Galatians Chapter 3 Parsed

[Clare73]

I'm not a big fan of Valentinus.

Nor am I of those who deny the historical record regarding Greek philosophy (PBS Glossary Definition).

 

[Clare73]

You mean admit that Jesus is His OWN Father. That Jesus is HIS OWN GOD.

That Jesus awarded HIMSELF a Name above all others? That Jesus SENT HIMSELF, and is not sitting at HIS OWN right hand?

No, I won't "admit" to such foolishness.

Again, setting oneself above Jesus's own apostles in denying authoritative NT apostolic teaching of the Jewish apostle (Jn 1:1, Jn 1:14), whom Jesus loved; i.e.,

"the Word was God" (Jn 1:1), "the Word became flesh and dwelt among us" (Jn 1:14).
And what is more, the Word who was God (Jesus, Jn 1:14) is the Spirit (2 Co 3:17-18, Ac 16:6-7).
That's three divine (God) persons--Father, Son, Holy Spirit--in the one God.

Not to mention also setting oneself above Jesus' own NT revelation that the one God is three divine persons, where the
name (singular) of God into which we are baptized is "the name (singular) of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" (Mt 28:19).
Jesus said God's name is Father, Son, Holy Spirit. And we see all three divine persons operating in different ways in the NT.

In historical orthodox Christianity, denial of the above is the heresy of a sect; i.e., contrary to NT revelation.

 

[Studyman]

Again, setting oneself above Jesus's own apostles in denying authoritative NT apostolic teaching of the Jewish apostle (Jn 1:1, Jn 1:14), whom Jesus loved; i.e.,

"the Word was God" (Jn 1:1), "the Word became flesh and dwelt among us" (Jn 1:14).
And what is more, the Word who was God (Jesus, Jn 1:14) is the Spirit (2 Co 3:17-18, Ac 16:6-7).
That's three divine (God) persons--Father, Son, Holy Spirit--in the one God.

Not to mention also setting oneself above Jesus' own NT revelation that the one God is three divine persons, where the
name (singular) of God into which we are baptized is "the name (singular) of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" (Mt 28:19).

In historical Christianity, denial of the above is the heresy of a sect; i.e., contrary to NT revelation.

You have your ancient religious philosophers that you have adopted, along with your image of God they created in the likeness of a handsome long haired man. You have your own high days, sabbaths, judgments, and have rejected those "Words" spoken by the Christ of the Bible who said "I am the LORD thy God which teacheth thee to profit, which leadeth thee by the way that thou shouldest go."

I'll stick with my Savior, and Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel, who is advocating on my behalf, before His Father, and my Father, His God and my God.

John 14:23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him. 24 He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father's which sent me.

28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.

I do agree with you on one point though. Given we serve different Masters, what is the use in continuing.

 

[Clare73]

You have your ancient religious philosophers that you have adopted, along with your image of God they created in the likeness of a handsome long haired man. You have your own high days, sabbaths, judgments, and have rejected those "Words" spoken by the Christ of the Bible who said "I am the LORD thy God which teacheth thee to profit, which leadeth thee by the way that thou shouldest go."

And you know this, how?

Misrepresenting others as you misrepresent Jn 1:1, Jn 1:14?

"Thy speech doth betray thee."

 

[GDL]

Again, setting oneself above Jesus's own apostles in denying authoritative NT apostolic teaching of the Jewish apostle (Jn 1:1, Jn 1:14), whom Jesus loved; i.e.,

"the Word was God" (Jn 1:1), "the Word became flesh and dwelt among us" (Jn 1:14).
And what is more, the Word who was God (Jesus, Jn 1:14) is the Spirit (2 Co 3:17-18, Ac 16:6-7).
That's three divine (God) persons--Father, Son, Holy Spirit--in the one God.

Not to mention also setting oneself above Jesus' own NT revelation that the one God is three divine persons, where the
name (singular) of God into which we are baptized is "the name (singular) of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" (Mt 28:19).

In historical Christianity, denial of the above is the heresy of a sect; i.e., contrary to NT revelation.

You have your ancient religious philosophers that you have adopted, along with your image of God they created in the likeness of a handsome long haired man. You have your own high days, sabbaths, judgments, and have rejected those "Words" spoken by the Christ of the Bible who said "I am the LORD thy God which teacheth thee to profit, which leadeth thee by the way that thou shouldest go."

FWIW, the answer is not only a clear diversion, but it seems Jesus Christ's Apostle John is being referred to as an ancient religious philosopher.

It seems to be a legitimate point to be asking what is meant by the words of John1. Why divert?

 

[expos4ever]

I don't participate in the popular religious tradition of using one verse to make others void which may not align with a particular religious sect or philosophy.

Code for: I cannot reconcile a particular text with the position I hold.

Assuming we all believe in the inspiration and inerrancy of scripture, each text has to taken seriously and made sense of - it is simply not acceptable to screen out texts we do not like.

And, and as you repeatedly do, you once more spin the views of others as "religious tradition", or referring to "their religion" as if merely slapping that label on them makes your case. Not only does such a strategy not make your case it is effectively an announcement that you have no credible counterargument - if you did, you would not to resort to such a ploy.

 

[Studyman]

FWIW, the answer is not only a clear diversion, but it seems Jesus Christ's Apostle John is being referred to as an ancient religious philosopher.

It seems to be a legitimate point to be asking what is meant by the words of John1. Why divert?

I didn't divert. I was asked a question, and I answered in detail, not using my own words, or the words of a sermon from some ancient religious philosopher, or some random religious person who calls Jesus Lord, Lord. But from the Holy Scriptures Jesus and Paul said to live by, and continue in. I simply don't believe Biblical Truth can be found by taking one Scripture, separating it from the rest of the Bible, including the rest of John's words regarding the Christ, then molding this one verse to fit whatever narrative is being promoted, or create a doctrine that omits the Words of the Christ of the Bible Himself, defining who He is.

I was asked what I believe John 1:1 meant. And I posted the very Words of my Savior and Redeemer, as HE defined for me who HE is, and who Sent Him. And for that I am being demeaned. It's OK, it's to be expected and was prophesied. But I truly thought you were different.

Honesty is an important part of godliness GDL. You and I both know I wasn't referring to John as an "Ancient religious philosopher". And yet, you implied it anyway. I really thought you were different.

 

[Studyman]

Code for: I cannot reconcile a particular text with the position I hold.

Assuming we all believe in the inspiration and inerrancy of scripture, each text has to taken seriously and made sense of - it is simply not acceptable to screen out texts we do not like.

And, and as you repeatedly do, you once more spin the views of others as "religious tradition", or referring to "their religion" as if merely slapping that label on them makes your case. Not only does such a strategy not make your case it is effectively an announcement that you have no credible counterargument - if you did, you would not to resort to such a ploy.

"Studyman, it is pretty clear where you stand on the matter of Jesus's divinity. Why not simply own your position that Jesus is not divine?"

As I said, and fully demonstrated, I don't hold the position you are falsely attributing to me. But you will continue to justify this darkness for the reasons the Jesus of the Bible explained you would.

Proving once again, the pure wisdom and perfect understanding of my Savior and my Redeemer, who the ONE True God sent to save me and show me the WAY in which I should go.

 

[GDL]

I didn't divert.

In your own words, what does "the Word was God" in John1:1 mean?

I originally told you that I see a potential reference in Heb11 to a method of our faith/belief being tested by our peers. We also have the story of the Bereans looking at Scripture to confirm what was being taught. We also have Scripture telling us to test spirits and prophets. Your beliefs are being challenged and you clearly do divert at times and fall back into a theory that everyone who reads Scripture differently than you do is involved in some erroneous religion. If I had agreed with your theories - that they are according to Scripture - then I would be a staunch supporter of yours.

 

[Mark Quayle]

You mean admit that Jesus is His OWN Father. That Jesus is HIS OWN GOD.

That Jesus awarded HIMSELF a Name above all others? That Jesus SENT HIMSELF, and is not sitting at HIS OWN right hand?

No, I won't "admit" to such foolishness.

That's not what I said. You are equivocating, I think. Avoiding a straight —and simple— answer.

 

[Studyman]

That's not what I said. You are equivocating, I think. Avoiding a straight —and simple— answer.

Since my youth I have seen an image of God created by ancient religious men in the likeness of a handsome man with long flowing hair, and these men placed the name of Jesus on this image they created, and it is universally worshiped as a "Christian" god. I am simply allowing my Savior to define for me who HE really is, and also who sent Him, as HE, through instruction of His Father, forbad such a Sin.

So I'm not equivocating, or avoiding anything. I'm just not giving the canned answer you desire.

 

[Studyman]

In your own words, what does "the Word was God" in John1:1 mean?

I'm not going to use my own words, because then you will argue that it's my opinion.

GENESIS 1:1 KJV In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

Genesis 1:1 KJV: In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

www.kingjamesbibleonline.org

JOHN 1:1 KJV In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

John 1:1 KJV: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

www.kingjamesbibleonline.org

GENESIS 1:2 KJV And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit...

Genesis 1:2 KJV: And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

www.kingjamesbibleonline.org

GENESIS 1:3 KJV And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

Genesis 1:3 KJV: And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

www.kingjamesbibleonline.org

JOHN 1:3 KJV All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

John 1:3 KJV: All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

www.kingjamesbibleonline.org

JOHN 1:5 KJV And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

John 1:5 KJV: And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

www.kingjamesbibleonline.org

Here is God, in the beginning, sending His Son, the Light of all men, who created the "Way which we should go", the very WORD of God, to the earth.

This, along with "Every Word which proceeds from the mouth of God", teaches me about God the Father, and His Son, my savior and redeemer.

 

[Clare73]

I'm not going to use my own words, because then you will argue that it's my opinion.

And there you have it. . .

And if your "own words" are not in harmony with all Scripture, of course it will be your "opinion". . .what else could it be?

So your response above reveals more than one reason for not using your "own words;" i.e.,
another being exposure of your "own words" as not in harmony with all Scripture, thereby
making your "own words," in fact, simply your "opinion," which
he "will argue" correctly.

So one doesn't have to actually present their "own words" to actually demonstrate their "own words" are not in harmony with Scripture.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Paul said differently.

Rom. 1: 16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. 17 For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith. 18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; 19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.

And again; by the Hebrews author.

Heb. 4: 1 Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of it. 2 For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.

So the teaching that they had no way of knowing how to treat others, isn't supported by the Holy Scriptures. And Jesus exposed their Error, by quoting the Oracles of God that they were given, but didn't believe.

I’m not saying that they had no way of knowing how to treat others I’m saying that they thought they were obeying God by carrying out the punishment that He Himself commanded. The gospel was not preached before Christ’s ministry. What was revealed by Isaiah and Jeremiah was almost incomprehensible, that’s why the majority of Jews didn’t believe Christ during His ministry because what was revealed was intended to be misleading. Those prophecies were written in such a way to be inconclusive. When Paul was going around persecuting and arresting Christians he did that because he believed that he was actually serving God until Christ appeared before him on the road to Damascus and revealed to him that what he was doing was wrong. His eyes were opened to the truth after Christ corrected him, not before. When God says love thy neighbor then says kill anyone who commits adultery or works on the Sabbath it’s reasonable to assume that that love is not to be extended to those who are committing these sins that are commanded by God to be punishable by death.

 

[Studyman]

I’m not saying that they had no way of knowing how to treat others I’m saying that they thought they were obeying God by carrying out the punishment that He Himself commanded.

Yes, that is a popular doctrine. But if we actually read the Scripture, obeying God had nothing todo with it. Rather, they we deceivers who were trying to discredit the Son of God.

Do you believe the God of the Bible advocated in His Law to stone to death every person the children of the devil brought to Him?

I know it’s a popular religious philosophy in modern religions, that the Pharisees were trying to obey God which is the foundation of your statement. But according to Jesus, and the entire Bible, this isn’t so. Surely a Just Judge would consider the accuser as well as the accused.

The gospel was not preached before Christ’s ministry.

Again, this is taught to us by the religions of the world God placed us in. But not the Bible.

What was revealed by Isaiah and Jeremiah was almost incomprehensible, that’s why the majority of Jews didn’t believe Christ during His ministry because what was revealed was intended to be misleading. Those prophecies were written in such a way to be inconclusive.

Not for Zacharias, or Simeon or Anna or the worse men.

Again, the veil is removed from the heart, when it turns to the Lord.

When Paul was going around persecuting and arresting Christians he did that because he believed that he was actually serving God until Christ appeared before him on the road to Damascus and revealed to him that what he was doing was wrong.

Yes, he was led astray by the religious philosophers of his time, like Gamiliel, and the religious doctrines of men he listened to. Had he believed Moses and the Prophets, like Simeon did, he wouldn’t have persecuted Gods Church.

His eyes were opened to the truth after Christ corrected him, not before. When God says love thy neighbor then says kill anyone who commits adultery or works on the Sabbath it’s reasonable to assume that that love is not to be extended to those who are committing these sins that are commanded by God to be punishable by death.

Your lack of understanding the Law and Prophets cause you to Judge God as almost incompetent.

You should consider where this understanding comes from, certainly not the Jesus of the Bible.

 

[Studyman]

And there you have it. . .

And if your "own words" are not in harmony with all Scripture, of course it will be your "opinion". . .what else could it be?

So your response above reveals more than one reason for not using your "own words;" i.e.,
another being exposure of your "own words" as not in harmony with all Scripture, thereby
making your "own words," in fact, simply your "opinion," which
he "will argue" correctly.

So one doesn't have to actually present their "own words" to actually demonstrate their "own words" are not in harmony with Scripture.

Lol, you make my point. It’s not my words which expose your teaching, its the WORD of God, that became flesh. That is why I posted them, to show who your beef is truly with. I’m just the poor slob who opened your own Bible and showed you His Words.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Yes, that is a popular doctrine. But if we actually read the Scripture, obeying God had nothing todo with it. Rather, they we deceivers who were trying to discredit the Son of God.

Do you believe the God of the Bible advocated in His Law to stone to death every person the children of the devil brought to Him?

I know it’s a popular religious philosophy in modern religions, that the Pharisees were trying to obey God which is the foundation of your statement. But according to Jesus, and the entire Bible, this isn’t so. Surely a Just Judge would consider the accuser as well as the accused.





Again, this is taught to us by the religions of the world God placed us in. But not the Bible.



Not for Zacharias, or Simeon or Anna or the worse men.

Again, the veil is removed from the heart, when it turns to the Lord.



Yes, he was led astray by the religious philosophers of his time, like Gamiliel, and the religious doctrines of men he listened to. Had he believed Moses and the Prophets, like Simeon did, he wouldn’t have persecuted Gods Church.


Your lack of understanding the Law and Prophets cause you to Judge God as almost incompetent.

You should consider where this understanding comes from, certainly not the Jesus of the Bible.

But surely you must know that the whole purpose of the law was to be a stumbling block for the Jews. You seem to have a very strong knowledge of God’s word so I would assume you know this. This is why the prophetic scripture pertaining to the Messiah were written so ambiguously. My interpretation doesn’t imply incompetence on God’s part, it just takes into consideration the purpose of the law.

 

[Clare73]

Lol, you make my point. It’s not my words which expose your teaching, its the WORD of God, that became flesh.

Jesus never referred to himself as "the word of God". . .nor is he ever called "the Word of God" in the NT.

I do not make your point. . .I refute your point with the following point:

One doesn't have to actually present their "own words" to actually demonstrate their "own words" are not in harmony with Scripture.

 

[Studyman]

But surely you must know that the whole purpose of the law was to be a stumbling block for the Jews. You seem to have a very strong knowledge of God’s word so I would assume you know this. This is why the prophetic scripture pertaining to the Messiah were written so ambiguously. My interpretation doesn’t imply incompetence on God’s part, it just takes into consideration the purpose of the law.

My point is you are being taught this stuff by other voices, and not by God's Word. It was the same for the Pharisees who learned at the foot of Gamaliel.

This is a perfect example. Someone has taught you that God Laws, including His Law of Mercy Faith, and Judgment, were created for the purpose of making men stumble and fall. This makes God not only unjust, and a Liar as well, given His Repeated Statements regarding HIS Stated purpose for HIS instruction in Righteousness, but also Jesus who told them "These things you should have done, but not leave the others undone".

Sadly, the very instruction God Gave men for HIS Stated purpose, is rejected by them, based on the words of "another voice" who has convinced men otherwise. Jesus warns specifically about these religious voices in Matt. 24: 3-5.

And who has this not happened to? Eve? No, this same thing happened to her. Abraham? No, the same thing happened to Abraham, and he was called to leave this life. Paul? No! Paul was also convinced by "other voices" to reject God's righteousness and establish his own.

How about Jesus? Was Jesus placed in the same world, with the same "other voices"? Of course HE was, just as all His Brethren. But HE didn't listen to them. 20 years the religion of the Jews, who taught for doctrines the commandments of men, surrounded and worked to influence the man Jesus with their philosophies and traditions of men. But HE resisted and overcame so that we might repent, and choose His instruction, over the religions of the world God placed Him in.

I know this simply because your Bible and my Bible shows us. But to accept this, a man must be willing to humble themselves to trust the Holy Scriptures, "for doctrine, for reproof for correction and for instruction in righteousness." Not what the Pope, or Valentinus, or Kenneth Copeland tells you it says, but in Faith that God can reveal Himself to you, apart from the smorgasbord of "other voices" who "come in His Name, and call Him Lord, Lord". And that takes Faith.

My hope is that will see how many of your statements, settled and believed on in your heart, are shown to be contrary to both the Words of the Holy One of Israel, and the man He became, and follow the instructions of the Christ, as it is written "man shall live by every Word which proceeds out of the mouth of God".

 

[BNR32FAN]

My point is you are being taught this stuff by other voices, and not by God's Word. It was the same for the Pharisees who learned at the foot of Gamaliel.

This is a perfect example. Someone has taught you that God Laws, including His Law of Mercy Faith, and Judgment, were created for the purpose of making men stumble and fall. This makes God not only unjust, and a Liar as well, given His Repeated Statements regarding HIS Stated purpose for HIS instruction in Righteousness, but also Jesus who told them "These things you should have done, but not leave the others undone".

Sadly, the very instruction God Gave men for HIS Stated purpose, is rejected by them, based on the words of "another voice" who has convinced men otherwise. Jesus warns specifically about these religious voices in Matt. 24: 3-5.

And who has this not happened to? Eve? No, this same thing happened to her. Abraham? No, the same thing happened to Abraham, and he was called to leave this life. Paul? No! Paul was also convinced by "other voices" to reject God's righteousness and establish his own.

How about Jesus? Was Jesus placed in the same world, with the same "other voices"? Of course HE was, just as all His Brethren. But HE didn't listen to them. 20 years the religion of the Jews, who taught for doctrines the commandments of men, surrounded and worked to influence the man Jesus with their philosophies and traditions of men. But HE resisted and overcame so that we might repent, and choose His instruction, over the religions of the world God placed Him in.

I know this simply because your Bible and my Bible shows us. But to accept this, a man must be willing to humble themselves to trust the Holy Scriptures, "for doctrine, for reproof for correction and for instruction in righteousness." Not what the Pope, or Valentinus, or Kenneth Copeland tells you it says, but in Faith that God can reveal Himself to you, apart from the smorgasbord of "other voices" who "come in His Name, and call Him Lord, Lord". And that takes Faith.

My hope is that will see how many of your statements, settled and believed on in your heart, are shown to be contrary to both the Words of the Holy One of Israel, and the man He became, and follow the instructions of the Christ, as it is written "man shall live by every Word which proceeds out of the mouth of God".

No I apologize, this was not taught to me but instead inferred by a bad translation I read many years ago. When I became a Christian about 11 years ago I began reading the NLT version and after about 2 years of studying the Bible and the Greek manuscripts I came to the conclusion that the NLT is not a very accurate translation. So I misunderstood Romans 9 based on the NLT version which seems to imply that the stumbling block placed in Zion was the law but after searching for the verse and not being able to find it in the NASB which I use now, I decided to check the NLT version of Romans 9 and sure enough I found the source of the mistake.

“But the people of Israel, who tried so hard to get right with God by keeping the law, never succeeded. Why not? Because they were trying to get right with God by keeping the law instead of by trusting in him. They stumbled over the great rock in their path. God warned them of this in the Scriptures when he said, “I am placing a stone in Jerusalem that makes people stumble, a rock that makes them fall. But anyone who trusts in him will never be disgraced.””
‭‭Romans‬ ‭9‬:‭31‬-‭33‬ ‭NLT‬‬

I haven’t used the NLT version in about 8 or 9 years but evidently I retained the mistake I learned from it and hadn’t realized it until now because of this discussion. So I do humbly apologize for my mistake. I’ve been using the NASB after abandoning the NLT which is a far superior translation.

“What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, attained righteousness, even the righteousness which is by faith; but Israel, pursuing a law of righteousness, did not arrive at that law. Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as though it were by works. They stumbled over the stumbling stone, just as it is written, “Behold, I lay in Zion a stone of stumbling and a rock of offense, And he who believes in Him will not be disappointed.””
‭‭Romans‬ ‭9‬:‭30‬-‭33‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

The NASB makes it clear that the stumbling block was Christ not the law. So I concede that you are correct the law was not put in place by God to be a stumbling block for the Jews. Although I do see how the law became a stumbling block for them in the sense that they sought justification thru the law instead of by faith and it’s because of this that I held to that notion for so long because it seemed to line up with the result of the law being given to the Jews. So I retract my previous statement that the law was placed before the Jews by God for the purpose of being a stumbling block. I have more to say on this subject but my lunch break is over so I will reiterate at my next convenience. God bless.