Who Was Moses Talking To??

[JohnRabbit]

Seriously? I suppose you're referring to verses like these as your 'proof' that no one has seen the Father:

John 1:18(NKJV)
18No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him. (Who declared Whom?)

1 John 4:12(NKJV)
12No one has seen God at any time.


John 6:46(NKJV)
46Not that anyone has seen the Father, except He who is from God; He has seen the Father.

This is your 'absolute proof'? Really? "But Stephen, full of the Holy Spirit, gazed into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God.”

You’re misunderstanding the basic hermeneutical principle of limited force. A statement that appears on the surface to be an absolute, categorical assessment might in fact have a limited application/context. A simple everyday example is, “Everyone’s here, let’s get the party started.” Everyone? In the whole world? For a more pertinent example, “No one may see my face and live.” You said it was Christ’s face. No one has seen Christ’s face? No one saw God – Father or Son – face to face? Baloney . They saw God’s face in a limited-force sense (they saw a shaded view of it). “His face was like the sun in all its brilliance.”
If we don’t honor the principle of limited force, we run into insurmountable problems, consider for example one of the verse cited, “No one has seen God at any time (the Father! ).” Do you take this verse at full force? No one saw God, not even Christ, at any time? Of course not . You qualify it as, “No one has seen God the Father at any time.”

Every student of the Bible, if he is going to make sense of it, has to limit the force of some statements. The only difference between you and me, in the current debate, is how much to limit the force of the verses in question. In your limitation, no one has seen the Father in any sense. In my limitation, no one has seen the Father in the fullness of His glory/Light, He thus dwells in Light unapproachable (the fullness of it would kill us).
I repeat. You’ve proved nothing. You’ve merely expressed one biased interpretation of how to apply the limited force.


And I'm just getting started. I can actually prove to you that all Christians have seen the Father, although I'm not sure I care to spend the time.

i take all scripture at full force!

i don't put limits on any scripture. that simply wouldn't make sense.

you say that "they" saw God's face?

who are "they"?

i find that no where in the scripture so once again you're embellishing!



here is what the scripture says:

Exodus 24:16-17(NKJV)
16Now the glory of the Lord rested on Mount Sinai, and the cloud covered it six days. And on the seventh day He called to Moses out of the midst of the cloud.
17The sight of the glory of the Lord was like a consuming fire on the top of the mountain in the eyes of the children of Israel.

and you say that stephen saw the father (7:55)?

the verse says no such thing!

it does, however, say that he saw Jesus!


the verses i've already posted says that the COI saw the glory of God and explained what it was like.

now notice this verse as moses gives us more detail, while speaking to the COI:

Deuteronomy 4:15(NKJV)
15“Take careful heed to yourselves, for you saw no form when the Lord spoke to you at Horeb out of the midst of the fire,

"they" saw no form!

and like i said the proof i gave are facts that can't be disputed!

as you've done before, your conjecture and embellishments would introduce contradictions to the scripture!

if stephen had seen the Father, then john would have written a contradiction to the text in 1jn 4:12, some forty years after stephen's demise! (remember, I've already proven that it was Jesus to Whom moses spoke! )


please be careful to get full understanding of the scriptures before you speak, it will help you side step conjecture!

 

[JAL]

i take all scripture at full force!

i don't put limits on any scripture. that simply wouldn't make sense.

you say that "they" saw God's face?

who are "they"?

i find that no where in the scripture so once again you're embellishing!



here is what the scripture says:

Exodus 24:16-17(NKJV)
16Now the glory of the Lord rested on Mount Sinai, and the cloud covered it six days. And on the seventh day He called to Moses out of the midst of the cloud.
17The sight of the glory of the Lord was like a consuming fire on the top of the mountain in the eyes of the children of Israel.

and you say that stephen saw the father (7:55)?

the verse says no such thing!

it does, however, say that he saw Jesus!


the verses i've already posted says that the COI saw the glory of God and explained what it was like.

now notice this verse as moses gives us more detail, while speaking to the COI:

Deuteronomy 4:15(NKJV)
15“Take careful heed to yourselves, for you saw no form when the Lord spoke to you at Horeb out of the midst of the fire,

"they" saw no form!

and like i said the proof i gave are facts that can't be disputed!

as you've done before, your conjecture and embellishments would introduce contradictions to the scripture!

if stephen had seen the Father, then john would have written a contradiction to the text in 1jn 4:12, some forty years after stephen's demise! (remember, I've already proven that it was Jesus to Whom moses spoke! )


please be careful to get full understanding of the scriptures before you speak, it will help you side step conjecture!

Again, you're limiting the force of the text, "No one has ever seen God."

There's no way you can take that text at face value, without limiting the force, for men HAVE seen God.

You're also incorrect when you say they saw no form. The context is idolatry. Moses is saying they saw no FIXED form after which to fashion a (fixed) idol. But of course they saw a form, for example they saw Fire - they just didn't see a fixed form (a static form). Friend, the only way to see an object is to see a form of some kind. It is therefore logically incoherent - absolute nonsense - to say they saw no form.

Here's what I tell people. If you draw a conclusion that's logically self-contradictory, don't claim you have Scripture to back it up. I don't care if you have a million verses that SEEM to back it up, the reality is that none of them can be reasonably adduced in favor of logical contradictions. For the truth does not self-contradict.

Unless of you course you want to argue that the Bible is not the truth!

 

[JohnRabbit]

Again, you're limiting the force (whatever that means!) of the text, "No one has ever seen God."

There's no way you can take that text at face value, without limiting the force, for men HAVE seen God.

i can't take the verse at face value? (2pet 1:20)

why? because you say so?

you need to come more correct than that!

You're also incorrect when you say they saw no form.

i can read. it's what the verse says.

The context is idolatry. Moses is saying they saw no FIXED form after which to fashion a (fixed) idol. But of course they saw a form, for example they saw Fire - they just didn't see a fixed form (a static form). Friend, the only way to see an object is to see a form of some kind. It is therefore logically incoherent - absolute nonsense - to say they saw no form.

so it's nonsense just to repeat what the bible says!

the scripture says that God has a definite form, for we are created in His image and likeness, per gen 1:26. (no person i've ever seen looks like fire)

you'd rather go with your conjecture over scripture - that's on you.

Here's what I tell people. If you draw a conclusion that's logically self-contradictory, don't claim you have Scripture to back it up. I don't care if you have a million verses that SEEM to back it up, the reality is that none of them can be reasonably adduced in favor of logical contradictions. For the truth does not self-contradict.

Unless of you course you want to argue that the Bible is not the truth!

maybe you need to tell people that you either can't read or that you refuse to believe scripture.

or better yet, tell them that your conjecture trumps scripture!

 

[YosemiteSam]

And you offer this as proof. Now that's good entertainment. If it were true why would Jesus take up the form of a man since He already had it?

Yes maam? Do you forget what Christ said about the Spirit world?

6That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
7Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.
8The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

Obvious being a spirit being He had to manifest himself as human so He could been seen. Right? You cannot see angels can you?

So yes, God has a face, arms, hands, feet etc...and glory!

Elementary my Dear Watson, Elementary!

 

[JohnRabbit]

Elementary my Dear Watson, Elementary!

 

[YosemiteSam]

Will you please identify My Father's commandments?

I think this is most important first. 4He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.

And Jesus said, 15If ye love me, keep my commandments.

and Jesus said, 20Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother.

Now listed, which ones are yours and which ones are His?

 

[YosemiteSam]

And you offer this as proof. Now that's good entertainment. If it were true why would Jesus take up the form of a man since He already had it?

And you offered? Nada, zip, none, nil, naught, nothing, nix, diddly-squatch....well that should cover it!

 

[YosemiteSam]

You did not read the opening statement.

You must be tired?

 

[JAL]

i can't take the verse at face value? (2pet 1:20)

why? because you say so?

you need to come more correct than that!

Because Christ is God. And men have seen Him. Therefore you MUST qualify the verse, "No one has seen God." You can't just take it at face value, you have to figure out what the verse actually MEANS. Moreover Jesus said, "Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father" (John 14:9). So do you take this verse at face value? Do you admit that men have seen the Father? Or do you qualify the verse?

Here's what Ex 24 says, "Then went up Moses, and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel: 10And they saw the God of Israel: and there was under his feet as it were a paved work of a sapphire stone, and as it were the body of heaven in his clearness. 11And upon the nobles of the children of Israel he laid not his hand: also they saw God, and did eat and drink."
Two things to be noted here. First, if you claim they saw no form, you are simply out of your mind with foolishness. Secondly, in light of this passage, there's no way you can take at face value the verse that says, "No one has seen God". For we have two verses here:
(1) "They saw God"
(2) "No one has seen God".

You can't take them both at face value without contradiction. You MUST qualify at least one of the two verses. If you deny this, then you seem to have no respect for the law of non-contradiction, in which case it's not worth carrying on a discussion with you.

i can read. it's what the verse says.

If you don't accept the basic principles of
(1) Non-contradiction.
(2) Limited force
Then you obviously DON'T KNOW HOW TO READ. k?

so it's nonsense just to repeat what the bible says!

It's nonsense to draw logically incoherent, logically self-contradictory, utterly foolish conclusions from a passage. You might repeat the WORDS of Moses but you're not repeating what he MEANT by those words since your interpretations violate the basic rules of reading-with-sanity.

the scripture says that God has a definite form, for we are created in His image and likeness, per gen 1:26. (no person i've ever seen looks like fire)

False dichotomy. Both an be true. Look at Daniel 7 where God sits on a throne while emanating Fire from his form. David saw the same thing in a vision (Psalm 18).

you'd rather go with your conjecture over scripture - that's on you.

Logic over gibberish.

maybe you need to tell people that you either can't read or that you refuse to believe scripture.

This would evidently be an apt description of you.

 

[YosemiteSam]

Because Christ is God. And men have seen Him. Therefore you MUST qualify the verse, "No one has seen God." You can't just take it at face value, you have to figure out what the verse actually MEANS. Moreover Jesus said, "Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father" (John 14:9). So do you take this verse at face value? Do you admit that men have seen the Father? Or do you qualify the verse?

Here's what Ex 24 says, "Then went up Moses, and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel: 10And they saw the God of Israel: and there was under his feet as it were a paved work of a sapphire stone, and as it were the body of heaven in his clearness. 11And upon the nobles of the children of Israel he laid not his hand: also they saw God, and did eat and drink."
Two things to be noted here. First, if you claim they saw no form, you are simply out of your mind with foolishness. Secondly, in light of this passage, there's no way you can take at face value the verse that says, "No one has seen God". For we have two verses here:
(1) "They saw God"
(2) "No one has seen God".

You can't take them both at face value without contradiction. You MUST qualify at least one of the two verses. If you deny this, then you seem to have no respect for the law of non-contradiction, in which case it's not worth carrying on a discussion with you.

If you don't accept the basic principles of
(1) Non-contradiction.
(2) Limited force
Then you obviously DON'T KNOW HOW TO READ. k?

It's nonsense to draw logically incoherent, logically self-contradictory, utterly foolish conclusions from a passage. You might repeat the WORDS of Moses but you're not repeating what he MEANT by those words since your interpretations violate the basic rules of reading-with-sanity.




False dichotomy. Both an be true. Look at Daniel 7 where God sits on a throne while emanating Fire from his form. David saw the same thing in a vision (Psalm 18).

Logic over gibberish.

This would evidently be an apt description of you.
[/color]

Jal

What part of "Let US make man in OUR image do you not understand. Yes, Christ is God! God the Son and then their is God the Father.

So when scriptures says that no one has seen God at anytime, who might be that it is talking about?

When Christ (God) said, "37And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape." Jn 5.37

I guess, God (Christ here) knew which God was never seen.

So which one do you suppose was never seen or heard?

oh heres another one...
46Not that any man hath seen the Father, save he which is of God, he hath seen the Father.

another - 38I speak that which I have seen with my Father: and ye do that which ye have seen with your father.

another - 22All things are delivered to me of my Father: and no man knoweth who the Son is, but the Father; and who the Father is, but the Son, and he to whom the Son will reveal him

Theres more!

Talk about unlimiting the force,,, whoaaaaaa!

 

[JohnRabbit]

Because Christ is God. And men have seen Him.

thank you for saying that because this is the basis of my proof! (you might want to go back and reread it! )

Therefore you MUST qualify the verse, "No one has seen God." You can't just take it at face value, you have to figure out what the verse actually MEANS.

first of all, i can't qualify any verse in the bible, per 2pet 1:20!

second, i can take the scripture at face value because i believe that it is the word of the living God !

lastly, to figure out what the bible says, we must listen to what the bible says!

if one verse seems ambiguous then surely it is explained in another!


IOW, the bible interprets itself and needs no help from JohnRabbit!


isaiah gives us a tip about this:

Isaiah 28:9-10(NKJV)
9 “Whom will he teach knowledge? And whom will he make to understand the message?...
10 For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept, Line upon line, line upon line, Here a little, there a little.”

using this principle, one can side step conjecture and step into truth and understanding!

here's how it works!

in daniel 7, daniel was given a prophecy in a dream. the dream contained four beast and you can read of the account in verses 2-8.

anywho, if we were left to JohnRabbit's interpretation of what the beasts meant, we'd be lost because i wouldn't know what to tell you!

however, the bible does elaborate on the meaning of the word:

Daniel 7:16-17(NKJV)
16I came near to one of those who stood by, and asked him the truth of all this. So he told me and made known to me the interpretation of these things:
17‘Those great beasts, which are four, are four kings which arise out of the earth.


see the blue highlighted? beasts are kings[or kingdoms (remember the king represents the head of his government) or governments when put together with other scripture and the secular record].


if we let the bible interpret itself, we can come to a full understanding.

so, we don't have to "limit the force" of verses or rely on conjecture that could contradict scripture (remember, you've already done that) and we surely don't have to do any "hermeneutical jumping jacks"!

Moreover Jesus said, "Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father" (John 14:9). So do you take this verse at face value? Do you admit that men have seen the Father? Or do you qualify the verse?

in a case like this, we have to see what the bible says!

there is a seeming contradiction and jn 14:9 CANNOT contradict 1jn 4:12!

the bible does give us clarity on the statement Jesus made in jn 14:9!

if we look at jn 14:7,

John 14:7(NKJV)
7“If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also; and from now on you know Him and have seen Him.”

Jesus is clearly talking about a relationship and knowing ones character (see also jn 10:14-15, especially last part of 15).

the disciples saw what Jesus was like and Jesus expressed to them that His Father was no different - jn 10:30.

Jesus was expressing what the Father's character was like and that the disciples saw it through Him.

they didn't actually see the Father!

Jesus was simply speaking in a relational sense, see also jn 14:17, 1jn 4:6-7!


so there is no contradiction to 1jn 4:12 and my proof tells why!

 

[JohnRabbit]

Here's what Ex 24 says, "Then went up Moses, and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel: 10And they saw the God of Israel: and there was under his feet as it were a paved work of a sapphire stone, and as it were the body of heaven in his clearness. 11And upon the nobles of the children of Israel he laid not his hand: also they saw God, and did eat and drink."
Two things to be noted here. First, if you claim they saw no form, you are simply out of your mind with foolishness . Secondly, in light of this passage, there's no way you can take at face value the verse that says, "No one has seen God". For we have two verses here:
(1) "They saw God"
(2) "No one has seen God".(my proof already said there can be no contradiction! )

You can't take them both at face value without contradiction. You MUST qualify at least one of the two verses. If you deny this, then you seem to have no respect for the law of non-contradiction, in which case it's not worth carrying on a discussion with you.

you must have a reading comprehension problem or you might need to be assigned to the "hard of reading" group!

i used ex 24:9-10 in my proof, but unlike you, i actually read it!

look at the green highlighted in your post above.

these are the "they" that saw the God of Israel, only seventy-four - counting moses also!

the "they" that saw no form was the rest of the congregation(deut 4:1) and moses tells us what the glory of the Lord looked like to them - compare deut 4:11-15 to ex 24:16-17!

If you don't accept the basic principles of
(1) Non-contradiction.
(2) Limited force
Then you obviously DON'T KNOW HOW TO READ. k?

It's nonsense to draw logically incoherent, logically self-contradictory, utterly foolish conclusions from a passage. You might repeat the WORDS of Moses but you're not repeating what he MEANT by those words since your interpretations violate the basic rules of reading-with-sanity.




False dichotomy. Both an be true. Look at Daniel 7 where God sits on a throne while emanating Fire from his form. David saw the same thing in a vision (Psalm 18).

Logic over gibberish.

This would evidently be an apt description of you.

aren't you the one that got "busted" by interjecting a contradiction?

i highlighted it in my post #54!

this "limiting force" thing is simply nonsense to help foster your conjecture and embellishments which i've already shown goes against 2pet 1:20 and isa 28:10!


and here's where you might need to be added to the "hard of reading" group, you're own words:

"where God sits on a throne while emanating Fire from his form"

fire from His form is His part of His glory (ex 24:14)

however, any student of the bible knows that God's form resembles that of a man (gen 1:26, dan 3:25)

Daniel 3:25(NKJV)
25“Look!” he answered, “I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire; and they are not hurt, and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.”

and this should be the capstone of it all:

John 6:46(NKJV)
46Not that anyone has seen the Father, except He who is from God; He has seen the Father.

this is consistent with 1jn 4:12 and also the proof that i gave (thanks for that verse YosemiteSam. i had forgotten all about that one)!

 

[BobRyan]

Joh 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.

That seems pretty final, doesn't it? No man hath seen God at any time.

Oh, but wait!

Exo_33:11 And the LORD spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend. And he turned again into the camp: but his servant Joshua, the son of Nun, a young man, departed not out of the tabernacle.

Moses was talking to -- (seeing) God the Son and even at that Moses did not see God the Son in His full glory.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[JAL]

Jal

What part of "Let US make man in OUR image do you not understand. Yes, Christ is God! God the Son and then their is God the Father.

So when scriptures says that no one has seen God at anytime, who might be that it is talking about?

When Christ (God) said, "37And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape." Jn 5.37

I guess, God (Christ here) knew which God was never seen.

So which one do you suppose was never seen or heard?

oh heres another one...
46Not that any man hath seen the Father, save he which is of God, he hath seen the Father.

another - 38I speak that which I have seen with my Father: and ye do that which ye have seen with your father.

another - 22All things are delivered to me of my Father: and no man knoweth who the Son is, but the Father; and who the Father is, but the Son, and he to whom the Son will reveal him

Theres more!

Talk about unlimiting the force,,, whoaaaaaa!

You're just proving my point. What you wrote is an example of qualification. Taken at face value, "No one has seen God" WOULD OBVIOUSLY MEAN that no one has seen any of the Three. So instead of taking it at face value you qualify it (you limit the force) to mean, "People have seen God, but not God the Father.".


I agree with you - we have to qualify it, although your particular qualification is questionable in light of Christ's statement, "Anyone who has seen me HAS seen the Father."

Looks like you're going to need to qualify that statement as well. You conveniently ignored that verse in your response - which doesn't make your position seem very strong.

It doesn't matter. You'll keep qualifying these verses while denying qualification. That's how most people are on this forum - doesn't matter how many times they are proved wrong they will keep asserting nonsense.

 

[BobRyan]

John 6 makes it clear - that it is the Father.

John 6:46(NKJV)
46Not that anyone has seen the Father, except He who is from God; He has seen the Father.


John 1 points to TWO beings - and one is not the Father - but both are God. In both chapters Christ REVEALS God -- just as we see in John 14:1-6.

Col 2 "All the fulness of the Godhead in bodily form"


John 1
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God.


18 No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.

Even at the 2nd coming in Rev 19 Christ is stlll The "Word of God" -- God communicated to us.

 

[JohnRabbit]

John 6 makes it clear - that it is the Father.

John 6:46(NKJV)
46Not that anyone has seen the Father, except He who is from God; He has seen the Father.


John 1 points to TWO beings - and one is not the Father - but both are God. In both chapters Christ REVEALS God -- just as we see in John 14:1-6.

Col 2 "All the fulness of the Godhead in bodily form"


John 1
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God.


18 No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.

Even at the 2nd coming in Rev 19 Christ is stlll The "Word of God" -- God communicated to us.

absoutely correct Bob, great scripture post!

however, are some in this forum that seem to be of the "hard of reading" group!

 

[JAL]

you must have a reading comprehension problem or you might need to be assigned to the "hard of reading" group!

i used ex 24:9-10 in my proof, but unlike you, i actually read it!

look at the green highlighted in your post above.

these are the "they" that saw the God of Israel, only seventy-four - counting moses also!

the "they" that saw no form was the rest of the congregation(deut 4:1) and moses tells us what the glory of the Lord looked like to them - compare deut 4:11-15 to ex 24:1-17!

Still talking nonsense. They saw Fire but no form? That makes zero sense. Show me a flame that has no shape/form and then I'll believe you. Admittedly the shape of a flame changes from moment to moment (as does your shape whenever you take a walk) but that's a moot point.

aren't you the one that got "busted" by interjecting a contradiction?

i highlighted it in my post #54!

Baloney. I responded to your charge of contradiction.

this "limiting force" thing is simply nonsense to help foster your conjecture and embellishments which i've already shown goes against 2pet 1:20 and isa 28:10! [/quote

] "Limiting force" simply means
(1) to read Scripture non-superficially
(2) to determine the intended scope/application of a statement such as No one has seen God otherwise you might misread this to actually think no one has seen God.

Limiting force, then, simply means to find the correct meaning of a verse. Obviously you have a problem with that.

and here's where you might need to be added to the "hard of reading" group, you're own words:

"where God sits on a throne while emanating Fire from his form"

fire from His form is His part of His glory (ex 24:14)

however, any student of the bible knows that God's form resembles that of a man (gen 1:26, dan 3:25)

Daniel 3:25(NKJV)
25“Look!” he answered, “I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire; and they are not hurt, and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.”

Right, a humanoid form with Fire. I think we’re both saying the same thing here.

and this should be the capstone of it all:

John 6:46(NKJV)
46Not that anyone has seen the Father, except He who is from God; He has seen the Father.

this is consistent with 1jn 4:12 and also the proof that i gave (thanks for that verse YosemiteSam. i had forgotten all about that one)!

That’s an example of qualification, although you conveniently ignore what Jesus said, “Anyone who has seen me HAS seen the Father.” You can’t keep ignoring verses and expect anyone on this forum to respect your position.

Here’s another example of the need for qualification (i.e. for reading Scripture non-superficially). Paul says that Christ died for us. Is that a technically precise statement? Not if we take it at face value. Here’s why. Christ went through unimaginable suffering – and then it CEASED. The cessation (the instant that He underwent a loss of bodily consciousness, the very instant of death) was the EASY part. In fact, in the midst of that suffering, that was the moment He probably longed for – He probably just wanted it all to be over and done with.

Thus the cessation of suffering (the death) is not what atoned for us. The suffering prior to the death is what atoned for us. But didn’t He lay down His life for us? And wasn’t that decision costly? Yes. From the time He was a boy He had to live with the stress of knowing His assignment – and that lifelong stress was costly. But here again, the cessation of His life was the cessation of that stress/suffering. Again, it’s the suffering – not the putting-a-stop-to-the-suffering - that atoned for us.

Picture it like this. Suppose Jesus had lived a normal happy life and then suddenly – without any inkling this was going to happen – the Father ended His life (with no suffering). That’s death – but is it atonement? Nope. Real atonement is suffering. Has virtually nothing to do with death.

So why does Paul use technically imprecise language? Because the Bible is a book of brevity. God kept the text short by using concise language. It’s shorter to say (and clear enough), “Christ died for us” than to say, “Christ suffered for us for a time, and then He died as a putting-to-end of that suffering.”

There is no excuse for reading the Bible superficially. I therefore qualify the statement (limit the force), “Christ died for us” to mean, “He suffered the agony/stress of volunteering to lay down His life, plus the agony of physical torture – all this suffering is what atoned for us, and then death put all that suffering to an end. The death itself (the putting-an-end-to-the-suffering) was not the ‘atonement’ in the strict sense.”

You can read the Bible superficially if you want to – but it’s just childish. K?

 

[YosemiteSam]

You're just proving my point. What you wrote is an example of qualification. Taken at face value, "No one has seen God" WOULD OBVIOUSLY MEAN that no one has seen any of the Three. So instead of taking it at face value you qualify it (you limit the force) to mean, "People have seen God, but not God the Father.".


I agree with you - we have to qualify it, although your particular qualification is questionable in light of Christ's statement, "Anyone who has seen me HAS seen the Father."

Looks like you're going to need to qualify that statement as well. You conveniently ignored that verse in your response - which doesn't make your position seem very strong.

It doesn't matter. You'll keep qualifying these verses while denying qualification. That's how most people are on this forum - doesn't matter how many times they are proved wrong they will keep asserting nonsense.

Jesus said, 56Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad.

Jesus said, 40But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, which I have heard of God: this did not Abraham. (Abraham didnt seek to kill him, Abraham rejoiced.)

Jesus said, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.

Jesus told us who Abraham, Isaac and Jacob spoke too. Jesus told us that it was He who spoke to Moses.


So the bible teaches us that Jesus was the one who spoke to Moses at Mt Sinai. The bible teaches us that it was Jesus who Abraham worshiped. The bible teaches us that Jesus is the one who has been dealing with man since the Garden of Eden.

The bible explicitly states these things and you ignore them willingly.

You have not qualified anything nor have you supported anything you have said. It looks like it is you who ignores the scriptures.

 

[JAL]

Jesus said, 56Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad.

Jesus said, 40But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, which I have heard of God: this did not Abraham. (Abraham didnt seek to kill him, Abraham rejoiced.)

Jesus said, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.

Jesus told us who Abraham, Isaac and Jacob spoke too. Jesus told us that it was He who spoke to Moses.


So the bible teaches us that Jesus was the one who spoke to Moses at Mt Sinai. The bible teaches us that it was Jesus who Abraham worshiped. The bible teaches us that Jesus is the one who has been dealing with man since the Garden of Eden.

The bible explicitly states these things and you ignore them willingly.

You have not qualified anything nor have you supported anything you have said. It looks like it is you who ignores the scriptures.

I see you're still ignoring Christ's statement, "Anyone who has seen me HAS seen the Father." You've had multiple opportunities to address it. How telling.

As for the verses you say I ignore, that looks like dishonest debating. I didn't ignore them, I specifically said that I'm not convinced it's worth debating whether it was the Father or Son who appeared to the OT saints, as both figures are equally glorious.

So that's what you are going to do here? Stoop to dishonest debating? Instead of addressing the verses I adduced?

 

[JohnRabbit]

Still talking nonsense. They saw Fire but no form? (yet, that's exactly what the scripture says! deut 4:15)

That makes zero sense (must be "hard of reading"). Show me a flame that has no shape/form and then I'll believe you. Admittedly the shape of a flame changes from moment to moment (as does your shape whenever you take a walk) but that's a moot point.

i thought my "mike" was on!

Baloney. I responded to your charge of contradiction.

it's a good thing we've got you on record!

let's go to the "video tape"!

you said:

"Had Moses lived just a little longer, and kept maturing spiritually, perhaps he soon would have been able to withstand God's face."

however, God said:

Exodus 33:20(NKJV)
20But He said, “You cannot see My face; for no man shall see Me, and live.”

so no matter how you try to "paint" moses, what part of NO MAN do you not understand?

what you said is a BLATANT contradiction to the text, like i said!

"Limiting force" simply means
(1) to read Scripture non-superficially
(2) to determine the intended scope/application of a statement such as No one has seen God otherwise you might misread this to actually think no one has seen God.

Limiting force, then, simply means to find the correct meaning of a verse. Obviously you have a problem with that.

we find the correct meaning of a verse by using isaiah's principle - (isa 28:10) and being bound by what peter said - (2pet 1:20)!

i googled "limiting force" and found nothing of which you speak!

however from this website, What is limiting force, i found this:

What is limiting force?
limiting force is basically just friction

like i told you before, "QUIT DRINKING THE KOOL-AID"!

Right, a humanoid form with Fire. I think we’re both saying the same thing here.

no, i used ex 24:17 to express my view!

i think you mean this:

That’s an example of qualification, although you conveniently ignore what Jesus said, “Anyone who has seen me HAS seen the Father.” You can’t keep ignoring verses and expect anyone on this forum to respect your position.

didn't ignore it. i explained it!

Here’s another example of the need for qualification (i.e. for reading Scripture non-superficially). Paul says that Christ died for us. Is that a technically precise statement? Not if we take it at face value.

CONJECTURE ALERT! Here’s why. Christ went through unimaginable suffering – and then it CEASED. The cessation (the instant that He underwent a loss of bodily consciousness, the very instant of death) was the EASY part. In fact, in the midst of that suffering, that was the moment He probably longed for – He probably just wanted it all to be over and done with.

Thus the cessation of suffering (the death) is not what atoned for us. The suffering prior to the death is what atoned for us. But didn’t He lay down His life for us? And wasn’t that decision costly? Yes. From the time He was a boy He had to live with the stress of knowing His assignment – and that lifelong stress was costly. But here again, the cessation of His life was the cessation of that stress/suffering. Again, it’s the suffering – not the putting-a-stop-to-the-suffering - that atoned for us.

Picture it like this. Suppose Jesus had lived a normal happy life and then suddenly – without any inkling this was going to happen – the Father ended His life (with no suffering). That’s death – but is it atonement? Nope. Real atonement is suffering. Has virtually nothing to do with death.

So why does Paul use technically imprecise language? Because the Bible is a book of brevity. God kept the text short by using concise language. It’s shorter to say (and clear enough), “Christ died for us” than to say, “Christ suffered for us for a time, and then He died as a putting-to-end of that suffering.”

There is no excuse for reading the Bible superficially.

EMBELLISHMENT ALERT! I therefore qualify the statement (limit the force), “Christ died for us” to mean, “He suffered the agony/stress of volunteering to lay down His life, plus the agony of physical torture – all this suffering is what atoned for us, and then death put all that suffering to an end. The death itself (the putting-an-end-to-the-suffering) was not the ‘atonement’ in the strict sense.”

You can read the Bible superficially if you want to – but it’s just childish. K?

i'm sorry i can't go along with your "limiting force" that leads to conjecture and embellishment which puts you contradicting the scripture on so many levels!

i'll just let paul break it to you:

Romans 5:10(NKJV)
10For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.

(for the "hard of reading", reconciled means atoned! )

Colossians 1:21-22(NKJV)
21And you, who once were alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now He has reconciled
22in the body of His flesh through death, to present you holy, and blameless, and above reproach in His sight—


i guess you are part of the "hard of reading" group!