Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Logic which was treated much differently 2000 years ago. Back then, you could make a philosophical statement and it would hold true, even if a few exceptions existed.
No, you are pointing out one of the mysteries. Another happens to be the predestifreewillianism I am promoting in the other thread.
Because you fail to grasp the English language being typed by my fingers, Gary. Because you make false accusation and supposition rather than logical points.
You will not hear me talk about what that means because it is not a concept you can grasp without making excuses or ignoring some important point. I have seen how you treat me, Gary, and despite implying that insults are a bad thing, you have just insulted me.
Really? Then explain Matthew 28 and every single other verse that has been quoted on this thread.
Opinions of which are based upon faulty reasoning, similar to your own. A failure to actually look at the Bible rather than reading into it.
I have the evidence that sits in front of my face, buddy. This entire thread is evidence of your ignorance. I have already pointed out that you have failed to answer my questions, yet you still demand answers to my questions after I have told you in no uncertain terms that you will not get them until you answer mine.
No, I can't, because I typed it, I did not speak it.
And you have not? You have accused things of being only in my imagination when it is clearly and blatantly written in the Bible, yet you want to pin me for insults? If it is such an insult to be told that you are not being logical, are being rather obnoxious, and being childish, then I should be reprimanded for 'insulting' any kid I correct at the elementary school. Your point is only proving my post. You are digging yourself a bigger hole.
If I am so unloving, why am I pointing this out rather than letting you continue in your ignorant ways?
Quite the contrary, I did not say I have a narrow mind. I stated:
Really? I never said that he is not the Son of God. But why cannot he be both God and God's son?
Then why is Jesus called 'God and savior, Jesus Christ' in most of those translations? Why is Jesus called 'Lord' in all of them? Peter is a Jew, so he knows perfectly well that Lord only applies to God himself, especially in the Greek.
Then they were wrong
. It could be generally true, but it would be wrong to say it is always true if exceptions exist. That's the thing about logical proofs: they're cold, calculating, conclusive, and leave no wiggle room.Heh, indeed. But isn't it just a cop out to say "God works in mysterious ways", or some such?
I thought I said it was impossible. Why you no listen?
That’s funny coming from someone who has little concept of logic.
Funny how you will not commit to telling me what it is to live a righteous life. I thought coming from a professed Christian that would be easy. But it seems that because you cannot get pass your personal dislike of this heretic, as you so lovingly call me, you cannot bring yourself to impart the Christian spirit.
Of course I call you wrong, I don’t agree with your theology. And I do understand your meaning, I just don’t agree with it.
Always asking me to explain verses. It is you that does not understand me, Matt 28, has nothing to do with what I meant. And I'm pretty sure your interpretation would not agree with mine anyway. Try sticking to your own explanations, in your own words, if you can.
Boy, you sure are hard work. So your views are fact and the opinions of others are merely faulty opinions. Good luck with that one!
You really need to think before you talk. You cannot know what I ignore, unless of course you have to ability to read my mind. Firstly, disagreeing with something is not equal to ignorance. Secondly, I demand nothing from you at all; asking is not equal to demanding. And thirdly, you constantly rattle on about how I have not answered your questions. That’s one of your tactics, is it not!
Oh… Sarcasm from a professing Christian… Now I guess you’re going to tell me Jesus was sarcastic too.
Do you really want me to highlight the amount of times you have said to me, “Imagine?” And what you see so clearly and blatantly written in the Bible is your interpretation and opinion. Did you forget that there exists thousands of Christian denomination all reading the same Bible and coming to different conclusions. Oh, I forgot your interpretation is fact and all others are just faulty opinions.
Well, I hope the readers can see you the nature of your attitude that is neatly placed between the lines. Did you enjoy using certain words in that quote?
That line itself is proof of your unloving nature towards me.
No matter what you stated, you have a narrow mind. Also I see no evidence of ability for you to think outside of the box.
Oh, I have indeed considered yours, and I can see the other side of the coin. Been there, seen it, done it. I was once a Trinitarian....
According to today's philosophy, yes.Then they were wrong
I hope you're not leaving the entire site... And no, it is not a cop out when it is part of Christianity.
Because you're not talking, you're typing.
Your following statements contain circular logic, so not with them can you prove it. Try again, if you can.
Wait, let me get this straight. Jesus, being God's son, cannot be God because God cannot have a son if He is God? Nice circular argument there.
And this is another straw man argument from you. I never said that one times three equals one, I said one third times three equals one. Get your facts straight.
Then prove that God cannot do certain things, prove that he is physically unable to do them.
Really? Show me something that is impossible for God. And by the way, I did read it in context. I read the entire Bible where other such statements are made. Check Luke 1:37, for instance. It kinda goes with being all powerful and all knowing, you know.
Correction- not possible for God to die and stay that way.
Duh.
Define 'temptation'.
Laughing at someone in the face of an argument is not a very smart thing to do. It's like Obama last night muttering 'no, that's not true' as McCain continues to tell Obama what he said. It's bickering and just not smart.
Why, it's because you won't understand it being hypocritical yourself. You talk to me about not insulting yet you do the same to me!
Another straw man. My dislike of how you act has nothing to do with why I will not talk to you about righteousness. It has to do with the darkness being unable to comprehend the light. I am not going to explain things that will go right over your head.
Jesus never commands us to be kind, he commands us to love. If being kind was part of the package, then Jesus would not have insulted the pharisees, nor would Paul have insulted the Corinthians, nor would Peter insult Ananias and Saphira. You talk to me about logic and ask me to explain righteousness, yet you cannot see fit to take into account what the Bible says about loving and kind... The kindness you ask me to give you is not loving, it is ignorant.
Sorry, but I do not accept blessings that I do not need, nor do I accept hypocritical sentiments, nor do I condone stalking behavior. You have followed me ever since page nine of this thread into threads in GA, only responding to me trying to bash me. I can go back and post those too, because I've kept the links, so just as you tell me not to deny it, don't deny it yourself.
You cannot call a statement wrong simply because you do not agree with it. Disagreement does not make for errancy, it makes disagreement. And previously you said you do not understand my meaning... so you might want to make up your mind.
It has everything to do with the Trinity which you deny. So it has everything to do with this conversation.
Not when we are having a theological discussion. Or did you forget that you previously asked me for Scripture?
Sorry, but I did not claim to be perfect, I merely claimed that most, if not all denominations have their basis in opinion and reading into Scripture rather than logic and fact. Surely you would agree.
As do you.
I can when you do not address a valid point made.
No, but disagreeing and using such disagreement only to claim that someone else is wrong and you are right does equal ignorance.
Perhaps if you answered them I might shut up about it.
And I suppose you're going to show me a verse where it is condemned rather than making baseless claims?
Go ahead, you'd be wasting your time.
Then how come only a select fringe of 'Christians' actually support your view and the majority supports mine if it is just my opinion and interpretation?
Straw man. I never claimed that bit of nonsense. I claimed that denominations have their basis in opinion and faulty logic.
Not particularly, I really wish us humans could have just listened to God rather than ignoring him and causing everyone to stumble, but that's not the case. Thus, such labels are necessary. I do not enjoy having to point out flaws in others, nor do I enjoy the flaws in myself. In fact, I would go so far to say as that is a difference between you and I- I admit I have flaws, and you seem to deny them as 'insults'.
Hardly, it proves that I have an unloving nature towards your ways... When one condemns the ways of another, that is all they condemn.
Then you don't know me as well as you think. You've never seen me work with kids, nor have you seen me practice Tae Kwon Do, nor have you seen me read a book, nor have you seen me do any number of other activities which make up my daily life. You have judged how my mind works solely based on what you see me type- the part of me that I allow you to see.
Then why accuse it of being wrong? Why ignore the Bible for the sake of your own opinion?
Throughout this entire post you have shown that you do not, for if you did you would know that unless a moderator sees fit to shut us both up I will not drop this and you would cease this squabbling.I know how you think.
More sarcasm how typical
No need to try, my statement stands, you just dont get it!
That is right you got it straight. Now try to comprehend this simple logic instead of calling it circular as a smoke-screen. Circular logic indeed .
And I said 1+1+1=1 is impossible; my facts are straight thank you. That is the example is what trinity folk use, is it not?
OK.
Ummm. I just did!
Sorry, you believe you read it in context, but you have failed, as all things are not possible with God as other parts of the Bible will attest.
Which of course Jesus is not. Only the Father is all knowing, Jesus is not. More proof that Jesus is not God. Its in the Bible!
Cat got you tongue, or are you going to tell me God lies?
. Oh please, stop with the games, you know God cannot be tempted. Of course I know youre looking for a spin.
How is saying something is funny is laughing in someones face? And why are you telling me about US politics, Im English, Im not interested in your internal affairs.
I think the reason you will not commit to said life, is because you do not represent said life. And I am not hypocritical. As for insults, every time you slap me Im gonna slap you right back. Of course a real Christian would turn the other cheek as Christ taught. But I dont claim to be a Christian as you do!
There goes another slap. You really are a sad case arent you; you are your own worst enemy. You contradict your own theology with your un-Christian attitude.
Wrong! Never heard the phrase, Youve got to be cruel to be kind But you are not like Jesus or Paul, so youre not being kind as they were.
You might like to take that on board yourself. On that particular meaning I do understand. Mind made up maybe your using smoke again with a different time and meaning.
You mean your view on your interpretation of it. And I dont deny the trinity; I just dont believe it.
I could have forgot, I cant remember, but Im sure they would not agree.
.I do know the mindset of Trinitarians as I was one. And Im not squabbling, Im just reacting to your manner in the way you conduct your posts. I dont see why a mod would stop an on going debate. But in case that happens I will keep copies so we could continue in another thread.
NAS is the most literal translation we have. I notice that most of the translations cited have Trinitarian implications.
There are no commas in Greek. In Greek, the last part is literally 'righteousness God savior (or Christ or God) Jesus Christ'.
Lord, for the Jews, was reserved only for God himself.(ASV) Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained a like precious faith with us in the righteousness of our God and the Saviour Jesus Christ: Grace to you and peace be multiplied in the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord;
(KJV) Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ: Grace and peace be multiplied unto you through the knowledge of God, and of Jesus our Lord,
God and Jesus was separated by "and"......
Since in 2pet1:2 a distinction was made between God and his anointed one...."Additional "comma" by NASB is not necessary.....
So whether you use ASV, KJV or other version without the "additional" comma..... It still favors the non trinitarian view that the Anointed one (Christ) is a distinct being from God.....
I will also like to point out that Jesus Lordship was not inherent to him.... He received it from God.....
Yes, the anointed one recieved glory and power from God.......
No, try your argument again in a less circular fashion.
I am not smoke screening anything... it is circular. It goes, "A is B because C cannot have B when B is in the Bible." It goes around in circles.
No, it is not. I specifically said that 1/3 times 3 = 1.
It is possible for God to lie, but God does not allow himself to lie. In fact, it is possible for God to do all those things. And if you're going to use the Bible as proof, then you need to cite where it is.
No, you did not. You showed me nothing but an opinion.
Where?
Another circular argument. A is not B because A is not B.
I am going to tell you that God limits himself from lying rather than that it is impossible for God to lie.
I am not playing games. You say something is impossible, and I want you to prove it rather than just claiming it.
You laugh at the argument rather than addressing it. That is just as rude as laughing in one's face. And I am using a contemporary news example of what you are doing.
I already do commit and do represent.
Then you should not be posting in CA. And I should report you for that... seeing as it was posted as a rule.
You are the one claiming it is unChristlike and you are twisting the Bible to say that, so why should I be intimidated by this?
Straw man. I never said that... I said that being loving requires that truth be spoken, and truth sometimes hurts, albeit indirectly.
When I am the only one whose posts you respond to it is very suspicious.
No, I mean what I said, and interpretation or my view of it was not part of what I said. And when you do not believe in the trinity, you are denying it.
No, I don't condemn that. I state that it is incomplete. Without hell, there is no need for sacrifice, rendering your belief in the sacrifice useless. And without Jesus being God, the sacrifice would also be meaningless.
You don't know me as well as you claim to. That is my point.
But your interpretation not taking into account the various facts of what is in the Bible does mean that you ignore it.
No, it is not, sorry. It is written all over the NT, for one, and for another it is a cultural reference that we cannot ignore or debate.
Not in Greek it isn't, but it is when put into the context of the time period.
Because you claim it doesn't? Not gonna fly. Even so, address Matthew 28 for us. You know, the bit that states, "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit," tell us what that's all about.Therefore 2pet1:1-2 does not prove Trinity.......
You may be surprised, or you may not, but I've decided to be the one to turn the other cheek, because at the end of the day it is not a real debate and it's becoming quite silly.
Yes brother bias is upheld in many translations with faulty punctuation that diverts the truth.
When you drop out of the conversation or fail to address points, you concede the point.This is so sad.
No, I do not concede anything whatsoever.
I have turned the other cheek from the insults that are being exchanged between us.
Peace.
