Fret not thyself, my Brother. I know there's a life outside Topix. And it's good that you have one! lolGood evening BLL, sorry it took me this long to get back to you but it is the first real opportunity that I've had to do so
I'm not sure what you've asserted is accurate, my Brother. First, to quote the verse...and please do not equate a desire to understand Godly things with being a jerk, we learn by asking praying and allowing the spirit to open up our understanding, the scriptures that you have posted here could be talking about two different things, the union between a man and a women is a physical one, Christ relations to God is a spiritual one as he said in the Word that he proceeded forth and came from God and this pretty much takes us back to what I have been talking to both you and Qu about, taking us right back to the first chapter of John's gospel that the Word which was with God in the beginning and the Word was God and was made flesh and dwelt among us, to me what Paul was doing was using the physical to make an analogy concerning a spiritual matter.
Again Jesus and the Father are one and not two as it is declared all throughout the Word that there is but ONE God and one God only.
What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh.
Quoted, above, is how the verse appears. Now, I'll quote the verse again, as I did in my previous post, with the Greek rendering of the term "one," which is identical to the term John used, at John 10:30.
"What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is [HEIS] body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh."
Now, if we'll take a moment to notice, the term "one" actually appears twice, but only once from the Greek "HEIS." The other "one" is different, though. With the Greek rendering of this second "one," the same verse would appear as such...
"What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be [MIA] flesh."
And now, I'd like to quote the verse using both Greek renderings for the term "one."
"What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is [HEIS] body? for two, saith he, shall be [MIA] flesh."
Again, my point is to question the widely accepted interpretation applied to John 10:30, where our anointed Savior declared that he and Father are "one." Following is a verse that also has the term "one" in it, three times. First, I'll quote the actual verse without the Greek rendering. Then, I'll quote it again, but with the Greek rendering.
Then answered Peter, and said unto Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias.
"Then answered Peter, and said unto Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles; [MIA] for thee, and [MIA] for Moses, and [MIA] for Elias."
Thank you, so much, for your time, consideration, and patience, my Brother. And I truly hope you understand why I question the widely accepted interpretation of the term "HEIS" at both, the above verse and John 10:30. Consider this term "MIA," too, please and if you will.
Until next time...shalowm.