- This topic is empty.
- Posts
On another thread Nick said:
Quote Hi TT,
Can you not grasp the book of Job?
TO ALL:King David said:
Quote 4 What is man that You are mindful of him,
And the son of man that You visit him?
5 For You have made him a little lower than God,
And You have crowned him with glory and honor.
6 You have made him to have dominion over the works of Your hands;
You have put all things under his feet, (Ps. 8:4-6)
But Bildad said:Quote 4 How then can man be righteous before God?
Or how can he be pure who is born of a woman?5 If even the moon does not shine,
And the stars are not pure in His sight,6 How much less man, who is a maggot,
And a son of man, who is a worm?
King David said that God created man a little lower than God and has crowned him with glory and honor. But Bildad said that man is no better than a maggot or a worm. Nick accepts Bildad's estimation of man and thus concludes that God could not become incarnate. Nick reasons thus: “God cannot become like a worm.”If Nick chose King David's word over Bildad's then the incarnation would not be a problem for him. So who spoke the truth? King David or Bildad? The answer is simple. King David was an inspired oracle of God and Bildad was not. The new testament says that King David was a prophet.
Nick's reply is that all the statements in the Bible are true. So the statement “man is a worm” must be true. Nick errs because the Bible also contains the falsehoods that men and devils speak.
Job did not agree with Bildad. He specifically addressed Bildad's assertion that the stars were unpure. Job's reply:
Quote By His Spirit He adorned the heavens;
Did you note that? Bildad said that the stars are unpure and Job countered saying that the Spirit of God “adorned the heavens.” So how can the stars be unpure?Bildad said that man is a maggot and a worm. Note Job's reply:
Quote 4 My lips will not speak wickedness,
Nor my tongue utter deceit.5 Far be it from me
That I should say you are right;
Till I die I will not put away my integrity from me.6 My righteousness I hold fast, and will not let it go;
My heart shall not reproach me as long as I live. (27:4-6)
Job said, “Far be it from me to say you are right.” He charged Bildad with speaking deceit.So who did God accept? It was not Bildad as we can see:
Quote Job 42:7-9 (New King James Version)
7 And so it was, after the LORD had spoken these words to Job, that the LORD said to Eliphaz the Temanite, “My wrath is aroused against you and your two friends, for you have not spoken of Me what is right, as My servant Job has. 8 Now therefore, take for yourselves seven bulls and seven rams, go to My servant Job, and offer up for yourselves a burnt offering; and My servant Job shall pray for you. For I will accept him, lest I deal with you according to your folly; because you have not spoken of Me what is right, as My servant Job has.”
9 So Eliphaz the Temanite and Bildad the Shuhite and Zophar the Naamathite went and did as the LORD commanded them; for the LORD had accepted Job.
It was Job whom the Lord accepted. Therefore, Bildad spoke a falsehood when he said that man is a maggot or a worm. Thus Nick's conclusion that God cannot become incarnate is also a falsehood.Take your sides my friends. Will you side with God, Job and King David. Or will you side with Bildad and Nick.
The words of Bildad cannot be invoked as support against the doctrine of the incarnation. Nick shows that he is a novice by calling on Bildad for support.
thinker
Hi TT,
Jesus is the new David who will sit on the throne in Jerusalem and His Father God will rule earth through him[ps2]. Kiss the Son.Hi TT,
So if God accepts Job then Job could not be as a maggot or a worm?
Where does such weak logic come from?Hi tT,
Does your god not love worms and maggots?
It only expresses the lowly status of men compared to GodQuote (Nick Hassan @ Dec. 11 2009,07:30) Hi TT,
The incarnation?
Catholic twaddle.God was in Christ.
Was God in God?
Not “God was in Christ.” Rather, “God was by agency of Christ reconciling the world to Himself” (verse immediately preceding). You do not understand syntax. The idea is that Christ was indespensible to our salvation.Arain novice! Bildad was condemned by God. This doesn't bother you?
thinker
Hi TT,
So God WAS Christ?[cf 2Cor 5.19]
So how do you read Acts 10.38-God was WITH HIM?Was God the Son of God?
Quote (Nick Hassan @ Dec. 11 2009,12:18) Hi TT,
So God WAS Christ?[cf 2Cor 5.19]
So how do you read Acts 10.38-God was WITH HIM?Was God the Son of God?
Read what I said again. Paul had just said that God reconciled through Christ. The “in” Christ statement which follows complements that. God reconciled the world by agency of Christ. The statement proves the unity of God and Christ. You have no support for your antithetical theory.thinker
Quote (Nick Hassan @ Dec. 11 2009,12:18) Hi TT,
So God WAS Christ?[cf 2Cor 5.19]
So how do you read Acts 10.38-God was WITH HIM?Was God the Son of God?
Does it bother you that you side with a man whose speech God condemned?thinker
hi tk
you reasoning is as clear as mud,is there a way you could stop using someone else treath and tell the way you see it and back it up with scriptures ,this would be to show clearly your intentions.unless you want to be the only one to understsand your gibarish do i spell this right???
Quote Nick's reply is that all the statements in the Bible are true. So the statement “man is a worm” must be true. Nick errs because the Bible also contains the falsehoods that men and devils speak. I'm not sure if Nick really believes all statements in the Bible regardless of whom they are from (but I do remember this coming up before with him I think.)
Eliphaz:
Look! In his servants he has no faith,
And his messengers [or “angels”, same word] he charges with faultiness.
How much more so with those dwelling in houses of clay, [meaning, “humans”]
Whose foundation is in the dust!
One crushes them more quickly than a moth.Does God have no faith in his servants? Does God crush his servants as a person would crush a moth, easily killed, quickly forgotten?
No, while these words were inspired for our benefit, these were the words of one of Job's “troublesome comforters.” (16:2)
The truth is, even Job had it wrong in the beginning of the book of Job (placing too much emphasis on vindicating himself.) He had to be corrected by God near the end of Job.
Quote (thethinker @ Dec. 11 2009,02:13) On another thread Nick said: Quote Hi TT,
Can you not grasp the book of Job?
TO ALL:King David said:
Quote 4 What is man that You are mindful of him,
And the son of man that You visit him?
5 For You have made him a little lower than God,
And You have crowned him with glory and honor.
6 You have made him to have dominion over the works of Your hands;
You have put all things under his feet, (Ps. 8:4-6)
But Bildad said:Quote 4 How then can man be righteous before God?
Or how can he be pure who is born of a woman?5 If even the moon does not shine,
And the stars are not pure in His sight,6 How much less man, who is a maggot,
And a son of man, who is a worm?
King David said that God created man a little lower than God and has crowned him with glory and honor. But Bildad said that man is no better than a maggot or a worm. Nick accepts Bildad's estimation of man and thus concludes that God could not become incarnate. Nick reasons thus: “God cannot become like a worm.”If Nick chose King David's word over Bildad's then the incarnation would not be a problem for him. So who spoke the truth? King David or Bildad? The answer is simple. King David was an inspired oracle of God and Bildad was not. The new testament says that King David was a prophet.
Nick's reply is that all the statements in the Bible are true. So the statement “man is a worm” must be true. Nick errs because the Bible also contains the falsehoods that men and devils speak.
Job did not agree with Bildad. He specifically addressed Bildad's assertion that the stars were unpure. Job's reply:
Quote By His Spirit He adorned the heavens;
Did you note that? Bildad said that the stars are unpure and Job countered saying that the Spirit of God “adorned the heavens.” So how can the stars be unpure?Bildad said that man is a maggot and a worm. Note Job's reply:
Quote 4 My lips will not speak wickedness,
Nor my tongue utter deceit.5 Far be it from me
That I should say you are right;
Till I die I will not put away my integrity from me.6 My righteousness I hold fast, and will not let it go;
My heart shall not reproach me as long as I live. (27:4-6)
Job said, “Far be it from me to say you are right.” He charged Bildad with speaking deceit.So who did God accept? It was not Bildad as we can see:
Quote Job 42:7-9 (New King James Version)
7 And so it was, after the LORD had spoken these words to Job, that the LORD said to Eliphaz the Temanite, “My wrath is aroused against you and your two friends, for you have not spoken of Me what is right, as My servant Job has. 8 Now therefore, take for yourselves seven bulls and seven rams, go to My servant Job, and offer up for yourselves a burnt offering; and My servant Job shall pray for you. For I will accept him, lest I deal with you according to your folly; because you have not spoken of Me what is right, as My servant Job has.”
9 So Eliphaz the Temanite and Bildad the Shuhite and Zophar the Naamathite went and did as the LORD commanded them; for the LORD had accepted Job.
It was Job whom the Lord accepted. Therefore, Bildad spoke a falsehood when he said that man is a maggot or a worm. Thus Nick's conclusion that God cannot become incarnate is also a falsehood.Take your sides my friends. Will you side with God, Job and King David. Or will you side with Bildad and Nick.
The words of Bildad cannot be invoked as support against the doctrine of the incarnation. Nick shows that he is a novice by calling on Bildad for support.
thinker
You do realize that both individuals are correct in man is but a worm and man is a little lower than the angels. Context is important. King David is speaking of authority while Bildad is speaking of righteousness. In other words you are making a comparison where no comparison exists.Mind you my point may have nothing to do with you accusation against Nick but the bad logic of the comparison bugged me.
To all,
What Bildad stated agrees with the statement that God looked down from heaven and found no one was righteous not even one. If Bildad sinned his sin was not speaking an untruth but how he applied what he stated. It was a tough call and I believe Bildad made a false accusation as he assumed God was punishing Job for his sins when instead God was testing Job.
I hope and pray that God grants me the wisdom to tell the difference since I sinned as Bildad did.
David said:
Quote I'm not sure if Nick really believes all statements in the Bible regardless of whom they are from (but I do remember this coming up before with him I think.)
David,
Nick probably does not believe all the statements in the Bible are true. He said that because he is subborn. He would rather msake a ridiculous assertion than admit that he is wrong.thinker
Kerwin:
Quote You do realize that both individuals are correct in man is but a worm and man is a little lower than the angels. Context is important. King David is speaking of authority while Bildad is speaking of righteousness. In other words you are making a comparison where no comparison exists. Mind you my point may have nothing to do with you accusation against Nick but the bad logic of the comparison bugged me.
Kerwin,Bildad's view was gnostic. The Bible says that everything that God created was “very good.” Yet Bildad said that the stars are “unpure” thus implicating God with evil. How was this speaking of righteousness? Job understood and said, “By His Spirit He adorned the heavens.” So the stars were the ornaments of heaven in Job's mind. Job was right.
God did not give each man some credit for speaking something right. He condemned Job's speech and commanded him to offer a sacrifice for his sinful speech. God accepted Job. That's the context my friend. Therefore, the Arains have nothing from Job that proves that the incarnation could not happen.
Quote Job 42:7-9 (New King James Version)
7 And so it was, after the LORD had spoken these words to Job, that the LORD said to Eliphaz the Temanite, “My wrath is aroused against you and your two friends, for you have not spoken of Me what is right, as My servant Job has. 8 Now therefore, take for yourselves seven bulls and seven rams, go to My servant Job, and offer up for yourselves a burnt offering; and My servant Job shall pray for you. For I will accept him, lest I deal with you according to your folly; because you have not spoken of Me what is right, as My servant Job has.”
9 So Eliphaz the Temanite and Bildad the Shuhite and Zophar the Naamathite went and did as the LORD commanded them; for the LORD had accepted Job.
Yours and Nick's handling of Job are good examples of how you Arian novices twist the scriptures.thinker
The Thinker wrote:
Quote Bildad's view was gnostic. The Bible says that everything that God created was “very good.” Yet Bildad said that the stars are “unpure” thus implicating God with evil.
Please! Enough humor. I am assuming that bid was your attempt at humor. The Gnostics believe the material world is corrupt and that the spiritual world is not.
Bildad did not express that point of view. He expressed the point of view that all men are sinners. That is certainly not a rare point in scripture. Of all men only Jesus never sinned.
I do not even consider the absurd idea of God becoming a human being since I know God is always fundamentally God and thus cannot be fundamentally a human being. I do not need Bildad's statement of the fallen condition of humankind to prove that. Mind you humankind has not always been fallen and through the grace of God will once more attain the heights from which they fell.
Hi TT,
If others are all novices does that make you an expert?But you teach a god not even found in scripture??
Quote (kerwin @ Dec. 11 2009,22:01) The Thinker wrote: Quote Bildad's view was gnostic. The Bible says that everything that God created was “very good.” Yet Bildad said that the stars are “unpure” thus implicating God with evil.
Please! Enough humor. I am assuming that bid was your attempt at humor. The Gnostics believe the material world is corrupt and that the spiritual world is not.
Bildad did not express that point of view. He expressed the point of view that all men are sinners. That is certainly not a rare point in scripture. Of all men only Jesus never sinned.
I do not even consider the absurd idea of God becoming a human being since I know God is always fundamentally God and thus cannot be fundamentally a human being. I do not need Bildad's statement of the fallen condition of humankind to prove that. Mind you humankind has not always been fallen and through the grace of God will once more attain the heights from which they fell.
Kerwin,
Read Bildad's statement again. He said that the stars are unpure in God's sight. Bildad was speaking about man in the same way. This is clearly gnostic. Job corrected Bildad and said that the God's Spirit adorned the heavens. King David said that the heavens “declare the glory of God.”God said that Job was an “upright man.” Bildad was in essence saying, “How can this be seeing that man is a maggot and a worm.” Bildad was denying that Job was righteous because “man is a worm.” Read it without your Arain/Gnostic glasses.
You have failed to answer the point that God condemned Bildad's speech. For you guys to invoke Bildad as support for your theory that the incarnation was not possible is totally ludicrous! Your defense of Bildad pits you against Jehovah Himself. This should make you cringe.
I am glad that you have checked in on this topic. Now everyone can see how gnostic anti-trinitarianism really is. You defend the words of a man God condemned and commanded to offer a sacrifice for what he said. Amazing!
thinker
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
