• 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!

Watchtower: Jesus is not "a god"!

Brian2

Veteran Member
The summation of the Law is to love your neighbor as yourself. You do that by not killing, lying too, and stealing from your neighbor. The "New covenant" of Jeremiah 31:31 is with respect to the "house of Judah", and the "house of Israel/Ephraim", and refers to when that law will be written on the hearts of Judah and Ephraim/Israel (Ezekiel 36:26). The "other" sheep, the "house of Israel" remains scattered among the nations, and hasn't been given a new heart of flesh, where you will "observe my ordinances" (Ezekiel 36:27). Matthew 24:14 is about preaching the gospel of the "kingdom", not of the false gospel of grace. That "kingdom", is the destruction of the nations/Gentiles (Daniel 2:45), and the reunification of Judah with Ephraim/Israel (Ezekiel 36 & 37), whereas they will live in the land given to Jacob under the leadership of David (Ezekiel 37:24-25). None of that has happened, because this gospel of the kingdom hasn't apparently been disseminated "in the whole world". Good thing we have the internet, whereas that can be done at the speed of light. The "old"/covenant, made obsolete by means of some unknown writer of Hebrews, is the fabrication of man, at the behest of the serpent and the devil, who was in Eden, and with Yeshua in the wilderness, in the beginning. Paul's tare seed (message of the devil) is found right along side the good seed, the message of the son of man (Matthew 13:25).

Love of course is more than the don'ts in the Law. Love is a positive thing towards our neighbour.
The blood of Jesus is the blood of the New Covenant (Matt 26:28) which came in when Jesus offered up His life and God made it an offering for sin (Isa 53:10), a life that was poured out unto death (Isa 53:12) to bear the sins of many.
The New Covenant was offered to the Jews 2000 years ago after Jesus died. It seems it will also be offered again.
The same New Covenant was then also offered to the Gentiles.
The New Covenant where God gives us His Spirit and puts His law in our heart. (Isa 59:21, Jer 31:31-34)
There is one Gospel and that is it and it incorporates those in the New Covenant being part of the Kingdom that was preached from the time of John the Baptist on, and which will be set up in it's fullness when Jesus returns.
Luke 16:16 The Law and the Prophets were proclaimed until John. Since that time, the gospel of the kingdom of God is being preached, and everyone is forcing his way into it.
What was preached was the message of Jesus dying for our sins and those who believe in Him being given eternal life. (John 3:16,17)
What version of the gospel do you preach?
Do you want to be in the Old Covenant or the New one?
Jews cannot see how God can put His law in our hearts without it being the written Law, but the Spirit of God in us (given at Pentecost, the time when Moses brought the law down from Mt Sinai) is enough to teach us all what God would have us do and be especially with the extra help of the teachings in the whole Bible but especially in the NT.
The whole early Church taught the same gospel,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,and that includes Paul of course.
 

Dropship

Member
From my conversation and studies with Jehovah Witnesses they sincerely believe Jesus claims to be “a god” at John 10:33..

They can believe what they like but personally I believe Jesus who made it clear many times that he wasn't God or any other type of god..:)-

"Only God knows when Judgment Day will be, I don't know myself" (Mark 13:32)
"I say nothing of my own accord, I only say what my father tells me to say.." (John 12:49)
"I am going to my Father and your Father, my God and your God" (John 20:17)
“Father, the hour has come...I am coming to you now" (John 17:13)
"Father, into your hands I commit my spirit." (Luke 23:46)


And God himself said - "This is my beloved son, listen to him" (Matt 17:5)

and the people quickly cottoned on- "There is one mediator between God and men,- the man Jesus Christ" (1 Tim 2:5)
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
I never said what might happen. What MIGHT HAVE happened is NOT the same as what HAD REALLY happened!

Seems to me, you rejected Jesus’ words in Luke 24:39 which was AFTER his supposed crucifixion where he said he’s NOT DEAD because it does not agree with your own ideas of what had REALLY happened!! What had REALLY HAPPENED to Jesus was what Jesus said AFTER the supposed crucifixion, NOT BEFORE his supposed crucifixion!!

And you assume (as always) I rejected ALL the words of Paul. I have told you before, the words of other people (like Paul) matter ONLY and ONLY IF their words are aligned with the Words of God and/or the words of His prophet, Jesus. For example, I don’t reject Paul’s words in Ephesians 1:17 where he said “
I keep asking that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the glorious Father, may give you the Spirit of wisdom and revelation, so that you may know Him better”. Clearly here Paul was praying to God, NOT to Jesus, and he was praying to God, who Paul also CLEARLY referred to as the God of Jesus!! Why would Paul refer to God as the God of Jesus IF Jesus is God??!

Seems to me, not only you rejected Jesus’ words in Luke 24:39, you also rejected Paul’s words in Ephesians 1:17 because it does not agree with your own FALSE belief that Jesus is God!! …… And you are telling me it’s me when it’s obviously clear it’s
YOU who’s cutting bits out of the Bible to suit your own ideas and FALSE belief!! Are you on drugs??! Boy, you ARE confused and delusional!!

So, who really preached to you Jesus is God?? Your preachers?? The writers/translators of your Bible or was it the Jews who despised Jesus and was trying to kill Jesus?? Certainly NOT Jesus!


Luke 24:17 He asked them, “What are you discussing together as you walk along?”
They stood still, their faces downcast. 18 One of them, named Cleopas, asked him, “Are you the only one visiting Jerusalem who does not know the things that have happened there in these days?”
19 “What things?” he asked.
“About Jesus of Nazareth,” they replied. “He was a prophet, powerful in word and deed before God and all the people. 20 The chief priests and our rulers handed him over to be sentenced to death, and they crucified him; 21 but we had hoped that he was the one who was going to redeem Israel. And what is more, it is the third day since all this took place. 22 In addition, some of our women amazed us. They went to the tomb early this morning 23 but didn’t find his body. They came and told us that they had seen a vision of angels, who said he was alive. 24 Then some of our companions went to the tomb and found it just as the women had said, but they did not see Jesus.”
25 He said to them, “How foolish you are, and how slow to believe all that the prophets have spoken! 26 Did not the Messiah have to suffer these things and then enter his glory?”

It seems Jesus, after His resurrection said that what the disciples had told Him about Jesus suffering and death was true and He showed them in the Hebrew Scriptures where they say the same. I bet Isa 53 was part of what He showed them.

Jesus became a man and so His Father became His God because He was a man. He also was raised as a man with a glorified body and so His Father continued to be His God.
It is only in the womb of Mary that His Father became His God. (see Psalm 22:10)
This is when He took the nature of a servant. Before He became a man He was not a servant, He was just the Son of God with the same nature as His Father. As a man He still had that God nature but also the nature of a servant.(see Phil 2)
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
Praying to God…

Yes, Jerry. We are to pray TO GOD; To the Father, through Jesus Christ.

We are not called to pray TO JESUS.

I would ask Brian2 if he can produce a verse or command to pray to Jesus: There is none!

Jesus is the gatekeeper of our prayers TO GOD.. therefore Jesus - you rightly said - cannot BE GOD that we are to pray to…. Otherwise why is there a gatekeeper, a filterer of our prayers to THE ALMIGHTY.

Or does the doorkeeper to the kings chambers believe that he too is the king whose door he guards?

Do you think that if Jesus dwells in us that He cannot hear us?
John 14:23 Jesus replied, “If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word. My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our home with him.
John 14:12 Very truly I tell you, whoever believes in me will do the works I have been doing, and they will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father. 13 And I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. 14 You may ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it.
1 Corinthians 1:2 To the church of God which is at Corinth, to those who have been sanctified in Christ Jesus, saints by calling, with all who in every place call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, their Lord and ours:

Romans 10:9 If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved. 11 As Scripture says, “Anyone who believes in him will never be put to shame.” 12 For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile—the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, 13 for, “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”
14 How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them? 15 And how can anyone preach unless they are sent? As it is written: “How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news!”

Yes anyone who calls on the name of YHWH (Joel 2:32)............in Romans 10 YHWH is "Jesus", will be saved.
 

2ndpillar

Well-Known Member
Love of course is more than the don'ts in the Law. Love is a positive thing towards our neighbour.
The blood of Jesus is the blood of the New Covenant (Matt 26:28) which came in when Jesus offered up His life and God made it an offering for sin (Isa 53:10), a life that was poured out unto death (Isa 53:12) to bear the sins of many.
The New Covenant was offered to the Jews 2000 years ago after Jesus died. It seems it will also be offered again.
The same New Covenant was then also offered to the Gentiles.
The New Covenant where God gives us His Spirit and puts His law in our heart. (Isa 59:21, Jer 31:31-34)
There is one Gospel and that is it and it incorporates those in the New Covenant being part of the Kingdom that was preached from the time of John the Baptist on, and which will be set up in it's fullness when Jesus returns.
Luke 16:16 The Law and the Prophets were proclaimed until John. Since that time, the gospel of the kingdom of God is being preached, and everyone is forcing his way into it.
What was preached was the message of Jesus dying for our sins and those who believe in Him being given eternal life. (John 3:16,17)
What version of the gospel do you preach?
Do you want to be in the Old Covenant or the New one?
Jews cannot see how God can put His law in our hearts without it being the written Law, but the Spirit of God in us (given at Pentecost, the time when Moses brought the law down from Mt Sinai) is enough to teach us all what God would have us do and be especially with the extra help of the teachings in the whole Bible but especially in the NT.
The whole early Church taught the same gospel,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,and that includes Paul of course.

Did Paul preach to keep Circumcision, the covenant kept by the "father of nations/Gentiles", Abraham, (Zechariah 11:10) or to avoid unclean food/swine, or to avoid idols? Were the nations/Gentiles, in which the "house of Israel" is now 'scattered' (Ezekiel 36:17-19), taught to keep "My ordinances...and observe them" (Ezekiel 37:24) when given a "new heart" (Ezekiel 37:26), which only happens after they are taken out from among the nations/Gentiles (Ezekiel 36:24)? As for bearing the sin of the "many", which would be before their forgiveness, that would refer to those "gathered from the nations" (Ezekiel 36:25) who will be cleaned with "water"/baptism (Ezekiel 36:33), cleaned of their (house of Israel) iniquities, which precedes the setting up the kingdom whereas David is made king (Ezekiel 37:24-25). As for John the Baptist, who along with Yeshua, proclaimed the kingdom, your quote from Luke 16:16, leaves out Luke 16:17, which proclaims it is "easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one stroke of a letter of the Law to fail, which is a watered down version of Matthew 5:18. According to John the Baptist, you must confess your sins, and repent, and produce good fruit, less you be cast into the furnace of fire (Matthew 3:10). Are you taught to repent, which is turn from sin, and that you must produce good fruit, or be cast into the furnace of fire. Or are you taught to "believe" that God is one in three (James 2:19). If Yeshua died for your sins/iniquity, then you would no longer reside in sin, but the followers of Paul all will die, and carry the "plagues" of the harlot (Revelation 18:4). As for John 3:16-17, if one "believes in him", the "Word made flesh" (John 1:14), then they would heed his message, or else "fall" (Matthew 7:24-27), along with those who "hang" onto the the guy claiming the keys of David, the pope (Isaiah 22:22-25). As for the wine of the last supper, that would indicate the blood, whereas the breath of God resides (Genesis 2;7), the Spirit of God/Revelation/prophecy, whereas Yeshua had to go to heaven in order to send the Helper. As for your Isaiah 59:21, that eludes to Isaiah 59:20, which is a referral to Jacob, which includes Judah and Ephraim, and is limited to those turning from transgression, which would be transgression of the Law. And "My words" would remain in the mouth of your/Jacob's offspring "from now and forever". That would not include the words of false prophets, except when the false prophets quote real prophets and Law as did the devil in the wilderness.
 
Last edited:

Soapy

Son of his Father: The Heir and Prince
Do you think that if Jesus dwells in us that He cannot hear us?
John 14:23 Jesus replied, “If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word. My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our home with him.
John 14:12 Very truly I tell you, whoever believes in me will do the works I have been doing, and they will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father. 13 And I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. 14 You may ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it.
1 Corinthians 1:2 To the church of God which is at Corinth, to those who have been sanctified in Christ Jesus, saints by calling, with all who in every place call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, their Lord and ours:

Romans 10:9 If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved. 11 As Scripture says, “Anyone who believes in him will never be put to shame.” 12 For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile—the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, 13 for, “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”
14 How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them? 15 And how can anyone preach unless they are sent? As it is written: “How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news!”

Yes anyone who calls on the name of YHWH (Joel 2:32)............in Romans 10 YHWH is "Jesus", will be saved.
I have no idea what you are disputing, Brian2. We call on the name of YHWH … the name of the ONLY TRUE GOD.

Jesus said to pray to The Father ….

Jesus said to pray to GOD ….

Jesus said to pray ‘in his name’!

‘In his name’ does not mean ‘Jesus’… it is a reference to all that Jesus IS… Therefore pray to the Father in:
  • Righteousness
  • Sincerity
  • Sinlessness
  • Piousness
  • Mercifulness
  • Graciousness
  • Honesty
  • Loveliness
  • Reverence to God, the Father: YHWH
So, to incorporate all the above, we just use the encompassing ‘name’, ‘Jesus’… we pray ‘in the name of Jesus’, meaning that we claim that our prayers to God are all of those listed…

It certainly does not mean that:
  1. We are praying TO JESUS
  2. Our prayers will be heard BY GOD because we end our Prayer with ‘in the name of Jesus [Christ]’
  • “And when you stand praying, if you hold anything against anyone, forgive them, so that your Father in heaven may forgive you your sins.” (Mark 11:25)
  • “You can ask for anything in my name, and I will do it, so that the Son can bring glory to the Father.” (John 14:13)
    • (Who are you to ask in the name of Jesus?… The son filters the prayers so only those fitting the reverence and sincerity required by the Father reach the Father!! Thus the son is glorified by the Father in that no sinful prayers reach his spiritual ears!!)
  • “Now is your time of grief, but I will see you again and you will rejoice, and no one will take away your joy. In that day you will no longer ask me anything. Very truly I tell you, my Father will give you whatever you ask in my name.” (John 16:22-23)
    • (Jesus is referring to his death and resurrection - he states that after his resurrection the believers will not ask him anything directly as they did before but will ask the Father for it ‘in Jesus’ name!’ (Defined above). ‘Pray for what you need FROM THE FATHER!)
 

Clear

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Hi @Soapy and other readers :

1) REGARDING THE TYPE OF INDIVIDUALS WHO WILL INHABIT A SOCIAL HEAVEN, IF HEAVEN IS A PLACE OF SOCIAL JOY AND HARMONY AND SOCIAL HAPPINESS AND UNITY

Clear said : “1) There are no extra points awarded for uncivility in a debate

I don’t think your responses to individuals on the forum will be awarded extra points for mean-heartedness or uncivility.
You could simply point out that someone is confused or did not seem to understand your point….

Ironically, I actually agree with your claim that the spirit placed within each individual is inseparably connected with our consciousness (our “mind” as you described it) and our personality and our will.
For example, those individuals who are mean-hearted or uncivil in their minds and hearts and actions, simply reflect a spirit that is mean-hearted and uncivil.

If the early Christians were correct when they proclaimed that the goal of the creative work of God was to ultimately have a rational, living creature who was prepared to be a citizen of heaven and live in harmony and joy and civility with others, then individuals whose spirits continue to be mean and uncivil cannot be allowed into heaven with those who have learned Christian principles of kindness and patience and civility else the mean and uncivil spirits would ruin the joy and harmony which was to characterize heaven.”

Soapy replied : “I see that you set yourself up as judge and jury as to who does if does not get to go to heaven…. “
Clear replied : "I am merely pointing out the logic that IF heaven is to be a place inhabited by individuals who are kind and loving and unified in a life of joy and harmony, THEN it cannot be inhabited by individuals who are mean and spiteful and oppressive and uncivil to each other."

soapy replied : “HEAVEN is for the ELECT… the elect will certainly not be anyone like you describe so what’s your point?”


THE KIND OF INDIVIDUALS THAT WILL INHABIT A SOCIAL HEAVEN IF HEAVEN IS A PLACE OF SOCIAL JOY AND HARMONY AND HAPPINESS


If heaven is a place of social joy and harmony and unity, then it will be inhabited by individuals who live principles upon which social joy is to be had, and principles by which harmony is to be maintained and if it is unified, then individuals who live there will be selfish, or oppress others, will not be liars and murderers and sociopaths.



2) Regarding the principle of a Christian seeking to become a kind and civil person versus a mean and uncivil person.

Soapy said : “Jesus called certain one of the Jews ‘Snakes’ and ‘Devils’… He aggressively overthrew the tables of the moneylenders and whipped them out if the temple in Jerusalem…. Yes, righteous anger is justified anger!”

Clear replied : "The disconnect here is that 1) you are not Jesus 2) Your anger is not "righteous anger" 3) There is no reason for anger and meanness and uncivility to characterize interactions with one another simply because we are debating Christian religion.
Your response seems as though you are simply trying to justify the type of uncivility in your interactions.

Your response does not justify a Christianity characterized by meanness or uncivility.
The fact that others notice our individual imperfections or the errors in our data is not a bad thing or something that should anger us, but instead it is an opportunity for introspection and improvement, an opportunity to re-examine our data and to re-examine who we want to be as people."
Soapy Said : “@Clear, is the only thing you can do is find fault where there is no fault? (Post #1467)

It is ironic to imply that there is no fault in angry, and mean, and uncivilized interactions when it is clear that such interactions are indeed faults inside Christian theology.

It is counterproductive to improvement to simply deny one has faults. Perhaps this is one of the principles as to why Jesus says such self-deception is associated with less truth, not more. (If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. - 1 John 1:8)

I am simply saying that If Jesus was correct, that men would know that authentic Christians disciples because they “love one another” ("By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another." John 13:35), it is also implied that to hate others, or to mis-label meanness as “righteous anger” is not merely a self-deception, but it implies such individuals who hate and engage in unrighteous anger are not authentic disciples of Christ and live in opposition to Christian principles of patience and love of neighbor.



3) Damage to the Christian witness when Christians respond with anger, demeaning, belittling, or viciousness in a simple discussion.
My point is : Improper disputes and mere anger weaken the collective witness to the world that love and peace are principles that Christians live and which add to world peace.


by the way. I do think your last post (#1486) was civil and a better example of how a disagreement can be better discussed than prior posts. It did not seem to be an angry post that simply belittled another debatant. It was good.

Clear
φυσεφιτωδρω
 
Last edited:

Soapy

Son of his Father: The Heir and Prince
Hi @Soapy and other readers :

1) REGARDING THE TYPE OF INDIVIDUALS WHO WILL INHABIT A SOCIAL HEAVEN, IF HEAVEN IS A PLACE OF SOCIAL JOY AND HARMONY AND SOCIAL HAPPINESS AND UNITY

Clear said : “1) There are no extra points awarded for uncivility in a debate

I don’t think your responses to individuals on the forum will be awarded extra points for mean-heartedness or uncivility.
You could simply point out that someone is confused or did not seem to understand your point….

Ironically, I actually agree with your claim that the spirit placed within each individual is inseparably connected with our consciousness (our “mind” as you described it) and our personality and our will.
For example, those individuals who are mean-hearted or uncivil in their minds and hearts and actions, simply reflect a spirit that is mean-hearted and uncivil.

If the early Christians were correct when they proclaimed that the goal of the creative work of God was to ultimately have a rational, living creature who was prepared to be a citizen of heaven and live in harmony and joy and civility with others, then individuals whose spirits continue to be mean and uncivil cannot be allowed into heaven with those who have learned Christian principles of kindness and patience and civility else the mean and uncivil spirits would ruin the joy and harmony which was to characterize heaven.”

Soapy replied : “I see that you set yourself up as judge and jury as to who does if does not get to go to heaven…. “
Clear replied : "I am merely pointing out the logic that IF heaven is to be a place inhabited by individuals who are kind and loving and unified in a life of joy and harmony, THEN it cannot be inhabited by individuals who are mean and spiteful and oppressive and uncivil to each other."

soapy replied : “HEAVEN is for the ELECT… the elect will certainly not be anyone like you describe so what’s your point?”


THE KIND OF INDIVIDUALS THAT WILL INHABIT A SOCIAL HEAVEN IF HEAVEN IS A PLACE OF SOCIAL JOY AND HARMONY AND HAPPINESS


If heaven is a place of social joy and harmony and unity, then it will be inhabited by individuals who live principles upon which social joy is to be had, and principles by which harmony is to be maintained and if it is unified, then individuals who live there will be selfish, or oppress others, will not be liars and murderers and sociopaths.



2) Regarding the principle of a Christian seeking to become a kind and civil person versus a mean and uncivil person.

Soapy said : “Jesus called certain one of the Jews ‘Snakes’ and ‘Devils’… He aggressively overthrew the tables of the moneylenders and whipped them out if the temple in Jerusalem…. Yes, righteous anger is justified anger!”

Clear replied : "The disconnect here is that 1) you are not Jesus 2) Your anger is not "righteous anger" 3) There is no reason for anger and meanness and uncivility to characterize interactions with one another simply because we are debating Christian religion.
Your response seems as though you are simply trying to justify the type of uncivility in your interactions.

Your response does not justify a Christianity characterized by meanness or uncivility.
The fact that others notice our individual imperfections or the errors in our data is not a bad thing or something that should anger us, but instead it is an opportunity for introspection and improvement, an opportunity to re-examine our data and to re-examine who we want to be as people."
Soapy Said : “@Clear, is the only thing you can do is find fault where there is no fault? (Post #1467)

It is ironic to imply that there is no fault in angry, and mean, and uncivilized interactions when it is clear that such interactions are indeed faults inside Christian theology.

It is counterproductive to improvement to simply deny one has faults. Perhaps this is one of the principles as to why Jesus says such self-deception is associated with less truth, not more. (If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. - 1 John 1:8)

I am simply saying that If Jesus was correct, that men would know that authentic Christians disciples because they “love one another” ("By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another." John 13:35), it is also implied that to hate others, or to mis-label meanness as “righteous anger” is not merely a self-deception, but it implies such individuals who hate and engage in unrighteous anger are not authentic disciples of Christ and live in opposition to Christian principles of patience and love of neighbor.



3) Damage to the Christian witness when Christians respond with anger, demeaning, belittling, or viciousness in a simple discussion.
My point is : Improper disputes and mere anger weaken the collective witness to the world that love and peace are principles that Christians live and which add to world peace.


by the way. I do think your last post (#1486) was civil and a better example of how a disagreement can be better discussed than prior posts. It did not seem to be an angry post that simply belittled another debatant. It was good.

Clear
φυσεφιτωδρω
I really don’t need you to judge me.

As Steve Biko wrote as the title of one of his books:
  • “I write what I like”
In other words, ‘I say things that I want to say regardless of what anyone else thinks about it!’.

However, I am writing ‘what I like about scriptures and the truth of lie or disingenuousness surrounding differing interpretations’. Sometimes this means getting righteously angry about things said that are so utterly crass that the writer’s sanity needs to be questioned.

Of course, and I know it, the writer is playing devils advocate because they see the truth but cannot find fault as a response. Their actions are to post obvious bluster and even half truths hoping to catch out the unwary… unfortunately that doesn’t work with me… but I’m not infallible and so, yes, I do get a little heated….

However, I would prefer YOU to answer questions set to you… You seem to be the half master of not answering questions while demanding… even chasing over many posts … that someone answers your questions … even after they have answered you but it didn’t seem like the answer you wanted.

“Judge not lest ye be judged likewise”, Jesus said. But of course that actually means ‘Don’t judge unlawfully lest ye also be judge unlawfully’.

Stick to answering what has been asked of you… don’t make yourself a judge over us … we have moderators in the drum to do that.
 

Clear

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Hi @Soapy ;

Soapy replied : “ ‘I say things that I want to say regardless of what anyone else thinks about it!’.

The problem that such self-centered communication causes is that the result of saying whatever one wants to say is that IF what is said originates from the emotion of anger, then the logic and rational content of what is said often suffers.

For example, when I point out that if a social heaven is to be joyful and harmonious, it cannot be inhabited by individuals who are mean and spiteful and oppressive and uncivil. Your repost is : HEAVEN is for the ELECT… the elect will certainly not be anyone like you describe so what’s your point?” (soapy, post #14670

However, that While the repost “HEAVEN is for the ELECT… the elect will certainly not be anyone like you describe so what’s your point?” is meant to deflect the sting of criticism, the repost offers an irrational and silly counter theory that a joyful and harmonious social heaven will NOT be inhabited by individuals who have learned social laws that create and sustain joy and harmony.

This irrational response creates a strange and irrational doctrine.
Individuals may rightly conclude that this specific religious belief is irrational and lose interest in authentic Christian principles.
If you want to do good for Christianity, it is counterproductive not to at least try to be logical in theories.





The rare but honest admission that you are "not infallible and so, yes, I do get a little heated" (Soapy post #1488) is a good insight for any of us to have since most of us can find ourselves in this same position.

I have to wonder if one of the reasons a basic Christian principle is to avoid irrational anger is that angry emotions often rob us of rational and logical thought and my point is that irrational anger and demeaning attacks and debate by ad hominems are not helpful in debates nor do they enhance the Christian Witness that we, as disciples of Jesus are to "love one another" or that authentic respect and love and personal happiness is to be found in our religion.


In any case Soapy, I hope your own spiritual journey in life is insightful and brings your life happiness and satisfaction.


Clear
 
Last edited:

Dogknox20

Well-Known Member
Jesus is God... Christians have ALWAYS taught "Jesus is God"! If you say "Jesus is NOT God then you are clearly not Christian!
 

2ndpillar

Well-Known Member
Jesus is God... Christians have ALWAYS taught "Jesus is God"! If you say "Jesus is NOT God then you are clearly not Christian!

You may be 90% technically correct with respect to being called a "Christian". Personally, I see no value in calling yourself a "Christian". Stalin was raised in a "Christian" household, and was supposed to be a priest, and Hitler was born a "Catholic", which means universal "Christian". They are all dead, and probably most likely were not "saved", from death, or a life of hell on earth, or even of being nuts. It is not what one calls themselves or others, it is what one does that matters.
 

Clear

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Hi @Dogknox20

Dogknox20 said : "Jesus is God... Christians have ALWAYS taught "Jesus is God"! If you say "Jesus is NOT God then you are clearly not Christian!" (post #1490)


dogknox20, Perhaps you missed my last post to you, it was as follows :

I see you have re-engaged this thread. We still have the following issues to resolve from post #1423.


1) HOW DOES ONE JUSTIFY “LYING FOR GOD”?


Dogknox20 said : “The Watch Tower ADDED the letter "A" to the verse John 1 so it will say Jesus is "A" god!”
Clear responded : “The English sentence rendered “and the Word was a God” is a grammatically correct translation of John 1:1c "και Θεος ην ο λογος".
The source greek itself grammatically lacks the definite article and so their rendering IS, grammatically, how the source greek reads.
If you disagree with the theology, you are going to have to argue historical context, and not grammar.

However, YOUR offering of John 1:18 is unauthentic and a false rendering of the source Greek.
Your offering doesn’t merely add an “a”, but it adds entire false phrases of multiple words to the Greek that are not there in the source Greek. This is much worse than your complaint against others.

How do you justify offering readers a falsely rendered, inauthentic commentary as scripture while complaining that the Jehovahs Witnesses offer a perfectly correct rendering of John 1:1c?
How does the fact that you are offering fake biblical text prove a grammatically correct sentence incorrect?

Dogknox20 responded : “There in NO scriptures in any Christian bible with the letter "A" in John 1! ALL ....”
Clear responded : “Your response did not answer the questions you were asked:
How do you justify offering readers a falsely rendered, inauthentic commentary as scripture while complaining that the Jehovahs Witnesses offer a perfectly correct rendering of John 1:1c?
How does the fact that you are offering fake biblical text prove a grammatically correct sentence incorrect?

Dogknox20 responded : "I post scripture.. NOT ONE of all the bible interpreters over Sixty (60) of them have said the letter "A" should be first before the word "God"!


No, you are NOT posting “scripture”.
There is no Greek source text of the bible that says : 1 John 18 No one has ever seen God. The one and only Son, who is himself God and is at the Father’s side—he has revealed him." (Dogknox, in post #1407).
Of THOUSANDS of Greek papyri and codices, NOT ONE says this.

You are posting a paraphrased commentary masquerading as scripture.

There are readers who notice this dishonest tactic.

This is much worse than you complain the Jehovahs Witnesses are doing.
1)You are offering readers scriptural commentary as though it was authentic scripture.
2)While you complain the grammatically correct rendering adds a single letter in the Jehovahs Witness translation, your paraphrase adds more than 50 letters that do not exist in the source text.



The questions you were asked still remain unanswered :
1) How do you justify offering readers a falsely rendered, inauthentic commentary as scripture while complaining that the Jehovahs Witnesses offer a perfectly correct rendering of John 1:1c?
2) How does the fact that you are offering fake biblical text prove a grammatically correct sentence incorrect?




2) HOW DOES ONE JUSTIFY MULTIPLE THOUSANDS OF MURDERS AND SLAVERY AND OPPRESSION OF ONES OWN ORGANISATION WHILE COMPLAINING ABOUT A MINISCULE NUMBER OF DEATHS BY ADHERANCE TO AN ARTICLE OF FAITH?

Clear said : "Dognox20, I asked the uncomfortable question of you : Why is the murder of thousands of innocents who were simply guilty of not being catholic or unwilling to act in conflict with their own conscience before God, more justifiable than an incredibly small number of individuals who die because they did not receive a blood transfusion?
What is your answer?

Dogknox20 responded : “There in NO scriptures in any Christian bible with the letter "A" in John 1! ALL ....”
Clear responded : “Your response did not answer the questions you were asked:
Why is the murder of thousands of innocents who were simply guilty of not being catholic or unwilling to act in conflict with their own conscience before God, more justifiable than an incredibly small number of individuals who die because they did not receive a blood transfusion?
Dogknox responded : “I post scripture.. NOT ONE of all the bible interpreters over Sixty (60) of them have said the letter "A" should be first before the word "God"!”

How does this attempt at redirection from the important question justify the murder of thousands of innocents?

Does your mind and heart work such that if you claim others offer a different but correct translation, that this justifies the Catholic organization murdering thousands of innocents?

How does this justification work in your mind?

The same question can be said of the Catholic doctrine in it’s policy of forcing thousands into slavery. How do you justify slavery?

The same question can be asked regarding the Catholic doctrine of the persecution of Jews.
How does one justify the taking of Children from their Jewish parents by force to force the children to be or at least act like they believe in Catholicism?

The same question can be asked of the Catholic doctrine of Thievery.
How does one justify taking the property of thousands of others in order to enrich their organization and themselves in the name of Jesus?

The question can be asked regarding your claim that all of these evils are and were committed by “The Church of Christ” (when, in fact, Jesus would have repudiated such acts)?

How does your mind and heart work that it thinks that all these historical horrors are morally superior to adding an “a” to a sentence in a grammatically correct form?



3) THE NWTESTAMENT IS GRAMMATICALLY CORRECT IN IT'S TRANSLATION OF JOHN 1:1C. CONTEXT AND NOT GRAMMAR WILL DETERMINE CORRECTNESS IN THIS CASE
Clear claimed : “The English sentence rendered “and the Word was a God” is a grammatically correct translation of John 1:1c "και Θεος ην ο λογος".
The source greek itself grammatically lacks the definite article and so their rendering IS, grammatically, how the source greek reads.
If you disagree with the theology, you are going to have to argue historical context, and not grammar”

Dogknox20 responded : “There in NO scriptures in any Christian bible with the letter "A" in John 1! ALL ....”
Clear responded : “Dogknox20. You are unable to read the Greek source text and this specific ignorance is one reason why you seem to simply repeat talking points and religious advertisements rather than approach the actual underlying greek source text.

Answer my simple questions and I will attempt to give you grammatical examples that you can understand, including examples where Bibles created by the Catholics have both added and subtracted the article in Greek, the same as you claim the Jehovahs Witnesses have done.”

Dogknox20 responded : “I post scripture.. NOT ONE of all the bible interpreters over Sixty (60) of them have said the letter "A" should be first before the word "God"!”



Dogknox20. I might as well point out what is obvious to all other readers but you seem oblivious to.

YOU DO NOT READ GREEK.
YOU, DO NOT KNOW WHAT THE SOURCE GREEK SCRIPTURES ACTUALLY SAY.
YOU CANNOT TELL AN ACCURATE FROM A FALSE TRANSLATION (Else, presumably, you would not have offered readers the various false texts you have offered)

The deep irony of this situation stems (partly) from the hypocrisy and the complaint of inaccuracy of another, group, while you are guilty of much, much worse.

While you complain that you cannot find any of 60 (sixty) interpreters who added the “a”, NONE of the THOUSANDS of Greek source texts adds the 55 letters you offered readers.

While you complain you cannot find a single English version (from 60) that has the “a”, you also cannot find a single Greek source text (from thousands that exist) that grammatically, lacks the “a”.


If any reader on the forum can find a single Greek codex of John 1:1c that grammatically, lacks the “a”, is anyone able to point it out?

Anyone?

Even a single codex from THOUSANDS that exist will do.



Dogknox, I do not understand, How are you able, in your mind, to justify complaining about another person offering grammatically correct sentence while you offer a completely inauthentic and erroneous and grammatically incorrect text and claim it is “scripture” when it is, obviously, NOT scripture.

I do not understand how you justify lying about the Jehovahs Witnesses and the numbers of children who have died from lack of blood transfusion and yet justify your own Churchs’ murder of thousands and thousands of innocents, the enslavement of populations, the oppression and the stealing from entire populations as a policy and doctrine.

It seems so blatantly hypocritical to me.

However, such actions do not merely reflect on a single person or on a single Christian movement. Instead, engaging in such actions often tends to affect other christianities in the eyes of individuals who are investigating Christianity for truth and for a lifestyle.

How do you think it affects the credibility of other Christianities when Christians either “lie for Jesus”, or are blatantly and obviously hypocritical in doing the very thing they complain others should be condemned for?

Can the complaint that “there is no ‘A’ “ in a text that you, yourself cannot read, actually justify doing damage to the Christian cause by lying and hypocrisy?


Clear
 

JerryMyers

Active Member
Praying to God…
Yes, Jerry. We are to pray TO GOD; To the Father, through Jesus Christ.
We are not called to pray TO JESUS.
I would ask Brian2 if he can produce a verse or command to pray to Jesus: There is none!
Jesus is the gatekeeper of our prayers TO GOD.. therefore Jesus - you rightly said - cannot BE GOD that we are to pray to…. Otherwise why is there a gatekeeper, a filterer of our prayers to THE ALMIGHTY.
Or does the doorkeeper to the kings chambers believe that he too is the king whose door he guards?
No, Soapy, we are to pray DIRECTLY to God, NOT through anyone, AND Jesus is NOT the gatekeeper of our prayers to God - YOU are your own gatekeeper to your own prayers to God as ONLY YOU is responsible for the sincerity of your prayers to God, NOT Jesus or anyone else.

You are NOT going to find a single passage in the whole Bible where God Commanded man to pray to Him through Jesus NOR will you find a single passage in the whole Bible where Jesus told you to pray to God through him. Praying to God
in the name of Jesus is NOT praying to God through Jesus.
 

JerryMyers

Active Member
Luke 24:17 He asked them, “What are you discussing together as you walk along?”
They stood still, their faces downcast. 18 One of them, named Cleopas, asked him, “Are you the only one visiting Jerusalem who does not know the things that have happened there in these days?”
19 “What things?” he asked.
“About Jesus of Nazareth,” they replied. “He was a prophet, powerful in word and deed before God and all the people. 20 The chief priests and our rulers handed him over to be sentenced to death, and they crucified him; 21 but we had hoped that he was the one who was going to redeem Israel. And what is more, it is the third day since all this took place. 22 In addition, some of our women amazed us. They went to the tomb early this morning 23 but didn’t find his body. They came and told us that they had seen a vision of angels, who said he was alive. 24 Then some of our companions went to the tomb and found it just as the women had said, but they did not see Jesus.”
25 He said to them, “How foolish you are, and how slow to believe all that the prophets have spoken! 26 Did not the Messiah have to suffer these things and then enter his glory?”
It seems Jesus, after His resurrection said that what the disciples had told Him about Jesus suffering and death was true and He showed them in the Hebrew Scriptures where they say the same. I bet Isa 53 was part of what He showed them.
LOL! You are jumping the gun! After Jesus’ supposed crucifixion and his supposed resurrection, Jesus told his disciples he’s NOT dead which was recorded in Luke 24:39 while the passage you quoted above is Luke 24:17-26 where the disciples could NOT have known Jesus was NEVER dead because Jesus HAS NOT TOLD them yet!! So, in Luke 24:17-26, the disciples, who did NOT even recognize Jesus, were relating what they, like everyone else, believed happened to Jesus until Jesus told them what REALLY happened to him and that was in Luke 24:39, NOT BEFORE Luke 24:17!! It seems like your screw-up logic is making you talk nonsense again!

Jesus became a man and so His Father became His God because He was a man. He also was raised as a man with a glorified body and so His Father continued to be His God.
Talking nonsense again! God created Jesus a man when His Command/Word became flesh (John 1:14), NOT God!!

It is only in the womb of Mary that His Father became His God. (see Psalm 22:10) This is when He took the nature of a servant. Before He became a man He was not a servant, He was just the Son of God with the same nature as His Father. As a man He still had that God nature but also the nature of a servant.(see Phil 2
Would you stop trying to tailor-fit your FALSE belief into the scripture?? Psalm 22 is telling you God NEVER FORSAKE Jesus, or simply put, Psalm 22 is telling you Jesus will NOT be killed NOR will he be crucified! Go and read to understand Psalm 22 from verse 1 to the end!!
 

Dogknox20

Well-Known Member
Hi @Dogknox20

Dogknox20 said : "Jesus is God... Christians have ALWAYS taught "Jesus is God"! If you say "Jesus is NOT God then you are clearly not Christian!" (post #1490)


dogknox20, Perhaps you missed my last post to you, it was as follows :

I see you have re-engaged this thread. We still have the following issues to resolve from post #1423.


1) HOW DOES ONE JUSTIFY “LYING FOR GOD”?


Dogknox20 said : “The Watch Tower ADDED the letter "A" to the verse John 1 so it will say Jesus is "A" god!”
Clear responded : “The English sentence rendered “and the Word was a God” is a grammatically correct translation of John 1:1c "και Θεος ην ο λογος".
The source greek itself grammatically lacks the definite article and so their rendering IS, grammatically, how the source greek reads.
If you disagree with the theology, you are going to have to argue historical context, and not grammar.

However, YOUR offering of John 1:18 is unauthentic and a false rendering of the source Greek.
Your offering doesn’t merely add an “a”, but it adds entire false phrases of multiple words to the Greek that are not there in the source Greek. This is much worse than your complaint against others.

How do you justify offering readers a falsely rendered, inauthentic commentary as scripture while complaining that the Jehovahs Witnesses offer a perfectly correct rendering of John 1:1c?
How does the fact that you are offering fake biblical text prove a grammatically correct sentence incorrect?

Dogknox20 responded : “There in NO scriptures in any Christian bible with the letter "A" in John 1! ALL ....”
Clear responded : “Your response did not answer the questions you were asked:
How do you justify offering readers a falsely rendered, inauthentic commentary as scripture while complaining that the Jehovahs Witnesses offer a perfectly correct rendering of John 1:1c?
How does the fact that you are offering fake biblical text prove a grammatically correct sentence incorrect?

Dogknox20 responded : "I post scripture.. NOT ONE of all the bible interpreters over Sixty (60) of them have said the letter "A" should be first before the word "God"!


No, you are NOT posting “scripture”.
There is no Greek source text of the bible that says : 1 John 18 No one has ever seen God. The one and only Son, who is himself God and is at the Father’s side—he has revealed him." (Dogknox, in post #1407).
Of THOUSANDS of Greek papyri and codices, NOT ONE says this.

You are posting a paraphrased commentary masquerading as scripture.

There are readers who notice this dishonest tactic.

This is much worse than you complain the Jehovahs Witnesses are doing.
1)You are offering readers scriptural commentary as though it was authentic scripture.
2)While you complain the grammatically correct rendering adds a single letter in the Jehovahs Witness translation, your paraphrase adds more than 50 letters that do not exist in the source text.



The questions you were asked still remain unanswered :
1) How do you justify offering readers a falsely rendered, inauthentic commentary as scripture while complaining that the Jehovahs Witnesses offer a perfectly correct rendering of John 1:1c?
2) How does the fact that you are offering fake biblical text prove a grammatically correct sentence incorrect?




2) HOW DOES ONE JUSTIFY MULTIPLE THOUSANDS OF MURDERS AND SLAVERY AND OPPRESSION OF ONES OWN ORGANISATION WHILE COMPLAINING ABOUT A MINISCULE NUMBER OF DEATHS BY ADHERANCE TO AN ARTICLE OF FAITH?

Clear said : "Dognox20, I asked the uncomfortable question of you : Why is the murder of thousands of innocents who were simply guilty of not being catholic or unwilling to act in conflict with their own conscience before God, more justifiable than an incredibly small number of individuals who die because they did not receive a blood transfusion?
What is your answer?

Dogknox20 responded : “There in NO scriptures in any Christian bible with the letter "A" in John 1! ALL ....”
Clear responded : “Your response did not answer the questions you were asked:
Why is the murder of thousands of innocents who were simply guilty of not being catholic or unwilling to act in conflict with their own conscience before God, more justifiable than an incredibly small number of individuals who die because they did not receive a blood transfusion?
Dogknox responded : “I post scripture.. NOT ONE of all the bible interpreters over Sixty (60) of them have said the letter "A" should be first before the word "God"!”

How does this attempt at redirection from the important question justify the murder of thousands of innocents?

Does your mind and heart work such that if you claim others offer a different but correct translation, that this justifies the Catholic organization murdering thousands of innocents?

How does this justification work in your mind?

The same question can be said of the Catholic doctrine in it’s policy of forcing thousands into slavery. How do you justify slavery?

The same question can be asked regarding the Catholic doctrine of the persecution of Jews.
How does one justify the taking of Children from their Jewish parents by force to force the children to be or at least act like they believe in Catholicism?

The same question can be asked of the Catholic doctrine of Thievery.
How does one justify taking the property of thousands of others in order to enrich their organization and themselves in the name of Jesus?

The question can be asked regarding your claim that all of these evils are and were committed by “The Church of Christ” (when, in fact, Jesus would have repudiated such acts)?

How does your mind and heart work that it thinks that all these historical horrors are morally superior to adding an “a” to a sentence in a grammatically correct form?



3) THE NWTESTAMENT IS GRAMMATICALLY CORRECT IN IT'S TRANSLATION OF JOHN 1:1C. CONTEXT AND NOT GRAMMAR WILL DETERMINE CORRECTNESS IN THIS CASE
Clear claimed : “The English sentence rendered “and the Word was a God” is a grammatically correct translation of John 1:1c "και Θεος ην ο λογος".
The source greek itself grammatically lacks the definite article and so their rendering IS, grammatically, how the source greek reads.
If you disagree with the theology, you are going to have to argue historical context, and not grammar”

Dogknox20 responded : “There in NO scriptures in any Christian bible with the letter "A" in John 1! ALL ....”
Clear responded : “Dogknox20. You are unable to read the Greek source text and this specific ignorance is one reason why you seem to simply repeat talking points and religious advertisements rather than approach the actual underlying greek source text.

Answer my simple questions and I will attempt to give you grammatical examples that you can understand, including examples where Bibles created by the Catholics have both added and subtracted the article in Greek, the same as you claim the Jehovahs Witnesses have done.”

Dogknox20 responded : “I post scripture.. NOT ONE of all the bible interpreters over Sixty (60) of them have said the letter "A" should be first before the word "God"!”



Dogknox20. I might as well point out what is obvious to all other readers but you seem oblivious to.

YOU DO NOT READ GREEK.
YOU, DO NOT KNOW WHAT THE SOURCE GREEK SCRIPTURES ACTUALLY SAY.
YOU CANNOT TELL AN ACCURATE FROM A FALSE TRANSLATION (Else, presumably, you would not have offered readers the various false texts you have offered)

The deep irony of this situation stems (partly) from the hypocrisy and the complaint of inaccuracy of another, group, while you are guilty of much, much worse.

While you complain that you cannot find any of 60 (sixty) interpreters who added the “a”, NONE of the THOUSANDS of Greek source texts adds the 55 letters you offered readers.

While you complain you cannot find a single English version (from 60) that has the “a”, you also cannot find a single Greek source text (from thousands that exist) that grammatically, lacks the “a”.


If any reader on the forum can find a single Greek codex of John 1:1c that grammatically, lacks the “a”, is anyone able to point it out?

Anyone?

Even a single codex from THOUSANDS that exist will do.



Dogknox, I do not understand, How are you able, in your mind, to justify complaining about another person offering grammatically correct sentence while you offer a completely inauthentic and erroneous and grammatically incorrect text and claim it is “scripture” when it is, obviously, NOT scripture.

I do not understand how you justify lying about the Jehovahs Witnesses and the numbers of children who have died from lack of blood transfusion and yet justify your own Churchs’ murder of thousands and thousands of innocents, the enslavement of populations, the oppression and the stealing from entire populations as a policy and doctrine.

It seems so blatantly hypocritical to me.

However, such actions do not merely reflect on a single person or on a single Christian movement. Instead, engaging in such actions often tends to affect other christianities in the eyes of individuals who are investigating Christianity for truth and for a lifestyle.

How do you think it affects the credibility of other Christianities when Christians either “lie for Jesus”, or are blatantly and obviously hypocritical in doing the very thing they complain others should be condemned for?

Can the complaint that “there is no ‘A’ “ in a text that you, yourself cannot read, actually justify doing damage to the Christian cause by lying and hypocrisy?
Clear
I reply...
I post scripture.. I have never claimed to be a scripture scholar; I rely on the experts! NOT ONE of all the bible interpreters over Sixty (60) of them have said the letter "A" should be first before the word "God" in John 1.. NOT ONE!
Clear
, Clearly the New World Translation is wrong! And I add... Clearly you have been duped the Watch Tower has deceived you!
You point fingers saying; look at the Catholics.. All you do is show people are sinners! IF...
Clear
If you think it is only Catholics that sin, then you are more then just ignorant!
 

Soapy

Son of his Father: The Heir and Prince
With the Father in the Son and the Son in the Father and with the Son and Father both in the Spirit and with the Spirit in both the Father and Son, the 3 can be seen as being the same.
You just made this up ….

The Father is in the sin and the sin in the Father SIMPLY MEANS that they agree: ‘I and the Father, are one!’

But they are NOT IN THE SPIRIT…. The Spirit is IN THEM.

This means the same thing as the first claim: that they agree because the Spirit is The Spirit of Truth… and TRUTH is in them both!

Truth is not a person! it is a POWER!! Truth is power!!!

Jesus was ANOINTED with the HOLY spirit OF God.

‘Holy Spirit’ is not a NAME … it is a misused term. The term is just ‘Spirit of God… which is Holy’. The longer description is just an emphatic which has become a standard such that naive readers think it is the name … NO! The Spirit of God is Holy but ‘Holy Spirit is not its name’!
 

Soapy

Son of his Father: The Heir and Prince
Hi @Soapy ;

Soapy replied : “ ‘I say things that I want to say regardless of what anyone else thinks about it!’.

The problem that such self-centered communication causes is that the result of saying whatever one wants to say is that IF what is said originates from the emotion of anger, then the logic and rational content of what is said often suffers.

For example, when I point out that if a social heaven is to be joyful and harmonious, it cannot be inhabited by individuals who are mean and spiteful and oppressive and uncivil. Your repost is : HEAVEN is for the ELECT… the elect will certainly not be anyone like you describe so what’s your point?” (soapy, post #14670

However, that While the repost “HEAVEN is for the ELECT… the elect will certainly not be anyone like you describe so what’s your point?” is meant to deflect the sting of criticism, the repost offers an irrational and silly counter theory that a joyful and harmonious social heaven will NOT be inhabited by individuals who have learned social laws that create and sustain joy and harmony.

This irrational response creates a strange and irrational doctrine.
Individuals may rightly conclude that this specific religious belief is irrational and lose interest in authentic Christian principles.
If you want to do good for Christianity, it is counterproductive not to at least try to be logical in theories.





The rare but honest admission that you are "not infallible and so, yes, I do get a little heated" (Soapy post #1488) is a good insight for any of us to have since most of us can find ourselves in this same position.

I have to wonder if one of the reasons a basic Christian principle is to avoid irrational anger is that angry emotions often rob us of rational and logical thought and my point is that irrational anger and demeaning attacks and debate by ad hominems are not helpful in debates nor do they enhance the Christian Witness that we, as disciples of Jesus are to "love one another" or that authentic respect and love and personal happiness is to be found in our religion.


In any case Soapy, I hope your own spiritual journey in life is insightful and brings your life happiness and satisfaction.


Clear
You are an imposter.

I answered the ‘Heaven is for the elect’ because that was a point in question that you got sensationally wrong!. You replied:
  • However, that While the repost “HEAVEN is for the ELECT… the elect will certainly not be anyone like you describe so what’s your point?” is meant to deflect the sting of criticism, the repost offers an irrational and silly counter theory that a joyful and harmonious social heaven will NOT be inhabited by individuals who have learned social laws that create and sustain joy and harmony.

    This irrational response creates a strange and irrational doctrine.
    Individuals may rightly conclude that this specific religious belief is irrational and lose interest in authentic Christian principles.
    If you want to do good for Christianity, it is counterproductive not to at least try to be logical in theories.”
This completely incorrect. My view of Heaven is as of the scriptures. Your earthly snd incorrect view is that all people go to heaven therefore it requires civil people to qualify (which is a nonsense!!). I said that there is a class of people - the ELECT - whom scriptures claim are ‘chosen by God from before the beginning of time’. These are the only ones who will be in the spiritual heaven. All others will occupy the earth… that is, all of the class you state. The WICKED and utterly and wilful sinners will be judge BY JESUS as unworthy and they’d spirit will be destroyed (destroyed means eternal death).

I reacted to your wrongful mindset. How dare you claim it was to deflect from criticism! What you did was to claim that truth is a nonsense… truth that you know nothing about because: you are an imposter : pretending to be studying Christianity but secretly undermine, of attempting to undermine all that is God’s word!! In fact, what you do can be labelled as ‘Grieving the Holy Spirit of God’ but you wouldn’t understand what that means: You ‘Write what you do not know!’.

In fact, it seems like it is you who cannot take criticism… you love giving it… your writing is all about talking counter to what someone says while never answering to questions set to you. It’s as if you fear to be criticised so you deflect from putting your opinion … hiding it under ‘it’s got to be Historical data’ or I don’t believe it… but then there is so much contrary historical data that it is unclear what exactly you do believe… if anything but criticising what others say!!!
 
Last edited:

Brian2

Veteran Member
Did Paul preach to keep Circumcision, the covenant kept by the "father of nations/Gentiles", Abraham, (Zechariah 11:10) or to avoid unclean food/swine, or to avoid idols? Were the nations/Gentiles, in which the "house of Israel" is now 'scattered' (Ezekiel 36:17-19), taught to keep "My ordinances...and observe them" (Ezekiel 37:24) when given a "new heart" (Ezekiel 37:26), which only happens after they are taken out from among the nations/Gentiles (Ezekiel 36:24)? As for bearing the sin of the "many", which would be before their forgiveness, that would refer to those "gathered from the nations" (Ezekiel 36:25) who will be cleaned with "water"/baptism (Ezekiel 36:33), cleaned of their (house of Israel) iniquities, which precedes the setting up the kingdom whereas David is made king (Ezekiel 37:24-25). As for John the Baptist, who along with Yeshua, proclaimed the kingdom, your quote from Luke 16:16, leaves out Luke 16:17, which proclaims it is "easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one stroke of a letter of the Law to fail, which is a watered down version of Matthew 5:18. According to John the Baptist, you must confess your sins, and repent, and produce good fruit, less you be cast into the furnace of fire (Matthew 3:10). Are you taught to repent, which is turn from sin, and that you must produce good fruit, or be cast into the furnace of fire. Or are you taught to "believe" that God is one in three (James 2:19). If Yeshua died for your sins/iniquity, then you would no longer reside in sin, but the followers of Paul all will die, and carry the "plagues" of the harlot (Revelation 18:4). As for John 3:16-17, if one "believes in him", the "Word made flesh" (John 1:14), then they would heed his message, or else "fall" (Matthew 7:24-27), along with those who "hang" onto the the guy claiming the keys of David, the pope (Isaiah 22:22-25). As for the wine of the last supper, that would indicate the blood, whereas the breath of God resides (Genesis 2;7), the Spirit of God/Revelation/prophecy, whereas Yeshua had to go to heaven in order to send the Helper. As for your Isaiah 59:21, that eludes to Isaiah 59:20, which is a referral to Jacob, which includes Judah and Ephraim, and is limited to those turning from transgression, which would be transgression of the Law. And "My words" would remain in the mouth of your/Jacob's offspring "from now and forever". That would not include the words of false prophets, except when the false prophets quote real prophets and Law as did the devil in the wilderness.

Gentile Christians have been joined with the Jewish Christians as God's people. (John 10:16)
The Jews under the old covenant have been exiled because of their deeds and they are not under the New Covenant even if they are still loved because of Abraham etc and God will keep the covenant with them that they are under, and God still wants them in the new covenant. The Gentiles have what legitimately the Jews should also have, but rejected their Messiah (Ps 89:39) and stuck with the old covenant with it's commands and statutes and killed their Messiah and God was angry,,,,,,,,,,,,,,as the rest of Ps 89 tells us,,,,,,,,,,,,but for how long, not much longer it seems.
Deut 32:21
‘They have made Me jealous with what is not God;
They have provoked Me to anger with their idols.
So I will make them jealous with those who are not a people;
I will provoke them to anger with a foolish nation,

And yes they will be taken out of the nations and they will mourn when they see the one they have pierced. (Zech 12:10) and be given a spirit of supplication.
But as Jesus said, not one stroke or letter of the law will fail till heaven and earth pass away.
This is happening with the Jews now because they are under the Law of Moses and so must keep it to the letter.
Other parts of the Law,,,,,,,,,,,which includes the whole of the Old Testament, is the New Covenant in the Spirit and we end up fulfilling the requirements of the law through love and not through commands and statutes,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,the law is in our heart but it is not all the commands and statutes which are in our heart it is love given to us by the Spirit.
The Redeemer came to Zion to those who repented and they received the Spirit (Isa 59:20,21) and the law/word of God went forth from Zion to the world and many have come to the Lord the God of Jacob and He is teaching us His ways as promised. (Isa 2:3)
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
You just made this up ….

The Father is in the sin and the sin in the Father SIMPLY MEANS that they agree: ‘I and the Father, are one!’

But they are NOT IN THE SPIRIT…. The Spirit is IN THEM.

This means the same thing as the first claim: that they agree because the Spirit is The Spirit of Truth… and TRUTH is in them both!

Truth is not a person! it is a POWER!! Truth is power!!!

Jesus was ANOINTED with the HOLY spirit OF God.

‘Holy Spirit’ is not a NAME … it is a misused term. The term is just ‘Spirit of God… which is Holy’. The longer description is just an emphatic which has become a standard such that naive readers think it is the name … NO! The Spirit of God is Holy but ‘Holy Spirit is not its name’!

The Spirit is in them and they are in the Spirit because the Spirit of God,,,,,,,,,,,which is the same as the Spirit of Christ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,is everywhere. How could they not be in the Spirit?
I and the Father are one. This word one is neuter, meaning one thing. I and the Father are one thing,,,,,,,,,,,,,,not one in agreement.
The Spirit dwells in a believer,,,,,,,,,,,,the Spirit is alive.
The Spirit knows the mind of God,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,the Spirit knows things.
The Spirit speaks to us.
You are mistaken.
 

Soapy

Son of his Father: The Heir and Prince
Hi @Soapy ;

Soapy replied : “ ‘I say things that I want to say regardless of what anyone else thinks about it!’.

The problem that such self-centered communication causes is that the result of saying whatever one wants to say is that IF what is said originates from the emotion of anger, then the logic and rational content of what is said often suffers.

For example, when I point out that if a social heaven is to be joyful and harmonious, it cannot be inhabited by individuals who are mean and spiteful and oppressive and uncivil. Your repost is : HEAVEN is for the ELECT… the elect will certainly not be anyone like you describe so what’s your point?” (soapy, post #14670

However, that While the repost “HEAVEN is for the ELECT… the elect will certainly not be anyone like you describe so what’s your point?” is meant to deflect the sting of criticism, the repost offers an irrational and silly counter theory that a joyful and harmonious social heaven will NOT be inhabited by individuals who have learned social laws that create and sustain joy and harmony.

This irrational response creates a strange and irrational doctrine.
Individuals may rightly conclude that this specific religious belief is irrational and lose interest in authentic Christian principles.
If you want to do good for Christianity, it is counterproductive not to at least try to be logical in theories.





The rare but honest admission that you are "not infallible and so, yes, I do get a little heated" (Soapy post #1488) is a good insight for any of us to have since most of us can find ourselves in this same position.

I have to wonder if one of the reasons a basic Christian principle is to avoid irrational anger is that angry emotions often rob us of rational and logical thought and my point is that irrational anger and demeaning attacks and debate by ad hominems are not helpful in debates nor do they enhance the Christian Witness that we, as disciples of Jesus are to "love one another" or that authentic respect and love and personal happiness is to be found in our religion.


In any case Soapy, I hope your own spiritual journey in life is insightful and brings your life happiness and satisfaction.


Clear
You are an imposter.

I answered the ‘Heaven is for the elect’ because that was a point in question that you got sensationally wrong! I reacted to your wrongful mindset. How dare you claim it was to deflect from criticism!

In fact, it seems like it is you who cannot take criticism… you love giving it… your writing is all about talking counter to what someone says while never answering to questions set to you. It’s as if you fear to be criticised so you deflect from putting your opinion … hiding it under ‘it’s got to be Historical data’ or I don’t believe it… but then there is so much contrary historical data that it is unclear what exactly you do believe… if anything but criticising what others say!!

Tell me, therefore,
  1. Where in scriptures do you get the idea of who goes to Heaven?
  2. Give me a verse in which it is not claimed that the elect are the ones who will inhabit Heaven?
  3. Who do you say are the ELECT of God?
  4. Who will therefore occupy the earth to make it what God spoke in the beginning:
    1. “For this is what the LORD says— he who created the heavens, he is God; he who fashioned and made the earth, he founded it; he did not create it to be empty, but formed it to be inhabited— he says: “I am the LORD, and there is no other.” (Isaiah 45:18)
Answers please!!
 
Last edited:
Top