User Tag List

Page 43 of 43 FirstFirst ... 3340414243
Results 631 to 638 of 638

Thread: John 20:28 and the Trinity

  1. #631
    Over 5000 post club Rosenritter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    The land of ice and snow.
    Posts
    5,584
    Thanks
    957
    Thanked 1,766 Times in 1,408 Posts

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

    Rep Power
    192343
    Quote Originally Posted by Dartman View Post
    So, are you willing to consider that in Moses case "Face" IS literal?
    Considering that they concealed the face of Moses with a veil the context shows that the face of Moses was indeed his physical face, that segment of the human body that is on our head, such as would be covered with a veil.

    In the context of that same passage where Moses spoke with the LORD on the mountain, it says that the LORD talked 'face to face" with Moses, as one would a friend. Then Moses asks to see the face of God. The word "face" cannot have the same meaning in both applications. If one is literal, then the other must be metaphorical.

    Exodus 33:11 KJV
    (11) And the LORD spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend. And he turned again into the camp: but his servant Joshua, the son of Nun, a young man, departed not out of the tabernacle.


    Pure speculation.
    No, it is NOT "pure speculation" that the "face of God" that we cannot behold is the "fully glory of the LORD." That is EXACTLY what God said to Moses in Exodus. that is the opposite of "pure speculation" but rather "pure revelation."

    Exodus 33:18-20 KJV
    (18) And he said, I beseech thee, shew me thy glory.
    (19) And he said, I will make all my goodness pass before thee, and I will proclaim the name of the LORD before thee; and will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will shew mercy on whom I will shew mercy.
    (20) And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live.

    Moses asks to see "thy glory" and the LORD says that Moses cannot see "my face." Also see the next three verses, as it reemphasizes that the LORD shall cover Moses when his glory passes by, "while my glory passeth by... I ... will cover thee with my hand..." and in so doing, "my face shall not be seen."

    There is no Scripture explaining HOW seeing God's literal face would kill Moses.
    But since we know that the "face" that cannot be seen without death is "the glory" of God, that still leaves Moses speaking with the LORD, "face to face, as one would a friend" as a literal face. The idea that God could not appear with an eyes-mouth-nose combination without killing someone seems rather bizarre... and not actually stated or supported in other scripture.



    So, I have no intention to speculate.
    The "literal physical face" being deadly is speculation. You're already speculating. Nothing wrong with speculating, but that which is speculated should be subject to examination.

    However, Jehovah/YHVH God HIMSELF said "no man can see Me and live". The only other option to "live" is dead.
    Moses lived, the LORD spoke "face to face" with him. The deadly "face" was defined as the Glory of God.

    Sure.

    I added a comma, and highlighted a phrase .... I hope that helps.
    You have failed to explain away the Scriptures that CLEARLY show man, as created, is NOT in God's image spiritually.
    "Explain away" is an element of leading question and you haven't made any statements from the passages that say what you're thinking. Man is certainly created in the image of God spiritually.
    As created, we are NOT in God's "likeness" regarding "righteousness and holiness of the truth". We must "put on a NEW self" in order to be in God's likeness in this way.
    "God is a spirit" it says. Physical attributes are PHYSICAL attributes. God is not defined by physical attributes, because God existed before the physical world existed. That's basic and undeniable per Genesis 1 and John 1.

    "Likeness" is not "righteousness and holiness of truth" or at least certainly not limited by such. Rational thought and the ability to love or hate describe this image. A computer is not in the likeness of God, an animal or plant is not in the likeness of God, and a robot is not in the likeness of God, no matter how you dress up the robot to make it look human.

    Otherwise it would be a crime of MURDER to destroy a robot, because it is "made in the image of God." Your assertion logically extends into absurdity, therefore its premise must have one or more flaws.

    As humans, we already look like God.
    I cannot recall you answering whether someone who has lost arms and legs in an accident and had their visage marred is still "in the image of God." If not, is it OK to kill them without it being murder?

  2. #632
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    335
    Thanks
    24
    Thanked 77 Times in 69 Posts

    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Rosenritter View Post
    Considering that they concealed the face of Moses with a veil the context shows that the face of Moses was indeed his physical face, that segment of the human body that is on our head, such as would be covered with a veil.
    So, the veil that covered Moses is literal, Moses' face is literal, the brightness (glory) of Moses' face is literal ...... but the hand that covered Moses so he wouldn't SEE God's face, as they spoke "face to face", isn't literal, and God's back isn't literal, and God's face isn't literal ....... I think your agenda is transparent.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rosenritter
    In the context of that same passage where Moses spoke with the LORD on the mountain, it says that the LORD talked 'face to face" with Moses, as one would a friend. Then Moses asks to see the face of God. The word "face" cannot have the same meaning in both applications. If one is literal, then the other must be metaphorical.
    God's "glory" cannot be His face. Jehovah told Moses He WOULD show Moses His glory, but He would NOT show Moses God's face. Moses didn't ask to see God's face, he asked to see His glory. And Jehovah agreed.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rosenritter
    No, it is NOT "pure speculation" that the "face of God" that we cannot behold is the "fully glory of the LORD." That is EXACTLY what God said to Moses in Exodus. that is the opposite of "pure speculation" but rather "pure revelation."
    Your response is dishonest. You have intentionally avoided the "pure speculation";
    Here is what I called "pure speculation"; I can easily understand how a mortal man could not behold and comphrehend (see) the full glory (face) of God and live because we can only handle or process so much and certain levels of sensory input.

    You should take a deep breath, and reevaluate your honesty.

  3. #633
    Over 500 post club
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    742
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 136 Times in 106 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    11551
    Greetings again john w,
    Quote Originally Posted by john w View Post
    Please teach us another "original" stumper, that we've never heard before. Please?
    Slower:And I write this to those that have ears to hear, bible believers, not bible correctors/agnostics/mystics.
    I thought I had better introduce my following comments with the above. You have quoted 1 John 4:12 and then quoted numerous OT quotes and I will abbreviate by mentioning the first, and even here show a few relevant verses:
    Quote Originally Posted by john w View Post
    1 John 4 KJV
    12 No man hath seen God at any time.
    Judges 13:1-22 KJV 3 And the angel of the Lord appeared unto the woman, and said unto her, Behold now, thou art barren, and bearest not: but thou shalt conceive, and bear a son.
    21 But the angel of the Lord did no more appear to Manoah and to his wife. Then Manoah knew that he was an angel of the Lord. 22 And Manoah said unto his wife, We shall surely die, because we have seen God.
    I suggest that the logic that you are presenting is that John did not really know what he was saying, or that he was saying that no man has seen God the Father, but God the Son can be seen. But the only way I can reconcile the OT passages that you quoted is that these encounters are with an Angel who represented God and spoke and acted on His behalf.

    Kind regards
    Trevor

  4. #634
    TOL Legend john w's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Heavenly Places
    Posts
    18,627
    Thanks
    115
    Thanked 13,048 Times in 9,023 Posts

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

    Rep Power
    2147769
    Quote Originally Posted by TrevorL View Post
    Greetings again john w, I thought I had better introduce my following comments with the above. You have quoted 1 John 4:12 and then quoted numerous OT quotes and I will abbreviate by mentioning the first, and even here show a few relevant verses: I suggest that the logic that you are presenting is that John did not really know what he was saying, or that he was saying that no man has seen God the Father, but God the Son can be seen. But the only way I can reconcile the OT passages that you quoted is that these encounters are with an Angel who represented God and spoke and acted on His behalf.

    Kind regards
    Trevor
    =spam, demonic intoxication, and no refutation, as I picked you apart, leaving you with, "IMO."

    Slower:And I write to those that have ears to hear, bible believers, not bible correctors/agnostics/mystics, such as yourself, as you admitted.
    Saint John W

  5. #635
    Over 5000 post club Rosenritter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    The land of ice and snow.
    Posts
    5,584
    Thanks
    957
    Thanked 1,766 Times in 1,408 Posts

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

    Rep Power
    192343
    Quote Originally Posted by Dartman View Post
    So, the veil that covered Moses is literal, Moses' face is literal, the brightness (glory) of Moses' face is literal ...... but the hand that covered Moses so he wouldn't SEE God's face, as they spoke "face to face", isn't literal, and God's back isn't literal, and God's face isn't literal ....... I think your agenda is transparent.
    Agenda? Please tell me what agenda this might be.

    God's "glory" cannot be His face. Jehovah told Moses He WOULD show Moses His glory, but He would NOT show Moses God's face. Moses didn't ask to see God's face, he asked to see His glory. And Jehovah agreed.
    Please, stop bending my words out of their context. "Face" is "full glory", "back" or "covered by hand" is analogous to a partial glimpse of that glory. Am I really required to qualify each word of "glory" with "full" around you?

    Your response is dishonest. You have intentionally avoided the "pure speculation";
    Here is what I called "pure speculation"; I can easily understand how a mortal man could not behold and comphrehend (see) the full glory (face) of God and live because we can only handle or process so much and certain levels of sensory input.

    You should take a deep breath, and reevaluate your honesty.
    If you are going to accuse my honesty then there's no more point in talking.

  6. #636
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    335
    Thanks
    24
    Thanked 77 Times in 69 Posts

    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Rosenritter View Post
    Agenda? Please tell me what agenda this might be.
    Twisting the text between "literal and not literal solely dependent on your preconceived notions.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rosenritter
    Quote Originally Posted by Dartman
    God's "glory" cannot be His face. Jehovah told Moses He WOULD show Moses His glory, but He would NOT show Moses God's face. Moses didn't ask to see God's face, he asked to see His glory. And Jehovah agreed.
    Please, stop bending my words out of their context. "Face" is "full glory", "back" or "covered by hand" is analogous to a partial glimpse of that glory. Am I really required to qualify each word of "glory" with "full" around you?
    There is no used of "full glory" or "partial glory". God said He would show His "glory", but He would not show his face, or Moses would not live.

    You are still attempting to ignore the challenge;

    Then you should have no problem going through ex 33:17-23, and explaining the metaphorical meaning you believe is there. Pay CLOSE attention to explaining how seeing Jehovah/YHVH God's face would have killed Moses.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rosenritter
    If you are going to accuse my honesty then there's no more point in talking.
    Please respond accurately to my points;

    You have intentionally avoided the "pure speculation"; Here is what I called "pure speculation";
    Quote Originally Posted by Rosenritter
    I can easily understand how a mortal man could not behold and comphrehend (see) the full glory (face) of God and live because we can only handle or process so much and certain levels of sensory input.
    Please explain how you think this is NOT speculation.

  7. #637
    Old Timer NWL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    373
    Thanks
    9
    Thanked 57 Times in 47 Posts

    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Rosenritter View Post
    1. Forgiveness is a sacrifice. If I forgive a debt of money that you owe me, that means I transfer the transgression (the debt) to myself, I absorb what you properly (by all rights) ought to owe. I sacrifice my resources to pay your debt (to me.)
    The example you used only works as its specific, namely, that money is the thing being owed and forgiveness by any said person to the preparator involves allowing a loss. If I commit adultery I have also sinned against God, if God then forgave me for that sin he hasn't lossed or sacrificed anything, he's simply shown mercy. So yes, in regards to tangible things forgiving someone in a sense could be said to be a sacrifice, buts its not the rule, nor does it show that the ransom for mankind had to be YHWH himself.

    2. The wages of sin is death. If God forgives our sin, that means he absorbs the damage of our transgression without requiring our deaths. He might have the right to "bear a grudge" but he sacrifices this right. The bible itself invokes this analogy of wage and payment and sacrifice with regard to sin. It doesn't just "go away" or "vanish" as the transgression is serious.
    That's not what Roman 6:23 means at. All men die because we all sin (wages of sin pays is death), its only through God gift of eternal life that those who are dead or will one day die can come to life again. The gift of eternal life is given upon human death, not after, as your reasoning would imply.

    3. A man might be able to forgive your debt of money to me if he pays that amount of money, because money is fluid and transferable. There is no difference between one coin and the next or one digital dollar and the next. It adds together as a single numeric sum. But a man cannot forgive a debt of justice or vengeance that you have against another man. For example, if you murder a classroom of children, can a random person appear and say "I'm going to take his death penalty" and will that satisfy the justice system or those parents? Not unless they are psychopaths and just want lots of blood to be shed no matter who it is from. Those parents might choose to forgive the debt of those deaths of that murderer, but the forgiveness (and the damage, the sacrifice) is from the parents.
    Thank you for your response, none of it explains why the ransom of mankind had to be YHWH himself though.

    4. Sin is against God. Only God can forgive sin, that is scriptural, and it is common sense following all of our reasoning above. If God is to forgive sin, that means he forgives our transgression, and absorbs the damage of our sin by waiving the penalty he should rightfully require of us. That is, the penalty of our death. [B]Killing someone else who was innocent doesn't make it any better, any more than the parents of a slain child would want more innocent children to die in order to comfort them.
    Show me a scripture that teaches only God can forgive sin, this is simply not true and not taught in the bible.

    Please show me clear cut evidence that the sacrifice for sin and death that we inherited through Adam had to be a sacrifice of YHWH himself, instead of that what was lost by Adam, namely, a unblemished Human.
    Last edited by NWL; Yesterday at 02:04 PM.
    If you cant beat them join them

  8. #638
    Over 5000 post club Rosenritter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    The land of ice and snow.
    Posts
    5,584
    Thanks
    957
    Thanked 1,766 Times in 1,408 Posts

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

    Rep Power
    192343
    Quote Originally Posted by Dartman View Post
    Twisting the text between "literal and not literal solely dependent on your preconceived notions.
    There is no used of "full glory" or "partial glory". God said He would show His "glory", but He would not show his face, or Moses would not live.
    Are you even trying to read the passage for comprehension?

    Exodus 33:18-23 KJV
    (18) And he said, I beseech thee, shew me thy glory.
    (19) And he said, I will make all my goodness pass before thee, and I will proclaim the name of the LORD before thee; and will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will shew mercy on whom I will shew mercy.
    (20) And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live.
    (21) And the LORD said, Behold, there is a place by me, and thou shalt stand upon a rock:
    (22) And it shall come to pass, while my glory passeth by, that I will put thee in a clift of the rock, and will cover thee with my hand while I pass by:
    (23) And I will take away mine hand,and thou shalt see my back parts: but my face shall not be seen.


    Using your "super-literal" means of interpretation, "my face which is also equivalent to "me" but "my hand" and "my back parts" are NOT GOD.

    God does not say "you cannot see my face and live" but says "no man can see me and live" but with the strict way you are demanding, "my hand" and "my back parts" are not God, for Moses saw these and lived.

    a) If the hand and back parts were NOT GOD, do you believe that these perhaps metaphors for angelic representatives?
    b) Since you are being super strict, notice that it does not specify whether Moses saw glory of the LORD all or only an eclipse of that glory, sheltered by his hand.

    The most normal reading of this passage includes:

    1) The full glory of the LORD can also be called the face of God
    2) That God responded with "thou canst not see my face" because he was directly responding to Moses's request, not randomly speaking of unrelated things
    3) That Moses was shown something when he was covered with God's hand, when he beheld his back parts, else this demonstration would have had no purpose at all
    4) That being covered by God's hand would shelter Moses from at least some of God's glory, but that some would be beheld in that which was seen (this is a slight extrapolation, but hardly a stretch)

    You are still attempting to ignore the challenge;
    You haven't presented a challenge. You've just been ridiculous.

    Then you should have no problem going through ex 33:17-23, and explaining the metaphorical meaning you believe is there. Pay CLOSE attention to explaining how seeing Jehovah/YHVH God's face would have killed Moses.
    And your meaning of face is an arrangement of the eyes, nose, and mouth. Especially considering we are just told that Moses spoke with God "face to face, as one would a friend" when the usage of "face" in that phrase has no meaning outside of the literal, I am dumbfounded at how you would attempt to make the literal figurative and force the obviously figurative to be literal.

    Please respond accurately to my points;

    You have intentionally avoided the "pure speculation"; Here is what I called "pure speculation";

    Please explain how you think this is NOT speculation.
    It is hardly speculation that people die from sensory overload. It's been done numerous times. It's a proven scientific FACT. One application is called TORTURE.

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