@topic,

This is one interesting topic to me, but I know it's going to take some time to discuss it, and I am not sure I've got that time. In any case, I'll see what I can do.

@lysaa,

This is not about any church as you have said, but can you tell us you do not attend Christ Embassy? This teaching that the Angel of the Lord refers to the Holy Spirit is rooted and grounded in that ministry and that is why I believe pilgrim_1 mentioned that. Are we now going to be so sensitive to others' reaction to the truth that we will not say the truth? I think not.

In any case, I have never seen the scripture stretched as much as you just tried to do with the word "Christ". In essence, you are trying to tell us that any time the word Christ is used, the emphasis is on the Holy Spirit and not Jesus the Messiah. That is very absurd. Like I mentioned in an earlier discussion, our focus, and the Bible's focus from Genesis to Revelation is not on God the Father or the Holy Spirit, but rather on the Son.

Now let us look at the fallacy of your logic from another perspective. If indeed Jesus became the Christ when He was anointed with the Holy Spirit which I believe is a reference to Jordan, how then can you refer to the Rock that followed the Isrealites in the Wilderness as the Holy Spirit which was not given to Jesus until some thousands of years after? Please provide a biblical answer to this and we shall continue from there.

@ebos,

King David said "The Lord said to my Lord" Who's Lord did David refer to?

The scripture you referenced above is the very one that I plan to use to establish the fact that every manifestation of the Godhead in the OT is a manifestation of the Son.

@topic,

In responding to ebos question, I am sure we are all aware that the personage refered to as "My Lord" by David is actually the Son! While there are many ramifications to this phrase, I want to deal with its use as a title. In other words, every time the title "My Lord" is used in scriptures in reference to deity, it is a direct reference to the Son of God - Jesus Christ.

Now if we will take care to study each time that phrase is used in the OT, we can only come to one conclusion, the Angel of God is no other than the Son of God in His pre-incarnate manifestations. From Abraham, to Gideon and Samson's parents, the title "My Lord", which is a direct reference to the Son was used to address the Angel of the Lord. How then can we say this Angel is the Holy Spirit? Here are some of the scriptures that I refered to:

Abraham - Genesis 18:3 And said, My Lord, if now I have found favour in thy sight, pass not away, I pray thee, from thy servant:

Gideon - Judges 6:12 And the angel of the LORD appeared unto him, and said unto him, The LORD is with thee, thou mighty man of valour. 13 And Gideon said unto him, Oh my Lord, if the LORD be with us, why then is all this befallen us? and where be all his miracles which our fathers told us of, saying, Did not the LORD bring us up from Egypt? but now the LORD hath forsaken us, and delivered us into the hands of the Midianites.

TayoD:

@captjones,You miss road?

Hehe. . you don start again? Some of us dey miss road well-well. . _{talk about us leaving Eden! since we waka commot from there, nobody fit trace where the place dey!}

Anyhow, @topic:

I notice that the difficulty seems to be the seed that has been sown in the minds of those who see only the Father and the Holy Spirit in the Old Testament, but are persuaded that the Son did not exist until the New Testament.

This kind of thinking will lead to two serious problems:

(a) if the Son did not exist or was not actively engaged in divine matters in the OT, then such a thought denies the Trinity.

You cannot have the Trinity in co-equality and co-eternality by disregarding any one of the divine Personality of the Godhead. The moment any such suggestions to consign and confine the Son to only the NT comes to the fore, then such a person is denying His eternal existence.

(b) such a though confuses the divine Personality of the Son with that of the Father and the Holy Spirit.

Quite a few times, I've had to ask people to consider two very important verses that have direct bearing on this matter: (i) John 8:58 [Jesus - 'Before Abraham was, I am']; (ii) 1 Cor. 12:4 ['that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ'].

It is an untennable idea to promote that Christ was not seen in the OT until He was born in the NT. Let's consider this more closely.

Some have the persuasion that "Christ" could mean something else (i.e., the Anointing) and not merely the Messiah. The flaw in such a persuasion are twofold:

1. In the NT, "Christ" is used ONLY in reference to the Person of the Son of God. There is no other meaning given to that appellation in the NT; and John makes it clear to have stated: "We have found the Messias, which is, being interpreted, the Christ" (John 1:41).

If that quote above was merely to indicate that the disciples had found "the Anointing", most certainly they would NOT be referring to the Son of God! But so it is, that in every single instance that reference is made of "Christ", it points simply to the Lord Jesus, and to Him alone.

2. Which leads us to the Biblical distinction between the "Anointed" (i.e., "Christ", and the "Anointing" (i.e., the Holy Spirit). It is only the apostle John who specifically referred to the Holy Spirit as the "Anoint[b]ing[/b]" (1 John 2:27 - χρίσμα - chris[b]ma[/b]); but he refers to the Lord Jesus simply as 'Christ' (1 John 2:22 - Χριστός - Christ[b]os[/b]). I hope we can see the difference? But let me expound on this:

1 John 2:22 - "Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son."

Don't miss it - there he called Jesus the "Christ" (Χριστός - Christ[b]os[/b]); he does NOT refer to Him as the "Anointing". However, when John writes about the Holy Spirit, he uses two terms: "anointing" and "unction".

Please mark it - no NT writer ever referred to Jesus as either the "anointing" or "unction";

. . . and no writer ever referred to the Holy Spirit as the "Christ" (the "Anointed".

It is because readers do not take care in studying these issues that the confusion continues in many quarters.

Jesus ALONE is the Christ. No one else and NOTHING else is referred to as "Christ".

Sorry guys, my system has been down hence my reply coming this late. .

Idk who but the reference to Christ Embassy was not fair, read it again. Do not want to pull an argument from that please. Even if there is any teaching peculiar to Christ Embassy, it does not warrant those names.

I did not imply that whenever, which means all the time the word Christ is used it referred to the anointing. I said the word Christ is used interchangeably for both the person of Jesus and the anointing. The word Christ is from the root word Christos meaning the anointed and also means messiah. It’s not a surname of Jesus but an adjective that describes Him and His ministry. . His office, like a title. I was very clear and I wonder why u missed me.

Whether the focus of the bible is on Jesus, does not change anything because He is God. He is the express image of the Father, and He said of the Holy Spirit that He is just like Him. They are one and the same.
So what are we talking about?

Fallacy of my logic? There u go! Meanwhile, Christ refers to the anointing on the person of Jesus. He is Jesus the Christ meaning Jesus the anointed. This anointing has been before Jesus was introduced in the NT. Like I said in my previous post, God anointed Jesus with the Holy Spirit and power. Acts 10:38-9. Would one be called the anointed without the anointing? He was born of a woman, hence he was 100% man, Hebrews 4:15 says “For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.” . At the same time 100% God. As a man, He had to be anointed to operate in His office. Luke 4:18-19.

I notice that the difficulty seems to be the seed that has been sown in the minds of those who see only the Father and the Holy Spirit in the Old Testament, but are persuaded that the Son did not exist until the New Testament.

No dear, the difficulty is in not seeing from this clear light (view)
Who is disregarding any of the Persons of the Godhead? Is it not true that the Word was introduced as a son and Jesus only in the NT? He had being the Word that created the world. John 1:1-4, 1 John 1:1- 3; 5:7
Not until His birth on earth, the name Jesus was not given. For the record, I strongly believe in the Trinity.

There were manifestations of Christ in the OT but the person of Jesus, separate from the Father, was revealed in the NT. And yes again, there are places in the bible where Christ was not used in reference to the person of Jesus but to the anointing. I made this clear when I said Christ was interchangeably used giving few examples.

Hi Lysaa,

No dear, the difficulty is in not seeing from this clear light (view)
Who is disregarding any of the Persons of the Godhead? Is it not true that the Word was introduced as a son and Jesus only in the NT ? He had being the Word that created the world. John 1:1-4, 1 John 1:1- 3; 5:7
Not until His birth on earth, the name Jesus was not given. For the record, I strongly believe in the Trinity.

I think something is gravely amiss here. Lets just be clear about this one thing: Jesus and the WORD are not two different Beings - we're talking of the very same Person here. Even if we grant that it was not until the NT that we get to read about 'Jesus', it does not negate the fact that He existed before the Incarnation.

hey pilgrim,

Can u pls elaborate on ur point on the exisitence of Jesus before incarnation with references?

@lysaa,

Well, I think that has been done previously and several times as well.

Anyhow, I'd just like to understand two things from you:

* By the question above, what are you suggesting? It would sound to me as though
one was questioning the 'existence of Jesus before the incarnation' - which would
seem the very reason why you'd want me to elaborate on that with references.

Nonetheless, please carefully consider again the implication of Jesus' word to the Jews: 'Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.' (John 8:58)

* What is the main thrust of trying to distinguish between the Jesus in the NT and the
very Christ who was manifested in the OT before the Incarnation? I often hear some
people make this assertion that there was no Jesus before He was born in the NT;
but I also wonder if such people have taken the time to explain the fact that even He
Himself categorically affirmed that He existed before He was born in the NT.

Looking forward to yours. Cheers.

pilgrim.1:

@lysaa,
Well, I think that has been done previously and several times as well.

how come i didn't get it? well, thats exactly why i said u should buttress ur point.

pilgrim.1:

* By the question above, what are you suggesting? It would sound to me as though
one was questioning the 'existence of Jesus before the incarnation' - which would
seem the very reason why you'd want me to elaborate on that with references.

I am asking u, if u call it questioning His existence before I could have an answer, so be it. But I need an answer from u.

pilgrim.1:

Nonetheless, please carefully consider again the implication of Jesus' word to the Jews: 'Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.' (John 8:58)

* What is the main thrust of trying to distinguish between the Jesus in the NT and the
very Christ who was manifested in the OT before the Incarnation? I often hear some
people make this assertion that there was no Jesus before He was born in the NT;
but I also wonder if such people have taken the time to explain the fact that even He
Himself categorically affirmed that He existed before He was born in the NT.

Looking forward to yours. Cheers.

Now that's the thing, Amplifying the verse of scripture that says 'the word became flesh' referring to the person of Jesus wouldn't mean any harm would it?
Looking carefully at the statement of Jesus in the bk of John 8:58 You'd see that he wasn't particular about longevity but a person that revealed himself to Moses as the 'I AM'. First the english is wrong cos he would have said 'I was" but he chose 'I am' and that triggered the action in the next verse. Those people Understood the names of God. He (God) dealt with them revealing His names. You know, I am Jehovah your healer, more than enough and so on.
2ndly in my Bible, I am is in caps. It wasn't a mistake.

I just need you to oblige to my request. thanks

Preach on sis!

@lysaa,

What really is your request? I think what you have been presenting here is the same issue of trying to seperate between 'Jesus' and the 'WORD'; whereas that the point of John 8:58 is the direct opposite of such a reasoning. Look again at what you stated:

lysaa:

I am asking u, if u call it questioning His existence before I could have an answer, so be it. But I need an answer from u.

Now, if you're questioning His pre-incarnate existence, then you have missed the point and gone on to something different from what we read in Scripture. To have assumed that idea with a 'so be it' is to deny the point of John 8:58.

lysaa:

Now that's the thing, Amplifying the verse of scripture that says 'the word became flesh' referring to the person of Jesus wouldn't mean any harm would it?

But is that not the very same thing that you were directly opposed to? From your posts, you sounded like you were differentiating between 'Jesus' and the 'Word' - and that is the point I'd requested you to clarify so we know exactly what your point was. If your persuasion is that Jesus and the Word were different Beings, please let us know, so we could then re-arrange this discussion in its proper context for you.

lysaa:

Looking carefully at the statement of Jesus in the bk of John 8:58 You'd see that he wasn't particular about longevity but a person that revealed himself to Moses as the 'I AM'. First the english is wrong because he would have said 'I was" but he chose 'I am' and that triggered the action in the next verse. Those people Understood the names of God. He (God) dealt with them revealing His names. You know, I am Jehovah your healer, more than enough and so on.
2ndly in my Bible, I am is in caps. It wasn't a mistake.

Dear lysaa, how have you then correlated your statements to connect to what we're discussing? That the Jews understood Jesus was claiming to be deity is not the point here, else we would have been discussing the interpretation of the Jews following Jesus' statement in that verse.

However, the core issue here is: what informs your persuasion that Jesus did not exist before the Incarnation as regards His statement in the verse cited above? The implication of that idea (that Jesus did not exist before the Incarnation) would lead to just one thing: the denial of the deity of Jesus Christ.

Please think carefully on this point and let me know what exactly you're driving at.

lysaa:

I just need you to oblige to my request. thanks

I hope it's clearer to you now? If not, please try and state your concerns as simply so we could consider them together.

Cheers.

Dear Pilgrim,

My request was for u to substantiate your claims that the person of Jesus existed before his incarnation with more reference. When I say the person of Jesus, I mean an entity seperate from the father.

I never would seperate Jesus from the Word because he was the word. He was the very Word of God from the beginin up until when he became flesh and was revealed to us as Jesus. . Hey, I am not a scripture guru FYI, so don't think i'm trying to play one here. I only share what i have seen and known. This is the reason for my request (I could learn).

John 8:58, like i said before, He was revealing that he is God and not dealing with time here or how long he has been. Thats why they picked up stones wanting to stone him for committing blasphemy. .

The Word was always the Word (John 1) but was revealed in person when He came to earth, tho He had been and still is God. Now outside Him been the Word, I don't know How else he was revealed. which again is why I said you should tell me with references. You Know what? God is just too much! Jesus is God, the Holy Spirit is God yet there was one Jesus called his father. They are all the same. We only can tell who in the Godhead is operating by their characters.

Going back to where we began, the Angel of His presence as in Isaiah 63 Vs 9 is the Holy Spirit as clearly stated in the next verse. Well, Exodus makes it clearer in the 23rd Chapter and Vs 20-23. Talking about that same Angel, it says - Behold, I send an Angel before thee, to keep thee in the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared.

Exd 23:21  Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions: for my name [is] in him.

Exd 23:22  But if thou shalt indeed obey his voice, and do all that I speak; then I will be an enemy unto thine enemies, and an adversary unto thine adversaries. 

hear what Jesus said.

Mat 12:31 ¶ Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy [against] the [Holy] Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.

Mat 12:32  And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the [world] to come.

Christ being the spiritual rock that followed the Israelites connotes the presence of God (which comes with an anointing)carried alone by the Angel of His presence - the Holy Spirit. Jesus also said He (the Holy Spirit) would take of mine and declare it to you - John 16:15.They work together for same purpose. This Angel has not changed - In our meetings, He is the one that brings that presence of God. When we go out or come in, he is right there with us. Our conferences, rivivals or crusades, whatever, He brings God so real and miracles take place. He is called the one that proceeds from the father yet he is every whole God and is manifested everywhere the name of God is mention at the same time. This is the ministry of this Angel.

Whatever manifestaion of these persons of the Godhead, they are still the same one God.

@topic,

Okay I am back, albeit with a new user name. No thanks to the Obatanlapitipiti of nairaland. I was banned for bringing attention to his hypocrisy on the topic about King David.

@lysaa,

There were manifestations of Christ in the OT but the person of Jesus, separate from the Father, was revealed in the NT. And yes again, there are places in the bible where Christ was not used in reference to the person of Jesus but to the anointing. I made this clear when I said Christ was interchangeably used giving few examples.

I want to be careful in response to your statements so that we do not get bogged down with semantics. In that regard, I think you have provided a good basis for this discussion to progress. The question is this: "Is the person of Jesus (not his humanity) clearly dinstict from that of the Father and the Holy Spirit in the OT? The answer to that is absolutely YES. And if that is the case, your statement in bold above is very, very wrong. Once we can establish the dinstict personality called the Son of God, we can then go on to determine if He is the one refered to as the Angel of the Lord in the OT.

There are many scriptures in the OT that clearly dinstinguish the person of Jesus (I use that name loosely to refer to the second member of the Godhead). The appropriate title I believe, should be the "Son of God". We find a lot of that in the Psalms, but I'd like to start with the reference in Proverbs 30:4 - Who has gone up to heaven and come down? Who has gathered up the wind in the hollow of his hands? Who has wrapped up the waters in his cloak? Who has established all the ends of the earth? What is his name, and the name of his son? Tell me if you know! This scripture clearly refers to 2 personalities which I'm sure you'll agree are the Father and the Son of God (Jesus).

There are so many references in the Psalms. Perhaps you want to start with Psalm 2 which is very clear about the personality of the Son. Maybe the most famous reference in the Book of Psalms is the one that reveals the conversation between both personalities. This I already referenced before now with no rebuttal from your end. This scripture clearly indicates that David enjoyed the priviledge of listening into a discourse between the Godhead. This discussion is recorded in Psalms 110:1 The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool. Again it is clear that the personalities here are the Father and the Son and Peter confirmed this in the NT also by claiming that this personality is actually the Jesus that was crucified and risen - Acts 2: 34 For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, 35 Until I make thy foes thy footstool. 36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.

How clearer can this be?

Tayo-D:

Okay I am back, albeit with a new user name. No thanks to the Obatanlapitipiti of nairaland. I was banned for bringing attention to his hypocrisy on the topic about King David.

Oga T, welcome back jare.

_{wey dat topic sef?}

Lol. . . bros Tayo-D, glad to see you back. I no fit add to your reposte to lysaa's; but while awaiting her response, I'll come back to address a few issues thereto.

Enjoy.

Christ is not an angel . . . have never been an angel!

Christ is God!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Lol. . . @opokonwa,

opokonwa:

Christ is not an angel . . . have never been an angel!

Christ is God!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The appellation "the Angel of the LORD" does not mean that Christ was literaly an "angel". That was what was used to describe Him in the various places where He was pleased to manifest Himself to the saints in the OT. Just as Christ was never a "LION", or "LAMB", or even a loaf of "BREAD", so Scripture uses these various appellations to describe Him as relating to the events where we read such of Him.

Cheers.

@Tayo D

That was good reasoning but beg to say that there is more to those verses than has been revealed to you.

Prov.  30:4.  very well depicts the characteristics of the Word of God.

Whereas Acts 2 and Ps 110 which you quoted do not support the point you are trying to put foward.

The above verses of scripture you quoted from the book of psalms were prophetic writings.

If you will study the book of psalms you will notice that the pslmist a lot ot times spoke concerning the future, manytimes rejoicing as though he were there already.

With those particular verses, he spoke concerning the victorious resurrection of Jesus from the dead and his assension into heaven; not what you are trying to bring foward. It  talks about his corronation at the right hand of the father as king of kings and Lord of Lords to whom hath been given that name that is above all names.

The father asks His son Jesus to sit  at his right hand of authority and power until His enemies are made His footstool (ie. until they are completely put under the feet of the church).

Jesus is still there at the right hand of the father ensuring that the will of God is accomplished through us who are his seed, prolonging his days in the earth.

A parallel scripture is found in Acts 13:33 :

God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.

Jesus was the first to be born again (born from among the dead). He is the first beggoten from the dead. He was raised up to heaven and we were raised with Him. He is seated at the right of the father and we are there in Him glory!

@donnie,

That was good reasoning but beg to say that there is more to those verses than has been revealed to you.

I hear you. There is so much more I am yet to say about this topic. I am only taking it one step at a time.

Prov.  30:4.  very well depicts the characteristics of the Word of God.

So is that an acknowledgement that the personality of the Son of God was well dinstinguished, separate and acknowledged even in the OT? Can you now tell lysaa as I have that she was wrong in her earlier submission?

Whereas Acts 2 and Ps 110 which you quoted do not support the point you are trying to put foward.

I do not agree. The passage clearly distinguish between the Father and the Son. Can you recall when Jesus refered to this scripture in the NT, and how He made the people understand that the personality here was not just a human but divine? Jesus clearly made a case for His existence and individuality within the union we refer to as the Godhead from that scripture. This again is in the OT.

The above verses of scripture you quoted from the book of psalms were prophetic writings.

Every Word of God is prophetic.

If you will study the book of psalms you will notice that the pslmist a lot ot times spoke concerning the future, manytimes rejoicing as though he were there already.

Agreed. But He took a glimpse into eternity and not just time. And the fact remains that the personality of the son is clearly recognised in the OT.

With those particular verses, he spoke concerning the victorious resurrection of Jesus from the dead and his assension into heaven; not what you are trying to bring foward. It  talks about his corronation at the right hand of the father as king of kings and Lord of Lords to whom hath been given that name that is above all names.

While what you are saying is true, it still does not debunk the veracity of my claim. Let me explain further. What David witnessed was God the Father prophecying to God the Son. David did not witness the event. he was not trasported into the future to see it, but rather witnessed the Father speaking to the Son on His programme for Him. Read that entire psalm 110 again, and you will see that they are all just prophecies made by the Father to His Son. David only listened in on that conversation at that time.

The father asks His son Jesus to sit  at his right hand of authority and power until His enemies are made His footstool (ie. until they are completely put under the feet of the church).

Like I said before, all these were just prophesies. The sitting down had not taken place then. The Son was yet to become flesh and dwell amongst us at the time these words were spoken. This provides more validation to my point.

Jesus is still there at the right hand of the father ensuring that the will of God is accomplished through us who are his seed, prolonging his days in the earth.

This does not take anything away from my point.

A parallel scripture is found in Acts 13:33 : God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.

You are delving into areas that are much deeper than you can imagine. this scripture is refering to the humanity of Christ and not His deity. His deity has always been the Son of God, his humanity had to be anointed to become the Son of God, which took place after His resurrection from the dead and ascension into heaven. this will be left for another discussion as I wouldn't want to derail this topic.

Jesus was the first to be born again (born from among the dead). He is the first beggoten from the dead. He  was raised up to heaven and we were raised with Him. He is seated at the right of the father and we are there in Him glory!

Again, you are speaking of His humanity here and not His deity.

By the way, did you read Psalm 2 as i requested?

Hi @donnie,

donnie:

Jesus was the first to be born again (born from among the dead). He is the first beggoten from the dead. He was raised up to heaven and we were raised with Him. He is seated at the right of the father and we are there in Him glory!

I appreciate the calm way you replied; but the above was what I'd been waiting for lysaa to mention - because that is just the logical implication of what it seemed she might've been aiming at in her efforts to distinguish between the "WORD" and the Man "Jesus".

However, the phrase "born again" means something entirely different from what you have posted about Jesus. To say that somebody is "born again" means that they were "dead in trespasses and sins" prior to their conversion (Eph. 2:1). Unless you have clear texts to describe Jesus as such, then it would be a fallacy to hold onto that idea.

Later, I'll come back and expound on why it is not correct or sound to assume that Jesus was "born again". He was raised from the dead - but not "born again", because He was never "dead in trespasses and sins". Please craefully check on this - and let's rub minds together on it.

Cheers.

friends there are a few things that need to be made clear on this issue first of all in jesus prayer in the book of John he spoke to the father about the glory WE shared who are the WE in this sentence if not two individuals? he also said God loved him before the creation of the world, how can he say YOU  loved ME  if they were not two distinct persons of the godhead? the bible makes it clear that no man has seen God but obviously people saw him in some form in the old testament you can only reconcile these issues when you understand when the bible says HE IS THE IMAGE OF THE INVISBLE GOD also some of you say that it was the voice of God that moved in the garden and no visible form but if that were so then why would Adam go and hide? it would only make sense to hide if you know the direction the thing is coming from. God the father was mentioned many times in the old testament and so was the holy spirit, now if the holy spirit and the angel of the lord are the same then why the obvious absence of their mention together in the new testament? it only makes sense when we see that the angel of the lord is no more mentioned because he is now jesus christ. jesus said I saw satan fall from heaven like lightning who was the I he was referring to? his father? or himself a distinct person of the triune God. One last thing in the book of Jude it states clearly that jesus lead the isrealites out of egypt but later destroyed those who sinned and we all know the angel of his presence went ahead of them in the old tesatment. my friends jesus is the angel of the lord, the word of God who became flesh.

The Book of Life


Foreword
My beloved brethren and fellow creatures of God, the time is fulfilled: your salvation is at hand; believe the gospel of the grace of God. Then again, one cannot be made to believe what his conscience has not convicted him to believe: therefore every one, at some point, shall be convicted of the truth. Now is the time when both Jew and Greek, religion and science, though varying, yet unidirectional, merge at their source of light. And for the benefit of the scientific mind, this gospel is written, encompassing the varying perspectives.

What is the Gospel, and what is Truth? Gospel means Good News; and Truth shall unfold in the text. What is the news; and what makes it good? To understand the news, you must first understand Good; and this is the point where science and religion come to meet: the point of light. There is an eternal conscious energy force known to man as God, or Life, whose very core is a glorious light known as Love, and by whom the universe was created; even then this force once laid dormant: and in its dormancy, a negative void known as darkness pervaded space, encircling the atom containing this energy. If the light that is God was darkness; what good is that darkness?

An atomic fission occurred within, (as does the energy known as the Sun), generating a combustive living energy (Exodus 24: 17 and Hebrews 12: 29) known as Consciousness, or Light (thus, When God speaks, man, in his natural sensory, hears thunder): which perception was good. Darkness is a void, and light is a presence: thus in the absence of light, darkness pervades: in the absence of knowledge, ignorance pervades. Upon the emergence of consciousness, awareness came of the depravity of this negative void (Darkness, or, Death); and the process of transforming this negative void into a positive presence became relevant; thus conceiving a formula, which formula became known as The Word.

As was with God in the beginning (Genesis 1: 2), man, the expressive image of God, was encompassed by darkness; but through times have received deliberate flashes of light, giving him some form of hope in what might seem to him as a hopeless and discouraging state of being, yet through which comes wisdom and knowledge. The good news (gospel) is the revelation (unfolding) of those things that have been kept a mystery by design.
Creation is still in the making process: consciousness is still unfolding subconsciously; and all, at their varying appointed times, shall unfold incontrovertibly; acquiring perfect knowledge through experiencing the once unknown. Man can learn nothing except by allowing himself (yet directed by God) to explore consciousness beyond the apprehensive limit of his fear. Being made in the image of God, you cannot limit yourself below that which was set for you: for God found himself by not having inhibitions; in this found he wisdom: attaining true knowledge. Likewise shall all his creatures come to the conscious awareness of their true being: Divine Lights.

Every thing you see (all matter, and all transpirations) has its roots in the unseen world: (as man lives in constant motion in the seen world, so also is his spirit constantly in motion in the unseen world; at point of sleep, he transcends the seen into the unseen: the spirit never sleeps): the forms may change (vary), even as the trees; yet the essence remains the same. All matter originates and exist by virtue of a force: and this force exist out of a conscious (intelligent) energy known to man as God. Consciousness is the bases of all life, and the field of all possibilities; its nature is to unfold exponentially to its fullness: and the attainment of this fullness is the reconciliation of all of its molecules wholly to it (him), the source, even God.

Consciousness (Light) is limitless (unconstrainable); neither is there separation in consciousness, though it takes both the positive and the negative (two separate entities) to manifest it (light): for it is incontrovertible, regardless of how you self-justifyingly slice or dice it: for though malice may attack it, and ignorance may deride it; but in the end, there it is: unequivocal. And because consciousness has been proven, hence belief. It is one thing to believe; it is yet another thing (an experience) to see through the mind’s eye (perceiving beyond the flesh) that which you believe. For you cannot have faith in something non-existent: you have true faith only because that which you believe has been proven. It costs nothing to move from faith to sight: yet it is priceless to see, perceptively, the unseen.

All things you see, perceive, and believe, are limitable: these limitations are governed by emotional variableness (fear), prevalent due to an awareness of the unseen (unknown) world; preventing you from exploring consciousness beyond the apprehensive limit of fear.
Apprehensive limits serve as a gauge, a deterrent, and a test; yet implied by the prejudices of tradition (one’s social environment). And this emotional variableness known as Fear causes you to be apprehensive of the immutably pure and endearing emotion known as Love, which energy is emitted from the source of consciousness.

All feelings (emotional states) are transmittable (influential), being inter-connected: one’s emotional state is simply an extension of another’s; as emotional current flows through each and every element, all being filaments (reactors) of electrical current; and being a strand in this filament-web, the current that runs through the filament affects each strand equally, yet at varying times, according to the directional flow of current (energy). And this energy emanates from the source, which source is God, even as the brain sends signals through the nerves to all parts of the body. Therefore there is no Self, but a conglomerate of multifaceted molecules: filaments.

Find freedom in learning that the elements that surround you (in both realms), and the way in which they affect your outer being, are set up to refine your inner being (the true you) into a perfect holy spirit-being (Holy Ghost). Fear comes through ignorance; but in discerning the timeline (time allotment) of the outer being, and the timelessness (eternalness) of the inner being, fear then is excommunicated. For once all matter (outer beings) become extinct, then death (time limiter: constrainer) becomes powerless: destroyed.

But then, due to the bondage of fear, (as fear is the catalyst of self), man strives with himself against the freedom to learn that of which he is. To which I ask: Do you stop for a minute to wonder within if that which you suppose you know is the fullest knowledge: the end of all learning? For if it was, you would know the mystery of God, which obviously has remained veiled to man by divine design; to be revealed as denoted in Revelation 10: 7 and 3: 17-20, and in both the Qu’ran and the Torah. True knowledge is to recognize the extent of one’s own ignorance: for until you become reconciled to the source of consciousness, you know only that which was allowed you: (see Job 38: 11, 28: 21, and 11: 6-12). You do not know what you need not know; but at each appointed time you shall know what you need to know, as there is a preordained time for all things. To a simplified (humble) living, the law of the universe has no bearing.
As to the unfolding of the divine mysteries, the power and the wisdom of God, discern its relativity to the first and to the last comings: for thus it is written, Unto all who are called, Jews (at the first) and Greeks (the West, at the last), is Christ the power of God (at the first), and the wisdom of God (at the last: In whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge). For the Jews (at the first) require a sign (hence the miracles), and the Greeks (the West) seek after wisdom (practical discernment: scientific relativity): but we preach Christ crucified, to the Jews a stumbling-block, and to the Greeks foolishness (supposing to know, yet reveling in ignorance).

The birth of man is the beginning of his sorrows, as he enters a world of delusion. The longer he lives in it, the more deluded he becomes, as his anxiety to avoid unavoidable death becomes more and more acute: thus he invents age-defying processes, anxiously reaching for that which is out of reach: when all he has to do is be. His thirst for survival in the future makes him incapable of living in the present: thus he says to the Holy Spirit who is directing his life’s steps, “Not now, I am busy”, (preoccupied with worthless matter, which is subject to time). Thus he must be born again: not once, but twice (John 3: 5). For unless you become as a little child, you cannot perceive the things of the kingdom of heaven (the unseen world).

Being born again by the word (water, as in John 3: 5 and Ephesians 5: 26) does not mean hearing the gospel and professing John 3: 16; but awakening to Christ through the word (wisdom). And awakening is not seeing new things (elements of nature) or receiving enlightening insights: it is the fluorescence of one in the light of true consciousness: for the mystery of life is not a problem to be solved (for the equation has been solved); but a reality to be experienced. It is finding yourself in a new vista, from where you look back at the path you have walked, and the being that you were. From this point you evolve into perfection, upon your translation.

The energy of the sun is like unto the spirit: discern the sun in its cycle, and relate it to the spirit: for it is one with the cycle of consciousness. At reconciliation, the incandescent is transformed into a fluorescent: at which point one no longer is a filament, but becomes a radiant (Spirit). What good then is the delusive ornament he strives to nourish while as yet an element in his refining process?
Man lives a life he cannot see, in a world which though he sees, yet does not perceive, nor comprehend; as, in his haste, being preoccupied with his deluded goals, nature blurrily goes by. If he cannot see the elements of nature, which are before his eyes, how then can he perceive the things which cannot be seen (of the unseen world)? The forces of the unseen world direct the elements of the seen (natural) world. That which you see, which you experience, is simply a reflection of what the real you, the spirit, is going through in the unseen world: for the outer being bears the burdens of the inner being (see Psalm 84: 2, 42: 1&2, and 63: 1&2). All you have to do is be; submitting to the power that directs your very steps through your making process: for it is God which is working in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure; thus it is foolish to resist.

The world’s current state of polarity is the preparing of man for the unfolding of truth. In your making, the outer being bears the burden of the inner being, until he realizes the foolishness of bearing such worthless burdens, and finds the simple resolve of the inner being unto reconciliation to his true being: finding one’s corporate membership (see 2nd Peter 1: 19 and Malachi 4: 2). It does not matter what you asseveratingly hold as truth: what matters is what IS (I AM). Thus the end of all exploration is to know the beginning.

In today’s world, time has become man’s master: time was not created to rule you, but to keep you abreast. The flesh is limited in time, but the spirit is timeless. Man wastes much energy and life force striving with time; and this is simply because his main concern is about the time constrained flesh he is snared in, instead of the timeless and priceless spirit that is his true being. When you allow time to dictate your choice and state of being, you limit yourself to a restrained world governed by man, who himself is governed by the idol of Self, and so on in an endless cycle of bondage (enslavement).

There is a time and season for all things: but only as a point of reference in the unfolding mystery of consciousness; unto the fullness of divine illumination, at the point of reconciliation to the source of conscious energy. Submit to the fashioning of your inner being, and allow it to guide your outer being through its allotted time. Believe in that which you are being fashioned to become; and learn who you are, and the reason and beginning of your being.
Wisdom states, The fear (awesomeness) of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom and knowledge. If you start with God, you will understand all things; but if you rely on man’s ingenuity, you will be snared in confusion, confoundedly. Now discern creation:

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth (two kingdoms: fashioned after his image): a foreword to creation and its making. For the purpose of creating the earth came by virtue of the dual image of God, and the pervasion of darkness: for in the beginning darkness pervaded the face of the deep (space), which deep is wisdom, which wisdom is God; therefore knowledge was, at this point, non-existent; as God could not perceive his wisdom: thus, conscious of his dual image, positive and negative, he commanded light to be, and he became: thus perceiving (unveiling) his wisdom.

With this transpiration came knowledge: for God then saw (learned of) the light (the wisdom of conscious energy), that it was good: thereby realizing the evilness of darkness; and began the process of eliminating (separating) darkness from his being: discern Proverbs 3: 19. Thus, in the beginning, Genesis 1 referred to him as God; but upon perceiving his wisdom, attaining knowledge through creation, and separating himself, he then became the LORD God, which regard began in Genesis 2: 4. Discern Exodus 3: 14 as written in Hebrew: EHEYEH ASHER EHEYEH; meaning, I WILL BE THAT WHICH I WILL BE: (wholly Holy: upon full reconciliation).

It is written, It is God which works in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure: for you are that part of him pervaded by darkness. That which God is doing in you, he is doing for his good pleasure, in transforming his eternal body (which members of you are: see Ephesians 2: 21&22) into his chosen likeness (Holy: Light). God became aware of his dual nature, and realized the dark side of his being (the negative) was preeminent, overshadowing his positive side. As with a battery, to generate light, you must connect to both the positive and the negative: thus, to generate light, God connected unto his twain image (as denoted in Isaiah 45: 7, and in Ephesians 2: 15: For to make in himself of twain one new man). Having learned the goodness of light, through which wisdom came to life (came alive), God began to conceive (create) the process with which to completely cleanse (separate: rid) himself from the evil of darkness.
To cleanse a contaminated absorbable object, you must break it down into little particles (molecules), and run them through a chemical purification process (refinement): thus God broke his body down, through the process of reproduction, into molecules known as man; setting each one, being intrinsic members of the whole, on a purification course known as Afflictive Tribulation, in a laboratory known as the World, through a painstaking and longsuffering process of purifying each member, using natural elements that reactively affect man’s chemical balance, in reforming the complete body. And the conception of the method by which God broke down his body he conceived through creation; and he started by separating wisdom (symbolized as water): the spiritual from the worldly.

Now discern this parable, as presented by Buddhist folklore: Two traveling monks reached a river, where they met a young woman, who, being weary of the current, asked if they could carry her across. One of the monks hesitated; but the other monk quickly picked her up onto his shoulders, and transported her across the water, and put her down on the other bank. She thanked him, and departed. As the monks continued on their way, the one monk was brooding and preoccupied. Unable to hold his silence longer, he spoke out, saying, “Brother, our spiritual training teaches us to avoid any contact with women, but you picked that woman up on your shoulders and carried her.” “Brother,” said the second monk, “I sat her down on the other side, but you are still carrying her.” Do not allow legalism to distort righteous love, even God’s righteousness.

And now discern this mystery in Joshua 3: 2-4: It came to pass after three days, that the officers went through the host; and they commanded the people, saying, When you see the ark of the covenant of the LORD your God, and the priests the Levites bearing it, then you shall remove from your place, and go after it (follow). Yet there shall be a space between you and it, about two thousand cubits by measure (about two thousand years between the first and the last comings, signified by the two cherubims shadowing the Mercyseat): come not near unto it (but observe it as you follow), that you may know the way by which you must go: for you have not passed this way heretofore (prior). And understand that the Jordan river empties into the Dead Sea: therefore crossing it is overcoming it in purification, as all shall do by grace: as denoted in verse 17.
Back to the refining process: To commence on this process, the refinery (the natural world) had to be built, and the elements (perils) put in place, and then the body had to be biologically broken down into molecules in the refinery, to be sent through the process, and reformed back in purity (holiness) as whole, ready to be reconciled to the head: thereby making the LORD God wholly Holy.

The refinery had to have its by-laws, known as World Wisdom; thus the waters (wisdom) were divided: the spiritual to the heavens (the unseen world), and the natural to the earth (the seen world: carnality). But then, as was with the spiritual at the beginning, the wisdom of the natural had to start from zero: hence Dry land. And after this came the concept of reproduction: thus the vegetation was created, each having seed and bearing fruit, whose seed was in itself. Then came the elements and chemicals (gases) required to furnish the refinery. After which came the concept of flesh in the conception of the mammals (starting with the whales), and the concept of the angels (as with the fowls of the air). After which God then made man in his image as Adam (male and female), and then commenced the process of refinement unto perfecting his eternal body as Holy, rid of all impurities (all darkness).

Now understand this, No man, being lost to self (ego), can be made to learn what he does not want to learn: if pressured, he might learn of it, but he will not know it. Only when he seeks to know it will he make the commitment to learn it. It is something you find from within, through the guidance of the Holy Spirit, of whom you are; yet experience from without, as the Spirit directs your steps. If you are grounded on the foundation of the scriptures and Christ, as many claim to be, you should be able to discern any text (doctrine) without fear, and perceive what is or isn’t (truth): such a one is weaned from the milk. In the war of life, fear always brings with it false hope: but true hope can only be found in love. Right before the end, fear might present a form of false victory; but at the very end, love overcomes, thereby putting fear to shame, to the glory of love.

The mystery regarding life is that as the righteous work of God unfolds, so do the secrets of life; but as you cannot see dough rising, so also can you not see God’s righteous work as it unfolds: thus it might seem to the naked eye as if nothing is changing.
The soul will have attained the fullness of incontrovertible consciousness; yet it will seem as if there’s been no change. The power of the world to come is being transmuted in all; yet it cannot be perceived in its mutation: in the end, all shall find themselves perfected. Thus it is written, Whosoever shall fall on this stone (Love), which the builders rejected (being self-righteous), shall be broken; but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder.

Thus Paul confessed, saying: For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father (God) of our Lord Jesus Christ, of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named, (being one with him), that he would grant you, according to the riches of his glory, (in keeping with his righteousness), to be strengthened with might by his Spirit in the inner man (the true you); that Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith, (as you also become transformed into Christ: Love); that you, being rooted and grounded in love, may be able to comprehend with all saints the very breadth, length, depth, and height (of the mystery of the righteous work of God); and to know the love of Christ, (which is manifested unto all, to become permeated in all), which surpasses knowledge, (which fullness of, man, in his conceit, is yet to know), that you might be filled with all the fullness of God.

But to be filled with the fullness of God, you must apprehend first the knowledge of his righteous work; for which Paul confessed, Brethren, I count not myself to have apprehended, (yet many seem to think they have no need for further knowledge of the kingdom of God; supposing to know all there is to know; ignorant of their unclothedness): but this one thing I do, forgetting those things that are behind, (leaving behind that which has been fulfilled), and reaching forth unto those things which are before (ahead), I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus.

You are a greater witness than the literal word when you become the word. There comes a time in your transmutation when you internalize (embody) the scriptures (Word), even as did Jesus: this is what being born of the word (water) is; and after this you are on your way to be born of the Holy Spirit as Holy Ghost, after the similitude of Christ: (John 3: 5 and Romans 1: 4). And now discern the gospel of the kingdom of God as it unfolds; for which course you were told, Seek first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness.

Preface

Dearly beloved of the Father in heaven: be you Jew, Hindu, Buddhist, Christian, Moslem, or of any other faith, or heathen; grace to you, and peace be unto you. Though you segregate yourselves confoundedly, yet know that you are all heirs of the one true and faithful God. Deep within, you believe there is a greater being, though you see him not: this is faith, implanted within all; and his essence is your very being, making all equally precious. And the foundation of every faith is called Christ: indicated symbolically in the beliefs of each faith, in varying terms; else there is no faith. For each name (term) used to identify each faith simply means Believer.

O straying precious sheep; the reason for the knowledge you have always sought of life, and of God, is being made manifest unto you, to the end that you be reconciled to God in his living likeness. Therefore be of good cheer: for your Salvation is at the door: even the last (Omega). For by grace are you saved through faith; and not of yourselves: but the gift of God; not of works, lest any man should boast; but of the quickening of the Spirit: for you were once dead in sins against God, and in trespasses against each other; and when you were yet dead in sins, were you quickened together with Christ, by whose grace you are saved from sin, looking unto the finish, the peace offering, unto reconciliation: for your works cannot perfect you, being flawed. This is the exceeding greatness of the power and wisdom of God toward all who believe in him (both faithful and heathen). And in this shall the sacrifice of the Gentiles also be acceptable: the marriage supper: being sanctified by the Holy Ghost: for the God of peace shall bruise Satan under your feet shortly.

And, though being sanctified of the Spirit in the consolation; yet, as ordained, only through much travail shall you enter into the kingdom of God, after the order of the first begotten, being fellow heirs: thus partakers of the sufferings of the great tribulation, the travail of birth, which God spoke of by the mouth of his holy prophets. For, while you feel at home in the flesh, you are absent from the LORD: therefore mortify the flesh daily, that the Spirit might be prevalent in you. For as they that knew Christ after the flesh knew him no more after the flesh, but after the Spirit; so must you also no longer glorify the flesh, that the soul might be glorified.
Of the consolation: O Bethlehem Ephratah, though you be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of you shall (is) he come forth to me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting (preordained). Therefore will he give them up, until the time that she (Zion) which travails has brought forth: then the remnant of his brethren (Gentiles) shall return unto the children of Israel (as a body of believers). And he shall stand and feed in the strength of the LORD, in the majesty of the name of the LORD his God; and they shall abide: for now shall he be great unto the ends of the earth. And this man shall be the peace (Salem) when the Assyrian shall come into our land (into the land of Ephraim: US): when he shall tread in our palaces (even the towers).

Peter said to you: Repent, all of you, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the LORD; and he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached to you, (which mystery is significantly hidden within the doctrine of all faiths): whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God has spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.

Therefore discern this sign of the time, you who suppose that the kingdom of God should immediately appear: The kingdom of God is likened to a certain nobleman who went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom, and to return: yet know that as a snare shall his return be. For the kingdom of God comes not with observation: neither shall they say, Look, there he comes! for he would already be in your midst. For as the lightening, that lightens one part under heaven (the first), and shines also unto the other part under heaven (the last); so shall also the Son of man be in his day. To he that has perception: Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: he that opens up to me shall receive of me the bread of life from above.

*He that alters the words of this testimony, or sells this book for personal gain, seeks to exalt his idolatrous self, and is in danger of experiencing the wrath. As you receive freely of the wisdom and knowledge of God, so also pass on freely unto your brethren.

This book can be accessed on line at: www.thetestament.com

pilgrim.1:


However, the phrase "born again" means something entirely different from what you have posted about Jesus. To say that somebody is "born again" means that they were "dead in trespasses and sins" prior to their conversion Eph. 2:1

You're right!

pilgrim.1:


(Unless you have clear texts to describe Jesus as such, then it would be a fallacy to hold onto that idea.

No probs. . .

The very message of salvation tells us that Jesus took the sins of the whole world upon himself.


He did not just carry our sins or become a sinner; He took upon himself the very nature of sin, the nature of satan. He became sin. What could be worse than that?

This is what became of the son of God while on the cross:

2 Corinthians 5:21
For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

Psalm 22:6
But I am a worm, and no man; a reproach of men, and despised of the people

He was taken to hell like avery other condemned person but while there He became a rebel. His blood was speaking. It was accepted. The price hath been paid. He was raised up victorious over sin, death and the devil and we were raised with him. That is why when we believe in and testify of this work of Christ for our salvation, we recieve this same resurrection life with which he was raised up.

There was need for him to be born again.

pilgrim.1:


Later, I'll come back and expound on why it is not correct or sound to assume that Jesus was "born again". He was raised from the dead - but not "born again", because He was never "dead in trespasses and sins". Please craefully check on this - and let's rub minds together on it.

Cheers.

Am waitin. . .

donnie:

He did not just carry our sins or become a sinner; He took upon himself the very nature of sin, the nature of satan. He became sin. What could be worse than that?

- - -

Dear donnie,

I would love to have sat down to walk you through Scripture so you realize that you are gravely mistaken. I'll do so sometime next week when I return from an assignment.

But for the moment, let me offer you these considerations:

(a) nowhere in Scripture is Christ said to have taken upon himself the nature of satan. I'm quite aware of where that blasphmous idea emerged, and how unfortunate that so many people in pentecostal and charismatic circles swallowed it wholesale! No, Christ did not take upon Himself the NATURE os satan.

(b) the Bible teaches that at the Incarnation, Christ took upon Him the "seed of Abraham" - which is more expressive of His Humanity (see Heb. 2:14). But even so, in bearing our sins at the Crucifixion, He never took upon Him the "nature" of Satan. Sure, He was made Him "to be sin for us" (1 Cor. 5:21): but what that connotes is simply the picture of Him being our vicarious sacrifice as in Isaiah's prophecy:

"the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all" (Isa. 53:6)

God made "His [Christ's] soul an offering for sin" (Isa. 53:10)

(c) In making Him "to be sin for us" (same as Isaiah's prophecy above), it does not suggest that God transformed Christ into actual sin, nor that Christ therefore took the nature of Satan upon Himself! What He bore upon Himself were our sins (Isaiah 53:6; 1 Pet. 2:24) - not the nature of Satan.

(d) Now, if at all He took upon Himself the nature of satan, He would not have been the perfect sacrifice! Death claimed everything that was held by sin, and no one escaped its grip (cf. Rom. 5:14). However, because Christ was absolutely sinless, and was indeed still sinless in dying on the Cross, the Bible clearly teaches that it was not possible that death should hold Him back (Acts 2:24). If He had faced death with the nature of Satan upon Him, the resurrection would definitely not have occured!

(e) However, many people read the word "hell" in Acts 2:27 & 31 and assume that the Lord Jesus went to the place reserved for the wicked in other that He might be "punished" and then be "born again" by resurrection. Absurd reasoning, actually.

Here is a link that will help you understand the place where Jesus went to in His death:

(https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-46892.64.html#msg1382535)

Please access that link and see the distinctions I earlier offered to show that Jesus Christ did not go to "HELL" as we have many times supposed! He went to HADES - which is simply the place of the departed dead, and not GEHENNA (which is the place of punishment for the wicked dead)!

It is unfortunate that the KJV and other such versions of the Bible have the word "hell" in those verses to make many people suppose that Jesus went to some place that He did NOT go! Check this out by comparing with Ephesians 4:9 - Christ descended to the "lower parts" of the earth, and NOT into "hell".

(f) In all of these, I'd just ask you to please find me the verse(s) that demonstrate clearly that Christ took upon Himself the "nature of Satan". Until then, please bear these matter in mind and see exactly who Jesus was and is in Himself when He defeated death! He could not have done so if He faced death with anything that bore the mark of Satan!

Cheers.

Nature of satan? I dont think so!

@pilgrim,

Wetin? Take am easy now. We are yet to tackle the subject topic and you guys are delving into another area that'll take us further and further into the depths of the Word. Anyway, I cannot blame you for trying to correct another manifest error comming from donnie and company. I've had dealings with a number of people from Christ Embassy too, and while I appreciate their zeal, I get fearful of the way they read and interprete the scriptures.

@donnie,

I was hoping you guys will respond to my last post, but you dissapeared for a while and now reappeared and dodging the subject matter. It will be the height of humilty, and you will earn my respect if you will be gracious enough to admit that you guys were wrong, at least with respect to the notion that the identity of the "Son of God" wasn't dinstict in the O.T.

Let me add the following to the new subject of discussion. I have dealt with this before on nairaland, and here is what I had to say: Aside from this, there are 3 compartments altogether that the Bible mentions are in the ground Ephesians 4:9. Two of those are mentioned in the story of Lazarus. Hell or Hades is where the rich young ruler found himself while Lazarus found himself in the bossom of Abraham. I don't believe Lazarus found himself in Abraham's Bossom because he was a direct lineage of Abraham, rather it was because he was also a man of faith. Remember that Abraham is called the father of faith. Hades/Hell from this story is a place of torment and Abraham's bossom is a place of rest.
The third compartment will be found in the Book of Jude and the Bible called it Tatarus. This is the place where all the disobedient angels are being held. These angels were locked up "in chains of darkness" after the flood of Noah because they tried to pollute the human race.
As for Abraham's Bossom, it is no longer populated because Jesus took all the occupants with him to heaven during his ascension. This is what the Bible refers to in the Book of Ephesians 4:8 as "He led captivity captive." You will also remember that when Jesus was risen, people saw a number of this old testament saints in and around Jerusalem. Jesus took them with Him on His triumphant entry into heaven.
obviously, there's a lot to talk about. but I'll give more gist later. I hope this sheds more light to the conversation, though I wish we do not let it derail the subject topic.

all of una on this thread too no book!

davidylan:

all of una on this thread too no book!

Lol. . . you just wan take style congratulate us olodos!

Tayo-D:

@pilgrim,

Wetin? Take am easy now. We are yet to tackle the subject topic and you guys are delving into another area that'll take us further and further into the depths of the Word.

Lol. . . no vex. Infact, na summary I been wan write - but somehow the thing just pour out of my mind in a rush! Perhaps we might take off some time and then try and open another thread on that subject for discussion. After my assignment next week, if the thread is not already floated, pilgrim.1 would help do so.

Tayo-D:

Anyway, I cannot blame you for trying to correct another manifest error comming from donnie and company. I've had dealings with a number of people from Christ Embassy too, and while I appreciate their zeal, I get fearful of the way they read and interprete the scriptures.

Well, we all learn everyday - and the WORD is there to be revealed by God's enabling through His Spirit. We can't blame that error on our dear friends on the Forum though (donnie et al); way back before I converted from Islam, I heard that teaching from one of the popular Televangelists. . . and how my stomach churned with repulsion. Even after becoming a Christian, I've searched for the remotest confirmation of that error in the Bible - and there's just no place where God gave us that idea about the death and resurrectio of Jesus Christ.

As per the one on Hell, Hades, Tartarus, good observations - we might someday have occasion to help others understand that as well in another thread, so we don't derail or hijack the present topic of "Who Is The Angel Of The Lord?".

Cheers and blessings.

I sincerely hope that the little explanations i can have time to give at this moment will be seen, neither as an attempt to boast in the knowledge of scripture nor an attempt to confuse scriptures.

[/quote]

pilgrim.1:

Dear donnie,

I would love to have sat down to walk you through Scripture so you realize that you are gravely mistaken. I'll do so sometime next week when I return from an assignment.

But for the moment, let me offer you these considerations:

(a) nowhere in Scripture is Christ said to have taken upon himself the nature of satan.

NOT TRUE!

It is because you haven't properly defined sin that is the reason you find it hard to understand me. This is the reason He prayed the father to let this cup pass from Him. It wasnt the physical death or the beatings. It was the fact that He will become sin for us. He would be seperated from the father who does not behold iniquity. That is why on the cross, when the father turned His back on Jesus he cried out: My God My God. why has thou forsaken me?


Sin is more than an act, it is the nature of Satan; just like righteousness is more than an act but the very nature of God. It is that sin nature that God seeks to deal with for at the new birth this nature is completely supplanted(not renewed or refurbished) with the divine nature. And this has nothing to do with what  the man did or did not do.

1 John 3:10
In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil. . .  

You are either a child of God or a child of satan; no middle ground.

In the same way Christ became sin for us; the one who believes is made(not just righteous but) the righteousness of God in Him.

It reminds me of the brazen serpent which Moses made to save the Isrealites from death. That serpent (which is a symbol of sin) was spoken of agian in the new testament. For in the same way that serpent was lifted up on that rod, so the son of man is lifted today for the world to see and believe.


John 3:14 
"As [Num 21:9] Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must [Matt 8:20] the Son of Man [John 8:28; 12:34] be lifted up;

A lack of proper understanding of the message of salvation is what is responsible for the weakness we see in the church today.

pilgrim.1:

(b) the Bible teaches that at the Incarnation, Christ took upon Him the "seed of Abraham" - which is more expressive of His Humanity (see Heb. 2:14).

You talk about the incarnation I'm talking about what happened on the cross

[quote author=pilgrim.1 link=topic=61317.msg1578130#msg1578130 date=1192147285]
But even so, in bearing our sins at the Crucifixion, He never took upon Him the "nature" of Satan. Sure, He was made Him "to be sin for us" (1 Cor. 5:21): but what that connotes is simply the picture of Him being our vicarious sacrifice as in Isaiah's prophecy:

"the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all" (Isa. 53:6)

God made "His [Christ's] soul an offering for sin" (Isa. 53:10)

(c) In making Him "to be sin for us" (same as Isaiah's prophecy above), it does not suggest that God transformed Christ into actual sin, nor that Christ therefore took the nature of Satan upon Himself! What He bore upon Himself were our sins (Isaiah 53:6; 1 Pet. 2:24) - not the nature of Satan.

I dare say that you do not understand the scriptures you just quoted.

pilgrim.1:

(d) Now, if at all He took upon Himself the nature of satan, He would not have been the perfect sacrifice! Death claimed everything that was held by sin, and no one escaped its grip (cf. Rom. 5:14). However, because Christ was absolutely sinless, and was indeed still sinless in dying on the Cross, the Bible clearly teaches that it was not possible that death should hold Him back (Acts 2:24). If He had faced death with the nature of Satan upon Him, the resurrection would definitely not have occured!

No no no, you are getting it all wrong.

When he was condemned to the cross, A righteous man was condemned. But on that cross of calvary, something happened. Something beyond the ordinary. Our sins were layed on him, he took upon himself a form that words cannot fully describe. All manner of sickness sin and disease fastened themselves to His body.   

It was a shock to them when they pierced His side and blood and water gushed out showing that His heart had ruptured in just six hours! The roman centurion went on His knees when he saw this.

Isaiah 52:14
Just as there were many who were appalled at him [a]—
       his appearance was so disfigured beyond that of any man
       and his form marred beyond human likeness—


He had to die Spiritually first in order to die physically.

Isaiah 53

   5But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.

   6All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.

   7He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth.

   8He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken.

   9And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth


In the highlighted verse above, the margin KJV has it as plural (ie deaths) indicating that he died two deaths. Spiritually (his seperation from the father) first, then physically. For the father who does not behold iniquity turned his back on Jesus who had been made sin for us. This is what made Jesus cry out: father why have you forsaken me.

Jesus speaking to the Jews, said, Ye are of your father the devil (why? bc they had his nature) and the deeds of your father you will do (naturally). They had his nature of sin, therefore they were slaves of sin, Abrahamic covenant or no Abrahamic covenant. The law was Holy but they were carnal.

What was needed was a new creation.

pilgrim.1:

(e) However, many people read the word "hell" in Acts 2:27 & 31 and assume that the Lord Jesus went to the place reserved for the wicked in other that He might be "punished" and then be "born again" by resurrection. Absurd reasoning, actually.

Here is a link that will help you understand the place where Jesus went to in His death:

(https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-46892.64.html#msg1382535)

Please access that link and see the distinctions I earlier offered to show that Jesus Christ did not go to "HELL" as we have many times supposed! He went to HADES - which is simply the place of the departed dead, and not GEHENNA (which is the place of punishment for the wicked dead)!

It is unfortunate that the KJV and other such versions of the Bible have the word "hell" in those verses to make many people suppose that Jesus went to some place that He did NOT go! Check this out by comparing with Ephesians 4:9 - Christ descended to the "lower parts" of the earth, and NOT into "hell".

Hope i can have enough time to meet you over there. I am sure there is a lot you have not seen in the scriptures on that topic.

And just to drop an advice here, God is not impressed by your trying to distance Jesus from sin in His work of redemption. Let the Word speak for itself.

na wa o. . . se entire treatise! Abeg make we add this letter to the nairaland saints to the bible.