An article I found

I found this article only a moment ago, and suddenly I feel my spirit stirred and uneasy, although I know not why.

http://www.av1611.org/kjv/counterfeit.html

This article lists 25 points describing how you can spot a counterfeit Bible. I read it and feel uncomfortable. I know that personally, when God wants to say something to me or is speaking to me, my spirit always stirs and I feel so incredibly uneasy.

I read this article and, I must say, some of the points I read didn't seem to be harmful. For example, point 1 says:

1. Genesis 22:8
The counterfeits change ". . . My son, God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering:. . ." to distort the prophesy that God would become the Lamb. The counterfeits read as, "God will provide for Himself the lamb. . ." or "God himself will provide the lamb for the burnt offering". The fulfillment of Genesis 22:8 is found in John 1:29.

What is wrong with the variations of this verse? Forgive me for my possible ignorance, there may be something blatantly wrong with what, for example, the NIV has changed this verse to. However, I cannot see it.

Please help, your thoughts would be appreciated and I will pray about this also.

Since I recommended the site I will add a comment. I agree with alot of the material on this site BUT NOT ALL OF IT.

Concerning this point about Gen, I don't know if that is a biggy to be concerned about. Meaning I don't know the full significants if any of that particular rewording. Maybe it is.
However there is much more info on the counterfiet bible subject that I believe is accurate.
Having said that I am a King James "preffered" not a KING JAMES ONLY. For what it's worth. God bless John

richardf wrote:
I found this article only a moment ago, and suddenly I feel my spirit stirred and uneasy, although I know not why.

http://www.av1611.org/kjv/counterfeit.html

This article lists 25 points describing how you can spot a counterfeit Bible. I read it and feel uncomfortable. I know that personally, when God wants to say something to me or is speaking to me, my spirit always stirs and I feel so incredibly uneasy.

I read this article and, I must say, some of the points I read didn't seem to be harmful. For example, point 1 says:

1. Genesis 22:8
The counterfeits change ". . . My son, God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering:. . ." to distort the prophesy that God would become the Lamb. The counterfeits read as, "God will provide for Himself the lamb. . ." or "God himself will provide the lamb for the burnt offering". The fulfillment of Genesis 22:8 is found in John 1:29.

What is wrong with the variations of this verse? Forgive me for my possible ignorance, there may be something blatantly wrong with what, for example, the NIV has changed this verse to. However, I cannot see it.

Please help, your thoughts would be appreciated and I will pray about this also.

One interpretation would have it that God becomes the Lamb while the other states He will only provide it. BIG difference. Which one you accept as truth depends upon which side of the aisle of orthodoxy you embrace. Was Jesus God hanging on the cross or was He God's perfect Man, full of His Father, laying down His life for His sheep?

Clue: If He was God then I can never be like Him.

Orm

ginnyrose wrote:
Orm, you wrote:

Clue: If He was God then I can never be like Him.

Are you saying you do not believe Jesus was God?

ginnyrose

I believe He was the fulfillment of God in His flesh; God's full intention; His full expression of Himself in man. That is why Jesus always took the subservient role when speaking of God as His Father.
God, who sees only in the present tense, since there is no time in Him, could readily say this is My Beloved Son in Whom I AM well pleased without even the mission being accomplished. In His foreknowledge, it already was. However, in the actuality of time as we know it, it wasn't completed until Jesus' mount Transfiguration experience. Then He came down from the mount to make it possible for us to accomplish the same thing. (cf John17)

In Heaven the Christ of God now inhabits a new Body, of flesh.

Respectfully,
Orm

enid wrote:
It is obvious that this is going to lead into a yet another 'King James' debate. So here I go.

All I want to ask is this. Someone who does not use a King James bible, will they go to hell?
If they will, where is the scriptural proof for that? If they won't, what difference does it make which translation they use?

As it is, for the first 7 years I was saved I used a King James. For the last 17 years I have used a New King James.

For what it is worth, there are people I know who used a King James bible, they still backslid.
There are people I know who have never used one and are still serving God.

So what difference does it make which translation you use if in the end you backslide and end up in hell anyway?

If it bothers someone which translation they use, then change it, but keep serving God.

That's my two bits. God bless.

Heaven and hell is not the issue. Becoming a son of the Father, is.

Compare these two verses. You will find a BIG difference:

First the NAS and others who follow suit:

Galatians 2:20
"I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself up for me.

Then the KJV:

Galatians 2:20
I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.

Two tiny preps make the difference. Can you see them?

Orm

If you are a Christian heaven is the only place you can go when you die. So what is the BIG deal about hell being an issue, unless you aren't a Christian?

As far as other translations are concerned, they aren't a concern for me in my walk with the Lord. I know what the message of Jesus Christ about an can discern between truth and error; weakness and strength.
I might point out that heaven wasn't an issue for Peter, Paul and John, either.
Heaven should never be the goal in a Christians life since it is a settled issue by the very life of Christ residing within.

Orm

richardf,

The thing which strikes me about this particular example, (point 1, which you give) is that while John the Baptist, (Jesus' cousin in the flesh) identifies Jesus as the one of whom He (God the Father) had warned him, John the disciple is the one (who with Andrew had been a disciple of JB, who left following JB to follow Jesus after JB had said 'the lamb which takes away the sin of the world'), who points out afterwards, that Jesus had become the Lamb [i][b]slain from the foundation of the world[/b][/i] (Rev 13:8).

What I'm saying, simply, is, that in eternity - the ever-present tense, as Ormly pointed out - the Son was [i]already[/i] the Lamb, before He became the Word made Flesh.

In other words, God becoming the Lamb was never in doubt, as it had been established before the world existed.

The quote you give of point 1, strikes me as a [i]fleshly[/i] reading of scripture, limited to the superficial understanding of the natural mind. I believe the Holy Spirit is able to enlighten one's understanding of scripture, despite occasionally unhelpful choices of words in translations. This is why the KJV has stood the test of time. Something about the simplicity of certain of the words (such as its use of the word 'know', for instance), give God the ability to speak right through it, straight into the spirit of a man.

enid wrote:
Thank God that heaven isn't an issue for Christians. However, there are those caught in the throes of self-deception, who do read their bibles, who are not on the road to heaven. It might not be a personal concern, but it is a concern, even unknowingly, for those who read the word, but do not act upon it. In other words, unbelief.

Let's ask God for the heart and desire to see the lost won to Him before it is too late, because one day it will be too late. God bless.

But that is presumption, my friend, unless you have insight into some whom you personally know. However, I do know what you are saying is a fact because of family who did exactly that. Yet I expect them to be in heaven. Why? Because they did read their Bibles on a daily basis and they prayed, faithly. One in particular prayed for me every night. Yet, one could never have a meaningful discourse with them concerning the things of God. Good United Methodist' all....and all have passed on.

Do I believe they were saved, charitable, respectful-mindful of the things of God? Yes. Do I believe they were born again? Most emphatically, no.....Though I do want to believe one has special favor with the Lord.

:-(

What I'm saying, simply, is, that in eternity - the ever-present tense, as Ormly pointed out - the Son was already the Lamb, before He became the Word made Flesh.

In other words, God becoming the Lamb was never in doubt, as it had been established before the world existed.

Easy here. The Son was of Mary. The Christ of Heaven from eternity was the very Expression of God. He was/is the Word. In the Heart of God, the expression of His Heart would be made flesh and be born, as a Son, of the virgin Mary. The Flesh of the Expression gave Himself as the Lamb. It was the perfect flesh, full of the Expression of the Father, who was the Lamb. The Christ of that Flesh was what made that Flesh equal to God when it hung on the cross, thus cancelling out the stain of Adam.

Halleluyah to the Lamb!

:-D:-D

ginnyrose wrote:
Orm,

Easy here. The Son was of Mary. The Christ of Heaven from eternity was the very Expression of God. He was/is the Word. In the Heart of God, the expression of His Heart would be made flesh and be born, as a Son, of the virgin Mary. The Flesh of the Expression gave Himself as the Lamb. It was the perfect flesh, full of the Expression of the Father, who was the Lamb. The Christ of that Flesh was what made that Flesh equal to God when it hung on the cross, thus cancelling out the stain of Adam.

You again use language that is not found in traditional theological writings concerning the divinity of Jesus. At best it is ambigious!

I ask you: did Jesus exist before his birth to Mary? Was he divine?

ginnyrose

It is NOt ambigious. It is quite theological.

You question: "did Jesus exist before his birth to Mary?"

In the Mind, Heart and purposes of God, the Father, Yes. In the Light of His Reality, Yes. In actuality, NO, not until He was born by the young maiden named Mary. That's not arguable.

Question 2:Was he divine?

In the Mind, Heart and purposes of God, the Father, Yes. In the Light of that Reality, Yes. In actuality, NO, not until He was Glorified. The Mount Transfiguration evidenced His Divinity. That was His graduation day. His nailed scarred hands never existed in Heaven until He ascended from this earth after the cross..

In Reality, time is not a factor. God's time is never our time and is always expressed in the present tense. If He said to you, "You are" and you know you aren't, it is in His foreknowledge He speaks, and you will be.

:-)

Ormly I cannot help but jump in however this discussion should probably go to a new thread.
I ask you this and please give me the simplest straight answer you can.
Did Jesus pre exist as a Divine person,God the Word, second person of the Godhead, prior to humbling himself and becoming a man?
Also as the prexisting Word or logos of God did He and His Father counsel with one another? God bless, John

thingsabove wrote:
Ormly I cannot help but jump in however this discussion should probably go to a new thread.
I ask you this and please give me the simplest straight answer you can.
Did Jesus pre exist as a Divine person,God the Word, second person of the Godhead, prior to humbling himself and becoming a man?
Also as the prexisting Word or logos of God did He and His Father counsel with one another? God bless, John

John,

Everything I stated in my origin remarks answers your questions. Those remarks is my Biblically supported position in the matter.

Select something from my statement that you may be unclear about.

This is what I wrote:

The Son was of Mary. The Christ of Heaven from eternity was the very Expression of God. He was/is the Word. In the Heart of God, the Expression of His Heart would be made flesh and be born, as a Son, of the virgin Mary. The Flesh of the Expression gave Himself as the Lamb. It was the perfect flesh, full of the Expression of the Father, who was the Lamb. The Christ of that Flesh was what made that Flesh equal to God when it hung on the cross, thus cancelling out the stain of Adam.

:-)

In your statement you never say He "was" God. You keep saying expression,which is fine but you "seem" to not want to convey that He was actualy God second person of the Godhead or trinity.
Also again was He a seperate Divine person with God the Father prior to humbling Himself and becoming flesh? God bless, John

thingsabove wrote:
In your statement you never say He "was" God. You keep saying expression,which is fine but you "seem" to not want to convey that He was actualy God second person of the Godhead or trinity.

The term 'second person' isn't found in scripture.

Therefore,

Can your lips [expression] ever be seperate from your heart and still be you? Of course not.

Those "Lips", John, express you, your heart. Would you call them; call your expression of yourself, your "son"? Of course not, again.
However it was that "Expression" that became flesh. The flesh, full of the Expression, dwelt among us and died on a cross. The flesh just didn't pop out of Heaven into our midst. Since creation ended with Adam, He had to come by procreation, means that were vulnerable to the attacks of the enemy. That's also why He could die for us. The Expression can never be killed. Only the flesh of it was subject to death.

Also again was He a seperate Divine person with God the Father prior to humbling Himself and becoming flesh? God bless, John

For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word [Expression], and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.1 John 5:7 (KJV)

No son mentioned in the above, correct?

However of the three, the Expression-Word now has a new body in which to dwell. A Divine-Human Body.

[]Empasis mine

Hope that helps,

:-D

Dear Ormly,

I see others picking you up on various points of your post to me, so, here (before I read their responses), are the scriptures which immediately came to mind on reading 'The Son was of Mary.'

John 1:14
And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

Genesis 1:26
And God said, Let us make man in [u]our[/u] image, after [u]our[/u] likeness:

Although I don't have a list of the references for all the times in the Old Testament when God refers to Himself in the plural, I know He is both 3 and 7 in Hebrew. I hope someone else can back me up with the details of which I've read in the past.

Daniel 3:25
He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the [u]Son of God[/u].

These are the three most obvious allusions to the pre-existence of the Son, but, when you take into account the many pictures through the history, such as Abraham and Isaac, Jacob and Joseph, David and Absolom and David and Solomon, there is no end of support for the truth, following on my original point about the Lamb.

Here is a question for you: if the Lamb was slain from before the foundation of the world, who slayed Him?

John 17:24
Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: [b]for thou lovedst me [u]before the foundation of the world[/u][/b].

dorcas wrote:

Dear Ormly,

I see others picking you up on various points of your post to me, so, here (before I read their responses), are the scriptures which immediately came to mind on reading 'The Son was of Mary.'

John 1:14
And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

Genesis 1:26
And God said, Let us make man in [u]our[/u] image, after [u]our[/u] likeness:

Although I don't have a list of the references for all the times in the Old Testament when God refers to Himself in the plural, I know He is both 3 and 7 in Hebrew. I hope someone else can back me up with the details of which I've read in the past.

Daniel 3:25
He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the [u]Son of God[/u].

These are the three most obvious allusions to the pre-existence of the Son, but, when you take into account the many pictures through the history, such as Abraham and Isaac, Jacob and Joseph, David and Absolom and David and Solomon, there is no end of support for the truth, following on my original point about the Lamb.

Here is a question for you: if the Lamb was slain from before the foundation of the world, who slayed Him?

John 17:24
Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: [b]for thou lovedst me [u]before the foundation of the world[/u][/b].

I'm sorry but you aren't reading my posts accurately nor are you receiving much from the scriptures you are attempting to use against my position. If you were, these questions wouldn't be asked.

:-D

ginnyrose wrote:
Orm,

How would you interpret John 8:58: "Jesus said unto them, Verily,verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am."

ginnyrose

Why would that be aproblem considering the foreknowledge of God and Jesus who was full of the foreknowledge of Himself in the Father?

He knew why He was born and who His father was. Being full of the "Expression" of the Father, could He not know?

:-D

Ormly, I am over hea in Baghdad and I had to go away for a while that's why I did not emmediatly respond earlier.

Ormly, In plain langusge based upon what I have read from your posts I gather this.

You do not except the chistian doctrine that the Father Son and Holy Spirit are co equal in divine "essence" yet seperate persons.

Dorcas and Ginny are using sciptures that I was going to ask you to explain. Your response to them was not to address each scipture but rather to say they are not understanding you. If you do not except the doctrine of the Godhead or trinity as I have put forth (and I know you understand chistendoms stand on this,) then we indeed do understand your post. God bless, John

thingsabove wrote:
Ormly, I am over hea in Baghdad and I had to go away for a while that's why I did not emmediatly respond earlier.

Ormly, In plain langusge based upon what I have read from your posts I gather this.

You do not except the chistian doctrine that the Father Son and Holy Spirit are co equal in divine "essence" yet seperate persons.

Dorcas and Ginny are using sciptures that I was going to ask you to explain. Your response to them was not to address each scipture but rather to say they are not understanding you. If you do not except the doctrine of the Godhead or trinity as I have put forth (and I know you understand chistendoms stand on this,) then we indeed do understand your post. God bless, John

John, Rest assured, I am a Trinitarian. May that be an anchor in our discussions. I have never departed from that with the words I used to explain my position. So please go back review all that I wrote.

Having said that, would you say that the Word, who was the creator was the Son of God? Why/why not?

:-D

thingsabove said:

If you do not except the doctrine of the Godhead or trinity as I have put forth (and I know you understand chistendoms stand on this,) then we indeed do understand your post.

Thank you for commenting on Ormly's responses as you are.

Please let me divide a little deeper, what I see the 'problem' to be in this discussion.

You are asking Ormly to acknowledge the doctrine of the trinity, which is [u]not[/u] a scriptural word or concept, and Ormly is using words like 'Expression', instead of scriptural phrases like (Heb 1) v 3 who being the brightness of [His] glory and [b]the express image of His person[/b], and upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had by Himself purged our sins, sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,...'

What this is leading to, is neither you nor Ormly joining with ginnyrose and myself, to discuss [i][b]exactly[/i][/b] what scripture says and what it may mean - which would be a profitable exercise is there is any real confusion.... which of course, at this stage with Ormly making up his own form of words which inadequately concur with scripture.... there appears to be.

So, Ormly, why not use Bible words, phrases and verses, to support what you are saying?

Having said that, there [i]are[/i] times when we can depart from them to clarify a personal point of revelation or understanding which goes beyond the written word, but, the foundational platform has to be established in the written word, before that can happen; at least, here on SI that is the norm, and that's why you're being given a hard time by at least three of us, for not doing so.

By all means quote scripture and then interpret it to us in your own words, and we will do our best to follow. But, it really doesn't work, to pull your own spiritual vocabulary out of the air, unless you are willing to link it back to scripture immediately.... please? It will save us all some time and effort....

But, if you cannot show scripture to support your rather unique view of the Incarnation, then you can expect more of the same challenges. ;-)

Ormly,

I see we've posted within minutes of each other.

I'll let John answer your question to him.

Lets cut to the chase, Dorcas.

I used the term "Expression" instead of "Word" in some of what I wrote as being the truth of Jesus Christ. What is it you disagree with, feeling you must "divide a little deeper" for clarification?

I used the term "Expression" instead of "Word"

Sorry for the haziness in my previous long post. I was trying to say, this: lets start with Bible terms and terminology, and then add our own way of explaining how we see the meaning of those words and verses.

That way, first, everyone knows you believe the Bible, and second, your rejection of 'second person' is incongruous, if later you are going to confess you're a trinitarian. It's tautology, I think, and just a game of words, rather than fellowship in the Spirit.

feeling you must "divide a little deeper" for clarification?

On your term 'Exprssion', I had no idea you were thinking of it as a synonym for 'Word'. To me, expression is something mothers do with breast milk, or, people do when they use their own words to communicate what they are thinking. It might even be a form of painting, or music....

This is why I was recommending anchoring key thoughts in a Bible verse or two, before waxing lyrical with one's own personal jargon.

On your term 'Exprssion', I had no idea you were thinking of it as a synonym for 'Word'.

Error or truth?

'The Son was of Mary. The Christ of Heaven from eternity was the very Expression of God. He was/is the Word. In the Heart of God, the expression of His Heart would be made flesh and be born, as a Son, of the virgin Mary. The Flesh of the Expression gave Himself as the Lamb. It was the perfect flesh, full of the Expression of the Father, who was the Lamb. The Christ of that Flesh was what made that Flesh equal to God when it hung on the cross, thus cancelling out the stain of Adam.'

Error or truth?

In the same way as you said 'The Son was of Mary', which is true when referring to the Word made Flesh, I would say that Christ was never in heaven. The Lamb was in heaven. Christ means 'sent one', which ties in with the Hebrew writer's allusion to Him as the 'Apostle'.

Hebrews 3:1
Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus;

Also, He is seated in heaven at the right hand of the Father as the Son - [i]a Man in the glory[/i] - now, the Godhead having been changed forever, by the Incarnation.

I'm sorry if there was a misunderstanding of my terms. I was using the term "Godhead" which is the biblical word that conveys the concept of the trinity. I only introduced the word Trinity to try and get clearer answer from ormly on wether he accepts the orthodox belief of the Godhead,(trinity) or not. I will now attempt to bow out of this particular thread. You all have fun on this one. God bless, John

Well, Ormly, as usual, I would not polarise my opinion to one or the other.

I would say that Christ was never in heaven.

The Lamb was in heaven.

Christ means 'sent one', which ties in with the Hebrew writer's allusion to Him as the 'Apostle'.

Question: Who then was the Lamb?? The Christ of heaven, who couldn't die or Jesus the perfect man.

Hint/clue: Only one was capable of being put to death.

Question 2: Who is more able to be our role model, a man who went before us or a God who went before us?

[Kindly written]

My dear sister, You may say you read your Bible but I am convinced if you do read for understanding, you lack a missing ingredient. Words mean something. You have completely missed the meaning of mine. I would pray much because you miss much.

I have not violated the Gospel of Jesus Christ nor the purpose of the Father in Him, now given to us that we become like Him who is our Human role model, unto the becoming the Body of Himself.

If all that sound complicated or a play with words, the problem doesn't lie with me.

In Jesus and for His sake,

Orm

Pay attention, ginny. Learn to hear more accurately; learn to appropriate what is already written in the scriptures. Just as importantly, learn to read what is presented to you as answers that I believe, reflects what is written. It's all there. I chose my words very carefully. And there should be no question as to what I adhere as given through the gospel and Paul's letters.

Respectfully,

Orm

Question for you, ginny rose,

Can God die? If not then it was a man hanging on that cross.

Now, if I tell you my Father told me to tell you that, am I God or a god or am full of my Father who has relationship with me, by virtue of the Life of Christ within me?

Can you understand that?

:-(rm

Orm, I can only conclude from your many posts that you either:

1. Don't believe that Jesus is God
2. Don't believe that Jesus is God's son
3. Don't believe that Jesus died

Quote: 'Can God die? If not then it was a man hanging on that cross.'

God did die on that cross. 'I am the Father, and the Father is in me.' Jesus died even though He was God.

And can it be that I should gain
An interest in the Savior's blood?
Died He for me, who caused His pain
For me, who Him to death pursued?
Amazing love! How can it be,
That Thou, my God, shouldst die for me?
Amazing love! How can it be,
That Thou, my God, shouldst die for me?

[b]Tis mystery all: the Immortal dies[/b]:
Who can explore His strange design?
In vain the firstborn seraph tries
To sound the depths of love divine.
Tis mercy all! Let earth adore,
Let angel minds inquire no more.
Tis mercy all! Let earth adore;
Let angel minds inquire no more.

He left His Father's throne above
So free, so infinite His grace
Emptied Himself of all but love,
And bled for Adam�s helpless race:
Tis mercy all, immense and free,
For O my God, it found out me!
Tis mercy all, immense and free,
For O my God, it found out me!

Long my imprisoned spirit lay,
Fast bound in sin and nature's night;
Thine eye diffused a quickening ray
I woke, the dungeon flamed with light;
My chains fell off, my heart was free,
I rose, went forth, and followed Thee.
My chains fell off, my heart was free,
I rose, went forth, and followed Thee.

No condemnation now I dread;
Jesus, and all in Him, is mine;
Alive in Him, my living Head,
And clothed in righteousness divine,
Bold I approach the eternal throne,
And claim the crown, through Christ my own.
Bold I approach the eternal throne,
And claim the crown, through Christ my own.

Hope that post made sense...

O.K. I add alittle more. Jesus, the God-man's physical body died but his Spirit which is Divine which is God did not die. God bless

richardf wrote:
Orm, I can only conclude from your many posts that you either:

1. Don't believe that Jesus is God
2. Don't believe that Jesus is God's son
3. Don't believe that Jesus died

Quote: 'Can God die? If not then it was a man hanging on that cross.'

God did die on that cross. 'I am the Father, and the Father is in me.' Jesus died even though He was God.

And can it be that I should gain
An interest in the Savior's blood?
Died He for me, who caused His pain
For me, who Him to death pursued?
Amazing love! How can it be,
That Thou, my God, shouldst die for me?
Amazing love! How can it be,
That Thou, my God, shouldst die for me?

[b]Tis mystery all: the Immortal dies[/b]:
Who can explore His strange design?
In vain the firstborn seraph tries
To sound the depths of love divine.
Tis mercy all! Let earth adore,
Let angel minds inquire no more.
Tis mercy all! Let earth adore;
Let angel minds inquire no more.

He left His Father's throne above
So free, so infinite His grace
Emptied Himself of all but love,
And bled for Adam�s helpless race:
Tis mercy all, immense and free,
For O my God, it found out me!
Tis mercy all, immense and free,
For O my God, it found out me!

Long my imprisoned spirit lay,
Fast bound in sin and nature's night;
Thine eye diffused a quickening ray
I woke, the dungeon flamed with light;
My chains fell off, my heart was free,
I rose, went forth, and followed Thee.
My chains fell off, my heart was free,
I rose, went forth, and followed Thee.

No condemnation now I dread;
Jesus, and all in Him, is mine;
Alive in Him, my living Head,
And clothed in righteousness divine,
Bold I approach the eternal throne,
And claim the crown, through Christ my own.
Bold I approach the eternal throne,
And claim the crown, through Christ my own.

Hope that post made sense...

Sure it makes sense, but you haven't understood me.

Blessings,

Orm

FWIW, God can't die. Now you have some distinctions to make. :-)

Quote:

'FWIW, God can't die. Now you have some distinctions to make.'

OK. Well, Jesus did die, and He is God. So you are saying that Jesus isn't God? Because if so I'm pretty stunned!

Orm, I can only conclude from your many posts that you either:

This is for all and it is only a repeat of my previous remarks:

1. Don't believe that Jesus is God.

Wrong. I do believe Jesus IS God. He is presently in heaven as a divine human being. Jesus, the man, was Glorified to the position of the Christ who was in Him. The man Jesus, had to be proven, that's what His life was all about.

2. Don't believe that Jesus is God's son.

Wrong, I do believe He WAS God's Son and God, His Father, will always addressed Him as such until all His enemies are His footstool. Did God ever address Christ in that way? If Christ was the Word and it is He that spoke in the scriptures, we can rightly conclude that He was God and not a son. Meaning, Sonship came by way of Mary, a new born vessel in which the Christ of heaven now dwells. Jesus was the first of first fruits.

3. Don't believe that Jesus died.

Again, wrong. He did die --- but not as God. He died as man as only man can die and resurrect. He was God's perfect Lamb sacrifice, FULL, [b]EQUAL[/b], OF THE VERY NATURE OF HIS FATHER. FULL, I SAY, AS IN FULLNESS.

Read that God made Jesus. God never made Christ, the FULL Expression of Himself who filled that Man who died on that cross..

Psalm 8:5 (KJV)
For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honour.

Hebrews 2:7 (KJV)
Thou madest him a little lower than the angels; thou crownedst him with glory and honour, and didst set him over the works of thy hands:

Hebrews 2:9 (KJV)
But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.

Can it be more clear than that?

If you can see this, you will be able to see yourself as God now intends you/me to be, if His LIFE resides in you/us.

That is the only LIFE that He, Christ Jesus, is returning for.

:-D

richardf wrote:
Quote:

'FWIW, God can't die. Now you have some distinctions to make.'

OK. Well, Jesus did die, and He is God. So you are saying that Jesus isn't God? Because if so I'm pretty stunned!

Dear richard, you are using the present tense which I have to agree, you correct. However, in His flesh, Christ [God] laid aside His divinity that the Man, the Human, of Himself could die.

Regarding the Humanity of Jesus:

Matthew 24:36 (KJV)
But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.

Mark 13:32 (KJV)
But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.

Luke 10:22 (KJV)
All things are delivered to me of my Father: and no man knoweth who the Son is, but the Father; and who the Father is, but the Son, and he to whom the Son will reveal him.

:-D

I chose my words very carefully.

Thank you for explaining in more detail what you believe, and how you put that into words.

The main thing which strikes me about your distinction between Jesus and Christ, is that you are putting 'Christ' inside Jesus, the Son (of God and of Mary).

Jesus was the Word made Flesh, according to John. This is a simple statement which is not confusing. Christ, was what He came to DO.

[b]Christ[/b], is a TITLE of the Son of God, because He was sent to do His Father's will -to accomplish the death of sin, death and the devil, for us. He was 'anointed' to do this when the Holy Ghost came upon Him at His baptism, at the very beginning of His ministry.

The Mount of Transfiguration was, of course, very important, but He still had a lot of tests to pass through. Yet, He set His face to go to Jerusalem, and later said that 'with fervent desire' He had desired to eat the last Passover with the disciples.

In the end, you have your interpretation of the Mount of Transfiguration, and I could say much more about mine. But, I think it was far to late in His life to qualify as anything more than yet another stunning event in the disciples' lives - stunning alongside casting out demons and sickness of all sorts, raising people from the dead and teaching with [i]more[/i] authority than the scribes and Pharisees.

I think I already asked you who must have slain the Lamb before the foundation of the world, and you have not answered.

This brings me to my last question.... It is clear from your use of 'reality' and 'actuality' that you attribute a more spiritual quality to 'reality' and a more physical quality to 'actuality'. Still, [b]how can you justify the implication that Jesus was [i]more[/i] 'real' when in the Flesh, than He was as a member of the eternal Godhead?[/b]