IMMORTALITY IN THE WILDERNESS. THE AIM FOR JESUS TEMPTATION

[BeyondET]

Lol idk what a marble maid is.

I figure John was pretty human, it is human to have doubts. I would think also especially when placed in such circumstances as being put in prison. I find Jesus response to be sent to comfort John Baptist. The truth will set you free after all.

Well that is one the biggest fear of Christians, to say well maybe someone miss translated things here and there, made a few punctuation mistakes etc.. The bible was inspired from God,,.. IMO God is a God of choice and when speaking to us he allows humans to use there own language and experiences to discribe things of spiritual nature...

There are verses in scripture that clearly are the author speaking here's just one of them...

Luke 1:1
1Many have undertaken to compose an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, 2just as they were handed down to us by the initial eyewitnesses and servants of the word. 3Therefore, having carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, 4so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught.

And this was written along time ago, and even then the author says MANY have undertaken to compose and account..

 

[Naboth]

Yeah possibly but then you still have an underlying tone of "had a begining". In being eternal, immortality is also implied but you are adding the "no begining" also. For example the works of Bach may be immortal but they had a begining. If we say "Jesus became immortal" that means he had a begining.

Well if as Gospel of John says Jesus is the Word of God and was with God from the beginning, and elsewhere is written he is in the Father and the Father in him, then I would think Jesus immortal indeed. What do you think though?

 

[Naboth]

you do not agree with the following according to your own posts and neither does the op nor beyond, yet you agree together, which indicates a common ground ... pay special attention to number 1...that seems to indicate a peculiar lack of faith with you 3

1. Christ was the “seed of the Woman” not the man. Gen. 3:15 means he would not be born of theegg of the woman but by a seed that God would provide the women “her seed..” not egg “shallbruise thy head”. This meant Mary’s womb would only provide the Lord an incubator during thegestation period until His birth.

2. His conception was supernatural, not in the natural order, which means His birth would be amiracle Isa. 7:14 and Matt. 1: 21-23.

3. Jesus was not born under a broken law as all other men born of women (Ps. 51:5), He is separatedfrom sinners Gal. 4:4-5, Heb. 7:26. If Jesus was born under the broken law as all other men are,then he was disqualified of being the Savior of the world and would stand in need of someone toredeem Him.

4. Jesus was God. God, who is spirit took on human nature that was perfect and sinless for theexpressed purpose of condemning sin in the flesh Jn. 1:1, 14; 4:24; Rom. 8:3; Heb. 2:14; Phil 2:7.

5. Jesus was the fulfillment of the Pascal offering which had to be holy and without blame Ex. 12:3;Lev. 4:23; 1Pet. 1:18-21; Heb.4:15, which means He was set apart and without a sinful nature.This means throughout the redemption process from the incarnation to the Resurrection there wasno point in time that Jesus was ever sinful.

Where have I said I do not agree with any of this?

I quite agree, Jesus was born of the virgin, he was the fulfilment of all the law and the prophets, and he was crucified and resurrected for the reconciliation of man to God.

As for the OP I cannot speak for him, you must ask him yourself I suppose.

 

[LaurenTM]

now we are getting somewhere

Well that is one the biggest fear of Christians, to say well maybe someone miss translated things here and there, made a few punctuation mistakes etc.. The bible was inspired from God,,.. IMO God is a God of choice and when speaking to us he allows humans to use there own language and experiences to discribe things of spiritual nature...

thanks..confirmation is always nice

God is not composed of our opinions or understanding

this thread is contiguous upon error and the reason for it is highlighted above

what comes after does not matter to me at all...the above is what is really going on here

 

[Naboth]

Well that is one the biggest fear of Christians, to say well maybe someone miss translated things here and there, made a few punctuation mistakes etc.. The bible was inspired from God,,.. IMO God is a God of choice and when speaking to us he allows humans to use there own language and experiences to discribe things of spiritual nature...

There are verses in scripture that clearly are the author speaking here's just one of them...

Luke 1:1
1Many have undertaken to compose an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, 2just as they were handed down to us by the initial eyewitnesses and servants of the word. 3Therefore, having carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, 4so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught.

And this was written along time ago, and even then the author says MANY have undertaken to compose and account..

Yea I suppose some people are afraid of that. I have no such fear, I believe the Bible has been written and translated with great care. Even the most translated and copied and published series of books in history if I am not mistaken.

 

[LaurenTM]

Where have I said I do not agree with any of this?

I quite agree, Jesus was born of the virgin, he was the fulfilment of all the law and the prophets, and he was crucified and resurrected for the reconciliation of man to God.

As for the OP I cannot speak for him, you must ask him yourself I suppose.

Not sure what you mean. I think the baptism is a decent point in regards to the immortality to Jesus.

As for the OP I find no fault, I think it is an interesting topic

the op states Jesus had a sin nature

you agreed with it and find no fault with it

you do not comprehend the Bible and are believing fiction...not truth

I don't expect most people will care about the mess in this thread as much as I do, but it is apparent this thread misrepresents the truth

 

[Naboth]

Not sure what you mean. I think the baptism is a decent point in regards to the immortality to Jesus.


As for the OP I find no fault, I think it is an interesting topic

the op states Jesus had a sin nature

you agreed with it and find no fault with it

you do not comprehend the Bible and are believing fiction...not truth

Oh I see you are confused to think that because I do not seek to find fault with the OP that I agree with him. I think he has written a topic for the discussion and I have expressed my point of view, which is somewhat different than his, and is actually somewhat closer to yours, but nevertheless it is still a decent topic.

 

[Sac49]

Well if as Gospel of John says Jesus is the Word of God and was with God from the beginning, and elsewhere is written he is in the Father and the Father in him, then I would think Jesus immortal indeed. What do you think though?

I prefer the word "eternal" lol.

But you arent completely wrong. If we use the word immortal then take the Bible on whole then it can make sense. But if we use the word immortal in certain parts by themselves it can have a different meaning. If we were to say Jesus became immortal upon the assention then it could be taken that he wasnt eternal beforehand. I guess it would come down to context.

Hmm good thread discussion on its own?

 

[LaurenTM]

Oh I see you are confused to think that because I do not seek to find fault with the OP that I agree with him. I think he has written a topic for the discussion and I have expressed my point of view, which is somewhat different than his, and is actually somewhat closer to yours, but nevertheless it is still a decent topic.

you are confused if you think I believe your story, the op's story or beyond's story

we'll just leave it at that

your words are carefully chosen, but your English is not good enough to conceal the slip ups

you don't really believe as you say you do

 

[BeyondET]

you do not agree with the following according to your own posts and neither does the op nor beyond, yet you agree together, which indicates a common ground ... pay special attention to number 1...that seems to indicate a peculiar lack of faith with you 3

1. Christ was the “seed of the Woman” not the man. Gen. 3:15 means he would not be born of theegg of the woman but by a seed that God would provide the women “her seed..” not egg “shallbruise thy head”. This meant Mary’s womb would only provide the Lord an incubator during thegestation period until His birth.

2. His conception was supernatural, not in the natural order, which means His birth would be amiracle Isa. 7:14 and Matt. 1: 21-23.

3. Jesus was not born under a broken law as all other men born of women (Ps. 51:5), He is separatedfrom sinners Gal. 4:4-5, Heb. 7:26. If Jesus was born under the broken law as all other men are,then he was disqualified of being the Savior of the world and would stand in need of someone toredeem Him.

4. Jesus was God. God, who is spirit took on human nature that was perfect and sinless for theexpressed purpose of condemning sin in the flesh Jn. 1:1, 14; 4:24; Rom. 8:3; Heb. 2:14; Phil 2:7.

5. Jesus was the fulfillment of the Pascal offering which had to be holy and without blame Ex. 12:3;Lev. 4:23; 1Pet. 1:18-21; Heb.4:15, which means He was set apart and without a sinful nature.This means throughout the redemption process from the incarnation to the Resurrection there wasno point in time that Jesus was ever sinful.

Oddly for some reason you think people are saying he sin or something, clearly your not reading things right..

DNA , GENES,,, why do you think there is a genealogy in scripture, for just some hoopla of nothing that there is no connection from the orginal fall of man because of sin,, he carried that weight on his shoulders his fleshly shoulders literally...

 

[Naboth]

I prefer the word "eternal" lol.

But you arent completely wrong. If we use the word immortal then take the Bible on whole then it can make sense. But if we use the word immortal in certain parts by themselves it can have a different meaning. If we were to say Jesus became immortal upon the assention then it could be taken that he wasnt eternal beforehand. I guess it would come down to context.

Hmm good thread discussion on its own?

Lol hey eternal is a good word too. I thought immortal and eternal somewhat synonymous, but I find no problem with saying eternal.

I see what you mean though here in the boldened. But then that is why the topic is very interesting! Was Jesus immortal because he was with God always, even in the beginning and everything that was made was made by him and without him nothing was made? Or was Jesus immortal because he was resurrected as promised by God from the beginning and to come back at the end?

Makes me think of an interesting philosophical I have encountered: What is time to an immortal?

 

[BeyondET]

Ahhh,, forget about it,, I'm out this is like fighting a bear in a phone booth...

 

[Naboth]

you are confused if you think I believe your story, the op's story or beyond's story

we'll just leave it at that

your words are carefully chosen, but your English is not good enough to conceal the slip ups

you don't really believe as you say you do

I believe as I have told you. Are you just trying to find faults in people?

 

[Sac49]

Lol hey eternal is a good word too. I thought immortal and eternal somewhat synonymous, but I find no problem with saying eternal.

I see what you mean though here in the boldened. But then that is why the topic is very interesting! Was Jesus immortal because he was with God always, even in the beginning and everything that was made was made by him and without him nothing was made? Or was Jesus immortal because he was resurrected as promised by God from the beginning and to come back at the end?

Makes me think of an interesting philosophical I have encountered: What is time to an immortal?

Yes very interesting subject. Unless you beat me too it i see the makings of a thread for discussion. Lol

 

[Naboth]

Yes very interesting subject. Unless you beat me too it i see the makings of a thread for discussion. Lol

Lol it's all yours, though I thought perhaps this such a thread.

 

[BeyondET]

I believe as I have told you. Are you just trying to find faults in people?

Hahaha,, she's a man beater.. lol.. no she's really a Pentecost believer.. Oooo my,, now I didn't it,, the blood is boiling...

 

[Naboth]

Hahaha,, she's a man beater.. lol.. no she's really a Pentecost believer.. Oooo my,, now I didn't it,, the blood is boiling...

Well I don't feel beaten. Maybe she is just confused? I forgive her, no need to have your blood boil.

 

[Sac49]

Lol it's all yours, though I thought perhaps this such a thread.

I am not completely sure the real subject of this thread. But did have a couple good conversations. And as per the norm a couple bad conversations. Such is the way here on CC.

 

[Naboth]

I am not completely sure the real subject of this thread. But did have a couple good conversations. And as per the norm a couple bad conversations. Such is the way here on CC.

Heh such is the way of conversation, everyone has to be free to express themselves or elsewise we're really just talking to ourselves.

I thought the subject was when Jesus was immortal, whether it be before the baptism or after, before the temptation or after, before the resurrection or after, before the beginning of time, or after the end of it. I could be wrong though.

 

[BeyondET]

Well I don't feel beaten. Maybe she is just confused? I forgive her, no need to have your blood boil.

Me either,,, indeed your probably right about the confusion,, and of coarse I always forgive others,, it's my nature...

No not my blood is boiling,, I do apologize if I was harsh,, though I know things I know because I know...