inchrist

Why would I lie.....honestly what point then does that serve for me coming here without the intent to test and learn? Certainly then I would have better things to do if that was the case Biblical correction does not come with a bag of insults.

As/like So "as" and "like" not the same now.....this is desperate stuff....

Divida, i have no issues with anyone testing what I share..... In fact I would be in the wrong place if what I share is not tested....as I continuously hope I get to learn by something I might of missed. But given the nature and history between myself and shiloh.....I have nothing to learn from someone who is motived by hate. Since shiloh wishes to be a self appointed watchdog, who watches the watchdog? And before sounding like a hypocrite the same post should be applied to shiloh..... The problem I am seeing is anyone who disagrees with shiloh and your band automatically is labelled a false teacher....you guys throw this word around like free candy to such an extent you call them satan worshippers.

Wow.....unbelievable how blind you are.... For God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God You will be LIKE or AS God, KNOWING good and Evil The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. LIKE one of US, KNOWING No where does ot state man has now become gods, nor did satan state become gods LIKE God who KNOWS good and Evil And that is certainly what happened man become LIKE gods or LIKE God who KNEW the knowledge of good and Evil The same application Gen 1:26 Then God said, "Let us make human beings in our image, to be like us LIKE I seriously must question the state of the theologian education you all claim you get your degrees from.....

I enjoyed this Particularly this We certainly do seem to act like them at times.

Not fair you bet me to it ?

Congratulations youve just made God a co-conspirator to the lie Gen 3:22 The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil.

You are so hopeless at this, that wasnt what the lie was. Gen 3:4 You will not certainly die," the serpent said to the woman.

And all of that must be understood with Christs teachings to how we understand the father in our how our relationship is to be to God. Which He in turn taught the apostles and in turn how sonship and resurrection are similarly connected on a consistent bases in scripture. Thats not what I stated did I. It made him the firstborn. How do you not grasp God desires a family? That makes no sense at all. The whole point of the title Son of God is to give glory directly to the Father. Even in a trinity concept there is ranking of hierarchy, you muddy the waters. Just a walking contradiction Its ranking, its co- equal. Retardation. "Before that can happen" clearly subconsciously you understand it can happen, which undermines your position. Is this a joke? And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together. Rom 8:17 Joint-heirs....clearly youve never dealt with contractual law before. Legal term of common portion. Because clearly Joint-heirs (a joint participant) and co-rulers is beyound your understanding. Thou hast put all things in subjection under his feet All things, joint-heirs in all things subject under Christ feet (rulership) Is the entire universe not under Christ feet? Subject under to rulership He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son.(Rev 21:7) Inherit all things, not one little thing or that little thing but EVERYTHING with Christ.....wake up!!!! No actually the opposite.... it glorifies God. You clearly have no concept of what inheritance is about. To have the divine nature is one thing, but to be God Himself is another. You clearly cant handle this difference. Yes they do, but clearly learn the differemce between divine nature and being God himself Listen guy, there is a difference My twins have my life and nature..... however, they are not, nor will ever become, my very person. (penny sinking now?) They have the nature of me as their father, but they are not the person of me being their father. No, you just showed you have no cooking clue on inheritance and definitions.....you so out of your depth its no wonder you overcompensate with insults. I actually dont even feel sorry for you, because you dont even look to acknowledge how vain you are....theres simply no excuse for your lack of class. Your over zealousness is out of control....and its not from God.

Sure, Ephraim would be a prime example, yet it was still done in a paternal way. I didnt need to address it as it never addressed the paternal issue, hence way I stated you present only half truths. It never addressed the issue that sonship and resurrection are similarly connected. That makes no sense, if God is using comparison in terms we can understand, then how can we not draw a one on one comparison since that is how we understand.....no, what we find is your replays are shallow. But then again I had no idea im dealing with the worlds greatest biblical scholar. Please give your vanity are rest. This loses sight of the fact that Christ chose this as his metaphor to address God and that he taught this as the metaphor by which his disciples should address God. It also loses sight of the continuity established by the use of this metaphor with those who have called God "Father" and children. Gal 4:6 6 Because you are his sons, God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, the Spirit who calls out, “Abba, Father It also shows God as a father when we deal with Jer 31 Is not Ephraim my dear son, the child in whom I delight? The very same message taught by Christ in the parable of the prodigal son with the father son paternal relationship. With all the emotions provoked as a father would in a one on one comparison. 5 The Spirit you received does not make you slaves, so that you live in fear again; rather, the Spirit you received brought about your adoption to sonship.And by him we cry, “Abba, Father Again we have this family dynamics being taught Not in a sexual way but clearly in the intended paternal spirtual way. Again losing site. INCORRUPTION is the quality of a body that is not subject to decay, ruin, or destruction. Christ body was clearly ruined at the cross, it was so damages that Christ didnt even resemble a human, Christ grew old didnt he? Did Christ not go through puberty? Did Christ still have his baby teeth? Of cause his body was subject to decay because it was not immortal it was at His transfiguration that Christ body became glorified immortal. This is just a poor example, of cause im not going to be the exact of my father, thats naturally impossible. However God wants children after his kind Beloved, now we are the children of God; and it has not yet been revealed what we shall be, but we know that when He is revealed, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is As coinheritors with Christ, we will receive dominion over all things, including the entire vast universe—dominion just as Christ has Romans 8:17; Hebrews 2:5-9; Revelation 21:7. To truly exercise dominion over all things requires the omnipotent power of God. 1 Corinthians 13:12 For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known Showing that we will possess the omniscience of God. And why not, for we will have the Holy Spirit, the mind of God We will be filled with all the fullness of God (Ephesians 3:19; Colossians 1:19;Colossians 2:9). How can someone be filled with all the fullness of God and be anything less than God? Therefore, at our ultimate change, we too will be divine—though the Father and Christ will forever be greater than us. There are obviously limits Oh and as for Psalms 82:6, a christ taught the meaning. No its heretical to teach otherwise. yes and soon He will be the only God over gods.

Certianly it deals with Christ surpremecy, clearly a firstborn will have surpremecy however you still have neglected to wash away the natural meaning of the words father and son. So all we have from you is half truths with half a picture. If God wished to display only a ranking system, God would not have chosen the natural parental ranking system of a family..... Duh? And yet you wish to question intellect? And yet His body was still subject to decay and death. That doesnt even make sense on any level, you either participating or youre not. Through these he has given us his very great and precious promises, so that through them you may participate in the divine nature, having escaped the corruption in the world caused by evil desires. Participate is actually the word become. The phrase participate in the divine nature, the word "the" is added in, the word "in" is actually of. The verse really reads Through these he has given us his very great and precious promises, so that through them you may become of/in divine nature , having escaped the corruption in the world caused by evil desires. We are either of divine nature to escaping the corruption of the world or we not of divine nature escaping the corruption of the world. We who have received Christ have been born of God, and we have the right to become the children of God. At this very moment we are the children of God 1 John 3:2 Every child has the life and nature of his father. This is simply a fact of life. If Paul can use the facts of nature to explain the resurrection, we cant usethe facts if nature of lifw to explain our nature with God? To come out and state man wont be divine is heresy since we are taking on the very divine life and the divine nature of our Father. Hebrews 2:11 says, “For both he that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all of one: for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren Christ can not call us brethern if we are not of the same nature.

Yes it does Colossians 1:18 And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. Then God should never have used the paternal talks like Father and Son? And Christ should never have used talks like brother All showing a family concept with God and his many soon to be children. What you doing is taking the title Son of God, removing the the word Son and having just the word God. The title Son no longer refers to a family connection but now an estranged connection. It is complete heresy. And now you deny the redemption of Christ body 1 jn 3:2 . But we know that when Christ appears, we shall be like him Please stop contradicting scripture How can christ be the only begotten Son of God when you just stated their is no paternal relationship? Heb 11:17 By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son By such logic on biblical definitions Isaac and Jacob werent paternal it was only ranking..... Think again 2 Peter 1:4 ► Verse (Click for Chapter) New International Version Through these he has given us his very great and precious promises, so that through them you may participate in the divine nature, having escaped the corruption in the world caused by evil desires Psalm 82:6 "I said, 'You are "gods"; you are all sons of the Most High

What utter nonsense, how anyone cant see sonship out 1 Cor 1:18 as a family connection is completely mindboggling. Sonship and resurrection are similarly connected Luke 20:36; and they can no longer die; for they are like the angels. They are God's children, since they are children of the resurrection. What you dictate is Christ is not a child of God, making Christ no longer a child of the resurrection. Which is high ranked heresy. Romans 1:4; and who through the Spirit of holiness was appointed the Son of God in power[a] by his resurrection from the dead: Jesus Christ our Lord. Repercussions no longer means Son of God carries a familyship Romans8:23; 23 Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption to sonship, the redemption of our bodies Further repercussions we are no longer children or have sonships with god in a relationship but only carry an estranged title. 1John 3:2 Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when Christ appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is. Which ia to say a child of God like Christ.....which you deny.

God actually did 2 Chronicles 7 When Solomon finished praying, fire came down from heaven and consumed the burnt offering and the sacrifices, and the glory of the Lord filled the temple. 2 The priests could not enter the temple of the Lord because the glory of the Lord filled it. 1 Kings 8: 12 Then Solomon said, “The Lord has said that he would dwell in a dark cloud You think you can figure out God is omnipresent? The Jews (Judah) werw boasting about the temple as if it gave them special access to God, in spite of their wicked behavior. Stephen is showing them that the main issue is not the place where they worshiped, but rather having their hearts right before the Person of the Holy Creator. He was reminding them of the fact God could be worshipped anywhere and not just ina temple. The Jews in Jeremiah’s day had done the same thing. Jer. 7:9-10 (NET) 7:9 You steal. You murder. You commit adultery. You lie when you swear on oath. You sacrifice to the god Baal. You pay allegiance to other gods whom you have not previously known. 10 Then you come and stand in my presence in this temple I have claimed as my own and say, “We are safe!” You think you are so safe that you go on doing all those hateful sins! stand in my presence in this temple please allow that to sink in Please stay away from prophecy, you do not have the emorional temperament for it.

Where does Solomon claim he knew God wouldnt dwell in the temple? You're force fitting your opinion into Solomon's mouth. All you have is Solomon not comprehending how God could dwell in the temple 12 Then Solomon said, “The Lord has said that he would dwell in a dark cloud; 13 I have indeed built a magnificent temple for you, a place for you to dwell forever.” A place for you to dwell, should we just sweep this verse under the carpet? Here we have Ezekiel seeing Gods shekinah (you might want to look that word up) leaving the 1st temple before the destruction of the 1st temple. Ezekiel 10:18 Then the glory of the Lord departed from over the threshold of the temple and stopped above the cherubim. A theme which we see reoccurring of God dwelling in the tabernacle. In the very first tabernacle we see God dwelling in the tent. Ex 39:34 Then the cloud covered the tent of meeting, and the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle. 35 Moses could not enter the tent of meeting because the cloud had settled on it, and the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle. Then God moved to the first temple 2 Chronicles 7 When Solomon finished praying, fire came down from heaven and consumed the burnt offering and the sacrifices, and the glory of the Lord filled the temple. 2 The priests could not enter the temple of the Lord because the glory of the Lord filled it. Then God leaves the 1st temple as per Ezekiel then God returns to the second temple luke 2:48 49 “Why were you searching for me?” he asked. “Didn’t you know I had to be in my Father’s house ‘And whoever swears by the temple swears by it and by Him who dwells on that place.’ (Matthew 23:21 Then God leaves the second temple Matthew 23:38 Look, your house is left to you desolate Then the tabernacle/ temple becomes Christ They replied, "It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and you are going to raise it in three days?" This is why in Revelation 21:22 you find the following I did not see a temple in the city, because the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are its temple Without this background you have no chance of understanding Haggai 2 prophecy. The glory of this present house will be greater than the glory of the former house,’ says the Lord Almighty. ‘And in this place I will grant peace,’ declares theLord Almighty.” This is a prophecy of Christ, and was fullfilled by Christ when he walked into the temple as High priest. The temple for which you claim must be built so the antichrist my desecrate doesnt even come close to fulfilling this prophecy. . 18 ‘From this day on, from this twenty-fourth day of the ninth month, give careful thought to the day when the foundation of the Lord’s temple was laid. Give careful thought The jews in this regard neglected to finish the 2nd temple hence Haggai call to prophecy. Is there yet any seed left in the barn? Until now, the vine and the fig tree, the pomegranate and the olive tree have not borne fruit. (Prophecy of believers in Christ) From this day on I will bless you.’” Fulfilled when they completed the second temple. Acts 14:17New International Version (NIV) 17 Yet he has not left himself without testimony: He has shown kindness by giving you rain from heaven and crops in their seasons; he provides you with plenty of food and fills your hearts with joy.” The entire prophecy looks at the neglect to complete the second temple and looks towards Christ amd the body of Christ leading all the way to the shaking of heavens hence the gap in the two visions 20 The word of the Lord came to Haggai a second time on the twenty-fourth day of the month: 21 “Tell Zerubbabel governor of Judah that I am going to shake the heavens and the earth. 22 I will overturn royal thrones and shatter the power of the foreign kingdoms. I will overthrow chariots and their drivers; horses and their riders will fall, each by the sword of his brother. A second time isnt part of the first time, two seperate visions. Something I really don't understand with the preteib cults.....you guys are far to obssessed with character assassinations, what do you hope to achieve? That this verse is going to magically just disappear by attacking my character? I have indeed built a magnificent temple for you, a place for you to dwell forever.

Are you denying that God dwelt in the first and second temple? "When the priests came out of the sanctuary -- for the cloudl had filled the House of the LORD and the priests were not able to remain and perform the services be cause of the cloud, for the Presence of the LORD filled the House of the LORD -- then Solomon declared: 'The LORD has chosen to abide in a thick cloud: I have now built for you a stately House, a place where You may dwell forever (I Kings 8:10-13). Matthew 23:38 Look, your house is left to you desolate luke 2:48 49 “Why were you searching for me?” he asked. “Didn’t you know I had to be in my Father’s house ‘And whoever swears by the temple swears by it and by Him who dwells on that place.’ (Matthew 23:21) Love to see how you going to solve this paradox now. The whole point of both the first and second temple being glories was due to the presence of God.....how can your fabled 3rd temple before Christ arrive be more glories than the 1st and second temple without the presence of God? Its a simple question. You are not above testing....sorry to tell you, honestly what did you expect by posting on this forum? Everyone just to agree with you, and not question your interpretations? So basically you throw your toys out the cot because I have the nerve to test your interpretation, ask you to answer a question which apparently Im demanding, then tell me to go read the bible? None of that answered my question, I asked you, that you need to show me that I am not allowed to have a gap between the first time and the second time the Lord came to Haggai. Simple questions

The word of the Lord came to Haggai a second time on the twenty-fourth day of the month: 21 “Tell Zerubbabel governor of Judah that I am going to shake the heavens and the earth. 22 I will overturn royal thrones and shatter the power of the foreign kingdoms. I will overthrow chariots and their drivers; horses and their riders will fall, each by the sword of his brother. You need to show me that I am not allowed to have a gap between the first time and the second time the Lord came to Haggai

Let me clear something up here for you, im not a teacher, nor do I go around claiming to be such..... Im a student of the word of God, i study, i share and I test and I test and I test and I test. And you are in no position to tell me I have no right to ask you questions and test what you state is true

Im at fault, I was under the impression you were using Ezra3 for the 3rd temple and not the second temple, you could of just clarefied that a little abit better. Hence why I stated a ressurection would be needed for those who saw the first temple were going to build a 3rd temple. Oh but I am..... Acts 17:11 Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true. And 1 Thessalonians 5:21 New International Version but test them all; hold on to what is good, In order for your 3rd temple to work it needs to be more glorified than the previous two. Both the previous temple had God dwelling in them....in order to be glorified in the first place Now please show me with Haggai 2:18-22 as I am commanded to test all things and examine scriptures of what you say is true..... where or what scripture do you have of God dwelling in the 3rd temple that the antichrist is going to desecrate, in order to be more glorified than the previous two?

Really, both the second and first temple had God dwelling in the temple......please show us how the Third temple, the one the antichrist is to desecrate is going to exceed this?

old men who had seen the first temple, wept with a loud voice when the foundation of this temple was laid

Can you please back up that the following is misrepresented facts....im salivating for your factual response. Cuneiform tablets discovered near the Ishtar gate in Babylon gives the biblical account in 2Kings 25:27-29 : Yaukin, king of the land of Yahud,("Jehoiachin, the king of the land of Judah") The New Unger's Bible Dictionary Also, a family of Jewish businessmen living in the Mesopotamian city of Kippur in the fifth century BC left behind a collection of clay tablets. The clay tablets, known as the Murashu documents, contain vowels and list the names of about 70 Jewish settlers in Persia. The Hebrew names which begin with יהו (Yod Heh Waw) are all written "Yahu-" and never "Yeho". "In the cuneiform texts Yeho [YHW], Yo [YW] and Yah [YH] are written Yahu, as for example in the names Jehu (Yahu-a), Jehoahaz (Yahu-khazi) and Hezekiah (Khazaqi-yahu)" A. H. Sayce in "Higher Criticism" on p. 87 "The evidence from the Murashu documents thus corresponds to that from other sources: after the Exile the ordinary form of the divine name used as an initial theophorous element was yahu" "Patterns in Jewish Personal Names in the Babylonian Diaspora" JSJ, Vol. 4 Issue 2 Pg. 188 Notice that not only were names beginning with "Yeho" written as "Yahu", but also names beginning with "Yo" such as "Yochanan" (John) and "Yoel" (Joel) were written as "Yahu". This indicates John and Joel were originally pronounced "Yahuchanan" and "Yahuel". Also found was an inscription of the Assyrian monarch Tiglath-pileser III (Gressmann Bilder 348; ANET 282a). When listing those kings who were paying tribute to this Assyrian King, it mentions "Yauhazi", also known as "Ahaz".

Not what I say, its what archeology states.....let me guess you're an archeologist as well? Cuneiform tablets discovered near the Ishtar gate in Babylon gives the biblical account in 2Kings 25:27-29 : Yaukin, king of the land of Yahud,("Jehoiachin, the king of the land of Judah") The New Unger's Bible Dictionary Also, a family of Jewish businessmen living in the Mesopotamian city of Kippur in the fifth century BC left behind a collection of clay tablets. The clay tablets, known as the Murashu documents, contain vowels and list the names of about 70 Jewish settlers in Persia. The Hebrew names which begin with יהו (Yod Heh Waw) are all written "Yahu-" and never "Yeho". "In the cuneiform texts Yeho [YHW], Yo [YW] and Yah [YH] are written Yahu, as for example in the names Jehu (Yahu-a), Jehoahaz (Yahu-khazi) and Hezekiah (Khazaqi-yahu)" A. H. Sayce in "Higher Criticism" on p. 87 "The evidence from the Murashu documents thus corresponds to that from other sources: after the Exile the ordinary form of the divine name used as an initial theophorous element was yahu" "Patterns in Jewish Personal Names in the Babylonian Diaspora" JSJ, Vol. 4 Issue 2 Pg. 188 Notice that not only were names beginning with "Yeho" written as "Yahu", but also names beginning with "Yo" such as "Yochanan" (John) and "Yoel" (Joel) were written as "Yahu". This indicates John and Joel were originally pronounced "Yahuchanan" and "Yahuel". Also found was an inscription of the Assyrian monarch Tiglath-pileser III (Gressmann Bilder 348; ANET 282a). When listing those kings who were paying tribute to this Assyrian King, it mentions "Yauhazi", also known as "Ahaz".

Sorry not the complete picture.....Sheva is used by the scribes that it is why you will sometimes see "Yehoshua" or "Yeshua" written as "Y'hoshua" and "Y'shua". The purpose of this is to indicate the presence of the sheva vowel point in Hebrew. But Yeshua does not contain that vowel at all. Yeshua uses the Tsere vowel. Again you continually expose yourself.

I have archeological evidence on the use of vowels ?