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!

Jesus Is God: Part 1

You asked about Spirit and I replied. Now you have lots of material to work from.

Yeah and that's very interestiing to me how it seems like a lot of people don't believe that we are comprised of spirit/soul/body. That our spirit isn't us and is merely (!!) the breath of God which gives life to our flesh, and it goes back to God when the flrsh dies.

He told us in scripture, behold I have given you a new spirit, when we're born again. All things become new. So where Adam died in spirit on the day of the fall, it is risen again as a new spirit that is ours. I give you...a new spirit.

And this boy has his own consciousness and voice! He talks directly to God. The Holy Spirit bears witness with our spirit.

If we don't believe he is there, how can we hear him or be led by him? Walking by the flesh is walking by sight. Walking in the spirit is being led by the Spirit.

We've all been born of the Spirit again. Right?! That which is born of the spirit is spirit...

And if we're seated in Heavenly places with the Lord right now and you believe this, then it's a good guess that it is our spirit which can come and go as he pleases and is there. And here, the vreath of God hasn't left since being reborn. So we're here, and there, at one. The flesh can not stand before God, so it's our spirit. It has to be.

Spirit/soul/body. Three in one. Are you not one with yourself? We are a shadow of things to come, where God is Fatger/Son/Holy Spirit, three in one, which is one and yet is really three also.
 
He was caught up to heaven in the Spirit, not the body, as a witness to what God showed Him for future generations.

Paul
I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago was caught up to the third heaven. Whether it was in the body or out of the body I do not know—God knows.

I don't know why you can't accept the testimony that we are spirit, (from God), in the tent of the body. ( biology sent in motion by God in the beginning)

Its not the body that dwells in that heavenly dwelling.
For we know that if the earthly tent we live in is destroyed, we have a building from God, an eternal house in heaven, not built by human hands
If we believe the translators John was caught up by the Holy Spirit. That doesn't necessitate that he left his body. He could simply be saying he saw a vision. It is a book full of symbolism.

Paul said he didn't even know so I don't know what we can take from that.

You asked why I can't accept that we are spirit. It's because I believe what the Scriptures say. They don't say that man is a spirit. They do say, God Himself actually, that man is flesh. Think about that. God Himself said man is flesh. Now, how can I beleive that man is a spirit when God stated plainly that man is flesh? God said to Adam, "YOU" are dust or earth. How can I beleive that man is spirit when God said Adam was dust? When Moses recorded the creation of Adam he called the creation man. Thus man is dust. How can I not beleive that man is dust/flesh when I have it in writing from the master of creation. If anyone knows what man is, it's God. How can I not believe Him?

I don't want to beat a dead horse but it's the case. When we have comprehensive study of how all of these terms are used in Scripture it becomes clear what they mean and what the Bible teaches. The problem is that today Christiamity is an echo chamber. Everyone just repeats the same things and if anyone tries to say something different they're ostracize. I'm not referring to people here but rather the church at large. Since it's an echo chamber there's not much chance of fixing error because those who try are shown the right foot of fellowship. And so the status quo is never in danger.

If we're ever going to get back the the original faith we've got to start challenging our own beliefs. I had to do that a dozen or so years ago. It was an eye opening experience. It was also a very liberating experience. For the first time I got to see what the original Christian faith was and it is vastly different than what we have today. I would never go back to what we have today.
 
Psa_33:6 By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth.

Right. We exhale when we speak, there is a breath. One can not be on the inhale and speak at the same moment. So it was done by the breath of His mouth and with His words.
 
You asked why I can't accept that we are spirit. It's because I believe what the Scriptures say. They don't say that man is a spirit. They do say, God Himself actually, that man is flesh. Think about that. God Himself said man is flesh.

The man was considered flesh after the fall. But how do you reconcile this scripture from Ezekial?

Ezekial 36:26=27
26 A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.

27 And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.../

Question. Are you Born Again?
If yes, then what is this saying here? He directly refers to our spirit as being not 'only' His Spirit, which is here too...
 
Right. We exhale when we speak, there is a breath. One can not be on the inhale and speak at the same moment. So it was done by the breath of His mouth and with His words.
Psalm 33 is a praise and worship psalm. Listening to the videos, I feel as though I am back in my home church. Having a blessed time. Thank you Lord for saving me.

Praise to the Ruler of the World as the Protector of His People.
This entire psalm is a call to lively and joyful praise of God for His wonderful and glorious attributes and works, as displayed in creation, and of His general and special providence, in view of which the psalmist, in the name of all believers, professes trust and joy and invokes God’s mercy.
v. 1. Rejoice in the Lord, O ye righteous, those justified by the grace of God; for praise is comely, fitting, proper, for the upright, it is both their duty and their honor to praise the Lord; for silence on their part would be equivalent to a denial of His blessings.
v. 2. Praise the Lord with harp, a kind of zither; sing unto Him with the psaltery and an instrument of ten strings, a ten-stringed harp or lute, which was also used in the Temple orchestra.
v. 3. Sing unto Him a new song, one especially adapted to the occasion; play skillfully with a loud noise, with a vim, showing the eagerness of the heart to praise the glory of Jehovah in a song never heard before.
v. 4. For the Word of the Lord is right, upright, true, not full of mistakes and contradictions; and all His works are done in truth, in faithfulness, the fulfillment always agreeing with His promises.
v. 5. He loveth righteousness and judgment; He delights to show these attributes of His divine essence. The earth is full of the goodness of the Lord, of the many proofs of His kindness.
v. 6. By the Word of the Lord, the great Word which was in the beginning with God, Joh_1:1-3, were the heavens made, Pro_8:22-30; and all the host of them by the breath of His mouth, by the power of His Spirit, the reference obviously being to the third person of the Trinity.
v. 7. He, the Triune God, gathereth the waters of the sea together as an heap, the mighty ocean being firmly held together by the almighty power of Jehovah; He layeth up the depths in storehouses, assigning to the vast extent of the ocean waters their place where they must stay. Jesus in the Old Testament.
v. 8. Let all the earth, even the inanimate creatures, fear the Lord; let all the inhabitants of the world, especially men, who are endowed with reason and sense, stand in awe of Him, with a reverence verging on fear.
v. 9. For He spake, with the almighty word of His command, and it was done; He commanded, and it stood fast. The reference is plainly to the story of creation: God said, Let there be; and there was, Genesis 1. God is furthermore to be praised on account of His almighty rule of the universe.
v. 10. The Lord bringeth the counsel to the heathen to naught, making void their plans as actually devised; He maketh the devices of the people, the very thoughts and intentions of their hearts, of none effect, thus frustrating their wickedness.
v. 11. The counsel of the Lord standeth forever, in contrast with the vain counsels and thoughts of men, the thoughts of His heart to all generations, abiding forever.
v. 12. Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord, Jehovah, as their Ruler, being also their greatest treasure; and the people whom He hath chosen for His own inheritance, as was the case in Israel at the time of David, the spiritual Israel, the Church of God, being His heritage in the highest sense of the word.
v. 13. The Lord, as the great Ruler of the universe, looketh from heaven, with the eyes of His omniscience; He beholdeth all the sons of men, not one being hidden from His knowledge.
v. 14. From the place of His habitation He looketh upon all the inhabitants of the earth, all their deeds being open to His gaze.
v. 15. He fashioneth their hearts alike, He is the Former of their hearts all at once, both in the creation of each soul and in forming the thoughts of the heart under His providence; He considereth all their works, understanding exactly how they put their plans into execution.
v. 16. There is no king saved by the multitude of an host, no matter what display of strength and arms he may make; a mighty man is not delivered by much strength, all this is useless without God.
v. 17. An horse is a vain thing for safety, for a man to rely on; neither shall He deliver any by His great strength; as it is a delusion for help and victory, so it will disappoint him who absolutely relies upon it to carry him to safety. All this is subject to God’s government.
v. 18. Behold, the eye of the Lord is upon them that fear Him, the entire purpose of the world and of His government is realized in them, upon them that hope in His mercy, putting aside all trust in themselves;
v. 19. to deliver their soul from death, sustaining them in all dangers which threaten their life, and to keep them alive in famine. These facts being set forth, the psalmist makes the application to the Church of God of all times.
v. 20. Our soul waiteth for the Lord, trusting firmly in His help, no matter when it is manifested; He is our Help and our Shield.
v. 21. For our heart shall rejoice in Him because we have trusted in His holy name, as the foundation of their faith, love, and hope, from which all salvation comes.
v. 22. Let Thy mercy, O Lord, which alone gives the believers the courage to invoke the Lord, be upon us, according as we hope in Thee, their confident waiting and trusting and the divine answer being correlates. In this way the attitude of hope and trust is the attitude of the Church in all ages, sustained by the Word of God’s grace.
 
Last edited:
If we believe the translators John was caught up by the Holy Spirit. That doesn't necessitate that he left his body. He could simply be saying he saw a vision. It is a book full of symbolism.

Paul said he didn't even know so I don't know what we can take from that.

You asked why I can't accept that we are spirit. It's because I believe what the Scriptures say. They don't say that man is a spirit. They do say, God Himself actually, that man is flesh. Think about that. God Himself said man is flesh. Now, how can I beleive that man is a spirit when God stated plainly that man is flesh? God said to Adam, "YOU" are dust or earth. How can I beleive that man is spirit when God said Adam was dust? When Moses recorded the creation of Adam he called the creation man. Thus man is dust. How can I not beleive that man is dust/flesh when I have it in writing from the master of creation. If anyone knows what man is, it's God. How can I not believe Him?

I don't want to beat a dead horse but it's the case. When we have comprehensive study of how all of these terms are used in Scripture it becomes clear what they mean and what the Bible teaches. The problem is that today Christiamity is an echo chamber. Everyone just repeats the same things and if anyone tries to say something different they're ostracize. I'm not referring to people here but rather the church at large. Since it's an echo chamber there's not much chance of fixing error because those who try are shown the right foot of fellowship. And so the status quo is never in danger.

If we're ever going to get back the the original faith we've got to start challenging our own beliefs. I had to do that a dozen or so years ago. It was an eye opening experience. It was also a very liberating experience. For the first time I got to see what the original Christian faith was and it is vastly different than what we have today. I would never go back to what we have today.

We all need to be filled with the Holy Spirit.
 
If we believe the translators John was caught up by the Holy Spirit. That doesn't necessitate that he left his body. He could simply be saying he saw a vision. It is a book full of symbolism.

Paul said he didn't even know so I don't know what we can take from that.

You asked why I can't accept that we are spirit. It's because I believe what the Scriptures say. They don't say that man is a spirit. They do say, God Himself actually, that man is flesh. Think about that. God Himself said man is flesh. Now, how can I beleive that man is a spirit when God stated plainly that man is flesh? God said to Adam, "YOU" are dust or earth. How can I beleive that man is spirit when God said Adam was dust? When Moses recorded the creation of Adam he called the creation man. Thus man is dust. How can I not beleive that man is dust/flesh when I have it in writing from the master of creation. If anyone knows what man is, it's God. How can I not believe Him?

I don't want to beat a dead horse but it's the case. When we have comprehensive study of how all of these terms are used in Scripture it becomes clear what they mean and what the Bible teaches. The problem is that today Christiamity is an echo chamber. Everyone just repeats the same things and if anyone tries to say something different they're ostracize. I'm not referring to people here but rather the church at large. Since it's an echo chamber there's not much chance of fixing error because those who try are shown the right foot of fellowship. And so the status quo is never in danger.

If we're ever going to get back the the original faith we've got to start challenging our own beliefs. I had to do that a dozen or so years ago. It was an eye opening experience. It was also a very liberating experience. For the first time I got to see what the original Christian faith was and it is vastly different than what we have today. I would never go back to what we have today.
Again you try to bend everything to fit your belief, "Come up here" and "I was in the spirit not flesh" is clear to me.
Paul didn't know but considered both as valid. It suggests to me it wasn't Paul speaking of himself as some believe and he heard the testimony from a 3rd party. Not the person caught up. And the 3rd party was held in such high esteem Paul considered the source truthful.

Moses and Elijah met with Jesus on the mountain top and Jesus was there.

Jesus testified also about a heavenly dwelling for His disciples just as Paul did away from the body in our heavenly dwelling.

My Father’s house has many rooms; if that were not so, would I have told you that I am going there to prepare a place for you?
 
He was caught up to heaven in the Spirit, not the body, as a witness to what God showed Him for future generations.

Paul
I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago was caught up to the third heaven. Whether it was in the body or out of the body I do not know—God knows.

I don't know why you can't accept the testimony that we are spirit, (from God), in the tent of the body. ( biology sent in motion by God in the beginning)

Its not the body that dwells in that heavenly dwelling.
For we know that if the earthly tent we live in is destroyed, we have a building from God, an eternal house in heaven, not built by human hands
Revelation 1:10–11 (KJV 1900): I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet, 11 Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea

Revelation 4:1–2 (KJV 1900): After this I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me; which said, Come up hither, and I will shew thee things which must be hereafter. 2 And immediately I was in the spirit

The passages say that John was in the spirit. If John was the spirit, who is the "I"?

If you look at the passage from Paul and begin in the previous chapter it becomes clear that he is talking about the Resurrection, not what happens when people die. 'This mortal must put on immortality'. Immorraliry is put on at the Resurrection. In this passage Paul is actually arguing against the idea that man is a spirit. That's what the Greeks believed and that idea was finding it's way into the church at Corinth. If we look we see that Paul says He doesn't want to found naked. In that context that is to be without a body. That was the ultimate goal in Greek Philosophy, to escape the flesh. Paul said he didn't want that. Instead he wanted his mortality to be swallowed up of life. The Greek word he uses literally means to put on over. Like one puts a coat over their clothes. Paul wanted to put on immortality over his mortality. He wasn't looking to leave the body. The earthly tent and heavenly house in context are mortality and immortality. Why is the house in Heaven? It's because that is where our immortality is. Our immortality comes through Christ and Christ is in Heaven.

It's our presuppositions that are the issue. Christians are given a framework of belief before they begin their own journey. When one becomes a Christian they are "taught" what the Bible says. Once this framework is established it becomes the basis for their presuppositions. In other words, how they interact with the Scriptures, is based on what they beleive, which is what they were taught. This is why things never change. Error is just perpetuated. It's not until we begin to question everything we believe and compare it to Scripture to see what actually can stand that we begin to shed the error.

I've been where you guys are and made some of the very same arguments you're making. However, there was an event that took place in my faith that made me question some of the doctrines I'd been taught. So, I decided to compare them with Scripture and came to find out that they couldnt hold water. Then a light came on. If those doctrines were wrong, what else have I been wrongly taught? At that point I took every single doctrine I beleived and held it up to the Scriptures. Many of those doctrines couldn't hold water. So, they got tossed to the curb. But, it wasn't until I questioned everything that I began to see the problem. As long as I held to certain positions they would influence how I saw the Scriptures. But, if I held none sacred and let fall whatever might fall and let the Scriotures say whatever they said then I could begin to get to the actual truth of Scripture.

I don't know exactly how to say this, if it comes across as arrogant it's not meant to be. But, when was inside the box I couldn't see the outside. All I could see was the box. However, when I got outside of the box I could see the big picture. I could see the places where I had been in error that I couldn't see when I was inside the box. It gave me a completely different perspective. I don't mean this offensively at all, but, you guys are still in box. That's why you don't see or get a lot of what I'm saying. We're coming at this from very different angles. When I say something you (it's natural) filter it through your theological presuppositions and often it doesn't fit or make sense. However, it make perfect sense from my perspective. Basically it's like were on different pages. If you just look at what I say and filter my words through the statements I've made you'll see it all fits together. It just doesn't fit with the Christian framework you guys have been taught. Like I said, I used to have that same framework so I know how it looks to you.

This is why it's so hard to change ones beliefs. If I had held to certain doctrines and not held them up to Scripture they would be part of that framework that influenced how I interacted with the Scriptures. That's why we have to challenge everything we believe. If we only do one or two doctrines the remaining doctrines will influence us and may keep is from a correct understanding.
 
Any son or the first born?
I first stated: "The use of firstborn can mean preeminence without the referent having actually been born (Psalms 89:27; Jer 31:9). It is about the sovereignty of Christ, hence what is in the verses that follow."

You replied: "One can make that claim, however, Jesus is the first born. Th as ts why He has preeminence."

I asked: "He is the firstborn, as the Bible tells us, but the whole point is, that does it mean in that verse?"

You then asked: "I agree context determines the meaning. Again, who is it that has preeminence?"

I responded: "The Son."

And now you are asking if by Son I mean the firstborn, but that is the word the very meaning of which we are trying to determine. The circle of your reasoning is complete.

It's not hard to notice that you didn't even address the passages I provided, you simply sidestepped it all. However, the whole point of those passages proves my assertion, that the use of firstborn can mean preeminence without the referent having actually been born. Do you simply want to ignore the significance of Psalms 89:27? It is a messianic Psalm where God says of David, "I will make him the firstborn." Here, firstborn clearly means that God will put him in a position of preeminence, "the highest of the kings of the earth." David is here the prototype of the coming Messiah, the "firstborn," and has nothing to do with David's being born or coming into being. This is almost certainly what Paul had in mind.

You didn't. That's why I asked you to explain,
I did. It was in the very next thing you quoted from me.

You first stated: "Eternally begotten is a logical contradiction."

I replied: "Not necessarily."

Then I quoted you: "Begotten indicates a point in time"

To which I replied: "Not necessarily; certainly not in reference to Christ. In reference to the Son, begotten (monogenes) refers to his being the only Son of the Father (all nine references in the NT mean the same). It speaks to the unique relationship between the Son and the Father and has nothing to do with begetting or coming into being."

See, I explained it in the same post.

If I assume I could be wrong. I'd rather you explain what exactly you mean. Saying, "It's obvious, is it not?" seems to me to be a way to avoid explanation.
I have explained it, more than once now, including in the quote you wrote this particular response to.

To be born.
You claim that "begotten" means "to be born." Prove it from Scripture as it applies to the Son.

That's what you say, but Scripture doesn't say that. Where does Scripture say the Son has always existed? John 1 doesn't say it. It says in the beginning was the word. Gen 1 says in the beginning God created the Heavens and the Earth. Okay, you've proved that Christ existed at the beginning of creation. Can you prove He existed before that?
The tense of the Greek word, en, in John 1:1 translated as "was," expresses continuous action in the past. This not only means that the Word already existed when the beginning began--"In the beginning was the Word"--but that the Word existed for eternity past as God--"the Word was with God, and the Word was God". If we want to stick with only the English, "the Word was God" means that the Word was God in nature. If the Word was God in nature, then by definition it is eternal, or it cannot be God. Well, it could if you want to deny that God is eternal, in which case he isn't really God, at least not the God of the Bible.

This contrasts with the Greek word, egeneto, in John 1:3, "All things were made through him," and John 1:14, "the word became flesh," which means to enter into existence at a point in time. This is why your position is so wrong--the Son "became" and was "produced," entering into existence at a point in time.

Col 1:16-17 proves that Christ existed before creation. Okay, we've already established that. How does that prove He existed in eternity past? That seems to me to be an assumption on your part.
Not at all an assumption. If all things were created by him (and it says they were) and if he is before all things (and it says he is), then the only logical conclusion is that he is not a created thing. The only "thing" that is uncreated is God, which means he has existed for eternity past.

Is it your contention then that Christ is the adopted Son of God?
Of course not. That would mean there are two Gods, which would actually be the least of our worries. It would lead to all sorts of absurdities. It was just an analogy which refuted your point that "A son by definition is the offspring of the Father."

It's simple. A father produces a son through procreation. Therefore. logically, the father must predate the son.
It's always simple when thinking of humans in human terms. Or are you now suggesting that the Father procreated with some "Mother" to produce the Son?

If Christ has always existed then the Father didn't predate Him, thus He couldn't be a son.
Again, not necessarily, for all the reasons I have given.

Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Was God and yet in some way distinct. Sounds exactly like a Father-Son relationship, with both having the same (eternal) nature that one would expect of a Father who is God and his Son.
 
Your examples would be Modalism. H2O is not liquid, ice, and vapor, all at the same time. They're different forms of the same substance. Modalism says that God is a being who sometimes manifests as the Father, sometimes the Son, sometimes the Spirit. It doesn't hold to the three separate persons concept.
While I do agree with your analysis, that it would support Modalism as presented, I have used the argument to the triple point of water. In thermodynamics, the triple point of a substance is when under a certain pressure and at a certain temperature, a substance simultaneously exists as a solid, liquid, and gas (thermodynamic equilibrium).

So, if something as simple as water can coexist as solid, liquid, and gas--one substance in three states--is it so inconceivable that the one God who created water can coexist as three persons?
 
Revelation 1:10–11 (KJV 1900): I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet, 11 Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea

Revelation 4:1–2 (KJV 1900): After this I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me; which said, Come up hither, and I will shew thee things which must be hereafter. 2 And immediately I was in the spirit

The passages say that John was in the spirit. If John was the spirit, who is the "I"?

If you look at the passage from Paul and begin in the previous chapter it becomes clear that he is talking about the Resurrection, not what happens when people die. 'This mortal must put on immortality'. Immorraliry is put on at the Resurrection. In this passage Paul is actually arguing against the idea that man is a spirit. That's what the Greeks believed and that idea was finding it's way into the church at Corinth. If we look we see that Paul says He doesn't want to found naked. In that context that is to be without a body. That was the ultimate goal in Greek Philosophy, to escape the flesh. Paul said he didn't want that. Instead he wanted his mortality to be swallowed up of life. The Greek word he uses literally means to put on over. Like one puts a coat over their clothes. Paul wanted to put on immortality over his mortality. He wasn't looking to leave the body. The earthly tent and heavenly house in context are mortality and immortality. Why is the house in Heaven? It's because that is where our immortality is. Our immortality comes through Christ and Christ is in Heaven.

It's our presuppositions that are the issue. Christians are given a framework of belief before they begin their own journey. When one becomes a Christian they are "taught" what the Bible says. Once this framework is established it becomes the basis for their presuppositions. In other words, how they interact with the Scriptures, is based on what they beleive, which is what they were taught. This is why things never change. Error is just perpetuated. It's not until we begin to question everything we believe and compare it to Scripture to see what actually can stand that we begin to shed the error.

I've been where you guys are and made some of the very same arguments you're making. However, there was an event that took place in my faith that made me question some of the doctrines I'd been taught. So, I decided to compare them with Scripture and came to find out that they couldnt hold water. Then a light came on. If those doctrines were wrong, what else have I been wrongly taught? At that point I took every single doctrine I beleived and held it up to the Scriptures. Many of those doctrines couldn't hold water. So, they got tossed to the curb. But, it wasn't until I questioned everything that I began to see the problem. As long as I held to certain positions they would influence how I saw the Scriptures. But, if I held none sacred and let fall whatever might fall and let the Scriotures say whatever they said then I could begin to get to the actual truth of Scripture.

I don't know exactly how to say this, if it comes across as arrogant it's not meant to be. But, when was inside the box I couldn't see the outside. All I could see was the box. However, when I got outside of the box I could see the big picture. I could see the places where I had been in error that I couldn't see when I was inside the box. It gave me a completely different perspective. I don't mean this offensively at all, but, you guys are still in box. That's why you don't see or get a lot of what I'm saying. We're coming at this from very different angles. When I say something you (it's natural) filter it through your theological presuppositions and often it doesn't fit or make sense. However, it make perfect sense from my perspective. Basically it's like were on different pages. If you just look at what I say and filter my words through the statements I've made you'll see it all fits together. It just doesn't fit with the Christian framework you guys have been taught. Like I said, I used to have that same framework so I know how it looks to you.

This is why it's so hard to change ones beliefs. If I had held to certain doctrines and not held them up to Scripture they would be part of that framework that influenced how I interacted with the Scriptures. That's why we have to challenge everything we believe. If we only do one or two doctrines the remaining doctrines will influence us and may keep is from a correct understanding.

Don't you mean that was John, in revelation? It is about the resurection but when Paul was taken up, and didn't know if he was in the spirit or in the flesh, that was because he could not tell because he could see and touch and hear and smell, he had all of his senses.

But it doesn't mean that we do or do not have a spirit within us. It means he couldn't tell. But if we can agree that the flesh passes away and we put on immortality...it's describing that we do have a spirit and that we 'put on' our immortality (our new heavenly spiritual body).

It will be an upgrade. But it will be a body. With you inside of it, like you are now!

If you find this hard to believe, then just who is it, that "puts on' immortality?
 
Again you try to bend everything to fit your belief, "Come up here" and "I was in the spirit not flesh" is clear to me.
Paul didn't know but considered both as valid. It suggests to me it wasn't Paul speaking of himself as some believe and he heard the testimony from a 3rd party. Not the person caught up. And the 3rd party was held in such high esteem Paul considered the source truthful.

Moses and Elijah met with Jesus on the mountain top and Jesus was there.

Jesus testified also about a heavenly dwelling for His disciples just as Paul did away from the body in our heavenly dwelling.

My Father’s house has many rooms; if that were not so, would I have told you that I am going there to prepare a place for you?
Randy, it seems clear to you because you believe it's possible to be outside of the body. Take the other position and look at it. What if it was impossible for man to be outside of the body? How would you understand those passages. Remember, Paul was a Pharisee, he understood that man was a flesh being with the breath of God in Him. With that belief how could he be saying a man was outside of the body?

I'm not twisting things to fit my position. I'm trying to get you to look at this from a different perspective. I'm trying to you to think outside of the box.
 
While I do agree with your analysis, that it would support Modalism as presented, I have used the argument to the triple point of water. In thermodynamics, the triple point of a substance is when under a certain pressure and at a certain temperature, a substance simultaneously exists as a solid, liquid, and gas (thermodynamic equilibrium).

So, if something as simple as water can coexist as solid, liquid, and gas--one substance in three states--is it so inconceivable that the one God who created water can coexist as three persons?
All things are possible with God.
.
 
Randy, it seems clear to you because you believe it's possible to be outside of the body. Take the other position and look at it. What if it was impossible for man to be outside of the body? How would you understand those passages. Remember, Paul was a Pharisee, he understood that man was a flesh being with the breath of God in Him. With that belief how could he be saying a man was outside of the body?

I'm not twisting things to fit my position. I'm trying to get you to look at this from a different perspective. I'm trying to you to think outside of the box.
I believe God could pull my spirit wherever He wanted to. Daniel had visions as he wrote. John was pulled into heaven as he wrote and he would know.
 
I believe God could pull my spirit wherever He wanted to. Daniel had visions as he wrote. John was pulled into heaven as he wrote and he would know.
Rev 1:1 The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show to his servants the things that must soon take place. He made it known by sending his angel to his servant John

Rev 1:9 I, John, your brother and partner in the tribulation and the kingdom and the patient endurance that are in Jesus, was on the island called Patmos on account of the word of God and the testimony of Jesus.
Rev 1:10 I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, and I heard behind me a loud voice like a trumpet (ESV)

Notice that God gave Jesus the revelation who then gives it to an angel to give to John. John was given a vision, while on Patmos; the “Spirit” referred to is the Holy Spirit.
 
Rev 1:1 The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show to his servants the things that must soon take place. He made it known by sending his angel to his servant John

Rev 1:9 I, John, your brother and partner in the tribulation and the kingdom and the patient endurance that are in Jesus, was on the island called Patmos on account of the word of God and the testimony of Jesus.
Rev 1:10 I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, and I heard behind me a loud voice like a trumpet (ESV)

Notice that God gave Jesus the revelation who then gives it to an angel to give to John. John was given a vision, while on Patmos; the “Spirit” referred to is the Holy Spirit.
After this I looked, and there before me was a door standing open in heaven. And the voice I had first heard speaking to me like a trumpet said, “Come up here, and I will show you what must take place after this.” 2 At once I was in the Spirit, and there before me was a throne in heaven with someone sitting on it.
 
John 20:28
And Thomas answered and said ὁ κύριός μου καὶ ὁ θεός μου

ὁ The ( Is a definite article. It limits the meaning of a noun to one particular thing)
κύριός Lord
μου of me
καὶ and
ὁ The ( Is a definite article. It limits the meaning of a noun to one particular thing)
θεός God
μου of me

And how does YESHUA respond to Thomas calling Him, The Lord and The God

John 20:29
Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen Me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.
 
Back
Top