tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30991724.post2545015967426816214..comments2024-02-27T03:28:22.684-06:00Comments on In Defense of the Gospel: False Paradigms of the “Crossless” Gospel #1Lou Martuneachttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08683967904677815711noreply@blogger.comBlogger93125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30991724.post-31560829789339552172007-08-29T03:43:00.000-05:002007-08-29T03:43:00.000-05:00Also, Jon, if it is your desire to delete the post...Also, Jon, if it is your desire to delete the posts where the misunderstanding occured starting with your first post on 8/28, I would also be willing to delete the post on 8/28 1:44pm.Greghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08627415936514319391noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30991724.post-58664048790701225242007-08-29T03:14:00.000-05:002007-08-29T03:14:00.000-05:00Jon, thanks for your reply. I am happy the problem...Jon, thanks for your reply. I am happy the problem was based on a misunderstanding and that is resolved. I will reply to your post later on.<BR/><BR/>-- GregGreghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08627415936514319391noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30991724.post-62577770152883323412007-08-28T17:01:00.000-05:002007-08-28T17:01:00.000-05:00Greg -Thanks for pointing out my mistake, all I ca...Greg -<BR/><BR/>Thanks for pointing out my mistake, all I can say is that I honestly misread/misinterpreted your question. I apologize.<BR/><BR/>You said -<BR/><BR/><B>"With regard to Christ's incarnation, you devised a whole new category. You said this is not essential to believe but a person cannot get saved while denying it.<BR/><BR/>My question is: a) what other truths fit into this category, and b) how do you distinguish "not affirming" and "denying" when a person refuses to "affirm" Christ's incarnation?"</B><BR/><BR/>A) all truths other than belief in the Lord Jesus Christ for eternal life.<BR/><BR/>B) A person can believe in the Lord Jesus Christ for eternal life and not know everything about him - thereby not actively denying the truth but not affirming it as well.Jon Leehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16942165441339559170noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30991724.post-18429571280439151262007-08-28T14:44:00.000-05:002007-08-28T14:44:00.000-05:00Jon,You are evading my questions and putting up sm...Jon,<BR/><BR/>You are evading my questions and putting up smoke screens. You say something and when I repeat it, you raise a fuss and deny you said it.<BR/><BR/>I said, <I> "With regard to Christ's incarnation, you devised a whole new category. You said this is not essential to believe but a person cannot get saved while denying it."</I><BR/><BR/>Jon responded, <I>"I see where you said this but where did I say this?"</I><BR/><BR/>Jon, are you kidding me!!?? You are acting like a child. You said this in two posts prior to my comment.<BR/><BR/>Let's look:<BR/><BR/>Lou specifically asked you: <I>"Do you believe a lost man can get saved (born again) even if he denies Jesus came in the flesh?"</I><BR/><BR/>Jon replied: <I> No. That is, personally, I don't think you can DENY this truth. However, you don't not need to affirm it at the point of being born again either.</I><BR/><BR/><I>"So, you can not believe in Greg's 'anti-Christ Jesus' - you must believe in the Lord Jesus Christ for eternal life. You must know that He is God, that He makes a promise and that He will make good on His promise."</I><BR/><BR/>Jon, in the above comments you say the issue is what is believed when at the point of CONVERSION. We are NOT talking about what happens after. You know that.<BR/><BR/>You specifically say in the comments above that a man can NOT get born again while denying Jesus came in the flesh (incarnation) but that it is not essential for him to believe to be saved. That is exactly what I repeated to you. You know it.<BR/><BR/>In a different place, I noted that, in your view, salvation is salvation is negated if a man denies Jesus came in the flesh but believes Jesus for eternal life. I said at least four things that show very explicitly that I am talking about what a LOST man must believe to get saved. This was the subject of our discussion. I was clearly NOT talking about someone who is already saved that denies this. You know that. Yet, you evaded the issue by pretending I am talking about perseverance and loss of salvation.<BR/><BR/>Your reply was <I>"I don't think anything can negate salvation!"</I><BR/><BR/>Jon, this is a smoke screen. I never implied anything about loosing salvation. You know I was talking about what must be believed at the point of salvation. You will not even stand behind your own answers. When I bring up the implications to your answers, you deny even having that answer. <BR/><BR/>Unless you repent about the way you are carrying on this discussion, I am done talking to you, Jon.<BR/><BR/>-- GregGreghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08627415936514319391noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30991724.post-1230149930607976032007-08-28T09:54:00.000-05:002007-08-28T09:54:00.000-05:00I've answered your very same question in another t...I've answered your very same question in another thread - twice now.<BR/><BR/>The Apostle Paul answers you in 1 Cor 15<BR/><BR/>KevKevlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18080346872086553798noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30991724.post-27046888878091436342007-08-28T09:25:00.000-05:002007-08-28T09:25:00.000-05:00Kev -Can one believe everything on your salvation ...Kev -<BR/><BR/>Can one believe everything on your salvation checklist, therefore be saved and later say that Jesus Christ did not come in the flesh and still be saved?<BR/><BR/>JLJon Leehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16942165441339559170noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30991724.post-38865778028814142302007-08-28T09:02:00.000-05:002007-08-28T09:02:00.000-05:00"..and every spirit that does not confess that Jes..."..and every spirit that <B>does not confess</B> that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God..."<BR/><BR/>This is indicating a lack of action reveals a truth. <BR/><BR/>That a spirit does this action does not prove validity.<BR/><BR/>So, if you lack a confession of Christ having come in the flesh would that be denying or simply not being aware?<BR/><BR/>I think you know the answer and that is why you chose to respond the way you did.<BR/><BR/>KevKevlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18080346872086553798noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30991724.post-37612345714094472122007-08-28T07:36:00.000-05:002007-08-28T07:36:00.000-05:00Greg says -"With regard to Christ's incarnation, y...Greg says -<BR/><BR/>"With regard to Christ's incarnation, you devised a whole new category. You said this is not essential to believe but a person cannot get saved while denying it."<BR/><BR/>I see where you said this but where did I say this?<BR/><BR/>"Your view negates salvation"<BR/><BR/>I don't think anything can negate salvation!<BR/><BR/>"...and every spirit that does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God..."<BR/><BR/>Are you saying this is on your checklist for salvation or are you taking this in context and saying that this is on the checklist to recognize false prophets?<BR/><BR/>I affirm Jesus Christ has come in the flesh. I don't deny it - I know that it is true.<BR/><BR/>By this do you know that I am saved? At least you know that I'm not a false prophet!Jon Leehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16942165441339559170noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30991724.post-30465404453999760012007-08-28T03:20:00.000-05:002007-08-28T03:20:00.000-05:00...and every spirit that does not confess that Jes...<I>...and every spirit that does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God...</I><BR/><BR/>Jon,<BR/><BR/>Would this be "denying" or "not affirming"?Greghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08627415936514319391noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30991724.post-51715016756089397212007-08-28T03:17:00.000-05:002007-08-28T03:17:00.000-05:00Jon, you said, Can a lost man say "I don't know e...Jon, you said, <I> Can a lost man say "I don't know everything but I believe in the Lord Jesus Christ for eternal life" and be saved? </I><BR/><BR/>That wasn't my question.<BR/><BR/>With regard to Christ's incarnation, you devised a whole new category. You said this is not essential to believe but a person cannot get saved while denying it. <BR/><BR/>My question is: a) what other truths fit into this category, and b) how do you distinguish "not affirming" and "denying" when a person refuses to "affirm" Christ's incarnation?<BR/><BR/>In my view, it is very simple. A lost person needs to believe essential truths that identify Him. If he does not believe/denies these truths, he is yet to believe in Jesus Christ. Other truths are not essential for salvation, even if they are denied. For example, a person does not need to believe Jesus was born of a virgin to get saved. Likewise, a person who believes the essential truths that identify Him CAN get saved while denying that He was born of a virgin.<BR/><BR/>Your view negates salvation even if a person denies certain truths that aren't essential to begin with in your view. What are these truths? If you cannot specify them, a person that denies any potentially true thing about Jesus could not have assurance of salvation.<BR/><BR/>-- GregGreghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08627415936514319391noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30991724.post-19710122661739410452007-08-27T11:04:00.000-05:002007-08-27T11:04:00.000-05:00"Last, the practical effect of your latest claim i..."Last, the practical effect of your latest claim is that perhaps we should not tell men that He came in the flesh. Since it is not essential for them to believe for salvation, we could possibly jeopardize their souls by giving them the opportunity to deny Jesus came in the flesh."<BR/><BR/>Why wouldn't you tell them Jesus has come in the flesh? I know I would.<BR/><BR/>The practical effect is that the lost person could say "I don't know but I believe in Him for eternal life". Greg - you would have people believe that they are not saved based on the testimony God has given of His Son. <BR/><BR/>No offense but I'll take God's word on this one.Jon Leehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02504094652494397357noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30991724.post-35082090505348255812007-08-27T10:26:00.000-05:002007-08-27T10:26:00.000-05:00God's checklist #1John 6:47Most assuredly, I say t...God's checklist #1<BR/><BR/>John 6:47<BR/>Most assuredly, I say to you, he who believes in Me has everlasting life.<BR/><BR/>I don't have a checklist, like you or Dennis. I just use God's.<BR/><BR/>Greg says -<BR/>"How do you distinguish between "denying" Christ is man and "not affirming" Christ is man?"<BR/><BR/>Can a lost man say "I don't know everything but I believe in the Lord Jesus Christ for eternal life" and be saved?<BR/><BR/>I say yes.....Jon Leehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02504094652494397357noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30991724.post-60295865242888128582007-08-27T03:20:00.000-05:002007-08-27T03:20:00.000-05:00How do you distinguish between "denying" Christ is...How do you distinguish between "denying" Christ is man and "not affirming" Christ is man? If a lost man is told, "Jesus came to earth in the flesh" but thinks in his heart "I won't affirm that, but I will believe in Jesus for eternal life" is he saved?<BR/><BR/>Also, in effect, Jon, you have established two check-lists related to what a lost man must believe to get saved. So far it is:<BR/><BR/>Jon's Checklist #1: MUST BE BELIEVED<BR/>- The Savior is named "Jesus" (correct me if I'm wrong)<BR/>- Jesus is God<BR/>- Jesus guarantees everlasting life to all people who believe His "promise of everlasting life" and is able to perform what He promised<BR/><BR/>Jon's Checklist #2: NOT NECESSARY TO BE AFFIRMED BUT SALVATION IS NEGATED IF DENIED:<BR/>- Jesus came to earth in the flesh<BR/><BR/>Jon, what else fits in checklist #2? For example, can a man get saved while denying Jesus died for our sins and rose again?<BR/><BR/>Last, the practical effect of your latest claim is that perhaps we should not tell men that He came in the flesh. Since it is not essential for them to believe for salvation, we could possibly jeopardize their souls by giving them the opportunity to deny Jesus came in the flesh.<BR/><BR/>-- GregGreghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08627415936514319391noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30991724.post-50777075206567474982007-08-27T03:19:00.000-05:002007-08-27T03:19:00.000-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.Greghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08627415936514319391noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30991724.post-32030428165693496812007-08-26T19:48:00.000-05:002007-08-26T19:48:00.000-05:00Jon:You wrote, “If anything, we should learn that ...Jon:<BR/><BR/>You wrote, “<I>If anything, we should learn that we can't make the Bible say more about the requirement for eternal life than it does</I>!”<BR/><BR/>It is error to add or take away from the Gospel. <BR/><BR/>Lordship Salvation adds, the “<I>Crossless</I>” gospel reduces the message to where it becomes almost meaningless. The lost man can deny Christ’s deity, not know or believe he is sinner, not know or believe Jesus died on the cross and rose from the dead.<BR/><BR/>Hodges has lead men to believe that one only needs to believe in the name of Jesus, not knowing anything about who He is or what He did to provide salvation, and that lost man can be born again.<BR/><BR/>I have already had several men who are following Hodges' "Crossless" interpretation go on record saying the lost man can consciously reject that Jesus is God and still be saved. You did not make the grave error, but it seems many are.<BR/><BR/>The following appears in the introduction to my book, <I>In Defense of the Gospel</I>. I had the kind of teaching that we are seeing from Hodges in mind when I first wrote this in 1997.<BR/><BR/>“<I>Many have been alarmed at the increasingly meaningless presentation of a gospel that seems to ignore the person of Christ, the sinfulness of man and the pending judgment of God. This gospel calls men to salvation when they have been given only a vague idea of just what they need to be saved from</I>.”<BR/><BR/>My worst fears on just how far Hodges would depart from orthodoxy, and even worse lead others into error, have been realized.<BR/><BR/><BR/>LMLou Martuneachttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08683967904677815711noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30991724.post-40644752375236233382007-08-26T08:38:00.000-05:002007-08-26T08:38:00.000-05:00No.That is, personally, I don't think you can DENY...No.<BR/><BR/>That is, personally, I don't think you can DENY this truth. However, you don't not need to affirm it at the point of being born again either. It's only on the man made Dennis Rokser checklist - it's not a Biblical requirement.<BR/><BR/>So, you can not believe in Greg's "anti-Christ Jesus" - you must believe in the Lord Jesus Christ for eternal life. You must know that He is God, that He makes a promise and that He will make good on His promise.<BR/><BR/>"This is serious business Jon."<BR/><BR/>Thanks for pointing that out Lou. I'm aware of how significant correct doctrine is - especially in evangelism. That's why I'm here.<BR/><BR/>That's why John wrote to brothers, Christians, not to be swayed by false doctrine.<BR/><BR/>If anything, we should learn that we can't make the Bible say more about the requirement for eternal life than it does!Jon Leehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02504094652494397357noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30991724.post-42820980780319283162007-08-26T01:03:00.000-05:002007-08-26T01:03:00.000-05:00Jon:Greg said, "You're the one who says a person c...Jon:<BR/><BR/>Greg said, "<I>You're the one who says a person can get saved while denying Jesus came in the flesh</I>."<BR/><BR/>This is serious business Jon.<BR/><BR/>I am going to, (for the first time), ask for a "Yes" or "No" answer.<BR/><BR/><B>Do you believe a lost man can get saved (born again) even if he denies Jesus came in the flesh?</B><BR/><BR/>Do you take that position? Please reply, "Yes" or "No," and then feel free to expand if you wish to.<BR/><BR/>Thanks,<BR/><BR/><BR/>LMLou Martuneachttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08683967904677815711noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30991724.post-20946458721385336472007-08-26T00:33:00.000-05:002007-08-26T00:33:00.000-05:00Jon, I have a clear conscience before God. You're ...Jon, I have a clear conscience before God. You're the one who says a person can get saved while denying Jesus came in the flesh. John says that is not the true Jesus. That is an anti-Christ fabrication. I hope you will seriously think about the Scriptures in my prior post.<BR/><BR/>-- GregGreghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08627415936514319391noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30991724.post-43474420092599992702007-08-25T17:02:00.000-05:002007-08-25T17:02:00.000-05:00Greg -"Whoever believes the Son of God makes the p...Greg -<BR/><BR/>"Whoever believes the Son of God makes the promise of life..."<BR/><BR/>It's not believing He makes the promise but believing that what He has promised He is also able to perform ie.."He who believes in Me has eternal life"....<BR/><BR/>"In your view, a person can believe in the anti-Christ Jesus of gnosticism for salvation"<BR/><BR/>Wow - start praying for yourself! To call the Son of God who guarantees eternal life to all who believe in Him the anti-christ sounds close to being an unpardonable sin. Don't pray for me - pray for yourself that God will forgive your fleshly desire to take ownership of His truth to such an extent as to side with Satan himself!Jon Leehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02504094652494397357noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30991724.post-61233316609372125952007-08-25T00:04:00.000-05:002007-08-25T00:04:00.000-05:00Jon, the condition Jesus spoke is this: "He who be...Jon, the condition Jesus spoke is this: <I>"He who believes in Me..."</I> <BR/><BR/>If your view were true, wouldn't it have been better for Him to phrase the condition: <I>"Whoever believes the Son of God makes the promise of life..."</I><BR/><BR/>Instead, in the passage we're talking about, He called people to believe on Him as <I>"The Bread of Life" </I>(John 6:35; 47-48).<BR/><BR/>Notice the parallel:<BR/><BR/><I>"<B>I am the bread of life</B>. He who comes to <B>me</B> shall never hunger..."</I> (John 6:35)<BR/><BR/><I>"He who believes in <B>Me</B> has eternal life. <B>I am the bread of life</B>" </I>(John 6:48).<BR/><BR/>Jesus is clearly calling people to believe on Him as <I>"The Bread of Life"</I>. Let's consider Christ's own words about this:<BR/><BR/>No less than five times (John 6:33; 38; 41; 50; 51) Jesus and the writer emphasize Jesus' incarnation. <I>"The Bread of Life"</I> refers not just to some abstract concept of sustenance but the incarnation of the Son of God from heaven. Look at these verses yourself. I would also point out that everyone recorded in John's Gospel believed He was a man. That wasn't the problem! The problem was believing this man is also God. So I am surprised you believe a lost person can deny that Jesus is a man who ever came to earth and be saved as long as they believe the Son of God named "Jesus" guarantees everlasting life. In your view, a person can believe in the anti-Christ Jesus of gnosticism for salvation (1John 4:3; 2John 7; compare these verses to 2Cor. 11:4).<BR/><BR/>When speaking of Himself as <I>"The Bread of Life"</I>, Jesus emphasized the essential truth about the giving of His flesh and blood. He emphasized that it is essential to believe in His death for us. The whole concept of the Father "giving" the bread of heaven implies His death. The incarnation is absolutely meaningless without His death. The "giving" of His Son is not complete without His death and resurrection. That's why Jesus emphasizes the His death for us (6:51, 53, 54, 55, 56) and refers to His resurrection (6:51; 57).<BR/><BR/>Notice also this parallel:<BR/><BR/>"<B>He who believes in Me</B> has eternal life" (John 6:47)<BR/><BR/>"<B>He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood</B> has eternal life".<BR/><BR/>Shouldn't this clue you in to what it means to believe in Him!? This sounds awfully close to what you said the verse should say if my view were true!<BR/><BR/>You also mentioned the historical context of this verse. I have not forgotten the historical context. But did you forget that Christ spoke this fairly shortly before He died and these people would live to understand His words? Did you take into account that John puts them in his gospel for us and expects us to understand them in light of Christ's completed work? I would also point out several of Christ's statements to historical people of His day were made so that those same people would understand them after the cross (e.g. John 3:14-16; 7:37-39; 8:21-24, 28; 12:32-33).<BR/><BR/>I am praying for you.<BR/><BR/>-- GregGreghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08627415936514319391noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30991724.post-8997296317622123802007-08-24T07:55:00.000-05:002007-08-24T07:55:00.000-05:00Greg - I get where you're coming from - here's the...Greg - <BR/><BR/>I get where you're coming from - here's the difference that we have as I see it. <BR/><BR/>You are treating John 6:47 as if it where in the third person - like Paul stated this rather than Christ making a real offer to those present. <BR/><BR/>Since it is the Lord Jesus Christ, the sustainer of eternal life, these words spoken to those present where effective to impart eternal life to all who would simply believe in Him. There is no mention of the cross. <BR/><BR/>We are going to differ on eating His body and drinking His blood - we've already been over that. If there were anything more to having eternal life than believing in Him wouldn't it have been important for Him to say something like "He who believes in my death and resurrection has eternal life"?Jon Leehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16942165441339559170noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30991724.post-67328110826409290442007-08-22T14:20:00.000-05:002007-08-22T14:20:00.000-05:00Jon, I have tried to politely show you the self-co...Jon, I have tried to politely show you the self-contradictory nature of your paradigm on John 6:47. I am dumbfounded that you cannot see the obvious. I'm satisfied to leave this convo with you 'as is' so anybody looking at it can make their own judgment.Greghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08627415936514319391noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30991724.post-26890949157486368272007-08-22T07:30:00.000-05:002007-08-22T07:30:00.000-05:00Sorry - I posted this under the wrong thread."Do y...Sorry - I posted this under the wrong thread.<BR/><BR/>"Do you believe someone has to believe Jesus came as a man in order to be saved?"<BR/><BR/>No.<BR/><BR/>Do you believe if someone believes Jesus came as a man they are saved?<BR/><BR/>"Jon, you are proving my point!! I obviously agree the Lord Jesus Christ spoke these words."<BR/><BR/>Careful Greg - you're starting to look Crossless!<BR/><BR/>The bottom line is John 6:47 does have enough information as long as you know who is speaking these words - the Lord Jesus Christ. He is saying that He alone sustains us eternally ie. The Bread of Life.Jon Leehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16942165441339559170noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30991724.post-12905287712921587922007-08-22T07:22:00.000-05:002007-08-22T07:22:00.000-05:00"Jon, with all due respect, you are not thinking c..."Jon, with all due respect, you are not thinking clearly. I wonder if you need to take some time off to just think about these things before the Lord? I am not saying this to be condescending. I am saying this because the problem is repeating where you offer some sort of reasoning, I show your reasoning is wrong, and then you just continue on with your false reasoning that proves my point to begin with. What I'm talking about right now isn't even necessarily an interpretational issue but simple reasoning."<BR/><BR/>Greg -<BR/><BR/>I feel the same way. Please pray to God that you would be His disciple and not Dennis or Tom's. Pray that His word alone would be enough to sustain you.<BR/><BR/>We aren't getting anywhere. You have ceased to prove your point and continue to make a mess of the clear and simple plan of salvation. I know I won't convict you so I will leave it to someone far greater than I.<BR/><BR/>In Christ,<BR/><BR/>JLJon Leehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16942165441339559170noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30991724.post-10234466242180020522007-08-21T22:01:00.000-05:002007-08-21T22:01:00.000-05:00Jon, with all due respect, you are not thinking cl...Jon, with all due respect, you are not thinking clearly. I wonder if you need to take some time off to just think about these things before the Lord? I am not saying this to be condescending. I am saying this because the problem is repeating where you offer some sort of reasoning, I show your reasoning is wrong, and then you just continue on with your false reasoning that proves my point to begin with. What I'm talking about right now isn't even necessarily an interpretational issue but simple reasoning.<BR/><BR/>Let me again dissect what just happened.<BR/><BR/>Jon, you keep repeating the argument that John 6:47 MUST detail the essential arguments of the content of faith. However, you believe Christ's Deity and name are essential elements, yet I pointed out these elements are not detailed in the sentence of John 6:47 itself.<BR/><BR/>In order to defend your position, you replied: "My answer is yes (that John 6:47 DOES detail all of these elements) based on who spoke these words".<BR/><BR/>Jon, you are proving my point!! If all you heard was John 6:47, you would NOT know enough. Instead, someone would have to tell you: 1) that JESUS spoke these words and 2) that JESUS is God. I pointed out that completely contradicts your point that John 6:47 must detail all of the essential elements.<BR/><BR/>In order to defend your position, you replied: "You have not shown me that anyone else other than the Lord Jesus Christ"<BR/><BR/>Jon, you are proving my point!! I obviously agree the Lord Jesus Christ spoke these words. But, by your same reasoning, I could say say, "You have not shown me that anyone else other than the Lamb of God, Christ crucified, the Bread of Life, the Lord Jesus Christ who died for our sins spoke these words." We agree on who spoke the words. The point is, John 6:47 itself does not detail all of the elements in my view, your view, or even the view of GES. All of us are adding at least one thing, and all of us can say, "You have yet to show me that the One who spoke this view is NOT...." By adding information, you put yourself in the same boat as the view you say is illegitimate on this very basis. Every one of your explanations for this can just as easily be used by us.<BR/><BR/>That is the simple logical fact of the matter.<BR/><BR/>In terms of interpreting John 6:47, in the very next sentence Jesus defines the "Me" He wants us to believe in, i.e., "the Bread of Life". As I pointed out in the article, He did not mandate we believe in the literal term "Bread of Life" but the truths signified by it which He explained in the context.<BR/><BR/>In relationship to this, I have a question for you. Jesus repeatedly emphasizes that the Bread of Life is the incarnate God. Do you believe someone has to believe Jesus came as a man in order to be saved?<BR/><BR/>Thanks,<BR/>GregGreghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08627415936514319391noreply@blogger.com