User Tag List

Page 6 of 14 FirstFirst ... 3456789 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 202

Thread: God will not give His glory to another, or will He?

  1. #76
    TOL Legend genuineoriginal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    On a sea of glass mixed with fire in front of a throne.
    Posts
    9,247
    Thanks
    1,333
    Thanked 1,506 Times in 1,091 Posts

    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    501710
    Quote Originally Posted by Rosenritter View Post
    Two titles in parallel do not necessarily mean two separate beings. You are offering this as an objection which if successful would only create biblical contradiction... justifying your choice of one of two contradicting sides. I'm pointing out that this is not a valid objection, such as illustrated in the following passage:

    Isaiah 44:6 KJV
    (6) Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God.
    The translators added words and punctuation that changes the meaning of the statement.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rosenritter View Post
    For your objection to carry true that would mean it must be true always, such as in Isaiah 44:6 above. Do you understand that passage as speaking of one being or two?
    Looks like one to me.

    Isaiah 44:6 CJB
    6 Thus says Adonai, Isra’el’s King and Redeemer, Adonai-Tzva’ot: “I am the first, and I am the last; besides me there is no God.



    Quote Originally Posted by Rosenritter View Post
    Mind if we look further who it is that sits upon that throne? First, the Lamb is in the midst of that throne, and elsewhere we see that the Lamb is also included in that throne. There is only one throne (not thrones) and the Lamb owns the throne.

    Revelation 7:17 KJV
    (17) For the Lamb which is in the midst of the throne shall feed them, and shall lead them unto living fountains of waters: and God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes.

    Revelation 22:1 KJV
    (1) And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb.
    The four beasts and the twenty-four elders are also in the midst of the throne.

    Revelation 4:6
    6 And before the throne there was a sea of glass like unto crystal: and in the midst of the throne, and round about the throne, were four beasts full of eyes before and behind.



    Revelation 5:6
    6 And I beheld, and, lo, in the midst of the throne and of the four beasts, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth.



    Quote Originally Posted by Rosenritter View Post
    Jesus... is the one who sits on that throne
    Do the scriptures state that Jesus sits on the throne with God or in place of God?

    Revelation 3:21
    21 To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.


    Quote Originally Posted by Rosenritter View Post
    Who MADE the Sabbath? Pretend you are a Jew who has been raised his entire life keeping that Sabbath day from the sixth day sundown to the seventh day sundown, each and every Sabbath reminded of the commandment:

    Exodus 20:11 KJV
    (11) For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

    I didn't make a mistake. There is only one Lord of the Sabbath, that is the LORD. Anyone claiming to be the Lord of the Sabbath is claiming to be the Creator God. The Jews were right when they said "thou makest thyself God." but the mistake they made was in refusing to recognize the signs and miracles he gave of God (thus validating him.) Jesus can say "Therefore" because the Son of Man is the Son of God, and the Son of God is the Creator God. No other explanation makes any sort of sense, there is no other "Lord" of the Sabbath.
    According to the plain reading of what Jesus said, Jesus said that mankind is the master (אָדוֹן 'adown) of the sabbath because the sabbath was made for mankind and mankind was not made for the sabbath.
    Learn to read what is written.

    _____
    The people who are supposed to be experts and who claim to understand the science are precisely the people who are blind to the evidence.
    ~ Dr Freeman Dyson

  2. #77
    TOL Legend genuineoriginal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    On a sea of glass mixed with fire in front of a throne.
    Posts
    9,247
    Thanks
    1,333
    Thanked 1,506 Times in 1,091 Posts

    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    501710
    Quote Originally Posted by Rosenritter View Post
    Genuine, if we take a step back we might make better progress by defining some rules, or perhaps even attempting to state the other's views as we understand them. I'm not selling a Trinity package, I'm simply maintaining that "Scripture emphatically says this" so therefore "Let us form any other views beneath what it actually said." If we accept the known first then we can legitimately try to create a model or understanding second.
    I am not selling a Unitarian package.
    I am simply maintaining that "Scripture does not emphatically say this" so therefore "Let us not form any other views on what is not actually said."

    The scripture has some passages that appear to imply that Jesus is God.
    The scripture does not state anywhere that Jesus is God.
    The scripture states over and over that Jesus is the Son of God.

    That is where I am starting from.
    Learn to read what is written.

    _____
    The people who are supposed to be experts and who claim to understand the science are precisely the people who are blind to the evidence.
    ~ Dr Freeman Dyson

  3. #78
    Over 5000 post club CherubRam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    5,526
    Thanks
    72
    Thanked 437 Times in 367 Posts

    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    1208
    Quote Originally Posted by Rosenritter View Post
    Has anyone noted any significance between Methuselah's name (its Hebrew meaning) and that Noah's flood would have occurred with the same timing as his death? His death shall bring... ? It would seem that his death was the trigger to bring something into effect.
    Methuselah name means, “his death shall bring.” Noah's name means, "repose."

    His death shall bring / repose.

  4. #79
    Over 5000 post club CherubRam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    5,526
    Thanks
    72
    Thanked 437 Times in 367 Posts

    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    1208
    Quote Originally Posted by Rosenritter View Post
    So you believe that "oldest text" is indeed reliable? Tell me, are you speaking of Sinaicatus or Vaticanus, and have you ever taken a look at what those texts physically look like? Seen the cross-outs and the like? Noted the obvious flaws within the text itself? Seen the nine-fold repetitions like "Holy holy holy holy holy holy holy holy holy?"

    Noted that these two that are called "the oldest and most reliable manuscripts" disagree with each other, and in practice the modern translators pick and choose whatever minority readings they like if they find even one instance of what they want? What does the Bible say about witnesses who cannot even agree with each other?

    Mar 14:57-59 KJV
    (57) And there arose certain, and bare false witness against him, saying,
    (58) We heard him say, I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and within three days I will build another made without hands.
    (59) But neither so did their witness agree together.

    Cherub, with respect, I am quite familiar with the other side, and it is on very shaky and non-desirable ground. May I ask that you also be willing to investigate both claims and counter-claims with respect?

    I understand that this touches to a belief that you hold, but is your belief drawn from evidence, or is the evidence filtered to that which is conducive to your belief? This is a choice we all are inevitably faced with at one time or another.
    Here is my answer:

  5. #80
    Body part Right Divider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    13,424
    Thanks
    10,791
    Thanked 18,473 Times in 10,502 Posts

    Blog Entries
    5
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147679

    Lightbulb

    Quote Originally Posted by Rosenritter View Post
    Has anyone noted any significance between Methuselah's name (its Hebrew meaning) and that Noah's flood would have occurred with the same timing as his death? His death shall bring... ? It would seem that his death was the trigger to bring something into effect.
    Sounds like a great topic for another thread.
    Quote Originally Posted by Squeaky View Post
    That explains why your an idiot.
    Quote Originally Posted by God's Truth View Post
    Father figure, Son figure, and Holy Spirit figure.
    Quote Originally Posted by God's Truth View Post
    You preach against me for preaching obedience to Christ for salvation.
    Col 2:9 (AKJV/PCE)
    (2:9) For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

    1Tim 4:10 (AKJV/PCE)
    (4:10) For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.

    Something that was SPOKEN OF since the world began CANNOT be the SAME thing as something KEPT SECRET since the world began.

  6. #81
    Over 4000 post club Rosenritter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    The land of ice and snow.
    Posts
    4,268
    Thanks
    778
    Thanked 1,442 Times in 1,134 Posts

    Mentioned
    22 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    195786
    Quote Originally Posted by genuineoriginal View Post
    The translators added words and punctuation that changes the meaning of the statement... [Isaiah 44:6 KJV] Looks like one to me.
    Your first statement seems rather unsupported, considering that you state agreement with your next sentence.

    The point being that the passage illustrates the use of English by those that know the English: commas and parallel structuring of titles do not necessarily designate things that are different, rather they can emphasize different aspects of the same thing. Everyone involved in this equation knows this is one God and one being, claims of "added words and punctuation" not withstanding. Need I also remind you that every item of punctuation in our scriptures is added by interpretation, as Hebrew and English lacks that punctuation?

    The four beasts and the twenty-four elders are also in the midst of the throne.
    And who is in the midst of those beasts and twenty-four elders? Who are they centered on? Who is at the center of all of this?

    Rev 5:12-14 KJV
    (12) Saying with a loud voice, Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honour, and glory, and blessing.
    (13) And every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, heard I saying, Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever.
    (14) And the four beasts said, Amen. And the four and twenty elders fell down and worshipped him that liveth for ever and ever.

    Heb 1:4-6 KJV
    (4) Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.
    (5) For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?
    (6) And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.

    Rev 22:8-9 KJV
    (8) And I John saw these things, and heard them. And when I had heard and seen, I fell down to worship before the feet of the angel which shewed me these things.
    (9) Then saith he unto me, See thou do it not: for I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren the prophets, and of them which keep the sayings of this book: worship God.

    Angels are not worshipped, and angels do not worship men, yet of the Son that sits upon that throne it is said "Let all the angels of God worship him" and the angels of God do worship him. "Worship God" we are told, and "for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve." (Matthew 4:10). The commandment is easily understood, all things are to worship God and God exclusively.

    Him that liveth for ever and ever is none other than He which we called Jesus. Is it necessary to barrage passages demonstrating this as well?

    Do the scriptures state that Jesus sits on the throne with God or in place of God?
    "With" is appropriate for designating the same, "against" or "in place of" would indicate that one or the other was false or being deposed.

    According to the plain reading of what Jesus said, Jesus said that mankind is the master (אָדוֹן 'adown) of the sabbath because the sabbath was made for mankind and mankind was not made for the sabbath.
    No, Jesus did not say that mankind was the master of the sabbath. The Sabbath was made for man, not that man is the master of the Sabbath. If man was the master of the sabbath, he has the power to change its meaning, redefine its use, or abolish it altogether. Jesus demonstrated that he had the power and authority to define its use and meaning, consistent with his status as Lord and Creator of the Sabbath.

  7. #82
    TOL Legend genuineoriginal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    On a sea of glass mixed with fire in front of a throne.
    Posts
    9,247
    Thanks
    1,333
    Thanked 1,506 Times in 1,091 Posts

    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    501710
    Quote Originally Posted by Rosenritter View Post
    Your first statement seems rather unsupported, considering that you state agreement with your next sentence.
    Maybe you missed the difference between the phrases: "the King of Israel, and his redeemer" and "King and Redeemer"?
    "the King of Israel, and his redeemer" is speaking about two.
    "King and Redeemer" is speaking about one.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rosenritter View Post
    Need I also remind you that every item of punctuation in our scriptures is added by interpretation, as Hebrew and English lacks that punctuation?
    (Did you mean English or Greek?)
    I already pointed that the translators added the punctuation and extra words to make the translation easier to understand in English.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rosenritter View Post
    "With" is appropriate for designating the same, "against" or "in place of" would indicate that one or the other was false or being deposed.
    You have been speaking as if Jesus is seated on the throne in place of God instead of sitting with God on His right hand side.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rosenritter View Post
    No, Jesus did not say that mankind was the master of the sabbath. The Sabbath was made for man, not that man is the master of the Sabbath.
    Jesus said that the reason the Son of man is master of the Sabbath is because the Sabbath was made for man.
    By implication, every man is master of the Sabbath for that same reason.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rosenritter View Post
    If man was the master of the sabbath, he has the power to change its meaning, redefine its use, or abolish it altogether. Jesus demonstrated that he had the power and authority to define its use and meaning, consistent with his status as Lord and Creator of the Sabbath.
    Jesus did not redefine the Sabbath.

    Mark 2:23-26
    23 And it came to pass, that he went through the corn fields on the sabbath day; and his disciples began, as they went, to pluck the ears of corn.
    24 And the Pharisees said unto him, Behold, why do they on the sabbath day that which is not lawful?
    25 And he said unto them, Have ye never read what David did, when he had need, and was an hungred, he, and they that were with him?
    26 How he went into the house of God in the days of Abiathar the high priest, and did eat the shewbread, which is not lawful to eat but for the priests, and gave also to them which were with him?

    Learn to read what is written.

    _____
    The people who are supposed to be experts and who claim to understand the science are precisely the people who are blind to the evidence.
    ~ Dr Freeman Dyson

  8. #83
    Over 4000 post club Rosenritter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    The land of ice and snow.
    Posts
    4,268
    Thanks
    778
    Thanked 1,442 Times in 1,134 Posts

    Mentioned
    22 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    195786
    Quote Originally Posted by genuineoriginal View Post
    Maybe you missed the difference between the phrases: "the King of Israel, and his redeemer" and "King and Redeemer"? "the King of Israel, and his redeemer" is speaking about two. "King and Redeemer" is speaking about one.
    Then how come that every person I have encountered that reads that passage as written in the King James English has no trouble understanding that it is speaking of one and the same?

    You have been speaking as if Jesus is seated on the throne in place of God instead of sitting with God on His right hand side.
    There is more than one analogy, but Jesus is seated on that throne. Do you remember who judges the quick and the dead? Therefore who sits on that throne in the judgment? "The Father judges no man" ... remember? Jesus judges, and Revelation 20:12 identifies him as GOD within that context. Yes, Jesus is on that throne... Jesus is one of his names.

    Jesus said that the reason the Son of man is master of the Sabbath is because the Sabbath was made for man.
    By implication, every man is master of the Sabbath for that same reason.
    If that was the case, then every commandment of how the sabbath was to be kept holy is for naught. How can one possibly transgress the Sabbath if one has the power to redefine it?

    Jesus did not redefine the Sabbath.
    He said that He was the Lord of that Sabbath (the Creator) and as even the priests profaned the Sabbath in service of the temple, his disciples were also held blameless if they profaned the Sabbath while in his service. Think about that please.

  9. #84
    TOL Legend genuineoriginal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    On a sea of glass mixed with fire in front of a throne.
    Posts
    9,247
    Thanks
    1,333
    Thanked 1,506 Times in 1,091 Posts

    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    501710
    Quote Originally Posted by Rosenritter View Post
    Then how come that every person I have encountered that reads that passage as written in the King James English has no trouble understanding that it is speaking of one and the same?
    The Trinity doctrine has become so widespread that few people realize when they are misreading the scriptures because of it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rosenritter View Post
    There is more than one analogy, but Jesus is seated on that throne.
    Jesus is seated next to God.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rosenritter View Post
    Do you remember who judges the quick and the dead? Therefore who sits on that throne in the judgment? "The Father judges no man" ... remember? Jesus judges, and Revelation 20:12 identifies him as GOD within that context. Yes, Jesus is on that throne... Jesus is one of his names.
    Did you skip over the part where Jesus said that God the Father is not doing the judging?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rosenritter View Post
    If that was the case, then every commandment of how the sabbath was to be kept holy is for naught. How can one possibly transgress the Sabbath if one has the power to redefine it?
    Once again, you are trying to redefine being master of the Sabbath as being able to reject all the commandments of the Sabbath.
    That is not what Jesus taught.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rosenritter View Post
    He said that He was the Lord of that Sabbath (the Creator)
    That is not what Jesus said, you are adding your own thoughts to His words.
    Jesus stated that the "Son of man" is lord (master) of the Sabbath.

    Try to figure out why Jesus uses the phrase "Son of man" instead of "Son of God".
    Learn to read what is written.

    _____
    The people who are supposed to be experts and who claim to understand the science are precisely the people who are blind to the evidence.
    ~ Dr Freeman Dyson

  10. #85
    Over 4000 post club Rosenritter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    The land of ice and snow.
    Posts
    4,268
    Thanks
    778
    Thanked 1,442 Times in 1,134 Posts

    Mentioned
    22 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    195786
    Quote Originally Posted by genuineoriginal View Post
    The Trinity doctrine has become so widespread that few people realize when they are misreading the scriptures because of it.
    So while you might apply this the many vague "others" I mentioned I am not sure why this would apply to me. Regardless, when you say the passage is supposed to mean one subject (that is God) and everyone else (including the alleged Trinitarians) read the same passage and also conclude one subject (that is God) I don't understand how you can continue an objection at this instance.

    Did you skip over the part where Jesus said that God the Father is not doing the judging?
    Did you forget the part about "God judges among the gods?" "The Father" is Jesus's reference to God that is out of reach of humanity. The Son of God is God as he revealed himself to us in the flesh. God is not judging from a distance, we stand in front of him and are judged by Him, by the same one who tasted death for us and felt our infirmities and who is also willing to make intercession for us.

    Try to figure out why Jesus uses the phrase "Son of man" instead of "Son of God".
    Unless you want to contend that these are different beings because of different titles, one title emphasizes one aspect and the other title emphasizes another... of the same being. He was both manifest in the flesh and yet the incarnation and the image of the invisible God.

  11. #86
    Over 4000 post club Rosenritter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    The land of ice and snow.
    Posts
    4,268
    Thanks
    778
    Thanked 1,442 Times in 1,134 Posts

    Mentioned
    22 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    195786
    Quote Originally Posted by Right Divider View Post
    Sounds like a great topic for another thread.
    It's another angle directly into this thread.

  12. #87
    Over 4000 post club Rosenritter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    The land of ice and snow.
    Posts
    4,268
    Thanks
    778
    Thanked 1,442 Times in 1,134 Posts

    Mentioned
    22 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    195786
    Quote Originally Posted by CherubRam View Post
    Here is my answer:
    I don't watch Youtube videos for answers. You're free to do whatever research you like that helps you but please use text for me.

  13. #88
    Over 4000 post club Rosenritter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    The land of ice and snow.
    Posts
    4,268
    Thanks
    778
    Thanked 1,442 Times in 1,134 Posts

    Mentioned
    22 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    195786
    Quote Originally Posted by genuineoriginal View Post
    I am not selling a Unitarian package.
    I am simply maintaining that "Scripture does not emphatically say this" so therefore "Let us not form any other views on what is not actually said."

    The scripture has some passages that appear to imply that Jesus is God.
    The scripture does not state anywhere that Jesus is God.
    The scripture states over and over that Jesus is the Son of God.

    That is where I am starting from.
    You may not call yourself Unitarian, but even some of the seasoned Unitarians (I have read and talked with some) that the Bible does literally call Jesus God in at least two places.

  14. #89
    TOL Legend genuineoriginal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    On a sea of glass mixed with fire in front of a throne.
    Posts
    9,247
    Thanks
    1,333
    Thanked 1,506 Times in 1,091 Posts

    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    501710
    Quote Originally Posted by Rosenritter View Post
    So while you might apply this the many vague "others" I mentioned I am not sure why this would apply to me. Regardless, when you say the passage is supposed to mean one subject (that is God) and everyone else (including the alleged Trinitarians) read the same passage and also conclude one subject (that is God) I don't understand how you can continue an objection at this instance.
    Maybe you missed the difference between the phrases: "the King of Israel, and his redeemer" and "King and Redeemer"?
    "the King of Israel, and his redeemer" is speaking about two different beings with different titles, but people that read those words with the belief that both the Father and the Son are a single being can't seem to understand what "and his" means in the phrase.
    "King and Redeemer" is speaking about only one being that has two (or more) titles.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rosenritter View Post
    Unless you want to contend that these are different beings because of different titles,
    No, that is what the phrase "the King of Israel, and his redeemer" does, not what the title "Son of man" does.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rosenritter View Post
    one title emphasizes one aspect and the other title emphasizes another... of the same being.
    Which aspect of Jesus is emphasized by the phrase "Son of man"?
    Is it His divinity that Jesus is claiming makes Him LORD of the Sabbath?
    Or is it His humanity that Jesus is claiming makes Him master of the Sabbath?
    Learn to read what is written.

    _____
    The people who are supposed to be experts and who claim to understand the science are precisely the people who are blind to the evidence.
    ~ Dr Freeman Dyson

  15. #90
    TOL Legend genuineoriginal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    On a sea of glass mixed with fire in front of a throne.
    Posts
    9,247
    Thanks
    1,333
    Thanked 1,506 Times in 1,091 Posts

    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    501710
    Quote Originally Posted by Rosenritter View Post
    You may not call yourself Unitarian, but even some of the seasoned Unitarians (I have read and talked with some) that the Bible does literally call Jesus God in at least two places.
    That doesn't seem to be a sufficient argument if the Bible ever literally calls any other man "god".
    Jesus even points that out.

    John 10:34
    34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?

    Learn to read what is written.

    _____
    The people who are supposed to be experts and who claim to understand the science are precisely the people who are blind to the evidence.
    ~ Dr Freeman Dyson

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

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