Dr. Rich Posted June 22, 2011 Posted June 22, 2011 Of course this is not what Jesus said or taught. Satan's original argument with God was this same question or idea, that there is a little evil in good and a little good in evil, the Yin and Yang which is the foundation for all eastern Religions. Satan was kicked out of heaven because heaven and who live there are pure and without any sin. 1Jn. 3:6-9 proves that sin can't be where the Holy Spirit dwells. A human who keeps sinning can't have the Holy Spirit dwelling within him. Paul clearly was mistaken into believing that the Holy Spirit's temple is the body of humans. John 17's prayer shows that the Holy Spirit is what causes one to be 'one' with God. When this is done, a human becomes a family of God, not by adoption, but by being born of the Holy Spirit. This is why Jesus commanded His disciples to "love one another". Did Paul love the disciples? Did Paul show any love towards the disciples? I don't think so! In fact Paul cursed them for presenting the same gospel that Jesus taught. Go fish!?? Quote
Sonny Posted June 22, 2011 Author Posted June 22, 2011 Look here, Rich, I don't have the patience with a believer who throws out Paul. There's really no use carrying on a conversation with you because you reject 53% of the NT. Quote
Aliensanctuary Posted June 22, 2011 Posted June 22, 2011 In order for humans to be judged, there must be a complete record of their thoughts and actions. The Seven Spirits of God may have a role in recording and storing our life-records. Just as demons, locked away somewhere in the depths, can access human minds telepathically, so, too, can the Messengers of God, via the Spirit. One of the Spirit of God's functions, then, is maintaining a telepathic communications network. When we pray, selfish and polluted as we are, we are attempting to access this network to communicate with Father and Son. Someday, when evil is no more, we will be able to receive our Master's commands in our minds from great distances, telling us where to go or what to do. They will, of course, still be able to hear our requests for our needs. When Jesus, the only human-born son of God, spoke, he spoke the thoughts of his Father, YHVH, e.g., "I Am." In order to speak to his human subjects, the Father accessed the mind of, and used the voice of, Jesus. Because they were connected via the Spirit, the mind of Father and Son were essentially merged into one, a unity. Perhaps we will have to wait until the Last Days, when everything about the Kingdom of YHVH will be made clear to us via the Two Witnesses, and the Three Angels' Messages to mankind. Until then, with incomplete, ambiguous, or erroneous information, we can only blunder our way into understanding the Kingdom. Alas, poor St. Paul. In attempting to explain the Kingdom of God, he paved the way for others to create conflicting religions down through the ages. We should know, though, that the Kingdom of God is not a religion. It's more like a master/servant relationship, where the servants willingly and faithfully perform the tasks they are assigned. Quote The Parable of the Lamb and the Pigpen https://www.createspace.com/3401451
Guest Posted June 22, 2011 Posted June 22, 2011 Jesus did not become the 'Son of God' until He was born of His surrogate mother, Mary. What do you do with these OT verses? Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling. Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him. Psa 2:11,12 He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God. Dan 3:25 Quote
miz3 Posted June 22, 2011 Posted June 22, 2011 Quote: He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God. Dan 3:25 I suppose when Jesus Christ had this humanity that "Mary" was involved too? When Jesus Christ visited Abraham, His humanity was also from "Mary" then too? Quote
Musicman1228 Posted June 23, 2011 Posted June 23, 2011 Originally Posted By: Musicman1228 Jesus did not become the 'Son of God' until He was born of His surrogate mother, Mary. What do you do with these OT verses? Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling. Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him. Psa 2:11,12 He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God. Dan 3:25 Both of those expressions 'the Son' and 'son of God'. It is the editors that capitalized 'son', and does not specifically say this in the Hebrew. Actually, for the second quote, if you look at the source, it would more appropriate to translate this as 'a son of the gods'. What I do know is that the part of the Godhead that was Michael in the OT became Jesus in the NT, and will receive a New Name which will be placed on the foreheads of the 144,000, along with the name of the Father and the name of the New Jerusalem (Rev. 14:1, Rev.3:12). Quote
Dr. Rich Posted June 23, 2011 Posted June 23, 2011 Aliensanctuary, I missed you! Welcome back! This was a grea post. Quote
Sonny Posted June 23, 2011 Author Posted June 23, 2011 Both of those expressions 'the Son' and 'son of God'. It is the editors that capitalized 'son', and does not specifically say this in the Hebrew. Whatever....All side issues. Face the music....Your humanity died in Christ. Paul says repeats this many, many times. Christ assumed our humanity at the incarnation, period! Quote
Sonny Posted June 23, 2011 Author Posted June 23, 2011 1 Timothy 3:16 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. Quote
miz3 Posted June 23, 2011 Posted June 23, 2011 Quote: 1 Timothy 3:16 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. Thank you Sonny this text also makes my point very well. Notice: God manifest in the flesh........That means his physical (outside) nature. It bore the marks of sin. Justified in the Spirit.........That means Jesus' Spirit (inside) nature. Justified means that this nature was sinless. Thanks again Sonny! Quote
Sonny Posted June 23, 2011 Author Posted June 23, 2011 God manifest in the flesh........That means his physical (outside) nature. It bore the marks of sin. Pure nonsense! It means that Christ, as God, was made human while remaining Himself, God. Quote
miz3 Posted June 23, 2011 Posted June 23, 2011 Your [idea is] just hilarious Sonny! [Ed. by moderator.] Quote
Moderators John317 Posted June 23, 2011 Moderators Posted June 23, 2011 God manifest in the flesh........That means his physical (outside) nature. It bore the marks of sin. If as you say Christ was not actually related to other human beings, how and why did His body bear the marks of sin? Didn't Christ have to do with the great law of heredity like other people do? If not, what caused his body to bear the marks of sin? And what marks do you have reference to? Please explain. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Moderators John317 Posted June 23, 2011 Moderators Posted June 23, 2011 When Jesus Christ visited Abraham, His humanity was also from "Mary" then too? No, and why would anyone suppose such a thing? The pre-existent Christ took on a human appearence but was not yet incarnate. It is similar to the angels who appeared to be "men" at the tomb of Christ. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Moderators John317 Posted June 23, 2011 Moderators Posted June 23, 2011 Originally Posted By: John317 On the Adventist Forum, all of the Bible is equally valid. It's all Holy Scripture. If so, then prove it John and Sonny!. Prove your point by using both Paul's words and the words of Jesus. What you have done John is shown everyone that there is indeed two gospels, one from Paul and the correct one from Jesus. You can't have it both ways John. Your false idea that the words of Jesus are the same as Paul's is proven right here and now. Who ever said that on the Adventist Forum, all of the Bible is equally valid must answer for this some day when the rubber meets the road. We've been down this long road before many times, and it's only confirmed the fact that you can't prove something to someone who does't want to believe it. No, there are not two gospels, although it may seem so to people who are unwilling to study deeply into Paul's Epistles. Just the fact that people disagree doesn't mean there's no single truth. No one disagrees about what is true more than lawyers do. I'm very glad to answer for what I have said here about all the Scriptures being equally valid. As someone who has been involved in the SDA church most of his life, you must realize that Seventh-day Adventists accept the whole Bible as the Word of God. When you come to an Adventist Forum, there's no reason to be shocked at this or to try and change people's minds about it. Quote John 3:16-17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. [17] For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
Sonny Posted June 23, 2011 Author Posted June 23, 2011 Originally Posted By: miz3 When Jesus Christ visited Abraham, His humanity was also from "Mary" then too? No, and why would anyone suppose such a thing? The pre-existent Christ took on a human appearence but was not yet incarnate. It is similar to the angels who appeared to be "men" at the tomb of Christ. You have more patience than I....Some of miz3 replies are just too over the top for me. Quote
miz3 Posted June 23, 2011 Posted June 23, 2011 If as you say Christ was not actually related to other human beings, how and why did His body bear the marks of sin? Didn't Christ have to do with the great law of heredity like other people do? If not, what caused his body to bear the marks of sin? And what marks do you have reference to? Please explain. By the marks of sin I mean that Jesus Christ got tired, got hungry, could have gotten a virus cold, actually felt cold, got thirsty, felt that it was too hot, he perspired like other humans, etc. Genetic heredity was NOT involved. Legal heredity was! Matthew chapter one clearly states that the Holy Spirit was the ONLY ONE involved in the conception of Jesus Christ. Quote
miz3 Posted June 23, 2011 Posted June 23, 2011 When Christ, "took on the appearance of being human", implies that it was a "hologram". I believe that if Abraham had touched Christ Abraham would have touched actual skin. In addition Jesus Christ ate the meat (actual flesh food, not vegetarian) that Abraham placed before Jesus. Do "hologram's do these things or do actual human entities do these things? Of course I know that the humanity of Jesus Christ when He visited Abraham was NOT FROM MARY? I said that to demonstrate the absurdity of saying that the Incarnation "HAD TO" involve Mary's genetics! The humanity of Jesus Christ at the visit to Abraham had nothing to do with "heredity" or "genetics". The humanity of Jesus Christ at the visit to Abraham was created by God without any other help from any human source. That humanity ate, talked, just as you and I do. It was not a "hologram". It was not some exterior covering. They ate! They drank! The idea that Mary had to be involved in the Incarnation is not found in Scripture! People can believe what they want on any basis they choose. However, you cannot make the Scripture say what it does not say. And Scripture says, conceived by the Holy Spirit. It does not say the "Holy Spirit and Mary". Mary was just an incubator! Quote
miz3 Posted June 23, 2011 Posted June 23, 2011 Your gospel bypasses the law. It's an immoral gospel! It's not "my" gospel, Sonny, it is the Bible's Gospel that I preach. In addition, it does not bypass the Law. In fact placing our sins on Jesus Christ at the Cross, only, meets all the demands of the Law. Quote
miz3 Posted June 23, 2011 Posted June 23, 2011 Sonny, the Bible does not say anything about Jesus Christ being involved in "genetic" heredity. We have shown this both from Matthew chapter one and the genealogy given in Luke chapter three. I am afraid that you are not correct about this. You have no Biblical support for your Incarnation theory. Quote
Sonny Posted June 23, 2011 Author Posted June 23, 2011 Mary was just an incubator! Why even use Mary? This idea is mindless - it's nonsense. Come on, miz3, get real! This theology is so off it's crazy. Quote
Sonny Posted June 23, 2011 Author Posted June 23, 2011 In fact placing our sins on Jesus Christ at the Cross, only, meets all the demands of the Law. You can't place sins on someone like putting pants on. It's crazy. The law requires that your humanity be made obedient to God's law. If Christ didn't take our humanity into Himself then He couldn't have obeyed in that humanity. He lived in our fallen humanity as a man for 33 yrs from the cradle to the grave. Therefore our humanity, indwelt with sin, was in Him from the start - i.e., the incarnation. Again, "the soul that sins it shall die". God's law requires the death of the sinner. Christ isn't the sinner. Christ took into Himself our humanity. It died in Him. Hence when "One died, all died" Quote
Sonny Posted June 23, 2011 Author Posted June 23, 2011 You have no Biblical support for your Incarnation theory. That statement is untrue. Both John and I have given overwhelming proof that Christ, as the Son of Man, was a descendent of Abraham. You chose to ignore it. 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.