User Tag List

Page 7 of 15 FirstFirst ... 45678910 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 105 of 216

Thread: The new rules for the Exclusively Christian forum

  1. #91
    Over 5000 post club Letsargue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    North Georgia
    Posts
    5,109
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 153 Times in 137 Posts

    Blog Entries
    103
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    43780
    Quote Originally Posted by Chandler View Post
    I don't want you to think that I am short-changing you. But what you say here isn't exactly correct.

    Isaiah 9:6 calls Jesus "Mighty God" but not "Almighty God".

    I fully accept that Jesus is "Mighty God". He is also the "Everlasting Father" of Isaiah 9:6. However (as a Trinitarian would agree -- although Writer would disagree --) Jesus is not God the Father. Jesus is a different person, Mighty but not Almighty. Jesus said: "The Father is greater than I." (John 14:28)


    1Corinthians 15:22-24 KJV
    Christ delivers up the Kingdom to “GOD THE FATHER”, Christ does do that. – NOW:
    John 14:3-4 KJV
    Who delivers up the kingdom? (Christ).
    And who is the receiver of the kingdom? (Christ).
    The Word was with God and the Word was God, every time.
    Christ delivers up the Kingdom as the Son, But in “THAT” moment of the twinkling of an eye, as fast as the lighting from the east to the west, at the last trump.
    Old things have passed away, behold all things becomes NEW.
    He shall be called the everlasting Father, the Mighty God, God of Gods, Lord of Lords, King of Kings. (The all mighty God, there’s none more mighty)?
    Psalms 136:2 KJV
    Daniel 2:47 KJV

    ---Paul---
    ---Gal. 4:16.
    ---"Am I therefore become your enemy because I tell you the truth"???

  2. #92
    Rookie Chandler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    22
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by Letsargue View Post
    1Corinthians 15:22-24 KJV
    Christ delivers up the Kingdom to “GOD THE FATHER”, Christ does do that. – NOW:
    John 14:3-4 KJV
    Who delivers up the kingdom? (Christ).
    And who is the receiver of the kingdom? (Christ).

    Christ delivers up the Kingdom as the Son, But in “THAT” moment of the twinkling of an eye, as fast as the lighting from the east to the west, at the last trump.
    Old things have passed away, behold all things becomes NEW.
    Revelation chapter 20 depicts Christ and others ruling over the earth, not for just the twinkling of an eye, but for 1,000 years (verse 4). Only at the end of this 1,000 years do we read that "death" is destroyed in the lake of fire (verse 14).

    1 Corinthians 15:24-26 says: "Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death."

    So: Christ is given rulership over the earth by God the Father (Psalms 2:8; Daniel 2:44). He rules for 1,000 years bringing mankind to perfection. Then Satan is given one final chance to test mankind's integrity (Revelation 20:7, 8). All on earth who become corrupted by Satan are then destroyed (fire from heaven). And Satan himself is also cast into the lake of fire. Then last of all death is destroyed.

    After the dust settles it must be at this point in time that Christ finally "hands over the kingdom to God the Father".
    He shall be called the everlasting Father, the Mighty God, God of Gods, Lord of Lords, King of Kings. (The all mighty God, there’s none more mighty)?
    Psalms 136:2 KJV
    Daniel 2:47 KJV
    Both Jesus and his Father are alled "Mighty God", (El-Gibbor), but only the Father is called "Almighty" (El-Shaddai). I believe that this distinguishes the Son from the Father.
    The Word was with God and the Word was God, every time.
    We could start a whole new thread on John 1:1. The literal Greek reads: "God was the Word". Even Godrulz has said that the anarthrous "theos" in this phrase is qualitative. That is, it describes the Word in some way without necessarily identifying who the Word is. Because of this some translations read similar to Moffatt's: "the Logos was divine" rather than "the Logos (Word) was God".

    It is entirely reasonable to suppose that John is describing some divine godlike quality about the Word. But it is not reasonable to conclude that the Word was the same God that he was with. If he was that God then he could not stand in relation to that God.

  3. #93
    Over 5000 post club Letsargue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    North Georgia
    Posts
    5,109
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 153 Times in 137 Posts

    Blog Entries
    103
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    43780
    Quote Originally Posted by Chandler View Post
    Revelation chapter 20 depicts Christ and others ruling over the earth, not for just the twinkling of an eye, but for 1,000 years (verse 4). Only at the end of this 1,000 years do we read that "death" is destroyed in the lake of fire (verse 14).

    1 Corinthians 15:24-26 says: "Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death."

    So: Christ is given rulership over the earth by God the Father (Psalms 2:8; Daniel 2:44). He rules for 1,000 years bringing mankind to perfection. Then Satan is given one final chance to test mankind's integrity (Revelation 20:7, 8). All on earth who become corrupted by Satan are then destroyed (fire from heaven). And Satan himself is also cast into the lake of fire. Then last of all death is destroyed.

    After the dust settles it must be at this point in time that Christ finally "hands over the kingdom to God the Father".

    Both Jesus and his Father are alled "Mighty God", (El-Gibbor), but only the Father is called "Almighty" (El-Shaddai). I believe that this distinguishes the Son from the Father.

    We could start a whole new thread on John 1:1. The literal Greek reads: "God was the Word". Even Godrulz has said that the anarthrous "theos" in this phrase is qualitative. That is, it describes the Word in some way without necessarily identifying who the Word is. Because of this some translations read similar to Moffatt's: "the Logos was divine" rather than "the Logos (Word) was God".

    It is entirely reasonable to suppose that John is describing some divine godlike quality about the Word. But it is not reasonable to conclude that the Word was the same God that he was with. If he was that God then he could not stand in relation to that God.

    What all are you saying?
    Are you not helping along a few scriptures to show what you believe? Why not just have Faith in them as they are?
    Peace.

    ---Paul---
    ---Gal. 4:16.
    ---"Am I therefore become your enemy because I tell you the truth"???

  4. #94
    Rookie Chandler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    22
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by Letsargue View Post
    What all are you saying?
    Are you not helping along a few scriptures to show what you believe? Why not just have Faith in them as they are?
    Peace.

    ---Paul---
    Where have I not shown faith in the scriptures as they are?

    Do you have any comments on Revelation ch. 20?

  5. #95
    Over 3000 post club
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    In front of the strange glowing screen of an inexplicable mechanism.
    Posts
    3,641
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 43 Times in 43 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    173064
    The early followers of Jesus heard and saw first-hand the words and deeds of one who was clearly the incarnation of God.

    Jesus was subsequently interpreted as the manifestation of the divine in the world.

    And Jesus taught them that there was a divine kingdom that was accessible and that it was ruled not by Caesar but by the God celebrated by Jesus of Nazareth.
    ____________________________________
    ...terrorism is the war of the poor and war is the terrorism of the rich...




    (STILL trying to set up conservatives and fundamentalists on blind dates with Jesus...)

  6. #96
    Over 5000 post club Letsargue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    North Georgia
    Posts
    5,109
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 153 Times in 137 Posts

    Blog Entries
    103
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    43780
    Quote Originally Posted by Chandler View Post
    Where have I not shown faith in the scriptures as they are?

    Do you have any comments on Revelation ch. 20?

    What can I tell you, other than it's a vision that was given to John to enterrupt, and John Did not enterrupt it to us, He didn't even write what the seven thunders uttered to us. Unless you or I have the Gift of enterruption, of visions and dreams, I can't tell you anything beyond what it says. And this also.
    Revelation 22:18-19 KJV
    Why do you guys insist on doing that?
    Peace.

    ---Paul---
    ---Gal. 4:16.
    ---"Am I therefore become your enemy because I tell you the truth"???

  7. #97
    Rookie Chandler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    22
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by aikido7 View Post
    The early followers of Jesus heard and saw first-hand the words and deeds of one who was clearly the incarnation of God.

    Jesus was subsequently interpreted as the manifestation of the divine in the world.

    And Jesus taught them that there was a divine kingdom that was accessible and that it was ruled not by Caesar but by the God celebrated by Jesus of Nazareth.
    Matthew 16:15, 16 reports: "But what about you?" he asked. "Who do you say I am?" Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God."

    Peter didn't say: "You are Almighty God." He declared that Christ was, not God, but the Son of God.

  8. #98
    Rookie Chandler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    22
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by Letsargue View Post
    What can I tell you, other than it's a vision that was given to John to enterrupt, and John Did not enterrupt it to us, He didn't even write what the seven thunders uttered to us. Unless you or I have the Gift of enterruption, of visions and dreams, I can't tell you anything beyond what it says. And this also.
    Revelation 22:18-19 KJV
    Why do you guys insist on doing that?
    Peace.

    ---Paul---
    I was just hoping to know your thoughts on ch. 20. Not the seven thunders. Never mind.

  9. #99
    Rookie
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    29
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    132

    The deceiver Arian Chandler 97 92 90 88

    97 "Who do you say I am?" Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God."
    Peter didn't say: "You are Almighty God." He declared that Christ was, not God, but the Son of God.
    To the contary of the misrepresenter Chandler: Peter didn't declare Christ or Son of God isn't God

    92 John is describing some divine godlike quality about the Word.
    The Word's not only like God, He is God

    88 97 it is not reasonable to conclude that the Word was the same God that he was with.
    Why not?
    Because God is subject and limited to Chandler's understanding?

    The root of all such heresies (Arianism, Modalism, etc), and what all such heresies have in common, is that they're attempting to explain God rather than love Him.
    In addition, a soulish man doesn't receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they're foolishness to him and he's not able to know them because they're discerned spiritually.
    In other words, to understand God (Christ, Their Spirit), you have to have Christ

    97 If he was that God then he could not stand in relation to that God.
    To the contrary: unlike Arianism, Modalism, Islam, and Judaism without Christ teach: God is 3 in 1

    90 Isaiah 9:6 calls Jesus "Mighty God" but not "Almighty God".
    Contrary to Chandler's polytheism

    Hear O Israel, Jehovah's our God; Jehovah's one.
    Jehovah's God in heaven above and upon the earth below; there's no other

    I fully accept that Jesus is "Mighty God". He is also the "Everlasting Father" of Isaiah 9:6.
    Just as God's only one and there's only one God,
    the Father, Son, and Spirit;
    there's only one divine Father
    Eph 4:6 Isa 9:6

    Jesus is not God the Father.
    To the contrary of this deceit:
    "I and the Father are one"
    John 10:30.

    Jesus isn't His Father in the sense of replacing Him or of eradicating Their eternal Father-Son relationship and persons.

    Jesus is His Father in the sense of being His Father's Son
    (homousion, containing Him, expressing Him, including Him)

    Jesus is a different person, Mighty but not Almighty.
    Jesus is a different person within the Trinity. Not a different person outside of, or separate from, the Father. Since Father, Son, and Spirit are inseverable. Being one Organism, one Being, one God: God.

    What's centrally "different" here is Chandler's polytheism, Jehovah Witnessism's pantheon, versus Father, Son, Spirit and Their revelation of God to Their apostles in Scripture

    Jesus said: "The Father is greater than I." (John 14:28)
    Who existing in the form of God didn't consider being equal with God a treasure to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a slave, becoming in the likeness of men; and being found in fashion as a man

    88 if the organisers of TOL decree that "Exclusive Christian Theology" is only for those who believe Jesus to be Almighty God then I shall abide by their wishes and never intrude here again.
    We'll see if they can or will

  10. #100
    Over 3000 post club
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    In front of the strange glowing screen of an inexplicable mechanism.
    Posts
    3,641
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 43 Times in 43 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    173064
    Quote Originally Posted by Chandler View Post
    Matthew 16:15, 16 reports: "But what about you?" he asked. "Who do you say I am?" Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God."

    Peter didn't say: "You are Almighty God." He declared that Christ was, not God, but the Son of God.
    I would just say--seriously--that not everybody in the gospels had the same literal interpretation. Matthew's Peter was no exception.

    Son of God, God, Messiah, Savior, divine sacrifice--all of these designations ultimately depended on the specific gospel writer's theology, location and the particular events their communities lived through. For example, Mark's Jesus cries out "My God, why have you forsaken me?" on the cross. In John, Jesus is made to show that everything in the scriptures has been fulfilled and the crucifixion is just one aspect of that ("It is finished!").

    Mark's community was written shortly after or during the Roman-Jewish wars. Many Jews were killed and died in agony. Mark's crucifixion narrative shows that.

    John's gospel was written much later--probably in the 90s. By then the christology of Jesus was solidifying and John's gospel of Jesus speaking in long, theological discourses confirms that.


    The later canonical designations (Son of God, Messiah, etc.) were all theological affirmations.
    ____________________________________
    ...terrorism is the war of the poor and war is the terrorism of the rich...




    (STILL trying to set up conservatives and fundamentalists on blind dates with Jesus...)

  11. #101
    Rookie Chandler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    22
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by aikido7 View Post
    I would just say--seriously--that not everybody in the gospels had the same literal interpretation. Matthew's Peter was no exception.

    Son of God, God, Messiah, Savior, divine sacrifice--all of these designations ultimately depended on the specific gospel writer's theology, location and the particular events their communities lived through. For example, Mark's Jesus cries out "My God, why have you forsaken me?" on the cross. In John, Jesus is made to show that everything in the scriptures has been fulfilled and the crucifixion is just one aspect of that ("It is finished!").

    Mark's community was written shortly after or during the Roman-Jewish wars. Many Jews were killed and died in agony. Mark's crucifixion narrative shows that.

    John's gospel was written much later--probably in the 90s. By then the christology of Jesus was solidifying and John's gospel of Jesus speaking in long, theological discourses confirms that.


    The later canonical designations (Son of God, Messiah, etc.) were all theological affirmations.
    Interesting observations. I take the view that whatever the time and circumstances of the writing, "all scripture is given by inspiration of God" (2 Timothy 3:16).

    I believe that Matthew originally wrote his gospel in Hebrew, intending this to be a conclusion to the Old Testament Hebrew writings. He also included many quotations showing fulfillment of prophesy in Jesus' lifetime. And of course, the gospels contain many prophetic utterances of Jesus. Hence, both the gospel writers and their readers must have acknowledged the gospel writings as scripture inspired by God and free from human error.

  12. #102
    Rookie Chandler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    22
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by writer View Post
    To the contrary of this deceit:
    "I and the Father are one"
    John 10:30.

    Jesus isn't His Father in the sense of replacing Him or of eradicating Their eternal Father-Son relationship and persons.

    Jesus is His Father in the sense of being His Father's Son
    (homousion, containing Him, expressing Him, including Him)


    Jesus is a different person within the Trinity. Not a different person outside of, or separate from, the Father. Since Father, Son, and Spirit are inseverable. Being one Organism, one Being, one God: God.
    Hello Writer. I wish that we could have a friendly discussion without you accusing me of misrepresentation and deceit.

    Your view that Jesus is "not a different person from" the Father (do I understand you correctly?) is quite different from the Trinity doctrine: One God but three separate persons. This seems to lead to the idea that God the Father died for our sins (some early theologians believed this).

    I disagree with you because Hebrews 1:3 says that Jesus is "the express image of his person" (KJV).

    This pictures Jesus as having the "image" (Greek: "charakter") of God the Father but not actually being that person (Greek: "hypostasis" = substance).
    Who existing in the form of God didn't consider being equal with God a treasure to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a slave, becoming in the likeness of men; and being found in fashion as a man
    The word for "grasped" in Philippians 2:6 is "harpagmos", a very strong term meaning "to snatch or seize with violence". The KJV correctly translates this as "robbery". Elsewhere in the scriptures forms of this word mean literal plunder and robbery. The name of the mythical harpy, a snatching half bird, half woman, is derived from this word.

    The sense of Philippians 2:6 is that Jesus never ever gave consideration to violently seizing equality with God for himself (as Satan did). Becoming equal with God was never in his thoughts.
    We'll see if they can or will
    Any news on that? I consider myself a Christian but I can't help it if others do not.

  13. #103
    Over 3000 post club
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    In front of the strange glowing screen of an inexplicable mechanism.
    Posts
    3,641
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 43 Times in 43 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    173064
    Quote Originally Posted by Chandler View Post
    Interesting observations. I take the view that whatever the time and circumstances of the writing, "all scripture is given by inspiration of God" (2 Timothy 3:16).

    I believe that Matthew originally wrote his gospel in Hebrew, intending this to be a conclusion to the Old Testament Hebrew writings. He also included many quotations showing fulfillment of prophesy in Jesus' lifetime. And of course, the gospels contain many prophetic utterances of Jesus. Hence, both the gospel writers and their readers must have acknowledged the gospel writings as scripture inspired by God and free from human error.
    I agree with Timothy.

    And I also believe that the gospel writers were inspired to make sense of Jesus' life by using their own scriptural tradition as a springboard for telling parts of the story in ways that would resonate with that traditon.

    And I know that this view is a purely historical one. The popular, "theological view" is not persuasive to me. I am a minority on TOL. Whenever I sit at the counter I am denied service. Such is life.
    ____________________________________
    ...terrorism is the war of the poor and war is the terrorism of the rich...




    (STILL trying to set up conservatives and fundamentalists on blind dates with Jesus...)

  14. #104
    Rookie Chandler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    22
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by aikido7 View Post
    I agree with Timothy.

    And I also believe that the gospel writers were inspired to make sense of Jesus' life by using their own scriptural tradition as a springboard for telling parts of the story in ways that would resonate with that traditon.
    I can definitely see traits of individuality in the gospel writings. Tax collector Matthew is always accurate with numbers. And physician Luke sometimes includes details of miraculous healing that the other three omit (Luke 22:51).
    And I know that this view is a purely historical one. The popular, "theological view" is not persuasive to me. I am a minority on TOL. Whenever I sit at the counter I am denied service. Such is life.
    As a Jehovah's Witness I am just a minority of one on TOL. And if Writer gets his way I will soon be a minority of zero on the Exclusively Christian forum.

  15. #105
    Over 3000 post club
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    In front of the strange glowing screen of an inexplicable mechanism.
    Posts
    3,641
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 43 Times in 43 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    173064
    Quote Originally Posted by Chandler View Post
    ...As a Jehovah's Witness I am just a minority of one on TOL. And if Writer gets his way I will soon be a minority of zero on the Exclusively Christian forum.
    I definitely can hear that. But maybe there's an upside: we heretics might get to choose the type of wooden stake we will be lashed to before we are burned.
    ____________________________________
    ...terrorism is the war of the poor and war is the terrorism of the rich...




    (STILL trying to set up conservatives and fundamentalists on blind dates with Jesus...)

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us