For a fact, the CHRIST only existed for 3 years, after the dove landed on the shoulder of Christ at His baptism from John. Jesus lived for 30ish years before that. Jesus was no where in the OT. Rather the WORD from the OT and before creation, became manifest as Jesus/Joshua and had a reason to do so, a big part of that was to train those that would build His Church upon the rock that Christ was the son of God.
He is the pre-existent WORD. Also, in speaking of the Christ, read Heb 9:26 He was from the foundation of the world. Don't blame me if the word of God doesn't suit your theology...just not my fault.
John 1 is your pre-existant Word verse. The Christ isn't said in the verse to have existed.
It's a comparison say, OTHER WISE HE WOULD HAVE NEEDED TO suffer from the foundation... it's a conditional statement. A hypothetical observation. I don't blame you that the word of God says what it says. We are certainly safe there.
Hbr 9:26 Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested to put away sin
[fn24]by the sacrifice of Himself.
Gal 3:7. says :"Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham. " Noah? as one born out of time.
Do you think noah was a son of abraham?
Why do you think the word FAITH is the determinant of the Church in the NT? Why do you think that word, anywhere it is used is proof of a link to the NT? I have faith my chair will work when I sit on it. (albeit not as much faith as I used to have...) Is that use of FAITH a link to the NT church? You have people of faith, ALL THROUGH the OT, but it's not a faith in Jesus Christ on the cross, but on God keeping His promises. When the law was given the Jews, there were promises with them. The Jews of that time, didn't have faith in the law, they had faith in GOD to honor the format He laid out through the law.
Really? You do know the full counsel of God don't you! For what does the Scripture say? Heb 9:22. "Indeed, under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins." And, Jesus says as recorded in Matt 26:28. "For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins." and again in Mark 14:24. Jesus said it (there are two witnesses), I believe it, that settles it.
I'm officially lost. Who said that the blood of Christ wasn't the format God chose to help us realize our sins could be forgiven? Why is this relevant to anything I said, I certainly haven't denied or contradicted this?
hehe, forgive me, but I gotta....
one has.
but I think suffice to say that you need to let the word of God fashion your theological understanding. Don't get bogged down on words and their temporal positioning by mere humans. The Church might only be mentioned by that specific name in the New Testament, the Body/Bride of Christ the same.
Yeah, words don't mean nuttin. You can just make them say whatever you want. I get it. :|
So what! Even Messiah is only forecast by name as late as the life of Daniel. However as later revelation shows, He, the Messiah was from the foundation of the World.
You can only say that by not being bogged down in words. The term messiah, only applied to the man for 3 years. Before that He was Jesus the carpenter. And that takes NOTHING away from His divinity. It merely denotes the stage of His life he was in. His carpetry time was totally separate from His Messianic life.
You might not want to look at it as God being omnipotent, but the truth is He has been at work providing for the saving of people ever since Adam and Eve messed up in the Garden in Eden.
Why do you imply I don't find God omnipotent? I assure you he's much less limited in my theology than yours! In my theological understanding HE does things that (I think) yours denies flat out.
Yup, even Cain and Abel were into sacrificing to God.
As a thanks, not to forgive sins. It doesn't compare. But there we go with words again, don't let them bog us down...
Things didn't wait till Abraham came along or Moses, or Paul. God was in there, sleeves rolled up providing for fallen mankind from the start.
No one has said God hasn't been there from the beginning, nor that He was inactive.
I'm missing the argument that ties all of this faith, to the Church. That was my claim, when the Church started. I don't see much reason to chase this tangent in this thread with you. You ignored paragrpahs 2-7, not even a comment to address them. That means, we aren't talking with each other.
Have a good day.