
QUESTION LIST #24:
| To
list of all questions on Website |
The importance of the
Christian Baptism
Adam &
Eve, and the serpent, and the Tree of Life, in the Garden of Eden
Adam &
Eve, who did what?
Illustration of the danger of extra-Biblical writings; the Targums on
Gen 3
An answer to those who challenge
the validity of the "Serpent Seed Doctrine" simply on the grounds of 'guilt
by association' with the many groups, both good and bad, that realized the
Biblical truth of the teaching all down through the ages.
A
man has a problem with the concept of 'pre-existence.'
Did
Jesus change the Law? And, what of food laws?
How
could God, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit be One?
Is
celibacy for Priests Biblical?
Question #1
| Back To Top |
The importance of the
Christian Baptism
Answer to a reader on the
matter:
Hi, you asked:
"So
if I have read correctly you do not believe in baptism being essential but
necessary? Would it be correct to say that?"
Let me clarify: I do not think that it is OK for one not to be
Baptized! Jesus told us to get Baptized, so how can we say it is OK to
disobey Him???
What I did say was that Baptism does not save you, Jesus Christ does. And
this Jesus Christ, whom saves you, said that you were to be Baptized:
Matt 28:18-20 18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in
heaven and in earth. 19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations,
baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of
the Holy Ghost: 20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded
you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the
world. Amen. (KJV)
What I said that you may have misunderstood was that the man on the cross next
to Jesus was saved by Jesus on the cross and he did not have a chance to get
Baptized. Therefore, technically, he was saved without being Baptized. But
you do have a chance to get Baptized. The man on the cross didn't get
Baptized because he was unable to for being nailed to a cross dying. What
excuse will use when Jesus asks you why decided not to get Baptized? Surely
the man on the cross would have gotten Baptized had he the chance.
Any Christian can baptize you.
If you believe upon Jesus Christ, do as He said.
Do it.
You said:
"I first gave my life to
Christ under an Oneness Pentecostal Church, but I don't believe that anymore,
however the thought of having to be baptized still plagues me from time to
time. Please keep in mind I'm not trying to argue just get another view on all
this."
I know the error of the Pentecostal Church, and I know that all their dogma
about being 'Baptized in the Holy Spirit' is error. But are you saying that
they do not water Baptize? Inform me, for I did not know that.
We have a study, and in it is the testimony of many who have come out of the
Pentecostal church error. Perhaps you would like to read it as it clears up
much err of the churches (especially the Pentecostal, Charismatic, and like
teaching churches); it is at:
The Holy Spirit & The Holy Trinity
If you would consider it, I would like your testimonial as to your experiences
in the Pentecostal Church and what events led up to your breaking free from
it. I may like to include it in the above study - I would not use your name.
So if you are led by God to share, so that it may help others still trapped,
would you take your time and give me your testimonial for possible use in the
study? Perhaps if you had been warned in the beginning you would not have
spent time in the Pentecostal Church. it seems that your time in the
Pentecostal Church has confused you instead of uplifted you. Well, by sharing
maybe you can help to warn others.
But either way, feel free to follow-up with questions.
God bless
the study of His Word, in Jesus Christ' name!
Nick Goggin (Editor)
The reader follows up; to which we
replied as below:
Hello again, you asked:
"Another question would be in Baptized in Jesus name, or father son and
Holy Ghost?"
It is the same thing. The Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit are One. Jesus is
God in the flesh, God is the Father in Heaven, and the Holy Spirit is the
Spirit of God.
Jesus was the only one to say to be Baptized in the name of the Father, the
Son, and the Holy Spirit.
Matt 28:19 [Jesus speaking]
19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations,
baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy
Ghost: (KJV)
All other's Baptized in the Lord's name. Why? Because He had been crucified
and risen by that time:
Acts 19:3-5 3 And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto
John's baptism. 4 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying
unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him,
that is, on Christ Jesus. 5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. (KJV)
Acts 2:38 38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the
name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift
of the Holy Ghost. (KJV)
Jesus said this (to Baptize in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit)
because at the time of His statement He had not yet been glorified,
i.e., He was not yet crucified and risen AND ASCENDED INTO
HEAVEN, He was still on the earth prior to His
ascension in:
Acts 1:8-9 8 But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you:
and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and
in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth. 9 And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld,
he was
taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight. (KJV)
After His ascension the Apostles said to be Baptized in the name of Jesus
Christ. They had not changed the ‘formula,' for Christ's coming did not
change the Scriptures, He fulfilled them. And after His ascension it was His
rightful place to have Baptism in his name.
Jesus in the Hebrew is Yehoshua ("Ye" is Yehovah, "hoshua"
is salvation), which means the Salvation of Yehovah or Yehovah
Savior, or in the English the Salvation of God, God the
Savior.
Jesus was God in the flesh. You remember the Scripture announcing Jesus'
birth? He is there called the "God with us" (Emmanuel):
Matt 1:23-25 23 Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they
shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with
us. 24 Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden
him, and took unto him his wife: 25 And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he
called his name JESUS. (KJV)
"Christ" means the Anointed One. Anointed with what? Anointed with
the Holy Spirit.
Luke 1:31-35 31 And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and
shalt call his name JESUS. 32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord
God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: 33 And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom
there shall be no end. 34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? 35 And the angel answered and said unto her,
The Holy Ghost shall
come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee:
therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the
Son of God. (KJV)
Luke 4:1 1 And
Jesus being full of the Holy Ghost returned from
Jordan, and was led by the Spirit into the wilderness, (KJV)
So when you say Jesus Christ (God Savior the Anointed One)
at Baptism it is the same thing as saying Father, Son and Holy Spirit. It is
not magic in the words, but what is in the heart that matters. When we are
Baptized we go down into the water as Christ went down into the earth at His
burial. When we rise up out of the water it is as Jesus rose from the dead.
We become alive in Christ. It is not the water, the H2O,
it is not the ritual, not the words, but it is truth, what we believe.
We must believe that Jesus Christ is the Savior from God. That is what
Baptism is, it is an affirmation, a statement of our faith in obedience. When
we are Baptized we are agreeing (or testifying) that Jesus did these things
and that God hath sent salvation to mankind in the name of His Son Jesus
Christ:
Acts 4:8-12 8 Then Peter, filled with the Holy Ghost, said unto them, Ye rulers of the
people, and elders of Israel, 9 If we this day be examined of the good deed done to the impotent man, by
what means he is made whole; 10 Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name
of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom
God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you
whole. 11 This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become
the head of the corner. 12 Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other
name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved. (KJV)
Our study on the Holy Spirit will help you understand why "Jesus Christ" is
the same as saying "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit" at Baptism:
The Holy Spirit & The Holy Trinity
You asked:
"My next question would be tithing? Something I'm very confused on, I due
it out of my heart anyways, giving more than the 10% or so that most churches
require from people, but I do not stand fully convinced that is required of
us, but in not fully convinced that it is not required of us either. I have
looked on your site but I cannot find anything about this practice."
I don't write about tithing unless it is in private questions because I feel
that it looks like I am begging for money when I address such topic.
But in the Bible the original formula was 10%, for that is the meaning of the
word "tithe" (a tenth). However, in the days of that writing the church
supported the community, they gave food and money to the widows and orphans,
they sustained the priests and the government. Now we pay taxes to the
government of the United States which (supposedly) cares for the needy and the
needs of the community, the retired, the lame, etc. So to give 10% now would
go beyond what is expected because we give so much to the government already
to do the things that the church used to do.
How much should you give? The number does not matter, it is the thought that
counts. Many people give much money but believe little, they are just
‘covering their butts,' if you know what I mean. Many people give little, but
what they give comes from their heart and is acceptable to God more so than the
much given by the unjust.
God doesn't need the money, He could supply the needs of the needy and the
Church on His own, but He wants us to care, He wants us to help.
So for you, maybe you are led to give more than others, and for others they
have little to give. But if given in Christ's name and from a pure heart, all
offerings are equally acceptable unto the Lord.
Personally I do not see any Godly point of decking the false preachers out in
Cadillac's and $500.00 suits while the parishioners are poor and in need
themselves. Sadly, the modern church is far from helping the widows and
orphans, which the Good Book directs us to do, but as often is the case the
church bilks money out of poor widows. Shame!
I suppose that some poor souls think that they can buy Heaven because greedy
false apostles have lied to them for gain. And they are not blameless, for it
is their love of the ‘praises of man' that drive many to publicly give. God
knows the difference.
Follow your heart when it comes to offering to the Lord. But remember, your
offering can be given directly to a needy family, a Ministry, or a bum on the
street, it needn't be given to a rich preacher - to be considered a tithe.
I know that I sound 'down' on many Ministries, but look around you, how many
good ones are there anymore? How many teach truth? Yours apparently teaches
to babble in demonic tongues things that they know not what they say. Some
day they will learn what it is that they were saying - and they shall be
ashamed. Are there good Ministries out there yet? Yes, but they are far and
few between. Most are corrupted by satan in one way or another. I mean
really, what baby Christian even can't see that the concept of 'slain in the
spirit' is evil?!? The prosperity Ministries are all in vain. Most of the
churches are compromised by now, they will user in the antichrist period,
though they pay lip service against him now. Look at Kenneth Copeland's eyes,
if you can't see demonic possession then you have absolutely no spiritual
discernment whatsoever. The man is evil with a dead gaze. So is God well
pleased at the dupes who finance these mega-Ministries? No way!
Frankly, our money in many cases would better get to the needy in Christ by
bypassing the money-changers at the pulpits. But I do understand that all
Ministries have financial needs that must be met, so if you have a good
Ministry then you should financially support them.
Follow your heart. Give to God what is His and to the preacher what is his.
God will guide you as to which is which if you seek His council. Though you
won't be quite so popular at church if you give some of their money to the
needy in Christ. Isn't that the point?
God bless
the study of His Word, in Jesus Christ' name!
Nick Goggin (Editor)
Back to list of questions at
top of page
Question #2
| Back To Top |
Adam & Eve, and the
serpent, and the Tree of Life, in the Garden of Eden
Hello Cathy, you asked:
"In the garden Eve had
sex with Satan - you believe.
In your opinion, when in Genesis it says that
Adam and Eve are thrown out of the Garden so that they will not eat of the
Tree of Life and live forever, what does this mean? Had adam and eve stayed
they would have had sex with that tree ? Was that tree Jesus?"
The Tree of Life was Jesus, yes. But would Adam and
Eve done what you asked (had sex) with the Tree of Life? God forbid, no!
You are confusing several elements here. For one,
Adam and Eve did not have sex with a tree, in fact Adam isn't said to have had
sex with the serpent, only Eve is said to have had sex with the serpent.
Observe what Eve did with the serpent compared to
what God didn't want Adam & Eve to do to the Tree of Life:
Gen 3:13
13 And the LORD God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done?
And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I
did eat. (KJV)
Gen 3:22
22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know
good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also
of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: (KJV)
Eve was beguiled (seduced) by satan (the serpent).
Let me clear this up better for you, let's look at another element in the sin
of Eve. Eve was told not to "touch" the tree; this word 'touch" is naga
in the Hebrew and can be a euphemism for sexual intercourse. Adam was never
told by God not to "touch" the tree of evil, perhaps because He knew that Adam
would not be tempted like that. Else you have the origin of
Homosexuality.
Touch:
Hebrew word #5060 naga` (naw-gah');a primitive root; properly, to
touch, i.e. lay the hand upon (for any purpose; euphem., to lie
with a woman); by implication, to reach (figuratively, to
arrive, acquire); violently, to strike (punish, defeat, destroy, etc.): KJV--
beat, (X be able to) bring (down), cast, come (nigh), draw near (nigh), get
up, happen, join, near, plague, reach (up), smite, strike, touch.
Below observe that Eve was given two commands
regarding the Tree of Good and Evil; one: to not "touch" (naga) the
tree, and two: to not "eat of it." Regarding the Tree of Life no such mention
is made of "touching" (naga) the tree only about eating of it:
Gen 3:3-5
3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath
said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither
shall ye touch it, lest ye die.
4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be
opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil. (KJV)
Gen 3:22
22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know
good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the
tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: (KJV)
Don't let the English translation confuse you.
Don't confuse the "put forth his hand, and take"
of Gen 3:22 with the "touch" of Gen 3:3. For the
"touch" in Gen 3:3 is naga, Hebrew word #5060, but the
"put forth his hand, and take" in Gen
3:22 is three Hebrew words (#'s 7971, 3027 & 3947) having nothing to do with
naga.
You asked:
"Also- if Satan's seed is mixed with Adam's here on earth,
does that mean it is like a recessive gene - some times you have red hair -
some blond or brown and so then some people are Satans' and some God's? if
not - then how do you account for people in China, Iraq, Africa etc, when
they hear the Word preached, coming to Christ?"
You are confusing several things here. For one, you
seem to believe that all people descended from Adam and Eve, for you ask about
recessive genes as though all people have the same genes whereby differences
are simply recessions in some people. All people are not from Adam and Eve
(nor from the serpent and Eve).
Also you seem to think that salvation is by race,
for you ask of others of other races being saved. People of all races, when
they believe upon Jesus Christ, are saved; it has nothing to do with their
genes whatsoever.
Cathy, if you would just invest the time to read the
below three Bible studies, in their entirely (no skipping around), in the
below order, all of this will make perfect sense to you:
When was the
beginning? Learn when the true beginning of creation was, and of
the three Earth ages. Discover why God had to destroy the first Earth Age.
Mankind; the
two separate creation events The FORMING of Adam in
the Garden of Eden was a long time preceded by the CREATING of all
the various peoples of the world. Understand why this was necessary and
you are well on your way to understanding the plan of God.
What was the
real sin in the Garden of Eden?!? Did Adam and Eve really eat
the wrong apple and ruin everything? Of course not; find out what really
happened, the reason it happened, and the repercussions of it. When you
learn the truth from God's Word on this, much of the Bible is at once put
into perspective.
I am not putting you off in any way, but it would
take hours and dozens of e-mails to answer the questions that are answered in
these three Bible studies.
Please feel free after having read the three studies
to ask any question that you are yet unsure of.
God bless
the study of His Word, in Jesus Christ' name!
Nick Goggin (Editor)[The
reader wrote back, and it is contained in the below Q & A]
Back to list of questions at
top of page
Question #3
| Back To Top |
Adam
& Eve, who did what?
The above reader (question
#2) wrote back; below is our reply:
You asked:
"I keep asking about the Tree of Life
because- in the Gospels when Jesus says "you must drink my blood and eat my
flesh", I was wondering if that fit in in the Garden of Eden scenario in
your opinion"
Yes, I can see it no other way.
You ask:
"I know that Adam and Eve would not have had
sex with the Tree of Life, but what would they have done?"
Gen 3:22-24
22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know
good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the
tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:
23 Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till
the ground from whence he was taken.
24 So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden
Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of
the tree of life. (KJV)
The fulfillment of the above Scripture:
John 6:57-58
57 As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that
eateth me, even he shall live by me.
58 This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did
eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live
for ever. (KJV)
You state:
"I have always heard that although both Adam and Eve sinned, Adam's sin
was worse because he was not deceived as Eve was but sinned knowingly"
Here is where you are 'missing it,' dear. In the below Scripture what it
is saying is that Adam at the first had obeyed God, he had not sinned, he had
not eaten of that tree; but then along came Eve who disobeyed God and sinned
and (among other things, I might add) she ate of that tree. Eve then went on
to lead Adam astray, and he did eat of that tree.
1 Tim 2:13-15
13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the
transgression.
15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in
faith and charity and holiness with sobriety. (KJV)
Adam "was not deceived", but Eve "being
deceived was in the transgression", and "she
shall be saved" if "they
continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety".
Eve "saw that the tree was good for
food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make
one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat" (Gen 3:6)
Eve "gave also unto her husband with
her" (Gen 3:6).
Adam then took from his wife "and
he did eat" (Gen 3:6).
Adam pleaded to God that "The woman
whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the
tree, and I did eat" (Gen 3:12).
Eve pleaded to God that "The
serpent beguiled me, and I did eat" (Gen 3:13).
God charges the serpent with "I will
put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed
and her seed" (Gen 3:15).
God charges Eve with "I will greatly
multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou
shalt bring forth children" (Gen 3:17).
God charges Adam with "Because
thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and
hast eaten of the tree...cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt
thou eat of it all the days of thy life" (Gen 3:17).
Gen 3:16
16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy
conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children;
and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee. (KJV)
conception: 2032
herown (hay-rone'); or herayown (hay-raw-yone'); from 2029;
pregnancy: KJV-- conception.
Every other occurrence of the word herown in the Old
Testament:
Ruth 4:13
13 So Boaz took Ruth, and she was his wife: and when he went in unto her,
the LORD gave her conception, and she bare a son.
(KJV)
Hosea 9:11
11 As for Ephraim, their glory shall fly away like a bird, from the birth,
and from the womb, and from the conception. (KJV)
For did not God say to the serpent (satan):
Gen 3:15
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. (KJV)
seed: 2233 zera` (zeh'-rah);
from 2232; seed; figuratively, fruit, plant, sowing-time, posterity: KJV--
X carnally, child, fruitful, seed (-time), sowingtime.
Some other occurrences of the word zera` in the Old Testament:
Gen 4:25
25 And Adam knew his wife again; and she bare a son, and
called his name Seth: For God, said she, hath appointed me another
seed instead of Abel, whom Cain slew. (KJV)
Gen 9:9
9 And I, behold, I establish my covenant with you, and with your
seed after you; (KJV)
Gen 21:13
13 And also of the son of the bondwoman will I make a nation, because he
is thy seed. (KJV)
Gen 38:8
8 And Judah said unto Onan, Go in unto thy brother's wife, and
marry her, and raise up seed to thy brother. (KJV)
You state:
"Eve was told to be a helpmate to her husband - not a slave"
The choice of the word "slave" is yours, not mine; for the word carries
with it much baggage that confuses this issue here today. God originally had
made Eve to be a helpmeet as you said (Gen 2:20-25), but then Eve fell by
transgression and was 'demoted' so to speak:
Gen 3:16
16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy
conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy
desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
(KJV)
You said:
"My parents were Episcopalians - I don't think they were ever born
again"
I see that you have been mislead by the term "born again." One becomes
"born again" when one believes upon Jesus Christ. Episcopalians are a
Christian denomination which believes upon Jesus Christ (though they have
become apostate of late over the 'gays' issue). If your parents believed upon
Jesus Christ then they were automatically "born again." See our Getting
Saved; What does it mean, and how can I be?, and also The
"born of the water" in John 3:5.
You said:
"I have been going to the First Assembly of God Church"
You closed with:
"I am sure I am telling you much more than you really wanted to know.
Thanks for your time. I always love talking to a brother in Christ."
No, you told me what I needed to know to help you. I know that you must
be going through a lot right now coming out of the AOG Church (Assemblies Of
God); and that you are dealing with the 'Rapture theory', the 'born again'
misrepresentations, the 'spiritual gifts' misrepresentations, the 'talking in
tongues', etc., misrepresentations, but continue in faith and trust the Lord;
He will guide you into sound doctrine.
And may God bless you dear Sister in Christ Jesus. Feel free to write in
with questions anytime. And I do not discourage disagreement, I just demand
that that disagreement be supported by the Word of God.
God bless
the study of His Word, in Jesus Christ' name!
Nick Goggin (Editor)
Back to list of questions at
top of page
Question #4
| Back To Top |
Danger of extra-Biblical
(non-Biblical) writings; the Targums on Gen 3
A Reader writes:
" Dear friend ( Nick Goggin), I would just
like to comment on your statement you made that the serpent seed doctrine (
or whatever the masses would call it) can be traced back just 50 years as
you stated. I assume that the source ( 50 year old) you speak of is Mr.
Burnham. When I began to study the "birth" of the "rapture" doctrine I
noticed that it was extremely new as far as Biblical doctrines go. This lead
me to the task of finding the source of the "serpent seed' doctrine which
lead me back about 50 years, until I ran across a source much older, nearly
1300 years older, namely the Targum fashioned Psuedo-Jonathan. I know many
of the Targums are quit corrupt with "jewish" (more like babylonian) myths
so I approched them with care. Yet the fact of the matter is that the Psuedo-Jonathan
targum is at least 1250 years old and was most likely copied from a much
older source. So with that in mind the Targums account of Genisis is worth a
look and boy did it surprise me when I read it. It not only explains that
Eve had sexual relations with the serpent it also calls the serpent an angel
of death. It also plainly states that Cain and Abel are twins and that Cain
is from the angel whom Eve desired. Quite frankly this blew me away, there
are some other things in this targum that are not scriptual but it still
proved interesting to say the least. If you would like to take a look at the
Targum P-J on Gen. link to
www.tulane.edu/~ntcs/pj/pjgen1-6.htm"
ANSWER:
Hi Mr. or Ms. ? (you didn't leave a name). Thank
you for passing that info along to me, I am always interested in seeing what
is out there.
However, there is a danger in the
Targums (Jewish Literature) to the Christian as I will
illustrate shortly.
You said:
"I know many of the Targums are
quit corrupt with "jewish" (more like babylonian) myths so I approched them
with care. ... It not only explains that Eve had sexual relations with
the serpent it also calls the serpent an angel of death...."
Perhaps I didn't make myself clear in the study; I
didn't mean that the teaching was only 50 years old, but that, rather it has
only gained renewed widespread interest in the last 50 years. The
teaching itself (so-called Serpent Seed) was written down in approx 1490 B.C. when Moses wrote it in Genesis. And the teaching
itself goes back to 4004 B.C. when Adam witnessed the
events. Let's not loose sight of the antiquity of the Holy Scriptures.
What this Targum presents is a perversion of the
ancient truths written by unsaved antichristian Jewish Rabbis some 5000 years
after the actual events.
Below I excerpt from the Webpage depicting the
Targum in question. You will at once notice a very obvious error; that
obvious error I will highlight with bold text in the below excerpt:
"...And he said, The voice of Thy
Word heard I in the garden, and I was afraid, because I am naked; and the
commandment which Thou didst teach me, I have transgressed; therefore I hid
myself from shame. And He said, Who showed thee that thou art naked? Unless
thou hast eaten of the fruit of the tree of which I commanded that thou
shouldst not eat. And Adam said, The woman whom Thou gavest to be with me,
she gave me of the fruit of the tree, and I did eat. And the Lord God said
to the woman, What hast thou done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled
me with his subtilty, and deceived me with his wickedness, and I ate. And
the Lord God brought the three unto judgment; and He said to the
serpent, Because thou hast done this, cursed art thou of all the cattle, and
of all the beasts of the field: upon thy belly thou shalt go, and thy
feet shall be cut off, and thy skin thou shalt cast away once in
seven years; and the poison of death shall be in thy mouth,
and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life. And I will put enmity
between thee and the woman, and between the seed of thy son, and the seed of
her sons; and it shall be when the sons of the woman keep the commandments
of the law, they will be prepared to smite thee upon thy head; but when they
forsake the commandments of the law, thou wilt be ready to wound them in
their heel. Nevertheless for them there shall be a medicine, but for thee
there will be no medicine; and they shall make a remedy for the heel in the
days of the King Meshiha." ... "...And the Lord God made to Adam and
to his wife vestures of honour from the skin of the serpent...." --
THE TARGUM OF PALESTINE, COMMONLY ENTITLED THE TARGUM OF JONATHAN BEN
UZZIEL, ON THE BOOK OF GENESIS. SECTION I. BERASHITH.
This writing of the Jewish Sages (Targum) thinks
that the serpent in the Garden of Eden became a literal snake with venom; that
his (satan's) arms were cut off! Not only that, but it even went on to
say that the clothes that God had made for Adam and Eve to cover their
nakedness where made of the serpent's skin!
Any document with such a glaring fundamental errors
is not Inspired. Therefore the whole of the document cannot be trusted and
could never be used to substantiate a Biblical truth. The two don't mix, for "...what
fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath
light with darkness?" (2 Cor 6:14), and, "Can two
walk together, except they be agreed?" (Amos 3:3). This is the leaven
that our Lord spoke of:
Matt 16:6-12
6 Then Jesus said unto them, Take heed and beware of the leaven of the
Pharisees and of the Sadducees.
...Cont. ...
...12 Then
understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but
of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees. (KJV)
Also in this Targum, purportedly written 1250 years ago, is pure Jewish
Doctrine; the doctrine of salvation through the Law (not by belief upon Jesus
Christ):
"...Before He had created the world, He created the law; He prepared the
garden of Eden for the righteous, that they might eat and delight themselves
with the fruit of the tree; because they would have practised in their lives
the doctrine of the law in this world, and have maintained the commandments:
(but) he prepared Gehinnam for the wicked, which is like the sharp,
consuming sword of two edges; in the midst of it He hath prepared flakes of
fire and burning coals for the judgment of the wicked who rebelled in their
life against the doctrine of the law. To serve the law is better
than (to eat of) the fruit of the tree of life, (the
law) which the Word of the Lord prepared, that man in keeping it might
continue, and walk in the paths of the way of life in the world to
come." -- THE TARGUM OF PALESTINE, COMMONLY ENTITLED THE
TARGUM OF JONATHAN BEN UZZIEL, ON THE BOOK OF GENESIS. SECTION I.
BERASHITH.
But the Bible speaks of better things:
Gal 2:16-21
16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but
by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus
Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the
works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh
be justified.
17 But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are
found sinners, is therefore Christ the minister of sin? God forbid.
18 For if I build again the things which I destroyed, I make myself a
transgressor.
19 For I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live unto God.
20 I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ
liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith
of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.
21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by
the law, then Christ is dead in vain. (KJV)
But anyway, thanks for the information. And please use caution whenever
reading extra-Biblical materials; I know that you said that you did, but
remember, "A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump."
(Gal 5:9).
God bless the study of
His Word, in Jesus Christ' name!
Nick Goggin (Editor)
Back to list of questions at
top of page
Question #5
| Back To Top |
An answer to those who
challenge the validity of the "Serpent Seed Doctrine" simply on the grounds of
'guilt by association' with the many groups, both good and bad, that realized
the Biblical truth of the teaching all down through the ages.
A reader writes
with his opinion. And shows the danger of guilt-by-association:
[Quote of reader] Check for your self ,but two groups teach the serpent seed
doctrine. One you may not be aware of but The proof of what I am about to state
here can be verified easily. In any good cult book on Moon
1. Preachers of Hate KKK Teach this. The only need of such a doctrine is to
disprove Gods Word and to show that all People , ALL come from Adam. You see,
according to the Bible If one is not Born Of Adam They can not be a sinner.
Through one Man sin entered the world. Notice I did not say One Devil Sin
enterd the world. So according to these two. Being white would be a curse due
the penalty of death because the Adamic blood line. I am a 36 yr old white male.
2. Sun Myung Moon AKA as the Unification Church Or Moonies Teach this same Doctrine. Sir or Madame, This Man claims to be The second coming
of Jesus Christ. Or An antichrist in my book. What you are teaching as to be
from the Bible, is taught by sabatarian hate groups and an Anti-christ. If it
looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and walks like a duck ,well it must be a
duck. Just
add to your site that a deranged Korean man who claims Jesus Christ failed and
He is to be the Savior of the world now, agrees with you on the nature of the
original sin and the serpent seed doctrine. Post that the KKK teach this as dogma.# 16 in
their list of we believes. Oh by the way Sun Myung Moons wife is an incarnation
of the Holy Spirit. Hey every cult group has their own peculiar doctrine .
Arnold Murray Of Gravvette Ark. Teaches this but twists it a little to say the
Kennites, (Moses own Kinfolk) was the product of the union of satan and Eve. I
know this will not get posted but I could not resist a response to this
Teaching. It truly Is from their Father the Devil. From A concerned
Denominational Christian who studies the Cults. [end quote]
Answer:
Hello Sir. I agree
that the above groups are spurious. But even they have some true doctrine
(not much). But even a stopped clock is correct twice in a day. Take
the Catholics for example, they are ever worshipping idols and corrupting
doctrine, but even they will tell you that Jesus Christ resurrected from the
grave. Are we to throw away that truth because the idolatrous and apostate
Catholic Church declares it? of course not. Be realistic here,
please. What you are presuming to do is to 'throw the baby out with the
bathwater.' The teaching of the so-called Serpent-Seed Doctrine stands on
Scriptural foundations. See our:
What was the Real sin in
the garden of Eden?
God bless the study of
His Word, in Jesus Christ' name!
Nick Goggin (Editor)
Back to list of questions at
top of page
Question #6
| Back To Top |
A man has a
problem with the concept of 'pre-existence.'
A reader writes:
Hello,
As a fellow student of the bible, I
agree with 95% of the explanations you give concerning God’s word and what
it teaches. I do have a problem with your teaching that we have lived in
spiritual bodies in the first earth age. I have read all of the Bible
studies I could find on your website as well as listened to Pastor Murray on
tape concerning this subject.
I do not have trouble believing the
teaching of the three earth ages nor that there were spiritual beings living
during the first earth age, and we live in the second. I have believed those
teachings for years and long before I knew Pastor Murray or the Watchmen
Bible Study Group. I do have a problem with the teaching that these
beings are then “Born of women” and live in the second earth age “today” as
you and I. (In other words the belief that we pre-existed.)
The only relevant scripture that
I have heard you back this specific belief with is
Jeremiah 1:5 KJV “Before I formed thee in the belly
I knew thee; and before thou camest forth
out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the
nations.” Although this scripture may sound like
it supports your belief I don’t believe it does....
In his Service,
Brad
Answer:
...Sorry to be brief....so
busy..., have been dealing with a possessed woman... I have two
jobs... Etc..
BUT:
You said:
"
It
is sown a natural body; it
is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a
spiritual body."
Your answer lies in: What is the "it"
in the above Scripture? Whatever the "it" is, it
preceded the
flesh body of this world and the spiritual body of the age to come. For
"it" was before "it" was
now.
"It" is you. You "were" before you
were born into the natural (flesh) body.
What can't you see here?
And PS: Reincarnation is a lie from satan.
Every entity that exists in this world only lives HERE once. Don't be
confused.
1 Cor
15:35-44
35 But some man will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what
body do they come?
36 Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it
die:
37 And that which thou sowest, thou sowest not that body that shall
be, but bare grain, it may chance of wheat, or of some other grain:
38 But God giveth it a body as it hath pleased him, and to every
seed his own body.
39 All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one kind of flesh
of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of
birds.
40 There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the
glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is
another.
41 There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and
another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star
in glory.
42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in
corruption; it is raised in incorruption:
43 It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in
weakness; it is raised in power:
44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There
is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body. KJV
God
bless the study of His Word, in Jesus Christ' name!
Nick Goggin (Editor)
Back to list of questions at
top of page
Question #7
| Back To Top |
Did Jesus change the Law? And, what of
food laws?
Dean asks:
"Hi Nick, I've looked all over your web
site and I cant find a study on the Law.
I was told that Christ Fulfilled the law
in Matt 5:18 and then He further changes it even more, but Pastor Murray
says the law is still in place, can you help me with this one?
I'm being told all the food laws are null
and Void, that Jesus made all foods clean?"
The confusion is arising in what is
the law? 'We' use an incorrect term when 'we' say "Food LAWS."
It is true that in referring to what animals, fish, birds, and insects were
'clean' (acceptable/healthy) to be eaten, the Old Testament Scripture says
that "This is the law of the beasts..." (meaning
these are the rules of what animals you should eat), but these are not laws
like the Ten Commandments are:
Lev 11:46-47
46 This is the law of the beasts, and of the fowl, and of every living
creature that moveth in the waters, and of every creature that creepeth upon
the earth:
47 To make a difference between the unclean and the clean, and between the
beast that may be eaten and the beast that may not be eaten. (KJV)
In the above Scripture, God had just
saved Israel out of Egyptian bondage; He was now leading them through the
wilderness for the forty years and giving them His laws and statutes and
teaching them all things again (for they had forgotten their God during their
four hundred years of slavery in the land of Egypt).
But when it says
"This is the law of the beasts..."
(Lev 11:46) it is not like the Ten Commandment Law, it is rather like the
"law" of leprosy in the below:
Lev 14:54
54 This is the law for all manner of plague of leprosy, and scall, (KJV)
In other words it was God's explanation.
Let me explain like this:
- When God explains foods,
He is giving His explanation on what is healthy to eat (i.e., what is clean to
the human body to consume).
- When God explains the Medicinal,
He is giving His explanation on what is diagnosis and cures of sicknesses
(i.e., what is the way to cleanse the human body of disease).
- When God explains
Commandments, He is giving His explanation on what is commanded
by God of men to do and not to do (i.e., what is the way to eternal life of
the human soul).
Comparative explanation:
Below is God explaining food
Laws, i.e., what is the way of foods for the body:
Lev 11:46-47
46 This is the law of the beasts, and of the fowl, and of every living
creature that moveth in the waters, and of every creature that creepeth upon
the earth:
47 To make a difference between the unclean and the clean, and between the
beast that may be eaten and the beast that may not be eaten. (KJV)
Below is God explaining Disease Laws,
i.e., what is the way of diagnosis and curing of the sick body:
Lev 14:54-57
54 This is the law for all manner of plague of leprosy, and scall,
55 And for the leprosy of a garment, and of a house,
56 And for a rising, and for a scab, and for a bright spot:
57 To teach when it is unclean, and when it is clean: this is the law of
leprosy. (KJV)
Below is God
explaining Commandment Laws, i.e., what is the way
that men ought to act under penalty of eternal death:
Exod 20:1-4
1 And God spake all these words, saying,
2 I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt,
out of the house of bondage.
3 Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any
thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is
in the water under the earth: (KJV)
[Etc., the Ten Commandments continue through verse
17...]
To say that all this law has the same
weight would be to say that eating a piece of bacon (pork is forbade under the
food laws) is the same as murdering a man (murder is outlawed in the Ten
Commandments). Do you see the folly in calling the food laws the
same as Commandment Law?
So it can become confusing when we use
the modern-day English term "Law" for everything that
God said. Don't get me wrong, whenever God speaks it is law, for He
speaks only to command, not engaging in idle conversations; but there are laws
unto death and there are laws that are not unto death. In other words,
if you break the food laws you get sick, if you break the
medicinal laws you won't get cured, but if you break His Commandment
Laws you are apt to end up in Hell.
In the New Testament, Peter was told
by God to eat unclean foods; Peter objected; God was a
little bit upset with him:
Acts 10:11-15
11 And saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending unto him, as it
had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth:
12 Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild
beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air.
13 And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat.
14 But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is
common or unclean.
15 And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath
cleansed, that call not thou common. (KJV)
Was God here rescinding His "food
laws" of the Old Testament? No, He was not. But this shows that the "food
laws" were not commandments unto death if not followed; for God would
not tell Peter to sin against God - yet God told Peter to break the 'food
laws," thus proving unassailably that the "food laws" were not like the
Commandment Laws (the Ten Commandments, etc.) Below
Peter explains what God was showing him when God told Peter to eat the unclean
foods (foods against the "food laws"):
Acts 10:28
28 And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man
that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation;
but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.
(KJV)
But there is more to this. Before
and after Christ's time, the religion of the Hebrews (the Old Testament) was
in a shambles. The Jews among the Israelites had corrupted the Law and the
religion of God. They had made their own laws and their own religion; that
being referred to in the New Testament by Jesus Himself as the
"tradition of the elders." Today we know this tradition of
the elders as Judaism - the religion of those whom today
call themselves Jews. And their "Bible" is the Babylonian Talmud, not
the Old Testament..
Jesus came for His First Advent
because of this sinful tradition of the elders, to stop it. But they
would not listen and instead they killed Jesus Christ so that they could keep
their tradition of the elders. This is the legacy of the modern-day
Jew. This is the history of the religion of Judaism.
That is why I get so upset when an
unwitting Christian looks upon the modern-day Jew and their religion as some
kind of noble and holy thing. Judaism is a religion of the devil. Not a
socially-correct thing to say nowadays, I know; but nevertheless it is the
truth of the matter. And let's face it, no truth is socially-correct today.
Every lie and obscene thing and practice and religion is socially correct, and
every Biblical absolute is assailed as intolerant and "hate speech." Gay
marriage, gay priests, abortion, ecumenism (interfaith meshing) between
different religions, etc. ad nauseum. These are indeed the end times
where it was foretold that right would be considered wrong,
and wrong right.
Isa 5:20-21
20 Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for
light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for
bitter!
21 Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own
sight! (KJV)
Mal 2:17
[The words of the disobedient placed in
maroon italicized text]
17 Ye have wearied the
LORD with your words. Yet ye say, Wherein have we
wearied him? When ye say, Every one
that doeth evil is good in the sight of the LORD, and he delighteth in them;
or [when ye also say],
Where is the God of judgment? (KJV)
Well, the
disobedient in the above
Scriptures asked a question "Where is the God of
judgment?" It wasn't a question, really it was a statement
meaning that He (God) is not real (they say), or that He is far, not near.
Well God is near, and not far; and He is very much real, as they shall one day
see. Below is His word for THEM:
Jer 5:29-31
29 Shall I not visit for these things? saith the LORD: shall not my soul be
avenged on such a nation as this?
30 A wonderful and horrible thing is committed in the land;
31 The prophets prophesy falsely, and the priests bear rule by their means;
and my people love to have it so: and what will ye do in the end thereof? (KJV)
2 Pet 2:2-3
2 And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of
truth shall be evil spoken of.
3 And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of
you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation
slumbereth not. (KJV)
John 3:19
19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men
loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. (KJV)
2 Tim 4:3-4
3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after
their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned
unto fables. (KJV)
Deut 32:28-29
28 For they are a nation void of counsel, neither is there any understanding
in them.
29 O that they were wise, that they understood this, that they would
consider their latter end! (KJV)
But anyway, back to our point. We may
eat "unclean foods" if we want. But there is one time that we should not.
That time is when we sit down to eat with a weaker brother who thinks that the
food laws are necessary to be followed to be saved. In front of this legalist
we should not eat, say Pork; which is an unclean food. Because to do so would
offend that weak in knowledge one and make him think that we are not faithful
to God. Because to him (the unknowledgeable one) he thinks that not eating
pork is the way to please and obey God. So for this man's ignorance we should
ourselves abstain from eating pork in his presence because it would be a
stumbling stone to him to eat pork.
Let us allow Apostle Paul in few
words to explain the food laws and how they relate
to man, which would take me volumes to explain:
Rom 14:14-17
14 I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean
of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is
unclean.
15 But if thy brother be grieved with thy meat, now walkest thou not
charitably. Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died.
16 Let not then your good be evil spoken of:
17 For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and
peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost. (KJV)
1 Cor 8:6-13
6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we
in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.
7 Howbeit there is not in every man that knowledge: for some with conscience
of the idol unto this hour eat it as a thing offered unto an idol; and their
conscience being weak is defiled.
8 But meat commendeth us not to God: for neither, if we eat, are we the
better; neither, if we eat not, are we the worse.
9 But take heed lest by any means this liberty of yours become a
stumblingblock to them that are weak.
10 For if any man see thee which hast knowledge sit at meat in the idol's
temple, shall not the conscience of him which is weak be emboldened to eat
those things which are offered to idols;
11 And through thy knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ
died?
12 But when ye sin so against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience,
ye sin against Christ.
13 Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while
the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend. (KJV)
You said/asked:
"I was told that Christ Fullfiled the law
in Matt 5:18 and then He further changes it even more, but Pastor Murray
says the law is still in place, can you help me with this one?"
Ok, to prove my point; did Christ
become a food law or a leprosy law? No, of course He did not; it is silly to
even say that. He became the Commandment Law. For now if one does not
believe upon and follow Jesus Christ, that man is in jeopardy of damnation;
just as in the Old Testament when a man followed not the Commandment Law, he
was jeopardy of damnation.
Jesus did not change the law, He
fulfilled it. Today as in the Old Testament times we are not to murder, nor
commit adultery, or steal, ... Jesus didn't change that one wit. But what He
did change (and I don't like the word 'change' here) was the sacrifice and
offerings laws. Since Jesus was glorified on the cross, man is not to
sacrifice animals to God for repentance, thanksgiving, or blessings any more.
Jesus BECAME that one-time for-all sacrifice to God, a sweet savor pleasing to
Him. To sacrifice the blood of animals to God now that after Jesus had been
offered would be the highest form of blasphemy under the heavens.
Incidentally, since I have mention the
Jews and their ungodly religion (which religion some unknowledgeable Christians
esteem to be honorable), did you know that they are readying themselves to
once again offer slain animals to God on the Temple Mount Jerusalem? (The
only thing stopping them is the Muslims) And that in certain Hasidic
Jew's (ultra conservative) groups that on the Feast of Purim
they actually already today do offer chicken blood to God to cleanse
their sins?!? (They cut the chicken's head off and sprinkle themselves with
the warm blood.)
Now what do you think that God thinks
about this after that He has already sent His son Jesus Christ to shed Holy
Blood for sin!
But anyway, Jesus didn't change the Law or
the Offerings, He became them.
Heb 10:1-20
1 For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image
of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by
year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.
2 For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the
worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins.
3 But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every
year.
4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take
away sins.
5 Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering
thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me:
6 In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure.
7 Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,)
to do thy will, O God.
8 Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and
offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which
are offered by the law;
9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first,
that he may establish the second.
10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of
Jesus Christ once for all.
11 And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the
same sacrifices, which can never take away sins:
12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat
down on the right hand of God;
13 From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool.
14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.
15 Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to us: for after that he had
said before,
16 This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith
the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I
write them;
17 And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.
18 Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin.
19 Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the
blood of Jesus,
20 By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the
veil, that is to say, his flesh; KJV)
God
bless the study of His Word, in Jesus Christ' name!
Nick Goggin
Back to list of questions at
top of page
Question #8
| Back To Top |
How could God, Jesus
Christ, and the Holy Spirit be One?
Hope asks (referring to the
The Holy Spirit & The Holy
Trinity study):
"But Jesus clearly says there are three
in heaven and three in earth. He also says that He will pray to the Father
that He would send a comforter. I don't see how it can be explained that Jesus
and the Holy Spirit are one in being - and not just one in unity and purpose."
ANSWER:
You would see it if you remembered that
God is omnipotent and that He can be everywhere at once.
You and I can be here or there, never in both places at the same time; but He,
He is everywhere at once. We cannot understand Him based upon how we understand
ourselves; we and He operate under two entirely different sets of rules.
I have so much trouble with people regarding the Godhead (Trinity). Perhaps for
His own good purpose not everyone can understand Him as He is. But to agree with
their point of view would be to worship three separate Gods. God forbid, for
Jesus Himself declared that there is only one God:
Mark 12:29 29 And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel;
The Lord our God is one Lord: (KJV)
And Jesus was not speaking this as though He were delivering some new thing. He
was quoting Scripture that they should have known:
Deut 6:4-5 4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD: 5 And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy
soul, and with all thy might. (KJV)
How can you then say: "God the father, AND ALONG WITH HIM THERE IS ALSO ANOTHER: God the Son, AND
ALONG WITH HIM THERE IS ALSO ANOTHER: God the Holy Spirit" if they be not
One?
And if they be not One then they are three separate entities. This cannot be,
for Jesus declares "The Lord our God is one Lord."
(Mark 12:29). And again Jesus declared "For there are
three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and
these three are one." (I Jn 5:7).
Jesus was not saying that these three were three separate entities
that
agreed with each other, He was saying that the Father, the Son, and the Holy
Spirit are one God. Thus being in perfect alignment of the Old
Testament Scripture that Jesus confirmed "The Lord
our God is one Lord." (Mark 12:29).
It is ironic that even the Protestant branches of Christianity adopt the
thoroughly pagan Catholic idea of a Three Separate Person God, then call
me a blasphemer when I say that God is One (I am not saying that you call me
that, Hope; but that many do).
But why is it so hard to comprehend that this One God could come in the flesh,
be sent as a Spirit, be in the world, and return from earth to the heavens as
often as He wished?
The Scriptures state this very thing, the Scripture tells us that GOD came in
the flesh (Jesus Christ), that God was seen of angels (as the Father), that God
was sent in the Spirit (the Holy Spirit), and yet He was God (Theos Gr. #2316 -
the supreme Divinity):
1 Tim 3:16 16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness:
God
was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached
unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory. (KJV)
God: Greek word #2316
theos
(theh'-os); of uncertain affinity; a deity, especially (with 3588) the supreme
Divinity; figuratively, a magistrate; by Hebraism, very: KJV-- X exceeding, God,
god [-ly, -ward].
Many are confounded because God could speak to Himself from Earth, could send
Himself to Earth, and could create the Earth. To this I say
“...With men it is impossible, but not with God: for
with God all things are possible.” (Mark 10:27).
One simply cannot understand God based upon how they understand the world. How
do we compare the Creator to the created and then hope to understand the
difference?
God bless, in Jesus Christ' precious name!
Nick Goggin
Hope replied, and I excerpt her reply below with our answers
Hi Hope:
I appreciate your
reply. With volumes we could look into each Scripture where you feel that God and
Jesus Christ are two different Divinities, two different Gods (three, counting
the Holy Spirit which people who take your position also consider as a separate
Divinity (another God); i.e., three Gods, not One God. But we do not have that
kind of time here and it would all run together and get confusing. At the end of
this post I posited a course of action.
But first I will comment on a couple of your points
that I feel may clear some things up. But I don’t expect to change your mind.
From your reply:
Quote:
(Our) Quote:
I have so much trouble with people regarding the Godhead (Trinity). Perhaps
for His own good purpose not everyone can understand Him as He is.
(Hope's reply):
I don't think it is very fair to insert an idea here that because some may
disagree with you, it must because we haven't reached a high enough level of
revelation from God about His Word.
That is not at
all what I am saying. The fact that you disagree with me means nothing in this,
it is the fact that you are incorrect that matters. If I agreed with your point
of view, and then we were both incorrect, would that somehow be more ‘humble’ of
me?
And you do not understand that an understanding of some
things cannot be earned by great study effort of the individual, it is given of
God. Therefore you are incorrect when you said “it must because we haven't
reached a high enough level... ”. We cannot “reach levels” regarding things
that are only given of God.
Are you getting upset at me?
From your reply:
Quote:
Mark 12:29
29 And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O
Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord: (KJV)
Yes, the Lord our God IS one Lord. That is not in dispute. And who is the
verse talking about? Who is the Lord?
OK, here goes:
Mark
12:29-30
29 And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O
Israel; The Lord [Kurios] our
God [Theos] is one Lord
[Kurios]:
30 And thou shalt love the Lord
[Kurios] thy God [Theos]
with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and
with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment. (KJV)
Jesus was quoting the Old Testament
Scripture:
Deut 6:4
4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD [Yehovah]
our God [‘Elohiym]
is one LORD [Yehovah]:
(KJV)
From your reply:
Quote:
I happen to think that is exactly what
He was saying and not just that they agree with each other, but that they are
ONE in purpose, power, unity, direction....
But not one Being, huh?
From your reply:
Quote:
Well, from my vast personal experience
with maintream churches, what you say here is not the case at all. Protestant
churches, for the most part, do not teach three separate beings at all. They
are mostly all strictly three-in-one believers.
Well, they CLAIM
to be, as you term it, three-in-One believers. But when you ask them to
explain what this means to them, they will express the views that you express
that there are three Gods in Heaven, but they don’t like the way that it sounds
to them when they try to explain it.
They believe as you, they believe that Jesus is a
separate God, they just won’t admit it because they are uncomfortable saying
that there is more than one God. So they just can’t understand.
You know, a full understanding of the Holy Trinity
(Godhead) is NOT a salvation issue. If it was it would have been given at
conversion, for at the conversion a Christian is at that moment in possession of
all things unto his salvation. For if he died a moment after his salvation, he
would be granted eternal life. Even though he does not fully understand the
nature of the God that has saved him.
And I know that no matter what point I make, what
explanation I give, you cannot get it out of your head that Jesus is mentioned
separately in some Scriptures from God. I know, Hope, I know that
it bothers you; and I also know that you want to believe the thing that is right
and correct and pleasing to God.
Let me try to explain it a little further in a slightly
different way. You do not have to blindly follow what I say, but please do clear
your head of all preconceived notions and do hear me out here:
Jesus’ flesh body
was very real and very separate from God, for God is a Spirit and not flesh
“God is a Spirit...” (John 4:24). Therefor,
God prepared a human body of Mary for Himself to dwell in
“...the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee:
therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the
Son of God.” (Luke 1:35).
Now at long last God was able to dwell amongst His
mankind again, for had God revealed Himself in His Spirit form all who looked
upon Him would die, because sin cannot stand in God’s presence. That is why God
uses Jesus Christ all throughout the Millennium and even up till and at Judgment
Day. But then, in the New Heavens and the New Earth, it is not then Jesus who
abides with man, but it is God Himself “...and God
himself shall be with them, and be their God” (Rev 21:3), for all sin is
cast away “...for the former things are passed
away.” (Rev 21:4) and God’s creation is now at that time prepared to bear
His Glory. You cannot know how vile sin is to God.
After the New Heaven and New Earth in Revelation
chapter 21 we no longer hear of Jesus Christ of Nazareth. It is not that Jesus
is gone, God forbid, it is rather that God is now all in all (One) and the Son
(flesh) is made to submit to the Father “And when
all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be
subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in
all.” (1 Cor 15:28).
I.e., the flesh body of God (which was called Jesus
Christ) is gone, just as our own flesh bodies at that time are gone. What is
mentioned is the Lamb - that everlasting token of God’s forgiveness, the
token that exists long after sin is no more remembered. Jesus is God, and when
all flesh is done away with - then there is only left God.
God is the Lamb, the Lamb is the Glory of God:
Rev 21:23
23 And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it:
for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the
light thereof. (KJV)
From your reply:
Quote:
Why is it so hard to comprehend that
this one Godhead could be three separate beings with three distinct roles.
Especially when we have the very words of Christ explaining that to be the
case.
We do not have
“the very words of Christ explaining that to be the case,” we have your
interpretation of what Jesus was saying.
I wonder if my answer in the previous section has
helped your understanding? Please take that thought and consider it as you read
the couple below Scriptures that plainly show that God has said that He is, and
shall be, several of the things that we know Jesus Christ was and did become. In
that you should, for a moment, see that God is Jesus Christ, or better stated,
that Jesus Christ is God come in the flesh:
I shall show concordance with God in the Old Testament
and Jesus Christ in the New Testament; they are both one in the self-same
entity, Jesus is God and God was Jesus, for Jesus fulfilled (became) that which
God said that He Himself (God) is:
Isa 43:10-11
10 Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen:
that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there
was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.
11 I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour. (KJV)
2 Pet 1:11
11 For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the
everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. (KJV)
Isa 44:6
6 Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts;
I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God.
(KJV)
Rev 2:8
8 And unto the angel of the church in Smyrna write; These things saith
the first and the last, which was dead, and is alive; (KJV)
Isa 44:8
8 Fear ye not, neither be afraid: have not I told thee from that time, and
have declared it? ye are even my witnesses. Is there a God beside me?
yea, there is no God; I know not any. (KJV)
John
20:28-29
28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.
29 Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast
believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.
(KJV)
[Note:
believed what? believed that Jesus Christ was "My Lord
and my God".]
Isa 45:5-7
5 I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me: I girded
thee, though thou hast not known me:
6 That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there
is none beside me. I am the LORD, and there is none else.
7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil:
I the LORD do all these things. (KJV)
John 1:1-3
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. (KJV)
Isa 45:21-22
21 Tell ye, and bring them near; yea, let them take counsel together: who hath
declared this from ancient time? who hath told it from that time? have not I
the LORD? and there is no God else beside me; a just God and a Saviour;
there is none beside me.
22 Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and
there is none else. (KJV)
Titus 2:13
13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the
great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; (KJV)
[Note: Not two entities; not the
“Great God” along with another individual called “Jesus Christ,” as many
read it; but the Great God, whom (He) is our Savior Jesus Christ. For
we know that at the Second Advent Jesus does not bring God from Heaven with
Him, He comes alone (with His angels). Therefore, by the internal evidence
in just the last two Scriptures above, Jesus Christ can be none other than
the One Lord God manifested in the flesh body (called Jesus Christ on the
Earth) to save His creation from perdition.]
Don’t be angry
with me Hope. But don’t also expect me to dumb myself down to manplease. I
understand the Trinity (Godhead); I cannot say anything other than that I
understand it, because I do understand it. I also know that many (most) good
Christians cannot understand it, I cannot lie about that either. I do not mean
to offend, but when you tell a serious Bible student that he is wrong, it
offends naturally, though not intentionally.
I am doing my best as a flawed human Bible teacher to
teach that which I know to be true – but I know that if God doesn’t show it to a
person, no man can teach it into someone. It is not a salvation issue, and
perhaps it is best that most do not understand it for conscience sake.
You mentioned (alluded perhaps), in a round about way,
that you feel that I was (am) acting as a know-it-all. I am not, I do not
know-it-all, but I do know this that we speak of. What else can I do but declare
it to be true??? Would anything else be acceptable to God? Would anything else
be acceptable to you?
Instead of confusing with numerous Scriptures, why
don’t you take the Scripture that you feel best supports your position. And I
shall address it the best that I can, trying to explain in it?
God bless, in Jesus Christ' precious name!
Nick Goggin
Continued Misc. dialogs on
Internet Forum concerning this topic:
Hi Jay, some points, you said:
Quote:
“God the Father gave his son, not became
his son. That's a huge difference.”
“Again, sent not became.”
1 Tim 3:16
16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was
manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached
unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory. (KJV)
You said:
Quote:
“1 John 5:7 For there are three that
bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these
three are one.
1 John 5:8 And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the
water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.
When this says "these three are one", it is not "one" as in "one being". It is
further clarified in the second verse to be "agree in one", which means to be
"one of mind" not to be "one being".”
The second verse is a different subject. The first is in Heaven, the second on
the Earth, speaking of earthly things. There is no blood in Heaven. And
“these three are one” is just that, One. One cannot add “in
unity” or "of one mind" to the Scripture to fit their own
interpretations.
You said:
Quote:
“Here Christ prays that this group he is
praying for to be "one" just as He and his Father are
one. As Christians, we should be as "one" in the same manner as Christ is one
with his Father
but this doesnt mean we all are actually one person as well, only one as in of
"one mind"...
working as if we are in one spiritual body. The symbolic body of Christ.
We as Christians are one in Christ, so too are the Father and Son one.”
AND ALSO:
“John 10:30 I and my Father are one.
I think when comparing to other scriptures the idea that Christ was saying
that
he was the father fails. He was saying they were one in the same way we are to
be one. We also are not literally one person, but one of mind and purpose
together. We are one in the sense of being parts of the body of Christ.
one body made up of persons, so is God one God, made up of a Father and His
Son and a HS”
You are trying to understand spiritual things by physical things. You are trying
to understand heavenly things by earthly things. This is what is causing you the
problems.
I have highlighted certain words to show that we are separate from God in the
eternity, we are not one as Jesus was one with the Father. Jesus was God in the
flesh, we shall always be sons [no reproductive gender in Heaven] to God. There
is quite a difference. This teaching that we can become one with God
is the base of all New Age doctrine.
Rev 21:1-7
1 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first
earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.
2 And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of
heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.
3 And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of
God is with men, and he will dwell with them,
and they shall be his people, and God himself
shall be with them, and be their God.
4 And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and
there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be
any more pain: for the former things are passed away.
5 And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he
said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.
6 And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the
end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life
freely.
7 He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God,
and he shall be my son. (KJV)
God bless, in Jesus Christ' precious name!
Nick Goggin
Jays writes:
"He was still the Son of God before being begotten. That was my point...and if
he was the Son, then he had a Father.
Daniel 3:25 He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the
midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like
the Son of God."
ANSWER:
The Son of God (with the articles) is only
used of Jesus Christ. When God comes to Earth He is Jesus Christ. He was also
called Melchisedec, and He was also the "Angel" that Jacob wrestled with. Since
the fall in Genesis, whenever God is in on the Earth He is Jesus
Christ. Thus, when the men saw God in the flames they saw a man, that man was
Jesus Christ (who was “the form ... like the Son of God”), before His time.
Jay you are getting ‘hung-up’ on the Father-Son thing. You are thinking in the
flesh. You cannot get past thinking that because there is a “Father” and a “Son”
that they must be two different souls.
The way things are on Earth is one thing; but with God we are talking about
another whole new thing.
You pick verses and comment, but you always come back to that if there is a
Son then there has to be a SEPARATE Father.
Well, Jay, you will find a whole plethora of Scriptures that seem show that
Jesus was a distinct and separate entity from God the Father. The reason for
this is it was not time that Jesus declare that He is God (though that very fact
can be found in multiple Scriptures).
Heck, they killed Him for calling Himself the Son of God; who,
pray tell, would have even listened to Him if He had come right out and plainly
declared that He was in fact the Everlasting Father whom came in
the flesh of a human body!?!
You don’t even believe it today, with all the information that we have over them
of old; how much less would they have believed?
Jesus hinted at mysteries beyond our grasp; that He was God come in the flesh
was one of them.
John 3:12-13
12 If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe,
if I tell you of heavenly things?
13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven,
even the Son of man which is in heaven. (KJV)
Jay, I guess that you never will understand this. It isn’t a salvation issue, so
why make such a big stir over it? If you will not accept the simple clear
Scriptures on the matter, what amount of great debate could ever win you over?
John 1:1-14
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.
...(Cont.)...
10 He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him
not.
...(Cont.)...
14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory,
the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. (KJV)
Consider the below Scripture, for it says
that God shall come as a man:
Isa 42:13
13 The LORD shall go forth as a mighty man, he
shall stir up jealousy like a man of war: he shall cry, yea,
roar; he shall prevail against his enemies. (KJV)
LORD: Hebrew word #3068
Yehovah (yeh-ho-vaw'); from 1961; (the) self-Existent or Eternal;
Jehovah, Jewish national name of God: KJV-- Jehovah, the Lord. Compare 3050,
3069.
as a mighty man: Hebrew
word #1368 gibbowr (ghib-bore'); or (shortened) gibbor (ghib-bore');
intensive from the same as 1397; powerful; by implication, warrior, tyrant:
KJV-- champion, chief, X excel, giant, man, mighty (man, one), strong (man),
valiant man.
like a man of: Hebrew word
#376 'iysh (eesh); contracted for 582 [or perhaps rather from an
unused root meaning to be extant]; a man as an individual or a male person;
often used as an adjunct to a more definite term (and in such cases
frequently not expressed in translation): KJV-- also, another, any (man), a
certain, + champion, consent, each, every (one), fellow, [foot-, husband-]
man, [good-, great, mighty) man, he, high (degree), him (that is), husband,
man [-kind], + none, one, people, person, + steward, what (man) soever,
whoso (-ever), worthy. Compare 802.
Also consider the below Scripture; here it
calls Jesus Christ the Mighty God, and the Everlasting Father. I.e., Jesus
Christ was God come to Earth in the flesh!
Isa 9:6-7
6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the
government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful,
Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father,
The Prince of Peace.
7 Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the
throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with
judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD
of hosts will perform this. (KJV)
God bless, in Jesus Christ' precious name!
Nick Goggin
Jay said:
"Christ is one with his Father but he
'isn't' his own Father”
ANSWER:
I have tried on several other threads to
appeal to you to not think of God within the boundaries of our flesh world. You
seem ‘stuck’ on the Father-Son thing, as though One can’t be Both. On
Earth this is not possible, but with Heavenly things it is possible.
Consider this please: I assume that you agree that Jesus was/is Melchisedec (if
you do not, the below Scripture will leave you with no other conclusion). Well,
this Melchisedec had no father, no mother, no descent, no beginning of His days,
nor any end to his life. That, Jay, can only describe one entity ever - the Lord
God, Creator of all. Below in the Scripture you will notice that this One
is Jesus Christ:
Heb 7:1-24
1 For this Melchisedec, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, who met
Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him;
2 To whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all; first being by interpretation
King of righteousness, and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of
peace;
3 Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning
of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest
continually.
...(Cont.)...
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:)
22 By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament.
23 And they truly were many priests, because they were not suffered to continue
by reason of death:
24 But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood.
(KJV)
Jesus was/is God in the flesh. They are One, not Two. Though God can be in
Heaven and upon the Earth at the same time. I know that this is what is throwing
you here.
God bless, in Jesus Christ' precious name!
Nick Goggin
The conversation degenerated until a fellow stated that there are two Gods in
Heaven, one being Jesus Christ and the other one being the Father! (This
fellow had yet to fit the Holy Spirit into the equation - thank God!) So
after going round and round for two weeks, we ended up here (this will be the final entry for
us here on the matter). Call it an epilog if you will:
THE FINAL QUESTION
POSED (not by me) DURING THE DISCUSSION:
"God is one entity comprised of two bodies - agree or
disagree?"
Replies
from others on the above question:
(Caution, errant
Doctrine!)
"Agree. God is one entity comprised of two bodies."
-- love Jay
"I AGREE. The Godhead is one entity, comprised of two beings or
persons."
-- In Him, Hope.
"It is my position that God is two persons in two bodies.
I wouldn't say 'manifested' in two bodies because that sounds too much like
there was one body, and at some point God became two. There have always been
the two 'bodies' "
-- Name withheld
"I believe both the Father and the Son
have their own souls, and have their own spirits. The HS
[Holy Spirit]
is complex, but there are verses that
say it's [the
Holy Spirit] the Father's and not
the Son's.'
-- Jay
[WBSG NOTE:
To see where all of the above are incorrect, see our
The Holy Spirit & The Holy
Trinity ]
WBSG ANSWER:
Hello All:
God does indeed have a body, one body, you know Him as Jesus Christ. In Heaven
God does not have a flesh body, for no flesh can enter Heaven. And in the
eternity there shall be no flesh, but we shall be there.
John 4:24
24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit
and in truth. (KJV)
Luke 24:37-39
37 But they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a
spirit.
38 And he said unto them, Why are ye troubled? and why do thoughts arise in your
hearts?
39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for
a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have. (KJV)
1 Cor 15:49-51
49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image
of the heavenly.
50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the
kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.
51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all
be changed,(KJV)
Flesh and bones are for this world, when God comes to this Earth He comes in a
flesh body that you know as Jesus Christ, but when God is in Heaven He is not in
a body, for He is Spirit. Once again, you cannot understand Heavenly things by
Earthly things; round and round you will go never coming to the knowledge of the
truth on the matter if you try to understand Heaven by what you see on the Earth
and God by what you see in yourself.
Why can’t you see that the ‘body’ of God is Jesus Christ???
No one can dispute that the below is Jesus Christ seen in a vision by John of
Heaven:
Rev 1:13-14
13 And in the midst of the seven candlesticks one like unto the Son of man,
clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden
girdle.
14 His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his
eyes were as a flame of fire; (KJV)
Daniel saw this Jesus Christ is a vision as well, and he referred to Him as “the
Ancient of days” (God):
Dan 7:9
9 I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days
did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the
pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning
fire. (KJV)
Below we Jesus being foretold of. We see this Jesus Christ being called God.
This could not be so if there was another God other than Jesus Christ.
Isa 9:6-7
6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given:
and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called
Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The
Prince of Peace.
7 Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the
throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with
judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the
LORD of hosts will perform this. (KJV)
Below Jesus is referred to as the One who’s
“goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.” How can this
be? It can be because Jesus was God, not a companion of God, not another second
God; He was The God Himself who came to this Earth in a flesh body. That flesh
body, God in human form, which the Disciples ate with and with whom the people
talked with was Jesus Christ, The Immanuel, The God with us.
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was
with God, and the Word was God. ... He was in the world, and the world was made
by him, and the world knew him not. ... And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt
among us...” (John 1:1-14):
Micah 5:2
2 But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of
Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in
Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.
(KJV)
In the book of Revelation Jesus (Yehovah Savior) called Himself the
“beginning and the end, the first and the last.”
In Isaiah God (Yehovah) calls Himself this very same thing
“ I am the first, and I am the last; and beside
me there is no God.” This could not be if they were/are not one in
the same entity. Jesus could not claim to be the first if there was a God that
was also the first - unless of course if they are the same entity speaking about
Himself.
Rev 1:17-18
17 And when I saw him, I fell at his feet as dead. And he laid his right hand
upon me, saying unto me, Fear not; I am the first and the last:
18 I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore,
Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death. (KJV)
And also in Rev 22:13-16: “I am Alpha and Omega,
the beginning and the end, the first and the last. ... I Jesus ....."
Isa 44:6
6 Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his
[Israel's] redeemer the LORD of hosts;
I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God.
(KJV)
Jesus is God and God is Jesus; Thomas saw and knew
“And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and
my God.” (John 20:28). They are not two separate entities, they are
One Entity in two different realms (worlds). “I
and my Father are one.” (John 10:30).
Now some will try to say that in the above statement
“I and my Father are one.” that Jesus
meant that He was merely ‘in agreement’ with God, ‘one in purpose’ so to speak
and not that He was God. What can we say to that idea? Well, the people that
Jesus was speaking face to face with knew exactly what Jesus was saying; Jesus
was declaring that He was in fact the Lord God. For this they attempted to kill
Him for the crime of blasphemy; and if Jesus had not in fact been God then they
would have been justified by the Law to kill Jesus. So either Jesus was a
blasphemer (God forbid!), or , He was God - just as He said He was:
John 10:30-33
30 I and my Father are one.
31 Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.
32 Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for
which of those works do ye stone me?
33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for
blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.
(KJV)
Why is it so hard to comprehend that Jesus Christ was God manifested in
(shown forth, appeared in) the flesh? I know why; it is because it is a
mystery that not all can see even though it be so clearly declared in Scripture
plainly telling them so:
1 Tim 3:16
16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God
was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of
angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into
glory. (KJV)
If you cannot understand the mystery, that is fine, but do not try to twist the
Scriptures that you cannot understand to fit that which your fleshly mind can
handle. To do so enters into a whole new realm of error.
God opens to whom He will, and closes to whom He will. For instance, here on
this forum, Todd understands yet cannot explain it - but he knows in his heart
that which he cannot describe with his mouth. On the other hand, others here
cannot understand - but they try to explain-away that which they cannot grasp.
It is no shame nor penalty for them to not understand, for the full
understanding of the Trinity (Godhead) is not a salvation issue, but where they
begin to thread on thin ice is when they misrepresent the Scriptures to force
spiritual truths to align with carnal insights.
Matt 13:9-13
9 Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.
10 And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in
parables?
11 He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the
mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.
12 For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance:
but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath.
13 Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and
hearing they hear not, neither do they understand. (KJV)
My humble advice is that if one doesn’t understand then one shouldn’t teach on
it. How do you know if you truly understand it? You will know that you know -
ask Todd, he knows that he knows even though he can’t articulate it. He just
knows. It is God-given, not any great mental feat on man’s part.
Why don’t we drop this issue? We have so confused the matter over a half-dozen
threads for some time now. And those who knew and those who did not know, at the
start, still know and do not know respectively after many hours of debate.
Nobody changed anybody’s mind. That perfectly proves what Jesus said in the
above Scripture (Matt 13:11), does it not!
How then can one understand who does not now understand? Prayer. By asking God
to open it for you. But the proud would never ask God for what they feel that
they already have and which they suppose that they should have had. God resists
the proud and reveals unto babes.
God bless, in Jesus Christ' precious name!
Nick Goggin
FINAL COMMENT FROM THE FORUM:
Re: God is
one entity comprised of two bodies - agree or disagree?
I would agree with the position articulated above. I understand this
within, but I do not have the appropriate words to describe it and how
it can be. It is not something I understand by my own ability.
I know and understand that the Son was the Father manifested in the
flesh. I will leave the statement at that.
--F.S.
WBSG FINAL COMMENT (I promise): F.S.,
amen to you. So clear, so short, so correct: "the Son was the Father
manifested in the flesh." Amen!
God bless
the study of His Word, in Jesus Christ' name!
Nick Goggin
Back to list of questions at top of page
Question #9
| Back To Top |
Is celibacy for
Priests Biblical?
Reply to a reader:
Hi Bruce, you said/asked:
"Here's my question - my boss is Catholic, and he pointed out places where
celibacy for priests is described. Specifically he referred to 1 Corinthians
7:27-34, 38. Matthew 19:10-12, 27. 1 Timothy 5:9-16. Can you help me with
interpreting these verses truthfully? Where can I document that celibacy for
priests is not Biblical?"
In each Scripture you mentioned the answer is contained a few verses
below or above it.
In your below Scriptural reference, the reference is not at all to
Priests being celibate. And besides, it says "But and if thou marry, thou
hast not sinned":
1 Cor 7:27-28
27 Art thou bound unto a wife? seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a
wife? seek not a wife.
28 But and if thou marry, thou hast not sinned; and
if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned. Nevertheless such shall have trouble
in the flesh: but I spare you. (KJV)
In your below Scriptural reference, the reference is not at all to
Priests being celibate. And besides, it says "let him do what he will, he
sinneth not: let them marry":
1 Cor 7:34-36
34 There is difference also between a wife and a virgin. The unmarried woman
careth for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in
spirit: but she that is married careth for the things of the world, how she
may please her husband.
35 And this I speak for your own profit; not that I may cast a snare upon
you, but for that which is comely, and that ye may attend upon the Lord
without distraction.
36 But if any man think that he behaveth himself uncomely toward his virgin,
if she pass the flower of her age, and need so require, let him
do what he will, he sinneth not: let them marry. (KJV)
In your below Scriptural reference, the reference is not at all to
Priests being celibate. And besides, it says "he that giveth her in
marriage doeth well":
1 Cor 7:38
38 So then he that giveth her in marriage doeth well;
but he that giveth her not in marriage doeth better. (KJV)
In your below Scriptural reference, the reference is not at all to
Priests being celibate, the Scripture is against divorce; and the reference is
to that if a man is going to end up divorced it was better that he had never
married:
Matt 19:9-10
9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it
be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso
marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.
10 His disciples say unto him, If the case of the man be so
with his wife, it is not good to marry. (KJV)
In your below Scriptural reference, the reference is to "rich men"
entering heaven. It has nothing to do with Priests being celibate:
Matt 19:23-27
23 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you,
That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven.
24 And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye
of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.
25 When his disciples heard it, they were exceedingly amazed, saying, Who
then can be saved?
26 But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible;
but with God all things are possible.
27 Then answered Peter and said unto him, Behold, we have
forsaken all, and followed thee; what shall we have therefore?
(KJV)
In your below Scriptural reference, the reference is not at all to
Priests being celibate. The Scripture discussed who should be responsible for
the financial maintenance of a widow, and that a young woman who is widowed is
most likely going to seek the "company" of a man:
1 Tim 5:9-16
9 Let not a widow be taken into the number under threescore years old,
having been the wife of one man,
10 Well reported of for good works; if she have brought up children, if she
have lodged strangers, if she have washed the saints' feet, if she have
relieved the afflicted, if she have diligently followed every good work.
11 But the younger widows refuse: for when they have begun to wax wanton
against Christ, they will marry;
12 Having damnation, because they have cast off their first faith.
13 And withal they learn to be idle, wandering about from house to house;
and not only idle, but tattlers also and busybodies, speaking things which
they ought not.
14 I will therefore that the younger women marry, bear children, guide the
house, give none occasion to the adversary to speak reproachfully.
15 For some are already turned aside after Satan.
16 If any man or woman that believeth have widows, let them relieve them,
and let not the church be charged; that it may relieve them that are widows
indeed. (KJV)
In every case your friend has misinterpreted the Scriptures. Here, show
him these; it should end the debate for all times whether or not a clergyman
can marry in God's determination:
1 Tim 3:2
2 A bishop then must be blameless, the
husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given
to hospitality, apt to teach; (KJV)
1 Tim 3:12
12 Let the deacons be the husbands of one
wife, ruling their children and their own houses well. (KJV)
And finally, Apostle Peter, whom the Catholic Church esteems as the first
"Pope" (but he was not and he would rebuke the apostate Catholic Church if he
was alive today) was himself married:
Matt 8:14
14 And when Jesus was come into Peter's house, he
saw his wife's mother laid, and sick of a fever. (KJV)
The Priesthood (of many Christian
denominations, not just Catholics) need to stop worrying about marrying; they
need to work on the rampant Homosexuality and Pedophilia in the ranks of the
Clergy. For them it would have been better that they married. And even
better for them had they not entered the Ministry; for God judges His servants
hardest of all, for they have been given much and thus much more is expected
of them. They are in trouble with the Lord.
God bless
the study of His Word, in Jesus Christ' name!
Nick Goggin (Editor)
Back to list of questions at
top of page
| To top |
In
His Service:
Nick Goggin
Editor;
www.biblestudysite.com
WATCHMEN BIBLE
STUDY GROUP
Contact
Editor | Bible
studies | Newer
students |
Bible Q
& A's
| Study
tools
| Search
our site
Library/Bookstore
| Statement
of faith |
New material on
site |
Join
our mailing list | Home
Page
| Donate
NOTE:
To insure quality and content integrity, these In-depth Bible
Studies are © copyrighted and may only be downloaded for study and
shared private use. They may not be reproduced or distributed for
sale or publication without prior written approval. Other
Christian Web sites are welcome to link up to this Website or any page
on it.
|