Bible Teachings or Traditions of Men?

quote:

---

CATHOLIC SCIENTIST:

quote:

---

ALTER2EGO:
Jesus' death interferes with the trinity dogma which says Jesus is eternal.

​

...

​

DEFINITION OF "ETERNAL":
"Eternal means not having a beginning or an end."
http://www.yourdictionary.com/eternal

---

​

I think you're missing the obvious:

​

Jesus' death wasn't his end.

---

ALTER2EGO -to- CATHOLIC SCIENTIST:
Obviously, I am not missing anything because I mentioned previously that when Thomas referred to Jesus as "My Lord and my God" at John 20:28, Jesus had only recently been resurrected from the dead. That's "resurrected" as "no longer dead."However, the fact that Jesus Christ did indeed die disqualifies him from being eternal. An eternal person cannot die for even a minute. By definition, an eternal person must exist through all time."without beginning or end; existing through all time; everlasting" (Source: Webster's New World College Dictionary) QUESTION #1 to CATHOLIC SCIENTIST:: During the three days of Jesus Christ's death, are you saying he was actually still in existence as a living being?

Genocide is murder, God's acts on the other hand are righteous and just judgments. He does not violate His own commandment against murder.

We don't have to because He doesn't. Oh sometimes He "does it Himself," by bringing floods and fires and volcanoes and hurricanes and so on.Just judgment is not evil, it is not murder. For example, the death penalty properly applied is not evil, it is not murder, it is just judgment. Here are some scriptures to ponder about the nature of Jesus Christ: That same passage was quoted by Jesus as fulfilled by Himself: Note that He did not read past the line, "the acceptable year of the Lord," that is, He did not read the line, "and the day of vengeance of our God."Any idea why not? Here's the answer: Because His first coming was as the Suffering Servant to pay for the sins of believers, not vengeance.But His second coming will be in vengeance, as Paul says here: Therefore such righteous judgments as you so falsely call "genocide" will in the end be enacted by Jesus Himself, whom you've so generously exonerated from such acts. Ever heard of the "wrath of the Lamb?" The Lamb of God, meaning Jesus of course, wrathful? Isn't only the ferocious God of the OT "wrathful?" And later in the Book of Revelation we read Here we have the wrath of God poured out as fire and brimstone IN THE PRESENCE OF THE LAMB. Shouldn't He protest if He's like your portrait of Him? Obviously you have a completely false idea of who Jesus is if you think He will not enact vengeance.He suffered and died so that those who believe on Him can be saved from vengeance, what could be more merciful and kind than that? He did not do anything to prevent vengeance itself, however, which still comes against God's enemies as described, all those who won't accept His salvation. God does live by it, He embodies it. He commands us not to commit murder, which is the killing of INNOCENT people, which He does not do. He enacts justice and righteous judgments like the death penalty for offenses against the moral law, against the GUILTY who have refused His provision of salvation from His judgment. For those who gratefully receive his provision of the cross, no, but the vast majority of nations are under the Law, not the Cross, and even many of those individuals who have heard the gospel have the effrontery to reject it and they cannot escape God's judgments. And see above: For now we are living under the great great mercy of the Cross, but a time of vengeance has been promised and will certainly come. See above. The fact is that if God didn't judge wickedness at all the earth would already be so evil, so overrun with demonic hordes, with murder and mayhem of all kinds, it would make your picture of evil look like a sweet fairytale. I utterly reject your terminology. God is no tyrant, God is a merciful and just judge who is very patient with sinners, that they might repent and turn, but His justice must eventually issue in vengeance if they do not. I see the loving just God all through the OT without exception, He is Jehovah, God in Three Persons, and Jesus is the Son. And I believe that if you DON'T regard the scriptures as inerrant, THAT is when you have a distorted picture of a God who IS loving, just, forgiving, merciful, patient, longsuffering, putting up with violations of His law for centuries before having to act in judgment. You believe in a one-dimensional caricature of Jesus, not the real Jesus.======================================================================Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Doesn't it give you any pause for thought that your insistence of reading the bible literally causes you to deny pretty much all science AND a straight reading of the bible itself?

For the umpteenth time I do not, nor does any Biblical Christian, "deny pretty much all science." We believe the Bible was really the main inspiration for the development of western science, as based on a God of law and reason. I believe that. The "science" I reject I will say again and again and again is NOT science. It is limited to those "scientific" claims about the UNKNOWABLE PAST, the unwitnessed, unobserved, untestable past. That means PART of Geology, the OLD EARTH part, not ALL of geology, most of which deals with observable testable information, GENUINE science that no Christian rejects.And it means PART of Biology, the Evolutionist part that claims to be able to see into the unseeable past and tell us how life developed over unknowable epochs of time. MOST of biological science deals with observable testable information, GENUINE science that no Christian rejects.I have no idea what you mean about my supposedly denying a "straight reading of the Bible" since that's exactly what I believe I'm doing.And beware of that term "literally." I try to avoid it myself because the Bible must be read according to context or the particular literary form of each section. AND THIS IS OFF TOPIC. GDR's topic is pushing it but this has gone over the line, so please don't continue it.===============================================================================Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I totally understand that you believe that you are right - my question was whether it caused you any pause for thought. It's not only the entirety of science that's against you (and yes it IS the entirety of the sciences because none of it makes any sense on a young earth basis) but also the majority of Christians disagree with your understanding of the the Bible too. (As shown to you here.)

"Pause for thought?" Good grief, I took years working through what I think from the beginning of my Christian life. I HAD been an atheist and believed in evolution up until my conversion in my mid forties. I liked to read Stephen Jay Gould, I subscribed to Skeptical Inquirer. I read my way to Christ, book after book after book. A few years later I began to read the creationists, book after book. I'm sure you disagree with every conclusion I came to but don't accuse me of not THINKING THROUGH what I believe. SO sorry I DO disagree with you about that. The "science" that supports the Old Earth is a bunch of twisted confused speculations, without any actual evidence that can't be explained by the Young Earth just as well. It's one of the most amazing pieces of pure mental sleight of mind ever imposed on the human race. Yes, the entire scientific community has been bamboozled by mere fantasy. SO sorry again but I believe it very likely that there ARE no other Christians on this thread, because a Christian historically is one who believes in the inerrant Bible. If some can squeak into the Kingdom although rejecting parts of the Bible I don't know for sure, but believing the WHOLE Bible defined Christians throughout history. It was Bible believers who were persecuted and martyred by the Roman Inquisition, the Reformation was founded on Sola Scriptura, SCRIPTURE ALONE as our rule of authority, no traditions of men, and that's how Christians have defined ourselves all along. It has been the case in all generations back to apostolic times.Calling yourself a Christian does not make you a Christian, and unfortunately there is a growing population of such deceived "Christians" these days, which many of us see as evidence of what the Bible identifies as the Great Apostasy that must develop before the coming of the Antichrist just before the Grand Finale of Planet Earth.You don't know what a Christian is and shouldn't allow yourself to have an opinion.And again THIS IS OFF TOPIC.======================================================================================

quote:

---

An eternal person cannot die. Being dead for just one minute results in an end to someone's claim to eternity. Jesus was dead for three days.

---

Says who??????? Where are these rules for eternal beings????? The supreme being is not human, how do you know what constitutes death for such a being????An eternal being is given human form. To shed the human form, that human form must die. This releases the eternal being from that human form. It doesn't mean the eternal being ceased to exist. Only the human form ceased to exist. The eternal being continues.It's very easy to write a scenario that doesn't interfere with the eternalness of a divine being.

quote:

---

Thomas was imperfect, as are all humans who are offspring of Adam. Your argument is that because Thomas said "My Lord and My God," at John 20:28, the mere fact that his sayings are recorded in the Bible equates to: "Thomas was right."

---

No that's not my argument. My argument is that Thomas was referring to Jesus, who was standing in front of him. My argument is that Thomas did view Jesus as a deity or divine being, but not YHWH. Seriously, he's looking at someone who was dead and is now alive. So he obviously isn't viewing a normal human being.My argument with you is that deeming Thomas incorrect is not supportable through scripture, just your own fiction. Doubting doesn't automatically make his statement wrong. That's why I said we really need to try and understand to the best of our ability what he was actually saying regardless of current dogma and traditions.

quote:

---

Now apply that to Thomas who was so lacking in faith that he would not even believe the other disciples who told them Jesus had been resurrected from the dead. Even if one were to argue that Thomas really thought Jesus was Jehovah, it does not matter what Thomas thought because the context of John 20:28 tells us Jesus could not be in a trinity with Jehovah and that Jesus is not also Jehovah. John 20:1-3 and 9 says Jesus died, while the Trinity dogma says Jesus the Son is CO-ETERNAL with Jehovah.

---

You do realize that my position is that the Bible doesn't support the idea of a 3 in 1 god, don't you?Where's your support that an eternal being who has taken human form, will cease being eternal because the human form died and the eternal being continued?It's very easy to write fiction, but can you support it through scripture?

As I said, you avoid the word. Fine, let's use another word for it when God does it. Let's call it jenocide. I say that God didn't commit jenocide, 'cos of not existing. GDR says that God didn't commit jenocide, 'cos of him being good. You say that he did commit jenocide, 'cos someone wrote that he did, and your opinion of God's character is such that you find the accusation, unsupported though it is by a shred of evidence, perfectly plausible.I don't think he did it, GDR doesn't think he did it, you do think that he did it --- but then find him Not Guilty By Reason Of Divinity.

GENOCIDE IS MURDER, GOD CANNOT COMMIT GENOCIDE BECAUSE HE CANNOT COMMIT MURDER. THIS IS NOT MERELY SEMANTIC. GOD CAN ONLY DO RIGHT, HIS ACTIONS CAN ONLY BE JUST AND GOOD. WHAT YOU CALL GENOCIDE, OR JENOCIDE OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT, WHETHER YOU BELIEVE IN GOD OR NOT, IS IN REALITY ACCORDING TO SCRIPTURE, GOD'S RIGHTEOUS JUDGMENT OF SOME PRETTY HEINOUS SINS. WHAT GDR CALLS GENOCIDE IS IN REALITY ACCORDING TO SCRIPTURE, GOD'S RIGHTEOUS JUDGMENT OF SOME PRETTY HEINOUS SINS. I SAY THAT GOD RIGHTEOUSLY JUDGED SOME NATIONS FOR THEIR HEINOUS SINS. GENOCIDE OR JENOCIDE IS MURDER, AND GOD CANNOT COMMIT MURDER.This argument is parallel with the arguments for and against the death penalty. The moral equivalence thinkers can't tell the difference between justice and murder. That's what's going on here too. Of course you and GDR are eminently qualified to be God's judges, and judges of 4000 years of theological understanding carefully worked out by the greatest men of ancient Israel and the greatest men of Christianity, as well as by millions upon millions of ordinary Bible believers. I would think you might feel some shame at such a self-aggrandizing role in contempt of so many of your fellow human beings, and of the religion that pretty much built western civilization, which is of course now going down under God's judgment thanks to those who have been undermining it for decades now, you being one of that number. I was once one of them myself, sad to say. What a snaky thing to say.=============================================================================Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

That's not true. Your definition of eternal is not having an end. You are equating death to an end, but in Jesus' case his death was not an end. Therefore, that he died does not disqualify him from being eternal. It seems contradictory to say that someone who is dead is "living", but that's how the Bible goes about it, though it makes a distinction between the body and Spirit:Take a look at 1 Peter 3: 18-19 (NIV)

quote:

---

18 For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God. He was put to death in the body but made alive in the Spirit. 19 After being made alive, he went and made proclamation to the imprisoned spirits

---

Either way, if he was making proclamations while he was dead then he certainly had not ended and thus he is not disqualified from being eternal.That same verse is also used as Biblical support for hell. What do you think the "imprisoned spirits" is referring to?Regardless, I don't have a problem with the Trinity and Hellfire coming from outside the Bible. Sola Scriptura is one of the biggest mistakes in Christianity anyways.

I think you are forgetting the 'No True Scottsman' argument. If you disagree with Faith regarding the Trinity or anything else she holds to be doctrinal then you aren't a Christian.Now let's take the poll among the people who Faith accepts as being Christians, a group which overlaps only partially with the group of people who accept Jesus as their Lord and Saviour, repent of their sins, and who try to follow Christ's example, and you'll find 100% agreement.

Nicely said. But I wonder if even this statement can make the slightest impact. Yes, but what kind of 'Hell' does this verse describe. It's a place that would have been the abode of the spirits of Abraham, Moses, and David. Of all of the righteous men of the Old Testament, only Elijah is said to have escaped going there.

But jenocide isn't murder. I made up a completely new word just for you --- jenocide is an act which involves doing exactly the same things as one would if one was committing genocide, except that jenocide is morally OK, unlike genocide. Your God committed jenocide. Heaven forbid that I should say he committed genocide. He's jenocidal, not genocidal.It is your position that he committed jenocide, as defined. GDR and I think that he didn't. And both of us think he did nothing wrong. He, I and you all agree in exculpating him of any sin --- me because I don't think God exists, GDR because he thinks God is good and didn't commit the acts attributed to him by his anonymous accuser, and you because while agreeing that God did do what he's accused of, he was thereby committing jenocide rather than genocide.It's nice to see such unanimity of opinion, isn't it?

While rereading the chapter to find out more about what it says about this "Hell", I noticed another part that I think is worth quoting in this thread:

quote:

---

1 Peter 3:
15 But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect,
16 keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander.

---

Haven't been seeing a lot of that here from the True Christians Here's what we've got:

quote:

---

19 After being made alive, he went and made proclamation to the imprisoned spirits
20 to those who were disobedient long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built. In it only a few people, eight in all, were saved through water,

---

So its a prison, and those who are there were disobedient before the Flood. So not much. I'm not familiar with what you're referring to.