Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,807 Year: 3,064/9,624 Month: 909/1,588 Week: 92/223 Day: 3/17 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Did Jesus Really Suffer?
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 801 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 16 of 73 (534485)
11-08-2009 6:34 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by Hyroglyphx
11-08-2009 11:18 AM


So again I ask, what purpose does it serve to have ever created the physical world when it is more than evident, by scripture, that the spiritual world is all that really matters?
I've thought this myself many times: why create all the asshole airsucking bonebags if you already know who you want to come hang out with you for eternity, and that list is already made up...AND if that's the ultimate goal: to get to heaven?
Edited by hooah212002, : No reason given.
Edited by hooah212002, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Hyroglyphx, posted 11-08-2009 11:18 AM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 17 of 73 (534523)
11-09-2009 6:06 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by Hyroglyphx
11-08-2009 11:18 AM


Hyroglyphx writes:
We therefore pay for their mistakes.
We are paying for their mistakes, yes. But not in that God is punishing us. We are living in the consquences of the life they chose.
For example, if a gambler chooses to spend all the families money and sells the family assets to pay his debts, the family are indirectly suffering for the gamblers mistakes.
In the same way, we are living under the conditions that A&E created by going contrary to Gods law.
Hyroglyphx writes:
Which we are designed to do. Nothing can happen apart from the will of God, and we certainly didn't create ourselves. There is only one thing left to deduce, and that is that God created us imperfect and then punishes us for those frailties.
True or false: God imparted our natural desires and our predilections for sin.
No, we are designed to have freedom of choice and for this reason we CAN sin if we choose to. However it also means we can choose NOT to sin. Gods will is that all mankind return to him and his standards
Malachi 3:7 Return to me, and I will return to you.
With freedom comes responsiblity. If we use our freedom badly, then the consequences flow onto those around us. Every decision we make has the potential to harm us and others.
While God gave us our natural desires, he also gave instructions on how to use our freedom. When we go contrary to that instruction we fall into sin and its consequences.
Hyroglyphx writes:
Exactly! We were designed to fail, so how can we be held more accountable than the one who created this way?
No, we were designed to choose. Jesus proved that mankind is capable of remainging sin free. He succeeded where Adam failed which means we can choose. Granted, Jesus was perfect and so his factulties were perfect...ours are not yet there are many examples of imperfect people chosing to obey God and therefore we are not designed to fail.
Hyroglyphx writes:
The Serpent is never described as a "spirit" nor was it ever described in Genesis as Satan, the great evil protagonist. The earliest the name Satan was introduced was in Job. It is therefore unclear as to the authors true intent.
Satan very much evolved throughout the centuries taking on greater meaning and relevance, but was not always a central figure.
the hebrew word Satan means opposer/resister...in Job the hebrew word describes one of the spirit sons of God who chose a rebellious course. he is called 'satan' however its a descriptive name only. Later Jesus spoke a lot about this one and he called him the 'ruler of the world' and the christians called him 'the original serpant'
Its quite well established that Satan is a rebellious angel. Revelation says that he will be destroyed and mankind set free from his influence.
Hyroglyphx writes:
I am simply saying that the passage in Genesis is ambiguous, and indeed, the term "seed" is also ambiguous. "Seed" generally refers to one's progeny or direct line of descendants.
Its not ambiguous when you take into consideration the revealing of the 'seed' in the OT. The jews were waiting for the seed and the prophets explained him in great detail. The christians proclaimed Jesus as the seed so right throughout the bible, you can follow the revealing of who the seed is and whe he would do. Its certainly not ambiguous.
Hyroglyphx writes:
You are drawing conclusions from a very ambiguous piece of scripture. It may or may not mean that, I am simply saying that to draw a parallel is done so from people who want to see parallels so it can justify New Testament prophecy.
Im not drawing conclusions, Jesus and the christians testified to the identity of the seed.
Hyroglyphx writes:
Can you please explain why you think Moses wrote the book of Job? The last time I checked, authorship is unknown.
critics claim that almost all the bible books were written by unknown authors. However there are a few lines of reasoning to conclude that Moses wrote the book.
The oldest jewish and christian traditions say that Moses was the writer and that the book was an inspired writing. The book was written in Hebrew poetry which means it was an original composition and not a copy from another language so only an Ancient isrealite could have written it. The style of writing is very similar to the Pentateuch which is the 'books of Moses' according to many other jewish writers including Jesus and the Christians.
And because of the content being dialogue between God and Satan, it must have been written by an isrealite who was given divine direction. At that time, only Moses was being provided direct instructions from God so it reasonable to accept that moses was the writer. Also, Moses spent 40 years in Midian which is fairly close in proximity to Uz the land where Job lived.
Hyroglyphx writes:
How would you know either way? Do you know how many gnostic scriptures were written all claiming to be divinely inspired? Hundreds of codices have been discovered. It was only after the voting process that the canonized bible is the way it is. The point is that for hundreds or even thousands of years, people revered non-canonized writings as being from God.
What makes you so sure that the canonized bible is completely inspired by God (even the Songs of Solomon) but the Book of Jasher (which is referenced in the bible) is not from God?
the gnostic scriptures contradict the bible so its clear that the source of information is not from the same source as the bible. You would expect that if God were the author of the gnostic writings, then they would have been accepted by the priests of Isreal, however they were not accepted. They may even have been writen after the cannonization of the scriptures which would exclude them.
The bible does make mention of other writings that were not inspired such as the 'book of the kings' which would have been an account of the kings of isreal. While it wasnt inspired, it was still an important piece of writing for the nation. However, not all pieces of writing by the isrealites are inspired by default as if being an isrealite means you must be inspired. Remember the nation was not always followers of Gods law and often false teachers were leading them away to worship pagan gods and even succeeded in introducing false worship into the nation at times.
[qsHyroglypx]My question is how you know this to be true. From where I'm sitting it appears circular. [/qs]
the writers themselves testify to this Peter said at 2peter 1:20 "no prophecy of Scripture springs from any private interpretation. For prophecy was at no time brought by man’s will, but men spoke from God as they were borne along by holy spirit."
Prophecy is an evidence of inspiration because its impossible for man to accurately foretell future events. Yes perhaps they can make vague gueses but the bibles prophecies are incredibly detailed.
Hyroglyphx writes:
what purpose does it serve to have ever created the physical world when it is more than evident, by scripture, that the spiritual world is all that really matters?
if God wanted his physical creations in the spirit world, he would have mades us spirits the way he made myriads of other spirits called Angels.
There is no reason to assume that God wants us in heaven with him. He created us for the purpose of mananging the earth, not living in heaven. And the earth is just as important to him as the heavens are.
here are a few scriptures to give you an idea of how he views the earth and those on it.
Isaiah 45:18 This is what Jehovah has said, the Creator of the heavens, He the true God, the Former of the earth and the Maker of it, He the One who firmly established it, who did not create it simply for nothing, who formed it even to be inhabited..."
Genesis 1:28 "Further, God blessed them and God said to them: Be fruitful and become many and fill the earth and subdue it"
Psalm 78:69 "And he began to build his sanctuary just like the heights, Like the earth that he has founded to time indefinite."
Psalm 104:5 "He has founded the earth upon its established places;
It will not be made to totter to time indefinite, or forever"
Psalm 37:11 "But the meek ones themselves will possess the earth,
And they will indeed find their exquisite delight in the abundance of peace."
Psalm 115:16 "As regards the heavens, to Jehovah the heavens belong,
But the earth he has given to the sons of men"
these scriptures, and many like them, show that mankind was always meant to live on earth...the whole going to heaven thing is a non biblical teaching adopted by the church.
Edited by Peg, : added malachi scripture

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Hyroglyphx, posted 11-08-2009 11:18 AM Hyroglyphx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by Michamus, posted 11-09-2009 11:05 AM Peg has not replied
 Message 19 by Hyroglyphx, posted 11-09-2009 11:25 AM Peg has replied
 Message 20 by HalifaxGuy, posted 11-09-2009 1:18 PM Peg has replied

  
Michamus
Member (Idle past 5157 days)
Posts: 230
From: Ft Hood, TX
Joined: 03-16-2009


Message 18 of 73 (534555)
11-09-2009 11:05 AM
Reply to: Message 17 by Peg
11-09-2009 6:06 AM


Peg writes:
But not in that God is punishing us.
So God didn't force A&E out of the Garden of Eden? So I guess God was willing to welcome them back in the GoE at any time...
quote:
Gen 3
23 Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.
24 So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way
DOH!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Peg, posted 11-09-2009 6:06 AM Peg has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 19 of 73 (534557)
11-09-2009 11:25 AM
Reply to: Message 17 by Peg
11-09-2009 6:06 AM


We are paying for their mistakes, yes. But not in that God is punishing us. We are living in the consquences of the life they chose.
They didn't choose it, God did. They had no concept of consequence or of sin or of right or wrong BEFORE they ate of the fruit, right? So how can you hold them accountable for something they had no concept for, and what's worse, have the rest of mankind pay for their actions?
It seems clear that very much intended for it and set them up for failure.
For example, if a gambler chooses to spend all the families money and sells the family assets to pay his debts, the family are indirectly suffering for the gamblers mistakes.
Irrelevant since A&E had no idea what they were doing was wrong.
No, we are designed to have freedom of choice and for this reason we CAN sin if we choose to. However it also means we can choose NOT to sin. Gods will is that all mankind return to him and his standards
You are not understanding. God, in his infinite wisdom, could have opted not to have sin at all. It's the same principle as disallowing humans to fly under their own mechanics. Why even create it? And why impart in mankind a desire for it?
How is that mankind's fault and how can you honestly it is a choice? That's like sticking a heroin addict in a room full of heroin and telling them they have a choice. Sure, on some basic level it is technically a choice, but how fair is it to do?
While God gave us our natural desires, he also gave instructions on how to use our freedom. When we go contrary to that instruction we fall into sin and its consequences.
Gosh, what a swell guy! I made you an addict to sin, but I'll give you ambiguous instruction on how to get around it.
No, we were designed to choose.
Is choosing which parent to shoot in the head somehow make the horror of it stop? God at any point in time could have opted to make a world modeled after heaven. The fact that he doesn't makes him complicit in all of mankind's sins.
Man did not create himself. God is omnisicent. So how could God not be faulted for the failings of mankind?
Jesus proved that mankind is capable of remainging sin free.
Peg!?!?! He's God! That proves that God can be capable of remaining sin-free. In fact, the whole purpose of Jesus atoning for man's sins is because man could NOT remain sin free. Think about it, Peg. That was the whole entire point.
Its quite well established that Satan is a rebellious angel. Revelation says that he will be destroyed and mankind set free from his influence.
Why did Satan rebel?
Its not ambiguous when you take into consideration the revealing of the 'seed' in the OT. The jews were waiting for the seed and the prophets explained him in great detail. The christians proclaimed Jesus as the seed so right throughout the bible, you can follow the revealing of who the seed is and whe he would do. Its certainly not ambiguous.
That the Jews have always been awaiting their messiah since the time of David is no mystery. I am saying "seed" in specific reference to Jesus is. As the Jews say today, it is a false parallel.
Im not drawing conclusions, Jesus and the christians testified to the identity of the seed.
It doesn't make it so, especially when Jesus failed to perform the basic requirements laid out in the Tanakh for what accomplishments the mashiach would accomplish.
critics claim that almost all the bible books were written by unknown authors. However there are a few lines of reasoning to conclude that Moses wrote the book.
The oldest jewish and christian traditions say that Moses was the writer and that the book was an inspired writing. The book was written in Hebrew poetry which means it was an original composition and not a copy from another language so only an Ancient isrealite could have written it. The style of writing is very similar to the Pentateuch which is the 'books of Moses' according to many other jewish writers including Jesus and the Christians.
I see far more parallels in Job with the poetic style attributed to Solomon. Not that it matters, since no one knows for sure.
And because of the content being dialogue between God and Satan, it must have been written by an isrealite who was given divine direction.
Must have been an Israelite given "divine direction?"
gnostic scriptures contradict the bible so its clear that the source of information is not from the same source as the bible.
Exactly, which is why it was systematically removed. But many of the books were revered by early Christians and Jews. The point is, they thought it was divinely inspired of God but wasn't. How are you so sure that you are correct in the same assumptions?
Furthermore, the bible contradicts the bible on numerous occasions.
The bible does make mention of other writings that were not inspired such as the 'book of the kings' which would have been an account of the kings of isreal. While it wasnt inspired, it was still an important piece of writing for the nation. However, not all pieces of writing by the isrealites are inspired by default as if being an isrealite means you must be inspired. Remember the nation was not always followers of Gods law and often false teachers were leading them away to worship pagan gods and even succeeded in introducing false worship into the nation at times.
two canonized books in the bible (which means according to you it is inspired God himself) endorses the book of Jasher as a book of wisdom and something to follow.
the writers themselves testify to this Peter said at 2peter 1:20 "no prophecy of Scripture springs from any private interpretation. For prophecy was at no time brought by man’s will, but men spoke from God as they were borne along by holy spirit."
That does not prove it true, it just means it is in the bible. That's obviously circular. You give the bible authority on account of the authority of the bible.
Prophecy is an evidence of inspiration because its impossible for man to accurately foretell future events. Yes perhaps they can make vague gueses but the bibles prophecies are incredibly detailed.
Nostradamus had far less vagueness than the bible, giving specific dates, and even that is highly questionable. Biblical prophecy is also sometimes not even remotely accurate, such as the prophecy of Tyre.
There is no reason to assume that God wants us in heaven with him. He created us for the purpose of mananging the earth, not living in heaven. And the earth is just as important to him as the heavens are.
Right, which goes back to what I was saying. He obviously would want man on earth. Why there is an earth at all is the question when so much biblical emphasis is placed on the spiritual realm. The bible is silent on that issue.
these scriptures, and many like them, show that mankind was always meant to live on earth...the whole going to heaven thing is a non biblical teaching adopted by the church.
Are you saying that God never intended for man to ever be in heaven, that it's a false insertion made by the "Church?" And if so, what church, as "The Church" is biblically described as the totality of a body of believers?

"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." --John Adams

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Peg, posted 11-09-2009 6:06 AM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by Peg, posted 11-09-2009 9:17 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

  
HalifaxGuy
Junior Member (Idle past 5192 days)
Posts: 2
From: Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
Joined: 06-26-2009


Message 20 of 73 (534572)
11-09-2009 1:18 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by Peg
11-09-2009 6:06 AM


Could Jesus suffer?
The only way Jesus could have suffered was if he was human. So if Jesus was the human form taken by God for his time on earth, I guess he could have suffered. When the human body died on the cross, the spirit went back to heaven at which point the physical body would have remained behind. Is there any Biblical evidence of what happened to the physical body after it ceased suffering?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Peg, posted 11-09-2009 6:06 AM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by Peg, posted 11-09-2009 9:32 PM HalifaxGuy has replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 21 of 73 (534623)
11-09-2009 9:17 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by Hyroglyphx
11-09-2009 11:25 AM


Hyroglyphx writes:
They didn't choose it, God did. They had no concept of consequence or of sin or of right or wrong BEFORE they ate of the fruit, right?
they certainly did know the consequences
Genesis 3:2-3 "Of the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat. But as for eating of the fruit of the tree that is in the middle of the garden, God has said, ‘You must not eat from it, no, you must not touch it that you do not die.’"
Hyroglypx writes:
God, in his infinite wisdom, could have opted not to have sin at all. It's the same principle as disallowing humans to fly under their own mechanics. Why even create it? And why impart in mankind a desire for it?
Perhaps you misunderstand what 'sin' is.
Sin is disobedience to Gods standards and laws and requirements.
Its not something that he could give them or plant in them as a desire.
Sin is what happened when A&E used their freewill to disobey God.
He wanted them to obey him which is why he told them NOT to eat from the tree.
Hyroglyphx writes:
Peg!?!?! He's God! That proves that God can be capable of remaining sin-free. In fact, the whole purpose of Jesus atoning for man's sins is because man could NOT remain sin free. Think about it, Peg. That was the whole entire point.
Well not every religion beleives that Jesus is God. Mine does not teach that Jesus was God. We teach, as the bible says, Jesus is the 'SON' of God.
Jesus is a created being, just like the rest of the angels. Jesus was the very first angel created which is why the bible calls him 'The only Begotten Son'
The point of Jesus coming was to stand in place of Adam, the first father.
1Corinthians 15:22 "For just as in Adam all are dying, so also in the Christ all will be made alive"
the purpose of Jesus was to give mankind a new perfect father. Sin has been passed onto us thru the original father Adam, however thru Jesus, we can have a new perfect father, one who does not pass sin onto us. Those who look to Jesus and follow him, can be viewed by God as 'sinless' and thus have the opportunity to live forever as God intended.
Hyroglyphx writes:
Why did Satan rebel?
Ezekeil prophetically described 'Satan' in his pronouncement of judgement upon the king of Tyre. In this description, Satan was shown to be a heavenly cherub who was created perfect. However he became unrighteous.
Ez 28:13-15 13In E′den, the garden of God, you proved to be. Every precious stone was your covering, ruby, topaz and jasper; chrys′o‧lite, onyx and jade; sapphire, turquoise and emerald; and of gold was the workmanship of your settings and your sockets in you. In the day of your being created they were made ready. 14You are the anointed cherub that is covering, and I have set you. On the holy mountain of God you proved to be. In the midst of fiery stones you walked about. 15You were faultless in your ways from the day of your being created until unrighteousness was found in you.
Jesus shed light on the nature of Satans unrighteousness. He told his diciples that Satan did not stand fast in the truth, this shows that Satan was once a faithful servant of God but deviated from that right course. The bible shows that Satan nurtured feelings of self-importance to the point that he coveted worship that belonged only to God.
It also tells us that Jesus came to put an end to Satans rebellion
1John 5:8...the Devil has been sinning from [the] beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was made manifest, namely, to break up the works of the Devil.
In the account of Job, Satan shows his motives when he challenged God saying that he could turn God’s servant Job, and by implication any servant of God, away from Him.
When Satan tempted Jesus, he asked Jesus to fall down and do an act of worship to Satan and Jesus reply was that "Its is your God Jehovah you must worship"
This shows that Satan was after the worship that living creatures rightly give to God.
Hyroglyphx writes:
That the Jews have always been awaiting their messiah since the time of David is no mystery. I am saying "seed" in specific reference to Jesus is. As the Jews say today, it is a false parallel.
the Jews are as wrong today as they were back then. Did you know that Daniels prophecy gave the year of the Messiahs arrival? The jews back then knew and they were in anticipation of his arrival. However when Jesus presented himself, they wanted a warrior, not a carpenter.
Hyroglyphx writes:
It doesn't make it so, especially when Jesus failed to perform the basic requirements laid out in the Tanakh for what accomplishments the mashiach would accomplish.
their idea was that the Messiah would free them from the Roman yolk. Even Jesus diciples thought that he was going to restore the kingdom to Judah and Jesus had to correct them. the Messiahs kingdom was to be a heavenly kingdom, not antother earthly government. Their expectation was wrong, but Jesus fulfilled everything that the OT required.
Some of those requirements are pending for a future time, but as the Messianic kingdom was to be a world wide rulership, it couldnt possibly be another human run governemnt located in Jerusalem.
Hyroglyphx writes:
Are you saying that God never intended for man to ever be in heaven, that it's a false insertion made by the "Church?" And if so, what church, as "The Church" is biblically described as the totality of a body of believers?
thats exactly what i'm saying. He made us as physical creations because he wanted us to look after his physical creation, the earth.
The early christians formed the original body of Christ on earth. But after the death of the Apostles, other men began to introduce their teachings into the church, they took over and transformed the church into something false. Some of their teachings were completely contrary to the teachings of Christ. There was fortold to be a long time of darkness on the earth where the 'light' or truth of the scriptures would be hidden, but then in the last days, God would pour out his spirit and reveal the truth to those who loved him.
when the last days began, there were many different christian churchs and groups all studying and teaching the bible. Some of them continued to teach the false doctrines that had been introduced centuries earlier, but some others spoke out against such teachings. God chose those who were true to the scriptures to pour out his spirit on and they became the new Isreal of God.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by Hyroglyphx, posted 11-09-2009 11:25 AM Hyroglyphx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by Hyroglyphx, posted 11-10-2009 11:35 AM Peg has replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 22 of 73 (534625)
11-09-2009 9:32 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by HalifaxGuy
11-09-2009 1:18 PM


Re: Could Jesus suffer?
HalifaxGuy writes:
The only way Jesus could have suffered was if he was human. So if Jesus was the human form taken by God for his time on earth, I guess he could have suffered.
Jesus was certainly human, but he wasnt God. He was the Son of God as the scriptures repeatedly testify. The idea that Jesus was God was introduced after the Apostolic period....the bible doesnt support it.
HalifaxGuy writes:
When the human body died on the cross, the spirit went back to heaven at which point the physical body would have remained behind. Is there any Biblical evidence of what happened to the physical body after it ceased suffering?
Pauls spoke about jesus death and about how God did not allow Jesus human body to 'see corruption' or to rot in the ground.
Acts2:31he saw beforehand and spoke concerning the resurrection of the Christ, that neither was he forsaken in Ha′des (Hell) nor did his flesh see corruption
We know that when the women went to the grave to emablm his body, the body had gone and an Angel told them that Jesus had risen. But the physical body was taken by God. When Moses died, God buried him in a place that no isrealite knew of and this was also the case with Enoch from the account in Genesis.
But in the case of Jesus, the physical body is said to 'not see corruption' which measn it was not left in the ground to rot. The likely scenario is that God himself disposed of Jesus body.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by HalifaxGuy, posted 11-09-2009 1:18 PM HalifaxGuy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by HalifaxGuy, posted 11-10-2009 9:22 AM Peg has replied

  
HalifaxGuy
Junior Member (Idle past 5192 days)
Posts: 2
From: Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
Joined: 06-26-2009


Message 23 of 73 (534680)
11-10-2009 9:22 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by Peg
11-09-2009 9:32 PM


Re: Could Jesus suffer?
In reply to Peg
So when Jesus was seen ascending to heaven, it wasn’t his physical body but just a vision for the benefit of those viewing the event. Wouldn’t those humans viewing from earth automatically assume He had ascended in both body and soul? — I’m assuming that souls cannot normally be seen. Wouldn’t it seem normal for those viewers to report the physical body vanishing into the clouds and subsequent writings would report it that way? How could someone writing about this event conclude that only the soul was present when everyone there clearly saw a body?
I guess my problem is accepting that all those viewing and those subsequently writing about it would report only the soul ascending. Wouldn’t they automatically assume the body went to heaven as well? Since the bible doesn’t account for where the body went, wouldn’t it seen obvious for those present at that time, that it went to heaven and wouldn’t that be reinforced by the fact that no body remained behind?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Peg, posted 11-09-2009 9:32 PM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by Peg, posted 11-11-2009 1:30 AM HalifaxGuy has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 24 of 73 (534707)
11-10-2009 11:35 AM
Reply to: Message 21 by Peg
11-09-2009 9:17 PM


they certainly did know the consequences
Genesis 3:2-3 "Of the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat. But as for eating of the fruit of the tree that is in the middle of the garden, God has said, ‘You must not eat from it, no, you must not touch it that you do not die.’"
How can you know what the consequence of death is if you have no comprehension of it, and how can you know it is "wrong" to not listen to God BEFORE you eat of the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil?
Sin is disobedience to Gods standards and laws and requirements.
Its not something that he could give them or plant in them as a desire.
I know what sin is. He gave them not only the ability to sin but a desire to sin. He therefore creates sin. How do you create "evil," and yet plain as day God stated that he creates evil.
Sin is what happened when A&E used their freewill to disobey God. He wanted them to obey him which is why he told them NOT to eat from the tree.
If he did he wouldn't have given the serpent unmitigated access to them, or not warn them of his ways, or give them a desire to sin, etc, etc. A&E were set up so God could prove a point.
Well not every religion beleives that Jesus is God. Mine does not teach that Jesus was God. We teach, as the bible says, Jesus is the 'SON' of God.
[i]"Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad." You are not yet fifty years old," the Jews said to him, "and you have seen Abraham!" I tell you the truth," Jesus answered, "before Abraham was born, [color=red]I AM[/color=red]!"[/i] - John 8:56-58
Clearly a reference to Exodus.
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made... The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us." John 1
I wonder who they're talking about.
"For unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given; and the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace." - Isaiah 9:6
Oh dear...
"Christ Jesus, who being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a servant, and coming in the likeness of men." -Phillipians 2:6
There are dozens more scriptures clearly describing the Trinity, and therefore my point still stands. God immolated himself and so how much can God suffer when there is no chance he will ever wind up in hell?
The point of Jesus coming was to stand in place of Adam, the first father.
So why not do it when it actually happened? Or even better, why not have set him up for failure from day 1?
Those who look to Jesus and follow him, can be viewed by God as 'sinless' and thus have the opportunity to live forever as God intended.
If that was his true intent, he would have made it a reality and not allowed us to be free of it from the start.
Ezekeil prophetically described 'Satan' in his pronouncement of judgement upon the king of Tyre. In this description, Satan was shown to be a heavenly cherub who was created perfect. However he became unrighteous.
Created "perfect" but became unrighteous? That's an oxymoron. Either he's perfect or imperfect.
Secondly, that verse has nothing to do about Satan and everything to do with the king of Tyre who exalted himself above God. The concept of Satan evolved over time. Nowhere is he mentioned in the Torah, to include the Serpent, as the only parallels of the Serpent being Satan is referenced in the New Testament. The Torah makes no mention of Satan anywhere. He first surfaced in Job, as a facilitator of God by playing the role of "devil's advocate." He only later became the monster by early Christians as there are no outside references.
Make no mistake though, the King of Tyre and Satan bear zero relevance to one another. And if you think they do, please support your assertion. The Ezekiel passage does not correlate to Satan.
the Jews are as wrong today as they were back then.
That's a matter of opinion, now isn't it? Secondly the entire cast of the bible is in fact, Jewish, so...
their idea was that the Messiah would free them from the Roman yolk. Even Jesus diciples thought that he was going to restore the kingdom to Judah and Jesus had to correct them. the Messiahs kingdom was to be a heavenly kingdom, not antother earthly government. Their expectation was wrong, but Jesus fulfilled everything that the OT required.
He was supposed to bring peace, which he didn't. I realize that Christians think the last "week" in Daniel's Seventy Sevens is supposed to represent over 2,000 years to explain why there still is no peace, but suffice it to say that it is certainly debatable.
Problem is, we keep adding topics to discuss as we go. I prophesy that this debate will go off topic
He made us as physical creations because he wanted us to look after his physical creation, the earth.
Look after earth? Who is looking after Pluto, Neptune, Venus, Saturn, etc, etc? The better question is why there is a physical universe at all when so much emphasis is placed on the heavenly realm as the goal.
There was fortold to be a long time of darkness on the earth where the 'light' or truth of the scriptures would be hidden
In Malachi, where the world is waiting for mashiach.
God chose those who were true to the scriptures to pour out his spirit on and they became the new Isreal of God.
How are we supposed to know what is true and what is not true?
Edited by Hyroglyphx, : No reason given.

"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." --John Adams

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by Peg, posted 11-09-2009 9:17 PM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by Peg, posted 11-11-2009 2:29 AM Hyroglyphx has replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 25 of 73 (534782)
11-11-2009 1:30 AM
Reply to: Message 23 by HalifaxGuy
11-10-2009 9:22 AM


Re: Could Jesus suffer?
Hi halifaxGuy
it might be easier for me to answer each of your questions using only the bible.
HalifaxGuy writes:
So when Jesus was seen ascending to heaven, it wasn’t his physical body but just a vision for the benefit of those viewing the event. Wouldn’t those humans viewing from earth automatically assume He had ascended in both body and soul?
Acts 1:9And after he had said these things, while they were looking on, he was lifted up and a cloud caught him up from their vision.
10And as they were gazing into the sky while he was on his way, also, look! two men in white garments stood alongside them, 11and they said: Men of Gal′i‧lee, why do YOU stand looking into the sky?
This Jesus who was received up from YOU into the sky will come thus in the same manner as YOU have beheld him going into the sky.
Notice that in this verse, the diciples did not view jesus ascending into heaven. Vs 9 says 'a cloud caught him up from their vision'
Also vs 10 says they were looking into the 'sky'...not looking at Jesus. Then the Angels appeared and asked them why they were looking into the sky...so it wasnt Jesus they were looking at, it was the sky.
HalifaxGuy writes:
I’m assuming that souls cannot normally be seen. Wouldn’t it seem normal for those viewers to report the physical body vanishing into the clouds and subsequent writings would report it that way? How could someone writing about this event conclude that only the soul was present when everyone there clearly saw a body?
the early christians thought of the 'soul' as the living person not as somthing invisible or spiritual.
Look at the following verses and decide how they viewed Jesus resurrection? What form or type of body do they identify as being raised for heavenly life?
1Pe 3:18"Christ died once for all time ...he being put to death in the flesh, but being made alive in the spirit"
1Co 15:50 "However, this I say, brothers, that flesh and blood cannot inherit God’s kingdom"
1Cor 15:35"Nevertheless, someone will say: How are the dead to be raised up? Yes, with what sort of body are they coming? ...40And there are heavenly bodies, and earthly bodies; but the glory of the heavenly bodies is one sort, and that of the earthly bodies is a different sort. ...44It is sown a physical body, it is raised up a spiritual body. If there is a physical body, there is also a spiritual one. 45It is even so written: The first man Adam became a living soul. The last Adam became a life-giving spirit."
HalifaxGuy writes:
Since the bible doesn’t account for where the body went, wouldn’t it seen obvious for those present at that time, that it went to heaven and wouldn’t that be reinforced by the fact that no body remained behind?
The isrealites were familiar with the Idea that God can dispose of bodies himself so that they do not have to be buried. Moses body was disposed of by God and so was Enoch's body.
The Apostles applied the prophecy in Psalm about God not leaving the body/soul of the loyal one in the grave/pit, to Jesus. Its likely that they believed that God had disposed of Jesus body in the same way he did Moses and Enoch.
Psalm 16:10For you will not leave my soul in Sheol.
You will not allow your loyal one to see the pit."
Acts 13:34"And that fact that he (Jehovah) resurrected him (Jesus) from the dead destined no more to return to corruption,...35Hence he also says in another psalm, ‘You will not allow your loyal one to see corruption.’ 36For David, ...fell asleep [in death] and was laid with his forefathers and did see corruption. 37On the other hand, he(Jesus) whom God raised up did not see corruption"
What is also notable about jesus appearance after his resurrection is that the body did not look familiar to his close associates.
When Mary Magdalene saw Jesus, she though he was the gardener. It was actually the way he spoke that made her realize it was actually Jesus. And the body was able to appear and dissapear at will. This is exactly how the angles appeared to people, they could materialize and take on different bodies.
John 20:14-15"After saying these things, she turned back and viewed Jesus standing, but she did not discern it was Jesus. 15Jesus said to her: Woman, why are you weeping? Whom are you looking for? She, imagining it was the gardener, said to him: Sir, if you have carried him off, tell me where you have laid him, and I will take him away.
Luke 24:30"And as he was reclining with them at the meal he took the loaf, blessed it, broke it and began to hand it to them. 31At that their eyes were fully opened and they recognized him; and he disappeared from them"
John 21:4 "However, just as it was getting to be morning, Jesus stood on the beach, but the disciples did not, of course, discern that it was Jesus."
The conclusion is that the body of Jesus was disposed of by God in order for the body not to experience corruption in the grave...corruption means disintegration in this sense.
Edited by Peg, : No reason given.
Edited by Peg, : fixed quote boxs

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by HalifaxGuy, posted 11-10-2009 9:22 AM HalifaxGuy has not replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 26 of 73 (534786)
11-11-2009 2:29 AM
Reply to: Message 24 by Hyroglyphx
11-10-2009 11:35 AM


Hyroglyphx writes:
How can you know what the consequence of death is if you have no comprehension of it, and how can you know it is "wrong" to not listen to God BEFORE you eat of the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil?
Of course they had comprehension of death, the animals around them died, so they knew what death was. God placing the law on the tree was how they knew it was bad not to listen...the law told them what would happen if they disobeyed it.
Hyroglyphx writes:
I know what sin is. He gave them not only the ability to sin but a desire to sin. He therefore creates sin. How do you create "evil," and yet plain as day God stated that he creates evil.
Can you explain how he gave them a desire to sin? Sin and evil are not one in the same. People sin, but they are not necesarily evil.
How do you define evil?
Hyrglyphx writes:
"Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad." You are not yet fifty years old," the Jews said to him, "and you have seen Abraham!" I tell you the truth," Jesus answered, "before Abraham was born, I AM!" - John 8:56-58
Clearly a reference to Exodus.
Is it?
Many other translations simply say "before Abraham was,I have been" or "I was"
John said at John 1:1
In [the] beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God
This is in harmony with the words of Genesis 1:26 Let us make man in OUR image, according to OUR likeness.
God is clearly speaking to someone here. He is speaking to the one who told the religious leaders...
57Therefore the Jews said to him: You are not yet fifty years old, and still you have seen Abraham? 58Jesus said to them: Most truly I say to YOU, Before Abraham came into existence, I have been.
HyroglyphxThere are dozens more scriptures clearly describing the Trinity, and therefore my point still stands. God immolated himself and so how much can God suffer when there is no chance he will ever wind up in hell?
there is no trinity. That teaching was developed centuries after the bible had been penned by christians who tried to explain christianity in terms of greek philosophy.
quote:
The New Encyclopdia Britannica says: Neither the word Trinity, nor the explicit doctrine as such, appears in the New Testament, nor did Jesus and his followers intend to contradict the Shema in the Old Testament: ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord’ (Deut. 6:4). ... The doctrine developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies. ... By the end of the 4th century ... the doctrine of the Trinity took substantially the form it has maintained ever since.(1976), Micropdia, Vol. X, p. 126.
John 1:1 has deliberately been translated incorrectly.
Hyroglyphx writes:
"For unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given; and the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace." - Isaiah 9:6
if Jesus was God Almighty, why describe him in terms of 'son' and 'child' 'Prince'
that is not how Jehovah is ever described in the OT.
Hyroglyphx writes:
"Christ Jesus, who being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a servant, and coming in the likeness of men." -Phillipians 2:6
again this verse does not support the trinity. Its says Jesus is in the 'form' of God...not God himself. It also shows that Jesus is in subjection to God and that he is NOT Equal to him. If Jesus was God, then surely he must be equal to God...this scripture is not saying that though.
Hyroglyphx writes:
If that was his true intent, he would have made it a reality and not allowed us to be free of it from the start.
if he corrected things in Eden, You and I would not be alive today. We are from the genes of Adam and Eve. It was their blood line that we have come through...if they produced no children, none of us would be alive today.
Hyroglyphx writes:
Created "perfect" but became unrighteous? That's an oxymoron. Either he's perfect or imperfect.
and yet millions of other angles and 1 other perfect human have remained sinfree...doesnt make sense if we are prone to sin.
Jesus was tested to the extreme and yet remained sin free. Millions of other Angels have remained sin free too so its not impossible.
Hyroglyphx writes:
Look after earth? Who is looking after Pluto, Neptune, Venus, Saturn, etc, etc? The better question is why there is a physical universe at all when so much emphasis is placed on the heavenly realm as the goal.
its the church's who promote heaven, not the bible. The bible speaks endlessly about living on earth in paradisaic conditions. If God wanted us in heaven, he would have made us there.
Hyroglyphx writes:
How are we supposed to know what is true and what is not true?
you do that by looking at what you are being told with a critical eye and comparing those teachings with Gods word the bible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Hyroglyphx, posted 11-10-2009 11:35 AM Hyroglyphx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by hooah212002, posted 11-11-2009 2:58 AM Peg has replied
 Message 30 by Hyroglyphx, posted 11-11-2009 11:00 AM Peg has replied

  
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 801 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 27 of 73 (534787)
11-11-2009 2:58 AM
Reply to: Message 26 by Peg
11-11-2009 2:29 AM


Of course they had comprehension of death, the animals around them died, so they knew what death was. God placing the law on the tree was how they knew it was bad not to listen...the law told them what would happen if they disobeyed it.
You are literally the first literal creation believer I have seen say that there was death before the fall. Most I have seen say that there was no death before the eating of teh apple.
Is it?
Many other translations simply say "before Abraham was,I have been" or "I was"
So which bible is right? (hint: that seems a mighty hefty problem with christianity, at least for me)
if he corrected things in Eden, You and I would not be alive today. We are from the genes of Adam and Eve. It was their blood line that we have come through...if they produced no children, none of us would be alive today.
So god can't give himself a second chance? It was all or nothing? God said to himself "ok, I've got one shot to make mankind. Here goes: FAAAAAKKKKKKK! I screwed up. Oh well, I will just damn them all and make them atone for this first broad's mistake."
and yet millions of other angles and 1 other perfect human have remained sinfree...doesnt make sense if we are prone to sin.
Jesus was tested to the extreme and yet remained sin free. Millions of other Angels have remained sin free too so its not impossible.
regular humans don't come back to life, walking the earth as zombies. So to use jesus as a picture of perfection to prove that MAN can be sinfree....is daft. he is not a man, he is god incarnate/son of god.
you do that by looking at what you are being told with a critical eye and comparing those teachings with Gods word the bible.
Which one? you've already shown that not all bibles say the same thing. Don't get me started on the Q'uran.
Edited by hooah212002, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by Peg, posted 11-11-2009 2:29 AM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by Peg, posted 11-11-2009 5:34 AM hooah212002 has replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 28 of 73 (534796)
11-11-2009 5:34 AM
Reply to: Message 27 by hooah212002
11-11-2009 2:58 AM


hooah212002 writes:
You are literally the first literal creation believer I have seen say that there was death before the fall. Most I have seen say that there was no death before the eating of teh apple.
the animals were not created in the 'image' of God so there is no reason to conclude that they could live forever. Besides, if death came from the consequences of disobedience, then the animals could not have disobeyed becasue they are not conscious of Gods existence or his laws.
hooah212002 writes:
So which bible is right? (hint: that seems a mighty hefty problem with christianity, at least for me)
it is a problem i agree...however not one that cannot be identified. More accurate knowlege of the Hebrew language has helped many translators to convey accurately the original language. A lot of misunderstanding is also the result of church doctrines... in this case the idea that Jesus is God might cause a translator to make that verse read 'I Am' as Hydroglyphx translation did.
But if a translator sticks to the bibles simple truth that Jesus was a 'Son' of God, then they would be moved to look closer at the translation of that verse and would probably present a more accurate verse.
Or better still, you could get a jewish person to read it for you in hebrew...now there's an idea!
hooah212002 writes:
Which one? you've already shown that not all bibles say the same thing. Don't get me started on the Q'uran.
you can study yourself, there are plenty of reference works to help people understand hebrew....you could even learn hebrew and read it yourself
or you could find a source of information that is not contaminated by false teachings...lets face it, there are 10,000 odd christian denominations in this world...the chances are that someones gotta have it right. If evolution can do it, why can we lol
Edited by Peg, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by hooah212002, posted 11-11-2009 2:58 AM hooah212002 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by hooah212002, posted 11-11-2009 5:45 AM Peg has not replied

  
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 801 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 29 of 73 (534799)
11-11-2009 5:45 AM
Reply to: Message 28 by Peg
11-11-2009 5:34 AM


it is a problem i agree...however not one that cannot be identified. More accurate knowlege of the Hebrew language has helped many translators to convey accurately the original language. A lot of misunderstanding is also the result of church doctrines... in this case the idea that Jesus is God might cause a translator to make that verse read 'I Am' as Hydroglyphx translation did.
yet you are quite confident that the one you read is the correct one........
.......the bibles simple truth .......
please, please, show me some simplicity ANYWHERE in the bible after the part that says "in the beginning...."
you can study yourself, there are plenty of reference works to help people understand hebrew....you could even learn hebrew and read it yourself
Or I could not.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Peg, posted 11-11-2009 5:34 AM Peg has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 30 of 73 (534846)
11-11-2009 11:00 AM
Reply to: Message 26 by Peg
11-11-2009 2:29 AM


Damning evidence
Of course they had comprehension of death, the animals around them died, so they knew what death was.
Please support this assertion and show me where the animals died around them before the Fall of Man.
God placing the law on the tree was how they knew it was bad not to listen...the law told them what would happen if they disobeyed it.
They had no concept of "law" since they had no concept of right or wrong. True or not true: The point of the Tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil allowed them to understand right from wrong?
Secondly, there was no Law. That was introduced long after them and long after Abraham.
Can you explain how he gave them a desire to sin?
Because nothing can come to pass without the will of God, either his permissive will or his perfect will. It is still his will.
God created man's instincts and his desires, right? Man could not create that on his own, God created it. What left is there to deduce?
Sin and evil are not one in the same.
It is exactly the same. Please view the synonym of evil and tell me what it is.
quote:
"Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad." You are not yet fifty years old," the Jews said to him, "and you have seen Abraham!" I tell you the truth," Jesus answered, "before Abraham was born, I AM!" - John 8:56-58
Clearly a reference to Exodus.
Is it? Many other translations simply say "before Abraham was,I have been" or "I was"
Regardless, Jesus plain as day is saying that he has existed long before mankind. He did not simply begin to exist when Mary conceived. He had stated several times that he's "not of this world," and made other remarks that he's existed either as God or with God.
That's biblical.
So he is not just a man, as you allege. My initial point still stands that no one is perfect, and it is clear that God intended that so he could offer salvation. That's the whole point of salvation, because man by his very nature cannot stop sinning.
We are therefore punished for something God created.
This is in harmony with the words of Genesis 1:26 Let us make man in OUR image, according to OUR likeness.
God is clearly speaking to someone here. He is speaking to the one who told the religious leaders.
That verse where God is speaking is about the creation of man. How can he be speaking to a man long before he created man?
there is no trinity. That teaching was developed centuries after the bible had been penned by christians who tried to explain christianity in terms of greek philosophy.
So you say, but I am backing up my assertions with scriptures. The concept of the trinity may be complete malarky (which it probably is), but there is good reason why people assume the trinity from scripture.
Paul (or Timothy) even states that Jesus being considered God is not something that can be fully comprehended, yet it is nonetheless true.
"Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus: Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death even death on a cross!" Phillipians 2:5-8
These verses are very clear that Jesus is God. What church do you attend telling you otherwise?
quote:
The New Encyclopdia Britannica says: Neither the word Trinity
Irrelevant. The word "trinity" is a later description and concept for what is clearly read about in scripture.
John 1:1 has deliberately been translated incorrectly.
If that is so then the bible is not infallible, is it? It can be tampered with, and if that is the case it opens the door to question the entire veracity of it.
if Jesus was God Almighty, why describe him in terms of 'son' and 'child' 'Prince' that is not how Jehovah is ever described in the OT.
An even vastly more important question, if Jesus was not God then why describe him as God?
Its says Jesus is in the 'form' of God...not God himself. It also shows that Jesus is in subjection to God and that he is NOT Equal to him. If Jesus was God, then surely he must be equal to God...this scripture is not saying that though.
In plain language it says he is God, taking the form of man and being found in the appearance of man, humbling himself.
if he corrected things in Eden, You and I would not be alive today. We are from the genes of Adam and Eve. It was their blood line that we have come through...if they produced no children, none of us would be alive today.
Yeah, so?
and yet millions of other angles and 1 other perfect human have remained sinfree...doesnt make sense if we are prone to sin.
Jesus was tested to the extreme and yet remained sin free. Millions of other Angels have remained sin free too so its not impossible.
Peg, Jesus is God and the angels are constantly with God. What temptations are so great for perfected beings? They don't eat, so they can't be gluttons. They don't copulate, so they can't lust. They're in God's presence, so they cannot lie, etc, etc.
Again, the entire point of Jesus is the unblemished Lamb, the ultimate and final Passover. This was done because there are none that are righteous, no, not even one (according to the messianic verse by David).
its the church's who promote heaven, not the bible. The bible speaks endlessly about living on earth in paradisaic conditions. If God wanted us in heaven, he would have made us there.
My question was he wanted it this way at all when it is very clear that the heavenly realm is the ultimate goal.

"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." --John Adams

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by Peg, posted 11-11-2009 2:29 AM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by Peg, posted 11-12-2009 10:03 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024