Understanding John 1:1

[Brickjectivity]

What does this mean..."a new creation"?



What did these apostles think was going to happen to them? They knew that they had been chosen to go to heaven but what did Paul say about them being "a new creation"? What did it involve?



The beginning of what? John said that the Word was "with God" "in the beginning"......yet God had no beginning.



Jesus was "the light of the world" because the world was "in darkness" without him.

John 8:12...
"Then Jesus spoke again to them, saying: “I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will by no means walk in darkness, but will possess the light of life.”

How did the world get to be in darkness? How is that darkness taken away?

What is "the light" that Jesus' disciples will possess?

• John 1:1-3 In beginning was the word. This parallels James 1:18 "..He chose to give us birth through the word of truth"

• John 1:6-7 John comes as witness to the light. John announces the baptism of the holy spirit, envisioned in Jeremiah 31:34 that never more will men need to teach one another saying "Know the LORD." It is the audacious beginning of the church, the church which will openly commune with gentiles. It is the new creation, while the first creation is that of Israel and the Jews.

• John 3:19-21 Light and dark have been separated in this new creation thusly: Those who avoid the light, the same light from chapter 1, have their deeds declared evil. It says those with evil deeds ignore this baptism. I infer this is about the cornerstone and the stone made without hands and Peter's name. They reject the cornerstone, that stone made without hands, that stone upon which the church is founded for which Peter is renamed. They go on insisting the Jeremiah 31:34 is not contemporary but only in the future. Thus they don't step in to the light.

 

[BilliardsBall]

Show me the Hebrew and Greek scriptures that do this....perhaps “a simple reading” is the problem...?
Please post some of them, and we can all examine them a little more closely.....otherwise your claims are without foundation.

Can I ask how a Jew ever utters the Shema and gets three gods in one head....? (Deuteronomy 6:4) Did Abraham worship a triune deity?

Three separate 'gods' forced into one "godhead" (a word that is not found in scripture) and calling them "one God" is not the Bible's description of Yahweh.....three different personalities residing in one entity, who can be in three different places at once, and speak independently of each other, is not monotheism. If it was, and we are made in God's image, then multiple personality disorder would not be a "disorder".
Since when are Father and son ever the same person?

Jesus was a servant of his God (Acts 3:13, 26) as are all of God's intelligent creation. We are all assigned our role in his service and when we know our place and keep it, everything works well, but when intelligent creatures step outside of their assignment, then we have chaos. Satan was the first, but sadly not the last to do that, and we are living in the chaos that resulted from his defection......soon though, according to scripture, all rebels (goats and their leader) will be put out of the way, (Matthew 25:31-33, 46) and things will go back to the way that God first intended when he placed mankind on this planet all those millenniums ago. (Revelation 21:2-4) That is what I look forward to.....not some 'airy fairy' notion of going to heaven without understanding why that was never in God's plans for the human race originally.

Those bound for heaven have a role already outlined. They will be "kings and priests" but their subjects are not in heaven because there are no sinners in heaven who need priests and kings do not rule one another. God's promise is to be with humans.....(Revelation 20:6)There are no humans in heaven.

Again, I will ask you to consider how many of the Jews rescued from Egypt made it into the Promised Land? Only two....and Moses was not one of them. Please think about where you came from and where you think you are going......

The Hebrew scriptures use echad for God, a plural unity, and NEVER ever yachid (a singular oneness). We Jews emphasize monotheism, I went further to explore the Hebrew scriptures and obey them. Here are some verses about Jesus as God (25 passages): 25 Important Bible Verses That Say Jesus Is God

And even a cursory reading of the NT reveals EXACTLY why the Jewish leaders asked for Jesus to die at the hands of Rome--not for any false testimony from false witnesses, not for any miracles He performed, but for the blasphemy of saying HE IS GOD.

 

[BilliardsBall]

the nwths defines him as the chief agent . your problem solved

And it is the sole Bible to create a new category of "agent" that is not in the Greek and neither God, man nor angel!

And it comes from a cult.

 

[cataway]

And it is the sole Bible to create a new category of "agent" that is not in the Greek and neither God, man nor angel!

And it comes from a cult.

"agent" perfectly describes the office and actions of the things Jesus does for his God.

cults are notorious known to be run by flamboyant leaders . no such thing can be found in the organization of the JW's. hence its not a cult

 

[cataway]

The Hebrew scriptures use echad for God, a plural unity, and NEVER ever yachid (a singular oneness). We Jews emphasize monotheism, I went further to explore the Hebrew scriptures and obey them. Here are some verses about Jesus as God (25 passages): 25 Important Bible Verses That Say Jesus Is God

And even a cursory reading of the NT reveals EXACTLY why the Jewish leaders asked for Jesus to die at the hands of Rome--not for any false testimony from false witnesses, not for any miracles He performed, but for the blasphemy of saying HE IS GOD.

The word 'echad, "one," is used in the Jewish Scriptures in either a compound or absolute sense. In what sense is 'echad used in the Shema, "Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is One" (Deuteronomy 6:4)?

Answer:
In such verses as Genesis 1:5: "And there was evening and there was morning, one day," and Genesis 2:24: "Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother and shall cleave to his wife, and they shall be one flesh," the term 'echad, "one," refers to a compound united one. However, 'echad often also means an absolute one. This is illustrated by such verses as 2 Samuel 13:30: "Absolom has slain all the king's sons, and there is not one of them left"; 2 Samuel 17:12: "And of all the men that are with him we will not leave so much as one"; Exodus 9:7: "There did not die of the cattle of Israel even one"; 2 Samuel 17:22: "There lacked not one of them that was not gone over the Jordan"; Ecclesiastes 4:8: There is one [that is alone], and he has not a second; yea, he has neither son nor brother." Clearly, the word "one" used in these verses means an absolute one and is synonymous with the word yachid, "the only one," "alone." It is in this sense, with even greater refinement, that 'echad is used in Deuteronomy 6:4: "Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is One." Here, 'echad is used as a single, absolute, unqualified one. There is no mention of a triune god.

 

[Deeje]

The implication of John chapters 1 through 3 is they are at the beginning of a new creation -- the beginning of the church. Paul refers to a new creation in his letters, possibly in reference to this. John says the Word is in the beginning, and within the word is the light, and then in chapter three he says that light is breaking upon the world. Either he has pulled Genesis 1 forward into the year 33AD, or he's saying Jesus ministry is the light of a new creation.

Only when one is “born again” can they be a “new creation”.

What does it mean to be “born again”?

What is the darkness that the light dispels?

The light in Genesis 1 is the physical sun....the very thing that life on this planet cannot do without. Light has so many beneficial uses, but the light that Jesus brings into this world makes the darkness disappear. What is that darkness?

 

[Deeje]

Here are some verses about Jesus as God (25 passages): 25 Important Bible Verses That Say Jesus Is God

All of these have been addressed already.....posts #85, #86 and #87. NONE of them say that Jesus is Almighty God.

Do you even read of the replies given to answer your erroneous accusations? Or are you so sure that you can’t be wrong that it’s OK to shut your ears? It’s your choice of course, but you can never say....”nobody told me”....

 

[Brickjectivity]

Only when one is “born again” can they be a “new creation”.

What does it mean to be “born again”?

What is the darkness that the light dispels?

The light in Genesis 1 is the physical sun....the very thing that life on this planet cannot do without. Light has so many beneficial uses, but the light that Jesus brings into this world makes the darkness disappear. What is that darkness?

According to how I am reading John's gospel, darkness is the lie that the spirit goes from teacher to student, such that a good teacher carefully selects and instructs students worthy of carrying his lessons to fruition. In this situation the breath of the teacher becomes the breath of the student, so the spirit's trajectory is thought to be controlled and sustained by the teacher student relationship. John the Baptist departs from that teaching.

Here in John's gospel is John the Baptist preaching about it as if to Jews since there are no gentiles in the story. How to reconcile this teaching to the fact that there are teachers among Christians and in Paul's letters? It may sound interesting but is a side topic. The spirit is not controlled, not pinned down. Like the tabernacle follows the glory, the teachers must follow the spirit. The spirit doesn't follow the teachers, so having the right teacher doesn't guarantee anything. There is no pedigree or school of the prophets. John is I think saying that the time of Jeremiah 31:34 has come, that Jesus birth heralds a new time. Therefore John says the light dispels the old thinking, and it marks those who resist as part of the unformed world that is being replaced by creation. The result goes far beyond teachers because ultimately this is about the large numbers of gentiles who become disciples, catholics, gnostics and various other varieties many of which we no longer know about.

 

[Deeje]

According to how I am reading John's gospel, darkness is the lie that the spirit goes from teacher to student, such that a good teacher carefully selects and instructs students worthy of carrying his lessons to fruition.

I believe that the darkness is the spiritual darkness that permeates a world where the devil rules as king. (1 John 5:19) There is no part of this world that the devil does not control. His stamp is on everything.....corrupt politics, greedy commercialism and false religion. The light that Jesus brings dispels that darkness but only for those who accept him for who he is.....and he is not God....but sent by God to penetrate the darkness.....to reveal the truth and to save those who have not been taken in by satan's deceptions. The trinity muddies the waters and confuses God's true identity....which the Jews knew to be one God, not three occupying the same head.

In this situation the breath of the teacher becomes the breath of the student, so the spirit's trajectory is thought to be controlled and sustained by the teacher student relationship. John the Baptist departs from that teaching.

I have no idea where your reasoning comes from.....I do not see this in John’s gospel.
John the Baptist was the one sent ahead in advance of the Messiah to "prepare the way", so that the people were in the right frame of mind and heart to receive him.....and to repentant, publicly demonstrated by their baptism.

John’s Baptism did not make Jews into Christians however, but prepared their hearts for Jesus’ teachings. Those baptized by John had to undergo Christian baptism as they chose to become Christ’s disciples.

Here in John's gospel is John the Baptist preaching about it as if to Jews since there are no gentiles in the story.

Jesus was sent only to “the lost sheep of the house of Israel”.....he was not sent to the Jewish religious leaders because they were already set in their traditions and would not budge from them. He castigated them at every opportunity. (Matthew 23) But because of God's promise to Abraham, the Jews had first option to come into “the new covenant” and rule with Christ in his Kingdom.....to become "a kingdom of priests and a holy nation". (Exodus 19:4-6)

When the Jews rejected Jesus as Messiah and had him put to death, (innocent of all charges against him) only after that, when Israel did to Jesus what they had done to all the other prophets, (Matthew 23:37-39) was God’s attention finally turned to the Gentiles to take out of them “a people for his name”. (Acts 15:14)

Paul called those Christians, both Jewish and Gentile “the Israel of God”. (Galatians 6:16) This was no longer fleshly Israel, but spiritual Israel. God had done what John the Baptist had said he would do. (Matthew 3:7-8) He can raise up children for Abraham even from the stones.

How to reconcile this teaching to the fact that there are teachers among Christians and in Paul's letters? It may sound interesting but is a side topic. The spirit is not controlled, not pinned down. Like the tabernacle follows the glory, the teachers must follow the spirit. The spirit doesn't follow the teachers, so having the right teacher doesn't guarantee anything.

That was not true in Jesus’ case. He was the only teacher who could give the power of the Holy Spirit to his disciples....first by the mention of his name, and after his death and resurrection, by the power he sent to his disciples so that many more would come out of corrupted worship and become footstep followers of Christ....both Jews and Gentiles. Those spirit anointed teachers made it their life's work to find more disciples for Christ as Jesus had instructed them to do. (Matthew 28:19-20)

There is no pedigree or school of the prophets. John is I think saying that the time of Jeremiah 31:34 has come, that Jesus birth heralds a new time. Therefore John says the light dispels the old thinking, and it marks those who resist as part of the unformed world that is being replaced by creation.

John heralded the arrival of the Messiah. But John died before Jesus did, so he was not aware that Jesus was executed. He was a man born to be a prophet and he did his job well but he was anointed with God's spirit from birth.

It was Jesus’ apostles who carried on his work and demonstrated the power of God’s spirit in their activities. That was not to be manifest past the apostolic period however. The gifts of the spirit died with the apostles because seeing miracles, Paul said, was the trait of a spiritual infant.....they needed to grow up and take on the task as mature Christians of preaching and teaching "to the most distant part of the earth".

The result goes far beyond teachers because ultimately this is about the large numbers of gentiles who become disciples, catholics, gnostics and various other varieties many of which we no longer know about.

The corruption foretold for Christianity is seen clearly in history....as soon as that corruption and bloodshed entered the Church, Christ left the building. What gained ascendancy was an imitation Christianity....the "weeds" of Jesus parable. (Matthew 13:24-30; 36-43; Matthew 7:21-23) Planted by the devil in the ultimate deception, they betray their true character by being 'part of the world' and forming friendships and alliances with worldly nations and participating in their political wars. (John 15:18-21; James 4:4, Matthew 5:43-45)

What masquerades as Christianity today is a mish-mash of human traditions, opinions and mistranslated Bible verses.
Christ's true followers would all speak in agreement and hold to the same truth. (1 Corinthians 1:10) They will not have blood on their hands....and then wonder why their prayers are not answered.....(Isaiah 1:15)

 

[oldbadger]

Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος.

En arche ēn ho Logos, kai ho Logos ēn pros ton Theon, kai Theos ēn o Logos. – John 1:1 (Greek text)

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god. – John 1:1 (NWT)

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

(Some translations read "the Word was divine.")

“The beginning” refers to the time when God began his creative work and produced the Word. Thereafter, the Word was used by God in the creation of all other things. (John 1:2, 3) The Bible states that Jesus is “the firstborn of all creation” and that “by means of him all other things were created. Colossians 1:15, 16. -JW.org

Many scholars identify "logos" with God’s wisdom and reason. The logos is the expression of God, and is His communication of Himself, just as a “word” is an outward expression of a person’s thoughts. This outward expression of God has now occurred through His Son, and thus it is perfectly understandable why Jesus is called the “Word.” Jesus is an outward expression of God’s reason, wisdom, purpose and plan. For the same reason, we call revelation “a word from God” and the Bible “the Word of God.”

If we understand that the logos is God’s expression—His plan, purposes, reason and wisdom, it is clear that they were indeed with Him “in the beginning.” Scripture says that God’s wisdom was “from the beginning” (Prov. 8:23). It was very common in Hebrew writing to personify a concept such as wisdom. No ancient Jew reading Proverbs would think that God’s wisdom was a separate person, even though it is portrayed as one in Proverbs chapter 8. “I, wisdom, dwell with prudence, and I find knowledge and discretion."

The Greek language of the first century did not have an indefinite article (“a” or “an”). The Septuagint and the Christian Greek Scriptures were being translated into Sahidic Coptic (an ancient Egyptian language) during the 3d century C.E., the Coptic version is based on Greek manuscripts which are significantly older than the vast majority of extant versions. The earliest translations of the Christian Greek Scriptures were into Syriac, Latin, and Coptic. Syriac and Latin, like the Greek of that time, did not have an indefinite article, Sahidic Coptic does.

ϨΝ ΤЄϨΟΥЄΙΤЄ ΝЄϤϢΟΟΠ ΝϬΙ ΠϢΑϪЄ
ΑΥШ ΠϢΑϪЄ ΝЄϤϢΟΟΠ ΝΝΑϨΡΜ ΠΝΟΥΤЄ ΑΥШ ΝЄΥΝΟΥΤΕ ΠЄ ΠϢΑϪЄ
John 1:1 (Sahidic Coptic text)

Transliteration:
Hn te.houeite ne.f.shoop ngi p.shaje
Auw p.shaje ne.f.shoop n.nahrm p.noute Auw ne.u.noute pe p.shaje

Literal English translation: In the beginning existed the word. And the word existed in the presence of God. And a god was the word.

The Coptic translation says ne.u.noute pe p.Saje: "the Word was a god (or, divine)," not "the Word was God." The Coptic language has both indefinite and definite articles in its grammatical structure. If the Sahidic Coptic translators held the doctrine that "the Word was God," or if the Coptic translators understood the Greek text to say "the Word was God," the Coptic language had the grammatical tools to say so. But they did not write "the Word was God." They wrote "the Word was a god."

Egypt was conquered by Alexander the Great in 332 BCE and the country was subsequently Hellenized. Greek influence had been in Egypt for some 500 years by the time those translators began their work. Likely made well before Nicea (325 CE), the Coptic text tells us how early translators interpreted John 1:1, apart from the influence of later dogma and church tradition. The Sahidic Coptic version, the earliest translation of the Greek originals into a language that contained the indefinite article, used that indefinite article at John 1:1: “the Word was a god.”

The NWT of John 1:1 is said to be an incorrect translation. Yet, in rendering John 1:1 from Greek into their own native language, the Coptic scribes came to the same understanding 1,700 years ago.

I read your entire post, thank you.

So this religion was spun in to being many many decades after Jesus the peasant handworker had joined the Baptist's campaign........ and died.

So the ordinary human can ignore all John's spin, who clearly never was there, never was the disciple John........ that's so easy to show.

 

[Brickjectivity]

I believe that the darkness is the spiritual darkness that permeates a world where the devil rules as king. (1 John 5:19) There is no part of this world that the devil does not control. His stamp is on everything.....corrupt politics, greedy commercialism and false religion. The light that Jesus brings dispels that darkness but only for those who accept him for who he is.....and he is not God....but sent by God to penetrate the darkness.....to reveal the truth and to save those who have not been taken in by satan's deceptions. The trinity muddies the waters and confuses God's true identity....which the Jews knew to be one God, not three occupying the same head.

Whereas I view the devil as something different. The NT argues to let uncircumcised into the church. To do so they make arguments, and they propose the circumcision (those who believe Christians must be circumcised) lay a charge against humanity that we should all be ignored, excluded. The paradigm is that of a court with a defendant, a prosecutor, witnesses and a judge. The NT authors argue it is a false charge (against the uncircumcised) and make several arguments to allow them into the house of Israel. Thus the prosecution is considered a dissembler and maker of false charges and is called 'Devil'. In Koine they are called 'Diabolos' which we have translated into 'Devil'. Anyone who says "Uncircumcised shouldn't be allowed into the house of Israel" is called 'Devil'. Anyone who makes false accusations against anyone is called 'Devil'.

The court sits, and the prosecutor accuses; but the judge rules in favor of the uncircumcised. The prosecutor having been proven a liar is called 'Devil', which in the Koine is the word 'Diabolos' which is neither 'Satan' nor 'Demon' having the specific meaning that it is a dissembler and a maker of false charges. It is the paradigm of the NT authors, their argument for atonement. It is a way that they frame the discussion about whether Christians must be circumcised. They are saying that the circumciser of the nations is making a false charge and is to be ruled against.

Contrary to what I used to overlook, the NT is full of arguments about this. Its not just casually mentioned in Acts as a confrontation between Paul and the elders. There are several attempted arguments. One is the argument in Galatians (not the best argument). One is Paul's argument in Romans (7 in particular). One is the argument in Hebrews which is about the same as Paul's argument, and there are other arguments made in the gospels.

I have no idea where your reasoning comes from.....I do not see this in John’s gospel.
John the Baptist was the one sent ahead in advance of the Messiah to "prepare the way", so that the people were in the right frame of mind and heart to receive him.....and to repentant, publicly demonstrated by their baptism.

John’s Baptism did not make Jews into Christians however, but prepared their hearts for Jesus’ teachings. Those baptized by John had to undergo Christian baptism as they chose to become Christ’s disciples.

John is far, far from an argument about the Trinity. The Trinity is a philosophically derived tool; and this is no secret. Discussing trinity was once like discussing the color of drapes, but then pride got involved. This is no secret, either. Today we're still dealing with the fallout. It was never the real problem, but pride was. That was why people were killed over this.

Jesus was sent only to “the lost sheep of the house of Israel”.....he was not sent to the Jewish religious leaders because they were already set in their traditions and would not budge from them. He castigated them at every opportunity. (Matthew 23) But because of God's promise to Abraham, the Jews had first option to come into “the new covenant” and rule with Christ in his Kingdom.....to become "a kingdom of priests and a holy nation". (Exodus 19:4-6)

When the Jews rejected Jesus as Messiah and had him put to death, (innocent of all charges against him) only after that, when Israel did to Jesus what they had done to all the other prophets, (Matthew 23:37-39) was God’s attention finally turned to the Gentiles to take out of them “a people for his name”. (Acts 15:14)

Paul called those Christians, both Jewish and Gentile “the Israel of God”. (Galatians 6:16) This was no longer fleshly Israel, but spiritual Israel. God had done what John the Baptist had said he would do. (Matthew 3:7-8) He can raise up children for Abraham even from the stones.

I understand I think but don't share many of your assumptions of your argument. These books including John were hidden from the public for centuries and only read in Latin. When they were translated and published into English it was as if they had been stolen. It was done against the will of the governments of the time. Confusion about them is everywhere, today, now in every continent of the globe and most languages. God has done nothing to stop this confusion for four centuries or five or more. Nothing has stopped it. The conclusion is we are not owed any clarity, but you seem to think that you are owed that clarity. Millions of people have sought clarity and not found it. What then does James mean when he says anyone can ask God to obtain wisdom? Does it mean everyone who asks God for wisdom will always agree with everyone else who does? Probably not.

So what is "a people for his name?" Is it a people who all know everything about God and always agree? Probably not. What does Matthew 23:37-39 mean when it says the devil took Jesus to a high mountain? It is an allusion to an interpretation, a corrupt midrash, a midrash which occurs to me when I read a certain scripture. It oozes from the dark place in my heart when I read "ride upon the high places of the Earth." (deut 32:13, Isaiah 58:14). I think I know what it is saying to Jesus. It says "Bow to me (circumcision), and I will make you ruler." The good midrash and the faithful interpretation is not about physical power or might. The good midrash is self sacrifice. The evil of the heart says otherwise. Matthew associates this with the move to circumcise Christians.

That was not true in Jesus’ case. He was the only teacher who could give the power of the Holy Spirit to his disciples....first by the mention of his name, and after his death and resurrection, by the power he sent to his disciples so that many more would come out of corrupted worship and become footstep followers of Christ....both Jews and Gentiles. Those spirit anointed teachers made it their life's work to find more disciples for Christ as Jesus had instructed them to do. (Matthew 28:19-20)

Is that not wishful thinking? Look how many people have sought unity through clarity. Its fleeting. I've never seen God honor it, never bless these genuine ecumenical efforts. I've seen it tried, and it results in more division and more arguing. Cain and Abel argue. They dispute, and the result is a murder, not clarity, not unity.

John heralded the arrival of the Messiah. But John died before Jesus did, so he was not aware that Jesus was executed. He was a man born to be a prophet and he did his job well but he was anointed with God's spirit from birth.

It was Jesus’ apostles who carried on his work and demonstrated the power of God’s spirit in their activities. That was not to be manifest past the apostolic period however. The gifts of the spirit died with the apostles because seeing miracles, Paul said, was the trait of a spiritual infant.....they needed to grow up and take on the task as mature Christians of preaching and teaching "to the most distant part of the earth".

These are all based in assumptions that the books that have been acquired through the roman catholics are strictly rational. It is a large pill you swallow. These are the same roman catholics whom you dispute with about transubstantiation. They says its flesh and blood. You say its symbolic. That's not what their books say. Their books say verbatim its flesh and blood at communion-time, but in other matters you insist the books are not symbolic.

The corruption foretold for Christianity is seen clearly in history....as soon as that corruption and bloodshed entered the Church, Christ left the building. What gained ascendancy was an imitation Christianity....the "weeds" of Jesus parable. (Matthew 13:24-30; 36-43; Matthew 7:21-23) Planted by the devil in the ultimate deception, they betray their true character by being 'part of the world' and forming friendships and alliances with worldly nations and participating in their political wars. (John 15:18-21; James 4:4, Matthew 5:43-45)

What masquerades as Christianity today is a mish-mash of human traditions, opinions and mistranslated Bible verses.
Christ's true followers would all speak in agreement and hold to the same truth. (1 Corinthians 1:10) They will not have blood on their hands....and then wonder why their prayers are not answered.....(Isaiah 1:15)

'Foretold' sounds ominous. People are predictable. Historians note that History goes in cycles, and the same mistakes get repeated. Its a matter of record.

 

[Deeje]

There is quite a bit to address here, so I'll break it up....

Whereas I view the devil as something different. The NT argues to let uncircumcised into the church. To do so they make arguments, and they propose the circumcision (those who believe Christians must be circumcised) lay a charge against humanity that we should all be ignored, excluded. The paradigm is that of a court with a defendant, a prosecutor, witnesses and a judge. The NT authors argue it is a false charge (against the uncircumcised) and make several arguments to allow them into the house of Israel. Thus the prosecution is considered a dissembler and maker of false charges and is called 'Devil'. In Koine they are called 'Diabolos' which we have translated into 'Devil'. Anyone who says "Uncircumcised shouldn't be allowed into the house of Israel" is called 'Devil'. Anyone who makes false accusations against anyone is called 'Devil'.

The “devil”, according to scripture is a real individual, a renegade spirit who entertained thoughts of becoming a god to the newly created humans. Ensnared by his own magnificence, according to Moses (who was inspired to write the book of Job) he was a high ranking angel, stationed in Eden as a guardian. (a covering cherub. Job 28:13-17) He was right there carefully planning his moves so as to achieve his goal.....to separate the humans from their Creator so that he could take over as their ruler and substitute god. He used the woman (who was deceived by his lies....1 Tim 2:13-14) to influence the man, setting in motion all that followed.....none of which was in God’s original purpose.

The “devil” (which literally means “slanderer” as you have indicated) needed to be brought to justice and your court scenario is accurate, though not completely IMO. God needed to exonerate himself from the slanderous lies that satan told, resulting in humanity having to spend time on ‘death row’ with God’s accuser. We were not created to experience death, so it remains an “enemy” to mankind. (1 Corinthians 15:26) Something that God will eliminate in the future when he restores his original purpose on this earth, having concluded his case and providing the witnesses necessary for his defense.

Many witnesses have been bringing their testimony to the court all through time, creating a record of their choice of sides in this legal case. Some are recorded in God’s “book of life”....others are not.

Unlike human court cases, this case has a foregone conclusion and foretold ruling. All those who side with the slanderer will share in the sentence handed down to him......eternal annihilation. (Matthew 25:31-33, 41, 46)

The court sits, and the prosecutor accuses; but the judge rules in favor of the uncircumcised. The prosecutor having been proven a liar is called 'Devil', which in the Koine is the word 'Diabolos' which is neither 'Satan' nor 'Demon' having the specific meaning that it is a dissembler and a maker of false charges. It is the paradigm of the NT authors, their argument for atonement. It is a way that they frame the discussion about whether Christians must be circumcised. They are saying that the circumciser of the nations is making a false charge and is to be ruled against.

The circumcision issue was important because it demonstrated that the physical aspects of it for Jews, were now replaced by the spiritual aspects for Christ’s followers.....not a circumcision of the flesh, but of the heart.....(Romans 2:29)....not according to a written law, but more importantly to obey one’s conscience according to the ‘law of the Christ’ or ‘the law of love’.

Anyone can make themselves "a devil", which is why this original slander is called "the" devil. He is the "father" of many others. (John 8:44) Both in heaven and on earth.

His angelic henchmen are called "demons" in the Bible.
According to Strongs, a "demon" is...

1. a spirit, a being inferior to God, superior to men

1. evil spirits or the messengers and ministers of the devil "

I understand I think but don't share many of your assumptions of your argument. These books including John were hidden from the public for centuries and only read in Latin. When they were translated and published into English it was as if they had been stolen. It was done against the will of the governments of the time.

Everything in its own time....that is what I see in the outworking of God's purpose. Time, is apparently our worst enemy. We humans have very limited amounts of it compared to our God who is not limited at all.....so why is everything taking so long???? The answer I believe is that the worst enemy of mankind is not mankind itself, but the one who pulls the strings from behind the scenes. He is the one who hijacked the human race for his own ends and he and his minions are the ones who can cause the most damage both in heaven and on earth.....the only way to prevent anything like this from happening again is to provide a first hand object lesson that will prove beyond any doubt the rightfulness of God's sovereignty.

Its not about his power, because he could have snuffed out these upstarts in a heartbeat....but this lesson is about whose rulership is the best one for mankind. Telling the humans was one thing......but it didn't work against the deceptive suggestions used by satan to undermine God's sovereignty. He had to show all of his children why his rulership is superior. Are we in any doubt now after thousands of years of man's inept rulership under the devil's leadership, whose ways are the best for us? Look where we are......we now have the capacity to ruin the only home we have....not in just one way, but many. God will put a stop to that. (Revelation 11:18)

 

[Deeje]

Confusion about them is everywhere, today, now in every continent of the globe and most languages. God has done nothing to stop this confusion for four centuries or five or more. Nothing has stopped it. The conclusion is we are not owed any clarity, but you seem to think that you are owed that clarity. Millions of people have sought clarity and not found it. What then does James mean when he says anyone can ask God to obtain wisdom? Does it mean everyone who asks God for wisdom will always agree with everyone else who does? Probably not.

I don't think you could be more wrong.....its about the timing....in foretelling the fact that the counterfeit Christianity sown by the devil would be subtle at first, but deadly in the end, we have to understand what the "weeds" were that Jesus used in his parable. It is believed to be a poisonous plant called "bearded darnel" which in its early growing stages, looks just like wheat.

Farmers in the Middle East hate it because it is impossible to tell one from the other, so after the first sprouting, they have no way of telling the difference. But once the weed has identified itself in the later growing period, the roots of both are so intertwined that you cannot uproot the weeds without uprooting the wheat as well......so the farmer had no option but to wait until the harvest time when the two were easily identified and separated by the reapers, who gathered the weeds first, and burned them. After that they placed the wheat into the farmer's storehouse. (Matthew 13:24-30; 36-43) The parable then makes more sense.

Here we are, well and truly approaching the harvest time and the weeds are now clearly identifiable. They all hold to the same core teachings that the devil planted in the early growing period....none of which were taught by Jesus. The only ones confused in this time period are the weeds.

 

[Deeje]

So what is "a people for his name?" Is it a people who all know everything about God and always agree? Probably not. What does Matthew 23:37-39 mean when it says the devil took Jesus to a high mountain? It is an allusion to an interpretation, a corrupt midrash, a midrash which occurs to me when I read a certain scripture. It oozes from the dark place in my heart when I read "ride upon the high places of the Earth." (deut 32:13, Isaiah 58:14). I think I know what it is saying to Jesus. It says "Bow to me (circumcision), and I will make you ruler." The good midrash and the faithful interpretation is not about physical power or might. The good midrash is self sacrifice. The evil of the heart says otherwise. Matthew associates this with the move to circumcise Christians.

I don't get that interpretation at all....
"A people for his name" indicates to me a shift in which the people who originally bore the responsibility of representing the true God, here on the earth (Israel, who failed) put their Messiah to death. So God "abandoned" them as his people (Matthew 23:37-39) and chose another 'people'...the followers of his son. He backed up that switch with great and powerful demonstrations of his spirit.

True to his promise to Abraham, "all the nations of the earth" would receive a blessing through the one who came in the name of his God. So Gentiles were always going to be included, but in order to bring his Messiah into the world, he had to have a nation dedicated to his worship, and the right circumstances, at the right time for all the things foretold to play out as God said they would. Abraham's descendants were not chosen because they were in any way superior to any other people, but because Abraham was the most faithful man on earth at the time, and the Messiah had to be born as a human through a foretold family line as part of his 'credentials'.

Is that not wishful thinking? Look how many people have sought unity through clarity. Its fleeting. I've never seen God honor it, never bless these genuine ecumenical efforts. I've seen it tried, and it results in more division and more arguing. Cain and Abel argue. They dispute, and the result is a murder, not clarity, not unity.

Again, I believe its all in the timing.....have you studied the prophesies in Daniel at all?
Daniel was given many visions of the future as well as visitations from God's angel Gabriel. In Daniel 12:4, Daniel was told...
"But as for you, Daniel, keep these words secret and seal up the book until the end of time; many will roam about, and knowledge will increase.” (NASB) So, we are now in "the time of the end"....and we have so much more knowledge in this age of technology.

He also said..."And he said, “Go your way, Daniel, for these words will be kept secret and sealed up until the end time. 10 Many will be purged, cleansed, and refined, but the wicked will act wickedly; and none of the wicked will understand, but those who have insight will understand." (9-10)

God knows who the wicked are.....those who deliberately lead people to believe lies to aggrandize themselves.

What else did God foretell for this time period? He told us the exact order of world powers from Babylon down to the present day rulers. He then said that the coming of his Kingdom would take place when these ones were in power...in a powerful "crushing" of all the previous Kingdoms.

Daniel 2:44....
" And in the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which will never be destroyed, and that kingdom will not be left for another people; it will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, but it will itself endure forever." (NASB)

This is not a passive event, but one that will change forever the way mankind are ruled.....we will return to the rulership we should have had in the first place...one that was taken away from us and one, thanks to the sacrifice of Christ we can get back.....but it has taken a lot of time in human terms....but to an infinite God time isn't the main thing......its the overall achievement in the long term. What we lost in Eden will finally be returned to humankind with no likelihood that it will ever be repeated. Precedents are set now.

 

[Deeje]

These are all based in assumptions that the books that have been acquired through the roman catholics are strictly rational. It is a large pill you swallow. These are the same roman catholics whom you dispute with about transubstantiation. They says its flesh and blood. You say its symbolic. That's not what their books say. Their books say verbatim its flesh and blood at communion-time, but in other matters you insist the books are not symbolic.

I think it is important to realize that the Bible is God's word, not man's. It may have come through an earthly agency but it isn't from that agency.....no Catholic penned a word of it......God can use whomever, or whatever will accomplish his will....they don't even have to be willing.

The reason why we take little notice of what the RCC teaches is because we believe that these were the early sprouting of the "weeds" of Jesus parable. How can we rule out the RCC as God's instrument for the dissemination of his truth? Because of what is written in Daniel.....understanding of the "end times" prophesies are basically ignored by the Catholic church. She has filled the earth with her errors and passed them off as truth. They refused the "cleansing"or "purifying" that God foretold for this time period.

By promoting the idea that the bread and wine become literal "flesh and blood" she has encouraged her charges to break God's law.....eating human flesh and drinking human blood are abhorrent to God's worshippers. In symbol, they break no law.....but first century Jews were shocked and stumbled by Jesus' inference. His apostles too were shocked, but waited for an explanation. There can be no literal transubstantiation. Jesus passed around literal bread and wine as symbols.

The RCC has not prepared her people for what is to come in the near future and neither have many other mainstream churches. They are too busy interfering in politics and sticking their noses into what does not concern them to follow the command that Jesus gave. (Matthew 28:19-20)

We see her as part of the devil's empire of false worship, ("Babylon the Great") which was created to give satan all the worshippers he needs for the time he has been allowed to rule this world....I believe that time is about to run out. We are told to "come out of her" because God is about to judge her for all her iniquities. (Revelation 18:4-5)

'Foretold' sounds ominous. People are predictable. Historians note that History goes in cycles, and the same mistakes get repeated. Its a matter of record.

History repeats because humans never learn the lessons that they teach.....we are so stubborn and stupid that we keep making the same mistakes, generation after generation.....but some "get it" and will separate themselves from the rabble to become part of God's spiritual family....he is choosing them as much as they are choosing him. (John 6:44; 65)

The earth we believe is about to undergo a drastic change that most people will not see coming.....it will culminate in the "end" of life as we know it on this planet....the greatest tribulation in mankind's history (Matthew 24:21)....but something wonderful happens after that....(Revelation 21:3-4)

 

[Brickjectivity]

There is quite a bit to address here, so I'll break it up....

It is easiest for me to respond to your post in a reverse order, so I will quote last parts first and move backwards.

History repeats because humans never learn the lessons that they teach.....we are so stubborn and stupid that we keep making the same mistakes, generation after generation.....but some "get it" and will separate themselves from the rabble to become part of God's spiritual family....he is choosing them as much as they are choosing him. (John 6:44; 65)

The earth we believe is about to undergo a drastic change that most people will not see coming.....it will culminate in the "end" of life as we know it on this planet....the greatest tribulation in mankind's history (Matthew 24:21)....but something wonderful happens after that....(Revelation 21:3-4)

Tribulation would be a matter of perspective. There is slavery still in this world. Where it is illegal its done in secret, but its a $40 billion per year industry. It is widespread, and products you and I use are likely in part the work of slaves -- people who have been coerced to work for nothing. There are how to books on the psychology of enslavement. To many people a great tribulation would not seem like anything had changed at all. To such people it would not be noticeable, but you and I enjoy privileged lives. It would not take much for me to feel I was in a great tribulation, because I am unused to suffering.

I think it is important to realize that the Bible is God's word, not man's. It may have come through an earthly agency but it isn't from that agency.....no Catholic penned a word of it......God can use whomever, or whatever will accomplish his will....they don't even have to be willing.

The reason why we take little notice of what the RCC teaches is because we believe that these were the early sprouting of the "weeds" of Jesus parable. How can we rule out the RCC as God's instrument for the dissemination of his truth? Because of what is written in Daniel.....understanding of the "end times" prophesies are basically ignored by the Catholic church. She has filled the earth with her errors and passed them off as truth. They refused the "cleansing"or "purifying" that God foretold for this time period.

By promoting the idea that the bread and wine become literal "flesh and blood" she has encouraged her charges to break God's law.....eating human flesh and drinking human blood are abhorrent to God's worshippers. In symbol, they break no law.....but first century Jews were shocked and stumbled by Jesus' inference. His apostles too were shocked, but waited for an explanation. There can be no literal transubstantiation. Jesus passed around literal bread and wine as symbols.

The RCC has not prepared her people for what is to come in the near future and neither have many other mainstream churches. They are too busy interfering in politics and sticking their noses into what does not concern them to follow the command that Jesus gave. (Matthew 28:19-20)

We see her as part of the devil's empire of false worship, ("Babylon the Great") which was created to give satan all the worshippers he needs for the time he has been allowed to rule this world....I believe that time is about to run out. We are told to "come out of her" because God is about to judge her for all her iniquities. (Revelation 18:4-5)

I believe God is invisible and intangible, that spiritual means contemplative or abstract and don't believe people have individual ghosts, nor that God wants to raise us individually to an afterlife. It is appointed unto us once to die and then the judgment, and that's it. We can bury our individuality in Christ in order to live with Christ. I think NT authors view repentance as synonymous with eternal life but not my individual life. They're interested in a church that goes on and on, not individuals having an afterlife.

Your point about the Roman church: I think the interest and belief in a church that continues has in the intervening centuries somehow become a preoccupation with tradition. You don't want to be associated with that and think its evil largely because of doctrinal points. I grasp, and I'm not going to suggest anybody must become Roman or Greek or Russian etc. Why would I? I hate converting to things.

God's word is in God, not bound into ink. I have to experience God's word, or not; or it is not part of me though my eyes see it or hears hear it. A foolish investor builds an expensive house on a beach, just like a person who takes other's assurances for what God is and wants. The word I have experience with is "God is no respecter of individuals." This I am assured of. God is not asking my approval. I must reject assurances that the Bible is God's word, because this is asking me to trust you too much. Of course I cannot. Only God reveals God. Besides, you could perceive inspiration in the Bible and misunderstand and think its God's word and mislead me by mistake.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Again, I believe its all in the timing.....have you studied the prophesies in Daniel at all?
Daniel was given many visions of the future as well as visitations from God's angel Gabriel. In Daniel 12:4, Daniel was told...
"But as for you, Daniel, keep these words secret and seal up the book until the end of time; many will roam about, and knowledge will increase.” (NASB) So, we are now in "the time of the end"....and we have so much more knowledge in this age of technology.

He also said..."And he said, “Go your way, Daniel, for these words will be kept secret and sealed up until the end time. 10 Many will be purged, cleansed, and refined, but the wicked will act wickedly; and none of the wicked will understand, but those who have insight will understand." (9-10)

God knows who the wicked are.....those who deliberately lead people to believe lies to aggrandize themselves.

What else did God foretell for this time period? He told us the exact order of world powers from Babylon down to the present day rulers. He then said that the coming of his Kingdom would take place when these ones were in power...in a powerful "crushing" of all the previous Kingdoms.

Daniel 2:44....
" And in the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which will never be destroyed, and that kingdom will not be left for another people; it will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, but it will itself endure forever." (NASB)

This is not a passive event, but one that will change forever the way mankind are ruled.....we will return to the rulership we should have had in the first place...one that was taken away from us and one, thanks to the sacrifice of Christ we can get back.....but it has taken a lot of time in human terms....but to an infinite God time isn't the main thing......its the overall achievement in the long term. What we lost in Eden will finally be returned to humankind with no likelihood that it will ever be repeated. Precedents are set now.

Its in our nature to seek reassurance, but its our lower nature. We doubt. We want to quit. Signs are attractive and draw us in. I warn that scripture must not be used for divination, which I think is what this is talking about how Daniel proves this or that. That being said it isn't much of a temptation for me, because it is very difficult to work out. I don't have a lot of focus to go painstakingly through his discussion with the angel about the king of the north and south and the beast and it horns etc. For a moment it looks interesting, but it quickly exhausts me. I stick to the easy parts, and I don't do divination with it. I don't pay attention to what anyone says about proofs and signs. If knowledge has increased, then fine. If it hasn't then fine.

If you want to know what is in the ark you must ask a Philistine. One Jewish man (named Uzzah) touches the ark and dies, but the Philistines open it, rifle around inside and replace its contents but live! Therefore only the ignorant may look inside. (1Samuel 5, 2Samuel 6:6)

I don't get that interpretation at all....
"A people for his name" indicates to me a shift in which the people who originally bore the responsibility of representing the true God, here on the earth (Israel, who failed) put their Messiah to death. So God "abandoned" them as his people (Matthew 23:37-39) and chose another 'people'...the followers of his son. He backed up that switch with great and powerful demonstrations of his spirit.

True to his promise to Abraham, "all the nations of the earth" would receive a blessing through the one who came in the name of his God. So Gentiles were always going to be included, but in order to bring his Messiah into the world, he had to have a nation dedicated to his worship, and the right circumstances, at the right time for all the things foretold to play out as God said they would. Abraham's descendants were not chosen because they were in any way superior to any other people, but because Abraham was the most faithful man on earth at the time, and the Messiah had to be born as a human through a foretold family line as part of his 'credentials'.

In the prophets, Jerusalem and the Jews may leave LORD, but LORD never divorces them. They are always brought back, and Deuteronomy writes this will always be the case. Prophets write about this, too, using marriage language. It is like with King David and Michael. Had David left Michael he could not have taken her back, but this was not the case. She left David, so David was able to take her back. If the husband is unfaithful he must divorce, but if the wife is unfaithful the man may choose not to divorce. This is the situation in the law and described by the prophets between the LORD and Israel and described both ways in Deuteronomy. When the husband provides the get document, then he should no longer take the woman as a wife; however if he has not divorced then he can take back an adulterous wife, forgive her, reunite.

Matthew 23:34 mentions that Jesus is going to send prophets to Jerusalem, and those prophets will be killed; but Jerusalem does not have a history of killing its prophets! I think Mathew 23:37 is not saying that Jerusalem has been slaughtering all of its prophets, and this would be inconsistent with the record of how they died. This is a good lead in to the story of Saul, the killer of prophets who converts and becomes Paul the apostle to the uncircumcised. He's one of those killing the prophets sent by Jesus, but then he converts. He helps stone Stephen.

 

[Brickjectivity]

I don't think you could be more wrong

Oh, I can be even wronger, but I realize you're just using a figure of speech.

.....its about the timing....in foretelling the fact that the counterfeit Christianity sown by the devil would be subtle at first, but deadly in the end, we have to understand what the "weeds" were that Jesus used in his parable. It is believed to be a poisonous plant called "bearded darnel" which in its early growing stages, looks just like wheat.

Farmers in the Middle East hate it because it is impossible to tell one from the other, so after the first sprouting, they have no way of telling the difference. But once the weed has identified itself in the later growing period, the roots of both are so intertwined that you cannot uproot the weeds without uprooting the wheat as well......so the farmer had no option but to wait until the harvest time when the two were easily identified and separated by the reapers, who gathered the weeds first, and burned them. After that they placed the wheat into the farmer's storehouse. (Matthew 13:24-30; 36-43) The parable then makes more sense.

Here we are, well and truly approaching the harvest time and the weeds are now clearly identifiable. They all hold to the same core teachings that the devil planted in the early growing period....none of which were taught by Jesus. The only ones confused in this time period are the weeds.

That does not sound like proper procedure. You can't tell by what they say, only by how they live. Signs are getting in the way of principle. If a person is stupid and knows nothing, they may nevertheless by very good. On the other hand an intelligent malicious person can fool you. People also fool ourselves with our words. That you think you can identify who is who by their words indicates missing the point of the parable. The point is that you can't tell who is who. Also your words indicate we don't agree, but you act as if you do. Even now you are giving me the benefit of the doubt though my ideas don't impress you! That means you're treating me as neither tare nor wheat despite my words. You're not judging me by my knowledge. This goes back to what we started talking about. Good people stepping into the light. You say it means they must step into good teachings, but this completely turns the whole thing upon its head. The Pharisees in John's story are 100% with you. They believe the same. I think both they and you are opposed to what John the Baptist is teaching and to the lesson of the tares and wheat.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Everything in its own time....that is what I see in the outworking of God's purpose. Time, is apparently our worst enemy. We humans have very limited amounts of it compared to our God who is not limited at all.....so why is everything taking so long???? The answer I believe is that the worst enemy of mankind is not mankind itself, but the one who pulls the strings from behind the scenes. He is the one who hijacked the human race for his own ends and he and his minions are the ones who can cause the most damage both in heaven and on earth.....the only way to prevent anything like this from happening again is to provide a first hand object lesson that will prove beyond any doubt the rightfulness of God's sovereignty.

Its not about his power, because he could have snuffed out these upstarts in a heartbeat....but this lesson is about whose rulership is the best one for mankind. Telling the humans was one thing......but it didn't work against the deceptive suggestions used by satan to undermine God's sovereignty. He had to show all of his children why his rulership is superior. Are we in any doubt now after thousands of years of man's inept rulership under the devil's leadership, whose ways are the best for us? Look where we are......we now have the capacity to ruin the only home we have....not in just one way, but many. God will put a stop to that. (Revelation 11:18)

When Cain and Abel argue, Cain kills his brother. Before this happens the LORD says something to Cain: "Sin is crouching at your door. It desires to have you, but you must master it." How can the sin inside of Cain have its own desire? In addition there are other verses which lead me to believe other than you have accounted. There is only one obvious enemy of God, and that is us. Paul talks about the law of sin in himself, and its clear he's talking about this thing inside of Cain. Hebrews talks about it, and says each person is tempted by his own internal desire. This internal force is given action, motive, its own influence. It seeks mastery of the individual. Its enough to explain everything wrong with the world. There is no need for another external enemy of God to explain things.

The circumcision issue was important because it demonstrated that the physical aspects of it for Jews, were now replaced by the spiritual aspects for Christ’s followers.....not a circumcision of the flesh, but of the heart.....(Romans 2:29)....not according to a written law, but more importantly to obey one’s conscience according to the ‘law of the Christ’ or ‘the law of love’.

Anyone can make themselves "a devil", which is why this original slander is called "the" devil. He is the "father" of many others. (John 8:44) Both in heaven and on earth.

His angelic henchmen are called "demons" in the Bible.
According to Strongs, a "demon" is...

1. a spirit, a being inferior to God, superior to men

1. evil spirits or the messengers and ministers of the devil "

I hear what you're saying. I still think that a lot of the gospels are part of a dialogue about whether to make new Christians get circumcised. For me it explains some things.

The “devil”, according to scripture is a real individual, a renegade spirit who entertained thoughts of becoming a god to the newly created humans. Ensnared by his own magnificence, according to Moses (who was inspired to write the book of Job) he was a high ranking angel, stationed in Eden as a guardian. (a covering cherub. Job 28:13-17) He was right there carefully planning his moves so as to achieve his goal.....to separate the humans from their Creator so that he could take over as their ruler and substitute god. He used the woman (who was deceived by his lies....1 Tim 2:13-14) to influence the man, setting in motion all that followed.....none of which was in God’s original purpose.

The “devil” (which literally means “slanderer” as you have indicated) needed to be brought to justice and your court scenario is accurate, though not completely IMO. God needed to exonerate himself from the slanderous lies that satan told, resulting in humanity having to spend time on ‘death row’ with God’s accuser. We were not created to experience death, so it remains an “enemy” to mankind. (1 Corinthians 15:26) Something that God will eliminate in the future when he restores his original purpose on this earth, having concluded his case and providing the witnesses necessary for his defense.

Many witnesses have been bringing their testimony to the court all through time, creating a record of their choice of sides in this legal case. Some are recorded in God’s “book of life”....others are not.

Unlike human court cases, this case has a foregone conclusion and foretold ruling. All those who side with the slanderer will share in the sentence handed down to him......eternal annihilation. (Matthew 25:31-33, 41, 46)

I'm not in agreement about what the devil is and think you've overstated "according to scripture." It is a lot of disparate scripture verses put together, and I think you know that. I like figures of speech. I think this could all be confusion about figures of speech. Also to say we weren't created to experience death is difficult to support, too. We don't even see resurrection language in scripture until the prophets talk about the resurrection of Israel. Finally we see it in the gospels, but even there Jesus directly says that repentance is resurrection. That leaves open the possibility that you are completely wrong. I know there are stories in the gospels about Jesus walking about after dying, but there is a lot we don't know about who wrote these gospels.

 

[BilliardsBall]

"agent" perfectly describes the office and actions of the things Jesus does for his God.

cults are notorious known to be run by flamboyant leaders . no such thing can be found in the organization of the JW's. hence its not a cult

"Agent" is not a Bible Word.

The "Agent" created the entire universe by speaking it into existence (John 1)!

A cult may have boring leaders and a boring lifestyle.

We know that antichrist cults depart from true doctrine, aka calling Jesus an "Agent".