[URL=http://www.themoorings.org/apologetics/prophecy/VirginBirth/Jerem.html]]]Demonstration That the Prophecy is Messianic[/URL] The context is Messianic. The prophet introduces a Messianic motif some verses earlier 31:15 Jeremiah sets Israel's restoration in the future Messianic age Jeremiah 33:14-17 In light of Isaiah's more explicit prophecy, we understand what Jeremiah means. He also is predicting that an unworthy mortal will be the mother of Almighty God in the flesh.
note my use of a quote of YOU with a good example of fair use of the ellipsis.. I'm focused on the words 'virgin birth' as earlier when [URL=http://www.icr.org/article/375/]]]Morris cites Hebrews[/URL] --- despite `papal decree', Henry M. Morris was not bound to a DJC49 edict that a verse cited can't use an ellipse. re:the blood of Christ
"in all things . . . made like unto His brethren" (Hebrews 2:17). From conception to death, He must be "in all points . . . like as we are, yet without sin" (Heb 4:15). In particular, His blood must be "precious blood . . . as of a lamb without blemish and without spot" (I Pet 1:19), for that blood must be "offered . . . without spot.."Heb.9:14) Heb.9 ABOUT blood-9:22 after all
[URL=http://www.chick.com/bc/2004/ecumenism.asp]]]FATIMA worshipped by RCC and Islam[/URL] After the first story in the link talks of U.S. schools teaching Muslim doctrine, the 3rd post tells why RCC would be friendly to Islam.
"Millions of pilgrims visit the Fatima shrine each year where the Virgin Mary goddess appeared to three children nearly 100 years ago. Delegates to the annual "Vatican and UN inspired" gathering were told that the shrine was to be revamped.
The shrines rector, Monsignor Luciano Guerra, stated: "The future of Fatima, or the adoration of God and His mother at this holy Shrine, must pass through the creation of a shrine where different religions can mingle."
One delegate told the congress that "...already in the Far East, millions of Hindus are getting 'positive vibrations' from visiting Marian shrines without endangering their faith." Others spoke of the fact that Muhammad had a daughter named "Fatima."
Dupuis argued that the other "religious traditions" were part of God's plan and "the Holy Spirit is operating and present in Buddhist, Hindu, and other sacred writings" and shared in the "same mystery of salvation. In the end it is hoped that the Christian will be a better Christian and each Hindu a better Hindu." "
1Cor 15:45-49 begins with Christ's type of body:15:38 "But God giveth it a body as it hath pleased him, and to every seed his own body."
this 1 Corinthians passage pertains to the type of Body of Christ? A THOUSAND times YaY!!! It is VITAL and ESSENTIAL for our salvation that Christ took part "flesh and blood" in all points ... YET WITHOUT SIN of "the children". Our Kinsman Redeemer was not as poor as Ruth, but wealthy and powerful, and able to lift her up.
The Lord Jesus Christ was the 2nd Adam from the moment He came to earth, as detailed [URL=http://www.icr.org/article/76/]]]here- at the creation of the 2nd Adam [/URL]
To say Christ only became 2nd Adam at the resurrection is derivative of the logic that led to the modern false 'bibles' that separated Jesus from Christ- [URL=http://www.truthquest.free-online.co.uk/jm_tds02.htm]]]What Lies Behind This Separation? Adoptionism[/URL]
"The idea that Jesus would have been tainted by sin except He was virgin-born has no basis in Scripture. " This rank error is taught by the link that DJC49 and ML recommended -by extolling McGeown his supporters spread error. again- DJC49/ML do you still agree that "The idea that Jesus would have been tainted by sin except He was virgin-born has no basis in Scripture. "
The church is bought by "God, which he hath purchased with hihis own blood."Acts 20:28 and as Paisley notes, this is the meaning of -1 John 5:8, 9 cited in his 5th reason (about 1/2 way thru his message) [URL=http://www.whatsaiththescripture.com/The.Holy.Bible/Reasons7_Atoning_Blood.html]]]the blood[/URL]
The body of the 2nd Adam though 'of no reputation' Phil.2:7 and so veiled before his resurrection, was seen to be the body of the Christ, the God/man when manifested as the Lord of Glory in Matt. 17's transfiguration.
[URL=http://www.icr.org/article/375/]]] God-Man by Morris [/URL] "From conception to death, He must be "in all points ...like as we are, yet without sin" (Hebrews 4:15). In particular, His blood must be "precious blood . . . as of a lamb without blemish and without spot" I Pet1:19,for that blood must be "offered...without spot to God"Heb 9:14. Thus the body of the second Adam must be formed directly by God and placed in a virgin's womb. "The LORD hath created a new thing in the earth, a woman shall compass a man" Jer31:22. Note that the "new thing" in the chosen woman must be "created." "...a body hast thou prepared me" Heb 10:5
Jim Lincoln wrote: Why, Engineer, that doesn't sound like a disaster, that sounds exciting! But then that would mean that [URL=http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/04/obama_the_savior.html]]]Obama the Savior[/URL], wouldn't get in!
Yes, exciting, but remember the old Chinese curse... "may you live in interesting times."
ml wrote: Heb 2:14a Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same... Engineer, if Christ's blood is divine then what does the verse above mean?
Heb 2:14a Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same...
he also himself likewise took part of the same "flesh and blood" stop ,
period, (that is, it is error for a creed to teach that the Lord Jesus Christ took part of "the children" of the 1st Adam. As I cited,1 Cor.15:45-49 "And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual..." I think as does Paisley, cited prev. post, that this is part of the plan of God."flesh&blood"of 2nd Adam
I point out the errors of your link's cite of Hoeksema, & Article 13 of the Belgic Confession when they say Jesus took part of the flesh "of the children" of fallen Adam & Eve. see 9/29/08 3:27 PM
your cite's wrong to say "the idea that Jesus would have been tainted by sin except He was virgin-born has no basis in Scripture"
"The idea that Jesus would have been tainted by sin except He was virgin-born has no basis in Scripture. "
This rank error is taught by the link that DJC49 and ML recommended as correcting the 'heresy' of Ian Paisley,Rev. John Greer,Rev. Thomas Martin & Dr. Alan Cairns and also Jack Hyles, R. L. Hymers, the Bob Joneses, Rod Bell ,D. A. Waite,Dr. J. Hymers, Jr,Dr. M. R. De Haan ,Calvin Ray Evans, (all named as "Heretic"in the paper that DJC49 said would be so good to 'study') and also, DJC49, used the paper's type logic to denounce "Henry Morris's Christological heresy" along with Christiananswers.net's Paul S. Taylor.
IMHO by extolling McGeown his supporters spread error. [URL=http://www.christiananswers.net/dictionary/mary-motherofjesus.html]]] summary-Taylor[/URL]
ml wrote: No, I don't think they are antichrists but I do think they are in great error regarding this very important matter.
Well, that is sure a lot better than McGeown's terms... But this looks like an excellent statement to me- [URL=http://www.whatsaiththescripture.com/The.Holy.Bible/Reasons7_Atoning_Blood.html]]]7 reasons I believe in THE ATONING BLOOD OF CHRIST[/URL] FIFTH REASON: THE ATONING BLOOD OF CHRIST LIES AT THE HEART OF THE THREE-FOLD WITNESS ON EARTH
"And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one. If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater: for this is the witness of God which he hath testified of his Son." 1 John 5:8, 9.
The witness of God on this earth to the fact that His Only Begotten Son, the Eternal Word, has come into the world, is the Spirit, the Water and the Blood.
Now the Spirit here spoken of is the Spirit of God. The Water is the Word of God. ("Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you." John 15:3. "The washing of water by the word." Ephesians 5:26.) The Blood is the Blood of God. "Feed the Church of God which He hath purchased with his own blood." Acts 20:28. "unparalleled in haematology"
ml this got buried, and I did want to know- do YOU think Cairns, Paisley,etc are antichrist(s)? as in the link you gave to the Blood of Christ by McGeown,
under #1(Gnosticism) Ian Paisley,Rev. John Greer,Rev. Thomas Martin & Dr. Alan Cairns and also Jack Hyles, R. L. Hymers, the Bob Joneses, Rod Bell ,D. A. Waite,Dr. J. Hymers, Jr,Dr. M. R. De Haan ,Calvin Ray Evans who all teach of Christ, that His blood was "divine and human" are "of antichrist and his spirit."
blood of his cross Col. 1:20 faith in his blood Rom. 3:25 justified by his blood Rom. 5:9redemption through his blood Eph. 1:7; cf. Col 1:14; I Peter 1:17-18 nigh by the blood of Christ Eph. 2:13-cfHeb. 9:14 enter into the holiest by the blood Heb. 10:19sanctified with the blood Heb. 10:29sprinkled I Pet1:2cleansed I John 1:7 washed Rev. 1:5 all by the Blood- why? Acts 20:28: â€śfeed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.â€ť
DJC49 backed away from his commending this link where it is calling them 'antichrists' (before he got into the latest calling Henry Morris/Paul S. Taylor, etc, heretics)
Since he didn't say otherwise, I'd assume he agrees with you link that Cairns, Paisley, etc. are heretics in this area. Do you think they are heretics,TOO, as the paper alleges?
DJC49 wrote: fundamental mistake Christ's physical body had to be without inherent or apparent flaw [Isaiah 53:2]
No beauty - This the prophet speaks in the person of the unbelieving Jews. AND the unbelieving DJC49?
"As a root - And the reason why the Jews will generally reject their Messiah, is, because he shall not come into the world with secular pomp, but he shall grow up, (or spring up, out of the ground) before him, (before the unbelieving Jews, of whom he spake ver.1, and that in the singular number, as here, who were witnesses of his mean original; and therefore despised him) as a tender plant (small and inconsiderable) and as a root, or branch, grows out of a dry, barren ground. No form - His bodily presence shall be mean and contemptible. No beauty - This the prophet speaks in the person of the unbelieving Jews. We - Our people, the Jewish nation. " Matthew Henry
Hard to miss the context: the cross of Christ, and the mocking of the pagan Jews, now echoed by our our DJC49, to my disgust.
prefaced by- 52:14 As many were astonied at thee; his visage was so marred more than any man, and his form more than the sons of men"-53:5
DJC49 wrote: Jesus was NOT of a "new" line of humanity with NO physical connection to Adam's descendants
15:45-49 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from heaven. As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly. And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.
It's unfortunate that DCJ49 believes in a Redeemer who of necessity MUST be related to all of fallen evil sinful mankind based on the fact that DCJ49 believes He shares in our common fallen evil sinful humanity and who wasn't a "special creation" with absolutely NO CONNECTION genetically to any fallen evil sinful man or fallen evil sinful woman. Not Adam.Not Mary. DCJ49'S Christ does NOT fulfill Scripture. Morris's& Taylor's Christ does.
Mat 24:24 "For there shall arise false Christs, and FALSE PROPHETS, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if [it were] possible, they shall deceive the very elect."
God announced very early that His plan for redemption involved the Messiah being brought forth from the tribe of Judah, and specifically from the line of David. The succession of subsequent kings proved to be, with only a few exceptions, a dismal chain. As the succeeding kings of Judah went from bad to worse, we eventually encounter Jeconiah (also known as Jehoiachin), upon whom God pronounces a " blood curse" : "Thus saith the Lord, Write ye this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days: for no man of his seed shall prosper, sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling any more in Judah."(Jeremiah 22:30)
This curse created a rather grim and perplexing paradox: the Messiah had to come from the royal line, yet now there was a "blood curse" on that very line of descent! (I always visualize a celebration in the councils of Satan on that day. But then I imagine God turning to His angels, saying, "Watch this one!")
The Solution The answer emerges in the differing genealogies of Jesus Christ recorded in the gospels. [URL=http://www.khouse.org/articles/1998/73/]]]Chuck Missler on 2 geneologies[/URL] Moreover- Jesus, being of the blood line of Mary, still did not inherit her blood- Christiana had a good point 9/29/08 11:41 AM Babies have different blood!
â€śJoseph was clearly the son of Jacob (Matthew 1:16, so this verse [Luke 3:23 - says â€śson of Heliâ€ť] should be understood to mean â€śson-in-law of Heli.â€ť Thus, the genealogy of Christ in Luke is actually the genealogy of Mary, while Matthew gives that of Joseph. .... Since Matthew and Luke clearly record much common material, it is certain that neither one could unknowingly incorporate such a flagrant apparent mistake as the wrong genealogy in his record. As it is, however, the two genealogies show that both parents were descendants of Davidâ€”Joseph through Solomon (Matthew 1:7-15), thus inheriting the legal right to the throne of David, and Mary through Nathan (Luke 3:23-31), her line thus carrying the seed of David, since Solomonâ€™s line had been refused the throne because of Jechoniahâ€™s sinâ€ť [Dr. Henry M. Morris, The Defenderâ€™s Study Bible, note for Luke 3:23 (Iowa Falls, Iowa: World Publishing, Inc., 1995).]. [URL=http://www.christiananswers.net/dictionary/mary-motherofjesus.html]]]Jesus was legally related to both parents -Taylor [/URL] Jesus was clearly legally related to both parents,PHYSICALLY born of Mary, with NO inherited genetic/sin defects . [URL=http://www.everlastinglifeministries.com/genesis/genealogy.asp]]]The Combined Genealogies of Matthew and Luke[/URL]
was (Jesus) genetically related to them or to his brothers and sisters? "For thousands of years, every human child has been born with an inherited sin nature and sinful flesh Rom8:3. This is a result of our sinful first parents, Adam and Eve to whom we are all genetically related. Each generation(without exception) has sinned (Rom. 3:23)and passed on its sinful nature and the curse of death,to each succeeding generation(the biblical doctrine of imputation of sin-Rom 5:12-19).There is only one exception in history. Although Jesus grew in the womb of Mary,in the same manner as any baby,he was different from all other babies. It appears that he was not genetically related to either Mary or Joseph, for both had an inherited sin nature. Jesus was sinless, and one may reasonably assume without genetic flaw, since he was to serve as the spotless and sacrificial Lamb of God.
Ever since the Creation, each subsequent life has been created at the moment of conception.Scientifically, the new entity begins at the moment the DNA of man and woman combine. This was not the case with Jesus.As a spirit and part of the Trinity,Jesus existed before the Creation of the world."
Therefore, even though He was nurtured in Mary's womb for nine months and born without her ever knowing a man, it was also necessary for all this to have been preceded by supernatural intervention, to prevent His receiving any actual genetic inheritance through her. The body growing in Mary's womb must have been specially created in full perfection, and placed there by the Holy Spirit, in order for it to be free of inherent sin damage. Christ would still be "made of the seed of David according to the flesh" (Romans 1:3), because His body was nurtured and born of Mary, who was herself of the seed of David. He would still be the Son of Man, sharing all universal human experience from conception to death, except sin. He is truly "the seed of the woman" (Genesis 3:15), His body formed neither of the seed of the man nor the egg of the woman, but grown from a unique Seed planted in the woman's body by God Himself.
That is, God directly formed a body for the second Adam just as He had for the first Adam (Genesis 2:7). This was nothing less than a miracle of creation, capable of accomplishment only by the Creator Himself. "That holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God" (Luke 1:35). www.icr.org/article/76/
Neil wrote: *any* fossil sequence, not matter how complete, cannot prove anything, for they are based upon fallacious inductive reasoning.
Since every major museum USES this "fallacious inductive reasoning" to indoctrinate in a lie, it is only logical to point out with as much of a grandstanding point as possible, that they are lying. Or you can use humor. [URL=http://www.evolutionfairytale.com/cleanerf.htm]]]the cleaner fish... how did it 'evolve'?[/URL]
[URL=http://www.evolutionfairytale.com/giraffe1.htm]]]How did the Giraffe evolve (graphic humor!)[/URL]
[URL=http://www.evolutionfairytale.com/whale1.htm]]]The whale, now more popular than the horse as 'proof' from fossils[/URL]
[URL=http://www.evolutionfairytale.com/articles_debates/fossil_illusion.htm]]]Exposing the Evolutionistâ€™s Sleight-of-Hand With the Fossil Record[/URL] "One of the most effective pitches evolutionists use to sell their theory is their claim that the fossil record supports evolution. This could not be farther from the truth; in fact the fossil record provides powerful and overwhelming evidence that evolution did not occur on earth. So how is the evolutionist able to effectively sell to their audience the precise opposite of what the data shows?" TRICKERY!
[URL=http://www.sbcbaptistpress.org/bpnews.asp?ID=23372]]]Birth of twins, formerly frozen embryos[/URL] "Embryo adoption, Adam said, was an answer to prayer." Speaking of name coincidences
thus, a modern 'type' of what Paul S. Taylor, Henry M. Morris,& others (affiliated with ICR&Christiananswers) believe- non-DNA kids!
Henry Morris, PH.D. asserts that there was a distinct and TOTALLY separate "new creation" of Christ's physical human nature apart from ANY connection with "fallen evil sinful" humanity. Christ had NO CONNECTION with "fallen evil sinful" mankind through DNA either from an earthly "fallen evil" father OR "fallen evil" mother! Therefore, Christ is NOT one of us "fallen evil sinful" and can save; He's NO"W" our Kinsman Redeemer.
this, compared to the erroneous mischaracterization of Morris in 9/29/08 10:03 AM shows the logic of [URL=http://www.christiananswers.net/dictionary/mary-motherofjesus.html]]]Paul S. Taylor[/URL]
"Although Jesus grew in the womb of Mary, in the same manner as any baby, he was different from all other babies. It appears that he was not genetically related to either Mary or Joseph, for both had an inherited sin nature. Jesus was sinless, and one may reasonably assume without genetic flaw"
[URL=http://www.learnthebible.org/creation_science_cambrian_explosion_disproves_evolution.htm]]]disproving evolution - the â€śCambrian Explosionâ€ť[/URL] "One of the most remarkable pieces of evidence disproving evolution is the â€śCambrian Explosionâ€ť Most textbooks never mention it, and the ones that do relegate it to a short phrase or paragraph as if it is some insignificant detail. This phenomenon is so pronounced in the fossil record that Scientific American called it â€ślifeâ€™s big bang.â€ť It is considered one of the biggest challenges to evolutionary theory. Many reputable and highly accomplished scientists at major accredited universities worldwide say it is an insurmountable challenge. Moreover, I believe it is proof that evolution is merely a widely held myth of popular culture.
â€śCambrian explosionâ€ť refers to the great quantity and diversity of life found in what is called the Cambrian layer of the geologic column. The Cambrian age in the geologic time scale is dated by scientists as being about 530 million years old. What is really interesting is not just what is found in this layer, but what is found in the layers above it, and what is not found in layers under it. The Cambrian layer has virtually every phyla known to man."
DJC49 wrote: Paul S. Taylor Absolutely! Henry Morris They BOTH unquestionably hold to an unorthodox, heretical Christology.
websites that cite them as authority on this question agree with them. (Taylor teaches in his own words, then cites Morris & ICR for MORE about the subject...such as here: [URL=http://www.icr.org/article/76/]]]CREATION AND THE VIRGIN BIRTH [/URL]
Re: how the Christ is related to Abraham as his seed ?
well, How can GENTILES be related to Abraham?
Gal 3:7 "Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham. " Gal 3:9 So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham. "
AND note in this passage
Gal.3:17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ..."
In corrupt New Age versions, "in Christ" is dropped. Paul is talking about the covenant with Abraham through his seed which was Christ.
Gal 3:29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.
According to THIS anyone who is born again is now the seed of Abraham...
3:18 For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.
DJC49 wrote: This viewpoint is obviously heretical making Dr. Morris a HERETIC
mankind has the same father with the first Adam as the second: God.Luke 3:38"which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God. "
Jesus was "flesh and blood" -the same as us, but NOT the fallen "flesh and blood" of the 1st Adam
As not only Henry M. Morris, and the ICR organization teach, but also [URL=http://www.christiananswers.net/dictionary/mary-motherofjesus.html]]]christiananswers.net dictionary , Author: Paul S. Taylor[/URL] "neither Christâ€™s spirit nor his body must have resulted from the DNA of Maryâ€™s egg or from any manâ€™s sperm. Both would have contained inherited genetic defects and the sin nature. As Scripture tells us, Jesus was truly the Second Adam. The first Adam was a special creation of God (not related to any human being),and so was the second Adam (Rom 5:12-19).Jesus was just as fully human as the first Adam.And just like the first Adam,he had no sin nature, no inherited sin,no sinful flesh, which has always been passed from one generation to the next since Adam and Eveâ€™s sin." "He was absolutely pure and without sinâ€”..he was the Lamb of God, without blemish or spot, sacrificed for sins Jn.1:29"