- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 19 2010,14:00) Save that one for the debate Roo. You'll need something to fall back on. 
mike
You stuck your nose in first Mike. I was originally talking to sf.Roo
Guys,
Scriptures states that it was an angel in the bush.
God, Himself, does not appear, personally, to mankind. He appears 'through' an agent body, whether a messenger angel, the medium of the elements: air, water, wind, thunder, lightening, smoke, rays of light, etc, but not a physical emination of His Spirit self. If He did, even the mountains would melt like ricepaper put to a flame, such is His raw power, let alone flesh of mankind!
Quote (SimplyForgiven @ July 19 2010,12:17) wow this plural debate is going lol so far.
sf,What do you mean the debate is going lol so far? Mike and I are workin our butts off making our arguments. We're not insulting each other or engaging in the nonsense like before. It is the other debates that is a three ring circus.
I have gotten a couple of doozy headaches sitting at this computer for hours forming my rebuttals. So it's not “lol” to me. Please keep such comments to yourself.
thanks,
KJ
WorshippingJesus said to Mikeboll:
Quote I don't have to prove it. Jesus own words speak for themselves!
You are asserting that “All” means less.
Prove it!
WJ
Keith,Mike is really a piece of work isn't he? He says that “all” means “all” in Colossians 1:15. But in verse 23 the word “all” is an “exaggeration.” Now he is suggesting that “all” in reference to Christ's authority is less than “all.”
From Mike's and my first debate I said:
Quote Rom 9:5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over ALL, God blessed for ever. Amen. The English word “over” is the same Greek word “epi” in both verses.
* The Father is “over (epi) ALL.”
* Christ is “over (epi) ALL.”Therefore, God and Christ are EQUAL in authority.
Christ owns the heaven and the earth by inheritance. He has taken FULL possession of ALL things. The owner of property has “all” authority over his property.Mike has turned your debate into a three ring circus.
Jack
Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ July 20 2010,13:01) Quote (SimplyForgiven @ July 19 2010,12:17) wow this plural debate is going lol so far.
sf,What do you mean the debate is going lol so far? Mike and I are workin our butts off making our arguments. We're not insulting each other or engaging in the nonsense like before. It is the other debates that is a three ring circus.
I have gotten a couple of doozy headaches sitting at this computer for hours forming my rebuttals. So it's not “lol” to me. Please keep such comments to yourself.
thanks,
KJ
Hold your HORSES THERE BUDDY!
your spitting fighting words!MY comment was referring to that the plural debate even went back to where it was started which was in this thread fyi.
Thats what i meant by far.You guys chose to debate for TEN REBUTTALS. which i strongly suggested you shouldnt.
Again as i stated many times before CF debate is effeicent to make arguements and a time saver.
Simple and Strong.Dont blame me because you wanted to go debate sucide on ten rebuttals.
CF debate hits the heart of the subject without letting the debators go off subject.
Anyways enough abotu Cf Debate,
lets go back to the torture chamber for KJ and Mike.which is almost done ladies and gentlemen.
I believe we are on the 6th rebuttal!congrats!
Much love Kj!
Lighten up will ya?
Quote (SimplyForgiven @ July 20 2010,21:20) Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ July 20 2010,13:01) Quote (SimplyForgiven @ July 19 2010,12:17) wow this plural debate is going lol so far.
sf,What do you mean the debate is going lol so far? Mike and I are workin our butts off making our arguments. We're not insulting each other or engaging in the nonsense like before. It is the other debates that is a three ring circus.
I have gotten a couple of doozy headaches sitting at this computer for hours forming my rebuttals. So it's not “lol” to me. Please keep such comments to yourself.
thanks,
KJ
Hold your HORSES THERE BUDDY!
your spitting fighting words!MY comment was referring to that the plural debate even went back to where it was started which was in this thread fyi.
Thats what i meant by far.You guys chose to debate for TEN REBUTTALS. which i strongly suggested you shouldnt.
Again as i stated many times before CF debate is effeicent to make arguements and a time saver.
Simple and Strong.Dont blame me because you wanted to go debate sucide on ten rebuttals.
CF debate hits the heart of the subject without letting the debators go off subject.
Anyways enough abotu Cf Debate,
lets go back to the torture chamber for KJ and Mike.which is almost done ladies and gentlemen.
I believe we are on the 6th rebuttal!congrats!
Much love Kj!
Lighten up will ya?
Okay SF. Sorry for gettin hot about it. You're cool
KJ
Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ July 20 2010,03:16) WorshippingJesus said to Mikeboll: Quote I don't have to prove it. Jesus own words speak for themselves!
You are asserting that “All” means less.
Prove it!
WJ
Keith,Mike is really a piece of work isn't he? He says that “all” means “all” in Colossians 1:15. But in verse 23 the word “all” is an “exaggeration.” Now he is suggesting that “all” in reference to Christ's authority is less than “all.”
From Mike's and my first debate I said:
Quote Rom 9:5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over ALL, God blessed for ever. Amen. The English word “over” is the same Greek word “epi” in both verses.
* The Father is “over (epi) ALL.”
* Christ is “over (epi) ALL.”Therefore, God and Christ are EQUAL in authority.
Christ owns the heaven and the earth by inheritance. He has taken FULL possession of ALL things. The owner of property has “all” authority over his property.Mike has turned your debate into a three ring circus.
Jack
JackGood points. It is obvious that he totally denys certain scriptures and their meaning, just like Pss 2:7 which he pushes as not speaking of King David and being prophetic of Jesus, but in fact now is inferring that Jesus was begotten 700 years before he came in the flesh!
I think the words of Jesus play very well here when Jesus said they make the word of God of none effect.
All doesn't mean all. Jesus is god but not my god but someones god. Jesus had a begining before the ages but yet he was born on a specific day before time. The Holy Spirit doesn't have any authority over the believers though it was he that made them overseers over the Church to feed the flock of God. That God the Father is coming again and not Jesus who clearly is the Alpha and Omega that is coming quickly. That Jesus is not to be worshipped though it is clear that in scriptures he is worshipped many times by the same Greek word that Jesus uses in true worship to the Father yet never says do not worship me.
Mike seems to know more than all of the scholars. If you don't believe it just ask him, yet he calls us clowns.
WJ
WJ said:
Quote All doesn't mean all.
“All” means what Mike wants it to mean when he wants it to mean it.WJ:
Quote Jesus is god but not my god but someones god. 
WJ:
Quote Jesus had a begining before the ages but yet he was born on a specific day before time.
Yeah and Mike is a history revisionist and now he's got poor Kathi revising history too. The expression “begotten before all ages” according to the fathers meant that Jesus was eternally generated like the sun's rays are generated. The trinitarian aplogists used the generation of the sun's rays to illustrate their “eternal generation” principle. There was never a time when the sun did not have rays. Of course you and I don't agree with “eternal generation.” My point is that the church fathers did not mean by the term that Jesus had a beginning.Mike's revision of history shows that he has lost the argument on the scripture front. So he must find what he thinks is “company” among the fathers. Kathi is now doing the same thing. She allowed Mike to bring her down to his category. I was totally floored when I saw Kathi trying to pass Calvin off as a non-trinitarian. Both Kathi and her spiritual husband Mike are losing their credibility here.
WJ:
Quote That God the Father is coming again and not Jesus who clearly is the Alpha and Omega that is coming quickly.
What! I didn't see this one!WJ:
Quote That Jesus is not to be worshipped though it is clear that in scriptures he is worshipped many times by the same Greek word that Jesus uses in true worship to the Father yet never says do not worship me.
The Father and the Lamb TOGETHER receive honor, praise AND WORSHIP.13Then I heard every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and on the sea, and all that is in them, singing:
“To him who sits on the throne and to the Lamb
be praise and honor and glory and power,
for ever and ever!” 14The four living creatures said, “Amen,” and the elders fell down and worshiped.Both the Father and the Lamb are the objects of honor, praise and worship. The elders “FELL DOWN and WORSHIPED” both the Father and the Jesus.
Jack
Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ July 20 2010,15:11) Mike's revision of history shows that he has lost the argument on the scripture front. So he must find what he thinks is “company” among the fathers. Kathi is now doing the same thing. She allowed Mike to bring her down to his category. I was totally floored when I saw Kathi trying to pass Calvin off as a non-trinitarian. Both Kathi and her spiritual husband Mike are losing their credibility here.
JackI wouldn't go that far. I think Kathi at least sees Jesus as “One Godhead” with the Father and worships Jesus and calls him her God as well.
Mike and Kathi are miles apart in their beliefs I think!
WJ
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 21 2010,07:56) Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ July 20 2010,15:11) Mike's revision of history shows that he has lost the argument on the scripture front. So he must find what he thinks is “company” among the fathers. Kathi is now doing the same thing. She allowed Mike to bring her down to his category. I was totally floored when I saw Kathi trying to pass Calvin off as a non-trinitarian. Both Kathi and her spiritual husband Mike are losing their credibility here.
JackI wouldn't go that far. I think Kathi at least sees Jesus as “One Godhead” with the Father and worships Jesus and calls him her God as well.
Mike and Kathi are miles apart in their beliefs I think!
WJ
Keith,Kathi knows better than to pass off trinitarians like Calvin as non-trinitarians. But this is to be expected of Mike. Historical revisionism is inexcuseable and those who do it know that they are losing the argument scripturally. I hope that Kathi will maintain the integrity she has always enjoyed here. If she cannot prove her views scripturally she should either concede she is wrong or not post. To join Mike in revising church history and to misrepresent the views of Calvin is not acceptable.
Jack
Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ July 20 2010,16:41) If she cannot prove her views scripturally she should either concede she is wrong or not post.
Well you know that most here are convinced of their views and so they will continue to post.WJ
Hey WJ,
I knew you could speak truth.
However, try doing it more often.
Truth is in the eye of the hearer or the ear of the beholder.
WorshippingJesus said to Mikeboll:
Quote Do you see the highlighted parts Mike? This is proof that the word “Begotten, gennaō” does not always mean “to be born”! It’s the same word used for the “begetting” of the saints which already exist…
For though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have “begotten (gennaō)” you through the gospel. 1 Cor 4:15
And Paul says…
I beseech thee for my son Onesimus, whom I have “begotten (gennaō)” in my bonds: Phm 1:10
These are the facts Mike and cannot be disproved by your inferences and conjecture.
Hi Keith,
I concur!
Jack
WorshippingJesus said to Mikeboll:
Quote The facts are that a literal begetting when spoken of being born is it takes a “Male and Female” and Sons are not born as FULL GROWN sons as you infer Jesus was, are they? So you are reinventing the word “Begotten”. But we do see in scriptures where men were “begotten” after they were born. Stick to the scriptures Mike! Keith,
You're right again. Strong's says that a literal begetting is by a father and a mother. So who is the goddess that gave birth to the Son?
Jack
Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ July 27 2010,03:28) WorshippingJesus said to Mikeboll: Quote The facts are that a literal begetting when spoken of being born is it takes a “Male and Female” and Sons are not born as FULL GROWN sons as you infer Jesus was, are they? So you are reinventing the word “Begotten”. But we do see in scriptures where men were “begotten” after they were born. Stick to the scriptures Mike! Keith,
You're right again. Strong's says that a literal begetting is by a father and a mother. So who is the goddess that gave birth to the Son?
Jack
Keith,An additional thought. If the Christ's Father literally begat the Son (a goddess would have been necessary), then who beget Christ's Father?
In my first debate with Mike he posted a JW source that says that God begets like human fathers beget. But human fathers are also begotten themselves. So the Son must have a Grandfather. And is the Son's Grandfather the God of another universe? And is the Son's great Grandfather the God of even another universe?
Mike is really a piece of work isn't he? He has quite an imagination and he does not think things through.
Jack
Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ July 26 2010,10:40) WorshippingJesus said to Mikeboll: Quote Do you see the highlighted parts Mike? This is proof that the word “Begotten, gennaō” does not always mean “to be born”! It’s the same word used for the “begetting” of the saints which already exist…
For though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have “begotten (gennaō)” you through the gospel. 1 Cor 4:15
And Paul says…
I beseech thee for my son Onesimus, whom I have “begotten (gennaō)” in my bonds: Phm 1:10
These are the facts Mike and cannot be disproved by your inferences and conjecture.
Hi Keith,
I concur!
Jack
JackIts obvious that Mike is sticking his head in the sand here.
He thinks he has an air tight case on the Hebrew word “yalad”, but he has not really done his studies as he shall see in my next post.
Blessing Keith
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 27 2010,03:51) Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ July 26 2010,10:40) WorshippingJesus said to Mikeboll: Quote Do you see the highlighted parts Mike? This is proof that the word “Begotten, gennaō” does not always mean “to be born”! It’s the same word used for the “begetting” of the saints which already exist…
For though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have “begotten (gennaō)” you through the gospel. 1 Cor 4:15
And Paul says…
I beseech thee for my son Onesimus, whom I have “begotten (gennaō)” in my bonds: Phm 1:10
These are the facts Mike and cannot be disproved by your inferences and conjecture.
Hi Keith,
I concur!
Jack
JackIts obvious that Mike is sticking his head in the sand here.
He thinks he has an air tight case on the Hebrew word “yalad”, but he has not really done his studies as he shall see in my next post.
Blessing Keith
Keith,The TWOT says that “yalad” is used figuratively. The word “yalad” is also used of God giving birth to Israel
Of the Rock who begot (yalad) you, you are unmindful,
And have forgotten the God who fathered you. Deut. 32:18It looks like God had sexual relations with a goddess more than once.
I hope I didn't steal any of your thunder.
Jack
Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ July 26 2010,12:24) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ July 27 2010,03:51) Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ July 26 2010,10:40) WorshippingJesus said to Mikeboll: Quote Do you see the highlighted parts Mike? This is proof that the word “Begotten, gennaō” does not always mean “to be born”! It’s the same word used for the “begetting” of the saints which already exist…
For though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have “begotten (gennaō)” you through the gospel. 1 Cor 4:15
And Paul says…
I beseech thee for my son Onesimus, whom I have “begotten (gennaō)” in my bonds: Phm 1:10
These are the facts Mike and cannot be disproved by your inferences and conjecture.
Hi Keith,
I concur!
Jack
JackIts obvious that Mike is sticking his head in the sand here.
He thinks he has an air tight case on the Hebrew word “yalad”, but he has not really done his studies as he shall see in my next post.
Blessing Keith
Keith,The TWOT says that “yalad” is used figuratively. The word “yalad” is also used of God giving birth to Israel
Of the Rock who begot (yalad) you, you are unmindful,
And have forgotten the God who fathered you. Deut. 32:18It looks like God had sexual relations with a goddess more than once.
I hope I didn't steal any of your thunder.
Jack
No not completely for there is more that blows holes in his claims.
WJ
Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ July 20 2010,15:11) WJ said: Quote All doesn't mean all.
“All” means what Mike wants it to mean when he wants it to mean it.WJ:
Quote Jesus is god but not my god but someones god. WJ:
Quote Jesus had a begining before the ages but yet he was born on a specific day before time.
Yeah and Mike is a history revisionist and now he's got poor Kathi revising history too. The expression “begotten before all ages” according to the fathers meant that Jesus was eternally generated like the sun's rays are generated. The trinitarian aplogists used the generation of the sun's rays to illustrate their “eternal generation” principle. There was never a time when the sun did not have rays. Of course you and I don't agree with “eternal generation.” My point is that the church fathers did not mean by the term that Jesus had a beginning.Mike's revision of history shows that he has lost the argument on the scripture front. So he must find what he thinks is “company” among the fathers. Kathi is now doing the same thing. She allowed Mike to bring her down to his category. I was totally floored when I saw Kathi trying to pass Calvin off as a non-trinitarian. Both Kathi and her spiritual husband Mike are losing their credibility here.
WJ:
Quote That God the Father is coming again and not Jesus who clearly is the Alpha and Omega that is coming quickly.
What! I didn't see this one!WJ:
Quote That Jesus is not to be worshipped though it is clear that in scriptures he is worshipped many times by the same Greek word that Jesus uses in true worship to the Father yet never says do not worship me.
The Father and the Lamb TOGETHER receive honor, praise AND WORSHIP.13Then I heard every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and on the sea, and all that is in them, singing:
“To him who sits on the throne and to the Lamb
be praise and honor and glory and power,
for ever and ever!” 14The four living creatures said, “Amen,” and the elders fell down and worshiped.Both the Father and the Lamb are the objects of honor, praise and worship. The elders “FELL DOWN and WORSHIPED” both the Father and the Jesus.
Jack
Roo,
I would like an apology for that rude remark to Mike and I and my husband. That was uncalled for. If someone is in agreement then they are spiritually married? Where do you find that in scripture? I agree with Mike on some things, with you on some things, with Keith on some things but we aren't spiritually married together. We all long for being brother and sister in Christ.That was very poor choice of words and I want an apology. Let's use our ambition to build one another up, not tear down and cause divisions. Unity in truth should be our goal with love. Derogatory comments will not serve that purpose. We need to pursue being on the same side of God and not by making enemies and name calling and childishly labeling others.
Please turn from this…please!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
