Were Men Born Again Before Pentecost?

[TCassidy]

. We know it is recounted at a later date, but, that does not change the fact that all statements refer to statements by Christ, not John.

So, are you claiming that Christ claimed His human form was Omnipresent?

 

[Darrell C]

What part of the exception, "but he who descended" did you miss?

What part of the exception did you miss?

And then go on to equate this with Moses going up the mountain?

Which brings us back to the very same conclusion...no man has ascended into Heaven. You, and your source/s impose a retro interpretation that denies a present tense to the account, and even go so far as to infer that John is filling in the blanks.

You will not change the fact that Christ is said to state this at that time, and He is not speaking from a perspective of Post-Ascension.


God bless.

 

[TCassidy]

If it always refers to Christ being human then you have just cancelled out your argument.

You obviously have a serious problem understanding rather simple concepts. Christ's Human form was NOT Omnipresent. That is the crux of the entire point!

 

[Darrell C]

So, are you claiming that Christ claimed His human form was Omnipresent?

No, TC, I am claiming exactly what Christ Himself claimed...not John.

You ignore the passage I gave you, now address that passage and the question/s posed.


God bless.

 

[TCassidy]

And I would ask you, do you really take a view that Christ was not in Heaven from a perspective of His Deity?

Again, what part of "Jesus as being human" did you fail to understand?

 

[Darrell C]

You obviously have a serious problem understanding rather simple concepts. Christ's Human form was NOT Omnipresent. That is the crux of the entire point!

Christ is not limiting Himself to human form [Personal attack edited]. Either His statements are true, or they are not.

So far, I see [Personal attack edited].

You could easily settle this by answering the post.


God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

Again, what part of "Jesus as being human" did you fail to understand?

That is understood very well, it is a matter of God manifesting in the flesh, which still leaves us with an answer from you.

Answer the post.


God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

Just to clarify, I am waiting for an answer to this:

If it always refers to Christ being human then you have just cancelled out your argument.

And I would ask you, do you really take a view that Christ was not in Heaven from a perspective of His Deity?

Do the disciples actually see the Father?


John 14

King James Version (KJV)


8 Philip saith unto him, Lord, show us the Father, and it sufficeth us.

9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Show us the Father?

10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.


Are you saying that you do not believe that the Son was in the Father and the Father in the Son? Do you really separate God in this manner?

Please answer, that we not have to continue this round-about.


God bless.

 

[TCassidy]

What part of the exception did you miss?

None. I am the one who pointed it out to you.

And then go on to equate this with Moses going up the mountain?

Please post where I equated Jesus's Human form not being Omnipresent to Moses ascending the mountain. Thank you.

Which brings us back to the very same conclusion...no man has ascended into Heaven. You, and your source/s impose a retro interpretation that denies a present tense to the account, and even go so far as to infer that John is filling in the blanks.

Yes, I understand that Nicodemus, a teacher of Israel, understood the Mishna and Cumash ascribing to Moses the action of "ascending into heaven" to receive the decalogue. And I also understand the import of a Greek perfect tense verb.

And your dismissive comment that John's Gospel, Inspired by the Holy Spirit of God, and thus Infallible as merely being "John filling in the blanks" is very close to deny the Baptist distinctive of Biblical Authority. You might want to rethink that attack on God's word. It will not be tolerated.

You will not change the fact that Christ is said to state this at that time, and He is not speaking from a perspective of Post-Ascension.

The words are not Christ's words in the 1st person. They are John's words, Inspired by God in the perfect tense to show that John's comments, along with the rest of the Gospel of John, was inscripturated post ascension. God understand's Greek grammar and does not make foolish grammatical errors. He inspired a perfect tense verb. That verb is correct. Christ had ascended to Heaven in the past and remained in Heaven through the point the passage was inscripturated.

 

[TCassidy]

Please answer, that we not have to continue this round-about.

Asked and answered.

 

[TCassidy]

Christ is not limiting Himself [Personal attack edited].

Untrue. I don't limit God/Christ at all. But He has Self-limited His Humanity to NOT being Omnipresent. For the address "Son of Man" to be used, which refers to His Humanity, including His Human form, we must understand that He indicates that He, as "Son of Man" was not both in Heaven and on Earth, in His Physical, Human form, at the same time.

 

[TCassidy]

No, TC, I am claiming exactly what Christ Himself claimed.

Which was that, at the time of John's comments, He was already in Heaven and was still in Heaven when John penned His Gospel!

 

[TCassidy]

Nice dodge but you are ignoring that Moses going up the mountain is not in the text, which makes your view something imposed into the text.

Moses in the wilderness is the central theme of the passage. I really don't see how you could miss that?

 

[Darrell C]

None. I am the one who pointed it out to you.Please post where I equated Jesus's Human form not being Omnipresent to Moses ascending the mountain. Thank you.
Yes, I understand that Nicodemus, a teacher of Israel, understood the Mishna and Cumash ascribing to Moses the action of "ascending into heaven" to receive the decalogue. And I also understand the import of a Greek perfect tense verb.

And your dismissive comment that John's Gospel, Inspired by the Holy Spirit of God, and thus Infallible as merely being "John filling in the blanks" is very close to deny the Baptist distinctive of Biblical Authority. You might want to rethink that attack on God's word. It will not be tolerated.
The words are not Christ's words in the 1st person. They are John's words, Inspired by God in the perfect tense to show that John's comments, along with the rest of the Gospel of John, was inscripturated post ascension. God understand's Greek grammar and does not make foolish grammatical errors. He inspired a perfect tense verb. That verb is correct. Christ had ascended to Heaven in the past and remained in Heaven through the point the passage was inscripturated.

Okay, I see nothing that is not a repeat of what has already been discussed.

[Personal attack edited].

I will leave you to your theology.


God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

Which was that, at the time of John's comments, He was already in Heaven and was still in Heaven when John penned His Gospel!

Then John was in Heaven taking dictation?


God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

Untrue. I don't limit God/Christ at all. But He has Self-limited His Humanity to NOT being Omnipresent. For the address "Son of Man" to be used, which refers to His Humanity, including His Human form, we must understand that He indicates that He, as "Son of Man" was not both in Heaven and on Earth, in His Physical, Human form, at the same time.

[Personal attack edited].

You focus on His humanity because you know that if you take this reasoning to it's conclusion [Personal attack edited] in several places.

I am amazed, really, that [Personal attack edited].


God bless.

 

[TCassidy]

Then John was in Heaven taking dictation?

Okay, you have ceased all intelligent discussion and are just being deliberately obtuse.

End of discussion.

 

[Darrell C]

Moses in the wilderness is the central theme of the passage. I really don't see how you could miss that?

A reference to Moses lifting up the serpent as an example of the Cross equates to "Moses is a central theme of the passage?"

If you say so.

So how does this excuse imposing Moses going up the mountain to bring down truth? No such mention is made. There is no correlation between Moses going up the mountain to be found in the text. The example is the lifting up of the serpent.


God bless.

 

[TCassidy]

[Personal attack edited].

If you make such a false accusation against me again there will be consequences.

Be very careful how, or if, you respond. Anything other than an apology will be dealt with accordingly.

 

[Darrell C]

Okay, you have ceased all intelligent discussion and are just being deliberately obtuse.

End of discussion.

The discussion ended when you got to the point where you could not further support your view. It just took you a little while to catch on.

You need to give some serious consideration to [Personal attack edited]. Christ teaches this in a number of places, and [Personal attack edited].


God bless.