The Only True God, the God of Jesus Christ.

[robert derrick]

Revelation 1:
"I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty... I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last...And I turned to see the voice that spake with me...And when I saw him, I fell at his feet as dead. And he laid his right hand upon me, saying unto me, Fear not; I am the first and the last...I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen."

The Son Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, which is and was and is to come, the Almighty, the first and the last, He that lives and was dead and is alive for evermore.

Not the Father. He did not shed His blood on the cross and die for the sins of man.

 

[APAK]

"Yahshua became the Son of YHWH after he was baptized and anointed."

So Jesus was not God's begotten, until baptized. The Word was not made flesh, until baptized. Jesus was not anointed, until baptized.

Jesus was not God's Son, until baptized.

Jesus was mistaken, when He said He must be about His Father's business, because He was not yet baptized, and so Mary dragged Him out of the temple for prematurely ministering in the name of a Father, he was not yet son of. A punk human kid posing as Son of the Father.

You people, get funnier every day. But, keep it up, I am learning all I can about you, and even at this late date, You still come up with more I never ever ever would have thunk of by just reading Scripture.

"'Jesus' is a corrupted Latinized Greek word and has no Hebrew and thus Israelite meaning."

That's good then, since God no longer has any Hebrew or Israelite dealings with man. Jesus is from Greek Iyesus.

"YHWH is our only salvation for the world...the anointed man, the Messiah, the Christ, the chosen man, and our human Lord and human Savior."

And I was wondering how you guys were going to get around the fact that there is only One Saviour, the LORD, Thy God, The Holy One of Israel, our Lord Jesus Christ.

You couldn't write all those verses of Scripture as spurious text, and you couldn't figurative them away, and so you went to the good ol' pseudo science of original languages to change the plain King's English into something it never said:

Jehovah is our divine Saviour, and Jesus is just our human Saviour.

If I believed as you, I would be rejecting all the apostles' doctrine given to them by the risen Jesus, because He persistently kept neglecting to call Himself human Lord and human Saviour only...

But then, that is exactly what you do anyway, because you are a wanna-be Jew of the Old Covenant of Jehovah, posing as Christian believer in the human Christ.

"Now the Father of Yahshua is of course God"

Now the Son of the Father is of course God...

You apparently are writing back with full of unnecessary heated emotion. Sorry my post caused you to become unsettled. I was only sharing and not trying to scare or cause any anguish.

I think you might have to reread my post once again and I believe yo have jumped to conclusions based on nothing I said, and only what I did not say. And you are therefore short on patience. Yes, I did not explain it all to you then. So ask me in bite sizes, your questions.

Do you want to start with your first assumption of what I have not address yet...?

The first jump you made is when you said, "So Jesus was not God's begotten, until baptized."

I said he was begotten of course although you really want to know if he was begotten, why is he not considered the Son at that time of birth and even later, as I see you added these thoughts in as well.

My answer: YHWH, his Father, recognized Yahshua as a baby, then later as a boy who was certainly his son as any boy is to their human father. And yes, Yahshua knew his Father was not a human man from the earth, but from above, at the time he was a teenager. He was doing his Father's work already per scripture.

What is different at Yahshua's baptism and from his birth is simple in terms of sonship. He was born as his natural first birth as any son to his parents. However, his second birth was his symbolic spiritual new second birth (not rebirth as for us) as scripture required it, for its fulfillment.
So for his first birth, the Father considered him a natural boy and son. His second new birth was spiritual in nature.

When Yahshua accepted John's actions for his own baptism in the Jordan River, he was really sayin to his Father, I accept and acknowledge claim and title as the true SPIRITUAL Son of YHWH, my Father. And I accept this mission of sacrifice and redemption for all mankind. His Father YHWH now knew he had a true spiritual partner as his true Son. And he shouted it out to all creation per scripture. ////This is my Son I am well pleased/////

The Father then proceeded his acknowledgement of his 'new' SON, by anointing him with his own Spirit that came upon him and lived inside of his own spirit. What a beautiful act of union to witness. The Father and Son were now united as one in Spirit although still quite different spirits.

I hope you can see my point here.

Bless you,

APAK

 

[kcnalp]

Which Michael are you talking about? There are men called Michael mentioned in the Bible, and there is an angel, or archangel (Jude 1:9), mentioned by Daniel, who he says was "one of the chief princes" and "your prince", i.e. the “the great prince who stands for the" Israelites (Daniel 12:1). Some people suppose that Michael is just another of Jesus' names, and that it is referring to Jesus. I don't think that is the case.

So no, Michael is not my saviour.

You don't know which Michael I'm referring to? Maybe you need to consult with Kingdom Hall?

 

[robert derrick]

You apparently are writing back with full of unnecessary heated emotion. Sorry my post caused you to become unsettled. I was only sharing and not trying to scare or cause any anguish.

I think you might have to reread my post once again and I believe yo have jumped to conclusions based on nothing I said, and only what I did not say. And you are therefore short on patience. Yes, I did not explain it all to you then. So ask me in bite sizes, your questions.

Do you want to start with your first assumption of what I have not address yet...?

The first jump you made is when you said, "So Jesus was not God's begotten, until baptized."

I said he was begotten of course although you really want to know if he was begotten, why is he not considered the Son at that time of birth and even later, as I see you added these thoughts in as well.

My answer: YHWH, his Father, recognized Yahshua as a baby, then later as a boy who was certainly his son as any boy is to their human father. And yes, Yahshua knew his Father was not a human man from the earth, but from above, at the time he was a teenager. He was doing his Father's work already per scripture.

What is different at Yahshua's baptism and from his birth is simple in terms of sonship. He was born as his natural first birth as any son to his parents. However, his second birth was his symbolic spiritual new second birth (not rebirth as for us) as scripture required it, for its fulfillment.
So for his first birth, the Father considered him a natural boy and son. His second new birth was spiritual in nature.

When Yahshua accepted John's actions for his own baptism in the Joran River, he was really sayin to his Father, I accept and acknowledge claim and title as the true SPIRITUAL Son of YHWH, my Father. His Father YHWH now knew he had a true spiritual partner as his true Son. And he shouted it out to all creation per scripture. ////This is my Son I am well pleased/////

The Father then proceeded his acknowledgement of his 'new' SON, by anointing him with his own Spirit that came upon him and lived inside of his own spirit. What a beautiful act of union to witness. The Father and Son were now united as one in Spirit although still quite different spirits.

I hope you can see my point here.

Bless you,

APAK

Ok. So in your clarification, I am still in doubt what you are saying, so I agree to your suggestion to point by point. But I must insist you respond likewise. We do not need to restate what we already said, but rather to respond in kind to each point made.
I do truly want to understand you completely.

And I have gone back to reread, and maybe I am getting it wrong, and so I apologize if I did.

Let's try this:
1. YHWH delivered our human Savior of the world.

Delivered from what?

2. Yahshua became the Son of YHWH after he was baptized and anointed.

This is where I read you saying that Jesus was not begotten and born of God at virgin birth, but at baptism, which is where He became the Son...
-Jesus was called Son of God from beginning of virgin birth: "Therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God."

3. Yahshua is not our Messiah (Christ), he is YHWH's Messiah, his anointed one, and his Son.

Ok, even as God's pastors are not our pastors, but His pastors given to us for our edification. And I would further contend, that Jesus was not Mary's Son, but God's Son, and so Mary is not Mother of God, or as you would say, not Mother of God's Son.

4. "Now the Father of Yahshua is of course God, the Father, the only one, YHWH => therefore, YHWH is our only salvation for the world => therefore, YHWH saves/saved the world through his Son he begot by his human birth with Mary, the anointed man, the Messiah, the Christ, the chosen man, and our human Lord and human Savior."

And this of course is the response I've been waiting for pertaining to there being only One Saviour and none other: LORD, Holy One of Israel, God of Israel, the Living God, the Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour.

You say God the Father is our only salvation, Who saves us by Jesus who is our human Saviour.

This of course has never been spoken in my hearing, nor written in my reading, anywhere. Especially not in Scripture, which plainly states there is One Saviour and One salvation of man by that Saviour.

You seem to be saying there is difference between actually saving someone and being called a Savior of that someone. As in the Saviour does not do the saving. Our Saviour does not actually save us, but rather God the Father does by Jesus, our human Saviour, but not God the Saviour. Jesus has the title of Saviour only, but does not have the power of salvation, which is God's alone.

Sort of like all things are created by the Lord Jesus, but He is not the actual Creator. All things were made by Him, but He is not the actual Maker.

I would go ahead and respond with:

1. the man Christ Jesus is not calling Him the human Saviour.
-the human savior is a completely humanistic reasoning and way of saying it. There is no Scripture for it, and this verse does not even imply it.
-Scripture doesn't even use the term 'human'. That is a term of man used to describe mortality, mortal man. To say Jesus is the 'human Lord and Saviour is to say He is the mortal Lord and Saviour.
-Jesus was never mortal in the human sense, and He was not Saviour until after His resurrection. There is nothing about our risen Saviour, as in mortal flesh and blood.

2. No doubt you are comparing Jesus with the saviors God sent as judges to deliver His people, and they had not the power to do so, but only by their faith God did so. So even god called them savior, but God did the saving and delivering.
-Jesus did have power of God in Himself. The power to lay down His life and to take it again. God commanded Him to do so, but did not give Him the power to do so. God commanding and giving are not the same. Sinful man are completely depended upon God to both command and to give power to obey, but not Jesus, who was born in the likeness of sinful flesh, but was not born with sinful and therefore mortal body.
-Jesus gave power to His disciples and God gives power to believers to become sons of God. God did not give Jesus power to become His 'First' Son, nor to become the 2nd Adam, as God gave power to Adam to become His first son.
-He already had His own power on earth to forgive sins and to heal. God never gave that to Him. He had it with Him coming into the world. Neither was He given life and spirit.

"All power is given unto me..." This was after the resurrection, where He had taken up His own life again, after laying it down on the cross.
He laid down His life and power and breathed out his own spirit at the cross, and then in resurrection power of His own he took it all up again, He gave Himself His own power: all of it as before He came down out of heaven.

Even as He will take unto Himself His own great power and will reign as Christ over the earth. (Rev 11)

The only god that gives his son power is the dragon to the 1st beast, his very own 'firstborn'. In this way, Jesus is being compared to the firstborn beast, and the father to the dragon, if He created His own son and gave him his power.

And so, I await your responses point by point, Thanks.

 

[APAK]

@robert derrick ..hello again

1. YHWH delivered our human Savior of the world.

Delivered from what?

From what delivery process? By the Spirit of the Father, the Holy Spirit. That created a fertilized egg of Mary to a zygote to a fetus to a baby...
Or if you meant delivered the Savior from something or someone, then the answer is, I do not know and I never meant that thought or thinking to arise.

2. Yahshua became the Son of YHWH after he was baptized and anointed.

This is where I read you saying that Jesus was not begotten and born of God at virgin birth, but at baptism, which is where He became the Son...
-Jesus was called Son of God from beginning of virgin birth: "Therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God."

No, I never said he was NOT begotten. In the two posts and this one I say he was begotten by his Father. And I never suggested he was not born of Mary. Actually I did say that he was born Mary with the Father in my 1st post...maybe not clearer enough. And at his baptism this is considered another new birth of the spiritual kind, as his Father's Spirt soon afterwards came into his Son, Similar, although different to our rebirth when the Spirit of Christ comes into to out own hearts.

The scripture you quoted here, Luke 1:35 has the emphasis on SHALL BE/ WILL BE CALLED..in the future, and NOT at his natural birth. Mary was told by the angel Gabriel to call the baby Yahshua (Jesus/ Joshua) not the Son of God. And he was called his Son, by his Father after his baptism.

If you go back to Luke 1:32, 3 verses back, "He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David,"

This verse is not something you would call your baby at birth to other people. They would only understand it clearly as his title in the future as an adult, and not even as a teenager. When the Lord God or YHWH will give the throne of the father David to Yahshua as an adult, and after his baptism, not from his birth.

Then soon after Yahshua's anointment by his Father with his Spirit and presence, even Satan acknowledge he was the Son of YHWH, his Father, during his time of testing in the desert.

Matthew 1:21 says: She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins."

In fact the name would be more like Joshua or Yahshua as these names mean 'he will save.....' This is the name of the baby boy of the virgin Mary and YHWH that connotes salvation. Son of God is the true title of Yahshua (his birth name) of his adult future.

3. Yahshua is not our Messiah (Christ), he is YHWH's Messiah, his anointed one, and his Son.

Ok, even as God's pastors are not our pastors, but His pastors given to us for our edification. And I would further contend, that Jesus was not Mary's Son, but God's Son, and so Mary is not Mother of God, or as you would say, not Mother of God's Son.

I can live with that if you want to split hairs here. And no, I agree with you that Mary is definitely NOT the Mother of God. That is something I never claimed or would never anywhere and at anytime..

4. "Now the Father of Yahshua is of course God, the Father, the only one, YHWH => therefore, YHWH is our only salvation for the world => therefore, YHWH saves/saved the world through his Son he begot by his human birth with Mary, the anointed man, the Messiah, the Christ, the chosen man, and our human Lord and human Savior."

And this of course is the response I've been waiting for pertaining to there being only One Savior and none other: LORD, Holy One of Israel, God of Israel, the Living God, the Lord Jesus Christ our Savior.

This #4 is where I have to part ways with you on I see. Yes, there is only one Savior. And as my 1st post said. This one Savior is the Father God and (this is new input) the ONLY way YHWH of Spirit and divinity can save people from sin is by a perfect substitute of the same kind, as YHWH is perfect and can never die. He had to create the 2nd Adam as the perfect 100% human sacrifice for our sin and to atone for and from the 1st 100% human Adam. There was no other way. His human blood had to be shed for our restoration and continued life. YHWH of Spirit could not actually do that himself. He has to create another Adam who was sinless this time. And he did of course.

Yashua is out Lord and Savior indeed, on a human level. On the Spiritual plane it is and has always been the Father, the Holy Spirit that is the source of all salvation. The one and only God Almighty.

Blessings,

APAK

 

[robert derrick]

@robert derrick ..hello again

1. YHWH delivered our human Savior of the world.

Delivered from what?

From what delivery process? By the Spirit of the Father, the Holy Spirit. That created a fertilized egg of Mary to a zygote to a fetus to a baby...
Or if you meant delivered the Savior from something or someone, then the answer is, I do not know and I never meant that thought or thinking to arise.

2. Yahshua became the Son of YHWH after he was baptized and anointed.

This is where I read you saying that Jesus was not begotten and born of God at virgin birth, but at baptism, which is where He became the Son...
-Jesus was called Son of God from beginning of virgin birth: "Therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God."

No, I never said he was NOT begotten. In the two posts and this one I say he was begotten by his Father. And I never suggested he was not born of Mary. Actually I did say that he was born Mary with the Father in my 1st post...maybe not clearer enough. And at his baptism this is considered another new birth of the spiritual kind, as his Father's Spirt soon afterwards came into his Son, Similar, although different to our rebirth when the Spirit of Christ comes into to out own hearts.

The scripture you quoted here, Luke 1:35 has the emphasis on SHALL BE/ WILL BE CALLED..in the future, and NOT at his natural birth. Mary was told by the angel Gabriel to call the baby Yahshua (Jesus/ Joshua) not the Son of God. And he was called his Son, by his Father after his baptism.

If you go back to Luke 1:32, 3 verses back, "He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David,"

This verse is not something you would call your baby at birth to other people. They would only understand it clearly as his title in the future as an adult, and not even as a teenager. When the Lord God or YHWH will give the throne of the father David to Yahshua as an adult, and after his baptism, not from his birth.

Then soon after Yahshua's anointment by his Father with his Spirit and presence, even Satan acknowledge he was the Son of YHWH, his Father, during his time of testing in the desert.

Matthew 1:21 says: She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins."

In fact the name would be more like Joshua or Yahshua as these names mean 'he will save.....' This is the name of the baby boy of the virgin Mary and YHWH that connotes salvation. Son of God is the true title of Yahshua (his birth name) of his adult future.

3. Yahshua is not our Messiah (Christ), he is YHWH's Messiah, his anointed one, and his Son.

Ok, even as God's pastors are not our pastors, but His pastors given to us for our edification. And I would further contend, that Jesus was not Mary's Son, but God's Son, and so Mary is not Mother of God, or as you would say, not Mother of God's Son.

I can live with that if you want to split hairs here. And no, I agree with you that Mary is definitely NOT the Mother of God. That is something I never claimed or would never anywhere and at anytime..

4. "Now the Father of Yahshua is of course God, the Father, the only one, YHWH => therefore, YHWH is our only salvation for the world => therefore, YHWH saves/saved the world through his Son he begot by his human birth with Mary, the anointed man, the Messiah, the Christ, the chosen man, and our human Lord and human Savior."

And this of course is the response I've been waiting for pertaining to there being only One Savior and none other: LORD, Holy One of Israel, God of Israel, the Living God, the Lord Jesus Christ our Savior.

This #4 is where I have to part ways with you on I see. Yes, there is only one Savior. And as my 1st post said. This one Savior is the Father God and (this is new input) the ONLY way YHWH of Spirit and divinity can save people from sin is by a perfect substitute of the same kind, as YHWH is perfect and can never die. He had to create the 2nd Adam as the perfect 100% human sacrifice for our sin and to atone for and from the 1st 100% human Adam. There was no other way. His human blood had to be shed for our restoration and continued life. YHWH of Spirit could not actually do that himself. He has to create another Adam who was sinless this time. And he did of course.

Yashua is out Lord and Savior indeed, on a human level. On the Spiritual plane it is and has always been the Father, the Holy Spirit that is the source of all salvation. The one and only God Almighty.

Blessings,

APAK

Great, thanks. Point by point.

Jesus is called saviour, but He does not do the saving. Only the Father, Who is the Holy Spirit. (So, you don't agree the Spirit was created like the word? He is not a force? But is the Father?)

And so, Redeemer:
"Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God."

"For I know that my redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth..."

Will the LORD Father stand upon the earth in the latter days? Is this not the returned Saviour to reign upon the earth?

"But God will redeem my soul from the power of the grave: for he shall receive me. Selah."

"Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works."

"In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace."

Did not our Saviour Jesus Christ give Himself for us on the cross that He might redeem us, and we might have redemption through His blood? It is not the Father's blood through which we are redeemed.

Does Jesus redeem us, but He is not Redeemer, as opposed to Jesus is Saviour, but He does not save us?

But of course we have this:

"Thou shalt know that I the LORD am thy Saviour and thy Redeemer, the mighty One of Jacob."

The Redeemer and the Saviour are One. The LORD, the mighty One of Jacob, the Lord Jesus Christ. For if indeed He is Saviour, then He is also Redeemer.

And you say only the Father, the Holy Spirit, does the work of salvation, but it is Jesus who did the work of redemption on the cross.

 

[APAK]

Great, thanks. Point by point.

Jesus is called saviour, but He does not do the saving. Only the Father, Who is the Holy Spirit. (So, you don't agree the Spirit was created like the word? He is not a force? But is the Father?)

And so, Redeemer:
"Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God."

"For I know that my redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth..."

Will the LORD Father stand upon the earth in the latter days? Is this not the returned Saviour to reign upon the earth?

"But God will redeem my soul from the power of the grave: for he shall receive me. Selah."

"Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works."

"In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace."

Did not our Saviour Jesus Christ give Himself for us on the cross that He might redeem us, and we might have redemption through His blood? It is not the Father's blood through which we are redeemed.

Does Jesus redeem us, but He is not Redeemer, as opposed to Jesus is Saviour, but He does not save us?

But of course we have this:

"Thou shalt know that I the LORD am thy Saviour and thy Redeemer, the mighty One of Jacob."

The Redeemer and the Saviour are One. The LORD, the mighty One of Jacob, the Lord Jesus Christ. For if indeed He is Saviour, then He is also Redeemer.

And you say only the Father, the Holy Spirit, does the work of salvation, but it is Jesus who did the work of redemption on the cross.

Yes indeed Robert, Christ was the major centerpiece for our salvation. He executed the plan of his Father for our redemption. The plan and purpose for our salvation was now in the hands of a human being.

The purpose, plan and thoughts, expressions of the Father, his word actually, for our salvation, became flesh, in the hands of Yahshua the man, and we saw his glory..... (John 1:14)

As I've said in a couple of places previously Yahshua chose to begin and fulfill his mission of redemption by shedding his own blood and his death on the Cross. Without his willingness to do this we all would by in deep dodo.

He was not a human robot. He chose to die for his Father and us. His love and purpose drove him to death so to speak.

The source for all this plan of salvation and redemption was with his Father's word all along, with his intervening Spirit in the affairs of men.

APAK

 

[robert derrick]

Yes indeed Robert, Christ was the major centerpiece for our salvation. He executed the plan of his Father for our redemption. The plan and purpose for our salvation was now in the hands of a human being.

The purpose, plan and thoughts, expressions of the Father, his word actually, for our salvation, became flesh, in the hands of Yahshua the man, and we saw his glory..... (John 1:14)

As I've said in a couple of places previously Yahshua chose to begin and fulfill his mission of redemption by shedding his own blood and his death on the Cross. Without his willingness to do this we all would by in deep dodo.

He was not a human robot. He chose to die for his Father and us. His love and purpose drove him to death so to speak.

The source for all this plan of salvation and redemption was with his Father's word all along, with his intervening Spirit in the affairs of men.

APAK

What happened to the point by point?

Need time to consider how to answer our Redeemer and Savior being One?

Ok, take your time. I'll be looking for your answer. It took a couple weeks for the One Savior only.

 

[keithr]

"Thou shalt know that I the LORD am thy Saviour and thy Redeemer, the mighty One of Jacob."

The Redeemer and the Saviour are One. The LORD, the mighty One of Jacob, the Lord Jesus Christ. For if indeed He is Saviour, then He is also Redeemer.

(Isa 60:16) ... Then you will know that I, Yahweh, am your Savior, your Redeemer, the Mighty One of Jacob.
Jesus is not Yahweh; Yahweh sent Jesus to be our redeemer and saviour:

1 John 4:
9) By this God’s love was revealed in us, that God has sent his one and only Son into the world that we might live through him.
10) In this is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son as the atoning sacrifice for our sins.
14) We have seen and testify that the Father has sent the Son as the Savior of the world.


To redeem means "To recover ownership of something by buying it back", or "to liberate by payment of a ransom". Adam's punishment for sin was death. In order to save Adam, and restore him to life again, another perfect man had to pay the penalty of sin (death) instead of Adam. Jesus became our saviour by paying that redemption price. So yes, our saviour saves us by becoming our redeemer. Jesus said:

Mark 10:45) For even the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.


All children of Adam and Eve were born after Adam and Eve had become imperfect and started decaying, until they eventually died - their punishment for sin. So everyone has been born imperfect and decaying (dying) ever since, and therefore have not had a fair chance of being able to perfectly obey God's laws and have eternal life. That is why after their resurrection there will be a long period of around 1,000 years for everyone to be taught and nurtured back to human perfection, followed by a testing and trial to determine if they are worthy of eternal life. By buying back (redeeming) Adam's right to life, so also is everyone else's right to life restored, for they only died because of the imperfections and sinful nature that they inherited - if Adam and Eve had not received the death penalty then their offspring would have been born perfect.

For Christians, the merit of Jesus' sacrifice is applied to us immediately, so we are already redeemed and considered perfect and righteous, and our trial for eternal life is now (not after our resurrection); it is our faith that is on trial (1 Peter 1:7, "That the trial of your faith, being much more precious than of gold that perisheth, though it be tried with fire, might be found unto praise and honour and glory at the appearing of Jesus Christ").

 

[APAK]

What happened to the point by point?

Need time to consider how to answer our Redeemer and Savior being One?

Ok, take your time. I'll be looking for your answer. It took a couple weeks for the One Savior only.

Back with the points system Robert... :)

You said ....1. Did not our Saviour Jesus Christ give Himself for us on the cross that He might redeem us, and we might have redemption through His blood? It is not the Father's blood through which we are redeemed.

---------------------------------------my response------------
The Father’s plan included the redemption and then the salvation of man, and was accomplished through the work of his Son, all at the same time, ultimately on the Cross.

Isa 63:16 "Doubtless You are our Father, though Abraham was ignorant of us and Israel does not acknowledge us, You oh Lord are our Father, our Redeemer from everlasting is Your name."

The Father presented his Son as the atonement for sin by his shed blood on the cross and therefore propitiated or reconciled us back to the Father. Of course it takes effect, with personal meaning for us, individually, if and only if we have demonstrated true faith and unquestionable belief in this very act of human sacrifice for all sinners, of which we are one.

And yes, Christ did believe he was redeeming and saving us by his actions on the Cross with his loss of blood, because he knew it was fulfilling the plan of redemption and salvation of his Father. Christ never had a plan of redemption and salvation. Christ executed the plan(s) for his Father. This is very clear in scripture. Christ also never took credit for his Father's plan(s). He was a humble, yielded his will and spirit, as an obedience servant to the last.

Romans 3:24-26 "24 being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25 whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed, 26 to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus."
--------------------------------------------

You said .....2. Does Jesus redeem us, but He is not Redeemer, as opposed to Jesus is Saviour, but He does not save us?

-------------------------my response-------------------
Your question is a bit confusing, although I get your drift..

Redemption and Salvation are not binary, they are consecutive results of one executed action by the Son. Christ did 'the work' to redeem (pay back 'the' debt) and save (allow us to live spiritual lives in this life to eternal life) us in one process. Nothing complicated here. Although many religions are born out of making this topic way too complex and it is all in err.

For salvation then...John 6:44 says, "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day."

So who really saves? Is it the Father or the Son? Again as I pointed out above, the Son executed the plans of his Father. Christ had not conceived of any at all. He was the willing and obedient servant or slave for his Father and by effect to us. So the Father ultimately saved because the word, his expressions and ideas his plan(s) was/were conceived by him and no one else. And begetting Christ was also a part of his plan for its execution of redemption AND salvation.

Scripture tells us that Christ is our Savior because we have faith in his actions on the Cross, and have faith in him period, because he was obedient to the plan of Salvation for us - to live in the spirit of Christ and thus, with the Father who is in Christ. We have to look at it this way, else much scripture needs to be either revised or chucked out and others added in, to please ignorant and unspiritually minded people. And then this has already been done by men over the centuries to God's wrath and his condemnation set for the judgement....
------------------------------

Bless you,

APAK

 

[robert derrick]

(Isa 60:16) ... Then you will know that I, Yahweh, am your Savior, your Redeemer, the Mighty One of Jacob.
Jesus is not Yahweh; Yahweh sent Jesus to be our redeemer and saviour:

1 John 4:
9) By this God’s love was revealed in us, that God has sent his one and only Son into the world that we might live through him.
10) In this is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son as the atoning sacrifice for our sins.
14) We have seen and testify that the Father has sent the Son as the Savior of the world.


To redeem means "To recover ownership of something by buying it back", or "to liberate by payment of a ransom". Adam's punishment for sin was death. In order to save Adam, and restore him to life again, another perfect man had to pay the penalty of sin (death) instead of Adam. Jesus became our saviour by paying that redemption price. So yes, our saviour saves us by becoming our redeemer. Jesus said:

Mark 10:45) For even the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.


All children of Adam and Eve were born after Adam and Eve had become imperfect and started decaying, until they eventually died - their punishment for sin. So everyone has been born imperfect and decaying (dying) ever since, and therefore have not had a fair chance of being able to perfectly obey God's laws and have eternal life. That is why after their resurrection there will be a long period of around 1,000 years for everyone to be taught and nurtured back to human perfection, followed by a testing and trial to determine if they are worthy of eternal life. By buying back (redeeming) Adam's right to life, so also is everyone else's right to life restored, for they only died because of the imperfections and sinful nature that they inherited - if Adam and Eve had not received the death penalty then their offspring would have been born perfect.

For Christians, the merit of Jesus' sacrifice is applied to us immediately, so we are already redeemed and considered perfect and righteous, and our trial for eternal life is now (not after our resurrection); it is our faith that is on trial (1 Peter 1:7, "That the trial of your faith, being much more precious than of gold that perisheth, though it be tried with fire, might be found unto praise and honour and glory at the appearing of Jesus Christ").

"Then you will know that I, Yahweh, am your Savior, your Redeemer, the Mighty One of Jacob. Jesus is not Yahweh; Yahweh sent Jesus to be our redeemer and saviour."

And so Jesus is our redeemer and saviour, but not that Redeemer and Saviour, even as He is our Lord, but not that LORD.

And so the Scripture is broken: "and there is no God else beside me; a just God and a Saviour; there is none beside me."

Unless, you have a Scripture stating that there is in fact a God and LORD the Saviour separate and distinct from Our Lord and saviour. There would then indeed be One God Saviour and also one 'human' saviour.

"So everyone has been born imperfect and decaying (dying) ever since..."

And this is pretty much the heart of your error and unbelief. Jesus as the 2nd Adam was born sinless and with the incorruptible blood and immortal flesh as the 1st Adam, because He came that way from heaven, not as Adam by the Lord God breathing into his nostrils the breath of Life, but He came with His own spirit and power and incorruption as God from everlasting.

'Adam's right to life'. There is no right to life for mankind, it is the gift of God, and they who have eternal life in them have right to the tree of Life. Adam's flesh was immortal, because Adam's blood was incorruptible, because in the blood was the Life of God, and that incorruptible blood with eternal life is the blood of the Lamb born in them that believe.

No Scripture has the Father in heaven giving the Son on earth His spirit and power and incorruption. He had it with Himself from everlasting, yet not the blood, until He came upon the earth as a man. He laid down His own power and life at the cross and then took it up again in resurrection. And yet His blood remained with Him forever.

He saw no corruption of His body nor His blood in the tomb, because He did no sin on earth, and so unlike the 1st Adam His blood remained incorruptible and His flesh immortal. And His body remained in the tomb for three days to preach to the spirits in prison and to fulfill the prophecy of the sign of Jonas to the unbelievers. Otherwise, He could have taken up His own life and power in His immortal body from the cross itself, at any time after breathing out His spirit. He was God in the flesh.

When He died on the cross, it was only because He purposely and willfully laid down His life and power by breathing out His spirit. No man took His life from Him. The Father did not take His life, and the cross itself did not kill Him: He laid it down on the cross to pay the full price for sins of others. And this is the very reason why the Centurion declared Him Son of God, because He saw Jesus prematurely die on the cross by His own will.

The main reason for the true God coming down out of heaven to be the Father's Son on earth was to bring once again the incorruptible blood into the world and to be made available to mankind, if they believe and drink thereof.

Your symbolizing of drinking the blood symbolizes away the reality of the blood of the Lamb itself. You make the cross of none effect by thinking the blood of Jesus shed thereon was merely more human blood, the same as all others, and so He is merely human saviour, the same as those in the Old Testament sent to deliver Israel from her enemies.

If any drink not His blood which is drink indeed and not just symbolic idea, because any think not His blood incorruptible, and so are offended at the cross, that God should die thereon: Then any such have no life in them, because they have no blood of Jesus in them, because they refuse to drink what offends them as just human blood.

All such are trying to worship the LORD of the Old Testament without acknowledging Him as Lord of the New.

It is not the Father who returns to the earth to do battle in that great day, it is the Son, who is called the Word of God and the LORD of LORDS.

Jesus is LORD, and His name is above the name He had before He come from heaven upon the earth: Jehovah.

 

[robert derrick]

Back with the points system Robert... :)

You said ....1. Did not our Saviour Jesus Christ give Himself for us on the cross that He might redeem us, and we might have redemption through His blood? It is not the Father's blood through which we are redeemed.

---------------------------------------my response------------
The Father’s plan included the redemption and then the salvation of man, and was accomplished through the work of his Son, all at the same time, ultimately on the Cross.

Isa 63:16 "Doubtless You are our Father, though Abraham was ignorant of us and Israel does not acknowledge us, You oh Lord are our Father, our Redeemer from everlasting is Your name."

The Father presented his Son as the atonement for sin by his shed blood on the cross and therefore propitiated or reconciled us back to the Father. Of course it takes effect, with personal meaning for us, individually, if and only if we have demonstrated true faith and unquestionable belief in this very act of human sacrifice for all sinners, of which we are one.

And yes, Christ did believe he was redeeming and saving us by his actions on the Cross with his loss of blood, because he knew it was fulfilling the plan of redemption and salvation of his Father. Christ never had a plan of redemption and salvation. Christ executed the plan(s) for his Father. This is very clear in scripture. Christ also never took credit for his Father's plan(s). He was a humble, yielded his will and spirit, as an obedience servant to the last.

Romans 3:24-26 "24 being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25 whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed, 26 to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus."
--------------------------------------------

You said .....2. Does Jesus redeem us, but He is not Redeemer, as opposed to Jesus is Saviour, but He does not save us?

-------------------------my response-------------------
Your question is a bit confusing, although I get your drift..

Redemption and Salvation are not binary, they are consecutive results of one executed action by the Son. Christ did 'the work' to redeem (pay back 'the' debt) and save (allow us to live spiritual lives in this life to eternal life) us in one process. Nothing complicated here. Although many religions are born out of making this topic way too complex and it is all in err.

For salvation then...John 6:44 says, "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day."

So who really saves? Is it the Father or the Son? Again as I pointed out above, the Son executed the plans of his Father. Christ had not conceived of any at all. He was the willing and obedient servant or slave for his Father and by effect to us. So the Father ultimately saved because the word, his expressions and ideas his plan(s) was/were conceived by him and no one else. And begetting Christ was also a part of his plan for its execution of redemption AND salvation.

Scripture tells us that Christ is our Savior because we have faith in his actions on the Cross, and have faith in him period, because he was obedient to the plan of Salvation for us - to live in the spirit of Christ and thus, with the Father who is in Christ. We have to look at it this way, else much scripture needs to be either revised or chucked out and others added in, to please ignorant and unspiritually minded people. And then this has already been done by men over the centuries to God's wrath and his condemnation set for the judgement....
------------------------------

Bless you,

APAK

"Christ did believe he was redeeming and saving us by his actions on the Cross with his loss of blood..."

He did not 'believe' He was doing anything, He knew it, because He knew from the foundation of the world, that He would need be the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world, if man transgressed.

You may think this a splitting of hairs, but it is not. It is a divergence of faith in Christ as God and unbelief: Nowhere does Scripture say that Jesus 'believed' this or 'believed' that. He spoke with authority in all things, because He had His own authority and power from everlasting to do so.

Jesus did not 'believe' as created man believes: He knew as only God can know.

"The Father presented his Son as the atonement for sin..."

Once again. No Scripture. Everything I write as being true with God has explicitly written Scripture for it, as it is plainly written. More than half the things you say have no Scripture at all, only humanistic reasonings according to the fashion of this world.

The Father did not 'present' the Son in anything. The Son came of Himself and showed Himself to be the exact image of the Person of God that He was from everlasting. He showed Himself, and they saw Him and the Father in Him (John 14), because He and the Father are one.

"Christ never had a plan of redemption and salvation."

Once again. No Scripture. Jesus never said, "this is not my plan, my way of redemption and salvation, but my Father's only". But rather He did say, I am the way: the way to salvation, redemption, justification, to Heaven and the Father. I am the Life: No Life given Him, but being God, He is life eternal: "that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life."

Jesus is not the Life, while the Father is the LIFE, even as you would falsely declare Jesus is Lord but not LORD, saviour but not Saviour and redeemer but not Redeemer. Jesus is the Life, and He is the way of salvation and redemption, and He is the LORD of LORDS, which is the only place the LORD has in the Scripture of the New Covenant with the coming of the Son into the world. The LORD you claim as Saviour does not even show up in the New Covenant of God, until His return to earth as LORD of LORDS.

"So the Father ultimately saved because the word, his expressions and ideas his plan(s) was/were conceived by him and no one else."

And this of course is mystical reasoning and not Scripture. God did not personify his 'expressions and ideas' as a created being and 1st angel of the LORD and then conceived that expressioned word as another man on earth.

No amount of fruitless effort can be done away with the Word was God and became flesh...

 

[APAK]

"Christ did believe he was redeeming and saving us by his actions on the Cross with his loss of blood..."

He did not 'believe' He was doing anything, He knew it, because He knew from the foundation of the world, that He would need be the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world, if man transgressed.

You may think this a splitting of hairs, but it is not. It is a divergence of faith in Christ as God and unbelief: Nowhere does Scripture say that Jesus 'believed' this or 'believed' that. He spoke with authority in all things, because He had His own authority and power from everlasting to do so.

Jesus did not 'believe' as created man believes: He knew as only God can know.

"The Father presented his Son as the atonement for sin..."

Once again. No Scripture. Everything I write as being true with God has explicitly written Scripture for it, as it is plainly written. More than half the things you say have no Scripture at all, only humanistic reasonings according to the fashion of this world.

The Father did not 'present' the Son in anything. The Son came of Himself and showed Himself to be the exact image of the Person of God that He was from everlasting. He showed Himself, and they saw Him and the Father in Him (John 14), because He and the Father are one.

"Christ never had a plan of redemption and salvation."

Once again. No Scripture. Jesus never said, "this is not my plan, my way of redemption and salvation, but my Father's only". But rather He did say, I am the way: the way to salvation, redemption, justification, to Heaven and the Father. I am the Life: No Life given Him, but being God, He is life eternal: "that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life."

Jesus is not the Life, while the Father is the LIFE, even as you would falsely declare Jesus is Lord but not LORD, saviour but not Saviour and redeemer but not Redeemer. Jesus is the Life, and He is the way of salvation and redemption, and He is the LORD of LORDS, which is the only place the LORD has in the Scripture of the New Covenant with the coming of the Son into the world. The LORD you claim as Saviour does not even show up in the New Covenant of God, until His return to earth as LORD of LORDS.

"So the Father ultimately saved because the word, his expressions and ideas his plan(s) was/were conceived by him and no one else."

And this of course is mystical reasoning and not Scripture. God did not personify his 'expressions and ideas' as a created being and 1st angel of the LORD and then conceived that expressioned word as another man on earth.

No amount of fruitless effort can be done away with the Word was God and became flesh...

There you go again, a little unsettled with me as before. I believe you really need to slow down and learn how to organize your thoughts here.

Are you not confident in what you believe as I am in my beliefs? Then if yes, do a COMMENTARY about it filled with scripture.

You now suddenly say I have not supplied scripture in my posts. Quite stunning. Why are you confused here? You mistake my commentary remarks as my made up scripture. And so you cannot understand my remarks NOR the actual scripture. It seems all a blur to you.

I have shown scripture to back up my major portions of my claim along with a running commentary. They go together. I can certainly provide a lot more scripture although I believe I will be wasting my time. You have an agenda as I surmised from the start. I believe you were just waiting to acquire more info on me before you exposed your true beliefs. And now you have. What a relief, right? You could have done this from the start. I would not be upset with you as I'm not now.

I ask you then, can you provide any scripture for your novel theories and claims of the Father and in particular our Savior? You have to share scripture as well Robert. A commentary of these latest views would go along way with this scripture. You do want be to be persuasive, right?

No, I do not believe that the Son and then Christ had authority before his birth, because he only existed in the mind of his Father, in the form of his plan for our redemption AND salvation. Christ was going to be at the appointed time the key ingredient for its success. And it was a success, indeed.

I'm sure you can find scripture to support my claim I just wrote above here. It is there. And you won't, because that does not apparently interest you, or align with your theories. Oh well.

And so I now ask you, and inquire of you for the FIRST time, what do you means when you say that, " He spoke with authority in all things, because He had His own authority and power from everlasting to do so".?

You will be hard pressed Robert to even find one verse or passage to imply this statement of yours can ever be true. I can find you at least a dozen verses that says your statement is completely false.

And then you say "But rather He did say, I am the way: the way to salvation, redemption, justification, to Heaven and the Father. I am the Life.." And I agree with you here Robert, because it fits in exactly with what I have said in my posts. Yours is not actual scripture though.

I believe you have modified John 14:6 that says "Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me." Now you are excited to provide a condensed picture of Christ like this and I understand it. I would caution you in doing so however. Why not provide a safe and clearer approach, do a COMMENTARY describing what you said and add in John 14:6 and other scripture in the discussion. Much safer and clearer. You can do this with all you have to say regarding your beliefs. A commentary and scripture together can also serve to self-audit and make clearer your intents and beliefs to a reader.

Happy trails

APAK

 

[Wrangler]

Jesus is LORD

No. Jesus is our Lord. Jesus' God is LORD, the only God.

 

[robert derrick]

There you go again, a little unsettled with me as before. I believe you really need to slow down and learn how to organize your thoughts here.

Are you not confident in what you believe as I am in my beliefs? Then if yes, do a COMMENTARY about it filled with scripture.

You now suddenly say I have not supplied scripture in my posts. Quite stunning. Why are you confused here? You mistake my commentary remarks as my made up scripture. And so you cannot understand my remarks NOR the actual scripture. It seems all a blur to you.

I have shown scripture to back up my major portions of my claim along with a running commentary. They go together. I can certainly provide a lot more scripture although I believe I will be wasting my time. You have an agenda as I surmised from the start. I believe you were just waiting to acquire more info on me before you exposed your true beliefs. And now you have. What a relief, right? You could have done this from the start. I would not be upset with you as I'm not now.

I ask you then, can you provide any scripture for your novel theories and claims of the Father and in particular our Savior? You have to share scripture as well Robert. A commentary of these latest views would go along way with this scripture. You do want be to be persuasive, right?

No, I do not believe that the Son and then Christ had authority before his birth, because he only existed in the mind of his Father, in the form of his plan for our redemption AND salvation. Christ was going to be at the appointed time the key ingredient for its success. And it was a success, indeed.

I'm sure you can find scripture to support my claim I just wrote above here. It is there. And you won't, because that does not apparently interest you, or align with your theories. Oh well.

And so I now ask you, and inquire of you for the FIRST time, what do you means when you say that, " He spoke with authority in all things, because He had His own authority and power from everlasting to do so".?

You will be hard pressed Robert to even find one verse or passage to imply this statement of yours can ever be true. I can find you at least a dozen verses that says your statement is completely false.

And then you say "But rather He did say, I am the way: the way to salvation, redemption, justification, to Heaven and the Father. I am the Life.." And I agree with you here Robert, because it fits in exactly with what I have said in my posts. Yours is not actual scripture though.

I believe you have modified John 14:6 that says "Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me." Now you are excited to provide a condensed picture of Christ like this and I understand it. I would caution you in doing so however. Why not provide a safe and clearer approach, do a COMMENTARY describing what you said and add in John 14:6 and other scripture in the discussion. Much safer and clearer. You can do this with all you have to say regarding your beliefs. A commentary and scripture together can also serve to self-audit and make clearer your intents and beliefs to a reader.

Happy trails

APAK

I was looking for more point by point as I gave you, but instead you emoted. Maybe the unsettled and disturbed one is yourself. I am not. I am more convinced than ever of the truth of Scripture vs your intellectualized ideas about them.

The Scriptures you quote are fine (other than the stylish shows of Hebraic word knowledge), it's the humanist and mystical commentaries that I reject: the 'human' saviour vs the God Saviour. the son was just existing in the mind of God until created as a man. The Father 'presented' the Son. I addressed and rebutted these point by point with Scripture, and you evaded:

1. What Scripture shows the son was only existing in the mind of the Father, before he was created.

2. The Lord returns to earth and is called the Word of God. The LORD of LORDS. Your 'LORD' of the Old Covenant is nowhere mentioned anywhere else in the entirety of the New Covenant, except as the returning Lord Jesus.

3. You are dogmatically firm like iron when Scripture says the LORD is One LORD and God, and there is no other beside Him, and there is not the lightest wiggle room for doctrine of unity of Persons, though there be several Scriptures saying it. (John 1) (1 John 5) (Jude 25) (Rev 1) (Rev 19) (Rev 22) And yet, when the same Scripture says that the One Saviour and Redeemer is the LORD and God and no other beside Him, you find plenty of latitude to come up with God Saviour vs human Saviour. Human Saviour in name only not in fact the Saviour that does the saving. Which have no Scripture whatsoever.

Spare me the lecturing and get back to the points at hand, as I will continue to do:

"No, I do not believe that the Son and then Christ had authority before his birth"

No, He did not, because the the Word that was God with His own authority, power, life, and spirit as God, emptied Himself of all to be born a babe of a woman, and the Father in heaven returned them to Him by commandment from heaven. The Son then laid them down again at the cross, and took them back to Himself at resurrection.

As a youth He spoke with the same authority of God in His temple before His baptism, as He would later after His baptism.

 

[robert derrick]

No. Jesus is our Lord. Jesus' God is LORD, the only God.

"And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God...And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS."

 

[keithr]

"Then you will know that I, Yahweh, am your Savior, your Redeemer, the Mighty One of Jacob". Jesus is not Yahweh; Yahweh sent Jesus to be our redeemer and saviour."

And so Jesus is our redeemer and saviour, but not that Redeemer and Saviour, even as He is our Lord, but not that LORD.

And so the Scripture is broken: "and there is no God else beside me; a just God and a Saviour; there is none beside me."

I'm surprised that you cannot understand such a simple thing as this! If the USA president sends troops to save some Americans being persecuted in a foreign country, then the president will be regarded as their saviour, because it was his decision and orders that it be done. The troops that went and saved the Americans would also be regarded as their saviours. Similarly it was God that decided how to save mankind and gave the orders and authority to Jesus to become our saviour.

There is just one person at the top of the management, or government, tree. In the example above it is the president. Likewise, although there may be many gods (mighty ones with a lot of power), there is just one almighty god who is above all others, which is God Yahweh. Yahweh's Son Jesus is and always will be subservient to Him, which is why after he has established God's governmental kingdom on the Earth he will then hand it over to our Father:

(1 Corinthians 15:28) When all things have been subjected to him, then the Son will also himself be subjected to him who subjected all things to him, that God may be all in all.​

To help others, the verse you quoted above (but again didn't supply a reference for) was (WEB):

(Isaiah 45:21) Declare and present it. Yes, let them take counsel together. Who has shown this from ancient time? Who has declared it of old? Haven’t I, Yahweh? There is no other God besides me, a just God and a Savior; There is no one besides me.​

Here Yahweh declares there is no other God like Him, or greater than or equal to Him, and that he is a saviour. When it came to saving mankind from death, he delegated that task to His son Jesus. It's not that difficult to understand and believe - unlike trying to believe that two seperate persons are the one and same God, and occasionally three persons (although you seem to be claiming that Jesus is in fact Yahweh, so you seem to be resisting believing in a Trinity)!

Unless, you have a Scripture stating that there is in fact a God and LORD the Saviour separate and distinct from Our Lord and saviour. There would then indeed be One God Saviour and also one 'human' saviour.

There are many verses of Scripture that indicate that Jesus and God are seperate and distinct, as well you know because I and others have quoted them on numerous occasions, e.g.:

(John 20:17) Jesus said to her, “Don’t hold me, for I haven’t yet ascended to my Father; but go to my brothers, and tell them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’”​

"So everyone has been born imperfect and decaying (dying) ever since..."

And this is pretty much the heart of your error and unbelief. Jesus as the 2nd Adam was born sinless and with the incorruptible blood and immortal flesh as the 1st Adam, because He came that way from heaven, not as Adam by the Lord God breathing into his nostrils the breath of Life, but He came with His own spirit and power and incorruption as God from everlasting.

Well of course we all know that Jesus was the exception! Surely that goes without saying. Although once again, there is no such thing as immortal flesh - you still haven't grasped that! Adam obviously didn't have immortal flesh - he died! Jesus also was not "God from everlasting"!

(2Co 4:11) For we who live are always delivered to death for Jesus’ sake, that the life also of Jesus may be revealed in our mortal flesh.

(1Ti 6:13) I command you before God, who gives life to all things, ...;
(1Ti 6:16) who alone has immortality,​

'Adam's right to life'. There is no right to life for mankind, it is the gift of God, and they who have eternal life in them have right to the tree of Life. Adam's flesh was immortal, because Adam's blood was incorruptible, because in the blood was the Life of God, and that incorruptible blood with eternal life is the blood of the Lamb born in them that believe.

Adam forfeited his right (or privilege) to live eternally by disobeying God's command to not eat the fruit of the "tree of the knowledge of good and evil" (Genesis 2:17). The wages of sin is death, but to regain life and to live eternally (to be saved) is a gift of God (Romans 6:23). Once again, Adam's flesh was not immortal (obviously!), and his blood was not incorruptible, and the life of God was not in Adam's blood - where do you get that from? Nobody is infused with Jesus' human blood - again, where did you get that from?! Christians have a hope of eternal, immortal life as a spirit being - physical blood will be of no use to them!

No Scripture has the Father in heaven giving the Son on earth His spirit and power and incorruption.

How about :

(John 1:32) John testified, saying, “I have seen the Spirit descending like a dove out of heaven, and it remained on him.​

He had it with Himself from everlasting, yet not the blood, until He came upon the earth as a man. He laid down His own power and life at the cross and then took it up again in resurrection. And yet His blood remained with Him forever.

Scripture reference? How does Jesus carry around the physical blood with him? And why?!

(John 6:51) "... the bread which I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.”​

He has given his flesh and blood as a sacrifice - he doesn't still keep it!

He was God in the flesh.

Jesus was the only begotten son of God in the flesh.

The Father did not take His life, and the cross itself did not kill Him:

The cross (and his flogging and beatings previous to that) did kill him! Jesus willingly submitted himself to it.

And this is the very reason why the Centurion declared Him Son of God, because He saw Jesus prematurely die on the cross by His own will.

Really? The Scriptures give a different reason (Matthew 27):

45) Now from the sixth hour there was darkness over all the land until the ninth hour.
51) Behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from the top to the bottom. The earth quaked and the rocks were split.
52) The tombs were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised;
53) and coming out of the tombs after his resurrection, they entered into the holy city and appeared to many.
54) Now the centurion, and those who were with him watching Jesus, when they saw the earthquake, and the things that were done, feared exceedingly, saying, “Truly this was the Son of God.”​

The main reason for the true God coming down out of heaven to be the Father's Son on earth was to bring once again the incorruptible blood into the world and to be made available to mankind, if they believe and drink thereof.

The Father came down from heaven to be His own Son? More nonsense!

Your symbolizing of drinking the blood symbolizes away the reality of the blood of the Lamb itself.

We are symbolically washed in the blood of Jesus. Jesus only symbolically alludes to drinking his blood and eating his flesh, to explain that he was the bread of life come down from heaven:

(John 6:33) For the bread of God is that which comes down out of heaven, and gives life to the world.”
(John 6:63) It is the spirit who gives life. The flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and are life.​

You make the cross of none effect by thinking the blood of Jesus shed thereon was merely more human blood, the same as all others, and so He is merely human saviour, the same as those in the Old Testament sent to deliver Israel from her enemies.

It was the death of his soul, his life, that was the redeeming sacrifice. He was different from the Old Testament prophets in that he was sinless - his sacrifice was only acceptable because he was sinless, which no human could be because of inheriting a corrupt and sinful nature.

If any drink not His blood ... Then any such have no life in them, because they have no blood of Jesus in them,

If you drink blood it will be digested and pass out of the body. It won't be absorbed directly into your blood, that would require a blood transfusion. As Jesus said, "The flesh profits nothing".

Jesus is LORD, and His name is above the name He had before He come from heaven upon the earth: Jehovah.

There is no verse in the Bible that says that Jesus is Jehovah (or Yahweh). If Jehovah has now changed His name to Jesus then you now have two persons with the same name - two of the Trinity that you believe in. What about poor old Mr. Holy Spirit - doesn't he ever get a name?!

 

[APAK]

1. What Scripture shows the son was only existing in the mind of the Father, before he was created.

I'll just answer your first question then I'm done here Robert. You have your views and I have mine. Sorry we do not agree on much of anything.

You asked, "1. What Scripture shows the son was only existing in the mind of the Father, before he was created."

Before I answer it, why do you have to add into you question, "..ONLY existing.." as if you have found scripture to say otherwise. As if there is wiggle room for Yahshua to have existing BEFORE the earth was created and also being in the mind of the LORD. This can be poisonous thinking, of something you have heard and been taught in err. Rule #1" if at all possible and readily feasible and observable, let scripture interpret itself, without adding in all types of hooks and mental obstacles to cause unnecessary confusion.

One verse that speaks to YHWH or the LORD who included choosing Yahshua in his future plans for our redemption and salvation is 1 Peter 1:20.

"Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you," (KJV)

"God chose him for this purpose long before the world began, but only recently was he brought into public view, in these last days, as a blessing to you." (TLB)

“Knowing that you were not redeemed with perishable things like silver or gold from your futile way of life inherited from your forefathers, but with precious blood, as of a lamb unblemished and spotless, the blood of Christ. For He was foreknown before the foundation of the world.” 1 Peter 1:18-20

Being foreknown or chosen before the foundations of the earth are old expressions, even idioms that say the LORD had Yahshua in his thoughts and plans, and he specifically chose and planned to create him in the future, at his planned time. There are no hooks here to infer that Christ was also present, 'living' before he was born. Why add that in when the scripture I quoted says nothing of the sort. If you can find scripture that does say what you believe then I have not seen it yet.

//

Besides Yahshua, we as believers are also chosen by the LORD, before the earth was created, to be in his Kingdom. And we never existed before we were born either.

“Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and blameless before Him.” Ephesians 1:3

“But when God, who had set me apart even from my mother’s womb and called me through His grace, was pleased to reveal His Son in me so that I might preach Him among the Gentiles (nations).” Galatians 1:15-16

“In love He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will, to the praise of the glory of His grace, which He freely bestowed on us in the Beloved.” Ephesians 1:4

“But we should always give thanks to God for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, because God has chosen you from the beginning for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the truth.” 2 Thessalonians 2:13

“Also we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to His purpose who works all things after the counsel of His will, to the end that we who were the first to hope in Christ would be to the praise of His glory.” Ephesians 1:11-12

This last scripture gives more insight into the mind of the LORD. The LORD ONLY thinks ALONE (counsel of his will) and plans his own purpose(s) and plans ALONE for future event to occur in the affairs of mankind. And Yahshua and his elect were chosen as part of his plans and purpose before the earth was created. We never existing before the earth was created neither did our Lord and Savior.

Let's cut this discussion then for now. You might need a recess anyway. I know I do.

Happy Trails

APAK

 

[keithr]

We never existing before the earth was created neither did our Lord and Savior.

The following verses tell us that Jesus (the Word) did exist before the earth was created, because he created it:

John 1:1-3 (REB):

In the beginning the Word already was. The Word was in God's presence, and what God was, the Word was. He was with God at the beginning, and through him all things came to be; without him no created thing came into being.​

Colossians 1:16 (WEB):

For by him all things were created, in the heavens and on the earth, things visible and things invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers; all things have been created through him, and for him.​

 

[JunChosen]

Yes, in Hebrews 5:5 silly. "So Christ also glorified not himself to be made a high priest, but he that spake unto him, Thou art my Son, This day have I begotten thee:" (Hebrews 5:5 ASV)

Do you even read/write English?

My question was, When did the term, "today I have begotten thee" occur? Do you know? That is what day did God have begotten His Son?

To God Be The Glory