Who is God Almighty?

[moorea944]

I am 100% convinced that you will not succeed. David was also born in Bethlehem and thousands of other Jews, and
David became a King in Israel. Jesus was born in Bethlehem and never became a king in Israel. Therefore, that's one
evidence that he was not the Messiah.

I am of the kind of Jews who believe in the collective concept of Messiah. The Messiah cannot be an individual. The individual is born, lives his span of life and dies. Are we to expect a new Messiah in every generation? Obviously not! The Messiah is not supposed to die but to remain as a People before the Lord forever. (Jeremiah 31:35-37) Then, if you read Habakkuk 3:13, "The Lord goes forth to save His People; to save His Anointed One." That's what Messiah is, the Anointed One of the Lord aka Israel the Son of God if you read Exodus 4:22,23.

Messiah is supposed to have been from the Tribe of Judah. Was Jesus from the Tribe of Judah? He had to be a biological son of Joseph to be from the Tribe of Judah. Joseph was the one from the Tribe of Judah. The NT denies that Jesus was a biological son of Joseph by making him a son of God with Mary. (Mat. 1:18)

The Messiah is the fulfillment of the Scapegoat and the Scapegoat was sent to Azazel alive, not dead. The only thing you have to prove that Jesus is alive is faith. I have History to prove to you that he has been dead for about 2000 years. He was a Jew and, as a Jew, he would not contradict his own gospel which was the Tanach which denies bodily resurrection if you read II Samuel 12:23; Psalms 49:12,20; Isaiah 26:14; Job 7:9; etc. And, as a Jew, he did not have a church but a Synagogue. Paul was the one who founded the Christian Church if you read Acts 11:26.

Jesus was born in Bethlehem and never became a king in Israel. Therefore, that's one evidence that he was not the Messiah.

Scripture tells us that he will be King when he returns. He will be a king that will rule in righteousness and rule the world. I know that you dont really like reading the NT, and really dont believe in Jesus, but some of your remarks completely go against scripture.

I am of the kind of Jews who believe in the collective concept of Messiah. The Messiah cannot be an individual.

That's not what the bible says........

The individual is born, lives his span of life and dies. Are we to expect a new Messiah in every generation?

Why would you say something so sarcastic as that?

The Messiah is not supposed to die but to remain as a People before the Lord forever.

What bible are you reading? You should start reading the NT too. Scripture tells us that the Messiah did die and was raised. It also tells us that he will remain with his people forever...

Also, read 1 Cor 15......

Then, if you read Habakkuk 3:13, "The Lord goes forth to save His People; to save His Anointed One." That's what Messiah is, the Anointed One of the Lord aka Israel the Son of God if you read Exodus 4:22,23.

Your saying that the Messiah or the anointed one is the nation of Israel. Who does the bible say the Anointed one is in the future? The Anointed one comes to save Israel, to restore David's throne, to "set up" a kingdom.

Messiah is supposed to have been from the Tribe of Judah. Was Jesus from the Tribe of Judah? He had to be a biological son of Joseph to be from the Tribe of Judah. Joseph was the one from the Tribe of Judah. The NT denies that Jesus was a biological son of Joseph by making him a son of God with Mary. (Mat. 1:18)

Again....... your missing other books and chapters on who the messiah is. He is from the tribe of Judah. He is also called the Lion from the Tribe of Judah.

The only thing you have to prove that Jesus is alive is faith.

Without faith, scripture says, it is impossible to please God. We know that God raised Jesus because scripture has told us. Plus, we also read that people saw him after his death.

I have History to prove to you that he has been dead for about 2000 years.

No you dont. You just say that because you dont believe that Jesus is the Messiah.

He was a Jew and, as a Jew, he would not contradict his own gospel which was the Tanach which denies bodily resurrection if you read II Samuel 12:23; Psalms 49:12,20; Isaiah 26:14; Job 7:9; etc.

Anything is possible with God. Abraham believed that his son would be raised if he killed him. The bible also talks about death. That in death, there is nothing. That is why Paul and the apostles preached the resurrection which is part of the gospel.

Also read 2 Sam 7, Psalms 22, Zech 13, there are so many verses that talks about the coming Messiah. And who was that person that was nailed to the tree or stake (cross), it was Jesus. And you say that the messiah is the nation of Israel? Wow.
Yes, the bible says that Israel was the first born in a certain sense, God was also their husband, their king, their rock, etc...... That is how our Creator talks. But he never said that the nation of Israel was the messiah. Israel was good and bad all throughout their history. That's a messiah to you?

And, as a Jew, he did not have a church but a Synagogue. Paul was the one who founded the Christian Church if you read Acts 11:26.

What is a church in the bible? You really think it's a four walled building? Church was put in their by the translators. The word is ecclesia or ekklesia. It means a group or asembly of people who have been called out of the world. Or called out ones.

 

[MJFlores]

Yes and even better luck to you.

Let us check the verses you used - about the Messiah, @Ben Avraham

Jeremiah 31:35-37 New International Version (NIV)

This is what the Lord says,

he who appoints the sun
to shine by day,
who decrees the moon and stars
to shine by night,
who stirs up the sea
so that its waves roar—
the Lord Almighty is his name:
“Only if these decrees vanish from my sight,”
declares the Lord,
“will Israel ever cease
being a nation before me.”
This is what the Lord says:

“Only if the heavens above can be measured
and the foundations of the earth below be searched out
will I reject all the descendants of Israel
because of all they have done,”
declares the Lord.

The Messiah is not supposed to die but to remain as a People before the Lord forever. (Jeremiah 31:35-37)
@psychoslice Sir, do you see his assertion on his verse?
Let the gentleman be our arbiter
You could answer with a simple Yes or No

 

[psychoslice]

Let us check the verses you used - about the Messiah, @Ben Avraham

Jeremiah 31:35-37 New International Version (NIV)

This is what the Lord says,

he who appoints the sun
to shine by day,
who decrees the moon and stars
to shine by night,
who stirs up the sea
so that its waves roar—
the Lord Almighty is his name:
“Only if these decrees vanish from my sight,”
declares the Lord,
“will Israel ever cease
being a nation before me.”
This is what the Lord says:

“Only if the heavens above can be measured
and the foundations of the earth below be searched out
will I reject all the descendants of Israel
because of all they have done,”
declares the Lord.

The Messiah is not supposed to die but to remain as a People before the Lord forever. (Jeremiah 31:35-37)
@psychoslice Sir, do you see his assertion on his verse?
Let the gentleman be our arbiter
You could answer with a simple Yes or No

No god doesn't do any of that, it just happens, no special magic behind it.

 

[MJFlores]

@Ben Avraham

About resurrection, people coming back to life - is something that will happen on the end of the world. I'm sure you believe that?

That is why the Lord Jesus Christ was the first to be resurrected and lifted up in heaven - hence to be the first born of the dead.

Colossians 1:18New International Version (NIV)

And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy.

 

[Sapiens]

And as usual, there is no way to get an answer from an atheist. As usual, you have not given me a single word for an answer about what or Who caused the Universe to exist. All the paraphernalia added to discard what I asked has nothing to do with my question. Just in case you did not understand my question, let me ask it from another angle. Let's call it Genetic Causality. Tell me, did you cause yourself to exist? Logically, if you understand what I mean, the answer is "No". To cause yourself to exist, you had to exist to do so. Since you already existed, you would have no need to further cause yourself to exist. Bottom line, you could not have caused yourself to exist. Only two human beings who preceded you caused yourself to exist; your parents; and your parents? Their parents; and their parents? Their parents. Instead of going back by steps, jump all the way back and tell me who caused the very first parents to exist? Someone that preceded them if you are not operating under the power of atheistic preconceived notions. The name is the Primal Cause aka the first One to cause. Your turn.

As usual there is no way to get anything except insults and logical fallacies from a blind believer ... it is all that you have to go on and thus your stock-in-trade. If we run the the entire evolutionary history of humans and their predecessors we have excellent, logical and by-and-large demonstrable science. Abiogenesis is the next, and as yet unexplained, step. I say,"Gee ... I have some hypothesis at this time, but little more. You say, "God-did-it." I admit to a current (and possibly eternal) lack of clear knowledge concerning the origin of life, you retreat into an argument from ignorance. "Primal Cause" is naught but another example of a logical fallacy.

 

[Ben Avraham]

The Lord Jesus Christ is alive, he was lifted up in heaven and is now with Elijah the prophet and Enoch. He is due to return in the future before "the end of all things" (Zephaniah 1) to save his church. Christianity is divided into sects and denominations - each is has its own doctrines - majority non biblical that is how I see it. Oh, about the Hellenistic issue like the Lord Jesus mentioning "Hades" or "Church (ekklesia)" was because after his death, the Gentiles and other races (Greeks and Romans and people in the "ends of the earth") are going to be members of the Church of Christ.

It happens that I can't take faith as an evidence. If you can't use even your own NT as an evidence of an eyewitness for the bodily resurrection of Jesus, no deal! Where is Elijah and Enoch today? In the eternal home of the dead if you read Psalms 49:12, 20. This that the text says he was taken to heaven in a fiery chariot according to II Kings 2:11, was only an embellishment for dying and being buried. You know, that's what we say to children when their father dies and they ask their mother, where is Daddy? And the Mommy says, he went to heaven to be with the Lord. As this cannot be literal, to go up to heaven in a fiery chariot was not literal either. Zephaniah says nothing about the return of Jesus. The opposite is rather true that, once dead, no one will ever return from the grave. (II Samuel 12:23; Psalms 49:12,20 Isaiah 26:14; Job 7:9; etc. To save his church! Jesus never had a church. He used to have a Synagogue. He was a Jew, not a Christian if I have to remind you.

 

[Ben Avraham]

As usual there is no way to get anything except insults and logical fallacies from a blind believer ... it is all that you have to go on and thus your stock-in-trade. If we run the the entire evolutionary history of humans and their predecessors we have excellent, logical and by-and-large demonstrable science. Abiogenesis is the next, and as yet unexplained, step. I say,"Gee ... I have some hypothesis at this time, but little more. You say, "God-did-it." I admit to a current (and possibly eternal) lack of clear knowledge concerning the origin of life, you retreat into an argument from ignorance. "Primal Cause" is naught but another example of a logical fallacy.

For heaven's sake man, answer my simple question! That's all I asked! What or who caused the Universe to exist? You don't have to call me an ignorant. Besides, did I say "God-did-it!" Look for in my previous post. These are all terms in your agenda to deviate or discard a question that you do not know how to answer. You could simply say, "Sorry man, but I don't know". That would be much more decent and civilized than to chain up a lot of insults on someone that you do not know!

 

[Ben Avraham]

About resurrection, people coming back to life - is something that will happen on the end of the world. I'm sure you believe that? That is why the Lord Jesus Christ was the first to be resurrected and lifted up in heaven - hence to be the first born of the dead. Colossians 1:18New International Version (NIV) And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy.

Don't be so sure that I would believe that Hellenistic myth! If you allow me to remind you, I am Jewish and I believe the gospel of Jesus aka the Tanach that says, "From the grave, one will never return." (II Samuel 12:23; Psalms 49:12,20; Isaiah 26:14; Job 7:9; etc.) Regarding your claiming that Jesus was the first to be resurrected, I need an evidence of an eyewitness to the bodily resurrection of Jesus, because I find too had to take faith as an evidence; and Jesus was no head of a Christian Church. That was an office started by Paul the founder of Christianity if you read Acts 11:26. Jesus could not have been the firstborn from among the dead because he was a Jew and not a Hellenistic Christian.

 

[Sapiens]

For heaven's sake man, answer my simple question! That's all I asked! What or who caused the Universe to exist? You don't have to call me an ignorant. Besides, did I say "God-did-it!" Look for in my previous post. These are all terms in your agenda to deviate or discard a question that you do not know how to answer. You could simply say, "Sorry man, but I don't know". That would be much more decent and civilized than to chain up a lot of insults on someone that you do not know!

I do not know what caused the universe to exist, did you fail to read the post where I wrote: "I say,'Gee ... I have some hypotheses at this time, but little more.'"?

Perhaps there was no cause, or there was a cause that requires a detailed understanding of more than three or four dimensions. In any case and despite your protestations, your "Primal Cause" is, in terms of logical fallacies no different than "Got-did-it" and remains an argument from ignorance.

 

[Ben Avraham]

I do not know what caused the universe to exist, did you fail to read the post where I wrote: "I say,'Gee ... I have some hypotheses at this time, but little more.'"? Perhaps there was no cause, or there was a cause that requires a detailed understanding of more than three or four dimensions. In any case and despite your protestations, your "Primal Cause" is, in terms of logical fallacies no different than "Got-did-it" and remains an argument from ignorance.

Okay, you don't know what caused the Universe to exist. Nothing wrong with that! Do you know what caused you to exist? Probably your parents. Do you know what caused the first couple of parents to exist? Probably you don't know either! Okay, when one does not know something, the nicest way to demonstrate it is to keep his mouth shut and not deny the opposite which is claimed to be known by another. Silence is one way to demonstrate some wisdom. (Proverbs 17:28)

 

[Sapiens]

Okay, you don't know what caused the Universe to exist. Nothing wrong with that! Do you know what caused you to exist? Probably your parents. Do you know what caused the first couple of parents to exist? Probably you don't know either! Okay, when one does not know something, the nicest way to demonstrate it is to keep his mouth shut and not deny the opposite which is claimed to be known by another. Silence is one way to demonstrate some wisdom. (Proverbs 17:28)

I will point out here that you are the one to first open his yap and the only one to spew out a logical fallacy as though it were truth. Try taking your own advice since you do not advance your cause with arguments from ignorance. The worst you can say of me is that I do not suffer fools gladly, something I have never denied.

 

[Ben Avraham]

I will point out here that you are the one to first open his yap and the only one to spew out a logical fallacy as though it were truth. Try taking your own advice since you do not advance your cause with arguments from ignorance. The worst you can say of me is that I do not suffer fools gladly, something I have never denied.

I am sorry okay? I did not know you, and I thought we could dialogue. But you turned out to be an atheist and, as usual, they never have an answer to my questions. So, I'll stay with my "ignorance" until I find someone else who can help me out of my "ignorance."

 

[Sapiens]

While your apology is appreciated it does not change the fact that your argument is based on a logical fallacy. Anyone with a freshman logic course, however, will quickly point out to you what an argument from ignorance is and how it differs from being an ignorant person. The perspicacious can even master this with a desultory perusal of wiki,

 

[Ben Avraham]

While your apology is appreciated it does not change the fact that your argument is based on a logical fallacy. Anyone with a freshman logic course, however, will quickly point out to you what an argument from ignorance is and how it differs from being an ignorant person. The perspicacious can even master this with a desultory perusal of wiki,

Do you have an answer why my argument to you seems to be fallacious? And about Logic, do you have one at all to use it to prove that mine comes from ignorance? As you can see, I have changed the form of my questions. Do you have an answer so we con continue with this dialogue or you mean to call the quits?

 

[Sapiens]

Do you have an answer why my argument to you seems to be fallacious?

Because it partakes of what is know as an augment from ignorance.

And about Logic, do you have one at all to use it to prove that mine comes from ignorance?

You might try learning what an augment from ignorance is, might I recommend you look it up?

As you can see, I have changed the form of my questions. Do you have an answer so we con continue with this dialogue or you mean to call the quits?

Answer to what? There is no significant change in your posts which are still based on an argument from ignorance. As I stated earlier: "... your argument is based on a logical fallacy. Anyone with a freshman logic course, however, will quickly point out to you what an argument from ignorance is and how it differs from being an ignorant person. The perspicacious can even master this with a desultory perusal of wiki."

Here, I'll do most of the work for you: Argument from ignorance - RationalWiki

 

[Ben Avraham]

Because it partakes of what is know as an augment from ignorance. You might try learning what an augment from ignorance is, might I recommend you look it up? Answer to what? There is no significant change in your posts which are still based on an argument from ignorance. As I stated earlier: "... your argument is based on a logical fallacy. Anyone with a freshman logic course, however, will quickly point out to you what an argument from ignorance is and how it differs from being an ignorant person. The perspicacious can even master this with a desultory perusal of wiki." Here, I'll do most of the work for you: Argument from ignorance - RationalWiki

No offense meant, but I have come to the conclusion that your opinion to label me as an ignorant is based on atheistic preconceived notions due to the fact that you have realized from the very beginning that this Jew is a different theist and I'll be better off getting rid of him before I waste my time further. Have you ever debated a Jewish theist before?

 

[Sapiens]

No offense meant, but I have come to the conclusion that your opinion to label me as an ignorant is based on atheistic preconceived notions due to the fact that you have realized from the very beginning that this Jew is a different theist and I'll be better off getting rid of him before I waste my time further. Have you ever debated a Jewish theist before?

You are way off base. I never labeled you as ignorant, I identified that you were advancing a claim that partakes of a logical fallacy known as an "argument from ignorance." Your stubborn refusal to look up the term, even after I provided you with a link, is however rather telling.

Let me make this as easy as possible for you.

Argument from ignorance
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Argument from ignorance (from Latin: argumentum ad ignorantiam), also known as appeal to ignorance (in which ignorance represents "a lack of contrary evidence"), is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proved false (or vice versa). This represents a type of false dichotomy in that it excludes a third option, which is that: there may have been an insufficient investigation, and therefore there is insufficient information to prove the proposition be either true or false. Nor does it allow the admission that the choices may in fact not be two (true or false), but may be as many as four,

1. true
2. false
3. unknown between true or false
4. being unknowable (among the first three).[1]

In debates, appeals to ignorance are sometimes used in an attempt to shift the burden of proof.

It should be relatively easy for anyone to see how your premise:

"Almighty" is due to the fact that the Primal Cause caused the Universe to exist. "God Almighty" is just a title to describe the power of the Primal Cause. Anyways, you don't believe It and that's your position. I respect your position if you can explain to us what or who caused the Universe to exist. If you can't, I do not understand how you can so easily discard the Creator when you and all of us are eyewitness of the things created.

is, in fact, an Argument from Ignorance.

Is there some special dispensation proffered to to Jewish Theists as concerns the rules of logic? If so, then I'd rather not play.

 

[Ben Avraham]

You are way off base. I never labeled you as ignorant, I identified that you were advancing a claim that partakes of a logical fallacy known as an "argument from ignorance." Your stubborn refusal to look up the term, even after I provided you with a link, is however rather telling.

Let me make this as easy as possible for you.

Argument from ignorance
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Argument from ignorance (from Latin: argumentum ad ignorantiam), also known as appeal to ignorance (in which ignorance represents "a lack of contrary evidence"), is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proved false (or vice versa). This represents a type of false dichotomy in that it excludes a third option, which is that: there may have been an insufficient investigation, and therefore there is insufficient information to prove the proposition be either true or false. Nor does it allow the admission that the choices may in fact not be two (true or false), but may be as many as four,

1. true
2. false
3. unknown between true or false
4. being unknowable (among the first three).[1]

In debates, appeals to ignorance are sometimes used in an attempt to shift the burden of proof.

It should be relatively easy for anyone to see how your premise:

is, in fact, an Argument from Ignorance.

Is there some special dispensation proffered to to Jewish Theists as concerns the rules of logic? If so, then I'd rather not play.

There is no dispensation of preference from an atheist to another as Logic is concerned. Logic admits no room to contradictions.

 

[MJFlores]

According to the bible, Jehovah is Almighty God. (Genesis 17:1) Yet, some people think that the Bible says that Jesus is Almighty God but is that true? I've compared many different bible translations and have never come across any scripture stating that Jesus is God Almighty. The bible also says Jehovah gives his glory and praise to no one else and that we should worship only him (Psalms 29:2, Isaiah 42:8). Worshipping any other besides Almighty God is a direct violation of the very 1st commandment (Exodus 20:3) and is a sin known as idolatry, and what does the bible say about idolatry? Why not take a look at (1 Corinthians 10:14)

Is the bible wrong for saying "Jehovah is the true God" at (Jeremiah 10:10)? How about when Jehovah is referred to as our Father at Isaiah 64:8? Jesus let's us know his God and Father is the same as our God and Father at (John 20:17). The bible also says that all true worshippers will worship "the Father" (John 4:23). Jesus said the "Father is greater than I am" at John 14:28 right. Jehovah and Jesus are not the same person as some believe, just look at (Acts 7:55 and Acts 7:56) and you'll see.


So for all Christians who believe Jesus is Almighty God or that he should be worshipped, I ask can you please show me a scripture that clearly refer to Jesus as Almighty God or any that say he should be worshipped? And if the true worshippers are worshipping the Father, Jehovah, what does that make those who are worshipping God's son Jesus?

Well, to me the Lord God Almighty is the Father and I worship him.

For the Lord Jesus Christ, he too is to be worshiped because the Father is pleased with his Son.and this is shown in:

Philippians 2:9-11 New International Version (NIV)

Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
and gave him the name that is above every name,
that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.

That is why I worship the Lord Jesus Christ.

Is the Lord Jesus Christ God? My answer is no. He is a man.

John 8:40 New International Version (NIV)

As it is, you are looking for a way to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God. Abraham did not do such things.

I worship the Lord Jesus Christ, not as God but as a man. Why? to the glory of God the Father.

 

[Desert Snake]

According to the bible, Jehovah is Almighty God. (Genesis 17:1) Yet, some people think that the Bible says that Jesus is Almighty God but is that true? I've compared many different bible translations and have never come across any scripture stating that Jesus is God Almighty. The bible also says Jehovah gives his glory and praise to no one else and that we should worship only him (Psalms 29:2, Isaiah 42:8). Worshipping any other besides Almighty God is a direct violation of the very 1st commandment (Exodus 20:3) and is a sin known as idolatry, and what does the bible say about idolatry? Why not take a look at (1 Corinthians 10:14)

Is the bible wrong for saying "Jehovah is the true God" at (Jeremiah 10:10)? How about when Jehovah is referred to as our Father at Isaiah 64:8? Jesus let's us know his God and Father is the same as our God and Father at (John 20:17). The bible also says that all true worshippers will worship "the Father" (John 4:23). Jesus said the "Father is greater than I am" at John 14:28 right. Jehovah and Jesus are not the same person as some believe, just look at (Acts 7:55 and Acts 7:56) and you'll see.


So for all Christians who believe Jesus is Almighty God or that he should be worshipped, I ask can you please show me a scripture that clearly refer to Jesus as Almighty God or any that say he should be worshipped? And if the true worshippers are worshipping the Father, Jehovah, what does that make those who are worshipping God's son Jesus?

According to Scripture, Jesus is the only way to the Abba, so I'm not sure who you are praying to.


2 Corinthians 6:18

'Lord Almighty'