Guest sub_zer0 Posted February 12, 2006 Share Posted February 12, 2006 Sorry, but you are wrong. If you want to make that Christian argument, then you have to realize that Jesus said he is physically a manifestation of the Law, Prophets and Psalms. I.E. – the Old Testament. He made that claims, so if only one verse in the OT invalidates him, then he is not a manifestation of the OT – therefore false. What vers in the OT invalidates Jesus? You want us to care and listen to what you have to say regarding your Word of God? Then validate it. Why does it need to be proved to you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thunderbolt Posted February 12, 2006 Share Posted February 12, 2006 What vers in the OT invalidates Jesus? Do you want to go through this AGAIN? We have had a 20 page discussion with you about Jer 31 which invalidates Jesus. His "virgin" birth invalidates him as the Messiah, and in fact, there is not a single prophecy that Jesus fulfilled. Or perhaps you can conjure up one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scotter Posted February 12, 2006 Author Share Posted February 12, 2006 What vers in the OT invalidates Jesus? Do you want to go through this AGAIN? We have had a 20 page discussion with you about Jer 31 which invalidates Jesus. His "virgin" birth invalidates him as the Messiah, and in fact, there is not a single prophecy that Jesus fulfilled. Or perhaps you can conjure up one. This is SubZ's game, a game of consumption. He tried to do that to SkepticOB. Skeptic, Thunderbolt and members are smart enough not to fall into it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkepticOfBible Posted February 13, 2006 Share Posted February 13, 2006 Sub_zero, you are only allowed 10 quotes function at a time. So I suggest you start to color code your text.. Soooooo.... Correct me if I am wrong According to you, the trinity is 1)Godhead = Father + Son + HG 2)All of the three entities reside in the same shell(GodHead), but have different personalities and duties 3)That they are co-equal in power and knowledge In short the Borg Analogy from Star Trek would suite in the description of the Trinity. So what, no way does it explicitly or implicity defines that the messiah would take 2/3 turns to complete his job. According to Amos 3:7, there is nothing hidden/implied in the OT. The OT God doesn't keep secrets The OT defines two different times in which the Messiah will come to earth, it defines them as seperate times as well. Which verse would that be?Where does the OT defines that the messiah would come twice? I showed you scriptural evidence which proves otherwise It is more Godhead = God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. I have already shown where it speaks about God's Son, where it speaks about God and where it speaks about Gods spirit. I'm done. ..... Point me to the verse in that proverb, which gives the answer Why does it have to be defined in the OT? It is the Bible OT/NT, theywork together and if you say only use one book it will NEVER make sense! You tried to provide me with a verse as evidence of Trinity. You said that when the writer is asking "who is his son", it is talking about Jesus. I proved to you that by looking that the context of the passage, this question is nothing more than a rhethoric. The writers leaves it as open ended question, and pretty much you can fit in anybody as a answer for his question. All the Ot characters(angels and Human) and Isreal were refered to as son to God. The writer could be talking about anybody. And I am NOT limiting you to one book. I am only limiting you to certain sets of books(which are recognised by the Jews). My challenge to you was to prove me to me Godhead=Father,Son and Holy Ghost from the OT only You didn't provide me any verse which mention anything about God the father. All verses say "God" not "God the father" The verses that you and I discussed provided definately mentioned about God's Son and Holy spirit, but they no way prove that they are co equal in power and knowledge or are sharing the same shell space with the God of the OT. The OT gave clear warning ,to the Jews, about False Prophets and gave them clear cut instructions on how to identify them. He also said he will send false prophets to test the faithfullness of his people. The NT writers and Paul definately fit the description of these false prophets You haven't provided me any verse which says one god = 3 distinct persons. On the other hand I have provided you with verses which says directly "there in none, but me". The OT God doesn't have any other 2 personality with him Of course not, the NT does. That is the point. and God the Father in the OT is merely a part of it used during that time to accomplish a grander purpose, You are saying that whenever the OT mentions about God, it is talking about God the Father. So in other words you saying that God the father lied when he said "There is none, but me" He also lied to his "chosen people" when he gave them the instruction regarding not believe in a god other than the one revealed to them. You also said that OT implies about the trinity ie God kept it a secret However when you read the OT on can clearly see that 1)The OT God does not keep secrets nor does he imply anything. If there is a grander purpose(such as the existance of Jesus), the OT God would have informed his people. 2)The OT Godhead=God(No one else) Thanks for admiting the trinity is implied only in the NT. According to the bible that you hold in your hand, it tells me that during the end times, I shall be asking the Jews about god, not christians. Zech 8:23 Thus saith the LORD of hosts; In those days it shall come to pass, that ten men shall take hold out of all languages of the nations, even shall take hold of the skirt of him that is a Jew, saying, We will go with you: for we have heard that God is with you. And ATM, the Jews are saying that God is one, and it is definately not a trinity or Godhead=father+Son+HS If the Hebrew Bible really is the word of God, you should be wise to stop assuming that you are on of God's new chosen people or that you have superior knowledge about God. Although the trinity as existed forever How ironic, the word trinity doesn't even exist anywhere in the bible(not even in the NT). It is man made assertion about the God in the Bible. So you mean to say you are "a human" and "like a human" at the same time? Try to follow here. Jesus is directly related to God the Father, but is also a human. You see why the prophet speaks of it like that? If Jesus is the Son of Man and the Son of God, one would certainly refer to Him as "one like a Son of Man" as He is like that as well as God. You statement doesn't even make sense. If a person is a American and a Canadian at the same time would you say his nationality "is like a American". As soon as you says use the phrase "LIKE A" in sentence if automatically means that it only resembles the thing that it is describing, but it actually is not the thing itself, ie off course if you are speaking normal English. You are quite misguided in your interpretation of the Scripture. Oh really. Verse 1-14 is a vision and is explained metaphorical. Verse 15-18 is the explanation of the that vision. I am reading the these verses in context, you are NOT. It is you who are guided in proving your pet doctrine of trinity. You change from a metaphorical interpretation to a literal one within the same paragraph itself, because it suits your purpose. The saints inherit the Kingdom of God while Jesus Christ or the "Son of Man" has complete control and dominion over the entire world, that is a direct reference to the Millenial Kingdom of Christ, His second coming! Do you even read the bible!!!!!!!!!!!!! 18'But the saints of the Highest One will receive the kingdom and possess the kingdom forever, for all ages to come 27'Then the sovereignty, the dominion and the greatness of all the kingdoms under the whole heaven will be given to the people of the saints of the Highest One; SUB_ZERO IT IS HIGH TIME YOU START READING THE BIBLE AND READ WHAT IT SAYS, RATHER THAN WHAT YOU WANT IT TO SAY. Please read that passage carefully before repeating it apologetic propaganda like a Robot Tell me who should I trust what you say or should I trust what the bible says? Where does it say in the explanation of the vision, that "the son of man" has complete control. You are once again rewriting the verse in the vision to say 13 I kept looking in the night visions, And behold, with the clouds of heaven Son of Man was coming, And He came up to the Ancient of Days Daniel is seeing everything in a metaphorical sense(including the part about the "like a son of man") in those verses. BTW here is an interesting verse 12"As for the rest of the beasts, their dominion was taken away, but an extension of life was granted to them for an appointed period of time. If these beast represent the four empire, then where are the 3 empire that you are talking about? 23 Thus he said: 'The fourth beast will be a fourth kingdom on the earth, which will be different from all the other kingdoms and will devour the whole earth and tread it down and crush it. 25'He will speak out against the Most High and wear down the saints of the Highest One, and he will intend to make alterations in times and in law; and they will be given into his hand for a (AQ)time, times, and half a time. From a Jewish perpective, Christianity fulfills this prophecy quite well. Jesus and Paul made alteration with law. Christians had oppressed the Jews(the saints) throughout the history of christianity. Christianity intends to convert everyone to JC and bring every kingdom under it. So you see the 4th Kingdom is Christianity. Not the kingdom of Anti Christ. Of course the Father has different tasks and essential duties (for lack of a better word), just as the Son of God the Father. So the father at this moment owns more than the son. The dominion of this earth is with the father. So right now the father has more power than the son, hence they are not co-equal. You know, most christians admit that the trinity is mystery and cannot be proved logically and scripturally. However you think otherwise They are clearly working together as the Son of Man approaches the Ancient of Days to aquire dominion over the last kingdom that will reign on earth before this second coming. You still haven't provided me with OT scriptural evidence which proves that messiah would come twice? The parts of the Son of Man and the Ancient of Days specifiaclly mentions kingdoms that were in existence AFTER the OT and AFTER the Roman Empire (Jesus' first coming). Then after Jesus' first advent (Roman Empire days), it is declared after the Roman Empire another kingdom will arise, diverse from the rest. WTF. Where does it even mention that in those verses that the messiah would come after/during the First Kingdom. BTW according to the gospel Jesus came and died during the Roman empire See the second coming? If Christ lived and died during the Roman Empire days and the OT mentions kingdoms after the Roman Empire with the Son of Man conquering that last kingdom, how does it not speak of two comings? Too bad it is quite clearly mentioned that "like a Son of Man", whether literal or metaphorical, will come after these 4 kingdom. The King of the 4th Kingdom will the one who will oppress the saints(son of man) No you haven't. The title of "son of God" isn't something reserved exclusively for Jesus. When it speaks of God having a Son, that "Son of God" is Jesus. What verse would that be? where is jesus even mentioned in the OT?Where does it say "name of the son of God is Jesus". The OT had many son of god, but they don't include Jesus(ironically it includes Satan). The "Son of God" was never refered to the status of Godhead. It was always below God. OK, so why couldn't Jesus be the Son of God? what is the proof he was? The NT writers used this fancy word to describe Jesus to promote their theological agenda. It is a claim that was never proven. BTW for your answer about Moses seeing "God the father", here is something from CARM.org. The people at CARM share the exact same doctrines as you, so you can't complain that they are not "True" christians. Has anyone seen God or not? The solution is simple. All you need to do is accept what the Bible says. If the people/Moses of the OT were seeing God, the Almighty God, and Jesus said that no one has ever seen the Father (John 6:46), then they were seeing God Almighty, but not the Father. It was someone else in the Godhead. I suggest that they were seeing the Word before He became incarnate. In other words, they were seeing Jesus. ........... Therefore, Almighty God was seen, but not the Father. It was Jesus before His incarnation. There is more than one person in the Godhead and the doctrine of the Trinity must be true. You are saying Moses saw god the father, and the CARM website says they say that they did not see God the father.. One of you is wrong, and I am pretty sure the people at CARM would definately asked the HS for guidance on this verse. That leads to two possibility 1) the Holy Spirit is decieveing one of you(who are "true" christians), because both of you are making opposite statement 2)Both of you are interpretating the bible according your theological preference and bias,(which proves the HS does not exist or you are not listening to the HS) Which is it? The Following Section is for others, so there is no need to respond From Is God a Closed Trinity or an Expanding Family? I went to the Internet and searched for "trinity doctrine." The first web site I selected from the first grouping was entitled: "Doctrine of the Trinity" By Dr. Ed DeVries, President of the School of Biblical & Theological Studies. His first paragraph makes the following statements: "Since the word Trinity IS NOT FOUND ANYWHERE IN THE RECEIVED TEXT or in its offspring (the Authorized Version and other biblical translations derived from the received text), many argue that the doctrine of the Trinity is NOT A BIBLICAL ONE. However, when a person comes to understand the THEORY [yes dear readers, we are back to that word "theory" again] that is embodied in the terminology they can NOT HELP BUT FIND PROOF OF THE TRINITY THROUGHOUT THE BIBLE. The doctrine of the Trinity is believed by ALL Christian groups. Some groups profess to be Christian and DO NOT believe in the Trinity, however, NONE OF THESE GROUPS ARE TRULY CHRISTIAN..." (Emphasis mine--of course). Did you get all that? Notice that in order to "find PROOF of the trinity THROUGHOUT the Bible," all one has to do is come to "understand the THEORY that is EMBODIED in the TERMINOLOGY." What am I missing? Why does my brain not work like that? Am I an intellectual dunce? I'll tell you the way my brain works. If I wanted to "find proof of the trinity throughout the Bible," I would not first try to come to "understand the theory that is embodied in the terminology." No, I'm sorry, but I would not do that. Here's what I would do. If I wanted to "find proof of the trinity throughout the Bible," I would... LOOK IN THE BIBLE!!! That's what I would do. But, I have already done that, and the trinity 'ain't' there! And that my friends is why we are told to we must "understand the THEORY that is EMBODIED in the TERMINOLOGY." Please understand and believe me when I say that I am not poking fun directly at such teachers as this. I am not, but I am poking fun at their stupid, stupid teachings! God inspired the proverb that teaches us to: "Answer a fool according to a fool," and to "...expose those who contradict" (Titus 1:9, Concordant Literal New Testament). Can anyone imagine our Lord saying something like this in Matt. 11:24, "...for Thou hidest these things from the wise and intelligent and Thou dost reveal them to those who come to understand the theory that is embodied in the terminology."? No, I think not. Jesus said "Thou dost reveal them to babes [Gk: minors]." Does anyone really think that the average person would ever tolerate a bank statement that used terminology like the above? Would anyone in their right mind sign a contract using terminology like the above? Would anyone accept a doctor's diagnosis using the kind of terminology above? But, as I have often said, "When it comes to religion, anything goes." The above teacher says that one can come up with a term, then develop a theory based on the term [not on truth, not on law, not on the Scriptures, but based on the "term" you have come up with], and finally, when you come to understand the theory embodied in the term, you will then be able [the author doesn't say whether it is first necessary to say 'abracadabra'] TO FIND THE TRUTH OF THAT THEORY THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRETY OF THE BIBLE!? ...... Seriously, I hope my readers can see through such inane scholarship. Only religious people, theologians, and self-professed ministers of God can get away such total nonsense. No author could EVER get away with such childish and unscholarly presentations if he were writing on serious subjects such as medicine, aviation or physics. His contemporaries would laugh him to scorn. Well, now that I think about it, there might be two exceptions to that--those who write books on evolution, and those who write fiction. The above article on the Trinity is assuredly a religious work of fiction! If all three are EQUALLY CO-EQUAL, why does Jesus Christ HAVE A GOD, yet the Father is NEVER SAID TO HAVE a God? Jesus said He didn't need to "rob" God to be equal with Him. Why? Because the Father freely GAVE Jesus all that He had and possessed. Jesus had ALL power and ALL authority and ALL judgment in heaven and earth. Were these things the natural possessions of Jesus seeing that He is supposedly a third equal part of this trinity? No, my friend. God GAVE Jesus all these things -- they had an origin and the origin is GOD THE FATHER. Jesus Christ will be SUBJECT to God His Father for all eternity (See I Cor. 15:24-28). Where are we told that the Father will be subject to Jesus Christ for all eternity? And, of course, the Holy Spirit is not even mentioned in this discussion in I Cor. 15. If the trinity is true, how is it that Jesus Christ was CONCEIVED BY THE HOLY SPIRIT, but is the SON OF GOD THE FATHER??? ........ As far as Christ going around claiming He was God, He did not, however, I will concede that He did say before Abraham was "I AM." Even when Pilate asked directly whether or not He was the Son of God, Christ refused to answer Pilate directly. If you noticed I made the statement at least twice in my paper, "Jesus IS GOD" "Christ is God." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts