I already knew that. Jesus is adni, never used of God. God YHWH is adonai in Septuagint. This is your problem in configuration, not mine.
-
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:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Is Jesus God?
- Thread starter Orbit
- Start date
I already knew that. Jesus is adni, never used of God. God YHWH is adonai in Septuagint. This is your problem in configuration, not mine.
outhouse
Atheistically
Yes a long time ago. Some of his work still serves a good foundation. It also does not mean he was not an apologetic biased man either.
But that does not mean it is accurate today. Nor is he followed today. many things have been discovered that makes his work a model T compared to a modern truck.
You cannot use a source from horse and wagon days just because it says the antiquated apologetic history you want.
outhouse
Atheistically
Israelite monotheism factually did not exist then.
Please learn what your doing, your literally blind here.
Start providing credible sources.
outhouse
Atheistically
Sorry not one thing I mentioned comes from that period as Israelites did not exist in the Bronze age.
No Israelite existed prior to 1200 BC.
At that time they were proto Israelites who were basically Canaanite at this point.
You can argue a global flood
You can argue creation mythology
You can argue flat earth
But good luck convincing anyone of apologetic rhetoric.
outhouse
Atheistically
In progress. But thanks for knowing what your talking about.
I also lecture on the ethnogenesis of Israelites, at Sac city.
Let me play Mr. assume for a bit, You? Not a single university or college class on any subject were debating, correct?
outhouse
Atheistically
You could not read that title ?
Servant_of_the_One1
Well-Known Member
Allah swt says about the blasphemers:
And to warn those who say, " Allah has taken a son."
They have no knowledge of this, nor do their fathers. Tremendous indeed is the word coming out of their mouths. They are but saying a lie!
Surah Al-Kahf verse 4 and 5.
And to warn those who say, " Allah has taken a son."
They have no knowledge of this, nor do their fathers. Tremendous indeed is the word coming out of their mouths. They are but saying a lie!
Surah Al-Kahf verse 4 and 5.
outhouse
Atheistically
Not a credible source for anything historical about Jesus.
Servant_of_the_One1
Well-Known Member
outhouse
Atheistically
The words of atheists means really nothing to me
Words with no possible historical value mean nothing to me.
lovemuffin
τὸν ἄρτον τοῦ ἔρωτος
looks like you're at an impasse
pistols at dawn?
pistols at dawn?
outhouse
Atheistically
looks like you're at an impasse
pistols at dawn?
Nah brother.
The koran has never carried any historical credibility what so ever for Jesus. Not in any way.
Not one credible scholar in the whole world uses that book for historical research on Jesus. Plagiarized books have little historical value.
Servant_of_the_One1
Well-Known Member
Nah brother.
The koran has never carried any historical credibility what so ever for Jesus. Not in any way.
Not one credible scholar in the whole world uses that book for historical research on Jesus. Plagiarized books have little historical value.
You can repeat that million times, its still the words of a atheist, which means really nothing to me.
The words of a idolworshipper is more valuable than atheists, because atleast they believe in something and are not arrogant bigots.
outhouse
Atheistically
But your an atheist to Jesus LOL
My words have historical value and credibility. Yours are lacking in that dpt.
Servant_of_the_One1
Well-Known Member
But your an atheist to Jesus LOL
Says the atheist himself lol
Why in God's name are you on this thread
Jesus pbuh did not preach atheism .
outhouse
Atheistically
Helping the blind to see
You will notice, the more educated one is the less I need to debate.
1) JM2C said : “ (post #700) "...or Nu 13:23 And they came unto the valley of Eshcol, and cut down from thence a branch with one/echad cluster of grapes, and they bare it upon a staff between two; they brought also of the pomegranates, and of the figs….. Never thought I would agree with you. “
I think your example is good. Just as the man and woman, who become "one flesh" do not become ONE, and as the individuals of the echad of Jews in the dead sea do not become one, the individual grape do not become one single grape, but rather they belong to a אֶחָד “echad” or “cluster” or “community” or “group” of grapes that have a connection.
2) JM2C asked : “…if your conclusion in Hebrews 1:8 is “Thy Throne, Oh God” then how can you make a different conclusion in John 1:1-c “and the Word was a god”?
JM2C : I think you simply misunderstood what I was doing and my motives for doing so. When you claimed that the Jehovah’s Witnesses mis-translated the text in john 1:1 to deceive, I simply showed that their translation is perfectly legitimate. This did not mean that I agreed with their theology, nor did I agree with what they think the text means in the context of it's application to Jesus.
Strict translation of language is a discrete subject while the theological use to which a text is applied is a different matter.
While I do not agree with Jehovah’s Witness theology in all respects, I cannot fault them for faults they do not have. Nor do I wish to ignore their many incredibly positive characteristics. I simply want to be fair and as objective as I can with everyone of all faiths and to those without religious faith as well. Just as the Jehovahs Witnesses are legitimately translating John 1:1's last phrase, I believe Kolibri is mis-translating Hebrews 1:8. Kollibri and I are friends and he knows I respect him, (just as I respect you), but I feel perfectly fine at trying to be objective on a point and disagreeing with specific points.
I hope your spiritual journey is wonderful JM2C
Clear
I think your example is good. Just as the man and woman, who become "one flesh" do not become ONE, and as the individuals of the echad of Jews in the dead sea do not become one, the individual grape do not become one single grape, but rather they belong to a אֶחָד “echad” or “cluster” or “community” or “group” of grapes that have a connection.
2) JM2C asked : “…if your conclusion in Hebrews 1:8 is “Thy Throne, Oh God” then how can you make a different conclusion in John 1:1-c “and the Word was a god”?
JM2C : I think you simply misunderstood what I was doing and my motives for doing so. When you claimed that the Jehovah’s Witnesses mis-translated the text in john 1:1 to deceive, I simply showed that their translation is perfectly legitimate. This did not mean that I agreed with their theology, nor did I agree with what they think the text means in the context of it's application to Jesus.
Strict translation of language is a discrete subject while the theological use to which a text is applied is a different matter.
While I do not agree with Jehovah’s Witness theology in all respects, I cannot fault them for faults they do not have. Nor do I wish to ignore their many incredibly positive characteristics. I simply want to be fair and as objective as I can with everyone of all faiths and to those without religious faith as well. Just as the Jehovahs Witnesses are legitimately translating John 1:1's last phrase, I believe Kolibri is mis-translating Hebrews 1:8. Kollibri and I are friends and he knows I respect him, (just as I respect you), but I feel perfectly fine at trying to be objective on a point and disagreeing with specific points.
I hope your spiritual journey is wonderful JM2C
Clear
Servant_of_the_One1
Well-Known Member
No believer needs the help of atheist, no offense lol
outhouse
Atheistically
They don't need your mythology either. No offense.
Its nice that your fanaticism and fundamentalism is so deep, that you will only accept like minded apologetic rhetoric with no credibility, as your education base.
kepha31
Active Member
Agreed. I believe that absolute truth exists, that's why I left Protestantism.
I do not have the luxury of advanced education but for psych 101, nursing, and hold a federally recognized trademark in a complementary health field. I am self taught, and do not claim to be an apologist, although I enjoy apologetics. I keep files to answer the Christian Taliban with their steady drumbeat of anti-Catholic bigotry and prejudice. I avoid debating with atheists because I find their arrogance is beyond description. I put you on my follow list because you are challenging and send me running for scholarly resources, like a good teacher does with their students. There is more to finding the truth than with knowledge and education alone. Maybe that's why you dismiss the Pope as a historical ignoramus and replied about his letter to the atheist prof. with bland, rhetorical one liners.
You are assuming he knows no history, which is a baseless insult.
unsubstantiated rhetoric. Most professors are atheists with a post Enlightenment agenda. They have been impressing upon you since your first university class. And Catholic apologists debate with all kinds of professors, if you know where to look. You assert pagan parallels without any proof because no one has been able to prove such with any intellectual rigor. If you have proof, provide the documentation and we can stop gouging each others eyes out. http://www.catholic.com/tracts/is-catholicism-pagan
The Pope Emeritus sent the letter in response to a book Odifreddi wrote in 2011 entitled Dear Pope, I’m Writing to You. The work was a critique of certain arguments and lines of thought found in Benedict’s theological writings, beginning with his 1967 volume Introduction to Christianity, and including his book Jesus of Nazareth, which he wrote as pope.
To his surprise, the Pope responded with a letter, which I posted. They met for a beer. Your flaming zingers has no context. If the Pope is in historical error, then point it out instead of arrogantly dismissing him as not having a Ph.D. in history. The Pope's letter was not intended to be a comprehensive historical treatise, but history is mentioned, which I mistakenly thought you would find interesting. It's my fault for throwing pearls before swine.
History, anthropology and theology ( and a list of other social sciences) are separate spheres of knowledge, and you should know they overlap. You may not like the meeting points which is why you think the Pope's response is meaningless because he lacks 5 doctorates. I'm wondering if you would dismiss a Catholic historian with more degrees than a thermometer as biased, or Protestant J.N.D. Kelly, a world renowned patristic scholar whom you may think doesn't know the modern intelligensia's version of history. (denial of divinity and Resurrection)
Agreed, cultural definitions of divinity are subjective, but truth is objective, or it's not truth. Subjective truth is the end result of the so called reformation which ultimately led the "higher learning" into pandemic atheism, in my opinion.
Is that a rhetorical question?
I don't claim to know everything like some people.
If and when you find the pearl of great price, I suggest you take your degrees back to your universities and demand a refund. Knowledge and education are of great value, but not to be fashioned into idols.
I did concede because I looked it up, and quoted wikipedia. You seem to ignore my replies and are having a monologue.
I'm glad we finally got that straight.
From what?
True, I don't know much about 1st century Judaism. But the 1st century Christians, as expressed by the ante-Niacene Fathers, were quite firm in their identity. Many Protestant scholars, as well as for a list of many other reasons, have become Catholic by studying Patristics.
Yale published Prof. Scott Hahn's book on covenants. I guess you didn't get the memo.
Kinship by Covenant - Hahn, Scott W - Yale University Press
Go to a selected resource site on the subject at hand.
Copy and paste the URL into the forum
Highlight the URL
click on the link icon to the right of the "A"
re-paste the URL into the pop up box.
It's not the best way to educate oneself but it's what we all have to work with.
Then we can all know what you are talking about and not blindly rebut your condescending rhetorical one liners. Who knows? Maybe you can inspire a high school drop out to go back to school.
Last edited: