AuldSoul,
I had enough of such reasoning in the WT. This is what they do when they do not have a scriptural answer to offer.
Joseph
JosephMalik
JoinedPosts by JosephMalik
-
221
Was Jesus the first creation.
by ajie inas i mentioned in my last post that im studying the book what the bible really teaches,anyway im now on the bit about who is jesus,now it uses the scripture col1:15 does this prove he was created where it says hes the firstborn.
-
-
-
221
Was Jesus the first creation.
by ajie inas i mentioned in my last post that im studying the book what the bible really teaches,anyway im now on the bit about who is jesus,now it uses the scripture col1:15 does this prove he was created where it says hes the firstborn.
-
-
JosephMalik
AuldSoul, Here is heaven(s) and God used as interchangeable terms. Mt 11:11 Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist: notwithstanding he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he. Lu 7:28 For I say unto you, Among those that are born of women there is not a greater prophet than John the Baptist: but he that is least in the kingdom of God is greater than he. So Heaven in scripture is not restricted to a place outside earth’s atmosphere. It has many uses especially for Jews that include earth’s atmosphere. And it includes men of importance holding positions above common man, like government officials. Php2:10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; Like in Col the word is used of human beings here as well as all such human beings will once again gain life in this Kingdom. Translation simply makes this a bit difficult. Or how about this one by Peter: 2Pe 3:12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat? Human beings that is what Peter is talking about here. And such humans will be replaced with new ones like this: 13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness. Like Colossians the word applies to human government in such texts not someplace in the universe just like the elements do not mean the planet but refers to common man dependent upon such heavens. Some would simply call this a description of Armageddon? But the reality is that words like heaven can and are used in such ways. J oseph
-
221
Was Jesus the first creation.
by ajie inas i mentioned in my last post that im studying the book what the bible really teaches,anyway im now on the bit about who is jesus,now it uses the scripture col1:15 does this prove he was created where it says hes the firstborn.
-
-
JosephMalik
AuldSoul,
You know that is not true. I gave scriptural applications of how heaven(s) was used in NT times. For example I demonstrated how it was used by Jews in place of the word God. Words like visible and invisible are simple no brainers in this case. Now if you cannot understand this or choose to ignore it fine. That is your problem not mine.
Joseph
-
221
Was Jesus the first creation.
by ajie inas i mentioned in my last post that im studying the book what the bible really teaches,anyway im now on the bit about who is jesus,now it uses the scripture col1:15 does this prove he was created where it says hes the firstborn.
-
-
JosephMalik
Yes... and this should apply to the Roman government (which btw had a lot of visible officials and institutions representing it throughout the empire)?
Narkissos,
And Paul covered them as well with visible. Once again your argument has no merit, and the blood of Christ was not shed for the salvation of anyone off world.
Joseph
-
221
Was Jesus the first creation.
by ajie inas i mentioned in my last post that im studying the book what the bible really teaches,anyway im now on the bit about who is jesus,now it uses the scripture col1:15 does this prove he was created where it says hes the firstborn.
-
-
JosephMalik
Say Gumby,
Maybe I just try to think like a Jew and not jump to conclusions since their use of the word Heaven(s) had many uses and applications that go far beyond the way you think.
Joseph
-
221
Was Jesus the first creation.
by ajie inas i mentioned in my last post that im studying the book what the bible really teaches,anyway im now on the bit about who is jesus,now it uses the scripture col1:15 does this prove he was created where it says hes the firstborn.
-
-
JosephMalik
This is why many interpret the case as a genitive of subordination, i.e. "firstborn over creation," as implying the kind of domination that is explicitly explained in v. 16-18.
Leolaia,
That was good and the real point being made by Paul. We should also understand that all does not mean everything and we must depend on (as you show) the material being discussed (context) to determine what is meant. The scriptures do not explain how or when the Word that became Jesus came into existence or if this Word is simply a part of God like the rib God took from Adam to make Eve. The same is true for the angels that support God's creation. What we do know is that the blood of Christ was not meant to redeem them and their fate has already been predestined.
Joseph
-
221
Was Jesus the first creation.
by ajie inas i mentioned in my last post that im studying the book what the bible really teaches,anyway im now on the bit about who is jesus,now it uses the scripture col1:15 does this prove he was created where it says hes the firstborn.
-
-
JosephMalik
Does "invisible" (aoratos) in the first instance mean "far away as..." the Pleiades? Narkissos, No, it simply means” 1) unseen, or that which can not be seen, e.g. invisible. No literal location is specified in either case thus your argument has no merit. And since Paul is talking about human governments there is no reason to think off planet in the case of such governments as you suggested. What is it that causes so many readers to disregard the reality of the text and go off world like this? Joseph
-
221
Was Jesus the first creation.
by ajie inas i mentioned in my last post that im studying the book what the bible really teaches,anyway im now on the bit about who is jesus,now it uses the scripture col1:15 does this prove he was created where it says hes the firstborn.
-
-
JosephMalik
How bout John Chap1 Not ONE THING was created without him. If Jesus had been created by his daddy, then the scripture would have to say..."apart from him, not one thing was created that was created". To whoever: John is only discussing human creation, human life in this introduction of how the Word came to be Jesus our Savior. Mankind with all its tribes, races and other complex structure is the world to which this Word came and the world for which He was responsible. How the animals or anything else came into existence is not being discussed by John in these verses. This is also what Paul is doing in Colossians chapter 1. Paul is only discussing the human creation that will be redeemed by His blood over which our Lord has pre-eminence. 14 In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins: 15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: 16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, (rulers, kings) and that are in earth, (common man) visible (local) and invisible, (far away as in Rome) whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: 17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist. All human entities in various stages of authority in this world. The successful sacrifice of this now firstborn human Jesus assures this hope for those now named by Paul who goes on to include the Church in this listing as well. Joseph
-
15
ParadiseWhere?
by AuldSoul inre chap.
7 p. 37 rekindle that first love!
14 since they have no prospect of living in an earthly paradise, how is it that anointed christians, such as those ephesians, are rewarded with eating of the tree of life, which is in the paradise of god?
-
-
JosephMalik
How can you use a complete different term in Colossians to explain what Paul referred to in 2 Corinthians? I am at a loss how you justify this. AuldSoul, The word under discussion is heaven and the many ways it is used in scripture especially by Paul in this case. Jews used Heaven(s) for God as Matthew demonstrated. They disliked using the word God and even today spell it G_d. Kingdom of the Heavens and Kingdom of God are interchangeable. But there are other ways Heaven is used as I demonstrated in Paul’s letters. I can show this because definitions are not always complete and scriptural use carries more authority than dictionaries. You asked: Likewise, if "heaven" means "covenant" and "third heaven" means "the third covenant" why would a covenant need to be reconciled by Christ's blood? Heaven simply means elevated be it God or Government a Kingdom or something else with authority over us. It is not that it means covenant as you say. I am simply showing how the word can be used when discussing such covenants and arrangements. Read the texts, they make perfect sense as I explained. Why do you think Heaven is a place or someplace else when it is not used that way in numerous texts? Stay with the context of message. The things in the heavens (non human beings) and the outcome for such has already been determined by God. There is no sacrifice or reconciliation for them. Our Lord did not die for the sin of Satan or anyone else that followed him. His future has already been determined. You said: If Paul meant government/kingdom, he could have made that clear by use of "kubernesis" (Strong's g2941), "kuriotes" (Strong's g2962), or "basileia" (Strong's g935). Why would he confuse readers unecessarily? Who is confused? Paul was not. The Jews understood such use. And it was when writing specifically to such Jews that Paul used heavens in place of such other terms that you think would have been more appropriate. If I said heavens now would you think God? Jews would. The problem is our world, our time not his. Take another example: 1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. 2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. KJV But in the NIV we read: 1 Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2 Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. Governing authorities, Kingdom, words that change through time and different cultures just as heavens and its use is barely recognizable today. You asked: I notice you did not fulfill the one simple request I had of demonstrating a use of kingdom that means covenant. But I did and in detail. I even explained how they had provision to forgive sin (authority that can only come from God) and how this all tied together using heaven instead. You said: Jesus' incessant use of the phrase "kingdom of the heavens" if that means "kingdom of the kingdom." How do you explain John 18:36? 36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence. Time! This world this time of Pilate was the wrong time. My Kingdom as our Lord stated was future, much further in time than the Kingdom or Rome. Later the disciples wanted to know this time and asked: 6 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel? 7 And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power. Now for Kingdom of the heavens and God once again: Mt 11:11 Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist: notwithstanding he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he. Lu 7:28 For I say unto you, Among those that are born of women there is not a greater prophet than John the Baptist: but he that is least in the kingdom of God is greater than he. Which way did Jesus say it? The Jewish way or the Gentile way? That the authors did not quote our Lord’s words exactly is not the problem. The wrote for their audiences who understood them. They interpreted our Lords words to clarify what was meant. How we understand the message and such words being from different backgrounds than they were, that is our problem the one we must face today. Makes no difference to me if you agree or disagree with such assessments. This is after all a discussion group presenting alternate views and the responsibility for what we teach is ours alone. Joseph
-
15
ParadiseWhere?
by AuldSoul inre chap.
7 p. 37 rekindle that first love!
14 since they have no prospect of living in an earthly paradise, how is it that anointed christians, such as those ephesians, are rewarded with eating of the tree of life, which is in the paradise of god?
-
-
JosephMalik
Do research on what Paul, one of Gamaliel's students, would have understood "third heaven" to mean and I feel it is safe to say you will dispense with the belief that he referred to the world's governmental system or to a covenant. I believe he meant what he said. AuldSoul, I have Paul’s own words and how he used them for evidence. Gamaliel would have understood that this word “heaven” was another way to say “God” or higher authority (elevation) someone in authority as in government just as Paul did. For example: 16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: 17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist. Here Paul used heaven and earth to describe Kingdoms and those ruled by such Kingdoms, nearby (visible) or far away as in Rome (invisible). He even explained what he meant. He identified them: thrones, dominions, principalities, powers all things (human) created by him and for whom He also died. Thus he continues and says of such heavens. Col 1:20 And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven. Non human beings are not reconciled by the blood of Christ only humans can be so reconciled. Earth and heavens are simply descriptive of such human beings for which our Lord died. You said: You mentioned the Law, the New, and the Kingdom. What happened to the Abrahamic? The Abrahamic covenant was for fertility and property (land) and was incorporated in with the Law covenant to become part of it in the book of the Law. It is not only introductory but actually the basis for the Law Covenant and for the New Covenant as well that will embrace all peoples on earth. Ac 3:25 And you are heirs of the prophets and of the covenant God made with your fathers. He said to Abraham, ‘Through your offspring all peoples on earth will be blessed. But as to life itself and those worthy to gain it the Law was specific was blood based having authority to forgive sin (possessed Godly authority) and man was to live by means of it just as “life in you” is specific to the New Covenant and those that partake. The Kingdom has it’s own blood based provision for the great multitudes or peoples on earth that will be allowed entry just as John saw in his vision: These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. Paul was already an apostle chosen specifically by our Lord to be such and was a participant in a functioning New Covenant with real power to make disciples on earth. Thus this Covenant had real purpose and authority as if Christ was already ruling and present with them (through the Church the body of Christ). It is a heaven in its own right but this covenant is not the actual Kingdom it proclaims. That is yet to come. You said: As to human beings becoming non-human beings in the Scriptures, I wholeheartedly disagree that there is no provision for that. The resurrected Jesus is not called "a different human" but a "new creation" But this Jesus you speak of was Human! He was flesh and bone, not a spirit creature according to His own words: Lu 24:39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have. He was an immortal human being, visible, touchable and the very first human to achieve this status as a new creation (creature) spoken of by Paul. This is what Paul actually meant when he said: 16 Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen. Paul was not teaching that other immortal beings did not exist. In this same letter at 1Tim 1:17 he taught God was immortal. He knew what the word immortal means. Are there others? Are not angels by nature immortal? Do any of them die of old age or must they be destroyed by God? Among human beings there is only one who hath immortality and that one is Jesus. Joseph