I have a question that remains unanswered:

[Aunty Jane]

Dear Abaxvahl, You said: "He has no proper name but only titles"

God did give to us His Name. HE assigned this Name to us as a commandment Forever.

God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: ‘I AM has sent me to you.’ ”
God also told Moses, “Say to the Israelites,
‘The LORD, the God of your fathers—the Elohim of Abraham, the Elohim of Isaac, and the Elohim of Jacob—has sent me to you.’
This is My name forever, and this is how I am to be remembered in every generation. - Exodus 3:14-15

PLEASE do not miss out on the part that says: "This is My Name FOREVER - in EVERY generation."

How many times will you ignore this....?

From the Tanakh......
“13 And Moses said to God, "Behold I come to the children of Israel, and I say to them, 'The God of your fathers has sent me to you,' and they say to me, 'What is His name?' what shall I say to them?" יגוַיֹּ֨אמֶר משֶׁ֜ה אֶל־הָֽאֱלֹהִ֗ים הִנֵּ֨ה אָֽנֹכִ֣י בָא֘ אֶל־בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵל֒ וְאָֽמַרְתִּ֣י לָהֶ֔ם אֱלֹהֵ֥י אֲבֽוֹתֵיכֶ֖ם שְׁלָחַ֣נִי אֲלֵיכֶ֑ם וְאָֽמְרוּ־לִ֣י מַה־שְּׁמ֔וֹ מָ֥ה אֹמַ֖ר אֲלֵהֶֽם:

14 God said to Moses, "Ehyeh asher ehyeh (I will be what I will be)," and He said, "So shall you say to the children of Israel, 'Ehyeh (I will be) has sent me to you.'" ידוַיֹּ֤אמֶר אֱלֹהִים֙ אֶל־משֶׁ֔ה אֶֽהְיֶ֖ה אֲשֶׁ֣ר אֶֽהְיֶ֑ה וַיֹּ֗אמֶר כֹּ֤ה תֹאמַר֙ לִבְנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל אֶֽהְיֶ֖ה שְׁלָחַ֥נִי אֲלֵיכֶֽם:

15 And God said further to Moses, "So shall you say to the children of Israel, 'The Lord God of your forefathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you.' This is My name forever, and this is how I should be mentioned in every generation. טווַיֹּ֩אמֶר֩ ע֨וֹד אֱלֹהִ֜ים אֶל־משֶׁ֗ה כֹּ֣ה תֹאמַר֘ אֶל־בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵל֒ יְהֹוָ֞ה אֱלֹהֵ֣י אֲבֹֽתֵיכֶ֗ם אֱלֹהֵ֨י אַבְרָהָ֜ם אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִצְחָ֛ק וֵֽאלֹהֵ֥י יַֽעֲקֹ֖ב שְׁלָחַ֣נִי אֲלֵיכֶ֑ם זֶה־שְּׁמִ֣י לְעֹלָ֔ם וְזֶ֥ה”

God gave both his proper name and its meaning, clearly stated “The Lord God”.....YHWH is יְהֹוָ֞ה.....”I Will Be What I Will Be”. This was to be ‘his NAME forever’.....it is not his title. Do we understand that God has one name, given to his own people exclusively...and they lost it. Why? Because of some silly superstition they invented, implying that it was too sacred to be uttered....what absolute nonsense! What Bible writer ever said that? Where will we find any command from God to cease using the name by which he was to be identified....FOREVER?

The meaning of God’s name is a description of his intentions, not a statement of his existence. Israel knew that their God was Yahweh, but now they were to understand what his name meant in connection with them. What he would “be” or “become” in order to fulfill his purpose in connection with them. Abraham’s close friendship with his God was widely known among his descendants.

I am bewildered by all these attempts to make God into something he is not and never was.
Just see what he said, and how the Jews themselves understood God’s declaration through Moses.
It is not ambiguous at all....unless someone is trying to spin a lie.

 

[Abaxvahl]

The meaning of God’s name is a description of his intentions, not a statement of his existence. Israel knew that their God was Yahweh, but now they were to understand what his name meant in connection with them. What he would “be” or “become” in order to fulfill his purpose in connection with them. Abraham’s close friendship with his God was widely known among his descendants.

An operation, very ancient and common opinion, perhaps the most rational one. Very cool.

 

[David in NJ]

How many times will you ignore this....?

From the Tanakh......
“13 And Moses said to God, "Behold I come to the children of Israel, and I say to them, 'The God of your fathers has sent me to you,' and they say to me, 'What is His name?' what shall I say to them?" יגוַיֹּ֨אמֶר משֶׁ֜ה אֶל־הָֽאֱלֹהִ֗ים הִנֵּ֨ה אָֽנֹכִ֣י בָא֘ אֶל־בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵל֒ וְאָֽמַרְתִּ֣י לָהֶ֔ם אֱלֹהֵ֥י אֲבֽוֹתֵיכֶ֖ם שְׁלָחַ֣נִי אֲלֵיכֶ֑ם וְאָֽמְרוּ־לִ֣י מַה־שְּׁמ֔וֹ מָ֥ה אֹמַ֖ר אֲלֵהֶֽם:

14 God said to Moses, "Ehyeh asher ehyeh (I will be what I will be)," and He said, "So shall you say to the children of Israel, 'Ehyeh (I will be) has sent me to you.'" ידוַיֹּ֤אמֶר אֱלֹהִים֙ אֶל־משֶׁ֔ה אֶֽהְיֶ֖ה אֲשֶׁ֣ר אֶֽהְיֶ֑ה וַיֹּ֗אמֶר כֹּ֤ה תֹאמַר֙ לִבְנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל אֶֽהְיֶ֖ה שְׁלָחַ֥נִי אֲלֵיכֶֽם:

15 And God said further to Moses, "So shall you say to the children of Israel, 'The Lord God of your forefathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you.' This is My name forever, and this is how I should be mentioned in every generation. טווַיֹּ֩אמֶר֩ ע֨וֹד אֱלֹהִ֜ים אֶל־משֶׁ֗ה כֹּ֣ה תֹאמַר֘ אֶל־בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵל֒ יְהֹוָ֞ה אֱלֹהֵ֣י אֲבֹֽתֵיכֶ֗ם אֱלֹהֵ֨י אַבְרָהָ֜ם אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִצְחָ֛ק וֵֽאלֹהֵ֥י יַֽעֲקֹ֖ב שְׁלָחַ֣נִי אֲלֵיכֶ֑ם זֶה־שְּׁמִ֣י לְעֹלָ֔ם וְזֶ֥ה”

God gave both his proper name and its meaning, clearly stated “The Lord God”.....YHWH is יְהֹוָ֞ה.....”I Will Be What I Will Be”. This was to be ‘his NAME forever’.....it is not his title. Do we understand that God has one name, given to his own people exclusively...and they lost it. Why? Because of some silly superstition they invented, implying that it was too sacred to be uttered....what absolute nonsense! What Bible writer ever said that? Where will we find any command from God to cease using the name by which he was to be identified....FOREVER?

The meaning of God’s name is a description of his intentions, not a statement of his existence. Israel knew that their God was Yahweh, but now they were to understand what his name meant in connection with them. What he would “be” or “become” in order to fulfill his purpose in connection with them. Abraham’s close friendship with his God was widely known among his descendants.

I am bewildered by all these attempts to make God into something he is not and never was.
Just see what he said, and how the Jews themselves understood God’s declaration through Moses.
It is not ambiguous at all....unless someone is trying to spin a lie.

And HE WILL BE FOREVER the ELOHIM of ABRAHAM and ELOHIM ISAAC and ELOHIM JACOB
This IS MY NAME FOREVER to all generations - (this includes you sassy lady.)

Boy, you sure are book smart but willfully ignorant.

 

[Aunty Jane]

Barney, you take things personally. AJ and I attack ideas not people. When your ideas are challenged you retreat into victimhood.

Sorry @BarnyFife but I have to agree here. You took everything I said as a personal insult when it was never intended to be. I was challenging your beliefs, but the first thing many people do when their beliefs are confronted is to either attack the person, or appear wounded so as to solicit their sympathy.
Psychologically, I see you doing both.

I am not here to attack anyone personally, but like Jesus I will attack your beliefs because if I care about your salvation, I must. How you respond is how you respond.

My job is not to judge my enemy, only to arrange a meeting for Judgment with them and God.

I like the way you put that Wrangler. The judgment is coming and all of us who claim Jesus as our Lord are going to stand before him......Matthew 7:21-23 indicates that it will not go well for “many” who think that their “Christianity” is “wheat-like” when it is only “weeds”.
God allows us the full freedom to be who we are without his intervention....so that when the judgment comes, we will all be caught in the act of being our true selves....no excuses.

My pastor gave a sermon with the ridiculous claim that you should always be kind to everyone. I emailed her a challenge: Quickly Send Your Balanced Budget Proposal to Washington. It comes down to being unkind to tomorrows generation or today’s generation; enslave the future or lower standard of living today.

Hard choices. Partially explains why it has been so rarely done in over a century.

This is also a good point. Being kind to everyone is an obligation, but not to the point of condoning their bad behavior or erroneously beliefs. I see those who misinterpret Jesus ‘hanging around with sinners’ as condoning their sins....but he was sent to “the lost sheep” to bring them back into a pen of safety and security with him as their shepherd.......they had to leave their sinful ways at the gate. He preached repentance as the way to life. Wilful sinners have no place in his Kingdom. Those who willfully hold onto scriptural errors and teach them to their flocks, will not have a place either. (Matthew 23:13-15)

So in today’s World, where sinful ways are seen as almost “normal”, the churches have a real challenge. Since the Pastor’s livelihood is based on their contributions, they have a dilemma on their hands. If they get tough with their parishioners and demand Biblical morality, they would lose half their flock and half their income. So compromise is their only way to keep their job with all its perks.
Those who lead are under greater obligation and responsibility.....so they will have no excuses to offer their judge. (1 Corinthians 5:9-13)

No one should ever get “paid” to do God’s work. The apostles accepted hospitality and expected that they would have food and a lodging place for the night, and the Jews as a people were obligated to host travelling strangers in this way. That’s why Jesus told them to take no provisions. But today’s clergy see it as a right to have their own house, a car and bills paid by their flock. There is no such thing as a prosperity gospel.....Jesus was poor and never expected anything more than people willingly gave to support him in his work. He never had to ask, nor did he ever demand.

The truth is not kind to those living a lie, no matter how mildly AJ or I say it.

I never deliberately set out to hurt anyone’s feelings, and I genuinely apologise if I have, but I agree with what you have said here....when Jesus confronted those who were making a mockery of his Father’s sacrificial arrangement by selling animals right in the Temple grounds for profit, he responded with anger and left none of them in any doubt about what he thought about their activities.

This is part of being a Christian I believe.....challenging people’s beliefs and showing them what God’s word says. The truth will hurt some people who want to hang on to their convenient lies....they have no genuine love for the truth, because it’s not “their” truth.(2 Thessalonians 2:9-12)

This current world of “offensiveness” is rather pathetic IMO. People have lost their resilience and crumble under any kind of personal pressure....it has become a criminal offence to “offend”. Good grief!

We might not agree on everything Wrangler, but I support your love of the truth and your freedom to express your beliefs as you see fit. Maybe it’s time for people to learn to get over themselves and lose all this PC.

 

[Aunty Jane]

And HE WILL BE FOREVER the ELOHIM of ABRAHAM and ELOHIM ISAAC and ELOHIM JACOB
This IS MY NAME FOREVER to all generations - (this includes you sassy lady.)

Boy, you sure are book smart but willfully ignorant.

Oh dear......where is the facepalm when you need it....?

 

[Aunty Jane]

Yeah, it's called a paradox. I'm familiar with it, having been an avid Bible student for over 30 years. wadr, That's not an answer at all. Either Christ had the Holy Spirit before the ascension or He didn't. You're the one who made the claim. :)

Luke 4:16 Then Jesus came to Nazareth, where He had been brought up. As was His custom, He entered the synagogue on the Sabbath. And when He stood up to read,
Luke 4:17 the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was handed to Him. Unrolling it, He found the place where it was written:
Luke 4:18 "The Spirit of the Lord is on Me, because He has anointed Me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent Me to proclaim liberty to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to release the oppressed,
Luke 4:19 to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor."
Luke 4:20 Then He rolled up the scroll, returned it to the attendant, and sat down. The eyes of everyone in the synagogue were fixed on Him,
Luke 4:21 and He began by saying, "Today this Scripture is fulfilled in your hearing."

Barney, Jesus received his anointing with Holy Spirit at his baptism. He had the spirit (power) of God at his disposal thereafter, and demonstrated it abundantly in his ministry......the apostles and disciples were also able to use the Holy Spirit when something was done “in Jesus’ name”. But the apostles and others did not receive the Holy Spirit for themselves until Pentecost when it allowed them to speak in different languages to preach to those from far away places, who had come to Jerusalem for the festival, in their own language. We can see that these gifts were varied and all intended for one purpose....to allow the Jews first and then later, the Gentiles to come to Christ, as it was intended when God first made his promise to Abraham. “All the nation’s were to be blessed” by the coming of Abraham’s seed.

What is the paradox?

 

[BarneyFife]

What is the paradox?

I never claimed there was one at issue. I was merely introducing the concept into the discussion I was having with Mr. Gwin.

 

[Aunty Jane]

I never claimed there was one at issue. I was merely introducing the concept into the discussion I was having with Mr. Gwin.

This is a forum Barney....you are never talking to just one person.
You said it was a paradox.....can you explain why?

 

[BarneyFife]

This is a forum Barney

Thank you for clearing that up for me.

you are never talking to just one person

I'm pretty sure I can if I want to. I think that's largely what the quoting and tagging features are for.

You said it was a paradox

No, I didn't. I already explained that.

can you explain why

I could recount the exchange, but I'm not going to. I type slow, and you could always just read back through the short conversation between Mr. Gwin and myself if you're really that interested. The up arrows beside the names of those being quoted will take you right back through the progression, inversely.

 

[BarneyFife]

We might not agree on everything Wrangler, but I support your love of the truth and your freedom to express your beliefs as you see fit.

That's nice.

 

[BarneyFife]

Barney, Jesus received his anointing with Holy Spirit at his baptism. He had the spirit (power) of God at his disposal thereafter, and demonstrated it abundantly in his ministry......the apostles and disciples were also able to use the Holy Spirit when something was done “in Jesus’ name”. But the apostles and others did not receive the Holy Spirit for themselves until Pentecost

Receiving, anointing, having, demonstrating, using (?)

 

[David in NJ]

How many times will you ignore this....?

From the Tanakh......
“13 And Moses said to God, "Behold I come to the children of Israel, and I say to them, 'The God of your fathers has sent me to you,' and they say to me, 'What is His name?' what shall I say to them?" יגוַיֹּ֨אמֶר משֶׁ֜ה אֶל־הָֽאֱלֹהִ֗ים הִנֵּ֨ה אָֽנֹכִ֣י בָא֘ אֶל־בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵל֒ וְאָֽמַרְתִּ֣י לָהֶ֔ם אֱלֹהֵ֥י אֲבֽוֹתֵיכֶ֖ם שְׁלָחַ֣נִי אֲלֵיכֶ֑ם וְאָֽמְרוּ־לִ֣י מַה־שְּׁמ֔וֹ מָ֥ה אֹמַ֖ר אֲלֵהֶֽם:

14 God said to Moses, "Ehyeh asher ehyeh (I will be what I will be)," and He said, "So shall you say to the children of Israel, 'Ehyeh (I will be) has sent me to you.'" ידוַיֹּ֤אמֶר אֱלֹהִים֙ אֶל־משֶׁ֔ה אֶֽהְיֶ֖ה אֲשֶׁ֣ר אֶֽהְיֶ֑ה וַיֹּ֗אמֶר כֹּ֤ה תֹאמַר֙ לִבְנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל אֶֽהְיֶ֖ה שְׁלָחַ֥נִי אֲלֵיכֶֽם:

15 And God said further to Moses, "So shall you say to the children of Israel, 'The Lord God of your forefathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you.' This is My name forever, and this is how I should be mentioned in every generation. טווַיֹּ֩אמֶר֩ ע֨וֹד אֱלֹהִ֜ים אֶל־משֶׁ֗ה כֹּ֣ה תֹאמַר֘ אֶל־בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵל֒ יְהֹוָ֞ה אֱלֹהֵ֣י אֲבֹֽתֵיכֶ֗ם אֱלֹהֵ֨י אַבְרָהָ֜ם אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִצְחָ֛ק וֵֽאלֹהֵ֥י יַֽעֲקֹ֖ב שְׁלָחַ֣נִי אֲלֵיכֶ֑ם זֶה־שְּׁמִ֣י לְעֹלָ֔ם וְזֶ֥ה”

God gave both his proper name and its meaning, clearly stated “The Lord God”.....YHWH is יְהֹוָ֞ה.....”I Will Be What I Will Be”. This was to be ‘his NAME forever’.....it is not his title. Do we understand that God has one name, given to his own people exclusively...and they lost it. Why? Because of some silly superstition they invented, implying that it was too sacred to be uttered....what absolute nonsense! What Bible writer ever said that? Where will we find any command from God to cease using the name by which he was to be identified....FOREVER?

The meaning of God’s name is a description of his intentions, not a statement of his existence. Israel knew that their God was Yahweh, but now they were to understand what his name meant in connection with them. What he would “be” or “become” in order to fulfill his purpose in connection with them. Abraham’s close friendship with his God was widely known among his descendants.

I am bewildered by all these attempts to make God into something he is not and never was.
Just see what he said, and how the Jews themselves understood God’s declaration through Moses.
It is not ambiguous at all....unless someone is trying to spin a lie.

This is because you do not have the Holy Spirit. You have head knowledge like the Scribes and Pharisees.
You search the Scriptures, you rely on the god of intellect, greek, hebrew, scholarly studies.
But this will never give to you the clear understanding of The Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
Just as those before you when the Lord walked this earth and they knew Him not.

The fact that you reject what is written in a children's book makes it clear that you are in need.

 

[Aunty Jane]

Receiving, anointing, having, demonstrating, using (?)

Ignoring all the nonsense.....(now who is being sarcastic....pot/kettle....)
How about we try just a civil conversation and I'll try really hard not to patronize you.....you don't make it easy though.

Especially when you ask these kinds of questions?

Am I speaking to someone well educated in the scriptures or am I not....sometimes its hard to tell...ya know.

Receiving ? Yes...
Matthew 3:16-17...
"When Jesus was baptized, he went up immediately from the water. The heavens suddenly opened for him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and coming down on him. 17 And a voice from heaven said, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well-pleased.”

So Jesus was just 'Jesus son of Joseph' before his baptism, but after receiving God's spirit, he became Jesus the "Christ"....which means "anointed one"....so "anointing"? Yes.

Having? yes.....those who received the Holy Spirit at Pentecost demonstrated that they had been anointed with God's Spirit as Jesus had promised, and could use it in the same way that Jesus did....healing the sick, raising the dead, and speaking in various languages etc.

Using? Yes...the Holy Spirit was a power granted to them by God....it was not theirs, but they were "using" it with God's permission.

Does that answer your questions?

It would really help if you could flesh out your responses, rather than just single sentences or single words?
And you wonder why I wonder about you....?

 

[Aunty Jane]

This is because you do not have the Holy Spirit. You have head knowledge like the Scribes and Pharisees.
You search the Scriptures, you rely on the god of intellect, greek, hebrew, scholarly studies.
But this will never give to you the clear understanding of The Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
Just as those before you when the Lord walked this earth and they knew Him not.

The fact that you reject what is written in a children's book makes it clear that you are in need.

A children's book?

.....you are shown the irrefutable facts from the God inspired scriptures, and yet all I am hearing is justification for ignoring all of it in order to hang on to your precious trinity.....which was nowhere taught by Jesus.

I hope you and your threesome will be very happy together for however long your embrace may last.....

 

[David in NJ]

A children's book?

.....you are shown the irrefutable facts from the God inspired scriptures, and yet all I am hearing is justification for ignoring all of it in order to hang on to your precious trinity.....which was nowhere taught by Jesus.

I hope you and your threesome will be very happy together for however long your embrace may last.....

Absolutely The Father, Son and Holy Spirit is His Name forever - just as HE said in Exodus 3:14-15
I will Be what I will Be is not His name - that is His declaration of being Unlimited and from Eternity - not from creation.
Everything in creation is what it is was created to be and nothing more.
Maybe a little too much for you? Sassy

 

[BarneyFife]

Ignoring all the nonsense.....(now who is being sarcastic....pot/kettle....)

No sarcasm intended at all. And what would be wrong with sarcasm? It's actually considered acceptable in the Forum Rules.

How about we try just a civil conversation and I'll try really hard not to patronize you.....you don't make it easy though.

Especially when you ask these kinds of questions?

I guess I'd better get used to it, unless we're going to part ways.

Am I speaking to someone well educated in the scriptures or am I not....sometimes its hard to tell...ya know.

Since the doubts keep coming up, why don't we just say I'm not.

So Jesus was just 'Jesus son of Joseph' before his baptism, but after receiving God's spirit, he became Jesus the "Christ"....which means "anointed one"....so "anointing"? Yes.

Does this qualify as chronology of Jesus's Messiahship?
Luke 2:11 Parallel: For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord.
https://www.jw.org/en/library/bible/study-bible/books/luke/2/#v42002011

Having? yes.....those who received the Holy Spirit at Pentecost demonstrated that they had been anointed with God's Spirit as Jesus had promised, and could use it in the same way that Jesus did....healing the sick, raising the dead, and speaking in various languages etc.

So, "it's" a show?

Using? Yes...the Holy Spirit was a power granted to them by God....it was not theirs, but they were "using" it with God's permission.

So, "it's" like a tool.

It would really help if you could flesh out your responses, rather than just single sentences or single words?

I tried that but people generally just address the points they want to instead of the main ones, even when I point them out.

 

[David in NJ]

A children's book?

.....you are shown the irrefutable facts from the God inspired scriptures, and yet all I am hearing is justification for ignoring all of it in order to hang on to your precious trinity.....which was nowhere taught by Jesus.

I hope you and your threesome will be very happy together for however long your embrace may last.....

Sassy, i love irrefutable facts - when you have one, and i mean one, please let me know
Some people think that the more scripture they post it some how proves their point - not so with God or me.

"But let your statement 'Yes' be 'Yes,' and 'No,' 'No.' Anything more than these comes from evil." Matt 5:37

Stay direct on target with subject matter as you messed up with the "I will be what I will be", which is not His name.
Stay with the direct statement God made when He said "This is My Name forever" plain simple grammar.

Gotta go for now - Good Night

 

[Aunty Jane]

No sarcasm intended at all. And what would be wrong with sarcasm? It's actually considered acceptable in the Forum Rules.

Oh goody!

No more whining then...OK?

I guess I'd better get used to it, unless we're going to part ways.

That at least makes me less likely to patronize you. I can handle "I dunno".

I don't know what to do with "I know, but I'll keep you guessing"....

Since the doubts keep coming up, why don't we just say I'm not.

I'll tolerate your ignorance if you tolerate my frankness....chalk and cheese can still converse...right?
Maybe I should have called myself Aunty Frank?

Does this qualify as chronology of Jesus's Messiahship?
Luke 2:11 Parallel: For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord.
https://www.jw.org/en/library/bible/study-bible/books/luke/2/#v42002011

The baby Jesus was not at that time the Savior....he could not save himself from Herod's plot, his father saw to that.....so being born to take up that role is a little different to being born already equipped. He was 30 years old when he took up that post and it was then that God equipped him for the task with his spirit.

Mary was by then without her beloved Joseph. As he was close to death, Jesus gave her care over to the apostle John, even though he had male siblings who could have filled the role....but Jesus was more concerned with her spiritual welfare because his siblings were not yet believers.

So, "it's" a show?

A show? No, more a demonstration. All of the miracles of the first century were foregleams of the world to come, mentioned in Revelation 21:2-4. The healing of the sick, lame, deaf and blind and even the raising of the dead.

So, "it's" like a tool.

If you want to put it that way....it was used to bring people to Christ, seeing the miracles, showed that God's favor had shifted from the old system with its now outdated covenant, to the new one under Messiah's leadership. It was called "The Way" because it was the way back to God for any Jew who saw Jesus as the Christ. When the apostolic period ended, so did the miracles. They had done their job and were no longer needed.

I tried that but people generally just address the points they want to instead of the main ones, even when I point them out.[/QUOTE

Clarity is good....saves misunderstandings......we've had a few already.

That's a shame because I am sure there are more things that we agree on, than disagree on if you are an SDA.

 

[BarneyFife]

The baby Jesus was not at that time the Savior....he could not save himself from Herod's plot, his father saw to that.....so being born to take up that role is a little different to being born already equipped. He was 30 years old when he took up that post and it was then that God equipped him for the task with his spirit.

Aunty, I’m not sure exactly how to approach this, so please forgive me if it goes amiss. Are you saying Jesus was not Messiah or Savior at His birth because He could not save Himself from Herod’s plot? Because I’m pretty sure that was not what He was sent to earth to do as Messiah or Savior. And if this is what you’re saying, do you have any scriptural evidence to support it? Because I get the impression that the angels who made the announcement that He was the Anointed Savior on the day that He was born were pretty serious about it. A message from heaven is pretty striking evidence of the very literal thing it was/is proclaiming. The message doesn’t say anything about taking up the role or being equipped for it. It simply says that He was the Anointed Savior on that day, in no uncertain terms, apparently.

On to the business of the imparting of the Spirit. I assume you’re of the school that Jesus was sinless throughout His life, are you not? And if that were so, how did He remain so from His conception to the time He was 30? How could He have known what sin was without the Spirit? How could He have withstood temptation without the Spirit? How could He have overcome without the Spirit?

I guess you can tell, I have a problem with the idea that the Spirit’s agency was limited somehow in different “dispensations.” I believe in a literal reading of verses like Matthew 5:6 and Luke 11:13. Although, I do recognize the immense measure in which the Spirit was poured out upon Pentecost. But in this case I see cups as half-full and not half-empty. I believe the Spirit was dispatched in the precise measure that was necessary to carry out God’s will all throughout history.

I see so many man-made terms for the agency of the Spirit, that it makes me question whether people really know what they’re talking about, or whether they’re just making a simple thing complicated to support their canned theology. I find that this is done in varying degrees, often in ignorance, and certainly not directed at you personally. I simply offer it as a concern of mine and to clarify why I asked the ambiguous question consisting merely of words, separated by commas with a question mark at the end in reference to this subject, earlier on in our discussion.

Mary was by then without her beloved Joseph. As he was close to death, Jesus gave her care over to the apostle John, even though he had male siblings who could have filled the role....but Jesus was more concerned with her spiritual welfare because his siblings were not yet believers.

Finally, for the sake of being direct and frank, I’m not sure what Mary’s welfare had to do with the anointing of Jesus as Messiah or Savior whatsoever. To me, it seems to be anecdotal evidence in the matter, at best.

 

[Aunty Jane]

Are you saying Jesus was not Messiah or Savior at His birth because He could not save Himself from Herod’s plot? Because I’m pretty sure that was not what He was sent to earth to do as Messiah or Savior.

No...I am saying that Jesus was born to be the Messiah, but he needed to grow up first. As an infant he needed education and training, just like any other son of devout Jewish parents. His superior intellect would have put him in the genius category as the teachers at the Temple marveled as his wisdom for such a youngster, only 12 years old.

Luke 2:46-50...
"Well, after three days they found him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the teachers and listening to them and asking them questions. 47 But all those listening to him were in constant amazement at his understanding and his answers."
So it is obvious that God had guided this young man on his path and he was well versed in the word of God, thanks to his devoted parents.
"And the young child continued growing and getting strong, being filled with wisdom, and God’s favor continued upon him." (Luke 2:40)

But growing up as a human, there was still much that he did not know about his past life....and details also about what was ahead of him. That was revealed in God's due time.

On presenting himself for baptism (which was not for forgiveness of sins or for repentance over transgressions against the Law of Moses) the account in Matthew 3:16-17 tells us that...
"After being baptized, Jesus immediately came up from the water; and look! the heavens were opened up, and he saw God’s spirit descending like a dove and coming upon him. 17 Look! Also, a voice from the heavens said: “This is my Son, the beloved, whom I have approved.”
So only at his baptism did Jesus become the "Christ"; the Greek word Khri·stosʹ, which is equivalent to the Hebrew word translated “Messiah,” or “Anointed One.” So, only then was the Holy Spirit operative on him as part of his anointing. Just like the disciples at Pentecost received their anointing with Holy Spirit to become "sons of God" by adoption.
Galatians 4:1-5...
"Now I say that as long as the heir is a young child, he is no different from a slave, although he is the lord of all things, 2 but he is under supervisors and stewards until the day set ahead of time by his father. 3 Likewise, we too, when we were children, were enslaved by the elementary things of the world. 4 But when the full limit of the time arrived, God sent his Son, who was born of a woman and who was under law, 5 that he might release by purchase those under law, so that we might receive the adoption as sons."

There is not a single mention of Jesus being able to perform miracles until after his baptism. It was one of the reasons why his siblings did not yet believe in him...he was just their older brother.

The heavens opened up, allowing Jesus to see the holy Spirit in the shape of a dove descend upon him....and then hearing his Father's voice of approval. But as to the road ahead (and in all likelihood, what Jesus had left behind regarding his former position in heaven)....the magnitude of this required 40 days in the wilderness to come to terms with it all, communing with his Father about all those details and also that which was to come.

I get the impression that the angels who made the announcement that He was the Anointed Savior on the day that He was born were pretty serious about it. A message from heaven is pretty striking evidence of the very literal thing it was/is proclaiming. The message doesn’t say anything about taking up the role or being equipped for it. It simply says that He was the Anointed Savior on that day, in no uncertain terms, apparently.

He was born for this role....there was no other reason for his coming into the world. So the promised Savior was born, the future "King of the Jews"...but would not begin to fulfill his role as Messiah until the age of 30, when he presented himself for baptism.....and his Kingship was yet hundreds of decades into the future.

On to the business of the imparting of the Spirit. I assume you’re of the school that Jesus was sinless throughout His life, are you not? And if that were so, how did He remain so from His conception to the time He was 30? How could He have known what sin was without the Spirit? How could He have withstood temptation without the Spirit? How could He have overcome without the Spirit?

Are you under the impression that humans were created sinful? Were Adam or his wife "sinful" before their disobedience?
Did God create flawed human beings who could not help but sin, and then punish them for doing so?

Why did the devil tempt Jesus? He knew that he was the son of God, and that God would protect him to the end.

Consider.....didn't the devil already have two notches on his belt? Two sinless humans who were created perfect, but who, out of their own free will acted in direct contravention to God's explicit command......only then did they become "sinners"....and they passed that sin onto all their offspring. (Romans 5:12)
To entice Jesus from his course by challenging him to abuse his free will, could have messed everything up. But Jesus showed that the first humans could have obeyed one simple command and told the devil to "go away" as Jesus had done. (Matthew 4:1-11) Thus proving that giving his children free will, was not a mistake.

The redeemer could not have been a sinful son of Adam or else he could not have paid the required price for freeing mankind from the perpetual sentence of sin and death. He had to be sinless like Adam was....."a life for a life". (Exodus 21:23-25) Equivalency is what God's Law demanded.
1 Corinthians 15:45...
"So it is written: “The first man Adam became a living person.” The last Adam became a life-giving spirit."

I guess you can tell, I have a problem with the idea that the Spirit’s agency was limited somehow in different “dispensations.” I believe in a literal reading of verses like Matthew 5:6 and Luke 11:13. Although, I do recognize the immense measure in which the Spirit was poured out upon Pentecost. But in this case I see cups as half-full and not half-empty. I believe the Spirit was dispatched in the precise measure that was necessary to carry out God’s will all throughout history.

I agree....how did you get the impression that I believe differently. The Holy Spirit has always been dispensed in due measure....not too much, not too little. Precisely measured out as to need.

I see so many man-made terms for the agency of the Spirit, that it makes me question whether people really know what they’re talking about, or whether they’re just making a simple thing complicated to support their canned theology. I find that this is done in varying degrees, often in ignorance, and certainly not directed at you personally. I simply offer it as a concern of mine and to clarify why I asked the ambiguous question consisting merely of words, separated by commas with a question mark at the end in reference to this subject, earlier on in our discussion.

Unclear questions often gain unclear answers....
I would ask you to clarify the term "agency of the Spirit" for I have no idea what that means?