All the Fullness of Deity dwells bodily

[Truther]

Remember Bread of Life on the other forum?

That guy was a blast too.

I loved "chatting" with him.

Others almost hated him though.

I just posted something for BOL a few minutes ago.

He will explode on me, then I will sift through his insults and show him his errors again.

It's a game over there.

 

[Administrator]

True.

We still need to treat each other honorably.

Thanks for understanding, Like Civic said it's cool to have a good time and joke around.

 

[Azriel]

I'm glad you guys are having a good time. Laughter is good medicine it's in the Bible.

 

[101G]

Okay, you think that the human son of God thought it not robbery to be equal with God, correct?

God don't have humans sons of God, women do.... please get out of that carnal thinking.

@101G are you ok with it ? Is this the two or yours “ love” language lol with that kind of bantering ?

yes, we get along fine, just having fun with each other... no harm intended.

101G.

 

[Truther]

God don't have humans sons of God, women do.... please get out of that carnal thinking.

yes, we get along fine, just having fun with each other... no harm intended.

101G.

God doesn't have a human son of Himself?

Not even a begotten son?

Man, I begat 4 kids and they begat kids.

All along I thought I knew what beget means.

 

[101G]

Not even a begotten son?

what was begotten? and HOW.

Man, I begat 4 kids and they begat kids.

All along I thought I knew what beget means.

Listen and LEARN. 1 Corinthians 4:15 "For though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel."

did the apostle sleep or lay with all these people mothers? now how did he ... "BEGAT" them..... "through the gospel."

now one more, 1 Timothy 1:2 "Unto Timothy, my own son in the faith: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God our Father and Jesus Christ our Lord." HIS OWN SON? HOW, ..... "IN THE FAITH"..... (smile). try again.

oh the fleshly mind.

101G.

 

[Truther]

what was begotten? and HOW.

Listen and LEARN. 1 Corinthians 4:15 "For though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel."

did the apostle sleep or lay with all these people mothers? now how did he ... "BEGAT" them..... "through the gospel."

now one more, 1 Timothy 1:2 "Unto Timothy, my own son in the faith: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God our Father and Jesus Christ our Lord." HIS OWN SON? HOW, ..... "IN THE FAITH"..... (smile). try again.

oh the fleshly mind.

101G.

I see now.

God begat Jesus another way than through Mary's uterus.

Right?

Please explain exactly how Jesus(God's ONLY begotten son) was begotten by the Father(God) other than in her uterus?

I wait....

 

[101G]

I see now.

God begat Jesus another way than through Mary's uterus.

Right?

no, U still don't see, nor KNOW... (smile), LOL, LOL, LOL, Oh Dear.

Right? .... listen carefully..... WRONJ not WRONG, but WRONJ, and the J is for the Lord Jesus, meaning you're wrong about the Lord Jesus who is the ONLY TRUE and LIVING .... GOD... Yea! praise the Lord.

Please explain exactly how Jesus(God's ONLY begotten son) was begotten by the Father(God) other than in her uterus?

I wait....

keep on waiting ..... but was it not the Holy Spirit who conceive the ..... "CHILD/flesh bone and Blood" in Mary? let's see. Matthew 1:20 "But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost."
with your fleshly mind, the Holy Ghost/Spirit is the Father...... Right? is not the conceiver the FATHER... (smile).... YIKES!

READ Matthew 1:20 again and tell us all who is the conceiver or the Father is.... (smile).... your answer please.

101G.

PS as to how.... Luke 1:35 "And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God." NOW LOOK UP " overshadow"....

 

[Truther]

no, U still don't see, nor KNOW... (smile), LOL, LOL, LOL, Oh Dear.

Right? .... listen carefully..... WRONJ not WRONG, but WRONJ, and the J is for the Lord Jesus, meaning you're wrong about the Lord Jesus who is the ONLY TRUE and LIVING .... GOD... Yea! praise the Lord.

keep on waiting ..... but was it not the Holy Spirit who conceive the ..... "CHILD/flesh bone and Blood" in Mary? let's see. Matthew 1:20 "But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost."
with your fleshly mind, the Holy Ghost/Spirit is the Father...... Right? is not the conceiver the FATHER... (smile).... YIKES!

READ Matthew 1:20 again and tell us all who is the conceiver or the Father is.... (smile).... your answer please.

101G.

PS as to how.... Luke 1:35 "And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God." NOW LOOK UP " overshadow"....

So, the divine microscopic cell was implanted and her egg was not used, right?

She was carrying a child that was not actually her biological son?

"Conceived" per Mary meant something else than the rest of Biblical conception?

Jesus had no physical traits of Mary at all?

He did not even look like her or was similar in any way?

He was not in the lineage of Abramam after all?

Hmmm.

 

[Truther]

what was begotten? and HOW.

Listen and LEARN. 1 Corinthians 4:15 "For though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel."

did the apostle sleep or lay with all these people mothers? now how did he ... "BEGAT" them..... "through the gospel."

now one more, 1 Timothy 1:2 "Unto Timothy, my own son in the faith: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God our Father and Jesus Christ our Lord." HIS OWN SON? HOW, ..... "IN THE FAITH"..... (smile). try again.

oh the fleshly mind.

101G.

Were you begotten by your parents before you were begotten of the gospel?

Was Jesus begotten by God and Mary by Paul?

Is that what you are trying to tell me inadvertently?

Maybe you think be-gotten son means, went and got a son somewhere?

Please tell me how Jesus was begotten of God? Thanks.

 

[101G]

So, the divine microscopic cell was implanted and her egg was not used, right?

get rid of that fleshly mindset. no egg from Mary nor any sperm from any man was used.

She was carrying a child that was not actually her biological son?

surrogacy, heard of that?

Jesus had no physical traits of Mary at all?

read Isaiah chapter 53

He did not even look like her or was similar in any way?

see above 2 & 3

He was not in the lineage of Abramam after all?

not by blood or genetic .... (smile)

Hmmm.

don't think and hurt yourself......

101G.

 

[101G]

Were you begotten by your parents before you were begotten of the gospel?

ask God because he knew 101G before he was in the womb.

Was Jesus begotten by God and Mary by Paul?

was he? see all of 101G posts....

Is that what you are trying to tell me inadvertently?

AM I?

Maybe you think be-gotten son means, went and got a son somewhere?

dose it?

Please tell me how Jesus was begotten of God? Thanks.

see all of 101G's posts..... now... next question.

101G.

 

[Truther]

get rid of that fleshly mindset. no egg from Mary nor any sperm from any man was used.

surrogacy, heard of that?

read Isaiah chapter 53

see above 2 & 3

not by blood or genetic .... (smile)

don't think and hurt yourself......

101G.

So, technically, Mary was not the mother of Jesus?

So, when Jesus claimed to be the son of man and also the son of God he was telling a half truth?

Why did he call himself the son of man if he never came from man's lineage at all?

 

[Truther]

ask God because he knew 101G before he was in the womb.

was he? see all of 101G posts....

AM I?

dose it?

see all of 101G's posts..... now... next question.

101G.

So, you are not sure if your parents begat you, so I have to ask God?

I asked Him, he said yes.

Now you know what begotten means.

You should have been instructed this before you became an adult.

 

[101G]

So, technically, Mary was not the mother of Jesus?

surrogate mother.

I asked Him, he said yes.

U asked someone who told you that he was the Lord Jesus.... (smile).

Now you know what begotten means.

been known

You should have been instructed this before you became an adult.

and?..... (smile), LOL, LOL, LOL, Oh Dear

101G.

 

[Truther]

surrogate mother.

U asked someone who told you that he was the Lord Jesus.... (smile).

been known

and?..... (smile), LOL, LOL, LOL, Oh Dear

101G.

I guess I have to do the dirty work....

Beget:
(typically of a man, sometimes of a man and a woman) bring (a child) into existence by the process of reproduction.
"they hoped that the King might beget an heir by his new queen"

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son,...


Conception:
the action of conceiving a child or of a child being conceived.
"an unfertilized egg before conception"

20 But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.




Now, don't blush.

 

[Bob Carabbio]

"The Word BECAME flesh."

Not the Word "took on" flesh.

Not the Word "began to exist" in flesh.


Became.

Word Games.

 

[Truther]

Word Games.

The spoken Word of God was made flesh. It did not turn into flesh. Boy, those new translations are whoppers.

 

[civic]

I'm just curious what you would say about the "begotten of the Father before all worlds (æons)" phrase in the Nicene creed?

"And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds (æons), Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father;"

Here is a good one @Rockson @sethproton proving from the Greek we are talking about all the fullness of Deity presently dwelling in Christ BODILY.

Expositor's Greek Testament
Colossians 2:9. ὅτι is connected by Bleek and Meyer with οὐ κατὰ χ., but it is much more probable that it should be connected with the whole warning introduced by βλέπετε. The false teachers represented the fulness of the Godhead as distributed among the angels, and thus led their victims captive. Paul’s warning against the false doctrine thus rests on the fact that it was in Christ that the whole fulness dwelt.—ἐν αὐτῷ is emphatic, in Him and in Him alone.—κατοικεῖ: “permanently dwells”. The reference is to the Exalted State, not only on account of the present, but of the context and Paul’s Christology generally.—πᾶν τὸ πλήρωμα τῆς θεότητος: “all the fulness of the Godhead”. πᾶν is emphatic, the whole fulness dwells in Christ, therefore it is vain to seek it wholly or partially outside of Him. πλ. τ. θ. is not to be taken (as by Ol.) to mean the perfection of Divinity, i.e., ideal holiness. Nor can it mean the Church, for which Ephesians 1:23 gives no support, nor yet the universe, either of which must have been very differently expressed. The addition of θεότητος defines πλ. as the fulness of Deity. The word is to be distinguished from θειότης as Deity, the being God, from Divinity, the being Divine or Godlike. The passage thus asserts the real Deity of Christ.—σωματικῶς. This word is very variously interpreted. The reference is usually taken to be to the glorified body of Christ, or (as by Lightf.) to the Incarnation, and the word is translated “in bodily fashion”. Apart from the question whether the word naturally expresses this, there is the difficulty caused by the contrast implied in its emphatic position. This contrast is sometimes thought to be to the pre-incarnate state, but this has no relevance here. A contrast to the angels might be in point, but they were closely connected with bodies, so the contrast in this respect did not exist. But neither is Soden’s view that while the angels have bodies what is expressed in them is only θειότης (Romans 1:20) not πλ. τ. θεότητος, a tenable explanation, since this is just read into the words, not elicited from them; nor could such a distinction have occurred to the readers. This interpretation of σωμ., then, as expressing the indwelling of the fulness in a body, although said by Abbott to be “the only one tenable,” is encumbered with grave difficulties, and has been rejected by several commentators. Many have taken it to mean “really” (recently Bleek, Kl[12], Everling, Cremer). This is supported by the contrast of σῶμα with σκιά in Colossians 2:17, the indwelling is real and not shadowy or typical. But σωματικῶς could hardly express this shade of meaning unless the antithesis was expressed. Oltramare translates “personally, in His person”. But he quotes no instances of the adverb, but only of σῶμα. And Haupt’s criticism is just, that this sense might suggest that in God Himself it dwelt impersonally. After an elaborate examination of the various views, Haupt puts forward the explanation that σωματ. relates to τ. πλ. τ. θ., and is to be translated “in the form of a body”. The meaning he takes to be that the fulness exists in Christ as a body, that is as a complete and organic whole. This suits the context and the general argument better than the reference to Christ’s own body. In contrast to the distribution of the fulness among the angels, or to the view that it dwelt only partially in Him, Paul insists that all the fulness dwells in Him, and not fragmentarily but as an organic whole. This view, like Oltramare’s, is supported only by references to the use of σῶμα. This is not a fatal objectiön, and its harmony with the context makes it the most probable interpretation.

 

[Truther]

Here is a good one @Rockson @sethproton proving from the Greek we are talking about all the fullness of Deity presently dwelling in Christ BODILY.

Expositor's Greek Testament
Colossians 2:9. ὅτι is connected by Bleek and Meyer with οὐ κατὰ χ., but it is much more probable that it should be connected with the whole warning introduced by βλέπετε. The false teachers represented the fulness of the Godhead as distributed among the angels, and thus led their victims captive. Paul’s warning against the false doctrine thus rests on the fact that it was in Christ that the whole fulness dwelt.—ἐν αὐτῷ is emphatic, in Him and in Him alone.—κατοικεῖ: “permanently dwells”. The reference is to the Exalted State, not only on account of the present, but of the context and Paul’s Christology generally.—πᾶν τὸ πλήρωμα τῆς θεότητος: “all the fulness of the Godhead”. πᾶν is emphatic, the whole fulness dwells in Christ, therefore it is vain to seek it wholly or partially outside of Him. πλ. τ. θ. is not to be taken (as by Ol.) to mean the perfection of Divinity, i.e., ideal holiness. Nor can it mean the Church, for which Ephesians 1:23 gives no support, nor yet the universe, either of which must have been very differently expressed. The addition of θεότητος defines πλ. as the fulness of Deity. The word is to be distinguished from θειότης as Deity, the being God, from Divinity, the being Divine or Godlike. The passage thus asserts the real Deity of Christ.—σωματικῶς. This word is very variously interpreted. The reference is usually taken to be to the glorified body of Christ, or (as by Lightf.) to the Incarnation, and the word is translated “in bodily fashion”. Apart from the question whether the word naturally expresses this, there is the difficulty caused by the contrast implied in its emphatic position. This contrast is sometimes thought to be to the pre-incarnate state, but this has no relevance here. A contrast to the angels might be in point, but they were closely connected with bodies, so the contrast in this respect did not exist. But neither is Soden’s view that while the angels have bodies what is expressed in them is only θειότης (Romans 1:20) not πλ. τ. θεότητος, a tenable explanation, since this is just read into the words, not elicited from them; nor could such a distinction have occurred to the readers. This interpretation of σωμ., then, as expressing the indwelling of the fulness in a body, although said by Abbott to be “the only one tenable,” is encumbered with grave difficulties, and has been rejected by several commentators. Many have taken it to mean “really” (recently Bleek, Kl[12], Everling, Cremer). This is supported by the contrast of σῶμα with σκιά in Colossians 2:17, the indwelling is real and not shadowy or typical. But σωματικῶς could hardly express this shade of meaning unless the antithesis was expressed. Oltramare translates “personally, in His person”. But he quotes no instances of the adverb, but only of σῶμα. And Haupt’s criticism is just, that this sense might suggest that in God Himself it dwelt impersonally. After an elaborate examination of the various views, Haupt puts forward the explanation that σωματ. relates to τ. πλ. τ. θ., and is to be translated “in the form of a body”. The meaning he takes to be that the fulness exists in Christ as a body, that is as a complete and organic whole. This suits the context and the general argument better than the reference to Christ’s own body. In contrast to the distribution of the fulness among the angels, or to the view that it dwelt only partially in Him, Paul insists that all the fulness dwells in Him, and not fragmentarily but as an organic whole. This view, like Oltramare’s, is supported only by references to the use of σῶμα. This is not a fatal objectiön, and its harmony with the context makes it the most probable interpretation.

Sola scriptura