popsthebuilder
New member
I just deleted a few from tol. Maybe it will work now...Pops, if you clear out your box it would be possible to send private messages.
Sent from my Z983 using Tapatalk
I just deleted a few from tol. Maybe it will work now...Pops, if you clear out your box it would be possible to send private messages.
You do realize that that is what gt said, right.
Nice try. 40 days out of thirty three years. Don't think so and you're a fool if you do. He was tempted in every way that we are.
You mean like this:
TRANSLATION: I, gt, say that the Son is a way!
"And when the devil had ended all the temptation, he departed from him for a season" (Luke 4:13)
You don't even realize what you say do you.
So in your scenario a paralyzed that can't move that can't talk and can only think and experience emotions cannot be saved because they CAN ONLY BELIEVE and in your world his/her faith is dead. Got it.
Oh, foolish, foolish woman.
Hebrews 4:15 KJV
(15) For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.
What way is correctly?
I didn't mean to imply it was tempting to Him.
Thank you for allowing for my own clarification.
peace
Sent from my Z983 using Tapatalk
Hebrews 4:15 New King James Version (NKJV)In the desert and possibly before being arrested with torture and death in mind.
You have to be kidding if you think Jesus lived a life struggling not to sin.
Jesus was led IN THE DESERT to be TEMPTED.
I'm simply copying it straight from a digital Bible.When you put scripture reference like this: James 1:13, people can put their cursor on the scripture reference and the whole scripture will appear.
If you put your scripture references like this: James: 1. 13., no such benefit of seeing the scripture exactly as written.
Okay.... I'm going to go over this with you. Where you see discrepancies or word games; isolate and present them for all to see including myself please.
You ask if Jesus was tempted to evil I believe. The answer is no. He was tempted by evil(satan), but in no way tempted to evil(the thought or act there of).
Now we know that GOD cannot be tempted by any to do any will but the selfsame will that belongs to GOD. GOD cannot be tempted by evil, of evil, and most assuredly to evil.
Now let us go over the scripture you asked about. I will isolate the scripture that is pertinent to your and my conversation; the rest of it is indeed pertinent and revealing if any but chose to see.
James: 1. 13. Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:
(The above refers to GOD (father))
14. But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.:
(such as how satan repeatedly attempted and failed to plant the seed of sin within Jesus(son))
I look forward to your reply.
peace
In all points; as in ways such as how we might find ourselves so tempted.Hebrews 4:15 New King James Version (NKJV)
15 For we do not have a High Priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin.
You don't believe it do you.
Hebrews 4:15 New King James Version (NKJV)
15 For we do not have a High Priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin.
You don't believe it do you.
In all points; as in ways such as how we might find ourselves so tempted.
All points does not denote at all times.
Point doesn't denote span.
Sent from my Z983 using Tapatalk
I'm simply copying it straight from a digital Bible.
If it came out that way I must have done it intentionally.
Is that generally a problem with my references or just that one?
Please excuse my ignorance on the topic and medium.
Sent from my Z983 using Tapatalk
I don't say what you said I did.
Thanks.
I think it would be more accurate to say that the one that tried to tempt him was evil.
(I think it's the same thing; evil-not GOD)
I think that this is where the word game enters. "God cannot be tempted by evil" does not mean "God cannot be tempted by one who is evil." Here are two examples:
(no; you are wholly switching the topic at hand. The first example you provide speak of man's mocking of GOD to his own detriment, and has nothing to do with GOD being tempted to do evil.)
Exodus 17:7 KJV
(7) And he called the name of the place Massah, and Meribah, because of the chiding of the children of Israel, and because they tempted the LORD, saying, Is the LORD among us, or not?
Were the children of Israel good, or evil?
(why is that relevant? We both k panther children of Israel were mostly evil)
You can't say there were Good as God, but perhaps this next contestant is a little less gray.
Job 1:9-11 KJV
(9) Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, Doth Job fear God for nought?
(10) Hast not thou made an hedge about him, and about his house, and about all that he hath on every side? thou hast blessed the work of his hands, and his substance is increased in the land.
(11) But put forth thine hand now, and touch all that he hath, and he will curse thee to thy face.
Although that doesn't use the word "tempt" Satan is tempting God.
(stop, you should care more about the words coming out of your mouth for your own motives)
He is trying to provoke him. Are you able to see that?
(Are you unaware that GOD did indeed afflict Job greatly? Would you have us think GOD was actually tempted by satan? Damning words if I ever did hear any.)
God didn't act unjustly, he was not tempted by evil in the sense of the book of James.
(indeed GOD was not tempted to evil ever, not once; please do consider your words more carefully for your own sake.)
In the previous passage, Moses was tempted to evil, when he struck the rock out of belligerence, pride, and rage.
So here's the word game I'm identifying. The mere act of one "who is evil" attempting to provoke (tempt) someone to do something evil does not mean that the target person (Jesus, God) is no longer God. Yet that's what that Unitarian argument is trying to do via word trick.
(that seems to be some game of your own devising as I am lost as to exactly what it is you are even trying to say.
If you think the plain simple reading and comprehending of sacred texts is for the confusion of others then you are wrong. What I say is clearly and easily discerned by any with a care to see.
Perhaps I had mistaken your meandering for lack of bias; I would hope not)
The one and only place that "tempted" is used with this "not God" argument is from James. And what James says and what James defines his meaning as is "succumbs to temptation" or "successfully tempted." Not the mere act of someone trying to tempt, or of the target having real passion and feeling.
Please keep this in mind ahead:
(Go read Job. Feel free to get back with me afterwards; unless you still think satan tempted the One Creator GOD (FATHER), in which case I would urge you to read it yet again; I would be happy to go over it with you. It is one of my favorites.)
(Not interested inbred rest until you amend your understanding.)
No... your comment is wrong here. That is precisely NOT what it is like. Was Jesus "drawn away of his own lust, and enticed?" That is what you would need to say that this has any application in this passage. Jesus is an example of one who was not tempted by evil in this sense. If anything, the passage has an implication that Jesus is in the same category of God, not the other way around.
I did keep reading.
There's another bad argument that I'd like to bring up for comparison. I know you (or anyone else here) hasn't used this here, but hopefully it will be helpful as an example of bad logic / word tricks:
1. God is not a man, nor the son of a man, that he should repent. Numbers 23:19 KJV
2. Jesus was a man. Acts 2:22 KJV
3. Therefore, Jesus was not God!
Ah, but wait, applying those verses the same way yields even better results!
4. God repented. 1 Chronicles 21:15 KJV, Amos 7:6 KJV, Jonah 3:10 KJV,
5. Therefore, God was not God!
That's the inevitable fate of word trick arguments, they wind up proving too much. The "Jesus was tempted" trick also turns Jesus into a sinner, and the "Jesus was a man" trick also says God cannot be God. I see both of those angles as having similar merit. It takes isolated passages out of context, and then applies different shades of meaning outside of their intended application to arrive at an entirely different result, a result that is contradicted by scripture elsewhere.
Do you understand my frustration with the "Jesus was a man" argument above? The trick there is played with confusing "in the form of a man" with "the created creature man." Even angels are called men in other passages (see Genesis 18:2 KJV) so the flexibility of the word shouldn't be up for debate. The word "tempted" is being wrung through the wringer similarly here, and if we can be honest and friendly here, let's put a brake on that and get to the working details that strike closer to heart and home, that have a better chance of reaching resolution.
You are arguing about words that don't matter.
Jesus is 'the' Way and I never said otherwise.
You should be concerned that RD went against Jesus not being a way.
A deaf person who cannot talk can obey.
That is your falseness that says they can only believe.
Jesus says to humble yourself, fear God, repent of sins, including bad thoughts or just wrong thoughts.
Jesus also says to forgive others.
How do you ever get that is not something a deaf person can do?
No ma'amI have noticed it on your posts of late.
I thought you might have just chosen to do it that way.
Are you able to have the scriptures appear on your phone when you put the cursor on the scripture reference?