- This topic has 18,300 replies, 268 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 1 month ago by
.
- Posts
To Cult Buster.
Quote (Cult Buster @ Dec. 08 2006,06:38) Quote Hi CB,
We do not listen to the voice of strangers.Of course you do not listen to the voice of strangers. Only to the voice of your Watchtower.
Come out of her!
He he.I have seen this many times before.
The cult busters categorize every one into cults and they proclaim themselves to be right and everyone else wrong. But cults practice this very thing too. So in reality we see cult vs cult.However I would like to remind you that there is one regular member here who is a JW. Nick, myself, and others do not encourage anybody to join any cult or any denomination.
The biggest cult in the world is the one that has the Trinity as it's foundation. But scripture clearly teaches another foundation. Therefore we listen to scripture, not man.
Could I suggest that before you can free people from cults that you need to be free yourself.
I have made the decision to come out of her and am free to learn what scripture teaches without first placing scripture into a denomination template or creed. What about you?
Are you willing to come out of her and be led by the Spirit as opposed to adhering to a creedal foundation?
Hi Cb,
You preach, as t8 says, a doctine that comes out of the world's largest and oldest and most bewitching CULT, that is the same CULT that God said we should come out of, lest we suffer for her sins.So even though you may regard her as evil if you are in one of her DAUGHTER CULTS you have not left her, and even though you may not have participated directly in her witchcraft and her heinous crimes you may still suffer the consequences for them just as if you were fully involved unless you abhor her rebellious ways and doctrines.
Come out of her.
Come out of the Watchtower and be free from this cult.
Joh 8:36 If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.
Heb 1:8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.
Hey Buster.
You don't read very well, apparently. Or maybe you didn't read what they said to you:
Quote In fact, as far as I know, there is only one JW on this discussion forum. Everyone else, to my knowledge, is unaffiliated with any religious sect or denomination. Quote I would like to remind you that there is one regular member here who is a JW. These words were spoken to you. I don't know. Maybe you just missed them. They are on this page (470).
Anyway. I'm wondering why you think JW's are a “cult.” What is your definition of cult.
When I think of the word “cult,” I think of people following a man and not Christ, such as the roman Catholics following the pope for example. I think of people who do things mindlessly not really knowing why: Putting up a tree in your house and decorating it with lights for example. If you don't know why you do this and do it without question, perhaps you are in a cult. JW's know why they do what they do. They have scriptural reasons for everything they do. JW's neither follow a human nor isolate themselves from the rest of society. They live and work in the midst of other people.It is true that our beliefs are considered unorthodox, different from the masses of those calling themselves Christians. But, didn't Jesus say that most would be on the wrong path. Wouldn't Christians be different from the world and from false Christians?
Interestingly, some of the Jews asked whether the activity of Jesus Christ represented “a new teaching.” (Mark 1:27) Later, some Greeks thought the apostle Paul was introducing a “new teaching.” (Acts 17:19, 20) It was new to the ears of those who were hearing it, but the important thing was that it was the truth, in full harmony with God’s Word.The trinity doctrine is false. And if you want to convince people otherwise, you'd better brush up on your scriptural knowledge and stop trying to intimidate or scare people. It rarely works.
Badmouthing JW's won't convince anyone on here that the trinity doctrine is true, because the ones on here aren't JW's. And many on here can see through false logic and reasoning.david
Quote (Cult Buster @ Dec. 11 2006,01:53) Come out of the Watchtower and be free from this cult. Joh 8:36 If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.
Heb 1:8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.
Was just wondering how to come out of something that you haven't entered into.Do you not have to be a JW to come out of the JWs? If not, then maybe you should come out of the JWs.
Quote (Cult Buster @ Dec. 11 2006,01:53) Come out of the Watchtower and be free from this cult. Joh 8:36 If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.
Heb 1:8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.
To Cult buster.Jesus said to Peter, whom do men say I am. Peter answered, the Messiah, the son of God. That is also my answer, but I suspect that your answer is that Jesus is God, which is a different answer of course.
The correct answer “Jesus is the Messiah and son of God” is what Jesus built his Church on top of and it is the very reason John wrote his book, the gospel of John in the bible.
So the correct declaration is not that Jesus is God, but that Jesus is Lord.
Romans 10:9
That if you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.1 Corinthians 12:3
Therefore I tell you that no one who is speaking by the Spirit of God says, “Jesus be cursed,” and no one can say, “Jesus is Lord,” except by the Holy Spirit.So if Jesus is Lord, then who is God?
1 Corinthians 8:6
yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.Now you might as well start confessing that Jesus Christ is Lord now, as opposed to later. Confessing that Jesus Christ is God is not the same as confessing that he is Lord. And you need the Holy Spirit in order to confess that he is Lord.
So are you willing to humble yourself and admit that you need to come out of the Trinity cult and confess Jesus as Lord, and not as God?
Let your Heaven Net ID “Cult buster” be prophetic and bust out of the Trinity cult for what benefit is it to you to be in a cult?
Quote (Cult Buster @ Dec. 10 2006,06:53) Come out of the Watchtower and be free from this cult. Joh 8:36 If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.
Heb 1:8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.
Is that what you say when you don't have a rebuttle or cannot refute scripture? Sounds kinda canned.If you can explain the scriptures I posted then I would be glad to listen to you. If you can only ignore the scriptures posted and quote other scriptures then you might as well just go talk to a wall.
This is what I find happens when people cannot explain scriptures that seem to contradict what they believe is true. Instead of searching it out they just quote some other “proof text” to back up their doctrine. It's debating at such an immature level that I would hardly call it debating or dialog. It's rather fruitless.
sscott
Quote
If you can explain the scriptures I posted then I would be glad to listen to you. If you can only ignore the scriptures posted and quote other scriptures then you might as well just go talk to a wall.Kindly repost your scriptures because I cannot find them and I will address your concerns. There is a lot of traffic on this forum and things get obscurred with Nick Hassans multitude of postings.
Quote (Cult Buster @ Dec. 11 2006,05:32) sscott Quote
If you can explain the scriptures I posted then I would be glad to listen to you. If you can only ignore the scriptures posted and quote other scriptures then you might as well just go talk to a wall.Kindly repost your scriptures because I cannot find them and I will address your concerns. There is a lot of traffic on this forum and things get obscurred with Nick Hassans multitude of postings.
Thank you,It's the fourth post from the top in this thread:
ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA
“Trinity, the doctrine of God taught by Christianity that asserts that God is one in essence but three in “person,” Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Neither the word Trinity, nor the explicit doctrine as such, appears in the New Testament, nor did Jesus and his followers intend to contradict the Shema in the Old Testament: “Hear, 0 Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord” (Deut. 6:4). The earliest Christians, however, had to cope with the implications of the coming of Jesus Christ and of the presence and power of God among them-i.e., the Holy Spirit, whose coming was connected with the celebration of the Pentecost. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit were associated in such New Testament passages as the Great Commission: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them mi the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” (Matt. 28:19); and in the apostolic benediction: “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all” (II Cor. 13:14). Thus, the New Testament established the basis for the doctrine of the Trinity. The doctrine developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies. Initially, both the requirements of monotheism inherited from the Old Testament and the implications of the need to interpret the biblical teaching to Greco-Roman paganism seemed to demand that the divine in Christ as the Word, or Logos, be interpreted as subordinate to the Supreme Being. An alternative solution was to interpret Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as three modes of the self-disclosure of the one God but not as distinct within the being of God itself. The first tendency recognized the distinctness among the three, but at the cost of their equality and hence of their unity (subordinationism); the second came to terms with their unity, but at the cost of their distinctness 'as “persons” (modalism). It was not until the 4th century that the distinctness of the three and their unity were brought together in a single orthodox doctrine of one essence and three persons. The Council of Nicaea in 325 stated the crucial formula for that doctrine in its confession that the Son is “of the same essence [homoousios] as the Father,” even though it said very little about the Holy Spirit. Over the next half century, Athanasius defended and refined the Nicene formula, and, by the end of the 4th century, under the leadership of Basil of Caesarea, Gregory of Nyssa, and Gregory of Nazianzus (the Cappadocian Fathers), the doctrine of the Trinity took substantially the form it has maintained ever since.”
(Encyclopedia Britannica, 1979, Trinity, Vol. X, p.126)Recently, someone on here has suggested that the trinity doctrine was always taught and it is us who have changed the thinking. This reference work above says that the trinity “doctrine developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies,” and that “It was not until the 4th century that the distinctness of the three and their unity were brought together in a single orthodox doctrine of one essence and three persons.”
Is there any proof that contradicts this. I thought it was common knowledge that the trinity doctrine came about slowly through these councils much later than the scriptures were inspired.
The Encyclopedia Brittanica explains further:
“Constantine: On June 15, 313, he issued at Nicornedia (Izmit) an edict (often misleadingly called the edict of Milan) proclaiming the common policy, agreed between the two emperors at Milan, of full toleration for all religions and restitution of wrongs done to the Christians. Constantine himself went further, making lavish donations to the churches and granting immunities to the clergy. Conversion- The reasons for Constantine's conversion to Christianity have been much debated. Some believe that it was an astute stroke of policy, designed to win the support of the Christians, or a wise act of statesmanship aimed at buttressing the decaying fabric of the empire with the strength of the Christian church. Neither view is very likely, for the Christians, especially in the west, were a small and unimportant minority and the churches weak and divided. Constantine's motives can be best divined from his voluminous letters and edicts on religion, whose authenticity has been proved. From these it appears that from 313 he regarded himself as the chosen servant of the “Highest Divinity” (whom he identified with the God of the Christians), who had given him victory over his enemies and raised him to supreme power, and believed that the prosperity of the empire and of himself, to whose care it had been committed, would be increased by God if his worship were properly conducted, and would be endangered if God were moved to wrath by its neglect. This belief is most simply explained by the story Constantine himself many years later told his biographer Eusebius of Caesarea and confirmed upon oath. When he was contemplating his attack on Maxentius and considering whence he should obtain divine aid, he saw a cross of light superimposed upon the sun. This vision, whatever its nature, was decisive in his conversion, evidenced in the favours he henceforth showered on the Christian church. During the decade following his conversion Constantine's legislation shows many signs of Christian influence. For example, he repealed the legislation of Augustus that penalized celibates, legalized bequests to the church and gave full validity to manumission performed in a church. He even gave powers of jurisdiction to bishops, allowing either party to transfer a suit to the cognizance of a bishop, whose verdict should be final and executed by the civil authority. He also made Sunday a public holiday according to Christian practice, although he emphasized its sacredness to the sun. It was probably at this period that he built and lavishly endowed the Basilica Constantiniana and its baptistery, the Fons Constantini, in the palace of the Laterani in Rome. Religious Policy. Constantine was soon involved in ecclesiastical controversy, in particular that associated with Donatus (see DONATISTS). In 313 a group of African bishops led by Majorinus, who claimed to be bishop of Carthage, submitted to him charges against Caecilian, the rival bishop of Carthage, and asked him to appoint judges to decide the dispute. Constantine was already aware of the schism and on the suggestion of his ecclesiastical adviser, Ossius, bishop of Cordoba, he had confined his benefactions to Caecilian's party, but he accepted the petition of the other group and appointed as judges the bishops of Rome, Arelate (Arles), Augustodunum (Autun) and Colonia (Cologne). The bishop of Rome, having called in 15 Italian bishops in addition, pronounced in favour of Caecilian, but the defeated party, now led by Donatus, Majorinus' successor, appealed. Constantine summoned a larger council of bishops at Arles (314), and they again decided in Caecilian's favour. The Donatist party now appealed to Constantine himself. He eventually agreed to hear the case, and again condemned the Donatists. When they remained recalcitrant, he endeavoured to suppress them by force, but they welcomed martyrdom. In 321 he ended the persecution, announcing that he would leave the dissidents to the judgment of God. Constantine was convinced, doubtless by Ossius, that dissension in his church was deeply displeasing to God. It was the traditional duty of the emperor to maintain the pax deorum, and Constantine assumed that he had to win and retain for the empire the favour of God. He used the bishops as experts to pronounce on the religious issue, as his pagan predecessors had used the pontifices or the augurs, but he himself selected and summoned the bishops, received appeals on their decision and took what executive action he thought fit, Victory over Licinius and Foundation of Constantinople.Constantine and Licinius were soon at variance. In 314-315 there was a war in Pannonia in which Constantine on
the whole gained the upper hand: Licinius had to cede to him the two dioceses of Pannonia and Moesia as the price of peace. In 317 Constantine's two elder sons, Crispus and Constantine, were jointly given the title of Caesar with Licinius' son Licinius, but relations gradually deteriorated. Licinius, uncertain of the loyalty of his Christian subjects. began to persecute them, and Constantine in a war against the Goths violated Licinius' territory in Thrace. In 324 Constantine attacked, and, fighting under the protection of the labarum, his armies were victorious at Adrianople (modern Edirne) in Thrace (July 3) and on Sept. 18 at Chrysopolis (Oskiidar), situated opposite Byzantium across the Bosporus. Licinius surrendered and in 325 he was executed for an alleged attempt at revolt. Soon after his victory Constantine began to rebuild Byzantium on a magnificent scale, renaming it Constantinople (q.v.). He spent great wealth on his new foundation, and to adorn it robbed many pagan shrines of their statues and columns; the city was formally dedicated on May 11, 330. It symbolized a break with the pagan past which was identified with Rome, and heralded the beginning of a new Christian empire. Constantine states in one of his laws that he founded the new city “by the command of God,” and he doubtless conceived it as a memorial and thank offering for the final victory whereby God had granted him rule over the whole empire. As such it was from the start a Christian city, unsullied by pagan sacrifice and amply endowed with magnificent churches. Coin types suggest that it was regarded as a sister to Rome, and it may have been called New Rome from the beginning. But it did not share Rome's constitutional privileges under Constantine. It had no prefect of the city until 359 and no senate. but was primarily an imperial residence. Arianism: Council of Nicaea and its Consequences. Immediately after his victory over Licinius Constantine had redressed the wrongs inflicted on the Christians during the recent persecutions and supplied funds for enlarging and rebuilding the churches in all the eastern provinces. He remembered from his youth that the church was far larger and more flourishing in the east than in the west, and he had hopes that the eastern bishops would be able to resolve the intractable Donatist problem. It was therefore with dismay that he discovered that the eastern churches were divided by a much more widespread dispute, the doctrinal controversy between Alexander, bishop of Alexandria, and one of his priests, Arius (see ARIUS; ARIANISM). Not understanding the theological points at issue Constantine first sent a letter to the two parties rebuking them for quarreling about minute distinctions, as he believed them to be, about the nature of Christ, and urging them to agree to differ, as did pagan philosophers. Ossius, who carried this letter to Alexandria, soon discovered that the dispute was too serious to be thus resolved, and summoned a large council of Syrian bishops at Antioch (325). They condemned Arius, but before they had concluded their deliberations, Constantine decided to convoke a still larger council at Ancyra (Ankara) in Galatia. Shortly afterward he resolved to hold a universal (ecumenical) council of all, the churches at Nicaea in Bithynia: this city was chosen as being more convenient for the bishops of Italy and the west who had been summoned, and for the emperor himself, who intended to be present. The Council of Nicaea met on May 20, 325. Constantine himself presided, actively guiding the discussions, and personally proposed (no doubt on Ossius' prompting) the crucial formula expressing the relation of Christ to God in the creed issued by the council, “of one substance with the Father” (see CREED). Overawed by the emperor, the bishops, with two exceptions only, signed the creed, many of them much against their inclination. The council also dealt with a number of lesser schisms and heresies, laying down the conditions on which their adherents might be readmitted to the church; endeavoured to settle the date of Easter; and regulated various questions of ecclesiastical precedence and organization. Constantine banished Arius and his partisans, confiscated the Arian churches and banned the cult of recusant schismatics and heretics. Constantine regarded the decisions of Nicaea as divinely inspired. As long as he lived no one dared openly to challenge the creed of Nicaea, but the expected concord did not follow. Those who disliked the Nicene formula took every opportunity of attacking its principal adherents and succeeded in condemning several of them on charges of doctrinal error or uncanonical conduct. Their chief victim was Athanasius, who became bishop of Alexandria in 328 (see ATHANASIUS, SAINT). At first Constantine supported him, acquitting him of several charges, but he eventually lost patience. The emperor's cherished aim was to reconcile Arius with the church, but Athanasius stubbornly refused to accept Arius' vaguely worded submission. At last, in 335, Constantine summoned a council of bishops at Tyre to investigate various charges against Athanasius and ordered him to appear. The council condemned him; he appealed to Constantine himself, who banished him to Gaul. In the same year at a council at Jerusalem Arius was readmitted to communion. During the last decade of his reign Constantine became increasingly pious. He devoted more and more of his time to completing his religious education, reading the scriptures and theological works supplied by Eusebius of Caesarea, listening to sermons and himself delivering homilies to his court. He continued to spend lavishly on building churches, at Rome, Constantinople, Antioch and the holy places in Palestine. He showed marked favour to Christians, thereby causing a flood of interested conversions. At the same time his attitude to his pagan subjects became more severe. Shortly after his victory over Licinius be issued an edict urging all his subjects to adopt the Christian faith, but at the same time he confirmed his policy of toleration to paganism (although in contemptuous language) and forbade overzealous Christians to disturb the pagan cult. He nevertheless destroyed three famous temples, at Aegae in Cilicia and at Apheca and Heliopolis in Phoenicia, and in 331 confiscated all the temple treasures, even stripping the cult statues of their gold; he probably also seized the temple endowments. Before the end of his reign he may even have banned sacrifice.”
(Encyclopædia Britannica, 1971, Constantine, Vol. 6, p. 386)The council of Nicea was “actively guided” by Constantine!
Contantine wanted unity in his empire, between Christians and the pagans. It just so happens that the pagans worshipped gods in trinities, as many cultures in the past have: Babylonians, Egyptians, etc.It was a politician that “personally proposed . . . the crucial formula expressing the relation of Christ to God in the creed issued by the council,”
I wonder what his motives were?
Notice that this encyclopedia says that: “Overawed by the emperor, the bishops, with two exceptions only, signed the creed, many of them much against their inclination.”
“Many of them against their inclination.”??
It also says that:
“As long as he lived no one dared openly to challenge the creed of Nicaea.”Wow.
Here's another one for you David.
Mark 2:28 Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath.
Exodus 20:10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God:
Q. Who is the Lord thy God?
A. The Son of Man.
Quote (Cult Buster @ Dec. 11 2006,12:51) Here's another one for you David. Mark 2:28 Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath.
Exodus 20:10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God:
Q. Who is the Lord thy God?
A. The Son of Man.
Hi CB,
Logic is weak human wisdom.
We cannot apply it to scripture and prove anything.
Scripture proves itself.
It is sad that you do not yet know who your God is yet that was the mission of Jesus.Quote (Cult Buster @ Dec. 12 2006,07:51) Here's another one for you David. Mark 2:28 Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath.
Exodus 20:10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God:
Q. Who is the Lord thy God?
A. The Son of Man.
Cult Buster, this is an incredibly weak argument to make.If God made Christ lord of the Sabbath, then that doesn't make Christ God.
Acts 2:36
“Therefore let all Israel be assured of this: God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ.”So God made Jesus Lord over his creation. It is not saying that Jesus is God, but that he is lord because God made him lord.
Think about it. As an example look to the Pharaoh and Joseph. The pharaoh made Joseph lord over his kingdom, yet most people have enough common sense to know that you cannot make this mean Joseph is the actual Pharaoh. The most you can say is that Joseph spoke on behalf of the Pharaoh or represented him.
It is written that the head of Christ is God.
I believe this and teach it, not because it tickles my ears, but because it is written.So do you believe that Jesus is lord. You can only believe and confess this as true if you have the Spirit.
Let's hear you say that Jesus is Lord. Let's hear you say Jesus is Lord over God's creation.
Another one for you T8
Luk 4:2 (Jesus) Being forty days tempted of the devil.
Luk 4:12 And Jesus answering said unto him, It is said, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.Who was being tempted here? Jesus; The Lord thy God!
Zec 7:11 But they refused to hearken, and pulled away the shoulder, and stopped their ears, that they should not hear.
Hi CB,
Surely you did not fall into this trap?
Jesus would have broken the Law if he had tempted God by jumping off the temple.
He would not do so.CB, you wrongly try to make this argument:
Quote Another one for you T8 Luk 4:2 (Jesus) Being forty days tempted of the devil.
Luk 4:12 And Jesus answering said unto him, It is said, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.Who was being tempted here? Jesus; The Lord thy God!
Hi CB. Unfortunately, you seem to have a knack for picking out scriptures from the KJ version that only the KJ version translate that way.
In luke 4:12, Jesus quotes scripture saying: You shall not put your God to the test.
The King james version says: you shall not tempt your God. But look to the verse that it quoted from.DEUTERONOMY 6:16
““YOU must not put Jehovah YOUR God to the test, the way YOU put him to the test at Mas′sah.”Deut 6:16 (KJ)
Ye shall not tempt the LORD your God, as ye tempted him in Massah.The KJ version has many now incorrect words which were correct at the time. The english language has changed.
For example, to “let” used to mean to “hinder.” Today the meaning usually attached to the expression is just the opposite, to “permit.” (2 Thess. 2:7)To “prevent” used to mean to “go before” or to “precede.” Today it means to “keep from happening.” (1 Thess. 4:15) “Conversation” used to mean “conduct.” Today it most often refers to talking with another. (Phil. 1:27) And for most persons today “shambles” does not refer to a “meat market,” as it used to, but to a “scene of destruction.”—1 Cor. 10:25.
The word “tempt” here is incorrect.
Did they tempt him at Massah or did they put him to the test? The word “massah” actually means “Testing; Trial.”
Massah is one of the names for the place near Rephidim where the Israelites received a miraculous supply of water. As instructed by Jehovah, Moses and some of the older men of Israel went to the rock in Horeb. There Moses struck the rock. The water that then began to issue forth flowed as a river there in the wilderness. Moses subsequently named the place Massah (meaning “Testing; Trial”) because the Israelites had put Jehovah to the test by their faithless murmuring, and on account of their quarreling, he called it Meribah.—Ex 17:1-7; Ps 105:41.THEY CERTAINLY DIDN'T TEMPT HIM THERE. Maybe the word “tempt” had the meaning of to test 400 years ago. It doesn't anymore.
As far as I can tell, all other Bibles have God being put to the test in verse 12, not being tempted.
NOW, LET'S LOOK AT THE CONTEXT.
“If you are a son of God, hurl yourself down from here; 10 for it is written, ‘He [THAT IS, “GOD”] will give his angels a charge concerning you, to preserve you,’ 11 and, ‘They will carry you on their hands, that you may at no time strike your foot against a stone.’” 12 In answer Jesus said to him: “It is said, ‘You must not put Jehovah your God to the test.’”
It would be testing God to try to get him to do these things: have his angels save Jesus. This would be a test, not a temptation. It's speaking of God, not Jesus.
Taking the only verison that translates it this way, a version that is 400 years old and uses old english and uses words with meanings that have changes makes your argument very weak.
The reference from where Jesus was quoting proves that the word “tempt” is wrong. The word is more accurately: “test.” So Jesus being tempted by the devil should not tried to be connected to God being put to the test in saving him and carrying out his words.david
Sscott.
Re. your 5 questions.Q1. Your comments. God is a Trinity..without one member of the Trinity you do not have God.
There are a number of models of the “trinity” being used in Christianity today and your question I assume deals with the Catholic trinity.
In a nutshell the Catholics teach that originally there was God the Father and that He copulated with Himself to produce God the Son, and then out of them both came the Holy Spirit. A three in one, one in three blend. This is unbiblical rubbish borrowed from paganism. No wonder it does not provide answers to your questions.
The word trinity is not found in scripture and I prefer not to use it. In the old testament we have the word “Elohiym” meaning God in the plurality or Gods. The new testament uses words like Godhead and Deity. (Theos Theios, Theiotes,)
The Bible Godhead consist of The Father, Son and the Holy Ghost. Each is a separate divine Person and each the Eternal God. The new testament Greek word for God “Theos” sometime refers individually to the Father, Son and Holy Spirit: and at other times refers to the Godhead. We must read scripture in its context to know Who it refers to.
Mat 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: /I]
Your question
So when Jesus cries out “My God My God why have you forsaken me”….how is it possible that God forsook God?
With the Catholic “trinity” it does not make sense, but with the Bible Godhead then it makes perfect sense. At the cross God withdrew His presence from Christ because of our sins.
2Co 5:21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.
This was the first time in eternity that Christ was separated from God. This started in Gethsemane; hence His suffering.
Isa 59:2 But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear.
It was our sins placed on the spotless Lamb of God that separated Christ from God.
Q2. Your comments
If Jesus was 100% God and 100% man how could He sin? God cannot be tempted to sin. Jesus had to have the possibility of sinning or else he could not be a faithful High Priest able to sympathize with our weakness.
There has on this forum been much confusion between Christ’s mission or “office” as Messiah and that of His substance which is The Eternal God. With respect to Matt Slick I’d rather follow what the Bible teaches.
When Christ was to leave heaven and was to take the form of a man He did not cease to be God. He simply put aside His own divine power and was dependent on God for power. This makes Him our example to follow because we too are to depend totally on God.
Heb 2:14 Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;
He had to overcome Satan while living as a man. Christ did not come to earth to show what a God can do, but what man can do when he depends on God for power. He succeeded where Adam failed.
Heb 2:16 For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.
Heb 2:17 Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.
Heb 2:18 For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted.Heb 2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.
A human body was fashioned for Christ. A body which had sinful propensities just like ours. A body less than what Adam had, weakened by the curse of sin.
Rom 8:3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:
Christ condemned sin in the flesh. He resisted sin. Don’t forget that He laid aside His divine power and did not use it for His own benefit, overcoming temptation relying on God for power. We too can resist temptation if we rely on God for power. Christ was our example.
Heb 2:17 Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.
Heb 2:18 For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted.Luk 4:2 (Jesus) Being forty days tempted of the devil.
Luk 4:12 And Jesus answering said unto him, It is said, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.Who was being tempted here? Jesus; The Lord thy God.
1Ti 3:16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.
Isa 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
Q.3 Your comments
There are many instances in the scripture where Jesus calls the Father..His God and says the Father is greater than I. I always thought this was in reference to Jesus being a Man on earth. But you also have accounts of Jesus calling the Father His God after the resurection. He calls the Father His God when speaking to Mary and again in Revelations. (Rev 3:12) Why is Jesus still calling the Father His God? There is also a passage that says the head of Jesus is God. (1 Cor 11:3)
In many of these instances Jesus was encumbered with humanity or within the context of Him being the Messiah. Don’t forget that Christ is still ministering for us right now as our High Priest in the heavenly sanctuary. So His mission is not yet over.
Even within the Godhead each Divine Person recognise and have reverence for the other as God.
Heb 1:8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.
Q.4 Your comments
In John 5:26 Jesus says:
26 For as the Father has life in Himself, so He has granted the Son to have life in Himself,This is also in the context of Christ mission as Messiah. Within the Godhead a plan was made for the salvation of man. It is evident that each divine Person within the Godhead takes on a different office or role. It is a pity that we too cannot learn to work together and to serve each other.
Q.5 Your comments
John 6:58 says:
57 As the living Father sent Me, and I live because of the Father, so he who feeds on Me will live because of Me.This also is in the context of Christ’s mission as Messiah. I have already covered this.
sscott. The catholic trinity concept is clearly wrong, however most of the other Christian churches are teaching the Bible Godhead which is truth. However it is unfortunate that they use the word “trinity” which sometimes confuses theirs with the Catholic teaching.
Beware of the false teachers here on this forum; they will lead you astray.
Christ describes them well.
Mat 23:24 Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.
Col 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
Col 2:9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
Col 2:10 And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power:They are wilfully blind.
2 Timothy 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
4:4 And they shall turn away [their] ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. sscott. I hope that I have addressed all of your concerns.
Quote Luk 4:2 (Jesus) Being forty days tempted of the devil.
Luk 4:12 And Jesus answering said unto him, It is said, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.Who was being tempted here? Jesus; The Lord thy God.
See my post above.
Quote Hi CB. Unfortunately, you seem to have a knack for picking out scriptures from the KJ version that only the KJ version translate that way. In luke 4:12, Jesus quotes scripture saying: You shall not put your God to the test.
The King james version says: you shall not tempt your God. But look to the verse that it quoted from.DEUTERONOMY 6:16
““YOU must not put Jehovah YOUR God to the test, the way YOU put him to the test at Mas′sah.”Deut 6:16 (KJ)
Ye shall not tempt the LORD your God, as ye tempted him in Massah.Hi David.
Christ (the Lord thy God) was indeed tempted by the devil.
Luke 4:2 Being forty days tempted (peirazō) of the devil. And in those days he did eat nothing: and when they were ended, he afterward hungered.
G3985
πειράζω
peirazō
pi-rad'-zo
From G3984; to test (objectively), that is, endeavor, scrutinize, entice, discipline: – assay, examine, go about, prove, tempt (-er), try.Luk 4:12 And Jesus answering said unto him, It is said, Thou shalt not tempt (ekpeirazō) the Lord thy God.
G1598
ἐκπειράζω
ekpeirazō
ek-pi-rad'-zo
From G1537 and G3985; to test thoroughly: – tempt.And have a look at the following verse David.
Luke 4:13 And when the devil had ended all the temptation(peirasmos),
he departed from him for a season.[/B]G3986
πειρασμός
peirasmos
pi-ras-mos'
From G3985; a putting to proof (by experiment [of good], experience [of evil], solicitation, discipline or provocation); by implication adversity: – temptation, X try.The KJV translation is accurated. The devil was indeed tempting the Lord thy God (Jesus)
Re. Deut 6:16 the LORD (y'hovah) your God.
Jesus tells it as it is.
Joh 8:56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad.
Joh 8:57 Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham?
Joh 8:58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I AM.
Joh 8:59 Then took they up stones to cast at him (because Jesus claimed He was God; the I AM): but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by.Exo 3:14 And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM:and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.
Exo 33:11 And the LORD spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend.
The God that spoke to Moses was Christ Himself. because no man has seen the Father (John 1:18, John 6:46).
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
