- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote David argues that the angels were called “gods” and infers from this that that the name “god” in reference to Jesus is equivalent. But he ignores that the name “Son” in reference to Jesus is a name that is by far superior to the name “gods” in reference to angels (Heb. 1:1-6). Therefore, the name “god” as it is applied to angels is a much inferior name in comparison. –THINKER,
THINKER, no that is not what I argue, and I think you should apologize to who ever you mislead.
I believe that since others are referred to by the word “god” we cannot simply state that Jesus is “God Almighty” because he too is referred to by that word. I'm saying: It is not proof in itself.
You know, the angels are also called “sons” of God. Your argumentation above is not based on what I believe and your other points in the above are confusing and false.
Quote “How does a non person “testify” of someone?”–thinker My response which undeniably shows his thinking is false:
Quote Are “The Blood” and “The Water” persons? Yet, they are said to testify or to bear witness. And they are in agreement. Are they persons Thinker? What do you think? Is your logic sound? Do you use personification every day like most humans? WJ's response to my response to Thinker:
Quote Is that all you have? Find some inanimate objects or anything that can do the things that the Holy Spirit who has his own distinct identity does, and you might have a case. WJ, I got “testy” as you say, because I obviously showed Thinkers reasoning to be false. Instead of conceding this, he doesn't comment and you comment and attack my correct thinking. In the post, I did not say this is some grand proof that the holy spirit is not a person. But what I did do is show that the logic is false that just because something is said to 'testify' does not necessitate that it is a person.
Thinker's logic was false.
No one has yet to acknowledge that. Instead, you go all the way to the end and say it is not proof of the holy spirit not being a person. All I'm proving is that Thinker's “proof” was false.And it was.
Quote Keith, David is touchy because his arguments are weak.
btw, Has David answered the point that Jesus used the personal pronoun “ekeinos” in reference to the Spirit when He said “He (ekeinos) shall testify of Me” (John 14:26)?
I don't quite remember where that point was brought up.
–Thinker
Yes, I have. But I don't think you read my posts, because you certainly ignore my questions. (See underlined words in post above.)
Go back to around page 2 or 3 where I posted a long list of why I think the holy spirit is not a person. There is a section that deals with the pronoun “he” and how it is used in the Bible. (You don't speak French do you?) Unfortunately, English isn't like many other languages.Quote David I bumped this post because it answers the God in you question. You didn't respond to it, why?
–WJ
I didn't respond to it the first time, because I had no idea which question was referred to. This time, as you can read, I asked which scripture and SF doesn't seem to know. It's the God is all in all scripture, but no one can seem to find it, which is weird, given that it's mentioned so often. Of course, i could find it in 10 seconds, but given that it's one of your guys fav scripture, I'd think you'd know where it is. I hate responding to obscure ideas where the scripture isn't quoted, or where we're not even sure what the scripture says.
WJ, when you find the scripture, ask me the question. Also, do you think God himself is literally in people? Or is it God's holy spirit that is literally in people?Quote (david @ May 25 2010,12:38) Quote David I bumped this post because it answers the God in you question. You didn't respond to it, why?
–WJ
I didn't respond to it the first time, because I had no idea which question was referred to. This time, as you can read, I asked which scripture and SF doesn't seem to know. It's the God is all in all scripture, but no one can seem to find it, which is weird, given that it's mentioned so often. Of course, i could find it in 10 seconds, but given that it's one of your guys fav scripture, I'd think you'd know where it is. I hate responding to obscure ideas where the scripture isn't quoted, or where we're not even sure what the scripture says.
WJ, when you find the scripture, ask me the question. Also, do you think God himself is literally in people? Or is it God's holy spirit that is literally in people?
David,Gr to you sir, Gr to you!
1 Corinthians 15:28 “And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.”This is the scripture im takling about!!!
you know sometimes bc of the lack of sleep can sometimes hinder my search!THANKYOU LIGTHEN UP FOR POINTing IT OUT FOR ME!
lol,
My work here is done.
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ May 25 2010,09:19) What we do know is that the Apostles obeyed the command by baptising in Jesus name. Since Matt 28:18 is the qualifying verse it is of no surprise that Jesus is the name above all names is used. The name of Jesus with the unction of the Holy Spirit invokes the power of God to performe miracles, healings Etc which is carried out by the three, “The Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit which are ONE!
Hi WJ,What? How do we know? Matt 28:19 says to do one thing, the rest of Scripture shows another thing being done. Yet that's how we know?
You basically said that we can ask for help (miracles, healings, etc.) in the name of Jesus. And it could be done for us by the power of God through His Holy Spirit. Very good, you are correct in that part.
Why not say that it is done by the power of Jesus? God is subliminally telling you that there is a difference. You make statements like this frequently. You know – ones that show the power originally belongs to God before He decides how to dish it out.
And I'm with JA. Where is the scripture that says all three are one? I don't know of any.
peace and love,
mikeDavid,
Please respect my new user name or my real name which is Jack. For you to still call me “thinker” is for you to place yourself over me.
David:
Quote THINKER, no that is not what I argue, and I think you should apologize to who ever you mislead.
Explain your statement below:“All of this shows the scriptural understanding (as well as the same understanding by Christian writers of the first centuries) of “god” as applied to angels and certain men who were trying to follow God or who were representatives or ambassadors for God”.
https://heavennet.net/cgi-bin….;t=2907
Is Jesus merely a “representative of God” as the angels? If you say yes then explain how He can be superior to the angels which you say are also representatives of God.
David:
Quote I believe that since others are referred to by the word “god” we cannot simply state that Jesus is “God Almighty” because he too is referred to by that word.
Jesus is called “The God” (hotheos) in John 1:18 and Hebrews 1:8. On another thread you seem to imply that “The God” would be equivalent to the name “God Almighty”.You said,
“The idea that anyone called by the word “god” is either “The God” or a “false god” is a Title Confusion Trick…. The Bible does use the word “god” with reference to ones who were neither “false gods” or “The God.”
https://heavennet.net/cgi-bin….;t=2907
Did you mean to say above that the expression “The God” is equivalent to the term “God Almighty”? If so then Jesus is God Almighty because He is called “The God” (hotheos) in John 1:18 and in Hebrews 1:8.
Is Jesus a true “hotheos” or a false “hotheos” like satan?
David:
Quote You know, the angels are also called “sons” of God.
Angels are not called sons of God anywhere in the Bible. You are probably referring to Genesis 6 where it says that the sons of God intermarried with the daughters of men. The “sons of God” were of the godly line of Seth and the daughters of men were of the line of Cain.David:
Quote Your argumentation above is not based on what I believe and your other points in the above are confusing and false.
Your claim that you view Jesus as superior to the angels has just fallen apart. If the name “Son” in reference to Jesus was not a name that is by far superior to the angels, then why do you say that angels are also called “sons”? I'll tell you why. You do this because you do not view the Jesus' name as “Son” as a name that is by far superior to the angels.So I will not apologize! When I argue that the name “Son” means that Jesus is superior to the angels you reply saying, “But angels are called sons too”. So how can you claim that you believe that Jesus is superior to the angels?
EXPLAIN DAVID. If YOU DON'T EXPLAIN I WILL BE FORCED TO PAINT YOU AS A MIKEBOLL WHO COMPARES JESUS TO SATAN.
Kangaroo Jack or Jack
David, again please refer to me by my new username or my real name which is Jack.
Kangaroo Jack said:
Quote “How does a non person “testify” of someone?” David replied:
Quote “The Blood” and “The Water” persons? Yet, they are said to testify or to bear witness.
The “spirit and water and blood” denotes Christ's genuine humanity” and are set in contrast to the Father the Word and the Holy Spirit which were previously mentioned. In other words, there is the personal testimony of the of the Father, Word and Holy Spirit. Then there is the incarnation of Christ itself (spirit, water and blood) which testifies.Angels are called “ministering spirits. Are angels non personal because they are spirits David?
David said to WJ:
Quote But what I did do is show that the logic is false that just because something is said to 'testify' does not necessitate that it is a person.
Then question is one of how. How did the Spirit “testify” of Jesus. Jesus said that the Spirit speaks that which He HEARS“. Do impersonal things testify of what they “hear?”DO IMPERSONAL THINGS TESTIFY OF WHAT THEY “HEAR”?
David:
Quote No one has yet to acknowledge that.
How many times has WJ pointed out that all other spirits are persons and you all have just swept it under the rug?David:
Quote Thinker's logic was false.
David knew what I meant.Kangaroo Jack or Jack
Mikeboll said to WJ:
Quote Where is the scripture that says all three are one?
Keith,It would not do any good. Jesus says that “I and the Father are one” and Mike denies it in the way Jesus meant it. Jesus was speaking in reference to His keeping His sheep in cooperation with His Father. Yet Mike denies that the Father and the Son do all things as one.
Again, it will do no good.
Jack
Quote (david @ May 25 2010,12:31) Quote Keith, David is touchy because his arguments are weak.
btw, Has David answered the point that Jesus used the personal pronoun “ekeinos” in reference to the Spirit when He said “He (ekeinos) shall testify of Me” (John 14:26)?
I don't quite remember where that point was brought up.
–Thinker
Yes, I have. But I don't think you read my posts, because you certainly ignore my questions. (See underlined words in post above.)
Go back to around page 2 or 3 where I posted a long list of why I think the holy spirit is not a person. There is a section that deals with the pronoun “he” and how it is used in the Bible. (You don't speak French do you?) Unfortunately, English isn't like many other languages.
David,When you do not address me by the name I want to be called you disrespect my rights.
David,
I looked and saw no reference to pronouns or specifically the pronoun “ekeinos” in reference to the Holy Spirit. Give me a heading so I don't have to read your entire treatise.
Jack (or Kangaroo Jack).
Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ May 26 2010,03:21) David: Quote You know, the angels are also called “sons” of God.
Angels are not called sons of God anywhere in the Bible. You are probably referring to Genesis 6 where it says that the sons of God intermarried with the daughters of men. The “sons of God” were of the godly line of Seth and the daughters of men were of the line of Cain.
Hey KJ,I disagree with what you said here,
let me provide scripture to show you why,Bene-elohim, is often used to describe Angels,
Quote 4Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.
5Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?
6Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;
7When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?Quote Job 1:6 Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them. Quote Job 2:1 Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them to present himself before the LORD. You claimed that the Angels are not called Sons of God, but they are at some points. Doesnt it always refer to angels, of course not, but there are times that they are.
Point being, Bene-elohim i use for Angels as well.
With much love,
I hope you dont take personaly,
just an observation,Much Love,
Hi Jack,
And also who are the “Princes” (Son of the King) of whom ONE HAS FALLEN, in Psalm 82?
JustAskin.
Quote (JustAskin @ May 26 2010,05:53) Hi Jack, And also who are the “Princes” (Son of the King) of whom ONE HAS FALLEN, in Psalm 82?
JustAskin.
and the Stars right? The third of the stars mentioned in Reveltions?Quote (SimplyForgiven @ May 26 2010,05:48) Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ May 26 2010,03:21) David: Quote You know, the angels are also called “sons” of God.
Angels are not called sons of God anywhere in the Bible. You are probably referring to Genesis 6 where it says that the sons of God intermarried with the daughters of men. The “sons of God” were of the godly line of Seth and the daughters of men were of the line of Cain.
Hey KJ,I disagree with what you said here,
let me provide scripture to show you why,Bene-elohim, is often used to describe Angels,
Quote 4Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.
5Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?
6Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;
7When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?Quote Job 1:6 Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them. Quote Job 2:1 Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them to present himself before the LORD. You claimed that the Angels are not called Sons of God, but they are at some points. Doesnt it always refer to angels, of course not, but there are times that they are.
Point being, Bene-elohim i use for Angels as well.
With much love,
I hope you dont take personaly,
just an observation,Much Love,
Greetings SF,Where are angels mentioned in the passages you give. It simply says “sons of God”.
After the sons of God had taken the daughters of men and married them God said, “My spirit shall not always strive with MAN”. Therefore, the sons of God were OF MAN.
Jack
Quote (JustAskin @ May 26 2010,05:53) Hi Jack, And also who are the “Princes” (Son of the King) of whom ONE HAS FALLEN, in Psalm 82?
JustAskin.
Hi JA,Asaph was speaking about the rulers of the people. Jesus applied it to the Jews of His day (John 10). There is no place in scripture where angels are called sons of God.
Jack
Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ May 26 2010,06:08) Quote (SimplyForgiven @ May 26 2010,05:48) Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ May 26 2010,03:21) David: Quote You know, the angels are also called “sons” of God.
Angels are not called sons of God anywhere in the Bible. You are probably referring to Genesis 6 where it says that the sons of God intermarried with the daughters of men. The “sons of God” were of the godly line of Seth and the daughters of men were of the line of Cain.
Hey KJ,I disagree with what you said here,
let me provide scripture to show you why,Bene-elohim, is often used to describe Angels,
Quote 4Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.
5Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?
6Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;
7When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?Quote Job 1:6 Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them. Quote Job 2:1 Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them to present himself before the LORD. You claimed that the Angels are not called Sons of God, but they are at some points. Doesnt it always refer to angels, of course not, but there are times that they are.
Point being, Bene-elohim i use for Angels as well.
With much love,
I hope you dont take personaly,
just an observation,Much Love,
Greetings SF,Where are angels mentioned in the passages you give. It simply says “sons of God”.
After the sons of God had taken the daughters of men and married them God said, “My spirit shall not always strive with MAN”. Therefore, the sons of God were OF MAN.
Jack
Actually KJ,The verse you gave, i compelelty ignored,
I posted verse to prove the point that the
Sons of God, are the same Angels.I thought it was self explanatory i guess not let me fully extend.
Quote 4Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.
5Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?
6Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;
7When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?Its very obvious that When God mentions the Foundations of the earth, which was the third day, that the Sons of God were present. To whom does it refer to the sons of God, if Adam wasnt created until the 6th day?
Quote Job 1:6 Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them.
Notice that Satan was an angel, cheribum, and other sons of God also came to the presense of God? it had to be angels, or a degree of angels, such as Cherbiums or what not.Quote Job 2:1 Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them to present himself before the LORD.
Same here.This is self explanatory, If it was literal sons of God, as in MAn, than it would be different. Most of the time, when reffering to the greek sons of God, it means just that, Humans as the sons of God. but in hebrew, the 3 times that was mentioned as bene-elohim, is used for angels.
I mean, its not that big of a deal to argue about it, but I guess.
so thats my explanation.
Much love,
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ May 25 2010,09:19) What we do know is that the Apostles obeyed the command by baptizing in Jesus name. Since Matt 28:18 is the qualifying verse it is of no surprise that Jesus is the name above all names is used. The name of Jesus with the unction of the Holy Spirit invokes the power of God to perform miracles, healings Etc which is carried out by the three, “The Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit which are ONE! Quote (mikeboll64 @ May 24 2010,21:00) Hi WJ, What? How do we know?
Since you do not accept my explanation then ask God to show you or figure it out yourself!
Quote (mikeboll64 @ May 24 2010,21:00) Matt 28:19 says to do one thing, the rest of Scripture shows another thing being done. Yet that's how we know?
That is you opinion isn’t it Mike. So live with the contradiction or just trash Jesus words in Matt 28:18, 19. It is your choice.Quote (mikeboll64 @ May 24 2010,21:00) You basically said that we can ask for help (miracles, healings, etc.) in the name of Jesus. And it could be done for us by the power of God through His Holy Spirit. Very good, you are correct in that part.
Wrong, this is what I said Mike…“The name of Jesus with the unction of the Holy Spirit invokes the power of God to perform miracles, healings Etc which is carried out by the three, “The Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit which are ONE!”
So again you misrepresent my words, why do you insist on doing that?
And if you are inferring my meaning is that Jesus doesn’t have the power to carry out the works done in his name then you are wrong about my statement.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ May 24 2010,21:00) Why not say that it is done by the power of Jesus?
I did, because he has all authority and power and he possesses all things and it is in his name that the Apostles carried out the commission and Jesus went with them and worked through them by performing the Acts of God, so then it is in the “Power of Jesus” isn’t it?Remember Jesus also lives in us…2 Cor 13:5. Is he living in you Mike?
Notice what Jesus said after he gives them the Divine mandate and commissions them to go into the entire world…
Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, “I AM WITH YOU ALWAY, EVEN UNTO THE END OF THE WORLD”. Amen.
There is another one of those Divine attributes that the Divine Jesus has, it’s called Omnipresence.
Are we having fun yet Mike? The truth shall set you free!
Quote (mikeboll64 @ May 24 2010,21:00) God is subliminally telling you that there is a difference.
Is this how God speaks to you Mike, “subliminally”?Can you show us a difference in the attributes of the Father, Jesus and the Holy Spirit Mike?
When God speaks to you, is it the Father, Jesus or the Holy Spirit? Can you tell? There are scriptures that claim the Father and Jesus and the Holy Spirit speak to us.
So if Jesus speaks to you is it not God speaking to you? So if you say the Lord spoke to me today wouldn’t you be saying God spoke to me, yet it could be Jesus or the Holy Spirit right? Where is the difference Mike?
Quote (mikeboll64 @ May 24 2010,21:00) You make statements like this frequently. You know – ones that show the power originally belongs to God before He decides how to dish it out.
Not at all what I said is it? But I thought we were talking about the resurrected Jesus and not the servant Messiah? Oh that’s right, when it is convenient you deny Phil 2:6-8 and appeal to the Jesus when he was in the flesh!Quote (mikeboll64 @ May 24 2010,21:00) And I'm with JA. Where is the scripture that says all three are one? I don't know of any.
If you do not know that the Father is one with Jesus and the Holy Spirit by now you….O’ well what can I say? Do your own homework. For you and JA are lacking any scriptural support that shows any difference in the three in regards to their respective nature or ontology aren’t you?WJ
Kj,
I don't understand – to what advantage is it that you are enying that God calls ALL his sentient creation “Sons” – and those who would be inheritors of his kingdom “Princes”.
I don't get you – “the book Job” clearly says “Sons of God” as SF has pointed out – I posted teh same thing before realising that SF had posted just before me so i removed it from my own post – but you make me bring it up again here.
“Son of God” of God 0f whom even pre-Satan was one, is a term meaning “One who follows in the way of God” (IMO) – why are you frightened of it? Why are you denying it when Scriptures clearly shows it – Who wrote Scriptures? “Strong with his precious, “My Precious”, concordance”?! or You, KJ?
Genesis 6:1-8 says:'The Sons of god saw the daughters of men…Sons of God came into the daughtersof men and [the women] bore children to them' Read teh verses carefully, It shows “Men”, “Sons of God” and “Daughters of men” and Nephilims offsring of Angels and Human Women, clearly different beings.
Also Job 38:7 speaking about the earth:
“To what were its foundations fastened? Or who laid its cornerstone, When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?”KJ, why are you doing all this thrashing – What can you hope to achieve. NOONE BELIEVES YOU. I though you were going the right way and even said so – You disapoint me even as I try to praise you
– waddup man? weigh up and Wise up, Man??
Quote (JustAskin @ May 13 2010,01:43) Keith, Perhaps you are right.
Tell you what, you stop posting inconsistent and erronous arguments and we will stop the 'ad hominems'.
If you believe in the Trinity doctrine, then post with that as your base.
If some question arises that successfully disputes your claim, then acknowledge it. Don't make up silly pointless distractions nor change the context, to get out of the corner. You don't fool JA in that way…and you know that that is what you have done in the past.So, Agreed?
That is great advice. How about it?Surely it is more honorable to be honest and admit when you are wrong or when you are stuck.
Most of the time, I see pride defending itself to the point of ignoring any true challenges. And not just once or twice, but repeatedly.
Such is not good for anyone's development and God doesn't give you points for not being honest even if you think you are doing him a favor.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
