Mikeboll64 vs francis

[KangarooJack]

WJ said to Mike:

Quote

So now you have to prove how he isn't God Almighty since he is the “Supreme Ruler” having all authority and power of an infinite God and shares all the attributes and characteristics of God Almigthy! How are you going to do that Mike?

How can Mike deny that Christ is the Supreme Ruler when Jude 4 says that He is our ONLY DESPOTES (absolute ruler)?

Freshman year logical syllogism:

Major premise: God Almighty is absolute ruler
Minor premise: Jesus Christ is absolute ruler
Conclusion: Therefore, Jesus Christ is God Almighty.

If both premises are true, then the conclusion NECESSARILY follows.

Jack

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 22 2011,14:16)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 23 2011,03:31) The Joke is on you Mike because you cannot tell us in what way Jesus is not “God Almighty”, because you can't say he isn't called God, and you sure can't show us a scripture that says he is not God Almighty can you? Hi Keith, Are you saying you can't refute what I said: Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 21 2011,23:51) The word is ELOHIM.  And it does NOT refer to either God Almighty OR a false god.  It refers to a servant OF God Almighty.

Let me see if I understand… “The word is ELOHIM.  And it does NOT refer to either God Almighty OR a false god” yet you say “It refers to a servant OF God Almighty”. Ok so let’s take your definition and see how that works with your own words…

“The word is ELOHIM.  And it does NOT refer to either God [elohim] Almighty OR a false god [elohim]”. Yet you say…”It refers to a servant OF God [elohim] Almighty“. If it does not refer to God “elohim” Almighty then why do you say “a servant of God “elohim” Almighty”. Aren’t you saying the servant is a servant of “God Almighty” and therefore using the word “elohim” to refer to God Almighty? Shouldn’t you be saying “a servant of “Ruler Almighty or Leader Almighty”? If so then how confusing is that Mike? Do you see how confusing your doctrine is and that it defies everything and everyone Mike. Where is the source of support for this doctrine of yours?

Here’s how it is Mike, “elohim” refers to God Almighty only when you say so, right?

Other wise “elohim” it does not mean God Almighty at all! Ha Ha!

WJ

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 22 2011,13:56)

Hmmm……..where else in scripture is a SERVANT OF GOD ALMIGHTY referred to as “elohim”?    Oooh, oooh, I know one!  Hebrews 1:8!

You mean a servant of “ruler Almighty” don’t you? Who is “Ruler Almighty”? I don’t see any translations rendering “theos” that way do you? So what authority or what right do you have to change the text? Why do you keep “referring to God Almighty using the word “elohim” when you said…“The word is ELOHIM.  And it does NOT refer to either God [elohim] Almighty OR a false god [elohim]”?  

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 22 2011,13:56)

Can you show me the error in what I said?  Of course not.  That's why instead of dealing with what I said, you diverted to “I know Jesus is God, so there!”    How precious.

Ha Ha Mike

I just did show your error and the confusion.

So that is your answer? “The word is ELOHIM.  And it does NOT refer to either God Almighty OR a false god”

Then what does the word refer to Mike? I asked you a question and you divert to this?  

So Moses wasn’t referring to “God Almighty” when he says…

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. Gen 1:1

So “God Almighty” wasn’t speaking when he says…

And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. Gen 1:3

So David was not referring to “God Almighty” when he says…

O my God, I trust in thee: let me not be ashamed, let not mine enemies triumph over me. Pss 25:2

So Isaiah wasn’t referring to “God Almighty” when he says…

Say to them that are of a fearful heart, Be strong, fear not: behold, your God will come with vengeance, even God with a recompence; he will come and save you. Isa 35:4

So Paul wasn’t referring to “God Almighty” when he says…

Howbeit then, when ye knew not God, ye did service unto them which by nature are no gods. Gal 4:8

“Notice Mike that they used to serve others that “BY NATURE”  were no gods., yet now Paul says that he is a “bond servant (slave) to Jesus”.

Finally, was Paul referring to “God Almighty” when he says…

Now unto God and our Father be glory for ever and ever. Amen Phil 4:20

Now the question is Mike if God “elohim or theos” does not refer to “God Almighty” then who does it refer to? Lets take the last verse, by your definition of “elohim or theos” then it should be translated…

Now unto “ruler” and our Father be glory for ever and ever. Amen Phil 4:20

Why I could say Paul was talking about his earthly Father!

Do you see the problem you have Mike?

WJ

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 23 2011,03:31)

The Joke is on you Mike because you cannot tell us in what way Jesus is not “God Almighty”, because you can't say he isn't called God, and you sure can't show us a scripture that says he is not God Almighty can you?

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 22 2011,13:56)

Wow, that is sooooooooo weak.  I “can't show that Deborah isn't called God” either…………..does that mean SHE'S God Almighty just because there isn't a specific scripture that says, “Deborah is NOT God Almighty”?

Dance, dodge. That’s you Mike. Did you read the first part of my quote?

Here it is again…

“ The Joke is on you Mike BECAUSE YOU CANNOT TELL US IN WHAT WAY JESUS IS NOT “GOD ALMIGHTY”, because you can't say he isn't called God, and you sure can't show us a scripture that says he is not God Almighty can you?”

We know Deborah is not God almighty because she is a mortal human being who does not have all authority and power of an infinite God, don’t we? So who is being lame by making the same comparison between Deborah and Jesus? You said this earlier and didn’t respond because you know your words are ridiculous, you said…

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 22 2011,00:41)

And you are right that he is not God Almighty, but he is as much an elohim as Jesus or Deborah are.

So is Moses and Deborah who are called “elohim” are as much “an elohim” as YHVH or Jesus?

So you just proved that the word “elohim” when referring to God Almighty is not the same as “elohim” when referring to rulers, judges, men etc. It’s all about the Context Mike.

So this means mike your statement…? “The word is ELOHIM.  And it does NOT refer to either God Almighty OR a false god” is not a true one is it Mike?

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 22 2011,13:56)

Keith, like I've told Francis and Dennison, I have nothing to prove.

This is the funniest thing you have ever said. You are out to prove that the Apostles, the Forefathers, the 100s of Biblical Hebrew and Greek scholars and Commentators as well as the majority of Orthodox Christianity is wrong.    

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 22 2011,13:56)

The minute the scripture says Jesus is the “SON of God”, human common sense and logic immediately says he cannot possibly be the Being he is the Son OF

Says who? Do you understand an infinite God on merely human terms and logic? Peter didn't even know that Jesus was the Son of God until it was revealed to him by revelation. Can an infinite God only be explained by natural terms? Are you and your wife “One flesh”? That should be enough for you to know that it is possible for the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit to share the same essence or Spirit and what makes God, God..  

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 22 2011,13:56)

And although there are thousands of other things I could point to, why?  That first one is all I need to PROVE Jesus is not God Almighty.

LOL again, to you it proves he is not God. But you haven’t proved anything. You are only looking through your Arian glasses and that’s all.

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 22 2011,13:56)

So unless you can show where someone else's son has been proved to be the same being as his father……..or you can show other scriptures that SPECIFICALLY teach us that Jesus is God Almighty Himself, you have no legs to stand on.

Ha Ha.. The burden of proof is on you because you don’t have a natural example to compare the Father, Jesus and the Holy Spirit to, do you, unless you want to examine the Molecular structure of the Universe which is made of “protons -neutrons – electrons” (atoms). Well the creation does reveal the Glory of God. They are like no other aren’t they? You have no legs to stand on because you cannot prove how Jesus is not God or how he is not Almighty. The Father and Son thing doesn’t work because you and your Father are fully human as flesh. The Trinity is fully God as Spirit for they are One and share the same attributes and characteristics of that which makes God, God.

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 22 2011,13:56)

But wait…………I thought that's what we were doing here.  So let's wait for Francis' next “proof scripture” that Jesus is God Almighty, and you can jump in with all your support of it, okay?

I am waiting. I have been waiting since you came here to convince me or prove that Jesus is not God Almighty since everything about him is God Almighty.

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 22 2011,13:56)

Because for now, I got what I wanted.  You have admitted that being called “elohim” is not proof in and of itself.  And that's the first thing I set out to gain agreement on.  Jack has just agreed to it in another thread.  So now you, SF, Jack and I are all on the same page and believing truth so far…………I'm just waiting on Francis to join us.

But wait you haven’t proved anything because I also got what I wanted when you said…

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 22 2011,14:16)

“So, being called “elohim” is NOT proof in and of itself that one is either God Almighty or that that one is NOT God Almighty”.

Thanks!

Blessings Keith

[mikeboll64]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 23 2011,06:17)

Why did you avoid my question and not answer again Mike?   When Jesus is referred to as “elohim” or “theos” does it absolutely and positively mean he is “Not” God Almighty? If so please explain how you know this. OK I didn't see your post above so good for you Mike. So now you can't say that when the scriptures refer to Jesus as God that he abslolutely is not God Almighty!

Ah……….so you saw it this time!    Good, I originally posted the same thing days ago.      And I never said “Jesus is NOT God Almighty” soley based on him being called “elohim”.  That would be silly.

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 23 2011,06:17)

So now you have to prove how he isn't God Almighty since he is the “Supreme Ruler” having all authority and power of an infinite God and shares all the attributes and characteristics of God Almigthy! How are you going to do that Mike?

Well, the “SUPREME RULER” would have EVERYONE under him, right.  But 1 Corinthians 15:27 clears this right up.  Not EVERYONE is under Jesus, are they?  But, who is it that is NOT under the Father?  

That's just a sneak preview Keith.  I've been waiting for a trinity debate that someone doesn't run away from for a long time on HN.  I've got ammo to spare.    But you'll have to wait for a response from Francis………just like me.

peace and love,
mike

[mikeboll64]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 23 2011,09:23)

Here’s how it is Mike, “elohim” refers to God Almighty only when you say so, right?

Yes Keith! Now you're getting it. Except it's not “when I say so”, it's when context dictates.

Do you know of another “elohim” that Deborah was a representative of?

Look back at you whole post Keith. This is the kind of nonsense I put up with. And then, 500 posts later, you say, “That's what we've been saying from the beginning”.

So YES, Keith. Elohim REFERS TO God Almighty ONLY when the CONTEXT dictates it refers to God Almighty. Yet you are making a big diversion here as if YOU don't think the Elohim that Deborah represented was YHVH. If YOU think it's YHVH and I think it's YHVH, what's the point of your post?

Can you say “smokescreen” anyone?

mike

[mikeboll64]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 23 2011,09:28)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 22 2011,13:56) Hmmm……..where else in scripture is a SERVANT OF GOD ALMIGHTY referred to as “elohim”?    Oooh, oooh, I know one!  Hebrews 1:8!         You mean a servant of “ruler Almighty” don’t you? Who is “Ruler Almighty”? I don’t see any translations rendering “theos” that way do you? So what authority or what right do you have to change the text? Why do you keep “referring to God Almighty using the word “elohim” when you said…“The word is ELOHIM.  And it does NOT refer to either God [elohim] Almighty OR a false god [elohim]”?   Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 22 2011,13:56) Can you show me the error in what I said?  Of course not.  That's why instead of dealing with what I said, you diverted to “I know Jesus is God, so there!”    How precious.   Ha Ha Mike I just did show your error and the confusion. So that is your answer? “The word is ELOHIM.  And it does NOT refer to either God Almighty OR a false god” Then what does the word refer to Mike? I asked you a question and you divert to this?   So Moses wasn’t referring to “God Almighty” when he says… In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. Gen 1:1 So “God Almighty” wasn’t speaking when he says… And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. Gen 1:3 So David was not referring to “God Almighty” when he says… O my God, I trust in thee: let me not be ashamed, let not mine enemies triumph over me. Pss 25:2 So Isaiah wasn’t referring to “God Almighty” when he says… Say to them that are of a fearful heart, Be strong, fear not: behold, your God will come with vengeance, even God with a recompence; he will come and save you. Isa 35:4 So Paul wasn’t referring to “God Almighty” when he says… Howbeit then, when ye knew not God, ye did service unto them which by nature are no gods. Gal 4:8 “Notice Mike that they used to serve others that “BY NATURE”  were no gods., yet now Paul says that he is a “bond servant (slave) to Jesus”. Finally, was Paul referring to “God Almighty” when he says… Now unto God and our Father be glory for ever and ever. Amen Phil 4:20 Now the question is Mike if God “elohim or theos” does not refer to “God Almighty” then who does it refer to? Lets take the last verse, by your definition of “elohim or theos” then it should be translated… Now unto “ruler” and our Father be glory for ever and ever. Amen Phil 4:20 Why I could say Paul was talking about his earthly Father! Do you see the problem you have Mike? WJ

Big ol' smokescreen that neither says nor addresses anything.

Patience Keith. You'll learn soon enough.

mike

[mikeboll64]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 23 2011,09:47)

We know Deborah is not God almighty because she is a mortal human being who does not have all authority and power of an infinite God, don’t we?

First, Jesus has exactly the amount of power and authority his God gave him.  Same as Satan.    Same as the angels.  And same as Moses and Deborah.  Now, did Jesus' God give him MORE power and authority than He gave to Moses and Deborah?  Of course He did.  But the fact remains that Jesus has exactly the amount of power and authority his God gave him.  

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 23 2011,09:47)

So is Moses and Deborah who are called “elohim” are as much “an elohim” as YHVH or Jesus?

Yes Keith.  Are they as powerful?  NO.  Are they elohim over as much “territory”?  NO.  But they are nevertheless “elohim”………..just like YHVH.  But YHVH alone is the “Elohim OF elohim”.

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 23 2011,09:47)

So you just proved that the word “elohim” when referring to God Almighty is not the same as “elohim” when referring to rulers, judges, men etc. It’s all about the Context Mike. So this means mike your statement…? “The word is ELOHIM.  And it does NOT refer to either God Almighty OR a false god” is not a true one is it Mike?

Keith, these are games.  Consider this your LAST answer to them.  The word “elohim” is the EXACT SAME WORD no matter who it's appied to.  It is CONTEXT that tells us more about each particular elohim.

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 23 2011,09:47)

This is the funniest thing you have ever said. You are out to prove that the Apostles, the Forefathers, the 100s of Biblical Hebrew and Greek scholars and Commentators as well as the majority of Orthodox Christianity is wrong.

No.  All I do is prove that each and every one of your “Jesus is God Almighty” proofs are not that at all.    It is YOU who goes against the good common sense our God gave us by asserting the son OF a particular being can actually BE that being.  

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 23 2011,09:47)

Do you understand an infinite God on merely human terms and logic?

I understand God the best I can with the brain and logic and language and spirit He Himself gave me.  God made the languages.  God decided what the terms “father” and “son” and “begotten” mean.  Yet you would have us believe that the God whose image we are in is three people in one being when none of us who were made in His image are three people in one being.  Did not the Father know how we would understand the words, “This is MY SON”?  Why would He have said “BEGOTTEN SON” instead of “partner” or “brother” or “co-ruler” or something that wouldn't mean to us that one came forth FROM the other?  Was God just “messin' with our heads”?  

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 23 2011,09:47)

Are you and your wife “One flesh”?

I'm single, Keith.  But we've already discussed that “one flesh” most likely referred to the sexual joining of two beings to create one.  At least that's what Paul thought it meant.  You and your wife are NOT the same being, Keith.  Just as Lot's wife was NOT the same being as him………or else they both would have turned into salt simultaneously.

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 23 2011,09:47)

LOL again, to you it proves he is not God. But you haven’t proved anything. You are only looking through your Arian glasses and that’s all.

Keith, I don't have to prove it at all.  It is YOU who can't come up with any other instance in the history of the world where a son is the same being as his father.  And since this is not a frequent occurance, in fact – NEVER, then if YOU want to overturn the understandings of “father” and “son” that human beings have held since Adam and Eve, it is YOU who must provide, not little “maybe texts” or “wishful thinking texts”, but real, bonafide PROOF TEXTS.

My “Arian glasses” are looking at things in light of every single father/son relationship since the creation of mankind.  It is YOU who is wearing Athanasian blinders.  

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 23 2011,09:47)

The burden of proof is on you because you don’t have a natural example to compare the Father, Jesus and the Holy Spirit to, do you,

No………….the burden is on YOU because YOU don't have a natural example to compare.  The default meaning rules supreme UNLESS, and ONLY unless, there is sufficient evidence to override the default meaning.  And the defaul meaning of father and son is that one came forth FROM the other and they are TWO distinct beings.

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 23 2011,09:47)

You have no legs to stand on because you cannot prove how Jesus is not God or how he is not Almighty.

Sure I can.  But if you don't find a reason to override the default father and son relationship, then why move on?  I'm not moving on until I hear from Francis anyway.  So stop posting to me.  You are causing me to show my hand prematurely.  Stop it&
#33;  

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 23 2011,09:47)

The Father and Son thing doesn’t work because you and your Father are fully human as flesh.

Oh but it DOES work because my father and I are NOT the same being.  Just as the Father and Son whose image we are made are not the same being.

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 23 2011,09:47)

I am waiting. I have been waiting since you came here to convince me or prove that Jesus is not God Almighty since everything about him is God Almighty.

Keith, you've had your chances.  I've even started “localized” debates with you to discuss one “proof text” at a time to its entirety.  You've bailed from each debate.  I know you had some issues at home and left for a while, so I'm not  pointing a blame finger.  But it's not right for you to make this thread in support OF Francis, but then try to wrangle control of the debate away from him.  I will wait for him, so you too will have to wait a little longer.

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 23 2011,09:47)

But wait you haven’t proved anything because I also got what I wanted when you said… Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 22 2011,14:16) “So, being called “elohim” is NOT proof in and of itself that one is either God Almighty or that that one is NOT God Almighty”. Thanks!

Good!  Now we're BOTH happy!    And as soon as Francis DIRECTLY answers the bolded question from my last post – the point that you and SF and Jack have already agreed with me on – then I can make you sad again!      

peace and love to you and yours Keith,
mike

[francis]

This is for Mike and everyone else in here:

Mike, I just got in and saw  the following statement from you to Keith…

Quote

That's just a sneak preview Keith.  I've been waiting for a trinity debate that someone doesn't run away from for a long time on HN.  I've got ammo to spare.    But you'll have to wait for a response from Francis………just like me.

You didn't mention names, but I couldn't help but feel this was a comment referring to me when you said “someone” who doesn't run away “from for” a long time on HN.

Well Mike, if it is referring to me, then hey… if you think I'm running away and hiding, etc… then by all means, if everyone is willing, then I will hand over our debate to Keith since you have so much ammo to spare and that you have to wait for my responses and because you are “bursting at the seams” like you've said before.

It is very evident that you and Keith are able to devote a lot more time than I can on HN and therefore have the opportunity to respond more quickly to each other than I can.

When I agreed to our debate, I knew that I didn't have a lot of time and I was hesitant, but you convinced me to go forward when you wrote: “No time limits………post when you can or want and I'll do the same.”

and when you wrote that you were taking our debate “SLOOOOOOW, so there are no misunderstandings as we go along.”

If you did not mean what you said, I would have said “no thanks”.  But if I'm going to slow for you, and you're so anxious and full of ammo and you are bursting at the seams and you have been waiting for a trinity debate with someone who doesn't “run away from for a long time on HN”… then I have no problem handing the reins over to Keith in our debate… or if you want to start a new one.  Not that I want that… no way… but I took your word that there was no time limits and that you wanted to go “SLOOOOOOW”.  If you have changed your mind (and I understand that sometimes that will happen), then just tell me.  Straight up.  Just be direct.  

I have a lot things in my life that I am pursuing… with HN being just one of them. The fact that I'm willing to be in here and devote the time that I have so far, only shows that I do enjoy the intellectual challenge that such debates/discussions afford me… because I could certainly spend more time pursuing my other interests.

Please be aware that I am not trying to lay any kind of “guilt trip” on you and FORCE you to go at my speed.  If you want to change your mind about our debate, and switch our debate over to Keith… and Keith wants to… then I won't be offended.  It's like I keep saying to my wife… if she ever feels that she doesn't want to be with me any longer… or if she is not happy with me any longer… then I will release her from our marriage because I don't want to be with someone who doesn't want to be with me.

In that same kind of sense… if you don't want to engage in our debate any longer because I'm too slow or you are just impatient or not happy, then I will bow out.  I won't be bowing out because I've “lost” or “given up” or because I'm “afraid” of you or anything like that.  NO WAY!!!  Nothing would be further from the truth. LOL.    But I understand people change over time, etc.   And I don't want to be engaging in a debate/discussion with someone who would rather that the pace becomes a lot quicker.  If I had more time, I would oblige.

In fact, I sometimes wish I could figure out a way I could get paid doing this so that I could spend more time on here and do this.  It's fun.

Quote

Mike wrote to Keith: But it's not right for you to make this thread in support OF Francis, but then try to wrangle control of the debate away from him.  I will wait for him, so you too will have to wait a little longer.

If you both want to take over our debate, I won't hold it against either of you… and wouldn't consider that Keith is trying to “wrangle control of the debate away from ” me.

So let me know what you and Keith want to do.

Respectfully
Francis

ps.  I've figured out that the spell check is on my computer at home.  Sometimes I will do some typing on my computer at work and I saw that there is no spell check there.

[Ed J]

Hi Francis,

What I believe Mike is saying is :Mike has been for a long time for someone like you to come along,
who is willing to debate him on the trinity, because you have not (as yet) ran away from him.
You handing the debate over to WJ, would be what Mike refers to as 'running away'.

So far you have only ran away from me

God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

[Ed J]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 22 2011,06:15)

Quote (Ed J @ Jan. 21 2011,12:57) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 22 2011,03:59) Quote (Ed J @ Jan. 20 2011,19:39) Quote (Kangaroo Jack Jr. @ Jan. 21 2011,04:29) Quote When WJ is confronted with the truth of a Scripture, he moves off in a different direction to avoid a response or just accuses the one of some other distracting and often unfounded point. A bold faced lie! KJ Jr. Hi Jack and Francis, I have seen WJ do this many times. Because you believe this is 'a lie', do you consider Mike to be 'a liar'. Francis has trouble understanding this difference: let me explain to you both… If someone is propagating 'the rapture' doctrine. What they are saying is 'a lie'. But they themselves are not 'a liar'. because they believe what they say. I hope you can understand the difference now Francis. God bless Ed J (Joshua 22:34) http://www.holycitybiblecode.org ED Why don't you present your evidence? You are being a trouble maker here and to agree with a spirit like JA is telling. WJ Hi WJ, we are talking about this… Quote: 'When WJ is confronted with the truth of a Scripture, he moves off in a different direction to avoid a response' Here are the last two time you've done this with me (as this is common pattern with you)… Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 20 2011,11:24) Quote (Ed J @ Jan. 19 2011,19:14) Hi WJ, 1) Maybe you should reread 2Peter3:16? BYE ED I am not going to play your numbers games. My eyes hurt when I have to jump from one response to the next, and I am tired of this dialogue with you. You are creating distractions again and starting to accuse again by throwing scriptures at me like mud, just more your ole tactics of belittleing when you don't agree. You have the last word if you want. BTW I meant the AKJV for that is where the word came from. WJ Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 02 2011,10:08) Quote (Ed J @ Dec. 31 2010,02:27) Hi WJ, Is Jesus' father “Spirit”? Ed Give it a rest! I am not going around in circles with you. I hope you had a Merry Christmas and a Happy New year also! WJ Right when we get to a point you have no more wiggle room, you stop the dialog. And then start your usual rederick all over again with someone else. Sorry to be so blunt with you, but these are the facts. God bless Ed J (Joshua 22:34) http://www.holycitybiblecode.org Ed Oh I see. I have to come to a place where I “agree” with your proposed truth or I am running away?  Ha Ha. Some of us are smart enough to not waste our time going in circles with someone who is already convinced. Each case that you mentioned Ed we had been in a complete circle where we were only repeating ourselves. Then you start throwing scrptures at me in a rebuking fashion or JA starts accusing me of being dishonest and lying. So yea at that point it is useless and it is goodbye. I don't care what you or JA think ED, but to assume that I am a coward who runs away is a lie and me being here in this forum for as long as I have with as many post as I have is proof of that. When you start your numbers thing ED I am gone, just to let you know I don't believe you and am not gonna strain my eyes by jumping forth from one post to another to follow you. To me that is a distraction when you number the points and then reply to them like that. I believe most people don't read them. So I let you have the last word. That is not a sign of weakness just so you know and in fact I believe is a sign of strength. We will not always agree and when we cannot agree then it is goodbye I am moving on. So tell me ED do I have to agree with what you believe to be the truth before I move on?   WJ

Hi WJ,

         You can run from “The Truth”, but you can not hide! (Eph.5:13)

There is an underlying truth to what we all believe. “The Truth” remains constant.
The truth does not change over time as our perception may indeed change over time.
My goal is merely to show that truth; if you choose to ignore “The Truth”, it is your choice.
If your choice then is to not agree to the truth, it is (by default) you choosing to agree to a lie! (John 8:44)

God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

[mikeboll64]

Hi Francis,

The “someone who doesn't run away” IS you.  And I've been waiting for you to come around HN for a long time.  I have three or four stalled debates with WJ on this site, and two or three with Jack.  They all have ended with a point from me that they refuse to answer……….and so they have bailed from the debates.

So don't you go and do it now too.    You take your time, like I said at the beginning.  I'm not rushing YOU, but instead telling Keith to slow his roll so I can wait until you're caught up with your pending response before moving forward to the things we both want to move forward to.

I don't want to jump the gun and move forward with these guys until you are on the same page as all of us about the fact that being called “elohim” does not, in and of itself, prove that one is “God Almighty”.

We are all in agreement that the word “elohim”, taken on its own, doesn't say that one IS God Almighty and doesn't say that one ISN'T God Almighty.

Thanks for the spellcheck info………..I was feeling left out.  

peace and love,
mike

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Ed J @ Jan. 23 2011,18:16)

Hi Francis, What I believe Mike is saying is :Mike has been for a long time for someone like you to come along, who is willing to debate him on the trinity, because you have not (as yet) ran away from him. You handing the debate over to WJ, would be what Mike refers to as 'running away'.

Yes Ed,

You have it right. I'm patiently waiting for Francis, and Keith will just have to wait also………..because I'm not about to leave the one the debate is actually with behind.

peace and love,
mike

[SimplyForgiven]

HI MIke,

Quote

You are correct.  I still believe that the word itself simply MEANS “leader”.  But I have conceded the point and will continue the debate with “god” as a bonafide DEFINITION.  The fact remains that being called “elohim” doesn't necessarily mean you are God Almighty, so the end result is the same:  Just because Jesus is referred to as “elohim” does NOT mean he is God Almighty.  And that's the point I intended to make……and I've clearly made it apparently – for you and Keith are in agreement.

Actually this is where I disagree, because being called Elohim COULD MEAN that one IS God Almighty, but that all DEPENDS on context Mike. You keep on ignoring this.

Quote

Do you disagree that in 1:1, the elohim is God Almighty?  If not, then why bring it up?

I bring it up because Im trying to make a Point that This Elohim is God.   And the manner in how its used represents the Almighty God.

Quote

Haven't we just done this?    Remember the “leader” vs. “god” debate?  We know by CONTEXT, D.  Are you just being difficult here?  Was there someone else who in the past spoke to us through prophets, but more recently THROUGH His Son?

Im not trying to be diffcult, but i want to cover all the bases just in case.

Quote

D, does scripture say that God NEEDED anyone in order to create?  Does scripture say God DEPENDED ON anyone in order to create?  If not, then you are diverting.  The FACT IS that Jesus is NEVER said to have CREATED anything at all.  So I don't have to prove he DIDN'T create, YOU would have to PROVE he did.

Its not Diverting at all, If you can say that God used Jesus to create the world, when he really didnt have to is beacuse he simply chose to.  Than why cant i use the same arguement?
I already proved that he did create.
What Did Jesus Do in the beginning Mike?

Quote

I've never used that analogy…………..that was JA, I believe.  I couldn't claim to know the hows and whys of it all.  What I CAN claim is that scriptures says ONLY God created, and that HE ALONE did this THROUGH His Son, Jesus.

Oh Very True, JA did use that example.
Right But what does that MEAN Mike,
Dude lets get this clear, I admit that no where in the OT (correct me if im wrong) states that the “Son” had any participation in beginning of all Creation.
Its only the NT writers of paint that picture.

So what did JEsus Do exactly?

[mikeboll64]

Hi D,

Read the second to the last line in my recent post to Francis on this page.  We ARE in agreement.

And you keep saying you've proved that Jesus created.  I haven't seen any scripture that says so.  So like I said, YOU would have to PROVE that Jesus created.  I believe the scriptures that say the Father created the heavens and the earth and EVERYTHING in them.  Why wouldn't that “everything” include Jesus?  (Acts 4……..the prayer they made TO GOD, THROUGH HIS SERVANT, JESUS)

So again, creating all things THROUGH Jesus is apparently not the same in God's mind as “Jesus CREATED”………..or YHVH, the Father, would not have said He ALONE did it, right?

peace and love,
mike

[SimplyForgiven]

Hi Mike,

Quote

No, get YOUR facts straight…………and read what I actually wrote before spouting off:

No Mike, It seems that THEOS is used differently than Elohim.  because for Certain theos is used to present a “supreme being”.  Just put the defintions side by side and you can see that they dont totally match up.  Everything is based on the Context once again.

Quote

And once again, you're wrong.  It is not ME who has to prove a negative, but YOU who has to prove the positive.  I KNOW Jesus is not God Almighty because he is clearly the SON OF GOD ALMIGHTY.  That in itself says he cannot be the being he is the Son of.  So if YOU want to turn this very logical human understanding upside down, then YOU have to PROVE beyond a shadow of a doubt that the son of a being can actually be the same being he is the son of.

LOl WHAT?? Lol is this more of your “Twisting?”  
Here is several problems that you have made in this paragraph.
1. ITs you who stated that Jesus was not God becasue it was used as a Title. Therefore we asked u to prove it, and have been debating that ever since.  so you DO have to prove why Jesus is NOT God even though being called theos could mean that he IS God.
2. “logical human understanding upside down” How can you compared God to what a Human is?
Wasnt Jesus Birth totally humanistic or even normal?
3. You dont even know what the “Son” means in reference to Eternity with God.  How can you prove that what God refers to as a SON is the very same THING as Sons and Fathers in the Earth.

Quote

But you are right that we know Deborah is a REPRESENTATIVE of God, and therefore NOT God Almighty Himself.  And we know that Jesus WAS SENT by his God as a REPRESENTATIVE of Him also.  So it is up to YOU to show how the CONTEXT of Hebrews 1:8 shows Jesus to actually BE God Almighty.  And considering that 1:9 speaks of HIS God, you are fighting an up hill battle.  For God Almighty does NOT have a God………….DOES HE?    Please answer this question DIRECTLY, D.  I want to hear you say these words:  “Yes Mike, God Almighty DOES have a God”……..or acknowledge that He DOESN'T.

Mike, the Deborah point is obvious.
But the context and several letters from Paul prove that Jesus is THE IMAGE of God.  Deborah was merely human, and was NO WAY alike Jesus.  Just with that proves alot.
Jesus did what was not HUMANLY possible.
And again, How do u know what Son even  means?
Here is where the debate most go, that both of the “theos” were used to present a Supreme being.

And thats why i asked you if you agree that the “theos” from hebrews 1:1 is God Supreme.  and IF thats GOD than every other Theos in that chapter is also defined as a “supreme being” unless proven otherwise.

Quote

To my knowledge, you have not stated it CLEARLY until now.  You NOW are CLEARLY acknowledging that being called “elohim” does NOT make you God Almighty.  And that's good, because it's scriptural.  But for you guys, it's bad, because you cannot use the fact that Jesus was called elohim as any kind of proof he is God Almighty.   peace and love, mike

But You have YET to acknowledge that being Called Elohim COULD mean that one is God.
Sooooo being one sided doesnt help you mike.

[SimplyForgiven]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 22 2011,20:16)

Quote (SimplyForgiven @ Jan. 22 2011,16:53) 1.  So what does the Father mean to you? 2.  and what does the Son mean to you? 3.  and what does God mean to you? 1.  One who has brought forth offspring. 2.  One who has been brought forth by his father. 3.  The Almighty Creator of heaven and earth…………not to be confused with “elohim”, which does NOT necessarily mean that. mike

Ok can you do this again in reference to God and Jesus, because thats reffering to Humans.

like THE FATHER and THE SON. and THE GOD

[SimplyForgiven]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 23 2011,22:34)

Hi D, Read the second to the last line in my recent post to Francis on this page.  We ARE in agreement. And you keep saying you've proved that Jesus created.  I haven't seen any scripture that says so.  So like I said, YOU would have to PROVE that Jesus created.  I believe the scriptures that say the Father created the heavens and the earth and EVERYTHING in them.  Why wouldn't that “everything” include Jesus?  (Acts 4……..the prayer they made TO GOD, THROUGH HIS SERVANT, JESUS) So again, creating all things THROUGH Jesus is apparently not the same in God's mind as “Jesus CREATED”………..or YHVH, the Father, would not have said He ALONE did it, right? peace and love, mike

HMMMMMMMMMMM ok that makes sense,
Just ignore all the other places where im asking you to acknowledge that.

seems like i was behind on the thread.
My apologys

In reference to Jesus, Yes I have proven that, in the NT writings that Paul and John present that Jesus Created or participated within creation.

Of course he said HE ALONE created because Jesus is God.
You cant expect me to let that Go mike becuase thats what i believe and how i connect it.
You honestly cant refute this point UNTIL we solve the 1st debate which is whether Jesus is God or not.

So until that solves, everything else falls into place.

But either way, Mike what did JESUS do in creation according to Paul and John?
How did God create THROUGH Jesus?

Note: Jesus was never mention to have ever participated in the OT niether admit it publically in the gospels.

[mikeboll64]

Hey D,

What are you doing right now? It seems you and I are the only ones here. Do you have the time to do an “instant” debate about these things we're discussing right now?

mike

[SimplyForgiven]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 23 2011,22:54)

Hey D, What are you doing right now?  It seems you and I are the only ones here.  Do you have the time to do an “instant” debate about these things we're discussing right now? mike

Actually im about to leave bro,
Gotta eat with the family, and than go see a friend, and than i have to go to work and work on my promotion and than i have to do alot of things man.

and clean my room, and lol alot.
I just woke up and started going off on HN.
Its time to get my long day started.

Hey if u want to help out check out my site: dennisonrivera.acnrep.com

[Author]

Posts