Posted on 03/19/2006 6:25:15 PM PST by whispering out loud
"There ya go being arrogant again. If I had a nickel for each time you insinuated that you're more scholarly and more learned in scripture than the next guy I'd be a millionaire. Please take your head out of the clouds."
Why is it that people who are not capable of answering scriptural questions resort to personal attacks. I take note of your chosen screen name when determining how much credience to give to your opinions.
Would you consider it "arrogant" to cite the above verse when asked to define one's terms?
SD
Oh I'm perfectly capable just wanted to point out again how arrogant you are. You apparently don't see it.
You should beleive the Bible before correcting those who do.
It is probably too much to expect you to know what a paranthetical statement is, but there is one in the section.
We know that in the beginnig God created the heavens and universe. We know that Jesus was born in Bethlehem.
It makes sense to follow the prepositions (him, he, his) and make sure that you see to whom each is referring. If it talks about a 'him' that created the universe, then it has to refer to God; if it is a 'he' that is the head of the church, then it must refer to Jesus. Remember, there was no punctuation in the greek texts. The JKV translators sometimes got it right, sometimes not. Here they missed some. Also see sections in Romans 5-8 where Paul goes into paranthetical explanation.
I don't know. If you're correct about his motivation I would agree.
No, I find it appropriate when dealing with you.
You'll see that I've carried on civily, and at length with the others even though they don't supply answers butexpect me to jump at every 'gotchya' attempt they make.
I've always taken note of your screen name whenever I see you sparkin' up a fued with somebody. lol.
"Oh I'm perfectly capable just wanted to point out again how arrogant you are. You apparently don't see it."
Since you are perfectly capable of answering the question, pease explain the meaning of Col 1:12-16 to Eagle Eye.
I am sure that we would all benefit from your answer.
LOL. And what does "only begotten" mean again? Where did you answer this basic question?
SD
God cannot lie.
God cannot override free will.
So God does, indeed, have some limits even if they are self imposed. But if he lied, would he still be God? And if he overrode free will would he still be perfectly loving?
Well?
I don't know where you get any notion that I owe you any answers.
Maybe you should get a dictionary and look up each word then go to your room and think about it for a while.
No need. Its my opinion the writing is not inspired. I'll let you, Mr. scholarly hyper-literalist. That way it gives you another chance to encourage someone to study as much you do. Or at least as much as yo brag about studying.
I just asked my children and they see a metaphor. Of course, they also think that Jesus was not a literal loaf of bread or a literal vine, so why should he be a literal word (spoken or written).
They also know that when I promise to bake them a cake, my word is true. Therefore, when the cake comes into being, it is my word that has come true. My word was that there would be a cake. "Cake" is the word made manifest with flour, sugar, etc. Faith in the promise is the substance of the cake hoped for, the evidence of the cake not seen. By faith in the promise of the cake, the children obtained a good report - that mom's homemade cherry cheesecake will be tonight's dessert. They knew this even before they saw me assemble the ingredients, because they know me.
I thought you were trying to use words intelligently, to form an argument and convince others of the correctness of your position.
Little did I know you were either incapable or unwilling (or both) to define the very words you use. Not much of an argument, then, is it? How is one supposed to accept your illumination of our dank corners of the world when you can't even tell us what you are talking about?
SD
exactly who was the word that became flesh? To exact that Jesus could not be 100% God, and 100% man is putting God in a box, and taking away from omnipotence.
You guys are starting to resemble the pharisees and saducees.
No matter what Jesus told them they were displeased and continuted looking for ways to trip him up.
And they couldn't even answer his questions though they demanded answers from him.
Even a miracle wouldn't help them believe.
Nor would clear scripture open your eyes.
Col 1:3 We give thanks to God and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, praying always for you,
God is creator of heaven and earth and is the father of the Lord Jesus Christ.
Deal with it.
How is God the "father" of Jesus? Is Jesus the son of God in a special, unique way? What does "begotten" mean? What does "only" mean? What does "only begotten" mean?
Why do you continue to say the words over and over, but refuse to think about them?
SD
see 134.
But why is it that you cannot explain yourself, yet demand that I do?
If Jesus is God, how can the Bible call him the mediator between men and man the MAN Christ Jesus?
Since God is not a man, and Jesus is a man, wouldn't that make it pretty clear that God is not Jesus and Jesus is not God?
Luke 1;35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.
the Holy Spirit shall come upon the So Jesus was the son of the Holy Spirit? But I thought he was the son of God, So does that mean the Holy Spirit is God? Thats what it sounds like to me.
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.