Sonny Posted June 20, 2011 Author Posted June 20, 2011 Jesus Christ is not a metaphor! John did not say that Christ was a metaphor! [Words deleted.] Quote
miz3 Posted June 20, 2011 Posted June 20, 2011 I did not lie. Jesus Christ is not a metaphor. The Living Water is not a metaphor. The Living Water is real. The Living Water is Jesus Christ. The Living Water is NOT H2O! That is exactly what the Bible says. No metaphors. Just Fact! Quote
miz3 Posted June 20, 2011 Posted June 20, 2011 Sonny, [Words deleted here by the moderator.] I only quoted Scripture and commented on it. I know you do not like my comment but I am free, like you, to comment. Whether we like each others comments is not relevant. [Words deleted by the moderator.] Quote
Administrators Tom Wetmore Posted June 20, 2011 Administrators Posted June 20, 2011 Metaphor - "a literary figure of speech that uses an image, story or tangible thing to represent a less tangible thing or some intangible quality or idea. For example: "Her eyes were glistening jewels". Metaphor may also be used for any rhetorical figures of speech that achieve their effects via association, comparison or resemblance. In this broader sense, antithesis, hyperbole, metonymy and simile would all be considered types of metaphor." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphor Figure of Speech - "the use of a word or words diverging from its usual meaning. It can also be a special repetition, arrangement or omission of words with literal meaning, or a phrase with a specialized meaning not based on the literal meaning of the words in it, as in idiom, metaphor, simile, hyperbole, personification or alliteration. Figures of speech often provide emphasis, freshness of expression, or clarity." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Figure_of_speech Simile - "a figure of speech that directly compares two different things by employing the words 'like', 'as', or 'than'.[1] Even though both similes and metaphors are forms of comparison, similes indirectly compare the two ideas and allow them to remain distinct in spite of their similarities, whereas metaphors compare two things directly. For instance, a simile that compares a person with a bullet would go as follows: 'Chris was a record-setting runner as fast as a speeding bullet.' A metaphor might read something like, 'When Chris ran, he was a speeding bullet racing along the track.'" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simile Idiom - "an expression, word, or phrase that has a figurative meaning that is comprehended in regard to a common use of that expression that is separate from the literal meaning or definition of the words of which it is made." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiom And finally: Literal and figurative language - "a distinction in traditional systems for analyzing language. Literal language refers to words that do not deviate from their defined meaning. Figurative language refers to words, and groups of words, that exaggerate or alter the usual meanings of the component words. Figurative language may involve analogy to similar concepts or other contexts, and may involve exaggerations.These alterations result in figures of speech." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literal_and_figurative_language Quote "Absurdity reigns and confusion makes it look good." "Sinless perfection is such a shallow goal." "I love God only as much as the person I love the least." *Forgiveness is always good news. And that is the gospel truth. (And finally, the ideas expressed above are solely my person views and not that of any organization with which I am associated.)
Musicman1228 Posted June 20, 2011 Posted June 20, 2011 What is it about recognizing the authority of the Words of Jesus Christ that some of you find so unpalatable? If Jesus Christ is the Living Water then it is His words that make that water flow. Do you disagree that Jesus was constantly referring to His words as truth, and the necessity of believing in them? How do we KNOW Jesus without knowing His words? Yet many here on this forum, and on others, that insist that all we have to do is believe that Jesus is Christ and that is enough; don't bother me with what He said. How many times did the words that Jesus spoke to the Jewish leadership cause them consternation? Did not Jesus say that His words would be a stumbling block to some and stepping stones to another? The Pharisee's had a particular way of looking at Scripture. Jesus upset them because He looked at Scripture in a unique and different way. To the Pharisee's the words of Jesus caused them to stumble, because His way did not agree with their way. Is that not what is happening right now on the very forum? ALL I have suggested (along with Dr. Rich and others) is that we use the words of Jesus as the final arbiter of Truth. Yet when we do this we are castigated for even suggesting such a radical method for finding truth. Why? Are not the words and teachings of the Son of God, Jesus Christ, of greater importance than the words and teachings of anyone else? Should not those words be placed above the words of mere fallible human beings, however good you think they might be? Should we not hold the words of those who claim to be apostles and prophets of God to the highest standard possible for TRUTH? If not, the only possible alternative is to live in ignorance of the truth, so that we can later claim that God can't hold us accountable for that which we didn't know. The only possible downside to doing this would be that some part of the beliefs you now hold to be true could (possibly) be shown to be in error. But if that belief (those beliefs) ARE in error is it not important to know that they are, thereby finding out what is the real truth? Remember, we will all be held accountable for truth that we had the opportunity to learn, but did not. Truth is never harmed by testing. Quote
Moderators Gerr Posted June 20, 2011 Moderators Posted June 20, 2011 Originally Posted By: Gerry Cabalo That satisfied the demands of the law! SUBSTITUTION! No that's heresy! That's RC. The law demands YOUR death, Gerry. Your life must die. Christ isn't the sinner. The law is not content with another's death, especially if they are sinless. Your gospel is unethical - hence it makes God go against His own law. You are throwing the law out. You are making it void! You reject substitution and call it heresy & RC. Yet where is the Bible evidence? Yeah, you reject substitution and then claim this, "By His obedience to all the commandments of God, Christ wrought out a redemption for man. This was not done by going out of Himself to another, but by taking humanity into Himself. Thus Christ gave to humanity an existence out of Himself." Now, how does Christ take humanity into himself? That's just ANOTHER way of saying He is man's substitute!!! And that last sentence, "To bring humanity into Christ, to bring the fallen race into oneness with divinity, is the work of redemption," is exactly the good news I have been trying to tell you - restoration, and not merely justification! Unethical gospel? Me voiding the law? Donlt make me laugh! First, you have repeatedly charged me with legalism, and now you say I am antinomian? Friend, make up your mind! Quote
Members rudywoofs (Pam) Posted June 20, 2011 Members Posted June 20, 2011 Yet many here on this forum, and on others, that insist that all we have to do is believe that Jesus is Christ and that is enough; don't bother me with what He said. I haven't seen that said on this forum. Even Satan believes that Jesus is the Christ. I do not think that people are against reading and living by the words of Jesus. But you're kind of limiting yourself if you only want to believe the words of Jesus via His eyewitness's accounts. Everyone sees/hears things differently, and I would suppose that the accounts would vary according to who is relating what was seen and/or heard. If you only want to believe eyewitness accounts, then don't listen to sermons, don't attend theological seminaries, don't sing (no accounts of Jesus singing), don't try and explain anything in Revelation because that was written after Jesus' ascent to heaven...no eyewitness account there of anything that Jesus did or said. I suppose you could get on okay with quoting only the words of Jesus as recorded in the Bible by eyewitnesses, but geez...that would get awfully boring after awhile. Quote Pam Meddle Not In the Affairs of Dragons; for You Are Crunchy and Taste Good with Ketchup. If we all sang the same note in the choir, there'd never be any harmony. Funny, isn't it, how we accept Grace for ourselves and demand justice for others?
Dr. Rich Posted June 21, 2011 Posted June 21, 2011 Originally Posted By: Musicman1228 Yet many here on this forum, and on others, that insist that all we have to do is believe that Jesus is Christ and that is enough; don't bother me with what He said. I haven't seen that said on this forum. Even Satan believes that Jesus is the Christ. I do not think that people are against reading and living by the words of Jesus. But you're kind of limiting yourself if you only want to believe the words of Jesus via His eyewitness's accounts. Everyone sees/hears things differently, and I would suppose that the accounts would vary according to who is relating what was seen and/or heard. If you only want to believe eyewitness accounts, then don't listen to sermons, don't attend theological seminaries, don't sing (no accounts of Jesus singing), don't try and explain anything in Revelation because that was written after Jesus' ascent to heaven...no eyewitness account there of anything that Jesus did or said. I suppose you could get on okay with quoting only the words of Jesus as recorded in the Bible by eyewitnesses, but geez...that would get awfully boring after awhile. Clearly, if Eve had refused to listen to the words of the snake/Satan, then it is highly unlikely that she would have eaten from the tree of good and evil. Satan has a way of saying things that actually seem right and many of them were/are. Satan told eve that God would not kill her and he was right, because God did NOT kill her on the day she ate from the tree. Satan also told her that she would be like God, knowing good and evil and that too was correct. [Words deleted here by the moderator.] This is why Jesus talked in metaphors and parables (See Matthew 13:10-13) because while they see and hear sound, they do not understand the real truth. Here is the thing: IF you want to make grape juice you must use grapes. Don't use grape flavor with corn syrup. (Matthew 7:16) If you want the truth, then go to those who heard it from the lips of Jesus and had the power of the Holy Spirit to remember these words. (John 14:26) From their writings only, did Jesus pray for the few of us who abide in those same words, [Words deleted here by the moderator.] Quote
Sonny Posted June 21, 2011 Author Posted June 21, 2011 ...where is the Bible evidence? Yeah, you reject substitution and then claim this, "By His obedience to all the commandments of God, Christ wrought out a redemption for man. This was not done by going out of Himself to another, but by taking humanity into Himself. Thus Christ gave to humanity an existence out of Himself." Now, how does Christ take humanity into himself? That's just ANOTHER way of saying He is man's substitute!!! No, it's not a metaphor. Christ, as God, was united to our corporate life in the womb of Mary. That's truth. So, very good Gerry. You are getting the idea.... Quote
Sonny Posted June 21, 2011 Author Posted June 21, 2011 I will not respond to you any longer. Your nature is working overtime. Quote
Musicman1228 Posted June 21, 2011 Posted June 21, 2011 Originally Posted By: Musicman1228 Yet many here on this forum, and on others, that insist that all we have to do is believe that Jesus is Christ and that is enough; don't bother me with what He said. I haven't seen that said on this forum. Even Satan believes that Jesus is the Christ. I do not think that people are against reading and living by the words of Jesus. But you're kind of limiting yourself if you only want to believe the words of Jesus via His eyewitness's accounts. Everyone sees/hears things differently, and I would suppose that the accounts would vary according to who is relating what was seen and/or heard. If you only want to believe eyewitness accounts, then don't listen to sermons, don't attend theological seminaries, don't sing (no accounts of Jesus singing), don't try and explain anything in Revelation because that was written after Jesus' ascent to heaven...no eyewitness account there of anything that Jesus did or said. I suppose you could get on okay with quoting only the words of Jesus as recorded in the Bible by eyewitnesses, but geez...that would get awfully boring after awhile. What different perspective from someone other than the eyewitness disciples would be of use to finding truth. That would imply that what Jesus told His own disciples was not complete, accurate or truthful, and that would certainly not be the case. And then you take the situation into the absurd by suggesting that I not listen to sermons, or SING (I am/was a professional musician), or do what I have spent the past 15 years doing and that is studying Daniel and Revelation with a research ministry. The final absurdity is saying that you said that istening to Jesus would get boring after a while. I guess you aren't planning on being a member of the 144,000, "who follow the Lamb where ever He goes". I honestly can't imagine believing that using only the words of Jesus could in any way become 'boring'. This just goes to show how far people will go to defend their positions with respect to anyone BUT Jesus. Wow. Quote
miz3 Posted June 21, 2011 Posted June 21, 2011 Christ, as God, was united to our corporate life in the womb of Mary. NOT BIBLICAL! Here is clear evidence of you adding to the plain word of God! The Bible never says this nor does the Bible infer this in regard to the incarnation! The Holy Spirit is the only entity involved in the formation of Jesus Christ in Mary's womb. Mary was an incubator. The Bible does not say she contributed anything to the Incarnation of Jesus Christ! Any other Gospel concerning this point is false and heretical! It don't care what big brain person says different or what writings you produce which you call "inspired" that would say different. If it says different, then it is not Biblical, it is not "inspired by God (Holy Spirit), it is not logical, it is not scholarship, it is not anything but garbage! The only time Jesus Christ ever was made "sinful" was on the Cross! That and that alone is Biblical and it is the Gospel and it is the Truth! Anything else, then: it is not Biblical, it is not "inspired by God (Holy Spirit), it is not logical, it is not scholarship, it is not anything but garbage! Quote
Members rudywoofs (Pam) Posted June 21, 2011 Members Posted June 21, 2011 What different perspective from someone other than the eyewitness disciples would be of use to finding truth. That would imply that what Jesus told His own disciples was not complete, accurate or truthful, and that would certainly not be the case. And then you take the situation into the absurd by suggesting that I not listen to sermons, or SING (I am/was a professional musician), or do what I have spent the past 15 years doing and that is studying Daniel and Revelation with a research ministry. The final absurdity is saying that you said that istening to Jesus would get boring after a while. I guess you aren't planning on being a member of the 144,000, "who follow the Lamb where ever He goes". I honestly can't imagine believing that using only the words of Jesus could in any way become 'boring'. This just goes to show how far people will go to defend their positions with respect to anyone BUT Jesus. Wow. ...I do my best... Quote Pam Meddle Not In the Affairs of Dragons; for You Are Crunchy and Taste Good with Ketchup. If we all sang the same note in the choir, there'd never be any harmony. Funny, isn't it, how we accept Grace for ourselves and demand justice for others?
Sonny Posted June 21, 2011 Author Posted June 21, 2011 Metaphor - "a literary figure of speech that uses an image, story or tangible thing to represent a less tangible thing or some intangible quality or idea. For example: "Her eyes were glistening jewels". Metaphor may also be used for any rhetorical figures of speech that achieve their effects via association, comparison or resemblance. In this broader sense, antithesis, hyperbole, metonymy and simile would all be considered types of metaphor." And the Bible is full of Metaphors and symbols. Take this one: Ecc 12:6 Remember Him (God) before the silver cord is broken and the golden bowl is crushed, the pitcher by the well is shattered and the wheel at the cistern is crushed ; 7 then the dust will return to the earth as it was, and the spirit will return to God who gave it. Notice the context is all metaphors. Verse 7 is used to prove that when a person dies his/her spirit returns to God. Well, you can't take a metaphor and interpret in this manner. We know that when a person dies he/she goes back to dust. However, nothing goes back to God. It's a metaphor. God gave us life "in Adam". So metaphorically life returns to God who gave it. Nothing is transferred! Again it's metaphor. Quote
Sonny Posted June 21, 2011 Author Posted June 21, 2011 We know that when a person dies he/she goes back to dust. However, nothing goes back to God. It's a metaphor. God gave us life "in Adam". So metaphorically life returns to God who gave it. Nothing is transferred! Again it's metaphor. So well meaning folks will take metaphors and build up a doctrine around them. The false doctrine that our spirit goes to heaven when we die is based that mankind has an immortal spirit. The problem with this heresy is that it attacks the gospel. God back to Romans 7:17 So now, no longer am I the one doing it, but sin which dwells in me. 18 For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh.... Okay, there it is. The Apostle Paul states that nothing good dwells in our humanity. Nothing. Of course the person of the world will tell you people are basically good, but the Bible disagrees. People, according to the Bible, are basically rotten - they are self-centered & selfish. Oh sure, they'll do outward acts to appear selfless, but even this is an attempt to bring attention to themselves. Since there's nothing good in our humanity and since sin brought death (see Romans 5:12/6:23) nothing in us is immortal. That's because immortality and righteousness are linked just as mortality and sin are linked. You see if there's something good in our humanity then that part of us doesn't need Christ. That's why the Baptist preacher always has grandma in heaven during the funeral. Quote
Sonny Posted June 21, 2011 Author Posted June 21, 2011 My point for bringing this up? I remember getting into it with this Baptist guy at work many years ago. He didn't like my statement from Paul - that there's nothing in good in our humanity and therefore nothing goes to heaven at death. He got mad! Why? The gospel doesn't glory in our humanity - it glories in Christ Jesus. Any doctrine that brings humanity glory is heresy - it's the world in the church. We are to glory in Christ Jesus and make no provision for the flesh (humanity indwelt with iniquity). Anyway, this guy fought me. He said that there was something good in him. And I said what? He said God's Spirit. And I said that while it is true that God's Spirit is good and dwells in you, you are not God. And he said no, the two of us have become one. I said okay now you're claiming to be God! I guess the next thing you're going to tell me is that you are righteous too. At this he turned about three shades of red and stomped out of the room. What's my point? You see when Christ as the Son of God assumed our humanity nothing in His Deity was changed. He didn't become our humanity. He remained Himself, God. "Was the human nature of the Son of Mary changed into the divine nature of the Son of God? No; the two natures were mysteriously blended in one person—the man Christ Jesus. In Him dwelt all the fullness of the Godhead bodily. When Christ was crucified, it was His human nature that died. Deity did not sink and die; that would have been impossible.[EGW] Note that the Son of God didn't become a man. The Son of God remained Himself. Likewise the Son of Man (the 2nd Adam) didn't become God. He remained Himself - a child of Adam who had been made spiritually alive by the Holy Spirit. So my friend was confused. He thought he was God because the Holy Spirit dwelt in him. He needs the gospel, but I'm afraid he wouldn't listen to me. Quote
Musicman1228 Posted June 21, 2011 Posted June 21, 2011 A metaphor, just like a prophetic symbol, always refers to something literal. In other words a metaphor does not inform another metaphor, and a prophetic symbol does not point to another prophetic symbol. For example: Jesus said that his words are the bread of life, but beware of the leaven of the Pharisees. How is it that you fail to understand that I did not speak about bread? Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees.” (12) Then they understood that he did not tell them to beware of the leaven of bread, but of the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees. Matt.16:11-12. The bread that Jesus gives is His WORDS. This is a metaphor. The leaven of the pharisees is their teachings, which are lies. Words are real. Lies are real. But they are symbolized to convey the meaning. Many who study prophecy will identify a symbol as another symbol. For example: the 144,000 to many is just a large number, and has no meaning of itself. Yet in prophecy a number always means THAT number and not something else. Therefore, 144,000 actually means a literal 144,000 people. Another example: the head of God in Nebuchadnezzar's dream is a metaphor or symbol for the literal kingdom of Babylon. it is not a symbol for another symbol. The prophecies of the end of time are literal, they are just described (at times) in metaphor or symbols so that 'only the wise will understand' (Dan.12:10). The true interpretation of prophecy is ONLY for those that will go through the events that those prophecies describe. No one who is not going to live through those events will be able to understand the true meaning of the prophecies of the end of time. This was true for Daniel, it is also true for us: I heard, but I did not understand. Then I said, “O my lord, what shall be the outcome of these things?” (9) He said, “Go your way, Daniel, for the words are shut up and sealed until the time of the end. Dan. 12:9-10. Quote
miz3 Posted June 21, 2011 Posted June 21, 2011 Quote: Originally Posted By: SonnyIn his human nature he was a descendant of David. This is only true because of the genealogy of Jesus Christ through his father, Joseph! See Matthew chapter one and Luke chapter three. Since none of Joseph's sperm was involved it is not possible for Jesus Christ to have inherited by blood the fallen nature of any of His ancestors. The genealogy of Jesus Christ as the descendant of David is not through "sperm" or "any genetic material" but only as the legal son of Joseph! Thus, your text is a legal reference not a "genetic" reference! Sorry Sonny! Quote
Musicman1228 Posted June 21, 2011 Posted June 21, 2011 Quote: Originally Posted By: SonnyIn his human nature he was a descendant of David. This is only true because of the genealogy of Jesus Christ through his father, Joseph! See Matthew chapter one and Luke chapter three. Since none of Joseph's sperm was involved it is not possible for Jesus Christ to have inherited by blood the fallen nature of any of His ancestors. The genealogy of Jesus Christ as the descendant of David is not through "sperm" or "any genetic material" but only as the legal son of Joseph! Thus, your text is a legal reference not a "genetic" reference! Sorry Sonny! Well put, Miz3. There was no genetic material from either Joseph or Mary in the embryo that became the Son of God. If there had been then Jesus would not have been able to be called the Son of God. Also, if Jesus had any 'human nature' from either Mary or Joseph He would have contained sin, and would thus not have qualified to be the Passover Lamb that purchased the Kingdom of Heaven for God and for the Lamb. Jesus had the same 'human nature' as did Adam before the fall. God created Adam perfect in physiology and spiritual righteousness. When God made the DNA that became Jesus God created that DNA with the same perfection of body and spirit as He did with Adam. That is one of the reasons why Jesus is called the Second Adam. Jesus did the one thing that Adam did not do-He obeyed God His Father in all things; that is, He testified to the truth, and payed the penalty for the disobedience of the Kingdom of Heaven. Quote
Dr. Rich Posted June 21, 2011 Posted June 21, 2011 Miz3, It appears that you, MM and I are waisting our time posting or replying to Sonny as he just called me a liar without presenting evidence that I lied. When people attack you personally, it goes to show that their argument is filled with holes. I never mind when people attack what I have presented IF they can provide evidence supporting their stance. What you have presented about the bloodline of Jesus is the truth to which people such as Sonny can't comprehand. Sonny's gospel is totally based upon his blind faith, to which facts to do not matter. Therefore, it does not much matter what 'he thinks' in my opionion because I am looking for the facts to support my understanding. You have been arguing with many on this blog who have treated you the same way as Sonny is now doing. Even though we don't see eye to eye, it does appear that you are a real truth seeker too. At least you have given verses that support your understanding, Quote
miz3 Posted June 21, 2011 Posted June 21, 2011 Thank you Dr. Rich and thank you Musicman1228! You are correct that we do not always see eye to eye but I will always use the Bible to support my view. Quote
WayneV Posted June 21, 2011 Posted June 21, 2011 Quote: Originally Posted By: SonnyIn his human nature he was a descendant of David. This is only true because of the genealogy of Jesus Christ through his father, Joseph! See Matthew chapter one and Luke chapter three. Since none of Joseph's sperm was involved it is not possible for Jesus Christ to have inherited by blood the fallen nature of any of His ancestors. The genealogy of Jesus Christ as the descendant of David is not through "sperm" or "any genetic material" but only as the legal son of Joseph! Thus, your text is a legal reference not a "genetic" reference! Sorry Sonny! No to dispute your assertion here, but in my effort to better understand the discussion, could you clarify how what you have written here answers sonny's point that, "the soul (or person) who sins shall die" (see Eze. 18:4, 20)? Scripture seems very clear on this point. Agape` Quote WayneV Just remember these words of warning, for they will come to pass all too soon: If you are ever flying through the desert and your canoe breaks down, remember that it takes three pancakes to lift the doghouse, because there ain't nary a bone in ice cream!
miz3 Posted June 21, 2011 Posted June 21, 2011 No to dispute your assertion here, but in my effort to better understand the discussion, could you clarify how what you have written here answers sonny's point that, "the soul (or person) who sins shall die" (see Eze. 18:4, 20)? Scripture seems very clear on this point. If you go back over the posts between Sonny and I you can see the back and forth and you then should have the answer I give to what Sonny has written. Quote
WayneV Posted June 21, 2011 Posted June 21, 2011 I have read the complete thread and I fail to find a direct answer to these Scriptures, with Scripture, from you or anyone on this thread. Although, there does seem to be a lot of rationalization and eisigesis on both sides of the discussion. However, I will coninue to lurk on this topic as it is not one that is worth the disunity, antagonism, and bad feelings that it generates. It reminds me of the debate regarding predestination and free-will. Agape` Quote WayneV Just remember these words of warning, for they will come to pass all too soon: If you are ever flying through the desert and your canoe breaks down, remember that it takes three pancakes to lift the doghouse, because there ain't nary a bone in ice cream!
miz3 Posted June 21, 2011 Posted June 21, 2011 WayneV, I am sorry that you missed the quoted Bible texts. They are clearly there. As I said in the other thread, I only stated what the Scripture actually stated and did not add or subtract anything from them. I also took great pains to point out the context which Sonny at times seemed to lack. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.