03 Mar 18
Originally posted by @sonshipJesus flesh, humanity, was born and died 33 years later.
You seem to think that the humanity of Jesus is a temporary thing.
Originally posted by @sonshipYou are just wrapping philosophy around your abject unbelief, selectively salvaging a saying here or there that is useful to they philosophy.
[quote] The truth in the gospel preached by Jesus during His ministry still rings out loud and clear despite the corruptions that were introduced by the NT writers. The core of His gospel are contained in the parables, explanations of the parables, the Sermon on the Mount, passages where Jesus is explicitly describing the Kingdom and what living in the King ...[text shortened]... idol of your imagination that you've erected instead of the Christ of the New Testament.
Actually it's so much more than "selectively salvaging a saying here or there". Your attempt to frame it as such is deceitful on your part as proven by what I actually wrote:
The truth in the gospel preached by Jesus during His ministry still rings out loud and clear despite the corruptions that were introduced by the NT writers. The core of His gospel are contained in the parables, explanations of the parables, the Sermon on the Mount, passages where Jesus is explicitly describing the Kingdom and what living in the Kingdom entails, passages where Jesus is explicitly describing what is required for "eternal life" / "living in the Kingdom" etc. In short, passages where Jesus is explicitly preaching the vision of His gospel.
Not surprisingly the gospel preached by Jesus during His ministry is contained in passages such as the ones specified in bold above. The vision of the gospel He preached lies within passages such as those . The "treasure" of the gospel He preached lies within passages such as those. The bulk of the words attributed to Jesus lies within passages such as those.
Clearly it is so much more than "selectively salvaging a saying here or there". Your attempt to frame it as such is deceitful on your part
03 Mar 18
Originally posted by @sonshipThe humanity of Jesus Christ is temporary.
You seem to think that the humanity of Jesus is a temporary thing. Unitarianism doesn't appreciate that God and man are joined together in Jesus Christ forever and ever ??
Unitarianism doesn't think God will remain God manifest in the flesh for eternity?
I wonder if we have two extremes here.
One - that God did not become incarnate in ToO's " ...[text shortened]... o you think God manifest in the flesh comes to an end ? What passages leads you to that belief ?
Humans = Flesh and Blood.
Flesh and blood cannot inherit the Kingdom of God.
Jesus has already entered the Kingdom of God.
Therefore his form and body has changed.
All who follow Christ into the Kingdom of God must also change.
This is called the REGENERATION.
This is called BORN OF THE SPIRIT
This is when all the righteous put on a glorious body like that of Christ
It is a spirit body = no flesh and blood.
As dive said.. 33 odd years Jesus had a human body / humanity
He is now sitting on the right hand of God where he was before.
03 Mar 18
Originally posted by @romans1009Well!!
The way you constantly repeat yourself is a dead giveaway you’re either being coached by FMF - or are FMF.
If the latter, I guess you never really retired at all!
Looks like we have an upstart. Go you good thing!!
03 Mar 18
Originally posted by @rajk999Solid
The humanity of Jesus Christ is temporary.
Humans = Flesh and Blood.
Flesh and blood cannot inherit the Kingdom of God.
Jesus has already entered the Kingdom of God.
Therefore his form and body has changed.
All who follow Christ into the Kingdom of God must also change.
This is called the REGENERATION.
This is called BORN OF THE SPIRIT
This is ...[text shortened]... sus had a human body / humanity
He is now sitting on the right hand of God where he was before.
04 Mar 18
Originally posted by @rajk999"The humanity of Jesus Christ is temporary."
The humanity of Jesus Christ is temporary.
Humans = Flesh and Blood.
Flesh and blood cannot inherit the Kingdom of God.
Jesus has already entered the Kingdom of God.
Therefore his form and body has changed.
All who follow Christ into the Kingdom of God must also change.
This is called the REGENERATION.
This is called BORN OF THE SPIRIT
This is ...[text shortened]... sus had a human body / humanity
He is now sitting on the right hand of God where he was before.
Nonsense.
"Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have." Luke 24:39
"All who follow Christ into the Kingdom of God must also change.
This is called the REGENERATION."
No it's not. It's called the RESURRECTION.
"This is when all the righteous put on a glorious body like that of Christ
It is a spirit body = no flesh and blood."
Provide scriptural evidence. You are only half right. Our bodies will be changed in the resurrection and be like the body that Jesus was resurrected with. It is flesh and bone. Spirit driven. Not blood driven.
When Jesus ascended into heaven before the eyes of His disciples it was with the resurrected body He had before He died, but without blood.
Jesus Christ will retain that same body for all eternity. He's coming back with that same body too at His second advent just as the scriptures say.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
04 Mar 18
Originally posted by @thinkofone
[b][b]You are just wrapping philosophy around your abject
Actually it's so much more than "selectively salvaging a saying here or there".
Your attempt to frame it as such is deceitful on your part as proven by what I actually wrote:
Its not me who is being deceitful in just letting the Gospels speak for themselves.
You need an extensive special filter.
You can restate your paragraph though if you think I misrepresented something. I'll be glad to look at it again.
The truth in the gospel preached by Jesus during His ministry still rings out loud and clear despite the corruptions that were introduced by the NT writers.
No, your bastardized and filtered twist of the gospel "rings out loud and clear" in your anti-supernatural bias.
Minus what you refuse to believe, you think your revision "rings out loud and clear". It rings out loud and clear to make the Gospels say pretty much the opposite of what they convey about the Son of God.
And I have been interrupted and must continue latter.
I am not finished.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Originally posted by @secondson
"The humanity of Jesus Christ is temporary."
Nonsense.
"Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have." Luke 24:39
"All who follow Christ into the Kingdom of God must also change.
This is called the REGENERATION."
No it's not. It's called the RESURRECTION.
...[text shortened]... rnity. He's coming back with that same body too at His second advent just as the scriptures say.
"All who follow Christ into the Kingdom of God must also change.
This is called the REGENERATION."
No it's not. It's called the RESURRECTION.
Secondson, technically it has been translated "restoration" and "regeneration". Don't challenge him on that.
Where he is wrong is saying that that is the only "regeneration". Clearly, those born again have participated in the regeneration of the Holy Spirit (Titus 3:5).
You could call the millennial kingdom "the regeneration". I don't argue with Rajk999 about that.
Its a translation sensative matter. I wish I had more time this morning.
04 Mar 18
Originally posted by @sonshipI appreciate your effort to clarify sonship, but "regeneration" and "resurrection" aren't the same thing."All who follow Christ into the Kingdom of God must also change.
This is called the REGENERATION."
No it's not. It's called the RESURRECTION.
Secondson, technically it has been translated "restoration" and "regeneration". Don't challenge him on that.
Where he is wrong is saying that that is the only "regeneration". Clearly, tho ...[text shortened]... Rajk999 about that.
Its a translation sensative matter. I wish I had more time this morning.
My post was against the inference made by Rajk above concerning the body of the resurrected Lord Jesus Christ. It wasn't a "regenerated" body, but a "resurrected" body of flesh and bones. The very same body Jesus was born with, but without blood, and the same body He ascended into heaven with where He now sits at the right hand of God, and the same body He will return with and have throughout eternity.
That was the point of my post in opposition to the heretical teaching of a resurrection denying legalist.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Originally posted by @secondson
I appreciate your effort to clarify sonship, but "regeneration" and "resurrection" aren't the same thing.
Perhaps we were dealing with different concerns.
My main concern, if not yours, was to point out that the English word "regeneration" appears in some versions legitimately I think, in Matthew 19:28.
My concern, perhaps confused about your's, was to acknowledge when someone says -
"The regeneration? Well that is the time of Christ's reign on earth for 1,000 years"
they have the ground in Matthew 19:28 to make that claim.
Now, I think, that Rajk999 uses the legitimate use of the word "regeneration" to argue that there is NO regeneration in the church age before that time.
That is a serious error on his part I think.
As Christians we were regenerated in the church age, not of corruptible seed but through the living and abiding word of God.
"Having been regenerated not of corruptible seed but of incorruptible, through the living and abide word of God." (1 Peter 1:23 RcV )
Past tense - Rajk999 - "having been regenerated" in the age of Grace - the church age.
This is a brief word of regenerated.
The time of Matthew 19:28's reference is also called "the restoration". (Some versions of Matt.10:28 and some versions of Acts 3:21.
" ... Jesus, Whom heaven must indeed receive until the times of the restoration of all things, of which God spoke through the mouth of His holy prophets from of old." (Acts 3:21 RcV)
That's all on this at the moment.
Let me below talk about the comments you made on the resurrection.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
05 Mar 18
1 edit
Secondson, shall we go on?
My post was against the inference made by Rajk above concerning the body of the resurrected Lord Jesus Christ. It wasn't a "regenerated" body, but a "resurrected" body of flesh and bones. The very same body Jesus was born with, but without blood, and the same body He ascended into heaven with where He now sits at the right hand of God, and the same body He will return with and have throughout eternity.
That was the point of my post in opposition to the heretical teaching of a resurrection denying legalist.
He is a legalist. There is no question about that.
What would you say if I said that the resurrection of Christ was also the BIRTH of the Firstborn Son of God ?
How would that sit with you?
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
05 Mar 18
4 edits
Originally posted by @thinkofone
The "treasure" of the gospel He preached lies within passages such as those. The bulk of the words attributed to Jesus lies within passages such as those.
I think according to His own words, where your treasure is there your heart will be also.
You tell me that the treasure is in certain words. In other places there is no treasure there.
That is largly dependent upon what you treasure.
In your case - to roll up your sleeves and exercise perhaps the good part of your God created being by self effort and good intention is your treasure.
When Jesus seems to speak like you believe one should live anyway - Wow, the treasure of His words are there!
Well, there are treasures there no doubt. There are also treasures in the portions you find unbelievable, embarrassing, and supernatural.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
05 Mar 18
ToO,
I treasure every word. For He said heaven and earth would pass away before ONE of His words would pass away.
While you call me being deceitful, I view your methodology of taking your little broom and sweeping so much of the Gospel aside as "not of His ministry" as mistaken at best. At worst it is a methodology so embarrassing to you that you won't detail how its done. That is other than a suggestion that you should just be trusted to inform us on a case by case basis.
You never clearly delineate the specific boundaries of Jesus' words real and treasurable to Jesus' words fabricated and dross, fictional and to be swept aside.
That looks deceitful to me.
Watch.
Name me a chapter in the Gospel of John which consists of words over 50% of which are not to be "treasured."
If you shrink back from being specific, that appears deceitful to me.
05 Mar 18
Originally posted by @sonshipThis is interesting. Let's go on. Let's keep it simple though.
Secondson, shall we go on?
What would you say if I said that the resurrection of Christ was also the BIRTH of the Firstborn Son of God ?
How would that sit with you?
"Firstborn" Son of God?
That doesn't sit well with me. I can't find a verse to support that idea. Also, I don't see in the scriptures a conjuncture between the resurrection of Jesus Christ and the idea that that was a "BIRTH" as it were.
Jesus Christ is God's only begotten son and His resurrection made Him the firstborn from the dead.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
05 Mar 18
Originally posted by @secondson
This is interesting. Let's go on. Let's keep it simple though.
And let's try to keep it as fellowship. I would try to speak of these things in an edifying and Christ exalting way.
If it causes us to love the Lord Jesus more, it is at least a safe discussion. That is two believers in Christ hopefully sharing their understanding of Christ that Christ may be more loved.
Amen.
"Firstborn" Son of God?
Yes, Christ as the Firstborn is mentioned twice in the book of Colossi ans.
1.) In reference to the old creation He is the Firstborn of all creation.
"Who is the image of the invisible God, the Firstborn of all creation ..." (Col. 1:15)
At this point this is brief and simple, as you requested.
2.) Then concerning the new creation, that is the church He is the Firstborn from the dead. This is in the same chapter of the same epistle.
"And He is the Head of the Body, the church; He is the beginning, the Firstborn from the dead, that He Himself might have the first place in all things." (Col. 1:18)
Christ - the Firstborn of all creation.
Christ - the Firstborn from the dead.
See?
In the realm of the created universe - Christ is the Firstborn.
In the realm of the new creation which is the Body of Christ, the church - Christ is also the Firstborn from the dead.
Mostly, my mentioning of the resurrection of Christ being a BIRTH was in reference to Christ as the Firstborn from the dead.
That doesn't sit well with me. I can't find a verse to support that idea. Also, I don't see in the scriptures a conjuncture between the resurrection of Jesus Christ and the idea that that was a "BIRTH" as it were.
By this time, I think you should notice that being the resurrected Lord as the Head of the church, the mystical Body of Christ, Christ is indeed proclaimed by Paul to be "the Firstborn".
I eventually hope to show you that Jesus Christ Himself spoke of His resurrection as the BIRTH of a new born child.
Jesus Christ is God's only begotten son and His resurrection made Him the firstborn from the dead.
I am not sure whether I wrote this or you did. But it is true. Praise the Lord.
Shall I continue?