- Topic
The WMSCOG use Romans 5:14 to explain about "2nd coming christ" Ahnsahnhong. This is an important verse they use in some studies in which they try to prove that Ahnsahnghong is the 2nd coming christ. Let's take a look at what the verse says in the NIV, which is the version they use. Then, we will compare it to another bible version for more clarity. And finally, we will see Ahnsahnghong's explanation of the verse.
(NIV) "Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who is a pattern of the one to come."
Now in this version (NIV) it seems to be saying that, there is one who is coming. (The WMSCOG interpretation – The one to come in this verse, has yet to come.) Implying it is not about Jesus Christ. This version makes it seem like the one coming in the pattern of Adam has yet to come. However, It only seems that way, if we ignore the context. If we actually read the context (Romans 5:5-21) Paul explains that Jesus Christ was the one who was to come
Now let's read this in the (KJV)
"Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come."
It is much clearer in this version, because it seems to say that He once was the one to come, however, He already came. Which goes along with how Paul in the context, was actually explaining about Jesus Christ and not about a 2nd coming christ. Taking Rom. 5:14 out of context in the KJV doesn't seem to mean that the "one to come" is coming like in the NIV, but that he already came. We can see here that out of context, the KJV is clearer. However, we shouldn't be taking verses out of context anyway. Wonder why WMSCOG like the NIV better? It's because it's easier to misinterpret. Which is exactly what they did with this verse. This comes to show, that we should read the whole context before coming to conclusions regardless of bible version.
It is also important to note, what Ahnsahnghong himself said about this verse. Here's what he said exactly –
Here are his exact words from the book "The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil and the Gospel" Ch. 6 "The Man of the Earth and the Man from Heaven" Pg. 33
"The bible says that Adam, the progenitor of the human race, is a pattern of the one to come (Rom. 5:14). Actually, however, he became the oppisite of Jesus who came later. In other words, through one man, Adam many came to die and through one man, Jesus, many came to live (Rom. 5:12-21)"
So Ahnsahnghong explained that Jesus was the one to come in Rom. 5:14. So Ahn actually read the context in this, then explained. Unlike the WMSCOG who instead take the verse out of context then insist that this verse is concerning the 2nd coming christ. But wait, Ahn basically debunked the WMSCOG's interpretation of Romans 5:14. So not only did the WMSCOG misinterpret the verse because they took it out of context, but also they explained it differently then thier own claimed god. In conclusion, "the one to come" is actually Jesus, and the WMSCOG claim that the one to come in Rom. 5:14 is Ahn. Yet Ahn explains the verse is about Jesus who already came. Um yea, yet another contradiction to add to the list.
Other than the Nov v kjv controversy really good info
Please excuse the length =)
To give a more complete explanation of what the WMSCOG teaches, they do claim the "One to come" is Jesus but they argue that this Jesus is the One to come not the one who came. You have shown this difference between the NIV and KJV. Therefor, this Jesus must be the 2CC, i.e. Ash, because of Trinity [which doesn't include Ash]. This, IMO, is why they like to use the NIV because of it's convenient translation. Ash testified that Jesus fulfilled the pattern of Adam. He never made the suggestion that Rom 5:14 refers to the 2CC. Point well made, the WMSCOG and Ash are not in agreement.
Unfortunate finding: this is the direct translation from http://biblehub.com/text/romans/5-14.htm
But death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who not have sinned in the likeness of the trangression of Adam, who is a type of the coming [one].
My take on this, perhaps we are reading in the wrong context. That is, reading it as if Paul meant the one coming from the time he wrote it. Perhaps he was writing to mean the one coming from the time of Adam. How could Jesus, who came and died before this verse was written, be the fulfillment of the "coming [one]"? Because at the time of Adam, Jesus had not come yet. Adam's creation and extistence, which took place long before this verse was written, is a prophecy in itself.
E.g. I was destined to give a powerful yet graceful name to the one who is to be born of me. This is why I named my daughter Anaya-Faye meaning God answered-spirit.
The underlined appears to be speaking about someone in the furture. But the following sentence gives the explanation that I was speaking of a time before my daughter's birth and that it is now fulfilled.
The WMSCOG explanation of why Romans 5:14 speaks of 2CC is they say the book of Romans was written between 50-60 AD, which is after the time of Jesus' coming. So they say since it was written after Jesus' coming, the one to come would not refer to the one who already came but the one who we are all waiting for-2CC.
Im not debating…I'm just adding in what their teaching.
They’ll just make a sermon about it or give the members counter measures LOL. The funny thing was when I was a member they gave us counter measures for a few things but I never came across anyone that was challenging me. Now I know why! They know current members are coming here so they’re trying to prevent them from asking these very questions. Doesn’t matter…we’re definitely planting seeds of doubt. All we have to do is let God grow those seeds 🙂
I think the wmscog interpretation of the NIV translation is also a stretch.
The sentence speaks of Adam IS a pattern of the one to come. The sentence construct is viewing "the one to come" from a perspective of the past when Adam IS a pattern. It no way implies that it is a future event at the time of writing. But I agree that the NIV translation does lend itself to such twisted interpretation which is wrong from the context.
The clincher is all those preceding and succeeding verses of Rom 5, which unambiguously speak of Jesus, the one who died as a sacrifice and was raised.
emil wrote:
I think the wmscog interpretation of the NIV translation is also a stretch.
The sentence speaks of Adam IS a pattern of the one to come. The sentence construct is viewing "the one to come" from a perspective of the past when Adam IS a pattern. It no way implies that it is a future event at the time of writing. But I agree that the NIV translation does lend itself to such twisted interpretation which is wrong from the context.
The clincher is all those preceding and succeeding verses of Rom 5, which unambiguously speak of Jesus, the one who died as a sacrifice and was raised.
Did no one read my post? Y'all are repeating what I said..
^ Sorry Renita. I did read your post. I just explained the same thing a little differently.
Yes if ahn Shang hong mother is baptize and were in faith how could ahn Shang hong fulfill the prophesy of melkisedak. It’s impossible how this Korean pastor made ahn Shang hong as god. I am really worried how will they suffer in judgement day.
I can think of answers they could give but the fact is jesus already PERFECTLY fulfilled melchizedek with believer parents that isn’t what was meant
@God my love…dont worry about how the koreans will suffer on judgment day. They made up all this crap and taught it to unsuspecting people. They deserve all that God has waiting for them. Only focus on the members who are innocently being misled. We all went in there with good hearts and good intentions of trying to serve God, not false gods. In my heart I believe God has grace and mercy on us who unknowingly followed this destructive doctrine. We will truly be saved by the grace. Pray hard that the people will continue waking up and seeing through this nonsense. I know our prays are being heard because so many members are leaving.
Simon is absolutely right. They use Heb 7:1-3 to make their claim. All we have to do is read the rest of the chapter, particularly from verse 11 onward, to make it clear that Jesus completely fulfilled the prophecy.
I was reading that New Jerusalem book of Ahn and I believe he has debunked many other myths too. One myth he has debunked is in quoting the Japanese bible commentator Kurosaki:
In addition, there is the relationship of the father and the son that has been established between God and Christ in which God is the head and Christ submits to the Father
This sentence shows that Ahn himself did not believe in the wmscog doctrine that the Trinity is 3 ages of the same single entity.
Great Job well done. Emil
He wrote the book explanations of the trinity which teaches what wmscog does (except the ahn= god part )
^ I am not aware of that. I just saw the translation of the New Jerusalem (anti Um Sooin) book and he quotes copiously from Kurosaki including the sentence I quoted above. It appears that he conveniently overlooks what the sentence implies. That the Father and the Son are two separate entities.
Unless he’s addressing a logical conclusion based on her claims I dunno
i don't see how explaining the relationship between God and Christ proves Trinity is false.
@Renita – I did not say anything about Trinity being false.
For mainstream Christianity, Trinity is 3 distinct persons in one God. All 3 persons simultaneously exist for all time. Being 3, they are still one. The full understanding of this is a mystery, which will only be revealed when we get to heaven.
For the wmscog, Trinity is one person going by different persona in the 3 ages.
The sentence I quoted shows that even Ahn believed in the simultaneous existence of Father and Son as two distinct persons.
idk which christians you speak to but i grew up believing the same thing the wmscog teaches about trinity sin ash..
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.