The Nicene Creed Scam

Satan was very clever, if one really thinks about it, having that good and bad knowledge is no guarantee that one will choose or incline towards the good. After all, that’s what the serpent omitted in his speech, before Eve ate off the tree of knowledge of good and bad. The serpent said, You are not going to die, but Yahweh knows that as soon as you eat of it, your eyes will be opened and you will be like divine beings, who know good and bad.It’s true in one sense, but false in another; the serpent sort of omitted to point out, that its the power of moral choice alone, that is Yahweh like. The very action that brought Adam and Eve a Yahweh like awareness of their mortal autonomy, was an action that was taken in opposition to Yahweh.

My point is Dr Adequate, how can Yahweh make a covenant like that? To live forever in a land that is his? But the human race was cut off from that life that the tree of life produced?

Before we get into another covenant Yahweh made, why do the follower of the Creed always use "I AM" when in the context of Exodus shows different? Exodus 3:13-14 - Moses said to God, When I come to the Israelites and say to them, ‘The God of your fathers has sent me to you,’ and they ask me, ‘What is his name?’ what shall I say to them? And God said to Moses, Ehyeh-Asher-Ehyeh. He continued, Thus shall you say to the Israelites, ‘Ehyeh sent me to you.’ 
Not having been raised among his own people, Moses is ignorant of their God’s name and fears he will lack credibility with the Israelites. God’s proper name, disclosed in the verse 15, is YHVH (spelled yod-heh-vav-heh in Hebrew; in ancient times the vav was pronounced w). But here God first tells Moses its meaning: I Will Be What I Will Be, meaning My nature will become evident from my actions. 
Then God answers Moses’ question about what to say to the people: Tell them: ‘Ehyeh’ (I Will Be, a shorter form of the explanation) sent me. This explanation derives God’s name from the verb h-v-h, a variant form of h-y-h, to be. Because God is the speaker, he uses the first person form of the verb.

Not another JW!

That is a offshoot of the Nicene Creed? I know this is fact, no longer does the human race have to strive to attain and maintain God’s acceptance on the basis of who they are and what they can do. Our decree of judicial perfection in the eyes of God comes not through Christ’s death for our sins, but through our union with Christ’s resurrection life. If a person believes Christ died for their sins, but does not believe that God’s justice was satisfied, when Christ died for those sins, that person has not believed Christ died for their sins. 
God purchased the human race out of sins dominion, never to be returned to the market place of sin again. By removing the sin issue from the table of God’s justice, God effectively canceled Satan’s ownership of all the human race. Satan can lay claim to no person based on that persons sinfulness. 
It was God’s plan before the creation of the world, that humankind’s fingerprints would not be found on humankind's salvation. Reconciliation has to do with God’s justice being satisfied for sins, and that means all of them and that means for all the world, reconciliation is a sin issue. Justification is something entirely different, it has to do with a judicial decree of the very righteousness of God himself freely attributed to the believer’s account. Not preaching, let's go back to Israel's history, that will show the scam of the Creeder's!

It would seem so...and it appears that his responses are cut-n-pastes from his blog, as his replies don't directly address the message they are responding to but are rather obscure in their point.HBD

And his blog will be a cut and paste from his bosses approved content. They get heaven points for posting their garbage in places like this.Still it may get interesting if he's allowed to go off-piste. (He won't be.)

Hi Bob,Except for the first sentence, your Message 15 is just a cut-n-paste from your blog. The Forum Guidelines state:

5. Bare links with no supporting discussion should be avoided. Make the argument in your own words and use links as supporting references.

When this rule says to "make the argument in your own words" it doesn't mean your own words written at some other time in some other context. It means words you write just at that moment that directly address the point you're replying to.The reason that members are discouraged from cutting and pasting words from somewhere off the Internet in reply to another member, even their own words, is that invariably those words written at another time and in another context don't address the point. Your Message 15 is a perfect example. Dr Adequate argued that John 5:26b doesn't even address your claim that Jesus did not have eternal life. By simply cut-n-pasting from your blog you're ignoring Dr Adequate's point.For these reasons, please do not cut-n-paste from your blog. Read it all you like to refresh your memory, link to it (and tell people where in the link to look since it is long), even quote portions if you like (you can find the documentation for quoting here: Message Code Help), but please pen original compositions when responding.

I have assumed they at least wrote the content themselves, but this would explain why it is all but impossible for them to go "off-paste." Oooooo.... heaven points!!!! :excited:HBD

John 5:21 the word ‘quicken’ means ‘give life to’ which was then universally believed by the Israelites. The word ‘raise’ means awake or to rouse up from sleep which is talking about the resurrection. In the overall context here, Jesus was explaining that he was given the authority to give the promise of this eternal life to whomever he wished. He was not the source of that eternal life, but he was the only way to obtain the life from God himself. 
Israel, the people to whom the Gospel of the Kingdom was being proclaimed at the time of this context in John, could become a part of the Gospel of the Kingdom, meaning they would be granted entrance into that land they had been promised, that kingdom. Jesus was discussing how he is going to have access to that life that the tree of life produces? 
Remember how Yahweh stations the cherubim and the fiery ever-turning sword to guard the way back to the tree of life, once Adam and Eve were banished from the garden. The tree of life is now inaccessible; no humans have access to immortality, and the pursuit of immortality is futile.

This thread is hard to follow like the other one by Bob Bobber, with many odd statements that are false or disconnected from the topic or don't answer the questions they purport to answer, but the claim that we no longer have access to the tree of life particularly caught my attention. It's not true any more, not for believers in Christ: But this is wrong. Faith in Jesus in itself gives us eternal life. But the tree of life is only inaccessible to fallen humanity while those of us who are saved by faith in Christ will eventually have access to it, because Christ's mission was to reverse the effects of the Fall (at least), and His sacrifice has paid the sin debt that kept us from it: Sorry, shouldn't be answering you while you're suspended but I guess it will be here when you get back.ABE: Kind of exciting to think of getting to see the "Paradise of God," which is another name for the Garden of Eden, since the tree of life is in the midst of that garden. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.