Church 2.0: Part 10.6: Ekklēsia in the NT, Part 3 (Judging Angels)

Church2Paul says,

(1 Cor. 6:1-3 ESV) When one of you has a grievance against another, does he dare go to law before the unrighteous instead of the saints?  2 Or do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world is to be judged by you, are you incompetent to try trivial cases?  3 Do you not know that we are to judge angels? How much more, then, matters pertaining to this life! 

Really? We’re to judge angels? Us?

Lying behind Paul’s rebuke is his apocalyptic conviction that, in God’s final judgment of sin and its grasp of the world, it is the believers who will form part of the heavenly court (cf. Dan 7:22; 12:3; Wis 3:8; Sir 4:15; 2 Esdr 9:97; 1 Enoch 104:2; Testament of Abraham 1–4; 1QpHab 5:4; Matt 19:28; Rev 3:21; 20:4), who are at least present when God’s final judgment takes place (cf. Isa 24:21–22). 

J. Paul Sampley, “The First Letter to the Corinthians,” in The Acts of the Apostles-The First Letter to the Corinthians (vol. 10 of New Interpreters Bible, Accordance electronic ed. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2002), 854.

N. T. Wright brings the point home —

Do you not know, he says (most readers today will reply ‘No!’) that the saints will judge the world, and that we are to judge angels (6:2–3)? This remarkable statement is based on Paul’s vivid awareness of texts like Daniel 7, in which ‘the people of the saints of the Most High’ are given authority to execute judgment over the [figurative] beasts, and to rule the nations. He would have been quick to insist that Jesus himself was the ultimate judge, but he assumes a basic early Christian theology in which this judgment is shared with all Jesus’ people.

Once again he draws conclusions about the present from what will be true in the future: this is how things will be, so this is how they must now be. Learn to think in terms of the world that is to be, he is saying, and of the people you will be within it, and then you will see clearly who you must be in the present time. If you do that, you will see that there can be no place for Christians to go to law with one another in front of non-Christian courts.

Paul does not suggest that every single Christian will be capable of exercising a judicial role in the present, but he assumes that within even a small community, such as we assume the Corinthian church to have been, there will be some who are ‘wise enough’ to exercise this function. At all events, the eschatological reality (that God’s people will share in bringing his judgment to the world) must be brought forward into the present. If, for whatever reason, that is not possible, it would be better to suffer wrong than to turn that reality on its head and have secular courts sitting in judgment on Christians.

N. T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God, Christian Origins and the Question of God, (London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 2003), 288 (paragraphing modified to ease reading; emphasis is mine).

That is, we Christians, as justified people — people made just by God — should surely be capable of judging one another by God’s standards. This may be the entire congregation or it may be wise men and women chosen from among the church based on gifts of the Spirit, but some of us are surely capable of making such judgments and should be willing to do what God asks of us.

Thus, Paul concludes that it’s wrong for us to judge people outside the church (they are all damned, so what would be the point?) but necessary for us to judge those inside the church (for the sake of helping them overcome sin and make it to the end).

(1 Cor. 5:11-13 ESV) 11 But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler — not even to eat with such a one.  12 For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge?  13 God judges those outside. “Purge the evil person from among you.” 

That is, we should see ourselves as how we’re going to be when Jesus returns —

(Dan. 7:27 ESV)  27 And the kingdom and the dominion and the greatness of the kingdoms under the whole heaven shall be given to the people of the saints of the Most High; his kingdom shall be an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey him.’

(Ps. 8:5-8 ESV)  5 Yet you have made him a little lower than the heavenly beings and crowned him with glory and honor.  6 You have given him dominion over the works of your hands; you have put all things under his feet,  7 all sheep and oxen, and also the beasts of the field,  8 the birds of the heavens, and the fish of the sea, whatever passes along the paths of the seas. 

(Rev. 5:9-10 ESV)  9 And they sang a new song, saying, “Worthy are you to take the scroll and to open its seals, for you were slain, and by your blood you ransomed people for God from every tribe and language and people and nation,  10 and you have made them a kingdom and priests to our God, and they shall reign on the earth.”

(Rev. 22:5 ESV)  5 And night will be no more. They will need no light of lamp or sun, for the Lord God will be their light, and they will reign forever and ever. 

We were created to have dominion over God’s creation (Gen 1:26-28; 2:15). We fell because of sin, but through Jesus, we are being restored to the image of God — and that includes having our dominion over the earth restored. And to the ancients, the dominion of kings included serving as judges. Solomon was famous for his wisdom as a judge, even though we call him “king.” Until very recently, kings were the supreme courts of their lands.

And that means that, although we live in the already-not yet time in between Jesus’s Ascension and Second Coming, we are being prepared for this new role today. Our futures define our present. Church is supposed to be a preview of heaven. Really. No. I’m quite serious.

The ekklēsia is a polis within a polis; a nation within a nation; a city within a city. We are supposed to govern ourselves, settle our own disputes, and when necessary, discipline our own members. We are all called to be kings and queens, destined to rule the world and to judge angels — with Jesus. And as we are more and more shaped into the image of God by the Spirit, we become more like Jesus and so more qualified for these tasks.

Therefore, rather than thinking of our nation’s legislature (or constitution or judiciary) as the source of godly culture and guidance for how we should live, we should think of ourselves as citizens of heaven — aliens living in a heavenly colony in the world —

(Phil. 3:20-4:1 ESV)  20 But our citizenship is in heaven, and from it we await a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ,  21 who will transform our lowly body to be like his glorious body, by the power that enables him even to subject all things to himself.  

The ekklēsia, then, is not a civic organization or social club. It’s a nationality. It’s a citizenship. It’s an ethnicity.

(1 Pet. 2:9-10 NIV)  9 But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s special possession, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light.  10 Once you were not a people, but now you are the people of God; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy. 

We are not Americans, Nigerians, Syrians, Slovaks, Germans, or Chinese. We are Christians, citizens of the ekklēsia or Kingdom of God. We don’t have dual citizenship, not really, because we don’t and can’t have divided loyalties (Mat 6:24). We are, rather, in the words of Stanley Hauerwas, resident aliens.

One of my sons visited Kenya as part of a mission effort. There, all the Christian Kenyans had taken “Christian” names — from the Bible. Before, they’d had tribal names, identifying them with this or that tribe. And so they saw conversion to Christianity as a change in tribe — which is right. We want to cling to our earthly tribe while  having our ticket to heaven punched. We want to be hyphenated Christians: a Christian-American, a Christian-German, etc. The Kenyans understand their Bibles better than we do.

Therefore, we don’t judge by the world’s standards, nor do we behave as the world behaves. We follow Christ’s standards, Christ’s ethics. And so, even in our roles of kings, queens, and judges, we rule and judge as Christ rules and judges — with mercy and grace, sacrificially.

We are called to be servant-kings and servant-judges. We are to police ourselves, and not expect the world to have to tell us right from wrong. And when there is sin in the camp, we should have a sufficiently common understanding of God’s will and our obligation to discipline our beloved brothers and sisters that our leaders have no hesitance in bringing sin before the congregation to be dealt with as God expects — with the wisdom of the collective ekklēsia present.

Remember: our ecclesiology derives from our soteriology. We believe that it’s possible to fall from grace. And we believe that one of the most important ways to avoid falling away is the strength and encouragement of our brothers and sisters in our local congregation (Heb 10:24-25). And if those who know us the best and love us the most are unwilling to yank our chains — to discipline us — when our salvation is at stake, well, then we don’t really believe any of this, do we? I mean, if we believe our brothers and sisters can fall away by rebellious sin, then surely we love them enough to warn them and even excommunicate them if need be in hopes of saving them.

Or to put it another way, when we become Christians, we become accountable not only to God but to each other. We give our brothers and sisters permission to ask, to rebuke — to meddle. In love. With patience. But very much in our business.

Now, many, perhaps most, will find this very objectionable. This derives not only from our Western culture but also our failure to be the church that Jesus has saved us to become. We just aren’t that Christlike in how we treat each other, and so we’re understandably reluctant to be accountable to such un-Christlike people.

The solution isn’t to ignore God’s commands about mutual accountability. Rather, it’s to teach the grace of God, to teach one another how to  live as gracious people, and to appoint leaders based on the Spirit’s gifting.

(Jas. 5:16 ESV)  16 Therefore, confess your sins to one another and pray for one another, that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous person has great power as it is working.

Profile photo of Jay Guin

About Jay F Guin

My name is Jay Guin, and I’m a retired elder. I wrote The Holy Spirit and Revolutionary Grace about 18 years ago. I’ve spoken at the Pepperdine, Lipscomb, ACU, Harding, and Tulsa lectureships and at ElderLink. My wife’s name is Denise, and I have four sons, Chris, Jonathan, Tyler, and Philip. I have two grandchildren. And I practice law.
This entry was posted in Church 2.0, Ecclesiology, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

96 Responses to Church 2.0: Part 10.6: Ekklēsia in the NT, Part 3 (Judging Angels)

  1. laymond says:

    “but he assumes a basic early Christian theology in which this judgment is shared with all Jesus’ people.”

    “Once again he draws conclusions about the present from what will be true in the future:”

    Jay we know if we accept your theology, the theology you so avidly cling to so strongly, that I have been accused of heresy by you, and threatened to be banned from your blog.

    Jay, if I accept your teachings as truth, then by necessity I can not accept the two statements above as truth.
    Jay who assumes, and who draws a conclusion.?

    Jay you do what you must do, but it is very hard for me to accept your theology, and accept that you believe the statements quoted.

  2. Jim H says:

    If righteous judgement within the church (true Jesus-like judgment) is dependent upon the transformative power of the Holy Spirit within the Christian believer (2 Cor 3:18, Rom 8,& other like scriptures), and if faith (trust and confidence) in the operative transformative power of the Spirit is dependent upon the preaching and teaching of the person and role of the Spirit within the believer and the church, I first question how well we are doing in the preaching and teaching of the Spirit as church doctrine within the CoC? Secondly, I have yet to see or hear of a church fully practice Mt 18 in church discipline by bringing a case of discipline before the church membership and the result of the practice on the individual and the church members? And thirdly, is there a limit on the transformative power of the Spirit (Rom 7) between the flesh-Spirit tension of what seems to be Paul’s delimma?

  3. Ray Downen says:

    Citizens of the U.S.A. are in many ways different from citizens in nations where citizens are told what to do and think. Especially in other lands, Christians should judge other Christians and make sure that judgment is fair and honest. Should Christians sue others? I think that’s a fair question which should be asked. And the answer is NO, we should not sue other Christians. But which church will allow disputes to be settled by other Christians rather than by a civil court? I know of none.

  4. John F says:

    I was directly involved (advisory) in a dispute between two brothers — flesh and church. When all was said and done, it was a group of six men (church members, three from each brother) who reached a conclusion. We could discuss the fairness of their conclusion and other concerns, but it was done. The attorney who advised one brother was especially impressed and told me he had not seen such a case in over 20 years practice. The civil courts did not become involved.

  5. John F says:

    Regarding John 4:24 — spirit and truth. In the CofC we have spent 175+ years trying to understand and “contending earnestly” over what it means to worship in truth. It is well past time we spent as much energy trying to understand what it means to worship in spirit — and I’m quite certain the Spirit would lead us well past any earnest contention.

  6. Dwight says:

    John F, we in the coC try to make “the truth” of what the doctrine is as the “truth” of how we are supposed to worship. Notice the what has replaced the how. The whole context of John 4:24 is of the worshipper as opposed to now worshipping in the Temple, now worshipping “in Spirit and in truth”.
    So the worshipper, who is now the Temple, is to worship not “the Spirit and the truth”, but rather “in Spirit and in truth”, so it is the spirit and truth of the worshipper that is in question. And we must do so as God is spirit, meaning that our level of worship must be of God’s level of being. This has nothing to do with a particular doctrine, but has everything do with the spirit of man communicating with the God who is spirit and of the truth (or sincerity) of the man who communicates to the one true God. Our worship must not be done from our heart.
    But you are right in that we often focus on the concept of truth, but hardly on the Spirit, which is to lead the truth.

  7. Profile photo of Jay Guin Jay Guin says:


    I can’t find where I’ve accused you of heresy. I do recall referring to you as “heterodox.” And since you reject the Nicene Creed, you are the very definition of heterodox. I really don’t know a more accurate word.

    I’ve threatened to ban you from the blog (more than once) for insisting on arguing that Paul was not inspired — which is a discussion that is not of interest to me or most readers.

    I’ve also made the same threat regarding your heterodox views on the nature of Jesus, but if there are other readers who are interested in the discussion and seem able to defend the orthodox position, I usually let it go. But if the readers get tired of covering the topic yet again, I do try to get you to desist.

    I don’t bar people just for disagreeing with me, and I’m sure there are literally thousands of comments here, not moderated or deleted, that I disagree with some or all of. Which is fine. Why engage in dialog if you already agree? But then, why spend time on uninteresting topics. (I also banned someone for pushing Marcionism — which is heresy and … boring. Much more interesting is asking how we reconcile the God of the OT with the God of the NT. That’s a fair question. But pushing the argument that they are two different gods is just not interesting.)

    But to get to the real point: I have no idea how you see those two statements as inconsistent. Please explain.

  8. Profile photo of Jay Guin Jay Guin says:

    Jim H,

    1. I agree that most Churches of Christ struggle to teach a sensible doctrine of the Holy Spirit, and this messes up our understanding of grace and many, many other things. In fact, it pushes us toward a sort of Deism.

    2. I’m aware of churches that have handled disfellowship wisely and well, and where that person was brought to repentance. But it’s not often.

    3. Is there a limit on how far the Spirit might transform a Christian toward the image of God? Well, as is so often the case, yes and no. When Jesus returns, the Spirit will complete the work and we’ll be fully transformed, I’m sure. Before then, we are capable of being MUCH better than we achieve. Read the stories of the great Christian heroes and martyrs. There have been some remarkable people who walked this earth in the power of the Spirit. But we do a poor job of telling their stories. I think we’re embarrassed.

  9. Profile photo of Jay Guin Jay Guin says:

    John F,


    The eldership of which I am a part (although on leave of absence at present) has had more than one case arbitrated in similar fashion. I found the lawyers extremely cooperative and grateful.

  10. laymond says:

    Jay said,
    “But to get to the real point: I have no idea how you see those two statements as inconsistent. Please explain.”

    Jay, the two statements are not inconsistent with my belief at all. but when they are used to explain why Paul wrote what he wrote. (he assumes, and he draws conclusions) seems to fly in the face of your theology, of absolute inspiration. Yet you don’t seem to be bothered when you use it in your writings,

    “but he assumes a basic early Christian theology in which this judgment is shared with all Jesus’ people.”
    “Once again he draws conclusions about the present from what will be true in the future:”

    I might add this as well.
    “Lying behind Paul’s rebuke is his apocalyptic conviction that, in God’s final judgment of sin and its grasp of the world, it is the believers who will form part of the heavenly court”

    Then you go on to give many references all written, not once do you mention, the whisper of God or the Holy Ghost.
    Consistency, has to be part of a teaching, no matter the subject.

  11. Larry Cheek says:

    It really is a shame that there are not more congregations of Christians ( I mean Christians as is being explained in this blog). At one time I really thought that I was attending a part of the one and only Church that Jesus built, of course there were only a few of our congregations scattered among many cities in our part of the world. I was comfortable as we constantly condemned those members of the denominations who were calling themselves Christians also, until while attempting to indoctrinate many of them with the rules which we were taught that Christ had imposed upon our lives here. I found that sometimes their understanding followed the scriptures better than ours. When you approach our brothers in Christ with a real problem in our understanding which has been exposed by studies outside our click, I found that we did not follow our declared dedication to the scriptures. O my, now I have been labeled as a troublemaker, and this is spread among most of the assemblies of the Church of Christ. Many of the teachers and elders are very cautious in discussing anything with me, they just don’t have the answers to refute the teachings that I guide them to, they cannot become a friend of mine and allow that to be known because they would also become labeled. Many of the Churches of Christ in our area have shut the doors because there were not members there to support the expenses and now have associated themselves with another congregation, which is only grown because of the migration of others of like beliefs into their assembly. This just reinforces another stronghold, similar to an Army being overrun therefore retreat to regroup. They will never encounter the fact that their belief system is the problem, and therefore submit to reevaluating their commitments to the Saviors concepts. I really could appreciate an opportunity to communicate with many of the members and leaders of the Church of Christ in our area in a dialog as we have here with Laymond. Laymond is a very tough sell, but by being that way more evidence has been brought out from the scriptures that conflicts with his teaching than has ever been presented to anyone else that I have ever known. I readily, communicated with him believing that others were benefiting from the discussion.
    But, to get to where I was going with this, I have visited with others who call themselves Christians who are also entwined with associations which have control over them even if they do not see the actions ( you know, they never have encountered information in teachings that are not scripture). they can make you comfortable while in their midst, (they accept you as a Christian, and will until you begin to identify areas within their organization, rituals, or practices which do not match scriptural concepts) then you will be again in a position you were in in the Church of Christ.
    Question that I have then is, is there a place in the world where we live that may demand that for us to be able to teach a true picture of the Church and a relationship with The Lord we will have to reach out to those who have either been un-churched either from themselves or those who have been members (believers) who have dissociated themselves with those who claim to be followers because of the actions of organized believers. Essentially, then a missionary within a Christian field, I said a Christian field because I have a hard time believing now that those who have left organizations because they were either they so distanced from the membership that they have stopped attending not being able to find a suitable home (you might say) have fallen from Christianity to now have been removed from the Saviors “Book of Life”.

  12. Larry Cheek says:

    How do you go about confirming any information that you have received through the “whisper of God or the Holy Ghost”? Does he provide a miracle to confirm your interpretation? Of course, anything which was recorded in writing needs no “whisper of God or the Holy Ghost”.

  13. Ray Downen says:

    You say you want to be a Christian and not a particular kind of Christian other than faithful and loving. What a marvelous aim. I suspect that all of us in our hearts share that dream. I differ from some teachings of most Churches of Christ, in that I’m sure Jesus does not oppose use of musical instruments. But a church here in Joplin is commendable in that they sing a cappella but sing hymns, and for the sake of convenience offer hymnals and also show the hymn’s words on a large screen in the front of their auditorium. And the preacher they like loves Jesus and says so kindly and shows his love in clear Bible teaching. Families of all ages attend, including young people. It’s a GOOD church.

    The church where I’m a member has similar aims except the leaders have adopted a music style which is vastly different from hymns. I understand that they think that style will attract young couples, which they lack. They’ve been using it now for two years and I see few young couples in attendance. I make no attempt to sing the ditties they use in place of hymns. But the Sunday School class I attend has good Bible teaching and happy fellowship among us older folks. The sermons are very dissimilar from those to be heard at the Church of Christ I get to attend sometimes and speak of above. But the sound system lets everyone hear with no problem.

    I choose to invite folks from Spring River Christian Village to ride with me to Sunday evening and Wednesday evening church gatherings. Lately, two ladies are all who choose to go with me. Both are hard of hearing. They don’t like the Church of Christ because they can’t hear the sermons I commend so highly, so I’ve had to quit going there (for the sake of their hearing). Life goes on. I commend those who seek to love others who also love truth.

  14. Dwight says:

    Ray, I think there are many in the coC who do not hold to the view of the leaders (preachers and elders) in regards to IM and I am one of them and there are many more. And then there are those who hold to the concept that they cannot worship in assembly with IM, but do not have an issue with it outside of the assembly, as if there was a difference between corporate worship and individual worship in the scriptures.
    Although our song book says ‘psalms”, the songs in it are not anything like the psalms of the Bible and even they had IM by what the definition of a psalms is.

  15. laymond says:

    Larry said, ” Laymond is a very tough sell, ” Larry it depends on who’s selling, and what they are trying to sell 🙂
    Zep 1:17 And I will bring distress upon men, that they shall walk like blind men, because they have sinned against the LORD: and their blood shall be poured out as dust, and their flesh as the dung.

    Dwight, you seem to think you have it all figured out although the things you teach as ambiguous is very unambiguous in the biblical writings.
    You seem to think that if I don’t see things the way you do, that I am just hard headed and don’t want to understand. When in fact it might be cool to follow the crowd, it is not always the right thing to do. As my mother used to say ” if they jump in the fire are you going to jump in the fire too” and whether you believe it or not, right does not always win out. And the Nicene creed is one of those times. There are 1.5 billion Muslims in the world today, so if the majority wins, why are you not a Muslim. Just because some people in the fourth century ,with the help of the rulers, won an argument (by decree) over who God is and is not. Does not convince me they knew what they were talking about. Any more than a flat earth, that was only a few thousand years old. If they knew so little about the earth they lived on, what makes you think they knew more about God, and Heaven than was taught in the bible.
    I could write a book, but I think I made my point,

    Mat 15:14 Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.

    Rom 2:19
    If you are convinced that you are a guide for the blind, a light for those who are in the dark,
    Rom 2:21 Thou therefore which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself?

    I adhere to the old adage If you don’t stand for something, you will fall for anything.
    But that said we should never get to the point where we think we can’t learn anything, we know it all.

  16. laymond says:

    Sorry, I meant to say Larry, instead of Dwight.

  17. laymond says:

    Larry Cheek says:
    December 10, 2015 at 11:56 pm
    How do you go about confirming any information that you have received through the “whisper of God or the Holy Ghost”?

    Larry, you are asking the wrong person, I am not one that says the totality of the bible is breathed out by God.
    You might need to read Jay’s comment to me on the 10th where he said “I’ve threatened to ban you from the blog (more than once) for insisting on arguing that Paul was not inspired”

    You might need to take up this question with Jay,

  18. laymond says:

    As Elihu said, flattering titles do not always indicate wisdom.

    Job 32:9 Great men are not always wise: neither do the aged understand judgment.

    When we call these men “church fathers” we do error there is only one Father of creation, and there is only one father of the Church. Jesus Christ.

  19. Larry Cheek says:

    It was your quote which I copied and presented back to you. Jay was not involved in any way, in fact you are the one who has suggested many times that Paul was not inspired. Now if you are telling that you really do not believe that Paul wrote nothing in scripture without inspiration it is time to clarify your beliefs.

    By the way anyone can stand for anything, but not be even close what God has said to stand upon. The recent post announcing a statement from the pope confirms that men don’t always stand upon scriptures. What chance would you think there could be that the pope would allow anyone to show him the truth?

  20. laymond says:

    “Laymond is a very tough sell, but by being that way more evidence has been brought out from the scriptures that conflicts with his teaching than has ever been presented to anyone else that I have ever known. I readily, communicated with him believing that others were benefiting from the discussion.”

    Larry, this is the second time you said you were just using me to warn others of what not to believe, Or to trap me in something I had said. That really don’t sound like Christian teachings to me. Most if any of what you say is not backed by scripture, but as you have admitted what you do is tearing down, not building up, tricking or using people to make a point. there is a difference in correcting one, by use of scripture , You spent a lot of time, as you say, trying to trick me into saying that I don see Jesus as my lord and savior . Wasted time because as a Christian I would never say such a thing. and especially as a member of the Church of Christ . No one will ever really become a member of the body of Christ without recognizing that Jesus is the head of his church, the body follows the head in all things, therefore Jesus is the master, teacher, lord, and as the bible says there is no way to salvation except through God’s Son, savior. Evidently you don’t know that when someone tells you they are a member of the Church of Christ it tells you a lot about them. When I say Jesus was part of a plan set in place by God I am only repeating what Jesus has already said, it takes nothing away from the importance of Jesus in our salvation.
    All this said does not disprove anything I have said on this or any other blog. the Word of God , the word spoken through Jesus a man of God proves everything I have said. And the opinion of others does not shake my faith in the least, of the truth of what God spoke through the mouth of Jesus, or for that matter through Jesus’ 12 apostles.

    Larry, What I said to Jay was meant for Jay to understand , and not for me to explain to you why I said it.

  21. Larry Cheek says:

    The very essence of the need I have been addressing is explained fully as you refer to Jesus,”Jesus a man of God”. I really don’t know who it is that you think you can fool by distorting the facts as you have in this statement. “You spent a lot of time, as you say, trying to trick me into saying that I don see Jesus as my lord and savior” First I was not attempting to trick you I was prompting you to assure us exactly the opposite of your statement. You have been very consistent in confirming that you do not see Jesus as your (Lord and Savior), you even In your terminology expressed in this last post that you only see Jesus as a man who delivered the salvation plan that God requested him do. The following statement, follows the same concept,”All this said does not disprove anything I have said on this or any other blog. the Word of God , the word spoken through Jesus a man of God proves everything I have said. And the opinion of others does not shake my faith in the least, of the truth of what God spoke through the mouth of Jesus, or for that matter through Jesus’ 12 apostles.
    You claim Jesus as only the mouth piece of God and more precisely have placed him into a position of authority no greater than the 12 apostles. Both, given their messages directly from God. This totally ignores God’s communications giving Jesus all authority.
    Heb 12:2-3 KJV Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God. (3) For consider him that endured such contradiction of sinners against himself, lest ye be wearied and faint in your minds.
    This is Jesus speaking.
    Rev 3:19-22 KJV As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent. (20) Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me. (21) To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne. (22) He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.

    He claims to be setting in his Fathers Throne, “I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.”

    As I understand the communications that you present, you refuse to allow Jesus to have the authority given to him by God. You claim Jesus only as a brother who was used by God to set his plan in place.

  22. laymond says:

    Mar 14:62 And Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

    Act 5:31 Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins.

    Act 7:55 But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God,
    Act 7:56 And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God.
    ( we need to know when Jesus was declared , Son of God, what would be so surptizing to Stephen to see a god standing at the right of God, Stephen saw a man standing with God)

    Heb 1:13 But to which of the angels said he at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool?
    ( who seems to be the power in heaven)
    Heb 8:3 For every high priest is ordained to offer gifts and sacrifices: wherefore it is of necessity that this man have somewhat also to offer.
    Heb 10:12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;
    Heb 10:13 From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool.

    I suppose to be fair, you have to accuse the writer of Hebrews of robbing Jesus of his powers too.

  23. John F says:

    So Laymond, where is there any problem with the full deity of Jesus?

    John 10:30 I and the Father are one.”

    John 8:58 “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am.

    John 14:9-10 Jesus said to him, “Have I been so long with you, and yet you have not come to know Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; how can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? 10 “Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father is in Me?

    John 1:1-4 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.

    John 1:1 And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth

    How many more passages are needed? No one can explain the Godhead, it is well above our “pay grade” but we can accept the mystery in humility.

    The Word – Jesus – was God in the beginning. The Word – God/Jesus became flesh. Should be end of discussion, all else becomes tedious speculation.

  24. Ray Downen says:

    I certainly agree with John F. Jesus is God. Whether seated or standing in glory, HE is in full charge both in Heaven and on earth. He said so. Who dares to disagree? No one should disagree.

  25. laymond says:

    John F. I will try to counter your “knockout punch first’ or I will let Jesus do it for me.

    John 10:30 I and the Father are one.”

    Jhn 17:20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;
    Jhn 17:21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
    Jhn 17:22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:
    Jhn 17:23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.
    ( I believe that should pretty much explain, that Jesus was not saying he and his father are one and the same.)

    I can explain all the other definite proof you have, if you really need me to.

  26. laymond says:

    Ray Downen, sitting at the right hand, is self explanatory.

  27. laymond says:

    Ray my bible says Jesus sits with the power, not that Jesus is the power, I wonder if my bible is a misprint what does yours say.?
    Mat 26:64 Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.
    Mar 16:19 So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God.
    Luk 22:69 Hereafter shall the Son of man sit on the right hand of the power of God.

  28. Dwight says:

    Fellows, Ray and John F and Larry, for some reason the point of Jesus deity has passed on to yet another thread that had nothing to do with Jesus deity. Suffice it to say that after having presented many scriptures such as John 1 and Hebrews 1 Laymond still fails to recognized Jesus as the Son of God in having the nature of God. It therefore is futile as Laymond isolates points and scriptures from scriptures that should flow into a well understood concept. Laymond is consistent in his disjointed approach of Jesus just being a man who was a prophet, albeit a special prophet, and that Jesus is the not the “only begotten son”, but rather one of many who are the sons of God.
    It is true that Jesus does talk about He and His apostles on a similar level when talking about “being one”, but the point that is missed is that this is Jesus talking about his connection to God the Father in oneness and his connection to his apostles if they “believe on me” and that the context of John 10 is quite different than the context of John 17 to which Laymond alludes to. Jesus in John 10 is speaking about something that IS…”the Father is in me and I in Him” at all times.
    While John 17 is relaying what could be dependent upon his apostles faith in Him.
    Any who, this thread should be back on track about the church or congregation.

  29. laymond says:

    Dwight, If one had said that deity was to sit at the right hand of God, or even an angel such as Gabriel, was sitting at God’s right hand, the Jews probably would not have thought much of it, but a man sitting on that throne, now that is something to talk about. If Jesus sat at the right hand of God during creation, what would be so miraculous that he return here and why would he return in a human body. and why would it give hope to other men that they could do the same.

  30. Larry Cheek says:

    The main reason that I have continued to communicate with Laymond is that as he refuses to accept Jesus as his Lord and Savior, how is he different from the Jews who refused Jesus as the Son who has been given all power in heaven and earth. They are attempting to worship God and leave Jesus out, and it is easy to see what the NT has said about their position.
    Mat 28:16-18 KJV Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them. (17) And when they saw him, they worshipped him: but some doubted. (18) And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.
    The complete chapter of John 17 speaks of the oneness of God and Christ and even includes Christ’s followers ( Christians) into that same oneness.
    Laymond has committed that God has the duty or (work) to put all things under Jesus feet as is spoken of in Revelation, but the text in John 17 places that (work) upon Jesus prior to presenting the Kingdom to God.

    1Co 15:24-28 KJV Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power. (25) For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. (26) The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. (27) For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him. (28) And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.

    Verse (25) tells that Jesus is reigning until all enemies are put under his feet.

  31. laymond says:

    . (26) The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.

    Larry, what was the point of resurrection if not to show Jesus had defeated his (or man’s) last enemy. Larry when you are raised on that great judgment day, what enemy have you defeated.
    Jesus’ work is completed . As Jesus said “I have finished the work you gave me”

    Larry, I would think Jesus is so frustrated, when people don’t understand that Jesus gave us his all, and we still want more.
    Did you not read where he sat down at the right hand of God, and waited.
    Did you not read that when he returns he will be accompanied by his Father,.

    Mat 26:64 Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

    Read 1Co 15:24-28 once again.

  32. laymond says:

    Does anyone here know why it is important that we believe Jesus was a man, and not a god. that belief (that fact) gives hope to mankind, not just hope, faith that we to can be raised from death to dwell with God. Did God not say He would raise a savior from among the Jews, or did he say I will send my son from heaven to save you.
    Faith in Jesus is faith that he led the way, that he was the light that lit the way, he was the truth that told the way, and faith that, that truth came from God Almighty, just as Jesus said it did. The fact that Jesus performed miracles, showed he was backed by God. Jesus said don’t think I can do all these things, without God I can do nothing.
    Yes Jesus was a man that was mightily blessed by God . Jesus was the first, and only man raised higher than the angels, Jesus is an example of what we all can be one day. Jesus is the first of many.

  33. Monty says:

    “Now, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.

    Jesus was with the Father before anything was made and both he and the Father had “glory.” Philippians 2:6-10 talks about Jesus laying aside his glory in humbling himself being “found in the fashion of a man.”

    He fulfilled his role in providing salvation for us through his humility. He didn’t consider equality with God(shared glory) something to be grasped. But He humbled himself. God(the second person of the Godhead) humbled himself. Not a mere man, not a servant initially, but God humbled himself and took on the nature of a servant in human flesh. He was not a servant before he took on that role. When he completed the task at hand he ascended back to heaven where he was from and sat down(where he had always been) at the right hand of the Heavenly Father, seated(sharing) on the throne, glory restored.

  34. laymond says:

    Monty,If Jesus was with Jehovah from the start deity, just like God, eternal just like God, how come you refer to him as (the second person of the Godhead) . Why not first, or third, why always second.

    “He was not a servant before he took on that role. ” so you think Jesus was one of three gods playing a role pretending to be a human. Man this gets weirder, and weirder. Was the “godhead” made up of two persons while Jesus was playing this role.

  35. Ray Downen says:

    Correction. NOW Jesus is not sharing authority with the Father. He has ALL AUTHORITY and will return to the Father ALL AUTHORITY after this world is destroyed and replaced by the New Jerusalem.

  36. Ray Downen says:

    Laymond thinks God is weird. I disagree. I find no proof in apostolic writings that God is three in one. John makes clear that God is two in one, with the Father superior to the Word who was WITH GOD AND WAS GOD. The Word came to earth as Jesus and now has returned as God’s Son, who always lets His Father have the last say, as is appropriate for any son. That God is not human is an essential understanding. Whatever God does might seem weird to humans, but it makes perfect sense to God and we do well to not complain or doubt.

  37. laymond says:

    Monty, you seem to have an inside view of just how things came about. Maybe you can help me out with a question nobody else has been able to answer, I assume angels came to be through creation, we have testimony that man was made through creation , it is said that Jesus is neither angel, or man, and that he was not created yet he calls God Father. how can that be? please explain .How did God become Jesus’ father?

  38. laymond says:

    Ray said;
    “(Jesus) will return to the Father ALL AUTHORITY after this world is destroyed and replaced by the New Jerusalem.”
    Where did you find this in scripture Ray.

    Ray said; ” I find no proof in apostolic writings that God is three in one. John makes clear that God is two in one, with the Father superior to the Word ”
    Well that is a start Ray, you cut the “godhead by 1/3 from a trinity to a duo, but you say as I believe Jay also says that God is the boss god, so could that mean that “the word” is a servant of God.? and when Jesus became the word in flesh, would that not also make Jesus God’s servant.?
    I believe it would.

  39. Profile photo of Jay Guin Jay Guin says:


    I hope you mind my jumping in here. But the answer is found in Hebrews.

    (Heb. 1:1-4 ESV) Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, 2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world. 3 He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, 4 having become as much superior to angels as the name he has inherited is more excellent than theirs.

    Some translate “radiance” with “effulgence,” a word that has fallen into disuse. The reference is to the glow around a flame. God’s glory is pictured in scripture as a bright, shining light — like fire. Look at a candle, and there’s a flame, and around the flame a bright glow — the radiance or effulgence. That’s the picture.

    Now, as a matter of chemical science, the radiance is produced by the flame. The flame’s heat is the source of the radiance.

    So which came first? The flame or the radiance? Logic would seem to dictate that the radiance, being a product of the flame, came second. But you cannot have one without the other. Their existence is co-extensive even though one finds its origin in the other.

    Thus, Jesus Messiah is like the radiance to the fire of God. God is his source but he has existed as long as God has existed. And this is no logical paradox.

  40. Ray Downen says:

    Laymond, I recommend the book of Revelation for those who seek light on the future. That’s where we learn that authority will be returned to the Father AFTER this universe is destroyed and replaced. I encourage the reading of Revelation.

    As for God being two in one and one made up of two, read John 1:1-14, and believe that John was inspired to tell the truth about things previously unknown. And human wisdom has no say in what preceded the existence of humans.

  41. Ray Downen says:

    A second comment about Laymond’s remark “God is the boss god, so could that mean that “the word” is a servant of God.? and when Jesus became the word in flesh, would that not also make Jesus God’s servant?” No, indeed, God’s SON is not God’s servant. He is equally God, but in all things IS subservient to the Father God. At this time JESUS has all authority in heaven and on earth. He does nothing in opposition to the Father, but he’s the boss here now.

  42. laymond says:

    Jay, we are always glad when the Master of the house sees fit to join in on the conversation.

  43. laymond says:

    “So which came first? The flame or the radiance? Logic would seem to dictate that the radiance, being a product of the flame, came second. But you cannot have one without the other. Their existence is co-extensive even though one finds its origin in the other”

    So Jay as you say, logic dictates that the flame came first and without the flame the radiance would not exist, so it follows that the flame created the radiance. I like the Shakespearian touch of the Hebrews writer. .

  44. John F says:

    Laymond: “John F. I will try to counter your “knockout punch first’ or I will let Jesus do it for me”

    start the music: “Try, try is but to fail. sad, sad, that bitter wail . . . . ”

    All attempts to explain the Godhead fall short.

  45. Dwight says:

    Jay. even the first part of Heb.1 “Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world.” should be enough to qualify Jesus as the Son of God and thus God in nature, because through Jesus made the world. This is also expounded upon in John 1 as well as other places.
    Although, I am fairly sure that the Holy Spirit makes up the Godhead as Ray seems to question (and maybe there is maybe some room and yet the Holy Spirit is Holy and of God), the scriptures are at least clear the Son of God is like God in nature, but not in all things as He is the Son. The scriptures point to this and the congregation of God is built upon this concept that Jesus is the Son of God and He was from birth.
    I think part of the problem is the word “God’ which is derived from the German “got” for good to replace the word YHWH or similar designations. YHWY meant simply I am and was not a definition except to say he existed or was in the ultimate sense. But in a lot of places the word “el” is used which simply means god or one who is above all. The nature of God is deity as noted by the usage of the word EL in the context of this EL who is above all and creator of all.
    In the OT there is one voice (okay, as related by Moses), but there are hints at a plurality, in particular in Genesis as in “we shall make man in OUR image” and their was prophecy of the savior coming to earth who was God, so this wasn’t a far out concept to the Jews.
    But what confounded them, and it seems Laymond as well, was that God could come in the flesh (as a baby (who was summarily worshipped and called Immanuel or God is with us by the angels)) and look like everyone else (yet even this was prophesied) and live like everyone else (except he healed and forgave sins and lived perfectly without sin) and die like no one else.

  46. laymond says:

    Ray, maybe if you could be more precise as to the place in Revelations I should go to, I have read Revelations more than once, if I missed the verse you are talking about then, I doubt that it would pop out to me now.
    as a matter of fact I have to admit I do get a little confused in that book. It would be great to speak to someone who understands it all.

  47. Monty says:

    John 17:5 from the Pulpit Commentary Verse 5. – And now (νῦν) – the very point of time has come – glorify thou me, O Father, explaining the opening of the prayer, “Glorify thy Son.” He identifies his own Personality – “me” -with that of “the Son,” and “thy Son.” With thy own self (παρὰ σεαυτῷ); in closest connection and fellowship with thy-self – a relation which has been arrested or suspended since have been “Jesus Christ,” and glorifying thee amid the toil and sorrow of this earthly pilgrimage. This immediate glorification of the Son embraces the glory of vicarious death, the triumphant resurrection, the mystery of ascension in the strength of his human memories to the right hand of God (John 13:31, 32). He still further defines this wondrous prospect, as with the glory which I had with thee before the world was – before the being of the κόσμος παρὰ σεαυτῷ… παρὰ σοι Παρὰ in John represents local relationships (see John 1:40; John 4:40; John 14:25; Revelation 2:13) or intimate spiritual associations (John 14: ). So our Lord remembers and anticipates a “glory with the Father.” That which he refers to as before the existence of the world has been softened down by Grotius, Wettstein, Schleiermacher, and some moderns to mean the glory of the Divine thought and destination concerning him; but the expression παρὰ σοι ισ far from being exhausted by such a rendering. He who wrote the prologue (John 1:2, 18) meant that, as the Logos had been πρὸς τὸν Θέον and εἰς τὸν κόλπον τοῦ Πατρός, and at a special epoch “became flesh,” the beamings forth of his glory on earth were those which belonged to human life, to the form of a servant, and were profoundly different from that μορφὴ Θεοῦ in which his innermost self-consciousness, the center of his Personality, originally dwelt. And now he seeks to carry this new appanage of his Sonship, this God-glorifying humanity, up into the glory of the pre-existent majesty (cf. Philippians 2:9; 1 Timothy 3:16; Hebrews 1:8, 13). The δόξα which was visible to the disciples on earth (John 1:14) was glory limited, colored, conditioned, by human life and death; but so complete was the Lord’s union with the Logos, that it did not quench his memory of the glory of his omnipresent, eternal Being, nor his remembrance of absolute coexistence with the Father before all worlds. He would lift humanity to the very throne of God by its union with his Person. This stupendous claim both as to the past and future would be utterly bewildering if it stood alone; but the Old Testament has prepared the mind of the disciples for this great mystery (Proverbs 8; Isaiah 6.). The theophanies generally, and John 8:25 and Hebrews 1, with numerous other passages, sustain and corroborate the conception that the Logos of God was throughout all human history on the verge of manifestation in the flesh. The record of the extraordinary God-consciousness of Jesus does transcend all human experience, and baffles us at every turn; but the human consciousness of Jesus appears gradually to have come into such communion with the Logos who had become flesh in him, that he thought the veritable thoughts and felt the emotions of the eternal God as though they were absolutely his own. In addition to this idea of his resumption of his own eternal state, Lange and Moulton, in opposition to Meyer, lay emphasis on the answer to this prayer, consisting in such a manifestation of the premundane glory in his flesh, that it should perfectly establish the relation between the glory of the Father before all worlds, -rod the glory of utter and complete self-sacrifice for the redemption of the world. The glory of omnipotence and omnipresence is lost in the greater glory of infinite love. Thus the glory which he had with the Father would be best seen in the completion of his agony, the τετέλεσται of the cross.

  48. Ray Downen says:

    Laymond asks where in Revelation it is stated that Jesus will return authority to the Father, and I am not now locating the passage. My Bible-search program points me to many passages about authority, including this passage from Paul: 1 Corinthians 15:16-28 English Standard Version (ESV)

    “16 For if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised. 17 And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins. 18 Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. 19 If in Christ we have hope[a] in this life only, we are of all people most to be pitied.

    “20 But in fact Christ has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 21 For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive. 23 But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ. 24 Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power. 25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy to be destroyed is death. 27 For ‘God[b] has put all things in subjection under his feet.’ But when it says, ‘all things are put in subjection,’ it is plain that he is excepted who put all things in subjection under him. 28 When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to him who put all things in subjection under him, that God may be all in all.”

    I’ll read Revelation again and then point you to the verse there. Meanwhile I’m due to keep an appointment with a doctor at 10 and that’s only 9 minutes from now.

  49. Dwight says:

    Ray, even if you don’t find the verse in Revelations, the verse in I Cor.15 states it clearly enough.
    The fact is that Jesus states there is a Kingdom numerous times while he preached and that He was the King, then he was placed in that position after His death, on the throne then we have the verse I Cor.15. There is a natural flow.

  50. laymond says:

    Dwight said, “But what confounded them, and it seems Laymond as well” . I am pretty sure that those who lived at the time were as astute as Dwight says he is, and who knows I could be as well.

  51. laymond says:

    Ray, 25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy to be destroyed is death.

    “20 But in fact Christ has been raised from the dead,”

    Ray, does this not tell us that Jesus has defeated his last enemy ?

  52. Ray Downen says:

    I’m glad the apostles didn’t know big words like some people now do, so they told of Jesus in simple words! I think we do well to explain Jesus in simple words today if we hope to be understood by most people.

  53. Ray Downen says:

    It appears I was mistaken that it’s in Revelation that the statement is clearly made of Jesus “returning” authority to the Father. I’ve just re-read Revelation and don’t find there what I remembered as having read there. So the passage to which I earlier referred you is the one where it is clearly stated that Jesus will return authority to the Father at the end of earthly time. Truths need to be stated only once in order to be true. And the prophecy is clear, referring both to the fact that NOW Jesus is fully in charge and that later authority will be returned to the Father but only after this universe is destroyed by fire and replaced by the New Jerusalem.

  54. laymond says:

    Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power. 25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy to be destroyed is death.

    Ray I guess this is something else that we see differently. I see this “Then comes the end, ” as meaning the end of Jesus’ reign. I believe context of the subject demands we read it that way.
    Paul is not speaking of the end of the world, but the end of Jesus’ reign. And God taking control again.

    I don’t see why the world must end, for God to take the reins . I can see why god takes control when Jesus has finished the job given him by God.

  55. Ray Downen says:

    When it happens we’ll know. If, that is, it happens during our lifetimes. Did you see why God put the reins into the hands of Jesus? It’s equally important that we agree with how the world ends. God will do what He chooses to do in the way He chooses to do it regardless of what we see or fail to see. I expect we both knew that.

  56. Dwight says:

    Laymond, death has already been defeated by Jesus death and resurrection and this will be realized in the last days.
    “But each one in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who are Christ’s at His coming. Then comes the end, when He delivers the kingdom to God the Father, when He puts an end to all rule and all authority and power.”
    The second coming is predicted to happen, then when that happens, then Jesus will give the Kingdom back to God, but up until the point that Jesus comes and he hands it over to God, then Jesus reigns as King.
    Up until “the end” Jesus states “no man comes to the father but through me” so Jesus gives the path to God, but it is only through Jesus. Jesus is called the door, the way, the truth and the light. It appears Jesus is much, much more than just a servant, even though he was a servant as well. He was a servant to man, by his own volition, as well as His Father.

  57. laymond says:

    Dwight says:
    Laymond, death has already been defeated by Jesus death and resurrection and this will be realized in the last days.

    Exactly, just what I have been saying all along. Jesus has defeated his last earthly enemy, He sat down at the right hand of God and handed God the reigns.

    “Jesus will give the Kingdom back to God, but up until the point that Jesus comes and he hands it over to God, then Jesus reigns as King.”

    I am going to ask you as I did Ray, give me proof in scripture.
    Jesus said he would come in the clouds of heaven at the right hand of God. I do believe he was speaking of judgment day .

  58. laymond says:

    Dwight, if you remember, Jesus said that God is the only one who knows when that day will happen.

  59. laymond says:

    Psa 110:1 ¶ [[A Psalm of David.]] The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.

    Heb 10:12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;
    Heb 10:13 From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool.

    so who promised to do what?

  60. Dwight says:

    Laymond, the proof is the scriptures that has just been presented…Jesus at His coming…the end…delivers Kingdom to God. As far as I know Jesus hasn’t come yet, so He is still King by default. Jesus did not know the day of His coming while on this earth, but that doesn’t mean He doesn’t know now.
    Somehow I got sucked in again. This is my last entry until it gets back to the subject of the church.

  61. Ray Downen says:

    It’s good that Dwight “got sucked in” and answered as I should have. Good for Dwight.

  62. Ray Downen says:

    I’m really surprised that anyone who loves the Bible would write as Laymond did, “Exactly, just what I have been saying all along. Jesus has defeated his last earthly enemy, He sat down at the right hand of God and handed God the reins.” How clearly is it taught that Jesus is head of the church on earth TODAY, ruling from Heaven. And Jesus promises that HE will return in glory. What’s this about with the Father trailing along? Is that really what Jesus promised?

    Jesus now rules from Heaven, ruling both in Heaven and on earth. He will return to earth in triumph as this universe is being destroyed, in order to take with Him to glory those on earth who belong to Him. Any discussion about Christ’s church will be helpful, of course. WE are His church. WE belong to Him. HE is our Lord. We are called to love and serve one another, both the wise and the unwise. Here we have opportunity to do so!

  63. laymond says:

    What do you two do just ignore scripture like Psa 110:1 and Heb 10:12-13. I did not write either one, just reminding you that someone else did.

  64. John F says:

    How we given much thought to the possibility / probability that that Jesus as the mono genes “unique, only kind” first born, God in the flesh, may not have been considered “Son of God / Son of Man” UNTIL He set his glory aside, emptied himself, and took on the form of a servant. (Phil. 1). Prior to His enfleshment, He was fully God. John 1 and 17 can allow this view, but I am still working through this idea in my own mind. John 1 does not say “the Word” had a separate existence from God, but that God was the Word, the Word was God = all one, all the same, but v.14 the Word became flesh. Paul looks at this from the viewpoint of creation.

    Col 1:15-18 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. 16 For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities — all things have been created through Him and for Him. 17 He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together.

    Jesus cannot at the same time be the creator of all things, and be created himself. He is the prototokos — v.15 (prototype) the first God become flesh (OT theophanyies).

    Responsive thoughts welcomed. Yes, Laymond, you also.

  65. laymond says:

    Ray said, ” What’s this about with the Father trailing along?” If someone is tagging alone it will not be God.

    If you don’t believe the following scripture, just say you don’t believe it.

    Mar 14:62 And Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven

    Who do you think Jesus is referring to here.? Do you think this might be referring to the coming at judgment day.

    Mar 16:19 So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God.

  66. laymond says:

    John F. the relationship between God and the word, no doubt has existed forever, the relationship between God and Jesus came much later. The bible plainly tells us that God used the word to create all he created. God spoke and things happened. to make a very long story short, when Jesus was baptized, and the “spirit of God ascended upon him and dwelled there, “the word became flesh” Jesus became both created , and creator. Jesus (IMO) became a duel being . When we refer to God, as a person we fall short of describing who God really is. (as Jesus said “God is a spirit”) The word is a part of God always has been, and he (for the lack of a better word) returned to his God to take up the position he once had, as a part of God. Jesus died on the cross, and was raised to be on the right hand of God , his creator. (IMO) the raised spirit of Jesus, became “The Holy Ghost” guiding his apostles through his spirit rather than through his word.
    sometimes it is difficult to discern just who is speaking when Jesus spoke. I believe it was “the word ” speaking when Jesus said (I am before Adam was.) If one man could be indwelled by legions , Jesus could handle seven. That is how I see it.

  67. Dwight says:

    I will answer John F.,
    John 1:1-3 “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was WITH God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning WITH God. All things were made THROUGH Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.”

    The first three verses state that “the Word”, which we will later see is referred to as being Jesus, was WITH God and all things were made THROUGH Jesus. Through carries the concept of a conduit of which something is put in from one side (by someone else) and develops on the other side by way of. Col.1:15-18 restates this concept. The word or conduit was Jesus. We aren’t told much more than that and don’t need to know much more than that.

    Then in vs.14 “And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father.” which indicates that the word who dwelt among us wasn’t the Father, but the “glory as of the only begotten of the Father.”

    This Word who is Jesus was called Immanuel at his birth in Isaiah 7:14 to Matthew 1:23 “God with us.” No other person in the scriptures was given this name or title.

    Could he be created…by God the Father? Possible, but we don’t know the origin of Jesus. We don’t even know the origin of God…of if there was an origin. All we know is that God was there all along and Jesus was there at least at the moment of creation of all we know. And that many generations later Jesus, “the word” and “the light”, became flesh and dwelt among us.

  68. Ray Downen says:

    You seem to not have noticed that John says the Word (a person) WAS WITH GOD as well as being God. To me, the clear statement of the apostle tells me that the PERSON who came to earth as JESUS WAS GOD and also WAS WITH GOD as a separate entity/being/person.

  69. Ray Downen says:

    Laymond wrote: “The bible plainly tells us that God used the word to create all he created. God spoke and things happened.” So Laymond is saying that the words God spoke did the creating. And that is exactly the opposite of what JOHN the apostle reports.

    The WORD who was WITH GOD did the creating, according to John 1. John does not say God created. We read Genesis and hear that GOD spoke and things happened. But John gives us a slightly different slant on the Creation. The WORD who was WITH GOD (not words spoken by God) created, according to John’s testimony. The apostle wrote as he was inspired by the Spirit to write.

  70. Ray Downen says:

    I hear Mark saying that Jesus will sit on the right hand of God in Heaven, and that those who heard Mark would see Jesus coming in power when He returns to earth. I don’t believe that when Jesus returns we’ll see Him or His Father SEATED, but that could happen. I think it more likely that Jesus will NOT be seated when He returns in glory and every eye sees Him at that time.

  71. laymond says:

    So Laymond is saying that the words God spoke did the creating. And that is exactly the opposite of what JOHN the apostle reports.

    Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
    Gen 1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
    Gen 1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

    So Ray evidenly you can’t accept the first three verses in the bible as truth. Why do you bother to read the rest of it. If I thought I was lied to right off the bat, that would be it for me. God’s power is an awesome power.
    Although God gave Jesus the power of creation, (God’s word) I just recall twice when Jesus used that power, first to make wine for a wedding, and to magnify food to fed the multitudes. There might be more, but I don’t recall them.

  72. Monty says:

    You cannot separate the humanity of Jesus from his deity. Paul and John declare that everything that was made was made by him(Jesus), for him(Jesus) and through him(Jesus).He made it. It was all his. Do we get the point?

    If Jesus wasn’t God until God acknowledged him to JTB, then that Jesus didn’t make or create anything. Laymond believes the word sort of filled the human(only) Jesus and enabled him to be something he wasn’t already(God’s Son at birth) deity wrapped in humanity. Any view that Jesus(Messiah) wasn’t deity at his birth denies what John, Paul, and the prophets all declare. Did he go by the name Jesus before his birth? Who cares? The baby born to Mary was God come in human flesh. Predicted for hundreds of years before he came. Wonderful, Counselor, Prince of Peace, Mighty God, Emmanuel!!

  73. Dwight says:

    I understand that when it says, Gen 1:1 “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.” that this is a reference to God the Father and John doesn’t deny this either.
    If “All things were made THROUGH Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.” then we have a case where God spoke and then Jesus acted in some way to direct the will of God.
    How did God make the world through Jesus? Who knows.
    Where did the material for the world and the universes come from? Who knows.
    All we know is what we are told and they cannot go against each other.
    Hence John 1 shows that Jesus was present in the beginning and Gen.1:26 “Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness” indicates that there was plurality at play. So they reconcile with each other.

  74. laymond says:

    Dwight said, ““Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness” indicates that there was plurality at play.”
    Dwight, which came first, angels or men.

  75. Monty says:

    So, the angels helped God make man? Let us means let God and the angels? Interesting.

  76. Ray Downen says:

    Throughout the Old Testament times, the only creation story told was in Genesis. It has the Father God speaking things into existence. When the apostle John wrote about Jesus, he elaborates on the creation story, making clear that it was NOT words spoken by God which created, but instead it was the WORD of God who was with God and WAS GOD who actually created all things.

    John makes clear that there was more to the creation than was revealed in Genesis. You want to ignore the later revelation. You feel that the additional information which was NOT made available to Moses is unimportant, perhaps. I feel that the added information changes the revelation so that in fact the Genesis account is no longer sufficient. Christians do well to study the NEW TESTAMENT seeking truth about God. I do so.

  77. laymond says:

    John makes clear that there was more to the creation than was revealed in Genesis.
    as a matter of fact John is far from explaining the creation, do you realize the amount of time
    that had to pass between Verse one and the verse where the word became flesh, thousands of years.

  78. Ray Downen says:

    Laymond thinks since Jesus wasn’t born for centuries after creation that the WORD who WAS GOD and WAS WITH GOD couldn’t have done the creating, as John clearly teaches. Why would anyone think to link Jesus being born on earth with the creation of the universe? No link at all. By the way, we normally capitalize names and the NAME of the creator was God’s Word. It was not His words. It was the person who was described only as God’s WORD but who is clearly stated to have been GOD as well as WITH GOD. He later came to earth and lived as Jesus, but His name prior to that was not Jesus. His name was God’s Word. Now we call Him JESUS. He still is God’s WORD as well as being God’s SON now. But He never was God’s word (just a spoken word from God). John is led to say He was WITH GOD (someone other than the Father) and also WAS GOD. He deserves honor and recognition, which is not normally given by failing to capitalize His name.

  79. laymond says:

    Ray, “By the way, we normally capitalize names and the NAME of the creator was God’s Word. It was not His words”
    Ray I can assure you the original manuscript did not have “capital letters” in it. When you read capital letters in the bible, you are reading some man’s opinion. we need to be guided by context, not capitalized letters.
    So when the bible states , God said “let there be light” that is just a rumor started by Moses.

  80. Dwight says:

    Yes, Monty, it appears that when God made man he included the angels in the process and not Jesus who we are told that the worlds were made through according to John 1 and was with God and was God.
    It appears we are made in the image of God and the angels, which means that now the angels are God because in vs.27 “So God created man in HIS own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.”
    So Jesus is rejected from being God, but the angels are not.
    This seems to be what we are reduced to. Rejecting clear scripture and going for things that we aren’t told and that we have to suppose happened.

  81. John F says:

    Perhaps my earlier post was not as clear or complete as I thought. I ask / propose the the WORD (which was / is God) = God was not considered the “SON” (monogenes) until the enfleshment of God through Mary’s womb. The WORD (Imanuel) was not Jesus until His birth. In this view, the willingness of God to separate Himself into “entities” for our benefit that resulted in God Himself becoming flesh in the God/Man Jesus becomes the reason for the glorification of Jesus Christ and the reason all creation will “bend the knee and confess that Jesus is Lord to the glory of the Father.

  82. Dwight says:

    I’m not sure I can go with God separating himself into entities, at least at the time of Jesus birth? Which means that when God said in “Let us make man in our image”, then he was talking to Himself. And when Jesus rose from His baptism, he was basically congratulating Himself. And when Jesus prayed to God, He was praying to Himself. It doesn’t quite fit with the fact that John said “the Word was WITH God” in the beginning and it doesn’t quite fit with Jesus arguing that He knows and was sent by the Father and was before Abraham as far as lineage goes.
    It appears that Jesus had self awareness as the Son of God way before He became flesh.

  83. laymond says:

    Dwight said, “It appears we are made in the image of God and the angels,” Dwight I don’t know if Adam was made in the image of angels or not , but Jesus said we will be. if we make it to heaven.
    Mat 22:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.
    Mat 22:30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.

    What you are saying is that God was made into the image of man. That is just hard for me to believe.

  84. Dwight says:

    Actually what we are saying is that Jesus existed and came in the form of man, that is in the flesh, but he was still God, so Jesus wasn’t remade image wise. Jesus said to the people that when they beheld Him, they beheld God the Father, since Jesus was the glory of God.
    When God made man God worked from scratch in flesh and then breathed life into man and gave Him a soul, after he was made in the flesh.
    So the fleshly body really is a husk.
    When we are born a form is wrapped around a spirit, as all spirits come from and go back to God.
    Since God is not flesh, but spirit, then Jesus who was in heaven could be made flesh though the HS as John and the gospels point out, without changing the deity of Jesus.

    And I was being fasicious with the “made in the image of God and the angels” as I believe we were made in the image of God, which would have included Jesus, who all things were made through.

  85. laymond says:

    When we are born a form is wrapped around a spirit, as all spirits come from and go back to God.

    Reincarnation is the religious or philosophical concept that the soul or spirit, after biological death, can begin a new life in a new body. This doctrine is a central tenet of the Hindu religion

    Dwight, if all spirits go back to God, what are we working so hard to achieve that.

  86. Dwight says:

    Laymond, My that is a jump…reincarnation? Who said anything about reincarnation?

    In Gen.1 “God breathed life into man”. The “breathed” is “pneuma” or air or what is translated to be “spirit” I believe in the Septuagint.
    Job.33:4 “The Spirit of God has made me, And the breath of the Almighty gives me life.”
    Eccl.12:7 “Then the dust will return to the earth as it was, And the spirit will return to God who gave it.”
    Acts 7:59 “And they stoned Stephen as he was calling on God and saying, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.”
    Because in the end God will judge us accordingly and we will not all be judged the same at some future point in time.

    Laymond, you are not working within the scriptures, but making excuses for why you believe what you believe. But the point remains the same. Paul called his body “a tent”, because it wasn’t permanent and because it held something inside. Jesus could come in the flesh, because the flesh is holding the spirit, which upon death releases it. John 19:30 “And bowing His head, He gave up His spirit.” and why Jesus said, ““Father, ‘into Your hands I commit My spirit.’”
    Jesus could come in the flesh on the same basis he allowed himself to “give up His spirit.” This ability to do this so impressed the Centurian guard standing by that he remarked, “Truly this man was the Son of God.”

  87. Profile photo of Jay Guin Jay Guin says:

    Dwight wrote,

    When we are born a form is wrapped around a spirit, as all spirits come from and go back to God.

    Very Platonic but not Jewish or Christian. I know of nothing in scripture that suggests that the spirit pre-exists the human. Nor are there are any verses teaching that God gives us a soul. Rather, the soul is part of the whole human. It’s who we are, not our immortal element.

    Term translating the Greek word psychē and the Hebrew nep̄eš.
    The Greek philosopher Plato (4th century B.C.) perceived the soul as the eternal element in man: whereas the body perishes at death, the soul is indestructible. At death the soul enters another body; if it has been wicked in this life, it may be sent into an inferior human being, or even an animal or bird. By means of transmigration from one body to another, the soul is eventually purged of evil. In the early centuries of the Christian era, Gnosticism also taught that the body was the prison house of the soul. Redemption comes to those initiated into the Gnostic secrets, leading to the release of the soul from the body.
    Biblical thought about the soul is different. In the OT the soul signifies that which is vital to man in the broadest sense. The Hebrew and Greek words for soul often can be translated as “life”; occasionally they can be used for the life of creatures (Gen 1:20; Lv 11:10). “Soul for soul” means “life for life” (Ex 21:23). Blood is said to be the seat of life, for when blood is shed death ensues (Gn 9:4–6; Lv 17:11, 14; Dt 12:23). In legal writings a soul means the person concerned in a particular law (e.g., Lv 4:2; 5:1, 2, 4, 15). When people were counted, they were counted as souls, that is, persons (Ex 1:5; Dt 10:22).
    In a narrower sense the soul denotes man in his varied emotions and inner powers. Man is called to love God with all his heart and soul (Dt 13:3). Within the soul lies the desire for food (12:20, 21), the lust of the flesh (Jer 2:24), and the thirst for murder and revenge (Ps 27:12). The soul is said to weep (Jb 30:16; Ps 119:28), and to be exercised in patience (Jb 6:11). Knowledge and understanding (Ps 139:14), thought (1 Sm 20:3), love (1 Sm 18:1), and memory (Lam 3:20) all originate in the soul. Here the soul comes close to what today would be called the self, one’s person, personality, or ego.
    There is no suggestion in the OT of the transmigration of the soul as an immaterial, immortal entity. Man is a unity of body and soul—terms which describe not so much two separate entities in man as the one man from different standpoints. Hence, in the description of man’s creation in Genesis 2:7, the phrase “a living soul” (KJV) is better translated as “a living being.” The thought is not that man became a “soul,” for clearly he had a body. The use of the word in the original draws attention to the vital aspect of man as “a living being.” The Hebrew view of the unity of man may help to explain why man in the OT had only a shadowy view of life after death, for it would be difficult to conceive how man could exist without a body (Pss 16:10; 49:15; 88:3–12). Where hope of an after-life exists, it is not because of the intrinsic character of the soul itself (as in Plato). It is grounded in confidence in the God who has power over death and the belief that communion with him cannot be broken even by death (Ex 3:6; 32:39; 1 Sm 2:6; Jb 19:25, 26; Pss 16:10, 11; 73:24, 25; Is 25:8; 26:19; Dn 12:2; Hos 6:1–3; 13:14).
    In the NT the word for soul (psychē) has a range of meanings similar to that of the OT. Often it is synonymous with life itself. Followers of Jesus are said to have risked their lives for his sake (Acts 15:26; cf. Jn 13:37; Rom 16:4; Phil 2:30). As the Son of Man, Jesus came not to be served, but to serve and to give his life as a ransom for many (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45). As the Good Shepherd, he lays down his life for the sheep (Jn 10:14, 17, 18). In Luke 14:26 the condition of discipleship is to hate one’s soul, that is, to be willing to deny oneself to the point of losing one’s life for Christ’s sake (cf. Lk 9:23; Rv 12:11). In Luke 12:19 the rich man addresses his soul, that is, himself. But the soul can indicate the essential self of a man with its desire for life and well-being.
    Frequently “soul” can mean “person” (Acts 2:43; 3:23; 7:14; 27:22; Rom 2:9; 13:1; 1 Pt 3:20). The expression “every living soul” (Rv 16:3 KJV; cf. 8:9) reflects the vital aspect of living beings (cf. Gn 2:7). In his teaching on the resurrection Paul contrasts the merely physical aspect of the soul with the resurrection body. “Thus it is written, ‘The first man Adam became a living being’; the last Adam [Christ] became a life-giving spirit” (1 Cor 15:45). In the following verses Paul goes on to contrast the resurrection body with the natural body. It is clear that Paul is talking neither about the immortality of the soul nor of the resuscitation of corpses to the state in which they were at death. The resurrection body will be a new kind of body. “Just as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall also bear the image of the man of heaven” (v 49).
    As in the OT the soul can denote not only the vital aspect of the person on the physical level, but it can also connote one’s emotional energies. It denotes man himself, the seat of his emotions, man in his inmost being. Jesus could speak of his soul being crushed (Mt 26:38; Mk 14:34; cf. Ps 42:6). In Matthew 11:29 Jesus promises rest to the souls of those who come to him. Here as elsewhere “soul” denotes the essential person (cf. Lk 2:35; 2 Cor 1:23; 2 Thes 2:8; 3 Jn 2).
    Several passages place the soul alongside the spirit. Luke 1:46 is probably a case of Hebrew poetic parallelism which expresses the same idea in two different ways. Both terms denote Mary as a person to the depths of her being. Similarly in Hebrews 4:12, dividing the soul and the spirit is a graphic way of saying how the Word of God probes the inmost recesses of our being. The prayer in 1 Thessalonians 5:23—that the readers may be kept sound and blameless in spirit, soul, and body—is a way of speaking of man on the level of his mind, will, emotions, and physical needs. Here soul probably suggests physical existence, as in Genesis 2:7 and 1 Corinthians 2:14, whereas spirit may imply the higher or “spiritual” side of life.
    In other passages the emotions, the will, and even the mind come to the fore, though in each case there is the accompanying idea of man in his inmost being. Man is to love God with all his soul (Mt 22:37; Mk 12:30; Lk 2:27; cf. Dt 6:5). The expression “from the soul” (Eph 6:6; Col 3:23) means “from the heart,” with all one’s being. In Philippians 1:27 believers are called to be of one mind (cf. Acts 4:32; 14:2). Passages that speak of the soul in relation to salvation include Matthew 10:28; Luke 12:5; Hebrews 6:19; 10:39; 12:3; 13:7; James 1:21; 5:20; 1 Peter 1:9, 22; 2:25; 4:19; and Revelation 6:9; 20:4. Such passages speak of the soul either to stress the essential human being, as distinct from the physical body, or to express man’s continued existence with God prior to the resurrection. Jesus’ promise to the penitent criminal (Lk 23:43; see 2 Cor 5:8; Phil 1:21, 23; 1 Thes 4:14) gives assurance of abiding in his presence without, however, using the word “soul.”
    In quotations from the OT “my soul” is another way of saying “I.” Thus God speaks of his soul, thereby summing up all that characterizes God in his love, holiness, wrath, and faithfulness (Mt 12:18, cf. Is 42:1; Heb 10:38, cf. Hb 2:4).

    Walter A. Elwell and Barry J. Beitzel, Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible, 1988, 1987–1988.

    “Spirit” can take several meanings in the OT and NT, but it normally refers to life. To give up the spirit is to die. To give one’s spirit up to God is to turn your life over God. Jesus gave up his life to God, placing his life in God’s hands, as only God could resurrect him.

    God breathed life into Adam.

  88. Larry Cheek says:

    The commentator certainly conveys a different concept of “soul” than I understand from Jesus.
    (Mat 10:28 ESV) And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell.

    (Mat 16:26 ESV) For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul? Or what shall a man give in return for his soul?

    (Mat 22:37 ESV) And he said to him, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.

    (Mar 8:36 ESV) For what does it profit a man to gain the whole world and forfeit his soul?
    I would understand this forfeiting as an action which was after the man died.

    (Mar 8:37 ESV) For what can a man give in return for his soul?

    (Luk 12:20 ESV) But God said to him, ‘Fool! This night your soul is required of you, and the things you have prepared, whose will they be?’

    (Act 2:27 ESV) For you will not abandon my soul to Hades, or let your Holy One see corruption.
    How would it be possible to have the soul in Hades if it did not survive the death of the body?

    (1Th 5:23 ESV) Now may the God of peace himself sanctify you completely, and may your whole spirit and soul and body be kept blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.
    Was the writer expecting the individuals to whom he was addressing to still be alive when the Lord comes? If the body had died the soul was still alive.

    (Heb 6:19 ESV) We have this as a sure and steadfast anchor of the soul, a hope that enters into the inner place behind the curtain,
    What value would there be to have an anchor for the soul if it did not survive this body?

    (Jas 5:20 ESV) let him know that whoever brings back a sinner from his wandering will save his soul from death and will cover a multitude of sins.
    Death comes to a soul by wandering, departing from the Way. But, no man can kill a soul only God has that power.

    (1Pe 2:11 ESV) Beloved, I urge you as sojourners and exiles to abstain from the passions of the flesh, which wage war against your soul.

    (3Jn 1:2 ESV) Beloved, I pray that all may go well with you and that you may be in good health, as it goes well with your soul.

    (Rev 18:14 ESV) “The fruit for which your soul longed has gone from you, and all your delicacies and your splendors are lost to you, never to be found again!”

    There are many different ways that the “soul” is described in scripture, but I have not found that a man can kill a soul which is testified to by Jesus. Jesus says that there is only one who can destroy a soul. To me that states that the soul survives death of the physical body and is a partaker in either everlasting life or destroyed in the judgement rendered upon the unrighteous at judgement.

  89. Dwight says:

    Jay, It wasn’t my intent to indicate that there are spirits in heaven that are waiting for a body, but rather that God provided the animation and such for man that the flesh contains that. The spirit comes from God because God provides that. That is why man was created, in the flesh and then God breathed life into him. Just to clarify.
    Isa.57 “For I will not contend forever, Nor will I always be angry; For the spirit would fail before Me, And the souls which I have made.”
    I Thess.5 “Now may the God of peace Himself sanctify you completely; and may your whole spirit, soul, and body be preserved blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.”
    Heb.4:12 “For the word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the division of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.”
    There seems to be a division between what we would consider a spirit and the soul and body. From what I understand the spirit is the force of life and the soul is the individual and the body is the flesh.
    But our spirit must talk to God’s spirit and we are to be spiritual, which means elevate ourselves to what God is and leave the flesh behind. God is spirit and we have a spirit. We were made in the image of God.

  90. Monty says:

    Jesus gave up the spirit. The body without the spirit is dead. When the spirit leaves the person dies. But you have come to Mount Zion… God, the judge of all, ……to the spirits of the righteous made perfect. I saw under the alter the souls of those who had been slain because of the word of God, those souls speak, are told to be patient and are given white robes. Just too ,many anecdotal stories of near death experiences of people telling how their spirit left their body and saw things that took place while under heavy anesthesia. Things that were later verified. There is a certain commonality to practically all these stories. I don’t think Enoch and Elijah are sitting up in heaven by their lonesome.

  91. laymond says:

    Monty, all Martian sightings are pretty much the same as well. I don’t know but I suspect that if the first Martian spotted was a bright red in color, they all would have been bright red.

    Monty how many of these ” near death experiences” occurred outside the US. and outside the Pentecostal church.
    I can’t figure out why some experience this and the majority do not. (Been there done that) I fell like it is more like dying, and being raised later , nothing in between. I was under for several hours and remembered nothing that went on, and I an glad I didn’t after I saw what they had done to me 🙂

    I don’t know what others experienced, I am just wondering why some do, but most don’t.

  92. laymond says:

    I have never seen a Martian either, seem I get left out on all the amazing things 🙂

  93. laymond says:

    Dwight, it seems strange to me that you feel the need to explain to Jay , or try to, as to what you meant, And only showed belligerence toward me when we both said essentially the same thing , that what you said was not Christian, but it might fit right in with other religions. I just pointed it out more bluntly than Jay did. Sometimes religion requires bluntness sometimes it requires a gentle hand, I have about given up on gentleness with some here. sorry but even Jesus’ patents became short at times.
    I guess it is time I took some time off.

  94. John F says:

    What I see is that the soul becomes the battleground of life — Satan normally attempting to reach us (tempt) throguh our fleshly nature and God noirmally appealing to our spiritual nature. Perhaps the caricature of the angel / devil on each shoulder isn’t so far off, after all.

    1 thes 5:23 makes me a trichotomist — with the soul containing reason and emotion —

  95. Monty says:


    If someone tells what the ER DOc’s were doing to them and repeats verbatim what they said, I sort of have to take their word for it. Kind of like the kid in the movie” Heaven is For Real” told his mom he had a sister in heaven that had died in her tummy or something that affect. Now either it’s a bald face made up lie(hoax) or there is something there. Heard other stories from the ER that were verified(supposedly) by folks familiar with the case. Talk with some Hospice folks who are there regularly when folks are about to die and learn how many talk to their deceased(not living ones) family members shortly before dying. Hear them tell about the angels in the room with them. Hear them as they are able to see through the veil.

  96. Dwight says:

    Laymond, you made a jump to reincarnation, which Jay seemed to follow up on from your statement. I had to explain that I wasn’t talking reincarnation and the concept of souls waiting in heaven waiting for a body. My point was that bodies as tent hold spirits and that the spirits are a creation of God as is the body, but that God also has the power to imbue a body with a spirit, but one that already existed in the form of Jesus.

Leave a Reply