Christ isn't a single individual vs another individual, or even the rest of humanity. That which is perfect doesn't have to overcome anything..
I have never seen points as strange, posts as meandering, or verses as misunderstood as some of your responses. In two sentences you slam together 2 completely unrelated things then post verses that have nothing to do with either
This verse does not have anything to do with perfection of who Christ is. It is a verse explaining that race, creed, color, etc...... is irrelevant to our status as Christians.
Romans 8:11
And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies because of his Spirit who lives in you.
This verse has nothing to do with perfection either. This is a verse concerning the indwelling of the holy spirit and says nothing about anyone but Jesus being Christ.
Christ is a title not a name. The full and formal title is Jesus the Christ as in:
Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God."
7 Bible verses about Jesus Recognised As The Christ
He only said that about one man, not you, not me, not anyone but Jesus. Notice how my verses emphatically state exactly what it was that I claim.
the kingdom of god dwells within us, it doesn't come with the return of Jesus.
I did not say anything to which this was a response to. I have not stated anything about where the kingdom of God is.
oh but it is. he was called
adonai-tzedek which is Lord of Righteousness, or King of Peace(King of Salem). that was the title for the king of Jerusalem. As shown in Joshua 10:1
10 Now
Adoni-Zedek, King of Jerusalem, heard that Joshua had taken Ai and totally destroyed it, doing to Ai and its king as he had done to Jericho and its king, and that the people of Gibeon had made a treaty of peace with Israel and had become their allies.
Notice how your verses never even imply what you claim. There is nothing in the verse you quoted that says Melchezidek is the Lord. It does not even use the term at all. You gave him a bunch of titles then quoted a verse which contained none of them except for the King of Salem (that one "might" be accurate).
Melchizedek wasn't a levite like Aaron, or Moses.
I said he was a priest, I didn't say he was a Levite. Because that is exactly what the Bible says.
hebrews even tell you this. hebrews compares Jesus to Melchizedek. it doesn't compare Melchizedek, or adonai-tzedek to Jesus. Melchizedek was perfect.
Hebrews 7:
11 Now if perfection had been attainable through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need would there have been for another priest to arise after the order of Melchizedek, rather than one named after the order of Aaron? 12 For when there is a change in the priesthood, there is necessarily a change in the law as well.
You claim Melchezidek was perfect then quote another verse that does not back you up.
Read Mathew Henry's commentary of Hebrews 7: He interprets it almost in a way opposite to yours.
Hebrews 7 - Matthew Henry’s Commentary - Bible Commentary
If Melchezidek was like Christ there would not have been a need for another priest. When Christ came there was no need for priests, he retains his roll as priest forever.
ah you mean like this?
Luke 4:18
"The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to set the oppressed free,
who annointed Jesus? himself? then why refer to himself in the 2nd person pronoun in the past tense? why would Jesus need to be led by the Spirit as disassociated from himself?
That verse has nothing to do with anything I said. The verse is a quote from Isaiah that appears to refer to the anointing of Isaiah for the purpose of prophesying the coming of the reign of the messiah. It was read as a way of Jesus pointing out that Isaiah had predicted his arrival as messiah. Since it had nothing to do with what I said I didn't dig into it very far.
jesus was begotten. obviously Jesus needed God's Spirit to become like Christ.
Begotten not created. Begotten means to be composed of the same essence.
strong's
G2962 is used when referencing Jesus
also, messiah isn't a single person.
case in point.
I do not see what your referring to G2962 for. I read it but have no idea what I am supposed to do with it.
The OT is full of things referred to as types and shadows. There are hundreds of them and they extremely impressive once understood.
1. There are types of Christ in the OT but only one true Christ.
2. There are types and shadows of messiahs in the OT but only one true messiah.
3. There is a type of Passover in the OT but only one true Passover.
4. There is at least one shadow of the cross in the OT but only one true cross.
5. There are shadows of saviors in the OT but only one true savior. For example there were many people brought back to life previous to Christ but everyone of them died again, only Christ was resurrected. The resuscitations were a kind of shadow the predicted the resurrection.
Your getting the shadows and types confused with the real thing. Another example is the entire nation of Israel is a type of messiah but not one person in that nation could save anyone, they were a shadow of the real messiah Christ who could forgive all sins past, present, and future. The same with the blood of sacrificed animals, etc.......
