Isaiah 46:11: WHY CYRUS IS NOT THE ‘BIRD OF PREY FROM THE EAST?

The earlier English Translations of the Bible—such as Douay-Rheims (1609-1610), King James Version (1611), American Standard Version (1901), Revised Standard Version (1952), New English Bible (1961, 1970), and New American Bible (1970)—do not contain Cyrus?name in Isaiah 46:11.  It was only in the rendition of the Living Bible, which was published in July 1971, when the name of Cyrus appeared in Isaiah 46:11. It is important to bear in mind that the Living Bible is a paraphrase of the Old and New Testament. What is a “paraphrase?? In the Living Bible Version itself, it is explained: “To paraphrase is to say something in different words than the author’s thoughts, using different words than he did.?(Preface, Living Bible) The paraphraser of the Living Bible used words different from what the author originally used. The danger of paraphrase was also explained in the preface of the Living Bible:     “There are dangers in paraphrases, as well as values. For whenever the author’s exact words are not translated from the original languages, there is a possibility that the translator, however honest, may be giving the English reader something that the original writer did not mean to say.?(Ibid.)   We do not oppose the use of the Living Bible, or any other Bible translation for that matter. What we oppose are the verses that are erroneously translated, such as Isaiah 46:11 of the Living Bible. The inclusion of the name of Cyrus in Isaiah 46:11 is not correct. Cyrus is not the “bird of prey from the east because he does not fulfill the conditions that identify the prophesied messenger in Isaiah 46:11. The inclusion of Cyrus name in that verse is merely an assumption of the paraphraser of the Living Bible.

 

Will God change His nature?

When the Lord Jesus Christ ascended to the Father, He did not become God but remained a man, as testified by the Holy Scriptures: "If then you were raised with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ is, sitting at the right hand of God." (Col. 3:1,NKJV) "Let Your hand be upon the MAN of Your right hand, Upon the son of man whom You made strong for Yourself." (Ps. 80:17,Ibid.,emphasis ours) It is clear from the preceding passages that Christ remained a man. When He as such even now as He sits in the right hand of the Father. On His return, Christ will come in the same manner He was seen ascending to God in heaven (cf. Acts 1:11). The Scriptures do not teach that the Lord Jesus Christ had changed His nature from man to God. If Christ became God, as your premise states, then there would be two gods. This would contradict Christ's teaching that there is only one God--the Father (cf. Jn. 17:1,3). The same doctrine was upheld by the prophets (cf. Mal. 2:10). Consistently, the apostles upheld the teachings of Christthat there is only one God whom we must recognize, the Father (cf. I Cor. 8:6). The Lord God Himself declared that there is no other God aside from Him: I am the Lord, and there is no one else; there is no God besides Me. I will gird and arm you, though you have not known Me, that men may know from the east and the rising of the sun and from the west and the setting of the sun that there is no God besides Me. I am the Lord, and no one else [is He]." 9Is. 45:5-6, Amplified Bible) God is Almighty and nothing is impossible with Him (cf. Rev. 19:6; Gen. 35:11;Mt. 19:26). Thus, He has the power to do all things as He desires. But, would God allow Himself to become a man? Definitely not, for God said: "I am God, and not man" (cf. Hos.11:9, NKJV). In reference to man, He said: "yet thou art a man, and not God" (cf. Ezek. 28:2,KJV;Is.31:3). Therefore, to think that God could have decided to be man in the person of Christ is pure imagination. The Bible further tells us that the Father is distinct in nature from the Son and vice versa. Christ stated that God is spirit (cf. Jn. 4:24) which means that God does not have flesh and bones as what Christ has (cf. Lk.24:36-39). Being spirit in nature, God is invisible (cf. I Tim. 1:17). Moreover, Christ taught that He is a MAN who told the truth which He heard from God (cf. Jn. 8:40). What Jesus Christ revealed concerning His true state of being--His being a man--is a clear proof that He is not God.

Micah 5:2 Does Christ the Messiah dwells in eternity?

“But thou, Beth-lehem Ephrathah,? “Which art little to be among the thousands of Judah,? “Out of thee shall one come forth unto Me that is to be ruler in Israel;? “Whose goings forth?are from of old, from ancient days.?     “But thou, Beth-lehem Ephrathah,? “Which art little to be among the thousands of Judah,? “Out of thee shall one come forth unto Me that is to be ruler in Israel;? “Whose goings forth?are from of old, from ancient days.? Many mis-interpret the last part of the prophecy to advance their claim that Christ is God for He has existed from eternity.However it is quiet obvious that even the entire verse do not say about a Christ who has pre-existed from eternity. According to: [“THE HOLY SCRIPTURES, According To The Masoretic Text,?The Jewish Publication Society of America, Copyright 1917, 1945.] . “But thou, Beth-leham Ephrathah, Which art little to be among the thousands of Judah, Out of thee shall one come forth unto Me that is to be ruler in Israel; Whose goings forth?are from old, from ancient days.?(Micah. 5:1) “Out of thee?here we can see that, the LORD God is speaking to Bethleham. Also we can see that the “one?spoken of as, that shall “come forth? is spoken of, as coming forth “unto Me?or unto God, and “is to be ruler in Israel;?It should be quite clear that the LORD God as He, spoke through His prophet Micah, is speaking about some one other then Himself. The one coming forth unto God, out of Bethleham, to be ruler in Israel, is not God Himself. As it is written: “Has not the Scripture said that the Christ comes from the offspring of David, and from Bethlehem, the village where David was? (John.7: 42. NEW AMERICAN STANDARD BIBLE, The Lockman Foundation, Copyright 1960, 1977.) Yes indeed, For the Scriptures say “for today in the city of David there has been born for you a Savior, who is Christ the Lord. (Luke.2: 11. NASB) “He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Most High; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David;?(Luke.1: 32. Ibid.) So we can see that according to the Bible, the one Micah writes about in the Scripture in question is the Christ, not God. Now to continue with the Scripture in question, “Whose goings forth?are from of old, from ancient days.? This is the portion of Scripture, which is causing many to stumble. They could not comprehend how the subject “Whose?Christ) is predicated by the “goings forth? Here, the , “goings forth? that is spoken of as which “are from of old, from ancient days.?and not the subject “Whose? In other words, what this Scripture is referring to regarding the Christ,     “who was predestined for this before the foundation of the world, but was revealed only at the end of the ages,?(1 Peter 1:20) [THE BIBLE AN AMERICAN TRANSLATION, Smith&Goodspeed, Copyright 1931.] You see, what the Scripture in question is referring to, is the predestination of the Christ, not to Him as been preexisting, or eternal, and defiantly not to the Christ, as being God. I hope, that this was helpful; in rectifying, your misconception’s regarding this Scripture.

Are members of the Curch of Christ, forbidden to read the bible?

There is no such prohibition for members of the Church of Christ to read the Bible. Indeed, everyone must benefit from the enormous wisdom the Bible offers, and everyone must understand the truth or the words of God (Jn. 17:17), especially in matters concerning man’s salvation.

However, we do not agree that the Bible is an open book or that it can be understood by simply reading it. To illustrate this point, let us turn to the Bible and examine the case of the Ethiopian eunuch:

"..The eunuch had gone to Jerusalem to worship, and he was now returning. Seated in his carriage, he was reading aloud the book of the prophet Isaiah. The Holy Spirit said to Philip, Go over and walk alongside the carriage? Philip ran over and heard the man reading from the prophet Isaiah; so he asked, Do you understand what you are reading??The man replied, How can I, when there is no one to instruct me??And he begged Philip to come up into the carriage and sit with him.? (Acts 8:27-31, New Living Translation)

In the preceding biblical passages we see that the eunuch was already reading the book of Isaiah. But, when asked if he understood what he was reading, his reply was, How can I, when there is no one to instruct me

Filipos 2:5-8 Si Cristo ba ay Dios?

Ang talatang ito ay isa sa madalas gamitin ng mga tao na naniniwala sa pagka Dios daw ni Cristo, suriin po natin kung tama po ba ang pagkaunawa nila sa talata?

Sipiin po natin ang nasabing talata:

5Ito ay sapagkat kailangang taglayin ninyo ang kaisipan na na kay Cristo Jesus din naman. 6Bagaman siya ay nasa anyong Diyos, hindi niya itinuring na kailangang pakahawakan ang kaniyang pagiging kapantay ng Diyos. 7Bagkus ginawa niyang walang kabuluhan ang kaniyang sarili at tinanggap niya ang anyo ng isang alipin at nakitulad sa tao. 8Yamang siya ay nasumpungan sa anyong tao, siya ay nagpakumbaba at naging masunurin hanggang sa kamatayan, maging sa kamatayan sa krus. Ang talatang ito ang siyang ebedensya na  si Cristo ay hindi tunay na Dios. Bakit? Pansinin ang banggit na….

“Naging masunurin hanngang sa kamatayan sa krus”

Anong talata ang lalabagin pag tinanggap na Dios si Cristo?

ayon kay apostol Pablo ay ito po......

" Ngayon, sa Haring walang hanggan at walang pagkabulok, at hindi nakikita, at tanging matalinong Diyos, sumakaniya ang karangalan at kaluwalhatian magpakailan pa man. Siya nawa". ( 1Timoteo 1:17)

  "Ito ay sapagkat ibinigay ko na nga sa inyo nang una pa lamang ang akin ding tinanggap, na si Cristo ay namatay para sa ating mga kasalanan ayon sa mga kasulatan". (1 Mga Taga-Corinto 15:3)

Ang totoong DIOS  po ay walang kamatayan ayon sa pahayag ni Apostol Pablo kay Timoteo, samantalang ipinahayag naman niya sa mga taga Corinto na tanggap niya na si Cristo ay namatay. At Silang dalawa ay magkaibang entity,hindi po sila IISA,na ang ama ay si Jesus din tulad ng gustong palabasin ng mga naniniwalang Dios si Cristo., saka sisitas ng nasa Juan 10:30.

Sa pahayag ni apostol Pablo sa mga taga Filipos ay ganito po ang kanyang ipinahayag:

" Sumainyo nawa ang biyaya at kapayapaang mula sa Diyos na ating Ama at sa Panginoong Jesucristo.” (Mga Taga-Filipos 1:2)

Hayan po magkaiba po ang Cristo at ang Dios.

Ano pa po ang pruweba? Si Cristo po ay nanalangin sa Dios

Nanalangin si Jesus para sa Kaniyang Sarili.

 "Sinabi ni Jesus ang mga bagay na ito at tumingin siya sa langit at nagsabi:  Ama ang oras ay dumating na. Luwalhatiin mo ang  iyong Anak at nang luwalhatiin ka rin naman ng Anak. Kung paanong binigyan mo siya ng kapamahalaan sa  lahat ng tao, sa gayunding paraan siya ay magbibigay ng  buhay na walang hanggan sa lahat ng ibinigay mo sa kaniya. Ito ang buhay na walang hanggan: Ang makilala ka nila, ang tanging Diyos na totoo at si Jesucristo na  iyong sinugo."(Juan 17:1-3) 

Kung ipapangatuwiran naman na ang Dios ay pwede ding suguin at manalangin, sige nga po hanapin natin sa kanila saang talata mababasa na ang Ama ay nanalangin kay Cristo?

Dito pa lang po nakikita na natin ang hindi nila pagkakapantay.

Ano pa po ang pagkakaiba ng Dios at ni Cristo? Ang sagot po, sa Likas na kalagayan!

"Ingatan nga ninyo mabuti ang inyong mga sarili; sapagkat wala kayong nakitang anomang anyo nang araw na magsalita ang Panginoon sa inyo sa Horeb mula sa gitna ng apoy". (Deuteronomio 4:14)

Juan 4:24 Ang Dios ay Espiritu! (likas na kalagayan)

Ang Dios ay hindi nakikita, ngayon po ano naman ang pahayag ni Lucas tungkol sa Cristo?

Lucas 24:39Tingnan ninyo ang aking mga kamay at mga paa. Ang mga ito ay nagpapatunay na ako ito. Hipuin ninyo ako at tingnan. Ang espiritu ay walang laman at buto tulad ng nakikita ninyo sa akin.

Mag kaiba ang likas na kalagayan ng Panginoong Dios at Panginoong Jesus.

Kung gayon ano po ang katumbas ng banggit na si Kristo ay nasa anyong Dios?

Ito po ay hindi tumutukoy sa likas na kalagayan.ano po ang ating katibayan?

 Ang katibayan po natin ay naipahayag na natin sa itaas, naipakita natin na ang Dios ay walang pisikal na anyo kaya, nasisiguro natin na ang anyong binabanggit ay hindi pisikal kundi ito ay anyo na ang aibig sabihin ay imahe, o image sa English. Meron po ba tayong kakampi na hindi naman kaanib sa Iglesia ni Cristo na makakapagpatunay ng ating sinasabi?

Meron po! Dito po babasahin natin kung ano ba ang pakahulugan niya sa salitang “anyo” o “form”.

“..it has been long recognized that ‘Morphe’ (form) and ‘eikon ‘ (image) are near synonyms and that Hebrew thought the ‘visible form of God’ is his glory” (CHRISTOLOGY IN THE MAKING By James D.G. Dunn p.115)

Ayon naman po pala ang ibig sabihin ng “anyo o image” ang anyong makikita sa Dios ay ang Kanyang kaluwalhati-an.

Bakit po tayo agree sa ating kakampi? Kasi po ang kanyang sinasabi ay kakampi din ng sinasabi ng biblia.

Heto po ang patunay mula sa biblia….

 2 Mga Taga-Corinto 4: 4Binulag ng diyos ng kapanahunang ito ang mga kaisipan ng mga hindi sumampalataya upang hindi lumiwanag sa kanila ang liwanag ng ebanghelyo ng kaluwalhatian ni Cristo na siyang ANYO ng Diyos.SND)

In the form of GOD- hindi sa kalagayan tumutukoy kundi sa KALUWALHATIAN ng Panginoong Dios.

 EFESO 4:24

 “at ang dapat makita sa inyo’y ang bagong pagkatao na nilikhang kalarawan ng DIOS, kalarawan ng kanyang katwuiranat kabanalan.”(SND)

Si Cristo ay larawan o anyo ng Dios hindi po DIOS!

Philippians 2:6 Is Jesus Christ God?

Philippians 2:6

 One of the most oft-cited Bible verses relative to the issue under consideration, and which itself has given rise to much deliberations, is Philippians 2:6, which says,

 "Who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God" (Ibid.). That this verse has been either paraphrased or liberally rendered by some translators who believe that Christ is God is very evident in the following versions:

"Christ was truly God. But he did not try to remain equal with God." (Contemporary English Version) "Though he was God, he did not demand and cling to his rights as God." (New Living Translation)

"Who, though he was God, did not demand and cling to his rights as God." (Living Bible)

The most common explication of the verse by the advocates of the Christ-is-God doctrine is that God divested Himself of His divine nature and became man or, as some would put it, that God walked incognito on earth in the person of Jesus Christ.

Even without delving into the Greek language in which Philippians 2:6 was originally written, one cannot but notice immediately the obvious and great discrepancy, incongruence, and absurdity of the three foregoing renderings and the interpretation that is responsible for them. Mere spiritual comparison of this verse with the other related verses plainly shows that such an interpretation, and its concomitant renderings, are wrong.

Two distinct beings

Verse nine, for example, states, "Wherefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name" (KJV).

The existence here of two distinct beings is undeniable:

one is God, who "has highly exalted Christ and given Him the name which is above every name," and the other one is Christ, who has been highly exalted by God.

 If "Christ was truly God," - as CEV rendered, how could He be "highly exalted ... and given ... the name which is above every name" by God? How could Christ and the God, who exalted Him, be both "truly God"?

 In verse six itself, and using CEV, the mistranslation is quite obvious -

 "Christ was truly God. But he did not try to remain equal with God."

Again, the existence here of two distinct beings is very evident: one who "was truly God" and another one whom He "did not try to remain equal with."

User-friendly translations seek to make the Bible more readable and easier to understand, but if a verse is rendered in such a way that its original meaning is lost or twisted in the process, then that verse cannot be relied upon as God's Word. In view of this, strict accuracy,' achieved by faithfulness to the original languages in which a text was written is, therefore, to be immensely preferred to readability.

 Form, Image: 'near synonyms'

The KJV renders the verse: "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God."

The phrases "being in the form of God" (which is written) and "being God" (which is concluded) definitely do not mean the same thing. Just because Christ is "in the form of God," it does not necessarily mean that Christ "is God." In fact, not only do they mean two different things-they also are "spiritually incomparable." They are simply scripturally irreconcilable, considering the meaning of "form" and the fact that "form" and "image" (man, let it not be forgotten, was created in the image of God) are "near synonyms" (Christology in the Making: An Inquiry into the Origins of the Doctrine of the Incarnation)

 According to The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, "form" ("morphe" in Greek) denotes an expression of "essential attributes" or "essential qualities" of God: "6. Being in the form of God (AV). Better, Though in his pre-incarnate state he possessed the essential qualities of God, he did not consider his status of divine quality a prize to be selfishly hoarded (taking harpagmos passively). Morphe, form, in verses 6 and 7 denotes a permanent expression of essential attributes, while schema, fashion (v. 8 ), refers to outward appearance that is subject to change" (p. 1324).

Wycliffe's commentary is corroborated by a more pronounced explanation by other Bible commentators, who say that "in the form of God" does not refer to the "divine essence" or "divine nature" but to "the external self-manifesting characteristics" of God. " ... Who subsisting (or existing, viz., originally: the Greek is not the simple substantive verb, to be) in the form of God (the divine essence is not meant: but the external self-manifesting characteristics of God, the form shining forth from His glorious essence. The divine nature had infinite BEAUTY in itself, even without any creature contemplating that beauty: that beauty was 'the form of God'; as 'the form of a servant' (vs. 7) ... " (Practical and Explanatory Commentary on the Whole Bible, p. 1305)

Contrary to the popular understanding that Christ's "being in the form of God" in Philippians 2: 6 means that Christ is God, the use by the Apostle Paul of the word "form" (which is synonymous with "image") to refer to Christ is in itself an unequivocal proof that Christ is man, for, of all creatures, it is really man who was created in the image of God (Gen. 1:27). "It has long been recognized that ... (form) and ... (image) are near synonyms and that in Hebrew thought the visible 'form of God' is his glory ... " (Christology in the Making: An Inquiry into the Origins of the Doctrine of the Incarnation, p. 115).  Therefore, Apostle Paul's reference to Christ as "being in the form of God" in Philippians 2:6 is synonymous-or spiritually comparable- with his allusion to Christ as being "the image of the invisible God" in Colossians 1:15. But Christ's being "the image of the invisible God" does not make Him God, just as all other men's being created in the image of God does not make us all Gods. No doubt, Philippians 2:6 and Colossians 1:15 are spiritually comparable; they both underscore Christ's being a man, and not His allegedly being God.

 In righteousness and holiness

 Lest Christ's being the image of God be misconstrued to mean in the visual sense, Apostle Paul, at once, clarifies that God is "invisible" (Col. 1:15; I Tim. 1:17)-a term spiritually comparable with Christ's statement that "God is Spirit" John 4:24), which means that God has no flesh and bones (Luke 24:36-39).

 In what sense then is Christ the image of the invisible God, a characteristic that not only He, in fact, but all men should possess since all men have been created in God's image?

" In righteousness and holiness" (Eph. 4:23-24, TEV).

 Although God has made man­kind upright in keeping with His desire that men be in His image, yet men "have gone in search of many schemes," thereby failing to live up to his Maker's design. "This only have I found: God made mankind upright, but men have gone in search of many schemes" (Eccles. 7:29, New lnternational Version).

It is for this reason that all men need the Lord Jesus Christ, for Christ, being the only man who is sinless (I Pet. 2:21-22), is the only one who has lived up to God's purpose of creating man in His image. Apostle Paul says, "It is because of him that you are in Christ Jesus, who has become for us wisdom from God-that is, our righteousness, holiness, and redemption" (I Cor. 1:30, NIV).

 Owing to this, Paul urges the Christians who have truly "heard about [Christ] and were taught in him" that for them to be in "the likeness of God," they must "put off [their] old nature which belongs to [their] former manner of life and is corrupt through deceitful lusts, and be renewed in the spirit of [their] minds, and put on the new nature, created after likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness" (Eph. 4:20-24, Revised Standard Version).

 And to be able to heed this exhortation, they need to have the mind of Christ-humble and obedient. Paul says,

"Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, ... And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross" (Phil. 2:5, 8, New King James Version).

Christ is in the form or image of God in righteousness and holiness, and His followers should be so, too.

God does not change

The error in the belief that "God became man" lies in the fact that the true God of the Bible-who is neither man nor the son of man (Num. 23: 19)-is immutable. God does not change, as He Himself says, "For I the Lord do not change" (Mal. 3:6, RSV).

Consistent with this, Apostle James writes:

 "Every good endowment and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change." (James 1:17, Ibid.)

Clearly then, the belief that "God became man" is, to say the least, not spiritually comparable with other re­lated verses.

 We can come up with a host of other related Bible verses with which the Christ-is-God interpreta­tion of Philippians 2:6 simply cannot be spiritually compared. Instead of the verse introducing Christ as God, it actually all the more affirms the doc­trine that Christ is man, and not God. Thus, when compared with "spiritual things" (I Cor. 2:13, KJV), the Christ­is-God dogma miserably fails!!

 References

 Dunn, James D.G. Christology in the Mak­ing: An Inquiry into the Origins of the Doctrine of the Incarnation. London: SCM Press Ltd., 1980.

 Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown. Practical and Explanatory Commentary on the Whole Bible. Grand Rapids, Michigan:Zondervan Publishing House, 1961.

Pfeiffer, Charles F. and Everett F. Har­rison. The Wycliffe Bible Commentary: A Phrase by Phrase Commentary of the Bible. Chicago: The Moody Bible In­stitute, 1990.

Juan 4:24 - Genesis 1:26-27 Ang Dios ay Espiritu,Nilalang ang tao ayon sa Kanyang wangis.... Magkasalungat ba?

 Juan 4:24 - Genesis 1:26-27
Bakit sinabi na nilalang ng Diyos ang tao ayon sa kaniyang larawan? Dapat sana espiritu din tayo sa kalagayan tulad ng Diyos. Hindi kaya magkasalungat ang dalawang talatang ito?

Hindi maaaring magkaron ng salungatan sa bibliya o banal na kasulatan sapagkat ang Panginoong Diyos na makapangyarihan sa lahat ang nagpasulat ng kaniyang mga salita na nasa bibliya. Mababasa sa:

“Ganito ang sinasalita ng Panginoon, ng Dios ng Israel, na nagsasabi, Iyong isulat sa isang aklat ang lahat ng mga salita na aking sinalita sa iyo.” (Jeremias 30:2)

Hindi lamang ang Panginoong Diyos na makapangyarihan sa lahat ang nagpasulat ng kaniyang mga salita na nasa bibliya o sa banal na kasulatan kundi kinasihan ng Diyos hindi lamang ang mga tao na inutusan niyang sumulat ng kaniyang mga salita kundi maging ang bibliya o ang banal na kasulatan ay inspired o kinasihan ng ating Panginoong Diyos. Iyan ay pinatunayan ni Apostol Pablo:

“Mula pa sa pagkabata, alam mo nang ang Banal na Kasulatan ay nagtuturo ng daan ng kaligtasan sa pamamagitan ng pananalig kay Cristo Jesus.”

“Lahat ng kasulata’y kinasihan ng Diyos at magagamit sa pagtuturo ng katotohanan, pagpapabulaan sa maling aral, sa pagtutuwid sa likong gawain, at sa pag-akay sa matuwid na pamumuhay.” (I Tim. 3:15-16, MB )

Nabasa natin na ang Banal na Kasulatan ay kinasihan ng ating Panginoong Diyos kaya ang salita ng Diyos na nakasulat sa bibliya magagamit sa pagututuro ng katotohanan ito rin ang magtuturo sa tao para makamit ang kaligtasan at ang tunay na pananampalataya sa ating Panginoong Jesucristo.

Kaya ang mga salita ng Diyos ay magkakawangis walang salungatan at iyan ay nakasulat din sa Banal na Kasulatan:

 “Na ang mga bagay na ito ay atin namang sinasalita, hindi sa mga salitang itinuturo ng karunungan ng tao, kundi sa itinuturo ng Espiritu; na iwinawangis natin ang mga bagay na ayon sa espiritu sa mga pananalitang ayon sa espiritu.”(I Cor. 2:13)

Kaya hindi maaaring magkaron ng salungatan o kontradiksyon sa mga salita ng Diyos na nakasulat sa bibliya

Hindi kaya magkasalungat ang mga talatang Juan 4:24 at Genesis 1:26-27?

“At sinabi ng Dios, Lalangin natin ang tao sa ating larawan, ayon sa ating wangis: at magkakaroon sila ng kapangyarihan sa mga isda sa dagat, at sa mga ibon sa himpapawid, at sa mga hayop, at sa boong lupa, at sa bawat umuusad na nagsisiusad sa ibabaw ng lupa.”

“At nilalang ng Dios ang tao ayon sa kaniyang sariling larawan, ayon sa larawan ng Dios siya nilalang, nilalang niya sila na lalake at babae.”

Totoong nakasulat sa bibliya ang tao ay nilalang ng Diyos na maging kalarawan niya subalit natitiyak natin ang tinutukoy dito ay hindi sa likas na kalagayan ng Diyos kalarawan ang tao. Bakit? Sapagkat gaya din ng binanggit sa Juan 4:24 ang Diyos ay Espiritu

“Ang Dios ay Espiritu: at ang mga sa kaniya’y nagsisisamba ay kinakailangang magsisamba sa espiritu at sa katotohanan.” (Juan 4:24)

Ang Diyos sa kaniyang likas na kalagayan ay espiritu. Ano ang ibig sabihin na ang Diyos ay espiritu?

 “Tingnan ninyo ang aking mga kamay at ang aking mga paa, ako rin nga: hipuin ninyo ako, at tingnan; sapagkat ang isang espiritu’y walang laman at mga buto, na gaya ng inyong nakikita na nasa akin.”(Lucas 24:39)

Ayon kay Cristo ang espiritu ay walang laman at mga buto, walang materya kaya hindi nakikita ng ating mga mata. Kaya ang tunay na Diyos na makapangyarihan sa lahat, ang Ama na nasa langit, dahil sa siya ay espiritu hindi nakikita ng ating mga mata, walang laman walang buto kumpara sa tao. Ang tao may laman may buto gaya ng nasusulat:

 “At sinabi ng Panginoon, Ang aking Espiritu ay hindi makikipagpunyagi sa tao magpakailanman sapagka’t siya ma’y laman:…”(Genesis 6:3)

Ang tao ayon sa bibliya may laman. Kaya ang binanggit ng Panginoong Diyos na “lalangin natin ang tao ayon sa ating larawan” natitiyak natin na hindi niya kalarawan sa likas na kalagayan. Saan nais ng Diyos maging kalarawan niya ang tao na kaniyang nilalang?

“Magbago na kayo ng diwa at pag-iisip:”

“at ang dapat makita sa inyo’y ang bagong pagkatao na nilikhang kalarawan ng Diyos, kalarawan ng kanyang katuwiran at kabanalan.” (Efeso 4:23-24, MB)

Nais ng Diyos na maging kalarawan niya ang tao sa katuwiran at kabanalan. Bakit nais ng Diyos na ang tao na kaniyang nilalang maging kalarawan niya sa kabanalan? Ano ang katangian mismo ng Diyos na lumalang sa tao

“Ngunit yamang banal ang sa inyo’y tumawag, ay mangagpakabanal naman kayo sa lahat ng paraan ng paraan ng pamumuhay:”

“Sapagka’t nasusulat, Kayo’y mangagpakabanal: sapagka’t ako’y banal.” (I Pedro 1:15)

Ang Diyos na makapangyarihan sa lahat na lumalang sa tao ang sabi Niya “ako’y banal”. Ang mga tao na Kaniyang nilalang? Ang sabi Niya “Kayo’y mangagpakabanal”. Kaya walang salungatan sa dalawang talata na nabanggit.

Ang tao na nilalang ng Diyos nais ng Diyos na maging kalarawan Niya hindi sa likas na kalagayan kundi sa kabanalan sapagkat ang Diyos mismo na lumalang sa tao ay banal.