hnealc

Well, you talk a good fight!

I would like to see your reaction if you were ever given the opportunity to meet God in person, which you won't while in your earthly spirit.

Anonymous Loc: Hamtucket jersey city

Lol you conspiracy theorist

okie don

hnealc,
Right on,
short and to the point.
It's called 'FAITH'.

hnealc

conspiracy theorist????????

????????????????????????????????

Anonymous Loc: Hamtucket jersey city

Just a Joke

jack sequim wa Loc: Blanchard, Idaho

Afraid of dying? When a Christian is a disciple of Jesus, living for our Lord and saviour, we seek to glorify God and serve him, dying is to gain, no more pain, no evil, sadness, fear, hurt of this world condemned by sin. While no one looks forward to a painful or extended death, Christians desire eternal life, worshiping the almighty God.

jack sequim wa Loc: Blanchard, Idaho

Afraid of dying? When a Christian is a disciple of Jesus, living for our Lord and saviour, we seek to glorify God and serve him, dying is to gain, no more pain, no evil, sadness, fear, hurt of this world condemned by sin. While no one looks forward to a painful or extended death, Christians desire eternal life, worshiping the almighty God.

jack sequim wa Loc: Blanchard, Idaho

Afraid of dying? When a Christian is a disciple of Jesus, living for our Lord and saviour, we seek to glorify God and serve him, dying is to gain, no more pain, no evil, sadness, fear, hurt of this world condemned by sin. While no one looks forward to a painful or extended death, Christians desire eternal life, worshiping the almighty God.

okie don

Jack,
He has his right to his belief. Guess the Muslims don't give you a right other than Allah. Reminds me of a Pythagorean saying:"Not to every man speak of GOD".
They have the choice. Guess it's gotta be that way.(smile)(:-))

Alicia Loc: NYC

***************
There's that dumb word "assume" again. It's amazing how our imagination and desire to believe anything at all can cloud our vision.

Alicia Loc: NYC

**************
I would call what you think is your purpose in life Totalitarian!

Christians live in fear of the hereafter as painted for them by their various sects. So happy I don't have to be afraid of death because, according to the religious Christians, you'll never know until you die. I live to live, honoring myself for what I've accomplished in my span of years on this earth! My purpose here is to make this place a little bit better than it was.

okie don

As near as I can figure it out,I try usingto 'love one another', if that equates. I witness conflict ,beheadings and killings locally, nationally and internationally. 'Mystery Babylon' keeps pushing for destruction. Pretty sad state of affairs...

Theo Loc: Within 1000 miles of Tampa, Florida

You begin by eliminating all doctrinal issues you have been taught. Then you consider only what is in the verse. Only after you determine what is in the verse, then you can plug in what else you know about the subject.

Otherwise, if you carry what you know into the study, you will project what is not in the verse, as though it is in the verse.

Example: "Everyone knows" is not in the verse, so it has no power in considering what is in the verse.

"In the beginning was the logos, and the logos was with God, and the logos was God."

Nothing about "Everyone knows that is talking about Jesus." If that is true, John would have mentioned it. John did not mention it. So, let's see if there is an understanding available to us, that does not include "what everyone knows" as though that was what John said.

Jesus is not mentioned by name;'o logos and theos are inconvertible terms, therefore 'o logos is not equal to theos, so when 'o logos "became flesh" theos did not; "The beginning" of which John references is not the beginning of creation, but the beginning of the gospel. Even Jesus references this beginning.

The authors of Holy Writ by inspiration of the Holy spirit of God, certainly knew how to say "in the beginning of creation" when they wanted to say "in the beginning of creation."

Mark knew how to say "In the beginning of creation," for he wrote of it twice - "But from the[arxees ktisews] beginning of the creation God made them male and female."[Mark 10:6]

"For in those days shall be affliction, such as was not from the [arxees ktisews] beginning of the creation which God created unto this time, neither shall be." Mark 13:19]

Peter knew how to express the concept: "And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the [arxees ktisews] beginning of the creation."[II Pet 3:4]

Even John had previous experience when he wrote - "And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, [ee arxee tees ktisews tou theou] the beginning of the creation of God;" [Rev 3:14]

So that when John wrote his gospel in 96 a.d., he had Holy Spirit inspiration, as well as the writings of his peers, who had expressed the concept before his gospel was written; So he had adequate example prior to his need to express what it was he was wanting to convey to his reading audience - Let's look at John's writings to see how he used "In the beginning" - "Then said they unto him, Who art thou? And Jesus saith unto them, Even the same that I said unto you from [Teen arxeen] the beginning." John 8:25

"And ye also shall bear witness, because ye have been with me from [ap arxees] the beginning." -John 15:27

"But these things have I told you, that when the time shall come, ye may remember that I told you of them. And these things I said not unto you at the [arxees] beginning, because I was with you." -John 16:4

So John's "beginning" is a reference to the beginning of the gospel, not the beginning of creation. As you may have noticed, even Jesus acknowledged it as "being with the disciples in the beginning.

John tells us the logos was () God. He does not tell us the logos was (the) God. That is significant, because that would be saying that all that is the logos is all that is the God. It was taught that way at one time, and rejected as an heresy. "The logos was God" is what is known as
"inequivalent terminology." Also "unequal terms." There have been several ways to say the same thing developed over the centuries, but they all present the same argument, i.e., "The logos" and "God" are not equivalent terms, because "The logos" is articulated (has the article) while "God" does not.

John's prologue is about a personification, not an incarnation. In the 60th Anniversary of Life Magazine, on page 42, is found "Colonel Charles Lindbergh is the American Dream made flesh." This the same thing John is saying about "the logos of God" which is "Christ living in you."

It was Paul, not John, who first began to teach concerning "The Logos Of God" as he preached to the whole world, that there is a concept of "Christ Jesus living in you" that is the basis for what Paul calls "The Logos Of God;" It is Paul's name for the concept.

That is the secret to "The Logos Of God." It is a name for a concept. That is all it is. And John agrees with Paul when John writes "And the logos became flesh and dwelt among us." When a saint so lives his life, that it is no longer he that directs his own life, but "Christ lives in him" that is "The logos of God" i.e., Christ living in the flesh of a saint.

Paul wrote "I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me." [Gal 2:20]

And -

"But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, 5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. 6 And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father. 7 Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ." [Gal 4:4-7]

Paul also said in that same letter - "My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you," [Gal 4:19]

Then, in In 55 a.d. paul, writing to the saints in Corinth, said -"Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?" [II Cor 13:5]

Paul begins to introduce some finer points of definition when in 60 a.d. he said he had "fully preached the Logos Of God" to the whole world, and explained what it is - "If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister;"

"Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to (fully preach) fulfil the logos of God; 26 Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints: 27 To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you , the hope of glory:" [Col 1:23,25-27]

So Paul tells us "Christ is in you" and further, he tells us there is a name for this phenomena, "The Logos Of God." Now, "logos" is simply one of several words that carry the meaning of "word" or "message." This becomes "The message of God" to you is "Let Christ take over your life." Let him in. Let him completely renovate the dwelling he has discovered in you. Let him clean the inside and the outside, and make all things new as pertains to your identity, so that instead of the person you once were, is now replaced by that person you have become in Christ Jesus.

It is John's turn to talk about the saints in whom the spirit of Christ has been sent by God to dwell in the saints; ( that "Logos Of God" which was introduced by Paul - "Christ living in me" ) - John speaks of it this way: "He came unto his own, and his own received him not. 12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: 13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. 14 And the logos was made flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld his (the one who received Christ) glory, the glory as of an only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth." [John 1:11-14]

John does not say "as many as received him, them he made sons of God." No, John says "as many as received him, to them gave he power to become(no article in the Greek) sons of God." John is telling us there is something required beyond believing, to qualify one for being a son of God. And that requirement has been being spelled out by Paul the Apostle since Jesus ascended to the right hand of the Father, so many years ago.

Why does John fail to say "We beheld the glory of the only begotten son?" Instead, he says "We beheld his glory, glory as of an only begotten son."

That little Greek expression "os" is what is called a "particle of comparison." Why would John be comparing the glory of Jesus to the glory of Jesus? The truth is, he is not. He is comparing The glory of the saint in whom the logos of God is personified, with the glory of the only begotten son of God dwelling in that saint.

Jesus did not "become a man" in John 1:14. The only reason there is even a mention of Jesus at all in John's first chapter, is because in 96 a.d., John tied his gospel to the person of Christ and to "the logos of God" referenced in Rev 3:12 and in 19:12-13 with reference to the new name he is to be given, as "the logos of God."

Jesus was not "the logos of God" in 30 a.d; He was not "The logos of God" in 33 a.d. when he was ascended, and he was not "the Logos of God" when John prophecied about his gift-name, as of 69 a.d. it was still a future event.

In 96 a.d. John is speaking in 1:14 of his gospel, about an event in the life of a saint, a personification, and recalling his remarks he wrote in 69 a.d, about Jesus, and here ties the two events together.

But the personification of the logos of God takes place, according to Paul, everytime some saint or other, so lives his life that he can say "I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me." [Gal 2:20]

When this saint aknowledges "Christ Jesus" in his life, the logos of God is personified in the life of that saint. And "we behold the glory as of an only begotten son of God" all over again, in that saint, through Christ living in him.

Paul spent a lifetime convincing the saints about this subject of "Jesus Christ living in me" and said, "My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you," [Gal 4:19]

So to recap what the Apostles have introduced and defined.
Paul introduced "Christ in you;" Paul defined "Christ in you" and said it is "the hope of Glory." He also defined it as "[u]The Logos Of God[/u[."

Then John picked up on a new name which is to be given Jesus, and that new name is "The Logos of God;" Finally John brings together, in his prologue, the saints in whom can be said "Christ lives in you," and "hope" and "glory" just as Paul had already introduced and defined. And John did not change a thing paul already said.

Jesus was born, at which time he received a name,
"Jesus," which served to identify him while he grew in wisdom and in stature, and in favour with God and men, and when he was fully grown, and had died, had been resurrected, and had ascended by 33 a.d., received a name, "The logos of God" between the time when it was published in 69 a.d., and 96 a.d. when John ties the personification of The Logos Of God in the saints, to Jesus, who received the name; but it was not who and what he was; it was a name received.

Jesus was never "the logos of God" but was given the name after he successfully completed his mission and was extolled and made very high [Isa 52:13], and given a name above every name.[Phil 2:9-11][Eph 1:19-23]

People have him already pre-existing as "the logos of God" and recognized as the personification of "the logos of God" at his birth when in fact, the terminology did not even exist until 69 a.d.

When I look at a saint in whom Christ lives, I see the logos of God personified, and "behold the glory as of glory of an only begotten son of God."

When John in his epistle [2nd John 7] speaks of [b][color=blue]"Jesus Christ came in flesh," he is not speaking of the birth of Jesus, he is speaking of "Christ living in me, in my flesh" spoken of by Paul - "I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me."[Gal 2:20]

There is no way you can find a place to separate Paul's life in the flesh after his conversion to Christ, from Jesus Christ living in Paul.

Furthermore, John himself said "For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist."

John uses neither the aorist tense or imperfect verbs, which would be necessary if he was speaking of the life of Jesus in his flesh; but John used a present middle or passive deponent, which tells us it is not something Jesus actively does to take over your life, but it is something he is allowed by you, to do.

This becomes significant when we consider Paul's words -"For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life."[Rom 5:10]

The present participle in II Jn 7, which if you know anything about Greek participles, they are "-ing" words, and being present tense, means that in 85 - 90 a.d., John is saying Jesus is still com["-ing"] in flesh. Check it out with any Greek scholar you wish, if he knows what he is doing, and is honest, he will lay aside all doctrinal bias and admit the truth of this.

This is the mystery of the kingdom of God, part of which Jesus began to teach his disciples as he walked and talked among the Jews of his day. He gave his disciples clues and hints that later, helped them understand as bits and pieces of the doctrine of "The Logos Of God" became fully developed under the capable hands of Paul the Apostle.

And John, in 96 a.d., wrote his gospel, alluding to this doctrine by writing, In the beginning (of the gospel) was the logos, and the logos was with God, and the logos was God, and the logos became flesh and dwelled among us; which Jesus did not do during his lifetime in Galilee and in Jerusalem of his day. He was often remote, and elusive, often sought by the crowds, which is not necessary if he is in fact "among" them. But later, after the "Logos Of God" was fully developed and lived by the saints, Christ indeed lived among the saints, as they were hauled off to the slaughter of the Roman Coliseum, to serve as sport for the masses.

And that, my friend, is the "Mystery of the ages" which Paul spoke of, to the whole world, then wrote of it for later generatons to discover for themselves, and understand and persue.

So until at least 69 a.d., the saints had no idea of Jesus being named "The word of God" at some future point in time. It was NEVER a first century issue.

Then, by the time John wrote his epistle in 96 a.d., and began with "In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God," There was absolutely NO issue of Jesus being the word of God, because it was already understood for over sixty years, that the saints, living so that it was not they who lived, but Christ living in them, was the personification of the word of God, and the word of God was personified in the saints, and dwelled among men. The logos concept was already understood prior to John's gospel.

It was left to later generations, who studied the new testament from the standpoint of "life of Christ" FIRST, who began to understand John's gospel to reference an preexistent Jesus who somehow became a human.

If the books are studied in the order in which they were revealed by inspiration of the Holy Spirit, they CANNOT be understood to reference a preexistent Jesus.

How does it matter what order you use to study God's word? Look at the vast difference in concept if you approach the meaning attached to "the logos of God," which is "Christ living in me" by starting with the earliest books written, as opposed to beginning with the last book written.



Jesus was not "quoting" God saying "I AM." Look at what God actually said, that is ignored by those who accept doctrine for truth.


In Exo 3:13-14
"And Moses said unto God, Behold, when I come unto the children of Israel, and shall say unto them, The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you; and they shall say to me, What is his name? what shall I say unto them?

In verse 14, God introduced himself to Moses using singular pronoun, singular verb, singular definite article and singular verb participle. "egw eimi 'o wn" = "I AM THE BEING." "Tell them 'O Wn" hath sent you." So, "egw eimi" was never God's name, and the Trinitarians missed the significance of what is in the original text. THAT is the essence of Trinitarian Scholarship.

"egw" = first-person-singular pronoun = "I"
"eimi" = first-person-singular present active verb = "am"
"'o" = singular definite article = "the"
"wn" = Singular participle = "Being"

"Egw" leaves no room for 'We." "Egw" allows no room for "US." "Egw" is a reference to a first-person-singular "I."
"Eimi" leaves no room for "Are," but is a reference to "AM."
"Ho" leaves no room for "some" but is a reference to "The" one and only. It is a singular definite article.
"Wn" leaves no room for beings, it is a reference to "The Being." It is singular as to number of persons considered.

"Singular" participle means there is only one person in "The Being."



When God makes allowance for resurrected beings, it is not our purview to assign meaning. We must simply apply what is said, not what men make doctrine to explain what was said.



"God with us" is not a name, it is a mnemonic, a word designed to aid the memory. God gave the name "God with us" to Messiah, to remind men that God would be with us. It never meant Jesus is God. If that was the intent, He would have named Him "He is God."

Theo Loc: Within 1000 miles of Tampa, Florida

Then debate it, don't judge it.

robert66

Words in a book do not make them words from god or any other divine source . The only reason anyone thinks they are is because a human, a living breathing , not godlike creature , told them so. God did not appear , hand them the bible and say , These are my words , thoughts or lessons. I inspired these. A preacher , a parent or some other human told you this and passed it on to bring you into a group the same way that any criminal , boy scout leader or political activist does. They convince you their words and theories have a higher purpose or meaning or it's just a way to get ahead of someone else. It works for some and I don't think it's all bad. It just doesn't work for everyone nor should it. Religion preys on those who are weak , lost or greedy. If you need it to get you by , fine but trying to convince others to make you feel better about yourself or to control someone else is a lie and it is wrong.