- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (JustAskin @ Oct. 06 2010,18:57) Oh, let me help you get started on how to eat meat, how to chew. Mike it's a little different from drinking milk. If you try to eat meat like you drink milk, you will choke and die…
JA,I'm with Keith on the issue of your abusive behavior. Post it nicely, and I will discourse with you on any subject.
But when you lace your otherwise solid points with personal attacks and belittlement, count me out.
I've got nothing to say to an arrogant bully.
Either play nice, or don't play with me at all.
peace and love,
mikeTo all,
I think the answer to this question is on the first few pages of this thread. Go back to page one,
This is just like the word begotten, how long has it gone on, how many threads did the word begotten take over ?
It's all in scripture.
Mike, you and your friend must talk. You both use the same word arrogant (for JA), you both use the word judgmental (for me). All I did was give my opinion. Isnt this a forum ? Why is there so much anger ?
JA, be a bit kinder please,
Mike…you doing your THANG – When you can't can't answer – because you can't answer you DON'T answer – but accuse the other person of somethang or other.
Scrap the accusation stance – Just post an answer… or learn to CONCEDE… That is your lesson for today…
Can anyone believe these two – Boy, they can't walk a straight line even holding each other's …. hands.
Mike, YOU KNOW WHY YOU WON'T Answer – but give it it try – Conceding shows you are a good Christian boy – even if the other is not – Who's judging?
Shimmer, you are right,
These two still need milk – Meat chokes them… or perhaps they don't have teeth to chew – might hurt each other on what they doing with each other.
That's why their discussions go on and on – never ending – Neither of them have gospel truth – they just sounding off on each other.
They both too afraid to show credence to each other – or observe an invalid post. Just muddy the waters with their serpent tail and escape in the confusion.
Look with Spiritual eyes – no muddy water confuses Spiritual eyes – so don't waste your time and effort.
YOU HAVE BEEN SEEN… You always been seen for the changed persons that you are – Desperately desiring to be seen as right has drawn you, MIKE, over to the darkside and now you are afraid to come into the light.
Did anyone ever think to see Mileboll and WJ holding hands in this forum – well ya seen it now – When you getting Wed, you two?
Mike,
Are you saying that little thing you quoted was enough to stop you answering my questions – unlike you to rise to a challenge?
So, I was right – you ARE Afraid to post a RESPONSE…. well well, what a thing – and I was only getting started – my my – how the Mikeboll cooky crumbled!!
JA, I wasnt talking about WJ. WJ has never called me 'judgmental' and never said I was not welcome in a conversation.
But let it drop please.
Trinitarians and non Trinitarians both have things in common. Both can agree to the meaning of begotten, both disagree with procreation, I dont understand the Trinity so I prefer not to judge what I dont understand.
Hi Shimmer,
I see what you say…Notice that WJ has not responded … I keep stating that DEFINITION is CRUCIAL in debates and during discords.
It is vital that both parties understand exactly the same definition of the subject being discussed but it seems many are happy disagreeing with each other and never actually understanding that they are disagreeing on DIFFERENT concepts – hence they will never agree:
In Homer's “Oddyseus”, Oddyseus stumbles across the Cyclops on an island and enters one their caves, he and some of his men. They see huge vats of milk and chees. Then the cyclops comes home and rolls a huge stone over the cave mouth. Odds- and his men are stuck. Cyclops sees them and gets all narky for them eating his food and kills a few of them – but wiley Odds- plies him with strong wine and tells him nice stuff, until the Cyclops says “What is you name – I will eat you last”. Odds replies, “my name is 'Noman'”.
During the night Polyphemus, the Cyclops falls asleep in a drunken stupor fro the wine. Odds and his crew sharpen a huge wooden steak and heat it red hot over a fire and then jabs it into Polyp-s single eye. polyp-s wails and rages in agony slashing around trying to smash the little blighters. His neighbours hear him and call out,'”Polyphemus, Who is hurting you. Tell us and we will help you”.
Polyp-s shouts back “NoMan is hurting me”
His neighbours shout back, “Well if No Man is hurting you shut the heck up!” (p.s. Cyclops' are not not very friendly to each other even at the best of times)
Now, if Polyp-s had defined what he meant by “NoMan” he would have got help off his normally unfriendly neighbours because the “Gods” had told them that a Man would come and hurt one of them.Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 06 2010,11:38) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Oct. 05 2010,14:50) You didn't answer the questions? - “Is the Father “in the form of God“?
- “Or do you believe he has no form“?
If so then why do you assume that Jesus being in the “form of God” means he is not God?
It doesn't say he is in the “form of a spirit” or a “spirit form” does it? That is merely your inference.
Hi Keith,What a trinitarian “scholar” thinks is of no concern to me. You post the thoughts of a mere man, and then end your post with “Stick with the scripture”.
For all I know, A.T. Robertson is the one who started the “firstborn of all creation” really means “preeminent over all creation” crap. And we both know there's no Koine Greek referrences that imply that load of crap. In fact, we also both know the opposite is true.
I think God's Divine Name says it all about His “form”. “I shall prove to be what I shall prove to be” implies that God can take any form He wants to. But He must have a form, or He would be so all enveloping that everything in existence would be “God”. If He doesn't have a “barrier” between himself and some mass murderer, then that mass murderer IS God.
In other words, the being of God must be contained within certain boundaries – something that distinguishes Him from everything else. I think there is no limit to those boundaries, and He can be as “BIG” as He wants, but if there is no “line” where God ends and His creations begin, then everything is God.
That was a REALLY LONG way of saying, “Yes, I think God has a form”.
You ask:
Quote If so then why do you assume that Jesus being in the “form of God” means he is not God?
Listen Keith. If someone is “in the form” of someone, there are definitely TWO mentioned……….not ONE. I would not say “Keith is in the form of Keith”. And if Paul, who very clearly knows that Jesus is NOT God Himself, wanted to say “Jesus is God”, he would have said just that. Not “Jesus (one being) was in the form of God” (a different being).Okay, I answered yours……..your turn.
If I said, “Cain was in the form of Adam”, would you think that Cain actually WAS Adam, or just that they shared certain attributes?
peace and love,
mike
Hi Mike.Keith cannot grasp the difference between identity and nature.
If he understood that Eve was in nature adam, and she wasn't in identity Adam, then he wouldn't be fooled by the Trinity Doctrine.
Until then, he will skirt around this issue as he has done for years.
Maybe I should call him on a debate regarding this.
Quote (t8 @ Oct. 07 2010,20:53) Hi Mike. Keith cannot grasp the difference between identity and nature. If he understood that Eve was in nature adam, and she wasn't in identity Adam, then he wouldn't be fooled by the Trinity Doctrine.
T8Adam and Eve were “One flesh”, humanity!
The Father and Jesus are “One Spirit”, God!
Real simple.
Tell us t8…
Is the Father in the “form of God”? Is the Fathers nature God?
Then why would you say that Jesus being in the “form of God” is not God? In what way is Jesus “Nature” in Spirit different than the Fathers?
Real simple! I don't expect you to answer BTW.
WJ
t8, make it an 'controlled' open debate.
Others are allowed to post single post comments but not overwhelm it. It has happened naturally in some threads so why not in a controlled but open thread?
Mike,
Quote In other words, the being of God must be contained within certain boundaries – something that distinguishes Him from everything else. I think there is no limit to those boundaries, and He can be as “BIG” as He wants, but if there is no “line” where God ends and His creations begin, then everything is God. So you think God has boundaries but unbounded boundaries…strange concept… where did that spring from?
God is IN ALL because God IS ALL. Everything is FROM God and Everything is TO God, that is why Jesus says “I am in the Father and Father is in Me”.
I KNOW what you are saying but you say things DANGEROUSLY and that is why people tear you arguments apart.
Before the PHYSICAL World there was NOTHING but [intelligent] Energy. There was nothing but God.
Then God decided to make a physical world. So he took of his [intelligent] Energy and created the Spirit creatures – Powerful forces of pure energy with limited intelligence (Bounded Energy/Spirits).
God then used these Spirits creatures to create Matter, physical elements. ALL MATTER is composed of compressed Energy – pure energy – break down matter and it becomes Energy – Heat, Light, other stuff… All energy…
What is that great saying about a breadcrumb – the amount of energy store.. latent. in a breadcrumb?
How is God bounded if he is IN EVERYTHING – God is IN Everything.
You say in the God can't be in the mass murderer but that is a fleshly thing to say – the mass murderer is composed of Energy through every molecule, atom, particle, photon, electron, nucleus, what ever (Where's our Scientist when you need him?). What is it that 'separates' God from the sinner, his thoughts, not the body nor the spirit. His thoughts: that FREE part that God gave us to mimic himself – his Image.
If God is bounded, what is he bounded by? What is OUTSIDE of God, then? God Almighty has a God Almighty? A new dimension has been created – an Eight heaven.
And Mikeboll is God of it…
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 06 2010,20:38) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Oct. 06 2010,15:40) mikeboll64,Oct. wrote:How about telling me how Keith can be in the form of Keith?
MikeKeith is a proper name. God is not a proper name but a Title that describes the metaphysical class of a being.
Just like human is a title that describes man.
So Adam and Cain are equally human.
WJ
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 06 2010,20:38)
Hi Keith,Paul wasn't talking about some “species” of “god” in Phil 2.
Hi MikeAgreed! Then why do you insist that there are “other species” or kinds of gods? God is in a class of his own right? His form is “unique” and there is none to be compared to him and none like him, (Pss 89:6 – Ex 9:14 – Isa 46:9) Do you agree?
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 06 2010,20:38) He was speaking about the being “our God”.
True, and that being has a unique form i.e. the “form of God” and Jesus is in that same form.You didn’t answer the questions…
- Is the Father in the “Form of God”?
- If so does that mean that he is not God?
Then why do you assume that Jesus is not God. Why do you reject the NET, AT Robertson, and the many hundreds of commentators that agree that Jesus is “in very nature God” (NIV), and that he is in essence everything that God is. (John 1:1 – Phil 2:6 – Heb 1:3)
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 06 2010,20:38) This is made clear by the comment about Jesus considering equality with God.
who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, NKJVThough he was God, he did not demand and cling to his rights as God. NLT
who, being in the form of God, thought [it] not robbery to be equal to God, YNG
Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: WEB
who, existing in the form of God, didn't consider it robbery to be equal with God, HNV
Here is a clear statement by Paul of the deity of Christ. A prize (arpagmon). Predicate accusative with hghsato. Originally words in -mo signified the act, not the result (-ma). The few examples of arpagmo (Plutarch, etc.) allow it to be understood as equivalent to arpagma, like baptismo and baptisma. That is to say Paul means a prize to be held on to rather than something to be won (“robbery”). To be on an equality with God (to einai isa qeoi). Accusative articular infinitive object of hghsato, “the being equal with God” (associative instrumental case qewi after isa). Isa is adverbial use of neuter plural with einai as in Revelation 21:16 . AT Robertson
Robertson’s use of Strongs G725 – harpagmos which is the word that the NET and the NIV translated as “Grasped” is to say “Paul means a prize to be held on to rather than something to be won (“robbery”)”. To be on an equality with God (to einai isa qeoi)“.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 06 2010,20:38) I know you like the “didn't consider it robbery” KJV translation, and I like the “didn't consider it something to be grasped” NIV translation. Either way though, it makes it clear that Paul wasn't talking about “god-kind” in general, but a specific person.
Says who Mike? There is only “One Kind” of “Form of God”. Is there any other kind? Being like God or having his “likeness” is not the same as being in the “Form of God”. Is there any other being that the scriptures attribute the “Form (morphē) of God” too?But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form (morphē) of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: Phil 2:7
Paul uses the same word (morphē) for servant. Does the “form of a servant” mean he was not a servant?
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 06 2010,20:38) So if Jesus was in the form of the being we know as “God”, then Jesus couldn't actually BE that being we know as “God”, right?
This is a fallacy and a strawman. Is the Father in the “form of God”? Is there any other form of God? Is there any other that shares his form or is like him? (Pss 89:6 – Ex 9:14 – Isa 46:9)Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 06 2010,20:38) You keep avoiding this point Keith. If one is said to be “in the form” of another, then there are two mentioned, right? And in order to be “in the form” of someone else, you cannot actually BE the person you are said to be “in the form” of.
No Mike. You are avoiding the point. The Father and Jesus are not the same person. But they are both in the “form of God”, right? Who else in the universe is in the “Form of God”?Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 06 2010,20:38)
Will you either agree with this or refute it? Because the “ignoring it” option you've been choosing is only going to make me ask it more times.
There you go again, I have refuted it but you don’t like the answer, so your statement is to go in circles all over again. Mike why do you insist that someone “agree” with you or they are not answering or addressing your points? Why do you insist that others answer your questions and you not answer theirs?Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 06 2010,20:38) So I agree with you that he is talking about our Father, Jehovah God. And knowing that, you have to admit that for Jesus to be “in the form” of Jehovah God, he has to be someone other than Jehovah God, r
ight?
Yes he is another person that shares the “Form of God” with the Father. He is the Word that was with God and was God!WJ
WJ,
You and Mike, what a pair you two make… You two remind me of the two mice in HitchHiker's Guide To The Galaxy, who, in the end worked out that a becoming Pundits, engaged in everlasting debates, ensured that they would be 'On the Gravy Train for Life'.WJ, you don't answer any posts from me but then ask the very same questions or similar to others,..like Mike.
WJ, you say, 'God is unique and there is not another like him', and this is Scriptural and true.
But then you say, in a manner of speaking, that Jesus is 'like God'.
Is this not counter intuitive?You won't answer questions that clearly refute your claims. Why is this? What do you fear from admitting a truth? Are you not to learn truth…do you make yourself into a Devil and a Satan simply because you fear admitting the truth?
Was Jesus God. No.
WJ, why do you want to make Jesus God? Because trinity tells you to think so.
WJ, who created the trinity creed?Can you answer that? Was it not the Roman nation?
WJ, who are the Roman nation of the times of Jesus, the disciples, the Apostles and the Saints?
WH, were they not the 'Abomination' spoken of by Christ, 'The Abomination, standing where it should not'…standing in the inner sanctuary of the temple of Jerusalem, the place where only the purified High Priest is allowed to go? The Roman army in their blood splattered battle gear…to these you hold up your hands and wash them in the blood of their victims of the period.WJ, we have a kids program over here called 'Horrible Historys' that tell 'warts and all history'. Real history with a twist of humour that show amongst many sketches, the Romans using Christians as Human Candles, pour wax over them and out a wick down their back and set them alight for 'birthday party outdoor lighting', fighting wild animals with wooden swords, or nothing, all manner of nasty ways to kill christians…these are the same people who underwrote the trinity creed, these are who you support by adherence to the trinity creed.
If Jesus is God, how did he die? Can a God die?
Quote (JustAskin @ Oct. 08 2010,13:50) You won't answer questions that clearly refute your claims. Why is this? What do you fear from admitting a truth? Are you not to learn truth…do you make yourself into a Devil and a Satan simply because you fear admitting the truth?
JAWhos truth? Your truth?
No body cares to have dialogue with you because of your abusive nature.
Were you badly beaten as a child? Were you the victom of child abuse?
Why do you have to be so brass or harsh? You claim you have the Holy Spirit but the Holy Spirit is not condemning. Condemnation comes from the accuser of the brethren.
If you would learn to treat others like you want them to treat you, you might get somewhere on this sight.
WJ
WJ,
You lie…
You refuse to answer because you cannot.You and Mike both.
You cannot answer so your fall back is to claim that you are being abused….
Oh dear, such spineless sinners that you both are.
Ignore the 'so-called' insults and answer the questions if you feel you can answer…note, i don't say refute, you can actuall agree.
In fact, how about agreeing points instead of ignoring them and just trying to pick nonexistent holes in my points.
If you do not respond it will be taken that you agree with the points i put to you, each and everyone.
And therefore, forever after, if you speak counter to 'your agreement' then you make yourself a more selfconfessed liar in this forum.A non answer equates to agreement.
And, remember, WJ, you cannot lie…you claim to be answering by the grace of God and in the Spirit of that Holy one.
Answer with God's Truth, WJ, don't waver either to the left nor to the right, but walk the straight line.
WJ, if you are here by grace of God, answer by the grace of God.
Quote (JustAskin @ Oct. 08 2010,14:20) Ignore the 'so-called' insults and answer the questions if you feel you can answer…note, i don't say refute, you can actuall agree.
JAWhy, so you can come back with more insults?
Have you not realized how many on this sight has addressed your abusive nature?
Out of the mouth of two or three witnesses let every word be established.
WJ
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Oct. 08 2010,14:00) Quote (JustAskin @ Oct. 08 2010,13:50) You won't answer questions that clearly refute your claims. Why is this? What do you fear from admitting a truth? Are you not to learn truth…do you make yourself into a Devil and a Satan simply because you fear admitting the truth?
JAWhos truth? Your truth?
No body cares to have dialogue with you because of your abusive nature.
Were you badly beaten as a child? Were you the victom of child abuse?
Why do you have to be so brass or harsh? You claim you have the Holy Spirit but the Holy Spirit is not condemning. Condemnation comes from the accuser of the brethren.
If you would learn to treat others like you want them to treat you, you might get somewhere on this sight.
WJ
Keith,
I am wondering the same thing.WJ,
You continue with you twisting because you cannot answer – why not be MAN enough to ignore the 'insults' and answer – is there a short cut…
LU, yes you may well wonder why Keith does not just answer.
Have you seen Mike do the same – – Yes.
neither can answer so they both use the same tactic of saying “oooh i'm hurt by you – so i'm not gonna play'
No, LU, it is because they CANNOT answer so they play this game – have you not seen them do it to themselves..
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
