Pero ang dating naman sa akin nung sinasabi nila eh parang pinapalabas nila na ang Diyos (ang AMA) ay naghanda o gumawa ng katawan para kay Kristo, at nung oras na para bumaba ni Kristo (na nag-eexist na daw) ay sasanib siya doon sa katawan na inihanda ng Diyos para sa kaniya.
Ganun nga ba ang nangyari?
Sumanib ba siya sa isang katawang tao o IPINANGANAK SIYANG TAO?
Kung siya ay Diyos na nagkatawang tao, na nag eexist na bago pa gawin ang mundo, bakit kailangan pa niyang ipanganak sa pamamagitan ni Maria? Bakit pa niya kailangang maranasan ang pagiging sanggol eh pwede naman siyang sumanib sa katawan ng tao? o sa katawan ng tao na inihanda daw ng Diyos para sa kaniya?
Diyos ba talaga ang nasa sinapupunan ni Maria?
Sabi ng bibliya:
"Ito ang naganap nang ipanganak si Jesu-Cristo. Si Maria na kanyang ina at si Jose ay nakatakda nang magpakasal. Ngunit bago sila makasal, nalaman ni Maria na siya'y nagdadalang-tao sa pamamagitan ng kapangyarihan ng Espiritu Santo." Mateo 1:18
Yun naman pala, si Maria pala ay nagdalang-TAO. Hindi naman nagdalang-DIYOS : )
Sino o alin ba ang naging laman, si Kristo ba o ang "SALITA"?
Ayon pa rin sa bibliya:
New International Version (©2011)
The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.
New Living Translation (©2007)
So the Word became human and made his home among us. He was full of unfailing love and faithfulness. And we have seen his glory, the glory of the Father's one and only Son.
English Standard Version (©2001)
And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.
New American Standard Bible (©1995)
And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.
King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
Holman Christian Standard Bible (©2009)
The Word became flesh and took up residence among us. We observed His glory, the glory as the One and Only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.
International Standard Version (©2012)
The Word became flesh and lived among us. We gazed on his glory, the kind of glory that belongs to the Father's unique Son, who is full of grace and truth.
NET Bible (©2006)
Now the Word became flesh and took up residence among us. We saw his glory--the glory of the one and only, full of grace and truth, who came from the Father.
Aramaic Bible in Plain English (©2010)
And The Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld his glory, the glory as of The Only Begotten of The Father, full of grace and truth.
GOD'S WORD® Translation (©1995)
The Word became human and lived among us. We saw his glory. It was the glory that the Father shares with his only Son, a glory full of kindness and truth.
King James 2000 Bible (©2003)
And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
American King James Version
And the Word was made flesh, and dwelled among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
American Standard Version
And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us (and we beheld his glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father), full of grace and truth.
Douay-Rheims Bible
And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we saw his glory, the glory as it were of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
Darby Bible Translation
And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us (and we have contemplated his glory, a glory as of an only-begotten with a father), full of grace and truth;
English Revised Version
And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us (and we beheld his glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father), full of grace and truth.
Webster's Bible Translation
And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
Weymouth New Testament
And the Word came in the flesh, and lived for a time in our midst, so that we saw His glory--the glory as of the Father's only Son, sent from His presence. He was full of grace and truth.
World English Bible
The Word became flesh, and lived among us. We saw his glory, such glory as of the one and only Son of the Father, full of grace and truth.
Young's Literal Translation
And the Word became flesh, and did tabernacle among us, and we beheld his glory, glory as of an only begotten of a father, full of grace and truth.
source: biblehub.com
Yan oh, sa LAHAT ng bible translations at versions, sa LAHAT ng wika, mapa english, tagalog etc... Ang naging laman ay ang SALITA/WORD.
Kung totoong si Kristo ay nagkatawang tao, bakit hindi nalang sinabi na "JESUS WAS INCARNATED" para hindi na tayo malito?
Sabi sa gotquestions.org:
"The term word is used in different ways in the Bible. In the New Testament, there are two Greek words translated "word": rhema and logos. They have slightly different meanings. Rhema usually means “a spoken word.” For example, in Luke 1:38, when the angel told Mary that she would be the mother of God's Son, Mary replied, "Behold, I am the servant of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word [rhema].”
Logos, however, has a broader, more philosophical meaning. This is the term used in John 1. It usually implies a total message, and is used mostly in reference to God's message to mankind. For example, Luke 4:32 says that, when Jesus taught the people, "they were amazed at his teaching, because his words [logos] had authority." The people were amazed not merely by the particular words Jesus chose but by His total message."
" So the Message became flesh, took on human form, and came to dwell among us (Matthew 1:23; Romans 8:3; Philippians 2: 5–11).
The Greeks used the word logos to refer to one’s “mind,” “reason,” or “wisdom.” "
Itong WORD na ito ay ang pangako o ang plano ng Diyos na tumutukoy kay Kristo.
"Pinili na siya ng Diyos sa gawaing ito bago pa nilikha ang daigdig, at ipinahayag siya alang-alang sa inyo, bago sumapit ang katapusan ng mga panahon. Dahil kay Cristo, sumasampalataya kayo sa Diyos na sa kanya'y muling bumuhay at nagparangal, kaya't ang inyong pananampalataya at pag-asa ay nasa Diyos." I Pedro 1:20-21
Bago pa NILIKHA ang daigdig, PINILI na siya ng Diyos. Kaya nga nung oras na para maisakatuparan ang plano na ito ng Diyos, sabi sa John 1:14, the WORD BECAME FLESH, eto yung panahon na nasa sinapupunan na si Kristo ni Maria sa pamamagitan ng Espiritu Santo, balikan natin ang verse kanina:
"Ito ang naganap nang ipanganak si Jesu-Cristo. Si Maria na kanyang ina at si Jose ay nakatakda nang magpakasal. Ngunit bago sila makasal, nalaman ni Maria na siya'y nagdadalang-tao sa pamamagitan ng kapangyarihan ng Espiritu Santo." Mateo 1:18
WORD--> KRISTO--> TAO.
Yung WORD ang katuparan noon eh si KRISTO.
Yung WORD ang NAGING LAMAN at hindi si "KRISTONG DIYOS NA MAY PRE-EXISTENCE".
Iba si Kristo sa DIYOS, obvious naman yon doon palang sa verse sa itaas sa I Pedro 1:21, dahil daw kay KRISTO, sumasampalataya kayo sa DIYOS na siyang BUMUHAY at NAGPARANGAL sa kaniya.
Bakit, ano ba kasi si KRISTO, bakit sinabing "DAHIL kay Kristo"?
"iisa ang Diyos, iisa rin ang tagapamagitan sa Diyos at sa mga tao- si Kristo Jesus na tao." I Tim. 2:5
Siya pala kasi ang NAG-IISANG TAGAPAMAGITAN sa DIYOS (tunay na Diyos, ang AMA, hindi ang trinity) at sa mga tao, si Kristo Jesus na TAO. Yan ang sabi ni Apostol Pablo.
Hebreo 10:5
Yan, napatunayan na natin na hindi si Kristo ang naging laman. Ngunit bakit sinabi sa Hebreo 10:5 na ipinaghanda ng "katawan" si Kristo ng Diyos?
Pero bago natin puntahan, dapat nating malaman na itong verses na Hebreo 10:5-8 ay kinowt lamang sa Old Testament ng nagsulat ng Hebreo. Ito ay galing sa Awit 40: 6-8:
"Hain at handog ay hindi mo kinaluluguran; ang aking pakinig ay iyong binuksan: handog na susunugin, at handog tungkol sa kasalanan ay hindi mo hiningi.
Nang magkagayo'y sinabi ko: Narito, dumating ako; sa balumbon ng aklat ay nakasulat tungkol sa akin:
Aking kinalulugurang sundin ang iyong kalooban, Oh Dios ko; Oo, ang iyong kautusan ay nasa loob ng aking puso."
Ito naman ang sinasabi sa Hebreo 10:5-8:
"Kaya't pagpasok niya sa sanglibutan, ay sinasabi, Hain at handog ay hindi mo ibig. Nguni't isang katawan ang sa akin ay inihanda mo;
Sa mga handog na susunugin at mga haing patungkol sa mga kasalanan ay hindi ka nalugod.
Nang magkagayo'y sinabi ko, Narito, ako'y pumarito (sa balumbon ng aklat ay nasusulat tungkol sa akin.) Upang gawin, Oh Dios, ang iyong kalooban.
Sa itaas ay sinasabi, Mga hain at mga handog at mga handog na susunuging buo at mga haing patungkol sa kasalanan ay hindi mo ibig, at di mo rin kinalulugdan (mga bagay na inihahandog ayon sa kautusan),"
PANSININ:
"Hain at handog ay hindi mo kinaluluguran; ang aking pakinig ay iyong binuksan:..." Awit 40:6
"...Hain at handog ay hindi mo ibig. Nguni't isang katawan ang sa akin ay inihanda mo; " Hebreo 10:5
Maaaring magtaka ang ilan, bakit sa AWIT ang sabi PAKINIG o sa english bibles, EARS, bakit sa Hebreo 10:5 ay KATAWAN ang inilagay ng sumulat ng libro ng Hebreo?
Ayon sa bible.ca:
"The second phrase in the quotation in Hebrews is different from the reading of the Old Testament in our English Bibles because the Hebrews writer actually quotes from the Septuagint (our English Bibles, by contrast, are translated from Massoretic texts).
Lightfoot, in his commentary Jesus Christ Today, wrote, "The words, a body has thou prepared for me, follow the Septuagint, in keeping with the usual preference of the author. The Hebrew text, however, literally reads, 'ears hast thou digged for me,' which apparently means that God has given man ears to hear that he might obey Him. The Septuagint translators dealt freely with the text by substituting the whole ('body') for the part ('ears'), resulting in the meaning that instead of God equipping man with ears, He made or prepared for man a body" (185).
Of course, the Hebrew text used by the Septuagint translators was actually somewhat older than that used by the translators of our English Old Testament. A possible explanation for the difference in quotations (besides the view that the Septuagint translators "dealt freely with the text") is that the text used by the Septuagint translators was not only older, but actually a more accurate text.
Whether the Septuagint translators were "free" in their translation or simply working from a different Hebrew text, Robert Milligan offers an intriguing perspective on the difference in the two quotations. He wrote in his commentary, "To the careless and superficial reader, there may at first seem to be no connection between digging out, or thoroughly opening the ears of any one, and providing a body for him. But the thoughtful reader will at once see that, in the case of Christ, the two expressions are nearly equivalent, and that the latter differs from the former chiefly in this: that it is rather more specific and expressive. To dig out the ears of a person means simply to make him a willing and obedient servant (Ex. xxi.6). But in order to so qualify Christ as to make him a fit servant for the redemption of mankind, a body was absolutely necessary. Without this, there could have been no adequate sacrifice for sin, and without an adequate sacrifice, there could have no suitable atonement, and without an atonement, the claims of Divine Justice could not have been satisfied, and without this, the will of God could never have been accomplished in the redemption of mankind" (269-270).
Milligan's comment seems to fit well with the context of Hebrews 10 as the author notes that by the will of God "we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all" (vs. 10)."
Alin man pala sa dalawa, kahit pa sabihing BINUKSAN ANG PAKINIG o IPINAGHANDA NG KATAWAN, iisa lang pala ang ipinupunto o ang mensahe ng sumulat ng Hebreo:
"The point being made by the Psalmist is that God isn’t necessarily looking for rituals or animal sacrifices. Rather, God desires that a person wholeheartedly surrender himself/herself to the service of the Lord. The Psalmist is basically stating that he will devote himself completely to the will of God, giving himself over to perpetual servitude in accomplishing God’s purpose.
This is precisely the point that the author of Hebrews was making, namely that Jesus had a body prepared for him in order that he could come and perfectly accomplish the will of God:
"For the Son of man also came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many." Mark 10:45
"Meanwhile the disciples besought him, saying, ‘Rabbi, eat.’ But he said to them, ‘I have food to eat of which you do not know.’ So the disciples said to one another, ‘Has any one brought him food?’" John 4:31-34
"I can do nothing on my own authority; as I hear, I judge; and my judgment is just, because I seek not my own will but the will of him who sent me." John 5:30
"For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me;" John 6:38Hence, whether the Septuagint retained the original reading, or simply paraphrased the original text, it seems clear that at some point in time the variants arose in order to explain what the inspired author was trying to say." source: answering-islam.org
Kaya pala sinasabi na ang HAIN AT HANDOG (animal sacrifices) ay HINDI niya IBIG sa pagpapawalang sala sa ating mga kasalanan. Kundi yung KATAWAN ni Kristo o si Kristo mismo ang pinakamainam para matubos tayo sa ating mga kasalanan.
Sa isang TAO nagmula ang kasalanan, at mapapawalang sala tayo sa pamamagitan din ng isang TAO- si JesuKristo.
12 Ang kasalanan ay pumasok sa sanlibutan sa pamamagitan ng isang tao, at ang kamatayan ay pumasok sa pamamagitan ng kasalanan. Dahil dito, lumaganap ang kamatayan sa lahat ng tao dahil ang lahat ay nagkasala.
13 Nasa sanlibutan na ang kasalanan bago ibigay ang Kautusan, ngunit kung walang kautusan, ang kasalanan ay hindi ituturing na kasalanan.
14 Gayunman, naghari pa rin ang kamatayan mula kay Adan hanggang kay Moises, pati sa mga taong hindi nagkasala tulad ng pagsuway ni Adan sa utos ng Diyos. Si Adan ay anyo ng isang darating.
15 Subalit magkaiba ang dalawang ito dahil ang libreng kaloob ng Diyos ay hindi katulad ng kasalanan ni Adan. Totoong maraming tao ang namatay dahil sa kasalanan ng isang tao. Ngunit ang kagandahang-loob ng Diyos ay mas dakila, gayundin ang kanyang libreng kaloob sa maraming tao sa pamamagitan ng kagandahang-loob ng isang tao, si Jesu-Cristo.
16 Ang kaloob na ito ay higit na di hamak kaysa sa ibinunga ng pagsuway ni Adan. Sapagkat hatol na kaparusahan ang idinulot matapos na magawa ang isang pagsuway, subalit kaloob na nagpapawalang-sala naman ang idinulot matapos magawa ang maraming pagsuway.
17 Sa pamamagitan ng pagsuway ng isang tao, naghari ang kamatayan. Ngunit sa pamamagitan din ng isang tao, si Jesu-Cristo, ang mga taong pinagpala nang sagana at itinuring na matuwid ng Diyos ay maghahari sa buhay.
18 At kung paanong ang pagsuway ng isang tao ay nagdulot ng kaparusahan sa lahat, ang matuwid na ginawa rin ng isang tao ay nagdudulot ng kapatawaran at buhay sa lahat.
19 Sapagkat kung ang lahat ay naging makasalanan dahil sa pagsuway ng isang tao, ang lahat ay mapapawalang-sala dahil sa pagsunod ng isa ring tao.
20 Nang magkaroon ng Kautusan, dumami ang pagsuway; ngunit sa pagdami naman ng mga pagsuway ay lalong sumagana ang kagandahang-loob ng Diyos.
21 Kaya nga, kung paanong naghari ang kasalanan sa pamamagitan ng kamatayan, gayundin naman maghahari ang kagandahang-loob ng Diyos sa pamamagitan ng pagpapawalang-sala. Ito'y magdudulot ng buhay na walang hanggan sa pamamagitan ng ating Panginoong Jesu-Cristo." Roma 5:12-21
Yung tutubos pala sa atin ay ISA RING TAO ayon sa bibliya, hindi naman pala ISANG DIYOS na NAGKATAWANG TAO.
Pero bakit ba kasi sinabi na "Nguni't isang katawan ang sa akin ay inihanda mo"?
Ang ibig bang sabihin nito ay si Kristong nag-eexist noon pang simula ay bumaba sa langit, sumanib sa katawan ng tao na inihanda ng Diyos?
Sagot: HINDI. Sinabi ito dahil ang KATAWAN ni KRISTO ay inihanda ng Diyos upang maging HANDOG o alay. Kaya nga sa mas maiintindihan nating salin, eto ang sabi sa BMBB:
"Dahil diyan, nang si Cristo'y naparito sa daigdig, sinabi niya sa Diyos: "Ang mga pang-alay, pati mga handog, at ang mga hayop na handang sunugin, hindi mo na ibig sa dambana dalhin, hindi mo kinalugdan ang mga handog na sinusunog, at ang mga handog upang pawiin ang kasalanan. Kaya't inihanda mo ang aking katawan upang maging handog." Hebreo 10:5-6
"Inihanda" ang katawan ni Kristo, hindi in a sense na gumawa ang Diyos ng isang katawan na sasaniban ni pre-existidong Kristong Diyos galing langit, kundi ibig sabihin lamang nito na dati pa ay pinili na siya at ipinanukala na ang planong pagtubos ni Kristo para sa mga kasalanan ng mga tao.
"Subalit ang ipinapahayag namin ay ang lihim na karunungan ng Diyos na hindi nahayag noong una, na itinalaga na niya para sa ating ikaluluwalhati bago pa likhain ang sanlibutan." I Cor. 2:7
Kahit itanong pa natin sa mga bible scholars, ang nasa Hebreo 10:5 ay hindi isang PAGPAPATUNAY na si Kristo ay DIYOS NA NAGKATAWANG TAO at may pre-existence. Ang binabanggit dito ay tungkol sa mga HAIN at HANDOG ukol sa pagpapawalang sala sa tao sa mga kasalanan.
John 1:1
ReplyDeleteNew King James Version (NKJV)
The Eternal Word
1 In the beginning was the Word (PERSON OF JESUS CHRIST), and the Word (PERSON OF JESUS CHRIST) was with God (THE FATHER), and the Word was God (DIVINE OR GOD NATURE).
John 1:14
New King James Version (NKJV)
The Word Becomes Flesh
14 And the Word (PERSON OF JESUS CHRIST) became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.
I KNOW THAT MOST OF MY BORN AGAIN CHRISTIAN BROTHERS WOULD SAY OR USED "GOD BECAME FLESH" BUT, I MYSELF DO NOT USE THIS PHRASE. WHENEVER THEY USED "GOD BECAME FLESH", I KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THEY MEAN. THEY MEAN THAT JESUS WHO IS GOD, TOOK ON ANOTHER NATURE WHICH IS HUMAN. THE REASON WHY I DO NOT USED THIS PHRASE IS THAT IT WOULD APPEAR AS IF GOD BECAME HUMAN OR THAT GOD CHANGE INTO HUMAN FORM (WE KNOW THAT GOD DOES NOT CHANGE). ANOTHER REASON WHY I DO NOT USE THIS PHRASE IS THAT THIS PHRASE IS NOWHERE TO BE FOUND IN THE BIBLE. WHAT YOU WOULD FIND IN THE BIBLE IS THAT "THE WORD BECAME FLESH" AND "GOD WAS MANIFESTED IN THE FLESH".
FIRST, LET US FIND OUT WHAT IS THIS "LOGOS" OR "WORD" HERE IN JOHN 1:1. ACCORDING TO YOU, THE "WORD" IS SIMPLY “mind,” “reason,” or “wisdom.”
FOR US, THIS "WORD" IS MORE THAN THAT; IT IS A PERSON. YOU WOULD HAVE TO READ THE WHOLE CONTEXT OF JOHN CHAPTER 1 TO FIND OUT WHAT IS THIS "WORD" REALLY IS.
John 1:1-3
New King James Version (NKJV)
The Eternal Word
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 HE was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through HIM, and without HIM nothing was made that was made.
IF YOU PAY ATTENTION ON VERSES 2 & 3, PRONOUNS HE AND HIM WERE USED PERTAINING TO THE "WORD" AND NOT PRONOUNS "IT", SIGNIFYING THAT THE "WORD" IS NOT "SOMETHING" BUT "SOMEONE" WHO PRE-EXISTED.
THE NATURE OF JESUS CHRIST WHICH IS GOD CANNOT CHANGE AND THIS IS THE REASON WHY THE "WORD" OR THE PERSON OF JESUS CHRIST WAS USED INSTEAD OF "GOD".
"THE WORD BECAME FLESH" MEANS THAT THE PERSON OF JESUS CHRIST TOOK ON ANOTHER NATURE WHICH IS HUMAN WHILE MAINTAINING HIS GOD NATURE. SO WHEN JESUS WAS BORN HE IS GOD AND MAN.
Jeffrey Trinidad,
DeleteThough your comment has nothing to do with Hebrew 10:5, ill give this a chance.
I observed that you cant move on in the John 1:1 topic, and here you go again, sharing your personal interpretation and twisting the bible.
YOU POSTED:
"John 1:1
New King James Version (NKJV)
The Eternal Word
1 In the beginning was the Word (PERSON OF JESUS CHRIST), and the Word (PERSON OF JESUS CHRIST) was with God (THE FATHER), and the Word was God (DIVINE OR GOD NATURE).
John 1:14
New King James Version (NKJV)
The Word Becomes Flesh
14 And the Word (PERSON OF JESUS CHRIST) became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth."
BUT THIS IS WHAT THE REAL NKJV'S CONTENT:
John 1:1
New King James Version (NKJV)
The Eternal Word
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
John 1:14
New King James Version (NKJV)
The Word Becomes Flesh
14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.
source: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%201:1,14&version=NKJV
Mr. Trinidad, i DID NOT FIND ANY "(PERSON OF JESUS CHRIST),(THE FATHER), and (DIVINE OR GOD NATURE)" in the said translation of the bible.
This is the proof that you both twist the verses in the bible, and you only present your own interpretation on the said verses.
I will not answer you anymore about this because if that really was your own understanding about those, i can do nothing. But please, dont ever mix your personal interpretation with the verses like what you did, you are deceiving yourself.
Hebrews 10:5 nkjv
ReplyDelete5 Therefore, when He came into the world, He said: “Sacrifice and offering You did not desire,
But a body You have prepared for Me.
please continue on..
11 And every priest stands ministering daily and offering repeatedly the SAME sacrifices, which can NEVER take away sins. 12 But this Man, after He had offered ONE sacrifice for sins FOREVER, SAT DOWN at the right hand of God, 13 from that time waiting till His enemies are made His footstool. 14 For by ONE offering He has PERFECTED FOREVER those who are being sanctified.
ADAM (FIRST MAN CREATED) SINNED AND LAST ADAM (MAN BUT NOT CREATED) REDEEMED MANKIND. HE OFFERED ONE SACRIFICE FOR SINS FOREVER AND BY THIS ONE OFFERING HE HAS PERFECTED FOREVER THOSE WHO ARE BEING SANCTIFIED.
SIMPLY PUT, JESUS WHO'S FULLY GOD WAS THE "PERFECT" SACRIFICE AND WHO WAS FULLY MAN (though man, He did NOT sin and had no sin) AS ONE SACRIFICE FOR SINS FOREVER.
If not for His ONCE FOR ALL and PERFECT SACRIFICE who PERFECTED FOREVER those who are being sanctified, we will end up in hell because until now, every man still commits daily sins...But THANKS BE TO OUR GOD AND SAVIOR JESUS CHRIST! BY HIS GRACE AND FAITH IN HIM WE ARE SAVED!
BE BLESSED
Thank you for sharing your own interpretation on Heb. 10:5 but its already discussed above that Jesus is a HUMAN (not a God who dwell in a human body), his body was prepared as an offering for sins.
DeleteThis MAN who is Jesus is a creature:
"The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation." Col. 1:5
If Jesus is a God who just dwell on a human body then that BODY will be a cheap offering because that HUMAN BODY is not really his, being a GOD, he is not born with a human body, for Jesus is God believers, he is a God that was incarnated.
But because Jesus is a HUMAN, born with that HUMAN BODY, that is the best offering for sins, not ANIMAL SACRIFICES but of HUMAN.
The bible says:
15 Subalit magkaiba ang dalawang ito dahil ang libreng kaloob ng Diyos ay hindi katulad ng kasalanan ni Adan. Totoong maraming tao ang namatay dahil sa kasalanan ng isang tao. Ngunit ang kagandahang-loob ng Diyos ay mas dakila, gayundin ang kanyang libreng kaloob sa maraming tao sa pamamagitan ng kagandahang-loob ng isang tao, si Jesu-Cristo.
16 Ang kaloob na ito ay higit na di hamak kaysa sa ibinunga ng pagsuway ni Adan. Sapagkat hatol na kaparusahan ang idinulot matapos na magawa ang isang pagsuway, subalit kaloob na nagpapawalang-sala naman ang idinulot matapos magawa ang maraming pagsuway.
17 Sa pamamagitan ng pagsuway ng isang tao, naghari ang kamatayan. Ngunit sa pamamagitan din ng isang tao, si Jesu-Cristo, ang mga taong pinagpala nang sagana at itinuring na matuwid ng Diyos ay maghahari sa buhay. Roma 5:15-17
Sa pamamagitan ng pagsuway ng ISANG TAO (ADAN) naghari ang kamatayan. ngunit sa PAMAMAGITAN DIN NG ISANG TAO, si JESUCRISTO.
Its very clear in verse 17 that it is THROUGH a HUMAN (not through a GOD) who is JESUS CHRIST. Our God is not your trinitarian God, we, true christians have the same God with Christians in the 1st century, the Old testament and same God with Jesus.
This God, whom Jesus introduced to the world is none other than the FATHER:
Jesus said, "Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, 'I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.'" John 20:17
Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent. John 17:3
Anak si Cristo ng Dios ama. At nagkatawang tao sya dahil nga hindi talaga sya tao. Isinilang sya ni virgin mary bilang ''tao'' dahil kailangan nyang mamatay at tubusin ang ang mga kasalanan ng mga tao at itinakda yun ng sarili nyang ama sa kanya. Paano syang mamamatay kung nasa kalagayang spiritual sya? Yan ang hirap sa inyong mga INC, para sa inyo si Cristo na naturingan na mismong pangalan ng iglesia nyo pero ung punong pangkalahatan nyo itinuturing nyong anghel???? Kayo itong literal kung umintindi sa bibliya e.
DeleteTama ka dyan sir. very literal kung umintindi,. at yung sinasabi pa nila na "nagdalang-tao si maria" tao daw ang dinadala at hindi Diyos,. very literal,. i heard the doctrine of INC,. sampalatayanan din natin ang sugo na Diyos na si Felix Manalo at ang puno ng pamamahla na si Eduardo Manalo,.
DeleteAldrin,
Delete"At nagkatawang tao sya dahil nga HINDI TALAGA SIYA TAO?" Magulo, ano po?
Tapos, hindi talaga siya tao pero "isinilang siya ni Virgin Mary bilang "tao"...lalong pong nagulo, ano po?
"Paano siyang mamatay kung nasa kalagayang spiritual siya?"...Saan po sa Bibliya mababasa na si Kristo ay nasa spiritual na kalagayan?
Di po ba ang paniniwala ninyo si Kristo ay TOTOONG TAO at TOTOONG DIYOS? So, papano po yan ngayon dahil sinabi ninyong HINDI TALAGA SIYA TAO? Ang gulo, ano po?
Gayon ang nangyayari sa mga taong nakabase ang mga pananampalataya na GAWA LAMANG NG TAO at hindi nakabase sa Bibliya.
Kung naniniwala kami na si Kristo ay tao ay sapagkat sa Kanya mismo namin natutunan ang pananampalatayang iyan:
"Ngunit ngayon ay naghahanap kayo ng pagkakataon upang ako ay patayin. Ako ang TAOng nagsabi sa inyo ng katotohanang narinig ko mula sa DIYOS. Ito ay hindi ginawa ni Abraham." ~ Juan 8:40, SND.
Napansin niyo po ba? Hindi lamang pinatotohanan ni Cristo na Siya ay tao sa kalagayan, iniba Niya ang sarili Niya mula sa Diyos. Iba ang Cristo na nagpapahayag ng Kaniyang narinig. Narinig mula kanino? Mula sa Diyos.
Kaya kung tatanggpin namin ang paniniwala mo, lumalabas ang Cristo na bilang TAO ay nakinig mula sa Cristo (na spiritual)? Ang gulo, ano po?
Bakit magulo? KASI GAWA NG TAO ANG PANANAMPALATAYANG TAGLAY NIYO.
--Bee
TAMA, DAHIL Kung ano lang ang nakasulat sa bibliya at TAMANG PAGKAKAINTINDI dito ay siyang TAMA. SI CRISTO AY TAO AYON SA KANIYA MISMO, SA MGA APOSTOL at sa iba pa. HINDI NIYA SINABI NA SIYA AY DIYOS DIN KATULAD NG AMA. Siya ay Kasangkapan ng ama o Isinugo ng ama para iligtas ang mga Tunay na lingkod ng diyos sa mga huling araw. Tinubos ng sarili niyang dugo ang kaniyang iglesia na tinayo. Kaya paano nyo masasabing si Cristo ay DIYOS na nagkatawang TAO kung SIYA MISMO AY NAMATAY? At kung siya ay isa ding DIYOS nga BAKIT DI NALANG SIYA NAG INCARNATION? DIBA? SI CRISTO AY SIYANG TAGA PAMAGITAN, ANG SUGO NG DIYOS, ANG ULO NG IGLESIA ANG SIYANG TAGAPAGLIGTAS. Itinuturing namin siyanv bilang TAO pero hindi basta basta TAO dahil siya lang ang TAONG walang KASALANAN. PERO HINDI NGA NYA SINABI NA SIYA AY DIYIS BAGKOS SINABI NIHA NA SIYA AY TAO! NA NAGSASAYSAY NA SA ATIN na IISA lamang ang TUNAY NA DIYOS KUNDI ANG AMA LAMANG! SIMPLE. KUNG MAY IBA OANG DIYIS BAKIT PA NIYA SINABI YUN? DAPAT ANG SINABU NIYA AY "DIYOS NA NAGKATAWANG TAO NA NAGSASAYSAY SA INYO NA DALAWA ANG TUNAY NA DIYOS" DIBA HINDI NAMAN? ANDUN NA YUNG SAGOT EHH! TUTUKLAWIN NA KAYO!!
DeleteCOL.1:15-18 He is the IMAGE of the INVISIBLE God, the FIRSTBORN over all creation.
ReplyDelete>JESUS IS THE IMAGE OF THE INVISIBLE GOD FOR GOD IS SPIRIT. FIRSTBORN PERTAINS TO HIS PREEMINENCE OR SUPREMACY OVER ALL FOR HE EXISTED IN THE BEGINNING (JOHN1:1). HE IS NOT A CREATED BEING.
>JESUS IS FULLY GOD AND FULLY MAN. THE RIGHTEOUS REQUIREMENT OF THE LAW WAS THAT THE SACRIFICE SHOULD BE FULLY MAN TO PAY FOR MAN’S SINS. THE PERFECTION & PURITY OF THE SACRIFICE WAS BECAUSE JESUS IS ALSO FULLY GOD.
>JESUS IS GOD. NO MAN CAN GRANT FORGIVENESS EXCEPT GOD. THE PHARISEES AND SCRIBES PERSECUTED HIM FOR JESUS CLAIMED TO BE GOD—“I AM”
>JOHN 8:58, “ Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.”
>THE TRINITY: EXODUS 3:6
Then He said, “Do not draw near this place. Take your sandals off your feet, for the place where you stand is holy ground.” 6 Moreover He said, “I AM the God of your FATHER—the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac (THE SON), and the God of Jacob (THE SPIRIT).” And Moses hid his face, for he was afraid to look upon GOD.
>JACOB’S WELL WHERE JESUS OFFERED THE SAMARITAN WOMAN THE WATER REFERS TO THE HOLY SPIRIT WHO WILL GIVE ETERNAL LIFE
>BAPTIZE THEM IN THE "NAME" (PERSON) OF THE FATHER, OF THE SON, OF THE HOLY SPIRIT –THEY ARE ONE.
BE BLESSED
Again, thank you for sharing your own interpretation of verses of the bible. Your own interpretation are far different from what the bible teaches. Please do not base your interpretation of bible verses from the Council of Nicaea when they made Christ a God. You should read the bible with open mind, without any bias. Then you will be able to find the truth youre looking for.
Deletep.s. HE DID NOT DWELL ON A HUMAN BODY. JESUS IS FULLY GOD AND FULLY MAN
ReplyDeleteThank you for clarifying that. If that's the case, you cannot use heb 10:5 because that verse, if literally interpreted, suggest that God the Father gave Christ a human body that he will dwell on when he come down from heaven to earth.
Delete20 And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life.
ReplyDeletewho is true GOD?
you need a lot of understanding dear.
the Apostles worshiped Him and He did not stopped them.
Jesus is crucified because He was accused of blasphemy.
Please pray for understanding.
Name Koto,
DeleteLet us examine your interpretations:
And we know that the Son of God (Jesus Christ) is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him (God) that is true, and we are in him (God) that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ.
So if we follow your own interpretation, Jesus has come to the world to give us understanding about God (Jesus) even in his Son Jesus Christ. Is this what you call an "understanding"?
In fact this verse proves further that indeed one of the purposes that the Christ came to the world was to introduce who the TRUE GOD is. Did He fulfill such purpose?
After Jesus said this, he looked toward heaven and prayed:
“FATHER, the hour has come. Glorify your Son, that your Son may glorify you. For you granted him authority over all people that he might give eternal life to all those you have given him. Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent." ~ John 17:1-3, NIV.
The Christ is very specific. It is the Father that everyone should acknowledge as the ONLY TRUE God and such belief promises ETERNAL LIFE. Have you noticed the resemblance of the words used in both verses? He did not point Himself as the only true God nor the Holy Spirit or the man-made Triune god but only the Father ALONE.
Now back to that verse, it says there, "This is the true," and you immediately concluded that the God who was mentioned in that verse was referred to our Lord Jesus Christ.
Let us not be biased, let us ask the one who wrote it. Who is the true God referred to by Apostle John in that verse? Let alone explain himself:
"Grace, mercy and peace from God the Father and from Jesus Christ, the Father's Son, will be with us in truth and love." ~ 2 John 1:3, NIV.
And for our Lord Jesus Christ, who is the Father for him (not only for us)?
"Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies and God of all comfort," ~ 2 Corinthians 1:3.
So if you believe that Christ is the only true God then you must prove first that He does not acknowledge "another God" aside from himself otherwise He could not be the true God for the only true God knows no OTHER GODS besides himself.
If the Apostles worshipped Christ, does it follow that He is already the only true God? Let alone the Bible explain itself:
"For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus EVERY KNEE WILL BOW, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father." ~ Philippians 2:9
Why do we worship Christ? Simply because God commanded us so to His (Father) own glory and not because Christ is another god.
God made Jesus as Lord and the Christ (Acts 2:36) and He the Father commanded us to worship Him (Christ) to His (the Father) own glory.
How about the Father, did anybody made Him God? or did somebody command us to worship Him (the Father)?
One of the reasons that Christ was sought to be crucified was not because He claimed Himself as God but as the SON OF THE MOST HIGH.
It is God who gives understanding and how blessed are those who found wisdom:
"yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live." ~ 1 Corinthians 8:6.
So I pray that you will finally come to understanding.
-Bee
ang Diyos ba ay nagkakasala o liko?
ReplyDeletesi Kristo ba ay nagkasala o liko?
Tunay na walang matuwid sa lupa, na gumagawa ng mabuti, at hindi nagkakasala. Eclesiastes 7:20
Siya ang Bato, ang kaniyang gawa ay sakdal; Sapagka't lahat niyang daan ay kahatulan: Isang Dios na tapat at walang kasamaan, Matuwid at banal siya. Deuteronomio 32:4
Rommel Masallo,
DeleteSi Kristo ay hindi nagkasala o liko. Sa makatuwid, siya ay BANAL. Kung banal ang ating Panginoong Jesus, iyon ba ay sa SARILI NIYANG PARAAN o GAWA?
Ang AMA ay mabuti, matuwid at BANAL. Kung gayon ang kalikuan o kasalanan kailanman ay hindi masusumpungan sa Kaniya. Kung ang AMA ay mabuti, ito ba ay dahil sa MAY IBANG DIYOS na GINAWA siyang mabuti?
Nasa tanong ko na ang mga sagot ko. Sinusundan ko lang ang analogy mo (na nakabase sa karunungan ng tao at hindi sa karunungan na ayon sa Espiritu).
~Bee
masyadong literal ang pagkaka unawa nyo po. alam niyo naman na ang bibliya ay ginawa talagang parabola na mauunawaan niyo lamang sa pamamagitan ng gabay ng holy spirit. at wag niyo po kakalimutan na may halaga kapag ang salita sa bibliya ay naka CAPITALIZE may tinutukoy duon na hindi literal po :)
ReplyDeleteKaya't pagpasok niya sa sanglibutan ay malinaw na ang Panginoong Jesus ay hindi talaga Tao dahil siya ay pumasok sa sanlibutan...
ReplyDeletewag no iligaw ang mga walang malay sa bible. after ko mabasa ung explanation sa page na ito, ang nakikita ko lang ay puro pansariling pakahulugan sa tunay na pag-katao ni Kristo.
ReplyDeletesa bible dapat kinukuha ang explanation hindi galing sa pansariling pagkaunawa in favor sa nkasanayan nyong turo ng inc.
lahat ng verse na na nai-post sa page na ito ay hindi nag sasabi na si Kristo ay tao bagkus nag-katawang tao
binabago nyo ung nakasulat at binigyan nyo ng pansariling kahulugan upang patuloy na makapang daya ng kapwa.
im JW
ReplyDelete(si kristo ba ay Diyos na nagkatawang tao ayon sa heb 10:5?)
si kristo ay anak ng Diyos ng bumababa sa langit,pro hindi siya rin ,ang Diyos na nagkatawang tao...
sa madaling salita.
anak siya na bumababa sa langit.
anak siya na nagkatawang tao.at naging tao siya.
at anak siya na bumalik sa langit.
(sabi sa itaas:ito ang tanong,kung totoong si kristo ay nagkatawang tao,bakit hindi nalang sinabi na "jesus was Incarnated"para hindi na tayo malito?)
ano ba ang kahulugan ng reinkarnasyon?
-ang paniniwala na ang isa ay isinilang na muli sa isa o higit pang sunud-sunod na pag-iral,maaaring bilang tao o hayop...kadalasan ang sinasabing isinisilang muli sa ibang katawan ay ang di-materyal na "kaluluwa" na hindi itinuturo ng biblia...ang doctrina na ito ay galing sa pagano...kaya imposibling "jesus was incarnated" ang gagamitin ng banal na kasulatan...
bakit ba si jesus nagkatawang tao?umiral na ba si jesus before siya nagkatawang tao?
patotoo:
kawikaan 8:22
si jehova ay gumawa sa akin bilang pasimula ng paglikha niya...ang pinakauna sa lahat ng nagawa niya noong sinaunang panahon...
personipikasyon ng karunungan tumutukoy kay jesu-kristo...
pro 8:22
Jehovah himself produced me as the beginning of his way...
produced me hebrew.qa.na'ni.
TLXX greek ekti.sen.me
sy "created me"
latin -pos.sedit.me.
"possessed me"
mikas 5:2
at ikaw,o bethlehem efrata na napakaliit para mapabilang sa mga angkan,ng juda,sa iyo magmumula ang magiging tagapamahala sa Israel.na ang pinanggalingan ay mula noong unang panahon napakatagal nang panahon.
pansinin din ang juan 1:1
"sa pasimula ay umiral ang salita,at ang salita ay kasama ng Diyos,at ang salita ay isang diyos...
juan 1:14 kaya ang salita ay naging tao...
col 1:15
siya ang larawan ng di-nakikitang Diyos,ang panganay sa lahat ng nilalang...
ang mga talata na sinipi ko ay nagpapatunay na si jesu-kristo umiral na sa langit bilang bugtong na anak ng Diyos...bago nagkatawang tao dito sa lupa...
Ngunit ang hindi kumikilala na si Jesus ay naging tao ay hindi isinugo ng Dios kundi ng espiritu ng anti-Cristo. Narinig ninyo na darating na ang anti-Cristo, at naririto na nga sa mundo.
ReplyDelete1 Juan 4:3 ASND
"Naging TAO" ang sinabi jan hindi si Jesus na Tao"