# Was Jesus with God from the beginning?



## HawgJawl (Jul 21, 2011)

There are a few separate concepts that I'm having difficulty reconciling when viewed together.  

Concept #1:
Neither God nor Jesus ever change.  They are the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow. (Malachi 3:6  &  Hebrews 13:8)

Concept #2:
The Trinity; If God said it, by definition, Jesus said it too.  (1 John 5:7)

Concept #3:
Jesus was with God in the beginning.  (John 1:1  &  John 1:14)

Do you accept all three concepts to be true?
If so, does this present any problems for you when you read the Old Testament?


----------



## Huntinfool (Jul 21, 2011)

Yes I accept those concepts, with the caveat that "never change" does not = "never change his/their mind".

I am not aware of any problems accepting those concepts presents for me when I read the OT.

I accept the concepts that you are trying to present.  Not necessarily the exact way you have worded them.  But, yes, those concepts are ones that I accept as a follower of Christ. 

Now, ask me if I fully understand them.  The answer is no.  I cannot fully explain the nature of the Trinity.  It makes my brain hurt to try.


----------



## HawgJawl (Jul 21, 2011)

Huntinfool said:


> Yes I accept those concepts, with the caveat that "never change" does not = "never change his/their mind".
> 
> I am not aware of any problems accepting those concepts presents for me when I read the OT.
> 
> ...



Where I encounter difficulty while reading the Old Testament, is when God issues certain orders that I could never imagine Jesus issuing.  Such as Israel being ordered by God to slaughter everyone in a town including the infants and elderly.  I've heard the argument presented that since Israel was so special that other people didn't really matter.  But this didn't just happen to towns of the enemies of Israel.  There are examples of the Israelites being ordered by God to attack other Israelite towns and slaughter every living thing in the town.  God spared the Israelite babies at the first Passover in Egypt, but then ordered Israelites to kill other Israelite infants?  The point being; Did Jesus order this?


----------



## revrandyf (Jul 21, 2011)

While I agree with the points posted, I agree with others that I don't fully understand it (after years of education and training) but then neither has the Church ever come to be able to fully explain it.  That is the reason the Apostles' Creed and Nicene Creed were written.  While there has never been a perfect explanation of the Trinity, the Church basically said we might not fully understand it but we believe it.  I think it's called "faith" because we read it in the Bible and we accept the authority of the Scriptures for our life.  Yes, Jesus was, is and is to come; God incarnate.


----------



## Huntinfool (Jul 21, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> Where I encounter difficulty while reading the Old Testament, is when God issues certain orders that I could never imagine Jesus issuing.  Such as Israel being ordered by God to slaughter everyone in a town including the infants and elderly.  I've heard the argument presented that since Israel was so special that other people didn't really matter.  But this didn't just happen to towns of the enemies of Israel.  There are examples of the Israelites being ordered by God to attack other Israelite towns and slaughter every living thing in the town.  God spared the Israelite babies at the first Passover in Egypt, but then ordered Israelites to kill other Israelite infants?  The point being; Did Jesus order this?



Jesus was, himself, a human sacrifice.

God demanded it and he agreed with it and then carried it out.  Based on your post above, I would suspect that you would never imagine Jesus would demand a human sacrifice.

We often talk about the cross as beautiful and with reverence and both of those things are true.  

But at the base of it, it was a human sacrifice (with all sorts of more complicated implications).  It was a violent excrutiating death that was ordered by God and carried out by Jesus.  

Would you have expected that out of Jesus?


----------



## HawgJawl (Jul 21, 2011)

Huntinfool said:


> Jesus was, himself, a human sacrifice.
> 
> God demanded it and he agreed with it and then carried it out.  Based on your post above, I would suspect that you would never imagine Jesus would demand a human sacrifice.
> 
> ...



Jesus and God being the same, a self-sacrifice that serves a greater good, is easily viewed as an act of love.  Demanding that infants be slaughtered is different.


----------



## Huntinfool (Jul 21, 2011)

Good point.  I was just addressing the "I wouldn't expect that from Jesus" part of it.  

Would you expect him to order a torturous killing?  Regardless of love or not.

I think you hit upon the greater good thing.  It's important.  Many of the things that happened in the OT were DIRECTLY related to the coming of Christ and the necessity that the prophecies be fulfilled.


----------



## Gabassmaster (Jul 21, 2011)

Yup


----------



## Ronnie T (Jul 21, 2011)

In principle, I agree with what you've written.  But there's much I don't understand about it.  Actually, I understand almost none of it.

I see that you continue to struggle with how different the Christian present is from the Old Testament history.
I hope that one day you'll be able to come to terms with the things of God's nature.


----------



## HawgJawl (Jul 21, 2011)

The book of Judges chapters 19, 20, & 21 tell a story that I find difficult to believe God (Jesus) had any part of.  It's much easier for me to believe that this was done by men who used the excuse of "God told us to do it".

This story has nothing to do with prophecies being fullfilled.  It is about a mob overreacting to the actions of a few wicked men.

When I think of "WWJD", ordering the slaughter of infants and the elderly is not one of the first things that comes to mind.


----------



## HawgJawl (Jul 22, 2011)

How about women's overall "place" in society?  Under Mosaic Law, women were often viewed as property and when a woman was raped or kidnapped the victim was the father or husband.  The woman had no say in the matter and was sometimes bound by law to marry the rapist.

Do you think that Jesus' view of women has changed since the time of Moses?  If so, how would you explain the reason(s) for this change?


----------



## Huntinfool (Jul 22, 2011)

Jesus changed a lot things since Moses.


----------



## HawgJawl (Jul 22, 2011)

Huntinfool said:


> Jesus changed a lot things since Moses.



How do you reconcile that with the concepts mentioned in the original post?


----------



## Huntinfool (Jul 22, 2011)

With my caveat from my first post I suppose....God does not changed.  But he has proven that he sometimes changes his mind.

As has been said a bunch.  I do not, nor will I ever, fully understand God or his ways.

BTW....I think that Judges passage you posted would be a great seperate thread for discussion.


----------



## HawgJawl (Jul 22, 2011)

Huntinfool said:


> With my caveat from my first post I suppose....God does not changed.  But he has proven that he sometimes changes his mind.
> 
> As has been said a bunch.  I do not, nor will I ever, fully understand God or his ways.
> 
> BTW....I think that Judges passage you posted would be a great seperate thread for discussion.



Please feel free to jump all over the Judges 19-21 right here.

On a side note, how can God change His mind and also know the future?


----------



## JFS (Jul 22, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> how can God change His mind and also know the future?


----------



## Huntinfool (Jul 22, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> Please feel free to jump all over the Judges 19-21 right here.
> 
> On a side note, how can God change His mind and also know the future?



I don't know.....maybe he knew he was going to change his mind?


----------



## hummerpoo (Jul 22, 2011)

Deliberately avoiding the God changing His mind issue; I find most of the things in question here easier to grasp when I remember that it's not all about men, it's all about Him.


----------



## Bama4me (Jul 22, 2011)

When we read that God is the same today as He was yesterday in Hebrews 13:8, it's not talking about an unwillingess to change His mind... it's talking about His nature.  The fact Abraham was able to "talk God down" when dealing with the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah shows that God will and has changed His mind.

HJ... one of the things that will probably help if you are willing to consider it is the fact that many times when it came to destroying a people, there was a backdrop behind it.  In 1 Samuel 15, for example, Amalek was to be destroyed because they attacked the COI from the rear ranks... where the women/children traveled.  I think it's safe to say that it some cases, we may not know all the details of that backdrop as well.  Also, realize that it's often very difficult to determine when Israel was operating on their own volition and when they were operating from God's command.  

The Judges passage?  Remember the running theme of the book?  Everyone did what was right in his own eyes (17:6/21:25)... a place it seems we are getting to in America today.


----------



## Bama4me (Jul 22, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> Please feel free to jump all over the Judges 19-21 right here.
> 
> On a side note, how can God change His mind and also know the future?



Scripture seems to indicate that it's possible for God to choose to not know the future.  Jesus said in Matthew 24:36 that He did not know the day of His 2nd coming.  Someone may ask, "if He's God, how could He not know?"  Personally, it's my opinion that He does know now that He's back in heaven... it was something which was relative to His time on earth.  However, however you believe about it, it's not easy to understand.

More than anything else, when we talk about the nature of Deity, we have to remember 2 Corinthians 5:7... for we walk by faith, not by sight.  Walking by faith means we accept and obey whether we completely understand or not.  See Hebrews 11 for a working definition of some of the times people obeyed when they didn't understand.  For those of us who like things to be "black and white", faith is harder... and Satan siezes that opportunity if we are not careful.


----------



## Israel (Jul 23, 2011)

Put the billy on the boil.

If you are Australian, you know exactly what that means.
If you are not...some fellow named Billy could be in big trouble...especially around cannibals.

Cursed is everyone that hangs on a tree.
If you are carnal Jesus is accursed.
But no man can call Jesus Lord except by the Holy Spirit.


Seeing what "happened" is far different than seeing what is.
And always has been.

Jesus is Lord. Now and forever. Whatever God has allowed for any man to see that is to take that man out of the prison of "why?" into the glorious joy of "thanks be to God".

Isaiah 43:4 "Since you are precious in My sight, Since you are honored and I love you, I will give other men in your place and other peoples in exchange for your life."

Are we yet delighted with the God who had every right to completely deal with his creation according to his wrath...but didn't? Or have we not yet seen the cross?


----------



## The Foreigner (Jul 23, 2011)

Couple of things here:

1. The Trinity is something of a mystery - not a total mystery, but very much a mystery. That should not stop us searching Scripture, as you are, to understand it.

2. God does not change his mind: when Scripture speaks of God "repenting" of the harm he would do, or "Regretting" something - it is, what is called, and "anthropomorphism". That is, it speaks of God in a manner which we understand, but which does not capture the whole of the decision in God's mind. It is God accomodating himslef, in revelation to our finite minds.  It is a contradiction in terms, for the God of the Bible to change his mind. That means He got something wrong, or needed to improve something. If that is the case he ceases to be God.

3. The issue of "what would Jesus do?"  Jesus is fully God, and the operations of God as triune or indivisible. He commanded the death of the pagan nations in Canaan before Israel entered the land, as much as the Father did. There is no conflict in this: at his second coming, Christ will JUDGE all those who do not believe and they will be cast in to outer darkness. That's judgement. That is condemnation. He is the One, under who's feet, the Father will place all his enemies. He is happy with that. Furthermore, the appeal to the "women and children" argument is founded on faulty premises - are idol worshiping women and children any less sinful than idol-worshiping men? The nations of Canaan, were an abomination in the eyes of the Triune God (as we all are in our natural state, so I'm not scoring points here) and he had every right to execute justice upon them. Just as Christ will execute justice on those who do not believe in him, at his Second coming.

It seems to me that the "what would Jesus do" argument, neglects whole swathes of the Old and New Testaments. They ignore his condemnation of the self-righteous, they ignore him calling them "sons of the devil" and have this christmas-card-like view of him - the "Jesus meek and gentle, mild" approach. For sure that is there, but the idea that Jesus is only love, without him being holy and just is simply not biblical.

So it is being entirely consistent to see the Christ of the OT in the same light as the Christ of the NT. No contradiction - certainly some mystery, but no contradiction. Hope this helps.

Peace.


----------



## The Foreigner (Jul 23, 2011)

Bama4me said:


> Scripture seems to indicate that it's possible for God to choose to not know the future.  Jesus said in Matthew 24:36 that He did not know the day of His 2nd coming.  Someone may ask, "if He's God, how could He not know?"  Personally, it's my opinion that He does know now that He's back in heaven... it was something which was relative to His time on earth.  However, however you believe about it, it's not easy to understand.
> 
> More than anything else, when we talk about the nature of Deity, we have to remember 2 Corinthians 5:7... for we walk by faith, not by sight.  Walking by faith means we accept and obey whether we completely understand or not.  See Hebrews 11 for a working definition of some of the times people obeyed when they didn't understand.  For those of us who like things to be "black and white", faith is harder... and Satan siezes that opportunity if we are not careful.



Your second paragraph is insightful and helpful. Thank you. Satan ceases such opportunities.

Your first paragraph seems a little off however. We remember that Christ has two natures in the one person - the divine and the human nature. We must be careful to differentiate both: sometimes the gospels speak of him in his humanity - he got hungry for example. The eternal God does not get hungry. Neither did the Divine nature die on the cross (I'm not saying Jesus is not the God-man - he evidently is, only that which is eternal is not subject to death).  There are also times when he speaks and it is his humanity speaking - for example the day and hour of his 2nd Coming. He's speaking as a man there.  Yet other times, the gospels speak of him clearly in his divine nature - he knew what was in mens' hearts, and therefore did not trust himself to them. That is clearly the discernment of the divine, not the human nature.

So we need to protect the teaching of Scripture with regard to the divine and human natures - the 'God with us" principle we find in Scripture.

Peace.


----------



## The Foreigner (Jul 23, 2011)

Furthermore, what do you make of the New Testament's witness to Christ - "In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God... and the Word became flesh and dwelt among us"? That's Jesus.


----------



## Bama4me (Jul 23, 2011)

The Foreigner said:


> Your first paragraph seems a little off however. We remember that Christ has two natures in the one person - the divine and the human nature. We must be careful to differentiate both: sometimes the gospels speak of him in his humanity - he got hungry for example. The eternal God does not get hungry. Neither did the Divine nature die on the cross (I'm not saying Jesus is not the God-man - he evidently is, only that which is eternal is not subject to death).  There are also times when he speaks and it is his humanity speaking - for example the day and hour of his 2nd Coming. He's speaking as a man there.  Yet other times, the gospels speak of him clearly in his divine nature - he knew what was in mens' hearts, and therefore did not trust himself to them. That is clearly the discernment of the divine, not the human nature.



I believe that Jesus was both a man and Divine... not a 50/50 proposition, but He was 100% human and 100% Divine.  That means He was "God" at all times He was with us on earth.  That means He had access to all that makes one Divine.  If He didn't know when His second coming would occur, He had to choose to not know.  It may be related to His humanity or not... no evidence to swing it one way or another.  One of the hardest verses to understand is Philippians 2:7 - "He emptied Himself."  Certainly, He didn't "empty Himself" of His Divinity.

Regarding God's willingness to change His mind, I don't always see that in the vein as God making a mistake... or even as "improving Himself."  More than anything, when you see this in Scripture, it seems to be reactions due to encounters with humans.  

I agree to a degree that it is anthropomorphism"... but I also believe God included those things in Scripture to prove points - primarily that He is a God of mercy.  God knew beforehand, however, that a change would occur... but it doesn't cancel out the fact a change was made.  It doesn't mean God is any less all-knowing/all-powerful.


----------



## Ronnie T (Jul 23, 2011)

Bama4me said:


> I believe that Jesus was both a man and Divine... not a 50/50 proposition, but He was 100% human and 100% Divine.  That means He was "God" at all times He was with us on earth.  That means He had access to all that makes one Divine.  If He didn't know when His second coming would occur, He had to choose to not know.  It may be related to His humanity or not... no evidence to swing it one way or another.  One of the hardest verses to understand is Philippians 2:7 - "He emptied Himself."  Certainly, He didn't "empty Himself" of His Divinity.
> 
> Regarding God's willingness to change His mind, I don't always see that in the vein as God making a mistake... or even as "improving Himself."  More than anything, when you see this in Scripture, it seems to be reactions due to encounters with humans.
> 
> I agree to a degree that it is anthropomorphism"... but I also believe God included those things in Scripture to prove points - primarily that He is a God of mercy.  God knew beforehand, however, that a change would occur... but it doesn't cancel out the fact a change was made.  It doesn't mean God is any less all-knowing/all-powerful.



Completely agree with you.
And I'll add the obvious.  We are God's clay. Far be it for the clay to understand or question the Master.  And the same for His son.


----------



## mtnwoman (Jul 23, 2011)

Huntinfool said:


> Yes I accept those concepts, with the caveat that "never change" does not = "never change his/their mind".
> 
> I am not aware of any problems accepting those concepts presents for me when I read the OT.
> 
> ...



I agree.

I understand the Trinity in my spirit, but explaining it to someone else is difficult for me. It's one of those, you know that you know that you know.

It's like I know how I got pregnant and I know that I had a baby. Could I explain everything in between in detail? I don't have to know all that, I just know the beginning and the ending. I'm sure someone could explain all the 9 month details, but I'm good.  Just like all I really need to know, understand and believe is that I'm a sinner and someone else paid for my sins...paid my debt for me....rescued me from a seperation from God and all that is good.

ETA I believe Christ has always been. I believe that because I believe He is God that came to earth in the flesh.  God said to Abraham, I will provide myself a lamb...that was Christ.


----------



## hawglips (Oct 18, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> On a side note, how can God change His mind and also know the future?



The same reason he asked Adam in the Garder of Eden: "Adam, where art thou?"  

He knew where Adam was, and what he had done.  But the event had to play out and for Him to interact with Adam on a level Adam's human mind could follow and respond to.

I don't think he ever changes His mind, but I think he just interacts in the most effective way to accomplish what needs to be done among humans here on earth.


----------



## BANDERSNATCH (Oct 18, 2011)

mtnwoman said:


> God said to Abraham, I will provide myself a lamb...that was Christ.



love that verse.    Wasn't coincidence that He said it that way.


----------



## 1gr8bldr (Oct 18, 2011)

To answer the question stated in the title of the OP; No


----------



## gordon 2 (Oct 18, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> There are a few separate concepts that I'm having difficulty reconciling when viewed together.
> 
> Concept #1:
> Neither God nor Jesus ever change.  They are the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow. (Malachi 3:6  &  Hebrews 13:8)
> ...






The Hindu explain the trinity of Brahman (God) as this:

"Brahman is sometimes referred to as the Absolute or Godhead[2] which is the  a)Divine Ground[3] of all being. Brahman is conceived as b) personal ("with qualities"), c) impersonal ("without qualities").

Perhaps from a Devine Ground and "qualities" perspective God is never changing, but from impersonal qualities He is?

Also about why in the Old Testament God calls on the Hebrews to conquor other people and indeed rub-out some of their own, I would like to point to this often overlooked  and important aspect of ancient peoples and their govenors: the  concept of Rajdharma sort of explains this:

The duty of the rulers, as intrinsically entwined with the concept of bravery and Kshatriya. Kshatriya being: 

Kshatriya (Sanskrit: क्षत्रिय, kṣatriya from Sanskrit: क्षत्र, kṣatra) or Kashtriya, meaning warrior, is one of the four varnas (social orders) in Hinduism. Traditionally Kshatriya/Chattaris constitute the military and ruling elite of the Vedic-Hindu social system outlined by the Vedas and the Laws of Manu.

In other words if  "your ruling elite" were not subduing people by conquest you were not legitamently viable as a distinct people and forgoing your duty.

 Also, if I understand even partly, in the Hindu tradition the incarnation of the devine nature is not a one time thing. There have been many incarnations...all different. Which to even my weak ears means that from christian writers, Jesus was indeed from the beginning as far as incarnations go.

Just some .02cent ideas.....


----------



## rjcruiser (Oct 18, 2011)

1gr8bldr said:


> To answer the question stated in the title of the OP; No



John 1:1

In the beginning was the Word...and the Word was with God and the Word was God.


But...alas...you don't believe it reads that way...so, I know, I'm just posting for my own viewing pleasure.


----------



## gordon 2 (Oct 18, 2011)

rjcruiser said:


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



Did you know that the word for Word is not the same in all translations? For example in French "the Word" becomes the "Verb". I wonder what is an equivalent translation in the Navaho language?

But in any case for the reader who reads the bible in french the Verb that was at the beginning conotes "action or activity" or works as well as language itself..


----------



## TimB (Oct 18, 2011)

gordon 2 said:


> Did you know that the word for Word is not the same in all translations? For example in French "the Word" becomes the "Verb". I wonder what is an equivalent translation in the Navaho language?
> 
> But in any case for the reader who reads the bible in french the Verb that was at the beginning conotes "action or activity" or works as well as language itself..



Well while there are many translations, fortunately we know that the New Testament was written  in Koine Greek which is a dead language and thus has not changed or morphed over the centuries and "word" in John 1:1 is "Logos", 



> The essential Word of God, Jesus Christ, the personal wisdom and power in union with God, his minister in creation and government of the universe, the cause of all the world's life both physical and ethical, which for the procurement of man's salvation put on human nature in the person of Jesus the Messiah, the second person in the Godhead, and shone forth conspicuously from His words and deeds.


link


----------



## M80 (Oct 19, 2011)

The bible says in Gen.  Let us make man in our own image.  

Trinity, it's like 3 candles burning seperatly but when you combine them they all make 1 flame, best way I teach it in Sunday School.


----------



## formula1 (Oct 20, 2011)

*Re:*

And even before that passage in Genesis, there was Genesis 1:3, And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light: this being far before the creation of the sun.

And what did Jesus say of himself?

John 17:5
And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed.

And what does scripture say:

Collosians 1
13 He has delivered us from the domain of darkness and transferred us to the kingdom of his beloved Son, 14 in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins. 15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. 16 For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him. 17 And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together.

Oh, I am certain that Jesus was with God in the beginning and He was the Living word spoken of in John 1.  The scriptures can be twisted by the false, but they will never mean what they have not meant.


----------



## gordon 2 (Oct 20, 2011)

formula1 said:


> And even before that passage in Genesis, there was Genesis 1:3, And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light: this being far before the creation of the sun.
> 
> And what did Jesus say of himself?
> 
> ...



John 17:5
And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed.

Did the world exist before Adam's fall?


----------



## Ronnie T (Oct 20, 2011)

Jesus was with God from the beginning....................

but I cannot say for certainty what "the beginning" was!


----------



## gordon 2 (Oct 21, 2011)

Ronnie T said:


> Jesus was with God from the beginning....................
> 
> but I cannot say for certainty what "the beginning" was!



So you would not say, but not discount two beginnings for this: 

And Adam said, "And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed."


----------



## formula1 (Oct 21, 2011)

gordon 2 said:


> John 17:5
> And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed.
> 
> Did the world exist before Adam's fall?



Probably.  But it was a world not yet corrupted by sin and death, not unlike the one in Eden which Adam lived in before the fall of man.

But the point here is Christ was with God in Glory before the world existed. Before Genesis 1:1 in my limited view. It speaks of the diety of Christ and His perfect union with the Father from the beginning of all things.


----------



## Ronnie T (Oct 21, 2011)

formula1 said:


> Probably.  But it was a world not yet corrupted by sin and death, not unlike the one in Eden which Adam lived in before the fall of man.
> 
> But the point here is Christ was with God in Glory before the world existed. Before Genesis 1:1 in my limited view. It speaks of the diety of Christ and His perfect union with the Father from the beginning of all things.



Exactly.
Jesus(Word) was with God at the beginning of the world.
Jesus was involved in the transaction of the creation.

But I can't speak to anything prior to that.
Did God the father ever exist without His son with Him?  I don't know.

In the beginning??  Did God's son have a beginning?


----------



## formula1 (Oct 21, 2011)

RonnieT:

Those questions you ask are definately mysteries. God has not revealed them as far as I know.  You and I both know that if God doesn't want you to know something, you will not know it.  God Bless and have a great weekend!


----------



## Ronnie T (Oct 21, 2011)

formula1 said:


> RonnieT:
> 
> Those questions you ask are definately mysteries. God has not revealed them as far as I know.  You and I both know that if God doesn't want you to know something, you will not know it.  God Bless and have a great weekend!



You have a great one also brother.
I'm down at Apalachicola Bay and I'm about to go eat me 3 doz oysters.

Yum.


----------



## StriperAddict (Oct 22, 2011)

Ronnie T said:


> I'm down at Apalachicola Bay and I'm about to go eat me 3 doz oysters.
> 
> Yum.


 
Been there, done that, hardly anything better.

I forget the name of the place but several years ago in Apalachicola there was this rest./bar/grill that had happy hour oysters, and the price for a doz was under 2$. Insane!  I must have had me at least 5 doz. 

Sorry, talk of seafood will get a derailed thread outta me everytime!


----------



## Ronnie T (Oct 22, 2011)

They were the best I've ever eaten.
(Course, I say that every time)


----------



## polkhunt (Oct 23, 2011)

I believe in a father a son and a holy spirit(wind) but I do not believe that are one in the same. I  guess that is just a mystery we may or may not ever know the answer.


----------



## HawgJawl (Oct 25, 2011)

The Foreigner said:


> The issue of "what would Jesus do?"  Jesus is fully God, and the operations of God as triune or indivisible. He commanded the death of the pagan nations in Canaan before Israel entered the land, as much as the Father did. There is no conflict in this: at his second coming, Christ will JUDGE all those who do not believe and they will be cast in to outer darkness. That's judgement. That is condemnation. He is the One, under who's feet, the Father will place all his enemies. He is happy with that. Furthermore, the appeal to the "women and children" argument is founded on faulty premises - are idol worshiping women and children any less sinful than idol-worshiping men? The nations of Canaan, were an abomination in the eyes of the Triune God (as we all are in our natural state, so I'm not scoring points here) and he had every right to execute justice upon them. Just as Christ will execute justice on those who do not believe in him, at his Second coming.
> 
> It seems to me that the "what would Jesus do" argument, neglects whole swathes of the Old and New Testaments. They ignore his condemnation of the self-righteous, they ignore him calling them "sons of the devil" and have this christmas-card-like view of him - the "Jesus meek and gentle, mild" approach. For sure that is there, but the idea that Jesus is only love, without him being holy and just is simply not biblical.
> 
> ...





HawgJawl said:


> The book of Judges chapters 19, 20, & 21 tell a story that I find difficult to believe God (Jesus) had any part of.  It's much easier for me to believe that this was done by men who used the excuse of "God told us to do it".
> 
> This story has nothing to do with prophecies being fullfilled.  It is about a mob overreacting to the actions of a few wicked men.
> 
> When I think of "WWJD", ordering the slaughter of infants and the elderly is not one of the first things that comes to mind.



The story told in Judges 19, 20, and 21 does not deal with Israel slaughtering pagan nations.  It is about Israel declaring war upon itself.  The tribes of Israel united and attacked one of their own tribes of Israel and slaughtered all the women, children, and elderly of the Israelite tribe.  This has nothing to do with pagan nations.  It was an over-reaction to a crime committed by a few men.  Then after the men who had fled returned to find all their women and children slaughtered, the other tribes felt sorry for them and decided to kidnap women to replace the ones they had slaughtered.  This does not sound to me like a plan made by Jesus or by God for that matter.  It sounds like the actions of men who just said that God told them to do it.


----------



## dewclaw (Oct 26, 2011)

I am just finishing Dake's Annotated Reference Bible after 2 years. It is the longest most controversial Bible available. It was referenced by Finnis Dake and he spent 40 years on it. He believed that Jesus was with God from the beginning. I believe the Bible is the answer to all questions, and that no other person can tell you what to believe. I believe if you pray for spiritual wisdom before reading the Bible that God will answer your question through scripture and time. Happy Reading!


----------



## Lead Poison (Oct 28, 2011)

If only God the father knows when Jesus will return, how can Jesus and God be the same?

Jesus said only the father knows when he (Jesus) will return. 

God and Jesus share the same love for us, and I believe God gave Jesus full power as he has; however, they appear to be two distinctly separate entities. 

There are many questions about the Trinity that are not clear. 

All I know is God sent his only begotten son to die on the cross for the sins of the world and whosoever believes (truly accepts) in him will have everlasting life!

Praise God and his son, our savior, Jesus!


----------



## Ronnie T (Oct 28, 2011)

Lead Poison said:


> If only God the father knows when Jesus will return, how can Jesus and God be the same?
> 
> Jesus said only the father knows when he (Jesus) will return.
> 
> ...



Amen.


----------



## hawglips (Nov 1, 2011)

Yep, Jesus was there.

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

Genesis 1:24
26 ¶And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness:


----------

