Joshua, I have no lack of faith in a God of truth!

Your reasoning is as effective as Trinity believers who when faced difficulty with the truth, use the “God can do anything mentality”!

If he can create the universe than he can create himself as a man. I can't argue with that mentality.

Their right regardless, who can argue against God doing the impossible. That solve all difficult problems. So what's the point of truth? There is none! Call it a lack of faith if you like, but my faith is based on God keeping to his word of truth.

The problem with God raising up a seed out of stones to be David's descendant show God incapability of fulfilling his word. Instead of showing himself almighty it shows him to be weak and false. Matthew 3:9 is not about God fulifilling his word.

As I said before I love truth and I am persuaded by truth not by lies or foolish reasoning.

Cheers!

 

Jehovah said he'd raise up a son from the loins of David, He didn't say he'd raise up a seed from a rock or a stone. Either he means what he says or does not. He either raises up a genuine descendant of David or He cannot?

Why would God stoop to such a low level just so he can say he raised up a seed from out of David when he didn't.. That is weak and boarders on lying and deception. Sorry, I cannot accept your reasoning. It makes God's word null and void.

There is no point me going on. You win on the grounds you can make it fit, regardless of the truth.

** 2 Sam 7:12 When your days come to an end and you are laid to rest with your forefathers, then I will raise up your offspring after you, your own son ( literally from YOUR INSIDE PARTS)

If he has to raise one up from out of stones than he fails to fulfil his word.

Matthews account is of John the baptist chastising the hard heart religious leader who needed to repent rather than rely on being a descendant of Abraham. He uses a figure of speech (a hyperbole) to make his point. Their heart was harder than that of the stones. I have read this a few time since you bought it up. And I cannot see anywhere in the context any connection to a messiah which leads me to believe it is your own interpretation.

 

Hi Imabetterboy

Another interest I have is psychology. It's easy to project our thoughts, feelings, values and limitations on to others. In the psychological world, we call that process "transference." I strive not to do that - I try to think objectively. I don't always succeed but that's what I aim for.

I don't believe in putting human limitations on Jehovah.

I believe that Jesus had a pre-human existence in heaven. I think that Jehovah "gave" him up when he transferred him from heaven.

The account at Numbers chapter 5 (referring to the "jealousy test" using the bitter water and the dirt from the floor of the Tabernacle) would seem to indicate to me that Jehovah can affect the powers of the female reproductive system.

If an Israelite woman had a jealous husband who suspected that she may have slept with another man, she had to take the jealousy test. If guilty, "her thigh would fall away and her belly would swell." The footnote to the scripture says that this seems to be referring to the reproductive powers.

If the Israelite woman was pronounced as free from guilt, then she would "conceive seed."

If Jehovah can manage these outcomes, then I don't have any trouble getting my mind around the fact that He could transfer Jesus' life force from heaven into Mary's womb.

(One thing I wonder about the jealousy test is that I think it would have been a breeding ground for cholera. The dirt was taken from the floor of the Tabernacle in front of the altar. But that's another subject.)

I think that it's possible for a man to have the mind of a man and a mind of an angel.

In the pre-Flood days, the disobedient angels materialised human bodies to come to earth to mate with women. To mate with a woman, the disobedient angels would have had to know how to function as a human, to know what to do with their bodies, in order to perform this act, They would have to had to function as a man for about 120 years (because the Flood didn't come straight away.) When the Flood came, they disposed of their human bodies and returned to heaven.

The Bible calls Adam a "son of God" and Jesus "the last Adam." To me that indicates that Adam had the same knowledge and the same abilities as Jesus. Before the rebellion in the Garden of Eden, Jehovah (or someone representing Him) walked through the Garden and talked to Adam "during the breezy part of the day" on a daily basis. Jehovah was able to talk to him directly. He would have been able to convey information, thoughts, directions, spiritual guidance to Adam on a daily basis. How long did Jehovah communicate directly with Adam? The Bible does not specifically say. Maybe this communication went on for years, before Eve was created. I think Adam was as intelligent as Jesus was.


In John 14:1, Jesus said that "in the house of my Father, there are many abodes." How would he know unless he had been there? The apostle John was a very close friend of Jesus. I don't think that Jesus would have allowed him to write anything that was false.

I recognise that I may be wrong in the way I see things. At the same time, I don't have to get into a twist about it or lose any sleep over it. If Jesus thinks I've got things wrong, I'm sure he will correct me on that in the future.

Gotta go - have a very hectic work schedule.

Cheers, WF

 

Hi Wallflower! Thanks for taking the time to answer my inquiry. I feel however you did not fully agree or disagree to the actual paradoxes. But to give reason for your belief Jesus had a pre-existence. I will explain as I proceed through your post. Please, be assured that this my understanding of why I feel you are incorrect. And it is not my intentions in any way, to replace or change your view but to take an objective view of it.

Here you put before me the the fact that God is beyond human understanding and therefore anything is possible with God. And we as humans should not question Gods ability!

Just let me say, to a point I agree! How he made this universe and everything in it is absolutely awe inspiring. I have no reason to doubt that God is all powerful and all wise.

With that in mind than, let me put to you this scenario!

Since you do not put human limitations on God, than you would have no reason to say the trinity is in error, since that would be putting human limits on Jehovah to say he couldn't be? You have no logical answer regardless of all the scriptural objection you bring up, God is all powerful and therefore it is not impossible for God to be a man. You see the point, I’m sure?

Here is how I see the difference.

Apparently we are made in the image of God hence our sense of right and wrong is governed by his standard of right and wrong. We should therefore understand:: he will not lie! Nor would he expect us to believe foolish or absurd things. (such as a trinity) or (that a man pre-exists his mother or ancestors)

Because of your belief, you have to think that, that's your prerogative! But let me show you something objectively. The passage of scriptures where it says God gave his only begotten son is from John 3:16. If you take a closer look at this scripture you will see it is actual the writer John who is saying it, he is telling the story of Jesus about fifty to seventy years after Jesus birth death and resurrection. That is why the section from vs13-22 are in past tense. The words of Jesus conversation starts at v3 and finish at v12.

Let's reason a little more on this!

If these are Jesus words as attributed to him speaking still to Nicodemus from 13-16 and it is assumed that God had already given Jesus from heaven, than the death and resurrection of Jesus had already had taken place in heaven before he left!.

As you can see in the preceding words are about Jesus being hung on a pole. Which would have been future tense if Jesus was speaking. Read it carefully! I have no reason to lie. See for your self most of this portion is written in the third person. That is John is telling the story not Jesus.

But here is a bit more! From vs 13 John is making the case (from the time of his writing it), that only one MAN has ascended to God, that is the Son of man from heaven) the earthly second Adam, who had been resurrected prior to John writing his gospel.

Wallflower, the word “transferred” is used often to explain the transfer of person from heaven to the womb of Mary. I have yet to see that in the scriptures, which suggests to me it is simply an interpretation and not a fact of scripture.

On this I totally agree, Jehovah demonstrated that with Elisabeth, Sarah, and Samson.

You can get your mind around that! But You cannot understand That God can father a child by breathing the life force from out of himself to cause Mary's womb to function?

Why is it necessary to first delete a person, than reincarnate them as a man. When all it takes is a little bit of holy spirit out of himself to activate Mary maternal organ to function thus producing HIS future son.? Is that not possible for God to do?

How had did Adam get his life? Did not God breathing into him the breath of life, and hence he began to function as a living soul? He didn't need to breath another persons life force into him if you can see what I mean? He was fathered by God. He was an earthly son of God.

Adam, Jesus said was created Matt 19:4. The Bible says Jesus was begotten procreated in the womb. Matt 1:1-20 out of Mary v16 and out of God v18,20. (Out of) is translated from the Greek proposition ek the genitive of origin or source of origin. Hence you have the two sources to cause conception, a father = God, and a mother = Mary. Jesus was a unique son having a heavenly father and an earthly mother, that is why he is the son of God and the son of man. So it was by a miracle that God caused Mary's seed cell to function.

That is also why he is called the only begotten son of God.

Wallflower I think you have this back to front! I think it is possible for angels to be like humans, but I do not think humans can be like angels.

What you are posing here is that a human can have the mind of a SUPER human angel that can travel through space and time at incredible speed and do incredible things greater than what humans are incapable of doing like materialising. Man has not got that function as yet!

Man does not have that superior knowledge. On the other hand angels can pose as humans and function as humans as you say, the difference being that they have a greater degree of intelligence and knowledge than humans.

Wallflower, to this Yes I agree wholly! Jesus is of the same standard as the first Adam, Jesus had the same characters and abilities, he had no advantage over Adam in any way, otherwise he would not have been a corresponding ransom.

The only difference being that Jesus chose to be obedient to God when challenged. That, is a good reason why Jesus could not have had a superior mind than Adam, they had to be on the same level playing field as the saying goes.

At first impression this would seem to indicate Jesus had been in heaven to say such a thing, however, I disagree on the grounds he was a prophet, and prophets were given special knowledge of what to say, as God was speaking through them) This was no different to Jesus being a prophet.

He was told what to say and what to do. He had angels descending and ascending, ministering to him. He had many times to ponder in prayer and in conversation with God. He was sinless and no doubt shared a relationship like that of the first man Adam when he was on his own. Jn2:49, Jn 14:24.

I'm sure Jesus will correct you!

May you have God's blessings
IABB

 

Christian greetings, Imabetterboy,

I'm going to pause my responses to the points raised through this topic in the order they appear, so that I may more directly speak with you.

First, it seems clear to me that this is an important matter for you, because there is a certain abundance of emotion tied into the mix (more on that in a moment).

Let me ask you before I continue: Do you believe that the pre-existence of Jesus is a salvational issue? In other words, do you believe our heavenly Father or the one whom He appointed over all things will destroy someone over this particular matter and one's understanding/belief concerning it?

Now, the reason I ask you this is because of what I quoted from your post, and the impression it leaves on me— that this is a topic that must be won.

Please don't misunderstand me here: I've been where you appear to be right now. In fact, I've been at this personal reexamination of beliefs since long before pretty much everyone here. When I first began to be troubled with certain views being advanced by the Watchtower organization, I made it my personal mission to prove the rightness of my unfolding new comprehensions and understanding. I was probably pretty militant about it, truth be told. I was right, and that's all there was to it— everyone else could like it or lump it. I had to win every debate because I'd bought into the notion that it was upon me to set everyone else straight.

Worse, I had to have the final word!

All. The. Time.

It took me quite a while to come to understand and appreciate that neither our Father in the heavens nor Jesus our Messianic King and High Priest are as interested in who has all the right answers and understanding as they are in who has the right heart.

Much of this could have been due to the influence of the Watchtower organization, who always resorts to the "WE have the Truth" out of all other followers of Jesus who congregate together for fellowship and edification and mutual instruction. The whole "we're right, and everyone else is wrong" mentality really did a number on me, especially since I'd grown up under an intolerant and hyper-critical mother who spent my first sixteen years of life picking apart my every flaw, laying the seeds of intolerance deep in my psyche. Me and the Watchtower organization's exclusivity and constant criticizing, ridicule, and dismissiveness was a match made in heaven. I had at long last found a "validation" to pick apart anyone who didn't see things the way I did, or who didn't agree with me, and I had Jehovah on my side to back me!

I was excommunicated back in July 2005 for asking certain questions online which my local elders had refused for two or three years to sit down and discuss with me; even so, I brought the judgmentalism and argumentativeness and "holier-than-thou" (read: righter than thou) attitude I'd had honed by the Watchtower organization while a member.

Like I said: it took me quite a while to get over my deeply-engrained and flawed perspective toward others, along with my unbridled impatience with and intolerance for anyone who couldn't see something as clearly as was glaringly obvious to me.

These days, of course, the subjects which were such a HUGE deal to me back then, as I had to go back and re-examine everything I'd come to believe while under the influence of the Watchtower's theology, are silly little debates. I've come to believe that I'd rather have righteousness found with me than rightness. I no longer feel I have to win discussions— nor have an interest in getting caught up in debates.

Aristotle sums things up nicely my present-day view: It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.

I take comfort in knowing that our appointed judge, Jesus, can see a person's heart, and isn't out to dissect a person's brain so as to determine if they have a right understanding or a wrong one. The first 12 people that Jehovah gave Jesus were men abounding in mistaken understandings and views. What the apostles believed while they were disciples was worlds apart from what they'd come to understand and appreciate at the end of their individual lives. I suspect that they, like me when I look back at articles I'd spent so much time in compiling back in my heyday writing to prove and prove and prove, asked the question: What was I thinking back then?! LOL

The scripture I'm often reminded of now is from one of the apostle Paul's epistles. If anyone had to have the last word on a matter, anyone who loved a debate and to argue zealously— it was Paul. This quality didn't change when he began to believe, either. It simply... evolved into one loaded with Christlike compassion and patience.

He wrote:

Now in giving the following instruction I do not praise you, since you come together not for the better but for the worse. For to begin with, I hear that when you come together as a church there are divisions among you, and in part I believe it. There must, indeed, be factions among you, so that those who are approved may be recognized among you. — 1 Corinthians 11:18-19 Holman Christian Standard Bible​

Paul first mentions divisions among the brothers, and then mentions the factions which had developed over these divisions.

Factions, of course, develop as people become more and more insistent in their position on whatever subjects were creating contention. And factions, when they have reached maturity, give birth to sects.

The common denominator is the insistence of being right over being righteous. Today, the followers just can't seem to get along any better than they did in the first century.

But if you notice, Paul did not say "so that those who are right may be recognized among you." He writes that what these divisions do is cause what's in a person's heart to be manifested. Either a spirit of love or a spirit of contentiousness.

Jesus' command was that his followers have love among themselves especially— not to the exclusion of everyone else.

So, when I hear the Watchtower organization denigrate others who express belief and faith in Jesus and God, that— to my way of understanding— is a heart problem. But it's only manifested through their dividing themselves off from others serving God. The Watchtower is a sect, just as Pentecostals, Baptists, Lutherans, and even Roman Catholics are sects.

Why are there divisions over topics such as this matter of the pre-existence of Jesus? So that what is our hearts' inclination can be manifested— whether we have a spirit of contention, or of binding love.

Contention insists on rightness... Christlike love insists on righteousness.

But time has failed me this morning, and I now have to mad-dash my way to getting ready for work— or I would write more to try to encourage you to consider the emotions and thoughts which led you to say the above-quoted words.

Submitted for your perusal and consideration,

A fellow slave,
Timothy

 

As a brother, I would encourage you, Joshuastone7, to likewise consider my post (above written to Imabetterboy), as this is a troubling thing to see anyone write— but especially a brother.

In the spirit of Paul's words:

If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a ringing gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have absolute faith so as to move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. If I give all I possess to the poor and exult in the surrender of my body,a but have not love, I gain nothing. Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. —1 Corinthians 13:1-4 Berean Study Bible
​

Submitted for your perusal and consideration,
A fellow slave... Timothy

 

Dear Timothy,

Thank YOU! For such a meaningful and sincere effort to reach my heart, You may have saved me from making a very grave mistake. I don't know! While I thought I was sharing some new and wonderful things about God's word. I never thought I would be met with such strong opposition. I would assume old ingrained beliefs are hard to soften. It has never been my intentions to Win but to help my fellow believers see the truth of what I have found. It makes me think, is it all worth it?? Did God really mean it to be this way? I find it very hard to understand what really is truth!

The problem I see in understanding anything in the Bible is the enormous amount of ambiguity in the scriptures. Almost every scripture taken as a proof text can be understood in at least two different ways, some even more.

How can something be considered a truth if there are various ways to understand it?

If someone claims a certain belief, and that belief is based on ambiguous scriptures, it can only be conjecture and assumption, and not truth. It is really interpretation.

Can an interpretation be called truth?

How does one know what is actual truth and what is interpretation?

How can we trust God if we have to interpret it? Even the self explanatory theory, a scripture here and a scripture there to prove things is full of flaws you cannot trust that!

Who has the correct understanding? It is so confusing, and some claim it is a lack of faith on my part. But is it? I have faith in truth. Not in assumptions. I'm very sceptic because there is so many different ways to understand things in the Bible. All I can do is trust in the God of truth!

You put this thought before me: “Do you believe that the pre-existence of Jesus is a salvational issue? In other words, do you believe our heavenly Father or the one whom He appointed over all things will destroy someone over this particular matter and one's understanding/belief concerning it?”

I don't know, is truth important? Maybe not! Maybe, we should just let people think, what they want to believe, and leave them be, long as they are not hurting anyone. Why trouble them about some thing different.

Recently I was invited by a Christian group to attend their gospel meeting, I been going now for just over a month, They are wonderful people, clean, go out two by two in their ministry, sing a few songs, have 2 half hour talks, no collections not even a contribution box, They have not used God's name but they love Jesus and his message. Now why should I bother them with things they do not know? Why cause a division, even though what I Think is the truth? Would God consider me unrighteous if I refrained from expressing something about what I believed. I don't know!

I have attend various Groups since fading from the wts. Some are Trinitarians, sincere and loving people. Sure they object to what I say but we seem to remain good friends. They still welcome me back each time I go. And I do the same with the JW org. occasional I attend what use to be the ministry school. Even though I tell them I'm sceptic, I have never been D/F. I was baptised 3 years before you were D/F. One day they might! How can they D/F one who didn't dedicate themselves to an organisation.

My view to-day of organisation religion are they are all the same, just brothers on a different level of spirituality. I'm not their judge and their are not mine. I seem to be on a similar vein as yourself, I really do not think their should be religious organisations. That causes, division. It is THEM or US . Following Jesus is a way of life!

Any way I seem to be convoluting so I won't bore you any more, so I'll break it here.

Please be assured your words made a lot of sense, I like the thought expressed by Aristotle, to entertaining a thought without accepting it.

May Jehovahs blessings be with you!

IABB.

 

Thank you for appreciating that I was taking what you wrote at face value, not knowing what was behind the words. So often, when we rely on a medium such as this (communicating through written words), where all a person has before them are the words left by the person trying to convey thoughts to us who later read them. Had I been there when you wrote them, I would have had numerous other signals to include, such as your facial expressions, your tone, your stance as you spoke, and I would've had the luxury to ask you to explain what I was missing through your words.

Clearly, the impression and conclusion I got from what you wrote did not match what you were really saying or intended to convey-- even though I was taking you at your own words and expression.

Next crisis, please.

Agape,
Timothy

 

I feel that a fuller response by me would digress the discussion off-topic from the theme of your original post, so perhaps a separate discussion here on the forum or a private message might be better suited to discussing the matters you've raised with this particular matter? Whichever you would prefer. As it is, I still want to get back to combing through the posts left by you and Joshuastone7 up to this point in the thread.

Briefly, though, I get the impression that you are where I've been-- and I'm going out on a limb to say that others here likewise moved through this stage. Surprise. Shock. Consternation. Betrayal. Frustration. Anger. Resentment, perhaps, in some cases, at having believed the Watchtower organization's corporate "truth" concerning the scriptures.

I suspect that much of the attraction to the Watchtower organization's theology is the certainty it affords us, especially in this uncertain system of things we live within. The Watchtower organization has an answer for everything— and when it doesn't, it masterfully minimizes such-and-such as being of little consequence or concern, and with no regard for how such and such might be a HUGE deal to us. Those of us who press for something more than platitudes can very quickly find ourselves "kicked out" of the house.

Everyone here has been through this insofar as the Watchtower organization is concerned. Some have been kicked out of the house, others have managed to find the equilibrium required to stay in "mother's" good graces, so to speak. Still others successfully quash their personal conflicts with the organization.

It might come as a surprise to you, since you are new to all of this (relatively speaking), but I feel no compulsion to encourage someone to leave the organization, although I might have (and suspect that I did, although it's been so long now that I can't really remember, so I'm assuming I did, lol) done so for a time as I made the transition from the Watchtower to "the wilderness."

Similarly, I continue to support certain brothers with whom I have developed a kinship with over the years who continue to uphold the Watchtower organization as the only group on earth who has "the Truth," even though I personally disagree with them on that front.

It was a wonderful older sister in my congregation, a devout pioneer, who forever changed the way I looked at things. I may have been new in the Watchtower's ministry at the time, because I seem to remember the subject of things like the Trinity and going to heaven leading off the conversation as I asked her how I should deal with my frustration at the door with people who upheld Trinitarianism, or proclaimed their expectation to be going to heaven when they died.

Her response: Don't take someone's heaven away from them, that it isn't our place to change minds and win arguments. Jehovah will handle that part of things, and far better than we ever could. Our responsibility is to bear witness for what we believe and have become convicted on.

If you've borne witness and testimony, and others remain in their views, try to be okay with that and trust in our judge, appointed by Jehovah Himself-- someone who at one time lived and walked among those who held views and expectations at variance with his own.

Can it be frustrating? Are there ever times when we want to beat our head against a wall?

Sure as sure, Jesus can understand that, too, because he'd share truths with the people of Israel, and they just didn't listen! This included, evidently, his own disciples!

Jesus said to them, "You faithless people! How long must I be with you? How long must I put up with you? — Mark 9:19 New Living Translation
​

Jesus certainly had a purer understanding than any of us do, so we really need to temper our zeal with patience as well as implicit trust that Jehovah has matters in hand, as so does His son, who is also our Messianic King. As much as we might think and feel we understand something, we are operating on partial information shaped by our particular worldview. Utuna (I think it was Utuna) has a great topic on the subject of cultural influence on one's perception of scriptures, among a few other influences.

In any case, we're in the same boat as the apostle Paul was— and he was an apostle directly chosen by Jesus himself!

For presently we see through a glass in obscurity; but then, face to face. Presently, I know in part; but then I will know fully, even as I have been fully known. —1 Corinthians 13:12 Berean Literal Bible
​

Personally, and frankly, I'd rather we NOT have inerrant understanding, because throughout history we have examples of those who became so convinced, to the detriment of many, many others.

Having shards of insight and understanding, each of us, we must rely on each other to obtain a more rounded comprehension, rather than cordon ourselves off with a notion like we've got it right like nobody else. (Cf 1 Corinthians 12:21)

And, like I've said before, we should not be united by our rightness, but rather bound together in righteousness.

Give yourself time to work through things, IABB, and if we can help in any way we will surely try to do so.

Personally, I feel I grow more by discussing topics such as we have in this thread with those who disagree with me, because it affords me an opportunity to have things mentioned or pointed out which I may not have factored into my thoughts and considerations. Some are better at disagreeing without being disagreeable, and others not so much. But from both, I am convinced I have things to learn, so long as I'm listening for what Jehovah may be saying through someone else, rather than focusing on the work of persuading and convincing them to my understanding.

The above paragraph is why I appreciate being able to post here on Joshuastone7's site, although he and I don't share the same conclusions on various matters (obvious much? lol). It gives me opportunities to bear witness to where *I'm* presently at, without the baggage of imposed views, and allows the fulfillment of this, from the wisest man who ever lived (and yet was a massive failure of a human being in numerous respects, proving to be UNwise)— that is, apart from Jesus, of course.

Just as iron sharpens iron, friends sharpen the minds of each other. —Proverbs 27:17 Contemporary English Version
​

Well, as you can see, I DID go on much longer than I anticipated or intended with this post, and time has once again run its course so that I'll need to look to my next opportunity to come here and continue with my responses to the thread's earlier posts from you two brothers.

May you continue to move toward the peace that excels all understanding! (Philippians 4:7)

A brother and fellow slave,
Timothy

 

Dear brothers,sisters and friends,

Christian greetings!

It has come to my attention,(Thanks to earthbound) that perhaps I have come across too strong in expressing my understanding of scriptures. If I have offended anyone of you, I'm sorry!

It has not been my intention to upset or push my beliefs on to others, but rather to present the truth as I see it. I don't expect you to change your view or believe me. But to consider, there is more than one way to understanding it.

Earthbound asked if it was a salvation issue, I don't know what that means. If we are all his children with different views, why would he destroy one just because they happen to see things differently to others.

If one is saying if you don't believe what I say you will die, than I would assume than it becomes a salvation issue. But that is not what I have been doing, and I hope no one took it that way. Every family who has siblings knows the problems associated with children. They are not robots and are at different levels of understanding.

It is true I consider myself a sceptic believer. I don't have faith in all things being true. To me that is blind faith.

For example, there are 3 primary views of who Jesus is, (1) He is God, (2) He is an angel, and (3) He is a sinless man. The latter standing on it's own as the former two claim Jesus is also a man or a combination of the two.

That's where my scepticism and lack of faith comes in, I doubt Jesus is God or an angel, To me that means Jesus is not a real man, and therefore is not a corresponding ransom to the first Adam. I don't have the faith to blindly accept that! Can you understand my dilemma? Is he God, Angel, or a Man?

People read scriptures like Jn 17:5 which has Jesus saying, “So now, Father, glorify me at your side with the glory that I had alongside you before the world was”

Here in this setting Jesus is a MAN praying to his father. Now it seems to mean he had an existence millions of years prior. But he is literally a MAN (Bible gives his age about 30) and if we take it literally we know a man has not lived that long.

People “assume” Jesus must be something else other than a man. And so have “interpreted it” to mean he is God, while others “interpret it” to mean he is an angel.

That, to my understanding is contradictory to Jesus being just a sinless man. And contrary to the true definition of MAN who is of a lower rank than God or an angel.

Could it be, that Jesus is talking spiritually with his father, about what had been promised in Gen 3:15 about the seed?

That he would suffer and die (bruised in the heel) and that he would be raised to victorious glory?(bruising his opposer in the head) ?

Since he had fulfilled the first part (though not executed, it was a done deal) Jn 16:33. And to help him endure the difficult part of execution he needed encouragement to succeed. The glory that had been promised before the founding of the world, was like a joy that would be his reward for proving faithful. His time had come to be glorified as foretold.

What lead to Jesus saying this is evident from reading the previous chapters, taking note of the many times it says his time had not come, Jn7:6,Jn 8:20 and he had NOT yet been glorified, Jn 7:39 And they came to realise this after he was glorified. But in Jn 17:1 his time had come to suffer and die as foretold and to be raised up in victorious glory.

After his resurrection Jesus appeared to them and continued to teach that it was about him fulfilling the things written about him

**Luke 24:24-27 So he said to them: “O senseless ones and slow of heart to believe all the things the prophets have spoken! 26 Was it not necessary for the Christ to suffer these things and to enter into his glory?”27And starting with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them things pertaining to himself in all the Scriptures.

So you see brothers and sisters the scriptures point me to believe Jesus is a sinless man who fulfils the things written about him.

Now I am not expecting you to change, I am just pointing out there is another interpretation that does not change the meaning of the word MAN and that Jesus was talking spiritually about his role in fulfilling prophecy namely the one given before the founding of the world. Gen 3:15.

All my Christian love!

 

Yes, brother, I too agree he has gained domion over all of God's creation, the things invisible and visible, exalted to a position as a co-ruler as it were with God his heavenly father. Having the position of God on his father's throne. Rev 3:21

Thats true, there are other ways it is understood. Oneness Penecostals, and modalism also having variations.
I am of the opinion he is still a man who has been highly exalted, who serves as our mediator between ourselves and God. 1Tim 2:5, Acts 17:31. His body change to enable access to heaven

Point taken! I have learnt a great deal all ready!
Long as we can look at things objectively, we should not have too much problem. We don't want to be pedantic Our task is to bring glory to our heavenly father.
May you be blessed! IABB

 

Well, that is a good question. I don't know exactly. However, the simple answer is that his body was changed to a spiritual body. He had gained access to heaven.1Cor 15:51

** Luke 24:37 See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself; touch me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones just as you see that I have.

** Dan7:13 someone like a son of man was coming; and he gained access to the Ancient of Days,

Paul gives us an understanding of how the dead are to be raise and what kind of bodies they will have when resurrected.

** 1Cor 15:35 Nevertheless, someone will say: “How are the dead to be raised up? Yes, with what sort of body are they coming?

** 1Cor 15:44 It is sown a physical body; it is raised up a spiritual body. If there is a physical body, there is also a spiritual one.

** 1 Cor 15:47 The first man is from the earth and made of dust; the second man is from heaven

** Rom 8:29 because those whom he gave his first recognition he also foreordained to be patterned after the image of his Son, so that he might be the first-born among many brothers.

**1 Jn 3:2 Beloved ones, we are now children of God, but it has not yet been made manifest what we will be. We do know that when he is made manifest we will be like him, because we will see him just as he is.

Agape,