Unanswered Question Concerning Jesus' Deity

[JunChosen]

Sadly you trust those whom Jesus warned were promoting things inspired.....not by God...but by the devil. He warned about the “weeds” that would be sown by God’s adversary to draw people away from the true God, and from the truth of his word. You are not relying on God’s word at all, but a sad imitation or counterfeit with translations of the original writings into languages that could be manipulated to suggest things that Christ never taught.

I think you need to learn that all translations and the different versions of the Bible....is still the word of God!!! Every letter and every word written therein are still what God had intended them to be, unless the printer is not faithful to God's word. I know because of Revelation 22:18-19

Here lies the error of your ways....if I'm not mistaken, there is only one time that the word "weed" was ever mentioned in Scripture and it has nothing to do with God's adversary....Satan. There is however, the parable of the Wheat and Tares, but in this parable they were allowed to live together until Judgment day (Matthew 13:36-42). I agree, your posts are just opinions and without merit!

To God Be The Glory

 

[Aunty Jane]

I think you need to learn that all translations and the different versions of the Bible....is still the word of God!!! Every letter and every word written therein are still what God had intended them to be, unless the printer is not faithful to God's word. I know because of Revelation 22:18-19

Well you see, that is not the problem.....its not the words, which are from God, but its the translation that can make all the difference to our understanding. Something read into the words or a bit of punctuation in the wrong place.

Here lies the error of your ways....if I'm not mistaken, there is only one time that the word "weed" was ever mentioned in Scripture and it has nothing to do with God's adversary....Satan. There is however, the parable of the Wheat and Tares, but in this parable they were allowed to live together until Judgment day (Matthew 13:36-42). I agree, your posts are just opinions and without merit!

Do you know what the "tares" were? Its believed to be a noxious weed called bearded darnel.....Called "wheat's evil twin" in that part of the world because in the early stages, it is almost impossible to tell them apart. When it becomes obvious which is which, their root systems are so intertwined that you cannot uproot the weeds without pulling out the wheat with it......so at the harvest time, both are taken up and separated......the weeds are then destroyed....and the wheat collected.
Farmers who had a grudge against their neighbors would sometimes sow darnel in the wheat farmers field to destroy his crop.

Call it what you will....its a weed.....a noxious counterfeit and a very apt parable which his Jewish audience understood well.

 

[Enoch111]

Let's follow this through, can we?

Well when God the Word became the Man Christ Jesus, He did take "the form" of a Servant. He was the suffering Servant to God the Father and to humanity. He even said that He came to "minister" (serve) not to be ministered unto. As to being "obedient unto death" firstly Christ was the only man who was totally obedient to the Old Covenant (the Law of Moses). But the Father required that death on the cross in order for God to take away the sin of the world. That death (which included the shedding of His blood for the remission of sins, and the offering of Himself body, soul, and spirit, as the one great sacrifice for sins) was foreordained by the Father from before the foundation of the world.

 

[JunChosen]

Call it what you will....its a weed.....a noxious counterfeit and a very apt parable which his Jewish audience understood well.

God called it a tare and not a weed n the parables set forth in Matthew 13. If He calls it a "tare" why would anyone want to change it?

Well you see, that is not the problem.....its not the words, which are from God, but its the translation that can make all the difference to our understanding. Something read into the words or a bit of punctuation in the wrong place.

I beg to differ. In ancient days, there were no punctuation marks, but Scripture does tell us there is one who will speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws (Daniel 7:25). And we don't have to speculate who it is, right?

To God Be The Glory

 

[Wrangler]

God called it a tare and not a weed n the parables set forth in Matthew 13. If He calls it a "tare" why would anyone want to change it?

Readability. Most people know weed. Few know tare.

Frankly, this is what I rely on translations for, jettisoning esoteric weights, measures, terms and archaic saying THAT THEN need to be explained for the average reader. The cultural orientation need not be an obstacle to the message.

Don’t you agree that Jesus’ point is not about botany? But people who are to be saved from those that won’t be?

 

[robert derrick]

Who was it that "took upon him the form of a servant"?

And,

Considering that he "became obedient", does this mean that he was "not obedient" before becoming obedient?

Let's follow this through, can we?

Much love!

1. The Word was made flesh, in obedience to the Father.

2. The Word became obedient in the flesh, which could not happen, until Jesus Christ came in the flesh.

 

[JunChosen]

Readability. Most people know weed. Few know tare.

This is exactly why we need concordances. Myself, like the Strong's and Young's concordances because they were written for the KJV Bible.

Frankly, this is what I rely on translations for, jettisoning esoteric weights, measures, terms and archaic saying THAT THEN need to be explained for the average reader. The cultural orientation need not be an obstacle to the message.

As I told @Aunty Jane, all Bible translations are still what God had intended the contexts to be.

Except for the words "thee and thou" and a handful of words like "concupicense" I believe KJV Bible is the more excellent translation as it was translated from the Received Text! The reason we have many bibles in the market today is for the printers and theologians to make money!

Don’t you agree that Jesus’ point is not about botany? But people who are to be saved from those that won’t be?

Yes, that is exactly the thrust and context of the parables of Matthew 13.

To God Be The Glory

 

[Wrangler]

I believe KJV Bible is the more excellent translation as it was translated from the Received Text!

All translations go back to the Original language manuscripts. Newer translations actually have access to older manuscripts than the KJV.

While the KJV is the most influential book ever written in English, it had its day in the sun.

I don’t speak the kings English, middle English. I speak 21st-century American. A bridge too far for KJV - 500 years too far.

 

[marks]

Except for the words "thee and thou" and a handful of words like "concupicense" I believe KJV Bible is the more excellent translation as it was translated from the Received Text!

And "thee and thou" express singular and plural pronouns, something modern English doesn't do. Koine Greek uses both, so the KJV shows you a more detailed translation. And the couple of dozen words we need to look up, it's a small price to pay, and then you've got a larger vocabulary.

:)

Much love!

 

[JunChosen]

All translations go back to the Original language manuscripts. Newer translations actually have access to older manuscripts than the KJV.

While the KJV is the most influential book ever written in English, it had its day in the sun.

Really? I don't believe the KJV Bible had its' day in the sun as you termed it to be. WHY! Simple!!! Because Scripture has stipulated in Isaiah 55:8-11:
8 For my thoughts [are] not your thoughts, neither [are] your ways my ways, saith the LORD.
9 For [as] the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.
10 For as the rain cometh down, and the snow from heaven, and returneth not thither, but watereth the earth, and maketh it bring forth and bud, that it may give seed to the sower, and bread to the eater:
11 So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper [in the thing] whereto I sent it.

I don’t speak the kings English, middle English. I speak 21st-century American. A bridge too far for KJV - 500 years too far.

I wonder where the 21st Century American dialect came from? LOL

To God Be The Glory

 

[Aunty Jane]

If you look in the concordances you can see when something is mistranslated.
Not only that, but grafting foreign ideas into ambiguous verses also makes God's word invalid. All the scriptures pertaining to the trinity, immortality of the soul and hellfire, fall into that category.

 

[JunChosen]

If you look in the concordances you can see when something is mistranslated.
Not only that, but grafting foreign ideas into ambiguous verses also makes God's word invalid. All the scriptures pertaining to the trinity, immortality of the soul and hellfire, fall into that category.

So what you are really saying is that there is not really one translation of the Scripture that can be trusted because of ambiguous verses?

Question-- If God allowed the above to happen, is there a double meaning to the term, "The Lamb of God which take away the sin of the world?"

To God Be The Glory

 

[Wrangler]

So what you are really saying is that there is not really one translation of the Scripture that can be trusted because of ambiguous verses?

Don’t you think that ambiguous verses should be subordinated to explicit verses? For instance, a verse that could imply Jesus is God has to be subordinated to an explicit verse that says God is not a man. Hosea 11:9.

 

[Aunty Jane]

So what you are really saying is that there is not really one translation of the Scripture that can be trusted because of ambiguous verses?

I just love it when people put words in my mouth.....its not the verses, but the meaning implied in them that is the problem.
Since scripture does not contradict itself, there should be none that do....yet the verses that carry imputed meaning, contradict the verse that are clear statements.

Question-- If God allowed the above to happen, is there a double meaning to the term, "The Lamb of God which take away the sin of the world?"

There is no double meaning.....we all know who "the Lamb of God" is, and that his sacrifice cancels out the sin of Adam.

Can you not see that the churches of Christendom are fragmented and divided under the one banner that they claim describes them collectively? How can the Christ exist divided? All here are self described as "Christians".....and yet there are many here who claim that others are no such thing....so who has the right to point fingers and accuse others of not being "Christians", when it will be Christ himself who will make that decision.....Jesus also said that we will be judged by the same measure with which we judge others.

1 Corinthians 1:10...
"Now I urge you, brothers, through the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you should all speak in agreement and that there should be no divisions among you, but that you may be completely united in the same mind and in the same line of thought."
If Christendom imagines that this describes all the various churches in existence, who all have differing beliefs........they're dreaming.

 

[Taken]

Philippians 2:5-11 KJV
5) Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:
6) Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
7) But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:
8) And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.
9) Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:
10) That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;
11) And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Two questions.

Who was it that "took upon him the form of a servant"?

And,

Considering that he "became obedient", does this mean that he was "not obedient" before becoming obedient?

Let's follow this through, can we?

Much love!

The Spirit of God (Christ Jesus) took upon Himself the form of a servant...
....what FORM? Earthly
....what LIKENESS? as Abraham...Faithful..Hebrew..Israel (Gen 26:5)

Became Obedient
...according to WHAT LIKENESS? Earthly (terrestrial Mankind) Bodily Form
...Obedient to WHAT? Willingly give that body unto death. (Phil 2:8)

Where did THAT Body come from?
...God Prepared. (Heb 10:5)
...For WHEN? For when He would come into (this/the) world. (Gods footstool). (Isa 66:1)

What is the MYSTERY of that Body?
...God PURPOSED that body...IN Himself. (Heb 10:5)

Glory to God,
Taken

 

[CadyandZoe]

Philippians 2:5-11 KJV
5) Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:
6) Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
7) But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:
8) And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.
9) Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:
10) That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;
11) And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Two questions.

Who was it that "took upon him the form of a servant"?

And,

Considering that he "became obedient", does this mean that he was "not obedient" before becoming obedient?

Let's follow this through, can we?

Much love!

Paul isn't simply saying "he became obedient"; rather, his asserts that he "became obedient unto death." The complete thought is in view. He was always obedient. What he "became" was a unique person who never wavered in his obedience, even in the face of torture and death.

 

[Johann]

Philippians 2:5-11 KJV
5) Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:
6) Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
7) But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:
8) And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.
9) Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:
10) That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;
11) And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Two questions.

Who was it that "took upon him the form of a servant"?

And,

Considering that he "became obedient", does this mean that he was "not obedient" before becoming obedient?

Let's follow this through, can we?

Much love!

1. Christ Jesus

2. The always existing Messiah became something He was not before, a Man, as the 2nd Aorist indicates, in a body prepared for Him, and He was never disobedient but came to do the Father's will.

J.

 

[Behold]

...Obedient to WHAT?

His Father's Will.

Luke 22:42

 

[Wrangler]

What is the MYSTERY of that Body?
...God PURPOSED that body...IN Himself. (Heb 10:5)

Not at all.

That is why, when Christ came into the world, he said to God,

“You did not want animal sacrifices or sin offerings.
But you have given me a body to offer.

 

[Johann]

What is the MYSTERY of that Body?
...God PURPOSED that body...IN Himself. (Heb 10:5)

A body hast thou prepared me - `thou didst fit for me a body.’ ’In thy counsels thou didst determine to make for me a body, to be a sacrificial victim’ (Wahl). In the Hebrew, Psa_40:6, it is "mine ears heat thou opened," or ’dug.’ Perhaps this alludes to boring the ear of a slave who volunteers to remain under his master when he might be free. Christ’s assuming a body, in order to die the death of a slave (Heb_2:14), was a voluntary submission to God’s service, like that of a slave suffering his ear to be bored by his master. His willing obedience to the Father’s will is what gave especial virtue to his sacrifice for man (Heb_10:7; Heb_10:9-10). The fitting of a body for him is not with a view to His incarnation merely, but to His expiatory sacrifice (Heb_10:10), as the contrast to "sacrifice and offering" requires: cf. also Rom_7:4; Eph_2:16; Col_1:22. More probably ’opened mine ears,’ means opened mine inward ear, to be obedient to what God wills me to do-namely, to assume the body He has prepared for my sacrifice. So Job, margin, Job_33:16; Job_36:10 (doubtless the boring of a slave’s ear symbolized such willing obedience); Isa_1:5, "The Lord God hath opened mine ear" - i:e., made me obediently attentive as a slave to his master. Others, ’Mine ears hast thou digged,’ or ’fashioned;’ not with allusion to Exo_21:6, but to the true office of the ear-a willing, submissive attention to God’s voice. The forming of the ear implies the preparation of the body; this secondary idea, really in the Hebrew, though less prominent is the one which Paul uses for his argument. As he obediently assumed the body prepared by the Father, in which to make his self-sacrifice, so ought we present our bodies a living sacrifice (Rom_12:1).
JFB
^^
........just in case Ronald Bruno reads this......

But a body hast thou prepared me; or "fitted for me"; a real natural body, which stands for the whole human nature; and is carefully expressed, to show that the human nature is not a person. This was prepared, in the book of God's purposes and decrees, and in the council and covenant of grace; and was curiously formed by the Holy Ghost in time, for the second Person, the Son of God, to clothe himself with, as the Syriac version renders it, "thou hast clothed me with a body"; and that he might dwell in, and in it do the will of God, and perform the work of man's redemption: in Psa_40:6 it is, "mine ears thou hast opened"; digged or bored, the ear being put for the whole body; for if he had not had a body prepared, he could not have had ears opened: besides; the phrase is expressive of Christ's assuming the form of a servant, which was done by his being found in fashion as a man, Php_2:7 and of his being a voluntary servant, and of his cheerful obedience as such, the opening, or boring of the ear, was a sign, Exo_21:5. And thus by having a true body prepared for him, and a willing mind to offer it up, he became fit for sacrifice.
Gill
^^^
.......not welcomed.....

"But a body hast thou prepared me," (soma de katertiso moi) "But a body thou didst prepare for me,” or fitted me, in which he lived a sinless life, died a sinless death, except as he "bare our sins in his own body (the body of his flesh) on the tree," 1Ti_3:16; Gal_4:4-5; 1Pe_2:24; Col_1:20; Col_1:22; Eph_2:15-16; Heb_7:26.
Garner.

Heb 10:5 Therefore, when he comes into the Olam Hazeh, he says "ZEVACH UMINCHAH LO CHAFATZTA ("sacrifice and offering" Ps 40:7 (6) You did not desire but a body you prepared for me; (Ps 39:7 TARGUM HA-SHIVIM)
OJB

διο εισερχομενος εις τον κοσμον λεγει θυσιαν και προσφοραν ουκ ηθελησας σωμα δε κατηρτισω μοι

κατηρτισω
Part of Speech: Verb
Tense: Aorist<
Voice: Middle<
Mood: Indicative<
Person: second [you]
Number: Singular



Guess there is no mystery as to why a body was prepared for Christ Jesus @Taken