When was Jesus begotten?

[daq]

To try to say this means palm tree here is untenable. As I previously pointed out the palm tree as a whole is yet another word.
You haven't convinced me yet. It appears that you simply want to stick to your interpretation because of a preconceived notion you have about God:

That is not what I said to begin with. Tamar is a palm tree.

I believe there is as much or more textual evidence to show El Elyon has the physical form of a man as there is to show He doesn't. Even His name YHWH dictates He has a physical form: behold the nail, behold the hand.

God is not a man: the heavens and the heavens of the heavens cannot contain him.
But I have no need to argue that point with anyone who wishes to believe such a thing.

Sorry but Israel did not purge our sins.

Again I said no such thing.

Also, you should know that I discount the septuagint against the masoretic text unless there is other textual evidence to support it. Whoever translated it seemed to take some liberties to support certain theological viewpoints. Being that it was translated at a time when YHWH had stopped speaking to His people, I find it somewhat suspect. However, it can be a valuable tool when corroborated by the Targums, Qum'ran scrolls etc.

Well then you may as well remove that passage from Hebrews 1:6 because it does not appear in the Masoretic Text and may only be found in the Septuagint. Without the Septuagint there is no other context from where the quote was taken and one is therefore now free to make up his or her own imaginary context, and to each his own once again I suppose, but if it is good enough for the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews then it is good enough for me. Have a nice thread and thank you for inviting me.

 

[2ducklow]

Hebrews 1:6
6. But when again [palin] he leads in the prototokos-firstborn [Yisrael] into the oikoumenen-Land, he says, "And let all the messengers of Elohim do obeisance unto him." [Deuteronomy 32:43][/COLOR]

The angels or messengers were commanded to do obeisance unto Yisrael, (not "worship") and this is exactly what they do toward edification of the people throughout TaNaK. For the same reason Stephen says "the Torah was given by the disposition of angels-messengers", (Acts 7:53).

actually the word is proskuenos G6452. It is usually translated as worship but it means this.

προσκυνέω
to fawn or crouch to, i.e. (literally or figuratively) prostrate oneself in homage (do reverence to, adore)
Derivation: from G4314 and a probable derivative of G2965 (meaning to kiss, like a dog licking his master's hand);

G4352 ????????? - Strong's Greek Lexicon

but translating it as do obeisance has the same effect as translating it as worship. neither word requires any physical act of one. Just something you think.

 

[2ducklow]

2ducklow, I must commend you for your persistence in this discussion. You have brought something to my attention that I never considered before, that the Bible makes distinction between conceived, begotten, and born.

You're welcome

Thanks for pointing out this verse, although I disagree with your last commentary.

To it I add the first prophecy of a Savior. It reenforces Jer 31 saying he comes from woman, not man.
Gen 3:15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

But, I will clarify, Jesus was "a new thing"/different from us because he had flesh from Marry but a soul from heaven, not from a man. There are even scriptures in modern translations that refer to Jesus as something as opposed to someone. I have wondered about these verses before. The most perplexing was that Solomon was said by God to be the wisest man to ever live, past or future. Jesus said he was something greater than Solomon.
Matthew 12:42 The queen of the South will rise up at the judgment with this generation and condemn it, for she came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon, and behold, something greater than Solomon is here.
It makes sense to me now.

If Jesus soul wasn't human , then Jesus isn't fully human, If you meant that Jesus received a human soul from heaven and a human body from Mary, then Jesus wasn't begotten by god and wasn't conceived by Mary. Makes more sense to me that god created new human seed that fertilized Mary's egg , than that god sent a human soul, or some other kind of soul from heaven and somethow put it in Mary's egg or Mary's fetus inside her. to me your explanation eliminates God from begetting Jesus and Mary from conceiving Jesus.

I agree that Jesus was something different, but this commentary goes wrong when using the obscure to refute the obvious. The obvious is the Jesus was God and man, also that he existed before being made lower by taking on flesh. He himself said he was Son before King David was born.

Mat 22:42 Saying, What think ye of Christ? whose son is he? They say unto him, The son of David.
43 He saith unto them, How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying,
44 The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool?
45 If David then call him Lord, how is he his son?

Heb 2:9 But we see him who for a little while was made lower than the angels, namely Jesus, crowned with glory and honor because of the suffering of death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone.

Now I ask is God the Father someone or a something? To say he is someone says he is human. That would be blasphemous. To say he is something means he is different than human. Normally we think that to be a lower position, but I say strictly following language, not true. It is just a thought held by man. So it seems most appropriate to call Jesus something when wishing to distinguish that he was more than just a man/flesh.


So in summary, begat means to create a soul. The soul of Jesus was not created any time in the 33 years he was on earth. Therefore he was not begat in that time. What happened at Jesus conception was just as Gen 6 describes the Nephilim. A spirit joined a woman and created flesh that was born. The unique in all humanity is that the spirit of Logos joined this flesh that came from Mary and the Holy Spirit. I could not say exactly what day this happened though.

I would further add that the Spirit of the Son of God/Logos was with the Father at creation. Psalm 2 references a day meaning it was after creation. To reconcile these two things, I take Psalm 2 to be an oath made in heaven before the angels and later revealed to David by the Holy Spirit. Later on the oath was reaffirmed by God the Father on two noted occasions, Jesus' baptism and his transfiguration.

Note that if God said it two times he could have said it three or more times. Obviously the first time would be when the oath was actually made. This the one that was revealed to David.

You say oath, I say it was prophecy, and an apostrophe, which is a figure of speech wherein one speaks to someone or something that isn't present. such as in the bible where it says "O Death where is thy sting".

beget doesn't mean to create a soul, beget means to fertilize a female egg.

matthew 1.20 says God beget Jesus in Mary.

You say Jesus was more than a man, scripture says Jesus is a man, right now.

1 tim 2.5 King James Bible
For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

 

[RevelationTestament]

That is not what I said to begin with. Tamar is a palm tree.

Ok, I guess I am dense. I don't know what kind of palm you meant.

God is not a man: the heavens and the heavens of the heavens cannot contain him.
But I have no need to argue that point with anyone who wishes to believe such a thing.

The Hebrews quote I gave said the Son was in His express image. However, I am not trying to convince you, I am just pointing to a little of the textual evidence. There is more in Genesis, Exodus, John, etc.

Again I said no such thing.

I again misunderstood you then. I thought you were saying that Hebrews 1 was talking about Israel.

Well then you may as well remove that passage from Hebrews 1:6 because it does not appear in the Masoretic Text and may only be found in the Septuagint. Without the Septuagint there is no other context from where the quote was taken and one is therefore now free to make up his or her own imaginary context, and to each his own once again I suppose, but if it is good enough for the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews then it is good enough for me.

If it was a whole sentence or thought perhaps it would be a more probable argument.

Have a nice thread and thank you for inviting me.

You are welcome. I appreciate your thoughts. It is obvious you do your homework. Cheers

 

[AnticipateHisComing]

If Jesus soul wasn't human , then Jesus isn't fully human,

Jesus' flesh was just as human as ours. His Spirit was God. How else can we say Jesus was both man and God?

As I posted, scripture does put Jesus in a different class as man, calling him something instead of someone. You did not address that part of my argument. Further, nowhere does scripture say Jesus was the same as man in his flesh and Spirit. It only speaks to his flesh. He appeared as a man, because his flesh was just like a man. To argue over him not being a man because his Spirit was from heaven, I think to be a distraction. The point scripture makes is that he came in the flesh and that is why he is called a man.

Matthew 12:6 I tell you that something greater than the temple is here.

Matthew 12:41 and Luke 11:32 The men of Nineveh will stand up at the judgment with this generation and condemn it; for they repented at the preaching of Jonah, and now something greater than Jonah is here.

Matthew 12:42 and Luke 11:31 The Queen of the South will rise at the judgment with this generation and condemn it; for she came from the ends of the earth to listen to Solomon’s wisdom, and now something greater than Solomon is here.​

If you meant that Jesus received a human soul from heaven and a human body from Mary, then Jesus wasn't begotten by god and wasn't conceived by Mary.

I never said the Son of God was never begotten. I said it happened before he was born as Jesus. I think it was not the carnal begat that most do. I have quoted Jesus' own words that he was before David was. No one has commented on Mat 22 and is obsessed on just the carnal part of the Son of God.

Scripture clearly says that Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit. My argument that you did not address was the comparison with the Nephilim. Do you think there are Nephilim in heaven? When a spirit joins a woman, conception does take place. The distinction is that scripture in every place says the result was something born, implying it to be flesh. It does not say someone was begotten.

You say oath, I say it was prophecy, and an apostrophe, which is a figure of speech wherein one speaks to someone or something that isn't present. such as in the bible where it says "O Death where is thy sting".

So you have posted before. And, I have posted Psalm 2 to be an oath, post 455. Hebrews 6 and 7 says this explicitly.

Hebrews 6:17 Wherein God, willing more abundantly to shew unto the heirs of promise the immutability of his counsel, confirmed it by an oath:
Hebrews 7:20 And inasmuch as not without an oath he was made priest:
Hebrews 7:21 (For those priests were made without an oath; but this with an oath by him that said unto him, The Lord sware and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec
​

beget doesn't mean to create a soul, beget means to fertilize a female egg.

matthew 1.20 says God beget Jesus in Mary.

If scripture says what you say, this thread would be over.

You previously did such a good job distinguishing between conceive, beget and born. Now you misstate what scripture says. Look closely when conceive and beget are used. Don't mix the two. Mat 1:20 does not say God beget Jesus in Mary. It says the Holy Spirit conceived in Mary. Both places where a "spirit" joined with woman, conception took place and the result was born.

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.
​

Again that instead of one is used to describe the fetus in Mary. Further, the Holy Ghost is listed in conception instead of God the Father which is listed in Psalm 2 as begetting the Son. This only re-enforces that the two scriptures are describing different events.

Again, note the distinction between begat and born in the lineage of Jesus.

16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.
​

Joseph and all his fathers were begat. Jesus was born. Why does scripture make distinction?

You say Jesus was more than a man, scripture says Jesus is a man, right now.

1 tim 2.5 King James Bible
For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

This verse teaches we have a mediator, not what a man is or in what manner Jesus is currently man.

I will add my proof text that is much more in context to your last comment. Paul says he was not called by a man.

Galatians 1:1 Paul, an apostle—sent not from men nor by a man, but by Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised him from the dead—

 

[he-man]

Heb 5:4 And no man taketh this honour unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron.
Heb 5:5 So also Christ glorified not himself to be made an high priest; but he that said unto him, Thou art my Son, to day have I begotten thee.
Heb 5:6 As he saith also in another place, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.

O ye of little faith who need to understand the Koine Greek of firstborn from the dead; .

 

[2ducklow]

Jesus' flesh was just as human as ours. His Spirit was God. How else can we say Jesus was both man and God?

As I posted, scripture does put Jesus in a different class as man, calling him something instead of someone. You did not address that part of my argument.

You gave no source for your argument that Jesus is something instead of someone.
I have no idea what scripture you are referring to.

Further, nowhere does scripture say Jesus was the same as man in his flesh and Spirit. It only speaks to his flesh. He appeared as a man, because his flesh was just like a man. To argue over him not being a man because his Spirit was from heaven, I think to be a distraction. The point scripture makes is that he came in the flesh and that is why he is called a man.

my reasoning is different. when it says for example that Jesus is come in the flesh, it's meant figuratively. flesh is being used as a metonymy for Jesus, a metonymy is a figure of speech wherein the lesser( flesh) represents the greater(JEsus). LIke saying "the pen is mightier than the sword.." Pen in that sentence is a metonymy for books. Also I'd have to address several other things you say here that I see differently. but too much to deal with.

Matthew 12:6 I tell you that something greater than the temple is here.

Matthew 12:41 and Luke 11:32 The men of Nineveh will stand up at the judgment with this generation and condemn it; for they repented at the preaching of Jonah, and now something greater than Jonah is here.

Matthew 12:42 and Luke 11:31 The Queen of the South will rise at the judgment with this generation and condemn it; for she came from the ends of the earth to listen to Solomon’s wisdom, and now something greater than Solomon is here.​

I never said the Son of God was never begotten. I said it happened before he was born as Jesus. I think it was not the carnal begat that most do. I have quoted Jesus' own words that he was before David was. No one has commented on Mat 22 and is obsessed on just the carnal part of the Son of God.

Scripture clearly says that Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit. My argument that you did not address was the comparison with the Nephilim. Do you think there are Nephilim in heaven? When a spirit joins a woman, conception does take place. The distinction is that scripture in every place says the result was something born, implying it to be flesh. It does not say someone was begotten.



So you have posted before. And, I have posted Psalm 2 to be an oath, post 455. Hebrews 6 and 7 says this explicitly.

Hebrews 6:17 Wherein God, willing more abundantly to shew unto the heirs of promise the immutability of his counsel, confirmed it by an oath:
Hebrews 7:20 And inasmuch as not without an oath he was made priest:
Hebrews 7:21 (For those priests were made without an oath; but this with an oath by him that said unto him, The Lord sware and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec
​

If scripture says what you say, this thread would be over.

You previously did such a good job distinguishing between conceive, beget and born. Now you misstate what scripture says. Look closely when conceive and beget are used. Don't mix the two. Mat 1:20 does not say God beget Jesus in Mary. It says the Holy Spirit conceived in Mary. Both places where a "spirit" joined with woman, conception took place and the result was born.

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.
​

Again that instead of one is used to describe the fetus in Mary. Further, the Holy Ghost is listed in conception instead of God the Father which is listed in Psalm 2 as begetting the Son. This only re-enforces that the two scriptures are describing different events.

Mathew 1.20 uses the greek word that means beget. IT's not my fault that many bible translators falsely translate it as conceive.

Matthew 1:20
1:20 3778ταύτα[4these things 1161δε1And 1473αυτού2of his 1760ενθυμηθέντος3pondering], 2400ιδούbehold, 32άγγελοςan angel 2962κυρίουof the Lord 2596κατ΄by 3677όναρdream 5316εφάνηappeared 1473αυτώto him, 3004λέγωνsaying, *ΙωσήφJoseph 5207υιόςson *Δαβίδof David, 3361-5399μη φοβηθήςyou should not fear 3880παραλαβείνto take to yourself *ΜαριάμMary 3588την 1135-1473γυναίκά σουyour wife; 3588-1063το γαρfor the one 1722ενin 1473αυτήher 1080γεννηθέν[2engendered 1537εκ3of 4151πνεύματός5spirit 1510.2.3εστιν1is 39αγίου4holy].

Matthew 1:20 - Apostolic Bible Polyglot Greek-English Interlinear

G1080 γεννάω - Strong's Greek Lexicon Number

LSJ Gloss:
γεννάω
to beget, engender
Strong's:
γεννάω
to procreate (properly, of the father, but by extension of the mother

G1080 ?????? - Strong's Greek Lexicon

thus this is the reason for this translation of Mathew 1.20.

matthew 1.20 But, when, these things, he had pondered, lo! a messenger of the Lord, by dream, appeared to him, saying,—Joseph, son of David! do not fear to take unto thee Mary thy wife, for, that which, in her, hath been begotten, is of [the], Holy, Spirit.

there is a different greek word for conceived. and Jesus was also conceived in the womb of Mary.

Luke 2:21
KJV_Strongs(i)
21 G2532And G3753when G3638eight G2250days G4130were accomplished [G5681] G4059for the circumcising [G5629] G3813of the child G2532, G846his G3686name G2564was called [G5681] G2424JESUS G3588, which G2564was so named [G5685] G5259of G32the angel G4253before G846he G4815was conceived [G5683] G1722in G2836the womb.

Luke 1:24
1:24 3326-1161μετά δεAnd after 3778ταύταςthese 3588τας 2250ημέραςdays 4815συνέλαβεν[3conceived *Ελισάβετ1Elizabeth 3588η 1135-1473γυνή αυτού2his wife], 2532καιand 4032περιέκρυβενshe covered round about and concealed 1438εαυτήνherself 3376μήνας[2months 4002πέντε1five], 3004λέγουσαsaying 3754ότιthat

Luke 1:24 - Apostolic Bible Polyglot Greek-English Interlinear

G4815 συλλαμβάνω - Strong's Greek Lexicon

LSJ Gloss:
συλλαμβάνω
to collect, gather together
Strong's:
συλλαμβάνω
to clasp, i.e. seize (arrest, capture); specially, to conceive (literally or figuratively);

G4815 ?????????? - Strong's Greek Lexicon

So the greeks used the word that means collect or gather to mean conceive. Makes sense, an egg collecting seed is a perfect descrption of a female egg being fertilized.







I'm sure you are aware of the scripture that says God is holy, and God is spirit, since there is only one holy Spirit, God is THE holy Spirit, and since scripture says God the father is the one and only true God (john 17.3 and 1 cor 8.6) then that means God the Father is the holy Spirit.

Again, note the distinction between begat and born in the lineage of Jesus.

16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.
​

Joseph and all his fathers were begat. Jesus was born. Why does scripture make distinction?

the verses after verse 16 say why, because according to verse 18 Mary was with child by the Holy Spirit, and because God, the holy Spirit , beget Jesus (matthew 1.20). Verse 16 doesn't say Jesus was begat by any man. the following verses declare how he was begat and where (in Mary).

This verse teaches we have a mediator, not what a man is or in what manner Jesus is currently man.

God used the word man in his word and he meant man. the bible does say what manner of man Jesus is , he is the last adam. and he is the glorified son of God sitting at the right hand of God.

I will add my proof text that is much more in context to your last comment. Paul says he was not called by a man.

Galatians 1:1 Paul, an apostle—sent not from men nor by a man, but by Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised him from the dead—

well you probably know that koine greek doesn't have an indefinite article. so I take man in this verse to be used in the sense of mankind.
so
¶ Paul, an apostle,—not from men, nor through man, but through Jesus Christ, and God the Father who raised him from among the dead, (Rotherham)

since other scriptures plainly state that Jesus is and was a man, I take man in this verse to refer to the first adam and not the last adam man, Jesus. That's how I see those scriptures harmonizing.

 

[he-man]

Heb 5:4 And no man taketh this honour unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron.
Heb 5:5 So also Christ glorified not himself to be made an high priest; but he that said unto him, Thou art my Son, to day have I begotten thee.
Heb 5:6 As he saith also in another place, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.

Koine Greek of firstborn from the dead; .

Heb 5:5 So also Christ glorified not himself to be made an high priest; but he that said unto him, Thou art my Son, to day, have I begotten thee.
σήμερον on the (that is, this) day (or night current or just passed); genitively now (that is, at present, hitherto): - this (to-) day.

Mat 6:30 Wherefore, if God so clothe the grass of the field, which to day is, and to morrow is cast into the oven, shall he not much more clothe you, O ye of little faith?

Col 1:15 Who is the likeness of the invisible God, the firstborn [from out of the dead] of all creation:
16 That in Christ all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth,
visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities, all things have been created for him and on behalf of him.
17 He is in front of all things, and in him all things stand together.
18 And he is the head of the body, the assembly: who is a beginning of the
firstborn from the dead; that among all he might be first.

1Co 15:47 the first man from out of the dust of the earth; the second man, from out of heaven 49 And just as we have worn the likeness of the one made of earth, we shall also have the likeness he, himself wore from above.

 

[thepromiseofgrace]

Heb 5:4 And no man taketh this honour unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron.
Heb 5:5 So also Christ glorified not himself to be made an high priest; but he that said unto him, Thou art my Son, to day have I begotten thee.
Heb 5:6 As he saith also in another place, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.

form a mormon point of view to who was he begotten would be a question, not to mention who was his brother.

 

[RevelationTestament]

form a mormon point of view to who was he begotten would be a question, not to mention who was his brother.

Not sure of what you are saying, but we are all his brothers.
Hebrews 1:9
9 Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.

 

[thepromiseofgrace]

Not sure of what you are saying, but we are all his brothers.
Hebrews 1:9
9 Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.

well if God was a man before he was God everything was created through Jesus, so the man who became god could not have been the part of the trinity or the father of the one the bible calls Jesus. I'm not sure many Christians see the bible saying Jesus and satan were brothers.

 

[RevelationTestament]

well if God was a man before he was God everything was created through Jesus, so the man who became god could not have been the part of the trinity or the father of the one the bible calls Jesus.

John 5:19 Then answered Jesus and said unto them, 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.
20 For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself doeth: and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may marvel.

I'm not sure many Christians see the bible saying Jesus and satan were brothers.

Satan was once called Lucifer, son of the morning. He was a morning star like Jesus, but fell because He wanted to be like God without following the path Jesus took.

 

[2ducklow]

what really upsets Satan is a man, Christ Jesus took his place to become the light of the world.

 

[AnticipateHisComing]

You gave no source for your argument that Jesus is something instead of someone.
I have no idea what scripture you are referring to.

I am not going to bother quoting a third time and HIGHLIGHTING IN RED the verses that I quoted. Add to them 1 Kings 3:12. You may not agree with the modern translations; I am not going to argue translations with you. They are there though for you to dismiss, but don't say I gave no source.

my reasoning is different. when it says for example that Jesus is come in the flesh, it's meant figuratively. flesh is being used as a metonymy for Jesus, a metonymy is a figure of speech wherein the lesser( flesh) represents the greater(JEsus). LIke saying "the pen is mightier than the sword.." Pen in that sentence is a metonymy for books.

You say flesh used in the New Testament is not to be taken literally.
Not at all a common understanding of scripture.
I guess we are in the unorthodox section though.

Mathew 1.20 uses the greek word that means beget. IT's not my fault that many bible translators falsely translate it as conceive.

Not many translators, the majority translate Mat 1:20 to conceive. Again I am not going to argue translations.

I'm sure you are aware of the scripture that says God is holy, and God is spirit, since there is only one holy Spirit, God is THE holy Spirit, and since scripture says God the father is the one and only true God (john 17.3 and 1 cor 8.6) then that means God the Father is the holy Spirit.

Trinitarians believe God the Father and the Holy Spirit are unique persons. Even if Mat 1:20 used the word begat instead of conceive, it would still be wrong; for Psalm 2 says the Father begat the Son and Mat 1 says the Holy Spirit caused Mary to conceive. They can't be the same event because different persons of the Trinity are involved.

God used the word man in his word and he meant man. the bible does say what manner of man Jesus is , he is the last adam. and he is the glorified son of God sitting at the right hand of God.

well you probably know that koine greek doesn't have an indefinite article. so I take man in this verse to be used in the sense of mankind.
so
¶ Paul, an apostle,—not from men, nor through man, but through Jesus Christ, and God the Father who raised him from among the dead, (Rotherham)

since other scriptures plainly state that Jesus is and was a man, I take man in this verse to refer to the first adam and not the last adam man, Jesus. That's how I see those scriptures harmonizing.

You take flesh to be figurative, but man to be literally exactly like us.
Jesus was both Son of God and Son of man. Not exactly like.

1 Cor 15 contrasts fleshy man with spiritual man. It contrasts Adam/flesh with Jesus/spiritual. So here we have scripture using the word man to reference something completely different at two different times. The meaning of the word flesh in the Bible is much more consistent than man.

Philippians 2:8 And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself by becoming obedient to death—
even death on a cross!

 

[thepromiseofgrace]

John 5:19 Then answered Jesus and said unto them, 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.
20 For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself doeth: and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may marvel.

Satan was once called Lucifer, son of the morning. He was a morning star like Jesus, but fell because He wanted to be like God without following the path Jesus took.

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. it does not make them brother does it.

 

[Imagican]

what really upsets Satan is a man, Christ Jesus took his place to become the light of the world.

Oh my. SEE, it IS possible for SOME to see the TRUTH.

Satan rebelled against God BECAUSE of Jesus Christ. When God created a SON and designated the SON to be instrumental in 'creation', Satan was envious and jealous that this honor was not given to HIM. So the catalyst that led to Satan's rebellion was Jesus Christ, the SON of God.

Satan doesn't HATE God, he HATES the Son. And has done everything within his power to usurp the authority of Christ. He has led the majority of those having lived on this planet to worship HIM as their creator instead of God and His Son.

The 'church' teaches that it was merely pride that led Satan to rebel. But that doesn't explain the REASON that Satan CHOSE the moment that he did. And it wasn't pride in thinking himself EQUAL to God. Satan KNOWS that he is NOT equal to God because he KNOWS that GOD is the 'creator'. What Satan KNOWS is that he is capable of influencing men to worship HIM instead of God. And that means that he is indeed capable of BEING 'the god' of all that worship HIM.

And think about this:

The Bible tells us that ONE THIRD of the angels in heaven followed Satan in his rebellion. WHY? What would be the REASON that ONE out of THREE of God's angels could possibly follow Satan?

The answer is simple. Just as Satan believed that the honor of the 'creation of man' be HIS, so too did ONE third of God's angels. They felt JUST like Satan did. They felt that since Satan had been there all along, had reached the point of being the MOST accomplished angel, that God should have chosen Satan to be instrumental in 'creation'. They felt the same way about Jesus. They were envious and jealous that God 'created a son' and picked HIM to be the HEAD of man. They felt that Satan deserved this honor.

Satan and Jesus 'brothers'? I don't think so. I think that the ONLY begotten SON of God REPLACED Satan as the second most important entity in heaven. Something more akin to 'cousins'. I don't think that Jesus has any 'brothers' in heaven, (or hell).

Blessings,

MEC

 

[Norah63]

Matt. 12: 46--50

 

[thepromiseofgrace]

Matt. 12: 46--50

odd choice of scripture are you saying satan did the will of God?

 

[Norah63]

I didnt say it, scripture stands alone. Why did you think otherwise?

 

[RevelationTestament]

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. it does not make them brother does it.

I assume you are talking about Lucifer and Yeshua? No, it doesn't make them brothers. They were not. El Elyon, the Most High chose Yeshua to be His Word rather than the rebellious Lucifer, so they had ceased to be spiritual brothers. Christ does have brothers tho. They are those who followed YHWH, tho Christ was exalted above them as YHWH, they are still His brothers so He came to save them.
Matt 12:50 For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.
In the parable of the prodigal son, the brother who fell, learned good and evil - he returned to his father, but he never quit being a son and a brother.

I noticed you avoided my other point. I will give the scripture again.
John 5:19 Then answered Jesus and said unto them, 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.
20 For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself doeth: and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may marvel.

You seem fond of making "everything" an absolute. So if the Father had shown the Son all things that He Himself did, and Jesus laid His life down for the flock, did the Father do likewise? As YHWH, is the Father pierced? Did the Son follow what the Father showed Him, create this world with the Father, and come as the revelation of the Father to the world? That He who saw Him, saw the Father as the express image of the Father?
John 16:25
25 These things have I spoken unto you in proverbs: but the time cometh, when I shall no more speak unto you in proverbs, but I shall shew you plainly of the Father.