To Him That Has An Ear Hear What The Bible Says Is The Christian Confession

Transcription

1 The Confession of 1-John 4: November 13, 2010 To Him That Has An Ear Hear What The Bible Says Is The Christian Confession The Biblical Confession Affirms That The Christ Is Right Now Still In The Flesh! In our society, it is not politically correct to use the Bible to make personal judgments against people. Nevertheless, it is our duty to make personal judgments so that we may know the difference between right and wrong. We must make personal judgments every day, but only God has the right to make final eternal condemnations. In 1-John 4:2, God provides His children with a test. We are to use this test to make a very serious judgment about others. The test tells how to discern between the spirit of God and the spirit of Antichrist. Even without assigning condemnation, this is a very serious accusation to make against someone else. Those that pass the test can be called very nice things. However, those that do not pass this test are called Antichrists. Certainly, such a serious accusation must be backed up by a very clear test. Quoting the King James Bible, 1-John 4:2: Hereby, know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is in the flesh is of God: And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist In the English language this test seems to be simple enough. Certainly all Christians can pass this test. However, the trouble is that this test is too simple. Many people of other religions can also pass this same test. Many Jews do not deny that Jesus lived, and some will allow that he was an anointed Messiah, but, a Messiah only in the sense that King David was also an anointed Messiah too. The Muslims also believe that Jesus lived, and was a prophet that will again. So the Muslims can pass this test. Many of the eastern religions also believe that Jesus lived as a spiritually enlightened man, that he was a great prophet, even a Messiah, just like Buddha. So even those in the eastern religions can pass this test. It appears that this test is just too easy to pass. However, ask yourself: is it prudent to believe that God provided His children with a worthless test? Why provide a test at all, if it is not really a good test? Well, 1-John 4:2 is a good test. The traditional English translations do not have it translated correctly, on purpose. Reading the confession in the Greek Text reveals just how serious of a test it really is. In the Greek language, this verse forms a confession so serious, that the first reaction of most Christians is, No, this cannot be true! In this test is the affirmation against the traditional teachings about the nature of the Christ. In this test is the affirmation that Christ is not a spirit God-Person sent from heaven. The Trinity and other preexistent views of the Christ are directly refuted by this Biblical confession. In this test, the confessor affirms that the vast majority of traditional Christianity is in serious doctrinal error..

2 The following Grammatical Analysis of the Greek Text is taken from: 1. "The Complete Word Study New Testament with Parallel Greek" 1992 Spiros Zodhiates and AMG International, Inc. AMG Publishers. 2. "Analytical Greek New Testament" 1981 Baker Book House Company. 3. "Net Bible, New Testament Clarified and Explained in 15,950 Footnotes" 1998 Biblical Studies Press, L.L.C. 4. "Thayer Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament" (Lexicon) 1977 Baker Book House Company, Twelfth printing March Primary Source: the 2 nd Century Greek Grammar written in the Canon of Apollonious of Dyscolus. It says this about anarthrous proper names! Throughout this article the Greek Text is being quoted. The Greek Text uses the word translated as Jesus. This author will therefore use this name Jesus for the Messiah, even though it is not historically correct. Normally, this author personally prefers to use the Aramaic pronunciations, Ya-ho-wah for YHWH, and Ya-ho-shua for Jesus. Getting Started To understand this confession we will concentrate on these English words from the King James Bible: [confesseth that] Jesus Christ is in the flesh In the Greek Text, there are only five words to be understood, in this order: " Jesus + Christ + in + flesh + is- " Now we will dive deep into the Greek grammar. Why talk about Greek grammar? Because the Bible was not written in English, it was written in the Greek language, so we must understand the Greek grammar to understand what the author is telling us. This is not as hard as you may think. We just let the Greek scholars tell us how to do this. Ask: if the Greek Text was not in the Bible, but written in anything else, then how would the Greek scholars analyze and translate this text? Jesus Christ in + flesh is- an nn 5547 pfp 2064 is an Anarthrous Noun The Verb an, nn 2424 is an Anarthrous Noun N-AM-S Jesus : Noun, accusative, masculine, singular N-AM-S Christ : Noun, accusative, masculine, singular "in" == 1722 and "flesh" == an, nn 4561 Preposition, plus is an Anarthrous Noun PD and N-DF-S "in": Preposition, dative "flesh": Noun, dative, feminine, singular VPRAAM-S : Verb, participle, perfect, active, accusative, masculine, singular Page 2 of 18

3 Anarthrous: Not the noun, but the qualities of the noun. Expresses the nature or character of the noun. Such as the noun s attributes, classification, what it means to be like that noun. Jesus : the character of Jesus everything that Jesus stands for, His renown, Jesus the hero, Jesus the legend. Anarthrous: Not the noun, but the qualities of the noun. Expresses the nature or character of the noun. Such as the noun s attributes, classification, what it means to be like that noun. Christ : means anointed, so the Anarthrous is the qualities of being anointed everything that being the anointed stands for, the renown, the hero, the legend. Anarthrous: Not the noun, but the qualities of the noun. Expresses the nature or character of the noun. Such as the noun s attributes, classification, what it means to be like that noun. in flesh : the qualities of being in flesh everything that being in flesh stands for, the renown, the condition, the experience Perfect: Stresses that the state brought about by the verb, is still present or still happening. The verb, or the effects of the verb, are still happening right now. is- : and is still present or happening right now: is and is-still-now. The primary point is that there is no past tense in this thought. Nouns in the Greek Anarthrous Form What is the difference between the words brother and brotherhood? Both are nouns, but one is a specific thing, while the other is a generalized thing as a concept. One refers to a relationship, while the other refers to the more abstract concept of feeling such a relationship, or belonging to such a relationship. The Greek grammar has a special condition to distinguish such differences. Every time a noun is used, that noun can either have the word the with it, or not. The Greek text will use the same word, brother, but when it wants to refer to the specific thing, it puts the word the with it, and when it wants to refer to the generalized thing, it omits the the, it is not there. So in Greek I would have the following: Greek English That is my the brother That is my brother the person That is my brother That is my brotherhood the concept, the group When reading the Greek Text, it is paramount to notice whether or not the the is there with the noun. It makes a huge difference in the meaning of the sentence. In English, we also have this difference expressed as two different words, such as the difference between the President and the Presidency. In Greek grammar this same thought could be expressed by simply using the primary noun, President, and either including or excluding the the. The noun President, written in the anarthrous leaving out the the, would tell the Greek reader to think Presidency instead. Greek English This is my the President This is my Present the person This is my President This is my Presidency - the concept, the office-of Now all this grammar detail with the anarthrous is not a cut-and-dried as may be hoped. Here is one reference: : Page 3 of 18

4 Anarthrous nouns are generally translated in English with the indefinite article ("a, an"). However, some anarthrous nouns are qualitative and are often translated without an article. And here is an even better expert, the grammatical rules written by someone who wrote about Greek grammar in the same time-frame as this verse was written. Please go to this website: : The canon of Apollonius of Dyscolus, a second-century grammarian, states that two nouns in regimen [back-to-back] are either both articular or both anarthrous. The second century grammarian mentions exceptions, and modern scholars cite examples when very specific cases and tenses are germane. However, these special exceptions do not apply in this verse. Also, in this verse we have three anarthrous nouns, not just two. Since this second century grammarian tells us that in nearly all cases all of the nouns stay together, they are all definite (with the the ) or they are all indefinite (no the ), then let us avoid making any assumptions at all. Not making any decisions yet on translation, all this anarthrous grammar means that there are six possible ways to translate each of the three anarthrous nouns. So allow each anarthrous noun to go both ways: A. Let s say that the word Jesus is meant to be definite; the person, the Jesus, himself: B. Let s say that the word Jesus is meant to be indefinite; the character of Jesus, the higher concept of the office or characteristics of being Jesus : C. Let s say that the word Christ is meant to be definite; the entity, the Anointed : D. Let s say that the word Christ is meant to be indefinite; the characteristics of being an Anointed, the higher concept of the office or capacity of being Anointed : E. Let s say that the word flesh is meant to be definite; the thing that is in the flesh : F. Let s say that the word flesh is meant to be indefinite; the characteristics of being fleshly, the condition of being in flesh : Each of these six possibilities, A-F, are analyzed below. But first, a little more grammar is needed. Three Equally Valid Grammatical Constructs Grammatically, the entire phrase, "Confesses + Jesus + Christ + in + flesh + is-", has three equally valid constructs as shown below. The translator makes the choice about which grammatical construct to use. There is no grammatical reason to choose one construct over the other. The only way to know which to use is by context, which optional grammatical construct forms a serious confession-test. Each of the following three constructs have equal translation validity: (Source: The Net Bible footnote 17, this grammar requires a half-page to explain) Page 4 of 18

5 1. The entire phrase is a single object, one thought, of the verb "to confess". We confess "Jesus Christ in flesh is as one thought. 2. The verb "to confess" may be followed by a double accusative, so that both "Jesus Christ" and "in flesh" are two objects, two thoughts, of the verb "to confess". We confess "Jesus Christ is and we confess "in flesh is as two thoughts. 3. The same double accusative (as #2) except that the two objects are "Jesus" and "Christ in flesh". We confess "Jesus is and we confess "Christ in flesh is as two thoughts. Each of these three choices are equally valid, each derived directly from the text's grammatical structure. The question is: Which translation option forms a serious test? The Three Optional Constructs: We Confess That Grammar Object #1 A. the Jesus, himself + C. the entity, the Anointed + E. these things in the flesh A. the Jesus, himself + C. the entity, the Anointed A. the Jesus, himself Grammar Object #2 C. the entity, the Anointed + E. these things in the flesh Or Grammar Object #2 E. these things in the flesh is and is still is and is still is and is still Page 5 of 18

6 B. the character / renown of Jesus + D. the characteristics of being an Anointed + F. the characteristics of being fleshly B. the character / renown of Jesus + D. the characteristics of being an Anointed B. the character / renown of Jesus D. the characteristics of being an Anointed + F. the characteristics of being fleshly F. the characteristics of being fleshly is and is still is and is still is and is still Here are the close mental-thoughts of each option: We Confess That Grammar Object Grammar Object Or Grammar Verb #1 #2 Object #2 A. the Jesus C. the Christ E. in the flesh is and is still Options #1, 2, 3 1.) the Jesus + the Christ + in the flesh 2.) the Jesus + the Christ 3.) the Jesus the Christ + Options #4, 5, 6 4.) Jesus herohood + Christ-hood + fleshly-ness 5.) Jesus hero-hood + Christ-hood 6.) Jesus hero-hood in the flesh Christ-hood + fleshly-ness in the flesh fleshly-ness is and is still is and is still is and is still is and is still is and is still is and is still Page 6 of 18

7 Please read each of these above options as if you had to really confess them. Which ones could you in all honesty confess? Which ones make you have to think about it first? Your decision will focus on what it means is and is still? Which ever confession is the real test-confession, it will be a serious test, because the objects of confession are both is AND is still, it is still here even now at this very moment. Notice that the Greek text did not use the past-tense form of this verb. It does not say, has and is-still-now-. The author is only talking to us in the current presence tense, telling us what is now true, and what is still now true. Look at each option one at a time. Which one eliminates those of the other religions? Which confession can be used to separate people out? How do those who believe what is taught by the traditional Christian world hold up to these confession-options? 1.) First Table Option: the Jesus the Christ in the flesh is and is still is of God Now this confession-option could give people a problem. Most of traditional Christianity believe that the Christ is the God-Person who came down from heaven and manifested Himself in the form of a human named Jesus. But within this believe, is that there is always a separation between the fleshly man, Jesus, and the spiritual God-Person, Christ. This believe concept cannot have the Christ in the flesh at the same time! God cannot be in the flesh, as that would make God touch the lower nature of man caused by the original sin, God would then touch sin! However, there is a way around this problem. If the confessor inserts the idea of who is the in the sentence, then that would make it okay. Then they could think this while they say: which confesses [that] the Jesus (who is) the Christ in the flesh is Now this is not being honest with the Greek Text, but, this mental-insertion is exactly what people do to keep their current concept of the Christ, being incarnate in the flesh of Jesus. With this simple mental insertion, the confessor can recite this sentence, and is only saying that the man Jesus came, and in men s hearts is still, and that Jesus is the Christ who became manifested in the flesh for awhile. But what if you are an honest person, and do not want to play games by inserting words into the confession? Well, if you are honestly reciting this confession, then you would be putting all three thoughts together as one thought, one grammatical object. You would be saying the Jesus + the Christ + in the flesh all together as one thought. With this confession-option you would be saying that: the Jesus is and is still, and saying that: Page 7 of 18

8 the Christ is and is still, and saying that: both of these as one thought in the flesh is and is still. Both Jesus and Christ came (past tense about 2,000 years ago) in flesh, yes Christ in flesh too, and even now both are still in the flesh! Understand, this is not claiming that Jesus is one person and that Christ is another. Jesus is the man, and Christ is the title Jesus holds, the Anointed. There is only one personal-entity, the Jesus the Anointed. the Jesus the Anointed in the flesh is and is still is of God Please notice that as soon as you remove the errant doctrine that the Christ is a preexistent spirit God-Person sent from heaven, and read the Greek Text as it is written, as the Anointed, then the confession bes easy and uncomplicated. Jesus is the resurrected man who has the title of the Anointed, and who is still in the flesh, right now. Do Not Be Shocked! Do not be too shocked for this in the flesh assertion within the confession-text. The earliest Bishops believed this: "Ignatius, bishop of Antioch, writing to the Smyrnians in Asia Minor toward the close of the first century, insists upon the reality of Jesus' physical resurrection from the dead. While making this point he writes, 'But I know that even after his resurrection he was in the flesh; and I believe that he still is so.' " We can trace Ignatius teachers back to the original disciples, the actual eye witnesses. What did they see? They saw the man Jesus resurrected from being dead. They saw that he was composed of flesh and bone, not flesh and blood (Luke 24:39), they touched Jesus, He ate fish and honey, He walked and He talked in the flesh. They saw Him rise up into heaven, and they were told that Jesus will back in the same manner. Who is the surviving entity of the resurrection? It is the Jesus, not anyone or anything else. What Is So Significant About This Confession? Jesus was born as flesh and blood through Mary. There is nothing significant about confessing that the Jesus in the flesh is. The confessor just thinks past tense, that the man Jesus did about 2,000 years ago in flesh, and then there is nothing pressing on what he has been taught by traditional Christianity. But the verb used in the Greek Text means is and is still. The traditional English Bibles do not tell you that part of the confession. It is extremely significant that the confessor must think Present Tense, and recite that the Jesus in the flesh is and is still! The surviving personality of the resurrection is the Jesus, and He was given a new body of flesh and bone that cannot die anymore. It is this same the Jesus who is now in heaven with the Father, at this very Page 8 of 18

9 moment in the flesh, just as Enoch and others have been. We will be given similar new bodies in our resurrection too! Further, there is nothing significant about confessing that the Christ in the flesh is if the confessor just thinks past tense. Yes, he thinks, Christ did about 2,000 years ago in a manifestation of flesh by incarnating the man Jesus. By switching the Greek Text to past tense, and then pointing at Jesus as being in the flesh, and that the Christ was just borrowing Jesus body for awhile, does not press on what is taught by traditional Christianity. But the verb used in the Greek Text means is and is still. It is extremely significant that the confessor must think Present Tense. The confession is that the Christ in the flesh is and is still right now! What Have You Been Taught? It is all a matter of what you have been taught to think is the definition of the Christ. The Greek word means anointed. The whole reason for confessing is to believe that the anointed is the Anointed of YHWH. This is the hero that YHWH promised to Abraham to from his own seed (DNA) to be the Messiah (Hebrew/Aramaic) the Christ (Greek). The whole significance of the word the anointed is that you know this refers to the Anointed of YHWH, which He promised to Moses that would after Moses as the Prophet. The point is that it is of paramount significance that the confessor is to believe that the Anointed in the flesh is and is still in the Present Tense! Not only does this confession directly refute the doctrine of the Trinity, but we are to understand and believe that the Anointed the Messiah the Christ is still at this present time as promised in the flesh! Both of the Greek grammar objects, the Jesus and the Christ, are both still in the flesh right now, and this directly refutes what is taught by traditional Christianity. For those who believe in the Trinity, or that Jesus preexisted as a spirit-person, ask yourself: What do the scriptures teach about who survived death by being resurrected back to life again? Is it the man Jesus, or is it the spirit God-Person Christ that survived? The scriptures say that it is Jesus who was resurrected back to life. That it is this same man, Jesus, that is the Anointed (Messiah) of God, the one who is called the Christ (Matthew 1:16), the Anointed is His title. This teaching is not some kind of blasphemy! It is not a blasphemy to talk about the Jesus the Christ as not being a preexisting spirit God-Person. We are never told that we must believe that the Christ preexisted, nor that the resurrected son of God is now God too. Page 9 of 18

10 This below is very important to remember! No where in the Greek Text are we told that we must believe in a preexisting Christ spirit God-Person. Nor are we told that we must believe that the Christ came down from heaven, and be incarnate in the flesh of a man Jesus for awhile. This concept of the Christ the Anointed the Messiah is just simply not in the Greek Text, not anywhere. We are never told that salvation s from believing these teachings. We are never told that salvation is lost when we do not believe these teachings. We are told that we must believe in the resurrection of the man Jesus back to life again, who is now called The Son of God, who is now the promised Anointed (the Christ, the Messiah) of God, and is now at the right hand of God, and is now sitting in heaven with God. These teachings are what we are told to believe. We are told that salvation s from believing these teachings. It is therefore unfair for anyone to shout out: Blasphemy!. This is a very significant subject, but this subject should never be elevated to the level of telling people that they are going to hell if they don t believe in the Trinity, or a preexistent spirit-person as the Christ. Let the Greek Text tell us what we are to believe in order to be saved. 2.) Second Table Option: the Jesus the Christ in the flesh is and is still is of God Now this confession-option could give people a problem too, for the same reasons given above. However, there is also a way around this problem. If the confessor inserts the idea of who was in the sentence, then that would make it okay. Then they could think this while they say: which confesses [that] the Jesus the Christ (who was) in the flesh is This is not being honest with the Greek Text again, but, this mental-insertion is exactly what people do to keep their concept of the Christ being incarnate in the flesh of Jesus. With this simple mental insertion, the confessor can recite the sentence, and is only saying that the savior Jesus Christ came, and in men s hearts is still, and that Jesus Christ was also in the flesh for awhile. Notice that this mental insertion also requires that the confessor thinks that Christ is the last name of Jesus, so that they both run together as one name. But Christ it is not Jesus last name, the Anointed is His title. But what if you are an honest person and do not want to play games by inserting words into the confession? Well, if you are honestly reciting this confession-option, then you would be saying that: the Jesus the Christ is and is still, and saying that: this in the flesh is and is still. Page 10 of 18

11 Both the Jesus the Christ came (past tense about 2,000 years ago) in flesh, yes Christ was in the flesh too, and even now the Jesus the Christ is still in the flesh, even at this moment! the Jesus the Anointed in the flesh is and is still is of God Remember, that the Greek word Christ simply means Anointed. The Greek Text says the Jesus the Anointed. This is a title, even an official position as a result of being anointed. Consider how very far a field you are getting, when you insist upon using the English word Christ, and then you insist upon applying the Trinitarian-like preexistence definition of this word into the sentence, and thereby force the confession to mean something completely different. 3.) Third Table Option: the Jesus the Christ in the flesh is and is still is of God Now this confession definitely will give people a problem. Even if the confessor inserts the idea of who is the in the sentence, it still would not be okay. Listen to this mental insertion: which confesses [that] the Jesus (who is) the Christ in the flesh is is of God At first this may sound okay, like confession-option #1 above. But this sentence still has the Christ in the flesh, as one thought, as one grammatical object, which means this is no longer separate ideas. This option emphatically has the Christ in the flesh still being in the flesh, even to this day! Those who believe that the Christ is God, and came down to incarnate Himself in Jesus, these people cannot allow that their Christ be in heaven as God, and still be in the flesh at the same time! Their Christ has to be a spirit-being made of Light in heaven, and cannot be made of a fleshly sinful substance. Most Christians cannot say this confessionoption without doing a lot of very clever mental insertions and ya-but excuses. But the honest person knows that this confession-option has him saying that: the Jesus is and is still, and saying that: the Christ in the flesh is in the flesh and is still in the flesh. Both Jesus and Christ-in-the-flesh came (past tense about 2,000 years ago) in flesh, yes this makes Christ made up of flesh back then, and even now both are still in the flesh! Remember again, this is not claiming that Jesus is one person and that Christ-in-theflesh is another. Jesus is the man, and Christ-in-the-flesh is the title Jesus holds. The Jesus the Anointed-in-the-flesh. Page 11 of 18

12 the Jesus the Anointed in the flesh is and is still is of God For emphasis: please notice that as soon as you remove the errant doctrine that the Christ is a preexistent spirit-being from heaven, and let the Greek word be what it is, the Anointed, then the confession bes easy and uncomplicated. Jesus is the resurrected man who is still in the flesh (flesh and bone, not flesh and blood), and who has the title of being the Anointed-in-the-flesh. The above concludes the three confession-options in which the translation allows the intent to be using the definite-noun interpretation. Now, does it make any difference if the translation allows that the intent is to use the indefinite-noun interpretation? 4.) Forth Table Option: Jesus hero-hood Christ-hood in fleshly-ness is and is still is of God No, it does not make any difference if the translation of this confession-option allows that the intent is to use the indefinite-noun interpretation. It does not matter that the nouns are higher-level concepts, most people still have the same problem. The dishonest confessor still needs to mentally insert the idea of who is the in the sentence to make it okay. Then they could think this as they say: which confesses [that] Jesus hero-hood (who is the) Christ-hood in fleshly-ness is However, the honest confessor would recite this confession-option as follows by putting all three thoughts together as one thought, one grammatical object. The honest confessor would be saying " Jesus hero-hood + Christ-hood + in fleshly-ness " all together as one thought. With this confession-option you would be saying that Jesus hero-hood is and is still, and saying that: Christ-hood is and is still, and saying that: both of these as one thought in fleshly-ness is and is still. Both Jesus ministry and resurrection and His Christ-hood came (past tense about 2,000 years ago) in fleshly-ness, and even now both are still in fleshly-ness! Again, remember that this is not claiming that Jesus is one person and that Christ is another. Jesus is the man, and Christ is the title Jesus holds, the Anointed. Jesus heroness includes the office of the promised (to Abraham) the Anointed-One. Jesus hero-hood Anointed-hood in fleshly-ness is and is still is of God Page 12 of 18

13 5.) Fifth Table Option: Jesus hero-hood Christ-hood in fleshly-ness is and is still is of God Likewise, this confession-option gives people the same problem as #2 above, for the same reasons given above. It does not matter that the nouns are higher-level concepts, they still have the same problem. They still need to insert the words who was in the confession, only mentally of course, to make it okay. Then they could think this while they say: which confesses [that] Jesus hero-hood Christ-hood (who was) in fleshly-ness is This is not being honest with the Greek Text, because inserting the words who was breaks the thought up, so that who/what remains even to this day, is still, can be different. This splitting of the thought is exactly why inserting the words makes it okay to go ahead and say it. Now you can apply the in the flesh part to the past tense. However, the honest confessor would remember that this verb is in the Present Tense. The honest confessor will recite this confession-option as follows: Jesus hero-hood Christ-hood is and is still, and say that: this in fleshly-ness is and is still. Both Jesus ministry and resurrection and His Christ-hood came (past tense about 2,000 years ago) in fleshly-ness, and even now still is in the fleshly-ness state! Jesus hero-hood Anointed-hood in fleshly-ness is and is still is of God 6.) Sixth (and last) Table Option: Jesus hero-hood Christ-hood in fleshly-ness is and is still is of God Just as with #3 above, this confession definitely will give people a problem. Most people s belief in a Christ God-Being as the second person of the Godhead cannot allow the concept of Christ now being in a fleshly state (substance). Even if the confessor inserted the idea of who is the in the sentence, it still would not be okay. Listen to this mental insertion: which confesses [that] Jesus hero-hood (who is) Christ-hood in fleshly-ness is is of God This confession still has Christ-hood in fleshly-ness, as one thought, as one grammatical object, which is no longer separate ideas. This sentence still has Christhood being in flesh even to this day! See the problem? Either the Jesus has the Christhood and is right now in heaven as flesh, or, Christ-hood is right now in heaven as flesh. Either way, most Christians have a major problem with this. Page 13 of 18

14 For those who believe that Christ is God and came down to incarnate Himself in Jesus, these people cannot allow that Christ s God-hood with The Father in heaven is still at this moment in a fleshly condition! For emphasis: their Christ has to be a spirit-person now living in heaven composed of Light, and cannot be made up of a fleshly sinful substance. Such people cannot say this confession-option without doing a lot of very clever mental insertions into the Text. However, the honest confessor would recite this confession-option as follows: Jesus hero-hood is and is still, and say that: Christ-hood in fleshly-ness is and is still. Both Jesus ministry and resurrection and His Christ-hood in fleshly-ness came (past tense about 2,000 years ago), and even now still is in fleshly-ness! Jesus hero-hood Anointed-hood in fleshly-ness is and is still is of God Summarizing The Six Confession-Options This analyzes all of the possible options for the Biblical confession. Now which option is a truly serious test? Which of the six options is a test so powerful, that we can tell the difference between the spirit of Satan and the spirit of God? Which option is a test so conclusive, that you would be willing to point your finger at someone who could not honestly recite the confession, and tell them that they are an errant follower of Satan s counterfeit lies? Do you really understand just how very serious this confession is? Please notice that ALL OPTIONS cause a problem for those believing in the traditional Christian teachings! As it turns out, in this confession the Greek grammar does not matter. No matter how you translate it the confession forces most Christians to play games and mentally insert words into the confession before they can say it. This confession, in the Greek Text, is a major problem for anyone believing that the Christ is a preexisting spirit-being and could never be in the flesh, at any time. Everyone understands that inserting words into the Biblical Text is a no-no. Doing this is just simply being dishonest with yourself, and anyone listening to you. No one is fooling the Creator of all life with game playing and mental gymnastics. The Biblical Confession Is The Giving Of Our Allegiance By this you know the spirit of God, every spirit which confesses [that] the Jesus the Anointed in the flesh is and is still is of God Page 14 of 18

15 Can you confess this without mental tricks? No ya-but, no qualifications, and no saying afterwards that it really means this? Can you, in all honesty, before The Father, say this confession as it is in the Greek Text, and mean it, knowing all of the doctrinal ramifications? Can you confess to others that the promised seed of Abraham is in the flesh, and is still in the flesh at this very moment? You cannot say: You must say: (the entity) the Christ became the Jesus (the entity) the Jesus is the Anointed. What Happened In History To Bring This All About? In 325 AD there was a major history changing event. The Nicean Counsel was convened by Roman Emperor Constantine. You can read all about this on the Internet. This conference is well documented, as they recorded everything that happened. Resulting from this conference was the Roman legal decree that all Christians from then on must confess (believe) that the Christ preexisted, is composed of Light, and is God. The Nicean Creed was written at this conference, and everyone there was forced to sign this confession: "I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible; and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, begotten of His Father before all worlds, God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father; by whom all things were made; who for us men and for our salvation came down from Heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the virgin, Mary, and was made man; and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate;..." Christendom is taught that The Christ preexisted with The Father in heaven as God, and came down from heaven to manifest Himself as a man, Jesus, and then The Christ went back to heaven again as a spirit God-Person. But all of this is just made up by men, it is not in the Greek Text. All of this is the result of a legal decree by Rome. Look Seriously At The Nicean Creed Consider this, with all of your mind: If the Nicean Creed were in reality true, then 1-John 4:2 could not have been written as it is. Think about this. Page 15 of 18

16 The Biblical confession could not focus on the Jesus as the primary entity. It would instead have to focus on the primary entity the Christ that came down from heaven and went back up again. The Text would have to somehow make the focus on that spirit God- Person that preexisted, that incarnated Himself into a man for awhile, and then the spirit God-Person went back to heaven again. The confession could not just use the Greek word the Anointed and leave it at that. The Greek reader would never get-it, that the Anointed was in fact a preexistent spirit God-Person. The Greek reader would never be confessing that the Christ is that God- Person who incarnated Himself into the flesh of Jesus. The confessional-words would have to somehow be rewritten. Somehow it would have to tell us to confess our belief that the Anointed is the preexistent spirit God-Person that just used the body of Jesus for awhile. The confession could not use the Greek words in the flesh and just leave it at that. In order to avoid having the Christ be associated with and touch sin (the flesh), the sentence would have to somehow keep in the flesh away from the Christ. The confession would have to add more words, and rearrange them so that the spirit-person Christ would never be in the flesh. The confession would have to be rewritten so that we affirm that the God-Person Christ came down, and used Jesus flesh for awhile, but now is back in heaven as a God-Person again. The confession could not use the Greek word is and is still. Consider the ambiguity by leaving it as it is written. If in fact the Christ is a spirit God-Person that is now in heaven as God, composed of Light, and if in fact the Jesus died and was buried (the fleshly body decayed), then neither of these two entities can still now be in the flesh! If the Nicean Creed is indeed a fact, then this Biblical confession is simply too ambiguous to be any kind of a serious test. The confession would not say what it is suppose to say. It would not be clear, it would not be asserting anything close to the imagery of the Nicean Creed, and it does not have the focus of confession on the Christ. But the Greek Text confession does not say anything close to the Nicean Creed! The focus is on the Jesus. We are to confess the Jesus the Anointed in the flesh has and is still. No mention of a preexistent Christ spirit God-Person. Just the opposite. These three grammar-objects of the confession are still in the flesh, right now, still here! Consider Who Has The Focus? Consider just how simple the Gospel really is, by reading Acts 3:13-21: The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the God of our forefathers [this has to be YHWH], has glorified His servant-child Jesus [who is glorified? the Christ or the Jesus?]... You killed the founding-leader of life whom God raised from the dead Page 16 of 18

17 [who was raised from death? the Jesus ]... And on the basis of faith in Jesus name... The faith that is through Jesus... God foretold long ago that His Messiah would suffer... so that He may send the Messiah appointed for you that is Jesus. [ the Jesus is the Messiah, which is the Christ, which is the Anointed of YHWH, it is the Jesus who is the focus!] Please read the whole chapter: It is the man Jesus who is the focal entity we are to recognize as being God s Messiah, the Anointed. Further, we are told that the Jesus was resurrected as flesh and bone (Luke 24:39), and that He ate fish. Also consider: If it were true that the Jews and Romans had just killed a divine spirit God-Person on the cross, do you think that such a grave sin would not be a major point to be revealed later in the scriptures? But the scriptures do not talk about a spirit God- Person performing manifestations as a man, nor that this spirit God-Person was killed. The scriptures use simple language to talk about a bloodline descendant of Abraham (DNA) becoming YHWH s promised Messiah, who is the man the Jesus whom YHWH (the God of our Fathers) resurrected back to life again, as flesh and bone (not flesh and blood as we are). Traditional Christianity Confesses The Nicean Creed Today, traditional Christianity uses the Nicean Creed as their final test for who is a Christian or not. They use this Creed as if it were the test confession of 1-John 4:2. For example, in 1999 the Church of God 7 th Day was denied radio time in Bend Oregon solely because the denomination Is Not Trinitarian. The Christian radio station does not consider anyone who does not confess the Trinity (the Nicean Creed) to be a real Christian. It is interesting that it seems to be acceptable for traditional Christianity to use a man made-up confession as their only test for a true Christian, but 1-John 4:2 effectively identifies traditional Christianity as being those that are teaching the spirit of Anti-Christ! The Other Evidence Shows That There Is No Doubt There is more evidence. This same confession-test is repeated in two other places: 1-John 4:3 and 2-John 7. In 1-John 4:3: the same test of the previous sentence is repeated, but is negated with the words confesses not. In the Greek the confession words are exactly the same words as used in verse 2, with the single exception that the word Jesus is not in the anarthrous. This time in verse 3 the word Jesus is literally the Jesus in the sentence. This sentence unambiguously identifies the Jesus as the focus of the confession, and the person-entity having the other grammar-objects as His; the Christ in the flesh is and is still. As we analyzed above, any way you want to translate this sentence, it is saying that the Jesus and the Christ are still, at this very moment, in the flesh. Page 17 of 18

18 In 2-John 7: the Greek words are again exactly the same words as used in 1-John 4:2, with two exceptions. The word is listed in front of in flesh, and it is solely in the Present Tense! Verse 7 confesses: the Jesus the Christ is in the flesh Right Now! This verse confirms that the above analysis is correct. The two objects the Jesus and the Christ is, Present Tense, right now in the flesh! Conclusion The Biblical confessions of 1-John 4:2, 1-John 4:3, and 2-John 7 are indeed very serious tests. The Greek Text confession forces most Christians to add words and excuses to the Text before they can say it. The extensive analysis of the Greek Text shows that any way you want to translate this confession, you are saying that the Christ is still, at this very moment, in the flesh. Those believing that the Christ is a preexisting spirit-person cannot say the Biblical confession using the Greek Text. The readers who find themselves at odds with the Greek Text confession need to seriously investigate and rethink what they have been taught. The doctrine of the Trinity and the Christ being a spirit-person, who preexisted in heaven as a spirit-being, and then came down from heaven to incarnate Himself into a fleshly man Jesus for awhile; all this has its historical origins that can be investigated on the Internet. Such concepts are not in the Greek Text. Please read my other articles on John-1:1 and Colossians-1:14. In the Greek Text, the confession-test emphatically denies the traditional Christian teachings about the nature of the Christ. We are to confess the Christ in the flesh. Not the Christ in the spirit as a God-Person. The Biblical confession is our affirmation of our allegiance to our living hero: the Jesus, the Anointed (Messiah) in the flesh is and still is ; Present Tense, Right Now! Page 18 of 18