Path: paganini.bofh.team!eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!news.mixmin.net!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "NightBulb.net" Newsgroups: alt.bible,alt.religion.christian.catholic,alt.christnet.christianlife,alt.atheism,alt.bible.prophecy,alt.messianic Subject: Re: Enfleshment? Put into flesh? BAH! HUMBUG !! Followup-To: alt.bible Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2022 16:01:13 -0600 Organization: Mixmin Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2022 05:47:39 -0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: news.mixmin.net; posting-host="35ccbc5c9accf3be11681c233a31b48b7dd3ff6a"; logging-data="2848658"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@mixmin.net" Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: Xref: paganini.bofh.team alt.bible:653995 alt.religion.christian.catholic:5216 alt.christnet.christianlife:1040870 alt.atheism:4781442 alt.bible.prophecy:746584 alt.messianic:514745 On 12/10/22 15:44, Michael McLean wrote: > On 10/12/2022 3:27 pm, NightBulb.net wrote: >> On 12/9/22 19:57, Dr. Who wrote: >>> On Dec 9, 2022, NightBulb.net wrote >>> (in article ): >>> >>>> On 12/9/22 11:18, Dr. Who wrote: >>>>> He was MADE Flesh. IOW The flesh that all men at that time saw was >>>>> Jesus. >>>>> Touch Him and you touched Jesus. Yes, the ONLY son that was >>>>> begotten of our >>>>> Heavenly Father. >>>>> >>>>> Those who believe in Him are adopted sons. Born Again of the Spirit >>>>> of God, >>>>> But Jesus? To see him you saw a Son of God as a fleshly man. Yet of >>>>> the >>>>> Godhead >>>>> 35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall >>>>> come upon >>>>> thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore >>>>> also >>>>> that >>>>> holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God. >>>>> >>>>> The seed of God, the egg of mankind. God, made a man. >>>> >>>> This statement seems to insinuate that one of God's sperm fertilized an >>>> egg in Mary's fallopian tube. Is this true? Clarify how the deed was >>>> done. >>> >>> No doubt in your mind it did. A tubal pregnancy is abnormal and >>> deadly if not >>> caught in time. >> >> *facepalm* >> >> *crazymaking in action* >> >> *uncontrollable belly laughter* >> >> *laughing is causing facial pain* >> >> *face hurts so bad eyes are watering* >> >> *must ... not ... get ... face ... cramp* >> >> *you made my day* >> >> Did you attend Biology 101 in junior high school? Didn't you work at >> Loyala with their medical center and schools of medicine and what not? >> >> Did you not know that for a woman to get pregnant, the sperm swims >> into her ovaducts (fallopian tubes) and impregnates the egg while it >> is still in her fallopian tube? Then the impregnated egg travels down >> the fallopian tube, into the uterus. Pregnancy begins in the fallopian >> tube. Ectopic pregnancy has nothing to do with the question. I about >> died from laughter from your responses in this and another message. I >> seriously just started having uncontrollable laughing fits ... Read on >> to the end to find out why. >> >> So your answer is a dodge, and avoids the question: >> >> "This statement seems to insinuate that one of God's sperm fertilized >> an egg in Mary's fallopian tube. Is this true? Clarify how the deed >> was done." >> >> By all means, clarify and answer my question. Did a sperm impregnate >> an egg to form Jesus in the womb, or not? And if yes, who's sperm was >> it? If no, then why did you speak of the seed (sperm) fertilizing the >> egg? >> >>> Ask yourself why were the terms for conception and conceived used? >>> >>> 1Pe 1:23Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of >>> incorruptible, by >>> the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. >>> Again, ask yourself what does that mean? >> >> I was asking you what you mean, and instead of answering you >> misrepresented my words, and demonstrated ignorance of how a pregnancy >> occurs. I'm very sorry to see that a worker at a Jesuit institution >> didn't know female biology. >> >> At the same time that you confuse conception with ectopic pregnancy, >> you are presenting yourself as an expert on the pregnancy of the >> blessed mother of Jesus. I'm trying to reconcile the contradiction >> here, because you are demonstrating contradictory beliefs. >> >> You answer my question, first. I've already answered your question >> many, many times. The new birth comes when the Spirit speaks the Name >> of Jesus Christ to the hearer who has ears to hear. Yet 1 Peter 1:23 >> has nada to do with the details of Jesus being conceived by Mary. That >> would be equating the new birth by faith to the flesh conception. If >> you want to confuse conception with birth, when they are nine months >> apart, that's on you. >> >> BTW, I knew you would stumble over the fallopian tube before I sent >> the post. I really did. I saw it coming. I feel like Nicolas Cage in >> the movie, NEXT. >> >> Robert, if only you could laugh at yourself the way you made me laugh >> today, you would find more joy in that one moment than in your entire >> lifetime of pretending to believe in Jesus. >> >> Robert, it is OK to admit that you don't really believe in Jesus' >> resurrection. He still loves you. Your faith isn't up to you. It's up >> to Him. >> >> "Lord help me with my unbelief!" >> >> The man saying this prayer is justified and healed. The one lionizing >> his own great faith is not justified. >> >> Step down from your pedestal, Robert. Admit defeat and let Christ >> bring victory in weakness rather than pretending to have strength of >> your own. He conquers through the weak things of the world, and they >> take down the mighty and strong. > > This connects with something that the Lord brought to mind last night. > > Robert has a white-knuckle grip on his knowledge, and that will never > do! The Bible is his security, and it can't be. > > Along with that, but aside from that, Judaism thinks the path to God is > "knowledge"; you know, to "know" Him.  It sounds so right, doesn't it? > But it is not; a typical subtle satanic lie. > > The path, obviously, is to believe in Him, not in what you think you > know about God in the Torah or the Bible doctrines, dogmas, and > theologies. Yes, initial knowledge is required, but it does not end > there; as in ever-learning and never coming to the knowledge of the > truth, as the Bible states. > > Here is the problem with religion, the stumbling block for them: > everything you think you know, it all has to go and you have to rely > totally on Him, believing fully in Him. > > Imagine the Israelites at the Red Sea, Egyptians bearing down on them, > backs to a wall of sea, many young, old, frail, weak – no hope.  All the > practical, earthly-sound theology in the world will not help here. > > Even Tony Robbins is not going to out-positive this moment!  All the > knowledge in the world is not going to compete with simply believing in > Him, trusting in Him alone, and not leaning on your own understanding, > and that is where He wants all of us. > > Nothing less. It is too hard for those who lack faith because, to be in > that place (e.g., the Red Sea moment) and trust Him, you have to love > Him with all your heart, soul, and mind. To be able to do that, you > would have had to have allowed Him to create in you a clean heart and > place a right spirit in you through what is already described above. > > God is no fool; God can cleanse a man of all unrighteousness (yes, > sinless), and it must happen here and now; now is the accepted time. How > else can a man stand before Him in peace unless God has cleansed him of > all unrighteousness?  None of this "I'm a sinner" (a whore) but I claim > I have Jesus' blood dripping all over me theology, so God can't see my > sin state nonsense - get away with being a whore nonsense! > > All things are possible with God.  Isn't the parting of the Red Sea an > example of that?  How much more then is He able to...? > > You see, it all boils down to what a person really wants, all one way or > all the other, and there is no spectrum (compromise) of in between. Yes! "Knowledge" as they call it, is just their perceptions based on their desires. As soon as someone says, "I have experiential knowledge of God" I know I am dealing with someone who has no experience but his own perceptions. He attaches names, labels, doctrines to things, and thinks this gives mastery over them. If I know someone I don't say, "I have experiential knowledge of Bob." I say I know Bob. I talked with him yesterday. I can testify that I heard the voice of the Father tell me, directly, that Jesus is His Son, and that the Name of Jesus is salvation. Not only then was I baptized in His Name, but he is baptizing me daily. "I die daily" is how we walk. The Lord sends his spirit to guide me often. His Spirit witnesses about the goings on, the who for, the what for, and the why for, and then when I see it happening I know. The Christian religion claims the blood of Jesus, but His blood was shed once for all. They try to crucify him again and again with their spiritual works whoredom. Just reciting the name of Jesus like an incantation, or using scripture passages like incantations, has no power. But this is the type of Kabbalist sympathetic magic religious people are guilty of. It would be better for them to stand proud of their sin and sin boldly and defiantly, than it is to claim they have no sin, when they still reject the covering of the Word. -- Nightbulb | https://blog.nightbulb.net | Flip the night switch. If tacky red hats annoy Pharisees I want to buy hats for the whole town.