This really grabbed me today!

[stunnedbygrace]

Yes, the word became flesh. I agree. I disagree with the Trinity Doctrine, which teaches that "the Word", capital 'W' is the second person of the Godhead, and it was the second person of the Godhead who came to earth in human form. This idea is foreign to the New Testament, in my view.

Rather, John's point is that God began the world according to a plan (word small 'w'), or a script, or something like that. And at an opportune time, that plan, that script was transformed from an abstract, hypothetical plan into a living, breathing, real, human being.

No. I don’t know what else to say. No. A plan or script did not leave the glory He shared with God from before the world. A plan or script did not empty Himself and become nothing. That’s human reasoning.
Put all the verses in front of you. Put the verses and passages all in front of you at once on different pages. You cannot come to what you have come to if you do. You just can’t.

 

[CadyandZoe]

For myself, I find the Trinity doctrine central to understanding how God justifies us in Christ's death, giving us through His Spirit eternal life. I find the surety of this understanding - God Himself incarnated in a man, to provide His body in sacrificial death for us, that we can join with Him, and be filled with Him in His Holy Spirit. Actually united to Him, our Loving Creator, in mystical union, that we be one, even as they are One. An amazing truth! One which assures us of the power of a new life in Christ. We are alive in the spirit because we are alive in Christ, It's God's Own Spirit life that gives us our life, and forever will. Not like Adam. Like the Last Adam.

Okay, wouldn't the same thing be true if Jesus were just God incarnate and not formerly a member of a Godhead? I think so. Your perspective works just fine outside the idea that "the Word" is the second person of the Trinity. Right?

I find that when I look at the great number of verses that give us information on Father, Son, and Spirit, I find the Trinity doctrine inescapable. There are quite a number of things that are attributed to each, did you know that? God raised Jesus from the dead, that is plainly stated. Jesus also raised Himself. The Spirit raised Him. Each is true. None conflict. The same is true of creation, salvation, many more.

Again, I ask you. Why does your view require a Trinity? All you are saying here, and I agree, is that God the Father and Jesus the son share the same identity, which they do. The only way all these things can be attributed to both the father and the son is if they are both the same individual. And the only way this can be true is if God is transcendent over his creation, which includes Jesus Christ.

Suppose a novelist wanted to include himself in the novel he is writing? How would he do that? He is real, his characters are fiction. In order to put himself into the novel, he needs to write a character that represents him.

Now, Suppose God wanted to include himself into his creation? How would he do that? He is transcendent; they are not. In order to enter his creation, he either has to create a theophany, or he has to create a human being that represents him. God introduced himself to Moses through a burning bush. John's point is that God introduced himself to the world through a human being, Jesus.

For me this is more a matter of How we think about God. I don't think we have to understand all the things the Bible says, but we should be reading it for what it says and not what it does not say, and we should allow our minds to be formed according to what we read.

Agreed. Our concept of God informs our concept of ourselves and the world. I maintain that God is transcendent. Jesus represents him in our reality.

When we read that the Word became flesh, we know this is Jesus, and when we read God was the Word, we know this is Jesus, and we think of Him accordingly, and as we proclaim with Thomas, My Lord and my God, we don't have to somehow explain away these texts as something us, even IF we have no idea how the Father is God, and Jesus is God.

Well, God is the word and the word became flesh. This is true. But it does not follow that "the word", which became a person, began as a person.

And when we read, the Holy Spirit said to separate out Paul and Barnabas for the work they have to do, and that Ananias lied to the Holy Spirit, lying to God, again, we don't need to look for some hidden "real" meaning, we just accept it as written, and allow our minds to be formed.

I agree, but what you call the "hidden" meaning comes from dealing with other passages that impinge on the others. We believe that the Bible speaks with one voice, without error or contradiction. And our challenge is to make sense of the other passages that seem to contradict the dominant paradigm. We need to make sense of the entire thing, not just part of it.

The things I see people point to as contradictions I don't see that way. For instance, Isn't the Son worshiping the Father God worshiping Himself? The Son emptied Himself and took on flesh, and all that came with it, including the commandments, and including the proper human relationship with God. Jeremiah spoke of the LORD being God of all flesh, and Jesus took on flesh. He really did humble Himself, taking the form of a servant.

Yes, Jesus humbled himself. But how is this significant? For the Trinitarian, the second person of the God head humbled himself by giving up his essential qualities, such as omnipresence to become a human being. I don't think this is what Paul meant when he encouraged the Philippians to humble themselves. He encouraged them to humble themselves in like manner as Christ, who took the form of a servant as you rightly point out. That is, it isn't a question of quiddity; its a matter of station. As King of Kings and Lord of Lords, Jesus deserved to be treated as a king of the highest order. But he chose to live as a commoner. That's Paul's point. And we can do likewise.

I realize that God must enlighten our minds. I try to encourage that we read the text in what it says, and accept those things it says. When we find what seems contradiction, find the harmony that preserves the meaning held in all the passages.

Much love!

Amen brother.

 

[Ziggy]

What does it mean, and the Lord shall repent himself for his servants?


Deu 32:36 For the LORD shall judge his people, and repent himself for his servants, when he seeth that their power is gone, and there is none shut up, or left.

 

[Ziggy]

That reveals Jesus as the Messiah, the sacrifice that God provided, but it doesn't reveal Jesus as the Son of God, which is what the demons referred to him as, although Jesus was trying to keep that fact under wraps at that time:

Mark 3:11-12 (WEB):

(11) The unclean spirits, whenever they saw him, fell down before him, and cried, “You are the Son of God!”
(12) He sternly warned them that they should not make him known.​

Luke 4:41 (WEB):

(41) Demons also came out of many, crying out, and saying, “You are the Christ, the Son of God!” Rebuking them, he didn’t allow them to speak, because they knew that he was the Christ.​

1 John 5:5-12 (WEB):

(5) Who is he who overcomes the world, but he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God?

(9) If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater; for this is God’s testimony which he has testified concerning his Son.
(10) He who believes in the Son of God has the testimony in himself. He who doesn’t believe God has made him a liar, because he has not believed in the testimony that God has given concerning his Son.
(11) The testimony is this, that God gave to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.
(12) He who has the Son has the life. He who doesn’t have God’s Son doesn’t have the life.​

God's testimony:
At Jesus' baptism, Matthew 3:17 (WEB):

(17) Behold, a voice out of the heavens said, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.”​

At the transfiguration, Matthew 17:5 (WEB):

(5) While he was still speaking, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them. Behold, a voice came out of the cloud, saying, “This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. Listen to him.”​

So you think Peter listened to the unclean spirits moreso than John and his brother Andrew?

 

[stunnedbygrace]

What does it mean, and the Lord shall repent himself for his servants?


Deu 32:36 For the LORD shall judge his people, and repent himself for his servants, when he seeth that their power is gone, and there is none shut up, or left.

Have you checked other translations? I think it means He will have mercy and avenge and take mercy on them when He sees they have no power left and their punishment is enough.

 

[CadyandZoe]

I am quoting the book of John in an English translation, because English is my language.

Okay. I think it is safe to say that those who translated our Bibles into English are Christian men and women of good character and skilled in the Greek language. And for the most part, we trust what they produce.

Now, as I say, when I was a young Christian, I was not going to a regular church and I was unaware of the creeds. At first, before I found a church, all I had was my Bible, which I read for many hours a day. (New believers are so excited yes? I really wanted to know the Lord.) When I read the first chapter of John, I took each word at face value. I didn't hear John speak about a second person of the Godhead. I heard John make a point about the word of God, i.e. what he promised.

In the beginning was the word. John says. At some point I wanted to know the Greek word behind the English word "word". I found out that John used the Greek word "logos", which has a very wide range of meaning and so the actual meaning depends on the context. "Logos" is used over 300 times in the New Testament. It basically means, "the expression of a thought." Thus, many times "logos" is translated "word" in the NT.

Also, in the context, "logos" can refer to a particular message such as the gospel. Matthew 13:19, "When anyone hears the word of the kingdom and does not understand it, the evil one comes and snatches away what has been sown in his heart."

Paul uses the term "logos" in reference to God's promise of a Sabbath rest in Hebrews 4:8-13. In that context, the "logos" of God is the promise he made to Moses and Israel concerning a Sabbath rest. Paul argues that God has yet to keep this promise, as it was not fulfilled during the time of Joshua.

It can also refer to a narration or a story, Acts of the Apostles 1:1 for instance. "The first account I composed, Theophilus, about all that Jesus began to do and teach, 2 until the day when He was taken up to heaven, after He had by the Holy Spirit given orders to the apostles whom He had chosen."

I think it is safe to say that John was talking about an account, a story, a promise, or the gospel itself, rather than a second person of the Godhead.

 

[CadyandZoe]

Oh I just can’t today. It doesn’t have to be muddied like this. There’s no reason for it. If it’s not helping to build up the trust of others and yourself, there’s no reason for it. What the mind likes to focus on and finds to occupy itself with is utterly useless if it’s not helping to build up our trust and move us to unity in the Spirit so the whole body does not suffer.
But we will occupy our whole mind and energy on arguing over what the word “word” means and fail to see that we are being distracted by silly brickmaking so we will never say, wait a minute…why can’t we move mountains…?

Forgive me if you think that is what I was doing. I regret responding to this thread in that case. Our trust is in Jesus Christ and God the Father. We can trust Jesus Christ because God the Father raised him from the dead as a sign that Jesus was speaking truthfully about himself. When he said, "I and the father are one." we can bank on that. Let's continue to follow Jesus, sister, trusting that he will bring us safely into the next age. No more tears, no more crying, no more pain or suffering or evil or badness. Only joy and peace and prosperity and happiness.

Trust him. Amen?

 

[CadyandZoe]

Why argue for either side? Who does that edify? Is a perfect understanding of who or what God is required in order to approach Him more closely or to please Him?

Speaking of myself personally, the process of Bible study, discussion, discovery and all the hard work it takes to arrive at the proper understanding of scripture is very edifying. Sometimes, in order to produce a good thing, it requires a messy process, which becomes an occasion to practice curiosity, patience, self-control, and grace.

To answer your question, I would say yes, gaining a better knowledge of God is essential for approaching him more closely. Unless, of course, I prefer a God of my own imagination. It's scary, but we must get to know the real God.

Blessings to you Amadeus.

 

[Enoch111]

It's scary, but we must get to know the real God.

While vigorously denying the real God (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit)! That is grand irony (or should we say grand larceny?). So to which cult do you now belong? An honest answer would help to know who we are dealing with.

 

[stunnedbygrace]

Okay. I think it is safe to say that those who translated our Bibles into English are Christian men and women of good character and skilled in the Greek language. And for the most part, we trust what they produce.

Now, as I say, when I was a young Christian, I was not going to a regular church and I was unaware of the creeds. At first, before I found a church, all I had was my Bible, which I read for many hours a day. (New believers are so excited yes? I really wanted to know the Lord.) When I read the first chapter of John, I took each word at face value. I didn't hear John speak about a second person of the Godhead. I heard John make a point about the word of God, i.e. what he promised.

In the beginning was the word. John says. At some point I wanted to know the Greek word behind the English word "word". I found out that John used the Greek word "logos", which has a very wide range of meaning and so the actual meaning depends on the context. "Logos" is used over 300 times in the New Testament. It basically means, "the expression of a thought." Thus, many times "logos" is translated "word" in the NT.

Also, in the context, "logos" can refer to a particular message such as the gospel. Matthew 13:19, "When anyone hears the word of the kingdom and does not understand it, the evil one comes and snatches away what has been sown in his heart."

Paul uses the term "logos" in reference to God's promise of a Sabbath rest in Hebrews 4:8-13. In that context, the "logos" of God is the promise he made to Moses and Israel concerning a Sabbath rest. Paul argues that God has yet to keep this promise, as it was not fulfilled during the time of Joshua.

It can also refer to a narration or a story, Acts of the Apostles 1:1 for instance. "The first account I composed, Theophilus, about all that Jesus began to do and teach, 2 until the day when He was taken up to heaven, after He had by the Holy Spirit given orders to the apostles whom He had chosen."

I think it is safe to say that John was talking about an account, a story, a promise, or the gospel itself, rather than a second person of the Godhead.

I didn’t see it the first time I read it either. I think it was the second time I read it, after I received the Holy Spirit. I also only had my Bible and no church or denomination but I saw it. My thought was to plug in one of your words of story, script, promise, etc., to show you it doesn’t work but then I thought, no, if she cannot accept and see the words John used: word, life, light, then what good would it do to replace word, life, light with her chosen words of story, script, promise? So I just decided to put the whole passage here and…maybe someone will read and see.

In the beginning the Word already existed.
The Word was with God,
and the Word was God.
2 He existed in the beginning with God.
3 God created everything through him,
and nothing was created except through him.
4 The Word gave life to everything that was created,
and his life brought light to everyone.
5 The light shines in the darkness,
and the darkness can never extinguish it.

6 God sent a man, John the Baptist, 7 to tell about the light so that everyone might believe because of his testimony. 8 John himself was not the light; he was simply a witness to tell about the light. 9 The one who is the true light, who gives light to everyone, was coming into the world.

10 He came into the very world he created, but the world didn’t recognize him. 11 He came to his own people, and even they rejected him. 12 But to all who believed him and accepted him, he gave the right to become children of God. 13 They are reborn—not with a physical birth resulting from human passion or plan, but a birth that comes from God.

14 So the Word became human and made his home among us. He was full of unfailing love and faithfulness. And we have seen his glory, the glory of the Father’s one and only Son.

15 John testified about him when he shouted to the crowds, “This is the one I was talking about when I said, ‘Someone is coming after me who is far greater than I am, for he existed long before me.’”

16 From his abundance we have all received one gracious blessing after another. 17 For the law was given through Moses, but God’s unfailing love and faithfulness came through Jesus Christ. 18 No one has ever seen God. But the unique One, who is himself God, is near to the Father’s heart. He has revealed God to us.

The Testimony of John the Baptist
19 This was John’s testimony when the Jewish leaders sent priests and Temple assistants from Jerusalem to ask John, “Who are you?” 20 He came right out and said, “I am not the Messiah.”

21 “Well then, who are you?” they asked. “Are you Elijah?”

“No,” he replied.

“Are you the Prophet we are expecting?”

“No.”

22 “Then who are you? We need an answer for those who sent us. What do you have to say about yourself?”

23 John replied in the words of the prophet Isaiah:

“I am a voice shouting in the wilderness,
‘Clear the way for the Lord’s coming!’”

24 Then the Pharisees who had been sent25 asked him, “If you aren’t the Messiah or Elijah or the Prophet, what right do you have to baptize?”

26 John told them, “I baptize with water, but right here in the crowd is someone you do not recognize. 27 Though his ministry follows mine, I’m not even worthy to be his slave and untie the straps of his sandal.”

28 This encounter took place in Bethany, an area east of the Jordan River, where John was baptizing.

Jesus, the Lamb of God
29 The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said, “Look! The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world! 30 He is the one I was talking about when I said, ‘A man is coming after me who is far greater than I am, for he existed long before me.’ 31 I did not recognize him as the Messiah, but I have been baptizing with water so that he might be revealed to Israel.”

32 Then John testified, “I saw the Holy Spirit descending like a dove from heaven and resting upon him. 33 I didn’t know he was the one, but when God sent me to baptize with water, he told me, ‘The one on whom you see the Spirit descend and rest is the one who will baptize with the Holy Spirit.’ 34 I saw this happen to Jesus, so I testify that he is the Chosen One of God.”

The First Disciples
35 The following day John was again standing with two of his disciples. 36 As Jesus walked by, John looked at him and declared, “Look! There is the Lamb of God!” 37 When John’s two disciples heard this, they followed Jesus.

38 Jesus looked around and saw them following. “What do you want?” he asked them.

They replied, “Rabbi” (which means “Teacher”), “where are you staying?”

39 “Come and see,” he said. It was about four o’clock in the afternoon when they went with him to the place where he was staying, and they remained with him the rest of the day.

40 Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother, was one of these men who heard what John said and then followed Jesus. 41 Andrew went to find his brother, Simon, and told him, “We have found the Messiah” (which means “Christ”).

42 Then Andrew brought Simon to meet Jesus. Looking intently at Simon, Jesus said, “Your name is Simon, son of John—but you will be called Cephas” (which means “Peter”).

43 The next day Jesus decided to go to Galilee. He found Philip and said to him, “Come, follow me.” 44 Philip was from Bethsaida, Andrew and Peter’s hometown.

45 Philip went to look for Nathanael and told him, “We have found the very person Moses and the prophets wrote about! His name is Jesus, the son of Joseph from Nazareth.”

46 “Nazareth!” exclaimed Nathanael. “Can anything good come from Nazareth?”

“Come and see for yourself,” Philip replied.

47 As they approached, Jesus said, “Now here is a genuine son of Israel—a man of complete integrity.”

48 “How do you know about me?” Nathanael asked.

Jesus replied, “I could see you under the fig tree before Philip found you.”

49 Then Nathanael exclaimed, “Rabbi, you are the Son of God—the King of Israel!”

50 Jesus asked him, “Do you believe this just because I told you I had seen you under the fig tree? You will see greater things than this.” 51 Then he said, “I tell you the truth, you will all see heaven open and the angels of God going up and down on the Son of Man, the one who is the stairway between heaven and earth.”

 

[Enoch111]

Why argue for either side? Who does that edify?

Well the truth of the matter is that genuine Christians hold to the doctrines of (1) the deity of Christ (that Jesus is God) and (2) the triune Godhead (that God is indeed Father, Son, and Holy Spirit -- three divine persons yet one God). This is called "the Mystery of God, and of the Father, and of Christ" (Col 2:2).

 

[L.A.M.B.]

This thought has been grabbing me for a few days now, so I'll present it here.
Thank you @stunned.

If the original tribe of Israel that went down into Egypt and became captive for over 400 years served the God of Abraham, then where was the FAITH of Abraham?

They went in as proud family to the second in command from the Pharoh, Hebrews held in high esteem. By the time their favour had winnowed and they were regulated to slaves ,their desire for the " I am" was watered down by the mix of the gods of the land.

Through the hardships of life in captivity they began to remember the promises of the creator to send them a DELIVERER!

Was this deliverer looked at as their " Messiah" , the one to bring back their standing in God ?
Was he to be sent from heaven or from among mankind ?
WHAT OR WHOM DID THEY LOOK FOR ?

Look forward to 2000 yrs ago, again the Hebrews were under captivity of the Roman empire. They had a quasi religion of serving one God under the rule of a kingdom with multiple gods; free yet in bondage ! Few it was that had a sincere desire to be obedient but desired instead to be pompas and lifted to a degree of glory for themselves.

The true worshippers of the el shaddai were scattered and desiring to be free to worship God in truth and glory as he had set them apart to do.

Once again this band of believers began to search for that deliverer in scriptures, looking for the sign of God's promise to be fulfilled, a Messiah would come.
What or whom did they look for, was it a redeemer sent from God or was he looked to be raised up from among mankind ?

Today what do YOU look for, a Messiah, a redeemer to deliver the true worshippers, who worship in Spirit and truth?
What or whom are you looking for , a just man, a prophet among the ppl ?
Do you DENY the deity of the Son of God, claiming him to just be a man of God, and NOT as God ?

If you look for a redeemer from among man, you will serve the anti- christ !
If you look for our saviour, redeemer, the Son of God, the Alpha and the Omega, God in the Father, God in the Son ,JESUS and God in the Holy Ghost, THEN LIFT UP YOUR HEADS FOR OUR DELIVERANCE DRAWS NEAR AT HIS SECOND COMING !

 

[amadeus]

Speaking of myself personally, the process of Bible study, discussion, discovery and all the hard work it takes to arrive at the proper understanding of scripture is very edifying.

I do not disagree, but too many people...it seems to me... argue for the sake of winning a bit of glory for themselves rather than really in a search for truth, whatever it is. When a person has already decided that he has it and anyone else is wrong where does that lead? God is the only One who always already has it and knows that He does.

Sometimes, in order to produce a good thing, it requires a messy process, which becomes an occasion to practice curiosity, patience, self-control, and grace.

Perhaps those things manifested with or in charity/love are then the most important things... but who is able to see that? A person can be apparently right in the details, but wrong in the big picture for lack of charity!

To answer your question, I would say yes, gaining a better knowledge of God is essential for approaching him more closely. Unless, of course, I prefer a God of my own imagination. It's scary, but we must get to know the real God.

Everyone who has repented truly in the beginning has at least a bit of knowledge of God... but in this consider Job, the perfect or complete man at the beginning of the Book of Job. He was perfect/complete in what he had, but he went through what he did in order to grow. At the end again he was perfect/complete in what he had, but he had more!

Blessings to you Amadeus.

And to you my friend!

 

[amadeus]

Well the truth of the matter is that genuine Christians hold to the doctrines of (1) the deity of Christ (that Jesus is God) and (2) the triune Godhead (that God is indeed Father, Son, and Holy Spirit -- three divine persons yet one God). This is called "the Mystery of God, and of the Father, and of Christ" (Col 2:2).

So you have decided as so you believe.

Is not someone who is searching for God's Truth genuine even before he has found as much as he is able to find?

What is a Christian?

Christian:
Cristianovß Christianos (khris-tee-an-os');
Word Origin: Greek, Noun Masculine, Strong #: 5546

1. Christian, a follower of Christ

At what point does a follower stop seeking more from God about God and the things of God? What is the limit? It is certainly not in God, is it?

 

[Nancy]

Oh I just can’t today. It doesn’t have to be muddied like this. There’s no reason for it. If it’s not helping to build up the trust of others and yourself, there’s no reason for it. What the mind likes to focus on and finds to occupy itself with is utterly useless if it’s not helping to build up our trust and move us to unity in the Spirit so the whole body does not suffer.
But we will occupy our whole mind and energy on arguing over what the word “word” means and fail to see that we are being distracted by silly brickmaking so we will never say, wait a minute…why can’t we move mountains…?

Hah, love it. If we cannot edify one another to urge one another onto the high calling, we will never get there on our own...jmho. Even if your little toe is broken, you will be off balance.

 

[stunnedbygrace]

Hah, love it. If we cannot edify one another to urge one another onto the high calling, we will never get there on our own...jmho. Even if your little toe is broken, you will be off balance.

I remember that’s what John said, that we had to go together. Do you remember him saying something like that? I’ve never forgotten it. And the verse agrees, the one that talks about until we all come to a unity of the faith/trust. Oh my gosh I miss him and Dot, sometimes fiercely.

 

[stunnedbygrace]

Speaking of myself personally, the process of Bible study, discussion, discovery and all the hard work it takes to arrive at the proper understanding of scripture is very edifying. Sometimes, in order to produce a good thing, it requires a messy process, which becomes an occasion to practice curiosity, patience, self-control, and grace.

To answer your question, I would say yes, gaining a better knowledge of God is essential for approaching him more closely. Unless, of course, I prefer a God of my own imagination. It's scary, but we must get to know the real God.

Blessings to you Amadeus.

I watched some of The Nuts and Bolts of Sin. I don’t understand why you would call self deception the most egregious sin there is. Can it be forgiven? Yes. So it’s not the most egregious sin, is it…?

 

[Ziggy]

Gen 11:27 Now these are the generations of Terah: Terah begat Abram, Nahor, and Haran; and Haran begat Lot.
Gen 11:31 And Terah took Abram his son, and Lot the son of Haran his son's son, and Sarai his daughter in law, his son Abram's wife; and they went forth with them from Ur of the Chaldees, to go into the land of Canaan; and they came unto Haran, and dwelt there.
Gen 12:1 Now the LORD had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto a land that I will shew thee:
Gen 12:2 And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing:
Gen 12:3 And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.

My question is:
Why are we waiting for a Savior when we have already been saved?

Was Abram under bondage when God called him out of Ur?

Gen 12:4 So Abram departed, as the LORD had spoken unto him; and Lot went with him: and Abram was seventy and five years old when he departed out of Haran.
Gen 12:5 And Abram took Sarai his wife, and Lot his brother's son, and all their substance that they had gathered, and the souls that they had gotten in Haran; and they went forth to go into the land of Canaan; and into the land of Canaan they came.
Gen 12:6 And Abram passed through the land unto the place of Sichem, unto the plain of Moreh. And the Canaanite was then in the land.
Gen 12:7 And the LORD appeared unto Abram, and said, Unto thy seed will I give this land: and there builded he an altar unto the LORD, who appeared unto him.
Gen 12:8 And he removed from thence unto a mountain on the east of Bethel, and pitched his tent, having Bethel on the west, and Hai on the east: and there he builded an altar unto the LORD, and called upon the name of the LORD.
Gen 12:9 And Abram journeyed, going on still toward the south.

Abram wasn't waiting for Moses. Abram wasn't waiting for Jesus.
The Lord told Abram to leave "babylon" because that is Ur of chaldees.
Ur = "flame"
city in southern Babylonia, city of the Chaldeans, centre of moon worship, home of Abraham's father, Terah, and departure point for the Abraham's migration to Mesopotamia and Canaan

Gen 12:10 And there was a famine in the land: and Abram went down into Egypt to sojourn there; for the famine was grievous in the land.

How is it that Egypt seems to be the place to go when there is famine in the land?

Abram had told Sarah instead of saying I'm your husband, tell them I'm your brother. Which was truth. But the King of Egypt thought Sarah was extra pretty and took her into his own house. Now God warned the King in a dream that Sarah was Abram's wife and not to touch her.
So the King got upset, and told them to leave. He even gave them all kinds of gold and silver and gifts. Just get the heck out of here.

Isaac wasn't in bondage. He wasn't seeking a Savior because God was already leading him.
Jacob wasn't in bondage. He wasn't seeking a Savior because God was already leading him.
Until...
There was a great famine in the land and they all went down to Egypt.

The first King of Egypt that Abram ran iinto.. he believed in God. He even asked God for forgiveness because he didn't know Sarah was Abram's wife.
The second King of Egypt. This is 2 going on 3 generations later, this King was a good King and put Joseph in charge as Governor.
Israel now took up residence in Goshen where they had land and food. But it wasn't the land God promised to Abram.

Not until a King that did not know God arose, did the children of Israel look for a Saviour.
Why?
Why didn't they just pack up and leave.
Because they didn't have God to follow. They had forgotten. Even Moses said, Who shall I tell them sent me?
Only Aaron who would become the High Priest had any memory left of who God was.
And so a Savior was needed, to lead them out of Egypt. And God chose Moses.
And when they finally left Egypt they too left with a lot of substance, plundering Egypt in it's wake.

We're not looking to get rich. Right now there is no "famine" in the land. It's getting close. And I don't mean food I mean the word of God.
Why are we not Abram, and allowing the Lord to lead us to the promised land?
Why are we sitting in Egypt enjoying the good life for now, until we are saved again?

Do we need saving again?
We're are we? And who is leading us?
Do we need another Moses or another David?
What are we waiting for?

Rev 18:4 And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.

Abram didn't ask any questions. He packed up his house and didn't look back.
Are we the children of Abraham?
What are we waiting for?

just thinking, This really grabbed me today.
Hugs

 

[Lambano]

In the beginning was the word. John says. At some point I wanted to know the Greek word behind the English word "word". I found out that John used the Greek word "logos", which has a very wide range of meaning and so the actual meaning depends on the context.

I think it is safe to say that John was talking about an account, a story, a promise, or the gospel itself, rather than a second person of the Godhead.

The definition of "LOGOS" that I am convinced John is using, is not in Strong's, though the folks at Blue Letter Bible did put it in as a footnote. "Logos" in the first century Greek-speaking world also meant "The Divine Reason or Plan which coordinates a changing universe". The Creative Principle which orders everything that is. This definition best fits the context of John 1:1-14, especially John 1:3. This definition of "Logos" also best fits the Colossians 1:16-17 quote in the OP.

When I read Proverbs 8:22-31 about Wisdom Personified, something inside me recognized the Logos immediately. The "I" who rejoiced at Creation and delights in the human race. λόγος is NOT a "thing", λόγος is a Person.

 

[CadyandZoe]

The Word became flesh . . . and tabernacles among us. The Word tabernacled among us.

John 1:14 LITV
And the Word became flesh and tabernacled among us. And we beheld His glory, glory as of an only begotten from the Father, full of grace and of truth.

And we beheld Whose glory? The Word.

Yes, the word became flesh. What are the possible choices?
The promise became flesh;
The idea became flesh;
The concept became flesh;
The reason became flesh;
The script became flesh;
The story became flesh;
The narrative became flesh;
The account became flesh.

All of these are possible interpretations of John 1:14.

Suppose John employed the term "ho logos" to indicate God's promise of a coming one, a messiah who will rule over all of creation? Then John is saying that "ho logos", the promise, became real and actualized in Jesus. What did John and others see? They saw a man, who was truly the unique son of God, radiating (so to speak) God's glory, i.e. his moral character, his moral courage, his justice, his mercy, his righteousness, his goodness, his wisdom, and his love.

This is the error of the of Trinity Doctrine, which postulates that "the Word" was first a spiritual being that condescended to become human. This supposes that John is concerned about the quiddity of Jesus, rather than the creative power of God, who brings everything into existence by his word. "Let there be light" for instance. The Greek term "logos" indicates an idea being expressed through language. But John is counting on the fact that we know the creation story and we know that whenever God gives expression to an idea, that thing comes into existence.

The concept of a pre-existent spirit being called "the Word" having taken on human form is brought to the text, not found in the text.

1 Peter 1:23 KJV
23) Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

Much love!

Jesus tells us about being born again, which is recorded in John's gospel in chapter 3. In that context, the incorruptible seed is the Spirit of God, which Trinity Doctrine calls the third person of the Godhead. Well, which is it, the second person of the Trinity or the third person of the Trinity?

Neither. Here again, Peter is speaking about the will of God or the promise of God, which can never be thwarted or caused to fail. When God speaks, When God makes a promise, things come into being that didn't exist before. And his word never returns to him void.