It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Anyone I have ever read or heard preach says the Lord mentioned was a pre-incarnate appearance of Jesus, the Son of God.
He took on flesh much later at the incarnation.
39 Look at my hands and my feet. It is I myself ! Touch me and see; a ghost[spirit] does not have flesh and bones, as you see I have." 40 When he had said this, he showed them his hands and feet. 41 And while they still did not believe it because of joy and amazement, he asked them, "Do you have anything here to eat?" 42 They gave him a piece of broiled fish, 43 and he took it and ate it in their presence.
Luke 24:39-43 (New International Version)
Judges 6: KJV
19 And Gideon went in, and made ready a kid, and unleavened cakes of an ephah of flour: the flesh he put in a basket, and he put the broth in a pot, and brought it out unto him under the oak, and presented it.
20 And the angel of God said unto him, Take the flesh and the unleavened cakes, and lay them upon this rock, and pour out the broth. And he did so.
21 Then the angel of the LORD put forth the end of the staff that was in his hand, and touched the flesh and the unleavened cakes; and there rose up fire out of the rock, and consumed the flesh and the unleavened cakes. Then the angel of the LORD departed out of his sight.:
Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by NOTurTypical
People retrofitting an explanation to reconcile the inconsistency between the Old Testament description of whoever the Hebrew deity was, and God of the New Testament. These would be fundamentalist who you were listening to, who don't want to admit that the Old Testament is not 'inerrant', because they are Dispensationalists, and that belief system is built on the foundation that every word in the OT is true and must come to pass as it says.
Anyone I have ever read or heard preach says the Lord mentioned was a pre-incarnate appearance of Jesus, the Son of God.What 'theology' is that where they retrofit a NT god type person into the OT? Not any kind of serious theology.
These OT appearances of the Son are called "Christophanies" in theology.
If you look up Christophany in Wikipedia, it says that academics generally use that word to describe NT references.
Seems the current fad of describing OT occurrences of Christophany's is rather recent and comes from a professor at Liberty University, a fundamentalist Dispensationalist school. The author of this is not a real trained theologian but someone who went to preacher school.edit on 11-5-2013 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)
Didn't I write that attention should be paid to the fact that these three men ate the food?
The eating of food is offered in the gospel of Luke as proof of flesh and blood existence.
The Gods in zeus are none other than the fallen angels of the book of enoch and doesnt exist anymore because that head of the beast has fallen as with egypt and babylon and so on
Originally posted by pthena
reply to post by Akragon
It's been a while since I've read the Apocryphon of John.
I'm fairly certain that there is some one behind it all. Monad if that's what people want to call the One. What strikes me is how He is described as ineffable, which by definition means 1)Too great or extreme to be expressed or described in words: 2) Too sacred to be uttered.
Do you see the irony of describing Him as indescribable in words, and then going to great length describing Him in words. That's really what I see as the foolishness of the mystery religions.
Nevertheless, I will quote some that I think seems good to me:
"He is the invisible Spirit, of whom it is not right to think of him as a god, or something similar. For he is more than a god, since there is nothing above him, for no one lords it over him.
The Apocryphon of John
Behind seems more accurate in my mind than above.
So you caught me in foolishness. Sky Father is not the One, but rather one of the ones. Yet the contemplation of the one, informs of the One. But not in a bunch of words.
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by truejew
No, Jesus said He had this glory with God before the world was. That affairms they shared glory before the world was created.
And He talks about feasts we'll eat in the Kingdom.
Mark 14:22 As they were eating, Jesus took bread, and when he had blessed, he broke it, and gave to them, and said, "“Take, eat. This is my body.”"
23 He took the cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave to them. They all drank of it. 24 He said to them, "“This is my blood of the new covenant, which is poured out for many. 25 Most certainly I tell you, I will no more drink of the fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it anew in the Kingdom of God.”" 26 When they had sung a hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives.
- WEB -
Matt 9:14 Then John’s disciples came to him, saying, “Why do we and the Pharisees fast often, but your disciples don’t fast?”
15 Jesus said to them, "“Can the friends of the bridegroom mourn, as long as the bridegroom is with them? But the days will come when the bridegroom will be taken away from them, and then they will fast. 16 No one puts a piece of unshrunk cloth on an old garment; for the patch would tear away from the garment, and a worse hole is made. 17 Neither do people put new wine into old wineskins, or else the skins would burst, and the wine be spilled, and the skins ruined. No, they put new wine into fresh wineskins, and both are preserved.”"
Luke 5 39 No man having drunk old wine immediately desires new, for he says, ‘The old is better.’”"
Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
Originally posted by truejew
reply to post by adjensen
According to the statements made, they are polytheist.
I would not think that a brainwashed person would be a good source on whether or not another religion is a "cult".
Pot, meet kettle.
What if what Jesus presented was the Old...
Just not what's in the OT... more like the rules that always have been, and have never changed.
Mark 10 - WEB
2 Pharisees came to him testing him, and asked him, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?”
3 He answered, "“What did Moses command you?”"
4 They said, “Moses allowed a certificate of divorce to be written, and to divorce her.”
5 But Jesus said to them, "“For your hardness of heart, he wrote you this commandment. 6 But from the beginning of the creation, God made them male and female. 7 For this cause a man will leave his father and mother, and will join to his wife, 8 and the two will become one flesh, so that they are no longer two, but one flesh. 9 What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.”"
Does this imply that by seeing these three men, he was seeing Yahweh? Is that three persons, and yet one Yahweh?
Did Yahweh lie? Or did he actually go down to Sodom to see for himself?
Originally posted by truejew
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
The Shekinah is the female pressence of God and comes from Kabbalah teaching. It has no place in Christian teaching.
I think you kinda misunderstood what I was saying...
NOT whats in the OT
The rules Jesus gave were always the rules...
I believe he merely gave the correct ones which were in place from the beginning...