Before we talk about falling away, let’s discuss being in jeopardy of falling away. We begin in 2 Peter —
(2Pe 1:5-8 ESV) 5 For this very reason, make every effort to supplement your faith with virtue, and virtue with knowledge, 6 and knowledge with self-control, and self-control with steadfastness, and steadfastness with godliness, 7 and godliness with brotherly affection, and brotherly affection with love. 8 For if these qualities are yours and are increasing, they keep you from being ineffective or unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Notice v. 8 very carefully. The promise is that if we are growing in spiritual virtues (such as those listed in verses 5 – 7) we will be effective and fruitful. But if not, we can become ineffective and unfruitful.
(2Pe 1:9-10 ESV) 9 For whoever lacks these qualities is so nearsighted that he is blind, having forgotten that he was cleansed from his former sins. 10 Therefore, brothers, be all the more diligent to confirm your calling and election, for if you practice these qualities you will never fall.
Similarly, we are taught in v. 10 that if we “practice these qualities” we will “never fall.” That is, so long as we are growing in Christ, we will not fall. Which means what? Plainly, that if we don’t grow, we are in jeopardy of falling. The NET Bible, like the KJV and NIV, makes v. 10 clearer and truer to the Greek —
(2Pe 1:10 NET) Therefore, brothers and sisters, make every effort to be sure of your calling and election. For by doing this you will never stumble into sin.
Or KJV “make your calling and election sure.” If I can do these things to make my calling sure, where am I if I don’t? Well, I’m unsure — right? Plainly. Peter is saying that the way to escape uncertainty is to grow — to keep becoming more and more like Jesus. Sliding backwards doesn’t necessarily damn, but it puts us in jeopardy. Again, this is also exactly the point of —
(Heb 10:24-27 ESV) 24 And let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works, 25 not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near. 26 For if we go on sinning deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, 27 but a fearful expectation of judgment, and a fury of fire that will consume the adversaries.
We avoid falling into rebellion by allowing our brothers to stir us up “to love and good works.” By actively pursuing God and his mission, we avoid the temptation to fall back. Jeopardy is therefore possible — and dangerous.
(Heb 3:13-14 ESV) 13 But exhort one another every day, as long as it is called “today,” that none of you may be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin. 14 For we have come to share in Christ, if indeed we hold our original confidence firm to the end.
Sin deceives. The problem isn’t an insufficiency of grace or an insufficiency of God in our hearts through the Spirit. The problem is how easy it is to be a little lazy and so stop growing. And as we get a tad too comfortable, the occasional sin seems to be something we can control. There’s no real danger in this temporary indulgence. And soon sin deceives us into thinking that we’re safe in the arms of Jesus, when in fact we are running away from our Savior. And yet, for a while, we remain in grace and saved. God is patient and is not going to damn us quickly or easily. But there comes a time when it gets really hard to turn around and go back to God.
(1Ti 4:1-2 NASB) But the Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons, 2 by means of the hypocrisy of liars seared in their own conscience as with a branding iron,
I had a friend in middle school whose forearm had been badly burned in an accident when he was very young. He could stick pins in his arm and not feel a thing. We thought it was really cool, of course, but it was actually dreadfully dangerous. He could have a life-threatening wound or infection and have no idea! And as we leave God, that happens to us. Our consciences begin to be deceived by sin, and soon it’s really hard to turn back. It’s possible — and we’re still not damned — but we are in deep, deep jeopardy. And then —
(Heb 6:4-6 ESV) 4 For it is impossible, in the case of those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, and have shared in the Holy Spirit, 5 and have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the age to come, 6 and then have fallen away, to restore them again to repentance, since they are crucifying once again the Son of God to their own harm and holding him up to contempt.
Now — obviously — if someone repents, it was possible to restore him to repentance, and so he was never in the condition described here. But there is a condition where repentance becomes impossible — not because God won’t forgive but because the Christian’s heart is so hardened, so seared, that he can’t. The problem is not with God or his grace but human nature. We are plainly warned that if we play with fire, dabble in sin, we can not only fall away, but we can become so hardened that we won’t care. And then we’re damned, the Spirit is quenched, and we are no longer in Christ. We aren’t lost Christians. We’re just lost.
(Heb 10:26-27 ESV) 26 For if we go on sinning deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, 27 but a fearful expectation of judgment, and a fury of fire that will consume the adversaries.
Indeed, “there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins.” We’ve been forgiven and added to God’s family by the power of Jesus’ death. If we turn our back on that, there’s no other path to salvation. There’s no other hope. We’ve run out of options. Forgiveness is no longer available. But, again, that’s because the human heart has become too hard to turn back to God. It’s not because God is unwilling to forgive.
Back to the Restoration Movement
(I bet you think I forgot where this discourse began.) With this understanding of grace, consistent with traditional Church of Christ teaching on 1 John 1:7, it’s obvious that issues such as instrumental music and weekly communion should be no barrier to fellowship. Obviously, we cannot worship with other saved people if they insist on worshiping contrary to our consciences, but we can still recognize them as brothers. You see, those who use the instrument do not do so with a rebellious heart. They do not deliberately continue in sin. Their consciences haven’t been seared as with a hot iron. They are not incapable of penitence. They just read the silences differently. Therefore, they are our brothers and sisters in Christ — and they must be treated as such.
Jay, I’m a little confused by your statement “those who use the instrument do not do so with a rebellious heart. They do not deliberately continue in sin.” Is this a quote from an early restorationist, or are you of the opinion that the use of instruments are sinful?
If so, it seems contrary to what I thought your stance was on instrumental music.
I would like to add that as we grow, we do not totally resemble one another. As each one of us looks into the face of Christ there is still the human element, diversity. Unfortunately, within much of conservative thinking, all diversity is a result of the fall; that if the forbidden fruit had not been eaten we would be all the same, the same without sin, which would not have necessitated the scattering at the tower of Babel.
It will not be until we see diversity as a gift, from which all gifts find their uniqueness and blessing, that we will be able to recognise the difference between differences and sin. When we are able to appreciate another’s growth, though they do not think entirely like us, is when we can say, “…when I bcame an adult I put away childish things”.
What I find discouraging within “perfectionist” Christianity is the fear of being adventurous, of being curious, of being hungry. It mistrusts the one who APPEARS spiritual and confident, yet does not believe “the truth”. It is like the old gentleman who was as leglistic as they come once said, “Those who believe what’s wrong, but seem assured, must be doing something else that’s wrong to make themselves feel assured.”
The CoC is famous for quoting, “Study to show thyself approved”. But what must go along with that is, “…hunger and thirst for rightousness”; and we do not stay hungry by a bland, simple diet of “just us”, regardless of who “just us” is.
That punishment does await the impenitent is clear from Hebrews 10:26-27 but this passage should be read with other glimpses into the future Scripture gives us. We know from 2 Peter 3:9 that God is not willing that any should perish but that all should reach repentance. We also know from Philippians 2:10-11 that the day will come when at the name of Jesus every knee will bow and every tongue confess that Christ is Lord. In the end there will be no impenitent persons but only penitent believers in Christ. Christ is the Great Shepherd and he does not leave even one of his sheep behind.
Jay, I’d like to commend you for the unbelievable job you do in not only writing all of these posts, but in responding to the comments as well. It takes a special person to devote the time and energy such clearly requires. Of course, we disagree on some things, but I always look forward to your thoughts and have benefited from reading them (once or twice, j/k 😉
I also appreciate the patience you have developed in allowing those who disagree, to express their thoughts and ask their questions here. You vehemently (passionately, spiritedly) oppose the traditional, conservative and legalistic CofCs, but you do allow for anyone else to question and challenge your own thoughts. And you do a good job.
Before getting to my questions) about something you wrote today, I will first state my own position. I believe that when Jesus said that his disciples were “in” him and that he (Jesus) was “in” his disciples back in John 15, that he was. In whatever sense he meant it, he was definitely and truy “in” his disciples back then. In whatever sense that was, I believe that Christ is “in” us, his disciples, today. Out of consistency, I believe it is best to understand that the Holy Spirit is “in” us in the same manner as is Jesus. The Bible just as clearly teaches that Christ is in us, dwells in us, and lives in us as it teaches about the Holy Spirit. I do not believe it is necessary, or correct, to make the indwelling of one person of the godhead literally and personally, but then make the indwelling of
another person of the godhead be unliterary and not personal. I just believe that it would be best to be consistent. Having said that, I should add that none of the above implies that I do not believe that God (including the Holy Spirit) is limited to do things today. God could cause me to think about or remember things, he can heal physically, he could make sure I don’t wake up tomorrow if he chose to do so. Just as he was able to do to anybody else throughout time.
Now, in today’s post, you wrote:
“We are plainly warned that if we play with fire, dabble in sin, we can not only fall away, but we can become so hardened that we won’t care. And then we’re damned, the Spirit is quenched, and we are no longer in Christ. We aren’t lost Christians. We’re just lost.”
When you say that Christians who fall away “aren’t lost Christians”, what do you mean? You also say that they are “no longer in Christ.” I assume then, that you would say they are no longer in the church? That they are no longer born again? That they are no longer brethren?
Doesn’t the Bible teach that the church, the house of God, contains both saved and unsaved simultaneously? Vessles of honor as well as if dishonor? Both good fish and bad in the same kingdom/net?
If a Christian who falls away is no longer born again and outside of Christ and the church, no longer “has the Spirit”, must he then be baptized into Christ again? When and how would such a person who had fallen away get back into the church and receive again the Spirit?
And if the fallen away person forfeits the indwelling of the Spirit, does the Holy Spirit play a part in the restoring of such a one? Can the Holy Spirit convict a person without the Spirit and cause him to want to obey God again, from the outside?
Have a blessed Lords Day. Everyone..
Also, is thevability /privilege of being able to confess our sin and pray for forgiveness a spiritual blessing belonging to those who are in Christ (Eph. 1:3)?
Can a non Christian who is outside of Christ pray to God and have his sins forgiven? One who is outside of the body of the saved?
If a Christian who falls away is then outside of the body of Christ, what would be the steps to being restored? If he were no longer in Christ and no longer a Christian, wouldn’t the procees of obtaining salvation be the same for him as for every other sinner outside of Christ?
Hank, I appreciate your personal comments to Jay. I agree with and wonder how anyone who knows him would think differently.
You touched on an interesting problem with coc teaching. I will suppose for the sake of this discussion that a person can fall away, become un-born again. The Hebrews author makes it clear that person cannot come back to faith. Not once have I seen a person who had been living like hell for years, who came back, be asked to be baptized. Now folks talked about this person as if he was truly lost, not in the family of God. I think this is a glaring inconsistency in our coc’s. We preach one thing and practice another. Never have I seen anyone’s sin sinful, their lives so inconsistent with the Christ life, that we actually treated them as if they were lost when they came back. A confession, a prayer, and all is well.
The question you raised about if or not unsaved people are in the body of Christ? Of course not. Here is another really big error by traditional coc preachers and teachers. The VISIBLE, located congregations are not the same as the body of Christ for the precise reason that in it none are impostors. But we have used the false idea that the several churches of Christ on earth are the exact duplicate of Christ’s universal body (the church) as our chief weapon in battling those Baptists we so dislike. We can’t admit that we, like them have a few hypocrites, or our teaching that we are the only ones saved goes out the window. The passages you referred to are speaking of the visible expression of “the church universal, the Lord’s body”, not the great spiritual body it represents. It’s frankly a crazy idea that Christ rejectors are in the body of Christ. Thus, our too familiar term we use to speak of ourselves and our exclusivity, “The Lord’s church” proves up our ignorance of the Bible. the combined Restoration churches are no more “the Lord’s church” than other churches where devoted, godly men and women meet together to worship and serve Christ and those he died for.
Chris,
I was intending to speak from the perspective of those who object to instruments of music. Even for those who consider instruments sinful, there is no basis upon which to insist that those who use an instrument do so rebelliously. I’ve seen many a CoC preacher so argue, but it’s obviously untrue.
John wrote,
Exactly. My wife and I have four sons. They are all like us, made in our image, and all very different from the other 3. People who know me immediately recognize each as a son of mine despite how little they look alike and how different they otherwise are.
Gary,
Universalism makes little sense to me. Let’s look more closely as your texts.
Of course God wants no one to perish. And so, Peter says, God is being patient and giving people time to repent. But then he points out the destroying wrath of God against ungodliness. And so he urges his readers to live “lives of holiness and godliness” to avoid God’s wrath.
Therefore, he urges his readers to grow in grace and knowledge so they don’t lose their “stability.” The NIV translates “(2Pe 3:17 NIV) and fall from your secure position.”
The Louw-Nida Greek lexicon translates “from your safe position.”
In short, Peter is repeating here at the end of the book the lesson from chapter 1 about the necessity of growing to avoid being in jeopardy of damnation.
How is someone worse off for having been saved and then fallen away than if he’d never been saved? I think because (a) we are only accountable for the parts of God’s will we know and (b) as said in Heb 6:4-6, your heart can become so hardened that you can no longer repent.
And this would all be nonsense if Peter were to say in the very next chapter than everyone goes to heaven!
Imagine that a Roman general conquers a rebellious city. He burns it to the ground, salts the fields, and sells the inhabitants into slavery (as happened to Carthage at the end of the Punic Wars). He also grabs some enemy combatants and marches them in a parade in Rome before the emperor — and makes them bow before the emperor of Rome — but they still get sold into slavery.
The result is that armies of Rome bow before the emperor voluntarily and are rewarded with a generous pension and a plot of land — an inheritance. The enemy combatants bow involuntarily, well aware of who is more powerful, and they are sold into slavery or handed over as gladiators to be killed. They are punished for their rebellion.
But in your interpretation, “every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth” would mean that even Satan repents, contrary to Revelation and many other passages. The only way that every knee in heaven or under the earth will bow is involuntarily, as a result of being defeated.
Chrysostom explains it this way —
Irenaeus says in Against Heresies,
Paul writes shortly after the quoted passage —
Paul clearly suggests that his evangelistic work would be in vain if the readers do not hold “fast to the word of life” – the gospel. Why would his work be in vain if they go to heaven either way?
“In vain” mean “for nothing.” The word “vain” means emptiness or nothingness. It doesn’t mean “second best,” that is, Paul is not saying that if they let go of the gospel they will be saved but lose the abundant life until then.
The Philippians were living in a time of suffering for Jesus —
Paul’s point is eschatological — God will be honored in the end because he is supreme over all, including the emperor and the local persecutors. You’ll be well rewarded for your faith — if you hold on to it — but if not, you’ll suffer the same fate as all who oppose God. He is not saying that everyone goes to heaven, even your persecutors, but this life will be better for you if you remain in your faith.
Again, Paul speaks in eschatological terms, promising his readers salvation, if they live “worthy of the gospel” and promises their persecutors “destruction,” which does not mean salvation or even purging. It means destruction.
If becoming lazy is how one risks falling away, how is that NOT maintaining our salvation by works? Jay’s post seems to make the process only slightly indirect, but ultimately dependent on our own effort– if not on our actual level of accomplishment. This is not unlike the traditional idea of maintaining our salvation by “doing our best”. The “lazy” believer may lose reward because of a lack of effort, but he does not lose his place in Christ that way. As has been well stated before, we came to Christ by faith… we do not remain in Christ by any other means.
It is sometimes very challenging to maintain this view that we are saved by faith in Christ when we have spent a lifetime having that idea undermined by an alternative gospel. Something in the back of our minds seems to tell us that this is simply too good to be true, and there simply MUST be more to having eternal life. So, when we read Peter’s words, we may interpret them in that familiar context of salvation by obedience– or at least by doing our best to be obedient– with Jesus making up any shortfall by his own sacrifice. Once one is able to set aside that historic doctrinal perspective, it is not hard to see all the positives of faithfulness and mutual encouragement and walking in Spirit-led obedience as part of our growing and maturing in Christ rather than as part of avoiding the risk of losing our salvation.
If becoming lazy is how one risks falling away, how is that NOT maintaining our salvation by works?
Because, making every effort to add to our faith the seven “virtues” mentioned in 2 Peter does not = being saved by works.
That our salvation is “not of works” NEVER means or implies that it is unnecessary to grow in our faith. Otherwise, Peter never would have exhorted the church to “give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall.”
It was up to them to effort and to “make their calling and election sure.” But, that in no way takes away from the fact that our salvation is by grace through faith. Christ is the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him (Heb. 5:9). All who do obey and are saved, will be save by grace through faith and not of works. They still must obey.
It is not once saved always saved nor is it if saved barely saved.
Hank,
The Reformation era works/faith debates so distorted our vocabulary that we can’t even discuss things as to which we agree.
“Faith” is a condition of the heart that includes faithfulness and trust. Those who are faithful and who trust will not be lazy — not in terms of how their lives are characterized. And they will do works. But they will not do specific works. They may not have the same doctrinal understanding regarding worship or congregational autonomy. But as they understand the word of God, they’ll try to obey.
Paul speaks in terms of “faith working in love” or love being the fulfillment of the Law.
The goal of faith is to draw us to become like Jesus — who loves perfectly. And love is also a state of the heart.
If we say that someone with faith will worship as he understands God’s will, this is not works salvation. It’s the nature of faith to change the heart, which changes behavior.
If we say that someone with faith will sing without instruments, then we’ve imposed a standard beyond faith. We require the believer to also know about silences and the Regulative Principle and such like. We’ve imposed what lawyers call “strict liability,” that is, liability without regard to one’s intentions. Murder, for example, generally requires an intention to kill. Accidental killing is not murder due to the state of the heart.
Thus, when we say that believers are accountable for standards they know nothing about, we create a works salvation. And when we require a confession as a condition to forgiveness, we impose a works salvation — indeed, a works salvation that cannot be satisfied.
But the reality is that people of faith will do many works because their hearts love God and want to obey. Faith salvation is not for the lazy or rebellious. In fact, it’s much easier to sing a cappella and take weekly communion perfectly your entire life than to truly love your neighbors and to live accordingly.
Rom 9:1 I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost,
syneidēsis = conscience = .the soul as distinguishing between what is morally good and bad, prompting to do the former and shun the latter, commending one, condemning the other.
Unless your soul is the endwelling by (the holy ghost/comforter/ spirit of truth) I don’t understand how the indwelling is backed by knowledge. I understand the “soul” as being the inner controlling being. Good or bad it is still the inner being upon which we will be judged.
(2Pe 1:5-8 ESV) 5 For this very reason, make every effort to supplement your faith with virtue, and virtue with knowledge,
Rom 2:14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:
Rom 2:15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;)
Is Paul saying the gentiles have a guiding indwelled HG or a guiding conscience given them by GOD ?
1Ti 1:19 Holding faith, and a good conscience; which some having put away concerning faith have made shipwreck:
1Ti 1:20 Of whom is Hymenaeus and Alexander; whom I have delivered unto Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme.
1Ti 4:1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
1Ti 4:2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;
I myself believe some of those “blasphemys” are creeping their way into church ( coC ) teachings and being ignored although they are not proveable by knowledge.
Jay,
Were you meaning to be addressing me in your last comment? I hadn’t said a word about instruments, taking the Lord’s Supper perfectly (or at all), nor a word about worship.
What I asked about was the Christian who falls away. Whether or not he is still a member of the church? If upon falling away, he is no longer born again? If he is just like every other unsaved sinner outside of Christ? I asked about the privilege of praying in Christ for forgiveness, could one outside of Christ do that?
I talked about my viewing the indwelling of Christ in the same way as the indwelling of the HS.
And in another comment I was addressing Charles in terms of how being saved “not of works” does not ever mean we do not need to obey and grow in order to be saved thereafter.
What you wrote to me had nothing to do with “how we worship” and stuff like that.
When reading Hebrews 10:26 integration with the context of the chapter is best to know what is being said. It is important to comprehend that it is the superiority of Christ and His sacrificial death that is over everything else. The primary aspect of this theme is Christ’s sufficient sacrifice for sin once for all.
The book of Hebrews was, of course, written to the Hebrew people. The writer of Hebrews is addressing Jews who had knowledge of the Hebrew Scriptures but also knew of the miracles and of the teachings of Jesus. The issue being discussed were people who were continuing to sin who knew about Christ and yet continued to walk in their rebellious ways by rejecting the sacrifice that God had provided.
Hebrews 10:1-4 The law is a shadow of the good things that are coming, not the real things themselves. It never can perfect the ones who are trying to draw near to God through the same sacrifices that are offered continually every year. Otherwise, wouldn’t they have stopped being offered? If the people carrying out their religious duties had been completely cleansed once, no one would have been aware of sin anymore. Instead, these sacrifices are a reminder of sin every year, because it’s impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.
Those referred to in Hebrews 6:4-6 only tasted of the truth of the gospel. These people were tasters but not true followers and disciples of the truth. It is one thing to taste, but quite another thing to swallow. They never had genuine faith in Him, their faith was not deep within that takes hold of their heart and soul to save, they continued to trust something other than Jesus to save.
Going to church doesn’t make a person a Christian anymore than going to a garage makes a person a car. People who continue to trust in anything except Christ alone, who is the light that scatters all shadows, it is said to be tantamount to “trampling under foot the Son of God” believing that His once of all sacrifice is insufficient in itself to save. If something in place of or in addition to Jesus is trusted in, it is no different than a denial of Him.
If you know the truth about salvation you don’t leave when you know deep in your heart and soul it’s the truth. It’s absurd to seriously suggest that God is only interested in saving people for a few weeks or years. That is a God who is not sovereign and a God we could have no confidence in!
There are people who insist that we should be afraid to have confidence in God. To them God is just hanging around in Heaven waiting to see how we will turn out because such things are beyond His sphere of influence. To say God loses His own children presents an impotent God who is incapable of keeping and protecting His own children!
John 10:26-30 But you do not believe, because you are not of My sheep, as I said to you. My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand. My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father’s hand. I and My Father are one.
Paul says God’s power in us is greater than any other power, there isn’t any evil power greater than Him that can turn those who are His away.
Romans 8:31-39 What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us? He who did not spare His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all, how shall He not with Him also freely give us all things? Who shall bring a charge against God’s elect? It is God who justifies. Who is he who condemns? It is Christ who died, and furthermore is also risen, who is even at the right hand of God, who also makes intercession for us. Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? As it is written: For Your sake we are killed all day long; We are accounted as sheep for the slaughter. Yet in all these things we are more than conquerors through Him who loved us. For I am persuaded that neither death nor life, nor angels NOR PRINCIPALITIES NOR POWERS, nor things present nor things to come, nor height nor depth, nor any other created thing, shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Paul says he is sure that God will stay in us to complete what He has begun in us.
Philippians 1:6 I’m sure about this, the one who started a good work in you will stay with you to complete the job by the day of Christ Jesus.
Paul said he knew the Lord would deliver him from every evil work and preserve him.
2 Timothy 4:18 And the Lord will deliver me from every evil work and preserve me for His heavenly kingdom. To Him be glory forever and ever. Amen!
That’s what I thought. Thanks Jay! Enjoy reading your blog as always.
Charles,
See my last comment to Hank.
I would add that “human effort” is not the same thing as “works.” Consider —
Paul lives within the paradox of “work out your own salvation” and “it is God who works in you.” If we believe in free will, then we recognize that whether the Spirit’s work within us is effective depends in part on our cooperation or submission. Therefore, we must allow our faith/faithfulness/trust to change how we live and what we do. But I don’t know how we can even pray without some “effort.”
Human effort becomes a work when a particular work — circumcision, for example — becomes a condition of our salvation.
You can’t tell me that refraining from grumbling and complaining doesn’t take effort! It certainly does for me.
Again, how do I hold fast to the word of life if I make no effort to do so?
Paul teaches effort because he teaches penitence and faithfulness. They are inseparable because faith/faithfulness will necessarily produce effort to obey.
Now, it’s also true that the Spirit indwells us and shapes our hearts and our desires. And so is my effort to be obedient a product of my own self or of the Spirit? Well, how do we separate soul from Spirit? Yes and yes. And no one but God knows where to draw the line.
But this hardly means that I get to spend my days before Jesus’ return being sorry and useless. That behavior reveals a heart that is not faithful and does not trust. And if I have to make an effort to participate in God’s mission and to be shaped by the Spirit, so be it. That’s not an addition to faith but a necessary outworking of what faith means. And therefore Paul is not ignorant of works and faith.
I mean, what are we to make of —
Calvin and Luther would declare Paul a heretic if they’d dare, because this sounds very much like “works salvation.” He sure seems to be preaching that we need to make an effort.
NT Wright explains,
http://www.ligonier.org/learn/articles/future-justification-based-works/.
Wright’s clearest explanation for how Paul can say such things that I’ve found is in his commentary on Romans, in the Expositor’s Commentary series. There he explains that the “law of the Spirit of life” in Romans 8 is the obedience that comes from possession of the Spirit. Indeed, as promised in Deuteronomy, Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel, by the Spirit God writes his laws on our hearts so that we become obedient people. The works we do — anything that fulfills “love your neighbor” (Rom 13, Gal 5) — redound to our credit because they are empowered and energized by the Spirit — who changes our hearts so that we become more and more like Jesus and so, of course, we do good works.
Because we do good works, we will be saved in the end — as Paul says in the quoted passages. And I know of no Christian who does good work and who says no effort was involved. But the effort was prompted and motivated by the Spirit.
The fact that the works were done by the prompting of the Spirit and out love of for others, in faith, makes the works “good.” The unsaved cannot do good works because they cannot work out of love for Jesus and in response to the power of God in their hearts.
Therefore, effort does not equal works. In fact, “works” really means “works of the Torah.” The problem with works of the Torah is that they’re not a necessary product of faith in Jesus, not that they are works. Paul’s argument is always that works can’t save because they’re not faith, not that works damn. No, only faith saves and so circumcision does not. Neither does a cappella singing. Neither does weekly communion.
Works that are the product of faith in Jesus, prompted by the Spirit and motivated by love, will be credited to us at the end.
And if we refuse to make any effort, then we nullify our faithfulness and our trust, and there will come a time when we fall away.
[Please do not criticize by citing opposing verses unless you explain how the verses I cite are true within your worldview. Everyone has a proof text. Few can deal with the other guy’s proof texts. And I’ve heard the Calvinist arguments, and none make use or explain the verses I just cited.]
One last note. The foregoing understanding helps show how Jesus and Paul come from the same place in their teaching. Jesus seems very works-oriented to someone with a Reformation mindset. But if we read Jesus and Paul and long with the prophets who teach that God will write his laws on our hearts so that we’ll obey, it all fits very nicely.
It avoids my comprehension how anyone can misconstrue the following verses.
the only way in my thinking is because someone wants to.
2Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
2Ti 3:17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.
Jas 2:17 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.
Jas 2:18 Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.
Jas 2:19 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.
Jas 2:20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?
It is written
If apostolic writings condemned use of musical instruments by Christians, there would be a basis for anyone even discussing whether or not use of musical instruments by Christians is pleasing to God.
Apostolic writings do not in any way at all condemn Christian use of musical instruments. The anti-instrument law is totally of human origin.
I’m glad that Jay and others have figured out that it’s not sinful to play musical instruments anywhere or any time when the purpose is to praise God and enjoy fellowship with His people. Jay writes to members of churches where it’s taught that God hates musical instruments and those who play upon them. He writes judiciously.
Some don’t seem to remember the episode in Acts 8 when a Christian was told he had committed a serious sin and would be condemned because of his sin. So they ask whether or not a sinner needs to be re-baptized. Peter explained to the magician what steps were necessary to recover from having sinned seriously. So why do some wonder if re-baptism is necessary?
As for Christ dwelling in us, I think His promise is that it’s through His SPIRIT that He will dwell within us, and every provision is made for us to be indwelt with the Spirit of the Father and Son. Our spirits are not separate from our personality. I figure God’s Spirit is not a separate personality even when the Creation was occurring, being done by the Word (who later came to earth as the Son) and the Spirit also being present but John affirms that the creating was entirely done by the Word.
Hank asked some difficult but excellent questions, questions I’ve wrestled with when I wrote The Holy Spirit and Revolutionary Grace, which addresses many of them.
Of course, it required a book to respond, but I’ll try to keep this from being 100 pages long.
Hank wrote (I’m skipping all the great things he said about me due my modesty 🙂 )–
There is no rule that says that the Spirit must do only those things that Jesus does. After all, the Spirit did not come in the flesh, was not crucified, etc. The members of the Godhead are not identical and they have differing tasks.
Jesus does indeed dwell within in — but it’s through the Spirit.
Paul prays that the Spirit will strength his readers “with power through his Spirit in your inner being” — plainly declaring that the Spirit has special dwelling in our inner beings.
Power to do what?
Now, if we had no other passages at all, someone might argue that the resurrected Jesus would dwell within us just as the Spirit does, but the meaning is clearly that Jesus dwells within us by the power of the Spirit who lives in our inner being — through faith. The goal is spiritual formation, that is, for us to become like Jesus.
The same is true of this key passage —
Clearly, if you read all of chapter 8, it’s clear that Paul is focused on the Spirit dwelling within the individual Christian. This is the “Spirit of God” and the “Spirit of Christ.” Thus, we have the benefit of a fully Trinitarian indwelling because both God and Jesus dwell in us through the Spirit.
A superficial reading might conclude that God lives in us as his “temple. But in context, it’s clear that we are God’s temple because the Spirit dwells in us. The Spirit in us is like the statue of Venus in her temple. That statue is not the goddess, but it shows her special presence and attentiveness in the temple. And it’s like the Glory of God in the Holy of Holies, which is hardly the entirety of the Holy Trinity — who is/are omnipresent — but it shows a special presence and concern for that place — and a place where God’s atoning power is specially found.
And I said to in an earlier post, there are dozens upon dozens of verses addressing the work of the Spirit in us. Most clearly cannot be read as referring to the word or to God and/or Jesus. A theory must fit ALL the verses. Nearly any theory can find one or two verses to support it, but that proves nothing at all. And when i wrote HSRG, I really did go through every single “Spirit” verse in the Bible, plus all the cross references. And the idea that the Spirit indwells though the word, just as Jesus does, doesn’t fit.
[continued]
Hank asks,
Exactly. But don’t stop reading here. This is actually a good thing.
Many theologians find it helpful to speak of the visible kingdom and the invisible kingdom. The visible kingdom is what we mortals see as the church. In reality, there are surely some people in there with a false faith or who’ve fallen away but still attend, smile, and pretend. And because faith is a matter of the heart, we cannot judge very well at all who is really in and really out.
Moreover, there will be other invisible Christians who are not part of organized religion but haven’t fallen away (not that being separate from the visible church is a good or wise thing).
In Jesus’ Kingdom parables, he sometimes points out that we won’t be able to purify the Kingdom. it’s not within our power. But that doesn’t mean the fallen who still attend church are saved or even Christians. It just means that we can’t tell. Tares are still tares.
An excellent question. My answer is bit unconventional, but in 20 years of writing and teaching, I’ve not heard a better theory.
I take Heb 6:4-6 literally. In fact, it says much the same thing as Heb 3 and Heb 10. It should not be explained away.
Can we fall away? According to this passage, yes.
Can we be restored by repentance? God always accepts those who approach him with penitence and faith.
Then who is that can’t be restored? Those who cannot repent. The lesson is about the risk that the human heart will become so hard that it cannot repent.
What if I leave church, live a sinful live, and years later repent? Will God take me back since I fell away? Well, had you fallen away, you would not be able to repent. The writer of Hebrews says that those who fall away cannot repent. The fact that you repented means that you never fell away. You were in great peril, in desperate jeopardy for your salvation, but your heart was not so far from God that you could not repent — and so you did not fall away.
There we have to balance two truths —
1. Grace is far broader than we are often willing to accept. It truly is amazing.
2. But any time we get lazy and turn away from God, we are playing with fire — a fire that can destroy our ability to repent and so cause us to be lost and irretrievably so.
That is, in my view, grace is far better than taught in many churches (not just Churches of Christ), and falling away is less likely to happen by far — but when it does happen, the results are far, far worse than having to come forward and ask forgiveness. The result is a heart too hard to even care.
There are several counter arguments that people make, and these are dwelt with in HSRG in detail
[to be continued]
I never argued that each member of the godhead must all do whatever the others do. Merely, that we are in dwelled by the Holy Spirit in the same way and manner that we are in dwelled by Christ. That there is no need to make the indwelling different. That we can be consistent.
As far as the indwelling of Christ being “through the Spirit” (which the Bible does not say), how was Christ “in” his disciples back in John 15 when he claimed to be “in them”? Was it “real”, or a figurative indwelling in John 15?
We can disagree, I just don’t believe its as clear as you make it. Its seems wise to me to interpret the indwellings in the same sense. Why must they be different?
As far as the impossibility of the one falling away being able to repent (Heb 6), that must be a specific person/individual.
The fact that one “repents” and is “converted from the error of his way” does not mean he never actually wandered from the truth.
“Brethren, if any of you do err from the truth, and one convert him; Let him know, that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins.” Jas. 5:19-20
Clearly, the brother above who could fall away was both a brother and was later lost. The fact that his soul would be saved from death proves he could both be lost and be able to repent. Right?
Are you saying the “any of you” who could leave the truth and need to be converted was never in the truth to begin with?
Bottom line Jay, do you really believe that any Christian who falls can never be restored? Or, that that if they are restored, it means they never were a Christian?
Why would James encourage the church to attempt to bring back a brother who wandered away if such was impossible?
Hank asks,
I take Rom 8:9-11 as meaning just what it says: if you have the Spirit you are saved; if you don’t have the Spirit, you are condemned.
Hence, if you truly fall away, you lose the Spirit. In fact, some have made the point that just as the tabernacle and temple had to be purified for God to dwell in them through his Shekinah, the individual Christians must be sinless to be a suitable temple for the Spirit.
There is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus because our sins are cleansed continuously. We are therefore suitable to be temples of the Spirit.
When we fall away, our sins are no longer forgiven and the Spirit departs.
Heb 6:4-6 says this happens when your heart is so hard you can no longer repent. Therefore, there is no need for a second baptism or a second indwelling, because repentance is essential for those things and repentance won’t happen.
This is also part of what’s taught in Heb 10 —
In the OT, the priest has to make repeated sacrifices, because sacrifices could not forgive future sins. But the sacrifice of Jesus is “once for all.” One sacrifice for all time and all people who come in faith. It does not need to be repeated because it reaches back in time and forward in time.
The point is repeated. Jesus offered “a single sacrifice for sins.” His atonement work is finished.
In God’s eyes we are perfect — sinless — “for all time.” That is, like Jesus’ crucifixion, our forgiveness at baptism (Grace’s standing objection is noted) reaches back to our birth and forward to our deaths. We are made perfect for all time — even though as are “being sanctified” that is, made more and more holy but not yet truly perfect. But the direction of our lives proves that we’ve been made perfect forever.
The author quotes this passage a second time (the first is in chapter 8). It’s part of the passage that he builds his case on. Because God writes his laws on our hearts and in our minds, we are continuously forgiven — that is because his Spirit is sanctifying us, Christ’s sacrifice stretches across our entire lives to complete save us.
Because we were forgiven when we were baptized (objection noted), by the sacrifice that forgives from creation of the heavens and earth to the new heavens and new earth, we need no more sacrifice because we need no more forgiveness.
We now have the “full assurance of faith.” Our hearts are clean (by sprinkling — an allusion to the Day of Atonement) and our bodies are washed in the waters of baptism. Per 1 John, our faith assures us of our salvation, but per Gal 3:27, do does our baptism. This writer refers to both, as well as to our hearts — our changed desires (again, per 1 John and Rom 8:16).
Jesus is faithful and will certainly keep his promises. We must therefore remain true to the faith in which we began. “Wavering” is a real possibility — not mere theory — and presents a real danger.
Because of the risk of wavering — and maybe even falling away — we must encourage each other to “love and good works” because love and good works will keep us in a relationship with God that is safe and secure from all alarms. Growing in Christ helps keeps us away from temptation.
This is, to me, just as scary, if not scarier, than Heb 6:4-6. Because Jesus offered but one sacrifice, and because we received the benefit of that sacrifice at baptism, if we rebel for long enough, “there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins.” That is, there is no second baptism. There is no going forward to move from being lost to being saved. There’s just damnation.
We aren’t damned because of fellowship halls and organs but because our hearts refuse to submit to the Spirit and so quench the Spirit (1 THes 5:19). (The Greek word for “quench” does not refer to quenching a thirst, which will return, but to quenching a fire that you put it out so that it will not restart.)
This is truly a terrifying passage. The author calls Jesus and the Spirit as witnesses. To fall away is to sin against both, and with these two testimonies against you, spiritual death is sure to follow.
But our natural, usual state is confidence. To fall away we must throw that away. And so we must endure (which requires effort), because we will be saved because we “have done the will of God” — not that we live perfectly but that we submit to the work of Spirit in us to sanctify us — that is, we yield to the Spirit’s work to continually cause us to grow in Christ. Or as Paul says in Rom 8:13, we “by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body.”
Which is not always easy, and sometimes requires great courage and suffering. It always requires that we carry a cross — but we carry that cross with the help of God’s own Spirit.
Hank asked, “If a Christian who falls away is then outside of the body of Christ, what would be the steps to being restored? If he were no longer in Christ and no longer a Christian, wouldn’t the procees of obtaining salvation be the same for him as for every other sinner outside of Christ?”
This is an good question which touches on several inconsistencies in our traditional view. First, it calls into question what we mean by “falling away”. I don’t think this is a singular code word any more than is the word “salvation”, which means different things in different contexts. The writer of Hebrews 6 speaks of repudiating a gift once given and “crucifying again” the Lord of glory. He says that it is impossible to bring such a one back to repentance. This has never really been part of our theology. We are dedicated to the proposition that power of the believer’s free will makes repentance always within our reach. We presume that we came to Christ as an act of our own will, and remain in Christ by our free will decision to obey, so if we want to leave and come back later, we can. It’s up to us. But Hebrews suggests that it is not always about our will. In this case, God appears to refuse to let his son be crucified a second time for anyone’s benefit. There is a place which cannot be changed by the exercise of our own will. The idea that God would not honor our free will is foreign to us, although Jesus speaks of it in the parable of the wedding feast. There comes a time when the door is shut. We have presumed that this is the moment of our death, but there is no promise of this sort given by God.
Hank’s second question exposes a very curious facet of the traditional doctrine of “intermittent salvation” we have known for so long. That is, that while we are taught that it takes five steps to be saved, the believer can later expect to lose his salvation due to sin, but can be re-saved by repentance alone. Thus we find TWO paths to become “in Christ”: one for the unbelieving sinner, and another for the condemned believer. None of this is found in scripture, of course, and it is appropriate to point out that the whole concept is untenable and unsupportable.
The idea that we are in Christ by the power of God is an humbling idea. The thought that those who believe and then repudiate that faith are prevented from a second bite of the apple by God’s choice is perhaps even more humbling. We don’t always do “humble” very well. We have long preached a Christian walk which is centered around our decisions, for good or for ill.
Hank asked about,
Obviously, the person under consideration has not yet experienced spiritual death.
If James is being consistent in his vocabulary, those who fall away die spiritually before they die bodily.
Therefore, James teaches exactly what I’ve been trying to say. Wandering from the truth (meaning gospel throughout the NT) is a deadly, dangerous thing. It’s wrong to teach that we can play with sin for years and then years later show up at church, come forward, repent, and be newly saved. It’s true in a sense, but it’s like teaching your three-year old that you can play in the street and not die. It happens, but it’s foolish beyond words.
Moreover, James and the author of Hebrews both teach that we need to help each other make it to the end because at times we need the help. We need people who love us enough to tell us when we’re in danger, because we may be too deceived to see it.
In re Hank’s thoughtful questions, I need to add this —
Therefore, the normal case is for a Christian to become saved and to remain saved until the day he dies. He does not flit back and forth between saved and lost depending on how recently he prayed for forgiveness or when he last lost his temper or misunderstood the silences with regard to fellowship halls. He’s saved by the amazing power of the crucifixion of Jesus.
But if he’s lost because he rebels against the known will of God, as taught in Hebrews, it’s because the Spirit was resisted, grieved and eventually quenched. For a while, the Spirit will continue to attempt to reshape the rebel’s heart but eventually the Spirit leaves — and this happens when repentance is no longer possible.
But there are other ways to be lost. Galatians speaks of falling away because we fail to trust God’s promises and so add conditions to faith in Jesus. We make it harder for people to be saved and we divide the church when we do that. But I have seen many, many people repent of legalism and walk closely with Jesus. But I’ve also seen people so steeped in this kind of legalism that their minds cannot be changed, regardless of proofs and arguments — even when they lose their families from the Church of Christ, they cling to their precious inferences because their man-made laws have become their identities rather than faith in Jesus. And it’s terribly sad.
I know of no passages that talk directly about the restoration of those who fall away due to the Galatians heresy, but Paul could not be more harsh with those he curses in Gal 1 and declares alienated from Christ in Gal 5. And my experience is that hearts can be so hardened that, there comes a point, where repentance sure seems impossible.
On the other hand, if Peter was condemned because of his hypocrisy per Gal 2:11, he was obviously restored by his repentance, but Charles has persuaded me to follow the translations that say he was to blame or in the wrong rather than condemned — which makes a lot of sense.
The other way to fall, of course, is to no longer believe that Jesus is the Son of God and Lord. (1 John 4:2-3). This is not the same as doubting — and I think we all doubt at times. Even the psalmist expresses doubts in inspired writings.
I have had much less personal experience with this, but I know people who tell me that they lost their faith and later regained it. The scriptures give no such example. My inclination is to believe that they always had a glimmer of faith, as in —
The father had a faith so weak that he described it as “unbelief.” But he had enough faith for Jesus to honor a promise conditioned on faith.
The most difficult case, to me, is someone with an erroneous faith. What do we do with someone who denies the Nicene Creed but accepts as entirely true all that the scripture says about Jesus?
That was Barton W. Stone and the Campbells accepted him as a brother because they only disagreed about human inferences. This is not an easy test to apply, but it seems better than damning all who have any unorthodoxy in their Christology at all. But I admit to not having a good sense of where to draw the line. And if you disagree, read up on the issues that split the early church and ask whether you even understand the questions, much less know the right answers!
Jay observes, Paul lives within the paradox of “work out your own salvation” and “it is God who works in you.” I don’t find this to be paradoxical. If we interpret “work out your own salvation” as “accomplish your eventual salvation”, then this is certainly hard -perhaps impossible- to reconcile. If, however, we interpret this “workout” as participating in God’s outworking of an extant salvation which you have already received by faith– it trues up with the central theme of the gospel.
I think some of the perceived contradictions come from our historic habit of tacitly adding inverse conditionals to many encouragements and instructions which we find in scripture, to the point of preaching the inverse more than the instruction:
“Work out your own salvation, if you don’t work out enough, you won’t BE saved.”
“If we walk in the light as he is in the light… the blood of Jesus, his Son, purifies us from all sin; but if we don’t walk in the light like Jesus, we will be condemned.”
“He who believes and is baptized will be saved.. he who is not baptized is damned whether he believes or not.””
“If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. What we don’t confess, He doesn’t forgive.”
“If your brother or sister sins against you, rebuke them; and if they repent, forgive them. If they DON’T repent, you can keep rebuking ’em, but you don’t have to forgive them.
Now, Jesus DOES use such inverse conditionals at times, but sometimes we don’t embrace it so readily when HE does it: The inverse conditional in Mark 16:16 is about unbelief and does not mention baptism. The one Jesus gives us in Matthew 6 is about forgiveness. “For if you forgive other people when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if you do not forgive others their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins.”
I think we should be careful about presuming these conditionals where they are not given. When we start seeing how we have done this, it sometimes changes the either/or structure we have attributed to some of these instructions.
Thanks for your thoughts guys. We disagree a little but that is okay and I respect you.
I do still want to know how (in what sense) you understand Jesus to have been “in” his disciples in John 15, before Pentecost.
(I commented similarly but don’t believe it landed. Pardon me if this is repetitive)
Hank, maybe like he was in the OT prophets described in 1 Peter 1:10-12.
Hank, The “process of salvation” would not be the same as no baptism is required. In addition, I don’t view salvation as a formula or process. That is too clinical. How was the prodigal restored. What was his formula? His “process” was simply returning to his loving father in sorrow. Then the party began.
I am put to mind of Jesus’ reply to those who asked what to do in order to do the works God requires. “Believe in the one He has sent,” was Jesus’ reply. This is a more palatable answer if our definition of faith is not merely an inert philosophical assent. Faith, like love, is a dynamic and productive thing. We know this at a more mundane level. Teenage daughter says of her sketchy beau, “But, Daddy, I really love him!” This has Daddy keeping his head on a swivel afterward, expecting some sort of perhaps-unwise action from darling daughter. Daddy knows love produces action. Faith produces works consistent with the revelation connected with that faith. When most of us try to carefully separate salvation from works, this is not to denigrate works of obedience, nor to cast doubt upon God’s expectation of our obedience and our faithfulness.
Jay, remember that you and I both believe in temporary punishment. I just reread 2 Peter and every reference to punishment in it can fully be explained by the reality of temporary punishment for the impenitent. I find nothing in 2 Peter that points to the annihilation of those who are lost. The plain statement that God is not willing that any should perish stands and the question is whether God’s will will be finally accomplished or not.
Your position rests on the premise that destruction of the lost must mean their annihilation body and soul but Scripture does not support you in that premise. I’ve previously pointed out that the same Greek word is translated as lost in Luke 15 and there we find the lost being found and saved. Even in Paul’s writings we find what seems to be a figurative use of destruction in 1 Corinthians 5:5 where Paul speaks of the body of the sinner being destroyed so that the spirit may be saved. Even if we interpret Paul literally there destruction would be limited to physical death and the sinner would not be annihilated. Paul calls Jesus the Savior of all people in 1 Timothy 4:10. I’m not sure how Jesus could ever be the Savior of those whom you believe will be annihilated body and soul and forever beyond the power of God to save. We both believe in temporary punishment for the impenitent but I believe punishment will be followed by eternal life. Otherwise God’s will that no one will perish will be defeated for all eternity. Jesus really will be the Savior of all people.
Regarding Philippians 2:9-11 you assume that God will force all not previously saved to confess that Christ is Lord and that somehow that will glorify God. So the lost will be forced to confess Christ, suffer punishment in hell and then be annihilated? If that is true this is the only passage in Scripture where confession is involuntary. I’m not even sure the Greek word for confess can be understood as meaning an involuntary confession. I suspect the term involuntary confession is an oxymoron. In every other biblical use of the term that I can think of confession is a voluntary expression of a sincere belief. Philippians 2:9-11 presents to those who deny universalism the dilemma of hell being full of penitent believers in Christ and/or penitent believers in Christ being annihilated. By the way I do agree with you that this is an eschatological passage but that in no way excludes incidental soteriological lessons being drawn from it. Jesus rebuked the Sadducees for not believing in life after death on the basis of God being referred to as the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Much of the truth we learn in Scripture is incidental and not the primary purpose of the author in writing a particular passage.
Mat 10:28 And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.
Gary seems fixated on 2Pe 3:9 as a getout of jail free verse, instead it is a warning of just the opposite.
2Pe 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
Garry, is this the only verse you have read in 2Peter 3. ? Maybe if you were to read the rest of the chapter.
2Pe 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.
2Pe 3:17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness.
Hank,
Notice that Jesus describes a mutual relationship: I in you and you in me. It has to be a part of his extended metaphor “I am the vine and you are the branches.”
Verse 7 could well mean that Jesus is speaking of dwelling in the disciples through his words — which hardly contradicts the notion of an indwelling through the Spirit. After all, at this time, the Spirit had not yet been outpoured, and Jesus is, among other things, encouraging the disciples in preparation for the trauma of his crucifixion.
And while this is certainly possible, it hardly explains how the disciples are to remain “in” Jesus. Within the metaphor, the language surely suggests remaining attached to Jesus as the branch. V. 6 says as much, suggesting that if a branch doesn’t remain attached to the vine, it will be thrown away and burned.
Verse 4 explains,
That is, the branch must be connected to the vine as a source of essential nourishment — even life. To be in Jesus is to be attached to him so that we can be “fed” by him so we can continue to bear fruit. And this is highly suggestive of the Spirit. (Why else would Paul refer to Christian virtues as “fruit of the Spirit” unless he saw our fruit-bearing as a product of the Spirit’s work within us?)
Very similar language shows up here, with God added and with a prayer for Christians to be united with each other just as God and Jesus are “in” each other.
While I readily concede that Jesus may have had the word in mind in 15:5, v.22 is a reference to the Spirit (the “glory” of the LORD was in the temple as God’s real presence).
I think the real thought of John 15:5 is that you must remain attached to Jesus (through his words of course, but not just through his words). As we see in chapter 17, we are to be “in” each other and in Jesus just as Jesus and God are in each other — which is not about God’s word. Rather, they are so close as to be nearly the same person. They have shared desires and mission. And they have the same essence — just as we share in that essence when the Spirit comes to live within us. We don’t become gods, but the Spirit’s presence in us means we are made in part of spirit/Spirit, just as God and Jesus are. We take on a spiritual existence. We are intimately connected to the Godhead.
Therefore, John’s concept is deeper than learning the Bible or even applying the Bible in our daily lives — not that this isn’t in there. It’s much deeper yet.
The whole point of our forgiveness through Jesus’ death is so that, by the Spirit, we will become the very image of Jesus, just as Jesus is the image of God. When people see us, they should see Jesus. The word is a big part of this, but so is the sanctifying work of the Spirit of glory.
Just as must hold on to Jesus, as a branch clings to the vine, the vine must hold on to its branches. Jesus does his part by giving the Spirit and his words, nourishing us and equipping us and empowering us to abide in him; and we do our part by trying to live the words as the Spirit empowers us to do so. After all, it’s the Spirit that makes the word intelligible to us (1 Cor 2).
So it’s mooshed up together (a West Alabama expression). It’s not word or Spirit and not our effort or Jesus’ effort.
Moreover, as we heed the Spirit and the words, we become more like Jesus and more like other Christians who are doing the same. We are all being drawn to the same person with the ultimate goal being theosis — becoming like God together, to become truly one with him and Jesus.
It’s a big thought that should not be reduced to a proof text against the indwelling Spirit. It’s both word and Spirit all toward the end of unity.
Gary argues that nothing in 2 Peter argues for more than punishment — spiritual, eternal death is not mentioned.
This is a threat and a warning. “Destruction” means destroyed as in killed or torn to the ground. And Peter is hardly referring to a purging of sins in purgatory prior to eternity in heaven after these false prophets have been destroyed.
Thayer’s defines “destruction” as utter destruction or death. It’s no mere purging.
Destruction is here parallel with condemnation. Again, pretty far removed from a purging followed by heaven.
Peter seems pretty insistent on their destruction — not their salvation from or through destruction.
Again, fire and destruction. “Destruction” is not a metaphor for “live in perpetual conscious torment,” but neither does it refer to eternal life with God after a time of punishment. “Destroy” is not temporary.
Destruction is the opposite of life.
Destruction is the opposite of life.
The opposite of destruction is transformation into a body like Jesus’ body.
Destroyed is the opposite of the preservation of souls.
What was the threat that would have destroyed the wise men of Babylon? It wasn’t prison followed by a lifetime of bliss. Plainly, it was death.
So what of Luke 15?
The Greek for “destroy” in 2 Peter 2:3 (apoleia in most cases) and the above passages is not the same Greek word used in Luke 15 (apolummi). This word also takes as its primary meaning “destroy” but can also meant lost (and so at risk of destruction). Context distinguishes the two meanings.
1 Cor 5:5 is yet another Greek word: olethros. And here Paul makes a point of saying that this destruction is not eternal destruction — which is only necessary because olthros means dead or destroyed.
These verses are not speaking particularly physical death. Peter is not threatening the false prophets with capital punishment! He’s threatening eternal death.
Gary,
You didn’t respond to my point that under your theory, Satan is saved because Paul says,
this fits well with —
(Col 2:15 NLT) In this way, he disarmed the spiritual rulers and authorities. He shamed them publicly by his victory over them on the cross.
Jesus will defeat the heavenly powers and those under the earth — and they will all bow and confess — but Satan’s fate is not purgatory —
Looks to me like that not only Satan, but the “false prophet” is thrown into the lake of fire.
Gary, Looks to me like Jesus identified many souls that would join Satan in his punishment.
(Mat 7:15 NIV) “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves.
(Mat 24:11 NIV) and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people.
(Mat 24:24 NIV) For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and miracles to deceive even the elect–if that were possible.
(Mark 13:22 NIV) For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform signs and miracles to deceive the elect–if that were possible.
(Luke 6:26 NIV) Woe to you when all men speak well of you, for that is how their fathers treated the false prophets.
The warnings continue after Christs sacrifice, even until the end of time.
(2 Cor 11:13 NIV) For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, masquerading as apostles of Christ. 14 And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. 15 It is not surprising, then, if his servants masquerade as servants of righteousness. Their end will be what their actions deserve.
(2 Pet 2:1 NIV) But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them–bringing swift destruction on themselves. 2 Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute.
You mention God’s will that no one be lost as if that means it will be impossible or that he will make that happen just as surely as he created the earth. Have you so soon forgotten that it was also God’s will that man did not commit sin in the garden?
Using your logic God could just ignore that man ever sinned, and save all including Satan.
For if we sin willfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remains no more sacrifice for sins’’ (Heb 10:26)
Verse 26 refers to Jews who had come to a head-knowledge of Christ and still continued to ritualistically reject Christ. Verse 39 the position of true believers is contrasted with those in verse 26, Hebrews 10:39 “But we have never turned our backs on God and sealed our fate. No, our faith in him assures our souls salvation.”
By virtue of the fact that you could lose salvation would mean that keeping salvation would depend upon you efforts or actions. To say we can lose salvation, is in reality saying that we are trusting in human works to save us. Ephesians 2:8-9, “For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, NOT OF WORKS, lest ANYONE should boast.”
Jesus said in John 6:47, I tell you for certain that everyone who has faith in me has eternal life. It says the person has everlasting life. The person has salvation and this is forever, not temporary. According to Heb. 10:14 “For by one offering He has perfected FOREVER those who are being sanctified.”
Paul says in Col. 1:13-14 “For he has rescued us from the kingdom of darkness and transferred us into the Kingdom of his dear Son, who purchased our freedom and forgave our sins.” This transfer from one state to the other is the theme.
There is a radical transformation we undergo at the time of conversion. It is a remarkable and supernatural change of state. It is this transformation that impacts our lives.
Those who are saved are born again spiritually. We can’t reverse our human birth and become unborn. We have our earthly mother and father and can never genetically cease to be their child. We have our Heavenly Father by our spiritual birth who is even more so greater and it would be absurd to say we can reverse our spiritual birth and become unborn.
When we are saved we become a new creation, according to (2 Cor. 5:17) “Anyone who is joined to Christ is a new being; the old is gone, the new has come.” How do people uncreated what God created? Nothing can be uncreated that God has created.
Ephesians 1:13-14 “In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise, who is the guarantee of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, to the praise of His glory.” If salvation can be lost, then the Holy Spirit’s guarantee is no good.
God forgives us by Christ’s atonement. If we had to live perfect without ever messing up after salvation in order to keep salvation, then Christ’s death on the cross would be incomplete.
We are unable to have salvation by works and our works don’t keep it. We needed to be saved by grace and keeping of our salvation would not depend on something other than grace. (Rom 11:6) “And if by grace, then it is no longer of works; otherwise grace is no longer grace. But if it is of works, it is no longer grace; otherwise work is no longer work.”
The vast majority of mankind believes they have to work for salvation. There are some who invest in a halfway doctrine that says we have salvation by God’s grace but then we must keep our salvation by works. No one is going to be able to claim any merit before God. We will only be able to fall on our knees before the God of glory and grace and say, “You, Lord, have done it all!”
Jay, I think it is clear that Paul was speaking of human beings in Philippians 2:10 so I don’t see any application to Satan. Origen did think that it was possible that even Satan would finally be redeemed. If that is God’s will it’s certainly fine with me!
Jay, what about Mark 14:4? Apoleia is translated as waste or wasted regarding the perfume with which Jesus was anointed. The critics wanted to know why the perfume had been wasted (apoleia). The perfume had obviously not been destroyed or annihilated. Apoleia is capable of more nuances of meaning than you will admit. We have many straightforward statements of universal salvation in the New Testament. Camping out on unprovable monopoly of apoleia as annihilation can not overcome these plain statements.
One such plain statement is 1 Corinthians 15:22. “For as in Adam all die so in Christ all will be made alive.” Through Adam we are all going to experience physical death this side of Christ’s return. We all admit that. With that reference how can the rest of the verse mean anything other than universal salvation?
Gary, What about the scripture: “Jude 1:7 In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire.” Was the punishment for homosexuality really eternal? Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed/annihilated. Even though the same verse says they suffer the punishment of eternal fire it doesn’t seem eternal based on the whole story about how the city ended.
Grace, Hebrews 10:26 is talking about an experiential knowledge, not a head knowledge. In the Bible, when a man knows a woman, it is much more than they are merely friends. Also, 2 Peter 2:22 “Of them the proverbs are true: “A dog returns to its vomit,” and, “A sow that is washed returns to her wallowing in the mud.”
This refers to being washed from sin and then returning to the filth.
Skip, I’m not sure I follow you. The sexual sin Sodom and Gomorrah were punished for was that of human beings attemting to have sex with angels. Check out Dr. John MacArthur on this point. He is quite convincing. I agree with you that the cities were destroyed so that their punishment was not eternal.
Jay, you wrote:
“Verse 7 could well mean that Jesus is speaking of dwelling in the disciples through his words — which hardly contradicts the notion of an indwelling through the Spirit.”
EXACTLY! It does Not contradict the indwelling of the Spirit at all, rather, it explains it. You know, “the Bible is it’s own best commentary”, thing.
I like how FF Bruce explains the indwelling spoken of in John 15. In commentary on John, he writes:
“So with Jesus’ disciples: only as they remain in union with him and derive their life from him can they produce the fruit of the Spirit.”
And:
“There is no practical difference between Jesus’ personal indwelling in his disciples and his words remaining in them…. He himself is the living embodiment of all his teachings.”
Which is precisely my position. That Jesus was actually “in” his disciples when he said he was back in John 15. And, that by his being in them (and his words remaining in them), they would empowered to produce “the fruit of the Spirit”.
Is the fruit being produced in Jn 15 the ” fruit of the Spirit”, or a different kind of fruit?
I just believe that the fruit produced then is the same fruit to be produced by his disciples today.
And that it is produced in the very same way. And that the indwelling of the HS is in the same was as was (and is) the indwelling of Christ.
I don’t expect you to change your position here. But, hopefully, you (and others) can at least appreciate the consistency of the above points. To interpret the indwellings and fruits produced between persons of the godhead and sides of the cross differently, is the less consistent position.
Larry quoted this vs in his comment “(2 Pet 2:1 NIV) But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them–bringing swift destruction on themselves. 2 Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute.”
What is so sad many who teach “false doctrine” truly, fully believe in what they are teaching. They teach what “church fathers” taught but cannot be found within the pages of “God’s Holy Word”.
Just because you are repeating someone else’s lie (as fact) does not make you innocent of lying. Therefore if you are teaching someone’s falsehood, as a true fact, You are not absolved of being a false teacher. You are simply taking up the mantle of that falsehood, and making it your own.
A true child of God comes back home. But a pig is one who comes to church for a season, tries to tidy themselves up, yet being a pig they have the nature of a pig, their desire is to return to the mud from which they came and that is exactly what they do. A child of God may stupidly wander off for a season, but in their heart they will never find rest and will long for their home. Where as a pig comes to church, but in their heart they don’t find rest, the nature of a pig just loves mud and given time will always return.
The Parable of the Sower
Matthew 13:1-9 “That same day Jesus went out of the house and sat beside the sea. And great crowds gathered about him, so that he got into a boat and sat down. And the whole crowd stood on the beach. And he told them many things in parables, saying: “A sower went out to sow. And as he sowed, some seeds fell along the path, and the birds came and devoured them. Other seeds fell on rocky ground, where they did not have much soil, and immediately they sprang up, since they had no depth of soil, but when the sun rose they were scorched. And since they had no root, they withered away. Other seeds fell among thorns, and the thorns grew up and choked them. Other seeds fell on good soil and produced grain, some a hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty. He who has ears, let him hear.”
The Parable of the Sower Explained
Matthew 13:18-23 “Hear then the parable of the sower: When anyone hears the word of the kingdom and does not understand it, the evil one comes and snatches away what has been sown in his heart. This is what was sown along the path. As for what was sown on rocky ground, this is the one who hears the word and immediately receives it with joy, yet he has no root in himself, but endures for a while, and when tribulation or persecution arises on account of the word, immediately he falls away. As for what was sown among thorns, this is the one who hears the word, but the cares of the world and the deceitfulness of riches choke the word, and it proves unfruitful. As for what was sown on good soil, this is the one who hears the word and understands it. He indeed bears fruit and yields, in one case a hundredfold, in another sixty, and in another thirty.”
The Parable of the Weeds
Matthew 13:24-30 “He put another parable before them, saying, “The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a man who sowed good seed in his field, but while his men were sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat and went away. So when the plants came up and bore grain, then the weeds appeared also. And the servants of the master of the house came and said to him, ‘Master, did you not sow good seed in your field? How then does it have weeds?’ He said to them, ‘An enemy has done this.’ So the servants said to him, ‘Then do you want us to go and gather them?’ But he said, ‘No, lest in gathering the weeds you root up the wheat along with them. Let both grow together until the harvest, and at harvest time I will tell the reapers, Gather the weeds first and bind them in bundles to be burned, but gather the wheat into my barn.’”
The Parable of the Weeds Explained
Matthew 13:36-43 “Then he left the crowds and went into the house. And his disciples came to him, saying, “Explain to us the parable of the weeds of the field.” He answered, “The one who sows the good seed is the Son of Man. The field is the world, and the good seed is the sons of the kingdom. The weeds are the sons of the evil one, and the enemy who sowed them is the devil. The harvest is the end of the age, and the reapers are angels. Just as the weeds are gathered and burned with fire, so will it be at the end of the age. The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all law-breakers, and throw them into the fiery furnace. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. He who has ears, let him hear.”
Gary, I trust Jude’s interpretation. Jude mentions surrounding towns. Angels were only in one town.
Jay you’re making me study! In John 17:12 Jesus calls Judas a son of perdition (apoleia). Yet Matthew 26:29 seems to indicate that Judas will be saved as he is in that small group whom Jesus says will drink the fruit of the vine again with him someday in the fullness of the Father’s Kingdom. Matthew 26:29 at least strongly raises that possibility which cannot simply be dismissed out of hand. Jesus’ statement that it would have been better if Judas had not been born can be understood several ways. I think it is most likely that Jesus was referring to the guilt and notoriety of being the one who betrayed Jesus, similar to Paul’s calling himself the chief of sinners because of his persecution of Christians and his complicity in the death of Stephen. Even the Roman Catholic Church has never stated that Judas is definitely lost. My point is that there is no state of destruction or perdition (apoleia) that is beyond God’s power to redeem and renew. Even in cases where apoleia may mean utter destruction and annihilation that is no barrier to the God of love and grace. The One who has created us is fully able to recreate us. The plain statements in the New Testament of universal salvation will be fulfilled.
Skip, Jude refers to all of the cities associated with Sodom being obsessed with”strange flesh.” The word that is translated as strange is from the same Greek word from which we derive the prefix “hetero” so it is hardly the term that would have been used for homosexuality. The fornicators of these cities yearned for strange or other flesh. They wanted to carnally know angels. This sounds far-fetched to us but many first century Jews were obsessed with angels. The book of Enoch, obscure to us, was like a best-seller to them. There were many references in Jewish literature to this strange obsession of the people of Sodom and their neighboring cities.
On judgment day there will be sheep and there will be goats. The sheep will go into one eternal home and the goats will be thrown into another. It won’t be to determine which goat can swim and which cannot. Why do some want to suppose that the death of Jesus was a waste, that those who believe in Him and those who do NOT believe in Him will all be saved?
Jay asks
If we realized that Paul didn’t capitalize the word “spirit” we wouldn’t be thinking that only those empowered by the Holy Spirit can possess traits of godliness. Many people who don’t love Jesus are yet good people and have fruit of the spirit as described by Paul. It’s wrong to assume that every good person is a follower of Jesus and possessed of His Spirit. As usual, the contrast by Paul is between fruit of the flesh and fruit of the spirit. That’s HUMAN flesh and spirit. Just as some people are obviously bad people, some people are obviously good people. Paul is not claiming that the good ones all are good through work of the HOLY SPIRIT. In every nation, some people are just naturally good while some are naturally bad and most are in-between. None are good enough but that they need Jesus, of course.
Gary, “This sounds far-fetched to us but many first century Jews were obsessed with angels”. How do you stretch your point from Sodom and Gomorrah to 1st century Jews studying angels. Aren’t we talking about 2000 years of difference here? Your point stretches credulity. In addition, you try to use the Septuagint to justify your position but the OT was originally written in Hebrew, not Greek. I will side with the Hebrew. Plus, angels are spiritual beings which thus makes it impossible for men in Sodom to have intercourse with them. Sodomy was named after Sodom for a reason.
Laymond speaks well:
Ray writes:
“If we realized that Paul didn’t capitalize the word “spirit” we wouldn’t be thinking that only those empowered by the Holy Spirit can possess traits of godliness.”
Amen, a great observation!
The blessed man of Psalm 1 produced fruit. The disciples indwelt with Jesus in John 15 could produce. In neither case was it the Holy Spirit inside of them personally producing said fruit on their behalf. It was them, themselves. Through the inspired words of God!
God in dwelled them in and to the extent the holy and living word of God was running through them. Christ lives in us the same today as he did in his disciples back then. To the extent we allow him…
Jay quoted Peter, and I did not want to neglect his words: “For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive what is due for what he has done in the body, whether good or evil.”
The penalty due for evil things “done in the body” is death. But most of us agree that Jesus has born this penalty once, for all, for those who believe. So, that particular judgment has been made already. We clearly do still face reward -or none- for our deeds done as believers. But believers face no condemnation. So clearly, there is something else in mind here.
I fully agree that our good works redound to our credit, both here and hereafter. And there is no doubt that living as a believer involves effort, long effort, effort worthy of reward. But such reward is only for the sons of God. We become the sons of God by faith, by the Father’s adoption. Not as a reward for good works-of any variety- beyond faith in Christ.
We should be careful not to conflate becoming (and remaining) the sons of God, with the rewards the Father gives those sons for their faithfulness. (Or for that matter, the discipline received for their acts of disobedience.) I recall the father of the prodigal saying to his older, obedient son, “Everything I have is yours.” Just as that Father received home his disobedient son, one unworthy of reward, so He did not fail to honor the faithfulness of his obedient son.
Charles writes,
But this “whole concept” is exactly what IS found by those who read the Bible.
Acts 8 speaks of a new Christian who was caused by Satan to offer money to Peter in exchange for apostolic powers to perform genuine miracles. Peter told him what needed to be done, and it surely was not to be baptized again. It was to repent and pray, which some suppose is how seekers become Christians, but which is obviously NOT how seekers were taught by apostles to become Christians. Two ways. One for those outside the kingdom. The other for those now IN the kingdom.
Charles implies that Jesus teaches salvation by faith alone in Mark 16, by suggesting that WE add to what is said by inspiration. He has us saying:
But Jesus does not ever teach personally or through His apostles that faith ALONE saves, as seems to be the implication of Charles. In apostolic writings, the ONE place where faith alone is mentioned is when James points out that faith alone is dead. Jesus commands that we are to baptize new believers. The obvious conclusion is that we should baptize new believers. Yet some among us have begun teaching that Jesus will do the baptizing “into Christ” and we can later when it’s convenient baptize Christians who are NOT new Christians.
Charles affirms, despite all the apostles taught,
Where is there even one mention in apostolic writings of anyone who became a child of God through faith alone? That is not the apostolic teaching concerning repentance and salvation. What is taught about faith alone is that it’s useless. Charles is saying it’s the way to become a “child of God.” He’s wrong. Surely in the history of the apostolic church there would be at least one example of conversion by faith alone if that were possible.
Paul didn’t capitalize anything. Translators added chapters, the ends of sentences, chapters, verse numbers, and punctuation.
“And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, SAVE YOURSELVES from this untoward generation. Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.”
Of course, when Peter charged those penitent sinners who had come to faith in Christ to “save yourselves”, he did not mean or imply that they would be saved other than by grace through faith.
What he did imply, was they had actions to take themselves in obedience in order to be saved by grace through faith.
Because, Jesus was (and is) the author of eternal salvation to all them that obey him (Heb. 5:9).
Ray, I have read this quote several times and for the life of me I can’t see where he said “faith alone”. Even if that’s what he meant he did not say it in that quote.
“We become the sons of God by faith, by the Father’s adoption. Not as a reward for good works-of any variety- beyond faith in Christ.”
Of course there are dozens of passages that affirm the truth of Charles’ quote. Jay has posted them on this blog many times and I an others have posted many as well. But, they can’t possibly be true because of Acts 2:38 according to you. How do you suppose Luke is any more inspired or authoritative than John, or Peter, or Paul? By what logic do you decide a passage of Scripture must agree with Acts 2:38 or it isn’t true as written? Surely you don’t claim inspiration.
The problem might be a misunderstanding of your favorite text. Why is “baptized” so much more important than “repent” in that passage? Should our teaching be heavy on baptism and light on repentance and faith? I don’t think it should.
What then shall we say was gained by Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh? 2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. 3 For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness.” 4 Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due. 5 And to the one who does not work but believes in[b] him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness, 6 just as David also speaks of the blessing of the one to whom God counts righteousness apart from works:
7 “Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven,
and whose sins are covered;
8 blessed is the man against whom the Lord will not count his sin.”
9 Is this blessing then only for the circumcised, or also for the uncircumcised? For we say that faith was counted to Abraham as righteousness. 10 How then was it counted to him? Was it before or after he had been circumcised? It was not after, but before he was circumcised. 11 He received the sign of circumcision as a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised. The purpose was to make him the father of all who believe without being circumcised, so that righteousness would be counted to them as well, 12 and to make him the father of the circumcised who are not merely circumcised but who also walk in the footsteps of the faith that our father Abraham had before he was circumcised.
The Promise Realized Through Faith
13 For the promise to Abraham and his offspring that he would be heir of the world did not come through the law but through the righteousness of faith. 14 For if it is the adherents of the law who are to be the heirs, faith is null and the promise is void. 15 For the law brings wrath, but where there is no law there is no transgression.
16 That is why it depends on faith, in order that the promise may rest on grace and be guaranteed to all his offspring—not only to the adherent of the law but also to the one who shares the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all, 17 as it is written, “I have made you the father of many nations”—in the presence of the God in whom he believed, who gives life to the dead and calls into existence the things that do not exist. 18 In hope he believed against hope, that he should become the father of many nations, as he had been told, “So shall your offspring be.” 19 He did not weaken in faith when he considered his own body, which was as good as dead (since he was about a hundred years old), or when he considered the barrenness[c] of Sarah’s womb. 20 No unbelief made him waver concerning the promise of God, but he grew strong in his faith as he gave glory to God, 21 fully convinced that God was able to do what he had promised. 22 That is why his faith was “counted to him as righteousness.” 23 But the words “it was counted to him” were not written for his sake alone, 24 but for ours also. It will be counted to us who believe in him who raised from the dead Jesus our Lord, 25 who was delivered up for our trespasses and raised for our justification.
Royce wrote:
“How do you suppose Luke is any more inspired or authoritative than John, or Peter, or Paul? By what logic do you decide a passage of Scripture must agree with Acts 2:38 or it isn’t true as written?”
By the logic that every passage of Scripture must agree with the rest. While Luke is not “any more inspired than John or Peter or Paul”, he certainly is just as much inspired!
“Why is “baptized” so much more important than “repent” in that passage?”
Its not, but it is surely just as important. Both are equally important. The idea is not to “make baptism most important”, merely, to keep it in its proper place.
“Should our teaching be heavy on baptism and light on repentance and faith? I don’t think it should.”
Nope, your right! But, neither should our teaching be “light on baptism”. We should preach repentance and baptism together. Just like Peter did….
What is illogical, is for one to accuse another of being “heavy on baptism”, merely for insisting on keeping it in there.
“How do you suppose Luke is any more inspired or authoritative than John, or Peter, or Paul? By what logic do you decide a passage of Scripture must agree with Acts 2:38 or it isn’t true as written?”
I can’t believe someone here actually asked another person here “By what logic do you decide a passage of Scripture must agree with Acts 2:38 or it isn’t true as written?”
Don’t we all agree that every passage of Scripture agrees with every other one? Isn’t that like a rule or something here?
Royce, do you believe that there are Scriptures that are not in agreement with Acts 2:38? If so, I suggest the problem is in your interpretation, not the word of God.
You are correct…”the problem is in your interpretation, not the word of God”.
Hank, this is Ray’s quote and the one I was addressing.
Mar 28, 2014 ·” Any doctrine which contradicts Acts 2:38 seems iffy to me…”
I would reply that there is no doctrine that contradicts it. There are some that contradict his interpretation of it.
Royce, I’m not sure what passage you believe it is that contradicts Ray’s interpretation of Acts 2:38?
Either way, you basically admitted to being the one having a problem with Acts 2:38. I mean, look carefully again at your own words. You wrote:
“By what logic do you decide a passage of Scripture must agree with Acts 2:38 or it isn’t true as written?”
Those are your own words, you wrote that!
Royce wrote:
“How do you suppose Luke is any more inspired or authoritative than John, or Peter, or Paul? By what logic do you decide a passage of Scripture must agree with Acts 2:38 or it isn’t true as written?”
We often pit one writer against the other when arguing our point here, or any other debate of the bible as to what is meant when and where.
Does anyone see where Luke claimed to be moved by inspiration to write either book, I can’t find it. Does anyone see where any book of the new testament claims “inspiration”.
NIV
Luk 1:1 Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled [fn] among us,
Luk 1:2 just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word.
Luk 1:3 With this in mind, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, I too decided to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus,
Luk 1:4 so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught.
Act 1:1 The former treatise have I made, O Theophilus, of all that Jesus began both to do and teach,
Act 1:2 Until the day in which he was taken up, after that he through the Holy Ghost had given commandments unto the apostles whom he had chosen:
Does anyone see where any book of the new testament claims “inspiration”.
If we pay close attention we see Paul telling Timothy that prophets of old wrote by inspiration. Taking in to account the time in which Paul was speaking to Timothy, and the time Paul was speaking of we can only deduce that Paul is speaking of Old Testament writings. (there were no New Testament books at the time).
2Ti 3:15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
2Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
We see only one time Peter speaks of inspired writings once again “in old time”.
2Pe 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
OOPS, posted a little early. Question ; if new testament writers wrote by “inspiration” what does that do to Jesus mission spoken of in Hebrews?
The gospel is not a new start for self effort, it is not a chance for better religious practice, it is not what you are allowed or not allowed to do on Sunday. It is the good news about what Jesus, the God-man accomplished for sinners like all of us. Many people are striving to accomplish what was already accomplished by Christ. It is disappointing to see people trying to correct others when they themselves are unbelievers.
Laymond,
Since you are asking about verification for any book’s inspiration, does that suggest that you do not believe that The Book of Revelation was inspired?
As I continued to think about your verification qualification being that the Book identifies or states that it was inspired. I thought about Luke’s desire to accurately portray the actions and messages that were performed and taught by men who were inspired should be inspiration in its self. Luke was not making up his book on his own knowledge, he was a historian recording inspired history.
Thus an inspired Book. Now do you question those Apostles who recorded messages in writing as being inspired?
Larry, I agree with everything you just said The New Testament was written by “inspired men” not by inspiration of God. I think you might want to look up the phrase “Inspiration of God”.
.
English terminology is rather beside the point here. And frankly, so is human authorship. If human authorship was important, we could hardly accept as inspired an anonymous book like Hebrews. The manner of inspiration is hardly even germane. It really does not matter if the author even KNEW that what he was writing was given by God. Whether a writing was divine dictation, or a voice from a cloud, or stone tablets, or golden plates viewed under a hat, or simply a postcard to a friend recognized decades later for its Spirit-breathed content… the method is of no consequence.
The bottom line is, are these NT writings words from God, or are they not? If they are not, then why argue over them? If they are, then one may reasonably ask, “How were they given to us? That is, with what intent, or for what purpose?” This question is a key to understanding.
Do these “words from God” represent a new law, an updating of the law given to Moses, to be handled as the Jews handled the Law?
Are these “words from God” an anecdotal narrative of things said and done among the Jews and among the church during Jesus’ life and perhaps four decades afterward?
Do these “words from God” make up the last revelation of God to mankind?
“Inspiration” would not be so hard to fathom if we were not so unfamiliar with God speaking, up close and personal. Those who know that God continues to speak struggle less with how He does it, because we hear Him on an ongoing basis, and in various ways. It is a thing most marvelous, but it is not all that mysterious when it is a part of your life. If one thinks God spoke only to the ancients, that sets up a mental barrier between now and then which introduces all sorts of complications and stumbling blocks to our understanding.
Discerning of spirits cuts through a lot of this mental clutter.
Ray, I have said this innumerable times and out of sheer morbid redundancy will repeat it once more: I believe “faith alone” is an oxymoron. Faith does produce works; that is the nature of the thing. So it is not “alone”, any more than lightning is alone and unconnected to thunder. But every time I try to separate the evidence of a thing from the thing itself, someone starts braying, “YOU TEACH FAITH ALONE!” Some have gone so far as to say that when I say “faith is not alone” that this actually teaches “faith alone”. Hard to argue with that sort of logic. It’s a little like being in a McCarthy hearing; the witness can deny it all he wants, the verdict was in long ago. The one thing starkly absent from such a hearing is anyone on the committee actually hearing anything.
Charles said,
“Do these “words from God” make up the last revelation of God to mankind?
“Inspiration” would not be so hard to fathom if we were not so unfamiliar with God speaking, up close and personal.”
Charles, if what you say is true, that inspiration still abounds, then are you not saying that more letters could at some point be added to the Bible? A new revelation as the Mormons say about the book of Mormon? Do we need to read it and try to discern if it’s truly inspired? I don’t think that’s what you’re getting at, but if so, then it seems logical to accept that at any moment God might raise up a prophet and speak to us(which would carry as much authority as the Bible would).
Charles, you wrote:
“Those who know that God continues to speak struggle less with how He does it, because we hear Him on an ongoing basis, and in various ways. It is a thing most marvelous, but it is not all that mysterious when it is a part of your life.”
As you hear God speak to you “on an ongoing basis”, what it is like? When you say that you “hear him on an ongoing basis”, do mean like you actually (literally) hear him speaking to you?
What’s it like? It must be awesome!
..
As outlandish as it might seem, Monty, I find nothing –whether in the words of Jesus or of any apostle or of any NT writer– which precludes additional revelation. Nothing in the scripture itself closes it at the end of Revelation. The idea of a closed canon is of much later vintage- late 4th century or thereabouts- and may be attributed variously to Pope Damasus, Athanasius of Alexandria, the third council of Carthage, the council of Hippo, and others. It is, in fact, an oxymoron. If the closure of the canon was indeed by divine revelation, then said revelation came along centuries after the NT writings themselves, contradicting the very idea that God was no longer revealing Himself. If, indeed, inspiration ended when John’s prophetic pen ran dry, then Athanasius et al could hardly claim God’s voice as the basis for the closure accepted today.
As to false prophets or the book of Mormon, there have always been claimants to inspiration which have not been received by the church. And we are warned against false prophets. But the presence of counterfiets does not argue against the existence of the genuine. One can easily reject the Book of Mormon and still believe that God may readily add to the revelation we currently have.
God is immutable, as is the gospel of Jesus Christ. The NT canon makes no such claim for itself. There is really nothing to fear here. Jesus said, “My sheep know my voice.”
As to hearing from God for myself, it is indeed wonderful, Hank. It is sometimes corrective and sometimes uplifting, but always glorious because He is glorious. I have no greater access to the Shepherd’s voice than you or any other believer, so you should avail yourself of it! Listen and believe… it’s not really any more complicated than that.
Charles, thanks for your answer. I gotta process this, my study(teaching)has been that revelation is over, completed, done,and to believe there could be more still to come is a dangerous place to be. Not only Mormonism, but JW’s, David Karesh’s, Jim Jone’s group that fell pray, the group that committed suicide waiting for the mother-ship ? Khoutek? I believe God’s revealed will for mankind has been completed. Now whether God would speak(audibly) to individuals to encourage them or their church, I’m more open to. But it wouldn’t be new information to the body of Christ at large. I believe God can and does move and lead his people through the Spirit. I believe a Christian can be given a word of knowledge about a situation.
Charles, lets take a look at (as far as I know) the last recorded act of God speaking to the multitudes through his son Jesus Christ, who actually spoke through an angel and was relayed through the Apostel John.
Rev 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:
Rev 22:18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
Rev 22:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
Charles, you say he speaks to you regulery , what kind of filter does he use when he chats with you .
Charles said; “As outlandish as it might seem, Monty, I find nothing –whether in the words of Jesus or of any apostle or of any NT writer– which precludes additional revelation. Nothing in the scripture itself closes it at the end of Revelation.”
Charles did you stop reading before you got to , Rev 22:18,19
I just can’t understand why God would give Charles additional revelation if he is precluded to reveal it. sounds to me as if it is a closed matter.
“How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him; God also bearing them witness, both with signs and wonders, and with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to his own will?”
1. At the first was spoken by the Lord.
2. Confirmed unto us by them that heard him.
Some actually heard the Lord at first. Others (not being there), heard from those that heard from the Lord. God proving they actually heard by the miracles.
Crazy how some people are not content to hear from those who heard. But, insist on claiming they hear themselves!
Yet, with no witness bearing from God? As goes the proclamation, so must go the demonstration.
One time, God spoke to me directly and said, “I don’t speak to people directly anymore.”
Of course, I don’t actually expect anyone here to believe what I just said God spoke to me. Not without any proof like the Bible guys always had…
Do they that claim to hear God speaking to them (beyond the Bible) claim to have heard God speaking to them before they were Christians? Or, does God only converate with believers? And, do they that hear God speak to them know whether it is the Father speaking, or the Holy Spirit, or Christ? Do the individual persons identify themselves? Or, is it always and only the same person of the godhead that still speaks directly to men?
Hank,
Are you saying that, because Hebrews says what you quoted, miracles and inspired writing had already ended by the composition of Hebrews? That would seem to mean that Hebrews itself is not inspired — since the need for inspiration was already over. And the same for books written later — such as the Revelation.
And did miracles end with Hebrews? Before or upon completion of the book?
The author’s point is that the testimony is reliable and true and so ought to be submitted to due to its superiority to the Torah. But is he saying that there is no more witness being borne? Obviously not.
I used to teach that this proved Cessationism. But deeper study persuaded me to the contrary. We know that the angels, Jesus, and his apostles are all in the past — insofar as giving the testimony referenced here is concerned. So we are only really concerned with “while God also bore witness by signs and wonders and various miracles and by gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his will.” And “bore” sure seems to be PAST tense.
But in the Greek, its a present, active participle. Hence, the NASB translates —
(Heb 2:4 ASV) God also bearing witness with them, both by signs and wonders, and by manifold powers, and by gifts of the Holy Spirit, according to his own will.
(Heb 2:4 YLT) God also bearing joint-witness both with signs and wonders, and manifold powers, and distributions of the Holy Spirit, according to His will.
in agreement with the KJV —
The NET Bible translators comment —
According to Davis, Beginners Grammar of the Greek NT, —
That is, the activity of the angels, Jesus (while on earth), and the apostles is within the time frame of God bearing witness through gifts of the Spirit.
I find no historical evidence of a sudden end of miracles. And the Hebrews argument proves too much, because if he’s really saying that the age of inspiration is over, Hebrews is not inspired (nor are the later NT books). And the grammar, while easily confused because of weak translations, does not say with any force at all that God no longer speaks through the Spirit. And I’ve checked six major commentaries, none of which interpret this passage as saying miracles and inspiration have ended.
Obviously, the Spirit can do as he wills, but I can’t see declaring as a matter of assured doctrine that the Spirit can no longer be active in these ways. In fact, since the Spirit’s activities go back long before Jesus, it’s hard to argue that the Spirit must have retired shortly thereafter.
And it’s always bothered me that we accept the canon as Spirit-determined while declaring the Spirit inactive since the time of Hebrews. We can’t have it both ways since the canon wasn’t settled on for centuries.
On the other hand, I don’t think that we continue to receive revelation at the same level as the canonical books of the Bible, but I wouldn’t go so far as to declare the Spirit through with his revelatory work. Why couldn’t the Spirit speak and not speak doctrine? Is doctrine all that matters? Do we please God for certain if we get every doctrine right?
Or might the fact that love is the most important command indicate the most important work of the Spirit in our hearts?
“Are you saying that, because Hebrews says what you quoted, miracles and inspired writing had already ended by the composition of Hebrews? That would seem to mean that Hebrews itself is not inspired — since the need for inspiration was already over. And the same for books written later — such as the Revelation.”
Great queation, Jay. Of course, I don’t believe that miracles and inspired wilriting had NOT already ended by the composition of Hebrews – for the exact points you make.
Nevertheless, I do believe that the writer of Hebrews was making a distinction between those that heard from God directly, and those that merely heard from God FROM those that heard directly. I mean, that is precisely what he said.
Isn’t it possible that the writer was using accommodative language when he made a distinction between the “them that heard” and the “confirmed unto us”?
For all we know, there were men (and women?) to whom the Hebrews letter was addressed that HAD heard the Lord in person. Therefore, the “them” and the “us” were to be applied as the shoe fit. Obviously, the writer of Hebrews did not get his info merely from other men who heard directly, but from God.
Having said all of that, I really would like to know how anybody today who claims to “hear” from God directly, knows for sure that it is God that they are hearing?
Do they know if it is the Father speaking? Or Jesus, or only the Holy Spirit?
When they do “hear” God, can they quote whatever he says? Are they certain it is not their own human spirit speaking? How do they know? Do they also hear and know when evil spirits are speaking? Would they be able to tell?
In the Bible, when someone claimed to have heard from God, they not only could quote God, but they could also prove it.
Have you ever heard God speak directly to you? How often? Were you certain and could you quote what he said? Could it have been your own thoughts? I’d love to know…
Gary,
From the translator notes for the NET Bible —
Grk “strange flesh.” This phrase has been variously interpreted. It could refer to flesh of another species (such as angels lusting after human flesh). This would aptly describe the sin of the angels, but not easily explain the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah. It could refer to the homosexual practices of the Sodomites, but a difficulty arises from the use of ἕτερος (heteros; “strange,” “other”). When this is to be distinguished from ἄλλος (allos, “another”) it suggests “another of a different kind.” If so, would that properly describe homosexual behavior? In response, the language could easily be compact: “pursued flesh other than what was normally pursued.” However, would this find an analogy in the lust of angels (such would imply that angels normally had sexual relations of some sort, but cf. Mat 22:30)? Another alternative is that the focus of the parallel is on the activity of the surrounding cities and the activity of the angels. This is especially plausible since the participles ἐκπορνεύσασαι (ekporneusasai, “having indulged in sexual immorality”) and ἀπελθοῦσαι (apelthousai, “having pursued”) have concord with “cities” (πόλεις, poleis), a feminine plural noun, rather than with Sodom and Gomorrah (both masculine nouns). If so, then their sin would not necessarily have to be homosexuality. However, most likely the feminine participles are used because of constructio ad sensum (construction according to sense). That is, since both Sodom and Gomorrah are cities, the feminine is used to imply that all the cities are involved. The connection with angels thus seems to be somewhat loose: Both angels and Sodom and Gomorrah indulged in heinous sexual immorality. Thus, whether the false teachers indulge in homosexual activity is not the point; mere sexual immorality is enough to condemn them.
Gary wrote,
It’s fairly common to address a group of people in terms that apply literally to the entire group but not in actuality. If I finish teaching a Bible class, I might say, “See you all next week!” which hardly means that I really think that everyone will be back. I would say the same thing even if I knew one would be on vacation. Peter accused those at Pentecost of being guilty of the crucifixion, and it’s very unlikely that every single person there had personal involvement in the crucifixion. V 36 “whom you crucified”!
This makes far better sense than declaration the “son of perdition” saved.
And when God himself destroys someone, he is truly destroyed. The question isn’t whether God can save some from God’s own destruction! Surely that makes no sense.
(Mat 10:28 ESV) 28 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.
So no one need fear this fate because God is too good — even though Jesus that this is a fate that should be feared? There’s just WAY too much scripture that speaks of the eternal punishment of the damned to believe in some sort of purgatory followed by repentance and salvation.
Hank wrote
And how RIGHT is Hank! Jesus COMMANDS that we are to baptize each new believer and many who claim to love Jesus say baptism isn’t really important and doesn’t mean much. How wrong they are! Of course faith IN JESUS as the risen Lord is essential for salvation. Teaching that JESUS COMMANDS BAPTISM is not saying Jesus is NOT the Lord. It’s admitting that He IS the Lord.
Hank is right again! He quotes and comments:
It’s not only a rule with Jay Guin. It’s a rule with every honest Bible student. If the Bible contradicts itself, it’s not from God. The Bible does NOT contradict itself. But some who speak for God contradict what God caused to be written in the Bible, and they quote scripture which to THEM contradicts other scriptural truth. It’s especially tempting to add an “alone” to the more than 100 places in the Bible where it’s mentioned that we are saved by faith in Jesus. But the Bible never even once makes such a claim.
Royce thinks I interpret Acts 2:38 differently than Luke wrote it, it seems. Luke reports that Peter invited seekers to save themselves by repenting and being baptized in order to receive remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit. Some want the Spirit to be the Savior rather than the Son being the Savior, so they have the Spirit doing the saving. They do not agree with Luke or with Ray’s reading of the verse which agree with what Jesus had said to Nicodemus about a NEW BIRTH of water and spirit.
Some capitalize the “spirit” there. I’m sure Jesus did not do so, for he was contrasting human birth and spiritual rebirth. In many places in apostolic writings, flesh is contrasted with spirit, and it’s always a contrast between the HUMAN flesh and the HUMAN spirit, but the translators usually capitalize the “spirit.” This leads some to suppose that the “plan of salvation” is not based on faith in JESUS, but is somehow instead faith in the Holy Spirit and His work to cleanse from sin. In fact, the work of the Spirit begins when God gives to newly baptized Christians the “gift of the Spirit.”
But until seekers REPENT (a spiritual CHANGE) they can’t be baptized into Christ. We all should then understand that Peter was merely explaining the new birth about which Jesus had spoken to Nicodemus, a new birth of water and spirit. So any Bible scholar who disagrees with Acts 2:38 is also disagreeing with John 3:5 and several other passages where conversion is described. From the day that Paul was told to call upon the Lord by being baptized, Paul understood that baptism is INTO Christ, not because the person was already saved, but instead to complete the spiritual rebirth. Every writer whose topic is conversion into Christ agrees with Acts 2:38 or else their writing is not from God. And there the Spirit is God’s gift to the one who has already repented and been baptized (INTO CHRIST). So the Spirit doesn’t do the saving. It’s the blood of Christ applied that saves. Jesus saves. That’s why we are Christians rather than followers of the Holy Spirit.
Charles doesn’t like “faith alone.” He implies that everyone who believes acts upon the belief so that faith is always accompanied by faithful obedience. He obviously doesn’t agree with James, brother of Jesus and an elder in the Jerusalem church, who thinks that faith CAN be alone, and is deadly when NOT accompanied by faithful obedience.
As for inspiration, we believe the particular 27 books of the New Testament canon are inspired because a gathering of Christian leaders in the 4th century picked out these from the many volumes which were written and said that these particular books represented accurately the teaching of the apostles of Jesus Christ.
Other books were not thought to accurately represent apostolic teaching. I have no reason to second guess those early church leaders concerning the source of these writings. I believe they are from God. I note that within them is not to be found any contradictions. We do well to stake our future on the authenticity of the 27 New Testament books.
Laymond, You do know that Revelation 22 is talking only about the words of prophecy in Revelation – not the whole Bible. Right?
Charles claims
If Charles imagines that God speaks to him directly, as seems to be implied, and will speak to others directly rather than through the apostolic writings, then it’s easy to understand why the apostolic writings are not really important to Charles.
They re very important to us who realize that the apostles were unique, having received baptism in the Spirit which no other mortals ever received. God spoke to us through Jesus and His apostles. He did not waste the three years of preparation with them. He did not fail to give them HIS Spirit to guide them in the work for which they had been prepared.
Charles has not received apostolic powers. Yet he implies that God speaks directly to him. I’m sure that God does not speak directly to me, but instead wants me to search the SCRIPTURES to learn of Him. Of course He COULD speak directly to other than the apostles. I just don’t believe He said He would or that He chooses to do so. The Bible reveals the Way of life. It won’t change from generation to generation or from nation to nation. It needs no change. God obviously then does not need to notify some people of changes in His desires. We are all equal in God’s sight. He loves us ALL, not Charles in particular or any other person or race more than others. It’s through the apostles that the Way has been opened. Wise people will listen and learn from apostolic writings.
Skip asks:
“Laymond, You do know that Revelation 22 is talking only about the words of prophecy in Revelation – not the whole Bible. Right?”
What are you getting at, Skip?? That while we aren’t allowed to add to and/or take away from the words in Revelation, we ARE allowed to add to and/or take away from the other parts of the Bible?
What’s happening to the readers here? We have one brother arguing that its okay for some scriptures to disagree with Acts 2:38. And now we have another brother suggesting we can add and take away from the whole Bible (except Revelation)?!?
Really??
As others have wisely suggested:
“Stop listening for a voice and start looking for a verse. He’s already spoken!”
Virtually every false “Chriatian” religion has come into being by men and woman who have take the Bible PLUS new and extra revelation from God. By people who claimed to have heard God speak directly to them, apart from the Bible.
I’m sure that some of them, really believed it was God they were hearing…
Hank, Wow, what an overreaction. I merely said that you misapplied the intent of Revelation 22 and you flip out. Relax and rejoin a sane debate.
Hank, Sorry, it was Laymond who a applied Rev 22 to the whole Bible.
Sorry that you have taken such offense, Ray. You’ve said so many things wrong about me and about what I think that it would take many posts to sort them all out, so, I will let the whole mess go wholesale. All is forgiven. However, please forgive me if I do not cease to hear my Shepherd’s voice simply because you are critical of how it happens. I am a bit like the man in John 9 who was born blind. Jesus healed him, but the synagogue leaders descended on that man to explain to him how what he had was NOT from God. He couldn’t change their minds, all he could do was continue to see. That was enough to get them to kick him out. Works pretty good nowadays as well.
I think I will follow that no-longer-blind man’s example, myself. You will find it almost impossible to criticize a seeing man enough that he willingly returns to blindness. You might find John 9 an instructive read in this regard… or perhaps not.
Charles, you wrote :
“However, please forgive me if I do not cease to hear my Shepherd’s voice simply because you are critical of how it happens.”
I just HAVE to ask, is it really your Shepherd’s voice that you keep hearing? Or, is it the Holy Spirit? Or, are you not sure? Or, is it the Father? Have you heard the voice of all three? Do the voice(s) you hear actually identify themselves? Or, do you just have a gut feeling who it is? When you hear the voice of Jesus (the Shepherd), is it clear enough to quote?
Also, did Jesus talk to you before you were a Christian as well? Like, when you were a child, and if so, did you always know it was the Son of God talking to you?
And, have you ever heard the voice of Satan or any of his demons? Either before and/or after you became a Christian?
Are these not fair questions? I’d love to hear you share a few of the things God has spoken to you and how you are certain it was Jesus talking.
Ive asked these same questions to others who have claimed to heard the voice of God speaking to them (like my own mother), and usually (as in every time), it boils down to something better felt than told.
Usually, people that claim to actually hear the voice of the risen Son of God, the voice of the one sitting down at the right hand of the Majesty on High today, when questioned… They usually end up admitting it was more of a feeling or “hunch” that they had. And not that they are certain that they heard the actual voice of the one through whom all things were created.
We should be real carful when we claim to actually hear God talking to us apart from his written word.
Wow Ray, you’re on a roll aren’t you? I think I’ll just read your comments and find out what I think, believe, and have said. It was you, not me, who said any scripture that didn’t agree with Acts 2:38 is “iffy”. Then you accuse me of raising that point.
If you would discuss what people have actually said instead of what you say they have said, and what Bible passages say instead of your version of what the say you would be better received.
The “straw man” tactic works for you do you keep saying untrue things about what people have said. If that pleases you, very well.
Where in Scripture do we read that God has announced that He will never speak to people ever again? Those who are vehemently attacking Charles, who are declaring that God never communicates with people through any other means than what is written, then you should easily be able to give the Scripture where God announced what you claim.
Ray used the exact method with Al Maxie.www.zianet.com/maxey/reflx601.htm
Skip pointed out correctly to Hank that the Revelation passage concerning adding to referred only to the book of Revelation. Good for Skip. Hank then asked did we suppose the other apostolic writings could be modified. No, we said nothing about the other books. Skip just pointed out a true fact to Hank, which Hank apparently didn’t understand. What John said at the end of the Revelation applied to the book of Revelation. That’s a true fact.
So I just sent a note based on it being Hank when in fact it was Laymond! My mistake. I wasn’t looking at the original note which Skip says was written by Laymond. Laymond should catch on to the fact that the curse pronounced in Revelation 22 is to misuse of that book, the Revelation.
You suggest that I “use that same method with Al Maxey,” referring to quoting what is said and then commenting on it. I point you to http://missionoutreach.org/CD-O01.pdf where I quote exactly what Al wrote and comment on it. I comment on what he said and what the words he used mean. I do the same with any brother/sister in faith. Applauding what is good and right, and explaining why I disagree with what is wrong and bad.
I’m glad that some of Jay’s friends also love truth as Jay and I do. I don’t understand why some want to quarrel with obvious truth or claim superior knowledge based on something not in apostolic writings. Christians do well to study the Bible to learn truth. God doesn’t reveal new truths about the Way which is described in apostolic writings. Those who make claims to additional word from God always prove to be mistaken in thinking it was God who spoke to them.
Ray, I don’t believe anyone is saying they should add to what God wanted written.
You are declaring that God never speaks to people anymore, so where in Scripture has God announced that, or is that a revelation you had and who did you get it from? Since you want to declare that God never communicates with people through any other means than what is written, then you should easily be able to give the Scripture where God announced what you claim.
Grace,
Charles claims here that God speaks directly to him. He claims that he keeps “hearing the voice of his Shepherd.” I then asked how he knew for certain it was the voice of the Son of God he keeps hearing (as opposed to voice of the Holy Spirit, or to the voice of God the Father). I asked whether or not the voices he keeps hearing identify themselves. And whether or not he hears the voices clearly enough to quote whatever it is they say? And whether or not the Son of God spoke to him when he was a child as well. And if so, whether or not he knew it was Christ speaking to him back then.
I also asked about whether or not he hears the voice of Satan as well. Or, the voices of any of his demons?
Surely, since he asserts that God (specifically Jesus now) speaks to him on an ongoing basis, these questions are fair and appropriate.
How about you Grace? Does God conversate with you as well? Do you too, claim to actually hear his voice. If so, is it the Father, Son or Holy Spirit that speaks to you directly? And how do you know for certain?
I, for one, would love to know. Because, I must really be missing out here…
Maybe, you guys just mean you “hear” God throughout all of his creation? Figuratively speaking, like in the song “This Is My Father’s World”:
This is my Father’s world,
the birds their carols raise,
the morning light, the lily white,
declare their maker’s praise.
This is my Father’s world:
he shines in all that’s fair;
in the rustling grass I hear him pass;
he speaks to me everywhere.
Or do you actually mean that God speaks actual words to you that you can actually hear? And identify it is the Son of God actually speaking to you, as opposed to the Holy Spirit or the Father? If so, please do explain!
I might add that I find it interesting that from those who claim to be so led by the Holy Spirit, it is always the voice of “God” that speaks to them. Or, the voice of Jesus, the Shepherd, that they hear.
Its interesting to me that hardly anyone ever hears the actual voice of the Holy Spirit?
We need to keep the words of Peter in mind when we claim we are shown favoritism.
Peter said “I now realize how true it is that God does not show favoritism ”
Are we claiming Jesus does pick one over the other. speaks to some and ignores the rest.
I believe I read somewhere, that Jesus said I only do what I saw my father do. If the father
don’t show favoritism why would his son?
Hank, I believe the people did hear the voice of God once, (scared them half to death) they begged him never to do it again.
Careful, Grace, there is plenty of room still left here with me in Hank’s handbasket! He seems to have read John 9, because his post to you runs along the same lines:
A second time they summoned the man who had been blind. “Give glory to God by telling the truth,” they said. “We know this man is a sinner.”
He replied, “Whether he is a sinner or not, I don’t know. One thing I do know. I was blind but now I see!”
Then they asked him, “What did he do to you? How did he open your eyes?”
He answered, “I have told you already and you did not listen. Why do you want to hear it again? Do you want to become his disciples too?”
Then they hurled insults at him and said, “You are this fellow’s disciple! We are disciples of Moses! We know that God spoke to Moses, but as for this fellow, we don’t even know where he comes from.”
Grace, I did notice that Hank did not respond to your request for scripture underpinning his criticism, but he is to be forgiven for this. He cannot give you what he does not have.
There are those who are concerned that the idea of additional revelation outside the scripture somehow undermines the importance of scripture. Nothing is further from the truth. Paul reminds Timothy of the value of the OT scriptures, while he himself is adding to that body of writings. We sometimes forget that the NT writings themselves were the subject of much discussion and debate. They did not come to us prepackaged and delivered as a piece by the angel Moroni. The canon we have was produced by the Roman Catholic Church (sorry, guys). There were others of the Syriac and Eastern churches who did not concur entirely, and whose canons looked slightly different from our own. In the midst of this, we have always been dependent upon the Holy Spirit to confirm to us what is of Jesus. This was Jesus’ intention and promise, and nothing in scripture leads us to expect this to change.
I have seen more heresy preached with the Bible wide open than I have heard from people offering “new revelation”. Sticking to the bible as we know it has never prevented heresy and never will. The most dangerous heresies there are are the ones that come with BCV attached.
I think we all agree that anything which contradicts the substance of the scripture is not from God; not because the Bible is exclusively authoritative, but because the Holy Spirit is authoritative and constant. What He gives us in one place is not contradicted by what he gives us in another place.
And I hope to be forgiven for not answering all the questions posed to me, whether directly or indirectly. Some folks ask me questions because they want to understand better what I said, or because I said something puzzling, or to get more details or biblical foundation for what I said. Some agree with me, some disagree, but they are generally seeking to expand their own understanding, one way or the other. These brothers and sisters honor me with their questions, whether I ultimately persuade them or not.
There are also those pose strings of questions, but who are thereby seeking to continue their rebuttal in an argument which is, in their minds, already settled. The election is over, the ballots counted, and the boxes nailed shut. These brothers are welcome to their views, but they need no assistance from me to express these views, and cannot really benefit from anything I have to say.
“Then they asked him, “What did he do to you? How did he open your eyes?” He answered, “I have told you already and you did not listen. Why do you want to hear it again? ”
Charles, the difference between you and the blind man is that the blind man was willing and able to tell exactly what it was the Jesus directly said and did to/for him.
You, however, insist on keeping it a secret mystery – refusing to answer any of the questions I ask. Fair questions. How do you know it is the voice of the Son of God you claim to keep hearing? Does he identify himself as the Christ when he talks to you? Could it be the Holy Spirit instead? Or, perhaps your own spirit? Do you hear an actual voice? Or is it more of a funny feeling you keep having?
Please explain. Inquiring minds would like to know? Remember, the blind man shared his experiences. Be like him Charles.
Charles, I am not surprised you refuse to answer. Nor, that you use “the election being over”, as an excuse.
Surely, there are other readers here who would like to know for how long the Son of God has been speaking to you, what he has said, how you know it his his voice you keep hearing, etc.
Answer for them, at least…
Hear the sweet voice of Jesus say, “Come unto me I am the way”
Again, we sing a far better lesson than the one we preach.
I can’t imagine anyone not hearing the voice of God guiding them or answering a question or prayer, being it is the Holy Spirit, Jesus or God Himself doing the talking, in dreams, to our conscience, or ever how God wants to do it, it would be God either way.
Why must we try so hard to break everything down to our level of understanding instead of just leaving it to God and knowing we will not understand all of it til someday. The world would not hold all the books.
When I was a kid, my mom made two peanut butter sandwiches but would only give me one. “The other one is for your brother,” she said. I offered, “Well, give me his sandwich and I will go find out if he wants it.”
Mom was a little smarter than that.
AJ, asks why we should care where the voices in our head comes from, I believe it was Paul that said we need to verify, because there are other speakers as well. I forget just where it is but I can look it up if necessary.
AJ ,I was wrong once more it was John not Paul who said : 1Jo 4:1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
I believe this just might be what Hank is doing.
Thanks Laymond, you’re right. I do just want people to be careful and not attribute whatever voices they hear to the risen Son of God. Its especially concerning when people claim to hear the voice of Jesus regularly, and yet never know if they have ever heard the voice of an evil spirit.
I mean, even if I actually heard a voice saying, “Hank, this is Jesus talking to you…”, how would I know that it really was?
Its not like Satan would be honest. I think in fact, he always lies and tries to deceive the gullible.
Besides, I still would really like to know what the voices people attribute to Jesus actually say? Do the voices quote scripture? Explain scripture? Tell people where to work? What?
How are those not fair questions? They would surely fetch some interesting answers. Problem is, the people hearing voices usually don’t like to share them.
Except for Jesse Duplantis. That guys actually went literally to heaven and hung out with Abraham and David. At least he claims to have.
Of course, I don’t believe him either…
Hank asked, “How are those not fair questions? ” They are not only fair, they are required . If we believed everything we hear we would be a total mess. We couldn’t believe in anything.
laymond, the easy way to distinguish is if the direction given is what I want to do it is from God and if it is something I do not want to do it is from satan. That to most is how they try the spirits.
Best to ask for which GOOD thing I should do and which ever one is guided to us, it will be good.
satan hates it when we do that.
Alabama,
I don’t think the question here is “how to distinguish the direction of God from the direction of Satan.”
The question here is “Is the voice I claim to be hearing actually the second person of the godhead speaking to me?”
I’m sure nobody here denies the idea that God influences us and moves us to do his good will. I know I don’t.
What is being challenged here, is the idea of some people hearing ongoing voices that speak to them and that are attributed to the Son of God himself. That Jesus personally talks to them?! That they actually hear his actual voice?!
Not a feeling they are having, not a hunch. But, Jesus, the Son of God, actually speaking to them. Like they hear his VOICE and stuff.
I mean, if people don’t mean to imply that they literally hear the voice of Jesus speaking to them, then they should take it back. Otherwise, let them tell us what words he has said? Did the voice identify itself as the Christ? If not, how does Charles know it’s the Good Shepherd he is actually hearing?
Hank, I got it from laymond quoting 1John 4:1. Be interested in hearing how the Spirits are proved.
If some are hearing Jesus or a Godly person speaking to them directly out loud, I am curious in what language. Is it English or do they understand a heavenly language they previously didn’t understand.
“If some are hearing Jesus or a Godly person speaking to them directly out loud, I am curious in what language. Is it English or do they understand a heavenly language they previously didn’t understand.”
I know, right? I’m curious too! I’m hoping one of them will break it down…
You can be led by the “Word of God” without ever hearing him speak. We are led by a “good conscience” and the written word. I suppose one could confuse A good conscience with spoken words, if we try hard enough. “Something inside me told me not to do that, it had to be God” or a good conscience.
I know everyone wants to be special, but we just aren’t .
Hank asked Charles – As you hear God speak to you “on an ongoing basis”, what it is like?
You’ve made it clear that you won’t believe Charles or anyone else, so there is no sense for your tirade. There were people who didn’t believe what they heard or even saw what Jesus can do, they even tried to say His power came from Satan and their mocking of Him made it clear they weren’t open to believe what they were told about Him.
I made a request to you that you have yet replied to, here is my request again.
You are declaring that God never speaks to people anymore, so where in Scripture do we read that God has announced that He will never speak to people ever again? Since you want to declare that God never communicates with people through any other means than what is written, then you should easily be able to give the Scripture where God announced what you claim.
I never said that God never communicates to us apart from the written word. He does.
I just asked for those who claim to actually hear the VOICE of the Son of God to go ahead and describe it. And, to explain how they know for certain it is the Son of God that they are actually hearing.
Does the voice identify itself as the risen Christ? What words did the voice say? Stuff like that?
Why is taking such questions considered a “tirade”?
Have you heard the voice of God talking directly to you? If so, was it the Holy Spirit or Jesus talking? Did the voice identify itself, or did you just recognize it and “just knew” who it was?
AJ,
As to hearing God directly, I did not use the term “out loud”. I’m reminded that when God spoke from the cloud, it was not intelligible to everyone. We do well not to put natural limits on a God who has no such limits.
How do we know whose voice it is? The same way my toddlers knew my voice when I came through the back door, without even seeing me. By long and regular exposure. Jesus said, “My sheep know My voice.” I do not understand why some of my brothers simply and flatly deny this statement by Jesus to be true, and constantly challenge it. I understand when they don’t believe me, but their challenges make it clear that they won’t believe Jesus on the subject, either. (By the way, AJ, I think you are actually asking an honest question. That deserves an answer. Some others, sadly, are simply rewriting their disbelief in different syntax.)
And for the record, I do not dissect the Godhead so as to try to identify which member of the Trinity is speaking to me. Can’t see the point, actually. If God wants me to know that detail, he can certainly clarify it to me.
I do not know what language God speaks in when he speaks to us. Did he speak Hebrew when he woke up Samuel in the middle of the night? Did the “man of Macedonia” speak to Paul in Greek? When God spoke to Job out of the storm, what language did he use? If Job was hard of hearing would God have to speak extra loud? I don’t know. I do know that I understand it when he speaks to me in the spirit. I don’t suspect this is because the Father is a Berlitz graduate. And I know it’s not because I am. It is His Holy Spirit who indwells me; why would I NOT understand him? It is not unlike our ordinary communication, except that it is not limited to sound waves and our physical and mental acuity. I hear tone and inflection from God, just as my children hear that when I speak to them. God speaks to me because he wants me to understand. Why would he do anything to block that intention?
I cannot speak for how others hear from God. All I really know is that Jesus said his sheep know his voice and as a sheep, I have found this to be true. No surprise there.
Hearing from God is often easier than hearing from men. We often are not as clear as we would like to be, either in thought or articulation. God has no such limitations.
Charles, if when you “hear” the Shepherds voice (as you claim), but it is NOT “out loud”, is via signs? In which case it may more accurately stated that you “see” his voice.
If his voice is neither “heard out loud”, nor “even by signs”, you’re left to a feeling inside. Which is just as I said it usually comes down to when people who “hear” God’s voice today, are pressed.
You admit:
“I do not know what language God speaks in when he speaks to us.”
That’s because, apparently, he usesbno language at all. According to the dictionary, “language” is:
noun
1. a body of words and the systems for their use common to a people who are of the same community or nation, the same geographical area, or the same cultural tradition: the two languages of Belgium; a Bantu language; the French language; the Yiddish language.
2. communication by voice in the distinctively human manner, using arbitrary sounds in conventional ways with conventional meanings; speech.
3. the system of linguistic signs or symbols considered in the abstract (speech).
So, you can not even know (much less repeat), whatever it is you “hear” from the “voice” of God. Again, what you have experienced is better felt than told.
And, nobody here denies John 10. We just don’t equate our feelings with “the voice” of the Good Shepherd. For, “the voice” that the sheep hear and are saved by, is both understood and repeatable. And it is actual “language.”
You’ve made it clear that you won’t believe Charles or anyone else. Jesus said not to give what is holy to those who do not appreciate it, He said if we put what is holy in front of those who obviously will reject it they will seek to diminish it and destroy us. And you have given a great example that people will try do this.
It’s obvious you adamantly reject that God would speak through any other means than what is written. Since you are declaring that God never speaks to people anymore, where in Scripture do we read that God has announced that He will never speak to people ever again? You should easily be able to give the Scripture where God announced what you claim.
Grace, if God “speaking” to us simply means that we don’t actually hear him say anything and that we have no idea what language he may or may not be using, then fine – God speaks to us still.
I thought you guys were claiming to hear his voice in the sense that you understanding some type of actual language. Like you could actually repeat whatever it was you “heard” (like in words).
But, if its like Charles just explained, and its all an unrepeatable non language and unheard, I guess I have no problem with that.
I experience that quit often myself, actually
You still haven’t replied to my request, here is my request again.
Since you are declaring that God no longer speaks to people anymore other than what is written, where in Scripture do we read that God has announced that He will never speak to people ever again? You should easily be able to give the Scripture where God announced what you claim.
Are you having a problem giving the Scripture to your claim?
Grace, I assume you had me in mind when you wrote:
“Jesus said not to give what is holy to those who do not appreciate it, He said if we put what is holy in front of those who obviously will reject it they will seek to diminish it and destroy us.”
Doesn’t that mean you should stop addressing me? Are you TRYING to be destroyed 😉
Why won’t you give the Scripture to your claim, is it not there and you won’t admit it, that you have declared something about God that’s not true?
Grace you are so adamant to obtain an explanation from Hank . Where is the scripture that says God will talk directly to a person. Are you declaring something about God that isn’t true.? If the scriptures are silent on a subject what is the accepted rule ?
The CofC has ruled out musical instruments in their denomination from what they say is silence of Scripture, I believe they are wrong, musical instruments are in the Scriptures, same as God speaking to people, some say God doesn’t speak to people, I believe they are wrong.
I asked how we prove what is being said to us in our dreams and etc. is from God or not?
1John 4:2-3 tells us we just have to ask a simple question : Did Jesus come in the flesh and the answer will tell us.
Maybe we should start asking one another that question to be sure one of us, even me might be from the devil trying to influence all ya’ll.
Charles, Yes, I am serious and thank you for recognizing that. I do not know which one is telling me things either so if its good and has good results, I give God or someone working with God credit, really don’t care which writes it in my record book.. All I’ve done has not turned out good and when it turns out bad, I blame myself or the devil and move on. None of us will be perfect, but trying to do good ever how it turns out will be considered in any judgment by God.
Well said, Alabama. I’m fine with leaving it at that…
AJ asks how we prove what is being said to us in our dreams and etc. is from God or not?
I don’t know who we are trying to prove this to, so I many not be understanding the question entirely. Best answer I have is that we “prove” it in exactly the same way we “prove” the New Testament is from God.
Charles said; “I don’t know who we are trying to prove this to ”
Charles if I were to say to you “I can fly” would you want proof, or would you just repeat what you heard. Hey old Laymond can fly. Or would you say Hey, get the net old Laymond is off his rocker.
Unless I provided proof of what I said, you would continue to think I was off kilter.
Jhn 3:34 For he whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God: for God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto him.
(and he proved it before many witnesses)
Act 1:8 But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.
(and they proved,it before many witnesses)
Charles I believe the New Testament came from God, I have doubts that God dictated the words to the writers.
Whether or not you believe the new testament was given by God, has nothing to do with your hearing him speak, The new testament hangs on the truth of Jesus christ, backed by many witnesses. You hearing God speak hangs on your thoights with no witnesses.
I think that billygraham.org explains this question well enough:
“Why doesn’t God speak to us today in a voice we can hear? One reason is because we wouldn’t have any way of knowing whether or not it was God who was speaking to us, or if it was a fraud (or even a demon)….
But the other reason God doesn’t speak to us in a voice we can hear is because He doesn’t need to! God has already told us everything we need to know — and we find it in the pages of the Bible.”
http://billygraham.org/answer/in-biblical-times-did-god-speak-to-people-in-a-voice-they-could-hear/
It’s been admitted hear that the extra biblical “voice of God” people hear is not “out loud”, not “intelligible”, and comes in the form of an indiscernible language.
This, is hardly the way God spoke to the people in the Bible. Never, ever, did they have to wonder or guess if God had spoken to them. And never, when he did speak to them, were they left guessing at what he may have said.
The people going around believing God is constantly speaking to them (as even Billy Graham.org points out), are in a dangerous and vulnerable position.
People who were closest to Jesus and knew the miraculous things about Him since His birth, they even had thought Jesus was crazy. Having witnesses doesn’t mean people will believe you.
Mark 3:20-21 Jesus went back home, and once again such a large crowd gathered that there was no chance even to eat. When Jesus’ family heard what he was doing, they thought he was crazy and went to get him under control.
I can tell you I’ve been to Israel and Greece, and it’s true. You can certainly say you don’t believe me, that doesn’t make it any less true.
“It’s true that in Bible times God spoke occasionally to people in an audible voice, although it wasn’t common. And occasionally He still may do so, especially to people who live in places where the Bible is unknown.” Billy Graham, October 1, 2012 Tribune Media Services
Grace said, “I can tell you I’ve been to Israel and Greece, and it’s true. You can certainly say you don’t believe me, that doesn’t make it any less true.”
Grace, I have no reason to doubt what you say, but if you tell me you made those trips, and no one saw you, I have a very good reason to doubt.
Actually, I have been out at different places and no one saw me there to prove to that I was there. That doesn’t make it any less true.
That’s hilarious, Grace (Not you – Billy Graham). One year, BG says that one of the reasons that God does NOT talk to us today in any type of voice we can hear “is because we wouldn’t have any way of knowing whether or not it was God who was speaking to us, or if it was a fraud (or even a demon)”
Then , not long after he says that “occasionally he still may” (talk to men today).
So, taking both statements together, he must believe that God “still may” talk to people like he did before. The only difference being, the people he speaks to today have no way of knowing whether or not it was God who was speaking to us, or if it was a fraud (or even a demon).
Lol…
Jay has admitted in recent posts that he has changed his thoughts about certain spiritual things several times, even within recent years. It seems you don’t think someone is allowed to change their thoughts about something, perhaps that’s another rule the CofC denomination has.
Awesome point, Grace! Now, we just need to find another statement from BG explaining HOW the people that still do hear God speaking in an audible voice “have any way of knowing whether or not it was God who was speaking to us, or if it was a fraud (or even a demon)”?
He should fix and explain that part.
Remember, the people here who claim to hear the voice of Jesus ” speak” to them admit that it is NOT an audible voice.
But, let’s forget all of that for a minute. How about you Grave? Have you said whether or not God and/or Jesus speaks directly to you (not counting the Bible)?
Why is is such a secret? Did he tell you not to tell anyone or what? If not, and he has, who was it? The Father or the Holy Spirit? Or Christ? What did he tell you?
If God has not spoken words directly to you, then you are just like me. If he has, I beg you, please share. This would be the perfect place to share precisely what God told (or tells) you and how YOU knew it was actually him? As opposed to your own voice(s)…
Saul on the road to Damascus heard a voice speak to him. The voice identified Himself as Jesus. Saul didn’t call the voice a demon, he called the voice Lord. Saul didn’t think of the voice to be a demonic spirit, he took in consideration that it truly was Jesus speaking to him. How about Job, he heard the voice of the Lord as he was being afficted by Satan. Job didn’t think of the voice to be a demonic spirit, he had no doubt even in great pain that it was the voice of the Lord speaking to him.
You still haven’t replied to my request, here is my request again.
Since you are declaring that God never speaks to people other than what is written, where in Scripture do we read that God has announced that? You should easily be able to give the Scripture where God announced what you claim.
Okay Grace, I’m not saying God doesn’t talk to people directly and audibly anymore. Now, all I want to know is, for those of whom he still does talk directly to, how does it work? If it was like Saul, the voice said “this is Jesus, why are you persecuting me? Go to Damascus” Not only that, Saul asked questions and got answers back. They had an actual conversation. Just like Ananias and Jesus had right before Saul and Jesus. Just like Job had with God. We all know those stories and how it worked in the Bible when God talked to people. They heard him, they understood his language, they could quote God. It was not funny feelings and/or hunches. Not indiscernible languages. God spoke in the language of the people he spoke to. Every time, right? He spoke their particular language that way they could know what God was saying. They heard him and they understood. Nothing weird and unknown there.
Now, could you say whether or not Jesus talks to you in words you can understand? Does the Holy Spirit? If so, who was it, how did you know fore sure, and what did he tell you?
Why won’t you say? Did he charge you not to tell anybody about it? Was it when you went to Greece?
Agreed! I don’t think we should ever rule out things about God and the power of God, especially when Scripture has not done so.
And I could tell you whether or not the Lord has spoken to me to audibly hear Him. Though, how you have gone about trying to get such any such information about my relationship with the Lord, to me really doesn’t come across as sincere, so by my choice after what I’ve seen from you, I decline your ungracious request.
Have a blessed day
Lol, that’s so awesome!! Hope everybody sees that. Totally perfect reply!
You have a great day as well.
And thanks 🙂
Hank, I’m surprised that you would quote someone you don’t consider to be a Christian.
“Hank, I’m surprised that you would quote sombee you don’t consider to be a Christian.”
Dude, I quote all types of people I don’t consider to be Christians. If Billy Graham is “a Christian” (which he may be), he sure is a false teaching one.
I was just looking for a popular preacher who was way out there who at the same time would know that if God still talked audibly to people today, that they would have no way of determining whether what they were hearing was God, a fraud, or a demon.
My pont was in the fact that even BG knows that people aren’t still being talked to by God in any discernable language.
Of course, he may have changed on that recently.[JFG: deleted per site policy]
Hank’s comment – Of course, he may have changed on that recently.
Looks like you have changed on that too [JFG: deleted per site policy].
Hank’s comment – I’m not saying God doesn’t talk to people directly and audibly anymore.
There is a reason Jesus said not to give what is holy to those who do not appreciate it, He said if we put what is holy in front of those who obviously will reject it they will seek to diminish it and destroy us.
There are spirits we should beware of, no doubt.
All,
1. There are plenty of things that God might say that have nothing to do with adding doctrinal revelation to the NT. The fear of extending the canon is a straw man. For example, the leaders of a church may well pray for guidance when making major decisions — to build a new building, to hire a preacher, to fund a missionary, to disfellowship a straying member, to mend a family rift, to reach a consensus on a major doctrinal dispute … — and we should expect that God may well choose to offering the guidance prayed for — all without threatening the closed canon. So let’ s please drop that argument.
It’s a false, legalistic assumption that if God speaks, he speaks new laws. Therefore, it’s no surprise that, as we escape legalism, we become more open to the possibility that God still speaks beyond the Bible. Once the legalism is gone, there is little to fear.
In the church where I grew up, a common prayer was for God to “guard, guide, and direct us” — which was God’s providential leading — and it was for more than reminding us to read our Bibles. We expect God to actually answer the prayers — meaning whether it was through our feelings or circumstances, somehow or other, God would communicate to us a message.
2. I have little patience with the distinction between Providence and miracles. Either God is changing what would have otherwise happened or not — and if he’s changing the course of the world or my life, he’s acting outside of nature. It’s a miracle. If God really gives guidance in response to such a prayer, he is changing what would have otherwise happened — a miracle.
We fool ourselves into believing that there’s a difference so we aren’t threatened by scary miracles but God can still answer prayers, still be with the doctors and nurses who attend to a sick relative, and still guard, guide, and direct. And why are we afraid of miracles? Likely due to the presence of charlatans who claim false miracles — going back at least to Pharaoh’s priests just before the Exodus. But the presence of charlatans should not cause us to muzzle Jehovah God. Surely the church has enough faith and wisdom, coupled with intense prayer, to distinguish the holy from the profane.
3. “Audible” means that the message from God is communicated through someone’s ears, which is a possibility, but God could just as easily “speak” directly into someone’s mind. That would not be “audible” to others but it would be a propositional truth. He might also communicate via a feeling — such as by causing someone to feel uncomfortable with a chosen course of action, so that they rethink their decision. I can no reason to place strictures on how God chooses to communicate. Jer 31/Heb 8 say God will write his laws on both our hearts and our minds. He made them both and can communicate through both should he so choose.
4. The notion that we can’t prove who the message is from is a serious concern, but it hardly compels us to believe that God doesn’t speak to his people. After all, Gideon tested God twice before believing it was truly God who wanted him to lead Israel’s army. We are all certainly capable of confusing the word of Satan for the word of God — but that hardly means that there is no word of God! Rather, discernment is necessary. We should not become so cynical that, like some of the Pharisees, we deny the miracles of God when they are done in our plain view! But neither should we be gullible and accept as true every statement that “God told me …” Often that’s an excuse for wishful thinking.
It’s too cynical, jaundiced, and lazy to call all who produce evidence of God’s current communication outside of scriptures liars or gullible. Not allowed. After all, if we permit such an attitude at the outset of the discussion, then the conclusion is dictated by our beginning assumption. There is no evidence of God speaking because we’ve declared all such evidence inadmissible! It’s circular and a waste of time.
5. No ad hominem arguments — no matter how upset you are. I’ve been ill the last few days and haven’t had time to monitor the 160+ comments as I normally would, but my absence doesn’t change the rule.
6. I don’t blame anyone for not wanting to relate an encounter with the voice of God to people who are entirely closed minded and likely to ridicule their testimony. Those who wish to hear personal testimony should offer a more charitable attitude toward those they disagree with.
Readers,
Please do not accuse other readers of lying, even as a possibility. “Lie” implies an intent to deceive, and we can’t judge the intentions of others.
Hank,
If you want to insult Billy Graham, please do so at his site where he can respond. Disagreement is fine, but personal invective is not.
All,
For those seeking scriptural evidence that God might continue to speak to us today, see my earlier comment on Heb 1:1-4: /2014/04/what-must-be-preserved-of-the-churches-of-christ-unity-part-5-2/#comment-48243
Also, read Heb 8:8-12 (quoting Jeremiah), Phil 2:12-13, and Rom 8:14, for example.
If the question being considered is whether God speaks audibly (rather than directly into our minds or hearts), why would anyone care? What difference could it possibly make whether God chooses to communicate through dreams, visions, auditory miracles, or directly into our hearts and minds?
Where I grew up, the controversy was over the “direct operation” of the Spirit. Have all conceded that God (or God through his Spirit or Jesus through the Spirit) may well communicate messages by direct operation, but some question an indirect operation, such as through an audible voice?
I’m finding this entire discussion very confusing. I’m not even sure what the points of disagreement are.
“We expect God to actually answer the prayers — meaning whether it was through our feelings or circumstances, somehow or other, God would communicate to us a message.”
I agree. My point is that whatever times God may have communicated messages to us (and I believe he has/does), we are never able to say we absolute certainty – “God just communicated a message to me!”
We may presume as much, but we can’t ever say without any doubt that “God just did (or communicated) such and such. It was for sure God that made me think or feel what I just did.”
If anyone here claims they can know with certainty when a thought or feeling is from God rather than from anywhere/one else, I believe its fair to ask them to explain how it is they can tell?
So, God does things (even call them miracles), but they just don’t declare themselves to remove all doubt that it was an act of God.
Again, if one claims the ability to recognize with certainty the direct actions of God today (as opposed to any other causes), let he or she break it down.
For example, suppose an eldership prays for God’s guidance in the hiring of a preacher. Would you ever be able to tell the church, “Church, we prayed for God to guide us in choosing between these 6 candidates, and God communicated to us that he thinks we should hire Joe Rodriguez.”
No way, right? You might guess that’s who he wanted, but you couldn’t honestly say he told you Joe.
Many announce they have a NEW revelation from God the Father or the Holy Spirit. If it says what is already available in apostolic writing, what is gained by the repetition? If it’s new and agrees with apostolic writing, why would it be given to one individual rather than to all of us? If it’s new and disagrees with apostolic writing, as most “revelations” seem to do, then why would we believe it’s from God? I think God gave all that’s NEEDED for us to serve Jesus and do His will. If He would reveal how the nation could get good leadership again, and we all heard the message, I’d be happy to receive new revelations from any source. It appears that Nevada may soon give patriots a chance to send a message to the Federal Government about liberty. Will that be a word from God?
I think a lot. I hear myself thinking to myself. I don’t claim it’s God doing the speaking. I know it’s I (I first typed ME but realized grammar insisted on and I). We can be sure it’s the voice of God speaking in the Scriptures. We can be sure it’s APOSTOLIC if it’s in apostolic writings. Otherwise, we do well to avoid claiming that God has spoken to us in support of our opinions.
Hank, I’ve also suggested that God the Spirit may act much as He did in the first century in places where the Bible is not available but where a Christian seeks to teach the gospel. I have no proof of this except the testimony of several missionaries, whose words I didn’t put on paper. God is not limited to never speaking except through apostolic writings. Of course he’s not limited in any way. But I have serious doubts when people claim their thoughts are God speaking through them. Jesus proved by DEEDS that He was God. The apostles proved by DEEDS that they were empowered by the Holy Spirit. They healed. They did impossible things.
The only impossible things I see from some who today claim to speak for God is how unlikely some of the things they say are. Both words and deeds proved that the apostles were in touch with God. Before we seek additional information from God it surely would help if we’d become very knowledgeable about what we KNOW He inspired. I hear wisdom from Jay and Hank and several others. I figure their wisdom comes from studying the apostolic writings and considering how they apply to today. I’m not expecting NEW revelations while the apostolic writings are available and apparently unknown by those who claim to be receiving new words from God.
If we pray for God to direct us but then say God no longer directs us then we no longer need to pray.
Jay, Perhaps a bigger question here is who believes the Holy Spirit indwells. If we don’t believe he indwells then how would God speak to us? If we say he indwells then to what end? Can’t He do or speak as he pleases?
“If we pray for God to direct us but then say God no longer directs us then we no longer need to pray.”
Except, nobody here (that I know of), denies the fact that God directs us. He does. Never suggested otherwise.
God could make us think of something, make us forget about something, heal a physical pain, or even make us have a heart attack. He can do whatever he wants. We just don’t know for absolute certain whether an act was caused be God or other by other means. We can thank him for everything, but we can’t say “hey, God just put a thought in my head or heart” cause you don’t know.
If you do, if you can differentiate between your own thoughs and the ones put in your heart by an evil spirit directly, or by God. Please share your secret.
How have you know, how were you sure, and what did God tell you specifically?
But, and again, nobody is saying God doesn’t do stuff
“Jay, Perhaps a bigger question here is who believes the Holy Spirit indwells. If we don’t believe he indwells then how would God speak to us? If we say he indwells then to what end? Can’t He do or speak as he pleases?”
Except everybody here (that I know of) believes the Holy Spirit indwells us. The Bible is plain on that. Just as plain in fact, as it is in teaching that Christ indwells us. They both do. In fact, in Jn 15, Jesus was “in” his disciples way before they were given the HS. Right?
And yes, God can certainly do as he pleases. We just can’t say “that for sure was God” and “that for sure was not God.”
If you can, then share how you ghave such discernment
“If we don’t believe he indwells then how would God speak to us?”
We do believe he indwells us.
But, if you are trying to say that we have the Holy Spirit in us SO THAT GOD CAN COMMUNICATE with us directly (like some type of divine walkie talkie), then HOW was he able to communicate with men before men “had” the Holy Spirit?
Are you saying that although God was able to guide his people in the OT without the indwelling of the HS but now is unable?
Or, did God NOT guide his people in the OT (in your view)?
How were the OT children of God able to be led by God and how were they able to produce the fruit of the Spirit back before Pentecost?
“Except everybody here (that I know of) believes the Holy Spirit indwells us.”
I meant to write “denies”, nobody here DENIES that the HS indwells us. He does! So does Christ.
” Of course he’s not limited in any way. But I have serious doubts when people claim their thoughts are God speaking through them. Jesus proved by DEEDS that He was God. The apostles proved by DEEDS that they were empowered by the Holy Spirit. They healed. They did impossible things. ”
Jhn 17:1 These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee:
Jhn 13:20 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that receiveth whomsoever I send receiveth me; and he that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me.
Jhn 17:18 As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world.
Maybe it is just me but I had rather hear one claim a conversation with God, than to hear one discredit the words of God with their opinion. one could be just a mistake, while the other is a needless deception.
Why? may I ask, if the deeds God performed through Jesus proved Jesus was God, did not the deeds the apostles did, prove they were God also.?
I think as Jesus said the deeds they all did proved they were “from God”.
Jhn 14:10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.
Jhn 14:11 Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works’ sake.
Laymond,
By far the folks I have known that believe they have gotten instruction from God have not said a word to anyone until asked directly and then in a very humble manner. That includes me. Whether others believe you or not doesn’t matter, you believe it and are obeying and the chips will fall as they may and those obeying the instructions of God are waiting to see what happens and are just as suprised as anybody else when it does.
One thing always happens, God is given the glory.
I believe the folks that are doing this obeying of direct instructions are quiet and humbled and that is why its not heard of often.
Be leary of those beating their chest and bragging how God talks to them.
Jay wrote, “We should not become so cynical that, like some of the Pharisees, we deny the miracles of God when they are done in our plain view! But neither should we be gullible and accept as true every statement that “God told me …” Often that’s an excuse for wishful thinking.”
Indeed. Both Paul and John address this issue. Paul instructs the Corinthians to listen carefully to a prophetic word and let others in the group judge it, that is, to discern whether or not it is from the Lord. (Note: this instruction presumes believers who accept that God still speaks.) Anyone who says “Thus saith the Lord,” and will not submit his word to mature believers should send up a red flag. Not because it makes his words wrong, but because it is a mark of immaturity or pride. Additional revelation from God comes to us in community. Even if you heard the Lord in your closet, eventually, what you hear should come into the light of another brother or sister’s discernment as well. We are together in this. We CAN be wrong; we are certainly able to attribute to God what comes from us. But that is not a cause to reject God’s speaking, it is rather a cause to come closer together and to be more transparent with one another, that we can mature and be edified at the same time.
As a matter of experience– not as a matter of doctrine– what I have seen is this: I have judged another brother’s “word” as not from the Lord at times, along with other elders, and we had to identify it as such. BUT it is interesting to me that in these cases, the word given was not harmful or ungodly in and of itself. Invariably, those “words” were merely human, but harmless, like dead yeast in beer. Some were “wishful thinking”, as Jay calls it. Some were immature attempts to be seen as spiritual. We discussed these with the person who made the mistake and corrected them. But none of these words required our standing up and calling out dangerous doctrines or ungodly counsel offered as prophecy to the church. This is not to say that ungodly things will never be attributed to God, requiring the shepherds to identify a real wolf and protect the sheep. I am sure this can sometimes be the case. But in my experience, we are a community, hearing from a known person in our community. The Holy Spirit has an active role in us before we open our mouths. Having heard hundreds of prophetic words in our community without having to draw swords over a single one of them suggests that He is involved long before we are.
As to John’s words, he is far too liberal for most of our tastes: “Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God.”
I fear that we employ a lot higher standard than John did.
Jay, I appreciate your conclusion that the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah was not particularly about homosexuality. Enoch is tied in so closely with Jude and would have been so familiar to first century readers that the case for the sexual sin being an attempt to have sex with angels is pretty solid in my opinion. Enoch portrays angels having sex with human women. The “likewise” in Jude seems to tie in the attemted sexual sin of the mob with the same class of offense as the angels. It seems to me to be a real stretch to understand “heteras sarx” (strange flesh) as a reference to intercourse with one of the same sex. But more important than this matter is that OT writers never mention Sodom’s sin as being sexual in nature but rather as being the sin of unjust treatment of the poor and failing to show hospitality. Only Jude comments on the sexual aspect of what happened in Sodom.
Jay, I pulled out my Vines Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words today and fully expected it to side with you on the meaning of apoleia given your firmness on it meaning annihilation. I am surprised to find that it gives the definition of apoleia as “akin to A, (apollumi)…and likewise indicating loss of well-being, not of being….” Apollumi is of course translated as “lost” in the Luke 15 parables and refers to what or who can be found or saved. There is no distinction between apoleia and apollumi whereby the former means annihilation of existence. We both believe that the impenitent will be punished in hell but what about after that? I can’t see your basis in Scripture for believing in annihilation. On the other hand, such clear biblical statements as that in Adam all die but in Christ all will be made alive seem to point to ultimate universal salvation. Of course I may be wrong but I am a hopeful universalist. My hope is not wishful thinking but is based on what seems to me to be a solid biblical case. If you haven’t read Richard John Nuehaus and Hans urs von Balthaser on universalism I think you’re selling yourself short in dismissing the likelihood of univeralism.
Regarding Judas, the “all of you” in Matthew 26:27 (where Jesus tells all of the Twelve to drink of the cup) is the referent for the “you” in Matthew 26:29 whom Jesus says will drink the fruit of the vine anew with him in the Father’s Kingdom. Jesus was only speaking to twelve people so it seems unlikely that he would make such an important statement to all of them if it applied only to some of them. The examples you gave of how people sometimes speak in more casual situations don’t seem comparable to such a grave and important occasion.
I have read N.T. Wright on universalism and while he rejects universalism I do appreciate his recognition of the difficulty inherent in believing that those who bear God’s image will be either annihilated or punished in hell for eternity. His solution is that those who are not saved will cease to be human and will no longer bear God’s image. If that is the case then the lost would in effect become animals and hopefully they would be annihilated. Who would punish an animal in hell? Wright’s solution seems to me to require a lot more creativity in interpreting Scripture than does universalism. But again Wright at least acknowledges the difficulty.
Charles comments
But John is not saying that everyone who claims to be speaking from God can be identified by their acknowledgement that Jesus is Lord.
Many claim that Jesus is Lord and still prophesy falsely. John doesn’t affirm that everyone who admits faith in Jesus is going to be inspired to speak new things from God. He only points out that anyone who denies the deity of Jesus is surely NOT speaking truth from God.
Gary seems to be convinced that everyone will be saved, with or without faith in Jesus. I’ve read only the Bible concerning salvation and annihilation. I’m convinced that those who are not saved by Jesus will be destroyed eternally in Hell, not saved despite their unbelief and wicked deeds. If everyone is to be saved, the death of Jesus is absurd. But God makes no mistakes. Jesus died to save those who choose to enter the Way of life by way of new birth of water and spirit based on faith in Jesus. Those IN the kingdom will enter glory. Others will be cast into Hell.
Ray,
that is the same teaching we of the church of Christ have heard preached for years. There has also been preached a few exceptions like the mentally retarded and children since they cannot understand enough to obey.
Confusing, yes, because that also includes children and mentally retarded from countries, tribes, places and times where Jesus has not been heard of. In most cases these are our kinfolks.
Seems if we can all agree on the (innocent) in these circumstances being accepted into heaven why not their innocent parents in the same unknowing boat? I imagine those that believe as you do pray for their children to be born mentally handicapped to ensure heaven for them.
How we have picked and chosen has seemed rather hypocritical or even boasterous to many.
“We CAN be wrong; we are certainly able to attribute to God what comes from us.”
Exactly! In fact, not only CAN we be wrong (in claiming a given thought was from God and not from our own heads), we have NO WAY of determining between the two! What’s more, the “thought” may have even come from an evil spirit in disguise. We simply have no way of saying with absolute certainty “the thought I just had came from God.”
Today, whoever claims “the God in heaven just spoke to me thus and such”, has no way of knowing if that is true or not. How could he??
Today, THE ONLY word guaranteed to be from God, is in the Bible.
Remember, virtually EVERY false religion known to man, was started by a person of who heard God speaking to them apart from his living word. But, it was not God speaking to them. They were wrong..
“Seems if we can all agree on the (innocent) in these circumstances being accepted into heaven why not their innocent parents in the same unknowing boat? I imagine those that believe as you do pray for their children to be born mentally handicapped to ensure heaven for them.”
Not so. What makes the little children and mentally disabled “innocent” is because they are not lost in sin.
The wages of sin is death. The goal is not to be born mentally disabled (or to die as a child), but to find the Lord and be saved.
Remember, “seek and ye shall find.” God promises as much.
“Today, whoever claims “the God in heaven just spoke to me thus and such”, has no way of knowing if that is true or not. How could he??” The exact same way that we know that the New Testament is true, Hank.
“Today, THE ONLY word guaranteed to be from God, is in the Bible.” Guaranteed by whom, Hank? By the same One who gives us prophecy. A guarantee by anyone less would be worthless.
Observation: There are those who are quick to insist that we are to see things and do things exactly as the early church did… but at the same time, they start sentences like these with the qualifying word, “Today…”, by which they mean, “Unlike back in the first century…” For such folks, things are different now than they were back then. Except when they are not. How do we know whether “things are different now” OR “things are the same now”? There is no way to predict. All we know is that God can’t tell them, because He no longer speaks. SO… these folks will let us know what to hold to and what to set aside as they figure it out. Stay tuned.
The one thing which can be predicted with some certainly is that whatever limitations these folks experience in hearing God or in seeing Him interact with mankind, those limitations apply to everyone else as well. Nobody can receive anything THEY haven’t received.
Charles, you wrote:
“We CAN be wrong; we are certainly able to attribute to God what comes from us.”
What did you mean by that, Charles. Why would you “attribute to God” something that came from yourself (your own head), and not actually from God? Why would you do that?
Seems as you, yourself admit the inability to distinguish between your own thoughts and the ones you claim God gives you! Why else would you “attribute to God” the things that come from yourself?
You said that, Charles. And I agree…
I know you like to claim the same for yourself, we read of the inspired men in Scripture, but the men who spoke to God back then, did not wonder if or when God spoke back. They never attributed their own thoughts to have been from God.
They didn’t make the mistake that those who claim to hear from God today make.
Like it or not, it WAS different then.
“The one thing which can be predicted with some certainly is that whatever limitations these folks experience in hearing God or in seeing Him interact with mankind, those limitations apply to everyone else as well. Nobody can receive anything THEY haven’t received.”
Obviously Charles, you claim for yourself the ability to hear the voice of Jesus on an ongoing basis – you have written that here.
Yet:
1) You refuse to explain how you know it is the voive Christ you are “hearing”.
2) You admit that we/you certainly CAN “attribute to God”, that which came from yourself.
With that being the case, isn’t it fair to assume that you really have no way of knowing whether or not it is the actual voice of Christ you claim to be hearing?
For if you could know if and when it was Christ you were hearing, why the problem with being able to tell the difference between his voice and your own?
Hank,
seek and you shall find is certainly true.
Those broiught up thinking, from being taught by their elders, they have it right only seek more info to back up what they believe to be true.
We do the same.
An engineer sitting on a park bench was joined on the bench by a pigeon with a damaged wing. The engineer watched the pigeon walking around on the bench and began to explain to the pigeon why he was not flying. He explained how the damaged wing had ruined the pigeon’s lateral flight stability. He observed that with one wing damaged, the pigeon’s power to weight ratio had been compromised so that it could not generate enough lift and thrust to offset its weight. The engineer worked out the necessary mathematics on a scrap of paper to apply Bernoulli’s Principle and Newton’s Laws of Motion to demonstrate the impossibility of the pigeon getting airborne under its own power.
The pigeon suddenly bolted toward the opposite end of the bench and, flapping crookedly and desperately, managed to get into the air, fly erratically about thirty feet and land awkwardly in a nearby tree.
Said the engineer, “Stupid bird. Clearly can’t do math.”
It happens from time to time that a woman is told over and over again that she cannot conceive, only to later give birth. But never in recorded history has such a woman ever given up her baby in order to satisfy the skeptics’ words that such a thing was impossible.
Hank,
it is very easy to tell if a message is from God or satan.
1 John 4:2-3
2. Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every Spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:
3. And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God;and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come and even now already is it in the world.
These are the verses I referred to earlier. Just relax and ask anytime you get a message and are not told up front!!!
Charles, you wrote:
“We CAN be wrong; we are certainly able to attribute to God what comes from us.”
To which I asked:
“What did you mean by that, Charles. Why would you “attribute to God” something that came from yourself (your own head), and not actually from God? Why would you do that?”
To which, you replied:
“It happens from time to time that a woman is told over and over again that she cannot conceive, only to later give birth. But never in recorded history has such a woman ever given up her baby in order to satisfy the skeptics’ words that such a thing was impossible.”
What?? Sometimes your illustrations are clever, other times, I have no idea what you mean. You talk about eating the extra peanut butter and jelly sandwich that your mom made for your brother and stuff. Its weird.
I ask you to explain how it is you are “certainty able to attribute to God” the things that come from by our own head/heart, and you respond with stories about damaged pigeons and women who conceive against the odds?
What’s up with that?
Alabama, you wrote:
“it is very easy to tell if a message is from God or satan.”
Do you claim to get direct messages from both God and Satan? Like, do you claim to “hear” not God and Satan “speak” to you?
Do you sometimes have a though and claim that either God or Satan “spoke it” to you? Whenever you have a good idea, do you believe that you just heard Jesus speak to you?
Charles admits that he can certainty attribute to God the things that come from his own self (he said that).
Do you agree?
Hank, it has turned out to be pointless to answer your skepticism directly, as you have already decided not to believe anything I say. So, I’m trying my hand at parables.
But, hey, they can’t all be diamonds.
“Hank, it has turned out to be pointless to answer your skepticism directly, as you have already decided not to believe anything I say.”
You seem skeptical of your own beliefs. Earlier here, you claimed the ability to hear the voice of the Son of God on an ongoing basis. That God talks to you directly and when he does, you know that it is God you are “hearing”.
But now, when pressed, you admit that you “certainly CAN” attribute to God the things that come from your own mind?
Can you really not see the problem, there?
Speaking in “parables” just makes your position that much more obscure.
You quoted this text. It is very interesting.
1 John 4:2-3
2. Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every Spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:
3. And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God;and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come and even now already is it in the world.
If Jesus was only a another man, as some insist, these verses would make little sense. Both verses 2 and 3 include these important words, “in the flesh”. Every person who ever lived came in the flesh didn’t they? So why would John say “in the flesh”?
Jesus was no ordinary man, everyone will concede that. But what was it about him coming “in the flesh” that was so important that it became a central part of a confession of faith? The Jews understood that the “Christ” (Messiah) they were looking for was deity. They expected that “Christ”, the anointed one, to come “in the flesh”.
Jesus was a man, his human body was not unlike ours. He began as a baby and matured, aged, and shared with the rest of humanity all of the things humans experience. But, Jesus had no human father. God the Father was his literal father. He existed before his human birth, was active in creation, shared glory with the Father, yet came “in the flesh” to reconcile helpless and hopeless sinners to God by his perfect living, sacrificial dying, and triumphant Resurrection from the dead.
When we ask a baptismal candidate “Do you believe Jesus Christ is the Son of God?”, we are really asking them to affirm their belief in the deity of Jesus. If Jesus is not “God in flesh” as the Bible says and if he was not raised from the dead physically as the Bible says there is no Christianity. No mere man can be a Savior. Only God who “came in flesh” can save us.
Romans 8:12-17
12 So then, brothers, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh. 13 For if you live according to the flesh you will die, but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live. 14 For all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God. 15 For you did not receive the spirit of slavery to fall back into fear, but you have received the Spirit of adoption as sons, by whom we cry, “Abba! Father!” 16 The Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God, 17 and if children, then heirs—heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, provided we suffer with him in order that we may also be glorified with him.
Hank, I don’t profess to know all that this passage means. I’m not even sure I can say all that it means to me. But some things are very clear in this text, and I think gives light to what seems to be so very important to you and others.
There are two ways to live. The first is “according to the flesh” vs 12,13. The sure end of that way of living is death. Living “according to the flesh” describes a person who lives for himself to satisfy what his flesh wants. And, we can know what those desires of the flesh are by reading other texts in the Bible. One that comes to mind is in Galatians 5:19-20a
.”19 Now the works of the flesh are evident: sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality, 20 idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, rivalries, dissensions, divisions, 21 envy, drunkenness, orgies, and things like these.”
All of the things on this list and more are what the flesh craves and those who live according to the flesh feed that craving. This does not mean that every person outside of Christ is sexually immoral, or is into sorcery. What it does mean is that these things are typical of those who live to please themselves.
Now, the Romans text says there is a second way to live, “led by the Spirit”. Verse 14 says “For all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God”.( I think it would be fair to assume that if a person is not being led by the Spirit of God he is not a son of God)
So far the two paths are pretty clear, “according to the flesh” vs “led by the Spirit”. So what does it mean to be “led by the Spirit”? Does that term mean only to live by the words of the Bible? Surely Christians are to live by the words of the Bible, no right thinking person would deny that. But even those who desperately try to do that have huge struggles deciding which words to life by and what those words actually mean. I am convinced that to be “led by the Spirit” is far more than living by the words of Scripture. For you see, what I should say to a person whose spouse just suddenly died is not in the Bible. My decision about how to decide about how to best handle a conflict between two friends is not spelled out in the Bible necessarily. The principals are there, but the rubber-on-the-road application is not. This passage gives us further instruction.
Verse 16 says “The Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God…” One way I know I’m saved is because of what the Holy Spirit is doing in me. It is difficult if not impossible to explain. I recall Jesus conversation with Nicodemus about the Spirit. You can’t put your hand on on it, it does what it will, but you can’t deny it either. Now the verse says the “Spirit bears witness…” Now my usual thinking is that I expect a witness to speak. A witness is one who can give testimony to a fact or event (my entrance into the body of Christ). A witness must have personal knowledge about a fact or event by being there.
The Holy Spirit witnesses to me that I belong to God. The Holy Spirit leads me in the way. Does he use audible words? Of course not. But that he does not in no way is a denial of his speaking and leading. I only want you to believe the Bible, not me. Every child of God is led by the Spirit of God and every child of God is told by the Spirit of God that he is a child of God. This we can’t dispute unless we deny the clear teaching of Scripture.
My vRoyce, I too believe that God comforts us, answers prayer, may heal us, may cause us to remember and/or forget stuff, and that he leads us. My objection is with those who claim to have a thought and/or feeling, isolate said “revelation” and then claim with certainty, “Hey, I just had a thought or feeling right now, and it came from God. It was not my own thought or feeling, it didn’t come on its own, but God just spoke to me.”
Even the people here who claim to hear the voice of Jesus on an ongoing basis have admitted that they “certainly CAN” attribute to God the things that came from themselves. In other words, they admit to having no real ability to distinguish between their own thoughts and “the voice” of God.
As far as the Holy Spirit witnessing to us that we are sons, I believe he has done that by giving us his word on it. The ONLY way we KNOW anything about God is by what he has said (not by his we have felt). Even sinners can know that they will become the children of God, by being born again. They can know that by the witness of the Holy Spirit, by what he has promised.
Think about the children of God throughout the OT. They could be led by God, right? They could produce the fruit of the Spirit, right? How did God guide the faithful then? How was he a light unto their path? How did he comfort them and answer their prayers back then?
Its not like God did not first get into the leading business at Pentecost? Not at all, God led, comforted, and witnessed to people all along. And, he still does. In the same way.
I don’t believe that it is easier to love God and our neighbors today than it was back when Jesus said the greatest law was to love both God and neighbor with “all your” heart mind and soul.
“Hi Royce”, not ” My vRoyce” lol
“Hi Royce”, not “My vRoyce” lol
Hank, Consider these verses. This is not exhaustive but a sampling.of ways the Holy Spirit helps us.
“But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you”. John14:36 Here the Holy Spirit teaches and helps the disciples to remember..
” When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come” John 16:13 Here he guides into all the truth, he speaks what he hears (From the Father), and declares things to come.
” But, as it is written,
“What no eye has seen, nor ear heard,
nor the heart of man imagined,
what God has prepared for those who love him”—
10 these things God has revealed to us through the Spirit. For the Spirit searches everything, even the depths of God. 11 For who knows a person’s thoughts except the spirit of that person, which is in him? So also no one comprehends the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. 12 Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might understand the things freely given us by God. 13 And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who are spiritual” 1 Corinthians 2:9-13 Here the Holy Spirit gives us understanding of what God has given us freely, interprets spiritual truths by giving us the words to say.
The Holy Spirit in the life of a believer is far more than a passive guest. God is at work in us both to will and to do His good pleasure. He does all that work in us by the agency of the Holy Spirit. If you know truth, the Holy Spirit taught you that truth. If you love, the Holy Spirit produced that love in you. When we all get to heaven as they say, not one of us will be there because of our own merit. God is always at work at his redemptive plan. We are only glad beneficiaries of what He has done and is doing.
If a fellow tells me “God told me to do…..” whatever, and the guy goes and does something that glorifies God and helps others I am not going to fuss with him. If he on the other hand does something that brings reproach on God and is not good for his neighbor I’m going to assume God told him nothing. A preacher friend of mine said of those people who were known for saying “God told me…”, they might have eaten to many green onions for dinner last night. Our job is not to worry about what someone else does or does not do. Ours is to discern what is from God and what is not and the Holy Spirit will aid us in that.
Matthew 10:19-20
“But when they deliver you up, take no thought how or what ye shall speak: for it shall be given you in that same hour what ye shall speak. For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you.”
Some passages, like the above, were clearly dispensational. Our instructions today are to study up and be ready to give an answer to every man. There’s, back then, was to “to no thought how or what to say” for the Holy Spirit would speak through them personally. They were inspired men who worked miracles in order to prove said inspiration. The Holy Spirit bore them witness by the miracles they performed. The Holy Spirit taught them all things without their needing to study. The got it direct from on high. And when God was speaking through them, they knew it was God speaking through them. They were not left guessing whether or not it was the Pizza they had the night before.
They did not attribute to God things that came from themselves.
BTW, when Jesus claimed to be in his disciples back in John 15 (before Pentecost), was he merely a passive guest? Is he now? He is in us, right?
“A preacher friend of mine said of those people who were known for saying “God told me…”, they might have eaten to many green onions for dinner last night.”
No doubt…
I am glad that this level of discussion has been stimulated. I will clarify what I can of my own thoughts and see if it helps.
As believers, we know in part and we prophesy in part– Paul is still right about that. This reality involves both our incomplete knowledge of God and our imperfect handling of the revelation of God that we DO have. It is common for believers to read the scripture and draw wrong conclusions from it. In so doing we offer our own version of “thus saith the Lord”, which is to add our interpretation to the biblical text and present the sum as “what the Bible says”. Or we concatenate several disparate scriptures and present our conclusions from the resulting strand as “the truth”. (This is how we came up with “the plan of salvation”.) All this imperfection, when handling scripture which we agree is from the Holy Spirit. We have demonstrated ad infinitum that we can sincerely listen to God in the scripture and still get it wrong when it comes to what God has actually said. All of will agree that other believers do this, and some of us will actually admit we are subject to that same flaw ourselves. This reality does not cause us to call scripture generally into doubt. When the preacher fouls up in handling a passage of scripture, we do not burn our bibles and tear down the pulpit.
It is much the same with hearing God in other ways. We hear God and prophesy by faith. Just as we take the Bible by faith, and not by apologetics, so we speak that which we hear from the Lord by faith. This is also according to Paul’s instruction. To admit that we can err in such things from time to time is simple humility… and wisdom. If you can’t admit your own fallibility in speaking what you believe God is saying, someone else will undoubtedly come along and bear witness of it FOR you, and probably before an audience.
I am grateful for the positions I have heard on this thread. Even some of the most skeptical have come to acknowledge that God is still speaking to us –albeit with copious disclaimers and much hedging. There are admissions that God does “cause us to remember” things, or that He speaks through creation as Romans 1 teaches. There is still some dismay about the idea that God will speak “out loud” -whatever that means to a spiritual being- and concern about the general idea that someone else might hear something from God that I didn’t hear. I think this latter may be our American egalitarianism talking more than our doctrine. The most encouraging thing I hear is the progression of thought among us. We tend to evolve (sorry, it’s the best word) in our understandings over time, rather than making hard left turns on matters of importance. And we use some pretty familiar terminology to describe where we are along the way:
That’s not what the Bible says.
I don’t see that in the Bible.
I just don’t buy that
Well, it’s there, but that was for “back then”.
Well, it could be for then AND now.
I will have to think and pray about that
I can’t really argue against that
I don’t have a problem with that
I could maybe see that
That’s what it says
I believe that
We get on and off this learning train at various stops. It is really okay for our thinking to fall all along the spectrum as we go along. Can’t very well be proud about where we are, since we were probably at a different place before, about one topic or another. If I require everyone to stand on the same spot where I stand, I fail to allow for anyone to continue to learn and grow… especially me. And before I start placing myself in judgment of another, I should consider my words very carefully, and see if I am trying to help my brother or just knock him down a peg. Yes, some brother might need that… but it’s best to let Dad handle it, lest He catch us putting His razor strap to one another. He frowns on that.
That was good stuff, Charles
“But when they deliver you up, take no thought how or what ye shall speak: for it shall be given you in that same hour what ye shall speak. For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you.”
Some passages, like the above, were clearly dispensational. Our instructions today are to study up and be ready to give an answer to every man.
Such interesting speculation as this would be all the better for SOME biblical evidence of its validity. None has been offered, just opinion supported by more opinion from the same source. But, as we often argue, a lack of evidence is not evidence. So, perhaps someone could start with where some biblical writer tells us to “study up” in lieu of the no-longer-available work of the Holy Spirit in these circumstances. I couldn’t find anything like that, but that’s not proof it isn’t there.
Perhaps someone could “study up” and find that reference in actual scripture.
Of course, you can take all of the promised work of the Holy Spirit passages equally for you today. That’s what Jamie Coots, the “Snake Handling Pastor”, had been doing until he died a couple of months ago from a snake bite.
Clearly, he was just as unable to find the passage saying that that promise wasn’t extended all the way to him.
Hank, maybe this brother hadn’t studied up on that passage that tells us how to know which Biblical passages have expired. Without that information, how was he supposed to know what to stop believing? Still waiting for you to provide that scripture.
And it seems to me to be more than a bit hateful to mock a dead believer. (“See, you disagreed with me, and now you’re dead!”) I’ll bet you’re a hoot at funerals. I’ll make sure my kids invite you to mine.
“Hank, maybe this brother hadn’t studied up on that passage that tells us how to know which Biblical passages have expired.”
Exactly! That’s why he died. He actually believed that everything promised by God to the 1st century Christians, applied equally to him. Whether there is a vesre that flat out says “now this promised work of the Holy Spirit is not equally promised to all believer throughout all time” or not, it obviously wasn’t.
Not understanding this fact, in some cases, can be deadly.
Royce writes,
But these promises are made, not to a group such as we are but to the apostles. Only to the apostles.
Most of us feel that Jay Guin is led by the Spirit. Does that mean he will always be right in every sentence he writes? I don’t think what Jesus said to His apostles will necessarily apply to what Jay writes or what any one of us writes. What the apostles taught and practiced was led by the Spirit, for that was the promise Jesus made. What we disciples teach is not governed by any such promise.
Hank speaks truly
The promise made to US is not that Jesus will live in us, but that God will send His Spirit to live in us. No, Jesus is not in us except by way of His Spirit.
And the promise about God giving the words to some who were witnessing about Jesus is not applicable to us who cannot speak about what we saw and heard while Jesus was alive on earth. It does make a difference to whom a promise is made! We have no claim on Jesus for a promise He made to the apostles! He will do for us what is best, not because we deserve it or earned it but because He loves us. But we are not expected to serve Jesus as the apostles did, nor are we empowered to perform miracles as they were.
Paul corrected Peter so sometimes either the Spirit got it wrong or Peter or Paul, one or the other added something themselves.
Charles may be implying that anything said to anyone at any time applies to everyone all the time. He writes, “
It would be amazing if everything Jesus said to anyone applied to everyone, but it just isn’t that way. If we love Jesus we’ll look carefully to learn from His recorded messages things that do apply to us. But surely we’ll not claim everything He said applies to all of us. We would be wrong if we made such a claim. Yet that does seem to be what Charles has just said, that there has to be a definite word that what was said does NOT apply or else it surely does. I don’t agree.
Charles loftily remarks
Common sense should tell us that promises made to particular persons apply to those particular persons and no one else. As for the miracles spoken of in verses which may or may not have been written by Mark (I suspect they were NOT in the original writing of Mark, but who can be sure) they clearly WERE seen in the experience of the apostles to whom the great commission was originally given. And they may be seen in the experience of some missionaries in lands we think of as “uncivilized.”
But it’s absurd for Christians in THIS land or any civilized society to handle snakes as if that would prove our faith in Jesus. It’s a mark of ignorance rather than faith. What WE should be doing is what Jesus spoke of for sure in giving “the great commission.” We should be speaking and studying about Jesus and what He said and did and telling everyone about HIM rather than trying to prove ourselves by handling snakes or drinking poison.
We cannot be sure that Mark wrote the final verses found in some Bibles in “the gospel according to Mark.” What we can be very sure of is that what early Christians did when they were scattered by persecution was to tell others about Jesus. And THAT example we do well to follow! The only mention made of snakes as the gospel spread was when Paul was bitten by a poisonous snake and ignored the poison. What snake handlers do is to tempt snakes to bite them so they can prove how great THEY are. What a travesty of gospel life and teaching that is!
AJ wrote:
“Paul corrected Peter so sometimes either the Spirit got it wrong or Peter or Paul, one or the other added something themselves.”
Added something to what?? Nobody is arguing that the God inspired, miracle performing apostles we sinless, only that when they spoke for God:
1) They that knew it was God speaking through them.
2) They never, ever attributed to God the things that came from themselves.
3) When they spoke (or wrote) by inspiration of God, what they spoke or wrote was perfect truth. It was as though God had spoken or written himself!
The fact that Peter was called out does not, in ANY way, shape or form, imply that his God inspired words and/or letters were vulnerable to error. It did not in any way mean that he may have at times attributed to God any things that were from himself.
Just because Paul called out Peter for his sin, it does not mean that we have the same powers of the holy Spirit as he did. The fact that the apostles all sinned as Christians does not mean that all of the specific promises God made to them apply to us all.
Like the one where the Holy Spirit would bring to their remembrance all of the things that Jesus had spoken to them “when he was with them”?? How could that promise before for us?
Were some of us with Jesus and the apostles when he was talking to the apostles?
Remember, every person here who has claimed to “heard” the “voice” of God speaking to them (apart from the BIble, have either refused to explain how they knew it was God they were hearing, refused to repeat whatever it was they claimed to have heard, and/or admitted that they “certainly CAN” attribute to God the things that came from their own head.
Clearly, that was not how the promise went that was made by Jesus to the apostles!
John, we can know assuredly that Paul correctly corrected Peter. Peter was wrong. Surely he knew he was wrong. He was siding with ones who wanted Gentiles to have to become keepers of the Law of Moses in order to remain “in Christ.” That might tell us something about being led or not led by the Spirit. Peter was not following the lead of God’s Spirit in this matter about which you write. Paul WAS being led by the Spirit, and he was not one of the original apostles. So Paul felt it necessary to correct Peter. We may be led by the Spirit to correct wrong teaching when WE see wrong teaching being done. We may be led by some other than the Holy Spirit in some of the things we think and say and write. Our goal should always be to be like Jesus. If we learn we were in error, we should seek to correct the wrong thing we said or did if possible. And we should praise godly speech whenever we hear or read it. I like what Jay writes!
Ray, I agree with you. When those men led by the Spirit were listened to by the crowds or individuals thniking every word was inspired and seeked to obey or be like them, to make an error like Peter did was wrong. It came from Peter, not the Spirit but who knows how many heard it? I also like what Jay writes and his willingness to allow this discussion to continue which is so rare in the church of Christ folks.
Hank, they knew when the Spirit was speaking through them but not the hearers. The hearers took everything they said to be led since they couldn’t tell the difference. That is why Paul faced Peter, he was leading astray in error but the hearers would only believe and follow, not doubt.
Also to answer another question you ask or comment you make. Test the S(s)pirits: simply ask the S(s)pirit giving you a message to confess whether Jesus Christ is come in the flesh or not and the answer will tell you whether to heed, as its from God or not. This is not hard, just a simple statement will do according to 1John 4:2-3. Would false teachers and satan lie when asked? About most things YES, but according to this text, God will not allow a lie to this statement or question so we can follow with confidence
God can bring to remembrance His word to any of His people, not just the disciples back then. People don’t always have a Bible handy to quote from, God can bring to remembrance even something a person hasn’t really thought much about, that would at the time help them or someone else in a situation. I definitely believe Jesus’ promise is for any of His followers. God knows we need His help in all things and I don’t believe He leaves any of His people alone, God is always there to help us.
Matthew 28:16-20 Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, to the mountain which Jesus had appointed for them. When they saw Him, they worshiped Him; but some doubted. And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” Amen.
Jesus spoke the Great Commission to the eleven disciples. I don’t believe that was just for the eleven disciples, they did not travel the whole world and make disciples in all the nations. Many missionaries today have been to many more nations than the disciples ever traveled to. The Great Commission wasn’t just for the eleven disciples, and Jesus promised He would always be with them, and that also wasn’t just for the eleven disciples, Jesus knows we all need His help, He’s not going to leave any of His people alone, Jesus is always with us to help us.
Grace, nobody is arguing that “the great commision” is not for us today. All we are saying is that not all of the promises God spoke to his disciples back then, apply to us. For example, in Marks account of the commission, we read:
“And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.”
All of that stuff wasn’t promised to us. The people who believe that all of the promises apply to them, often find out the hard way, that they were wrong. Today, when believers drink any deadly thing, they die.
Its simply a big mistake to assume that everything God spoke directly to his disciples who were with him in the first century apply equally to all of us 21st century.
I don’t believe anyone should purposely play with snakes or poison, do not test the Lord your God. I absolutely believe God can do such miracles, people have miraculously survived things and no one can explain how it is possible they are still alive.
Ray said; “Most of us feel that Jay Guin is led by the Spirit.” Let’s not get carried away here Ray ,God alone knows what inspires Jay to write what he writes.
Don’t get drunk on wine but be filled with the Spirit. I take that to mean that just as being filled with wine will lead to certain undesired and sinful actions, being “filled with the Spirit” will lead to desired and beneficial actions and behaviors. It’s a choice, but it is also a command to be obeyed. For as many as are led by the Spirit of God , they are the sons of God.(Romans 8:14)
My hope for everyone is that they be led by Jesus Christ , otherwise we don’t deserve to bear the name of Christian, follower of Christ. I believe everyone here is seeking God through his son Jesus Christ, there is only one way I know to do that, have faith in what Jesus taught both by words and deeds, faith strong enough that we strive to follow in Jesus’ footsteps and the commands he had for us. I can’t see the promise of a comforter applying to any but the apostles present at the readying of Jesus to go to his father. Yes I have great respect and admiration for Jesus and what he did, but those who lived in close contact with him here on earth would miss him as a close friend or even a brother. I know there are those who say that is the way they love him, but it is hard for me to accept that as true. I accept Jesus as King and leader, of Christians, and lord over all until he turns all, back to God the Father. I am not sure he hasn’t already done that.
1Co 15:27 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.
1Co 15:28 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.
Heb 1:3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;
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?
Laymond, a good article to read is at http://www.answering-islam.org/Shamoun/q_jesus_subject.htm I hope this helps.
Monty, thanks, but no thanks. thanks for your concern, but no thanks for the insanity you suggested I read. the bible tells us plainly there is but one God. you recommend we believe in three gods of ascending rank. I think I will pass.
One God who exists in 3 persons, not 3 different gods. You know no one who comments on here believes that(and yet you say it anyway).
Either Jesus is God(of the same essence as the Father) or the Bible is corrupt, can’t have it any other way. “looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Savior Jesus Christ;” (Titus 2:14) “My Lord and my God” John 20:28) Many other passages, just a start. You can’t explain them all away. So, they have to be reconciled with he passages you quoted and vice-versa. But it is undeniable IMO that scripture says that Jesus is God. Then what we are left with is trying to understand what the meaning of subjecting one’s self is. It doesn’t mean inferiority(which is where I see you going). Jesus washed his disciples feet, (he subjected himself to them and also, to the cross) does that mean he’s less than them? Was he less than the cross? No. A voluntary act of submission is a sign of love. “Wives submit to your husbands”, not as an inferior or something less than. If you have or have had a wife, is she(was she) some how less than what you are? Of course not. She had a different role than you and she was to be submissive to you out of love and respect, not out of being unequal to you in being(value and worth).
Jesus is not anything of less value, worth or nature than HIs Father is, but he willingly subjected himself to the Father’s will. This magnifies the deity of Jesus(IMO) and the meaning of selfless love(sacrifice). If Jesus was somehow, less in some way, than the Father, then his death would still be great(but not as great), he would still be obedient, but He (according to you) never really had a choice in the matter. How does an underling tell the boss he’s not going to comply with the boss’ request? Think about it. Submitting to someone of equal status is something to behold, not so much if they are greater than you. Gotta kid rid of the Captain- Lieutenant idea.
Let’s take a look at just one statement in the piece you recommended. evidently you agree with this else you would not have recommended it to me.
“In the first place, when we examine this statement in light of the overall teaching of Scripture, especially from the perspective of Paul’s Christology, this text in no way shows that the Lord Jesus Christ is inferior to God in terms of his Divine nature and essence, that Christ is an inferior Divine Being, a lesser god of sorts. It only shows that Christ, by virtue of his being the Divine Son of God, is subject or subordinate to the Father in rank and position. Yet there is a sense in which Christ is inferior in essence to the Father. The Holy Bible teaches that the Lord Jesus, in his prehuman existence, was and is forever God, and therefore fully equal to the Father in relation to his Deity.”
I don’t know where this comes from, it sure does not come from the Trinity doctrine, which says the three are equal in all things, including authority.
Monty said, “Gotta kid rid of the Captain- Lieutenant idea.” yet he is the one who recommended
“It only shows that Christ, by virtue of his being the Divine Son of God, is subject or subordinate to the Father in rank and position.”
Laymond,
He concludes the article with: “At times Paul writes as if Christ is ‘subordinate’ to the Father. For he tells us that ‘God sent forth his Son to redeem’ (Gal 4.4) and ‘did not spare his own Son but gave him up for us all’ (Rom 8:32). And in a notable passage he declares that ‘when all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to him who put all things under him, that God may be everything to every one’ (1 Cor 15.28). Taken by themselves these passages might warrant the conclusion that Paul held a merely subordinationist view of Christ and did not place Him on the same divine level with the Father. But if they are taken together with the passages cited above in which Paul does put Christ on the same divine level as the Father by presenting Him as the creator of all things and the ‘image of the invisible God’ who was ‘in the form of God’ and equal to God, it becomes clear that Paul views Christ both as subordinate and equal to God the Father’
I’m OK with this, his being equal and subordinate, as I think I explained. It’s a great mystery of what Paul means exactly but from the other passages, it is clear that Jesus is God, of the same essence and nature with the Father. I don’t think you believe that, do you? You seem to want to hang onto a couple of verses and interpret them through your narrow lens. Look at all the evidence. We can both wrestle with the matter of subjection, but not that Jesus is God, something he certainly would have denied, if not so, right? Didn’t he say, I Am?
I don’t believe I am the one hanging my beliefs on the words of one man, the man who is supposed to have writer the following.
1Co 15:9 For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God.
Paul wrote many things that you have to twist, contort to the point they are not recognizable as his original thoughts to make them agree with other writers. And the progressive CoC seems comfortable in doing that.
They seem comfortable in wiping away such things as was written by john. or the other apostles.
Jhn 20:17 Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.
Or even some of what Paul wrote. 1Co 11:3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.
1Co 8:6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.
Eph 4:6 One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.
1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
Mar 12:32 And the scribe said unto him, Well, Master, thou hast said the truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but he:
Monty you seem to think Jesus should have spoken up and corrected those who misspoke why did he not also correct this scrib?
Romans 9:5 Of whom are the fathers and from whom, according to the flesh, Christ came, who is over all, the eternally blessed God. Amen.
I’ll never understand the with understanding this. I have a father, I’m the son, and I have a brother. We all are Grants. We have the same percentage of ownership and authority in our company. We are three seperate persons but one entity all in the same breath.
Why is this made such a big deal?
Grace refers to the apostles as “disciples.” That term is broad and includes all who study with Jesus as Lord and Teacher. A disciple is simply a learner. The apostles were uniquely trained and empowered to perform MIRACLES. Disciples are learners and few if any ever perform a miracle. We DISCIPLES are not promised that words will be given to us at time of need or that we will remember what Jesus or His APOSTLES said that would shed light on a particular problem we face. What we ARE promised is that the Holy Spirit will be with us. Exactly what He will do is not stated. Many of us learn in times of need that we cannot remember what we should say in order to best please God. And our writing proves that it is not GOD who guides our thoughts in every case.
Hank will do well to remember that the final verses in Mark 16 may not have been written by Mark. It seems that the most ancient manuscripts do not include the remarks about what will accompany doing as Jesus said about going. Mark was not present at the giving of the commission. Matthew was, and what Matthew says about it is surely what was said by Jesus. The miracles which often DID occur in the apostolic age are spoken of in verses claimed to have been written by Mark. But Matthew’s account of the giving of the commission says nothing whatever about such “miracles.”
Laymond wisely reminds us to not get “carried away” about anyone’s writing. I nonetheless affirm that much that Jay writes is “of God” and inspiring, causing us to think more highly of Jesus and His apostles, and to love God more than we may have done. Historically, the “Church of Christ” has been led farther and farther into legalism. Jay is helping urge all to return to New Testament Christianity, to the gospel according to the apostles. Some of his readers have been blessed and have agreed. Many continue to read and consider. Jay’s influence is for the good. I say so and am sure I’m correct in that assessment.
Monty points us to apostolic teaching
I agree with Monty except for the “being filled” being a command. It’s a statement and NOT a command. But we surely need to let Jesus (through His Spirit) LEAD our thoughts and words and actions. In effect that’s what repentance means. It is us surrendering to Jesus as our LORD. And no one can be in Christ without repentance and accepting the baptism He commands by us who serve Him for every NEW Christian (Galatians 3:27).
Laymond is right
There were promises made about the work of the Spirit IN THE APOSTLES that do NOT apply to us who are promised a “gift of the Holy Spirit” as a result of our turning to Jesus as Lord and accepting the baptism in water He commands. The apostles were special. Promises made to them applied to THEM, not to us who are not apostles, who were not with Jesus as He taught on earth, but instead who learn of Him from those who WERE with Him and those who were taught by apostles.
The varying ideas expressed in blogs surely prove that not every writer is inspired either in thought or in expression. OUR ideas vary. But God’s teaching remains the same in spite of any misunderstanding that we may hold about it.
“I agree with Monty except for the “being filled” being a command. It’s a statement and NOT a command. ”
Ray, if “be ye filled with the Spirit” is not a command, then “be not drunk with wine” is not a command, either.
How are those NOT commands? Clearly he was telling/charging/commanding them in what not to do and in what to do….
Laymond further writes,
The prophetic word is that this earth will be destroyed by fire and AFTER THAT the new Jerusalem will be brought down upon a NEW earth which is vastly different from this one in that everything will be “square” rather than circular as is this present earth in this present universe. The heavenly city will be cubic rather than a sphere as is the earth now circling the sun. A cube is not round. I’m sure that until the time when all things are made new that JESUS is our Lord. In charge. The boss. Absolute RULER of all who love God.
Is Jesus NOT God. John the apostle says He is. Jesus is quoted as claiming He IS God. Laymond says there is only ONE God, which counts Jesus out and the Holy Spirit out. That the Son feels the Father is superior to Him is obvious. That the Spirit is not superior to the Son or the Father is obvious. And that all three together ARE God is what the Bible affirms and what Christians do well to believe.
Alabama John, if you are saying you believe Jesus is God here are two reasons why I believe you are wrong. The first and greatest is it is anti-bible not only does the bible never mention this as you have , it strongly denies what you are saying. If what you say is correct why would Matthew not mention it in Jesus lineage. The book of Matthews begins with the following.
Mat 1:1 The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham. Then he names many human beings never a god.
The second reason. Jesus flatly denies that he is God. and God denies that he is Jesus.
Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?
Jesus clearly claims to be the “son of man”, or a human being.
To me this proves beyond a reasonable doubt that they’re not the same deity so who gives anyone the authority or right to change GOD’s Nature? GOD cannot be the opposite of what He is. as Jesus said God is a spirit. He also said he was a human being.
Just a few times Jesus called himself human. How many times can you find that Jesus called himself god? I find none.
Matthew 12:8 For the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath.”
Matthew 12:40 For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.
Matthew 13:37 He answered, “The one who sowed the good seed is the Son of Man.
Matthew 18:11 For the Son of Man has come to save that which was lost.
There has been many who have tried to redefine what Jesus meant by “son of man” but it still comes out as “human”.
Laymond says “the Trinity doctrine says the three are equal in all things, including authority.” I’m no authority on “the Trinity doctrine,” but I’m sure the Spirit is NOT equal to either the Son or the Father, but instead does what He is directed to do by the Father and the Son. In creation of our universe, the Son actually did the creating, John reports, and the Spirit hovered over what was created. The Spirit is SENT by the Son and the Father and acts under their authority. At no time does the Spirit tell the Son what He must do. The Spirit is God, but He is not equal to the the Father or to the Son, and Jesus makes clear that He does as the Father directs. It was the Father who in creation said, “Let there be” and there was. It was the Word of God who became Jesus who actually DID the creating, according to the apostle John. I don’t see that the Bible teaches that the Spirit is in all ways equal to the Son or the Father.
Hank, it would be interesting to have you explain where Christians are told “be filled with the Spirit.” Acts 2:38 promises that each believing-in-Jesus person who repents and is baptized will receive the “gift” of the Spirit. That obviously is not the same as a “filling” with the Spirit such as we read of later when one prayer meeting group was described as being “filled with” the Spirit. Where is there a promise that every Christian or ANY Christian will be “filled with” the Spirit. You speak as if it were a promise we surely should believe. Where is the promise made or the command given that all Christians are to “be filled with” the Spirit? I’ve read Acts many times, and I’m not aware of any such promise given to any single disciple or multiple groups of disciples. Please point us to the passage of which you speak.
Laymond points to many mentions of Jesus as the “Son of man.” He concludes that Jesus was in fact the son of Joseph rather than of God “the Father.” Anyone who reads and believes John 1:1-14 will not fight against the idea that Jesus IS GOD, known originally as the Word of God, and now known as the Son of God, born of a virgin, living without sin, and dying to make possible eternal life for sinners such as we all are. Many other passages point out that Jesus is God the SON who actually is creator of our universe. That He came to earth to suffer and die here for US so we could have eternal life is marvelous. That He gave up for the time of His sojourn on earth the glories of Heaven is stated. That He returned in glory is equally stated, and that He will return as God to judge every human is clearly told. Jesus was far more than a man even though He was every inch a man.
Here it is, Ray:
“And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit” Eph. 5:18
Hank feels that Ephesians 5:18 is a COMMAND that “every Christian” is to be filled with the Spirit. Is he correctly reading the passage? Is it a command that we are to force God to fill us with His Spirit? As I read it, it’s urging us to SEEK to be filled with the Spirit rather than a command that in some way we MUST be “filled with the Spirit.” Hank is right that those words are used in apostolic writing, “be filled with the Spirit.” I think this is an admonition concerning our desire rather than any promise of God that we will or MUST be filled with the Spirit of God. Many of us don’t drink intoxicating beverages. Many of us have never done so. But Hank is surely right that every Christian is urged to seek to be spiritual rather than linked only to what is physical. I don’t see what Paul writes as a command that must be obeyed, but rather as an exhortation that SHOULD be our goal in living for Jesus. We need to learn all we possibly can about how Jesus lived and taught so that we can be LIKE JESUS, which will be being “filled with the Spirit” OF Jesus.
laymond,
I appreciate your answering, you are a smart man and I appreciate your thoughts and I understand where you are coming from. I am not my father nor is he his son, we will always be father and son, but, we are both still Grants, humans, whatever you want to call us that fits us both. That doesn’t make us the same being and we will never be. 3 seperate entities, but still all the same is easy for me to understand as it is for most of us.
That to me is how simple this really is. After all, what difference will it make in the end at our judgment ever how we see or believe this about God? I keep thinking if all the things were written the world couldn’t hold all the books so a lot we will never know so why is so much paper used debating this?
Since I don’t see how it really matters, is it for some personal reason, pride, stature, or any other unspecified reason unknown by those on both sides of this?
Why not argue what size sandal Jesus wore. I’ve heard that before or what language did the Ass speak? Heard that debated too.
30-30
Ray, its not a command to us for God to fill us. Its God’s command for us to fill ourselves.
The way we fulfill that command is found in Col. 3:16. The two are parallel passages and are commentary on each other.
The command for us to be filled with the Holy Spirit is just like the command for us to have the mind if Christ.
It means to think and act like Jesus..
Ray said, “In creation of our universe, the Son actually did the creating, John reports”
Ray what John reported was “The word of God” created all things .( God spoke and it happened) and the word of God was one of many attributes of God that was passed to Jesus at his baptism, although they are called spirits they were the powers of God. And no I did not say Joseph was the father of Jesus, in my simple understanding of that event a woman had a miraculous birth of a child, that miracle was of God, therefore Jesus was actually the son of God. but being born of a miracle made him no less a human. John the Baptist was also born of a miracle of God and he was also human as far as I know.
I know some of this is hard to understand, it is not the everyday events we are used to seeing, but if we try, I believe we can understand. and we take nothing away from the importance of Jesus Christ.
Alabama John said, “Since I don’t see how it really matters, is it for some personal reason, pride, stature, or any other unspecified reason unknown by those on both sides of this?”
Well John let me tell you why I believe it does matter.
Mat 12:31 And so I tell you, every kind of sin and slander can be forgiven, but blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven.
Mat 12:32 Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.
Isa 45:6 so that from the rising of the sun to the place of its setting people may know there is none besides me. I am the LORD, and there is no other.
Isa 45:7 I form the light and create darkness, I bring prosperity and create disaster; I, the LORD, do all these things.
Isa 45:8 “You heavens above, rain down my righteousness; let the clouds shower it down. Let the earth open wide, let salvation spring up, let righteousness flourish with it; I, the LORD, have created it.
Isa 45:9 “Woe to those who quarrel with their Maker, those who are nothing but potsherds among the potsherds on the ground. Does the clay say to the potter, ‘What are you making?’ Does your work say, ‘The potter has no hands’?
Isa 45:10 Woe to the one who says to a father, ‘What have you begotten?’ or to a mother, ‘What have you brought to birth?’
Isa 45:11 “This is what the LORD says— the Holy One of Israel, and its Maker: Concerning things to come, do you question me about my children, or give me orders about the work of my hands?
Isa 45:12 It is I who made the earth and created mankind on it. My own hands stretched out the heavens; I marshaled their starry hosts.
If saying Jesus is the god of creation is not blasphemous to God’s words I can’t imagine what would be.
I surely like what Hank says about being filled with God’s (God the Father & God the Son) Spirit. He writes
And that surely should be the goal of every follower of Jesus! I’m glad to be able to agree.
Laymond seems to have missed seeing that the Word was WITH God and WAS God and it was “the Word” which became flesh and lived as Jesus of Nazareth (born in Bethlehem). Laymond wants the birth of Jesus to be a miracle but Jesus to be just a man as was John the Baptist. That won’t wash! Laymond wrote
Jesus claimed to BE God, and proved that He WAS God by His appearance on the Mount of Transfiguration and by feeding 5,000 and later 4,000 and by many miracles and by walking on water and by His appearances after His resurrection.
Compare that to what John the Baptist did, and you’ll perhaps recognize the difference between God on earth and the human John the Baptist. John made no claims to deity. He was a human all the way. Jesus claimed He was divine. He PROVED IT over and over, and Laymond says he wants to deny it! I hope I’m misunderstanding Laymond!
Laymond concludes that the apostle John is a blasphemer since he did what Laymond thinks is blasphemy. He wrote
Careful reading of John (the gospel) chapter 1:1-14 should make clear to any Bible believer that Jesus IS indeed GOD and was in fact the Creator of all things which were made. God the Father spoke. God the Son acted. God the Spirit watched, according to the record given us. I believe John spoke for God in writing his gospel. All through the Old Testament it is reported that God created. John makes clear that it was God the SON who actually did the creating. I believe it. I don’t think the explanation available only after Jesus came to earth denies that God is creator of all things, since Jesus IS God. It’s granted that until He was born here on earth He was known as the Word of God (unnamed other than Word), but it’s very clear that John the apostle claims that it was the Word who became Jesus who actually did the creating. I’m sure John was led into all truth just as Jesus promised the apostles they would be.
Ray,
and I also believe Jesus was the rock Moses struck and the cloud by day and the pillar of fire by night among who knows how many other things like passing through walls and crowds unseen.
Time and things we think is nature of this earth like a fish or fishes are not of Jesus’s universe and makeup. Nor will it be ours someday.
Ties to this old Earth will be broken.
I just do not see the purpose in debating some things that do not matter in the real long run. I’d bet there are differences in all of us if we talked Bible long enough but those should not be anything that would keep us from being together for eternity. We all have some surprises coming that will be wonderous to see.
Thanks for responding!
Ray, who do we know that fits the following description, and where does it say he came from.?
Isa 11:1 And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots:
Isa 11:2 And the spirit of the LORD shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the LORD;
Isa 11:3 And shall make him of quick understanding in the fear of the LORD: and he shall not judge after the sight of his eyes, neither reprove after the hearing of his ears:
Isa 11:4 But with righteousness shall he judge the poor, and reprove with equity for the meek of the earth: and he shall smite the earth with the rod of his mouth, and with the breath of his lips shall he slay the wicked.
Isa 11:5 And righteousness shall be the girdle of his loins, and faithfulness the girdle of his reins.
Unless there was two of these men, this describes to a “T” Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Mary and a miracle of God.
Ray, and A.J. who do we know that fits this description and what did God call him?
Isa 42:1 Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth; I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles.
Isa 42:2 He shall not cry, nor lift up, nor cause his voice to be heard in the street.
Isa 42:3 A bruised reed shall he not break, and the smoking flax shall he not quench: he shall bring forth judgment unto truth.
Isa 42:4 He shall not fail nor be discouraged, till he have set judgment in the earth: and the isles shall wait for his law.
Isa 42:5 Thus saith God the LORD, he that created the heavens, and stretched them out; he that spread forth the earth, and that which cometh out of it; he that giveth breath unto the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk therein:
Isa 42:6 I the LORD have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles;
Isa 42:7 To open the blind eyes, to bring out the prisoners from the prison, and them that sit in darkness out of the prison house.
Isa 42:8 I am the LORD: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images.
Ray and A.J. who did Jesus say he was in the following scripture, where he quoted Isaiah 42 ?
Mat 12:15 But when Jesus knew it, he withdrew himself from thence: and great multitudes followed him, and he healed them all;
Mat 12:16 And charged them that they should not make him known:
Mat 12:17 That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying,
Mat 12:18 Behold my servant, whom I have chosen; my beloved, in whom my soul is well pleased: I will put my spirit upon him, and he shall shew judgment to the Gentiles.
Mat 12:19 He shall not strive, nor cry; neither shall any man hear his voice in the streets.
Mat 12:20 A bruised reed shall he not break, and smoking flax shall he not quench, till he send forth judgment unto victory.
Mat 12:21 And in his name shall the Gentiles trust.
I cannot tell you what to believe, I can only tell you what I believe and why.
laymond,
I respect what you believe and your right to believe it. Many things are possible to debate from scriptures and that is why we have over 3000 different denominations, all thinking they have it figured out.
We will understand it all one day and that is good enough for me on this subject.
One day we will laugh together about who understood this right and it probably won’t be either one of us debating this. Either belief is not soul saving or losing.
Ray, said “Laymond concludes that the apostle John is a blasphemer ”
Not so Ray, I certainly believe John received the comforter , but I don’t believe John said anything that directly contradicted what Isaiah said before him. When we keep what is said in context with what other writers have said before them we understand better their intentions. You said Jesus became the word, that is not what John said John said the word became flesh, in other words the word became Jesus. And it does matter who became what, and at what time. I do believe “the son of man ” Jesus became indwelled with the spirits of God and spoke for God and did miracles with the power of God one of which was “The Word” I believe this happened when Jesus was baptized at the age of 30 years, not when he was born. Why because this same John, along with others said that was the time it happened.
Laymond, It is nice to know the fulfillment of Isaiah’s prophecy as written in the gospel can actually be mentioned without the sky falling (or in this case the server crashing). It is tragic that those texts are almost never mentioned from cofC pulpits.
Alabama John said, “One day we will laugh together about who understood this right and it probably won’t be either one of us debating this. Either belief is not soul saving or losing.”
John, I hope you are right . Can we agree that the bible says there is only one unforgivable sin, and that is blasphemy against God, through reading of the bible we can discern blasphemy is disrespect of God, and accusing God of lying is total disrespect.
Isa 45:6 so that from the rising of the sun to the place of its setting people may know there is none besides me. I am the LORD, and there is no other.
I don’t know what you would call saying there are two others besides the father, except to say God said an untruth.
Laymond, you think John the Baptist and Jesus are on the same level when it comes to God, you believe they were both only human. Then what made Jesus’ sacrifice more significant, how is His sacrifice the one that takes away sins, how is Jesus our Savior and John not?
Grace lets see what Jesus thought of John the Baptist; Mat 11:11 Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist: notwithstanding he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.
Mat 11:14 And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come.
was Jesus just exaggerating his praise of John, or was Jesus too born of woman.? Was Jesus saying they were equal servants of God. I will let you answer that question.
Why won’t you answer my question, Laymond : You think John the Baptist and Jesus are on the same level when it comes to God, you believe they were both only human. Then what made Jesus’ sacrifice more significant, how is His sacrifice the one that takes away sins, how is Jesus our Savior and John not?
What is your answer?
Philippians 2:5-11 Philippians 2:5-11 You must have the same attitude that Christ Jesus had. Though He was God, He did not think of equality with God as something to cling to. Instead, He gave up His divine privileges; He took the humble position of a slave and was born as a human being. When He appeared in human form, He humbled himself in obedience to God and died a criminal’s death on a cross. Therefore, God elevated Him to the place of highest honor and gave Him the name above all other names, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
Seems you cannot answer my question, you totally avoided it. What is your answer, Laymond?
You think John the Baptist and Jesus are on the same level when it comes to God, you believe they were both only human. Then what made Jesus’ sacrifice more significant, how is His sacrifice the one that takes away sins, how is Jesus our Savior and John not?
laymond,
God looks at our hearts and no matter how it can be interpreted by us humans, He knows when we are not being disrespectful or accusing Him of lying. I thank God He is doing the judging and not us.
Grace have you noticed that I quote a writer who spent three years at Jesus’ side, and you quote a writer who never spent one minute with Jesus. I only know what I read about Jesus, and I believe those who lived with him for years, would be the place to go.
So you are saying the Bible is not all God inspired, that it’s not trustworthy. So, how do you get to pick who is inspired by God and who isn’t when they speak?
Alabama John said ; God knows whether we really mean it or not (paraphrase); and he is right, but does the people around you know you are just kidding. Like Jesus said, you call me lord and I don’t even know you.
Makes one wonder why the warning of Mat 12:31,32 was even given.
Grace do you believe the bible is entirely God inspired, if so you disagree with Luke, and Paul. and probably ever writer who wrote the bible, it would take a little time but I would venture to say all writers have repeated something someone else said. and that does not qualify as “God breathed”. It is man breathed.
If the bible is not entirely inspired by God, how do we know WHICH portion is not from God, and why do we believe ANY of what it says? This is not a brush-back, but a sincere question. It seems to me that we have placed eternal investment in what the scripture reveals, and if that revelation is largely of mere human origin, exactly what is it that we are basing our faith upon? Some might say it was the direct revelation of God, speaking to individuals today. But if not that, then what?
There are many descriptions of the Messiah. The one which I choose to not ignore is in John 1:1-14 where Jesus is described as the “Word of God” who created the universe and who was with God and WAS GOD. .
Laymond well says “I cannot tell you what to believe, I can only tell you what I believe and why.” Good. What I believe about Jesus begins with John 1:1-14 where He is described as the Word of God who was with God and WAS GOD. The many other descriptions do not make this one untrue.
Laymond says I said that Jesus became the Word of God. To the best of my knowledge I never said such a thing. What I’ve said and what is true is that the Word became known as Jesus of Nazareth after being born of Mary in Bethlehem. If I said Jesus became the Word of God, that was surely wrong. I don’t know that I did say it.
In another note, Laymond expresses his opinion:
So it’s obvious that the apostle John is lying when he plainly teaches that the Word was with God AND WAS GOD and later became flesh and was known as Jesus of Nazareth. John the apostle claims there are three who are God.
Laymond says John the apostle is apostate, if I understand him correctly. He surely differs with the apostle! And with many clear statements made by Jesus which caused the Jews who agreed with what Laymond now says to call Jesus a blasphemer. I strongly recommend a dose of studying the NEW TESTAMENT scriptures for anyone who wants to know Jesus and what He taught and what His apostles taught and therefore what we should believe.
Charles, if you look at who decided what writings were inspired and deserved to be included in biblical canon, and what writings did not meet that criteria. then we will know how we came to have the book we have.
There were to many people, and years involved to keep any inspired writings totally inspired.
Laymond doesn’t want to answer the direct question Grace asks, but he comments: “I only know what I read about Jesus, and I believe those who lived with him for years, would be the place to go.” Indeed, the testimony of the apostles is critical to our knowledge of Jesus and His teaching. That’s what makes it so surprising to me that Laymond doesn’t want to accept the testimony of the apostle most loved by Jesus, the young man John. Laymond thinks John is wrong about Jesus, but that Isaiah’s prophecy as understood by Laymond is a much more accurate picture of Jesus.
Every bit of the Bible IS correct and accurate. But some of it was spoken by enemies of God, so we don’t want to believe the enemies are necessarily honest or correct. Yet their words are recorded in the Bible. And some of what ancient people believed is later revealed to have been less than fully accurate. Throughout the Old Testament God is pictured as One and only One. And indeed God IS only one, yet He is three IN one, we learn from Jesus. Jesus promised His apostles that THEY would learn even more new truths than He had taught while with them.
We do well to not assume we know more than did Jesus and His apostles. And we surely should be aware that more truth was revealed than was known by the ancients. That God is three IN one was never revealed prior to the lifetime of Jesus and it was most fully made known by the apostle John after Jesus had returned to the Father. We should not assume the Bible is wrong when we see progressive revelation. The Mosaic revelation was not the last word from God. It was the word for Israelites during the years of preparation.
The final revelation is apostolic writings. If we see a different teaching by the ancients than by the apostles, it won’t be because God has changed His mind. It will simply be because more truth has now been revealed. We do not study the Mosaic Law looking for guidance for living for Jesus. It doesn’t apply to US. It did apply to God’s people for many years. What Jesus revealed in His ministry and through His apostles is the message of God for God’s people today.
Ray said; “Laymond says I said that Jesus became the Word of God. To the best of my knowledge I never said such a thing.”
I sure thought Ray was the one who wrote this “but it’s very clear that John the apostle claims that it was the Word who became Jesus who actually did the creating.”
OK I believe. I better understand what you are saying now. Ray are you saying that Jesus was actually “the Word of God” at birth , that the creative powers of God were indwelled in a baby’s body, and lay dormant for 30 years, until it was awakened to change water into wine at a party.
Laymond is not alone in his thinking. Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons among others selectively ignore many clear passages of Scripture in favor of those few they can twist to fit their objective of stripping Jesus Christ of the “Christ” component of his person. They want a Jesus who was only a man and nothing more than other great men. We are nearing the celebration of Jesus rising from death and the grave, yet another problem for those who reject the biblical Jesus. To them his resurrection could not have been a real resurrection, it must have been only spiritual. And once again they conveniently dismiss every passage that opposes their willing unbelief.
Christianity with no Christ and with no bodily resurrection is nothing more than one more brand of religion void of any power to change the hearts of sinners. It offers nothing more than what any man can do for himself. Regarding Jesus Christ and who the Bible says he was and is, I agree with Ray 100%.
Ray said; ” Laymond thinks John is wrong about Jesus, ” Not so once again Ray, I think you are wrong when you interpret the first few verses as applying to Jesus, they don’t John begins by talking about the word of God, and everything he said is true. The word has always been with God as his creative attribute. one of the so called spirits of God. And the bible tells us that God did use the power of his word to create all things. Therefore all things were created by the word of God. But not by the Son of God, not by Jesus. The word of God has always existed, Jesus came into existence at the birth of a child in Bethlehem .
Isa 11:2 And the spirit of the LORD shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the LORD;
Unless I am wrong the spirit of “might” could be called “The Word of God” and I also believe the spirit of God is said to have ascended on Jesus at his baptism. Not incased in a baby’s body inside a woman’s womb, and in hibernation for 30 years.
Well we will see Royce, we will see.
How wonderful it is to believe what the Bible says! It does NOT say that Jesus did nothing until He began His public ministry. It mentions that at 12 He amazed the scholars in Jerusalem by His knowledge. It does NOT comment about what other things He may have said and done in the years until it was time to begin His public ministry. But all along He was both GOD and man. As a human, He worked I imagine in his earthly father’s carpenter shop. As a human he got along well and not always well with his siblings.
But He chose to perform no public miracles until it was time to begin preaching. That’s not because He couldn’t have done them. It IS because He chose to NOT do them until the first semi-public changing of water into wine ushered in His public ministry of healing and teaching. No, Jesus didn’t BECOME God at some later period in His life. He WAS God from before His birth. But it was after His resurrection that He made clear that NOW He was in charge of both Heaven and Earth. Until then, the Father had been taking care of things.
But John the apostle makes clear that Jesus was both with God and WAS GOD prior to the Creation. Because there is no conflict between Father and Son and Spirit, there IS only ONE God. But it’s made clear by John that in fact there are three who form the ONE GOD. Christians believe the apostolic writings and surely should understand that later revelation makes clear what may have been unclear in earlier writings about God.
Laymond is determined to not believe the apostle John. Laymond writes,
John the apostle clearly states BY INSPIRATION that the Word was “with God and WAS GOD.” Laymond denies that this is true.
John the apostle in clear speech says that the Word (who was God) became flesh and was known as Jesus. It couldn’t have been more plainly taught that Jesus at birth (and before birth) was God, known then as the Word of God. The Word was not one of many spirits which comprised God. God is ONE. But what the apostle reveals to us is that God is three IN one. God is the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Jesus names them in giving the “great commission.”
Laymond denies that Jesus knew the truth about God, it seems, and denies that John the apostle tells the truth about God. How good it is when people who claim to love Jesus let HIM lead us to truth rather than us seeking to inform Him of truths that really only He could know for sure! The miracles performed by Jesus should tell us something about His honesty and His person. Those who witnessed them report them. I believe them.
Jesus rose from the dead several years ago. We remember. Tell others!
Random Hallelujah
The John S. and James L. Knight Foundation is a national establishment dedicated to artistic excellence, funding local arts projects that engage communities in collective cultural experiences. With the assistance of the ever- and omni- potent YouTube, they put themselves on the map in recent years with an initiative they called “Random Acts of Culture.” Call it a cultural experiment in the transformational power of the arts, Mozart in the mall, tango in the airport terminal, or Puccini at the farmers’ market—the result was art in unusual places, wide-eyed children and startled shoppers, culture interrupted by culture.
The idea was simple. Gather a group of talented artists in a particular city—a string quartet from the Charlotte Symphony, the Opera Company of Philadelphia, or two very gifted dancers—and set them loose from the concert halls to stage a performance in the street. Or, as it were, in the shoe department. Shoppers at a very crowded shoe sale in Miami were startled as one by one their salespeople suddenly turned into characters from the French opera Carmen—shoe boxes in hand.
Yet one of these intruding bursts of creativity caused the most commotion by far. In October of 2012, the Opera Company of Philadelphia brought together over 650 choristers from 28 participating organizations to perform a Random Act of Culture in the heart of a busy Macy’s store in Philadelphia. Accompanied by the Wanamaker Organ—the largest pipe organ in the world—the Opera Company and throngs of singers from the community infiltrated the store as shoppers, and burst into a pop-up rendition of the Hallelujah Chorus from George Frideric Handel’s “Messiah” at high noon.
The reactions on the faces of singers, shoppers, and salespeople are worth the YouTube visit alone—which has been replayed over 8.5 million times: people with shopping bags in tow stop to raise their hands, gadgets and phones are pulled out of pockets and purses to record the moment, the busywork of a crowded mall in action otherwise stopped in its tracks by words that make it all seem so small.
The kingdom of this world
Is become the kingdom of our Lord,
And of his Christ, and of his Christ;
And He shall reign forever and ever,
Hallelujah! Hallelujah!
And then come the tears. The most posted comment after the replaying of this random act of culture is the presence of teary eyes and tingling spines. Some of the comments indeed belong to people who identify themselves as Christian. But many others come from people who claim they are pagan, atheist, or just thoroughly unreligious. But all have similar reactions: “Just beautiful!” said one. “[M]oving beyond words.” “One of the greatest things to happen in Philadelphia in a long time.” “[It] brought tears to my eyes.” “[It] gave me goosebumps.” “I couldn’t stop crying. So beautiful…” Another musician describes a little boy with tears running down his face. After everything was over, she walked up to the mother to ask if he was okay. She said, “‘Oh no, he was just so surprised and moved.’”
With the utmost of respect to Puccini’s La Boheme, there were no reports of any four year olds crying in awe thereafter. Some have attributed the difference in audience reaction to the sheer scope of this particular random act of culture—it was certainly the biggest; combining the world’s largest pipe organ with enough choristers to transform the already striking three-story Italian and Greek marble historic Macy’s Grand Court into a stunning concert hall. Others attribute the heightened reactions simply to the power of the classical arts, the surprise of long forgotten memories, or the beauty and influence of great music. Noticeably absent from all this commentary was reaction from those who seem to find something wrong with anything Christian in the public arena. “I’m an atheist, and I approve of this random act,” writes one responder with a smiley face. “I’m Hindu and I tearfully agree!” another replied. “It’s the beauty that counts.”
Certainly, the story of a God who comes near is exactly that. Beautiful. Remarkable. Show stopping. And our intense reaction to beauty is nothing if not an inherent recognition of a Giver of beauty, a creator of the things that bring chills to our spines and tears to our eyes—the Good, the True, and the Beautiful in Spirit, embodied, in Person.
In contrast, and I think illustrating this point, comedian Steve Martin sang a song last year at the New Orleans Jazz fest that he called “the entire atheist hymnal” (on one page of paper). He called it: “Atheists Don’t Have No Songs.”
Christians have their hymns and pages,
Hava Nagila’s for the Jews,
Baptists have the rock of ages,
Atheists just sing the blues.
Romantics play Claire de Lune,
Born agains sing “He is risen,”
But no one ever wrote a tune,
For godless existentialism.
For Atheists there’s no good news,
They’ll never sing a song of faith.
In their songs they have one rule:
the “he” is always lowercase.
Some folks sing a Bach cantata,
Lutherans get Christmas trees,
Atheist songs add up to nada,
But they do have Sundays free.
Of course, his humor is meant to entertain us—and does. But what a contrast to a piece of music that moves hearts and masses across the board. Handel’s Messiah is arguably one of the strongest expressions of Christian doctrine ever produced, and yet it’s called a masterpiece of beauty by everyone—without so much as flinching as to whether our philosophies really allow room for it in the first place.
In fact, I think it makes all the sense in the world that both inexplicable tears and profound joy accompany the words and sounds of Handel’s Messiah. For this Messiah brings with him an invitation unlike any other: Come and see the Father, the Creator, the Good, the True, and the Beautiful. Come and see the Light, and the Overcomer of darkness, the One who wept at the grave of a friend, and the one who collects our tears in his bottle even before he will dry every eye. Hallelujah, indeed.
Jill Carattini is managing editor of A Slice of Infinity at
Ravi Zacharias International Ministries in Atlanta, Georgia.
———————————————-
RAY DOWNEN (1148 W 28th St., Apt. 301, Joplin, MO 64804)
Now you are showing your true identity Ray putting words in my mouth, trying to kill the messenger because you can’t disprove the message.
That is the way a lot of people react when they realize they have been wrong all their life.
Ray said; “John the apostle clearly states BY INSPIRATION that the Word was “with God and WAS GOD.” Laymond denies that this is true. ”
This is what I wrote “I think you are wrong when you interpret the first few verses as applying to Jesus, they don’t, John begins by talking about the word of God, and everything he said is true. The word has always been with God as his creative attribute. one of the so called spirits of God ”
If Ray interpreted what I wrote shows I disagree with John, I clearly understand why he also misinterprets what John wrote.
I might add, I feel sorry for those who have no interpretive powers.
Jesus said, “Before Abraham was, I AM. Micah 5:2 ‘But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.”
What a great mystery revealed in Jesus. Jesus is from everlasting. Both fully man and fully God. No man takes my life from me, but I lay it down. And if I lay it down, I have the power to take it back up again. (paraphrase) No mere mortal(even one highly gifted) can make those kinds of boasts.
Monty, what do you think Micah 5:2 refers to – Maybe a promise God made to David – do you know how many times Jesus is referred to as Son of David. 10 times in Matthew alone.
Rom 1:3 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;
I still can’t get over that Laymond has declared that Paul was not inspired by God. The majority of the New Testament was written by Paul and Laymond says that’s all void. Wow! There’s no sense to continue discussing what’s in the Bible with Laymond since he has decided it’s not all true.
Grace thinks well that discussions about the Bible are useless when one of the discussers thinks part of the Bible is not from God. As for “the majority of the New Testament” being written by Paul, I question the accuracy of that claim. Paul’s letters are brief although they are many. It’s not certain whether Paul or someone else wrote Hebrews. What’s certain is that it is considered to be a word from God.
Considering the length of the gospel according to John and the Revelation written by John, I’d say he might get the prize of being the one who wrote the “majority of the New Testament books.” More New Testament books were written by Paul than by any other author, that’s sure. And most of us are aware that Paul was called by Jesus to be the “apostle to the Gentiles” and surely is speaking for Jesus as he writes each book we’re sure is written by him. As far as I know the only one where there’s a question is Hebrews, which I’m told is not in Paul’s usual writing style.
I’m not sure what religion a person should claim who doubts that Paul wrote as directed by God. It surely is not the Christian religion that is held by such a person. I thrill to the knowledge that Jay Guin is a lover of God and of Jesus. I wish every one of Jay’s friends was as loyal to Jesus as is Jay. While speaking of lovers of God I will put in a word about Rick Atchley. Rick believes the Bible and seeks to live according to what the Bible teaches. He is to be commended as a good example for any Christian to follow.
The primary difficulty with discussing the scripture with one who does not accept its inspiration in toto is that all common assumptions have be negotiated, phrase by phrase, sentence by sentence, even word by word. It would be like discussing physics with someone who holds that 2+2 does NOT necessarily equal four. Or discussing geography with someone who holds “north” to be an unproven concept. You can exchange sentences back and forth, but actual meaningful discussion is simply not likely. Explains a lot of my observations, actually.
Charles or Ray, you claim all scripture is inspired, and all can be reconciled one with the other.
Please either or both of you , please reconcile the two statements below . The first from Jesus, and the second from John the Baptist, and both from inspired writers.
Mat 11:14 And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come.
Mat 17:10 And his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come?
Mat 17:11 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things.
Mat 17:12 But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them.
Mat 17:13 Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.
Jhn 1:19 And this is the record of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, Who art thou?
Jhn 1:20 And he confessed, and denied not; but confessed, I am not the Christ.
Jhn 1:21 And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No.
Was John the Baptist Elias, or was he not Elias ?
Ray or Charles, Please reconcile these two statements.
Mat 11:14 And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come.
Mat 17:10 And his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elias must first
come?
Mat 17:11 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all
things.
Mat 17:12 But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have
done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them.
Mat 17:13 Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.
Jhn 1:19 And this is the record of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from
Jerusalem to ask him, Who art thou?
Jhn 1:20 And he confessed, and denied not; but confessed, I am not the Christ.
Jhn 1:21 And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that
prophet? And he answered, No.
Just in case you don’t read the KJV.
NIV
Mat 11:14 And if you are willing to accept it, he is the Elijah who was to come.
NIV
Jhn 1:21 They asked him, “Then who are you? Are you Elijah?” He said, “I am not.” “Are you
the Prophet?” He answered, “No.”
Which writer was inspired, or did Jesus and John disagree on just who John was?
Laymond,
Are you really attempting to promote that Jesus was identifying John the Baptist to not be himself but to be a resurrected from the dead “Elias”. Think about that seriously, if your assumption is really true than Jesus was not the first to be resurrected from the dead. A dead man (Elias) returning back not as he was when he left, but returning in the complete conception (human father identified) through the human birth process. At what time in his life was he converted into Elias? Did Elias then have two human fathers and mothers.
You are totally misunderstanding the concept of the Elias return.
John the Baptist was not Elijah.
In Matthew Jesus links John the Baptist with Elijah. John had the same spirit about him as Elijah did. Elijah, like John, was a kind of wilderness man, a man who lived on the run, out of the mainstream of society. But Elijah was a prophet of the Northern Kingdom and not Judah. John the Baptist wasn’t Elijah reincarnated, but he was of the same kind of man as Elijah was.
Larry, “there you go again” blaming me for something somebody else wrote and I just copied.
first of all, show me where Elijah died. second are you doubting the powers of God to do what he will.
Larry said; “You are totally misunderstanding the concept of the Elias return.”
I admit that is possible Larry, and it is also possible that you and many others misunderstand what John wrote in the beginning of his gospel. is it any more farfetched to believe the spirit of Elijah was placed in a woman’s womb, than the spirit of God was, it is far different to reincarnate a spirit, than it is to raise a body from the dead.
The two statements I brought up are diametrically opposed, I simply asked for someone to reconcile the two, as to where both were right. So far no one has done it. Do either of you want to try again.?
I will post my answer after others have posted theirs.
Laymond’s argument boils down to a single idea: “If I don’t understand it, then it cannot be true.” This is the fundamental result of taking faith out of one’s approach to scripture. The alternate view is what more of us tend to hold: “Whether I understand it, or whether I don’t, I believe it to be true.” The latter is faith in divine inspiration, the former is faith in one’s own intellect.
I see no point in attempting to bring Laymond to faith in anything beyond his own wisdom, nor do I see any prospect of accomplishing such a thing. If others want to make the attempt, my good wishes go with them.
1 Corinthians 2:14
Charles, I agree those who are not blessed with the intellect to understand the bible will be forgiven, but those who do, and choose to not use it to understand, I have little hope for.
of the two Christians/ followers of Christ, who responded, chose John over Jesus as telling the truth.
2Ki 1:7 And he said unto them, What manner of man was he which came up to meet you, and
told you these words?
2Ki 1:8 And they answered him, He was an hairy man, and girt with a girdle of leather about
his loins. And he said, It is Elijah the Tishbite.
Mat 3:3 For this is he that was spoken of by the prophet Esaias, saying, The voice of one
crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.
Mat 3:4 And the same John had his raiment of camel’s hair, and a leathern girdle about his
loins; and his meat was locusts and wild honey.
Luk 7:26 But what went ye out for to see? A prophet? Yea, I say unto you, and much more
than a prophet.
Luk 7:27 This is he, of whom it is written, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which
shall prepare thy way before thee.
Mat 17:3 And, behold, there appeared unto them Moses and Elias talking with him.
Mat 17:4 Then answered Peter, and said unto Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here: if thou
wilt, let us make here three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias.
Is it written somewhere that I may have missed that “John the Baptist never lied to anyone” . John was speaking to Jews who didn’t trust him.
Jesus was speaking to his apostles. this little experiment does not prove whether or not the
bible is inspired, but it does prove how some people interpret what it says.
They blamed me for bringing up the subject. but I didn’t write it, two different apostles did.
Royce, my bible is written in English , one of the languages I do understand. but if you are saying I am in trouble because God never speaks to me in person, I guess I am in big trouble. but I am not going to lie and say he does, I believe I would be in bigger trouble.
Laymond,
I put nothing into your statement that you had not admitted. As you asked the questions, you were expecting an answer, Yes or No was John the Baptist actually Elias. That question does not allow for an alternate view, which I believe that you may now project. In fact you have already indicated that which ever answer was provided, your answer would not agree. There can be some very confining understandings developed when life as a student within the local brotherhood, if the KJV was the only authorized version for all Christianity, I don’t remember being directed to the fact that Elias was the NT name for the OT man Elijah. There is no mention in the NT of Elias or Elijah not dying. Therefore, those who study the KJV will have to come to the conclusion from the descriptions of Elias’s works that he was actually Elijah, and that Elias was taken up in the whirlwind. .
Actually, Grace’s comment is more accurate to the subject than either of the one-sided positions that you wanted stated.
A duplicate transposition is necessary for KJV, Esaias and Isaiah.
Larry said, “Think about that seriously, if your assumption is really true than Jesus was not the first to be resurrected from the dead.”
Larry, think about this, do you believe Jesus really raised people from the dead?
Charles, in Kings God had only one prophet, Elijah. Baal had 400 prophets. Elijah was right.
Just because I am out numbered, does not mean I am wrong. As for as intellect I have been tested (more than once) and found to have received my fair share, maybe more than a fair share. No I don’t intend to brag on my IQ as Paul said God deserves all the glory/credit. But if one does not use the gift God gives, he is not deserving of it.
Laymond,
Are we speaking of physical death or spiritual death which Jesus was resurrected from? Was not the widows son resurrected from the dead by God’s reaction to Elijah’s request?
Notice; their bodies were dead but they were asleep.
(Mat 27:52 KJV) And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,
(Luke 20:34 KJV) And Jesus answering said unto them, The children of this world marry, and are given in marriage: 35 But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage: 36 Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection. 37 Now that the dead are raised, even Moses showed at the bush, when he calleth the Lord the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. 38 For he is not a God of the dead, but of the living: for all live unto him.
(John 11:25 KJV) Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: 26 And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?
Notice the FIRSTFRUITS. This was an event that is totally new. Not a single instance of bodies being returned to life was comparable to this.
(1 Cor 15:20 KJV) But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept. 21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. 23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ’s at his coming.
After this resurrection souls will never die.
(Rev 20:6 KJV) Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.
Larry, that is a list of scripture, but it has nothing to do with your previous statement . Yes Jesus is said to have been the first to be resurrected unto eternal life. We know according to scripture that John the Baptist died, beheaded, I see no contradiction in saying Elijah was reincarnated as John the Baptist. Plain as day what Jesus said. It does make one wonder if the reason God raised Elijah up without death, if he had future plans for him. I believe what Jesus said. He did not say a man like Elijah, he said Elijah.
This is one reason the Jews do not accept Jesus as the savior. They expected Elijah the prophet to return, Jesus said he had returned, John said he had not. They are still waiting. This subject is important to a lot of people. I doubt God will appreciate those who stand in the way of Him being joined with his people. And I won’t be caught doing that.
Malachi 4:5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:
Mal 4:6 And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.
We’re asked whether it was Jesus or John the Baptist who was right about John being the prophesied “return of Elijah.” It’s obvious it was Jesus who is right. John was humble and didn’t want to sound conceited. Jesus made clear that John the Baptist WAS the prophet who prepared the way for the coming King. I’m sure Jesus knew and knows best.
Laymond cites Malachi 4:5,6 which was fulfilled by the ministry of John the Baptist. MANY Jews did believe in Jesus and turn to Him. 3,000 in Acts chapter two. 2,000 more the next day and many more thousands in later days and weeks. Both Jesus and John had “prepared the way.” The “great and DREADFUL DAY is yet to come, however, for it’s the final judgment when ALL people of every tribe and nation will be brought before the Judge and those on His left hand will be cast into a lake of fire and brimstone as a result of their being judged. Meanwhile every person alive on earth is invited to turn to Jesus and be saved.
Royce points us to 1 Corinthians 2:14. 1 Corinthians 2:4-14
New International Version (NIV)
4 My message and my preaching were not with wise and persuasive words, but with a demonstration of the Spirit’s power, 5 so that your faith might not rest on human wisdom, but on God’s power. 6 We do, however, speak a message of wisdom among the mature, but not the wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are coming to nothing. 7 No, we declare God’s wisdom, a mystery that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began. 8 None of the rulers of this age understood it, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. 9 However, as it is written:
“What no eye has seen,
what no ear has heard,
and what no human mind has conceived”[a]—
the things God has prepared for those who love him—
10 these are the things God has revealed to us by his Spirit.
The Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God. 11 For who knows a person’s thoughts except their own spirit within them? In the same way no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. 12 What we have received is not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may understand what God has freely given us. 13 This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, explaining spiritual realities with Spirit-taught words.[b] 14 The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit.
RAY: As for whether or not John the Baptist was really the fulfillment of the prophecy concerning Elijah, I prefer to take the word of Jesus that he was despite John the Baptist denying that he was.
As I understand it, John the Baptist was “in spirit” like Elijah, but certainly was not Elijah reborn. His words and deeds sounded LIKE the prophet Elijah. But he was born to human parents just as Elijah was and the parents were not the same for the two men.
The first time Jesus came, it was as a humble and suffering servant. He came as the Lamb of God, the sacrifice to take away our sins. The second time He comes, it will be as the Lion of Judah (Revelation 5:5) the conquering King to take possession of the earth and setup His Kingdom.
Malachi’s prophecy explicitly says that Elijah himself will return, not another man. Malachi specifies that Elijah’s mission is going to take place before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD. Near the Second Coming of the Lord, Elijah himself shall come again, Elijah will return during the tribulation period as one of the two witnesses to Israel described in Revelation 11. These witnesses are very powerful and can call down fire from God, as Elijah did on several occasions the last time he was here. God will allow them to be murdered and their bodies left in the streets to be mocked at, for three days. Then they are both raised from the dead, and rise up to heaven in sight of the mockers.
Ray, it just astounds me that you have no problem believing that Jesus (in spirit) lived with God the father forever, and was placed in a woman’s womb to be born with a flesh and bone body. But you just can’t bring yourself to believe the spirit of Elijah could be born again to a woman and man way past child bearing years. I fail to see one more miraculous than the other. I believe someone said God could make children from stones if he wished. I do not ever doubt the powers of God.
I must express my appreciation for Laymond’s candor in this thread. He directly informs us that he is smarter than the rest of us, as as a result, understands God in ways we simply cannot. Laymond can’t help his superior brilliance, as it is the gift of God. And, of course, he is obligated to display it for us– with great intellectual power comes great responsibility. But, at least, God will forgive us lesser lights for not being as bright as Laymond, and not being able to understand the scripture as Laymond does. That particular grace is something for which I am personally quite grateful.
Grace, I agree that the two spoken of could only be Elijah, and Moses. But this is still something you have to deal with.
Mat 17:12 But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have
done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them.
I fail to see if Elijah has been here in old times, and new times, what prevents him from being here in end times.?
I would be watching for Enoch also.
Charles I do believe you are the one who started belittling another’s intelligence.
Do you remember this?
The latter is faith in divine inspiration, the former is faith in one’s own intellect.
I see no point in attempting to bring Laymond to faith in anything beyond his own wisdom, nor do I see any prospect of accomplishing such a thing. If others want to make the attempt, my good wishes go with them.
Just before Elijah was taken up into heaven in a flaming chariot, Elisha requested that he be given a double portion of Elijah’s spirit, which was granted to him (2 Kings 2:9-15). Elisha did not become a reincarnation of Elijah, they both lived and already existed at the same time. Elisha received in his ministry the spirit that characterized Elijah’s ministry. Neither Elisha nor John had the personal spirit of Elijah.
In Matthew Jesus links John the Baptist with Elijah. John had the same spirit about him as Elijah did. Elijah, like John, was a kind of wilderness man, a man who lived on the run, out of the mainstream of society. But Elijah was a prophet of the Northern Kingdom and not Judah. John the Baptist wasn’t Elijah reincarnated, but he was of the same kind of man as Elijah was.
John the Baptist was not the person of Elijah. The actual person of Elijah will come near the Second Coming of the Lord.
Well, I guess I just need to decide whether to believe you, or Jesus. that won’t take me long.
One thing is very evident, if John the Baptist was Elijah. No body on earth was able to kill Elijah the first time he was on earth, God carried him away to heaven in a whirlwind, but it was very easy for Herod to remove his head without any resistance from God. Now let’s see, he did not die when he was here the first time and the prophets prophesied that he would return. Jesus, testified that he was to return and immediately testified that, that was fulfilled (past tense) then the man that Jesus identified as Elijah was killed. Rumors abounded that he had came back from the dead but were not verified. John the Baptist whom the Disciples understood Jesus to be speaking of as he was talking about the return of Elijah was then asked this question.
(John 1:21 NIV) They asked him, “Then who are you? Are you Elijah?” He said, “I am not.” “Are you the Prophet?” He answered, “No.”
(John 1:22 NIV) Finally they said, “Who are you? Give us an answer to take back to those who sent us. What do you say about yourself?”
(John 1:23 NIV) John replied in the words of Isaiah the prophet, “I am the voice of one calling in the desert, ‘Make straight the way for the Lord.'”
Referring to this scripture.
(Isa 40:3 NIV) A voice of one calling: “In the desert prepare the way for the LORD ; make straight in the wilderness a highway for our God.
That same prophesy identifies this crying will extend much further than most men today will accept. Today there is a concept that presses the knowledge and reveling of salvation to all mankind into another segment of time. You know, the Jews who have refused to believe.
(Isa 40:4 NIV) Every valley shall be raised up, every mountain and hill made low; the rough ground shall become level, the rugged places a plain. 5 And the glory of the LORD will be revealed, and all mankind together will see it. For the mouth of the LORD has spoken.”
It does create a big question, why a man as Godly as Elijah was would directly deny that he was who Jesus had said he was. Is there something that we have missed by not studying carefully that would validate that both answers are true? We have seen similar communications in scripture before.
The last reference to Elijah in NT states that Elijah was a man just like us.
(James 5:17 NIV) Elijah was a man just like us. He prayed earnestly that it would not rain, and it did not rain on the land for three and a half years.
(James 5:18 NIV) Again he prayed, and the heavens gave rain, and the earth produced its crops.
Laymond, one mark of a developed intellect is the capacity to comprehend with a high degree of accuracy what an antagonist says, even in the face of passionate disagreement. If you review my words and your interpretation of them, you may note that you have taken my criticism of having “faith in one’s intellect”, and interpreted it as “belittling another’s intelligence”. The difference in meaning between these two phrases is readily apparent, even to the casual reader. In this particular case, you have allowed your effort to blame me (Google “tu quoque” for a detailed description) to overwhelm a simple understanding of what is really sophomore-level English. This presumes, of course, that your error was innocent.
If that was not the case, well, when you mis-characterize another’s words in order to criticize them, this is known in the study of logic as a “strawman” argument. And it is also easily recognized.
Larry, I have no problem with what James wrote, certianly Elijah was human at the time of which James spoke.
But was Elijah still human when he wrote the letter to Jehoram,this happened after Elijah was taken by the Lord.
2Ch 21:12 And there came a writing to him from Elijah the prophet, saying, Thus saith the LORD God of David thy father, Because thou hast not walked in the ways of Jehoshaphat thy father, nor in the ways of Asa king of Judah,
It seems God was not through with Elijah even though he took him up to be with God.
I don’t see it as impossiable that the spirit of Elijah returned to earth in the person of John the Baptist. both John and Jesus spoke the truth if one spoke of the person, and the other spoke of the spirit. The same spirit, but a different prophet. (the same engine in a different car.)
Charles said; “a simple understanding of what is really sophomore-level English. This presumes, of course, that your error was innocent.” .
I suppose this is not another attempt at critiquing my intelligence.
Jeremiah 17:10 ‘I the Lord search the heart and examine the mind, to reward a man according to his conduct, according to what his deeds deserve.” In Revelation 2:23 Jesus says, “I will strike her children dead. Then all the churches will know that I am he who searches hearts and minds, I will repay each of you according to your deeds.” Either there is more than one “he” who can search hearts and minds, or there is only one “he” who exist in 3 persons who can search hearts and minds. Either there is “no one like our God” as the Psalmist says, or there are others who have the same nature and ability as our God.
Charles, let’s just critique your statement that started this, (I’m rubber and you are glue) childish squabble.
Charles Mclean says:
April 20, 2014 at 11:35 am
“Laymond’s argument boils down to a single idea: “If I don’t understand it, then it cannot be true.” This is the fundamental result of taking faith out of one’s approach to scripture. The alternate view is what more of us tend to hold: “Whether I understand it, or whether I don’t, I believe it to be true.” The latter is faith in divine inspiration, the former is faith in one’s own intellect.”
You said this about me.
“If I don’t understand it, then it cannot be true.” I have never said such a nonsensical, thing in my adult life. But if I don’t understand it, I certainly can’t vouch for it’s truthfulness .
You said this about you and others.
“Whether I understand it, or whether I don’t, I believe it to be true.” Question; If you don’t understand it what is it that you are vouching for.?
And you call me childish for responding to what you said, about me. Come on Charles if you can’t take it don’t dish it up.
OK Monty, you worship as many gods as you want, I want only one, I need only one.
“Whether I understand it, or whether I don’t, I believe it to be true.” Question; If you don’t understand it what is it that you are vouching for.?
Laymond, I don’t understand exactly how Google knows what sorts of goods I might want to shop for, but that does not keep me from accepting that reality. I don’t know how one converts a string of ones and zeros into a picture of Teddy Roosevelt, but I believe that this is exactly what happens on occasion. I do not understand why a Father would sacrifice his own Son to pay for someone else’s sins– sins committed against the Father. But I believe it has been done, and done out of love. I do not understand how “The Lord is the Spirit” and how Jesus is “both Lord and Christ” and that the Father is “the Lord God almighty”… all at the same time. But I believe it is true, nonetheless.
Yes, I believe that there are things that are true whether I understand them or not. Laymond, you do this very same thing in your own life. You have no personal knowledge that the material being pumped by an Exxon pump you have never used before is really gasoline and not iced tea, but you do not hesitate to fill ‘er up, without even considering testing the product. You believe– without any actual knowledge– that you will get gasoline when you squeeze the nozzle.
If a doctor says you have cancer, you have not nearly enough knowledge to analyze the lab results he is reading, nor to interpret the x-rays he is examining, but you will let him feed you poisonous chemicals, or radiate you with cobalt, or cut into your living tissue– all because he says this is best for you. You place your faith in that physician, far beyond your understanding.
You buy a bottle of aspirin from a drugstore you have never visited before, and take it as though you KNEW is was not cyanide. You have no such knowledge. You believe, in a manufacturer you don’t know, and an inspector you can’t identify and a chain of custody you can’t even describe with accuracy.
You are dead certain that men have walked on the moon, but you don’t know this personally… you believe others whom you don’t know who say this is true.
Let’s face it; you live by faith beyond your knowledge at many junctures of your everyday life. So do we all. My choice is to have faith that the bible is true and is from God. You may not choose to place your faith in that particular place; in fact, most people in this world do not. But please do not suggest to us that you only believe that which you understand for yourself. It’s simply not true.
We all live by faith. The choice is only where we place that faith.
I have every reason to believe that the Word became flesh and lived as Jesus. I see no teaching that Elijah was re-born as John the Baptist. It’s obvious to me that it was in the spirit of Elijah that John acted. Jesus said that John the Baptist fulfilled the prophecy. He did not say that John WAS Elijah in the flesh. But John’s preaching surely was that of a second Elijah, and it was obviously an act of God that caused him to be born. But Elijah was still in Paradise while John was on earth. And the Word BECAME flesh and lived as Jesus of Nazareth. The head on the platter at the feast was that of John rather than the head of Elijah. The body of Jesus was the Word of God in the flesh.
Charles concludes, “We all live by faith. The choice is only where we place that faith.” His remarks surely make sense in the response which concludes in this way.
We surely cannot understand as humans how God could cause a human birth without a human father, for we know how births are caused. But we can know because God has revealed to us that it did once happen. There’s no such revelation about any other human birth than that of Jesus. He is in truth the UNIQUE Son of God. John the Baptist was not conceived without the aid of a human father. He was not Elijah reborn. He acted and spoke LIKE Elijah, in the “spirit” of Elijah, but he was John all the way.
Laymond said, “OK Monty, you worship as many gods as you want, I want only one, I need only one.”
Laymond, by your refusal to accept that God the Father, Son, and Spirit are “one God”, you don’t even realize it but you are the one believing in many gods, not me. The same God who spoke in Jeremiah 17:10 is the same one who spoke in Revelation 2:23. Whether I,or anyone else,can explain that to your liking is beside the point. But either they are the same God or there’s more than one god. I say they are the same, you obviously by your comment,say they are multiple gods. Something I deny. By your present understanding(God the father is God and not the Son, ) you cannot reconcile these two scriptures that say the exact same thing, because according to you they are said by two different entities,God in Jeremiah, and by his servant Jesus(who is not God) in Revelation. At least the Pharisees understood what Jesus was saying when he said, “before Abraham was born, I am,” “at this they picked up stones to stone him” John 8:58-59.
Laymond, is Jesus in error for saying he is “the one who searches hearts and minds” instead of God, (which would be blasphemy)or can he say that because he is God?
Monty, I will address your comment first.
When you are trying to convince one that Jesus Christ is an equal part of the “Godhead” , why would you pick scripture that plainly begins by stating that he is a servant, a sent messenger of God.
Rev 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant
John:
That is where we wind up when we fail to keep things in context. Jesus describes himself as a servant of God in John’s gospel, and he is described as a messenger in John’s Revelation. and in both he speaks the words of God. not his own.
Charles, that lengthy tirade of things you blindly trust in, does not describe how I live. I question all things and those I don’t understand I question twice or more, until I am satisfied that person knows what he is talking about. That is why I keep questioning what you say, I am not convinced as of yet.
I believe God knew humans were a suspicious lot, Jews at least , that is why he went to such great lengths to convince them it was really God who had sent the man Jesus. If I am not mistaken that was what all the miracles were about.
Charles you would not envy a car dealer trying to sell me a car. I could tell some of the discussions I have had with my doctor, but you are not here to hear that.
Ray, you say you believe Jesus was born of woman and God, and you believe God fulfilled his promise, spoken of by his prophet Isaiah, and yet you don’t see how it is possible that God fulfilled his promise spoken through his prophet in Malachi 4:5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:
I don’t see where he said I will send you one like Elijah, he promised Elijah. And he said he would send him “before” the great and dreadful day not during. so I don’t see where the mention of “the two in revelation” fulfills the promise.
Like I said I can’t tell you what you must believe, just why I believe. And there is that thing Jesus said.
Jesus will come to take possession of the earth and setup His Kingdom, after the two witnesses come during the tribulation. Malachi was prophesying that near the Second Coming of the Lord, Elijah himself shall come again, Elijah will return during the tribulation period as one of the two witnesses.
Grace, maybe Jesus should have had you to interpret what Malachi was prophesying, I believe he understood it differently than you. and I don’t rely on what Malachi meant, I rely on what Jesus said.
Laymond,
I see you will not address scripture that attributes to Jesus what was only attributed to God in the O.T. I understand. Jesus did become a servant. He subjected himself. That’s what Paul writes in (Philippians 2: 6-11). Paul say about Jesus ,” who being in very nature God.’ How do you get around that direct statement? Paul drives the point home even further, (he)did not consider equality with God something to be grasped(kept) but made himself nothing(a servant, humble, subjecting himself, subordinating himself).
Laymond when you fail to see the condescension of Jesus, you do miss a great deal of the depth of God’s love for us. God stepped down from his throne for us. How remarkable is that? God became one of us. It’s hard to wrap our minds around it, but like Charles said, or would say, in keeping with his previous post. I don’t see how a brown cow can eat green grass and give white milk, but he does.
Monty, I agree with you all but the giving of milk and HE doesn’t, SHE does! LOl
Monty really knows that it’s SHE-cows that he’s talking about and said “he.” “I don’t see how a brown cow can eat green grass and give white milk, but he does.”
Monty, I believe I did answer your question in a previous comment.
Now about what Paul said about the being of Jesus.
Phl 2:6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it (not) robbery to be equal with God:
form = morphē =1.the form by which a person or thing strikes the vision (or image)
(Just small mistakes change the total meaning of a sentence. The word “not” as I have been told was not in the original ).
Col 1:13 Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:
Col 1:14 In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:
Col 1:15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
image = eikōn = 1.one in whom the likeness of any one is seen
1Co 11:7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.
image = eikōn =1.one in whom the likeness of any one is seen
I see Paul using the same word to describe “man” and Jesus. eikōn/image .
We need to do research on scripture we think does not match what the writer has said before.
Monty said, “I see you will not address scripture that attributes to Jesus what was only attributed to God in the O.T.”
Monty, this is my answer, “and in both he speaks the words of God. not his own.”
( Included in my previous comment. )
“That is where we wind up when we fail to keep things in context. Jesus describes himself as a servant of God in John’s gospel, and he is described as a messenger in John’s Revelation. and in both he speaks the words of God. not his own.”
I could take a stab at explaining why some think Jesus was the creator , if anyone wants me to.
You still haven’t answered my question. What is your answer, Laymond?
You think John the Baptist and Jesus are on the same level when it comes to God, you believe they were both only human. Then what made Jesus’ sacrifice more significant, how is His sacrifice the one that takes away sins, how is Jesus our Savior and John not?
Just for you Grace, I have no reason to doubt what John said.
Mar 1:7 And preached, saying, There cometh one mightier than I after me, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to stoop down and unloose.
You didn’t answer the question, Laymond.
So what makes Jesus greater than John. Would like some insight from you, what made Jesus’ sacrifice more significant, how is His sacrifice the one that takes away sins, how is Jesus our Savior and John not?
I don’t really know what you are asking me to say. Both John and Jesus were assigned a job to do and both completed their mission. They both obeyed God, and they both paid with their earthly life, are you suggesting that because Jesus was raised from the tomb that God thought more of him than John. I suggest that they both will share in the promise of God they will be sons of God and share in the inheritance promised. Just as you will when you make it there, the bible says you too will be a child of God and share in the inheritance. Your job although it might not be as important to the world as that of John and Jesus it is important, and if you give it your all I believe, like the woman who gave a penny you have done what you are asked to do. give it your all. and you too will be rewarded. God loved the world so much he gave his son to save it, sounds like you are pretty important to God. As the old testament says , there is only one savior and that is God.
Jesus was God’s sacrifice to the world. The Lamb of God.
Psa 106:21 They forgat God their saviour, which had done great things in Egypt;
Isa 19:20 And it shall be for a sign and for a witness unto the LORD of hosts in the land of Egypt: for they shall cry unto the LORD because of the oppressors, and he shall send them a saviour, and a great one, and he shall deliver them.
(and God sent Moses, who God also called a god)
Exo 7:1 And the LORD said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.
Isa 43:3 For I am the LORD thy God, the Holy One of Israel, thy Saviour: I gave Egypt for thy ransom, Ethiopia and Seba for thee.
Isa 43:11 I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour.
Isa 45:15 Verily thou art a God that hidest thyself, O God of Israel, the Saviour.
Isa 45:21 Tell ye, and bring them near; yea, let them take counsel together: who hath declared this from ancient time? who hath told it from that time? have not I the LORD? and there is no God else beside me; a just God and a Saviour; there is none beside me.
This is not talking about Elijah, Moses, John or Jesus, it speaks of the God who sent all of them.Jehovah .
Laymond you said, As the old testament says , there is only one savior and that is God.
You say well that God is the only Savior. Scripture says that Jesus is our Savior, He is the only Sacrifice that takes away our sins.
Luke 2:11 This very day in David’s town your Savior was born, Christ the Lord!
John 4:42 Then they said to the woman, Now we believe, not because of what you said, for we ourselves have heard Him and we know that this is indeed the Christ, the Savior of the world.
2 Timothy 1:10 And now it has been shown to us in the coming of our Savior Christ Jesus. He destroyed death and showed us the way to have life. Yes, through the Good News Jesus showed us the way to have life that cannot be destroyed.
Titus 2:13-14 We are filled with hope, as we wait for the glorious return of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ. He gave Himself to rescue us from everything that is evil and to make our hearts pure. He wanted us to be His own people and to be eager to do right.
You haven’t answered the question, Laymond, you still totally avoid answering it.
What made Jesus’ sacrifice more significant, how is His sacrifice the One that takes away sins, how is Jesus our Savior and John not?
How is it that Jesus’ sacrifice giving His life is the only One worthy to take away our sins?
Laymond,
I think you still danced around things being said of Jesus that were said of God in the O.T. Not just the words Jesus said. But things that are attributed to both Jesus and God. Jesus being God, Jesus searching the hearts and minds, Jesus being the great Shepherd. Jesus being the Alpha and the Omega says the Lord God, something he repeats again in Revelation, that Jesus will repay everyone for their deeds-vengeance is mine says the Lord I shall repay. Either there are 2 great shepherds or one, either there are two gods who can search hearts and minds or there is one God who can do that. There is one Alpha and Omega and Lord God or there is God and his servant (as you say) who are both the Alpha and Omega. Strange.
How many examples would you need of not just Jesus repeating words, but characteristics or attributes that are only attributed to God that are attributed to Jesus too?
When you see Jesus you see God, not a reflection. Not like the moon reflecting the shine of the sun. I think you missed the point the writer was making. He wasn’t saying Jesus is as close to seeing God as we can get but he’s only just a mirror, a close approximation. That wasn’t the point. “For in him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily.” Jesus told Phillip, “He that hath seen me hath seen the Father.” Not just a close approximation like looking at a picture, but in his essence, he was God in human form. He and the Father are one. Not a two, or not a one and a one and a half, but a one. A hard to fathom truth, but to deny it is in essence to make Jesus less than who he is.
Monty,I won’t try over and over to answer all your questions, but I will deal with your last statement.
“He and the Father are one. Not a two, or not a one and a one and a half, but a one. A hard to fathom truth, but to deny it is in essence to make Jesus less than who he is.”
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:
I don’t know what you will concede that this spoils your argument, but I know that it does , unless you think we will all be God. I believe the “as one” that Jesus speaks of refers to being unified .
The Father and the Son are unified not in person but in mind.
Grace, I did not say what I wrote, God said this through the person of Isaiah.
God saved his people from Egyptian slavery , his instrument was Moses. God saved his people from Satan, his instrument was Jesus. That is about as good as I can do, that is what I believe. I have said I can’t make anyone believe what I believe, I can only tell you why I believe what I believe.
Laymond suggests, “We need to do research on scripture we think does not match what the writer has said before.” And surely that’s correct. One thing I keep in mind is that the Word does not contradict the Word, so any later writing is sure to NOT contradict what was earlier said/written. And those who heard Peter speak for the apostles to tell believing seekers what they needed to do had no other apostolic words to compare with Acts 2:38. They simply were told what seekers MUST DO in order to receive remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit.
As for the role of songs in Christian life, what the apostles wrote has us praising God with ALL our songs, and seeking to praise Him always in all ways, not just in “church worship.”
Laymond invites, “I could take a stab at explaining why some think Jesus was the creator , if anyone wants me to.” I’m satisfied with what the apostle John says on the subject. Speculations of others do not seem inviting. Jesus says that the Word (who became Jesus while on earth) was WITH God and WAS God. That’s why I’m sure that Jesus was Creator. He wasn’t at that time known by the name of Jesus, but He NOW is known as both the Word of God, and as God the Son who on earth was named Jesus.
Laymond makes clear that he does not believe that Jesus is God the Son as John the apostle clearly states is the case. Laymond wrote
Jesus claims that He now has all authority in Heaven and on earth. But Laymond obviously does not believe what Jesus says! He thinks Jesus and John the Baptist are equals since both did what God directed they were to do, if I understand him.
But Jesus healed and did impossible things while on earth, including rising from death, and John did none of those things. Both came from God, that’s true. One came to redeem us. The other came to prepare for the coming of Jesus the Messiah who offers salvation to all mankind. The one is God the Son. The other is a man born to serve God here on earth. Equals? No, not at all. Some of us believe the Bible is inspired. Others prefer human wisdom.
How do you bypass all the Scriptures that say Jesus is God, Jesus is Lord, Jesus is Savior? Do you just overlook them all saying they are not true, that they are void? Have you ripped them out of the Bible so that you don’t see what you think is blasphemy?
Moses, Elijah, and John the Baptist were a great men, but they were men who needed a Savior. Jesus is God who came in the flesh to save us from our sins. Jesus came to give Himself as the only Sacrifice that takes away sins. Jesus was much more than just a man, He is the Lord our God giving His perfect life that is worthy to take away our sins.
Laymond repeats that he does not believe the testimony of the apostle John that “In the beginning was the WORD and the WORD was with God and the WORD WAS GOD.” John 1:14 states that the Word became flesh…” This was not God the Father becoming flesh. That’s not what John says. It was the WORD who was WITH God who became flesh. John says the WORD was both WITH God and WAS GOD. Did John just make up a fable? Some think so.
Laymond believes instead of the Word being with God and also being God, “The Father and the Son are unified not in person but in mind.” He says they THINK alike but are NOT the same person. I believe the apostle. I therefore do not agree with Laymond even if my birth name is similar, being Raymond. Just call me Ray, and study the Bible if you want to know truth. By the way, I’ve a study available at my web site with “Helps for Understanding the Bible.” The site is missionoutreach.org. The link to various studies, each in a separate .pdf form suitable for printing is at the left side of the home page titled “list Tracts/Booklets” near the top of many particular articles which are listed.
Laymond is honest. Good for Laymond. He bases his thinking on the Old Testament. Poor thinking. Hebrews makes clear that we live under a NEW covenant which was ushered in by God the Son. We do well to listen to and learn from the Son and the message He wants us to carry the GOSPEL throughout the world wherever we or our words go (how blessed we are that now by way of computers and the internet we all can preach the gospel everywhere in the world).
The Old Testament was to prepare the way for the gospel. The Old Testament does not offer eternal life. The Old Testament is valuable history of the human race. The New Testament offers eternal life to those who turn to JESUS for salvation. The history in Acts is valuable to help us understand what the apostles understood that Jesus wanted done in His world.
Some want to rewrite that history. Others choose to believe what Luke wrote and rejoice in what God did through His people in the first days of the existence of the church of God which was led by Jesus Christ. I applaud Jay’s desire to honor Jesus in our assemblies. That’s very good. It’s even better for us to realize that we are to live for Jesus every day and not just on Sundays and when the “family” is together.
Grace is to be commended for realizing that Jesus is God the Son while John the Baptist is merely one of “us” who serve God as best we know how. John the Baptist was born miraculously, that’s true, which makes his birth similar to that of Jesus, different only in that God used the parents of John to together create John while Jesus had no earthly father. Jesus is uniquely God on earth. No other man is equal.
John served God faithfully and died. Jesus served God faithfully and rose from the grave. Different? Yes, very different. And Jesus performed many miracles which are recorded for us to know about. Did John perform miracles? None are reported. Just that he lived apart from others and preached about the coming Kingdom and baptized those who believed. Some who claim to be Christians seem unaware of His unique miracle-working power, but that’s very much a part of His ministry on earth.
Ray said, “Hebrews makes clear that we live under a NEW covenant which was ushered in by God the Son.”
And I agree with Ray Jesus’ death and resurrection ushered in the new age. Ray who made this new covenant with the people, God the Father or Jesus “god the son”. ?
believe me it matters.
Jer 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
Laymond asks “who made this new covenant with the people, God the Father or Jesus, god the son?” And I have to wonder what difference it makes whether it was God the Father acting without the Son or God the Son working without the Father.” Both are God. God made this new covenant. Jesus makes clear that for now HE is in charge both in Heaven and on earth. But the Word was both WITH God and WAS God and this hasn’t changed. God IS three in one. No one of them acts without it being the act of GOD. Three humans can unite and still not become ONE flesh. God is not human and is not limited as humans are. It happens that God is THREE IN ONE.
Laymond, You still haven’t answered my question.
What made Jesus’ sacrifice more significant, how is His sacrifice the One that takes away sins, how is Jesus our Savior and John not?
How is it that Jesus’ sacrifice by giving His life the only One worthy to take away our sins? What makes Jesus giving His life the only perfect Sacrifice that takes away our sins? How is Jesus the only Savior who takes away the sins of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Elijah, Elisha, David, Isaiah, John the Baptist, the thief on the cross, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter, and Paul, how is it Jesus’ sacrifice is the only sacrifice that takes away their sins? If you believe Jesus was just a man, you would have to put Jesus’ name on this list of people who needed a Savior, so why didn’t Jesus need a Savior as other people do?
Grace, how do you know all that you have stated, how am I to know what you say is true. Am I to trust what you say just because you say it, give some scripture to support what you have said. or I will not bother to refute it. scripture says Jesus insisted on being baptized, why,? baptism is said to be for remission of sins.
Luke 23:40-41 But the other man on a cross spoke sharp words to the one who made fun of Jesus. He said, “Are you not afraid of God? You are also guilty and will be punished. We are suffering and we should, because of the wrong we have done. But this Man has done nothing wrong.
2 Corinthians 5:21 For God made Christ, who never sinned, to be the offering for our sin, so that we could be made right with God through Christ.
Laymond, I have posted Scriptures that you continue to say are not true, that you will pick and choose what you want to believe. These are the Scripture you continue to ignore.
Romans 9:5 Of whom are the fathers and from whom, according to the flesh, Christ came, who is over all, the eternally blessed God. Amen.
Philippians 2:5-11 You must have the same attitude that Christ Jesus had. Though He was God, He did not think of equality with God as something to cling to. Instead, He gave up His divine privileges; He took the humble position of a slave and was born as a human being. When He appeared in human form, He humbled Himself in obedience to God and died a criminal’s death on a cross. Therefore, God elevated Him to the place of highest honor and gave Him the name above all other names, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
Luke 2:11 This very day in David’s town your Savior was born, Christ the Lord!
John 4:42 Then they said to the woman, Now we believe, not because of what you said, for we ourselves have heard Him and we know that this is indeed the Christ, the Savior of the world.
2 Timothy 1:10 And now it has been shown to us in the coming of our Savior Christ Jesus. He destroyed death and showed us the way to have life. Yes, through the Good News Jesus showed us the way to have life that cannot be destroyed.
Titus 2:13-14 We are filled with hope, as we wait for the glorious return of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ. He gave Himself to rescue us from everything that is evil and to make our hearts pure. He wanted us to be His own people and to be eager to do right.
Grace said.
” If you believe Jesus was just a man, you would have to put Jesus’ name on this list of people who needed a Savior, so why didn’t Jesus need a Savior as other people do?”
Mat 4:1 Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil.
Heb 4:15 For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as [we are, yet] without sin.
Jas 1:12 Blessed is the man that endureth temptation: for when he is tried, he shall receive the crown of life, which the Lord hath promised to them that love him.
Jas 1:13 Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:
You say Jesus was god, yet James said God cannot be tempted.
Laymond,
God in the flesh can be tempted. God became a man in the form of Jesus Christ.
Jesus and God are equal as evidenced by the following scriptures on Jesus:
He is worshiped (Matt. 2:2, 11; 14:33; 28:9)
He is prayed to (Acts 7:59; 1 Cor. 1:1-2)
He was called God (John 20:28; Heb. 1:8)
He is sinless (1 Pet. 2:22; Heb. 4:15)
He knew all things (John 21:17)
He gives eternal life (John 10:28)
The fullness of deity dwells in Him (Col. 2:9)
Jesus’ flesh was tempted, as the Son of Man He was tempted, but the devil’s temptation didn’t in any way cause Jesus to sin. Jesus never hesitated to the devil’s temptation the whole time, one of the answers Jesus gave without hesitating to the devil was, Matthew 4:7 “It is written again, You shall not tempt the Lord your God.” Jesus never sinned, isn’t that what you said in your comment that you would refute, your comment heavily implies that Jesus sinned.
Are you saying that the Scriptures are lying saying that Jesus is God that He is the Savior?
Luke 23:40-41 But the other man on a cross spoke sharp words to the one who made fun of Jesus. He said, “Are you not afraid of God? You are also guilty and will be punished. We are suffering and we should, because of the wrong we have done. But this Man has done nothing wrong.
2 Corinthians 5:21 For God made Christ, who never sinned, to be the offering for our sin, so that we could be made right with God through Christ.
Laymond, I have posted Scriptures that you continue to say are not true, that you will pick and choose what you want to believe. These are the Scripture you continue to ignore.
Romans 9:5 Of whom are the fathers and from whom, according to the flesh, Christ came, who is over all, the eternally blessed God. Amen.
Philippians 2:5-11 You must have the same attitude that Christ Jesus had. Though He was God, He did not think of equality with God as something to cling to. Instead, He gave up His divine privileges; He took the humble position of a slave and was born as a human being. When He appeared in human form, He humbled Himself in obedience to God and died a criminal’s death on a cross. Therefore, God elevated Him to the place of highest honor and gave Him the name above all other names, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
Luke 2:11 This very day in David’s town your Savior was born, Christ the Lord!
John 4:42 Then they said to the woman, Now we believe, not because of what you said, for we ourselves have heard Him and we know that this is indeed the Christ, the Savior of the world.
2 Timothy 1:10 And now it has been shown to us in the coming of our Savior Christ Jesus. He destroyed death and showed us the way to have life. Yes, through the Good News Jesus showed us the way to have life that cannot be destroyed.
Titus 2:13-14 We are filled with hope, as we wait for the glorious return of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ. He gave Himself to rescue us from everything that is evil and to make our hearts pure. He wanted us to be His own people and to be eager to do right.
And there is the other question I asked you still haven’t answered.
What made Jesus’ sacrifice more significant, how is His sacrifice the One that takes away sins, how is Jesus our Savior and John not?
How is it that Jesus’ sacrifice by giving His life the only One worthy to take away our sins? What makes Jesus giving His life the only perfect Sacrifice that takes away our sins? How is Jesus the only Savior who takes away the sins of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Elijah, Elisha, David, Isaiah, John the Baptist, the thief on the cross, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter, and Paul, how is it Jesus’ sacrifice is the only sacrifice that takes away their sins?
Skip on April 23, 2014 at 4:44 pm
“Laymond, God in the flesh can be tempted. God became a man in the form of Jesus Christ.
Jesus and God are equal as evidenced by the following scriptures on Jesus:”
Correction, Skip men led by the flesh can be tempted. As James said, “God can not be tempted.”
another correction, the bible plainly stated that there is no one equal to God. Jesus calls “Him” father and God, and greater than I.
Jesus said He and God are not even equal in knowledge. Jesus said God did miracles through him. If we believe Jesus is the Son of God, and spoke for God (as I do) we should take what Jesus said as truth, and what others said as either opinion, or remembrances. And always remember, memory fails us from time to time, and opinions are our own. For those who pit what Jesus said against what Paul wrote, I suggest you study about the life of Paul, which I have done and plan on continuing to do.
Laymond, You want other people to answer your questions, and I have answered your questions. Why won’t you answer the questions I asked you?
Here are my questions that you have ignored to answer.
Jesus never sinned, isn’t that what you said in your comment that you would refute, your comment heavily implies that Jesus sinned?
Luke 23:40-41 But the other man on a cross spoke sharp words to the one who made fun of Jesus. He said, Are you not afraid of God? You are also guilty and will be punished. We are suffering and we should, because of the wrong we have done. But this Man has done nothing wrong.
2 Corinthians 5:21 For God made Christ, who never sinned, to be the offering for our sin, so that we could be made right with God through Christ.
Are you saying that the Scriptures are lying that Jesus is God that He is the Savior?
Romans 9:5 Of whom are the fathers and from whom, according to the flesh, Christ came, who is over all, the eternally blessed God. Amen.
Philippians 2:5-11 You must have the same attitude that Christ Jesus had. Though He was God, He did not think of equality with God as something to cling to. Instead, He gave up His divine privileges; He took the humble position of a slave and was born as a human being. When He appeared in human form, He humbled Himself in obedience to God and died a criminal’s death on a cross. Therefore, God elevated Him to the place of highest honor and gave Him the name above all other names, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
Luke 2:11 This very day in David’s town your Savior was born, Christ the Lord!
John 4:42 Then they said to the woman, Now we believe, not because of what you said, for we ourselves have heard Him and we know that this is indeed the Christ, the Savior of the world.
2 Timothy 1:10 And now it has been shown to us in the coming of our Savior Christ Jesus. He destroyed death and showed us the way to have life. Yes, through the Good News Jesus showed us the way to have life that cannot be destroyed.
Titus 2:13-14 We are filled with hope, as we wait for the glorious return of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ. He gave Himself to rescue us from everything that is evil and to make our hearts pure. He wanted us to be His own people and to be eager to do right.
What made Jesus’ sacrifice more significant, how is His sacrifice the One that takes away sins, how is Jesus our Savior and John not? How is it that Jesus’ sacrifice by giving His life the only One worthy to take away our sins? What makes Jesus giving His life the only perfect Sacrifice that takes away our sins? How is Jesus the only Savior who takes away the sins of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Elijah, Elisha, David, Isaiah, John the Baptist, the thief on the cross, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter, and Paul, how is it Jesus’ sacrifice is the only sacrifice that takes away their sins?
What is your answer, Laymond?
Laymond, As to your quote on God being tempted… Psalm 106:13-15 says God was tempted, “They quickly forgot His works; They did not wait for His counsel, 14But craved intensely in the wilderness, and tempted God in the desert.” Obviously God never has sinned but I can quote God and temptation scriptures that contradict yours.
Laymond,
In Isaiah 44:6 we read, Thus says [Jehovah], the King of Israel and his Redeemer, [Jehovah Sabaoth]: ‘I am the first and last, and there is no God besides Me.’ That verse in and of itself offers strong proof of the Trinity, because it differentiates between Jehovah and His Redeemer Jehovah. But it also reserves for Jehovah God this expression “the first and last.” That title surfaces again in Revelation 1:8. where it is again applied to Jehovah: “I am the Alpha and the Omega,” says the Lord God, “who is and was and is to come, the Almighty.” No question about who owns that title. Notice too that it is a title that can hardly be shared with any created being: the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the One who is and was and is to come, the almighty. Yet at the end of the book of Revelation we read these words again, this time spoken by Jesus Christ in Revelation 22:13.
In Isaiah 43:11,God speaks: “I , even I , am Jehovah; and there is no savior besides Me.” Did you realize the title “Savior” is reserved in Scripture for God? This verse says so in the plainest terms. That is why Paul, writing to Titus, did not shrink from applying the name God and the word Savior both to Jesus.
Charles Spurgeon
Skip said, ” I can quote God and temptation scriptures that contradict yours.”
I don’t have any biblical scripture that is credited to me.
So I believe Skip, and Grace, are saying there are many contradictions in biblical scripture.
Yet they say the bible is inspired/breathed by God. What does that say.
I never said there are any contradictions in the Bible. From the beginning to the end it is all God inspired. It is as a puzzle and how our lives can seem sometimes, but as we go through it, it all fits together perfectly.
Laymond knows lots that isn’t so, it appears. He will not believe that Jesus on earth was fully human and could have sinned. He insists Jesus must always be either God or man, whereas the apostle John explains Jesus coming to earth in John 1:1-14. Laymond either does not believe what John wrote or misunderstands it. Good for Grace who does understand what has been revealed about God the Son.
A doubter questions:
I can’t answer for Skip or Grace, but I can point out that to tempt God is impossible. Any bribe we offered would be less than He already has. Any promise we offer would be subject to His approval. God cannot be tempted. It’s clear that Israelites ATTEMPTED to tempt God during the years when they were led through the “wilderness” while the adults died one by one because they had not obeyed (because they had not believed His prophet) God once they were out of Egyptian slavery. But there’s no mention that God WAS tempted. The statement is that they tempted God, not that He was in any way tempted to do as they asked.
What is the Bible. It’s a book of truths. It’s a book of light, speaking of things men could not know if we were not told, such as Creation. No humans were there to observe and report. But God tells us what was done and by whom it was done. The explanation given early is expanded upon by the gospel according to John. John does not contradict Moses. But He explains that the actual creator was not God the Father but was God the Word, a person who WAS GOD and also WAS WITH GOD. New truths unknown until apostolic writings.
Does Laymond not believe the Bible? His comments might cause us to believe he does not accept as true what the Bible teaches. I’m glad that Jay does believe the Bible is God’s Word, and that several who read his comments agree.
Monty, said; “In Isaiah 44:6 we read, Thus says [Jehovah], the King of Israel and his Redeemer, [Jehovah Sabaoth]: ‘I am the first and last, and there is no God besides Me.’ That verse in and of itself offers strong proof of the Trinity”
I fail to see the obvious truth that you see, please explain.
Isa 44:6 Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God.
NIV
“This is what the LORD says— Israel’s King and Redeemer, the LORD Almighty: I am the first and I am the last; apart from me there is no God.
Keep reading, what does the next verse say?
Isa 44:7 And who, as I, shall call, and shall declare it, and set it in order for me, since I appointed the ancient people? and the things that are coming, and shall come, let them shew unto them.
NIV
Who then is like me? Let him proclaim it. Let him declare and lay out before me what has happened since I established my ancient people, and what is yet to come— yes, let them foretell what will come.
I read this as saying if anyone thinks they are my equal, prove it.
I believe this enhances the verse where Jesus is asked when the end of the world will be, and Jesus answers “only the Father knows”
Ray said; “Does Laymond not believe the Bible? His comments might cause us to believe he does not accept as true what the Bible teaches.”
Ray what I believe about God comes from the bible, and only the bible. not some man that has the very same thing I am privy to, but can’t accept the plain and simple version and feels they need to twist scripture to fit their preconceived beliefs. beliefs that came into existence during the 4th century after Jesus death. nothing written in the old testament or the gospels indicate much less prove the trinity doctrine. as for temptation, the bible plainly states Jesus was tempted just like other men, and it is also said God can not be tempted, what does that say for Jesus being God. You find in the bible where it is written that God is a trinity and I will be the first to admit it to be true.
I doubt there was a more humble person to be found than the Son of God, in the time of Jesus.
humility was not named as a trait of God Almighty, who was there for him to be humbled by, his creation?
Laymond explains
I’m not twisting any scripture. I’m pointing out to you, Laymond, what you obviously haven’t notice IN the Scriptures. And your claim that the apostle John wrote his gospel account in the 4th century makes no sense. Understanding that God is more than one person is made clear in the gospel according to John 1:1-14. The Word was WITH GOD and WAS GOD. This was written prior to 60 A.D. I’m sure. That’s not the 4th century.
And in verse 14 it’s made clear that the Word who WAS GOD became flesh and lived on earth as Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus spoke of His Spirit whom He would send to empower the apostles and to live with all Christians through the ages. That’s God the Father, God the Son, and NOW God the Spirit unless we count the Spirit as somehow less than part of our God. With no question at all we should understand that God is TWO in ONE, the Father and the Word who became the Son of God and now still is called Jesus in Heaven. In Revelation, written about 96 A.D., we read of Jesus as glorified (chapter 1 and 5) and as active in end-time events in later chapters. Meanwhile the Father is on His throne in Heaven.
After His resurrection Jesus calmly claimed that He now was head of all things both in Heaven and on earth. We learn that at the end of earthly time He will return authority to the Father. Meanwhile Jesus is our boss in all things. And it wasn’t in the 4th century that this was first taught, as Laymond says is the case.
I believe Jesus “the King of the Jews” to be a descendant of David as promised.
2Sa 7:8 Now therefore so shalt thou say unto my servant David, ———————–.
2Sa 7:12 And when thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom.
2Sa 7:13 He shall build an house for my name, and I will stablish the throne of his kingdom for ever.
2Sa 7:14 I will be his father, and he shall be my son. If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men:
2Sa 7:15 But my mercy shall not depart away from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away before thee.
2Sa 7:16 And thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever before thee: thy throne shall be established for ever.
2Sa 7:17 According to all these words, and according to all this vision, so did Nathan speak unto David.
This prophecy at first presents an interesting question; “Is this prophecy about David’s descendant Solomon or about his later descendant Jesus?” To me the answer must be: both.
Building the Lord’s house (vs. 13). In one sense, it is Solomon who built the Lord’s house when he built the temple at Jerusalem. But Jesus also built a house for God; made of living stones; a spiritual temple; the church of Christ.
1Pe 2:5 Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.
Ray do you believe God fulfiled his promise to David, or sent a god instead. Why would a god want to be a king?
I believe Jesus “the King of the Jews” to be a descendant of David as promised.
2Sa 7:8 Now therefore so shalt thou say unto my servant David, ———————–.
2Sa 7:12 And when thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom.
2Sa 7:13 He shall build an house for my name, and I will stablish the throne of his kingdom for ever.
2Sa 7:14 I will be his father, and he shall be my son. If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men:
2Sa 7:15 But my mercy shall not depart away from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away before thee.
2Sa 7:16 And thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever before thee: thy throne shall be established for ever.
2Sa 7:17 According to all these words, and according to all this vision, so did Nathan speak unto David.
This prophecy at first presents an interesting question; “Is this prophecy about David’s descendant Solomon or about his later descendant Jesus?” To me the answer must be: both.
Building the Lord’s house (vs. 13). In one sense, it is Solomon who built the Lord’s house when he built the temple at Jerusalem. But Jesus also built a house for God; made of living stones; a spiritual temple; the church of Christ.
1Pe 2:5 Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.
Ray do you believe God fulfiled his promise, or sent a god instead.
I don’t know if I am the only one having problems with posting comments, but I won’t be posting until it is fixed, I will try to read other’s post, just not posting myself.
Laymond, I have asked you questions that you want to avoid answering. I think since you want to comment so much about your unbelief of who Jesus is, then you should be quite capable to answer these questions.
You believe that Jesus was nothing more than just a man, another sinner who was saved by grace, then what is the grace of God that saved Jesus?
Jesus never sinned, isn’t that what you said in your comment that you would refute, your comment heavily implies that Jesus sinned?
Are you saying that the Scriptures are lying that Jesus is God that He is the Savior?
What made Jesus’ sacrifice more significant, how is His sacrifice the One that takes away sins, how is Jesus our Savior and John not? How is it that Jesus’ sacrifice by giving His life the only One worthy to take away our sins? What makes Jesus giving His life the only perfect Sacrifice that takes away our sins? How is Jesus the only Savior who takes away the sins of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Elijah, Elisha, David, Isaiah, John the Baptist, the thief on the cross, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter, and Paul, how is it Jesus’ sacrifice is the only sacrifice that takes away their sins?
Laymond asks “Ray do you believe God fulfilled his promise to David, or sent a god instead. Why would a god want to be a king?”
I believe God fulfilled His promise to David by sending His Son (God the Son) to earth. He did so because He loved people and seeks our salvation. That Jesus is God is obvious. It’s especially clearly stated in John 1:1-14, but made clear in other passages as well. Jesus was not just a man, but while on earth He was fully human.
So the flesh was a descendant of David, but the spirit, and soul was a god. If Jesus was born a god, I wonder what purpose it served for God’s Spirit to descend upon him at baptism. And It seemed strange to me that Jesus spoke only the words of his Father. I suspect that was the results of the “word of God” that indwelled him.
We all have the freedom to believe what we want to, but that does not mean we all make the right decision.
You think Jesus was not God prior to His baptism. The dove was sent by God as a sign to John who had been promised that the sign of a dove would assure John that the one being baptized was the promised one. There’s no reason to suppose that Jesus did not possess all of God’s Spirit prior to His baptism.
Jesus was, is and always will be the great “I Am” who spoke to Moses, who seen Abraham and existed before him. John 8:57-58 “The people said, “You aren’t even fifty years old. How can you say you have seen Abraham? Jesus answered, “I tell you the truth, before Abraham was even born, I AM!”
Laymond, Are you going to say that John lied about Jesus saying He had seen Abraham and existed before him?
You throw out of the Bible anything that proves Jesus is God, and obviously you are not capable of answering my questions. Until you answer my questions, I don’t think you know what you are talking about and avoiding them makes your understanding seem very careless.
Laymond said, “So I believe Skip, and Grace, are saying there are many contradictions in biblical scripture. Yet they say the bible is inspired/breathed by God. What does that say.”
I believe all scripture is inspired and non-contradictory. You have wanted to prove Jesus was only a man by quoting only a few select pet verses. I have shown you verses that contradict your thesis and you ignore them. I don’t believe my scriptures contradict any other scriptures but they do contradict your cherry picked interpretation of scriptures.
Ray I don’t know where you found in scripture what you wrote. “The dove was sent by God as a sign to John who had been promised that the sign of a dove would assure John that the one being baptized was the promised one.”
Mat 3:16 And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:
Jhn 1:32 And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him.
Jhn 1:33 And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost.
I understand this to describe the descending of the spirit to resemble the landing of a dove out of the heavens.John 1;33 does not mention a dove at all, neither does Matthew, Mark, or John. except for the manner in which the spirit would descend.
Mar 1:10 And straightway coming up out of the water, he saw the heavens opened, and the Spirit like a dove descending upon him:
Naturally Luke expounded to the extremes as he did on many other things. no other person mentioned any bodily shape. Luke called it the “holy ghost” instead of “spirit”. and luke failed to mention that the spirit “abode upon him.” or “remained on him” .
Luk 3:22 And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased.
Ray don’t you think someone might have mentioned it if Jesus walked around with a bird on his person.
Zechariah 12:10 includes a most interesting prophecy. In context, this is Jehovah speaking. Verse 4 tells us so. Then verse 10 says, “I will pour out on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the Spirit of grace and of supplication, so they will look on Me whom they have pierced; and they will mourn for Him, as one mourns for an only Son, and they will weep bitterly over Him, like the bitter weeping over a first born.” Who was the one who was pierced? It was Christ. And John 19:37 specifically applies this text to Christ. From Who Is Jehovah? – Phillip Johnson
Royce wrote,
Royce seems to not notice to whom promises are made and assumes they all apply to himself and his friends.
When Jesus promised HIS APOSTLES they would be led into all truth, I feel sure that the apostles were led into all truth just as they had been promised. That’s why we believe apostolic writings. How does Royce figure we will be able to remember the things Jesus said in our hearing when we weren’t there to hear? Promises made to the apostles are promises for the apostles. And when we protest the many who ignore baptism in Acts 2:38 it’s not because we believe in baptism alone. We simply call for faith, repentance AND baptism, just as the apostles ordered.
If we speak of baptism often it’s simply to make up for those like Royce who ignore the baptism commanded by Jesus and promise salvation without being baptized “into Christ” to receive the gift of the Holy Spirit and remission of sins. We gladly point to the need of faith in Jesus for salvation, and for the absolute need to turn to HIM as Lord (repent of self-love and self-will) as preceding baptism into Him and His church. Some imply that Jesus was mistaken in commanding that all NEW believers were to be baptized, and that the apostles were mistaken in counting as Christians only those who HAD BEEN BAPTIZED.
Laymond wrote, “Ray I don’t know where you found in scripture what you wrote. ‘The dove was sent by God as a sign to John who had been promised that the sign of a dove would assure John that the one being baptized was the promised one.'” And then quotes John who explains the purpose of the dove and who was expected to see the dove. John 1:32,33.
Skip writes
I agree with Skip and we are not saying there is even one contradiction in apostolic writings. But some opinions some people hold are contradictory to what the apostles wrote.
Royce commented
Royce misunderstands what he has read from Skip and Grace and myself, it appears. WE are not claiming people are saved by baptism alone. We understand that it takes NEW BIRTH of water AND spirit in order to be saved and brought into Christ’s kingdom. Faith, repentance AND baptism are what Jesus had His apostles teach as the entryway into the church.
Hank writes well:
GOOD FOR HANK! Bad for those who emphasize faith as if faith is all-sufficient and is all that is required for salvation in Jesus. We note that Jesus commands baptism for all NEW believers, not that the new believer is expected to know somehow of the need, but the command is for us who tell others about Jesus. WE are to baptize them if they do believe in Jesus as Lord. Those who love Jesus OBEY JESUS. And we are ONE in Him. One body. One church with Jesus as its head. Obeying JESUS as Lord.
Royce feels that what Luke says is subject to misunderstanding. That’s not what he says, but what he obviously means. He says ” this is Ray’s quote and the one I was addressing.
Mar 28, 2014 ·” Any doctrine which contradicts Acts 2:38 seems iffy to me…”
I would reply that there is no doctrine that contradicts it. There are some that contradict his interpretation of it.
RAY: I feel sure that Peter spoke for all the apostles for for the Master in what he said. There’s no possible misunderstanding of what Luke records Peter said. We either agree with it or we disagree with it. It calls for seekers who now believe in Jesus to REPENT AND BE BAPTIZED with two promises given to those who comply. Those believers in JESUS who do repent of disbelief and who are baptized as Jesus commanded will receive remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit. The words are clear. Their meaning cannot be ignored. They can be disbelieved as some do. But the promise of being saved is conditioned on the believer repenting and being baptized.
Hearers either believe and obey the gospel or they disbelieve and are lost. And some blithely suggest the apostles were wrong in demanding repentance and baptism. That doesn’t change the fact that Jesus had His apostles place repentance and baptism at the beginning of the Way. Any teaching which promises salvation on other conditions is simply ignoring Jesus and His apostles.
It should be obvious to all that the FIRST requirement for salvation by Jesus is believing in Him. That is stated frequently in apostolic writings. It is never stated that faith ALONE will save. Yet salvation by faith alone is what some who study with Jay are saying is apostolic truth. It’s good they’re studying! And it’s good that Skip and Hank and Grace are pointing out obvious truth.
I was saved by the sacrifice of Jesus, the only Sacrifice sufficient to a Holy God, that is what my faith is. After I was saved I wanted to be obedient to my Lord and Savior and was baptized. It was out of love for Him for what He had done for me that I would ever want to be obedient to my God and My Savior!
Ray, I guess you must have missed the rest of what I said about a dove landing on Jesus head, and living there for three years.
“I understand this to describe the descending of the spirit to resemble the landing of a dove out of the heavens. John 1;33 does not mention a dove at all, neither does Matthew, Mark, or John. except for the manner in which the spirit would descend.
I believe some people should not attempt to explain just what the KJV is saying. Maybe I shouldn’t say it is an attempt to twist scripture, Maybe it is just the inability to understand.
Monty says:April 24, 2014 at 9:31 am
“Laymond,In Isaiah 44:6 we read, Thus says [Jehovah], the King of Israel and his Redeemer, [Jehovah Sabaoth]: ‘I am the first and last, and there is no God besides Me.’ That verse in and of itself offers strong proof of the Trinity, because it differentiates between Jehovah and His Redeemer Jehovah”
NIV
“This is what the LORD says— Israel’s King and Redeemer, the LORD Almighty: I am the first and I am the last; apart from me there is no God.
Isa 44:6 Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God.
I have had a little bout with my back, and haven’t felt like staying at the computer for long, feel better will try to refute some of the things said about me.
Ray Downen says: April 24, 2014 at 11:27 am
“Laymond knows lots that isn’t so, it appears. He will not believe that Jesus on earth was fully human and could have sinned. He insists Jesus must always be either God or man,”
Ray, I do not think of Jesus as a “shape shifter” someone who shifts back and forth from man to god as the situation requires. Give me an example of where this is exhibited.
Monty says:
Laymond,
Did you call on the name of the Lord to be saved? And if so, then who in particular was it? Joel 2:32 says in reference to Jehovah, “whosoever calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.” The Jews in that context understood the coming of the day of the Lord as the coming of their Jehovah. Peter attributes what was happening on Pentecost as pertaining to Joel 2:32.
Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye crucified both Lord and Christ.
Question for you: Who did those who “called upon the name of the Lord” on Pentecost, cry out to for salvation? Jehovah or Jesus? Who did Paul call on when he was instructed to “arise and be baptized …calling on the name of the Lord?” Was that his Jehovah God he was raised up serving or was it Jesus Christ? Acts 4:12 “Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is no other name(Jesus) among men, whereby we must be saved.
So, which name do we call on? Jehovah or Jesus? Or is calling on Jesus, the same as calling on Jehovah because they are One? If Jesus is less than Jehovah, how does appealing to his name(Jesus) save? Shouldn’t we appeal to the highest name? Or are we appealing to the highest name in Jesus? “and freely granted to him that name that is above Every name. ” (Philippians 2:9)
At the end of time, every knee shall bow and every tongue confess that Jesus is Lord, in heaven and on earth. Doesn’t that mean what it says it means, Laymond? That everyone will confess that Jesus is God? Not somehow less than God, for to do so (bow and worship)would be blasphemy wouldn’t it? Only Jehovah is to be worshiped. Right? Will the angels in heaven bow to Jesus and confess that he is Lord? Are they not included in “in heaven”? If he’s not God and somehow less than Jehovah(Father) then isn’t that, again blasphemy? Your interpretation of who Jesus is would not allow for that to happen. So how do you explain everyone bowing and worshiping and confessing Jesus is Lord, if he is in any way, less than, in his being, God?
Monty, we all call on God in the name of Jesus.(or we should, because Jesus asked us to). That simply means we come to God as a follower of Jesus. As Jesus said I come in the name of the Father, and the apostles go in my name. Which means God sent Jesus and Jesus sent the apostles. We should always call on God in the name of Jesus. I pray directly to Jehovah God, as a follower of his son Jesus. If Jesus accepts you his Father will also accept you.
No Jesus and his Father are not one in being, Jesus obeyed God strictly, they are one in thought and actions. What was it Jesus prayed for his apostles, “I pray they will be one as you and I are one”. Was Jesus asking that they would all be god, or asking they would all be of like mind?
Jesus was and is worshiped as the son of God, what Christian wouldn’t want to be like Jesus.
As for Jesus being less than God, I believe he said he was. Monty you accuse me of non belief, when in fact what you are saying is, that whole father, son thing was a farce. I just can’t believe it was.
Laymond,
We have had several back and forths, but I believe that we are just talking past one another and not actually conversing. I haven’t accused you of not believing . You, however, seem to accuse me of saying the whole Father – Son thing is a farce. Jesus is the Son of God but he is not less than God. You can’t prove that by anything I said. Jehovah Son and Jehovah Father are 2 of the persons of the Trinity that is the One God of scripture. Jesus is of the same Godness as the Father. His name is the name that is above every name. He is the Jehovah God of the OT. “Before Abraham was I am.” He claimed to be God. The Jews knew it and understood it, you would have picked up stones too, perhaps I would have also, because what he said was mind blowing and definitely not anything an Abraham or a Moses, or a good rabbi would have said.
You refuse to attempt to answer direct questions, so, like I said, we are just talking past each other. Your view of Jesus discounts his deity before becoming the babe in Mary’s womb. Mine does not. God became flesh and dwelt among us. Bible says so. In order to do so, he had to take on another role, that of a servant. He exchanged one form(nature or essence) for another form(servant or slave). Deity became a servant,(unthinkable right?) to be one of us, in order to die for us. Greatest story ever. Your version has God choosing a human surrogate to do the dirty work. Not a great story there.
There is a Oneness between God the Father, Jehovah Son and the Holy Spirit that is really unfathomable. There is a relationship there unimaginable where a One(Godhead) can be expressed as three persons without any discredit or damage to the One and making the One a Three.
You get the last word, for I will not be trying to converse on the subject matter any longer with you.
Monty, So this is the results of the mission of Jesus to reveal God to the multitudes.
Might I inquire just what you think Jesus accomplished, if what he taught is described by the two adjectives you say describes the gospel, what good news do you see.
unfathomable, and unimaginable
adjective
1. incapable of being fully explored or understood.
1Co 4:1 Let a man so account of us, as of the ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God.
NLT
So look at Apollos and me as mere servants of Christ who have been put in charge of explaining God’s mysteries.
Act 17:22 Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars’ hill, and said, Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious.
Act 17:23 For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you.
Act 17:24 God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands;
Act 17:25 Neither is worshipped with men’s hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things;
Act 17:26 And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;
Act 17:27 That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us:
Act 17:28 For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring.
Act 17:29 Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man’s device.
Act 17:30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:
Act 17:31 Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.
Unless I missed something Paul did not refer to God as a “trinity” and he did describe Jesus as “that man”.
And that same preacher said, 1Co 11:3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.
Monty, So this is the results of the mission of Jesus to reveal God to the multitudes.
Might I inquire just what you think Jesus accomplished, if what he taught is described by the two adjectives you say describes the gospel, what good news do you see.
unfathomable, and unimaginable
adjective
1. incapable of being fully explored or understood.
1Co 4:1 Let a man so account of us, as of the ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God.
NLT
So look at Apollos and me as mere servants of Christ who have been put in charge of explaining God’s mysteries.
Act 17:22 Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars’ hill, and said, Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious.
Act 17:23 For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you.
Act 17:24 God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands;
Act 17:25 Neither is worshipped with men’s hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things;
Act 17:26 And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;
Act 17:27 That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us:
Act 17:28 For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring.
Act 17:29 Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man’s device.
Act 17:30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:
Act 17:31 Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.
Unless I missed something Paul did not refer to God as a “trinity” and he did describe Jesus as “that man”.
And that same preacher said, 1Co 11:3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.
With some folks, every subject winds up being about baptism. But for others, every subject winds up being about the Trinity. A little variety, I guess.
Charles, I can’t think of two more important subjects in Christianity, can you? They both are a salvation issue, in my opinion. baptism is an issue of sin forgiveness, the trinity is an issue of arguing against God, or blasphemy against the word of God.
Breathing is the most important thing I do, but I have learned to do other things at the same time without constantly talking about breathing.
And when you stand in the middle of a room and continually insist that almost everyone else in the room is a heretic, eventually, you should realize that you are winning no converts. At some point, bringing your anti-Trinitarian argument to this forum becomes less about convincing anyone and more about keeping the spotlight.
Charles there are many people who read Jay’s blog beside those who post comments, and I have very little faith that I will change the minds of those (such as yourself) who debate me on the subject here on Jay’s page. But I will debate the subject as long as I am challenged, and Jay allows me to do so.
And Charles I am sorry if I am infringing on your glory. I know of very few churches of Christ that believes as you do on the trinity. Yes that is the belief of the Catholic Church and they also pray to Mary as the mother of god, I don’t do that either but I don’t hear any backlash from anyone here on that. If the man Jesus was god then the woman Mary was surely the mother of god, and the man Joseph was the step-father of god. None of that is true Mary is the mother of Jesus, and Joseph is the step-father of Jesus. Show me where God said “this is my son” anytime before Jesus was baptized and received the spirit of God. I believe it is said that all who receive the spirit become sons of god.
Laymond,
Was God angry with the Magi for honoring Jesus with gifts and worshiping him? “Where is he born king of the Jews?” He was king at his birth. Not at his baptism. I thought only God was to be worshiped, that’s what the angel said whom John tried to bow to him in Revelation and when Gentiles tried to worship Paul he tore his robe. Elizabeth called Mary “the mother of my Lord.”
Elizabeth called Mary “the mother of my Lord.” not my god.
Monty there are many things written in the bible that people misunderstand , I don’t believe Elizabeth meant to say Mary was the mother of God.
There are others that are misquoted as well, The one that comes to mind is Jesus is “the only son of God” which does not come close to what the bible says.
We need to search out the truth when we run up against something that sounds untrue, because it probably is.
Laymond, you still haven’t answered these questions.
You believe that Jesus was nothing more than just a man, another sinner who was saved by grace, then what is the grace of God that saved Jesus?
Jesus never sinned, isn’t that what you said in your comment that you would refute, your comment heavily implies that Jesus sinned?
Are you saying that the Scriptures are lying that Jesus is God that He is the Savior?
What made Jesus’ sacrifice more significant, how is His sacrifice the One that takes away sins, how is Jesus our Savior and John not? How is it that Jesus’ sacrifice by giving His life the only One worthy to take away our sins? What makes Jesus giving His life the only perfect Sacrifice that takes away our sins? How is Jesus the only Savior who takes away the sins of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Elijah, Elisha, David, Isaiah, John the Baptist, the thief on the cross, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter, and Paul, how is it Jesus’ sacrifice is the only sacrifice that takes away their sins?
Grace, I can’t blame you for what you said, nor what you believe. I blame those who taught you out of ignorance of the gospel. The questions you ask gives me better insite to why you believe you can be saved without baptism.
Grace I won’t comment on what you say I believe, because you don’t have a clue as to what I believe. Just because you don’t understand what I believe doesn’t give you the right to concoct something of your own and apply it to me.
Grace asked; “What made Jesus’ sacrifice more significant, how is His sacrifice the One that takes away sins,”
answer, Jesus sacrifice did not take away sins, it paid the price for the sins of those who come to him, through baptism and recognize him as “The Lamb of God” God forgives sin, but only through the one who paid the price.
Paul pretty much put it all together here.
Rom 6:23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Act 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
.
remission; forgiveness or pardon, of sins (letting them go as if they had never been committed), remission of the penalty.
I leave the judgement of who is saved to Jesus and to how they obeyed the “word of God “.
Laymond said – Jesus sacrifice did not take away sins.
I believe Jesus’ Sacrifice is the only Sacrifice that takes away sins.
Matthew 1:21 She will bear a Son, and you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins.
John 1:29 The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, “Behold! The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!
Romans 5:9 And since we have been made right in God’s sight by the blood of Christ, He will certainly save us from God’s condemnation.
Hebrews 7:25-26 So Christ can save those who come to God through Him. Christ can do this forever, because He always lives and is ready to help people when they come before God. So Jesus is the kind of high priest we need. He is holy. He has no sin in him. He is pure and not influenced by sinners. And He is raised above the heavens.
Hebrews 10:11-13 The priests do their work each day, and they keep on offering sacrifices that can never take away sins. But Christ offered Himself as a sacrifice that is good forever. Now He is sitting at God’s right side, and He will stay there until His enemies are put under His power.
1 John 2:1-2 My dear children, I write this letter to you so that you will not sin. But if anyone sins, we have Jesus Christ to help us. He always did what was right, so He is able to defend us before God the Father. Jesus is the way our sins are taken away. And He is the way all people can have their sins taken away too.
Laymond, you picked a single question you thought you could answer, so why not give it a try to answer the other questions:
How is Jesus our Savior and John the Baptist not?
You believe that Jesus was nothing more than just a man, another sinner who was saved by grace, then what is the grace of God that saved Jesus?
Jesus never sinned, isn’t that what you said in your comment that you would refute, your comment heavily implies that Jesus sinned?
Are you saying that the Scriptures are lying that Jesus is God that He is the Savior?
How is it that Jesus’ sacrifice by giving His life the only One worthy to take away our sins? What makes Jesus giving His life the only perfect Sacrifice that takes away our sins? How is Jesus the only Savior who takes away the sins of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Elijah, Elisha, David, Isaiah, John the Baptist, the thief on the cross, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter, and Paul, how is it Jesus’ sacrifice is the only sacrifice that takes away their sins?
Laymond and Grace,
Jesus had the power to forgive sins prior to his sacrifice. The text does not indicate to those he had forgiven that forgiveness was only conditional or only effective after he died. The Jews sought to kill him because he forgave sins, something they were sure only God could do. In this he was displaying to them he indeed was claiming to be God. .
In my previous post I intended to convey that the power for forgiving sins was not obtained through his sacrifice. I really do not believe that Grace would believe that,”Jesus’ sacrifice is the only sacrifice that takes away their sins?”, the power is not in the sacrifice. It was always Jesus’s power.
Actually, I do believe that Jesus’ sacrifice is the only sacrifice that takes away their sins. I believe Jesus’ sacrifice is the only sacrifice that takes away the sins of people before and after the cross.
Before the cross people were saved by the blood of Jesus. These early believers loved God and wanted to live with Him forever. They understood the nature of God’s grace. He hadn’t given Himself a Sacrifice yet but they believed that the Messiah would come and save them from their sins. They were looking forward to the coming of their Savior.
Job 19:25-26 For I know that my Redeemer lives, And He shall stand at last on the earth; And after my skin is destroyed, this I know, That in my flesh I shall see God.
Isaiah 53:5 But He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities; The chastisement for our peace was upon Him, And by His stripes we are healed.
Grace, first off you need to answer the questions , what is sin, and against whom did the world sin ?
and who did God send to represent him in this world ? Who was it that Jesus called his Father, and his God, who was it that Jesus prayed to.? Think about those questions long and hard. Jesus did not come to fool the people, he came to inform them.
I’m not Grace but I can answer the question which doesn’t in any way provide light on the good things Grace has said. Sin is against God (God the Father, God the Son and their Spirit, also God and separate from Father and Son). Jesus spoke of the Father as HIS Father and prayed to the Father while His Son was on earth.
It’s not clear to me why some want to ignore what the apostle Jesus loved says about Jesus and dispute with him about who Jesus is. Jesus is the Word of God who was with God prior to Creation and who also was God but who came to earth later as Jesus of Nazareth, a Jewish human. Jesus made clear that He claimed to be God but was not the Father God. And some don’t want to believe Him while yet claiming to love Him.
As long as people ignor Isaiah 11:1-5 . and Isaiah 42: 1- 6 , and Matthew 12: 17 – 21.
They can never know Jesus, and the true and faithful servant he was to his God. There has never been a more dedicated son and servant, and he has received his inheritance, one that I hope to share one day.
Laymond, You want other people to answer your questions, and I have answered your questions. Why won’t you answer the questions I asked you?
Since you won’t answer my questions. I don’t think you know what you are talking about and that you are not capable of answering my questions. Avoiding my questions makes your understanding seem very careless.
Ray , if as you say Jesus was born “fully god” with all the powers of God at his beck and call , please explain what happened at Jesus baptism, if Jesus was born with all the spirits/powers of God what was it that descended from heaven and stayed with Jesus, dwelled with him. I believe the bible tells of restrictions placed on Jesus, as I understand it God has no restrictions. I believe God said once he could not be contained in the temple, or even the earth, a much larger container than a human body.
The Bible is full of two-sided concepts…. There are scriptures on being saved by grace and there are scriptures showing we must work hard to show ourselves approved. There are scriptures that show Jesus was honoring and serving God and there are scriptures that show Jesus was God and accepted worship for himself. Granting forgiveness is reserved for God but Jesus indeed forgave many people.
We can choose to camp out on either position, dig in, and keep quoting our same pet verses…. Or we can look at all the pro and con scriptures on the divinity of Jesus and accept ALL scriptures on this topic.
Laymond asks what happened at the baptism of Jesus. God showed His approval of all that Jesus had done and was doing. The descending dove was for John’s sake rather than to at that time give to Jesus something He had formerly lacked.
Good for Skip. The only way we have of agreeing in Word Press is by a note saying so. If I could have just added my agreement without a separate note I’d have done so. Jesus is fully human and fully God. No other person has lived on earth as did Jesus. He was fully God, able to summon legions of angels at any time, but never doing so. He was fully human, tempted in every way as we other humans have been and will be tempted. No other person has ever been God on earth as a human.
Larry, I don’t have any argument against what you say – except this statement .
“It was always Jesus’s power.” As Jesus said, It was never his power that performed miracles it was the power of God working through Jesus.
Ray, did you intentionally leave something out of your statement, or was it just a mistake ?
Mat 26:53 Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels?
Skip, until we acknowledge that Jesus spoke the word of God, for God and did nothing of his own, we will never understand Jesus and his mission.
Ray said; “Laymond asks what happened at the baptism of Jesus. God showed His approval of all that Jesus had done and was doing.”
Ray, can you name some of those things Jesus did before he was baptized.?
Ray, said “The descending dove was for John’s sake” or in other words identify Jesus to John as the “Lamb” .
Ray if that is so. Why was John reluctant to baptize Jesus, because he felt unworthy to do so.?
Actually the account of Jesus’ baptism in John, is much different than any other account. John’s account tells us JTB did not know Jesus before he was baptized, all the others say yes he recognized the “Lamb” in the crowd, or when he presented himself for baptism.
Laymond wonders if I “forgot” to mention that Jesus could summon angels to do His bidding when the summons would go by way of the Father. I didn’t forget. Jesus could at any time have had angels to perform whatever He wanted them to do. He chose to never do the summoning. He always credited the Father with His power. He and the Father are one. Laymond asks what miracles Jesus had performed prior to His baptism and thinks a negative answer would prove that He had no power prior to that event. How many 12-year old Jewish boys would have been welcomed and listened to by the Jewish leaders in Jerusalem? Was that out of the ordinary when Jesus amazed those elders by his conversation over a period of more than one day? It’s mentioned that after that He lived an ordinary life until it was time to begin His public ministry at 30 years of age. Because He lacked power? No, because He chose to not USE His powers until the normal age for Jewish prophets to begin speaking for God. Was the changing of water into excellent wine done before or after His baptism?
So this is your proof, is it Ray. All 12 year old boys were versed in the Jewish bible, and I am sure some more than others.
Ray said, “Was the changing of water into excellent wine done before or after His baptism?”
Jhn 2:1 And the third day there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and the mother of Jesus was there:
Jhn 2:2 And both Jesus was called, and his disciples, to the marriage.
Well Ray, did Jesus choose his disciples before or after his baptism.
Laymond, you simply refuse to answer anyone’s questions…not surprising with the things you have said. The answer to Ray’s question that you don’t want to give is that Jesus turned water into wine before His baptism.
And the questions I asked you are still here waiting to be answered:
You believe that Jesus was nothing more than just a man, another sinner who was saved by grace, then what is the grace of God that saved Jesus?
Jesus never sinned, isn’t that what you said in your comment that you would refute, your comment heavily implies that Jesus sinned?
Are you saying that the Scriptures are lying that Jesus is God that He is the Savior?
What made Jesus’ sacrifice more significant, how is His sacrifice the One that takes away sins, how is Jesus our Savior and John not? How is it that Jesus’ sacrifice by giving His life the only One worthy to take away our sins? What makes Jesus giving His life the only perfect Sacrifice that takes away our sins? How is Jesus the only Savior who takes away the sins of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Elijah, Elisha, David, Isaiah, John the Baptist, the thief on the cross, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter, and Paul, how is it Jesus’ sacrifice is the only sacrifice that takes away their sins?
Grace says:
“Laymond, you simply refuse to answer anyone’s questions…not surprising with the things you have said. The answer to Ray’s question that you don’t want to give is that Jesus turned water into wine before His baptism.”
Grace is that what your book says? mine says Jesus was baptized, then taken up and tested for 40 days, before he picked any disciples.
I answer the questions Grace, I just have different answers than you do. How about you Ray, do you believe the miracle of the wine was before Jesus baptism. Even in the book of John baptism was before miracles.
Laymond,
Jesus told the Devil, “It is written, worship the Lord your God, and serve Him only.” If Jesus himself were only a creature, he would have been guilty of hypocrisy, for he himself received worship. Not once did Jesus ever rebuke anyone for worshipping him.
Matthew 14:33 – “and those who were in the boat worshiped Him, saying, “You are certainly God’s Son!”
John 9:38 – “and [ the man born blind] said, Lord, I believe. And he worshiped Him.’
Matthew 28:9 – “And behold, Jesus met them and [greeted the women coming from HIs tomb] and they came up to him and took hold of his feet. and worshiped Him.”
Matthew 28:17-18 – “and when [the eleven disciples] saw Him, they worshiped HIm; but some were doubtful. and Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, ‘All authority has been given Me in heaven and on earth.”
John 20:28-29 – “Thomas answered and said to Him,’ My Savior and my God!”
The last hold out of the 11 was Thomas, Laymond you have been a doubting Thomas. Could you not say what Thomas and the others said? They were the closest to Him on earth and they worshiped Jesus. He never told anyone not to. Only God is to receive worship and Jesus knew that better than anyone, then we are left with only 2 conclusions. 1. Jesus was a blasphemer for receiving only what is due God, or 2. He is the 2nd person of the Holy Trinity and therefore God. You cannot sweep these passages and there implications under the rug.
Worthy is the Lamb. Revelation 5:7-8 “He came and took the scroll from the right hand of Him who sits on the throne. And when he had taken it, the four living creatures and the twenty four elders fell down before the Lamb. And they sang a new song;
That’s worship Laymond. Right there in the presence of Him who sits on the throne, they fell down and worshipped the Lamb. Only God is to be worshiped, not the created. Jesus is God.
Monty, to say I am a doubting Thomas is to say I am the only one who doubts what you say to be true. Which is far from being the case. As a matter of fact you are in the minority, in the Church of Christ. But I must admit you are gaining, and I suspect there is one who is happy you are, and I am not speaking of Jesus.
Psa 8:3 When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained;
Psa 8:4 What is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man, that thou visitest him? Psa 8:5 For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honour.
Psa 8:6 Thou madest him to have dominion over the works of thy hands; thou hast put all things under his feet:
Heb 2:6 But one in a certain place testified, saying, What is man, that thou art mindful of him? or the son of man, that thou visitest him?
Heb 2:7 Thou madest him a little lower than the angels; thou crownedst him with glory and honour, and didst set him over the works of thy hands:
Heb 2:8 Thou hast put all things in subjection under his feet. For in that he put all in subjection under him, he left nothing that is not put under him. But now we see not yet all things put under him.
Heb 2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.
Heb 2:10 For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings.
Laymond is right that none of the miracles performed by Jesus occurred prior to His baptism. It’s my conviction that this was by choice rather than by lack of power during those years of preparation until he was 30 years of age. I feel that there were many young men aged 12 who did NOT entertain the nation’s leaders and amaze them, but Laymond is right that others had been born the same year and month as Jesus. And no doubt many of them had had excellent teacher/mentors. But there’s no record of any such highly-qualified teachers for Jesus, the carpenter’s son in a small town far from Jerusalem.
Monty is surely right all the way. One point Laymond might want to make is that the worship of Jesus was AFTER He had been baptized. We feel He was worthy prior to that event, but there is no record of Him performing any miracles or being treated as other than the carpenter’s son in Nazareth until He began His public ministry when he had turned 30 years of age. Well, I feel that the episode in Jerusalem when he was 12 proves something, but it’s recorded that he returned then to Nazareth and was a dutiful son to his parents.
Laymond, I have been in numerous churches of Christ dating back to the 80’s and none of them believed Jesus was less than God. Plus you attribute many views on this site to being Satanic. Thus, if we are taught by Satan, why bother with us. How about being forthright and just say we are going to hell
Laymond, The answer to Ray’s question that you don’t want to give is that Jesus turned water into wine before His baptism. In other words the answer you do want to give is that Jesus turned water into wine after His baptism.
It’s nice to see that you believe what John wrote. John also wrote:
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.
Notice John was speaking about the Word and that HE was in the beginning with God. Who do you think HE is that was in the beginning with God?
John 1:30 This is the One I was talking about when I said, There is a Man coming after me who is greater than I am, because He was living even before I was born.
John wrote that John the Baptist said Jesus existed before he was ever born. How did Jesus exist before John the Baptist?
John 8:57-58 The people said, You aren’t even fifty years old. How can you say you have seen Abraham? Jesus answered, I tell you the truth, before Abraham was even born, I AM!
Laymond, Are you going to say that John lied about Jesus saying He had seen Abraham and existed before him?
Since you believe what John wrote about Jesus, surely you won’t toss out all these things he wrote about Jesus.
Grace said, “In other words the answer you do want to give is that Jesus turned water into wine after His baptism” (yes Grace that is what I say, because Jesus was given miraculous power at his baptism)
Grace quoted John, 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.
(This simply says that God has always had the ability to speak, and things obeyed when he spoke.)
( the following is the very first example of God creating through “the word” and there are many others as well )
Gen 1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
Another example was after Jesus recieved the spirits at baptism,
Mar 4:39 And he arose, and rebuked the wind, and said unto the sea, Peace, be still. And the wind ceased, and there was a great calm. (Jesus spoke “the word of God” and calmed the storm)
Grace asked, “Notice John was speaking about the Word and that HE was in the beginning with God. Who do you think HE is that was in the beginning with God?”
( There was no “HE” in the beginning with God only God and his attributes which were many. The Jews had little respect for women, and refered to most powerful things as he or him)
But we can deduce that God had no gender, or both genders because of, Gen 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
John 1:1-3 In the beginning was the Word
Strong’s G3056 – logos = word
1.a word, uttered by a living voice, embodies a conception or idea
2.what someone has said
2.the sayings of God
3.decree, mandate or order
4.of the moral precepts given by God
5.Old Testament prophecy given by the prophets
Jhn 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
(this simply put means Jesus became the spokesman for God.)
Laymond said: There was no “HE” in the beginning with God only God and his attributes which were many.
You think there wasn’t, John said there was a “HE” in the beginning who was with God.
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.
Jesus is God and has always been since the beginning.
Colossians 1:15-17 Christ is as God is. God cannot be seen. Christ lived before anything was made. Christ made everything in the heavens and on the earth. He made everything that is seen and things that are not seen. He made all the powers of heaven. Everything was made by Him and for Him. Christ was before all things. All things are held together by Him.
And Laymond you skipped over other questions in my comment:
John 1:30 This is the One I was talking about when I said, There is a Man coming after me who is greater than I am, because He was living even before I was born.
John wrote that John the Baptist said Jesus existed before he was ever born. How did Jesus exist before John the Baptist?
John 8:57-58 The people said, You aren’t even fifty years old. How can you say you have seen Abraham? Jesus answered, I tell you the truth, before Abraham was even born, I AM!
Laymond, Are you going to say that John lied about Jesus saying He had seen Abraham and existed before him?
Since you believe what John wrote about Jesus, surely you won’t toss out all these things he wrote about Jesus.
Laymond, You said only God existed in the beginning but Genesis 1 says that God was plural and uses the plural Hebrew word Elohim. Genesis 1:26 says “God said, “Let US make man in OUR image”. Who is the US and who is the OUR?
Hebrews chapter 5
Heb 5:1 Every high priest is selected from among the people and is appointed to represent the people in matters related to God, to offer gifts and sacrifices for sins. 2 He is able to deal gently with those who are ignorant and are going astray, since he himself is subject to weakness. 3 This is why he has to offer sacrifices for his own sins, as well as for the sins of the people. 4 And no one takes this honor on himself, but he receives it when called by God, just as Aaron was. 5 In the same way, Christ did not take on himself the glory of becoming a high priest. But God said to him, “You are my Son; today I have become your Father.” 6 And he says in another place, “You are a priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek.” 7 During the days of Jesus’ life on earth, he offered up prayers and petitions with fervent cries and tears to the one who could save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverent submission. 8 Son though he was, he learned obedience from what he suffered 9 and, once made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey him 10 and was designated by God to be high priest in the order of Melchizedek. 11 We have much to say about this, but it is hard to make it clear to you because you no longer try to understand. 12 In fact, though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you the elementary truths of God’s word all over again. You need milk, not solid food! 13 Anyone who lives on milk, being still an infant, is not acquainted with the teaching about righteousness. 14 But solid food is for the mature, who by constant use have trained themselves to distinguish good from evil.
Laymond, So Jesus became a son according to Hebrews 5 but Jesus had another role before his sonship on earth. What was that role according to scriptures? Was he part of the Elohim in the OT? When Jesus said, “Before Abraham was, I Am”, what was his preexistence? When John 1:2 says “He was with God in the beginning”, what does that mean?
Well Skip, first of all I don’t believe God created man “in the beginning” I am pretty sure “man” was last .
Psa 8:4 What is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man, that thou visitest him?
Psa 8:5 For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honour.
Skip since man was made lower than angels, I read that to mean angels were created first therefore God should have had plenty of company to talk to.
We see the same statement made about Jesus in Hebrews. that was made about man in general in Psalms.
Heb 2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.
Laymond, Not sure what your are talking about. I never said that man was the first thing created. You have totally ignored my previous questions.
Laymond, You have not been able to answer questions and your avoiding them speaks volumes that you have little understanding about these things. The Scriptures are overwhelming about Jesus’ Deity being God who came to save His people. Jesus is God in His grace who came from heaven to earth to be our Sacrifice. There is no other person who could be our perfect Sacrifice than God Himself.
Jesus, as God in human flesh, suffered in his flesh, was tempted in his flesh (in his full deity alone would have been impossible) and dies in the flesh(impossible, except that, he took on flesh which made it possible). Jesus said, “no man takes my life from me, but that I lay it down. And if I lay it down, I have the power to take it back up again.” No mere mortal says those things. But God in the flesh can.
Jesus allowed himself to die. Mere men don’t allow themselves to die. Anyone can believe God will raise them up after death. That’s not what Jesus claimed. He said, he had the power to take his life back up again. What Laymond (IMO) struggles with is what Philippians 2:5-11 teaches. That man should humble himself before God? Hardly! That goes without saying, as it is taught all through scripture. No! This section teaches us that if God(in the person of Jesus) can make of himself nothing(a servant) then who are we not to make of ourselves nothing and serve one another, (an argument of the greater to the lessor). Jesus humbled himself, by submitting himself to death(he didn’t have to)through the human experience, in order to be our sin sacrifice. But he proved his power over death, as he said he would. That’s why his disciples, who would certainly not worship a fellow human(only), worshiped Jesus(the God/man) without hesitation.
Skip says:
“Laymond, So Jesus became a son according to Hebrews 5 but Jesus had another role before his sonship on earth. What was that role according to scriptures? ”
Well Skip according to scripture in my bible he was a favored servant of God.
Isaiah 42:1 Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth; I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles.
This favored servant was to be born a man in the line of Jesse, who was the father of David.
Isa 11:1 And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots:
Isa 11:2 And the spirit of the LORD shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the LORD;
Anyhow that is who Jesus said he was in Matthew. referring back to Isaiah 42:1
Monty, you make it sound as if Jesus was sent with no specific mission in mind, no orders at all . “go down there and look around and take care of the situation” no that was not the orders Jesus was sent with. according to him anyway.
Jhn 4:34 Jesus saith unto them, My meat is to do the will of him that sent me, and to finish his work.
Jhn 5:30 I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me.
Jhn 6:38 For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.
I believe Jesus said I have done the job you sent me to do, bring me home please.anyway that is the way I see it.
Laymond doesn’t agree with the apostle John who says that Jesus existed as “God’s Word” before the world was created, and “the Word WAS God” seems to mean nothing to Laymond. As God’s Word He who became Jesus was WITH God and WAS GOD, and John asserts that the Word was the actual creator. “Without Him nothing was made.” And this creature who was with God and was God became Jesus. He was God’s Word even before He was born on earth as Jesus. And it wasn’t as a helpless mortal that He spoke wisdom to Jewish leaders as a youth. He was God’s WORD long before the Spirit was sent as a dove to let John the Baptist know that Jesus was God and the long-expected Messiah.
It should be noted that God the Father is considered by Jesus to be greater than Himself. We do well to realize that the Spirit is not greater than God the Son. So the precedence places God the Father at the top, God the Son below Him, and God the Spirit serving the Father and the Son. Some want the Spirit to be greater than the Son. That’s not what the apostles believed and taught. They realized that the Spirit was sent BY THE SON. Baptism in the Spirit was prophesied to be performed by the Son and was performed by the Son. The Spirit did no baptizing. Jesus baptized His apostles with the Spirit, and commanded that Christians are to baptize in water “in the name of Jesus” those who believe the gospel about Jesus.
I’ve corresponded lately with a Christian teacher who is sure that Ephesians 4:5 is simply an error, that there are several baptisms in the Christian system. Since I believe the apostles were filled with the Spirit and were prevented from teaching falsely, and since Paul was an apostle, I believe his teaching is correct and factual. So the ONE BAPTISM in the Christian system is the baptism commanded by Jesus for us humans to perform. At the beginning there was another and at the end there will be yet another baptism. The one was in the Spirit given to the apostles prior to baptisms into Christ. The last will be in fire after the last invitation has been issued.
Ray, Cornelius’ household had the same baptism as the Apostles in Acts 10:47
Laymond, Who was with God participating in creation in Genesis 1:26? What did Jesus mean when he said, “Before Abraham was, I Am” (John 8:58)? God is the great “I Am”, how come Jesus also assumed this same title?
Laymond, What is meant in Hebrews 1:6 “And again, when God brings his firstborn into the world, he says, “Let all God’s angels worship him.”” God invited the angels to worship Jesus. Why is this not in contradiction to Exodus 34:14: “for you shall worship no other god, for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God.’ It says, “Worship no other god” but God invites angels to worship Jesus. This contradicts your views.
Ray offers a concept I have never heard before in Protestant circles, that is a claim of apostolic infallibility in teaching. What he describes is almost exactly what the RCC claims for the apostolic succession– in short, that in matters of faith and doctrine, the Pope is infallible. Not sure where this idea comes from if not from the RCC, who defined the concept around 1869, but who has argued it since the time of the Reformation.
Actually, Ray’s proposal about apostolic infallibility in teaching may exceed the scope claimed for papal infallibility. Ray, would you mind sharing how you came to this POV? And does such a state also apply to the non-apostle writers of the NT, such as Luke and Mark and (perhaps) the anonymous writer of Hebrews?
Skip, usually right, comments: “Ray, Cornelius’ household had the same baptism as the Apostles in Acts 10:47.” And the reason I disagree is that there is no record of these Gentile converts ever performing even one miracle. The apostles were promised they would be baptized in/with the Spirit to EMPOWER them and to INFORM them and to REMIND them.
The sign which convinced Peter God wanted the Gentiles also to be welcomed into the family of God did NOT empower, inform, or remind these Gentiles. It only convinced Peter and other Jewish Christians of God’s approval of baptizing Gentiles.
The baptism which was given to the Gentiles was indeed the same baptism as given on Pentecost BY the apostles, and it had the same results. Their sins were remitted and they received a “gift of the Holy Spirit” to walk with them every day. Do we believe Paul told the truth when he wrote in Ephesians 4:5 that there is ONE BAPTISM in the Christian system?
Unless Paul was not led into truth, these Gentiles in Acts 10,11, and 15 did NOT receive the same baptism in the Spirit which the apostles received. The apostles were the leaders of the followers of the Way. They were not joined as leaders by these Gentiles. Note that the apostles, having been baptized in the Spirit are not later reported to have been “immersed into Christ.” These who had a similar SIGN of God’s approval were immediately baptized INTO CHRIST.
Laymond’
Jesus did submit himself to the Father. ‘He did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, robbery(KJV).. something to be prized. He willingly and voluntarily(even though he was Co-God) submitted himself to God(the Father). He placed Himself as an “under” God- servant role, when in fact, he was God. Then when he ascended on high. God(the Father) restored back to HIs Son everything that was rightfully his. Jesus didn’t demand it. He was fine with the Father bestowing it to him. Heavy duty stuff, no doubt, but something you would expect perhaps from a God who desires his creation be servants of one another. The Godhead modeled it. Humans worry so much over who is over and who is under. The Godhead, not so much.
John the Baptist speaking prophetically said, “one is coming who is “mightier than I” whose sandals I’m not even worthy to unlatch.” Jesus said of John, of those born of woman, no one greater than John. How can this be? John says, I’m not even worthy to unlatch Jesus sandals!John told Jesus, “I have need to be baptized by you.’ Jesus didn’t deny what John said, he just said, “suffereth it to be so now.
Jesus was already “one mightier than John” before his baptism, and one whom John was already unworthy to even take off his sandals for him, and the one whom John needed to be cleansed by, through baptism(even though Jesus needed no such cleansing). All of that, was pre-baptism of Jesus.
“The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make straight in the desert a highway for our God(Jesus)’ Isaiah 40:3 – “Behold, the Lord will come with strong hand, and his arm shall rule for him: behold his reward is with him, and his work before him.( Isaiah 40:10) Revelation 22:12- “And , behold I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give to every man according as his work shall be.— The same God Isaiah speaks of, is this same Jesus in Revelation.
Charles questions
I’m not basing my thought on anything taught by Rome, but rather on what the Bible teaches that Jesus promised His apostles in John chapters 13-16. They would be led into “all truth.” What they bound on earth would be bound in heaven. They would remember accurately what Jesus had taught them. I came to this point of view by reading the Bible and believing it.
Charles asks about the books we respect which were not written by apostles. Since we don’t know for sure who wrote Hebrews, we have no way of saying it was or was not written by an apostle. Luke traveled with Paul and reports on what he learned from the apostle and others who had acquaintance with the Lord on earth. The same with Mark. The fact that early church leaders accepted these books as “apostolic” causes me to assume they are in fact apostolic and fully correct despite Mark and Luke not being apostles. Both were associates of Paul.
Laymond, You have not been able to answer these questions and your avoiding them speaks volumes that you have little understanding about these things.
• You believe that Jesus was nothing more than just a man, another sinner who was saved by grace, then what is the grace of God that saved Jesus?
• Jesus never sinned, isn’t that what you said in your comment that you would refute, your comment heavily implies that Jesus sinned?
Luke 23:40-41 But the other man on a cross spoke sharp words to the one who made fun of Jesus. He said, Are you not afraid of God? You are also guilty and will be punished. We are suffering and we should, because of the wrong we have done. But this Man has done nothing wrong.
2 Corinthians 5:21 For God made Christ, who never sinned, to be the offering for our sin, so that we could be made right with God through Christ.
• Are you saying that the Scriptures are lying that Jesus is God that He is the Savior?
Luke 2:11 This very day in David’s town your Savior was born, Christ the Lord!
John 4:42 Then they said to the woman, Now we believe, not because of what you said, for we ourselves have heard Him and we know that this is indeed the Christ, the Savior of the world.
Romans 9:5 Of whom are the fathers and from whom, according to the flesh, Christ came, who is over all, the eternally blessed God. Amen.
Philippians 2:5-11 You must have the same attitude that Christ Jesus had. Though He was God, He did not think of equality with God as something to cling to. Instead, He gave up His divine privileges; He took the humble position of a slave and was born as a human being. When He appeared in human form, He humbled Himself in obedience to God and died a criminal’s death on a cross. Therefore, God elevated Him to the place of highest honor and gave Him the name above all other names, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
2 Timothy 1:10 And now it has been shown to us in the coming of our Savior Christ Jesus. He destroyed death and showed us the way to have life. Yes, through the Good News Jesus showed us the way to have life that cannot be destroyed.
Titus 2:13-14 We are filled with hope, as we wait for the glorious return of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ. He gave Himself to rescue us from everything that is evil and to make our hearts pure. He wanted us to be His own people and to be eager to do right.
Hebrews 7:25-26 So Christ can save those who come to God through Him. Christ can do this forever, because He always lives and is ready to help people when they come before God. So Jesus is the kind of high priest we need. He is holy. He has no sin in Him. He is pure and not influenced by sinners. And He is raised above the heavens.
Hebrews 10:11-13 The priests do their work each day, and they keep on offering sacrifices that can never take away sins. But Christ offered Himself as a sacrifice that is good forever. Now He is sitting at God’s right side, and He will stay there until His enemies are put under His power.
1 John 2:1-2 My dear children, I write this letter to you so that you will not sin. But if anyone sins, we have Jesus Christ to help us. He always did what was right, so He is able to defend us before God the Father. Jesus is the way our sins are taken away. And He is the way all people can have their sins taken away too.
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.
• Notice John was speaking about the Word and that HE was in the beginning with God. Who do you think HE is that was in the beginning with God?
John 1:30 This is the One I was talking about when I said, There is a Man coming after me who is greater than I am, because He was living even before I was born.
• John wrote that John the Baptist said Jesus existed before he was ever born. How did Jesus exist before John the Baptist?
John 8:57-58 The people said, You aren’t even fifty years old. How can you say you have seen Abraham? Jesus answered, I tell you the truth, before Abraham was even born, I AM!
• Laymond, Are you going to say that John lied about Jesus saying He had seen Abraham and existed before him?
• What made Jesus’ sacrifice more significant, how is His sacrifice the One that takes away sins, how is Jesus our Savior and John not? How is it that Jesus’ sacrifice by giving His life the only One worthy to take away our sins? What makes Jesus giving His life the only perfect Sacrifice that takes away our sins? How is Jesus the only Savior who takes away the sins of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Elijah, Elisha, David, Isaiah, John the Baptist, the thief on the cross, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter, and Paul, how is it Jesus’ sacrifice is the only sacrifice that takes away their sins?
Ray, I understand your point. My comment was based upon Acts 10 where Peter says, Acts 10:47 “Surely no one can stand in the way of their being baptized with water. They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have.” The “just as we have” suggests that Cornelius’ household received the spirit in the same special way the Apostles did. I suppose it didn’t say that all manifestations would be identical.
Thanks, Skip. “Just as we have” obviously has to do with a public demonstration which others could see. It should be obvious to all that Peter understood these Gentiles could not have apostolic powers which Jesus had promised to give them THROUGH baptism with His Spirit. So we do well to realize that what Peter understood from what he saw and was told by God was that now gentiles COULD be baptized into Christ. Peter didn’t claim these Gentiles had been made into apostles. Nor should anyone make such a claim.
Skip is right that the RESULTS of the baptisms (if indeed we can call a baptism the fact that the Gentiles spoke as the apostles did on Pentecost after they were baptized with the Spirit) surely were NOT identical, as is shown by the fact we never hear more about these Gentiles. We surely would have been told if they had performed miracles of any kind as a result of the sign which Peter said was “just as we (apostles) have.” God made clear that Gentiles also were to be accepted–as equals with all Jewish Christians, not as equals with the apostles.
Jay suggests to Charles
I don’t want to be disagreeable, but I think Peter answers what is needed by a Christian who makes a mistake. The convert was a magician. He saw Peter performing miracles. He merely asked if he could purchase the power to perform miracles. Peter suggested, not that he needed to be baptized again, but that he needed AS A CHRISTIAN to repent and pray. So I have to disagree with Jay here and support what most of us have thought and taught concerning the continuing need for repentance and turning to JESUS as Lord, and the ability to do so and expect forgiveness.
Those who no longer SEEK forgiveness will surely not be forgiven. That’s clear. But those who SEEK are told they can find. I think this applies to our being “in Christ.” If we choose to turn away from Him as Lord, we are free to do so. Those who set their mind on love of self rather than love of God and other people who are loved by God can reach a point where they no longer seek to be “in Christ.” Of course they are then lost. But we are encouraged to help such persons return to faith in Jesus and love of Him.
Mark 1:8 I indeed baptized you with water, but He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit.
The baptism of the Holy Spirit was not just for the apostles who were with Jesus, the Holy Spirit is offered to any person. Jesus never said the baptism of the Holy Spirit was just for the apostles.
The Scriptures never say Cornelius and the others there received God’s Holy Spirit because they were different, the Scriptures say they received the Holy Spirit because they believed the message. Peter said God knew their hearts when they believed and He gave them His Holy Spirit. God didn’t give them the Holy Spirit for the Jews, He gave them the Holy Spirit because they believed.
Acts 15:7-9 At the meeting, after a long discussion, Peter stood and addressed them as follows: Brothers, you all know that God chose me from among you some time ago to preach to the Gentiles so that they could hear the Good News and believe. God knows people’s hearts, and He confirmed that He accepts Gentiles by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He did to us. He made no distinction between us and them, for He cleansed their hearts through faith.
Romans 8:9-10 But you are not ruled by your sinful selves. You are ruled by the Spirit, if that Spirit of God really lives in you. But whoever does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to Christ. Your body will always be dead because of sin. But if Christ is in you, then the Spirit gives you life, because Christ made you right with God.
Laymond,
Two more verses to consider. Isaiah 44:24 -“Thus saith the lord, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the Lord that maketh all; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself.
If Jehovah is God and Jesus isn’t(as you say) and he created everything(by Himself) and no one was there(God was alone), then how does Jesus also get credit for creating all things? Unless Jesus is God? Colossians 1:16-“for by him(Jesus in context) were all things created……..not only does Paul say they were created by Jesus, but they were created “for” Jesus.
A “voice” (as you have used for Jesus pre-incarnate), doesn’t create for itself. But a God(using His voice-word) creates for Himself. If Jesus was only the “instrument” God used(I believe you would assert) instruments never work for themselves but do the bidding of the one putting the creative thought to the voice(instrument). In other words I don’t think your view(if I understand it correctly) would have Jesus creating everything for Himself, but for Jehovah. However, that is not what scripture teaches. God himself, created the heavens and the earth, all by HIs lonesome(except that he is never truly alone as we think of it) for Himself, and by Himself. For Jesus is God.
Since it seems everyone use the following scripture as “The smoking gun” let me give my thought on that very scripture.
Jhn 8:56 Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad.”
Jhn 8:57 “You are not yet fifty years old,” they said to him, “and you have seen Abraham!”
Jhn 8:58 “Very truly I tell you,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!”
Jesus in no way said he was God, nor do I see where he said he had seen Abraham, they who did not believe often did not understand what Jesus was saying.
Look at another verse in John’s book. and see if it backs up what the Jews thought, and you all claim even today.
Jhn 18:37 “You are a king, then!” said Pilate. Jesus answered, “You say that I am a king. In fact, the reason I was born and came into the world is to testify to the truth. Everyone on the side of truth listens to me.”
As Jesus said if you are interested in truth, listen to what Jesus said. Not what others think.
Do you really think Jesus had no idea the significance of what He said to them making this statement, John 8:57-58 “The people said, You aren’t even fifty years old. How can you say you have seen Abraham? Jesus answered, I tell you the truth, before Abraham was even born, I AM!” This would never have been taken lightly by any Jew. Someone would have to be either a madman, a liar, or they’d have to be God to make such a statement. I don’t believe Jesus was crazy nor a liar, the conclusion any follower of Jesus has to believe is that He is God!
Grace, I do believe you may have just called Jesus a madman, or a liar if you don’t believe what he told Pilate was the truth. Jesus said, “the reason I was born and came into the world is to testify to the truth.”
John 18:38 Pilate said to Him, What is truth? And when he had said this, he went out again to the Jews, and said to them, I find no fault in Him at all.
Actually Pilate didn’t realize how close he was when he asked Jesus,“What is truth?” and Pilate comes a lot closer than you have when he said, “I find no fault in Him at all.”
Monty said, “If Jehovah is God and Jesus isn’t(as you say) and he created everything(by Himself) and no one was there(God was alone), then how does Jesus also get credit for creating all things?”
He didn’t Monty, The word of God/ the spirit of God, who indwelled him from his baptism did. People need to believe what Jesus says, instead of what people say about him.
Ray, a little more clarity on the apostolic writings by non-apostles, if you don’t mind. If memory serves, you have suggested that the power exhibited by apostles in Acts was unique to them, as was Jesus’ promise to “lead them into all truth”. Did Jesus promise to lead Luke into all truth? If the Eleven/Twelve/Thirteen apostles were unique in supernatural capacity, and Mark and Luke were inspired by mere proximity to Paul, did Mark and Luke also have the same supernatural capacities as Paul as a function of that same proximity? Were they inspired by the Holy Spirit or by Paul? Or were they infallible in print but powerless in person? Mark would have the toughest time of this, having failed Paul to the point where Paul no longer felt he could count on the young man and split the blanket with beloved Barnabas rather than team up with Mark again. (I wonder if that choice was infallible? Did Mark get his Pauline inspiration before they went their separate ways?) Ray, you have previously been clear about the limits of Jesus’ promise of revelation being the folks in that room, but now seem to be sliding some latecomers into folding chairs at that pre-crucifixion dinner to prop up other contentions.
This ongoing idea of the “uniqueness” of the Thirteen (not the Eleven of John 14, nor the Twelve of Acts 1, btw) becomes more tenuous the more you explain it.
Allow me to summarize what I heard you say, Ray, and you can correct any facet where I have misunderstood you: Only the apostles were infallible in their teaching, except for Mark and Luke, whose writings were infallible due to their proximity to Paul and not by Jesus’ promise of revelation by the Holy Spirit, Who didn’t lead them into all truth, but only led the people in the room to whom Jesus was speaking, plus Paul, who wasn’t there but should have been and they had to leave before he got there. And since we have no idea who the writer of Hebrews is, if he was an apostle, or inspired by his proximity to Paul, or just one of the ladies in the church, that writer’s unknown identity of course supports whatever theory of infallible teaching Ray attaches to it.
Funny, I thought the creation predated John the Baptist. In fact, I was pretty sure of it…
Laymond, You confuse Jesus being born as a human child with his pre-existence with God. You come across as if you believe Jesus never existed until his human birth. Am I understanding you correctly?
Skip, the human man Jesus did not exist until his birth. That said The bible plainly states that the vessel that Jesus was, was not fully filled until his baptism where he received the Spirit of God.
Jesus said to Pilate, “the reason I was born and came into the world is to testify to the truth.”
Jesus was no more qualified to do that than any other Jewish man of his age, until he was given the Spirit of truth. But let me explain, Jesus was, more qualified to receive the Spirit than any other man because he had been chosen, by God, before his birth to do just that. Jesus was the fulfilled promise of God in Isaiah 11, and Isaiah 42 so Jesus was made the perfect vessel to receive the servant of God promised in Isaiah 42, and the human Jesus fulfilled the promise made in Isaiah 11.
Jesus was not born with Godly powers, but he was born in the line of Jesse, who was the father of David. So no, Jesus was not “just another man” as Grace has accused me time and again of saying.
Jesus is not only special in life, Jesus was also special in death. Jesus was not the only son of God,
but he was the only “begotten son of God” which means Jesus was the only man ever to be raised from death to ascend into heaven to be with God. All who obey, have a promise to become “begotten children of God” but as of now there is only one recorded example of that happening.
Laymond,
A couple questions for you: 1) You say Jesus was not born with godly powers. Do you thus believe he sinned before the spirit was given to him? If he sinned, how could he be the spotless lamb? If he didn’t sin, wouldn’t you consider that a Godly power since the Bible teaches the spirit enables us to overcome sin? 2) Do you believe Jesus preexisted before his birth? If not how do you explain all these verses? “And now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began” (John 17:5). This passage alone is sufficient to show that the Scripture supports Jesus’ pre-existence, but it is just one of many such passages. Jesus Himself explicitly taught His own pre-existence (John 3:13, 6:33, 38, 62; 8:23; 16:28). Christ even said that He existed prior to Abraham’s birth (John 8:58-59) even though Abraham’s birth preceded Jesus’ own birth by many centuries! Several texts present Jesus as pre-existing with His Father (Romans 8:3; 1 John 1:2; Galatians 4:4). Several passages even identify Jesus as the Creator (John 1:2-3; Colossians 1:16-17; Hebrews 1:2).
Just curious how you believe or explain away these many passages? Please try to constrain your response to these scriptures if you can.
Skip says:
May 7, 2014 at 11:33 am
Laymond,
A couple questions for you: 1) You say Jesus was not born with godly powers. Do you thus believe he sinned before the spirit was given to him? If he sinned, how could he be the spotless lamb? If he didn’t sin, wouldn’t you consider that a Godly power since the Bible teaches the spirit enables us to overcome sin? 2) Do you believe Jesus preexisted before his birth?
Skip, you ask questions no one except God could answer truthfully . You asked if I believed Jesus ever sinned I don’t know, But do you believe baptism cleanses one of all sins? and if you do, when was it Jesus received the spirit of God, before baptism, or right after he came up from the water of baptism. Would not Jesus have been as white as the driven snow/spotless at that time, and I certainly believe he remained sinless from then on, don’t you. If you are indwelled with the spirits of God, I really doubt you are going to sin, don’t you. I think we can rest easy, knowing Jesus was sinless after baptism, whether he was or not before he was baptized.
As for Jesus existing before birth, I assume you mean did he exist in heaven before he was born on earth, we all exist before we are born else how could we be born. I know the plan of Jesus existed in heaven before Jesus was born. And I know the spirits of God that ascended upon him at baptism, existed with God in heaven from the beginning. And that includes the WORD by which God created all things.
Laymond,
What about the scripture in Hebrews? “For we do not have a high priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who has been tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin” (Heb. 4:15 NASB). Hebrews says that Jesus never sinned. If he hadn’t sinned then his baptism was not for forgiveness. The Bible says that Jesus is the same yesterday, today, and forever. (Hebrews 13:8). If he is has always been the same and the Bible says he was spotless and without sin, then that means he has always been spotless, even before his baptism. There is not a single scripture that ever says Jesus ever sinned. Thus his baptism was not a baptism for forgiveness. Even John the Baptist, his cousin who knew Jesus well, saw no need to baptize Jesus (Matt 3:14).
So I don’t buy your theory that Jesus was baptized for forgiveness. There was more than one type of baptism in the N.T..
Skip, you need to read back what you write before you publish it . I did not say Jesus committed sin, what I said is I don’t know. You seem to know the reason Jesus insisted on being baptized, please let the rest of us know. and I believe you are one who said Jesus was god from birth. and in this comment for all intent and purpose you said JTB was god’s cousin. either Jesus is god, or he is JTB’s cousin but not both. I believe JTB said he did not know Jesus was the lamb until the spirit lit on him at baptism, if I am not mistaken that is in John’s book, so why did John feel he didn’t need to be baptized. There are a few things in the book of John that need a little explaining, so maybe you are the fellow to do that.
Laymond, I do read back what I write before I publish it but thanks for the reminder. The Sinlessness of Jesus is clearly taught in the Bible. In Hebrews we read that Jesus “has been tempted in every way, just as we are – yet was without sin” (Hebrews 4:15). He is also described as “a high priest [who] meets our need – one who is holy, blameless, pure, set apart from sinners, exalted above the heavens” (Hebrews 7:26) and is “unblemished” (Hebrews 9:14). Even Peter, who knew Jesus well, declared that he “committed no sin, and no deceit was found in his mouth” (1 Peter 2:22). The apostle John tells us that “In him is no sin” (1 John 3:5) and Paul confirms for us that Jesus “had no sin” (2 Corinthians 5:21). Even Jesus himself asked those around him, “Can any of you prove me guilty of sin?” (John 8:46).
That being established… Jesus baptism by John could not have been for the forgiveness of sin. In fact, John pointed that out just before the event. Jesus said why he was being baptized at the event: “To fulfill all righteousness”. Jesus was demonstrating that a new regime was about to begin and he was the transition point.
The spirit descended on Jesus like a dove as a symbol for others to see. The word does not say that the spirit entered into Jesus so that he finally could have power. Descending upon and entering in are two different things.
But enough of these silly arguments. I don’t think any scriptural proof I ever give will change your thinking. You have to believe what you think the scriptures teach and so do I.
Skip, said agree to disagree, thanks at least you didn’t say I was a liar and going to hell, as some here do. 🙂
Laymond, I never thought you were a liar and certainly believe you are always sincere. I am not convinced your beliefs are salvation issues (perhaps you think they are and then that opens a whole new can of worms). You have implied in previous posts that some of our beliefs are from Satan. Perhaps that was a little indelicate on your part especially because the argument can go both ways. As long as we respect that each of us has diligently studied the scriptures and are sincere then I think we are ok. I stand before the Lord and not before any bloggers on this website.
Jesus existed before the world began with God and the Holy Spirit. Jesus came from heaven to earth conceived by the Holy Spirit. Jesus was the miraculous union of human flesh and the Holy Spirit. Jesus was the physical manifestation of the Holy Spirit who is also God.
The visible Spirit descended upon Jesus at the beginning of His earthly ministry. It was a time of dedication and public recognition of His ministry and commitment to His journey.
Since the beginning Jesus has always been God. God is three persons who are One, God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit.
The Scriptures are overwhelming about the Deity of Jesus being God.
I haven’t seen anyone here say Laymond is lying about his religious views. Though Laymond has heavily implied that the Scripture are not all truth, he ignores if not throws out that the Scriptures say Jesus was completely sinless and that He is God in the flesh.
I can have respect for Laymond, but I cannot accept his religious views to be something Christians should have.
Grace, My world is bigger than convincing anyone on this website that they are wrong and I am right. Blogging can’t ever replace face-to-face discussions. Sometimes I wonder if many of us ever change our views based upon these blogs. It is fun, it is informative, it does help me to more deeply understand aberrant views. In the end I still must believe what I think the scriptures are saying.
Who said that anyone is trying to say I’m right and they are wrong? You can believe that if you want about whoever. To me it’s more about believing what the Bible says who God is. To know God is much bigger than saying I’m right and you’re wrong. Knowing Him is bigger than anything in the world.
Grace, I agree with you but this website doesn’t always work that way.
Laymond mistakenly wrote:
Laymond is ignorant of or doesn’t believe the testimony of the apostle John in John 1:1-14.
The Spirit was a bystander during creation. Creation was done entirely by God the Son. “Without Him was nothing made,” says John. Laymond imagines that God the Father is supreme and next is the Spirit and then comes the puny Jesus, God’s unique Son. But Jesus claims that He is next to the Father and that the Spirit serves both Him and the Father. Jesus baptized His apostles with the Spirit. It’s promised that the “gift of the Spirit” will be given to all who are saved by Jesus.
The gospel (good news) is all about Jesus and what He did and what He will do for those who turn to Him as Lord. Those who preach the gospel tell about Jesus. They do NOT preach about the Holy Spirit. They never claim the Holy Spirit saves. For that is no part of “the gospel.” We who are cleansed from sin by turning to JESUS as LORD and are baptized in the name of JESUS as a consequence of being saved by Jesus receive the Holy Spirit of God as a gift.
Charles puts words into our mouths and claims WE said the things he figures we should have said. What nonsense! The writings of Mark and Luke and the writer of Hebrews are considered to have apostolic authority not because others than the apostles were baptized in the Spirit or promised to be led into all truth, but because the early church considered those writings to have been “apostolic.” That is, to represent accurately what the apostles taught.
All this foolishness about demanding that Mark and Luke must not write since they were not apostles is nonsense. And to say that Jesus actually baptized non-apostles with His Spirit is to go beyond what is written. Luke explains why he wrote. He makes no claim beyond the fact that he checked carefully with eyewitnesses and is recording what actually happened. Charles thinks he shouldn’t have written since he was not an apostle. I disagree with Charles. Luke doesn’t attempt to create doctrine. As a historian he records facts, some of which apparently are not liked or believed by Charles.
Laymond is determined to rewrite (and edit and change) the gospel according to John. Laymond writes “Jesus was not the only son of God, but he was the only ‘begotten son of God’ which means Jesus was the only man ever to be raised from death to ascend into heaven to be with God.” That’s about as silly a claim as any person could make. We don’t beget a person only if they are being raised up after death. Begetting is done prior to birth. Birth can’t happen without a begetting. And John testifies that Jesus was with the Father in the beginning of time and not only was WITH Him but WAS Him (He was with God and he WAS God).
Laymond thinks Jesus had no power until the Spirit was sent to inform John the Baptist that Jesus was approved by the Father. My suggestion is that He didn’t USE power prior to the beginning of his ministry at age 30. That’s not because He didn’t HAVE power but because He chose to wait until the normal age for Jewish prophets to begin their service as a prophet. And Jesus insisted on being baptized because He was a Jewish male and the Baptist had been sent in order to baptize all repentant Jewish males in preparation for the coming Kingdom.
Laymond knows a great deal that isn’t so. He wrote to Skip: Skip, said agree to disagree, thanks at least you didn’t say I was a liar and going to hell, as some here do. 🙂
I’ve not heard anyone say you were lying about your peculiar and anti-Christian beliefs, but surely every Bible believer realizes that you’re headed for Hell. Surely we all pray that you will learn truth and turn from beliefs which we see are wicked. Jay teaches truth. What must be preserved in all churches is what the Bible teaches. Laymond doesn’t understand God, and that understanding is primary to pleasing Him.
Laymond speaks of the Holy Spirit (singular) as being “spirits.” He thinks Jesus had no power until the spirits were given to Him when He was baptized. God is three IN ONE. God the Father is primary in being God. God the Word who later came to earth as Jesus is next to the Father. The Spirit of the Father and the Son is separate from both the Father and the Son. He acts as directed to act by the Son since Jesus is now head of all things in Heaven and on earth.
That Jesus was God’s Word before time began is hard for some to believe. But that’s precisely what John tells us in John 1:1-14. The Word who lived on earth later as Jesus did the actual creating of our universe. He now controls everything in the universe. While on earth as a human, God’s Word limited Himself to what humans can do except for rare shows of unearthly power.
Ray notes, “The writings of Mark and Luke and the writer of Hebrews are considered to have apostolic authority… because the early church considered those writings to have been “apostolic.” Such plain-faced circularity speaks for itself, but it does raise the question as to how an entirely uninspired and mostly illiterate general church populace became the arbiters of what was apostolic and what was not.
But it is an ill wind that blows no one any good. Ray does answer once and for all the chicken-and-egg question, “Did the church give us the Bible or did the Bible give us the church?” Clearly, we got the Bible from the church. And not from the church of 100 AD, either, but from the Fourth Century church. And not the Eastern church, either. (Their canon varies somewhat.) That leaves a fill-in-the-blank which for some will be most discomfiting.
Well Ray where do I start ?
Ray the promise of a human being from the line of David started well before the New Testament records.
Isa 11:1 And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots: (since Matthew, and others felt it necessary to give Jesus’ lineage back to Jesse, I thought they might be making a point)
Isa 11:2 And the spirit of the LORD shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the LORD;
Isa 11:3 And shall make him of quick understanding in the fear of the LORD: and he shall not judge after the sight of his eyes, neither reprove after the hearing of his ears:
Isa 11:4 But with righteousness shall he judge the poor, and reprove with equity for the meek of the earth: and he shall smite the earth with the rod of his mouth, and with the breath of his lips shall he slay the wicked.
Isa 11:5 And righteousness shall be the girdle of his loins, and faithfulness the girdle of his reins.
Mat 3:13 Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to Jordan unto John, to be baptized of him.
Mat 3:14 But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me?
Mat 3:15 And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him.
( why did Jesus insist that he be baptized,? to fulfill all righteousness, I don’t think it was to inform JTB as to who Jesus was)
Mat 3:16 And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:
Mat 3:17 And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
I see this as affirmation of Isa 11:2.
Ray tell me just where scripture is wrong here.
Ray, I have another small piece of scripture from Isaiah, that to me anyway confirms Just who Jesus was and is.
If you doubt that the servant talked about here was Jesus read Mat 12:17,18
Isa 42:1 Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth; I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles.
(lets look at what was said about this servant God spoke about)
Isa 52:4 This is what the Sovereign LORD says: “Long ago my people chose to live in Egypt. Now they are oppressed by Assyria.
Isa 52:5 What is this?” asks the LORD. “Why are my people enslaved again? Those who rule them shout in exultation. My name is blasphemed all day long.
Isa 52:6 But I will reveal my name to my people, and they will come to know its power. Then at last they will recognize that I am the one who speaks to them.”
(I believe Jesus confirmed this himself by saying he spoke the words of his Father.)
Isa 52:13 See, my servant will prosper;he will be highly exalted.
Isa 52:14 But many were amazed when they saw him. [fn]
His face was so disfigured he seemed hardly human,
and from his appearance, one would scarcely know he was a man.
(Ray, can you tell me who this is about, if not Jesus ?)
Isa 52:15 And he will startle [fn] many nations.
Kings will stand speechless in his presence.
For they will see what they had not been told;
they will understand what they had not heard about.
I really don’t know how anyone can turn a blind eye to this scripture.
Laymond wants Jesus to have been merely a human. That’s where he’s wrong. John makes clear in chapter one, verses 1-14 that Jesus is GOD. That he was born according to prophecy is surely correct. That he was of the lineage (through Mary) of David is correct. It doesn’t change in the slightest that He, prior to coming to earth, was God in Heaven. It doesn’t change the fact that NOW He is back in Heaven and is ruling there over Heaven AND EARTH. Jesus is not only human as Laymond seems to want to believe is the case.
I really am not impressed by the prophecies about Jesus, some of which refer to His time on earth and some of which obviously refer to the judgment which will occur as this universe is dying. I fail to understand what Laymond is trying to prove. Jesus is God. He is creator of the universe. Nothing was made except by HIM. He lived on earth as a human and died on earth as a human. He rose still with His earthly body and was seen alive again by many witnesses. He returned to Heaven and obviously there is not in a human body.
Laymond: “I really don’t know how anyone can turn a blind eye to this scripture.” He refers to a prophecy which obviously has nothing to do with us today and which Laymond thinks it’s imperative that we pay close attention to. I think what we need to pay attention to is what Jesus taught and what His apostles taught rather than to what was prophesied about Him.
Laymond, Let me try to help a little here. Part of a healthy discourse is that a point is made, a person acknowledges that point and genuinely considers it. At times one even refines their convictions based upon valid arguments made by others. This is called a discussion/debate. To the contrary you mostly appear to ignore valid points made by others and just quote a new round of scriptures in response. Have you changed any of your views because of discussions on this website?
Skip, I have not changed my thoughts, or beliefs on the “Greatest Man who ever lived” this is what the JWs call him, and the more I read about him, the more I am inclined to agree.
I have been trying to figure out just why some Christians insist he/Jesus was a god. As I was reading through some of the comments, especially must recent ones, It struck me that these people don’t want to claim any blame for Jesus horrible death. One said Jesus died this horrific death on the cross, and bore those terrible beatings, and all kinds of punishment because he chose to. Well that kind of lets us off the hook, doesn’t it? He said Jesus could have stopped this travesty at any time by just calling for thousands of angels, but he didn’t. Now how can we be held responsible for decisions Jesus made on his own. Now, Jesus prayed to be spared if it was at all possible, but it wasn’t. On the cross Jesus cried “my god, my god, why have you forsaken me”
I can only take that to mean Jesus was as helpless as you or I would have been if we were up there instead of him. Now if Jesus was a man and he died on that cross for our sins, we are responsible, but if Jesus was a god, making his own decisions, how in the world could we be held accountable ? That is the only reason I can think of that people insist that Jesus was god from birth, with powers to do as he wished. They don’t want to be guilty of causing this- Isa 52:14 But many were amazed when they saw him. His face was so disfigured he seemed hardly human,
and from his appearance, one would scarcely know he was a man.
But he was a man not an ordinary man, a great man, but a man just the same. And we owe him.
Laymond, What can I say. You have created a paradigm and you are trapped in it. The Bible clearly teaches in some scriptures that Jesus chose to be crucified and clearly says in other scriptures that our sins put him on the cross. You pit one against the other. I accept both. You have a hard time harmonizing scriptures because you have chosen a rigid paradigm. Since I can find scriptures on Jesus being equal with God (plenty exist) and I can find scriptures on Jesus being a man on earth (plenty exist), then I believe both are true and my little human pea brain cannot grasp all these mysteries. Open yourself up to learning Biblical stuff that you haven’t seen before and let go of your frozen, inflexible beliefs. The light will come on and you will grow.
Skip, did you call me less than a pea brain 🙂
I am just glad oil companies, like Shell oil, Amoco, Mobil, Humble , and British American, and others didn’t think like you do or I would never have had the job of consulting engineer, employed by an engineering firm located in Midland Texas. Thank goodness that I made it through until retirement before I lost all my faculties. 🙂
Laymond,
What in the world does your being a consulting engineer have to do with anything spiritual. Are your feelings hurt? I suppose you are bragging that you are smart and therefore must be right. Actually, your education is working against you (Rom 1:22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools). Do you want to get into a credential war to prove who has the most degrees and thus must be right? If I tell you about all my degrees in engineering will you be more willing to listen? If I tell you I too am a consulting engineer, will that cause you to be more willing to listen?
How about we argue on the merits of what the scriptures as a whole teach rather than on who has more boy scout badges.
Frank, I do know your educational achievements in electrical engineering and I appreciate someone with a “pea sized brain” could not have climbed to where you are. but maybe you should learn what the smiley face at the end of a sentence means. 🙂 🙂
Laymond, Sorry, sometimes you are hard to read. 🙂
Laymond ,
I really did not understand that believers in God would be allowed to offer comments that had to have a smiley or a frown faced character following to express to another reader to not consider the statement as would ordinarily understood. Do we ever find communications from God attempting to express himself in that manner? Should we not express ourselves as nearly like God would, or at least this man that you admit was a representative of God. Attempt that type of communications in the business or judicial environment and you might find yourself in very stressful problems.
Larry, I bet you are a hoot at the family reunion . (notice no smiley face here)
The Hebrew Scriptures strongly tells us Jesus is God.
The God of the Bible is YHWH and YHWH means “I Am who I Am.” The great “I Am” spoke to Moses during the burning bush encounter. Jesus told the Jewish people that He is the great “I AM”.
John 8:57-58 The people said, You aren’t even fifty years old. How can you say you have seen Abraham? Jesus answered, I tell you the truth, before Abraham was even born, I AM!
Jesus is the Lord our God who John the Baptist cried out was coming as Isaiah prophesied.
Isaiah 40:3 The voice of one crying in the wilderness: Prepare the way of the LORD; Make straight in the desert a highway for our God.
In Deuteronomy we read YHWH is not only God to us, He is also the Lord of lords. We also read in Revelation that Jesus is the Lord of lords.
Deuteronomy 10:17 For the LORD your God is God of gods and Lord of lords, the great God, mighty and awesome, who shows no partiality nor takes a bribe.
Revelation 17:14 These will make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb will overcome them, for He is Lord of lords and King of kings; and those who are with Him are called, chosen, and faithful.
In Isaiah the LORD (YHWH) refers to Himself as the First and the Last. Jesus also refers to Himself as the First and the Last in Revelation.
Isaiah 44:6 The LORD, the King of Israel and the One Who saves and frees from sin, the LORD of All, says, I am the First and I am the Last. There is no God besides Me.
Revelation 1:17-18 And when I saw Him, I fell at His feet as dead. But He laid His right hand on me, saying to me, Do not be afraid; I am the First and the Last. I am He who lives, and was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore. Amen. And I have the keys of Hades and of Death.
In Zechariah the LORD uses the word “Me” in conjunction to being the One that gets pierced, “they will look on ME whom they have pierced”, this is Jesus speaking about Himself. before He came to the earth.
Zechariah 12:10 And I will pour on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of grace and supplication; then they will look on Me whom they pierced. Yes, they will mourn for Him as one mourns for his only son, and grieve for Him as one grieves for a firstborn.
Great stuff Grace.
Grace and Skip, Do you agree with Ray on this statement. Ray Downen on May 6, 2014 at 12:48 pm ” It should be noted that God the Father is considered by Jesus to be greater than Himself. We do well to realize that the Spirit is not greater than God the Son. So the precedence places God the Father at the top, God the Son below Him, and God the Spirit serving the Father and the Son. Some want the Spirit to be greater than the Son. That’s not what the apostles believed and taught. They realized that the Spirit was sent BY THE SON. Baptism in the Spirit was prophesied to be performed by the Son and was performed by the Son. The Spirit did no baptizing. Jesus baptized His apostles with the Spirit, and commanded that Christians are to baptize in water “in the name of Jesus” those who believe the gospel about Jesus.”
In another place Ray said the holy ghost was on standby, while Jesus did all the work during creation, Ray didn’t say what God was doing during this time.
Sounds to me like that might get pretty close to what you all believe as well. Is that right?
Laymond, I agree with you that Ray can be all over the place sometimes. You putting the focus on Ray to avoid the questions and the Scriptures from myself and Skip doesn’t dismiss that we are still awaiting your answer. What is your answer to the questions and Scriptures we have presented to you?
I echo Skip’s request, how do you believe or explain away these many passages? Please try to constrain your response to these scriptures if you can.
Zec 12:10
And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.
Look how quickly the pronoun changed from me/first person to him/third person. The pronoun “me” did not refer to God, but the one who was pierced. ( God is spirit, and can not be pierced)
Now lets look at how John refered to this same scripture.
Jhn 19:37 And again another scripture saith, They shall look on him whom they pierced.
(him, third person)
I will try to answer some more later. when I get the time.
Laymond,
Your answer above for Zec 12:10 is comical, or in other words laughable. The text clearly states,” they shall look upon me whom they have pierced”, and the balance of the verse still refers to the ( I will pour upon the house of David), there is no reference to THE SON as being a different person than the ( I ). You have to consider that the I is God if you do not admit that the Son ( Jesus ) existed at that time. If you attempt to identify Jesus as the human Son as the one being pierced you will also identify Jesus the Son as the I doing the pouring out.
No Larry, I don’t have to admit anything of the sort. I can depend upon Paul, or John who at the very least lived in that time, and I’m pretty sure they understood the Hebrew language better than either you or I. and that is what I do.The one pouring out grace, is not the one who paid the price for it. I don’t believe there is one case in the bible where the one making the sacrifice, is the sacrifice. I do not know why one will find a single word that might be out of place, or they don’t understand why it is used, and try to build a theology on it. Grace is by God, and sent by God through his messenger.
Act 20:32 And now, brethren, I commend you to God, and to the word of his grace, which is able to build you up, and to give you an inheritance among all them which are sanctified.
Rom 3:24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
Rom 3:25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;
Rom 5:15 But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, [which is] by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.
Lets look at three verses in Hebrews that describe Jesus all three use different words, but all three are represented in English by the word “made”. and we wonder why some things in the bible are confusing to us English speakers.
Heb 1:4 Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.
ginomai = made 1.to become, i.e. to come into existence, begin to be, receive being
OK this author expects us to know that he/she is speaking in terms of after Jesus was called to Heaven. How are we supposed to know that? Because of Hebrews 2:9.
Heb 2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.
elattoō = made less or inferior: in dignity.
When in time is the Hebrew writer speaking now? At birth, how do we know ? because Jesus was born specifically for the purpose of saving his people.
Heb 2:10 For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings.
elattoō = to make perfect or complete.
This is confirming what I said about the first two verses. If Jesus as you say “is god and was at birth” why pray tell would he need to be made perfect.?
NIV
In bringing many sons and daughters to glory, it was fitting that God, for whom and through whom everything exists, should make the pioneer of their salvation perfect through what he suffered.
And by the way this says that God the Father made everything that was made. Why must you accept things that are not easily understood, and reject those which are. God bless.