 say the children of Israel tested in the desert?

Read the story in Numbers 21: 6 ff.

Then compare John 3: 13-16.

I think Paul or some copyist had a senior moment.

>>>Who does Jesus mean when He speaks of "He who came down from heaven"? Is He not speaking of Himself?

The best sense I can make of this verse is that it alludes to Daniel:

Daniel 7:

13 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.

14 And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.

This, I should think, should be located in time at the ascencion. A human goes through the clouds to the realm of the gods in the sky where God, a manlike deity, is presiding as king on his throne. They lead him to God, and God gives him a kingdom.

So why does the text say that the son of man is in the sky?

Joh 3:13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.

Joh 3:14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:

Some think that this is post-ascencion commentary, rather than part of the saying of Jesus. The only reading I can see that makes contextual sense is the idea that Jesus was lifted up into the sky, then descended into the grave, then ascended up to God in the sky. He "came down from the sky" after being lifted up.

It is a weak reading. I told you that this was one of the verses that "cloud my sky" because it is not a crisp reading.

But if Jesus were God, then came to be a man and then returned to God as a subject, that would hardly mean he was "highly rewarded for his obedience." The "son of man" is a human (that is what the term means) and he is led to God who gives him a kingdom. I'll live with my reading until I see something that makes more sense than it does.

Bill Ross

[BibleShockers]

>>>Echo-- imperfect indicative active, meaning to have, to hold, to possess. It does not say that God laid glory up before the world. Christ says, plainly, "glory which I possessed and held with you."

Lu 19:20 And another came, saying, Lord, behold, here is thy pound, which I have <2192> (5707) kept laid up in a napkin:

Well Jesus has had glory laid up with God until the hour came to glorify him:

Da 7:14 And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.

>>>The words "with you" refer to spatial proximity. Compare John 8: 38.

Um, you can't limit semantic range to a single example. This is a preposition that can mean many things depending on context. For example, here it means something like "to follow suit" or even "be like":

Php 1:23 For I am in a strait betwixt two, having a desire to depart, and to be **with** Christ; which is far better:

>>>Check out the meaning of these words in any standard Greek-English Lexicon.

I have. I suggest you do the same.

>>>When you say it means "God had a glory laid up before the world," you are using words that mean something altogether different from what the text actually says. The text has Jesus saying to God, "the glory which I possessed or held or had with you before the world began."

Actually it says:

"the glory I had prior to the KOSMOS [world? lost community?], to be beside you."

Think of an inheritance. You can have it before you get it:

Eph 1:11 In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will:

Eph 1:14 Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory.

Jesus is looking forward to the joy set before him - for which he endured - to be beside God. Not by a seizing but by obedience.

Bill Ross

[BibleShockers]

>>>Are you asking about this because it appears to be saying that Jesus was born of Joseph?

No. Because it says Jesus was born.

Jesus was "born of a woman" who was the descendent of David.

Let's do this... rather than grab prooftexts willy nilly, can you show an explicit teaching in the Bible about who Jesus was prior to being born? The JWs divine him to be Michael, which the Bible does not say. Trinitarians think him to be God, which the Bible does not say. So who was he before he was reincarnated?

Bill Ross