---

---

+ 8 more quotes (click to expand)

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

dermdoc said:

---

Jesus does know everything.

My Bible reading this morning was John 1. It is very appropriate for this discussion as the first 12 verses tells who Jesus is,

---

codker92 said:

What is your basis for God knowing everything?

---

BluHorseShu said:

Besides scripture (over 70 verses speak to God's omnipotence, and El Shaddai means as much), Christ's Church teaches it. And what's the alternative...that God does not know everything? Or were you just asking for what provides our evidence that he does? Which ultimately brings us back to the answer..."For the bible tells me so..."

---

codker92 said:

All of it. I don't think scripture actually supports God knowing everything, otherwise how could God forget sins? Isaiah 43:25.

---

BluHorseShu said:

I can't tell if you're trolling with that last part. It has always been understood to mean forget as if they never happened. Like when you tell some one they need not worrying about something ...."Forget about it". For purpose of our sin, once they are forgiven it is as if they are forgotten. Additionally, we cannot hold God to the same restraints of time and space that we experience, and thus memory. He could both 'forget' and 'retain'.

---

codker92 said:

Not exactly true. I think the passage reads literally to mean God actually forgets the sins. There is nothing ambiguous about the passage. I would challenge you to find other passages showing something different.

---

BluHorseShu said:

Even if I showed other passages, it sounds like you are committed to reading it through your lens. God is all knowing, so I think trying to confine what that means, including that he can forget things and never recount them again is a debate that is probably best argued by more experienced theologians than myself. I just take for granted that He is more than what we can possibly comprehend.

---

codker92 said:

Yours is the classical agnostic position; that is.. god cannot be known. You don't know god but you think you can prove I don't know him? How can you know I don't know him if you don't even know him yourself? Postmodern much?

---

BluHorseShu said:

Nice twisting of my words. I absolutely never said we cannot know God. We experience him through the world, through Christ and Holy Spirit,....but we will not fully know him until we are in his presence. In regard to the unambiguousness of scripture...lets try this...tell me what I mean by the following statement: "I never said you stole money". It seems a simple thing to understand. Am I saying "I" never said you stole money? Or I never said "you" stole money? Or I never "said" you stole money? Or I never said you "stole" money? Or, I never said you stole "money"? Sure some parts of the scripture are clear but it is backed up with context and 2000 years of agreement in the Church. Then you have every denomination after Martin Luther who can't agree on what is symbolic, literal, narrative etc. I get that you seem to take offense when you feel your knowledge is being questioned...All I am saying is that it is impossible for us to know/understand everything about God in our current state.

---

codker92 said:

Right so you who doesn't know everything about God are trying to tell me that I don't know everything about God. How do you know I don't know everything about God if you don't know everything about God? I don't care about your stupid early church argument. The church father's commentary on scripture was more than 700 years after most of it was written. Second Temple literature is within 200-300 years of the OT and it is the context of scripture. Im sorry, but the church fathers simply don't have the same context of scripture as the writers of scripture and they did not have have access to the second temple literature that I have today. Most of what they say is quite frankly flat wrong.

---

---

---

+ 9 more quotes (click to expand)

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

dermdoc said:

---

Jesus does know everything.

My Bible reading this morning was John 1. It is very appropriate for this discussion as the first 12 verses tells who Jesus is,

---

codker92 said:

What is your basis for God knowing everything?

---

BluHorseShu said:

Besides scripture (over 70 verses speak to God's omnipotence, and El Shaddai means as much), Christ's Church teaches it. And what's the alternative...that God does not know everything? Or were you just asking for what provides our evidence that he does? Which ultimately brings us back to the answer..."For the bible tells me so..."

---

codker92 said:

All of it. I don't think scripture actually supports God knowing everything, otherwise how could God forget sins? Isaiah 43:25.

---

BluHorseShu said:

I can't tell if you're trolling with that last part. It has always been understood to mean forget as if they never happened. Like when you tell some one they need not worrying about something ...."Forget about it". For purpose of our sin, once they are forgiven it is as if they are forgotten. Additionally, we cannot hold God to the same restraints of time and space that we experience, and thus memory. He could both 'forget' and 'retain'.

---

codker92 said:

Not exactly true. I think the passage reads literally to mean God actually forgets the sins. There is nothing ambiguous about the passage. I would challenge you to find other passages showing something different.

---

BluHorseShu said:

Even if I showed other passages, it sounds like you are committed to reading it through your lens. God is all knowing, so I think trying to confine what that means, including that he can forget things and never recount them again is a debate that is probably best argued by more experienced theologians than myself. I just take for granted that He is more than what we can possibly comprehend.

---

codker92 said:

Yours is the classical agnostic position; that is.. god cannot be known. You don't know god but you think you can prove I don't know him? How can you know I don't know him if you don't even know him yourself? Postmodern much?

---

BluHorseShu said:

Nice twisting of my words. I absolutely never said we cannot know God. We experience him through the world, through Christ and Holy Spirit,....but we will not fully know him until we are in his presence. In regard to the unambiguousness of scripture...lets try this...tell me what I mean by the following statement: "I never said you stole money". It seems a simple thing to understand. Am I saying "I" never said you stole money? Or I never said "you" stole money? Or I never "said" you stole money? Or I never said you "stole" money? Or, I never said you stole "money"? Sure some parts of the scripture are clear but it is backed up with context and 2000 years of agreement in the Church. Then you have every denomination after Martin Luther who can't agree on what is symbolic, literal, narrative etc. I get that you seem to take offense when you feel your knowledge is being questioned...All I am saying is that it is impossible for us to know/understand everything about God in our current state.

---

codker92 said:

Right so you who doesn't know everything about God are trying to tell me that I don't know everything about God. How do you know I don't know everything about God if you don't know everything about God? I don't care about your stupid early church argument. The church father's commentary on scripture was more than 700 years after most of it was written. Second Temple literature is within 200-300 years of the OT and it is the context of scripture. Im sorry, but the church fathers simply don't have the same context of scripture as the writers of scripture and they did not have have access to the second temple literature that I have today. Most of what they say is quite frankly flat wrong.

---

BluHorseShu said:

You're absolutely right about everything you wrote. You know everything about God and are the smartest here. Bully for you.

---

---

---

+ 10 more quotes (click to expand)

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

ramblin_ag02 said:

---

God did limit Himself by promising never to flood the Earth again. I don't know about all the swearing, but I think God can impose limitations on Himself

---

AgLiving06 said:

The very concept of Jesus as the God-Man is God limiting himself because if he weren't fully man, His sacrifice wouldn't have meant as much.

---

codker92 said:

Kind of the whole point. If Jesus, as a man, on earth was completely omnipotent, then what did he really give up by becoming a man. Scripture is clear that we are not of the same substance when we are glorified. This is what Christ meant when he said that God does not put new wine into old wineskins...

---

AgLiving06 said:

I don't think anybody on here understands your point. That's a big part of the problem.

The Christian belief is that Jesus was fully God and fully Man.

So what did he give up? He took on humanity and all that comes with it. He felt hunger and tiredness and pain. He felt death.

The problem I see in your argument is you're reducing God to one or two things (omnipotence and probably omniscience). God in the Scriptures is so much more than that and in your reduction you lose that.

---

codker92 said:

Key word "kind of" my point. Really what I find interesting is how, according to you, Jesus was instructing people in what you call the law using pseudepigraphal sources. However not all Jews considered those sources scripture…

EDIT: Really? Cmon, Really? Im the one suggesting Jesus read books like a normal person. The other posters are the ones insisting Jesus had all that info beamed into his head like in star trek.

---

BiochemAg97 said:

Beamed into his head like Star Trek seems to miss the point, doesn't it. Inspiration from God is a little different than being God and therefor omniscient.

There are a number of times in scripture where Jesus knows things without being told. The Samaritan women at the well, for example. Clearly didn't get that information from reading books. So either Jesus was God and omniscient or Jesus was not God and relied on inspiration from God (Holy Spirit) similar to the prophets.

Regardless, there is scriptural evidence for Jesus having knowledge beyond a normal man, yet you want to dismiss that for some reason to insist he needed to study scripture and and a bunch of other religious texts to give a sermon.

---

codker92 said:

Jesus definitely had knowledge beyond the church father because he read the pseudepigraphal sources which the church fathers did not have access to.

---

BiochemAg97 said:

Sure. The pseudepigraphal sources just happened to include the life history of the woman at the well.

Instead of starting with your hypothesis and using it to explain everything else, you should listen to what others are saying and see that there is an alternate explanation. Could Jesus have read scripture? Maybe, the gospels don't really talk about Jesus studying scripture on his own but they also don't say he didn't. Did Jesus have to read scripture, or in particular the pseudepigrapha? No, there are other alternate explanations for how and why similar ideas are expressed in both Jesus's teachings and the pseudepigrapha.

And give up on relying on the instructions to a mortal king of Israel as applying to Jesus when he is on the political throne of Israel. Jesus didn't sit on the political throne of Israel while he was on earth 2000 years ago. That was one of the big challenges the Jews had with recognizing the messiah. They were expecting a messiah that would come save them from the Romans, not one that was there to save them from eternal death.

Rather the "political" rule of Jesus will be at the second coming. Maybe the Jesus as King has to read scripture will apply then, but since the second coming would be the fulfillment of scripture, the prior rules might not apply. After all, we are no longer called to sacrifice animals because Christ was the ultimate sacrificial lamb.

---

codker92 said:

Having inspiration from God doesn't make Jesus God. Daniel received special inspiration from God, including information no one else knew, but that did not make him God. The only person who decides who God is, is Yahweh Elohim. Jesus is required to read scripture, because he is the king of Israel. The throne of Israel comes with obligations, these obligations are imposed by Yahweh Elohim. Actually, Jesus was literally called the king of Israel in the passage I cited, which occurred 2000 years ago. The political rule of Jesus was actually more than 2000 years ago.

Jesus is the Angel of the Lord in the OT, if you follow the two powers theology and the Metatron tradition. The Angel of the Lord was God's representative on earth, and for all intents and purposes held God's authority. He appeared to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, etc. He is all throughout the OT.

---

BiochemAg97 said:

So have we finally pivoted from the scripture reading nonsense to a debate about the Godness of Jesus? Because I'm pretty sure everyone you are debating with believes Jesus is God. So you are not going to get very far on that one.

A group of people in the streets called him King. I am pretty sure that isn't sufficient to become
king. In fact, historically there were a number of false messiahs. I'm guessing there were plenty of precessions where the people in Jerusalem declared someone King of the Jews.

You quoted Isaiah earlier.

For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us;
And the government will rest on His shoulders;
And His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
Eternal Father, Prince of Peace.
There will be no end to the increase of His government or of peace,
On the throne of David and over his kingdom,
To establish it and to uphold it with justice and righteousness
From then on and forevermore.
The zeal of the LORD of hosts will accomplish this. Isaiah 9:6-7

So when in his mortal ministry did Jesus sit on the throne of David (from then on and forevermore)?

As for your scriptural reading requirement of Kings of Israel, it says when the king sits on the throne. When did Jesus sit on the throne?

But ok, now you have pivoted to Jesus's political rule was as "The Angel of the Lord". Pretty sure the passage about kings reading scripture didn't say "The Angel of the Lord" has to read the scripture.

---

codker92 said:

I would like to point out that I never actually specified that Jesus read the scripture during his earthly ministry, I simply said that he read the scripture. I have an argument showing that jesus did read scripture during his earthly ministry, but it will take a while to type out so I will post later. For now the following will suffice.

If anything, Jesus read scripture in heaven before he came to earth. The idea of the pre-existence of souls in the OT supports this. Jesus' knowledge of scripture came from reading the scripture while he was in heaven. Here is the passage showing Jesus receiving thrones, one of which is the throne of david.

The throne of David was held by God after the destruction of Israel... Daniel 7:9,13-14.

9 I continued watching until thrones were placed and an Ancient of Days sat; his clothing was white like snow and the hair of his head was like pure wool and his throne was a flame of fire and its wheels were burning fire.


13 I continued watching in the visions of the night, and look, with the clouds of heaven one like a son of man was coming, and he came to the Ancient of Days, and was presented before him. 14 And to him was given dominion and glory and kingship that all the peoples, the nations, and languages would serve him; his dominion is a dominion without end that will not cease, and his kingdom is one that will not be destroyed.

---

BiochemAg97 said:

Yeah, all the "read books like a normal person" didn't mean during his earthly ministry. You really meant while he was in heaven before his earthly ministry, because that is when a "normal person" reads scripture.

How does that even make sense with your passage of writing a copy of scriptures that is approved by the priests. Prior to Christ's sacrifice, the gates of heaven were locked. How did the priests get to heaven to approve Jesus's copy of the scripture that he was supposedly reading every day?

---

---

---

+ 11 more quotes (click to expand)

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

ramblin_ag02 said:

---

God did limit Himself by promising never to flood the Earth again. I don't know about all the swearing, but I think God can impose limitations on Himself

---

AgLiving06 said:

The very concept of Jesus as the God-Man is God limiting himself because if he weren't fully man, His sacrifice wouldn't have meant as much.

---

codker92 said:

Kind of the whole point. If Jesus, as a man, on earth was completely omnipotent, then what did he really give up by becoming a man. Scripture is clear that we are not of the same substance when we are glorified. This is what Christ meant when he said that God does not put new wine into old wineskins...

---

AgLiving06 said:

I don't think anybody on here understands your point. That's a big part of the problem.

The Christian belief is that Jesus was fully God and fully Man.

So what did he give up? He took on humanity and all that comes with it. He felt hunger and tiredness and pain. He felt death.

The problem I see in your argument is you're reducing God to one or two things (omnipotence and probably omniscience). God in the Scriptures is so much more than that and in your reduction you lose that.

---

codker92 said:

Key word "kind of" my point. Really what I find interesting is how, according to you, Jesus was instructing people in what you call the law using pseudepigraphal sources. However not all Jews considered those sources scripture…

EDIT: Really? Cmon, Really? Im the one suggesting Jesus read books like a normal person. The other posters are the ones insisting Jesus had all that info beamed into his head like in star trek.

---

BiochemAg97 said:

Beamed into his head like Star Trek seems to miss the point, doesn't it. Inspiration from God is a little different than being God and therefor omniscient.

There are a number of times in scripture where Jesus knows things without being told. The Samaritan women at the well, for example. Clearly didn't get that information from reading books. So either Jesus was God and omniscient or Jesus was not God and relied on inspiration from God (Holy Spirit) similar to the prophets.

Regardless, there is scriptural evidence for Jesus having knowledge beyond a normal man, yet you want to dismiss that for some reason to insist he needed to study scripture and and a bunch of other religious texts to give a sermon.

---

codker92 said:

Jesus definitely had knowledge beyond the church father because he read the pseudepigraphal sources which the church fathers did not have access to.

---

BiochemAg97 said:

Sure. The pseudepigraphal sources just happened to include the life history of the woman at the well.

Instead of starting with your hypothesis and using it to explain everything else, you should listen to what others are saying and see that there is an alternate explanation. Could Jesus have read scripture? Maybe, the gospels don't really talk about Jesus studying scripture on his own but they also don't say he didn't. Did Jesus have to read scripture, or in particular the pseudepigrapha? No, there are other alternate explanations for how and why similar ideas are expressed in both Jesus's teachings and the pseudepigrapha.

And give up on relying on the instructions to a mortal king of Israel as applying to Jesus when he is on the political throne of Israel. Jesus didn't sit on the political throne of Israel while he was on earth 2000 years ago. That was one of the big challenges the Jews had with recognizing the messiah. They were expecting a messiah that would come save them from the Romans, not one that was there to save them from eternal death.

Rather the "political" rule of Jesus will be at the second coming. Maybe the Jesus as King has to read scripture will apply then, but since the second coming would be the fulfillment of scripture, the prior rules might not apply. After all, we are no longer called to sacrifice animals because Christ was the ultimate sacrificial lamb.

---

codker92 said:

Having inspiration from God doesn't make Jesus God. Daniel received special inspiration from God, including information no one else knew, but that did not make him God. The only person who decides who God is, is Yahweh Elohim. Jesus is required to read scripture, because he is the king of Israel. The throne of Israel comes with obligations, these obligations are imposed by Yahweh Elohim. Actually, Jesus was literally called the king of Israel in the passage I cited, which occurred 2000 years ago. The political rule of Jesus was actually more than 2000 years ago.

Jesus is the Angel of the Lord in the OT, if you follow the two powers theology and the Metatron tradition. The Angel of the Lord was God's representative on earth, and for all intents and purposes held God's authority. He appeared to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, etc. He is all throughout the OT.

---

BiochemAg97 said:

So have we finally pivoted from the scripture reading nonsense to a debate about the Godness of Jesus? Because I'm pretty sure everyone you are debating with believes Jesus is God. So you are not going to get very far on that one.

A group of people in the streets called him King. I am pretty sure that isn't sufficient to become
king. In fact, historically there were a number of false messiahs. I'm guessing there were plenty of precessions where the people in Jerusalem declared someone King of the Jews.

You quoted Isaiah earlier.

For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us;
And the government will rest on His shoulders;
And His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
Eternal Father, Prince of Peace.
There will be no end to the increase of His government or of peace,
On the throne of David and over his kingdom,
To establish it and to uphold it with justice and righteousness
From then on and forevermore.
The zeal of the LORD of hosts will accomplish this. Isaiah 9:6-7

So when in his mortal ministry did Jesus sit on the throne of David (from then on and forevermore)?

As for your scriptural reading requirement of Kings of Israel, it says when the king sits on the throne. When did Jesus sit on the throne?

But ok, now you have pivoted to Jesus's political rule was as "The Angel of the Lord". Pretty sure the passage about kings reading scripture didn't say "The Angel of the Lord" has to read the scripture.

---

codker92 said:

I would like to point out that I never actually specified that Jesus read the scripture during his earthly ministry, I simply said that he read the scripture. I have an argument showing that jesus did read scripture during his earthly ministry, but it will take a while to type out so I will post later. For now the following will suffice.

If anything, Jesus read scripture in heaven before he came to earth. The idea of the pre-existence of souls in the OT supports this. Jesus' knowledge of scripture came from reading the scripture while he was in heaven. Here is the passage showing Jesus receiving thrones, one of which is the throne of david.

The throne of David was held by God after the destruction of Israel... Daniel 7:9,13-14.

9 I continued watching until thrones were placed and an Ancient of Days sat; his clothing was white like snow and the hair of his head was like pure wool and his throne was a flame of fire and its wheels were burning fire.


13 I continued watching in the visions of the night, and look, with the clouds of heaven one like a son of man was coming, and he came to the Ancient of Days, and was presented before him. 14 And to him was given dominion and glory and kingship that all the peoples, the nations, and languages would serve him; his dominion is a dominion without end that will not cease, and his kingdom is one that will not be destroyed.

---

BiochemAg97 said:

Yeah, all the "read books like a normal person" didn't mean during his earthly ministry. You really meant while he was in heaven before his earthly ministry, because that is when a "normal person" reads scripture.

How does that even make sense with your passage of writing a copy of scriptures that is approved by the priests. Prior to Christ's sacrifice, the gates of heaven were locked. How did the priests get to heaven to approve Jesus's copy of the scripture that he was supposedly reading every day?

---

codker92 said:

If the gates of Heaven were locked then how did Elijah and Enoch make it to heaven and how did Abraham make it to Heaven? The doors of heaven were only locked for Israel and unbelieving Gentiles. The passage doesn't say when the Levitical priests must approve the copy of the Bible. Also, which is greater, Heaven (Gods administration) or the levitical council?

---

M1Buckeye said:

---

Existence is God.

---

---

---

+ 12 more quotes (click to expand)

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

ramblin_ag02 said:

---

God did limit Himself by promising never to flood the Earth again. I don't know about all the swearing, but I think God can impose limitations on Himself

---

AgLiving06 said:

The very concept of Jesus as the God-Man is God limiting himself because if he weren't fully man, His sacrifice wouldn't have meant as much.

---

codker92 said:

Kind of the whole point. If Jesus, as a man, on earth was completely omnipotent, then what did he really give up by becoming a man. Scripture is clear that we are not of the same substance when we are glorified. This is what Christ meant when he said that God does not put new wine into old wineskins...

---

AgLiving06 said:

I don't think anybody on here understands your point. That's a big part of the problem.

The Christian belief is that Jesus was fully God and fully Man.

So what did he give up? He took on humanity and all that comes with it. He felt hunger and tiredness and pain. He felt death.

The problem I see in your argument is you're reducing God to one or two things (omnipotence and probably omniscience). God in the Scriptures is so much more than that and in your reduction you lose that.

---

codker92 said:

Key word "kind of" my point. Really what I find interesting is how, according to you, Jesus was instructing people in what you call the law using pseudepigraphal sources. However not all Jews considered those sources scripture…

EDIT: Really? Cmon, Really? Im the one suggesting Jesus read books like a normal person. The other posters are the ones insisting Jesus had all that info beamed into his head like in star trek.

---

BiochemAg97 said:

Beamed into his head like Star Trek seems to miss the point, doesn't it. Inspiration from God is a little different than being God and therefor omniscient.

There are a number of times in scripture where Jesus knows things without being told. The Samaritan women at the well, for example. Clearly didn't get that information from reading books. So either Jesus was God and omniscient or Jesus was not God and relied on inspiration from God (Holy Spirit) similar to the prophets.

Regardless, there is scriptural evidence for Jesus having knowledge beyond a normal man, yet you want to dismiss that for some reason to insist he needed to study scripture and and a bunch of other religious texts to give a sermon.

---

codker92 said:

Jesus definitely had knowledge beyond the church father because he read the pseudepigraphal sources which the church fathers did not have access to.

---

BiochemAg97 said:

Sure. The pseudepigraphal sources just happened to include the life history of the woman at the well.

Instead of starting with your hypothesis and using it to explain everything else, you should listen to what others are saying and see that there is an alternate explanation. Could Jesus have read scripture? Maybe, the gospels don't really talk about Jesus studying scripture on his own but they also don't say he didn't. Did Jesus have to read scripture, or in particular the pseudepigrapha? No, there are other alternate explanations for how and why similar ideas are expressed in both Jesus's teachings and the pseudepigrapha.

And give up on relying on the instructions to a mortal king of Israel as applying to Jesus when he is on the political throne of Israel. Jesus didn't sit on the political throne of Israel while he was on earth 2000 years ago. That was one of the big challenges the Jews had with recognizing the messiah. They were expecting a messiah that would come save them from the Romans, not one that was there to save them from eternal death.

Rather the "political" rule of Jesus will be at the second coming. Maybe the Jesus as King has to read scripture will apply then, but since the second coming would be the fulfillment of scripture, the prior rules might not apply. After all, we are no longer called to sacrifice animals because Christ was the ultimate sacrificial lamb.

---

codker92 said:

Having inspiration from God doesn't make Jesus God. Daniel received special inspiration from God, including information no one else knew, but that did not make him God. The only person who decides who God is, is Yahweh Elohim. Jesus is required to read scripture, because he is the king of Israel. The throne of Israel comes with obligations, these obligations are imposed by Yahweh Elohim. Actually, Jesus was literally called the king of Israel in the passage I cited, which occurred 2000 years ago. The political rule of Jesus was actually more than 2000 years ago.

Jesus is the Angel of the Lord in the OT, if you follow the two powers theology and the Metatron tradition. The Angel of the Lord was God's representative on earth, and for all intents and purposes held God's authority. He appeared to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, etc. He is all throughout the OT.

---

BiochemAg97 said:

So have we finally pivoted from the scripture reading nonsense to a debate about the Godness of Jesus? Because I'm pretty sure everyone you are debating with believes Jesus is God. So you are not going to get very far on that one.

A group of people in the streets called him King. I am pretty sure that isn't sufficient to become
king. In fact, historically there were a number of false messiahs. I'm guessing there were plenty of precessions where the people in Jerusalem declared someone King of the Jews.

You quoted Isaiah earlier.

For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us;
And the government will rest on His shoulders;
And His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
Eternal Father, Prince of Peace.
There will be no end to the increase of His government or of peace,
On the throne of David and over his kingdom,
To establish it and to uphold it with justice and righteousness
From then on and forevermore.
The zeal of the LORD of hosts will accomplish this. Isaiah 9:6-7

So when in his mortal ministry did Jesus sit on the throne of David (from then on and forevermore)?

As for your scriptural reading requirement of Kings of Israel, it says when the king sits on the throne. When did Jesus sit on the throne?

But ok, now you have pivoted to Jesus's political rule was as "The Angel of the Lord". Pretty sure the passage about kings reading scripture didn't say "The Angel of the Lord" has to read the scripture.

---

codker92 said:

I would like to point out that I never actually specified that Jesus read the scripture during his earthly ministry, I simply said that he read the scripture. I have an argument showing that jesus did read scripture during his earthly ministry, but it will take a while to type out so I will post later. For now the following will suffice.

If anything, Jesus read scripture in heaven before he came to earth. The idea of the pre-existence of souls in the OT supports this. Jesus' knowledge of scripture came from reading the scripture while he was in heaven. Here is the passage showing Jesus receiving thrones, one of which is the throne of david.

The throne of David was held by God after the destruction of Israel... Daniel 7:9,13-14.

9 I continued watching until thrones were placed and an Ancient of Days sat; his clothing was white like snow and the hair of his head was like pure wool and his throne was a flame of fire and its wheels were burning fire.


13 I continued watching in the visions of the night, and look, with the clouds of heaven one like a son of man was coming, and he came to the Ancient of Days, and was presented before him. 14 And to him was given dominion and glory and kingship that all the peoples, the nations, and languages would serve him; his dominion is a dominion without end that will not cease, and his kingdom is one that will not be destroyed.

---

BiochemAg97 said:

Yeah, all the "read books like a normal person" didn't mean during his earthly ministry. You really meant while he was in heaven before his earthly ministry, because that is when a "normal person" reads scripture.

How does that even make sense with your passage of writing a copy of scriptures that is approved by the priests. Prior to Christ's sacrifice, the gates of heaven were locked. How did the priests get to heaven to approve Jesus's copy of the scripture that he was supposedly reading every day?

---

codker92 said:

If the gates of Heaven were locked then how did Elijah and Enoch make it to heaven and how did Abraham make it to Heaven? The doors of heaven were only locked for Israel and unbelieving Gentiles. The passage doesn't say when the Levitical priests must approve the copy of the Bible. Also, which is greater, Heaven (Gods administration) or the levitical council?

---

BiochemAg97 said:

Kinda the point isn't it. Heaven/God/Jesus is more important than the levitical council. So if the part about the levitical council approving the scriptures doesn't apply to Jesus, why does the part about the King of the Jews reading scripture daily apply to Jesus.

---