Has Jesus come in the spirit?

[justbyfaith]

The Bible has more than 66 books, unless one goes by the council at jamnia that hated Christ. The real Bible contains 72 books

Nope. The true Bible has 66 books. The extra six you are holding to be inspired are, in fact, apocryphal.

 

[historyb]

Nope, the fake Bible has 66 books.

 

[justbyfaith]

Nope, the fake Bible has 66 books.

So, the 66 books in the Protestant Bible are fake?

Are the same books not found in your Catholic Bible? (I don't think that the Catholic Bible is composed of different books other than the added apocrypha). Those same 66 books would be fake as they are found in your Catholic Bible...

But if they are genuine in your Catholic Bible, they are genuine in my Protestant Bible also.

And therefore my Protestant Bible isn't fake.

But the extra 6 books that you hold to be inspired in your Catholic Bible are basically apocryphal.

They may be good as a record of history; but they are not good sources of doctrine.

In fact, I believe that they are considered apocryphal over the fact that they depart from sound doctrine as the rest of the Bible explains it.

 

[justbyfaith]

I also have a question for you, @historyb.

What do you make of 1 Timothy 2:5?

Does it not for ever refute Catholicism as we know it?

 

[historyb]

So, the 66 books in the Protestant Bible are fake?

Are the same books not found in your Catholic Bible? (I don't think that the Catholic Bible is composed of different books other than the added apocrypha). Those same 66 books would be fake as they are found in your Catholic Bible...

But if they are genuine in your Catholic Bible, they are genuine in my Protestant Bible also.

And therefore my Protestant Bible isn't fake.

But the extra 6 books that you hold to be inspired in your Catholic Bible are basically apocryphal.

They may be good as a record of history; but they are not good sources of doctrine.

In fact, I believe that they are considered apocryphal over the fact that they depart from sound doctrine as the rest of the Bible explains it.

I am not DCatholc so I on't have a Catholic bible. Just because you reject true Christianity does not make everything Catholic

 

[historyb]

I also have a question for you, @historyb.

What do you make of 1 Timothy 2:5?

Does it not for ever refute Catholicism as we know it?

What am I suppose to make of it? Never said there was not one mediator between God and man, you evangelicals try to make it into a gotcha thing but it's not.

 

[justbyfaith]

I am not DCatholc so I on't have a Catholic bible. Just because you reject true Christianity does not make everything Catholic

Sorry, I assumed you were Catholic because in your signature it currently has a hail to Mary.

What am I suppose to make of it? Never said there was not one mediator between God and man, you evangelicals try to make it into a gotcha thing but it's not.

It definitely refutes the Catholic idea that we should go through Mary or the saints to get to God.

 

[ScottA]

Those who believe in Jesus Christ, believe He has come in the flesh. But if we also believe He rose from the dead and went to the Father, and has since come in the spirit...then He has returned, as promised.

 

[justbyfaith]

Those who believe in Jesus Christ, believe He has come in the flesh. But if we also believe He rose from the dead and went to the Father, and has since come in the spirit...then He has returned, as promised.

He is also returning again in the flesh.

But you are right, He has already returned...in the Person of the Holy Spirit.

I believe that the following may be a key passage:

Col 2:8, Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
Col 2:9, For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

 

[ScottA]

He is also returning again in the flesh.

But you are right, He has already returned...in the Person of the Holy Spirit.

I believe that the following may be a key passage:

Col 2:8, Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
Col 2:9, For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

That is a testament of Jesus' coming in the flesh 2000 years ago -- not of His "returning again in the flesh" as you say.

You are assuming (by "vain deceit after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ") what is not actually written.

 

[justbyfaith]

Col 2:8, Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
Col 2:9, For in him dwelleth (present tense) all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

Jesus Christ presently exists in a human body, no doubt about it.

And to deny this is to fail the test of 1 John 4:1-3, 2 John 1:7.

 

[ScottA]

Col 2:8, Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
Col 2:9, For in him dwelleth (present tense) all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

Jesus Christ presently exists in a human body, no doubt about it.

And to deny this is to fail the test of 1 John 4:1-3, 2 John 1:7.

You are quoting the whole passage...but apparently not reading or understanding it.

It clearly warns against being carried away ("spoiled") by "the rudiments (elements) of the world."

So, what is it about "There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body" and "you sow not that body that shall be", that you do not understand?

...Since you are obviously confused, I will explain (again):

The word "bodily" in the passage you quoted does not refer to Jesus having a natural body after His ascension, but a spiritual body in the "fullness of the Godhead." "God is spirit", and that is the "fullness" being spoken of. Contrary to what you believe and "after the traditions of men, after the rudiments of the world", the passage says just the opposite: not that the Godhead has become natural "after the rudiments of the world", but that Jesus has [ascended] in spirit just as God is spirit.​

It is your type of fleshly and worldly thinking ("philosophy") that Paul warned about, being "spoiled through philosophy and vain deceit, after the traditions of men." And now I am warning you also (again). You disqualify yourself:

1 Corinthians 9:27
"But I discipline my body and bring it into subjection, lest, when I have preached to others, I myself should become disqualified."

Examine yourself. Stop making the flesh your god. None of these verses are about the flesh being glorified, but rather about God whom is spirit, being glorified.

 

[justbyfaith]

I am not making the flesh my god.

No; rather, I am holding fast to what the apostle John said in 1 John 4:1-3 and 2 John 1:7.

When Paul warned against philosophy of this world, he immediately backed it up by teaching us that it is the philosophy of this world that denies that in Jesus Christ dwells all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. And it should be clear that this means that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh (1 John 4:1-3, 2 John 1:7).

To deny this realty you have to deny that the King James Version of the Bible is the word of the Lord. But there are even a few other versions that render it "is" rather than "has". But for you to be correct, these versions must be inaccurate and only those versions that render it as "has" can be accurate. Therefore we would have to throw out many a Bible version in order to support your pov.

Jesus will drink of the fruit of the vine new with us in His kingdom. I believe also that I heard recently that the tree of life waits for us in heaven; and it bears twelve kinds of fruits. This is the same tree of life that was in the garden; and this indicates a physical existence in the kingdom of heaven. Everything is not made of spirit only there: the spiritual bodies given have physical aspects to them. And this is in conjunction with the principle of 1 John 4:1-3, 2 John 1:7. I will quote the latter again:

2Jo 1:7, For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.

Therefore, as you do not confess that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh; that makes you a deceiver and an antichrist. Repent.

 

[ScottA]

I am not making the flesh my god.

No; rather, I am holding fast to what the apostle John said in 1 John 4:1-3 and 2 John 1:7.

When Paul warned against philosophy of this world, he immediately backed it up by teaching us that it is the philosophy of this world that denies that in Jesus Christ dwells all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. And it should be clear that this means that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh (1 John 4:1-3, 2 John 1:7).

To deny this realty you have to deny that the King James Version of the Bible is the word of the Lord. But there are even a few other versions that render it "is" rather than "has". But for you to be correct, these versions must be inaccurate and only those versions that render it as "has" can be accurate. Therefore we would have to throw out many a Bible version in order to support your pov.

Jesus will drink of the fruit of the vine new with us in His kingdom. I believe also that I heard recently that the tree of life waits for us in heaven; and it bears twelve kinds of fruits. This is the same tree of life that was in the garden; and this indicates a physical existence in the kingdom of heaven. Everything is not made of spirit only there: the spiritual bodies given have physical aspects to them. And this is in conjunction with the principle of 1 John 4:1-3, 2 John 1:7. I will quote the latter again:

2Jo 1:7, For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.

Therefore, as you do not confess that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh; that makes you a deceiver and an antichrist. Repent.

There you go lying about me again. As I have said many times, that is not my position.

And as a liar, you disqualify yourself to say anything of authority regarding the scriptures that you have quoted. In fact, the very verses that you quote are against you. They speak and warn of not accrediting Jesus with becoming One with the Godhead, but continuing to call Him flesh after He has ascended to the Father. Even worse, you blaspheme the Holy Spirit by saying that Jesus has remained in the flesh.

 

[Jane_Doe22]

There you go lying about me again. As I have said many times, that is not my position.

And as a liar, you disqualify yourself to say anything of authority regarding the scriptures that you have quoted. In fact, the very verses that you quote are against you. They speak and warn of not accrediting Jesus with becoming One with the Godhead, but continuing to call Him flesh after He has ascended to the Father. Even worse, you blaspheme the Holy Spirit by saying that Jesus has remained in the flesh.

ScottA, I do disagree with you on the question "whether or not Christ had/has a physical body after the Ascension".

But I do very much agree with you on the critical importance of taking the time to understand another person's beliefs and be honest in that approach.

 

[justbyfaith]

There you go lying about me again. As I have said many times, that is not my position.

So you agree with me that Jesus is a Man sitting on the right hand of the throne of God?

Because if you do not, then I am not lying about your position.

And in accusing me of lying you take on the nature of the accuser of the brethren, who is spoken of in Revelation 12:10-11.

However, I am redeemed by the blood of Jesus Christ; and am also not guilty of lying about you.

 

[ScottA]

So you agree with me that Jesus is a Man sitting on the right hand of the throne of God?

Because if you do not, then I am not lying about your position.

And in accusing me of lying you take on the nature of the accuser of the brethren, who is spoken of in Revelation 12:10-11.

However, I am redeemed by the blood of Jesus Christ; and am also not guilty of lying about you.

No...you don't know what you are reading, or what you are talking about.

Nonetheless, you lied (again) when you said:

you do not confess that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh

 

[Earburner]

The point I am wanting to amplify and ask for people to seriously consider or reconsider, is:

Where is Jesus Now?

Is He at the right hand of the Father, only to return at some distant, future date, by a mass event?

Or is it actually as He said, and He has come "quickly" and has "come in" to those who have opened the door when He knocked, beginning "quickly" after He went to the Father; and as the apostle Paul said, "each in his own order?"

...The scriptures simply do not say that Jesus returns in a future one-time mass event -- people do.

I agree to the truth of what you are saying. Romans 8:9 is very clear and decisive. However we should never discount that one day, Jesus shall return from Heaven, in all his physical, flaming Glory!

 

[justbyfaith]

No...you don't know what you are reading, or what you are talking about.

Nonetheless, you lied (again) when you said:

@justbyfaith: you do not confess that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh

No; I know that you think that I am lying when I say that, because you don't make a distinction between is and has:

You appear to think that because you confess that Jesus has come in the flesh, that you have passed the test in 1 John 4:1-3, 2 John 1:7.

But you have not; for that scripture specifically states that you must confess that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh for your spirit to be of God.

So, if I am lying in declaring that you deny this essential of the Christian faith, please declare to us how it is, and in what way it is, that you confess that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. Because confessing merely that He has come in the flesh won't cut it.

For you to pass the test, you need to confess that Jesus Christ is, currently, in a human flesh body.

Since you proclaim me to be lying in saying that you have failed that test, I ask you again: do you confess to the reality that I have stated in the sentence just above?

Clarify to us what it is that you really believe.

If you fail to answer, then you do not confess: it is the same as a denial of this essential doctrine.

 

[Waiting on him]

No; I know that you think that I am lying when I say that, because you don't make a distinction between is and has:

You appear to think that because you confess that Jesus has come in the flesh, that you have passed the test in 1 John 4:1-4, 2 John 1:7.

But you have not; for that scripture specifically states that you must confess that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh for your spirit to be of God.

So, if I am lying in declaring that you deny this essential of the Christian faith, please declare to us how it is, and in what way it is, that you confess that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. Because confessing merely that He has come in the flesh won't cut it.

For you to pass the test, you need to confess that Jesus Christ is, currently, in a human flesh body.

Since you proclaim me to be lying in saying that you have failed that test, I ask you again: do you confess to the reality that I have stated in the sentence just above?

If you fail to answer, then you do not confess: it is the same as a denial of this essential doctrine.

Where is heaven?