The Undiscovered Christ

[Episkopos]

When people interpret the scriptures themselves instead of allowing the Holy Spirit to teach or interpret they make mistakes, mistakes that can cost them more than they want to pay. The problem of course is that almost everyone who has received the Holy Spirit too often quenches the Holy Spirit.

Many presume that because the Holy Spirit led them right on one thing that they are always led rightly. They are only always led the right way if they are always led by the Holy Spirit. Since most people attend church services where they are taught to quench the Holy Spirit they will make more rather than fewer mistakes. Even those who attend no services may habitually make decisions without first consulting God.

Word!

 

[bbyrd009]

I am not at liberty to float my own ideas. If you can improve my understanding of scripture, please do.

you are a good hearted guy Dave, better than me ok, and i don't blame you for being skeptical; fear of God is the beginning of wisdom. Iow it isn't wisdom, or the Bible would have said that, but it is the beginning of it.

So, when you can accept that you will see Him come down in the same way you saw Him go up, just like the passage says, and you can't Quote "to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord" anymore without rolling your eyes, then you will be free. The only way i know is to question your assumptions, and this is not a pleasant process, right, especially once you have become emotionally invested in them. Confront the posts that you are currently unable to iow

So you might reflect on these two and go from there, or seek other dichotomies more obvious to you maybe, and believe me i don't even know Scripture that well ok, i would be useless here without google, none of your study up to now will be for nothing, you will simply hear "Stay here for the present" differently from now on, when Scripture is counting on us to hear it like a little kid would, It even tells us as much, "hidden from the wise," "written on your heart," etc

 

[bbyrd009]

"
The name Hebrew in the Bible
The name Hebrew, as we shall see below, literally denotes someone who passes through a liquid or watery medium and comes out dry on the other side...
Israel's theology may seem unique to a careless observer, but comparative mythology shows obvious overlap with the traditions of Babylon (in the story, due to the origin of Abraham and the patriarchal wives) and Egypt (due to Moses'education). The Bible also acknowledges the invaluable inputs of the Canaanite Melchizedek and the Midianite Jethro and several others, and those are just the sources we are told of. Likewise early Christianity did not arrive fully formed in a theological vacuum but as an amalgamation of various already existing but separate sects and schools of though: Those Of The Way, the Nazarenes, and possibly even a pre-Jesus Christianity comprising militant Messianics such as the Zealots." The amazing name Hebrew: meaning and etymology

the meaning of names is important, even central

Hebrew meaning

To us moderns the name Hebrew has a unique and exclusive (and even religious) ring to it, but it should be noted with some stress that this is not at all the case in the narrative of the Bible. The "name" Hebrew isn't an abstract label but much rather an ordinary word used as an appellative, like a nickname or even a signature quality. It means Passed Over or Passer Over or Transition or One Who Transits or One From The Other [Dry] Side or even Flower Forth or Deducer or He Who Looks At Something From All Sides.

 

[Episkopos]

"
The name Hebrew in the Bible
The name Hebrew, as we shall see below, literally denotes someone who passes through a liquid or watery medium and comes out dry on the other side...
Israel's theology may seem unique to a careless observer, but comparative mythology shows obvious overlap with the traditions of Babylon (in the story, due to the origin of Abraham and the patriarchal wives) and Egypt (due to Moses'education). The Bible also acknowledges the invaluable inputs of the Canaanite Melchizedek and the Midianite Jethro and several others, and those are just the sources we are told of. Likewise early Christianity did not arrive fully formed in a theological vacuum but as an amalgamation of various already existing but separate sects and schools of though: Those Of The Way, the Nazarenes, and possibly even a pre-Jesus Christianity comprising militant Messianics such as the Zealots." The amazing name Hebrew: meaning and etymology

the meaning of names is important, even central

Hebrew meaning

To us moderns the name Hebrew has a unique and exclusive (and even religious) ring to it, but it should be noted with some stress that this is not at all the case in the narrative of the Bible. The "name" Hebrew isn't an abstract label but much rather an ordinary word used as an appellative, like a nickname or even a signature quality. It means Passed Over or Passer Over or Transition or One Who Transits or One From The Other [Dry] Side or even Flower Forth or Deducer or He Who Looks At Something From All Sides.

Ivrit......comes from "ever"....meaning to cross over (as a river).

The curious play on words has the word "Hebrews" ... sounding exactly as..."blind ones". (Exchanging the silent ayin for the silent aleph).

So when Jesus said...You blind ones! ...He was saying "Ivrim" (which sounds exactly like "Hebrews")

 

[Dave L]

you are a good hearted guy Dave, better than me ok, and i don't blame you for being skeptical; fear of God is the beginning of wisdom. Iow it isn't wisdom, or the Bible would have said that, but it is the beginning of it.

So, when you can accept that you will see Him come down in the same way you saw Him go up, just like the passage says, and you can't Quote "to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord" anymore without rolling your eyes, then you will be free. The only way i know is to question your assumptions, and this is not a pleasant process, right, especially once you have become emotionally invested in them. Confront the posts that you are currently unable to iow

So you might reflect on these two and go from there, or seek other dichotomies more obvious to you maybe, and believe me i don't even know Scripture that well ok, i would be useless here without google, none of your study up to now will be for nothing, you will simply hear "Stay here for the present" differently from now on, when Scripture is counting on us to hear it like a little kid would, It even tells us as much, "hidden from the wise," "written on your heart," etc

I haven't a clue about anything I might have said that would have you recite any of the above.

 

[bbyrd009]

I haven't a clue about anything I might have said that would have you recite any of the above.

so what you're saying is you literally cannot see the posts that make you uncomfortable, or that you are not acknowledging/responding to? So then work on what you can see imo, i mean those were just suggestions that might allow you to begin a conversation and remain in it without the other person getting exasperated

 

[Dave L]

so what you're saying is you literally cannot see the posts that make you uncomfortable, or that you are not acknowledging/responding to?

I normally have 20+ posts every morning I try to respond to. And believe I might have missed one here or there. Forgive me if I seem to have ignored one of yours. But nothing makes me feel uncomfortable in matters of religion. I believe the truth always wins.

 

[bbyrd009]

I normally have 20+ posts every morning I try to respond to. And believe I might have missed one here or there. Forgive me if I seem to have ignored one of yours. But nothing makes me feel uncomfortable in matters of religion. I believe the truth always wins.

ok Dave, you don't owe me anything, and we can go with that if you like for now

Imo careful that your Beliefs do not turn into Absolute Truths, this seems to more or less define Determinism i guess.
Have a good day :)

 

[Dave L]

ok Dave, you don't owe me anything, and we can go with that if you like for now

Imo careful that your Beliefs do not turn into Absolute Truths, this seems to more or less define Determinism i guess.
Have a good day :)

How can you believe lies when truth is an option?

 

[bbyrd009]

How can you believe lies when truth is an option?

well i've always tried to make it plain here that i am a black-hearted guy Dave, prolly that's why i guess

 

[Dave L]

well i've always tried to make it plain here that i am a black-hearted guy Dave, prolly that's why i guess

Where do you find black hearted guys in scripture?

 

[stunnedbygrace]

Futility, noun: synonyms: pointlessness, uselessness, fruitlessness, unprofitability, hollowness, emptiness.

 

[bbyrd009]

Where do you find black hearted guys in scripture?

Revelations?

 

[stunnedbygrace]

Haman in Esther?

 

[bbyrd009]

ha sorry Dave but i mean maybe you see that you had no probs replying to that one, huh

 

[Taken]

The creeds are nothing more than conclusions about what the bible says after much debate and testing. If you stick with the Ecumenical Creeds on the person of Christ, you are on safe ground. If you stray from this, you are not.

Here's THE SYMBOL OF CHALCEDON


The Symbol of Chalcedon, adopted at the fourth and fifth sessions of the Fourth Ecumenical Council, dates back to 451 A.D.. Philip Schaff, in his Creeds of Christendom, writes of the Symbol (or Creed) of Chalcedon, “While the first Council of Nicaea had established the eternal, pre-existent Godhead of Christ, the Symbol of the Fourth Ecumenical Council relates to the incarnate Logos, as he walked upon earth and sits on the right hand of the Father. It is directed against the errors of Nestorius and Eutyches, who agreed with the Nicene Creed as opposed to Arianism, but put the Godhead of Christ in a false relation to his humanity.”3



"We, then, following the holy Fathers, all with one consent, teach men to confess one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, the same perfect in Godhead and also perfect in manhood; truly God and truly man, of a reasonable [rational] soul and body; consubstantial [coessential] with us according to the manhood; in all things like unto us, without sin; begotten before all ages of the Father according to the Godhead, and in these latter days, for us and for our salvation, born of the Virgin Mary, the mother of God, according to the Manhood; one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten, to be acknowledged in two natures, inconfusedly, unchangeably, indivisibly, inseparably; the distinction of natures being by no means taken away by the union, but rather the property of each nature being preserved, and concurring in one person and one Subsistence, not parted or divided into two persons, but one and the same Son, and only begotten, God the Word, the Lord Jesus Christ, as the prophets from the beginning [have declared] concerning him, and the Lord Jesus Christ himself has taught us, and the Creed of the holy Fathers has handed down to us."


Historic Creeds and Confessions. (1997). (electronic ed.). Oak Harbor: Lexham Press.[/QUOTE]

Where IN your Creed IS JESUS CALLED A "HUMAN MAN"?

Do you teach Jesus was a 'HUMAN MAN"?

Have you strayed from your own CREED?

Glory to God,
Taken

 

[Taken]

sure, pick your false doctrine/Absolute Truth, and Quote the vv that support it, and i'll Quote the vv that contest it if you like, i don't mind going around that track one more time if you want. If you assert Oneness, i'll go with Trinity, etc, i don't even care which wrong side you pick, see, we will both be guaranteed to be half right, meaning all wrong

Of course One person can quote one scripture and another person can quote another scripture that Between the two scriptures the scriptures themselves seems like OPPOSITE Meanings.

Scripture DOES say OPPOSITE THINGS.

WHY?

Because Scripture IS a teaching of KNOWLEDGE that APPLES TO Individuals who BELIEVE Completely OPPOSITE THINGS.

If a man BELIEVES in God, there are Scriptures that APPLY to him, that Would not apply to a DISBELIEVER.

If a man DISBELIEVES in God, there are Scriptures that APPLY to him, that Would not apply to the Believer.

There are also Scriptures that APPLY to A Converted Beliver, THAT DO NOT APPLY to a an UNCONVERTED Believer.

You mention Oneness VS the Trinity.

"ONENESS" and "TRINITY" are not IN Scripture, but rather are single word concepts to convey "and introduction" of WHAT an individual Believes ABOUT God.

MY view;

IS GOD ONE GOD? Yes.

IS GOD ONE GOD who can and does Spiritually come Forth out from Himself to effect His own desires and pleasures? Yes.

When God sends forth His WORD out of His mouth, Did HE give the world a NAME to call His Word? Yes

When Gods sends forth His SPIRIT out from Him, Did He give the world a NAME to call His Spirit? Yes.

Has God Himself, claimed He IS ONE GOD?
Yes.

Has God Himself, called what is HE...mine, our, us.....? Yes.

Do you do the same?
Do you come here send your word out of your mouth....and call your word by the name...
"bbyrd009" ?
Does your word out of your mouth have other names, that would apply for other certain people to call you?
IOW...would your child or employer call your word, you, by the name bbyrd009 ?

With numerous names, as many men answer to....does not make them any less ONE single individual.

God has numerous names and titles, and NOT all men address Him with the exact same names and titles.....just as individuals do not address you with the exact same names and titles.

When Scripture speaks of Gods names, His titles....
It is He, Them, His, Their, etc.
As for Himself, He has said of Himself;
I, me, us, ours, mine, etc.

It is all in reference TO ONE God, who as you, has numerous names and titles, that applies to your ONE self.

God Bless,
Taken

 

[Dave L]

Here's THE SYMBOL OF CHALCEDON


The Symbol of Chalcedon, adopted at the fourth and fifth sessions of the Fourth Ecumenical Council, dates back to 451 A.D.. Philip Schaff, in his Creeds of Christendom, writes of the Symbol (or Creed) of Chalcedon, “While the first Council of Nicaea had established the eternal, pre-existent Godhead of Christ, the Symbol of the Fourth Ecumenical Council relates to the incarnate Logos, as he walked upon earth and sits on the right hand of the Father. It is directed against the errors of Nestorius and Eutyches, who agreed with the Nicene Creed as opposed to Arianism, but put the Godhead of Christ in a false relation to his humanity.”3



"We, then, following the holy Fathers, all with one consent, teach men to confess one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, the same perfect in Godhead and also perfect in manhood; truly God and truly man, of a reasonable [rational] soul and body; consubstantial [coessential] with us according to the manhood; in all things like unto us, without sin; begotten before all ages of the Father according to the Godhead, and in these latter days, for us and for our salvation, born of the Virgin Mary, the mother of God, according to the Manhood; one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten, to be acknowledged in two natures, inconfusedly, unchangeably, indivisibly, inseparably; the distinction of natures being by no means taken away by the union, but rather the property of each nature being preserved, and concurring in one person and one Subsistence, not parted or divided into two persons, but one and the same Son, and only begotten, God the Word, the Lord Jesus Christ, as the prophets from the beginning [have declared] concerning him, and the Lord Jesus Christ himself has taught us, and the Creed of the holy Fathers has handed down to us."


Historic Creeds and Confessions. (1997). (electronic ed.). Oak Harbor: Lexham Press.

Where IN your Creed IS JESUS CALLED A "HUMAN MAN"?

Do you teach Jesus was a 'HUMAN MAN"?

Have you strayed from your own CREED?

Glory to God,
Taken[/QUOTE]
I did not say Jesus was fully man. He would have two personalities if he was. He was God having a fully human nature and a fully divine nature.

 

[Taken]

Where IN your Creed IS JESUS CALLED A "HUMAN MAN"?

Do you teach Jesus was a 'HUMAN MAN"?

Have you strayed from your own CREED?

Glory to God,
Taken

I did not say Jesus was fully man. He would have two personalities if he was. He was God having a fully human nature and a fully divine nature.[/QUOTE]

How so did Jesus have a "fully HUMAN nature"?

Here's a couple of things that apply to the HUMAN mans Nature;

Did He LUST after women?
Did He TELL LIES to avoid hurting someone's feelings?


Glory to God,
Taken

 

[Dave L]

I did not say Jesus was fully man. He would have two personalities if he was. He was God having a fully human nature and a fully divine nature.

How so did Jesus have a "fully HUMAN nature"?

Here's a couple of things that apply to the HUMAN mans Nature;

Did He LUST after women?
Did He TELL LIES to avoid hurting someone's feelings?


Glory to God,
Taken[/QUOTE]
Fallen human nature Jesus did not have.