- This topic is empty.
- Posts
t8 said:
Quote
KJ, when a point is lost you then back it up with another idea.
We have successfully dismantled wach of your points, one at a time.
You have successfully made fools of yourselves. Paul said in Colossians 2 that the sabbath rest was the “shadow” but Christ is the “substance.” The NWT says “reality.” The KJV says “body” (or embodiment).How can Christ be the “reality” without being God? How can he be the embodiment of rest for our souls without being God?
Hebrews says that His predacessor Joshua was unable to give them rest (Heb. 4:8). But Christ IS rest.
KJ
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 19 2011,10:01) Quote (Kangaroo Jack Jr. @ Aug. 18 2011,02:33) We have been over this a zillion times too. Christ's predacessors were mere shadows and Christ is the SUBSTANCE (or reality).
Show me the difference Jack:Was Christ anointed by his God, just like his predecessors?
Was Christ sent by his God, just like his predecessors?
Was Christ a servant of his God, just like his predecessors?
Was Christ a prophet of his God, just like his predecessors?
Did Christ obey the commands of his God, just like his predecessors?
Did Christ worship his God, just like his predecessors?
Did Christ do signs and wonders through the power of his God, just like his predecessors?
These are just a few off the top of my head, Jack.
mike
His predacessor Joshua could not give the people rest (Heb. 4:8). But Christ IS rest (Colossians 2:17). What Bible do you read anyway? The MB version?KJ
Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ Aug. 18 2011,19:01) He was all those things MORE THAN His predacessors and not “just like” them.
True, Jesus was more than those others. But was God Himself ANY of those things, Jack?Was God ever anointed by anyone?
Was God ever sent by anyone?
Is God a servant of anyone?
Is God a prophet of anyone?
Does God obey anyone's commands?
Does God worship anyone?
mike
Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ Aug. 18 2011,19:06) How can Christ be the “reality” without being God?
What does that even mean?
Don't you even know what the word “Christ” means, Jack? And was it not GOD who MADE Jesus both Lord and Christ? Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ Aug. 18 2011,19:10) His predacessor Joshua could not give the people rest (Heb. 4:8). But Christ IS rest (Colossians 2:17).
Oh. And “rest” = “God Almighty”?
What scripture teaches us this?Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ Aug. 19 2011,12:06) How can Christ be the “reality” without being God? How can he be the embodiment of rest for our souls without being God? Hebrews says that His predacessor Joshua was unable to give them rest (Heb. 4:8). But Christ IS rest.
KJ
Silly comment KJ.You are clutching at straws.
No one who is serious about scripture comes to the conclusion that one who is the real promise must be God. Have you not read that it was God who made Jesus both Christ and Lord. Are you not able to see that it was God who also made Jesus the promise and the fulfillment?
Your bias makes you swing toward the same error time and time again. Sad for you, but at least we can say interesting because this is a live demonstration as to what happens to an individual who has ears but cannot hear and eyes but cannot see. Is it not written that God hands people even over to deception if they push in that direction hard enough?
Debating with you is no different to debating with an Atheist. You can provide them with why there must be a God, but their bias just disregards such things because it is not what their itching ears want to hear. Your bias is against the truth that there is One God the Father and instead you promote Athanasius over Christ himself. Whereas, we respect and believe the first commandment, the doctrine of Christ, and the teachings of the apostles.
You promote tradition WJ, and as such you nullify the power of God because the traditions of men do that.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 19 2011,12:19) Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ Aug. 18 2011,19:01) He was all those things MORE THAN His predacessors and not “just like” them.
True, Jesus was more than those others. But was God Himself ANY of those things, Jack?Was God ever anointed by anyone?
Was God ever sent by anyone?
Is God a servant of anyone?
Is God a prophet of anyone?
Does God obey anyone's commands?
Does God worship anyone?
mike
WJ, would have us believe that God died, and God said, “Not my will but your will”. He is dreaming and needs to wake up to reality. His doctrine makes a mockery of scripture.Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 19 2011,12:22) Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ Aug. 18 2011,19:10) His predacessor Joshua could not give the people rest (Heb. 4:8). But Christ IS rest (Colossians 2:17).
Oh. And “rest” = “God Almighty”? What scripture teaches us this?
Yeah, where does it say that in those scriptures.I will tell you where. In your own head, that is where.
Quote (Kangaroo Jack Jr. @ Aug. 19 2011,05:07) Show where God called the woamn “Eve.” It explicitly says that the man named her “Eve.” God named them both “Adam.” And God called them (the male and the female) “Adam” (Genesis 5:1-2).
You show your comtempt for the word of God.
KJ
God called the race/species, man.God then gave Adam the authority to name the animals and I guess his wife and perhaps all the other things too, like mountains, trees, etc.
Really simple KJ. But yet once again, you show your lack of understanding the difference between identity and nature.
No Trinity here. Back to the drawing board.
Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ Aug. 19 2011,19:06) t8 said: Quote
KJ, when a point is lost you then back it up with another idea.
We have successfully dismantled wach of your points, one at a time.
You have successfully made fools of yourselves. Paul said in Colossians 2 that the sabbath rest was the “shadow” but Christ is the “substance.” The NWT says “reality.” The KJV says “body” (or embodiment).How can Christ be the “reality” without being God? How can he be the embodiment of rest for our souls without being God?
Hebrews says that His predacessor Joshua was unable to give them rest (Heb. 4:8). But Christ IS rest.
KJ
KJthe rest that Paul talks about is the rest for all who believe ,because the prophet that was promised as come
because the kingdom as finally arrived ,the time of reconciliation as arrived
what was not the case in Joshua 's time they were all waiting for that great prophet to be arriving,the one greater than Moses.
but there is no trinity in this ,do not follow what is not truth
Pierre
Quote (t8 @ Aug. 19 2011,15:37) Quote (Kangaroo Jack Jr. @ Aug. 19 2011,05:07) Show where God called the woamn “Eve.” It explicitly says that the man named her “Eve.” God named them both “Adam.” And God called them (the male and the female) “Adam” (Genesis 5:1-2).
You show your comtempt for the word of God.
KJ
God called the race/species, man.God then gave Adam the authority to name the animals and I guess his wife and perhaps all the other things too, like mountains, trees, etc.
Really simple KJ. But yet once again, you show your lack of understanding the difference between identity and nature.
No Trinity here. Back to the drawing board.
No. You show that you dissent from the lexographers and the philosophers on the meaning of identity and nature. Identity means “sameness of nature.”It's the experts that must be confused t8.
KJ
KJ, you can identify nature/species, and you can identify individuals. You can identify anything. A mountain, a car, a bank, and a brand. You can even identify good and bad quality.
Where you trip up KJ is pretty obvious to most to see, but for some reason you are either blind or stubborn, but which ever it is, the effect is the same.
You would no doubt understand this basic precept had the Trinity Doctrine not warped your view. And that is that language can identify a person or individual, and you can identify nature.
E.g.,
“The man is intelligent” is identifying an individual.
while,
“Man is intelligent” is identifying manKIND as intelligent.The first one is a specific person and the second, is talking about type which is nature.
You have dug yourself a nice big hole KJ, and instead of deciding to call it quits and climb out, you are digging yourself in deeper and we are watching you sink further down. But now you face the hurdle of having to unlearn something that is blocking you from seeing the plain truth and the only thing that can stop you is pride.
You shouldn't be setting yourself as a teacher on this subject KJ, when you cannot even understand the most basic precepts pertaining to this subject as evident from your last 7000 posts. Why continue to froth up the shame of your ignorance in this?
Quote (t8 @ Aug. 19 2011,20:03) KJ, you can identify nature/species, and you can identify individuals. You can identify anything. A mountain, a car, a bank, and a brand. You can even identify good and bad quality. Where you trip up KJ is pretty obvious to most to see, but for some reason you are either blind or stubborn, but which ever it is, the effect is the same.
You would no doubt understand this basic precept had the Trinity Doctrine not warped your view. And that is that language can identify a person or individual, and you can identify nature.
E.g.,
“The man is intelligent” is identifying an individual.
while,
“Man is intelligent” is identifying manKIND as intelligent.The first one is a specific person and the second, is talking about type which is nature.
You have dug yourself a nice big hole KJ, and instead of deciding to call it quits and climb out, you are digging yourself in deeper and we are watching you sink further down. But now you face the hurdle of having to unlearn something that is blocking you from seeing the plain truth and the only thing that can stop you is pride.
You shouldn't be setting yourself as a teacher on this subject KJ, when you cannot even understand the most basic precepts pertaining to this subject as evident from your last 7000 posts. Why continue to froth up the shame of your ignorance in this?
t8,Note that you said that you “can” identify nature/species, and you “can” identify individuals. You did not say that you “must.”
Also, a person cannot be an “individual” unless there is another individual of His kind. The man could not have individuality without the woman.
So God could not have individuality without another of His kind. God NEVER existed in isolation.
I am not digging a hole for myself. You are showing that you do not understand essence.
KJ
KJ, your dreaming once again. Time to awake from the slumber.
If Adam wasn't an individual before Eve, then what was he?
And one of the meanings of individual is “A person considered alone, rather than as belonging to a group of people”.You are so blind when it comes to language that talks about a person/individual and nature. That includes not only Greek but even English. It is this ignorance that aids your belief in the Trinity doctrine in the first place, whereas others who are informed, can easily see where you are tripping up. You might be wise in your own eyes, but I can assure you that most don't see a man who says that groups are HE and all people are called Adam, as a wise person. I mean think about it. GO back to when you were at school. I am sure that if you met a person who spoke like that, you would think he was very strange.
Also, you may not be wise enough to see it, but your rebuttals and refusal to see the obvious only makes you look more silly the more you pretend that you know what you are talking about.
If you really believed your own doctrine, then practice what you preach and call everyone Adam and call all married couples HE. Then look at all the strange looks you get from people aged 3 years old and above. Hopefully those strange looks and utterances of words like “strange person”, “what is that guy on about”, and “why does that guy call everyone Adam and why does he call groups of people, HE?” will make you rethink your position on how these words are used in everyday language and in scripture.
If you resist and continue to argue that you are the only one right and the human race is wrong, about every person being called Adam and groups or compound unities are called HE, then you might even end up sharing a room with a guy wearing a white coat on backwards.
Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ Aug. 19 2011,21:10) I am not digging a hole for myself. You are showing that you do not understand essence.
Sorry, but I measure 2 more feet down after your last post.Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 08 2011,22:07) Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ July 08 2011,11:03) TO ALL, On another thread some months ago WJ and I tried desperately to give Mikeboll and t8 an elementary lesson in nature and identity. It is unfortunate that some people who consider themselves students of the scripture cannot understand the elementary things.
Please note that t8 said that Eve is not “Adam” with a capital “A.” Then he says that Eve is “adam” with a small “a.” t8 was saying that Eve was “adam” qualitatively and that's all. This does not mean that she may share the name Adam (capital “A”) with Adam. But Genesis 5:1-2 says that God called their NAME “Adam”
t8 said:
Quote I have answered this before. adam consists of all humans including Adam himself.
Adam is the first human and excludes all others including Eve.Eve is not Adam.
Eve is adam.I didn't invent Greek, WJ, I am only pointing out a reality.
Please don't blame me for the way English and Greek are structured.
https://heavennet.net/cgi-bin….;st=100t8 knows that if Eve shares the name “Adam” (capital “A”) with the Adam, then Jesus may share the name “God” with God.
Note that God NAMED both the male and the female “Adam” with a capital “A.”
Quote 1This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him; 2Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their NAME Adam, in the day when they were created.
Genesis 5:1-2
Jesus shares the name God with God because God is a plural unity like Adam which He created. Just as Eve was Adam qualitatively and also shares the name “Adam,” so Jesus is God qualitatively and also shares the name “God.”KJ
Hi JackGood point! They claim Jesus has the same nature that the Father has but then seek to diminish his nature as something less than the Father.
To them he is not “The Only Begotten Son of God” but a son like all other sons and some demi-god who is neither 100% in nature God or 100% in nature man.
To them he is a cross or half breed of God and man making him a freak of nature.
All beings bear after their own kind. But to t8 and Mike Jesus is not in very nature God as the scriptures claim.
The argument that you can have identity without nature is a fallacious argument because if Jesus is “theos\god” like all the others as they claim then that means Jesus would be in nature like all the other so-called “theos\gods”.
If I call out for Sam how does one know that I am calling for a dog, cat, horse or a man.
But if I say “Sam is the daddy of 6 puppies” then I know Sam is a dog by nature.
This is elementary stuff that is over t8 and Mikes head or they just deny the truth so they can hold onto their Paganistic, Henotheistic, and Polytheistic belief in more than “one theos\god”. So they claim Jesus is one of those many theos\gods they believe in and serve.
If I say my Jesus has all authority and power and rules the entire Universe and that all things belong to him and are in his hands and that by him all things consist and he dwells in the hearts and lives of every true believer by his Spirit, then I know by his nature and name which is above every name that he is “The True God” and not “a god like the others.
Their Jesus is not “Fully God” or “Fully man” but some sort of demi-god and that is paganistic.
Blessings!
WJ
kieth,
i liked how you summed everything up. also i might add that they belittle terns such as “death”.Please explain YOUR understanding of “death” D. Explain how your God Jesus “died” in such a way that was somehow different from the way we all die. And then show which scriptures teach us about the “different” way that “God Almighty” died.
SimplyForgiven.
God did not send God to die.
That is a false gospel.
God sent his son into the world and the son died, and God raised him back up.
God also made the son, both Lord and Christ.Jesus is the son of the living God.
The Father is that God and hence why Jesus is called the son of God and the Father is called the Father.It is not hard to understand the truth.
No excuses.KJ, you cannot admit this truth:
The head of the woman is the man and the head of Christ is God.
When identifying these, the woman is not the man and Christ is not God.Your argument is to make the woman man so you can make Christ God.
But I have said repeatedly that you do not understand the difference between identifying an individual and identifying the nature.The above statement is obviously identifying 4:
Woman, Man, Christ, God.It is true that the woman and man are mankind and Christ and God are divine. (Although Christ also partook of our nature in order to redeem us. But that is an aside)
You need to realise that just as the woman is not the man, nor is Christ the God.
It is the last part where you and Kathi err greatly.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
