wrong that ...
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
wrong that ...
Prophecy fulfilled is sufficient evidence that the Bible alone is the Word of God. No other religion in the world can make this claim. There are over 300 prophecies in the Old Testament that point to the coming of the Jewish Messiah, each of which was satisfied by Yeshua, that is, Jesus Christ. These prophecies were written hundreds, and in some cases a few thousand years before Christ. The odds of 1 person fulfilling these prophecies is beyond human comprehension. The Bible validates itself.
Also, there are many other marvels hidden within the Bible. For instance, throughout the Bible the number 7 is used to symbolize God and perfection. A 19th century Russian-born mathematician named Ivan Panin discovered patterns based on the number 7 called heptadic structures within the Gospel of Matthew that are beyond the ability of any human to engineer, even with today's super computers. Look into yourself before you dismiss it. Here again is evidence that the source of the Bible can only be from the One who claims to be the author of life, Yeshua, Adonai, God himself.
Prophecy fulfilled is sufficient evidence that the Bible alone is the Word of God.
each of which was satisfied by Yeshua,
and in some cases a few thousand years before Christ
Prophecy fulfilled is sufficient evidence that the Bible alone is the Word of God
Thanks for that.false...
Thanks for that.
Some entertainment is required in the middle of serious discussion.
serious is fine
To bad we ignore all scholarships on every biblical subjects in favor of personal opinion of biased theist.
you keep throwing darts in a darkroom praying to hit the board instead of trying to hit the mark
Nice website.
Are you the owner?
I thought the website was laughable with false information. Starts off with the two seed theory and goes downhill from there.
useless
It's obvious that when Jesus said "I am" (I AM God), they sought to stone Him.
Again, ignoring all what I said about the verse and the similarity with Ps 90:2 and trying to change the subject.
This isn't proof it is an unsupported claim.
Also in that post you make an unsupported claim that the passage is not about Jesus saying He is God simply because Abraham is mentioned several times
That is ingenuous because the passage is not about Abraham even though he is mentioned several times. The passage is about the authority of Jesus being greater than the authority of Abraham.
How about considering the fact that the word "one" has multiple legitimate meanings. Even if the Father and the Son were not "one" in substance, they could still be "one" in everything that really matters. Aren't perfect, absolute, incomprehensible unity of will, purpose, mind, heart, power and glory enough? Why is a Son who is physically distinct from His own Father in some way a heresy, even when the Bible makes this relationship absolutely clear? The word one has a number of meanings, one of which is "united." Trinitarians insist that one must be understood to mean a numerical unit, a single "substance," instead of granting that it is much more reasonable, not to mention scripturally consistent, to understand it as meaning "united."I can't guarantee I will figure it out, only that I'm open to new ideas.
I just can't accept that they are two separate beings anymore which would be polytheism. (as per 1st vision), Nor do I understand how they are "one God" as per Mormon 7:7.
I can't explain it, not sure if I ever will be able to.
No, that's not why they sought to kill him. They sought to kill him way before chapter 8 (See. John 7:1). Even then you have to go back to see what he said as to why they sought to kill him and there is no mention of him claiming to be "God". About the time you get to chapter 8 tempers are flared. He begins to assert his claim to be the messiah (see. 8:28), *insults* them by telling them that they are children of the devil and calls them liars (see. 8:44 and 8:55). They were ticked at him at this point and said he was a Samaritan and possessed by a devil. This was just fuel on the fire and another reason to kill him. We know that before John 8:58 they sought to kill him and it wasn't for any claims of being "God" (see. 8:37 and 8:52). His claim that he was before Abraham was seen as a disrespect to the Jews given that Jews see Abraham as their patriarch. We see this in Judaism and Islam.
In John 7:1, they sought to kill Him for other reasons: "for healing a man on the sabbath day, and for asserting his equality with God" (Gill)No, that's not why they sought to kill him. They sought to kill him way before chapter 8 (See. John 7:1)...
You're obviously trying to change the subject again, since I used another verse. I told you before (but you ignored) that "on" is the present participle of "eimi", and agian used absolutely. And I showed before that in Revelation 1 Jesus used "ho on".No, just don't see...
Throwing the word God at the end of that doesn't even make sense in the context of what is being said. If he wanted to say he is God then there was no reason to involve Abraham and certainly no reason to say "Before". Either an existence before abraham is being explained or he is just saying he has greater authority and I lean toward the latter. Either way they were very quick to grab stones no matter what he said.So by comparison, it means "I am God".
It makes perfect sense.Throwing the word God at the end of that doesn't even make sense in the context of what is being said...
context:
the parts of a discourse that surround a word or passage and can throw light on its meaning
the interrelated conditions in which something exists or occurs : environment, setting <the historical context of the war>
Context - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary