- This topic is empty.
- Posts
It appears that Kangaroo Jack lost this debate.
And he didn't admit to the point that T8 made as being true even though it obviously was.He has a chance to reopen the debate by posting here.
Otherwise it may be closed or opened up for others.A summary is recorded in the Debate Log.
KJ is not answering because he knows he lost this debate.
But he is not man enough to admit it.
It is best to be humble and honest and admit when you are wrong KJ. Why? Because it helps others out.
I am going to challenge you to a new debate soon. You haven't finished with me yet.
Quote (t8 @ Aug. 19 2011,20:11) KJ is not answering because he knows he lost this debate. But he is not man enough to admit it.
It is best to be humble and honest and admit when you are wrong KJ. Why? Because it helps others out.
I am going to challenge you to a new debate soon. You haven't finished with me yet.
I answered your pm today so stop beating your chest. I got tired of the repetition in the debate.You refused to concede that John CLEARLY stated his purpose for writing this section (chapter 5). It was that we might believe in the name of the Son of God and have the confidence to petition HIM in prayer. This necessarily infers that He is God.
You refused to concede that the pronoun in 5:20 is the same as the pronoun in 1:1-2. It says that we are in “that” which is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. “He is the true God and eternal life.”
You have already said that I “lost” the debate. Why do you keep repeating it? Maybe you have to convince yourself.
You may open this debate for public comment if you wish.
KJ
KJ says that 1 John 5:20 which says this:
We know also that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true. And we are in him who is true—even in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life.is actually saying that Jesus Christ is the true God.
But I said to him that the true God has a son called Jesus Christ, so that means that he is saying that Jesus Christ has a son if the true God is Jesus Christ. Worse than that is that his son is called Jesus Christ.
Rather than admitting that he was wrong about this so called Trinity proof verse, he just stopped posting and admitted nothing.
Feel free to talk about these points I made.
The true God is the Father and there are other verses that witness to this fact such as:
John 17:3
Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.
Quote (t8 @ Aug. 19 2011,23:03) KJ says that 1 John 5:20 which says this:
We know also that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true. And we are in him who is true—even in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life.is actually saying that Jesus Christ is the true God.
But I said to him that the true God has a son called Jesus Christ, so that means that he is saying that Jesus Christ has a son if the true God is Jesus Christ. Worse than that is that his son is called Jesus Christ.
Rather than admitting that he was wrong about this so called Trinity proof verse, he just stopped posting and admitted nothing.
Feel free to talk about these points I made.
The true God is the Father and there are other verses that witness to this fact such as:
John 17:3
Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.
TO ALL,The Father is not called the true God in 5:20. This is out of context.
t8's exposition of 1 John 5:20 is out of context and therefore is not a proper exposition at all. John EXPLICITLY states his purpose for writing which was to create faith in the Son of God and to give us the confidence that we may petition Him in prayer (vss. 13-15). In verse 20 he said that He was manifested to give us an understanding of THAT WHICH is true. Then he said that we are in THAT WHICH is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. The exact same pronoun is used in chapter 1 about the Word of life saying, “THAT WHICH was from the beginning….”
Again, the context in chapter 5 is about faith in the Son of God and the confidence we have to petition HIM in prayer (verses 13-15). t8 avoided this like the plague. Verse 20 says that He was manifested to reveal THAT WHICH is true. Then it says that we are in THAT WHICH is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. “HE is the true God and eternal life.” Where is the Father called the true God in this verse? John's prologue indicates that the Word of Life (Jesus) is the eternal life.
t8 and I are repeating ourselves again. See what I mean? So what's the point? You all are fee to stick your two cents in. I am done with debating t8. He has become too much like Mikeboll with his incessant repetition.
btw, There was a period of SEVEN MONTHS that t8 did not answer. I posted on July 28, 2010 and it took t8 til February 22, 2011 to reply.
NOT ONCE DID I BEAT MY CHEST AND CLAIM VICTORY BECAUSE WE HAD NO RULES (SEE SECOND POST ON PAGE 1).
KJ
Hi T8 and Jack,
1 John 5:20 And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding,
that we may know HIM that is true, and we are in him that is true,
even (YHVH) in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God (YHVH), and eternal life. (See John 17:3)Why does Jack have trouble believing Jesus' father is God alone? (See Isaiah 37:16, Isaiah 44:24)
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgQuote (Kangaroo Jack @ Aug. 20 2011,01:36) NOT ONCE DID I BEAT MY CHEST AND CLAIM VICTORY BECAUSE WE HAD NO RULES (SEE SECOND POST ON PAGE 1).
KJ, stop beating your chest. You have never won a victory to date. You have lost on all points and are not man enough to admit it.Even in this debate you are teaching that the one who is the true God is Jesus. That means that Jesus has a son. And a nearly identicle scripture clearly states that the one true God is the Father and that one true God sent his son. (You ignore this second witness). Any student who has a true heart can see the holes in your argument.
Ignoring this point is not the fruit of a man who seeks truth. And when you ignore truth, it leads to deception. There is no middle ground here.
Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ Aug. 19 2011,08:36) I am done with debating t8. He has become too much like Mikeboll with his incessant repetition.
Not at all, Jack. If I was the one having this debate, you would have only heard, “Does Jesus have a son, Jack?” over and over until you actually ANSWERED the question.And if you didn't, I would have petitioned to give you tile for your refusal to answer a simple question.
Most of us here understand that those who must have questions repeatedly asked of them are those who don't actually DIRECTLY answer the question the first time(s) it was asked. If you don't want the same question asked over and over, then simply answer that question the first time, and that will be the end of it. (Oh, now I understand. If you actually ANSWER the questions we ask in a DIRECT and HONEST manner, your Trinity God goes bye-bye………….is that it?
)Quote (Kangaroo Jack Jr. @ Feb. 24 2011,06:44) ED J said: Quote Many places in “the Bible” the Scripture writers are talking about God being in Jesus.
Why does WJ and Jack continually overlook this all important “Biblical doctrine”?
You speak a half truth and a half truth is a lie. It says also that Jesus is IN the Father.KJ
It is you who speak a half truth KJ. It also says that WE can be in them.John 17:21
that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me.Back to the drawing board KJ.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Aug. 29 2011,03:25) Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ Aug. 19 2011,08:36) I am done with debating t8. He has become too much like Mikeboll with his incessant repetition.
Not at all, Jack. If I was the one having this debate, you would have only heard, “Does Jesus have a son, Jack?” over and over until you actually ANSWERED the question.And if you didn't, I would have petitioned to give you tile for your refusal to answer a simple question.
Most of us here understand that those who must have questions repeatedly asked of them are those who don't actually DIRECTLY answer the question the first time(s) it was asked. If you don't want the same question asked over and over, then simply answer that question the first time, and that will be the end of it. (Oh, now I understand. If you actually ANSWER the questions we ask in a DIRECT and HONEST manner, your Trinity God goes bye-bye………….is that it?
)
Yes that is it Mike.Quote (Kangaroo Jack Jr. @ April 08 2011,18:53) t8, This is an example of what I said about your making us bothh repeat things. Jesus called the Father His God but NOT His Lord. The word “God” was just a reference to His covenantal relationship with his Father.
SHOW WHERE GOD IS EVER CALLED CHRIST'S “LORD” IN THE SCRIPTURE.
We have gone over this already. PLEASE take this debate FORWARD.
KJ
It doesn't make any difference whether this is written or not.Why? Because it was God that made Jesus Lord and Christ.
Therefore, God is above any lord. And when the Father is referenced as God, we know that he is the Most High God.The Most High who is God is above all even the Lord Jesus Christ.
You may have your wires crossed because LORD, and Lord are not the same. And the Father never calls Jesus his God, but Jesus calls the Father his God and our God.
=Jesus also calls his God the “Lord of heaven and earth”. (Matthew 11:25)
I think that comment places Jesus under the one he calls the “Lord of heaven and earth”, and therefore makes the One Jesus calls “my God” also his Lord.
t8,
This is my LAST WORD. I am tired of our repeating ourselves. The following CANNOT be rrefuted but only denied.
The people forgot God, the Rock who fathered them out of Egypt:
“But Jeshurun grew fat and kicked;
You grew fat, you grew thick,
You are obese!
Then he forsook God who made him,
And scornfully esteemed the Rock of his salvation.
16 They provoked Him to jealousy with foreign gods;
With abominations they provoked Him to anger.
17 They sacrificed to demons, not to God,
To gods they did not know,
To new gods, new arrivals
That your fathers did not fear.
18 Of the Rock who begot you, you are unmindful,
And have forgotten the God who fathered you Deut. 32:15-18.Christ was the living (spiritual) Rock that went with them:
For they drank of that spiritual Rock that went with them, and that Rock was the Christ. 1 Cor. 10:4
KJ
KJ, you are not tired of repeating yourself, you are tired of questions that you have no answer to and thus shows the kind of foundation your teaching sits on.
Now taking your last point, that God is the rock and Christ is the rock thus Christ is the God that fathered them.
I will list a few points to consider before I show you a verse that shows it was not God himself:
- Jesus is not the Father, yet you are basically saying that the Rock fathered them.
- Moses didn't baptize Israel and the Israelites didn't get wet when they crossed the Red Sea, so you need to understand that not everything is to be taken literally.
- The Israelites were also not literally buried in the cloud.
Now lets have a look at the text in Exodus 14:19 which shows that the one who was with them was indeed the Angel (messenger) of the LORD and by reference of that we can assume that God was with them too.
And the Angel of God, who went before the camp of Israel, moved and went behind them; and the pillar of the cloud went from before their face and stood behind them.In the New Testament we read this account:
1 Thessalonians 4:13
For I do not want you to be ignorant of the fact, brothers, that our forefathers were all under the cloud and that they all passed through the sea.
2 They were all baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea.
3 They all ate the same spiritual food
4 and drank the same spiritual drink; for they drank from the spiritual rock that accompanied them, and that rock was Christ.So again we see that it was the Angel of the LORD that went with them, and the angel of the LORD is not the LORD himself his he?
Just as Moses saw God face to face and yet there too it actually says it was the Angel of the LORD, do I again need to remind you that Christ himself is the image of the invisible God and the fullness of the deity in bodily form. And again, that God is invisible and no man can see him, thus when we see YHWH, it is an image of him that we see and the image that is the full radiance of God is Jesus Christ his son.
The conclusion here is that God does things through agency. Revelation 1:1 is a perfect example where the message came from God, through Jesus, through the angel, to John, who forwarded it to the church in 7 cities, and was eventually passed on to us.
So you can truly say that the Revelation came from any of these sources, but ultimately God and of course it was ultimately God who was with the Israelites. We even read that God was in Christ Jesus redeeming the world back to himself. Do you not think that God was also in the Angel of the LORD redeeming his people from Egypt. Or was God himself an angel and didn't use agency like he did when Christ walked the Earth?
Exodus 13:21:22
By day the LORD went ahead of them in a pillar of cloud to guide them on their way and by night in a pillar of fire to give them light, so that they could travel by day or night.
Neither the pillar of cloud by day nor the pillar of fire by night left its place in front of the people.Exodus 23:20
“See, I am sending an angel ahead of you to guard you along the way and to bring you to the place I have prepared.Numbers 20:16
but when we cried out to the LORD, he heard our cry and sent an angel and brought us out of Egypt. “Now we are here at Kadesh, a town on the edge of your territory.Psalm 77:20
You led your people like a flock by the hand of Moses and Aaron.So who led them out of Egypt?
God, the Angel of the LORD, Moses, or Aaron?
The answer was it was all of them, but ultimately God as he is the Most High.
We see a similar pattern in Revelation 1:1 where the message comes from God, through Christ, sent to the Angel, to John, who wrote it down for the Church in 7 cities.
When we understand God uses agency, we understand that it is God doing it, but through someone.
God even created the cosmos through Jesus Christ.
FROM ANOTHER FORUM SITE:
John Doe wrote:
Quote Dr. George B. Winer’s Grammar of New Testament Greek page 195 says, “The pronoun HOU’TOS sometimes refers, not to the noun which stands nearest to it, but to one more remote, which is to be regarded as the principal subjectand which therefore was to the writer the nearest psychologically, than any other: A. iv. 11, HOU.TOS’ [this] (IE.SOUS’ KHRI.STOS’ [Jesus Christ] in ver. 10, though HO THE.OS’ [the God] is the nearest noun) ESTIN HO LI’THOS [is the stone]. So in 1 Jo v. 20, HOU.TOS’ ESTIN HO ALETHI.NOS’ THE.OS’ this is the true God, the pronoun refers to HO THE.OS’ [the God] –not KHRI.STO’ [Christ] (which immediately precedes), as the older theologians maintained on dogmatic grounds; for, in the first place, ALETHI.NOS’ THE.OS’ [true God] is a constant and exclusive epithet of the Father [This checked out-DS]; and, secondly, there follows a warning against idolatry, and ALE.THI.NOS’ THE.OS’ is always contrasted with EI’DO.LA [an idol].”
Kangaroo Jack replied:Quote The pronoun “houtos” sometimes does not take the nearest noun as its antecedent but takes the noun more remote as its principal subject. Now who is the “principal subject” in this section? Note John's purpose for writing this section: These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life, and that you may continue to believe in the name of the Son of God.
In verse 13 John EXPLICITLY states that his purpose for writing this section is that they might believe in the name of the Son of God. Therefore, the Son of God is the “principal subject” throughout this section. In verses 14-15 John goes on to say that we should have the confidence to petition Him (the Son of God) in prayer.
Since the pronoun “houtos” may take the nearest noun or the more remote noun as its “principal subject,” then Jesus is the “true God and eternal life” no matter how you diagram it; for Jesus Christ is the nearest noun and the Son of God is the “principal subject.” Add to this that in 1:1-3 the Word (Jesus) is explicitly called the “eternal life” which was “with” the Father, and the “true God” in 5:20 is also the “eternal life.” Therefore, Jesus Christ is the true God.
Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ Dec. 06 2012,03:11) FROM ANOTHER FORUM SITE: John Doe wrote:
Quote Dr. George B. Winer’s Grammar of New Testament Greek page 195 says, “The pronoun HOU’TOS sometimes refers, not to the noun which stands nearest to it, but to one more remote, which is to be regarded as the principal subjectand which therefore was to the writer the nearest psychologically, than any other: A. iv. 11, HOU.TOS’ [this] (IE.SOUS’ KHRI.STOS’ [Jesus Christ] in ver. 10, though HO THE.OS’ [the God] is the nearest noun) ESTIN HO LI’THOS [is the stone]. So in 1 Jo v. 20, HOU.TOS’ ESTIN HO ALETHI.NOS’ THE.OS’ this is the true God, the pronoun refers to HO THE.OS’ [the God] –not KHRI.STO’ [Christ] (which immediately precedes), as the older theologians maintained on dogmatic grounds; for, in the first place, ALETHI.NOS’ THE.OS’ [true God] is a constant and exclusive epithet of the Father [This checked out-DS]; and, secondly, there follows a warning against idolatry, and ALE.THI.NOS’ THE.OS’ is always contrasted with EI’DO.LA [an idol].”
Kangaroo Jack replied:Quote The pronoun “houtos” sometimes does not take the nearest noun as its antecedent but takes the noun more remote as its principal subject. Now who is the “principal subject” in this section? Note John's purpose for writing this section: These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life, and that you may continue to believe in the name of the Son of God.
In verse 13 John EXPLICITLY states that his purpose for writing this section is that they might believe in the name of the Son of God. Therefore, the Son of God is the “principal subject” throughout this section. In verses 14-15 John goes on to say that we should have the confidence to petition Him (the Son of God) in prayer.
Since the pronoun “houtos” may take the nearest noun or the more remote noun as its “principal subject,” then Jesus is the “true God and eternal life” no matter how you diagram it; for Jesus Christ is the nearest noun and the Son of God is the “principal subject.” Add to this that in 1:1-3 the Word (Jesus) is explicitly called the “eternal life” which was “with” the Father, and the “true God” in 5:20 is also the “eternal life.” Therefore, Jesus Christ is the true God.
kj1Jn 1:1 That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched—this we proclaim concerning the Word of life.
1Jn 1:2 The life appeared; we have seen it and testify to it, and we proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and has appeared to us.
1Jn 1:3 We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with us. And our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ.should we call now John insane according to you and your other forum guy
?KJ, if Jesus Christ is the true God, then Jesus Christ has a son called Jesus Christ.
No amount of ignoring that is going to make it go away. Be a man and face the real consequence of your view which is that by reason of your interpretation of this verse, you believe that Jesus has a son.
So now you need to create a doctrine on how Jesus Christ has a son and why did he call his son the same name as himself and also make him a Christ too.
I can't even wish you good luck with that.
Reality is hard to fight against KJ. Reality will knock you out when you challenge it. It's like ignoring gravity. Try jumping out of a plane and ignore gravity. This is what you are doing. Ignoring the most basic premises of reality is what is required when you fight the truth.
Jesus does not have a son called Jesus. The Father has a son called Jesus.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
