| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 12/26/2013 5:28:25 AM PST by Religion Moderator, reason:
Childish behavior |
Posted on 12/22/2013 7:28:20 AM PST by DouglasKC
“The Christian faith has not been tried and found wanting. It has rather been found difficult and left untried.” —Chesterton
I am the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending.The story of Jesus is either the greatest event in history or the cruelest hoax. If it is a hoax, then the whole of the Christian message crumbles together with the hopes of those multitudes of lives built on his name. The apostle Paul said:
“And if Christ is not risen, then our preaching is empty and your faith is also empty. Yes, and we are found false witnesses of God, because we have testified of God that He raised up Christ, whom He did not raise up; if in fact the dead do not rise. For if the dead do not rise, then Christ is not risen. And if Christ is not risen, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins! Then also those who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men the most pitiable.” -1 Corinthians 15:14-19 (NKJV)
But if the story is true, then this world has been hit with extraordinary news of earth-shaking consequences. Have you taken the trouble to decide which it is?
In a matter this weighty, it is in your interest to explore the truth or falsity of Christ's claims. Amazingly however, many people who don't believe have never bothered to explore the evidence in support of Jesus,[1] but to the contrary, often run away from it. At the same time, many Christians themselves are not sure, at bottom, whether the claims of their faith are solid. Is the Christian claim a hoax? Is it just wishful thinking? Or is it actually true?
(Excerpt) Read more at christiananswers.net ...
This is NOT a game and denying the deity of Christ will result in dyer consequences.
***I agree that there are dire consequences to denying the deity of Christ. The evidence is simple. Those who would deny it would twist history, bend the plain meaning of scriptures, and worse. It is simple heresy. Jesus had very harsh words for false teachers of His day, calling them ‘vipers’ and ‘sons of your father the devil’. No doubt the detractors would consider the actions of Christ to be unChristlike.
Let’s not read more into those Scriptures than they actually say.
***typical words of heresy.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3069049/posts?page=1997#1997
Jesus was either Divine God or he was a liar. Those who wish to believe this, may. But they have nothing in common with those who believe in Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior....the one true God. They cannot deny Him and be called a Christian in any sense of the word.
***Indeed, such teaching is simply heresy.
millerjr
“Jesus was either Divine God or he was a liar.”
Nonsense. He neither claimed to be God nor was he a liar.
He claimed to be the Messiah, Savior, Son of God and one sent by God but not God.
millerjr
“Jesus was either Divine God or he was a liar.”
Nonsense. He neither claimed to be God nor was he a liar.
He claimed to be the Messiah, Savior, Son of God and one sent by God but not God.
millerjr
“Jesus was either Divine God or he was a liar.”
Nonsense. He neither claimed to be God nor was he a liar.
He claimed to be the Messiah, Savior, Son of God and one sent by God but not God.
“his name shall be called Wonderful, Counseller, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.”
***Those who deny the deity of Chirst find it necessary to generate alternative translations of “The mighty God, The everlasting Father”
You who have bought the apostasy lie try to make it otherwise.
***Making it personal?
Jesus did define his disciples but it was not by belief that he was a person of a triune god.
***This sentence doesn’t make sense to me. Perhaps you could reformulate it.
See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the elemental spiritual forces of this world rather than on Christ.
For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form, and in Christ you have been brought to fullness. He is the head over every power and authority.
In him you were also circumcised with a circumcision not performed by human hands. Your whole self ruled by the flesh was put off when you were circumcised by Christ, having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through your faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead.
When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins, having canceled the charge of our legal indebtedness, which stood against us and condemned us; he has taken it away, nailing it to the cross. And having disarmed the powers and authorities, he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross. (Colossians 2:8-15)
So my educated guess is JW.
***I have run across hundreds of people who don’t realize that Jesus claimed to be God Himself, and when they are confronted with the claim, the first thing they do is doubt MY credentials for even bringing up this historical fact.
I think there may be millions of americans & europeans who uphold Jesus as some kind of demigod or “great man” but that’s the end of it. They do not want to be confronted with the simple historical evidence. They aren’t necessarily JW.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/3104583/posts
I think the answer is NOT GOD HIMSELF. For the rest of it, it becomes a philosophical bowlsheet exercise. They simply don’t care where it ends up, as long as it isn’t Jesus IS GOD.
Ah, thanks...been scratching my head trying to figure out the cult involved here. Roy Masters and the new age mediation schtick. One site said he is going to replace Phil Robertson on DD. That is going to ruin the show.
If The Son of God is not truly God and truly man, then what is His Nature? Is He an angel, or great prophet, or a lower divine being than the Father or a god?
***I never get an answer to that, either. All they seem to know is that, they’re against Jesus being God. Beyond that, it’s a bit of a crapshoot.
You are manipulating it to fit what you have been brainwashed to accept. Talk about cult like behavior!
***”Making it personal”?
No mere man or created being could have made that perfect sacrifice for our sins. Only God the Son, taking on human flesh and human nature, the Spotless Lamb, could do this. As another theologian had put it, the conflict over man’s sins was taken up into the Trinity itself.
MOSES SAW GOD...
No he didnt state He is the Father.
Yes he did...Numerous time in the scriptures...
He stated “He and the the Father are one”
That is not the same thing and it has been explained earlier in the thread BUT YOU WILL NOT SEE.
Oh ya, we see your false teaching but you won't dupe us...
It's is difficult to continue to be civil with people who are willfully ignorant, or dishonest...
Rev 22:16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.
Apparently you don't know who the root of David is, or, you are willingly being deceptive about it...Here is the root of David:::::
Luke 3:38 "the son of Enosh, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God."
Here is the offspring of David:
Luk 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,
Jesus says he is both the root of David (God) and the offspring of David (Jesus)...Anyone who disagrees with that is flat out wrong...
How could Jesus be God?
***The better question is “how could God be Jesus”? Simple. If He wanted to, He could do it.
So in stead of twisting scripture and mangling history, perhaps you should investigate the simple claim of Jesus that He was God.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/3104583/posts
If you have nothing of value to contribute, run along. There’s a lad, thank you.
As usual there is more to the story,Mighty God is not a fair translation as even some fair-minded Trinitarians note:
The Net Bible has this interesting note on the title gibbor el (”mighty God”):
“probably an attributive adjective (”mighty God”), though one might translate “God is a warrior” or “God is mighty.” Since this title is apparently used later (10:21, but cf. Hos. 3:5) for God, some have understood it as pointing to the king’s deity. Others argue that the title portrays the king as God’s representative on the battlefield, whom God empowers in a supernatural way (see Hayes and Irvine, Isaiah, 181-82). The latter sense seems more likely in the original context of the prophecy. Having read the NT, we might in retrospect interpret this title as indicating the coming king’s deity, but it is unlikely that Isaiah or his audience would have understood the title in such a bold way. Ps 45:6 addresses the Davidic king as “God” because he ruled and fought as God’s representative on earth. Ancient Near Eastern art and literature picture gods training kings for battle, bestowing special weapons, and intervening in battle. According to Egyptian propaganda, the Hittites described Ramses II as follows: “No man is he who is among us, It is Seth great-of-strength, Baal in person; Not deeds of man are these his doings, They are of one who is unique.” (See M. Lichtheim, Ancient Egyptian Literature, 2:67) Isa. 9:6 probably envisions a similar kind of response when friends and foes alike look at the Davidic king in full battle regalia. When the king’s enemies oppose him on the battlefield, they are, as it were, fighting against God himself.”
Notice that the NetBible scholars are Trinitarians, yet they are realistic and fair minded enough to recognize that gibbor el is not a title of deity. Other scholars agree.
Actually, the passage is not a particularly good one for Trinitarians. It would help the Oneness folks a lot more. The Trinitarian does not regard Jesus as the Father, yet the passage says he shall be called “everlasting father.” The Trinitarian has to do all sorts of twisting to insist that “gibbor el” should be taken as telling us that Jesus is God, but then the next phrase they have to explain away to tell us that he is not the Father.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.