King James Bible
King James Version (KJV)
Bible Discussion Thread
Viewing page: 1 of 2
1 2
This comment thread is locked. Please enter a new comment below to start a new comment thread.
Note: Comment threads older than 2 months are automatically locked.
Do you have a Bible comment or question?
Posting comments is currently unavailable due to high demand on the server.
Please check back in an hour or more. Thank you for your patience!
I believe in the trinity doctrine, and believe it is vital in understand much of scripture.
However, no doctrine should cause you to hate your Brothern. I have not seen hatred towards non trinity believers on this site.
However, hating a false doctrine is another or thing.
There is doctrine like the trinity that causes division and to be truthful I have seen more people being chased down that hold the view than those that don't hold it.
If NOT holding the trinity view is not a salvation issue, then HOLDING the trinity view is also NOT a salvation issue.
Has either of the views consumed you?
Are you treating people the way you are asking to be treated?
If one feels discussing it is pushing it, and you engage in it by support from afar, or directly, are not you also guilty of pushing it?
Have we been moved off our purpose and as a body what we have been called to do?
Why don't we display the same energy when calling out sin such as abortion, same sex marriage, Partiality, "inside and outside the Church"?
What light is being displayed debating translations but yet refuse to spend your time with whatever translation you use to display the Gospel as it is put on the back burner.
We seem to spend a lot of time desiring vain glory, back slapping and display and at times shunning rather than edifying.
Ephesians 2:10 says, "For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them. Are we doing that?
There is plenty of scripture to use to examine ourselves and there is certainly one word that we should all have for one another and that is Love.
God bless.
Chris reached out to me about my previous discussions on the Sabbath and the KJB. I had gotten frustrated with these discussions and said I was only going to correspond with my friends GiGi and Jema but that was over reacting on my part and I should have continued. We might start a discussion again or we might discuss the Trinity, which is a new topic for me, and that you might want to join in. I do believe in the Trinity just so you know. I hope you will be a part of our discussions. God Bless :)
Thank you, I certainly will!!
I have a busy week schedule Monday through Friday but I post and reply periodically.
I mostly engage on weekends.
There is trinity thread going on as we speak.
You might find it interesting.
I will be reading this one from the stands.
God bless.
I see no reason in stopping what could be productive Bible-based dialogs with fellow believers on a forum designed for that as long as its not an argument. You asked if the views have consumed someone- maybe you are tired of this topic? I've seen the trinity topic a lot on here, but less often discuss the root differences for why people believe what they believe and get into specific verse interpretations. That's ok if that's not of interest to you, but it seems to be of interest to those who are posting about it. I think others can post any Bible topics they want to discuss and I'm not aware of anything interfering with that freedom. God bless.
AMEN
I also failed to mention, none of this is pointed towards you.
God bless
I meant, disconnecting themselves "FROM" any of the basic fundamentals of the faith and join themselves to any other person or doctrine that is against those fundamentals.
I believe this is a worthy topic to discuss because to discover who Christ is through the volume of scripture one would come to the Revelation of Christ!
And that Revelation is he is God.
But part of my post I wanted to set the record straight that most of what I seen on this site those who believe in the Trinity has been on the defense.
I addressed those who may be consumed by this doctrine would be those who hate the Trinity doctrine so much it causes them to show hatred to anyone that holds it ( Not Ronald ) They show this by disconnecting themselves to any of the basic fundamentals of the faith and join themselves to any other person or doctrine that is against those fundamentals.
They show hatred towards the faith as the world do because of it's narrow and unapologetic nature.
Never mind what they don't subscribe to but pay attention to what they do subscribe to! ANYTHING THAT WE DON'T!
Everything else I mentioned was just in general over sight apart from this topic but not anything to do with neither of you.
It's great if one can examine themself and not be found guilty of such a thing.
God bless.
Without stating the obvious which you no doubt have picked up on when lengthy discussions here are in progress & they suddenly cease: for some of us, it's 'why did I even get into this discussion when the other person(s) have suddenly withdrawn just when the end of the matter & our understanding of it are soon before us?' So, I've just learnt to accept that some folk simply either don't have enough knowledge to properly defend their belief, or are hardened in their stand, or even maybe uninterested in taking the matter to its proper resolution or closure. I have often put forward pertinent Scriptures in this matter of the Triunity of God, but not one has come forth to exegete the Word & show why those verses are inapplicable.
So, I'll stop here. This is not just about the matter of the Trinity, rather that this may not be the right Site to expect a heavy protracted examination of the Scriptures on any subject. The best we can do is cite the clear ones (& these have already been done by many here), yet not live in hope that it will go much further than that. GBU.
"I have often put forward pertinent Scriptures in this matter of the Triunity of God, but not one has come forth to exegete the Word & show why those verses are inapplicable." They always just came back with their same arguments with little or no scripture and, although, I posted a rebuttal, I guess you could call it, with questions and other scripture they mostly wouldn't answer the question or explain, as you say, why those scriptures are inapplicable.
This is the first posting I've seen on the Trinity and I'd like to take part in a the discussion but if you feel like you must stop, I'd like to ask if you would go on a little longer and let me respond.
I am a believer of the Trinity. I have just watched a video on YouTube of a person explaining why believing in the Trinity is wrong for 5 main reasons. My next post will address these (empty) reasons. If it is a repeat of what you and S. Spencer have already discussed, please let me know. God Bless :)
Secondly, I believe you read my comment to S. Spencer incorrectly. Actually, I am very interested in lengthy back-and-forth discussions to reach a conclusion, rather than wanting "to quit" a discussion. I have found that discussions end abruptly, to my dismay, but not without a variety of reasons that the other person might have for doing so. Thus the limitations of such a discussion page come to the fore.
Using your example of the vibrant discussion you had recently on the Sabbath: obviously, I can't comment on other folk's comments or their not giving you the answers you required, yet I can say this of myself: if I recall, I did give limited comment on this topic, and my belief on the Sabbath, indeed the whole Decalogue, is generally at variance with other folk. What you sought were verses from us to refute the necessity of Sabbath-keeping, & I believe some were given you, concerning the Lord's Day observance (first day of the week), that our Sabbath-rest is found in Jesus alone, & maybe other references. These, I noted, you rejected. So what's next? In one sense, a stale-mate has been reached & we can proceed no further. Or else, we need to go back to the root, or core, of the matter to learn about this 'problematic' Decalogue; and this matter is found with the receivers of the Law & its intended outcome and how, if at all, it affects Gentiles.
The 'Trinity' debate has appeared on these pages for as long as I've been here, & of course, much before that. So yes, please share your understanding of it; and I believe bro. Ronald has given us some thoughts to consider & respond to. GBU
If you'd rather go to a new discussion about the Trinity, new for me, I'd like that also. I've already done some studying on it. Looking forward to communicating with you and S Spencer, also, if he decides to. God Bless :)
The apostles faced this same dilemma as various teachings were coming into the Church that were not according to the Word & apostolic teaching, but were taking away from Who this Christ Jesus was. Briefly, Gnostic belief was entering the Church (then, as it does now). 'Gnostic', from 'gnostikos', means, 'pertaining to knowledge'. And this translates to certain teaching relying heavily on using the mind to both read & interpret Scriptures; therefore, if something was too mystical or unbelievable, then one should use the powers of reason & logic to come to a reasonable conclusion.
Some of the Gnostic beliefs are: having knowledge is superior & more preferable to having virtue; the non-literal sense of Scripture is the correct position to hold, & this understanding is given only to a few; evil in the world precludes God being the only Creator; there is no resurrection of the flesh. And the one that applies here, is a variant of the Gnostics, that of the Docetics; and one of their beliefs is that there was no incarnation (referring to Jesus), simply because Deity cannot unite with anything material, such as a body. If we have this belief then no further discussion can take place since the Word of God is no longer our sole reference point. That is why I especially enjoy engaging on such important topics here, since our only appeal is to the Scriptures & not to what seems right in one's mind. I hope this helps a little.
I've been dealing with a situation which has caused me much exhaustion brought on by by my disability at times like this so I haven't been able to do any studying but, Praise the Lord, He has settled it for me and touched me and I'm not having to deal with exhaustion today so I will do a study of this belief. It seems to me, however, by your comments, that it is a matter of not believing that God could become incarnate and come to earth being a man and also a God and since the bible doesn't back up their belief they turn to the intellect to present their views. Is that correct?
I'll talk to you again soon. God Bless :)
This Docetic position stems from a belief that 'Deity cannot unite with flesh', but it doesn't mean that Scriptures aren't used to prove their belief, but with that foundation, their mental capabilities are engaged to re-visit Scriptures with alternative viewpoints. But there would be those who have from young age been taught that the incarnation is impossible (as you would know how RCs are indoctrinated from an early age in other matters, viz. Mary, saints, indulgences, penances, the Mass, etc.); or others by their own research from books, the Web, etc., where they can find a 'better' logic to this mystery, than just accepting what the Word states.
Thus we have the apostolic epistles, which essentially are pastoral letters directed to Churches for teaching, encouragement, dealing with problems/matters arising, & refuting the teaching of others that were contrary to what they had been taught. I always go back to 1 John in this 'docetic' regard, as Gnosticsm was rife then & John had to deal with it (see 1 John 1:1,2; 1 John 2:18 (the anti-Christ spirit, cf 1 John 4:2,3); 1 John 2:22,23). GBU.
I just read your post and wanted to say that I was just about to post a comment similar to yours but was not sure how to say what I wanted to say because it seems to be getting more and more difficult to post comments lately without someone becoming offended in some way.
I also was a little surprised that you were asked to engage in further discussion by momsage for the same reason. Of the two topics listed (sabbath and KJB), I was following along on the KJB topic for a couple of weeks and holding back from engaging in discussion because of the comment you are probably referring to which was, and I quote: "I don't discuss in this forum anymore with anyone except two of my friends." I took that literally, and it was because of those words that I chose not to engage in discussion on that topic with momsage.
I realize that momsage will probably read this since every post is viewable by all. That is okay. I have no hard feelings towards anyone on this forum. Besides having many brothers and sisters in Christ Jesus here, I also consider everyone here as a friend. But what I would like to know from momsage is if she is truly open for discussion with anyone else on this forum? I do agree with momsage about argumentative conversations. I do not enjoy those either. But friendly open-minded discussions should be welcomed.
Blessings to both you and momsage. I do look forward to reading your further discussion, if the Lord leads you both in that direction!!!
I Hope all is well with you Brother.
God bless.
I am doing well, thanks for checking. I hope all is well with you also. The Lord is good!
Many blessing to you!!!
I've been setting back and enjoying these great discussions here lately and thought I would check in on you.
God bless you.
I have been thinking of you, too and was going to post as S.Spencer did, but he beat me to it. We do need to check up on one another on here as we do not have another way to reach out since we don't give out identifying info on this site.
I hope your are doing really well and being blessed in your walk with the Lord everyday. What a privilege it is to do so, right?
We are knee-deep into this home repair which is turning into a whole house remodel. So, packing things up in closets that need to be painted before flooring goes in. We hope to do most of the wall painting ourselves and let the contractor remove the popcorn ceilings, retexturing and painting of those before he lays the flooring. The two that come most days are very pleasant, listen well to what we say we would like and then re-check with us before doing the most essential aesthetic part so that it is done how we would prefer. We appreciate that. This is the only remodel we have ever done, so we don't know much about the behind the finish work. They have been good at explaining to us and are good workers. Their workmanship is very good and we are very happy with them. So thankful for their great work.
Thank you! Yes, it is such a privilege and a blessing to be able to follow the Lord despite the distractions of everyday life. He has blessed me in ways that I don't feel I deserve.
I am happy to hear that your home remodel is going well and that you found some great contractors to do the work. We had a house built recently, moved in on June 8th, 2023, and the only thing left that we want to do in the near future is finish our basement. We had popcorn ceiling in our last house. We never liked it, but we left it alone. I learned the hard way that it's almost impossible to paint popcorn ceiling with a paint roller. (What a dummy!)
Anyway, I have been coming on here frequently to read and I must say that one of the most recent topics has really been out there in "left-field." I'll leave it at that as I'm sure you know what I'm referring to, plus I have nothing to add to the things you and others have spoken against such a bold claim.
Again, thank you so much for reaching out. I guess the only way to check on someone that hasn't been posting for a while is by finding the last post that person initiated, and enter a comment there, and they will receive an email notification.
Blessings in Christ!!!
When our inside is done, then we will look again to the outside with paint, new fencing, and perhaps a deck, deck cover and new driveway pavement. But it all depends on how much the inside costs us. We can put in the new lawn ourselves and do some of the fencing if we hire someone to set the new posts.
It is very interesting how some topics pop up here. It is enlightening to me and I seek to gain more understanding in order to either accept what one is saying, refute the doctrine, or just leave it.
Sometimes, it may be best to simply present the gospel in its pure form as a contrast to some of the convoluted teachings some add to it. Much prayer is needed to combat the enemy that wants to promote serious error and even heresy here. We can pray for wisdom, discernment, boldness, and true concern for others as we seek to present what is truly correct teaching from the Scriptures. But everyone has their "own" idea of what the truth is. This is where we need to know what to say in a conversation to bring about a redemptive end in a discussion.
I believe the Trinity discussion is a fruitful one and there is a lot to learn from it.
I believe some has let certain doctrine consume them to the point where they break fellowship. The Trinity is just one of many.
I believe we should explore all doctrine but no doctrine should cause a hatred that has been displayed by some.
We search the scripture and let the spirit of truth do his work in our lives.
There should be an increase in fruit in our lives and love for the Brothern that is produced from above as a result of the truth providing that the spirit of Christ is in us.
God bless you Momsage.
I will send this to you as I feel we consider each other as brothers. I thought I was clear when I ended my conversation about the Trinity, but it does not sound like that is not understood with the comments I have read.
I will ask this question not to stump anyone, but it is one I have not ever answered.
First, I would like to say Jesus was before any creation, He is the beginning of creation, and all was created after Him and through Him, but it was in God's plan of creation that Jesus being appointed heir to, Heb 1:1-4. Jesus was the beginning of creation Rev. 3:14 and in the fullness of time He was conceived, Ephesians 1:9-10. There were two Adams and Jesus is the last Adam both Adams who were men who came into this world without sin. The first sinned and the last lived perfect totally obedient to the Father.
Question, Jesus was conceived and brought forth the only begotten Son of God to die for the sins of mankind. If Jesus was preexisting, an immortal being, God the son. How can an immortal being die? How can God be tempted, James 1:13, but it is clear Jesus was tempted as we are, Hebrews 4:15 and He died shedding His blood to cover our sins.
Can God die? If not, how are our sins covered? Could the works of the devil be undone if God fulfilled the law that was made for man? The law was made for man and a man had to live without sin to fulfill it. What is the meaning of Acts 2:24 if Jesus was not a man?
Sorry to send this to you but anyone can answer, Love you brother.
God bless,
RLW
I got your post as I'm getting up for work.
I may be able to give throughout the week as you know I travel.
You're asking how could Jesus be our Kinsman redeemer if he's God and not a man.
I've briefly touched on this recently.
For now I pass this on to someone else considering we have discussed this and know one another's view quite well.
God bless and I Love you too Brother.
If I may respond to your good questions brother Ronald.
a. Revelation 3:14, "These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God". I think you're stating that Jesus existed in Heaven (i.e. before the rest of God's creative Work done by Him) & then came to Earth as a babe. Apologies if I've misunderstood, as this understanding is at variance with the general belief by the non-trinitarian, that Jesus made His first appearance as a human & He had no existence before that.
True, there were two 'Adams': "The first man (Adam) is of the earth, earthy: the second man (Adam) is the Lord from heaven" ( 1 Corinthians 15:47). Is Paul suggesting that this Jesus, before all creation, was also the Lord from Heaven or mistaken, that He was a sub-Lord? Then the question, 'if Jesus was created by God before other of His created Works, what was His position in Heaven - was He God's Assistant in His Works or the Lord Who shared (partook) in God's Glory' ( John 17:5) - or maybe God created another god (but how would that work for God cannot be created, or else the created one can never be a supreme God?).
And Jesus must have been immortal as all heavenly beings are & all humans are (having an immortal spirit that can never die). So, maybe some clarification on how you understand this matter. Then back to Revelation 3:14: we can also bring in Colossians 1:15-17: Jesus, as One from God, stands then as He is now, the Image of the invisible God, Who not only created all things "by Him (Himself), but for Him (Himself)". If He then is "the firstborn of every creature" (v15) & "the firstborn from the dead" (v18), this might indicate that from examination of this word, 'firstborn' (prototokos), we can understand this "beginning of God's Creation & firstborn of every creature". And also in Revelation 3:14, the "beginning" of the creation of God: 'arche', from which we get words like 'arche-type'. Onto Page 2.
May I intervene in your discussion saying something about the verses in Col 1:15-18
"15Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
16For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by(in grk through) him(also see Ephesians 3:9), and for him:"
17And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
18And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence"
1. "first born of every creature", the grk says "prototokos(first born) pases(of all) ktiseos(of creation)" .___"Prototokos" comes from "protos(first)" and the verb "tikto(give birth)"___ As Chris has said it doesn't say "protoktistos" which means "first to be created".
What does Paul mean with that? Which is that creation he is refering to. There are many interpretations of that.
a. The Orthodox church believes that Jesus as a God was born by His Father before the creation of the world (see the Nicene Creed). So as a son of a father who is God He is also God. Later during the Roman times He was also born by the Spirit and Mary as a man. So He is Son of God and Son of Man. This is what they believe.
b. Other beliefs. Firstly lets see the verse in Gal 6:14-15, " For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature." The grk actually says "creation" not "creature". New creation.
As you see in Col 1:18 Paul calls Jesus "first born from the dead" and he also says about Jesus "that in all things he might have the preeminence"
Taking all those into account a possible interpretation is (and this is the belief of many in my church) that first born of all creation means that Jesus was the first child of God among all other born(again) children (us, God's children)
See part 2.
Thank you, I don't mind at all brother, your knowledge of Greek is always welcome and enlightening. If our understanding is different if we in love discuss wirh the goal of finding the true meaning we are all better and closer to God. I have learned so much from the brothers and sisters on this site. It may be a bit before I get back with you.
God bless,
RLW
I looked at that term "deified" or something to that affect. I would define the new body as glorified but not God-that is disturbing.
All the power we will have in our glorified body it is due to God's provision; and all the authority in which we rule and reign with Christ. The other weird thing is how we are supposedly in our material bodies somehow tied in some mysterious way to the creation like it is still happening or something if I get that right.
As for me; I didn't understand how my ex wife was able to marry someone in that church if they knew she was divorced from someone. I thought they were against that.
Yes, the belief of the Eastern Orthodox church about Jesus is He didn't exist for ever but at a time before the creation of the woorld He was born/came out of Father God. The amended Nicene Creed which was a statement of faith states among others "(I believe) and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds (ons), Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father;". That statement was came out in 381 AD during the first ecumenical(universal) council of Constantinouple. So it was what all christians believed at that time. The church was still united at that time. The Roman Catholics also use it (with an extra addition about the Holy Spirit). So this is what the Catholics believe as well. They also believe that all saved people will be somehow "deified by grace". Probably they are using John 17:2, "That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us:..." and 1 John 3:2, "Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.". But John here says that we don't know what we will be, so that "be like Him" may not refer to Jesus' nature. Anyway, we know by part as the scripture says.
I am sory about your wife. Was she remary in an Orthodox church? Yes they allow as many as 3 mariages. Sadly they say a lot of excuses about that, thus canceling the Word of God.
Also I don't understand what you are saying in "The other weird thing is how we are supposedly in our material bodies somehow tied in some mysterious way to the creation like it is still happening or something if I get that right.". If you like explain that clearer please. God blesses.
This seems to be contradictory to the statement that flesh and blood can't enter the Kingdom of God but I suppose it could fit in if they actually believed in a Rapture event of the living (which I doubt they do unless a Post Millennial event).
What my Lord JESUS said is that ' they which shall be accounted WORTHY to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage: Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels (Example: Genesis 19:1-4. Take a look); and are the children of GOD, being the children of the resurrection.
And Paul Apostle revealed: Philippians 3:20-21:
20 For our conversation is in heaven(heaven? Ephesians 1:3-8. Take a look. Are you in heaven or not? Or you don't know?); from whence also WE LOOK for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ:
21 Who shall CHANGE OUR VILE BOVY(this is not a magic, this is a process, it is(will be) worked) that it may be fashioned like unto His glorious body, according to the WORKING whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto Himself.
And Paul said more: 1 Corinthians 15:24-27 and 51-55:
24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the Kingdom to GOD( Revelation 11:15-18), even the Father; when he shall have PUT DOWN ALL RULE AND ALL AUTHORITY and POWER.
25 For JESUS must reign, till He hath put all enemies under His feet.
26 The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.
51 Behold, I shew you a MYSTERY; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all BE CHANGED, (not by magic, but a process)
52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye (in the last seven years of the world of Devil- Revelation 11:15 and 18.Take a look), at the last Trump ( 1Thessalonians 4:16 combined with Daniel 12:1-3.Take a look):for the Trumpet shall sound( Revelation 11:15) and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.
53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.
54 So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.
55 O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?
The Ortodox believe in the post trib rapture. They don't use the term "the rapture of the saints" but always talk about "the 2nd presence of Christ". Also they believe that the millenium is a figurative period of time which actually started when Jesus ascended to Heaven and will finish at the White Throne Judgement. All events described in that millenium are figurative for what is occuring from Jesus' time till the very end.
About St Gregory the Theologian I don't know what he tought. But from what I read in your comment I tend to think that probably what he had in mind is what Paul tells us in Rom 819-23, "19For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.
20For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope,
21Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.
22For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.
23And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body"
I have to point out that the grk doesn't say "creature" but "creation" in all the above verses. And all interpretations I have read so far is that it means the whole creation, everything that has been created, the whole world, land, living beings, everything.
Which leaves me to think that the creation which is now in decay/corruption/wear will be libarated at that time, probably meaning that everything will be in a glorified stable condition in the new earth we will be living on. And I believe that "the blood and flesh" is for people, not for the rest of material creation.
About "deification" I don't want to say any opinion, I am very sceptical about it, This is actually something it is never discussed in my church.
God Bless.
Part 2,
John 17:5 I may not be able to answer this satisfactorily, but I do not think Jesus was in heaven other than in God's plan in God's thoughts as the word logos is the expression of a thought. When Jesus was baptized, He was anointed without measure by the Holy Spirit/Ghost, John 3:34 at that point Jesus was given power and authority John 5:26-27 and then Matthew 28:18.
All through the New Testament Jesus said what He said, what He did, and the works that were done was God His Father and not Him, John 14:10, it was the word of God, God was manifested in Jesus everything was given to Jesus, He did not have it before God the Father gave it to Him.
God dwelt in Jesus and Jesus in Him, I feel Jesus became the Tabernacle of God, as His name shall be called Emmanuel God with us, same as Jesus told Peter, John 14:9. Jesus had the full measure of the Holy Spirit/Ghost this is why He said what He said in John 14:17 they saw the Holy Spirit/Ghost because it was with them in Him that gave Jesus the power for God to do the works/miracles.
This was in the prayer Jesus was praying to His Father just before He went to the cross, Jesus was asking His Father to glorify Him so that He may glorify God so that we might know the only true God. John17:1-3 Mark 12:29.
Colossians 1:15-17 I will try on this one, "in the image" is a mirror-like representation that Jesus was, like He said to Peter if you have seen me, you have seen God. Man cannot see God nor look on Him, John 1:18 Jesus was the faithful witness Revelation 1:5 and a witness tells or reveals the truth, and Jesus showed us the truth of who God is the only true God.
Jesus was the first and everything in God's thoughts and mind, Jesus was there in God's mind but was not sent until the fullness of time, Ephesians 1:10. I feel that is why Jesus said over and over it is not me but He who sent me.
I know we may differ, but I hope I am showing honestly my understanding.
See part 3.
God bless,
RLW
Part 1
Thank you and I do not mind, I just sent this to S Spencer, I once believed Jesus preexisted but some things just did not feel right, 2 Cor. 11:3-4 stood out. I will do my best to give my understanding starting with Rev. 3:14. The beginning of the creation of God. God has no beginning or end, I understand this as God's plan for all creation began with Jesus, God's Son and all creation came after until all is made new, we were in this plan.
God declared the end from the beginning, Isaiah 46:10. God brought forth Jesus from His plan in the fullness of time, and Jesus's physical existence began with the miraculous virgin birth of our Lord from heaven, Ephesians 1:10 1 Corinthians 15:47. How this virgin conception was done by the Holy Ghost I have no clue; Jesus is the begotten Son of God if anything is begotten it has a beginning.
Jesus was the second man who came into this world without sin, Man had to live a perfect life to fulfill the law that was placed on man to make it void, Romans 3:19-20. Jesus as a man did this and paid the price that through Him is the only way to our Father John 14:6. My understanding of Jesus being the first in God's creation and everything came by Him and for Him and through Him and when Jesus completed what purpose His Father sent Him to do Jesus became heir of all that God created after Him, Hebrews 1:2. I will do my best to give my understanding although we may not agree we can see and study the other side.
See part 2.
God bless,
RLW