Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Funny you should bring that up.. THE BIBLE SAYS:
"Many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist." 2 John 1:7
Yet where does it say that to deny God as coming in the flesh is antichrist?
I never deny Jesus came in the flesh. . There were many anti-Christs in the past. Anti-Christ "against" or "instead of Christ" are those that say he never existed or wasn't the messiah and probably includes those who are against him in thought or deed (starting wars in his name is never a good thing).
How do they compare the originals to today?...have they discovered the original texts?..
There were no original texts per se, because Jesus' followers didn't see the need to write anything down, as they believed that he would return again and establish his kingdom on earth.
As I posted a couple of things in this thread, there are snippets of truth in the Bible. Jesus' spiritual teachings were about soul development and becoming at-one with our Heavenly Father by receiving His grace, or Divine Love, which is brought to us by the Holy Spirit, and this brings with it salvation and immortality... and his kingdom is in the spirit world... and it's called the Celestial Heavens.
The link I posted is from Luke, who said that he wrote down many of Jesus' truths, but over time... some 150 years after Jesus was gone... men were less spiritual and were more interested in establishing churches and their focus was on moral teachings ala the Ten Commandments... they didn't understand Jesus' spiritual message and instead reworked elements of the Jewish faith into what they perceived was the plan of salvation and came up with this idea that there must be a blood sacrifice... which is totally contradictory to what our Father said to Abraham... no more blood sacrifices.
Because Jesus wrote through James Padgett from 1914-1923 and gave a detailed and accurate account of exactly what his mission was... these messages are considered his second coming. Of interest is the simplicity of his message and the fact that everything makes so much sense... like the fact that his mother wasn't a virgin, but a mom just like yours and mine. A lot of made up stuff was inserted in there to give Jesus a persona as of God, but he tells us he isn't and was never God... but he was a divine man because he followed the will of our Father... something we can do ourselves, it if is our desire to do so.
There is so much great information about who and what is God, the holy spirit, where do our souls come from, why are we here and where are we going... this website is well worth checking into for those who believe in our Father, but question the accuracy of the Bible.
So, if Jesus had allowed himself to give in to a TRUE temptation he would not have been God anymore? How is that possible, if you ARE God?
That is not at all what I said. God can't sin. God can't be tempted to sin. But the humanity of Christ could be and was tempted to sin. Not from a sin nature, as He didn't have one. But He was tempted by Satan and the world. But since he was in hypostatic union, as the God-man, He was able not to sin, and not able to sin. Double speak? No. Confusing? Yes.
Had Christ sinned, He would not have been eligible to go to the Cross and pay the penalty for sin.
But it's a matter of Non Posse Peccure; and Posse Non Peccure. Not able to sin and able not to sin. The humanity of Christ was like a copper wire in that it could be bent. But His deity is like an iron bar. It can't be bent. When the copper wire is welded to the iron bar, the copper wire can't be bent. The humanity of Christ could have sinned but was able not to, but His deity was not able to sin. The humanity of Christ being in hypostatic union with His deity was able not to sin and not able to sin.
The deity of Christ could not be tempted, and could not sin.
The humanity of Christ could be tempted, and could sin.
As the God-man, He could be tempted, but was able not to sin, and not able to sin.
I said in the previous post concerning this, that ''He could of faltered, but He did not.'' That refers to His humanity. However, in hypostasis He couldn't.
Now if that's confusing (and it is), perhaps the following resource will make it a little more clear.
There were no original texts per se, because Jesus' followers didn't see the need to write anything down, as they believed that he would return again and establish his kingdom on earth.
As I posted a couple of things in this thread, there are snippets of truth in the Bible. Jesus' spiritual teachings were about soul development and becoming at-one with our Heavenly Father by receiving His grace, or Divine Love, which is brought to us by the Holy Spirit, and this brings with it salvation and immortality... and his kingdom is in the spirit world... and it's called the Celestial Heavens.
The link I posted is from Luke, who said that he wrote down many of Jesus' truths, but over time... some 150 years after Jesus was gone... men were less spiritual and were more interested in establishing churches and their focus was on moral teachings ala the Ten Commandments... they didn't understand Jesus' spiritual message and instead reworked elements of the Jewish faith into what they perceived was the plan of salvation and came up with this idea that there must be a blood sacrifice... which is totally contradictory to what our Father said to Abraham... no more blood sacrifices.
Because Jesus wrote through James Padgett from 1914-1923 and gave a detailed and accurate account of exactly what his mission was... these messages are considered his second coming. Of interest is the simplicity of his message and the fact that everything makes so much sense... like the fact that his mother wasn't a virgin, but a mom just like yours and mine. A lot of made up stuff was inserted in there to give Jesus a persona as of God, but he tells us he isn't and was never God... but he was a divine man because he followed the will of our Father... something we can do ourselves, it if is our desire to do so.
There is so much great information about who and what is God, the holy spirit, where do our souls come from, why are we here and where are we going... this website is well worth checking into for those who believe in our Father, but question the accuracy of the Bible.
You seem to be one of those divine love people based on the link you provided. The stuff in that link is not Christian. You are attacking the truth of the word of God with Satanic doctrines. You deny the virgin birth, you deny the deity of Christ. You make the claim that Jesus spoke to some guy named Padgett. This is new ageism. It is of the devil. You say there are only snippits of truth in the Bible. In so saying you show that Satan is always ready to use whoever he can to attack the truth of God's word.
That is not at all what I said. God can't sin. God can't be tempted to sin. But the humanity of Christ could be and was tempted to sin. Not from a sin nature, as He didn't have one. But He was tempted by Satan and the world. But since he was in hypostatic union, as the God-man, He was able not to sin, and not able to sin. Double speak? No. Confusing? Yes.
Had Christ sinned, He would not have been eligible to go to the Cross and pay the penalty for sin.
But it's a matter of Non Posse Peccure; and Posse Non Peccure. Not able to sin and able not to sin. The humanity of Christ was like a copper wire in that it could be bent. But His deity is like an iron bar. It can't be bent. When the copper wire is welded to the iron bar, the copper wire can't be bent. The humanity of Christ could have sinned but was able not to, but His deity was not able to sin. The humanity of Christ being in hypostatic union with His deity was able not to sin and not able to sin.
The deity of Christ could not be tempted, and could not sin.
The humanity of Christ could be tempted, and could sin.
As the God-man, He could be tempted, but was able not to sin, and not able to sin.
I said in the previous post concerning this, that ''He could of faltered, but He did not.'' That refers to His humanity. However, in hypostasis He couldn't.
Now if that's confusing (and it is), perhaps the following resource will make it a little more clear.
So, how are you truly tempted if you are HOOKED to a being that cannot be tempted?
I, mean, honestly. If I was out there trying to lift a mountain (of course, I could not, in my little peon body) and some giant came by and put me on his head or something and then lifted the mountain for me, I did NOT truly lift that mountain, did I?
So, if Jesus (body) was tempted (lifting mountains) and God helped him (giant) then was Jesus TRULY tempted? It wouldn't have been the kind of temptation that would make one sweat, right?
I understand Jesus was human and he had pain and so on, so he was tempted in his flesh but not in his spirit, it looks like you are saying. But that still doesn't explain why Satan tempted him with the kingdoms of this world, if he already owned them. What difference would it make to him if Satan tempted him with those kingdoms?
That is not at all what I said. God can't sin. God can't be tempted to sin. But the humanity of Christ could be and was tempted to sin. Not from a sin nature, as He didn't have one. But He was tempted by Satan and the world. But since he was in hypostatic union, as the God-man, He was able not to sin, and not able to sin. Double speak? No. Confusing? Yes.
Had Christ sinned, He would not have been eligible to go to the Cross and pay the penalty for sin.
But it's a matter of Non Posse Peccure; and Posse Non Peccure. Not able to sin and able not to sin. The humanity of Christ was like a copper wire in that it could be bent. But His deity is like an iron bar. It can't be bent. When the copper wire is welded to the iron bar, the copper wire can't be bent. The humanity of Christ could have sinned but was able not to, but His deity was not able to sin. The humanity of Christ being in hypostatic union with His deity was able not to sin and not able to sin.
The deity of Christ could not be tempted, and could not sin.
The humanity of Christ could be tempted, and could sin.
As the God-man, He could be tempted, but was able not to sin, and not able to sin.
I said in the previous post concerning this, that ''He could of faltered, but He did not.'' That refers to His humanity. However, in hypostasis He couldn't.
Now if that's confusing (and it is), perhaps the following resource will make it a little more clear.
This is beautiful Mike. I had never heard it put this way. And the analogy of the copper and iron is one I will remember. I do not see it as confusing, just alot of depth.
I myself did not have a Christian upbringing, however I had known and believed the Godhead and Trinty since 15 through the scriptures. Ephesians 4:32 Be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving each other, just as in Christ God forgave you.
God Bless,
Mercy
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
. There were many anti-Christs in the past. Anti-Christ "against" or "instead of Christ" are those that say he never existed or wasn't the messiah and probably includes those who are against him in thought or deed (starting wars in his name is never a good thing).
) and some giant came by and put me on his head or something and then lifted the mountain for me, I did NOT truly lift that mountain, did I?
