Is our belief in who Jesus is, necessary for salvation

[Imagican]

This is EXACTLY what I have been offering since the discussion of 'worship' was 'brought up'..........

OK, NOW we ARE 'getting somewhere'.

ABSOLUTELY. We ARE to worship ONLY God AS God. There ARE certainly 'others', (even some among us I'd be willing to wager), that DO worship 'other things' BEFORE God.

And I would also be willing to wager that there ARE others among us AS WELL that worship 'different gods', THINKING that they worship Our Creator. For Satan IS the 'Father of LIES' and ATTEMPTED to BE God. Thus, his FALL. And what did Satan WISH in order to 'distinguish' himself AS God? OUR WORSHIP. Do you reacon that he has simply 'laid back' and is 'just watching' everything 'work itself out'? Or, do you suppose he might be 'working OVERTIME' at the present in order to 'gain' as MANY souls as possible?

Now THIS is what I was talking about from the beginning of our 'discussion' concerning 'worship'. And not only are 'people' capable of worshiping SATAN, 'thinking' that they worship Our Creator, but people ARE capable of worshiping 'things' as well. ''Thou shalt worship NO GRAVEN image''. Anyone care to 'step in' here and offer WHAT a 'graven image' IS? Sorry, I can't 'wait'.........

A 'graven image' IS; ANYTHING made by the hands of men. ANYTHING. And I'll take it ONE MORE STEP in offering of UNDERSTANDING. 'ANYTHING' can be, NOT ONLY, things made by the 'hands' of men, but can also BE, ANYTHING created in the MINDS of men. Get that? Concepts, ideas, thoughts, DOCTRINE, these ALL can be 'graven images'.

If you 'doubt for ONE second' what I offer here. Here's your PROOF. What IS our current form of currency? The 'all MIGHTY DOLLAR'. It is NOTHING other than a 'piece of paper'. Yet, when we evalute it's TRUE nature, it is a simple CONCEPT created by men. Creating a 'piece of paper' that IS the basis for ALL our 'trading'. A 'piece of paper' that has NO intrinsic value other than that PLACED UPON IT. Now, HOW is this 'value' PLACED IN a piece of paper? Through THOUGHT. And IDEA, a CONCEPT. Nothing more, nothing LESS. Now, what we were told about worshiping 'filthy lucre'? NOT TO. So it is NOT the 'piece of paper' that SOME worship, but what it STANDS for. And this my friends is NOTHING more that an IDEA, a THOUGHT, a Concept.

So, have we 'firmly' established the TRUTH behind 'worship'. I AGREE, we ARE to worship NOTHING 'as God' OTHER THAN God. And to take it to the 'next level', we are to WORSHIP NO GRAVEN IMAGE, PERIOD. Get that? PERIOD.

So, I FREELY admited that there ARE things in my life that I allow to impede my WALK. I simply offered that WE ALL have such 'things'. Whether they be houses, cars, girls, guys, MONEY, clothes, shoes, etc, etc, the list IS ENDLESS.

And let me offer this illustration. The REASON that we were warned about worshiping such items is THIS. IF we worship such 'things', we are UNABLE to offer that which we have been commanded to. For WHO among us would offer HIS HOUSE to a 'stranger'? His CAR? Yet we have a perfect EXAMPLE of THE EXAMPLE set by Christ HIMSELF. What DID Christ offer so far as the 'materials' that we possess? WHAT did He TELL us to do if a man ask for a 'shirt'? Ahhhhh, I can see those marbles up there beginning to 'roll around'. I can see that some are following this thinking WOW. I DON'T LIKE what MIKE is 'saying'. This CAN'T be TRUE, CAN IT? Oh yes, my friends, like it or not, IT IS TRUTH and deep down inside YOU KNOW IT.

So, do we worship our homes, our cars, our SHOES, OH YES, so MUCH so that we wouldn't even DARE consider 'giving them to the BUM' asking for a 'dollar' to buy somehting to EAT.

Now, ANY ARGUMENTS? Anyone willing to DENY this CANOT possibly be subseptable to The Spirit. For The SPIRIT IS the SOURCE of 'such understanding'.

MEC

 

[jgredline]

Mec
Just so I am clear....We both Agree that worship is reserved for God and God alone correct?

That the worship of anything other than God is wrong?

Just want to make sure we are on the same page.

 

[Imagican]

j,

Yes, if what you have stated is that we ARE SUPPOSE to offer our worship TO God, ONLY TO GOD. YES. What I have attempted to 'point out' though, is that there are MANY that 'claim' to LOVE God that do NOT offer their worship to ONLY HIM.

And we KNOW that there will come the time where 'ALMOST' the ENTIRE world WILL worship 'something other than God'. We have already been forewarned of this. And this is NOT something that will happen 'overnight'. It is something that began LONG ago and has continued to escalate rapidly.

MEC

 

[LittleNipper]

Well, that settles it then. One must recognize The LORD JESUS CHRIST for who HE actually is. The fact that THE LORD JESUS CHRIST is GOD.

Philippians 2:10 & 11
That at the name of JESUS EVERY knee should bow , of in heaven, and under the earth; and EVERY tongue confess JESUS CHRIST LORD, to the glory of GOD the FATHER.

Only GOD is to receive worship and yet we are instructed that everyone should worship the LORD JESUS CHRIST.

The revelation is that Jesus is CHRIST (GOD WITH US)....

 

[Imagican]

Littlenipper,

While what you 'say' may sound good to 'itching ears', it is NOT what is offered in The Word.

God the Word does NOT say that we are TO ONLY WORSHIP GOD PERIOD. That is MISCONCEPTION of a MAJOR proportion. What the Bible states is that we are to worship NOTHING AS God EXCEPT GOD. A subtle difference I admit but one of astounding importance in understanding.

We are CERTAINLY able to worship The Son AS THE SON, WITHOUT 'calling' the Son the Father.

And notice that EVEN in the scripture that you offered it is what I offer in understanding that the scripture BACKS and it is YOU have 'chosen' to view it in a 'different' understanding. For Christ IS Lord. But God IS The Father. And EVERY knee SHALL bow to OUR LORD. And while EACH OF THESE KNEES bow, God will STILL be in Heaven. And WHY shall every knee bow, to the GLORY of God, the Father. NOT to the 'glory of the Son'. For there is NONE that IS GOOD save the Father ALONE, that being God, the Father of Jesus Christ.

The difference is that the worship that we 'should' devote to God is SEPARATE than that offered to ANY other entity, whether that be the Son or angels or Saints or Mary, etc......... For that IS what separates God from EVERYTHING else. And weren't we TOLD to pray IN THE NAME OF Jesus Christ when we pray TO the Father? And don't we KNOW that the Father IS GOD? And weren't we told that the ONLY way to the Father IS through the Son. And that NO ONE may know the Son unless allowed so BY the Father? And ISN'T the Father God Himself?

To make Jesus God Himself is to say that MUCH of what Christ HIMSELF offered is void. And this would be to ADD to what was offered by The Son. For the Son NEVER stated that HE WAS GOD HIMSELF OR THE FATHER. He PLAINLY offered that HE WAS/IS The Son of God. And PLEASE note The SON of God.

MEC

 

[jgredline]

Well, that settles it then. One must recognize The LORD JESUS CHRIST for who HE actually is. The fact that THE LORD JESUS CHRIST is GOD.

Philippians 2:10 & 11
That at the name of JESUS EVERY knee should bow , of in heaven, and under the earth; and EVERY tongue confess JESUS CHRIST LORD, to the glory of GOD the FATHER.

Only GOD is to receive worship and yet we are instructed that everyone should worship the LORD JESUS CHRIST.

The revelation is that Jesus is CHRIST (GOD WITH US)....

Actually Mec...
Little nipper hit it right on the head....Those were pretty much the same thoughts I had after reading your post...

 

[Imagican]

And j,............

I KNEW you would.

MEC

 

[jgredline]

And j,............

I KNEW you would.

MEC

 

[Gabbylittleangel]

1Jo 4:15 Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God.

While I believe that Jesus Christ is God manifested in the flesh, I also believe 1 John 4:15. If the Trinity doctrine was a necessary for salvation, then it would have been magnified a bit more in Scripture. Believing that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, that He died for our sin, repenting and asking God for forgiveness of our sin, and believing that Jesus Christ rose from the dead, is what makes a Christian a Christian.

Paul writes that 'if we confess with our mouth that Jesus Christ is Lord, and believe in our heart that God has raised Him from the dead, we shall be saved.

Once one becomes a Christian, there is a multitude of things to learn about Jesus that we did not know when we came to the cross.

 

[mutzrein]

How can we be saved unless we confess that Jesus is the son of God?
How can we confess that Jesus is the son of God unless we believe?
How can we believe that Jesus is the son of God unless we have faith?
How can we have faith in Jesus unless it be given us by God?

Faith, then, is the essence of salvation. It is given us by God. Without it, it is impossible to please Him. In fact anything that we do, outside of faith, is sin. So, once we have it, we have to remain in it. And this is what abiding in Christ, the vine, is all about.

He has remained faithful throughout every circumstance and afforded me hope when I had none. And I have learned much about the Lord since knowing Him. But my heart has never condemned me, my conscience has never been pricked, and my spirit has remained in peace in the knowledge of Christ my Lord, the son of the living God.

 

[Free]

Believing that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, that He died for our sin, repenting and asking God for forgiveness of our sin, and believing that Jesus Christ rose from the dead, is what makes a Christian a Christian.

So it necessarily follows that JW's, Mormons, and host of others are Christians, despite their vastly different, contradictory Christologies.

 

[Free]

Imagican,

I picked this little gem out of one of your other posts:

"NEVER, (other than a 'confused' individual Thomas), do we have ANY statement that Christ IS God. Each offers and understanding that Christ IS The Son of God. SENT to us BY GOD to offer us The Word."

On what basis do we have to believe that Thomas was 'confused'? I think you are saying that because you have no reasonable refutation of his clear admission that Jesus is God, nor of Jesus' lack of address to his statement (which actually refutes your claim that Thomas was 'confused' - you Jesus would have said "You have me confused with someone else (ie God)").

Also, Jesus is the Word.

 

[MarkT]

Since Jesus was God's only begotten Son and since he was the heir and since he ascended to the throne of God, we can say Jesus is God. An heir is an heir until he receives his inheritance. Then he is no longer called an heir. A prince is a prince until he ascends to the throne. Then he is called a king. Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God. When he ascended to the throne of God, God said, 'Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever, the righteous sceptre is the sceptre of thy kingdom. Thou hast loved righteousness and hated lawlessness; therefore God, thy God, has anointed thee with the oil of gladness beyond thy comrades." Hebrews 1:8

Call him by his right name, Lord Jesus Christ, Faithful and True, The Word of God, King of kings and Lord of lords. "He will tread the wine press of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty" Revelation 19: 15

Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! 1 Peter 1:3

 

[Imagican]

Imagican,

I picked this little gem out of one of your other posts:

"NEVER, (other than a 'confused' individual Thomas), do we have ANY statement that Christ IS God. Each offers and understanding that Christ IS The Son of God. SENT to us BY GOD to offer us The Word."

On what basis do we have to believe that Thomas was 'confused'?

I stated that Thomas was 'confused' for we have a perfect discription of his confusion in that this man 'doubted' that the man 'claiming' to be Christ, was INDEED, Jesus Christ. This man INSISTED that the ONLY way that he WOULD 'believe' that Jesus WAS who He 'claimed' to BE would be to 'SEE' the actual holes in his hands and feet. If this is NOT confusion, (you would 'THINK' that one that had KNOWN Christ would certainly recognize Him WITHOUT 'seeing' the 'holes in His body'. THIS was my meaning about His confusion.

Now, if this man was THAT confused over the identity of Christ, how difficult would it be for Him to be confused over the 'personage' of Christ AS WELL?

I think you are saying that because you have no reasonable refutation of his clear admission that Jesus is God, nor of Jesus' lack of address to his statement (which actually refutes your claim that Thomas was 'confused' - you Jesus would have said "You have me confused with someone else (ie God)").

I follow your line of 'logic' here, but that is NOT NEEDED to be 'the case'. There are MANY examples throughout The Bible where there IS no clarification offered in response to those that are 'confused'.

NOT a very sound basis to BASE one's 'doctrine' on. ONE man, a CONFUSED man, makes a statement that may have NO bearing on 'truth', and this is taken to mean something LITERAL? Don't forget, the Jews accused Christ of 'being Satan's son. Do we 'take this' to be literal?

Also, Jesus is the Word.

 

[Imagican]

Since Jesus was God's only begotten Son and since he was the heir and since he ascended to the throne of God, we can say Jesus is God. An heir is an heir until he receives his inheritance. Then he is no longer called an heir. A prince is a prince until he ascends to the throne. Then he is called a king. Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God. When he ascended to the throne of God, God said, 'Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever, the righteous sceptre is the sceptre of thy kingdom. Thou hast loved righteousness and hated lawlessness; therefore God, thy God, has anointed thee with the oil of gladness beyond thy comrades." Hebrews 1:8

Call him by his right name, Lord Jesus Christ, Faithful and True, The Word of God, King of kings and Lord of lords. "He will tread the wine press of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty" Revelation 19: 15

Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! 1 Peter 1:3

Mark,

May I 'suggest' that what you have offered above is a prime indication that what you have offered is an 'attempt' to make ones beliefs 'fit' scriptural reference.

For an 'heir' is NOT the 'same person as the one that they are to inherit FROM. My son IS my heir. HE IS NOT "ME".

And to further elaborate....

When Christ returns AS OUR KING, will He BE God, or, will there STILL be 'Father and Son'?

Will there then be ONE God, (Father Son and Holy Spirit), COMBINED into ONE entity, or, will there STILL be 'Our Father' in heaven, AND Christ ON earth as our King?

For, I believe, scripture offers an OBVIOUS distinction. When one reads Revelation, we see John given a 'vision' of TWO separate entities. ONE, God Himself, TWO, the Lamb of God. And these two ARE separate in function and entity. And don't forget, we are given MANY examples of Christ's power, throne and dominion being 'GIVEN' to Him BY THE FATHER. Now, HOW does one 'give' these 'things' to ONESELF?

A tiger and a lion MATE. Their offspring is what? A tiger? A lion? Or 'something' a bit of BOTH? They are then named, 'Ligers'. For they are NEITHER pure lion nor pure tiger.

Is there a 'difference' with Christ? His MOTHER was flesh and His Father was Spirit. Is He NOT of both essences? And being this 'hybrid' between God and man, HOW could one NOT see that Christ is NEITHER; He IS BOTH. A 'part' man, and a 'part' God. But NOT God Himself. And the WORDS of Christ Himself bear this out. For it is PLAINLY stated by Christ that 'HIS FATHER' gave Him that which He possesses.

MEC

 

[Rick W]

Mark,

May I 'suggest' that what you have offered above is a prime indication that what you have offered is an 'attempt' to make ones beliefs 'fit' scriptural reference.

For an 'heir' is NOT the 'same person as the one that they are to inherit FROM. My son IS my heir. HE IS NOT "ME".

And to further elaborate....

When Christ returns AS OUR KING, will He BE God, or, will there STILL be 'Father and Son'?

Will there then be ONE God, (Father Son and Holy Spirit), COMBINED into ONE entity, or, will there STILL be 'Our Father' in heaven, AND Christ ON earth as our King?

For, I believe, scripture offers an OBVIOUS distinction. When one reads Revelation, we see John given a 'vision' of TWO separate entities. ONE, God Himself, TWO, the Lamb of God. And these two ARE separate in function and entity. And don't forget, we are given MANY examples of Christ's power, throne and dominion being 'GIVEN' to Him BY THE FATHER. Now, HOW does one 'give' these 'things' to ONESELF?

A tiger and a lion MATE. Their offspring is what? A tiger? A lion? Or 'something' a bit of BOTH? They are then named, 'Ligers'. For they are NEITHER pure lion nor pure tiger.

Is there a 'difference' with Christ? His MOTHER was flesh and His Father was Spirit. Is He NOT of both essences? And being this 'hybrid' between God and man, HOW could one NOT see that Christ is NEITHER; He IS BOTH. A 'part' man, and a 'part' God. But NOT God Himself. And the WORDS of Christ Himself bear this out. For it is PLAINLY stated by Christ that 'HIS FATHER' gave Him that which He possesses.

MEC

"Christ's power, throne and dominion" is the sole intent of God, His Word, His purpose, His intention is given power, the throne, the dominion. God's Word in the flesh is The Lamb of God as the final sacrifice in flesh on the cross. God's Word is not blemished, His Word is spotless, God's Word was made flesh and dwelt among us. The Word of God was in the beginning. (Created all things from the beginning of time) God's Word was with God (how could his word be separated from Him?), the Word was God. (His purpose, His power, His majesty, His intent... the very essence of God)
You cannot separate the Word of God from God.

God's Word shall reign when His Word returns. All shall bow to His Word, all shall know His Word as the supreme authority on earth. It can't be any other way.

God shed blood for Adam and Eve. Blood then was God's intent for sin atonement. But the blood of animals was not enough, you know this. His Word, the very soul of God is without sin, can't be anything less. His Word is perfect, His Word is without sin, became flesh and blood as the Lamb of God, His perfect sacrifice in blood.

God gave all to His Word. And why not? His all IS His Word, His Word not only deserves all authority but IS all His authority. The Word of God shall rule supreme.

You can't separate the Word of God from God no more than you can separate your intent from yourself. Your purpose, your authority, your intent is you. Your word, what you say comes from your very heart from the depths of your soul, from you. You cannot separate your intent, your purpose from you. Your word is you.

If God's Word is not God, but another entity apart from God, then John 1:1 is a blatant lie to say the least. And if God's Word did not become flesh for our salvation through blood then our faith is baseless and a lie.

"God said" is the creative power of the universe, the heavens and all within. In Genesis we see "God said" over and over as His intent of creation became reality. "In the beginning was the Word." Absolutely. Not created, not conceived for how can God conceive Himself?

His Word became flesh, like us, with all the frailties associated with flesh. The Word breathed, the Word could touch, see, smell. The Word was with us, like us, physical. God, the Father of His Word, the Father of His intent, the Father of His purpose, His Father of His authority, is Christ's Father, can't be anything else. His Word does as He knows His Father does. His Word cannot do anything else but what the Father intends. God cannot act against Himself.
The flesh prayed, on earth, with us, to His Father. The flesh knew the weakness of flesh, was flesh, for the Word became flesh. But the flesh was still the Word of God with all the temptations inherent in the flesh.

Christ said "I am the ressurection". How can He be BE an event? An event that has not occured as yet when He said that? He also said "I am the way, the truth and the life". God's Word IS the way, God's Word IS the truth and God's Word IS the life. God's Word IS the resurrection, His intent to defeat death by the glorification of His Word through the death and ressuection of the flesh.

Spirit became flesh, God's spirit of purpose, God's spirit of authority, the spirit of His Word from God, from the Father whose Word is God. The Word was never separated from God, the flesh was, yes, in the man of Jesus, but not His Word.

 

[Imagican]

Pot,

And EVERYTHING that you mentioned IS CERTAINLY to be accepted as attibutes of Christ AS WELL AS God. For Chirst IS the Son of God who OVERCAME temptation.

MUCH of what you offered could VERY WELL have been 'said' of Satan AS WELL, UNTIL he CHOSE to rebel against ALL that IS GOOD. But Satan was SURELY NOT God.

How could God Himself have OVERCOME temptation? Is that REALLY possible in the 'sense' that we could 'discuss'? Yet we HAVE in The Word this VERY FACT; Christ overcame temptation in order to die an unblemished death. Hmmmm....

You state that the Word CANNOT be 'separate' FROM God. Sounds good. Let's work with this one for a second.

IF the Word is UNSEPERABLE from God, and the Word IS Jesus Christ, then MUCH of what we have been offered CANNOT 'add up'. For we have the words written of Christ Himself offering that upon the cross, He 'yelled out', "My Father, WHY hath thou forsaken me''. This is a PURE statement indicating that; AT THAT MOMENT, Christ and God WERE 'separate'. Like it or not. It is a 'part' of The Word.

And when we have a 'voice from heaven', (God?), speaking in reference to His 'beloved Son'. At this time YOU would state that Christ and God WERE NOT 'separate'?

Or, how about Christ in the desert? The WHOLE purpose for offering this 'story' was to SHOW Christ 'overcoming' the temptation of Satan. Were God and Christ 'together' then? If SO, we have NO indication of it.

Speculation is NOT a 'bad' thing in and of itself. BUT, when we 'choose' speculation over direct knowledge, at this point it becomes 'dangerous'.

MEC

 

[MarkT]

Mark,

May I 'suggest' that what you have offered above is a prime indication that what you have offered is an 'attempt' to make ones beliefs 'fit' scriptural reference.

I know what you mean but I'm not trying to fit the Bible into a doctrine that I had to learn by rote. My beginnings were in the Catholic church but I have root in myself which means I didn't come to my understanding by following after any traditional doctrine. I came to this understanding by the grace of God through the knowledge of his Son.

For an 'heir' is NOT the 'same person as the one that they are to inherit FROM. My son IS my heir. HE IS NOT "ME".

That's right. In human terms your son is not you but consider God isn't human. Furthermore, as Paul said, "we regard no one from a human point of view; even though we once regarded Christ from a human point of view, we regard him thus no longer." 2 Cor. 5:16

And to further elaborate....

When Christ returns AS OUR KING, will He BE God, or, will there STILL be 'Father and Son'?

Will there then be ONE God, (Father Son and Holy Spirit), COMBINED into ONE entity, or, will there STILL be 'Our Father' in heaven, AND Christ ON earth as our King?

Christ will be our God and the high priest in the service of God. As Paul said, "he had to be made like his brethren in every respect, so that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God, to make expiation for the sins of the people." Hebrews 2:17 The glory of God will be the light and the Lamb will be the lamp of the light.

For, I believe, scripture offers an OBVIOUS distinction. When one reads Revelation, we see John given a 'vision' of TWO separate entities. ONE, God Himself, TWO, the Lamb of God. And these two ARE separate in function and entity. And don't forget, we are given MANY examples of Christ's power, throne and dominion being 'GIVEN' to Him BY THE FATHER. Now, HOW does one 'give' these 'things' to ONESELF?

God did it by his knowledge and wisdom and understanding. He granted his Word to have life in himself as he has life in himself. He made Jesus his lamp so that he can dwell with us and we will be his people.

A tiger and a lion MATE. Their offspring is what? A tiger? A lion? Or 'something' a bit of BOTH? They are then named, 'Ligers'. For they are NEITHER pure lion nor pure tiger.

Is there a 'difference' with Christ? His MOTHER was flesh and His Father was Spirit. Is He NOT of both essences? And being this 'hybrid' between God and man, HOW could one NOT see that Christ is NEITHER; He IS BOTH. A 'part' man, and a 'part' God. But NOT God Himself. And the WORDS of Christ Himself bear this out. For it is PLAINLY stated by Christ that 'HIS FATHER' gave Him that which He possesses.

I wouldn't say that. The flesh is of no consequence. God can raise descendants from stones. The important point is that the Word came from God. He was made lower than the angels for a time and then he was raised by God to the throne of God. Jesus is the door. The knowledge of who he was lets us enter by the door and into the light in whom we understand and by whom we find the knowledge of God.

 

[MarkT]

"Christ's power, throne and dominion" is the sole intent of God, His Word, His purpose, His intention is given power, the throne, the dominion. God's Word in the flesh is The Lamb of God as the final sacrifice in flesh on the cross. God's Word is not blemished, His Word is spotless, God's Word was made flesh and dwelt among us. The Word of God was in the beginning. (Created all things from the beginning of time) God's Word was with God (how could his word be separated from Him?), the Word was God. (His purpose, His power, His majesty, His intent... the very essence of God)
You cannot separate the Word of God from God.

God's Word shall reign when His Word returns. All shall bow to His Word, all shall know His Word as the supreme authority on earth. It can't be any other way.

God shed blood for Adam and Eve. Blood then was God's intent for sin atonement. But the blood of animals was not enough, you know this. His Word, the very soul of God is without sin, can't be anything less. His Word is perfect, His Word is without sin, became flesh and blood as the Lamb of God, His perfect sacrifice in blood.

God gave all to His Word. And why not? His all IS His Word, His Word not only deserves all authority but IS all His authority. The Word of God shall rule supreme.

You can't separate the Word of God from God no more than you can separate your intent from yourself. Your purpose, your authority, your intent is you. Your word, what you say comes from your very heart from the depths of your soul, from you. You cannot separate your intent, your purpose from you. Your word is you.

If God's Word is not God, but another entity apart from God, then John 1:1 is a blatant lie to say the least. And if God's Word did not become flesh for our salvation through blood then our faith is baseless and a lie.

"God said" is the creative power of the universe, the heavens and all within. In Genesis we see "God said" over and over as His intent of creation became reality. "In the beginning was the Word." Absolutely. Not created, not conceived for how can God conceive Himself?

His Word became flesh, like us, with all the frailties associated with flesh. The Word breathed, the Word could touch, see, smell. The Word was with us, like us, physical. God, the Father of His Word, the Father of His intent, the Father of His purpose, His Father of His authority, is Christ's Father, can't be anything else. His Word does as He knows His Father does. His Word cannot do anything else but what the Father intends. God cannot act against Himself.
The flesh prayed, on earth, with us, to His Father. The flesh knew the weakness of flesh, was flesh, for the Word became flesh. But the flesh was still the Word of God with all the temptations inherent in the flesh.

Christ said "I am the ressurection". How can He be BE an event? An event that has not occured as yet when He said that? He also said "I am the way, the truth and the life". God's Word IS the way, God's Word IS the truth and God's Word IS the life. God's Word IS the resurrection, His intent to defeat death by the glorification of His Word through the death and ressuection of the flesh.

Spirit became flesh, God's spirit of purpose, God's spirit of authority, the spirit of His Word from God, from the Father whose Word is God. The Word was never separated from God, the flesh was, yes, in the man of Jesus, but not His Word.

I like many of the things you've said. I agree your word is you. It comes from you, not from anyone else. It carries your thought and your intent and your purpose. You are in your word, that's is, what you know and what you understand are in it. Your wisdom is in your word. However, once your word leaves your mouth, it is no longer in you, so to speak. It is beside you or with you. God said, "Let there be light". As you know, when God declares it, it comes to be. So there was 'light' and God called the light Day.

Proverbs 8:22 tells us the LORD created 'me' at the beginning of his work. "I was beside him like a master workman." Pr. 8:30

I believe Abraham saw God's Day. I think the Father was speaking through the Son referring to the light when Jesus said, "Your father Abraham rejoiced that he was to see my day; he saw it and was glad" John 8:56 and I believe God's Day was the light who was the God of Israel and the LORD of hosts. The light was in the form and image of the invisible God. So that's what the men of old saw. It also means the disciples were seeing the Father when they were looking at Jesus as Jesus said.

 

[Imagican]

Mark,

First of all, IF you were a Catholic you HAD to 'believe' in 'trinity' or you wouldn't have been considered a Catholic.

Secondly, you wrote;

Christ will be our God and the high priest in the service of God. As Paul said, "he had to be made like his brethren in every respect, so that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God, to make expiation for the sins of the people." Hebrews 2:17 The glory of God will be the light and the Lamb will be the lamp of the light.

Just offering this goes to show that God did NOT 'make' Himself ANYTHING except our Creator. Yet you state that Christ HAD TO BE MADE........... Don't you 'get it'?

There MUST be a Father for there to BE a Son. There CANNOT be a 'son' without there FIRST being a father. In order to 'believe' in 'trinity' one MUST ignore the implications of the relationship of, and even the WORD son itself, as it pertains to a 'father'. WHY? For the simple sake of a 'man-made' doctrine?

Look at ALL the scripture one is FORCED to ignore or alter in order to 'justify' this 'trinity'. When ALL one NEED do is accept what has been offered by God and His Son Themselves.

NOT ONCE in ALL of scripture did ANYONE even 'mention' a 'trinity'. Yet men came along and 'created' this 'holy trinity' and taught it as if it WERE something out of The Word itself. That ought to be warning enough.

God OFFERED His ONLY begotten Son as sacrifice for our sins. Christ willingly and obdiently followed the will of His Father and offered HIS LIFE for the sake of ours.

How do you contend with scripture that purposely SHOWS that Christ is The SON of God rather than God Himself? How do you explain away statements made by Christ Himself that STATE that God IS 'greater than He'? That ALL He possessed was GIVEN Him BY GOD? That there ARE things that HE DOES NOT KNOW AND ONLY THE FATHER DOES? And things like, "My Father, why hath thou forsaken me''? Must be tough ones to answer from a 'trinitarian' point of view.

I NEED NO 'man-made' doctrine to KNOW God through His Son. All I NEED do is accept what has been offered through scripture as revealed through The Spirit. And HOW is this EVEN possible if I 'create' a 'spirit' of my OWN?

In other words, I can 'call' Christ ANYTHING of my choosing. I can "MAKE" Him ANYTHING that I choose to 'make' Him. The problem is; IF I DO SO, I have created a 'different' Christ than that which IS The Son of God.

So Mark, follow this one:

Simply ACCEPT the 'simplicity' that IS Christ Jesus. Allow Him into your heart and you will NEED no 'man-made' doctrine in order to develope a PERSONAL relationship with God through His Son. Refusing such simplicity is to rely on 'man's limited understanding' and self-will rather than the will of God and HIS understanding.

Christ IS The Son of God. Simple huh? God IS The Father of Christ. This is simple TOO huh? Anything that one 'chooses' to 'add' to this is simply that; something 'added' by man to an understanding ALREADY completely revealed to those that will heed His understanding through the Words offered by Jesus Christ.

Now, WHY do you suppose that it took over a HUNDRED years AFTER Christ's visit to this earth for "MAN" to 'create' this 'trinity'? Why were the FIRST believers in Christ TOTALLY unaware of this 'doctrine'? And have read the WARNINGS given by Paul and OTHER apostles that it WOULD happen that there would be thoset that WOULD teach 'another doctrine' to the demise of those that would choose to 'follow THEM'? So, you've ALREADY been warned.

MEC