- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (carmel @ Oct. 16 2011,02:38) Jesus in the above scriptures, FIRST HE USED THE MODE “I SEND”,AND THEN HE USED THE MODE “YOU WILL PUT” to indicate that He sent them in the past.
Let me get this straight: You think the words “YOU WILL PUT THEM TO DEATH” refer to prophets that had ALREADY BEEN PUT TO DEATH in the past? Why?Quote (carmel @ Oct. 16 2011,02:38) Therefore I have every reason to belief that Jesus meant that He sent the prophets as God Himself,since all was created in Him,with Him,and for Him!
You have every PERSONAL reason to believe this – but no SCRIPTURAL reason whatsoever.Face it Charles, you WANT Jesus to BE the God he is the SON OF so badly that you read your own personal wishes into the scriptures.
Did you even read the passage in 1 Cor 12 that I listed? Jesus was talking about sending his disciples into the world just like GOD sent HIM into the world. (John 17:18)
Or have you forgotten that Jesus himself was also a prophet OF GOD?
Quote (carmel @ Oct. 16 2011,05:38) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 15 2011,15:22) What does the fact that I belong to Jehovah have to do with whether or not I existed from eternity What if I tell you that as a rightfull Christian,If you were born Christian, you became eternal,and it is, in a mode to say like you were eternally exsisted with the Father,since you become one spirit in Christ.
1Corintians 6 But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.
John 17:2As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he may give eternal life to all whom thou hast given him.
3 Now this is eternal life:
1 John 1:2 For the life was manifested; and we have seen and do bear witness, and declare unto you the life eternal, which was with the Father, and hath appeared to us
Now comment on this and also define in your logical resoning what eternal life is,and whether you agree or not that while still on earth, a real Christian, should, could and would live eternal life.
peace and love in Jesus Christ
Charles
If I'm understanding you correctly, you not only claim that we are Gods, but also that we've all existed from eternity?No, I don't agree with either of those thoughts.
I do find it funny that you would list only the first part of John 17:3 though.
Here's all of it together:3 Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.
Eternal life is taking in knowledge of BOTH the only true God Jehovah, AND the one He anointed and sent into the world as a sacrificial Lamb. This scripture speaks of TWO, not ONE.
Quote (carmel @ Oct. 16 2011,06:08) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 11 2011,11:46) Define how they would have literally “ate his body” even if he was God. It is metaphorical, Charles. Isn’t the whole of creation the manifestation of God in Jesus' Spirit, since only the spirit gives life.
No Charles. We are not the “manifestation of God”. We are creations of God.Quote (carmel @ Oct. 16 2011,06:08) I have a definition through scriptures to be aware of this possibility,thanks to the Holy Spirit.but I believe that you won't accept it!
You are probably right.Charles, you didn't really address my point. Could you LITERALLY EAT GOD? Or would it have to be a metaphor?
Quote (carmel @ Oct. 16 2011,09:39) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 11 2011,11:46) I want to know how Christians can take a statement that refers to Jesus and his Father as “WE” (as in TWO beings), and then come to the conclusion that only ONE is being spoken of. THIS IS HOW MIKE!
Reflect on what you stated:
Quote Sort of. My body is simply a vessel that houses my soul and spirit on earth, but you can say it too is “ME”. So Mike you understand that your soul and your body are two beings ALTHOUGH YOU ARE ONE! WHEN REFERRING TO YOURSELF!
So you are implying that YOU are a WE? When you go to the store, do you say, “WE are off to the store now”? Or do you say “I am off to the store now”?Quote (carmel @ Oct. 16 2011,10:21) Since as you stated that the body is only a vessel, and useless, and only the spirit gives life, do you believe that Jesus was really grateful to have such a useless body considering the fact that He himself massacred it. Logically:
Is that what you do when somebody gives you something and you feel so grateful that in front of him you smash and destroy whatever he gave you??
Well, if the thing given to you was given for the PURPOSE of being destroyed, then YES. If you gave me some dynamite as a gift, what would you expect me to do with it?Quote (carmel @ Oct. 16 2011,10:21) Quote (mikeboll @ 64) Now, back to the point of the thread: If Jesus is IN God, then Jesus isn't God Himself. If anyone is IN, OF, FROM, or WITH someone, then they can't possibly BE that someone they are IN, OF, FROM, or WITH. Your art of using words as usual within human understandings, but the more you speak with your corrupted logic the more you are subject to err!!
This is what you stated Mike:
Quote (mikeboll @ 64) Sort of. My body is simply a vessel that houses my soul and spirit on earth, but you can say it too is “ME”. Again Mike since as you stated that when Jesus in God ,and God in Jesus, then Jesus isn’t God Himself.
Logically
How come that your soul which is in you is also Mike himself? Not as you stated when referring to God
Logically If your soul in you is also Mike himself, God in Jesus is also God himself.
Or again when you refer to God you simply concentrate on your word wisdom and completely forget that you are referring to God and you must respect Him instead of ignoring Him???
Charles, read the big, bolded words in my statement. Is your soul a different SOMEONE than your spirit, which is in turn a different SOMEONE than your body? Is your soul the ANOINTED ONE of your body and your spirit the SON OF your soul and your body the GOD OF your spirit?You are trying desparately to justify your claim that God is three INDIVIDUAL PEOPLE in one being by comparing God with the three INDIVIDUAL PARTS of a human being. But human beings are not THREE PERSONS in a “Humanhead” anymore than the God who created us in His image is THREE PERSONS in a Godhead.
Charles, are you three PERSONS in a humanhead? YES or NO?
Mike
I always wander how those people have there faith in place ?
if the scriptures represent a so difficult subject to believe in, just as they are (scriptures)sure they believe in God and probably in the son ,but so are the demon ,
they sure know the verbs,and other grammar punctuation well !!!!! so and so .
just as the Pharisees,Scribes ,and Sadducee,and lost the kingdom ,
they also were convinced that they where right ,
Hi Pierre,
What bothers me the most is that there is hardly ever any acknowledgment. They make a claim, I show them scripturally how their claim is flawed, and instead of saying “OH!”, they just go on to OTHER claims.
Over and over and over again.
I started this thread by showing Charles the first three claims in his list on the first page of the thread were scripturally flawed. He didn't deny that they were flawed, but instead just keeps moving on to other things. But that's okay, because for each thing he moves on to, I'll be there with scripture to show him his new claim doesn't make Jesus God anymore than any of his previous claims did.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 17 2011,12:59) Hi Pierre, What bothers me the most is that there is hardly ever any acknowledgment. They make a claim, I show them scripturally how their claim is flawed, and instead of saying “OH!”, they just go on to OTHER claims.
Over and over and over again.
I started this thread by showing Charles the first three claims in his list on the first page of the thread were scripturally flawed. He didn't deny that they were flawed, but instead just keeps moving on to other things. But that's okay, because for each thing he moves on to, I'll be there with scripture to show him his new claim doesn't make Jesus God anymore than any of his previous claims did.
Mikeyou got patient ,I do not have much to go in circles,I have much to give to grow but not to wast.
but to you, you learn and improve in the same time,this gives you good practice in the word of God,
Quote (carmel @ Oct. 16 2011,08:21) Quote (Ed J @ Oct. 16 2011,07:58) Quote (carmel @ Oct. 16 2011,07:05) Quote (Ed J @ Oct. 16 2011,05:02) Quote (carmel @ Oct. 16 2011,04:06) Logically mike children of God are Gods. Since Logically children of dog are dogs
Hi Charles,What's wrong with this logic?
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
EDj,Then the Son of God Is God.
peace and love in Jesus Christ
Charles
Hi Charles,Who is the “son of Mary” then?
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
EDJ,Jesus God in Flesh as a human being.
Hi Charles,Is Mary the mother of “God” then?
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgQuote (Ed J @ Oct. 17 2011,17:22) Quote (carmel @ Oct. 16 2011,08:21) Quote (Ed J @ Oct. 16 2011,07:58) Quote (carmel @ Oct. 16 2011,07:05) Quote (Ed J @ Oct. 16 2011,05:02) Quote (carmel @ Oct. 16 2011,04:06) Logically mike children of God are Gods. Since Logically children of dog are dogs
Hi Charles,What's wrong with this logic?
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
EDj,Then the Son of God Is God.
peace and love in Jesus Christ
Charles
Hi Charles,Who is the “son of Mary” then?
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
EDJ,Jesus God in Flesh as a human being.
Hi Charles,Is Mary the mother of “God” then?
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
Ed J,I said the Mother of Jesus as a human being, THE SON OF MAN,but also THE SON OF GOD ,
THEREFORE GOD.Therefore Mary was the Mother of GOD in Flesh
Quote (carmel @ Oct. 18 2011,13:51) Quote (Ed J @ Oct. 17 2011,17:22) Quote (carmel @ Oct. 16 2011,08:21) Quote (Ed J @ Oct. 16 2011,07:58) Quote (carmel @ Oct. 16 2011,07:05) Quote (Ed J @ Oct. 16 2011,05:02) Quote (carmel @ Oct. 16 2011,04:06) Logically mike children of God are Gods. Since Logically children of dog are dogs
Hi Charles,What's wrong with this logic?
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
EDj,Then the Son of God Is God.
peace and love in Jesus Christ
Charles
Hi Charles,Who is the “son of Mary” then?
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
EDJ,Jesus God in Flesh as a human being.
Hi Charles,Is Mary the mother of “God” then?
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
Ed J,I said the Mother of Jesus as a human being, THE SON OF MAN,but also THE SON OF GOD ,
THEREFORE GOD.Therefore Mary was the Mother of GOD in Flesh
CHARLES 
you must be kidding ??this is a joke right ??
if not how far will you go in your folly ??
saying;
Quote Ed J, I said the Mother of Jesus as a human being, THE SON OF MAN,but also THE SON OF GOD ,
THEREFORE GOD.Therefore Mary was the Mother of GOD in Flesh
Pierre
Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 16 2011,15:32) but to you, you learn and improve in the same time,this gives you good practice in the word of God,
That it does, Pierre. I learn way more because of the Trinitarians and Non-preexisters here than from anyone else simply because I have to delve deep into scripture to refute their claims solidly. And delving deep into scripture causes me to learn at a much deeper level than just reading the Bible, or talking to someone else here who already has the same understanding as I do.peace,
mikeQuote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 18 2011,16:34) Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 16 2011,15:32) but to you, you learn and improve in the same time,this gives you good practice in the word of God,
That it does, Pierre. I learn way more because of the Trinitarians and Non-preexisters here than from anyone else simply because I have to delve deep into scripture to refute their claims solidly. And delving deep into scripture causes me to learn at a much deeper level than just reading the Bible, or talking to someone else here who already has the same understanding as I do.peace,
mike It's like this, Pierre:
Mike – Pierre, Jesus is not God, but the Son OF God.
Pierre – That's correct, Mike.
See? No need to delve any deeper, right?
That's why I appreciate the Trinitarians and Non-preexisters on this site. Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 18 2011,18:24) It's like this, Pierre: Mike – Pierre, Jesus is not God, but the Son OF God.
Pierre – That's correct, Mike.
See? No need to delve any deeper, right?
That's why I appreciate the Trinitarians and Non-preexisters on this site.
Mikethey may not answer you that way ,they are runners
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 16 2011,05:05) Quote (shimmer @ Oct. 14 2011,22:54) There is only one true God, the bible says, God the father. I go by what the bible says. If anyone wants to put their own twist to it, I don't listen.
I agree that our only God is the Father. But then how do we bring our brothers Mark and Charles to the truth of the matter by simply refusing to listen to the twists they put on the scriptures?I feel obligated to listen to those twists, and then try to scripturally show them that they ARE twists.
2 Timothy 3
16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.
Mike, it's the 'fruit' that matters in the end you know.Doctrine doesn't.
God will look on the heart and intentions of all, no matter what you know.
Someone could know 'not much' and have a good heart, good intentions , whatever, because the scales are weighed in the end.
Everything is measured up.
Example if a young man was lost, confused, and hanging onto life by a thread, and had just a dot of faith and prayer, he could be closer to God in that moment, than someone else – who knows it all.
Quote (shimmer @ Oct. 18 2011,13:15) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 16 2011,05:05) Quote (shimmer @ Oct. 14 2011,22:54) There is only one true God, the bible says, God the father. I go by what the bible says. If anyone wants to put their own twist to it, I don't listen.
I agree that our only God is the Father. But then how do we bring our brothers Mark and Charles to the truth of the matter by simply refusing to listen to the twists they put on the scriptures?I feel obligated to listen to those twists, and then try to scripturally show them that they ARE twists.
2 Timothy 3
16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.
Mike, it's the 'fruit' that matters in the end you know.Doctrine doesn't.
God will look on the heart and intentions of all, no matter what you know.
Someone could know 'not much' and have a good heart, good intentions , whatever, because the scales are weighed in the end.
Everything is measured up.
Example if a young man was lost, confused, and hanging onto life by a thread, and had just a dot of faith and prayer, he could be closer to God in that moment, than someone else – who knows it all.
Greetings Shimmer …… Right you are ! all one has to do is look at the two theives who were crucified with Jesus one was promised access to the kingdom with his expression of faith in his final moments of life ….Quote (theodorej @ Oct. 20 2011,06:24) Quote (shimmer @ Oct. 18 2011,13:15) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 16 2011,05:05) Quote (shimmer @ Oct. 14 2011,22:54) There is only one true God, the bible says, God the father. I go by what the bible says. If anyone wants to put their own twist to it, I don't listen.
I agree that our only God is the Father. But then how do we bring our brothers Mark and Charles to the truth of the matter by simply refusing to listen to the twists they put on the scriptures?I feel obligated to listen to those twists, and then try to scripturally show them that they ARE twists.
2 Timothy 3
16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.
Mike, it's the 'fruit' that matters in the end you know.Doctrine doesn't.
God will look on the heart and intentions of all, no matter what you know.
Someone could know 'not much' and have a good heart, good intentions , whatever, because the scales are weighed in the end.
Everything is measured up.
Example if a young man was lost, confused, and hanging onto life by a thread, and had just a dot of faith and prayer, he could be closer to God in that moment, than someone else – who knows it all.
Greetings Shimmer …… Right you are ! all one has to do is look at the two theives who were crucified with Jesus one was promised access to the kingdom with his expression of faith in his final moments of life ….
Hi Theoso there is now only one thing that we have to do to get in the kingdom
Quote (shimmer @ Oct. 18 2011,20:15) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 16 2011,05:05) Quote (shimmer @ Oct. 14 2011,22:54) There is only one true God, the bible says, God the father. I go by what the bible says. If anyone wants to put their own twist to it, I don't listen.
I agree that our only God is the Father. But then how do we bring our brothers Mark and Charles to the truth of the matter by simply refusing to listen to the twists they put on the scriptures?I feel obligated to listen to those twists, and then try to scripturally show them that they ARE twists.
2 Timothy 3
16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.
Mike, it's the 'fruit' that matters in the end you know.Doctrine doesn't.
God will look on the heart and intentions of all, no matter what you know.
Someone could know 'not much' and have a good heart, good intentions , whatever, because the scales are weighed in the end.
Everything is measured up.
Example if a young man was lost, confused, and hanging onto life by a thread, and had just a dot of faith and prayer, he could be closer to God in that moment, than someone else – who knows it all.
shimmerQuote Mike, it's the 'fruit' that matters in the end you know. Doctrine doesn't.
God will look on the heart and intentions of all, no matter what you know.
Someone could know 'not much' and have a good heart, good intentions , whatever, because the scales are weighed in the end.
Everything is measured up.
Example if a young man was lost, confused, and hanging onto life by a thread, and had just a dot of faith and prayer, he could be closer to God in that moment, than someone else – who knows it all.
you are right that the fruits we produce are of great importance,but how do we know to whom to give them those fruits ??
sure God can do all those things but it is not God that is on trial here it is men and his ways of sin ,unless we know the one we worship to be the true God and know his ways how can we know for sure that the fruits we produce are the ones he like to see us produce ??there is more than just what the eye can see .
Pierre
Hi all,
I haven't been here for a long while, but every now and then I like to throw in my two cents worth. But it is going to be extremely difficult to stay on point if Charles is going to take passages out of context in an attempt to prove his circular reasoning. Circular reasoning is a formal logical fallacy (Fallacy is defined as: A mistaken belief, esp. one based on an unsound argument) in which the proposition to be proved is assumed implicitly or explicitly in one of the premises. For example: “Only an untrustworthy person would run for office. The fact that politicians are untrustworthy is proof of this.” The second premise is the fallacy, if there is even one trustworthy politician in all of history (past, present or future), then the premise is false. Therefore, to pose the premise that states implicitly that God the Father and the Son are one and the same entity is a fallacy, as that is the proposition to be proved and therefore cannot be considered proof of itself. Charles states this premise as “My purpose is to proof (sic) that the Father and the Son is (sic) the same one God, and wherever, there is a reference to God the Father is equivalently (sic) also to the Son.”It also becomes extremely difficult to discuss such a complex subject one point at a time, as many of the points are interconnected. Also, Charles is going to be difficult to convince because it is fairly clear that he is not very well educated and so will often not understand the explanation being offered. I'm not trying to be mean spirited here, but if one is to understand the writings of the Apostle Paul, then one must realize that all of his explanations are based rigorously on his very deep understanding of Jewish law.
Further, Charles' insistence on using only the KJV would preclude anyone else's use of other mss and/or translations to show that all of the passages used to “prove” that the Father and the Son are one and the same entity can also be translated in a way that not only does not show the Father and the Son to be one and the same, but actually show just the opposite. I have to agree with Mike that the other mss and translations must be considered, but also ancient Greek grammar must be at the least rudimentorily understood because the language does not always translate easily into modern English (Elizabethan English being no exception). It must be understood that no human language is adequate to clearly difine the attributes of an infinite God, i.e. God is said to be omnipotent, but omnipotence implicitly implies that God can do anything, but by God's own laws and/or rules this is not the case, as God cannot lie, he cannot die and he cannot change his nature. If one is incapable of understanding such inadequacies of language in this matter, then there is absolutely no way to prove or disprove the proposition that The Father and the Son are one and the same entity.
This subject is probably the most complex of all “dogmas” of Christianity and can be debated ad nauseum depending on which side of the argument one chooses to stand. However, there are many passages that would be rendered absurd if one is to simply assume that the Father and the Son are one and the same entity and I propose that God is anything but absurd! However, at the same time, this subject is the most important to understand, because there is a son of God that seeks with all of his considerable cunning to be worshipped as God and to do so is anti-Christ.
There are also other points to be considered that add credibility to a non-trinitarian view. Such things as who defined “Trinity” and from whence he derived the basis for this dogma. It should be noted that all other Judeo based religions (both the Jews and Islam) do not accept “Trinity” and to blindly condemn them as idiots because they don't accept the dogma is supremely arrogant and, I submit, not of the Holy Spirit!
I hope that I have not thoroughly offended everyone, but this is a subject that I have studied for more than 40 years and I tend to be somewhat passionate about it. At this moment I don't really know how this subject would be best approached and maybe I'm out of line here and should be making this argument in a different thread, but I can say of a certainty that it is unlikely that either side will be able to prove anything in this manner.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
