Is Jesus God?

Quickfire · Aug 19, 2013

Sorry for my ranting i feel wounded im wounded and hert and i feel a sense of hatred in this thread i have spent all weekend trying to get rid of my battle scars i have been praying and just when i find my self healing i read this stuff here, that reopens all the other conversations i have been involved in lately from heart broken people who are herting,

it feels like an merry ground here you yell i yell everyone yells you hert i hert everyone herts its a family where brothers and sisters , i understand this , i understand herting people please let go forgive and forget,

stop blaming others for your own hert or wrongs that people have wronged you for,, except jesus into your life read the word chill out and lets party in the name of Jesus amen. sing out for Jesus.

Farther god let this topic be history in the making where all our brother an sister get a long even if its just for one week farther. Farther god please let this week be the week where all are past conflicts and disputes are put behind us, farther god please let this be the week where we forget are past conflicts

Farther god let this be the week where people see the light and forgive there brothers for past conflicts pleas farther god, i feel so wounded farther god i need a vacation on a beautiful meditranian beach,

kenisyes · Aug 19, 2013

phil36 said:

Hi, Phil? So why did you?

kenisyes · Aug 19, 2013

Quickfire said:

Sorry for my ranting i feel wounded im wounded and hert and i feel a sense of hatred in this thread i have spent all weekend trying to get rid of my battle scars i have been praying and just when i find my self healing i read this stuff here, that reopens all the other conversations a have been involved in lately from heart broken people who are herting,

it feels like an merry ground here you yell i yell everyone yells you hert i hert everyone herts its a family where brothers an sisters , i understand this , i understand herting people please let go forgive and forget,

stop blaming others for your own hert or wrongs that people have wronged you for except jesus into your life read the word chill out and lets party in the name of Jesus amen. sing out for Jesus.

Farther god let this topic be history in the making where all our brother an sister get a long even if t just for one week farther. Farther god please let this be week where all are past conflicts and disputes are put behind us, farther god please let this be the week where we all become friends here.

Farther god let this be the week where people see the light and forgive there brothers for past conflicts pleas farther god, i feel so wounded farther god i need a vacation on a beautiful meditranian beach,

Why can't I see a like button for this post? I like it and will add an amen.

Quickfire · Aug 19, 2013

kenisyes said:

shame on you ken you know i have only just posted because you have posted only 1 minute after mine that is why there is no likes your just looking to afflict please ken for the sake of others please let go and forgive and forget.

kenisyes · Aug 19, 2013

Quickfire said:

No, I did not know that. I am not trying to afflict. I am trying to agree with you. If you feel I am, I will stop responding to this thread.

Quickfire · Aug 19, 2013

You should never give up on a brother ken stand up and be strong, ding ding ding, fight on for the right reasons,

march on sort it out today and this is moment in time s a new start to you to me to everyone,

stand up and be counted,[video=youtube;WgcovIu3k9o]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WgcovIu3k9o[/video]

kenisyes · Aug 19, 2013

Quickfire said:

Thanks. Life is full of choices. And battles. And consequences.

Quickfire · Aug 19, 2013

Conséquences for who ,sounds like your now threatening , bring it on muppet.

cfultz3 · Aug 19, 2013

Quickfire said:

Are you even serious? The man is agreeing with you and you are carrying on like someone looking for blood. Relax dude.....

jonathanbchristian · Aug 19, 2013

Antoni123 said:

God is not wondering if you are a man. Stop wondering if He is God.

oldhermit · Aug 19, 2013

kenisyes said:

Very well. Let us engage in a little Greek exegesis of John 1:1.

These arguments and comments do not originate with me. I have them from a professor of New Testament Greek. I have taken the liberty to rework some of the arguments and added some of my own comments and observations.

εν αρχη ην ο λογος και ο λογος ην προς τον θεον και θεος ην ο λογος

There are a couple things you need to know about Greek syntax in order to understand what John is really saying in this verse. First, Koine Greek normally drops the article in a prepositional phrase. The absence of the article in a prepositional phrase is normal, and doesn't mean anything. It is the INCLUSION of the article in a prepositional phrase that is unusual, and thus, means something.

The prepositional phrase "εν αρχη" doesn't contain an article, but is still properly translated "in the beginning." The prepositional phrase "προς τον θεον," however, does include the article (τον). Since it was proper not to include it, the INCLSION then of the article here means something. In general, the inclusion of an article when it is not expected means you are being specific about a particular individual who is God. In order to fully understand how that effects this verse, we need to go to the last clause. To understand the implications of the last clause, you need to understand Greek syntax. First, Greek distinguishes the role a noun plays in a sentence by changing the case. In general, if the noun is the subject, it is in the nominative case. If it is the direct object, it is in the accusative case. However, there is a strange class of verbs that do not take a direct object, they take a predicate. There are three verbs that do this in Koine Greek. This means that you have two nouns that are the same case (nominative), where one is the subject, and one is the predicate. So if both are in the same case, how do you know which is the subject, and which is the predicate?

Here are the rules: Notice, I said these are rules. You can't ignore them, you can't change them, you can't remove them, and you can't add to them!
1. If both nouns have the article attached, then the first is the subject, the second is the predicate.
2. If NEITHER noun has the article attached, then the first is the subject, the second is the predicate.
3. If one has an article, but the other does not, then the one WITH the article is the subject, and the one without the article is the predicate.

So in the phrase "και θεος ην ο λογος", we see that λογος has an article (o) and θεος does not. Thus, o λογος is the subject, while θεος is the predicate.

When translated into English, because λογος is the subject, we have to put it first. English has syntactical rules that must be followed as well. So, this is properly translated "And the word was God."

Now, there are THREE things this could mean (depending on the construction): Now pay attention because it is critical that this is understood.
a. The word was a LESSER god than the Father who is the τον θεον in the previous clause)
b. The word was the father.
c. The word was fully God, but was NOT the Father.

If John had written the clause: και ο λογος ην θεος, it would mean "the word was A god." That is, the word was a LESSER god than the father. The reason being is that since λογος is the subject, and is first, there is no grammatical reason to leave the article OFF of θεος, thus the absence of the article means something (since even if we gave it the article, it would STILL be the predicate). Therefore, the absence of the article would mean "A" god. In other words, since the inclusion of the article would not change the grammatical function of θεος, the exclusion of the article must therefore change the MEANING of θεος.

The absence of the article in a position where the inclusion of the article would NOT change the word's grammatical function would tell us there is a difference in specificity: the λογος is not the same individual as the Father.

Further, if it does not have an article, the position of θεος at the end of the sentence would tell us there is a difference in emphasis (θεος is being “de-emphasized”): λογος is less of a god than the Father. Thus, "και ο λογος ην θεος" can ONLY mean "the Word was a god." BUT, John did NOT use this construction. If John had written the clause: και ο λογος ην ο θεος , it would mean "the word was THEGod." That is, the word was exactly the same person as the Father. Meaning there is only ONE person, not two, and there would then be no trinity. The Father and the Son are nothing more than manifestations of the SAME GOD. They are NOT separate individuals. There is one God who simply "appears" at times in different forms. This would then lend support to the monotheist argument. The inclusion of the article with θεος would make it specific: the λογος was exactly the same individual as the Father (the exact same θεος just mentioned in the previous clause). Since both nouns have the article, θεος is grammatically LOCKED into occuring AFTER λογος. If it moved in front of λογος, it would change its grammatical function, and become the subject. Thus, in this construction, the position of θεος would not mean anything. It MUST appear there. Thus, the clause "και ο λογος ην ο θεος" can only mean "Jesus was THE God (the exact same individual as the Father)." BUT, John did NOT use this construction.

By writing it: και θεος ην ο λογος, John does TWO critical and clearly indicated things. First, he leaves the article OFF of θεος, thus indicating that word is NOT the same individual as the father. Second, he pops θεος to the front of the clause, placing extra emphasis on that word. By doing that, he makes it clear by the INCREASE in emphasis, that the absence of the article does NOT mean "lesser." Since the absence of the article does not mean "lesser god," it leaves us only one choice as to what it can mean: Not exactly the same INDIVIDUAL as the "τον θεον" of the second clause, but every bit as much GOD as the "τον θεον" of the second clause. Thus, the absence of the article tells us the θεος of the third clause is NOT the same individual as the τον θεον of the second clause. The position tells us that the absence of the article does NOT mean "lesser." By placing θεος in a position of emphasis, John is doing the equivalent of bolding it, underlining it, and adding an exclamation
point: The Word was God!

Now we see why John included the article in the prepositional phrase "προς τον θεον." He was being very specific. The Word is WITH a SPECIFIC being called "The God" (τον θεον). In the next clause, he then lets us know that the Word was completely EQUAL with "The God" in divinity, but through the careful use of the articles, has clued us in that the Word is not the SAME individual as "The God."

One of the objections raised to the divinity of Jesus is that λογος means “the mind, wisdom, intelligence, or plan of God” and
nothing more. It is argued that λογος is NOT an individual, it is just a way of describing the “mind” or “wisdom” of God (this was a common philosophy of the Gnostics). Thus, the λογος was not an individual, but the wisdom of God. So Jesus was not a “God” made flesh, but the wisdom of God or the mind of God, made flesh. That means He did not EXIST prior to His birth (as God). Prior to his physical birth, He was merely an IDEA, a PLAN in the MIND of God and that IDEA became a man.

John makes this interpretation completely absurd with the statement “ο λογος ην προς τον θεον” (the Word was WITH God).
Further, προς emphasizes AGREEMENT WITH, not necessarily location or proximity. You see, if the λογος is JUST the mind, intelligence, wisdom or plan of God, it can’t be anything OTHER than with Him. If the λογος is the intelligence of God, then by definition it HAS to be with Him, which makes “the Word was WITH God” a completely pointless statement.

It is the equivalent of saying, “My spinal cord, brain cells, and nerves are with me today.” Since, if you are alive, they can’t be anything other than with you, not only have you given no information, you have implied something that is not true. By making that statement, you are implying that there might be a situation in which they could be somewhere else other than with you. Yet John makes it crystal clear that his choice of words was not an accident. He places extra emphasis on the fact that the λογος was WITH God by RESTATING it in the second verse: “And this one was in the beginning WITH God.” ουτος references the subject of the previous sentence, which was λογος in all three clauses. Thus, John is making a statement that can ONLY be interpreted as meaning the λογος is an individual who is somehow the ultimate summation of the wisdom of God. By stating TWICE that the λογος was WITH God, John makes it clear that the fact that the Word is WITH God was a CHOICE. It takes a real, living individual to make a choice. Not only is this individual with God, He is also God Himself. That means Jesus DID exist prior to His birth (as He reveals Himself in John 17:5) “Father, glorify me with yourself, with the glory I had with you before the world was.”).

John's construction is so carefully crafted that it is often called the most concise theological statement ever made. With these seventeen words of verse one, he wrote a sentence that took me all of this space to explain. John leaves us only ONE option: Jesus is completely and totally God in every way that the Father is God, but Jesus is NOT the same individual as the Father.

NOBODY WRITES LIKE THE HOLY SPIRIT!

kenisyes · Aug 19, 2013

Quickfire said:

Consequences for everyone who makes a choice. Starting with me. I understood your video as saying I should stay here. Did I misunderstand?

kenisyes · Aug 19, 2013

oldhermit said:

I agree with the whole post, always did. And the conclusion I quoted. My objection to using this as a proof has always been the issue of "did He remain God when He took on flesh?" That's vs. 14. The proof of that was found in Heb. 1:7 last night. But this is not in the gospels as requested by the OP.

breno785au · Aug 19, 2013

I could be wrong here and i'll accept if I am but I guess I kinda see it as you need spiritual revelation of who Jesus Christ is, it's not something that someone can tell you or that you can even read about, though the scriptures will point to who He is. Like when Peter declared Jesus as the Christ in Matthew...

Matthew 16 15-17
He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?”
Simon Peter answered and said, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.”
Jesus answered and said to him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven...

Quickfire · Aug 19, 2013

kenisyes said:

ken i made a post 1 minute later you made a post 1 minute after that i make another 1 minute after that you make another to say no one has give you a like so ii will give you an amen, this is using an amen in a way that is not nice, may the lord forgive you,

sorry ken but you know fine well your trying to be cleaver, maybe you can think that you can be cleaver wIth other people but not me, even though you had done this i still give you a chance to which your reply life has consequences, i dont know who would reply like that to a post i made, i have given you 3 chances to put it right you wish not to,

ken you know what a muppet is its someone who behaves imature,

which is worse ken calling you a muppet or threatening your life,

oldhermit · Aug 19, 2013

kenisyes said:

To even suggest that Jesus ceased to be God in assuming human form is absurd. He has never ceased to be God. If you are still conflicted with this notion, then you did not understand one thing I shared with you in my Philippians 2 post. At any rate, here is the rest of the Hebrews 1 proof that serves as the rest of the story from Phil.2.
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]
In Hebrews 1, the Hebrew writer will present eight points of divine reinstatement. These will represent a change of status from all of the things we saw Jesus surrender in Philippians 2:6-8. Philippians chapter two saw him from the standpoint of the incarnation. Hebrews chapter one presents him from the standpoint of his resurrection and ascension. The eight points of divine reinstatement will be examined according to the order in which they appear in the text. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]1. Divine Right of Possession – He is “[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Heir of all things[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif],” verse three. The[/FONT] o[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]wnership of all things[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]has now passed to him. The uniqueness of this heirship[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]resides in the[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]fact that everything already belonged to him by right of creation [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]from the beginning. He is now heir not only by right of creation, “[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]He made the [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]worlds,[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]” but also by right of redemption “[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]He made[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]purification for sin[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif].” He not [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]only [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]created all things but has now purchased it[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]back.
[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]2. Divine Equality - “[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Exact representation of His nature[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif],” verse three – The [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]equality of which he emptied[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]himself in Philippians 2:6-7 is the same equality [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]that is expressed by the Hebrew writer as [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]representing God. This includes [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]intrinsic attributes as well as moral character. Not only are the limitations of the[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]natural world lifted that were imposed upon his flesh, but his moral character is [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]no longer subject to vulnerability. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]3. Divine Dignity - “[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Sit at My right hand[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]…,” verse three and Psalms 110:1. This is[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]the place[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]of [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]honor and authority. It is a place reserved exclusively for deity. The [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Lord is[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]the one who sits at the right hand. This place is occupied only by divine [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]invitation, [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]“[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]The Lord said…Sit at My right hand[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif].” This[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]is the place where [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]relationship is[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]confirmed - it is[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]the Son who sits.
[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]4. Divine Preeminence - “[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Today, I have begotten Thee[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif].” verse five and Psalms 2:7. [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]This is[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]the [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]installation of heavens’ King.[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]The
meaning of “Today” has received a [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]number of speculative interpretations by commentators and expositors. In the[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]third century A.D. Origen said that “today” spoke of “that timeless ever-present, [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]eternal day[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]that Christ inhabits”; A.W. Pink regards the use of “today” as a fixed [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]point in linear time. While he is correct in this, I believe him to be incorrect in [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]his application of the fixed point in time. He believes this to be the [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]virgin birth,[/FONT][/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Luke 2:11. The apostle Paul gives us the inspired explanation of Psalms 2:7. [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]In Acts 13:31-38, Paul quotes the Psalm and specifically points out that “today”[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]refers to the resurrection of[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]our Lord, “[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]In [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]that He raised Him from the dead[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif].” [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Thus, the expression “today” does not refer to “that timeless ever-present, [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]eternal day that[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Christ inhabits.” Nor does[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]he link it to the virgin birth. The [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Hebrew writer qualifies “today” in four related statements that fix the[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]point in [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]time of this appointment. It was the time when he was “[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]appointed [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]heir,[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]” when he [/FONT]“[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]made purification for sin,[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]” when he “[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]sat down at the right hand,[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]” and when he [/FONT]“[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]inherited a more excellent name than they.[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]” All of these were the result of his [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]resurrection from the dead. [/FONT]“[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Begotten[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]” - [/FONT][FONT=Symbol, serif][/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]έ[/FONT][FONT=Symbol, serif][/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]ά[/FONT][FONT=Symbol, serif][/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]-[/FONT][FONT=Symbol, serif][/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]first person singular perfect indicative active of [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]ά[/FONT][FONT=Symbol, serif][/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]- used in reference to men[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]who beget children. It means to engender, to [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]cause to rise. In the Jewish[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]sense, it refers to one who brings[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]others to his way of [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]life. Thus, Jesus is the first in a new order[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]of those who have embraced a new [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]way of life; who share a common relationship with God. These shall also rise [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]from the dead to eternal life, Colossians 1:18, Thayers p 113.
[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]5. Divine Privilege - “[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]And let all the angels of God worship Him[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif],” verse six. This q[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]uote [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]is found the [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]LXX translation of Deuteronomy 32:43, but is not found in [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]most [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]English [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]translations of the Old Testament. The New American Bible 1971 [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]quotes[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]it as “[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]glorify Him, all you angels of [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]God.[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]” (See also Isaiah 6:1-4 and [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Revelation 4:15). Receiving worship is a divinely exclusive privilege. Only God [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]justly receives[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]worship.
[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]6. Divine Sovereignty - “[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Thy God has anointed Thee with the oil of gladness above [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Thy [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]companions[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif],” verse nine. Who are these companions? I offer three [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]possibilities.
[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]a. It has been suggested that “companions” may refer to the angles of verses [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]four and five but, in relationship to Jesus, angels are not “fellow” anything as they occupy a[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]completely subordinate role.
[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]b. [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Could it be Christians? Christians are not any part of the context of chapter [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]one.
[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]c. The most fitting candidate contextually would have to be fellow kings - This is far more likely. Notice the inferences. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]* “[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Your throne[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]” as opposed to all other thrones which are temporal and will [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]be left to others.
[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]* “[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Your scepter[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]” as opposed to all other scepters whose judgments are not [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]always just.
[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]* “[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Your kingdom[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]” as opposed to all other kingdoms, none of which will stand [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]forever.
[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]* His standard of rule as opposed to all other standards, “[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]You have loved [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]righteousness [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]and hated iniquity[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]... .” Thus, he is appointed above all those[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]who possess thrones,[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]scepters, and kingdoms. He is truly King above all[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]kings [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]and Lord above all lords.
[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]7. Divine Prerogative - “[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]You shall roll them up[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif],” verse twelve and Psalms 102:26 [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]and Isaiah 34:4. This is a set of contrasts. [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]The nature of creation is temporal and[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]mutable. They [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]shall perish, become[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]old. They shall be rolled up and changed, [FONT=Times New Roman, serif][FONT=Times New Roman, serif][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]ἀ[/FONT][FONT=Symbol, serif][/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]ή[/FONT][FONT=Symbol, serif],[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif] not changed as in given a new form but changed and replaced [/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]with something[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]else. That which is worn out is discarded. What replaces it is a [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]heavenly dwelling place. In contrast to creation, Jesus is immutable, eternal and [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]external. He[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]laid the foundations of creation.[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]He will be here after he been[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]brings [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]it to[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]an end “[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]You remain.[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]” He is constant, never changing – “[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]You are the same.[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]” [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]He is eternal “[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Your years shall[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]not end.[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]”
[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]8. Divine Adjudication - “[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Your enemies a footstool for your feet[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif],” verse thirteen. [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Notice the[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]indicators of sovereignty in Psalms 110:1-7 from which this quote is[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]taken. All of them have judicial implications.
[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]a. “[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Sit at My right hand[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif].”
[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]b. “[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Enemies a footstool for Thy feet[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]”
[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]c. “[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Stretches forth His scepter[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif].”
[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]d. “[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Rule in the midst of His enemies[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]”
[/FONT]e[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]. “[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]He will scatter the kings[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif].”
[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]f. “[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]He will judge among the nations[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif].”
[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]g. “[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]He will fill them with corpses.”[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]
[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]h. “[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]He will scatter the chief men[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif].”
[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]i. “[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]He will lift up His head[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif].”[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif] So, the One who surrendered all is now restored as Lord of all. The mission of Second Position function for redemption is complete. Having retained his rightful place on heaven’s throne, he promises all who will attend him will share in his inheritance and he gives us the Third Position of deity – the Holy Spirit as the certainty of that inheritance.

[/FONT]

kenisyes · Aug 19, 2013

Quickfire said:

I'm going to try one more time.

There literally was no like button on the post. I understood you to say that that is because I answered too soon, the five minutes edit time had not elapsed. So I posted a like to you and an amen. Both were sincere, I agreed with you. There was no attempt to be "clever". I understood your video (the boxing champ) to be encouragement that I should remain in the thread. My response meant that everyone needs to choose which battles God wants him to fight, and whether I will remain in the thread was something I was still considering. You took it as a threat. I have attempted to put this right each time, and we have misunderstood each other.

Are you seriously considering threatening my life? Judging my behavior as immature is something you are not qualified to do. I Tim. 5:1 should explain it. You simply do not talk to elders in the Body of Christ as you are talking to me.

kenisyes · Aug 19, 2013

oldhermit said:

I think you are doing a great job of documenting all this. And I agree with you. It is not my suggestion, you see. It was advanced seriously in the early church, and is a logical possibility that someone might propose it today. The solution is precisely what you are doing, assembling the evidence to the contrary.

oldhermit · Aug 19, 2013

kenisyes said:

Perhaps some of the readers can benefit from the information. No doubt there will be those who will attempt to argue their case. If some one cannot be convinced that Jesus is God from such evidence, they could not see through a chain-link fence any way.

Quickfire · Aug 19, 2013

kenisyes said:

ok thankyou for claering that up an i think i believe you and i hope you are sincere because this jesus is god is a verry important matter, and many soldiers are afflicted by it only jesus was worthy of opening the holy scrolls in my book that says it all victory was won amen thankyou jesus evengalistic christians should be christans that love and think forgiveness and understanding at most peace come after this, and then love, if not its war, theres no choice, a war as evenge the evil thoughts you may not like that idea but its the only way, but the words of a sincere heart will gve you all the words to fght the battle

Is Jesus God?

Quickfire

Guest

kenisyes

Guest

kenisyes

Guest

Quickfire

Guest

kenisyes

Guest

Quickfire

Guest

kenisyes

Guest

Quickfire

Guest

cfultz3

Guest

jonathanbchristian

Banned

oldhermit

Senior Member

kenisyes

Guest

kenisyes

Guest

breno785au

Senior Member

Quickfire

Guest

oldhermit

Senior Member

kenisyes

Guest

kenisyes

Guest

oldhermit

Senior Member

Quickfire

Guest