no need to restore the truth

[BigJulie]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

again...I would refer you to my story of the funeral....


God is spirit,

but Christ is both fully God (spirit) and fully man (flesh).

This is why the Bible teaches us of the word, "The Word became flesh"

The Word "BECAME" flesh!

The Word was not always flesh.
For it says the Word was God, and as we have read, "God is spirit"
The Word became flesh.

But you are ignoring the fact that Christ's flesh and bones did not stay in the ground.

We have God is spirit, but who says that is not referring to the Holy Ghost? Or to the spirit of Christ? Why do you insist that this must be God the Father when we have Jesus Christ teaching us who God the Father is?

So, once again, is Christ's resurrected body in the image of his Father? This is a simple yes or no?

[alanmolstad]

Your answer is at #114

[BigJulie]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

Your answer is at #114

Actually, it isn't. Why are you sure that God is spirit is not referring to the Holy Ghost?

The truth is, the more I read the scriptures in the NT, the more I realize you have to ignore so many teachings of Christ to make the ***umption that Christ is not the express image of His Father.

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by BigJulie

Actually, it isn't. Why are you sure that God is spirit is not referring to the Holy Ghost?

there are not 3 gods......

There is only one God, and God is spirit....

and God never stops being pure spirit.

and a Spirit does not have arms and legs...thats silly.

[BigJulie]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

there are not 3 gods......

There is only one God, and God is spirit....

and God never stops being pure spirit.

and a Spirit does not have arms and legs...thats silly.

But, Jesus Christ is God and he is spirit and a resurrected body of flesh and bones. There is no reason to take one verse and use it to ignore all of Christ's other teachings or use it to nullify his other teachings or make them metaphorical.

You haven't made your point scriptural-ly and just restating it over and over does not make it.

Listen to this verse again ""Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow." (1 Peter 1:11) to argue that Christ also did not have a resurrected body?"

How was the Spirit of Christ within them? Once again, we know Christ had a body and currently has a glorified resurrected body, but this does not deter one from referring to HIS spirit that teaches rather than his body.

So, then would you argue that the Spirit of Christ means that Christ CANNOT have arms and legs and that any such belief would be silly?

[BigJulie]

By the way, reading up on the words "spirit"--there is no difference between the word "spirit" and "ghost" in the New Testament Greek. There are also no caps. So, the Holy Ghost and the Holy Spirit and the Spirit versus the spirit does not exist in the original writings. This was also not there for Jerome, but was added later to keep with the "traditions" of the trinity.

The Jewish argument (and my own confusion as well) is, if God the Father is a spirit, then the Holy Ghost is redundant.

And if you did not have Christ in explaining he has a body of flesh and bones, would you use this scripture "Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow." (1 Peter 1:11) to argue that Christ also did not have a resurrected body?

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by BigJulie

The Jewish argument (and my own confusion as well) is, if God the Father is a spirit, then the Holy Ghost is redundant.

Im sure you will have plenty of time to take that point up with Him.......or perhaps not

[BigJulie]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

Im sure you will have plenty of time to take that point up with Him.......or perhaps not

But you have argued that I need to back my beliefs by the scriptures. So far, the scriptures do not back using one verse "God is spirit" to void every other things Christ said. In fact, there are so many times he teaches us that we learn of the Father by him, that God the Father is NOT invisible to Christ, the Christ does as He sees the Father do, that He is the express image of the Father, that there is NOTHING to support this version your belief that one verse nullifies all other teachings.

Looking into this further, here is an interesting view from another church:

http://www.ucg.org/bible-study-tools...inity-doctrine

Here is a quote "Anglican churchman and Oxford University lecturer K.E. Kirk revealingly writes of the adoption of the doctrine of the Trinity: “The theological and philosophical vindication of the divinity of the Spirit begins in the fourth century; we naturally turn to the writers of that period to discover what grounds they have for their belief. To our surprise, we are forced to admit that they have none . . ."

[alanmolstad]

God is spirit,

but Christ is both fully God (spirit) and fully man (flesh).

This is why the Bible teaches us of the word, "The Word became flesh"

The Word "BECAME" flesh!

The Word was not always flesh........(it seems a lot of people miss this important point)

For it says the "Word was God", and as we have read, "God is spirit"
The Word became flesh.




So to review:
The Word became flesh.
The Word became human.
This means that the Word was NOT flesh before.
This means that the Word was not human before.
This means that the Word became flesh
This means that the Word became human!!!!!









Now for the question....is the human body made in the image of God?....ever?
The spirit returns to the God who gave it"....

"And God said, Let us make man in our image"

"God is spirit"

-"for a spirit does not have flesh and bones, as you see I have"




There is your answer....God is Spirit, and when he made us in his image this spiritual-ness was what we are made in the image of.
and as Christ taught, a Spirit does not have even glorified flesh and bones.




Now we can go on on-and-on-and on.....but that is the answer we get from the Bible.





That is the only answer the Bible has.

All other answers come from some other source.....

[BigJulie]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

God is spirit,

but Christ is both fully God (spirit) and fully man (flesh).

This is why the Bible teaches us of the word, "The Word became flesh"

The Word "BECAME" flesh!

The Word was not always flesh........(it seems a lot of people miss this important point)

For it says the "Word was God", and as we have read, "God is spirit"
The Word became flesh.




So to review:
The Word became flesh.
The Word became human.
This means that the Word was NOT flesh before.
This means that the Word was not human before.
This means that the Word became flesh
This means that the Word became human!!!!!









Now for the question....is the human body made in the image of God?....ever?
The spirit returns to the God who gave it"....

"And God said, Let us make man in our image"

"God is spirit"

-"for a spirit does not have flesh and bones, as you see I have"




There is your answer....God is Spirit, and when he made us in his image this spiritual-ness was what we are made in the image of.
and as Christ taught, a Spirit does not have even glorified flesh and bones.




Now we can go on on-and-on-and on.....but that is the answer we get from the Bible.





That is the only answer the Bible has.

All other answers come from some other source.....

You know Alan, all of your repeating and making your font larger does nothing to change what the scriptures say.

And all of your repeating has caused me to do my own researching. What I found is that history does not support that the trinity came from doctrines found within the Bible but is a man-made concept. People can do their own research. It is there to be found.

[Phoenix]

Originally Posted by BigJulie

You know Alan, all of your repeating and making your font larger does nothing to change what the scriptures say.

And all of your repeating has caused me to do my own researching. What I found is that history does not support that the trinity came from doctrines found within the Bible but is a man-made concept. People can do their own research. It is there to be found.

that is some good research you have done. i agree with your persuasive conclusions.

[alanmolstad]

So to review....


God is spirit,
always was, always will be,pure spirit.
This is why God is called the "invisible God" for spirits are invisible,,always were, always will be....for God never changes.


The Word was God...
So the Word is God, and that means the Word is spirit, for we have already learned that "God is spirit".

The Word became flesh
So the Word that is and will always be pure spirit,became flesh.
God the Son took upon Himself a 2nd nature.
The Son never stopped being just like God the father in his nature, in that God is always spirit.
But this 2nd nature is the nature of a man..
So the Word became flesh, became human.
The word "became" means it first was not, then it was later...(In other words, it "became")

Jesus is the image of the invisible God.
Jesus is human...and we can see humans!
So while Jesus is always God, and as God is always invisible spirt, Jesus is also totally human too!
Thats why we can say of Jesus, that he is the "Image of the invisible God"...For in him was the fullness of what God is...yet due to this 2nd natire of being human we also can see Jesus.


A spirit does not have flesh and bone .
This means that God does not have flesh and bone, for as we learned at the start, "God is spirit"

So when Jesus said to his men, "A spirit does not have flesh and bone" who was he actually including in this teaching?....


That's right, the Father!

[BigJulie]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

So to review....


God is spirit,
always was, always will be,pure spirit.
This is why God is called the "invisible God" for spirits are invisible,,always were, always will be....for God never changes.


The Word was God...
So the Word is God, and that means the Word is spirit, for we have already learned that "God is spirit".

The Word became flesh
So the Word that is and will always be pure spirit,became flesh.
God the Son took upon Himself a 2nd nature.
The Son never stopped being just like God the father in his nature, in that God is always spirit.
But this 2nd nature is the nature of a man..
So the Word became flesh, became human.
The word "became" means it first was not, then it was later...(In other words, it "became")

Jesus is the image of the invisible God.
Jesus is human...and we can see humans!
So while Jesus is always God, and as God is always invisible spirt, Jesus is also totally human too!
Thats why we can say of Jesus, that he is the "Image of the invisible God"...For in him was the fullness of what God is...yet due to this 2nd natire of being human we also can see Jesus.


A spirit does not have flesh and bone .
This means that God does not have flesh and bone, for as we learned at the start, "God is spirit"

So when Jesus said to his men, "A spirit does not have flesh and bone" who was he actually including in this teaching?....


That's right, the Father!

And absolutely no scriptures to back it except one, really You like reading up on history. Read up on the history of the trilogy. You will find you really have nothing to stand on here.

And you know the beauty of it is? As I read up on John 1:1, I find that when read in Greek, you don't have that one right either. I had really no idea of how flimsy your belief system about this really is. Clearly, you have done far more research on my religion then on your own.

[alanmolstad]

God is SPIRIT !


always was, always will be,pure spirit.
This is why God is called the "invisible God" for spirits are invisible,,always were, always will be....for God never changes.


The Word was God...
So the Word is God, and that means the Word is spirit, for we have already learned that "God is spirit".

The Word became flesh
So the Word that is and will always be pure spirit,became flesh.
God the Son took upon Himself a 2nd nature.
The Son never stopped being just like God the father in his nature, in that God is always spirit.
But this 2nd nature is the nature of a man..


So the Word became flesh, became human.
The word "became" means it first was not, then it was later...(In other words, it "became")

Jesus is the image of the invisible God.
Jesus is human...and we can see humans!
So while Jesus is always God, and as God is always invisible spirt, Jesus is also totally human too!
Thats why we can say of Jesus, that he is the "Image of the invisible God"...For in him was the fullness of what God is...yet due to this 2nd nature of being human we also can see Jesus.


A spirit does not have flesh and bone .
This means that God does not have flesh and bone, for as we learned at the start, "God is spirit"

So when Jesus said to his men, "A spirit does not have flesh and bone" who was he actually including in this teaching?....


That's right, the Father!






I was just noticing that not only do I fill my posts with listings of the scriptures that support my views,I actually quote scripture greatly in my posts!
In fact, if you color the parts of my posts to show what comes directly from the Scripture, you dont really have much left that is not taken directly from the Bible...[/B]

[BigJulie]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

God is SPIRIT !


always was, always will be,pure spirit.
This is why God is called the "invisible God" for spirits are invisible,,always were, always will be....for God never changes.


The Word was God...
So the Word is God, and that means the Word is spirit, for we have already learned that "God is spirit".

The Word became flesh
So the Word that is and will always be pure spirit,became flesh.
God the Son took upon Himself a 2nd nature.
The Son never stopped being just like God the father in his nature, in that God is always spirit.
But this 2nd nature is the nature of a man..


So the Word became flesh, became human.
The word "became" means it first was not, then it was later...(In other words, it "became")

Jesus is the image of the invisible God.
Jesus is human...and we can see humans!
So while Jesus is always God, and as God is always invisible spirt, Jesus is also totally human too!
Thats why we can say of Jesus, that he is the "Image of the invisible God"...For in him was the fullness of what God is...yet due to this 2nd nature of being human we also can see Jesus.


A spirit does not have flesh and bone .
This means that God does not have flesh and bone, for as we learned at the start, "God is spirit"

So when Jesus said to his men, "A spirit does not have flesh and bone" who was he actually including in this teaching?....


That's right, the Father!






I was just noticing that not only do I fill my posts with listings of the scriptures that support my views,I actually quote scripture greatly in my posts!
In fact, if you color the parts of my posts to show what comes directly from the Scripture, you dont really have much left that is not taken directly from the Bible...[/B]

You seem to think that making your font bigger or putting it in red will make it read differently.

In order to come up with your trilogy definition, you have to ignore all other teachings of Christ.

As I stated before, there is no reason to take these teachings metaphorically as you do.

Is God the Father invisible to Christ? After learning that we are made in the image of God, we have this verse And Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him. (Genesis 5:22). Is this a metaphor to you again?

And even in John 1:1. We have the Word was God and the Word was WITH God. Once again, no reason to believe that Christ does not see the "invisible God".

Then we have "Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise." John 5:19.

So, once again, another reason to believe that one can walk with God, see God, and sit on the right hand of God.

But the biggest argument is that Christ has a body of flesh and bones. That alone should be enough to teach you the God CAN have a body of flesh and bones. Because John 1:1 says and the Word was God! In other words, right there, you know that Jesus Christ (God) has a body of flesh and bones.

Then to top it off, we learn that Christ is the express image of God.

What more can Christ do to teach you that to see him is to see the Father? Why do you have to keep arguing against His own words? Why do you insist everything be a metaphor that does not support your position? Especially in light that history shows us that the notion of the trinity is not based on Biblical teachings, but was a minority vote?

[BigJulie]

To answer your question, what was Christ teaching the disciples? He was teaching them to understand what resurrection means. He was teaching them what exalted means. He was teaching them what to be glorified and perfected means. He was glorifying his Father (making it clear to them who his Father is and who He is that they may we may be one with them!)

Jhn 17 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.
And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was...

That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.

It doesn't get much clearer than that (and Christ word's should once again make you recognize that your man-made trinity is incorrect.)

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by BigJulie

You seem to think that making your font bigger or putting it in red will make it read differently.

Ah yes, that's the point.

When I write my posts I want them to be easy for me to read later.
In that way I do try to make the words appear to me to be more clear, I try to make the sentences in sections around the same idea,,,(paragraphs).

I also try to use space between main points so as to make it more easy for me to find something later.

[BigJulie]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

Ah yes, that's the point.

When I write my posts I want them to be easy for me to read later.
In that way I do try to make the words appear to me to be more clear, I try to make the sentences in sections around the same idea,,,(paragraphs).

I also try to use space between main points so as to make it more easy for me to find something later.

Not sure why you have to have the big red font. It comes across as screaming. So does bold font.

That said, here is an interesting paragraph I found while researching the differences between Hebrew and Greek:

Greek thought refers to the writings of Plato and Aristotle as well as their intellectual heirs the Gnostic heretics. From Greek thought we have the whole dualistic heresies that try to pit everything into black/white or either/or thinking rather than recognizing the fuller balance. Greek thinking pits the physical against the spiritual, leading either to asceticism where the tainted and dirty physical is punished while the enlightened spiritual is developed or to hedonism, where the corruption of one’s physical body through promiscuity or gluttony is unimportant because it is only the mind and spirit and not the body that matter anyway. In Hebrew thought, the body, heart, mind, and spirit are all an interconnected whole, none of which can be neglected.

Everything I research regarding the making of the trinity to understanding Hebrew and Greek, point to the fact that there is no basis for you to not believe the words of Christ when he prayed prior to his atonement or when He taught us that to see Him is to see the Father.

Everything points to knowing that any argument we make regarding the nature of Christ can be applied to the Father.

Everything points to understanding that it would be redundant to have the Holy Ghost if God is a spirit only.

Everything points to that Spirits can have bodies and while our spirits are invisible, our bodies can be seen, and that Christ has seen the Father.

Everything points to the fact that we are made in the image of God.

John 3:2 Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.

(There you go, the big red bold font.)

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by BigJulie

Not sure why you have to have the big red font. It comes across as screaming. So does bold font.

Oh I never expected others to like my posts.....

I write for myself...

And so far, I like my posts the way they are.

[alanmolstad]

"God is spirit"
"a spirit does not have flesh and BONE..."





Shall I go over that again?...

[BigJulie]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

"God is spirit"
"a spirit does not have flesh and BONE..."





Shall I go over that again?...

And shall I go over it again? You have to take this scripture concretely and then take the rest of Christ's teaching metaphorically to stick with this belief.

But because Christ has a spirit, do you also ***ume he does not have a body?

For I know that this shall turn to my salvation through your prayer, and the supply of the Spirit of Jesus Christ, Phil 1:19.

Why do you ignore the other teachings of Christ for a Greek influence rendition of God created a few hundred years after Christ? When it is so clear that Christ came to teach us who the Father is by example, why are you so bent on one scripture to ignore all others?

Clearly, we are made in the image of God.

Clearly, Christ glorified the Father so we can understand who He is.

Clearly, when we meet God, we will find we are like him.

I'll tell you what. Why not repeat to me again that God is Spirit--make it in bold, and ignore all other scriptures. Ignore the history of the trinity. Ignore the influence of Greek though. Ignore Christ's words.

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

"God is spirit"
"a spirit does not have flesh and BONE..."





Shall I go over that again?...

the word "became" flesh.....


The word was not always flesh and bone...rather the Word "became" something it was not beforehand.



So to review-

God is spirit.
A spirit does not have flesh and bone.
The Word was God
The Word "became" flesh...

[BigJulie]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

the word "became" flesh.....


The word was not always flesh and bone...rather the Word "became" something it was not beforehand.



So to review-

God is spirit.
A spirit does not have flesh and bone.
The Word was God
The Word "became" flesh...

Yes, the Word became flesh--took on flesh and bones and then died and was resurrected into a glorified, resurrected body with flesh and bones who was exalted and sat on the right hand of God. And what does Christ teach us? That he does nothing that he does not see the Father do. He also teaches us that to see Him is to see the Father? When He came in his resurrected glorified body, do you think he didn't mean his words? Why keep his body?

Do you know that in the ten commandments, there is a word taken out from the Hebrew when saying that there should be no older gods before me---do you know how it really reads? It reads, thou shalt have no other gods before my face. Look it up.

One other thought--do you realize we are 200 years past the writing of the cons***ution. How has politics affected it? Yet the trinity was a political decision more than 300 years after Christ. Why do you cling to making so many scriptures metaphorical to make this one scripture concrete? If I was to read the New Testament according to Alan (or the trinity), it would be that this scripture "God is Spirit" is the only one to believe Christ. All of Christ's other words and example, just toss.

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by BigJulie

Yes, the Word became flesh--took on flesh and bones .

Thats all the Bible is saying...

That God is spirit....
and knowing that a spirit does not have flesh and bones we understand that God does not have flesh and bones.

Then the Word "became"flesh....

[BigJulie]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

Thats all the Bible is saying...

That God is spirit....
and knowing that a spirit does not have flesh and bones we understand that God does not have flesh and bones.

Then the Word "became"flesh....

Okay, let me try this another way since you seem so caught on this scripture as to ignore all others.

Do you have a spirit?

If you did not have a spirit, would your body have life?

When people get to know you, how do they know you?

What if they could only talk to you on the phone and could not see you, how would they know you? By your body or by your spirit?