Kejonn vs any Theist

[bodhitharta]

Quote (kejonn @ Jan. 15 2010,16:28)

Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 14 2010,21:32) It really isn't used that many times but no I cannot show you that but that doesn't mean that God is the genetic Father of Jesus it just means that Jesus was made a one of a kind son of MARY. Mary contributed 100% of the genetic material of JESUS he is the son of MARY and the anointed of GOD. This is the whole importance that Mary was a virgin IOW, the answer is “NO”. Now, either you say the Christian scriptures are wrong, or you admit they are right about Jesus. Where will you stand?

The Christian scriptures are wrong in their understanding Jesus is the literal Son of Mary

[kejonn]

Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 14 2010,23:47)

The Christian scriptures are wrong in their understanding Jesus is the literal Son of Mary

Good. Sorry it took so many pages for you to admit that you do not accept the same Jesus that Christians do. Why beat around the bush?

[bodhitharta]

Quote (kejonn @ Jan. 16 2010,00:05)

Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 14 2010,23:47) The Christian scriptures are wrong in their understanding Jesus is the literal Son of Mary Good. Sorry it took so many pages for you to admit that you do not accept the same Jesus that Christians do. Why beat around the bush?

This is the same Jesus the son of Mary who was a virgin

All Christians and Muslims believe that Mary was a Virgin and had her Son Jesus bestowed upon her by GOD.

No one believes that God was intimate with Mary, do they?

[kejonn]

Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 15 2010,13:36)

This is the same Jesus the son of Mary who was a virgin All Christians and Muslims believe that Mary was a Virgin and had her Son Jesus bestowed upon her by GOD. No one believes that God was intimate with Mary, do they?

Intimate? In what way?

Luk 1:35  And the angel answered her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy–the Son of God.

[bodhitharta]

Quote (kejonn @ Jan. 16 2010,14:47)

Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 15 2010,13:36) This is the same Jesus the son of Mary who was a virgin All Christians and Muslims believe that Mary was a Virgin and had her Son Jesus bestowed upon her by GOD. No one believes that God was intimate with Mary, do they? Intimate? In what way? Luk 1:35  And the angel answered her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy–the Son of God.

“Will be called” does not mean is.

[kejonn]

Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 18 2010,16:46)

Quote (kejonn @ Jan. 16 2010,14:47) Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 15 2010,13:36) This is the same Jesus the son of Mary who was a virgin All Christians and Muslims believe that Mary was a Virgin and had her Son Jesus bestowed upon her by GOD. No one believes that God was intimate with Mary, do they? Intimate? In what way? Luk 1:35  And the angel answered her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy–the Son of God. “Will be called” does not mean is.

*sigh*

Why continue this? You have already admitted that you do not accept the Jesus described in the Christian bible.

[bodhitharta]

Quote (kejonn @ Jan. 19 2010,14:20)

Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 18 2010,16:46) Quote (kejonn @ Jan. 16 2010,14:47) Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 15 2010,13:36) This is the same Jesus the son of Mary who was a virgin All Christians and Muslims believe that Mary was a Virgin and had her Son Jesus bestowed upon her by GOD. No one believes that God was intimate with Mary, do they? Intimate? In what way? Luk 1:35  And the angel answered her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy–the Son of God. “Will be called” does not mean is. *sigh* Why continue this? You have already admitted that you do not accept the Jesus described in the Christian bible.

You don't accept Jesus as existing, I accept Jesus as the Christ sent by God who came by way of a Virgin

You are a non-believer if you understood the scriptures you would believe.

[kejonn]

Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 18 2010,22:25)

You don't accept Jesus as existing, I accept Jesus as the Christ sent by God who came by way of a Virgin You are a non-believer if you understood the scriptures you would believe.

Ah, but that is the difference. You have claimed to accept some part of Jesus, I accept none (beyond the potential of a historical Jesus). You have nothing to offer in showing us why what you believe about Jesus is more valid that what a typical Christian believes.

[bodhitharta]

Quote (kejonn @ Jan. 19 2010,16:55)

Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 18 2010,22:25) You don't accept Jesus as existing, I accept Jesus as the Christ sent by God who came by way of a Virgin You are a non-believer if you understood the scriptures you would believe. Ah, but that is the difference. You have claimed to accept some part of Jesus, I accept none (beyond the potential of a historical Jesus). You have nothing to offer in showing us why what you believe about Jesus is more valid that what a typical Christian believes.

What do you mean by more Valid?

The belief is the same, Jesus was born of a Virgin

[kejonn]

And the wheels on the bus go round and round…

1Jn 2:22 Who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, he who denies the Father and the Son.

It has already been shown what the Christian relationship between Jesus and God is using “monogenes”. So you can go ahead an find yourself in the same group of antichrists as myself .

Oh, and BTW, “The Son” above in Greek is “ho uihos” so it is definitely “THE Son”.

[Ed J]

Quote (kejonn @ Jan. 20 2010,22:05)

And the wheels on the bus go round and round… 1Jn 2:22  Who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, he who denies the Father and the Son. It has already been shown what the Christian relationship between Jesus and God is using “monogenes”. So you can go ahead an find yourself in the same group of antichrists as myself . Oh, and BTW, “The Son” above in Greek is “ho uihos” so it is definitely “THE Son”.

Hi Kejonn,

You have proved once again that BD is NO Christian!

The systems of religion and traditions of men communicate
distortions of truth, confusion of mind, and distractions of spirit.

Kejonn, it's good thing that you have been set free from the religious penal institutions.
I can tell by your responses that you still believe in God!

God bless
Ed J
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

[bodhitharta]

Quote (kejonn @ Jan. 20 2010,22:05)

And the wheels on the bus go round and round… 1Jn 2:22  Who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, he who denies the Father and the Son. It has already been shown what the Christian relationship between Jesus and God is using “monogenes”. So you can go ahead an find yourself in the same group of antichrists as myself . Oh, and BTW, “The Son” above in Greek is “ho uihos” so it is definitely “THE Son”.

First of all Jesus was not greek so a greek interpretation of Jewish culture does not mean it is valid. Jesus said to John that Mary was his mother and he was her son, do you know the greek interpretaion of that?

Or when God calls Israel His firstborn son do you know the greek interpretation of that.

The bottom line is that Jesus is The Christ.

Where is your source for your “greek” assumption and is it using ancient greek or modern greek.

[bodhitharta]

Huios

a son rarely used for the young of animals generally used of the offspring of men in a restricted sense, the male offspring (one born by a father and of a mother) in a wider sense, a descendant, one of the posterity of any one, the children of Israel sons of Abraham used to describe one who depends on another or is his follower a pupil son of man term describing man, carrying the connotation of weakness and mortality son of man, symbolically denotes the fifth kingdom in Daniel 7:13 and by this term its humanity is indicated in contrast with the barbarity and ferocity of the four preceding kingdoms (the Babylonian, the Median and the Persian, the Macedonian, and the Roman) typified by the four beasts. In the book of Enoch (2nd Century) it is used of Christ. used by Christ himself, doubtless in order that he might intimate his Messiahship and also that he might designate himself as the head of the human family, the man, the one who both furnished the pattern of the perfect man and acted on behalf of all mankind. Christ seems to have preferred this to the other Messianic titles, because by its lowliness it was least suited to foster the expectation of an earthly Messiah in royal splendour. son of God used to describe Adam (Lk. 3: used to describe those who are born again (Lk. 20: and of angels and of Jesus Christ of those whom God esteems as sons, whom he loves, protects and benefits above others in the OT used of the Jews in the NT of Christians those whose character God, as a loving father, shapes by chastisements (Heb. 12:5- those who revere God as their father, the pious worshippers of God, those who in character and life resemble God, those who are governed by the Spirit of God, repose the same calm and joyful trust in God which children do in their parents (Rom. 8:14, Gal. 3:26 ), and hereafter in the blessedness and glory of the life eternal will openly wear this dignity of the sons of God. Term used preeminently of Jesus Christ, as enjoying the supreme love of God, united to him in affectionate intimacy, privy to his saving councils, obedient to the Father's will in all his acts son(s)85, Son of Man+( 444 )&version=kjv87 {TDNT8:400,1210}, Son of God+( 2316 )49, child(ren)49, Son42, his Son+( 848 )21, Son of David+( 1138 )15 {TDNT8:478,1210}, my beloved Son+( 27 ) +33507, thy Son+( 4575 )5, only begotten Son+( 3339 )3, his (David's) son+( 846 )3, firstborn son+( 4316 )2, miscellaneous14

also please understand this

In reference to the word Monogenes ,the word is conspicuously absent from the Gospels of Matthew and Mark, and though used by Luke in his Gospel, it does not occur in Acts; neither, Paul, Peter, James or Jude ever employs the word, and though John makes more frequent use of the word than all other New Testament authors combined, it is absent from the Apocalypse.

If these thigs were the most important things they would not be absent

[bodhitharta]

Quote (Ed J @ Jan. 22 2010,07:19)

Quote (kejonn @ Jan. 20 2010,22:05) And the wheels on the bus go round and round… 1Jn 2:22  Who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, he who denies the Father and the Son. It has already been shown what the Christian relationship between Jesus and God is using “monogenes”. So you can go ahead an find yourself in the same group of antichrists as myself . Oh, and BTW, “The Son” above in Greek is “ho uihos” so it is definitely “THE Son”. Hi Kejonn, You have proved once again that BD is NO Christian! The systems of religion and traditions of men communicate distortions of truth, confusion of mind, and distractions of spirit. Kejonn, it's good thing that you have been set free from the religious penal institutions. I can tell by your responses that you still believe in God! God bless Ed J http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

ED,

Kejonn just admitted that he was an Antichrist and you still seek his favour?

All Muslims believe in Christ, you are sorely mislead but what is more interesting is why you keep begging Atheists to confirm your discontent with believers, it's like asking Satan what he thinks about the anointed of God.

You really do care more about attention than truth, Now, Kejonn should really not be a hypocrite and really make it clear to you what he really believes.

You are right though he does still believe in God just in a very negative way, he believes God did him wrong.

Let me ask you ED if you were around when Jesus was here would you have held the nails for those crucifying him?

[Ed J]

Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 22 2010,10:13)

You are right though he does still believe in God just in a very negative way, he believes God did him wrong. Let me ask you ED if you were around when Jesus was here would you have held the nails for those crucifying him?

Hi BD,

Your the one who supports killing; you have said so in many posts.

Ed J

[bodhitharta]

Quote (Ed J @ Jan. 22 2010,10:25)

Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 22 2010,10:13) You are right though he does still believe in God just in a very negative way, he believes God did him wrong. Let me ask you ED if you were around when Jesus was here would you have held the nails for those crucifying him? Hi BD, Your the one who supports killing; you have said so in many posts. Ed J

Would you hold the nails?

[Ed J]

Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 22 2010,10:32)

Quote (Ed J @ Jan. 22 2010,10:25) Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 22 2010,10:13) You are right though he does still believe in God just in a very negative way, he believes God did him wrong. Let me ask you ED if you were around when Jesus was here would you have held the nails for those crucifying him? Hi BD, Your the one who supports killing; you have said so in many posts. Ed J Would you hold the nails?

BD, I don't support killing.

[Everlasting father Jesus]

Quote (Ed J @ Jan. 22 2010,10:55)

Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 22 2010,10:32) Quote (Ed J @ Jan. 22 2010,10:25) Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 22 2010,10:13) You are right though he does still believe in God just in a very negative way, he believes God did him wrong. Let me ask you ED if you were around when Jesus was here would you have held the nails for those crucifying him? Hi BD, Your the one who supports killing; you have said so in many posts. Ed J Would you hold the nails? BD, I don't support killing.

so you don't support this statement from Jesus?:

Luke 19:26-28 (King James Version)

26For I say unto you, That unto every one which hath shall be given; and from him that hath not, even that he hath shall be taken away from him.

27But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.

[bodhitharta]

Quote (Everlasting father Jesus @ Jan. 22 2010,11:14)

Quote (Ed J @ Jan. 22 2010,10:55) Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 22 2010,10:32) Quote (Ed J @ Jan. 22 2010,10:25) Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 22 2010,10:13) You are right though he does still believe in God just in a very negative way, he believes God did him wrong. Let me ask you ED if you were around when Jesus was here would you have held the nails for those crucifying him? Hi BD, Your the one who supports killing; you have said so in many posts. Ed J Would you hold the nails? BD, I don't support killing. so you don't support this statement from Jesus?: Luke 19:26-28 (King James Version) 26For I say unto you, That unto every one which hath shall be given; and from him that hath not, even that he hath shall be taken away from him. 27But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.

EFJ,

ED is one of those who don'yt believe that God killed almost the entire population except Noah in the flood and also killed the people is sodom and gomorrah.

God also helped david slew Goliath.

ED is a number theory man you should read some more of his posts if you haven't done so already.

[kejonn]

Quote (bodhitharta @ Jan. 21 2010,16:53)

Quote (kejonn @ Jan. 20 2010,22:05) And the wheels on the bus go round and round… 1Jn 2:22  Who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, he who denies the Father and the Son. It has already been shown what the Christian relationship between Jesus and God is using “monogenes”. So you can go ahead an find yourself in the same group of antichrists as myself . Oh, and BTW, “The Son” above in Greek is “ho uihos” so it is definitely “THE Son”. First of all Jesus was not greek so a greek interpretation of Jewish culture does not mean it is valid. Jesus said to John that Mary was his mother and he was her son, do you know the greek interpretaion of that? Or when God calls Israel His firstborn son do you know the greek interpretation of that. The bottom line is that Jesus is The Christ. Where is your source for your “greek” assumption and is it using ancient greek or modern greek.

This has nothing to do with a “Greek interpretation” of Jesus. “ho” is the Greek article used in to indicate that thew word “the” is definitely there. So “the” is not implied, it joins with “uihos” to make the phrase “The Son”.

[Author]

Posts