What will happen in the Afterlife? This post doesn't seem to allow any further discussion (was that you WG)??

@WG: It's almost impossible to have a discussion with you. Every time you get in trouble (When your position doesn't fit the narrative), you simply claim it as being an allegory, or "man wrote the Bible" as if that's a simple explanation for your problem. Or wrong interpretation, due to biased translators. Sinful men translated the Bible with natural (sin/nature factor) ill intent.

It's much the same when talking politics. Somebody says something, and the opposing party simply responds - "that's a lie!" and they leave it at that. No room for further discussion.

If you want to engage in a discussion, having anything, to do with the Bible, you must believe (same here) that it holds the true (intact) word of God, as if it is God speaking directly to you. When Jesus talks in parables, you might better understand them being real-life situations, that took place sometime throughout History. Take your allegory and place it in your mind as being real, not just a fictitious story...only then can we have a discussion on an even playing field.

That's just the way I see it. Please don't get all defensive on me.

Moving on.

Can we Talk about Holyness? Is Jesus Holy? Was Jesus holy? Are we Holy? Are we being made Holy? Was Jesus being made holy?

The Bible writers draw a sharp contrast between the Lord's character and that of humankind. Jesus lived a life of holiness and total devotion to God. Do you see where I'm going with this? Holiness precludes sin. It is impossible for Jesus to have sinned...NEVER EVER!

Once again you have put forward some serious claims without ever referring specifically to any Bible passages, so it's hard to know how to respond.


When Jesus talks in parables, you might better understand them being real-life situations, that took place sometime throughout History. Take your allegory and place it in your mind as being real, not just a fictitious story...only then can we have a discussion on an even playing field.Why would that be important? In other words, how would it make a difference, especially considering that we are never told to do that in the New Testament? "Thou shalt regard parables as being real stories," is a command not found anywhere.

As far as I know, the Bible never directly says anything about the possibility of Jesus ever sinning. That seems rather strange to me, but one of you might know of a passage that does address this.

Romans 8:3 --

3 For what the law was powerless to do because it was weakened by the flesh,[a (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%208:3&version=NIV#fen-NIV-28120a)] God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh to be a sin offering.[b (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%208:3&version=NIV#fen-NIV-28120b)] And so he condemned sin in the flesh.

Footnotes

Romans 8:3 (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%208:3&version=NIV#en-NIV-28120) In contexts like this, the Greek word for flesh (sarx) refers to the sinful state of human beings, often presented as a power in opposition to the Spirit; also in verses 4-13.
Romans 8:3 (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%208:3&version=NIV#en-NIV-28120) Or flesh, for sin

Once againI was simply saying, instead of crying foul; It might be better to liken it as taking place in real life.

Example: Talking Snake. Noah's Ark. The Flood and many More supposed Allegories. A person can claim "allegory" anytime they feel like it.
It might be better to liken it to taking place in real life. I'm just saying...what would it hurt?

@WG: Are your Bible references indicating that Jesus was a sinner? Or that he has sinned? or even capable of sinning?

Could Jesus have sinned?

Was Jesus Christ, who was God manifested in the flesh (John 1:1 - 4), susceptible to temptation? Could he have sinned by either choice or accident? Was it possible the devil, appealing to his human nature (Hebrews 2:14 - 18), could have led Jesus to disobey his Father?

On the other hand, given his critical role in our salvation, was Jesus, like his heavenly Father, sealed righteous and incapable of sinning? Was it impossible any temptation could adversely affect him? Was it pre-determined the pulls and appetites of his human nature would never be able to lead him to sin in his thoughts and deeds?

We will explore three key Biblical passages, out of many, which show the kind of life Jesus experienced during his 33 1/2 years as a human. We will learn that the Lord recognized he could sin and therefore took steps to lessen the possibility that he did so.
https://www.biblestudy.org/maturart/could-jesus-have-sinned.html

Noah's Ark -- allegory or true story? OR a true story that became an allegory -- some background information

A Noah by Any Other Name -- Noah's Prequel

If you read texts predating the Bible, you'll find that the well-known Old Testament Noah did not make his literary debut in the Holy Scriptures. Rather, he made his first appearance about 2,000 years or so earlier in the Sumerian (https://history.howstuffworks.com/asian-history/sumerians.htm) civilization of Mesopotamia (https://history.howstuffworks.com/asian-history/mesopotamia.htm). Holding power from roughly 3500 B.C. to 2000 B.C., the Sumerians were the first people to sketch out the story of Noah, except they called him Ziusudra.

Later, the Babylonians (https://history.howstuffworks.com/asian-history/babylonia.htm) would record a similar tale in the Epic of Gilgamesh, the oldest book in recorded history. As the Babylonians tell it, a man named Utnapishtim was warned of a great storm and built a boat an acre in size, split into six different divisions. All surrounding lands flooded after six days and nights of rain. Sailing to what may have been modern-day Bahrain, Utnapishtim and his wife received immortality for his obedience.

Here's where the Tigris and Euphrates rivers come into play. The two waterways that slice through modern day Iraq served as the main thoroughfares for trade at that time, and were the setting for the flood story in the Epic of Gilgamesh. Because both rivers flood each summer, scholars think that Noah's story may be based on that actual event -- a greater than usual flooding of the Tigris or Euphrates. In fact, archeologists have uncovered evidence of such a great flood in Mesopotamia, dating back to around 2900 B.C., that quickly wiped out a number of Sumerian cities [source: Saggs].

The real-life Noah could have been a wealthy merchant who had a strong enough boat to withstand the storm. Passed down through generations of telling and retelling, the story could have evolved over the centuries to integrate the Judeo-Christian and Islamic beliefs.

Please continue reading at:
https://history.howstuffworks.com/history-vs-myth/noahs-ark.htm#:~:text=Because%20both%20rivers%20flood%20 each%20summer%2C%20scholars%20think,than%20usual%2 0flooding%20of%20the%20Tigris%20or%20Euphrates.

Interesting read. Some quotes; Jesus understood that his human nature was always ready to lead him down the path of sin and death (see Romans 7:18 - 24). - Jesus knew he could not go it alone and understood the very real possibility that he could sin. One of the greatest proofs that Jesus not only could have sinned, but also was fully aware he had the power to do so.

So, Jesus understood his Human Nature and he had the Power to sin.
Maybe now is a good time to bring in; Power and Authority.

Example: Talking Snake. Noah's Ark. The Flood and many More supposed Allegories. A person can claim "allegory" anytime they feel like it. It might be better to liken it to taking place in real life. I'm just saying...what would it hurt?You had referred to the parables of Jesus and taking them as real life events. This above is a different story as they do not pertain to Christ's parables. I would agree with you on what you listed above.

WG, what point are you trying to support with this? "Romans 8:3. 3 For what the law was powerless to do because it was weakened by the flesh,[a (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%208:3&version=NIV#fen-NIV-28120a)] God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh to be a sin offering.[b (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%208:3&version=NIV#fen-NIV-28120b)] And so he condemned sin in the flesh."

Walter, Romans 7:18-24 did not pertain to Jesus. That was Paul speaking about his own personal experience. Jesus doesn't enter until verse 25.

Walter, Romans 7:18-24 did not pertain to Jesus.Ah, interesting. I was in a hurry so I just brazed through the link WG posted.


https://history.howstuffworks.com/hi...or%20Euphrates.All he is saying is; "Jesus understood his Human Nature and he had the Power to sin." Paul knew the same thing...you know the same thing.

Do you sin? Do you now have the power to stop sinning? Do you still sin, even while having the power of the Holy Spirit? Where does sin come from? Does a slave have free will? Why do we need a priest? Who are God's chosen people? Who is the chosen one...was he chosen before or after being birthed? **Why do the Jews reject Jesus as being the Messiah (this should be the answer you were not hoping to find)?

Answer these questions, to yourself, and you might see the light.

Here are a few more; Can Satan ever tell the truth? is Satan capable of telling the truth? Is the coming Antichrist able to do anything righteous? Does Satan know and understand Righteousness? To God is all the power and Authority!

https://www.desiringgod.org/articles/could-jesus-have-sinned

"How Stuff Works" would not be my first choice for finding knowledge about the Bible.


Do you sin? Do you now have the power to stop sinning? Do you still sin, even while having the power of the Holy Spirit? Where does sin come from? Does a slave have free will? Why do we need a priest? Who are God's chosen people? Who is the chosen one...was he chosen before or after being birthed? **Why do the Jews reject Jesus as being the Messiah (this should be the answer you were not hoping to find)?A boatload of unrelated questions does nothing to advance this discussion. Let's try just taking the first two.

1. Do you sin? Yes.
2. Do you now have the power to stop sinning. Yes.

So that raises a good point. If we Christians are no longer slaves to sin, why do we seem to continue to fall prey to it?


All he is saying is; "Jesus understood his Human Nature and he had the Power to sin." Paul knew the same thing...you know the same thing.Are you saying this in reference to the Romans 7 passage, because that is not at all what Paul was saying there. He never even mentioned Jesus until verse 25, so I have no idea how you could get that meaning from that passage.

"How Stuff Works" would not be my first choice for finding knowledge about the Bible.
Subtitle:

Culture - History - History vs. Myth

Still coming from "How Stuff Works". The Bible is not "stuff".

Still coming from "How Stuff Works". The Bible is not "stuff".
There's lots of stuff in the Bible to discuss.

All he is saying I thought it would have been clear; I quoted WG link. and then I responded. I was referring to WG"s link. The dude that was talking about Jesus's ability to sin.

Look, If God wanted a person to preach to the Gentiles he would create a Paul. If God promised a messiah, he would create...
Being set apart from God means being chosen by Him for His glory and purpose.

@WG: If Jesus was capable of sinning, at what point was Jesus incapable of Sinning?

Jesus was born holy and sinless, in distinction from all other children born naturally since Adam. It is impossible for somebody who is holy to sin. Holyness precludes sin. The Pharisees didn't see Jesus's Holiness. Ignoring God's holiness brought deadly consequences...Do you understand that the Jews missed it? Don't you miss it too? Jesus never doubted, and sin never entered thought. How do we know this, you say? because he remained sinless!

If Jesus had been capable of sinning that would mean we all lose. Our own ability to sin would remain and be remembered even while cohabitating within him. Even though we still sin, it is not us sinning. Not only has sin been forgotten, it has been taken away...as if we never sinned at all, for all time. Sin no longer exists. If you believe Jesus (the Son of God) is capable of sin, then sin will live (in you) forever.

I'm talking as if we have already entered Eternity.

I thought it would have been clear; I quoted WG link. and then I responded. I was referring to WG"s link. The dude that was talking about Jesus's ability to sin.

Got it. Thanks for the clarification, but you evidently pasted the wrong link, for the one you copied/pasted was about Noah's flood.


Even though we still sin, it is not us sinning.
Sin no longer exists. Elaborate on those two points some. Where do you find that in the Bible?

If you understand the fact that Jesus was born holy and sinless, Then you will know that the two (holiness and sin) are mutually exclusive...The participation in the life of God that we call “holiness” precludes sin.
Christ revealed the sin of his age in contrast to his own holiness.

Romans 17:17 "It is sin living in me that does it." At that time there was no sin [living] in Jesus, so it would be impossible for him to be susceptible to sin. Only now does Jesus have sin living in him...It is that same sin that is living in us that lives in him. Jesus takes all sin upon himself...Jesus, take all my sins upon yourself (seems like a nasty thing to do to someone doesn't it?). Sin is no longer sin as we know it.

Could Jesus have sinned?

Could Jesus have sinned?WG, there is no sin. sin has been done away with. How could God sin when there is no sin? how could humanity have sinned when there is no sin? The sin that is in you has either died or is going to die. Kill it now before it claims you. Jesus is life, sin is death. Jesus's life gives life to all of creation. Are you being created right now - yes. Let God create in you a life free of sin. If you don't grab onto God's Holyness (which is free from sin, aka Jesus) then the sin that we have all become will have no part (life) in what God is creating, through his Son Jesus. If you think Jesus was capable of sinning then you believe God is capable of sinning and in turn, you will fall subject to sin for all eternity.

Waltero, you say there is no sin? Why did Satan tempt Him (from Matt. 4):

8 Again, the devil took Him up on an exceedingly high mountain, and showed Him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory. 9 And he said to Him, “All these things I will give You if You will fall down and worship me.” ?

Waltero, again, you say there is no sin? Two daily newspapers are delivered to our house each morning. Page after page is filled with reports of robberies, shootings, killings. Those are sins!

There is no freedom from sin in this life.

Why did Satan tempt Him (from Matt. 4): You already have your answer, why ask me?
Why did Satan tempt HimFalls under the same line as; Why does the Devel carry on as he does, even though he knows he has been defeated? Why did Satan tempt Jesus? Why does he continue tempting Jesus? BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT SIN DOES!!!
again, you say there is no sin? That's what I'm getting at... AND - Again, you say there is sin!

Right now, Jesus is that life that we can look forward to in the reign of God we will be freed from every stain of sin and every shadow of death. Does God rein in your life?

When Satan tempted Jesus, Satan hadn't been defeated yet. That came later with the crucifixion and resurrection.

When Satan tempted Jesus, Satan hadn't been defeated yet.Ok, that might be as far as Satan (sin) knew. And for us (Christians), that might be as far as we know, now. What of the Jews? They knew Satan (sin) to be defeated, as it has been written. They know a Messiah is coming. So we have all of human history - past, present, and future waiting for the coming of the Messiah. The Jews are still waiting as well as the Christians, still waiting...Time is still waiting for Jesus to come. Time is the Birthing of all that God has created. God's Word has come to life, in Jesus...if God's Word lives in you you will come to live in Jesus. As far as I know, Satan had been defeated as soon as God uttered a breath from his mouth.

The first Adam brought sin into the world, but the last Adam (Jesus) succeeded in defeating sin and Satan.

The first Adam brought sin into the world, but the last Adam (Jesus) succeeded in defeating sin and Satan.You could also say that the first Adam birthed sin into the world (you me), but the last Adam birthed Holiness into the world, thereby eliminating sin forever...only for those of us who have been reborn, of God. This is where the Bible comes in. The Holy Bible is Holy, it is inerrant. There is no sin living in it, it can not be subject to sin. The Bible can not sin - with this I mean that man can not manipulate it nor corrupt it. We must believe the Bible is as Jesus himself...incapable of sinning.

man can not manipulate it nor corrupt it.Not sure what you mean with this. The Bible is manipulated and corrupted all the time. Check out the Passion translation if you'd like to.

Not sure what you mean with this.It can be used to manipulate and corrupt. I'm talking about translators purposely translating it to fit their own "sinful" purpose. or like when somebody believes that God did not put that in the Bible, man did...believing something should not be in the Bible. Owning the Bible...we must own it, own every jot and tittle.

I'll come back to this:
If you understand the fact that Jesus was born holy and sinless, Then you will know that the two (holiness and sin) are mutually exclusive...The participation in the life of God that we call “holiness” precludes sin. Come on WG, you're an educated woman. What we have here is Holiness. This occurrence of Holiness supersedes the other. The newer Model (Jesus's/holiness) supersedes the older model (Adam's/sinfulness). These two events cannot happen simultaneously. Just as sin can not become Holy, Holy can not become sin.

Holiness and sinfulness are mutually exclusive.

Not only are holiness and sinfulness mutually exclusive, but Christ, being perfectly holy, knows and feels the horror and weight of sin more deeply than any of us sinful ones could—just as the purer a man’s heart, the more horrified he is at the thought of his neighbors being robbed or abused.

It can be used to manipulate and corrupt. I'm talking about translators purposely translating it to fit their own "sinful" purpose. or like when somebody believes that God did not put that in the Bible, man did...believing something should not be in the Bible. Owning the Bible...we must own it, own every jot and tittle.
Then who is correct? Who "owns" the Bible that is accurate? There is no original Bible -- only copies.

It's quite possible that you two are debating a topic that is really difficult to settle.

And again - I'll come back to this:
If you understand the fact that Jesus was born holy and sinless, Then you will know that the two (holiness and sin) are mutually exclusive...The participation in the life of God that we call “holiness” precludes sin. Come on WG, you're an educated woman. What we have here is Holiness. This occurrence of Holiness supersedes the other. The newer Model (Jesus's/holiness) supersedes the older model (Adam's/sinfulness). These two events cannot happen simultaneously. Just as sin can not become Holy, Holy can not become sin.

Holiness and sinfulness are mutually exclusive.

Not only are holiness and sinfulness mutually exclusive, but Christ, being perfectly holy, knows and feels the horror and weight of sin more deeply than any of us sinful ones could—just as the purer a man’s heart, the more horrified he is at the thought of his neighbors being robbed or abused.

Do you still think - Jesus, who was, who is, and who is to come, has the option to sin? How could he who knew no sin have sin as an option? Jesus still lives. Jesus's life, now, is as his life has always been (always with us and having us with him). Why did Jesus get baptized, why was Jesus tempted, and why did Jesus pray as he did...it was for our benefit.
Who "owns" the Bible that is accurate You do.

If you understand the fact that Jesus was born holy and sinless, Then you will know that the two (holiness and sin) are mutually exclusive...The participation in the life of God that we call “holiness” precludes sin.So do you sin? And if you do, does that mean you are not holy?


Who "owns" the Bible that is accurate?A really evasive comment. It assumes that there are differences between translations that are sufficient to cause doctrinal problems. That is basically not true, but even at that, the Hebrew and Greek copies which scholars possess are able to get us to the truth, assuming a person wants to get there.

A really evasive comment. It assumes that there are differences between translations that are sufficient to cause doctrinal problems. That is basically not true,
Then why aren't we all only Assemblies of God or only Lutheran -- or only Catholic or only Baptist or ... or ... or ...???

It's those "differences between translations" that have caused doctrinal problems and divisions for centuries.

So do you sin?It's not so much the fact of whether we sin. It has more to do with giving ourselves over to sin.
Then why aren't we all only Assemblies of God or only Lutheran -- or only Catholic or only Baptist or ... or ... or ...???For the same reason "There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus."
It's those "differences between translations" that have caused doctrinal problems and divisions for centuries. Because for some people, Jesus is more than a doctrine.

It's not so much the fact of whether we sin. It has more to do with giving ourselves over to sin.
If we give ourselves over to sin, we are sinning.

If we give ourselves over to sin, we are sinning.Was that a question? It is not us anything...it is sin. If you give yourself over to sin - loving sin, promoting sin, or (big one) believing your sin is no longer sin, then you have become one with sin...aka the devel.

It's those "differences between translations" that have caused doctrinal problems and divisions for centuries.Please give just one example.


It's not so much the fact of whether we sinYou said, "Then you will know that the two (holiness and sin) are mutually exclusive." I asked, "So do you sin?" If you do, then aren't you, according to your statement, not holy since sin and holiness are, "mutually exclusive"?

A really evasive comment. It assumes that there are differences between translations that are sufficient to cause doctrinal problems. That is basically not true, but even at that, the Hebrew and Greek copies which scholars possess are able to get us to the truth, assuming a person wants to get there.Why isn't there only one Christian church? We should all be Catholic (but Luther changed that).

Was that a question? It is not us anything...it is sin. If you give yourself over to sin - loving sin, promoting sin, or (big one) believing your sin is no longer sin, then you have become one with sin...aka the devel.
Just committing a sin. We are not free of sin, not yet. We sin every day.

You said, "Then you will know that the two (holiness and sin) are mutually exclusive." I asked, "So do you sin?" If you do, then aren't you, according to your statement, not holy since sin and holiness are, "mutually exclusive"?100% correct.

We are not free of sin, not yet. We sin every day. Those in Christ have been freed from the slavery of sin. If you find yourself committing the same sin every day...

Please give just one example.
Why are there so many Christian church bodies and denominations? Why don't we all belong to one, the same one? Why aren't we all Catholic?


Those in Christ have been freed from the slavery of sin. If you find yourself committing the same sin every day...
I'm not talking about "committing the same sin every day."

You don't commit any sins at all, is that what I'm reading?

We are not free of sin, not yet. We sin every day. Those in Christ have been freed from the slavery of sin. If you find yourself committing the same sin every day...

WG, I know where you are coming from. I've listened to you for years.


"We are just born that way and it's okay, and I love you." - I agree with you. But what I don't agree with, is you telling people that they are going to be okay just being who they are. Yes, it is okay, it's okay with me, it's okay with JL, and Jesus might be okay (with people being who they are) with it as well. One thing we do know for certain - God is not okay with it.

Why isn't there only one Christian church? We should all be Catholic (but Luther changed that).None of that has anything to do with differences in translations. That's what you asserted and concerning which I asked you for examples. The truth is, you can read the KJV, NKJV, NASB, ESV, Amplified version, CSB, NIV, and get to the same place. If you disagree with that, then please give specific examples.


100% correct.So, Walter, you are not holy?

None of that has anything to do with differences in translations. That's what you asserted and concerning which I asked you for examples. The truth is, you can read the KJV, NKJV, NASB, ESV, Amplified version, CSB, NIV, and get to the same place. If you disagree with that, then please give specific examples.
Why was the Catholic Church against translating the Bible?


In 1498, the Inquisition (Catholic court) stated that it was impossible to translate the Vulgate (Latin Bible) into any other language without making mistakes that would plunge unskilled and especially new converts into doubts about faith.

You claimed, "It's those "differences between translations" that have caused doctrinal problems and divisions for centuries." I asked you to give one example. You have come up with no examples of translation issues that caused problems/divisions. It's because you don't know of any. Don't feel bad. I don't either.

The Catholic Church is corrupt and has been corrupt for centuries.

You claimed, "It's those "differences between translations" that have caused doctrinal problems and divisions for centuries." I asked you to give one example. You have come up with no examples of translation issues that caused problems/divisions. It's because you don't know of any. Don't feel bad. I don't either.
There ya go again! I've been busy working on a Sunday sermon and trying to keep up with this thread. You will get an answer.

Btw, check Post #44.

Here ya go:

Martin Luther claimed that what distinguished him from previous reformers was that while they attacked corruption (https://www.britannica.com/topic/corruption-law) in the life of the church, he went to the theological root of the problem—the perversion of the church’s doctrine of redemption (https://www.britannica.com/topic/salvation-religion) and grace (https://www.britannica.com/topic/grace-religion). Luther, a pastor and professor at the University of Wittenberg, deplored the entanglement of God’s free gift of grace in a complex system of indulgences (https://www.britannica.com/topic/indulgence) and good works. In his Ninety-five Theses, he attacked the indulgence (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/indulgence) system, insisting that the pope (https://www.britannica.com/topic/pope) had no authority over purgatory (https://www.britannica.com/topic/purgatory-Roman-Catholicism) and that the doctrine of the merits of the saints (https://www.britannica.com/topic/saint) had no foundation in the gospel. Here lay the key to Luther’s concerns for the ethical (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ethical) and theological reform of the church: Scripture (https://www.britannica.com/topic/Bible) alone is authoritative (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/authoritative) (sola scriptura) and justification (https://www.britannica.com/topic/justification-Christianity) is by faith (sola fide), not by works.
https://www.britannica.com/event/Reformation

You said, "Then you will know that the two (holiness and sin) are mutually exclusive." I asked, "So do you sin?" If you do, then aren't you, according to your statement, not holy since sin and holiness are, "mutually exclusive"?I think I know what you're getting at.

@JL: Are you asking; How can we, as sinners, become Holy if sin and holiness are, "mutually exclusive"? Answer; It is only through God's grace and the humility of Jesus Christ that we are able to share in His holiness (1 Corinthians 1:28–31; 2 Peter 1:3–4).

I don't think anybody should ever refer to themselves as Holy. I only know myself as a sinner...because that is all I bring to the table. I've heard pastors say - when I became righteous - When declaring something like that, it should always be followed with; In Jesus. Otherwise, a person is liable to get a big head. In fact, every time we speak, we should mention the name Jesus :-) Hoo YAh for Jesus!

WG, there won’t be an answer. Post 44 had no answer. And your long answer above about Martin Luther is an answer to a question no one asked. It does nothing to support your idea that various translations have caused divisions and problems. It doesn't even mention translations!! Luther worked from the Latin Vulgate. His German translation which he later did was not one ounce responsible for his different views. You have come up with zero.


I don't think anybody should say that they are Holy. I only know myself as a sinner...because that is all I bring to the table.It can be a difficult issue to work through. I think it would be proper to say, "I am holy in Christ." It is purely an issue of faith.

There won’t be an answer.
Look again.

WG, I know where you are coming from. I've listened to you for years.


"We are just born that way and it's okay, and I love you." - I agree with you. But what I don't agree with, is you telling people that they are going to be okay just being who they are. Yes, it is okay, it's okay with me, it's okay with JL, and Jesus might be okay (with people being who they are) with it as well. One thing we do know for certain - God is not okay with it.

No response, WG? Maybe you finally see the error of your ways? No worries. I'm not about to Challenge anybody of that nature. Spread the love while letting them know we are all a mess and God is the only person that is able to straighten us out.

Look again.You have no answer. You seem to do this constantly. You are facing a question for which you have no answer, so rather than just be honest and admit it, you have started listing extraneous answers (such as the one above from Britannica about Luther) in the hope that maybe it won't be noticed. It never works, and it amazes me that you continue to try it.

So again, just for the record.
You claimed, "It's those "differences between translations" that have caused doctrinal problems and divisions for centuries." I asked you to give one example. You have come up with no examples of translation issues that caused problems/divisions. It's because you don't know of any. Don't feel bad. I don't either.

You'll have no answer. Perhaps you don't even understand the question?


Jesus might be okay (with people being who they are) with it as well. One thing we do know for certain - God is not okay with it.Walter, Jesus and God are never in disagreement. One does not approve of something while the other disapproves.

You have no answer. You seem to do this constantly. You are facing a question for which you have no answer, so rather than just be honest and admit it, you have started listing extraneous answers in the hope that maybe it won't be noticed. It never works, and it amazes me that you continue to try it.

So again, just for the record.

You'll have no answer. Perhaps you don't even understand the question?
I had then added -----

Martin Luther claimed that what distinguished him from previous reformers was that while they attacked corruption (https://www.britannica.com/topic/corruption-law) in the life of the church, he went to the theological root of the problem—the perversion of the church’s doctrine of redemption (https://www.britannica.com/topic/salvation-religion) and grace (https://www.britannica.com/topic/grace-religion). Luther, a pastor and professor at the University of Wittenberg, deplored the entanglement of God’s free gift of grace in a complex system of indulgences (https://www.britannica.com/topic/indulgence) and good works. In his Ninety-five Theses, he attacked the indulgence (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/indulgence) system, insisting that the pope (https://www.britannica.com/topic/pope) had no authority over purgatory (https://www.britannica.com/topic/purgatory-Roman-Catholicism) and that the doctrine of the merits of the saints (https://www.britannica.com/topic/saint) had no foundation in the gospel. Here lay the key to Luther’s concerns for the ethical (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ethical) and theological reform of the church: Scripture (https://www.britannica.com/topic/Bible) alone is authoritative (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/authoritative) (sola scriptura) and justification (https://www.britannica.com/topic/justification-Christianity) is by faith (sola fide), not by works.
https://www.britannica.com/event/Reformation

Yes, I saw that and noted it TWICE in my answers. IT DOES NOT ANSWER THE QUESTION.
You claimed, "It's those "differences between translations" that have caused doctrinal problems and divisions for centuries." I asked you to give one example. You have come up with no examples of translation issues that caused problems/divisions. It's because you don't know of any. Don't feel bad. I don't either.Your article does not even mention translation issues, so how on earth do you think it would be an adequate answer?

WG, I know where you are coming from. I've listened to you for years.


"We are just born that way and it's okay, and I love you." - I agree with you. But what I don't agree with, is you telling people that they are going to be okay just being who they are. Yes, it is okay, it's okay with me, it's okay with JL, and Jesus might be okay (with people being who they are) with it as well. One thing we do know for certain - God is not okay with it.

No response, WG? Maybe you finally see the error of your ways? No worries. I'm not about to Challenge anybody of that nature. Spread the love while letting them know we are all a mess and God is the only person that is able to straighten us out.
Where the heck are you getting all this????


Yes, I saw that and noted it TWICE in my answers. IT DOES NOT ANSWER THE QUESTION. Your article does not even mention translation issues, so how on earth do you think it would be an adequate answer?
Catholic Church/pope - we are saved by our works
Luther - we are justified by faith

Catholic Church/pope - we are saved by our works
Luther - we are justified by faithAnd how did translation issues cause that division? That is, after all, what you claimed, and it's what I have raised as a question. Can you answer that, for that is the question. Both of them were working from the Latin Vulgate, so what other translation caused a problem?


For the fourth or fifth time.
You claimed, "It's those "differences between translations" that have caused doctrinal problems and divisions for centuries." I asked you to give one example. You have come up with no examples of translation issues that caused problems/divisions. It's because you don't know of any. Don't feel bad. I don't either.

What do you want? The Latin from the Vulgate? Do you know Latin?

Ephesians 2
8 Gratia enim estis salvati per fidem, et hoc non ex vobis: Dei enim donum est:
9 non ex operibus, ut ne quis glorietur.

Vs.

James 2:20
Vis autem scire, o homo inanis, quoniam fides sine operibus mortua est?

I don't know how to make the question any more simple, or to make my responses ("And how did translation issues cause that division?") any more simple, so I don't know what else to tell you. The translation being used was the same for both sides, so it didn't cause the problem as you alleged was happening. I just don't know what else to tell you other than to continue repeating the question until at some point, hopefully, you get it.


examples of translation issues that caused problems/divisions.

There are no translation issues in the ML example you are citing, so it is not an answer to the question. I do sincerely hope you can understand that.

Are you Catholic, JL?

Another non-answer. I guess I will have to supply your answer for you.

The only division I know of that is translation based would involve the small, small group who insist on handling snakes due to the Mark 16 passage, a passage that most likely was not written by Mark and is set off in italics in most modern translations to indicate that. Other than that, I know of no divisions caused by differences in translations. Neither, apparently, do you, so your statement was not correct. Now if you can accept that, we can move on.

I believe what you are saying is that the Holy Bible has become a misnomer.
Might I point out that you have said the same thing regarding Jesus's Holiness.

As if Jesus was able to keep his Holiness intact...next to God not being able to keep his holy word intact.
The Holy Bible still saves!

I believe what you are saying is that the Holy Bible has become a misnomer.
Might I point out that you have said the same thing regarding Jesus's Holiness.

As if Jesus was able to keep his Holiness intact...next to God not being able to keep his holy word intact.
The Holy Bible still saves!You are saying this to who?

The Bible does not save, but it does point us to the one who can save.

You are saying this to who?I thought it was pretty obvious. Saying it to whoever believes Jesus could have chosen (chosen sin over holiness) to sin
.The Bible does not save, but it does point us to the one who can save should I simply not post things that I know you are going to take issue with? When posting this quote (see above), I knew you would come up with an objection. There is the power of the Holy Scriptures, The Holy Bible does indeed save. Romans 1:16 I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, first to the Jew, then to the Greek.

I'm open to discussing this, just not here.


I believe what you are saying is that the Holy Bible has become a misnomer.
Might I point out that you have said the same thing regarding Jesus's Holiness.

As if Jesus was able to keep his Holiness intact...next to God not being able to keep his holy word intact.

Is this better? Or maybe I spelled something wrong? Let us keep on track (which has proven to be impossible with the two of you).

Reminds me of the time when Paul was brought in before the Pharisees and Sadducees, when he brought up - the hope and resurrection of the dead.

The two of you seem confused. Something having to do with the interpretation of the Holy Manuscripts...How is the life of Christ any different? I mean he was Holy and was not in any way corrupted. Being that Jesus is the living Word of God, it would hold equally true that the Holy Bible is beyond corruption. They are both intertwined...That is why it would be good for those who don't believe the Bible has remained intact, to start to believe otherwise.

@WG: You have brought up the fact that you have 50+ years on me. What good is it having 50 years of unbelief (believing the Bible is full of discrepancies and false translations etc.)?

I should go back to work. I'll leave the two of you to sort it out.

There is no original Bible. All we have are copies. The Dead Sea Scrolls are the oldest Bible manuscripts -- (circa 250 B.C.E.–70 C.E.) are centuries older than Codex Sinaiticus, but are extremely fragmentary and rarely make up anything close to complete books.
https://www.bibleodyssey.org/ask-a-scholar/what-is-the-oldest-bible/

And...Jesus was true man as well as true God. Yes, He could have given in to sin -- but He didn't.

The Holy Bible does indeed save. Romans 1:16 I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, first to the Jew, then to the Greek.Walter, you are contending that the Bible does save, but then you post the Romans scripture that most certainly does NOT say the Bible saves, but rather says the Gospel is the power of God to save. The Gospel is in the Bible, but is not the Bible. But if it bothers you to have your ideas questioned, just say so and I will be quite willing to stop posting on your comments.


There is no original Bible. All we have are copies. The Dead Sea Scrolls are the oldest Bible manuscripts.And so what is your point?


but are extremely fragmentary and rarely make up anything close to complete books.That is partially true. There have been two complete copies of Isaiah found, and they are remarkably close to the Masoretic Text, so there is no compelling reason to think that wholesale changes were made to any books of the Bible.

And so what is your point?
A response to waltero.

Good. I'll let you two sort this out.

Good. I'll let you two sort this out.
Good! JL said Good!!!!

deleted

And...Jesus was true man as well as true God. Yes, He could have given in to sin
There is no original Bible. All we have are copies.This seems to be the only thing you can come up with. I don't think it is any coincidence, that you - have the same mindset when believing, that both the Son of God and the Bible are Fallable. I don't want your idea of what "man-God" is, or your idea of True "Holiness." Jesus is not running for God, he just is.

Take this for instance:
Jesus was true man as well as true God. Why do you say "was"? And do you think it's just coincidental that you jotted down Man (before) God? As in (when you said) "Jesus was Man as well as God..." as if Jesus was simply a man of God, Like all the other Men of God throughout the Bible. The difference being - Jesus is the God-man, as in the one and only. Jesus is God and Man aka God-man...the G-in man comes before man.

Some people just don't mind as long as it can just be Jesus in his Humanity, Jesus as a good man, Jesus as a wise man, Jesus as an important man who said important things. Jesus is a man who suffered, Jesus as a Man Who Loved unlike any man has ever loved and all of those things are absolutely true and woefully insufficient
he is the God-man.

In fact, there are people who use Jesus in his Humanity to argue for their sins when you think about for example: The abortion debate, there are people who try to use Jesus in their arguments for abortion. Just be reminded of the fact that the greatest tool or one of the greatest tools of deception that the enemy has is the fact that it has been easy to make people appreciate Jesus in his Humanity.

Jesus is the creator. He is the creator God [as] himself.

Waltero, is Jesus still True Man?

I didn't say the Bible is fallible.

I didn't say the Bible is fallible.You certainly seemed to imply it when you said, "There is no original Bible. All we have are copies."

You certainly seemed to imply it when you said, "There is no original Bible. All we have are copies."
We have the original?

Waltero, is Jesus still True Man? You don't need to worry about any of that anymore. You need to know him as your great redeemer, God, and Lord of all! Not using his humanity as you see fit.
I didn't say the Bible is fallible.You did in as much as you saying it doesn't exist. Yeh, Jesus Humanity still exists for you, but the [original] Bible doesn't exist at all? Maybe the Original Bible doesn't exist, but the Bible I have in my hand right now does (I'm sorry it doesn't for you).

@jl: Do you see now? Do you see why no amount of talking, arguing, debating, discussing, and trying to convince somebody to believe is not what it's about..It can not come about that way. Then you ask - then why am I in here trying to convince? I'm in here doing research, learning the truth. I do it for me, I am not getting too Aggravated, not so much trying to convince. I am using this site as a journal...learning.

As far as the Bible saves. It's complicated and a bit touchy...I haven't got there yet. But the fact that you believe the Bible doesn't save, won't allow you to listen or see anything believable having to do with that subject. You can't take much of what is said here with an open mind. I think that holds true with many Christians when it comes to Bible talk. I'll throw one verse in for you. do with it what you will.

And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things! But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report? So then faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of God. But I say, Have they not heard? Yes verily, their sound went into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world.

The Bible can save about as much as you can save, by bringing the gospel to somebody's doorstep. And yes, only Jesus saves. I (personally) understand it as some people are being saved today without knowing Jesus (in name) as their personal savior. Take some of the Jews today, still following the scriptures and believing God in his word...just as they were saved pre-Jesus. I'm not 100 % on this. there is a verse that would back this up. I'll allow you to find it if you ever run into it, you can bring it up to me.

Yes, waltero, I KNOW Jesus as my Redeemer. You implied in Post #69 that he is still true man as well as true God.

We read the Bible. The Bible TELLS us how to be saved. That's what matters.

What doesn't exist are the original manuscripts. All we have are copies. Since they coordinate and reference each other and tell consistent truths, they are accepted and are vital to sustain our faith.

Walter, I actually agree with you that just discussing the Gospel with someone doesn't change their mind. Sometimes we are just sowing seed that will bear a crop at a later time, and other times, by the power of the Holy Spirit, we are allowed to gather in a harvest.


As far as the Bible saves. It's complicated and a bit touchy...I haven't got there yet. But the fact that you believe the Bible doesn't save, won't allow you to listen or see anything believable having to do with that subject. You can't take much of what is said here with an open mind. I think that holds true with many Christians when it comes to Bible talk. I'll throw one verse in for you. do with it what you will.Jesus does the saving. The Bible points us to him. When thousands were saved in Acts 2, they had no New Testament at all, and few of them had a copy of the OT. So how do you suppose they were saved? In fact that was true of the rest of the Book of Acts and then practically all of the first century. Many people have been saved with radio or television preaching and had no Bible in their possession, and yet Jesus still saved them. Yes, the message of salvation is in the Bible, and perhaps that's what you mean, but the Bible, the book itself, does not save.


And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things! But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report? So then faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of God. But I say, Have they not heard? Yes verily, their sound went into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world.A wonderful text that does NOT say that the Bible saves.

Just saw this.
And yes, only Jesus saves.So I think we are in agreement.

WG
What doesn't exist are the original manuscripts. All we have are copies.If you are not implying that the Bible is flawed, then what is your point?

What doesn't exist are the original manuscripts. All we have are copies.Why do you consistently bring this up? What are you inferring? Most of the time you bring this up when you want to shut down the truth of the matter at hand.


@JL; I was just wondering. On the matter of Jesus having the capacity to sin...You were Neutral. Are you still on the fence?

Why do you consistently bring this up? What are you inferring? Most of the time you bring this up when you want to shut down the truth of the matter at hand.
I was responding to your wailing with this explanation -- "Since they coordinate and reference each other and tell consistent truths, they are accepted and are vital to sustain our faith."

I was responding to your wailing with this explanaationWhy are you acting dumb all of a sudden? I don't know how many (hundreds if not thousands ) times you've mentioned how fallible man might have influenced the Bible (Word of God).

Bible Saves? Should I go into - in the beginning the Word was...and the Word became flesh and so on and so on?

or; “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you?

It's my understanding that those (Jews) that have been saved, Pre-Jesus incarnate, are still being saved in the same way as they were in the Old Testament.

“Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? Clearly, Jesu knew them, but they did not know Jesu by name.

Why are you acting dumb all of a sudden? I don't know how many (hundreds if not thousands)times you've mentioned how fallible man might have influenced the Bible (Word of God).
I have not! All I've said is that we don't have the original Bible, the original manuscripts.

Oh Boy, here we go Again!!! WG, you have brought up (numerous times), in the past. Past Posts. About How we could not trust the Bible being God's word being that man has dabbled with it. And all we have is man's dibble-dabbling manuscripts of God's Word. I can accept that. Let's go with that, you are 100% right. If God wanted man to dibble dabble with his manuscripts, then that is what we have. There we have it, the Holy Bible as God has presented it to us. The living Word!

If you're not going to accept what you have been saying all along, there is no reason why anybody should listen to you. Don't you agree?

(and No!. I'm not going to look up posts that I (and you) know exist.

Oh Boy, here we go Again!!! WG, you have brought up (numerous times), in the past. Past Posts. About How we could not trust the Bible as being authentically God's word being that man has dabbled in it.

If you're not going to accept what you have been saying all along, there is no reason why anybody should listen to you. Don't you agree?
You misunderstood what I wrote and came to a faulty conclusion. I have never said "we could not trust the Bible as being authentically God's word being that man has dabbled in it."

Oh Boy, here we go Again!!! WG, you have brought up (numerous times), in the past. Past Posts. About How we could not trust the Bible being God's word being that man has dabbled with it. And all we have is man's dibble-dabbling manuscripts of God's Word. I can accept that. Let's go with that, you are 100% right. If God wanted man to dibble dabble with his manuscripts, then that is what we have. There we have it, the Holy Bible as God has presented it to us. The living Word!

If you're not going to accept what you have been saying all along, there is no reason why anybody should listen to you. Don't you agree?

(and No!. I'm not going to look up posts that I (and you) know exist.


Who has the True Bible? Take a wild Guess. Apparently not you.

Bible Saves? Should I go into - in the beginning the Word was...and the Word became flesh and so on and so on?

or; “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you?The second scripture above doesn't seem to have anything at all to do with the topic, and I don't see why you think it is a reference to OT Jews. It is a reference to a future day of judgment, still yet to come.

As to Jesus being the Word, it is not referring to Jesus being the Bible. Surely you must realize that when Jesus walked the earth, he wasn't a King James Bible.

I just don't have a solid opinion on the idea of Jesus being capable of sinning. He was certainly capable of being tempted, but could he have chosen to sin? I don't see how, but I've never really studied it.

I have never saidJust stop.

I have never said "we could not trust the Bible as being authentically God's word being that man has dabbled in it."I think WG has an affection for the Bible, but only the parts that agree with her views. So, for instance, when Jesus in Matthew 25 teaches of a horrible day of judgment coming, she simply chooses to ignore it, claim "cherry-picking", or use some other excuse to get around it. Bible teaches homosexuality is a sin? Find an obscure, practically unknown author who has a hair-brained theory to work around it. And on and on it goes.

Following the teachings of the Bible is like taking your medicine. Much of it is cherry-flavored and nice to the taste, but some doesn't taste so good. Still, it is all a blessing and necessary for us to follow.

The second scripture above doesn't seem to have anything at all to do with the topic Jesus saves(right). You know the Jesus that saves, I know the Jesus that saves, WG knows the Jesus that walked the earth. So what of the People of the OT that are saved? Did they know Jesus?
Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? Clearly these righteous sinners didn't know the God-man Jesus.
As to Jesus being the Word, it is not referring to Jesus being the Bible. We can see Jesus all throughout the Old Testament. What Word do you think he's talking about? Gods Word? Do you mean the living Bible? If God's Word lives in you...
The Bible has power and authority. Yes, God's Word includes the Bible. The Bible is God's Word, the living Word. That's why its truths are our foundation. we must believe that he is the living Rock that provides a spring full of water.

You know those Rocks that Cried out Hosanna? Well, that would be the Bible crying out. You know The men of God in the Old Testament, the Bible talking.

I think WG has an affection for the Bible, but only the parts that agree with her views. So, for instance, when Jesus in Matthew 25 teaches of a horrible day of judgment coming, she simply chooses to ignore it, claim "cherry-picking", or use some other excuse to get around it. Bible teaches homosexuality is a sin? Find an obscure, practically unknown author who has a hair-brained theory to work around it. And on and on it goes.

Following the teachings of the Bible is like taking your medicine. Much of it is cherry-flavored and nice to the taste, but some doesn't taste so good. Still, it is all a blessing and necessary for us to follow.
Damning WG is a sin. Be careful. Yes, Bible teachings are a blessing, such as love one another and thou shalt not bear false witness against a member of AskMeHelpDesk.

Find an obscure, practically unknown author who has a hair-brained theory to work around it. And on and on it goes.Posted earlier: Some people just don't mind as long as it can just be Jesus in his Humanity,

In fact, there are people who use Jesus in his Humanity to argue for their sins. Just be reminded of the fact that the greatest tool or one of the greatest tools of deception that the enemy has is the fact that it has been easy to make people appreciate Jesus in his Humanity.

Yes, God took on flesh and was born a man. He did not take on the Nature of Man. Don't believe in Adams's humanity.

Jesus saves(right). You know the Jesus that saves, I know the Jesus that saves, WG knows the Jesus that walked the earth. So what of the People of the OT that are saved? Did they know Jesus?Great question. We had a long discussion of that probably a year or two ago. In my view, they were saved by faith in the coming Savior. Abraham is a great example who Paul used in both Romans and Galatians.

Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? Clearly these righteous sinners didn't know the God-man Jesus.Why do you say that?


Damning WG is a sin. Be careful. Yes, Bible teachings are a blessing, such as love one another and thou shalt not bear false witness against a member of AskMeHelpDesk.Oh please stop. No one is "damning" you. I am pointing out what is true and can easily verify it. There is no bearing of a false witness going on.

Great question. We had a long discussion of that probably a year or two ago. In my view, they were saved by faith in the coming Savior. Abraham is a great example who Paul used in both Romans and Galatians.
In the Old Testament salvation was by grace through faith, the same as today. They looked forward to the coming Messiah; we look back to the cross. The gospel was taught, preached, and proclaimed in the Old Testament just as it is in the New Testament.

Why do you say that? Why Would those who know Jesus not know what they were doing when they knew they were doing it for Jesus all along?
It's not like we (Christians) are going to be confronted by Jesus, having him say what he says, and not know what he is talking about. Jesus just said it to us (he's saying it to us as we read in the Bible). So we know now that whenever, whatever we give to somebody, we are giving to Jesus...So who is it that would be saying "When did we feed you etc. etc.?

Do you see where this is going?

Why Would those who know Jesus not know what they were doing when they knew they were doing it for Jesus all along?
It's not like we (Christians) are going to be confronted by Jesus, having him say what he says, and not know what he is talking about. Jesus just said it to us (he's saying it to us as we read in the Bible). Maybe. And then it's possible that many Christians know that to be true, but just don't put it altogether on that day. So perhaps your idea is right, but I wouldn't get dogmatic about it.


Do you see where this is going?Not really, but I'm listening.


In the Old Testament salvation was by grace through faith, the same as today. They looked forward to the coming Messiah; we look back to the cross. The gospel was taught, preached, and proclaimed in the Old Testament just as it is in the New Testament.Not sure I agree with that, but don't entirely disagree with it either. I think it's the part about the Gospel being, "taught, preached, and proclaimed in the Old Testament," that I will have to really ponder some.

Don't you understand? He was not born of ordinary generation. He's the God-man who was born of a virgin. Who therefore did not inherit Adam's sin. And it is only because of that, because he didn't inherit Adam's sin, he could atone for ours, which is exactly what he did. He reconciled Us in his body of Flesh by his death in order to present us holy blameless and above reproach, in him in Christ.

Do you remember when Jesus said if you simply think in your head, about lust, that it is a Sin?
The Sin starts once you think about it. Then it grows into full fruition and you have given yourself over to sin. On this Basis, I say it was impossible for the God-Man to sin. Because in order to sin you first have to think about it and If you think Jesus thought about sin the way that you and I think about sin, then you are gravely mistaken.

(Still don't understand?)
Why did God need to create a creator?
Being God why didn't he just create??

Not sure I agree with that, but don't entirely disagree with it either. I think it's the part about the Gospel being, "taught, preached, and proclaimed in the Old Testament," that I will have to really ponder some.
From Wikipedia (of all places!) --

Christian theology describes the good news of salvation in Jesus Christ not as a new concept, but one that has been foretold throughout the Hebrew scripture (known as the Old Testament in Christian Bibles) and was prophetically preached even at the time of the fall of man as contained in Genesis 3:14–15, which has been called the "Proto-Evangelion" or "Proto-Gospel".

And from --
https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/essay/christ-in-the-old-testament/

God’s revelation throughout the Old Testament prefigures, anticipates, and announces beforehand the redemption that he would accomplish in the person and work of his incarnate Son, Jesus Christ.

SUMMARYWhen the apostles read the Old Testament, they saw references to Christ and his kingdom, as it were, on every page. Jesus is the second Adam, the perfect law keeper, the scion of David who would sit on David’s throne forever, the ultimate singer of the psalms, the wisdom of God, the suffering servant, the perfect high priest, to name just a few. The theological foundation for this conviction is that God is sovereign over history and he is the (ultimate) author of Scripture. As such, God announced beforehand, in type and shadow, promise and prophecy, the redemption he would accomplish through his incarnate Son. He did this so that his people might believe on the promised Messiah prior to his coming and so that those who know the Christ who has come might have a greater understanding of the work that he accomplished through his suffering and glory.

Christian theology describes the good news of salvation in Jesus Christ not as a new concept, but one that has been foretold throughout the Hebrew scripture (known as the Old Testament in Christian Bibles)...

Great post!
I'm even taking notes. Read it four times now. Do you think it's actually possible (the three of us coming together in agreement)?

I think we should work on the - "Jesus succumbing to sin" - A bit more. What does it mean to sin, what is Sin? To present ourselves to sin is to say, “Here sin, use my eyes for a while. Use me to sin. Come on into my thoughts and ruminate around.” The only Sin in Jesus's body, the only sin to hit his mind is our sin. He is Lord over all creation. He came to destroy sin and the Devel... That is God in action. God uses sin as a tool. A tool to break sin itself. Think about it? God says Jesus became sin (that's us), and Us having the full righteousness of Jesus (who is now sin) can now overcome sin and its Father the devel. Sin is dead and buried. Jesus didn't come to teach us how to live (because he already lives, all life is in him) He taught us how to Die...get it?

...
Great post!
I'm even taking notes. Read it four times now. Do you think it's actually possible (the three of us coming together in agreement)?

Thanks, waltero!

Yes, we three are Christians. Let's pray and ask our loving Father to guide us toward unity of thoughts and useful discussions of our beliefs.

I think we should work on the - "Jesus succumbing to sin" - A bit more. What does it mean to sin, what is Sin? To present ourselves to sin is to say, “Here sin, use my eyes for a while. Use me to sin. Come on into my thoughts and ruminate around.” The only Sin in Jesus's body, the only sin to hit his mind is our sin. He is Lord over all creation. He came to destroy sin and the Devel... That is God in action. God uses sin as a tool. A tool to break sin itself. Think about it? God says Jesus became sin (that's us), and Us having the full righteousness of Jesus, we can now overcome sin and its Father the devel. Sin is dead and buried. Jesus didn't come to teach us how to live (because he already lives, all life is in him) He taught us how to Die...get it? Dies to sin. Take on the mind of Christ Jesus...which has eliminated sin before all of creation.

Is this too far out there? Does it make any sense? Because it does to me.

What does it mean to sin, what is Sin?
In short, to sin is to not love. Sin is total love of self, selfishness, thinking only of oneself.

When the apostles read the Old Testament, they saw references to Christ and his kingdom, as it were, on every page. Jesus is the second Adam, the perfect law keeper, the scion of David who would sit on David’s throne forever, the ultimate singer of the psalms, the wisdom of God, the suffering servant, the perfect high priest, to name just a few. The theological foundation for this conviction is that God is sovereign over history and he is the (ultimate) author of Scripture. As such, God announced beforehand, in type and shadow, promise and prophecy, the redemption he would accomplish through his incarnate Son. He did this so that his people might believe on the promised Messiah prior to his coming and so that those who know the Christ who has come might have a greater understanding of the work that he accomplished through his suffering and glory.I think this is pretty good. The underlined sentence seems to go much too far, but otherwise I like it. The difference is that the Gospel is explicitly taught in the NT over and over again while it is more seen in "types and shadows" in the OT rather than being clearly taught. The great emphasis of the OT is the law of Moses, a means of salvation which proved to be impossible due to the weakness and sinfulness of man. "For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh."
In short, to sin is to not love. Sin is total love of self, selfishness, thinking only of oneself.That's good, but I think sin is much deeper than that. It involves rebellion against the authority and revealed will of God. "The mindset of the flesh is hostile to God because it does not submit to God’s law. Indeed, it is unable to do so."

That's good, but I think sin is much deeper than that. It involves rebellion against the authority and revealed will of God. "The mindset of the flesh is hostile to God because it does not submit to God’s law. Indeed, it is unable to do so."
What about the rapists and burglars and murderers and arsonists, etc. who have no knowledge of God's authority and His will? And the many who were born with a mental illness lurking?

What about the rapists and burglars and murderers and arsonists, etc. who have no knowledge of God's authority and His will? And the many who were born with a mental illness lurking?"18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth [l (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+1&version=NASB1995#fen-NASB1995-27949l)]in unrighteousness, 19 because that which is known about God is evident [m (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+1&version=NASB1995#fen-NASB1995-27950m)]within them; for God made it evident to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse."

Equally as important, what about all of those you listed who do have knowledge of God's authority and His will?

rather than being clearly taught.Being taught nonetheless. In fact, I would believe the Jews understand more about the righteousness of God, and man's sinfulness than most believers. And if you understand that We are in the time of the Gentiles (aka the time of Grace)? Upon Jesus's return, the time of grace will (be over) revert back to the Jews (but that is neither here nor there). There are two sides, one is Physical and the other is Spiritual.. believe what you will.

But the fact still remains, they are still being taught to this day...the same Jesus (unbeknownst to them..."Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you...") and the same God.


The great emphasis of the OT is the law of Moses, a means of salvation which proved to be impossibleOnly Jesus proved it was not impossible. People who have God’s law and those who have never heard of the law are all the same when they sin. Those who do not have the law and are sinners will be lost. And, in the same way, people who have the law and are sinners will be judged by the law.

@ WG: I know it really bothers you not knowing about those who are mentally deficient or those who haven't heard the Word. The Bible tells us not to worry about that. We are to love them the same as Jesus loves us. We are called to love all people the same as Jesus loves. We can love, but our love is nothing in comparison to God's love.

God Loves Jesus - What is that? I mean what does that really mean? So God loves Jesus - Big deal...I mean *He is God*. Are we saying God loves himself? God shows his, great, love for His Son, through the love that we have for His Son. The love that he has given to us...that love being Jesus. by Giving us that same love, (through Jesus) that we give to Jesus. We are God's love. God doesn't love Humankind. He loves his Son (who do we love?). The Bible teaches us that this is all for Jesus. Everything that has been created has been created For Jesus...And we (those who choose life) are in Jesus aka God's great love...for us!

The world is an intricate web of interrelations, such that objects no longer have their own individual existence independent from other objects

In fact, I would believe the Jews understand more about the righteousness of God, and man's sinfulness than most believers.Not sure why you would believe that.


We are God's love. God doesn't love Humankind.Not real sure what your first sentence (We are God's love) means. Maybe you could expand on that one a bit. The second statement is not true at all. Of course God loves "humankind". John 3:16 is a clear statement about that, and it's hard to imagine how it could be any more plainly stated. Romans 3:21-25 also makes the case plainly.


The Bible teaches us that this is all for Jesus. Everything that has been created has been created For Jesus...And we (those who choose life) are in Jesus aka God's great love...for us!I think that's a good comment.

As for the mentally deficient, that will be placed in God's hands, and he can be trusted to do what is right.

It does? Where?Seek and yee will find...don't Worry, don't be scared, don't be afraid...God has it all under control. Everybody (even you) is right where their supposed to be...don't worry about it.
We are God's loveI thought I explained it pretty well.
The second statement is not true at all. Of course God loves "humankind". John 3:16 is a clear statement about that Is it? When you read it in it's proper context (We went over this once before).

Look at the Greek if it will help.
Context: You (we) need to look at the preceding verses 14 and 15. “Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the desert, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life.” God provided a way of escape. Thus, in the same way . . . . . . v 16. Loved: past tense. (Not “loves”) Agape love – a love of action, that responds to a need.

That's why Jesus never talked about the love of God (same in Acts) in public. He only talked about the love of God with His disciples. Why talk about the love of God when nobody can understand love, what love is, or where it comes from? I think that is what Jesus was talking about when he said; "Do not cast your pearls before swine." I was watching a video, and somebody posted a comment saying; This is unconditional love at its finest...where do you think they got that from?

We need God's love in order to "Love." What is that love? That would be Jesus. We need Jesus in order to love... more than that, we need Jesus's love in order to gain that same love that God has for his Son (God's love)...that same love that he gave to us (which is the Christ) we give back to God through Jesus. That is what makes God's love for his one and only Son so Special...being one in Jesus, we receive that same love. We have never loved God. We never asked for God's love in order to love him...It takes God's love in order for us to love Jesus. How does God show his love for his one and only Son? He shows it with the love he gave to us through our savior Jesus.


Our love is the one and the same love that he gave to us by sending Jesus...he sent his love to us. That same love that God adorns Jesus with (the love he gives to us sinners), Jesus, in turn, gives back to God (Circular reasoning).

We shall love God with all our Hearts, all our minds, all our strength, etc. etc. A commandment that is Impossible for us to fulfill. God has done it for us in the life and love of Jesus Christ. I'm sorry but God doesn't love all of Humanity (as we know it). Jesus brought us peace with God. Jesus loves all the people of the World. God in fact is angry with the world. Believe in Jesus and His love will shine through the darkness. If you don't understand - maybe think about all of Humanity being in one body...that of Jesus the Christ.

Seek and yee will find...don't Worry, don't be scared, don't be afraid...God has it all under control. Everybody (even you) is right where their supposed to be...don't worry about it.You took five words from the Bible and then just added your own thoughts. That's a dangerous habit you have. And the five words you actually quoted ("Seek and yee will find") have nothing to do with the question, and that's another dangerous habit you have. Just tossing out a word salad is not really giving a serious answer.


Look at the Greek if it will help.
Context: You (we) need to look at the preceding verses 14 and 15. “Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the desert, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life.” God provided a way of escape. Thus, in the same way . . . . . . v 16. Loved: past tense. (Not “loves”) Agape love – a love of action, that responds to a need.I've looked at it in the Greek several times. Guess what? It reads the same way in Greek as it does in English. "God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son." I just don't see how this could be any plainer. God loves sinners in the sense that, by sacrificing His only Son, He has made provision for them to not only be saved from the day of his wrath, but to enter into the eternal joys of heaven with Him. There is no love any purer or more beautiful than that.

This is from Young's Literal Translation. Tell me how this helps your cause. "for God did so love the world, that His Son -- the only begotten -- He gave, that every one who is believing in him may not perish, but may have life age-during."

The love of God for sinners can also be seen in Luke 6:35, John 13:34, and Romans 5:8.

Sometimes I'm not sure why you say; "where did you find that in the Bible"? I think we all know what Jesus said when he referred to Worry. Jesus even mentioned "Don't worry." I feel as though you are testing me. I don't feel like playing that game.


Main Points For/so : These are link words expanding or explaining something that was said earlier. We need to look at the preceeding verses 14 and 15. “Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the desert, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life.”

It is not "God Soooo loved." It is "God So loved" (as in verses 14 and 15) the world - . And if you look at the word "Loved" (past tense). And if you look in the World (Churches) today, you would see it is all messed up. Largely because Of that one Verse. John 3:16 seems to have summed up the entire Bible. Go ahead and read the Bible verses you posted, they all pertain to Jesus. Might I point out -Have you not read - Nobody knows the Father but the Son. How is one going to know the Father of Jesus much less The Father's love? Yes, God loves the People of the World...But only through Jesus. JESUS is the Father's love that he sends (if we ask) us...We express the Father's love that he bestows toward Jesus.

You can see what your Idea of love has done to the World today. What does It matter if God Loves Jesus? How is His love for Jesus any greater than his love for anybody or anything else? So you say God loves sinners? Big deal, right? In what way does he love sinners? In the way of him sending his love (Son) into a world of sinners. The only person who knows or experiences the Love of the Father is Jesus. In Order for us to truly know of the Father's love (at all) we must know Jesus. Once we know of Jesus, we have a choice to accept God's love or Reject the love of Jesus. if we were to reject God's love, we would never know God's love, and his love (which is Jesus) would have never known us.

A natural Father loves his Child for no other reason than it is his Child. God Loves his Son, in whom all of creation resides. We Sinners are his creation and it is our love expressed towered Jesus that the Father shows his love for his Son. In the same way, God shows his love for us sinners by sending his love (Jesus) to us sinners. Not all sinners are going to want to receive God's love...those who do not will never know love or what it is like to feel true love.

God is our inheritance means that God is our possession, our treasure, and our enjoyment. It also means that all God has promised us in salvation is being reserved for us in heaven. However, God does not inherit our natural being, but only what He has wrought into us of Himself. We are God's love and that is all we should ever express.

Walter, you said a lot in this statement. "Seek and yee will find...don't Worry, don't be scared, don't be afraid...God has it all under control. Everybody (even you) is right where their supposed to be...don't worry about it." Not worrying is one I would completely agree with, but suggesting that everyone is right where they are supposed to be is a different story. The stories of people being disobedient to God fill the Bible. They were certainly not where they were supposed to be.


It is not "God Soooo loved." It is "God So loved" (as in verses 14 and 15) the worldAs in verses 14 and 15? Where do you see the word "love" in those two verses? And the whole thing of "soooo" versus "so" is, to me, just silliness.


Might I point out -Have you not read - Nobody knows the Father but the Son.Might I point out that you were careless in your quote. The full quote says, "No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him." So yes, we can know the Father.


God is our inheritance means that God is our possession, our treasure, and our enjoyment. It also means that all God has promised us in salvation is being reserved for us in heaven. However, God does not inherit our natural being, but only what He has wrought into us of Himself. We are God's love and that is all we should ever express.This is very good, and especially the underlined sentence. I love that sentiment.

Walter, you need to know that I am very careful in my choices of words. I try to be precise as much as I can in expressing my thoughts. So when you say, "We are God's love," I really don't know what you mean. We are certainly the objects of God's love, but I don't think you can say that we ARE God's love.

I try to be precise as much as I can in expressing my thoughts.Maybe that is why you don't understand a word I said. What is it to know the Father?
Nobody would know the Father, or understand the Love that the Father has For his son['s]. The only way we get to know (love) the Father is through Jesus. We will continue to know jack all unless the Father gives us the Love that is needed to love him. we get that love only through his one and only son. It is not our love, it is Jesus's love for us that we are able to love the Father. Jesus's love for us is the same love God gives to his son['s]...otherwise, Otherwise, God would only love his son as all earthly fathers love their sons and Daughters. We know that love...But we don't know God's love...we will never know what it is about God's love that makes it differ from our love...Until Jesus enters our lives. It's all one and the same Love, bundled up in one person.

Our love for God is [that same] love we receive for him and his Son...That's what love is...It all belongs to God. Give Back to Jesus the love God gives to you. When you "love" your enemies, it is not you loving them it is Jesus. When you love your Wife, it is not you loving her, it is Jesus. When you love a homosexual, it is not your love...it is the love that comes from knowing Jesus that came from God.

We are like clay jars in which this treasure is stored. The real power comes from God and not from us.

The Power is Love. Not that you are to love everybody as you know love. But to love everybody as Jesus loved us...Giving your (which is actually his at that point) life if necessary.

I don't know if you remember a while back when I posted John 3:16. I mentioned what I mentioned here, and a poster that we all know and love, said: That would mean my life's work is Useless! That was exactly what I was talking about (thank you poster, But you all didn't understand any more than you do now)!!!!!

It's not about how much God loves you or how you strive to love your brothers and Sisters...That seems to be the way most Christians look and feel when reading John 3:16. That is not at all what John was saying. Also; I think Dividing the Bible up into verses might play a bigger part part in that...Bigger than we could ever realize.

Please reread before you respond. I've spent Mucho time editing. Thank you.

Maybe that is why you don't understand a word I said. How would me taking care with my choice of words have anything at all to do with trying to understand you???

If you will ponder this with even a smidgen of care, you will begin to see why your comments can be hard to understand.


We are like clay jars in which this treasure is stored. The real power comes from God and not from us.Aim for this level of clarity every time and you will have more success. This is well said and on target.

[QUOTE]How would me taking care with my choice of words have anything at all to do with trying to understand you???Same reason The disciples didn't understand a single word Jesus was saying. If you will ponder this with even a smidgen of care, you will begin to see why my comments can be hard to understand.

I don't know. It might have something to do with one of Us having Book smarts and the other through experience. I never understood why people feel they must go to seminary school to be an ordained minister. It's like saying; I want to feed the poor...I'd better go take a cooking class.

Yes, I understand it is hard to explain how all this (all of Creation) is simply an expression of God's love. Jesus receiving his expression and us being the recipients...which in turn (if you know that we are in Jesus and he is in us) Jesus gaining more than just an expression...Jesus gaining true love, as well as us gaining that same true love... Jesus being that true love, us receiving....round and round it goes. We enter into the fullness of the Godhead through love...So shall my word be that goes out from my mouth; it shall not return to me empty, but it shall accomplish that which I purpose, and shall succeed in the thing for which I sent it.

All for the Love Of his Son ['s]. God's word is love...we along with the Father, Son and Holy Ghost are a culmination of God's love. If God be love, we be that love (word choice :-) too.

It's stream of consciousness. From dictionary.com:

"a literary style in which a character's thoughts, feelings, and reactions are depicted in a continuous flow uninterrupted by objective description or conventional dialogue. James Joyce, Virginia Woolf, and Marcel Proust are among its notable early exponents."

Same reason The disciples didn't understand a single word Jesus was saying. If you will ponder this with even a smidgen of care, you will begin to see why my comments can be hard to understand.I assure you that I have been able to see that for quite some time. It has something to do with things like this. " If God be love, we be that love (word choice :-) too."

As to your experience, I've been a Christian for 45 years. I wouldn't count too much on your experience being able to prevail. And that's not to say I don't honor it, but it still all comes back to knowing the Word by the Spirit of God.

Jesus was born of a Virgin. Anybody born of sinful Nature will indubitably Sin. Had Jesus been Born of Mans sinful nature, He would have sinned and there would be no redeemer. Philippians 2:6–8 describes Jesus setting aside His divine privileges as God to take on the likeness of the humans He had created (see also John 1:3). However, Jesus did not have an earthly father, so He did not inherit a sin nature as all other human beings do (Luke 1:35).

When I mention the Carnal mind, what I mean by that is. If you are an allegorist, then you have it set in your mind that this is not true (this being the Word of God), in turn, you will miss other truths, being that you don't believe this or that previous verse. It's like When JL said I was a Calvinist (I don't know what a Calvinist believes in...Did Calvin know he was a Calvinist?) in that sense, he (JL) is liable to subject his understanding of a particular Verse, it not being "(his" belief) and in turn, ignore other verses as they were meant to be taken. You might be looking at the surface.

@JL, what is the difference between John 3:16 and John 1:14? “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.” In regards to tis Vers, you exclaimed, "The Bible is Not the Word he is talking about." You gave no explanation, you simply spoke it as you knew it to be...The difference is you. You got it in your Carnal mind that - John 3:16 and John 1:14 can not be.

As well as WG: Certainly God can have stones cry out...But WG doesn't believe that to be the case. The phrase "if they do not cry out, the very stones will" is a quote from the Bible, specifically Luke 19:40. It is said by Jesus in response to the Pharisees telling him to silence his followers for proclaiming him the King of glory. Jesus is saying that if his followers were to be silenced, the stones would immediately cry out.

The Virgin Mary was not sinless.

@JL, what is the difference between John 3:16 and John 1:14? “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.” In regards to tis Vers, you exclaimed, "The Bible is Not the Word he is talking about." You gave no explanation, you simply spoke it as you knew it to be...The difference is you. You got it in your Carnal mind that - John 3:16 and John 1:14 can not be.I gave no explanation? I most certainly did. I told you that when Jesus walked the earth, he was not a paper and ink book broken into chapters and verses. I guess you think he was. Go figure.

As to the two passages in John and how are they different? One describes the love of God leading to the sacrifice of Christ which makes our salvation through faith possible. The other describes the nature of Jesus and the reaction of John to His appearing on earth. I suggest you do some research on the Greek work "logos" in order to understand the meaning of the 1:14 passge.


The Virgin Mary was not sinless.Well said, WG. However, Walter's point is that the sin nature is passed on through the father. Jesus did not have an earthly father, so he would not have inherited that. There are some reasons to believe that, but I don't know that it's all crystal clear.

The Virgin Mary was not sinless. I'm not saying she was sinless. Then why did Jesus have to be born of a Vergin?

In the same way as God declared us Holy, Mary was Holy. Why didn't God Just Fill a man with the Holy Spirit and have him impregnate Mary? Jesus was not Born out of Sin! Anybody, everybody who is Born of a sinful nature will sin. There is no other compramise.

How does one explain that God is in a book, in pages? It's the Spirit of the Word. The Ten Commandments were etched in stone. Jesus was the Rock that spewed out water for the Israelites to drink. Jesus Is the Manna that came down from heaven, God's word is alive...the living Word. Stop thinking of it as your flesh.

So Jesus is also a door? He is also the light that comes from lightbulbs? If a person tears a page out of his Bible and burns it, then he has burned God? When Moses broke the tablets, was he breaking Jesus? Since the tock that put forth water was literally Jesus, then is Jesus still in the wilderness?


How does one explain that God is in a book, in pages?One cannot.

So Jesus is also a door? He is also the light that comes from lightbulbs? If a person tears a page out of his Bible and burns it, then he has burned God? When Moses broke the tablets, was he breaking Jesus? Since the tock that put forth water was literally Jesus, then is Jesus still in the wilderness?
Symbolic.

Symbolic.Exactly.

WOW, I didn't realize you were so far off. THE LIVING WORD! What is it you don't understand? Is there any reason why the Jews have given themselves over to their Scripture? Same With Christians. Same with being filled with the Holy Spirit.

The disciples didn't know the scripture. So how is it that once they were filled with the Holy Spirit, it brought the scriptures to life? We also have the book of life. You really should seek the spirit of the word. the life-giving spirit of the word.

How does one explain that God is in a book, in pages?
One cannot. Exactly. It is unexplorable when listening with your Eyes.

Exactly. It is unexplorable when listening with your Eyes.Woowwwww! That's really deep! It makes not one ounce of sense, however. Not one ounce. It's a completely ridiculous statement.

Woowwwww! That's really deep! It makes not one ounce of sense, however. Not one ounce. It's a completely ridiculous statement.
I think he means, "It is unexplorable when listening with your Eyes [reading], not with your Ears [hearing]."

Does that make sense to you?

It is unexplorable when listening with your Eyes.I'll explain it then; You are looking at the surface. In scripture we have "not one jot or tittle..." we have the lambs Book of Life.



Satan, who is the god of this world, has blinded the minds of those who don’t believe. They are unable to see the glorious light of the Good News. They don’t understand this message about the glory of Christ, who is the exact likeness of God.

Read about the Book that nobody in heaven or on earth can open...everything written in that book will come to pass.

I enCOURAGE you to open the one book that was written specifically for us. It is alive.

Does that make sense to you?
Rom. 10:17, So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ.

Christ sends out His representatives to preach the Gospel. Those who hear it have the opportunity to believe. Those who believe call on Christ. And all who call on the name of Christ will be saved.

Hearing the Word (enthsiastically) preached is much a more effective way to receive faith than (with no understanding) reading the Word alone at one's kitchen table.

Every word of God brings life. God spoke it, we wrote it, and it will all come to pass. It is alive...it is his living world.

Only he can bring it to life. And he already has, through Jesus. We wrote it Jesus spoke it.

I'll explain it then; You are looking at the surface. In scripture we have "not one jot or tittle..." we have the lambs Book of Life.Your "jot or tittle" reference is far removed from the meaning given it in scripture. The meaning in Scripture is that we dare not ignore even the smallest teaching in the Bible.


Satan, who is the god of this world, has blinded the minds of those who don’t believe. They are unable to see the glorious light of the Good News. They don’t understand this message about the glory of Christ, who is the exact likeness of God.

Read about the Book that nobody in heaven or on earth can open...everything written in that book will come to pass.

I enCOURAGE you to open the one book that was written specifically for us. It is alive.I have no doubt that I have read the Bible ten or twenty times more than you. It's why I can refer to it routinely and you cannot.

There is no book that nobody in heaven or on earth can open. Read your Bible more carefully.


Rom. 10:17, So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ.

Christ sends out His representatives to preach the Gospel. Those who hear it have the opportunity to believe. Those who believe call on Christ. And all who call on the name of Christ will be saved.None of which has anything to do with Walter's incoherent comment.

None of which has anything to do with Walter's incoherent comment.
But my explanation* does help this revision** of what he said:

*Hearing the Word (enthusiastically) preached is much a more effective way to receive faith than (with no understanding) reading the Word alone at one's kitchen table.

**"It is unexplorable when listening with your Eyes [reading], not with your Ears [hearing]."

It's why I can refer to it routinely and you cannot.2 Corinthians 4:4 “In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.”

Is it right out of the Bible? Maybe that is your problem? You won't recognize it unless it's associated with a numbered verse and chapter.
I have no doubt that I have read the Bible ten or twenty times more than you. Okay, so you can read. Can you live it or let it live in you? No - you can't. Because you don't understand it as being the living Word (Jesus)? that offers its life to you.

*Hearing the Word (enthsiastically) preached is much a more effective way to receive faith than (with no understanding) reading the Word alone at one's kitchen table.I don't agree with that. I have always received far more from my own devotionals than from preaching, but I realize that is not true for everyone. I don't really care if the preaching is "enthsiastical" or not so much as it is based on the Word and Spirit led.

I really like to see the way God repeats various truth in different places in the Bible. It gives me great confidence in those truths.


Is it right out of the Bible? Maybe that is your problem? You won't recognize it unless it's associated with a numbered verse and chapter.I do like to see people make reference to the Bible rather than their own ideas. Do you?


Okay, so you can read. Can you live it or let it live in you? No - you can't. Because you don't understand it as the living Word (Jesus)?the lifeMr. judgmental strikes again. It's sad how you get so angry when someone just doesn't automatically accept your ideas.

I do like to see people make reference to the Bible rather than their own ideas. Do you? Sure, it might help me do my research. Here, when quoting a Bible verse, It is only so people can dissect it and pick it apart.
Take Satan for example: He quoted a Bible verse. Now we know everything Satan says is a lie. So was that Bible verse that he quoted a lie...of course not. It was the spirit in which he spoke it...he was using it for death (so to speak). There are those Christians that would believe it to be true. Not fearing (when being offered - jumping to their death, as opposed to recanting their faith in Jesus/living word.
Mr. judgmental strikes again.Let the Word live to me O-Lord. You simply don't understand the Bible. Every word written and or spoken regarding the Bible is alive.

Sure, it might help me do my researchYou think it might??


You simply don't understand the Bible.You mean the one that you don't know, and that you think "might help" you?

You really need to stop all the bluster and start thinking about what you are saying. To say that, "Every word written or spoken regarding the Bible is alive," is just absurd. To believe that would make everything Joseph Smith taught about the Bible to be "alive", or everything the JW's have written about the Bible is "alive". Surely you don't really believe that. Is everything everyone here has written "regarding" the Bible to be considered "alive"? Really??? I really can't believe you truly believe something that bizarre.

To believe that would make everything Joseph Smith taught about the Bible to be "alive",Yes, Yes, Now you're getting it...Do you think he might have given birth to sin? Sin is alive as well.
We are Sin. We give birth to sin once we (think) open our mouths. Nothing we speak is going to survive. There is no life/ truth in what we speak or think.

When God Speaks, It brings true life. It gives life to all who will live with his word for all eternity. When God speaks of a coming Messiah, his very word Brought a messiah into being.

God speaks and his Word is true and alive. It brings life into existence. And to go one step further, God defeated Sin with sin.
Has much to do with Sinful Men bringing God's word into their lives. That's why the entire OT is full of Jesus. The very fact that man spoke (God's word) brought it about in their lives...And they rarely, if ever, knew what they were saying...Proving God's word is alive. And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. God's Word is Life. God's Word brings everything into being...there is only God's word,,, that is all. There is nothing else.

Which is better, to believe God's word (scripture) is a living Word (something so bizarre)? Or to believe whatever your mind is able to rationalize?

“It is written: ‘Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.’”

Thus sayeth Walter.


There is no truth in what we speak or think.Come on, Walter. That's foolishness. If you really believe that, then you will never speak or think another word.


Which is better, to believe God's word (scripture) is a living Word (something so bizarre)? Or to believe whatever your mind is able to rationalize?We need to believe God's word and we need to be able to apply good thinking.

Titus 1. 7 For the [a (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Titus%201%3A7%2D9&version=NASB1995#fen-NASB1995-29900a)]overseer must be above reproach as God’s steward, not self-willed, not quick-tempered, not addicted to wine, not pugnacious, not fond of sordid gain, 8 but hospitable, loving what is good, sensible, just, devout, self-controlled, 9 holding fast the faithful word which is in accordance with the teaching, so that he will be able both to exhort in sound doctrine and to refute those who contradict.

Is. 1:18. “Come now, and let us reason together,” Says the Lord, “Though your sins are as scarlet, They will be as white as snow; Though they are red like crimson, They will be like wool.

My "bizarre" comment was about this absurd idea of yours. "Every word written or spoken regarding the Bible is alive," It is just ridiculous. And then to justify it you try to assert that you meant sin is alive. Good grief.

Sometimes I think your biggest problem is in trying to put your thoughts into words. I can't believe you really consider much of what you write is true. I'd love to see you become more careful and thoughtful in expressing your thoughts.

If you really believe that, then you will never speak or think another word.as if that has never happened?


There is no truth in what we speak or think. Yeah, that's why God isn't going to do away with all this. Don't you know all of this is going to die, be wiped away? In the end, there is no you, there is no word other than the living Word (Jesus) of God. There is only Jesus. We are in Jesus. Jesus is it.

If you know of Satan and him being the Worship leader at one time, there was a Job opening. Jesus is the worship leader now. When Time is done, we (in Jesus) will Worship God for all eternity. We will give (sing) praise to God...that is all...I'm good with that.

But since you are speaking (writing) those words, should I consider them to contain "no truth"? After all, "There is no truth in what we speak." And that being the case, would it not basically amount to lying?

Jesus is the object of worship. But I certainly would agree that giving praise to God will be a glorious undertaking.

But since you are speaking (writing) those words, should I consider them to contain "no truth"? After all, "There is no truth in what we speak."Oh come on, would you please STOP! You know what was meant. We can Speak on our own (as you can see what's going on in the world today... man's word in action) or we can speak the Words of truth, that comes from God. You being a preacher should know exactly what it is I'm getting at. Do you not worry when giving a sermon that you might speak using your own words? Don't worry about what you're going to say...I will give you the words I want you to say.

As I have said, I am very careful with my words. That you are not is on you. Again, I would encourage you to begin to be more careful.


We can Speak on our own (as you can see what's going on in the world today... man's word in action) or we can speak the Words of truth, that comes from God.I completely agree with that well expressed belief.

As I have said, I am very careful with my words.I'm not so sure of that...your responses tell otherwise. For Example: when I said; "There is no truth in what we speak or think."
Your response; "Come on, Walter. That's foolishness."

I stated something that you didn't understand. You didn't understand because you might have been thinking Carnally (not Bible-based). Only until I mentioned: "We can Speak on our own (as you can see what's going on in the world today... man's word in action) or we can speak the Words of truth, that come from God."... Did you understand. It doesn't make my first statement false. Yet you jumped to an early conclusion, without making reference to God's Word/Bible. There is a living Spirit in the Word/Bible. Its meaning is more than simply quoting scripture.

Which Bible are we talking about? -- the KJV, the NKJV, the RSV, the NRSV, the NIV, and on and on.

I'm not so sure of that...your responses tell otherwise. For Example: when I said; "There is no truth in what we speak or think." Your response; "Come on, Walter. That's foolishness."Yeah. I said that because your statement was completely ridiculous. My words were chosen carefully and very accurately.


I stated something that you didn't understand. You didn't understand because you might have been thinking Carnally (not Bible-based).It just has to be someone else's fault, doesn't it? It couldn't possibly be due to thoughtless, careless wording, could it?


It doesn't make my first statement false.I didn't say your first statement was false. I simply pointed out that it was stupid. Sorry, but that's just how it is. And your response above amounts to, "Well golly, why can't you just read my mind and understand my poorly, foolishly worded statement? Oh, you must be carnal! You must not know anything!!" And on and on it goes.

Honestly, it would be helpful if you would take on some responsibility for your own actions. Here, when you make a poor comment, it gets pointed out. If you can't handle that, then let me know and I can block your posts. I'd rather not, because you do have some interesting insights, but I do get weary of being accused of nonsense because you don't know how to write accurately.


Which Bible are we talking about? -- the KJV, the NKJV, the RSV, the NRSV, the NIV, and on and on.Does it make a difference?

On one hand, you say: "I completely agree with that well-expressed belief." And on the other hand, you say it is complete foolishness...When both statements were saying the same thing.

Put it in the context in which it was said - I was referring to the Word of God being a living word and the Word of Man being a living sin. Reality comes from knowing, living, and loving God's word, God's Law, may it live in you...Being a law unto yourself.

It's like here we are, Darkness before the light shines. GOD said -Let there be light! - and here is us, saying - what, what are you talking about, there is no light - And to this day there is no light. - God's word ("let there be light") is not a reality, it doesn't exist. Christians on the other hand - God has just now (at this very moment in time) spoke - Let there be light! - WOW!!! They can see the light, they know the light to be reality. God's word comes alive just now, not some six thousand years ago. God's word lives for all eternity, not just in time. Only in eternity, we won't have to read the spoken word, it will come straight out of our mouths. Remember the Israelites at Mount Sinai, when They became afraid when they heard the voice of the LORD from the midst of the darkness. Why did they choose Moses to speak to them directly, instead of God? Moses died, but his words live on through the Scriptures that he had written down. Sometimes the Israelites Lived life according to the scriptures...thereby bringing life into existence, God's word into reality.

Just like when I said "How does one explain the Bible being the Word of God - you said - you can't - And you are completely right. We can not explain to darkness that God's word gives life. Only God can do that. And he does it by those of us who live the life...the life of the word. Your words are not your own...belonging to sin or God.

And as far as your little comment ("is the door alive" -Yes, knock and it will be open...the door is real) about how can words, written on a page be alive. Maybe you might want to look at the AI dilemma. autonomous artificial intelligence...coding (Laws) written on a page. We have created that which we have become. Right now they are debating on whether we should be able to unplug our creation (simply words on a page), the AI, or what rights they should have, if any. Crazy isn't it? crazy but true.

Once again your carelessness betrays you. When I said, "I completely agree with that well-expressed belief," I was referring to this well-framed statement. "We can Speak on our own (as you can see what's going on in the world today... man's word in action) or we can speak the Words of truth, that comes from God." When I said it is complete foolishness, I was referring to your original poorly worded statement. "There is no truth in what we speak." It seems you are attempting to be intentionally deceitful.


I was referring to the Word of God being a living word and the Word of Man being a living sin.Maybe, but that is certainly NOT what you said. And even this doesn't make sense. The Word of Man is a living sin??? What??


And as far as your little comment ("is the door alive"Except that I never said that. Carelessness, Walter, carelessness is your great enemy. This is what I said. "So Jesus is also a door?"


Just like when I said "How does one explain the Bible being the Word of God - you said - you can't. Where was this said? I don't think this comment is true either. What you ACTUALLY said was, "How does one explain that God is in a book, in pages?" to which I replied, "One cannot" .So four strikes and you are REALLY out.

Christians on the other hand - God has just now (at this very moment in time) spoke - Let there be light! - WOW!!! They can see the light, they know the light to be reality. God's word comes alive just now, not some six thousand years ago. God's word lives for all eternity, not just in time. Only in eternity, we won't have to read the spoken word, it will come straight out of our mouths.This, I think, is pretty good other than the last part about the word coming out of our mouths in heaven. Where do you ge that from in the Bible?

Which Bible are we talking about? -- the KJV, the NKJV, the RSV, the NRSV, the NIV, and on and on.(whichever translation Holds the top spot. Check your Amazon list to see which Bible translation holds the top spot. You might even see that the devotional far outshone the Bibles on the list.)
Does it make a difference? It apparently does to her. She brings this up every time the Bible is mentioned as being a life-giving source. She will never understand until she is able to give way and believe. That's why it's a living Faith.


(I don't agree with that -post 131)
have always received far more from my own devotionals than from preaching Your devotional is not a Bible. Peter captured the preciousness of divine speech in his pleading question to Jesus: “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life”
(John 6:68). human words fade. But the Word of the Lord—ever profitable for both comfort and correction—endures forever.
word coming out of our mouths. Where do you get that from in the Bible? We are in the mind of God. We give voice to his breath. Now it may only be in Praise and worship (in eternity). It would be like singing the same song over and over and over again for all eternity. But for us, every time we sing it it will be like singing it for the first time. God Gave man the breath (Jesus) of life. Through that Breath, translated into Words, spoken by men was the bringing of Jesus to life. It is done much in the same way today. If there was no mention or promise. (having God's life-giving breath...the Word/Scripture) then we would be hopelessly on our own and without a great redeemer, Messiah.

Satan said; Did God really say that. Eve had no clue as to whether God said it or not. Man (Adam) said it. Adam even added to God's spoken word. Eve, realizing that she didn't die after touching the fruit...

Adam added to God's word (he told her not to even touch it...God never said that) yet Adam Spoke well...Jesus telling us the same thing (do not think or touch, run flee, etc.) when dealing with Sin. Touching the fruit might have led to her eating the fruit. So why did Adam Eat the Fruit? Because he loved Eve. Jesus says; Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her.

When I said the word coming out of our mouth. Thinking Of the time Elisha turned around and looked at them, and he cursed (spoke into the air) them in the name of the LORD. Then two bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of them. Or: Elijah answered the captain, “If I am a man of God, may fire come down from heaven and consume you and your fifty men!” Then fire fell from heaven and consumed the captain and his men...might have been more man than God?

Which Bible version do you use, waltero?

Your devotional is not a Bible. Peter captured the preciousness of divine speech in his pleading question to Jesus: “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life”My devotional involves reading the Bible. I do love the text you quoted. It concludes with, "and we have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God.”


WG, you didn't ask me, but I'll answer. I read/preach from the NASB, but over the past few months I have come to really like the CSB. I use the JB Philips paraphrase as a sort of a commentary, and I also like the New English Translation.

Which Bible version do you use, waltero? I had to look up the word "Use." I in no way use the Scripture. I might have at one time, But I see it in a different light now.
If you ask me which Bible I read from. I don't know. I can't remember. I have several Bible translations in my house. There is one that I particularly like at present. But I will pick whichever one is available, depending on the room I am in. Who knows, a day might come when I like reading in the Garage more than I do the Bedroom. It's Like going to different Churches, each one might give me insight. It's like each Culture, and each language bringing the Bible to life in a different way, that I never understood before. Having the same meaning but bringing life in so many different ways...opening up God's word unto life.

Why was Jesus Tempted God Can not be tempted...Backed up By biblical proof. James 1:13 "God Can not be tempted..."

It's really as simple as that. Believe it or not.

Hebrews 2:18
For since He Himself was tempted in that which He has suffered, He is able to come to the aid of those who are tempted.
Hebrews 4:15
For we do not have a high priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but One who has been tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin.

Thank you for posting JL. Those two verses almost threw me for a loop. How many Verses will support a Christian belief that Jesus had a choice, that Jesus could have sinned? There isn't one, not one verse in the entirety of the Holy Scriptures. It's only man's Idea of what Temptation is (the devil made me do it)that does us in. That is why when we come across a plain and simple verse, such as - "God can not be tempted." We simply run with it (no opinion required, even if you don't have one), instead of trying to explain it away with the use of other verses. We shouldn't (not saying you did. You explained that you have no opinion) "use" the bible in that fashion.

I found this (in the hope that it might better articulate what it is I'm getting at)
For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted
By Satan, at his entrance on his public ministry, and a little before his death; which was done, not by stirring up sin in him, for he had none, nor by putting any into him, which could not be done, nor could Satan get any advantage over him; he solicited him one thing and another, but in vain; though these temptations were very troublesome, and disagreeable, and abhorrent to the pure and holy nature of Christ, and so must be reckoned among his sufferings, or things by which he suffered: and as afflictions are sometimes called temptations, in this sense also Christ suffered, being tempted, with outward poverty and meanness, with slight and neglect from his own relations, and with a general contempt and reproach among men: he was often tempted by the Jews with ensnaring questions; he was deserted by his followers, by his own disciples, yea, by his God and Father; all which were great trials to him, and must be accounted as sufferings: and he also endured great pains of body, and anguish of mind, and at last death itself.This might explain away any Idea that Jesus was undergoing a test of some kind. Or as if Jesus could have succumbed or even contemplated sin. There is no choice to Choose from... is that there is no superior force for him to have succumbed to...He is the source of the only force in existence.



For God cannot be tempted with evil;
or "evils", He was tempted by the Israelites at Massah and Meribah, from which those places had their names, who by their murmuring, distrust, and unbelief, proved and tried his patience and his power; and so he may be, and has been tempted by others in a like way; he may be tempted by evil men, and with evil things, but he cannot be tempted "to evil", as the Ethiopic version renders it; he is proof against all such temptations: he cannot be tempted by anything in himself, who is pure and holy, or by any creature or thing without him, to do any sinful action.

he cannot be tempted by anything in himself, who is pure and holy, or by any creature or thing without him, to do any sinful action.
Yes, He could hsve been while He lived on Earth. That's why God created Him as 100% God AND 100% man. Had Jesus been tempted and sinned, then God would know Jesus was the wrong One to be the substitute for mankind. God would have had to rethink this and maybe create another God-man or come up with a different idea to rescue mankind from sin.

Trying to find the point of agreement between the James passage and the Hebrews passages is the challenge. They do agree. The question is in what way.


Had Jesus been tempted and sinned, then God would know Jesus was the wrong One to be the substitute for mankind. God would have had to rethink this and maybe create another God-man or come up with a different idea to rescue mankind from sin..The utter impossibility of such an event leads me to conclude that Jesus was not capable of sinning. There was no plan B. I just don't think that there was ever any possibility of Jesus, the divine Son of God and every bit as much God as the Father, actually committing a sin. Tempted? Yes, but no possibility of him yielding to that temptation.

We always should remember that Jesus is the one who was "slain from the foundation of the world". In other words, it was really all settled even before His birth. God never had any intention of allowing His plan of redemption to be left teetering on the edge of a "maybe".

Yes, He could hsve been while He lived on Earth. That's why God created Him as 100% God AND 100% man. Had Jesus been tempted and sinned Jesus was the wrong One to be the substitute for mankind. God would have had to rethink this and create another God-man.This is truly unbelievable. JL, HELP!
After all that, this is what you get out of it?
I will leave you with that.

Then why was Jesus tempted -- and why did God allow that?

Here's an interesting article:
https://www.ligonier.org/learn/articles/could-jesus-have-sinned

In that article, the author (who wrote a book with the same title as this thread) wrote (and I agree):
"I may be wrong, but I think it is wrong to believe that Christ's divine nature made it impossible for his human nature to sin. If that were the case, the temptation, the tests, and his assuming of the responsibility of the first Adam would have all been charades. This position protects the integrity of the authenticity of the human nature because it was the human nature that carried out the mission of the second Adam on our behalf. It was the human nature uniquely anointed beyond measure by the Holy Spirit."

My congrats. This is a well written (though brief) article by a well-respected theologian. I once listened to a 30 part series on philosophy by Dr. Sproul that was great. Sad that he died a year or two ago. At any rate, you came up with a winner.

I especially like his "I may be wrong" approach. I assure you he is usually more adamant than that. From a practical perspective I would agree with him, but from the perspective of God's will and God's eternal plan, I would not agree. If Jesus was the lamb "slain from the foundation of the world", then he was the perfect lamb as well.

I'd still like to know why you think this is so pertinent that you have raised the issue twice now. "Which Bible are we talking about? -- the KJV, the NKJV, the RSV, the NRSV, the NIV, and on and on."

I've raised it twice???

If Jesus was the lamb "slain from the foundation of the world", then he was the perfect lamb as well.
He was the perfect lamb because he decided not to give in to temptation.

I've raised it twice???You've raised the issue of translations several times. Just wondering why.

He was the perfect lamb from the foundation of the world since he was, "slain from the foundation of the world."

You've raised the issue of translations several times. Just wondering why.

Huh??? Please tell me which posts.

Are you so completely dependent on others that you can't find this for yourself? Well, I'll do it for you. Posts 44, 28, and 32 are three of them.

And, of course, you will not answer the question now asked three times. Oh well.

Are you so completely dependent on others that you can't find this for yourself? Well, I'll do it for you. Posts 44, 28, and 32 are three of them.

And, of course, you will not answer the question now asked three times. Oh well.
That was days ago and had nothing to do with the current discussion.

By the way, which is your favorite Stephen King novel?

That was days ago and had nothing to do with the current discussion.Yesssss it did. All on the same thread. As I said, you sure seem to be afraid to answer.

Don't care about Stephen King novels as I but rarely read fiction. Now see how easy that is? Try it!

Seriously, I never ran into liberals being so afraid to answer questions until I came to this site. It's really been a shocker to me. I've always enjoyed the give and take of discussions, but that sure isn't the case here. Very strange.

I answered. Are you deef?

Same thread, different intent, subtopic

No answer…again.

What's the question?

Posts 158 & 161. I guess it's not really important. I just wondered what your thinking was, but we can move on since you seem to prefer not to answer. No big deal.

I just can't pass on this since it's so strange. First you claimed, "I answered. Are you deef?" Then just above you posted, "What's the question?" If you didn't know what the question was, how could you think you had answered?

JL: You've raised the issue of translations several times. Just wondering why.

WG: I guess my first question is, why are there so many translations and versions? Do readers gain (or lose) more when they use only one version/translation? Our (early 1970's) neighborhood women's Bible study group was made up of several Catholics, a Baptist, a Lutheran, two Methodists, and an agnostic. We read from the KJV and the RSV. I'm wondering if newer translations would offer any value to a Bible study group like this?

WG: I guess my first question is, why are there so many translations and versions?Great question. Do we really need several dozen translations? I could understand the development of translations up through the 1980's. Those would include the Amplified, NKJV, NIV, NASB, JP Philips, Living Bible, and a few others. It just seems that what we've had since then are just redundant. However, I don't see it as being a big problem. I only know of a handful of translations that seem to be a real difficulty.


Do readers gain (or lose) more when they use only one version/translation?I think people stand to gain from using more than one translation. I currently use the NASB, JB Philips, NET, and CSB, so I spend four days on the same passage. It helps me a great deal. I don't care for the KJV since the language is so archaic.

Thank you for the response.

Then why was Jesus tempted -- and why did God allow that?This is not an Honest Question. You are simply responding to an earlier statement with a question. This question that you posted is more of a statement, a formulated assertion, that you have come up with on your own; "Jesus could have definitely sinned Because..." - Because he was tempted or because God allowed it! And it doesn't matter how many different ways you might hear it, your thoughts will continue to be just that, "your thoughts -*Yes, Jesus Could have sinned."

"Pray - Prayer!

The question is: Could Jesus have sinned (not - then why this or why that)?

For Jesus to have given himself over to sin he would have to have acknowledged that there is a greater force....impossible. Jesus is the greatest force in the known universe, in all of creation. Jesus knows that God is even greater than He. Jesus Knows who his Father is. Jesus Knows he is his father's Son....Do you know what that means???

So what was the point of Jesus being true God and true man?

Again with the why's...why this why that...why anything???

For Jesus to have given himself over to sin he would have to have acknowledged that there is a greater force. Jesus knows that God is even greater than He. Jesus Knows who his Father is. Jesus Knows, Jesus knows, Jesus has known all along, that he IS his Father's SonDo you know what this means???

Walter, you are back to, "Thus sayeth Walter". Your and my ideas have no authority. Please state your case on the Word.

Perhaps you two have pretty much worn this topic out. Neither of you seems likely to convert the other to his/her point of view.

Walter, you are back to, "Thus sayeth Walter". Your and my ideas have no authority. Please state your case on the Word. Your idea of "the Word" and my understanding that "The Word" Is a Living Word aka the Bible makes all the difference. I don't need you to understand me!

This:
For Jesus to have given himself over to sin he would have to have acknowledged that there is a greater force than he Is irrefutable. Warning (WG) - If you believe Jesus was ever capable of sinning, you will always take God's word with a grain of salt. Thus sayeth Walter.

This is getting redundant.

my understanding that "The Word" Is a Living Word aka the Bible makes all the difference.Then why is it that you don't make your appeal to that Living Word? Becoming angry and "firing back" is not the answer. I've been guilty of that myself. The only authority you or I have is by appealing to what the Bible says. Our own opinions carry no weight at all.


Thus sayeth Walter.Thus sayeth a mere man.

When you say something you have to say it true. It is not saying something that is true outside of you, but true inside of you. You might quote the Bible that you know as true. The reason you Don't understand what I'm (ever) talking about is that you choose to refute it, believing it is something of my own and It is something of my own. But rather than trying to refute it using Scripture, try to understand it using scripture. That's All I can say about that.

rather to refute it, believing it is something of my own. It is something of my own.And therefore of no more meaning that what anyone else believes.


It is not saying something that is true outside of you, but true inside of you.You can certainly have your own personal truth if you want to, but it has no authority in trying to convince others. "I believe..." is the weakest form of argument I know of. We need to proclaim, "Thus sayeth THE LORD," and we know that only from the Bible.

@WG; Maybe we can talk this the other way around. For the sake Of Argument, even using Scripture It could be proven Jesus and God Are sinners. Do you believe not that? Not that they are sinners, but that It could be proven that way??

using Scripture I could prove Jesus and God Are sinners.Let's see it.

JL, what is it that your 2nd to last post is missing?

You have made a claim. "using Scripture I could prove Jesus and God Are sinners."

Let's see the proof. Can you show that or not?

@WG; Maybe we can talk this the other way around. For the sake Of Argument, even using Scripture It could be proven Jesus and God Are sinners. Do you believe not that? Not that they are sinners, but that It could be proven that way??
I have absolutely NO idea what you're saying and what you might be headed toward.

I have absolutely NO idea what you're saying and what you might be headed toward.Yep. I just don't see this one.

I would like to show you if you'd allow me.

The only thing is, Jl you'll have to hold back. Are you able to do that? You'll get your chance, But for now, could you just hold back for a sec??? Maybe we can Have some Fun with it. JL hold back until I say go? OK?? Is that alright???

If not tell me your parameters. I'd like for you to come out with them before I start this exercise in futility.

I am certainly willing to listen. Go right ahead. Am I willing to "have fun" with this effort to show God and Jesus to be sinners? No, but I am willing to listen.

I'd present it this way. We can potentially challenge each other's beliefs in a respectful way. BTW, as WG no doubt will affirm, this is my normal parameter.

respectful way.I got a good laugh at this one (let it go).
Am I willing to "have fun" - No You've already expressed your understanding on this subject. You've already come to the understanding that this subject is at a standstill. All I'm asking is for you to butt out (please). If you can't have fun then I don't want you here. At first you had no opinion on this subject. Now you do, OK, we know your opinion. Now I want to get to the truth of the Matter. Regarding the talk - "Jesus could have sinned"> Hers is what you are actually saying: Jesus Had to have sinned because Jesus repented! Please allow WG to explain what she means by this...these being even more why Questions.

You are trying to change the subject. You have made a claim. "using Scripture I could prove Jesus and God Are sinners." Let's see the proof. Can you show that or not?


Please allow WG to explain what she means by this.Why don't you go first? You've made a wild claim, or at least it certainly seems that way. I'd like to see those scriptures.

Now since it appears you can't do it, then I'm perfectly happy to back out. The field is yours.

Look at yourself JL?
I'm perfectly happy to back out.Yes, Please. Thank you.


@WG: Only sinners need to repent and Jesus repented. Jesus must have been a sinner. - Right?

Like I said.
Now since it appears you can't do it, then I'm perfectly happy to back out. The field is yours.

I've never understood why people want to make these dramatic claims only to be found completely unable to back them up. It's like they think no one is going to challenge their wild statements. Well...guess again.

You are free to ask WG to do what you have shown you are not able to do. I only ask that you leave me out of it. No more of, "Look at yourself JL?"

@WG: Only sinners need to repent and Jesus repented. Jesus must have been a sinner. - Right?
Please define "sinner".

Please tell us more about when Jesus repented. Why? Because of what?

With the same Idea as you claim Jesus could have sinned...Jesus must have sinned because the Bible (your idea of Sin) says that Sinners need to repent and be Baptized. It's easy...Using your own Logic; Because Jesus was Baptized...as to Why - Because he sinned. Could you please explain to me - If Jesus didn't Sin (as you said he could have) then why did he need to repent and be baptized?

With the same Idea as you claim Jesus could have sinned...Jesus must have sinned because the Bible (your idea of Sin) says that Sinners need to repent and be Baptized. It's easy...Using your own Logic; Because Jesus was Baptized...as to Why - Because he sinned.
No, that's not why Jesus was baptized.

Great answer. thank you. I believe you [Sarc]. Now maybe you could explain Why "Jesus Chose"(for he did have a choice did he not?) to repent and be baptised? If Jesus didn't Sin (as you said he could have) then why did he need to repent and be baptized?

Jesus didn't repent.

He could have sinned, yes, but He didn't.

Why was Jesus baptized?

Jesus didn't repent. John's Baptism was a baptism of repentance, was it not? WG, you're making this hard on yourself. Please don't do that. You can tell me, just say what's on your mind, please. Jesus sinned...He had to have, he repented and was Baptized.

Jesus didn't repent because He hadn't sinned.

Now, why was He baptized?

Jesus didn't repentOf course he did! Are you just going to ignore the fact that John's Baptism was a Baptism of REPENTANCE???

I'm just telling you (using your own Logic) with your own words, that Jesus was a sinner because he was Baptized with a baptism of repentance. Do you know why those Pharisees didn't get baptized by John or anybody else...Because they had no need of repentance.

Of course he did! Are you just going to ignore the fact that John's Baptism was a Baptism of REPENTANCE???
Not in Jesus' case.

By baptizing Jesus, John was declaring to all that Jesus was the One they had been waiting for, the Son of God, the Savior.

Jesus’ baptism also showed that He identified with sinners. His baptism symbolized the sinners’ baptism into the righteousness of Christ, dying with Him, and rising free from sin and able to walk in the newness of life.

Jesus’ baptism by John showed His approval of John’s baptism -- and that it was approved by God.

Not in Jesus' case.WG, I'm sitting next to the Jordan. I saw the whole thing. I just watched dozens of People repent and be baptized. I just witnessed Jesus being baptized like everyone else before him. And you're going to tell me [Not in this case] it was a charade?
John baptized with a baptism of repentance. Yes it was, it has to be. It's right in there, it's right in the Bible. Read it for yourself. "in this case." You're just going to tell me "Not in this case." And that's it?

Okay, Got it. Moving on to the next because why-answer.

Everybody dies. I know (because the Bible tells me so) that death is a result of sin... No ifs and's or buts. Jesus must have sinned because he died.

Think about that. Why did Jesus die?

Look up and read 2 Cor. 5:21.

Why did Jesus die?I'm not asking why. Why really has no relevance here.

The fact is Jesus died. It doesn't matter how he died, why he died. I'm not talking about that. Did Jesus Die? - Yes - SO now we know. we know just like every one of his disciples had known at the time.

Being that Sin kills and Jesus Died, He must have sinned. Doesnt even matter if he was raised from the dead. He still died!

Read that Bible verse.

I read the entire chapter...Jesus still died...proving he was guilty of sin. After all, he was born into a sin nature. Everybody who is born of the sin Nature dies. Not only that they will, but they will sin... It's a given (the Bible tells us that).

If death is a product of sin, then Jesus must have sinned because he died. Or is this just another one of your "not in this case" moments?

WG, I gotta tell ya, I just don't see how you could have picked a better, plainer verse.

"God made him who had no sin to be sin for us."

Ballgame over.

And again: If death is a product of sin, then Jesus must have sinned because he died. Or is this just another one of your "not in this case" moments?
"God made him who had no sin to be sin[b] for us."This does absolutely nothing.

"God made him who had no sin to be sin for us." Jesus had no sin.

John 10:17. (https://bible.knowing-jesus.com/John/10/18)For this reason the Father loves Me, because I lay down My life so that I may take it again.18 (https://bible.knowing-jesus.com/John/10/18) No one has taken it away from Me, but I lay it down on My own initiative. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This commandment I received from My Father.” Jesus did not die because of his sin. He laid his life down for ours.

John 10:11 (https://bible.knowing-jesus.com/John/10/11). “I am the good shepherd; the good shepherd lays down His life for the sheep.

John 10:15 (https://bible.knowing-jesus.com/John/10/15). even as the Father knows Me and I know the Father; and I lay down My life for the sheep.

Galatians 2:20 (https://bible.knowing-jesus.com/Galatians/2/20). I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself up for me.

You just can't help yourself can you JL. HE DIED!
Jesus did not die because of his sin.But you just said;"God made him sin." Was it Jesus's sin or wasn't it?

I didn't say anything. I quoted the Bible. "who had no sin." Jesus had no sin of his own. He was not a sinner in that respect. 1 Peter 2:22 say, "He committed no sin, and no deceit was found in his mouth." So the only sin he had was our sin that He took upon Himself. As Isaiah said in chapter 53, "4 (https://biblehub.com/isaiah/53-4.htm)Surely He took on our infirmitiesand carried our sorrows;b (https://biblehub.com/bsb/isaiah/53.htm#fn)yet we considered Him stricken by God,struck down and afflicted.5 (https://biblehub.com/isaiah/53-5.htm)But He was pierced for our transgressions,He was crushed for our iniquities;the punishment that brought us peace was upon Him,and by His stripes we are healed.c (https://biblehub.com/bsb/isaiah/53.htm#fn)6 (https://biblehub.com/isaiah/53-6.htm)We all like sheep have gone astray,d (https://biblehub.com/bsb/isaiah/53.htm#fn)each one has turned to his own way;and the LORD has laid upon Himthe iniquity of us all."

As the scriptures I posted above clearly show, Jesus did not die so much as he laid down his life. It was a voluntary death he died, the death as a punishment for our sins. As the old song says, "I owed a debt I could not pay, He paid a debt He did not owe." What we are discussing here is the core of the Gospel.

Jesus did not die because of his sin.Could you please Show me where it says this in the Bible? - you can't.
The fact is, that is exactly why Jesus died!!! You don't even understand what it is you are saying.

In Isaiah 53. "For He was cut off from the land of the living;e (https://biblehub.com/bsb/isaiah/53.htm#fn)He was stricken for the transgression of My people."

because He has poured out His life unto death,and He was numbered with the transgressors.k (https://biblehub.com/bsb/isaiah/53.htm#fn)Yet He bore the sin of manyand made intercession for the transgressors.

“the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world” (John 1:29 (http://www.christianity.com/bible/search/?ver=niv&q=john+1:29)).

1 John 2:My dear children, I write this to you so that you will not sin. But if anybody does sin, we have an advocate with the Father—Jesus Christ, the Righteous One. 2 He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.

How many more do you need?
And that doesn't count the chapter 53 passage from above.

You're not getting it JL. You said this: "Jesus did not die because of his sin." Now you are trying to read it into Scripture. When in Fact - Jesus did die because of his sin...It's the only sin he's got...He's got a lot...He Gots em from us.

I was showing WG how it looks when a person bases the entire subject matter with simple "Why answers."

Why:
"Well, then why did Jesus get baptized?"
"Why did Jesus Repent?"
"Why sin alone dies?"
"Why does God order Murder?"

When:
Jesus Did Get Baptized.
Jesus did Repent.
There is no death outside of sin.
God did order Human sacrifice.
God does change his mind.

There is something you need to realize. God is Unltamit authority. If Jesus was to sin, we would not know it as sin. What then? instead of God winning a decisive Victory over Sin he would only win a Marginal? You might think of it in those terms if you wish, but you would be wrong.

Jesus could have called His Angels to rescue him. Had he done so, It would have been a different story. God could have had the Hebrew nation totally and utterly destroyed and replaced them with Moses. Had God chose to do so, It would have been a different story...Same result but a different story.

He is GOD! He can change your story in so many different ways. An infinite number of ways. He could have already Changed the entire universe a dozen times over (just for you) and nobody'd be the wiser.

So from now on we regard no one from a worldly point of view. Though we once regarded Christ in this way, we do so no longer. Time to put any possibility of Jesus, ever, sinning to rest.

This was your contention. "Being that Sin kills and Jesus Died, He must have sinned." It is not correct.

John 8:46. "Which of you can truthfully accuse me of sin? And since I am telling you the truth, why don’t you believe me?"

Do you, Walter?

delete

JL said, Jesus did not die because of his sin.

waltero said,
Could you please Show me where it says this in the Bible? - you can't.
The fact is, that is exactly why Jesus died!!! You don't even understand what it is you are saying.
2 Cor. 5:21.

Jesus died for our sins. We call this concept “substitutionary atonement.” Christ died instead of us. He didn’t die for Himself; He died in our place, as our substitute, to atone for our sins and allow us to enter into a right relationship with a holy God. The death of Christ as our substitute is the heart of the Gospel.

Blah, Blah, Blah Blaaah. And Jesus didn't Repent..blah, blah, blah, blaa.

The two of you have no idea what you're talking about.
"Being that Sin kills and Jesus Died, He must have sinned." It is not correct.According to who?
If I was to answer my own question with why did he die then, you would respond in the way that you did. Okay, then why has everybody who has ever claimed to be the Messiah (hundreds) Die?

And you would simply repeat the same thing in many different ways. That still doesn't deter from the fact that they all died. And, the fact that you have no idea about anything having to do with John's baptism or Jesus being baptized in a baptism of repentance. Your simple response "Not in this case" does not cut it.

You keep talking as if you know why Jesus died. You continue trying to explain Jesus's relationship with sin that leads to death. Jesus In fact did die because of his sin. Jesus literally transferred our sins to himself. Our sins (our life of death) now belongs to him. Just as if he himself had sinned. He was marked for death. This is for you WG; Jesus did not pick up all the sins of the world. Not everybody wants to be saved. Not everybody is willing to give up their sin. Give everything that you treasure (which is sin) here in this world, You must give it to Jesus. Trust in Jesus, once you give up all your treasure, he will turn it into Gold.Go to the Cross, look at the man on the cross and you will immediately see why we call him sin.

Those who beheld the serpent on the pole lived because they saw their problem — the deadly serpent — nailed and put to death on the cross. In the same way, God loved the World... By giving his Son to us on a Cross. Now go pick up your Cross at the church nearest you.


Have fun, you Biscuite eaters!

I quoted scripture. You quote basically yourself. Take your pick.

This is for you WG; Jesus did not pick up all the sins of the world.
Yes, He did. He "picked up" (died on the cross for) everyone's sins.

Not everybody wants to be saved.
That might be true, but their sins are forgiven and they are saved once they ask for forgiveness and for Jesus to come into their hearts and lives.

Not everybody is willing to give up their sin. Give everything that you treasure (which is sin) here in this world, You must give it to Jesus. Trust in Jesus, once you give up all your treasure, he will turn it into Gold.Go to the Cross, look at the man on the cross and you will immediately see why we call him sin.
That makes absolutely no sense.

Those who reject Christ have their sins forgiven and are saved whether they like it or not? Someone should have told Jesus that. He told people that unless they believe in him, they will die in their sins. He spoke of a wide path that leads to destruction and said that many will take that path. The promise of salvation is for those who believe in him according to John 3:16.

Where did you get this idea of universal salvation from? It is clearly not in the Bible.

Ah, you edited your post. It’s better now. Not completely accurate, but better.

Ah, you edited your post. It’s better now. Not completely accurate, but better.
It's not easy to watch the soap opera, "Days of Our Lives", and keep one's wits handy while posting here.

At my age, just keeping my wits handy is by itself a chore, even with no distractions at all.