quietthinker
Well-Known Member
What benefit does it produce to make Jesus God
if it's like making flour into bread, you can eat it.
if it's like making flour into bread, you can eat it.
Last edited:
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
hmmmm...I'm not sure about that......if you're on the loosing end.Friends.....?Never minded a good pillow fight. Its not my job to force agreement, so to each his own.....its no reason to be enemies.
Thank you for answering the questions. Are the ones who take the bread and wine the 144,000?We believe that Jesus is divine, and has been granted divine authority which in the definition of "theos" makes him "a mighty one"....a god-like one but never is it stated in scripture that Jesus is the Almighty.....not once.
He is by his own admission a "created being" as his Father's "only begotten son"...he is unique among the many other "sons of God" because he alone is the first and only direct creation of his Father. He may well be "THE" Archangel Michael, because of things said about him in Daniel and other scriptures....there is only one Archangel. And Micheal is a "Prince" who stands in behalf of Jehovah's people, We also know that the description of the coming Messiah in Isaiah 9:6-7 depicts him as a "Mighty God" but not the "Almighty God"....he is also called the "Prince of Peace" so again we see Jesus as a Prince...the son of a King who can also have to role of co-regent.
In our ranks the ones who partake of the emblems (the bread and wine) at the Lord's evening meal, are diminishing in number as we would expect in these last days. As it is a replacement for the Passover, and is observed annually as the Passover was on that specific date. (Nisan 14 according to the Jewish calendar) that means that we will not celebrate Easter because it is a pagan adoption and has no place in the life of a Christian. The word "Easter" is a dead giveaway....its the name of a pagan fertility goddess and her emblems were rabbits and eggs....sound familiar?
The "anointed" (as we call them) are just fellow Christians in the congregation with no special attention drawn to them because they are humble and do not seek it. We support them in their work and in their trials, and as their numbers shrink and the congregations are made up of their subjects, we all look forward to being guided and directed by them during the thousand years of the Kingdom's rule....bringing us back to God's original purpose for humankind and this carefully prepared earth. (Revelation 21:2-4)
They have been chosen by God for their heavenly role.
Those who partake of the emblems without God's anointing will answer for their error.
1 Corinthians 11:27-29....
"Therefore, whoever eats the loaf or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will be guilty respecting the body and the blood of the Lord. 28 First let a man approve himself after scrutiny, and only then let him eat of the loaf and drink of the cup. 29 For the one who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment against himself."
Peterlag,
Jesus came as Man (Hebrews 2:16-18).
Compare and contrast "Jesus came as Man" with your first sentence, specifically "Jesus had to come as God".
You asked for a verse or two, so here's a passage based upon your question being reframed to the Biblical "Jesus came as Man":
"assuredly He does not give help to angels, but He gives help to the descendant of Abraham. Therefore, He had to be made like His brethren in all things, so that He might become a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people. For since He Himself was tempted in that which He has suffered, He is able to come to the aid of those who are tempted" (Hebrews 2:16-18).
Jesus is the One True God (Deuteronomy 6:4) who came to earth in the form of man (Philippians 2:6-8).
Peterlag, see the Apostle Paul's writing:
"who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a slave and being made in the likeness of men. Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross" (Paul, Philippians 2:6-8).
As you've been shown scripturally elsewhere, Jesus' followers can refer to Jesus as truly Man and/or truly God.
- The follower of Jesus named Paul wrote Jesus was "found in appearance as a man" (Philippians 2:8), so Paul describes Jesus as truly Man.
- The follower of Jesus named Paul wrote Jesus "existed in the form of God" (Philippians 2:6), so Paul describes Jesus as truly God.
Both Philippians 2:8 and Philippians 2:6 are descriptive of who Jesus is.
Jesus existing in the form of God equivocates with Jesus being God always.
Jesus taking the form of a slave equivocates with Jesus coming to Earth as a Man.
Peterlag, that's two passages from the Bible that explain why Jesus came as Man.
We believe so. These are the ones who will govern mankind and act as priests on our behalf during the thousand year reign of Christ, and since they are selected by God and anointed with his spirit, we can look forward to the best rulership mankind has ever had....hand picked by God...who could ask for better?Thank you for answering the questions. Are the ones who take the bread and wine the 144,000?
This has been posted before but it addresses the problem of the connection between Exodus 3:14 and John 8:58....If He was trying to simply prove He was "older", He would have said, "Before Abraham was, I was". That's proper syntax in ANY language and if anyone knew how to frame a thought, it was He of Whom it was said, "No man ever spoke like this Man".
Again, "Before Abraham was, I was". That what you read? That what you NWT says?
He said, "Before Abraham was, I AM." Not "I WAS", but "AM". "I AM".
Is that proper syntax? Is that how you tell someone you've been around longer than they? No. It's how you tell someone "I AM God and there is none else. I AM God and there is none like Me."
Hardly a more illogical statement was ever made by anyone in the history of humanity.And you can't pretend what disproves your point is not there
You are clearly, desperately intent on reading into Scripture what is not there. If it was important for us to know he was God incarnate, why didn't he just come right out and say it - like he came right out and said he was the Messiah? Why is all the so called evidence vaguely worded and you have to read into it?If He was trying to simply prove He was "older", He would have said, "Before Abraham was, I was".
You can't but Jesus can do a lot of things you can't do.You can't be two of something at the same time.
Jesus can do a lot of things you can't do.
How many people have you raised from the dead?“Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.” (John 14:12)
How many people have you raised from the dead?
What are the greater works?Is that what you consider a “greater” work?
Your argument isn’t with me, it’s with the holy scriptures.
What are the greater works?
Sometimes, baptism just makes people wet.
Baptism and the Catholic Church makes a Christian. That’s been your message to me.
“… widespread is the mistake of attributing to primitive Christianity the Greek belief in the immortality of the soul.”
(Oscar Cullmann, Immortality of the Soul or Resurrection of the Dead?, p. 7.)
I quote this for two reasons:
1. I self-identify as a primitive Christian; and
2. This is easy to confirm by reading the Early Church Fathers.
Was Dr. Cullmann, then, on “easy street”?
“… the truth I have found it necessary to draw between the courageous and joyful primitive Christian hope of the resurrection of the dead and the serene philosophic expectation of the survival of the immortal soul, has displeased not only many sincere Christians in all Communions and of all theological outlooks, but also those whose convictions, while not outwardly alienated from Christianity, are more strongly molded by philosophical considerations.”
(Ibid., p. 6)
I read the book many years before I delivered my grandmother’s graveside sermon. I often recall this comment made by Dr. Cullmann when I think back about that day in the cemetery.
The Baptist pastor that summer morning was, to put it mildly, “displeased”.
What I had previously only read about, I experienced myself that day.
It doesn’t matter? Let the reader decide.
It mattered enough to make a Baptist pastor scowl.
to say you are a primitive Christian is to date the church, early, middle, late and the church is eternal!
also you are saying there is more than one kind of Christian
“Now the word of Yahweh came to me, saying, …”
(Jeremiah 1:4, WEB)
@RLT63 how do you understand this? When the word of Yahweh came to Jeremiah (or when the word of Yahweh came to anyone in the OT) do you think the word is a pre-Incarnate appearance of Jesus?