S
Solo
Guest
I am content with the confirmation of my salvation from God Himself dwelling within me, and His guidence in all doctrines; never having to worry about either.
Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?
Join For His Glory for a discussion on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/
-
Taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need
https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
-
-
Depending upon the Holy Spirit for all you do?
Read through the following study by Tenchi for more on this topic
https://christianforums.net/threads/without-the-holy-spirit-we-can-do-nothing.109419/
-
-
How are famous preachers sometimes effected by sin?
Join Sola Scriptura for a discussion on the subject
https://christianforums.net/threads/anointed-preaching-teaching.109331/#post-1912042
-
Is our belief in who Jesus is, necessary for salvation
- Thread starter mutzrein
- Start date
Just what I said. Saying you're the Son is not saying you're the Father or equal to the Father. The Jews didn't know the Son because they didn't know the Father and they didn't know the Father because they didn't know his Son. Are you going to use their words or the actions they took as evidence that he was making himself God and therefore God? Or are you justifing the devils but saying, 'he was God, so it was ok to say he was.' Seeing it their way, even though you think you are on the side of God, is not serving God.
S
Solo
Guest
MarkT,Solo said:
Is there a reason why you did not answer my simple question?
I have seen so far that you use the common arguments against the meaning "Son of God" and the Scripture's recording of the Jews' reaction to it. It is all blamed on the Jews ignorance and lack of understanding.MarkT said:
But this completetly misses the point. The use of "son of ...." was (perhaps is) very common in the Middle East and it is something the Jews would have very easily understood. Peoples' view of you was predertmined by their view of your father - you were to them what your father was. This totally supports the idea that Jesus' claim to be the very Son of God meant that he was equal to the Father, which is precisely what the Jews accused him of and tried to stone him for.
Not only that, do a search in all of the gospels for each time "Son of God" is used - look at the context before and after, what happens, who says it and how they say it. It should become very obvious that the term held huge significance and is not merely a statement that Jesus was God's son.
cyberjosh
Member
Mark, if you don't believe in Jesus as God you do not have saving faith because the Jesus you believe in does not exist, thus has no power to save.
Look at my proof thread here.
~Josh
Look at my proof thread here.
~Josh
I
Imagican
Guest
cybershark5886 said:
Cyber,
BEWARE, my friend. Beware of accusations that YOU are UNABLE to make.
The Catholics 'tried' the SAME thing. Believing and teaching that it was THEY who had the 'ability' to admit or deny THE GRACE OF GOD. Once one goes down 'this path' they worship THEMSELVES over God and in essence create a 'false god'.
I would offer that GOD is capable of DOING THINGS HIS WAY regardless of man's understanding. This BEING THE CASE, why would you deny the 'possibility' that God DID create HIS SON to do HIS BIDDING?
So, beware of attempting to 'judge GOD'. For your offering above indicates that YOU know 'BETTER' than God Himself. That it is YOU who decides WHO will be forgiven and who WON'T. Dangerous ground, my friend. And it SPEAKS VOLUMES as to your understanding, (or lack of it), that you would even make such a 'blatant' blunder.
Not criticizing, just offering sound advice and HOPEFULLY 'understanding as well'.
Blessings,
MEC
I
Imagican
Guest
jgredline said:
What he is TRYING to state without being 'rude' is that SATAN HIMSELF will CLAIM to 'be God'. IS there ANY differnce in 'this claim' and the claim that Jesus Christ IS God IF He is NOT?
Satan IS the 'father of lies'. IF Christ is NOT God, then WHERE ELSE could this possible 'lie' have come from?
So, when one if FORCED to face the TRUTH once 'face to face' with their JUDGE, WHAT Excuse could they POSSIBLY have to justify this 'belief of man' over that offered by God THROUGH HIS SON?
I 'believe' that this is what Mark was trying to say.
MEC
I
Imagican
Guest
Free,
I would DISAGREE COMPLETELY with your 'deduction' of the 'use' of the NAME; Son of God.
While a man WAS referred to in relationship WITH HIS FATHER, the reference was JUST THAT. Calling a man 'the son of Jerry' does NOT make Mike, (the son), HIS FATHER. False teaching. And doesn't even add up in reference to language itself. For the using of the reference was NOT to 'call' a son HIS FATHER, BUT, to point out WHO the Father of the son WAS/IS.
From YOUR perspective, WHY was the term 'Son of God' used to START with, IF Jesus Christ WAS NOT THE SON OF GOD? How deceptive would you 'attempt' to teach us our God really is? To attempt to 'trick' people that were UNABLE to know when He was DELIBERATELY being deceptive? Not MY God. For we KNOW WHO the 'father of lies IS'. And this is NOT the 'god' that I choose to accept and worship.
So, you would have us 'believe' that the words contained WITHIN the Word are 'some kind of tricky fallacy'. That they DON'T MEAN what they say. That the term 'Son of God' REALLY DOESN'T MEAN 'The Son of God' but instead, the Son of God MEANS; God Himself? Come on, my brother. Perhaps you didn't REALLY mean what you are saying. Perhaps I 'misunderstand' what you were 'trying' to say. RIGHT?
MEC
I would DISAGREE COMPLETELY with your 'deduction' of the 'use' of the NAME; Son of God.
While a man WAS referred to in relationship WITH HIS FATHER, the reference was JUST THAT. Calling a man 'the son of Jerry' does NOT make Mike, (the son), HIS FATHER. False teaching. And doesn't even add up in reference to language itself. For the using of the reference was NOT to 'call' a son HIS FATHER, BUT, to point out WHO the Father of the son WAS/IS.
From YOUR perspective, WHY was the term 'Son of God' used to START with, IF Jesus Christ WAS NOT THE SON OF GOD? How deceptive would you 'attempt' to teach us our God really is? To attempt to 'trick' people that were UNABLE to know when He was DELIBERATELY being deceptive? Not MY God. For we KNOW WHO the 'father of lies IS'. And this is NOT the 'god' that I choose to accept and worship.
So, you would have us 'believe' that the words contained WITHIN the Word are 'some kind of tricky fallacy'. That they DON'T MEAN what they say. That the term 'Son of God' REALLY DOESN'T MEAN 'The Son of God' but instead, the Son of God MEANS; God Himself? Come on, my brother. Perhaps you didn't REALLY mean what you are saying. Perhaps I 'misunderstand' what you were 'trying' to say. RIGHT?
MEC
jgredline
Member
Imagican said:
Be careful Mec. This is bordering on blasphemy of the Holy Spirit...Remember that Jesus was accused of performing miracles by the power of Satan....The sin He was confronting was the Pharisees’ deliberate rejection of that which they knew to be of God. They could not deny the realty of what the Holy Spirit had done through Him, so they attributed to Satan a work that they knew was of God...
Pharisees Blaspheme the Holy Spirit
Mark 3:22–27; Luke 11:17–23
22 Then one was brought to Him who was demon-possessed, blind and mute; and He healed him, so that the blind and mute man both spoke and saw. 23 And all the multitudes were amazed and said, “Could this be the Son of David?â€Â
24 Now when the Pharisees heard it they said, “This fellow does not cast out demons except by Beelzebub, the ruler of the demons.â€Â
25 But Jesus knew their thoughts, and said to them: “Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation, and every city or house divided against itself will not stand. 26 If Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself. How then will his kingdom stand? 27 And if I cast out demons by Beelzebub, by whom do your sons cast them out? Therefore they shall be your judges. 28 But if I cast out demons by the Spirit of God, surely the kingdom of God has come upon you. 29 Or how can one enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? And then he will plunder his house. 30 He who is not with Me is against Me, and he who does not gather with Me scatters abroad.
Pharisees Commit the Unpardonable Sin
Mark 3:28, 29
31 “Therefore I say to you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven men. 32 Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the age to come.
33 “Either make the tree good and its fruit good, or else make the tree bad and its fruit bad; for a tree is known by its fruit. 34 Brood of vipers! How can you, being evil, speak good things? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks. 35 A good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth good things, and an evil man out of the evil treasure brings forth evil things. 36 But I say to you that for every idle word men may speak, they will give account of it in the day of judgment. 37 For by your words you wll be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.â€Â
I
Imagican
Guest
And 'I' Do NOT claim that Jesus performed miracles through the 'power of satan' BUT though the POWER OF GOD HIMSELF.
The difference is that YOU DENY THIS and accept and teach that the power WAS Christ's by BEING GOD. I have simply come to understand that Christ's words WERE/ARE the Truth and 'I' NEED NOT alter or change them to 'suit MY' understanding. Simply accepting them is ENOUGH FOR ME.
For YOU say that Christ IS God. Christ states that His power came FROM God. So the miracles that He performed WERE miracles of GOD performed THROUGH Christ. The 'power' that was USED to 'perform' these miracles came FROM God the Father and NOT FROM Christ the Son.
Do you accuse me of offering something 'DIFFERENT' than that offered IN THE WORD? Please, j, do NOT put yourself in a position to bear FALSE witness against The Truth. For the TRUTH IS that I have NOT 'chosen' to follow ANYTHING other than that offered through scripture and that offered through The Spirit. IF i offer ANYTHING other than 'truth' I will PLAINLY offer it AS MY BELIEF OR OPINION. Using phrases such as 'I believe' or 'I think' or 'what if'. Speculation is JUST THAT. Knowledge is something DIFFERENT entirely.
And, please take into consideration that I WAS clarifying the statement made by another. This is STATING NOTHING Of mine own but trying to put the words of another in an understandable perspective.
And j, I know that we disagree with 'some areas' of Biblical and Spiritual understanding. But PLEASE, an heretic? That REEKS of CC doctrine and treatment of their brothers and sisters. IF I offer something UN-BIBLICAL and AGAINST GOD, by ALL MEANS, feel FREE to 'point it out'. But if it's SIMPLY a matter of 'man-made' doctrine that you would so accuse me, beware of the consequences. Not from ME. For I forgive as I AM forgiven. But we all WILL answer to a 'higher source' on day and on that day there is NO WAY to 'turn back. On that day the TRUTH WILL BE as clear as crystal. On that day there will BE NO defense like; But I DIDN'T KNOW. But so and so TOLD me this or 'told me that'. On that day one's OWN heart will be revealed in it's ENTIRETY and there will be NO WAY to deny or accept ANYTHING other than that WHICH IS TRUTH.
So, please refrain from the blasphemy accusations or Heresy comments UNLESS I offer something that IS NOT SCRIPTURAL. REGARDLESS of what 'denomination' YOU choose to 'follow' or what 'church' you 'choose' to attend and what may or may NOT be 'taught' to you concerning 'doctrine' IF what I state is BACKED BY SCRIPTURE, then perhaps it is 'the man -made doctrine' that one should question BEFORE making false accusations towards another.
MEC
The difference is that YOU DENY THIS and accept and teach that the power WAS Christ's by BEING GOD. I have simply come to understand that Christ's words WERE/ARE the Truth and 'I' NEED NOT alter or change them to 'suit MY' understanding. Simply accepting them is ENOUGH FOR ME.
For YOU say that Christ IS God. Christ states that His power came FROM God. So the miracles that He performed WERE miracles of GOD performed THROUGH Christ. The 'power' that was USED to 'perform' these miracles came FROM God the Father and NOT FROM Christ the Son.
Do you accuse me of offering something 'DIFFERENT' than that offered IN THE WORD? Please, j, do NOT put yourself in a position to bear FALSE witness against The Truth. For the TRUTH IS that I have NOT 'chosen' to follow ANYTHING other than that offered through scripture and that offered through The Spirit. IF i offer ANYTHING other than 'truth' I will PLAINLY offer it AS MY BELIEF OR OPINION. Using phrases such as 'I believe' or 'I think' or 'what if'. Speculation is JUST THAT. Knowledge is something DIFFERENT entirely.
And, please take into consideration that I WAS clarifying the statement made by another. This is STATING NOTHING Of mine own but trying to put the words of another in an understandable perspective.
And j, I know that we disagree with 'some areas' of Biblical and Spiritual understanding. But PLEASE, an heretic? That REEKS of CC doctrine and treatment of their brothers and sisters. IF I offer something UN-BIBLICAL and AGAINST GOD, by ALL MEANS, feel FREE to 'point it out'. But if it's SIMPLY a matter of 'man-made' doctrine that you would so accuse me, beware of the consequences. Not from ME. For I forgive as I AM forgiven. But we all WILL answer to a 'higher source' on day and on that day there is NO WAY to 'turn back. On that day the TRUTH WILL BE as clear as crystal. On that day there will BE NO defense like; But I DIDN'T KNOW. But so and so TOLD me this or 'told me that'. On that day one's OWN heart will be revealed in it's ENTIRETY and there will be NO WAY to deny or accept ANYTHING other than that WHICH IS TRUTH.
So, please refrain from the blasphemy accusations or Heresy comments UNLESS I offer something that IS NOT SCRIPTURAL. REGARDLESS of what 'denomination' YOU choose to 'follow' or what 'church' you 'choose' to attend and what may or may NOT be 'taught' to you concerning 'doctrine' IF what I state is BACKED BY SCRIPTURE, then perhaps it is 'the man -made doctrine' that one should question BEFORE making false accusations towards another.
MEC
jgredline
Member
...Ok, i miss understood what your saying. I opologize.Imagican said:
Yep, I will teach that Jesus is God till the day I live.
Yep, I agree.....
Mec...You and I view the scriptures differently, because I know Jesus to be God and you believe Jesus to have been a created son....So there is a huge difference in theology.
Yep, I know and perhaps we should let Mark T AKA Bundy clarify what he is saying...
Mec...as much as it saddens me, I have come to accept that you have your position and I have mine...It is two 300 lb Gorillas playing tug of war....
ok, fair enough....Imagican said:
That would be a false teaching but that is not what I stated - it makes him equal with his father.Imagican said:
I never said that Jesus wasn't the Son of God.Imagican said:
Not at all. The Scriptures mean what they say.Imagican said:
Yes, you have misunderstood as I have pointed out a couple of times. I have merely pointed out what Scripture itself says:Imagican said:
Joh 10:33 The Jews answered him, "It is not for a good work that we are going to stone you but for blasphemy, because you, being a man, make yourself God."
It's pretty clear.
I
Imagican
Guest
Free,
WHO do YOU pray TO?
MEC
WHO do YOU pray TO?
MEC
cyberjosh
Member
But I am not standing in some judgement seat dictating some Church doctrine, I am stating the truth that there is "another Jesus" being preached out there, and belief in that Jesus does not save. That is scriptural and I showed it in my thread about it. As for my belief in the "true Jesus", I believe the Bible leaves no room in the definion of the person of Jesus for him to be anything BUT diety. Thus I can say what I just said with confidence, being scripturally sound & backed, while not being dogmatic like the Catholic Church's "Extra Ecclesium, Nulla Salas".
~Josh
Gabbylittleangel
Member
A question for those who do not believe in The Holy Trinity:
Do you believe that those of us who believe that Jesus Christ is God, manifested in the flesh, are saved? Do you believe that it is a sin to believe in the Trinity? In your opinion, how do you think God sees Trinitarians?
Do you believe that those of us who believe that Jesus Christ is God, manifested in the flesh, are saved? Do you believe that it is a sin to believe in the Trinity? In your opinion, how do you think God sees Trinitarians?
Gabbylittleangel said:
Gabby - salvation is not based on a person's interpretation of scripture, but on faith in Christ - who did come in the flesh in the image of the invisible God. But being in the image OF God does not make one God.
And how does God see trinitarians? The same way he sees non-trinitarians. :P
cyberjosh
Member
Jesus was a little bit more than just that, though I disagree. God said in the OT "My glory I shall not give to another." He certainly has exalted Jesus so high up that we worship him, and given him unsurpassed glory in heaven, did God create an idol for us to lead us astray? Hardly, Jesus' glory is equal to the Father's glory, and they both are one. Also through Jesus all things came into being, Jesus was not a crutch or "tool" God used to create the worlds, Jesus is God and began the Creative process as equally as the Father. I say that God cannot have kept his his word about not giving his glory to another if Jesus was not God, because Jesus is THE NAME that saves, what the name of the Lord did in the OT. And only some strange philosophy not unlike the Gnostics twisted theology would see Jesus as some "lesser diety" or even an angel who was initmately connected with God, and helped him in almost everything he does, yet was not God. God the Father would have put himself in a mega-bind if Jesus was anything less than diety because he commited all judgement over to the Son. If Jesus weren't God that would have been as bad as handing it over to Lucifer before he had fallen.
Just a few points to think over.
God Bless,
~Josh
I'm not sure what you mean by Jesus the Spirit. The Spirit refers to the life of God. Are you asking what happened to Christ? As far as I know Christ, who was alive in the spirit, went to the spirits who were in prison since the days of Noah and he preached the word of God to them. So even the spirits who were in prison since the days of Noah would hear the voice of the Son of God and had a chance to repent.
It's against the law for a man to make himself God; to say he is God or equal to God. So basically you think the Jews were right. They should have stoned him. Basically you are in agreement with the Jews that Jesus broke the law because you think he said he was God. When did he say he was God? In those words!
If you said God was in him, I would agree. If you said God was in his name or God was in his Word or God was in his light or God was in his image, I would agree. But saying Jesus was God in the flesh is wrong. The flesh died.
S
Solo
Guest
God is spirit, and Jesus is fully God and fully man. God had taken the form of a man in order to save mankind from the condemnation that they are born under. Jesus Christ, the man, died on the cross and was resurrected in a new glorious body as believers will one day have. Jesus Christ, the God, did not die, but went to lead the captives from Paradise to the Altar of God in heaven. The unrighteous spirits of the unrighteous are in Sheol/Hades in the condition that Jesus described in Luke 16, and the righteous spirits of the righteous are now in heaven awaiting the resurrection to be united with their new glorious bodies.MarkT said:
The Savior, the Word, the Redeemer, the Way, the Truth, the Life, the Jehovah, dwelt among us when He became flesh, and He died in the flesh to redeem sinners from the condemnation that they were/are under.