Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: April 28, 2024, 5:48 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Who was "he" talking to?
RE: Who was "he" talking to?
(January 25, 2017 at 8:01 am)Tonus Wrote:
(January 24, 2017 at 5:15 am)Godschild Wrote: The Israelites of the OT believed in the coming messiah.
But they don't believe that Jesus was it, and therefore do not recognize him as god.

I think you mean not all of them, there are many Jewish Christians.

Quote:


Tonus Wrote:They are one of many.  And although they have modified the Bible for their own convenience, the reason they and other denominations claim that Jesus is not god is because there are sufficient verses in the NT to support the claim.  Possibly even more than support the reverse.  This is one of the problems with the Bible, that it leaves many details open to interpretations that are sometimes contradictory and quite important.

They had to modify the Bible so they could say Jesus isn't Jesus. There only two denominations that do not believe Jesus is not God. I noticed you did not supply any of the many verses you say are in the Bible that shows Jesus sin't God. I'll give you a reference that will put an end to the nonsense that Jesus is not God, John 1:1-5.

Quote:


Tonus Wrote:I'm not sure which statement you are referring to.  I say that God hides because he does not reveal himself plainly, as the Bible claims he did in the past.  There is no reason to think that he is prevented from doing so, therefore I can only assume that he is concealing himself.  If he were to reveal himself it would not force my decision, it would inform my decision.  Why would God leave out such a crucial piece of information when my eternal soul depended on my choice?

In the past (ie before Jesus) only a few chosen people had direct access to God and only a chosen few ever received the Holy Spirit. The every day Israelis never saw God, heard from God or experienced the Holy Spirit.Actually no one has ever seen God, God revealed himself through His prophets.
Then God revealed himself in the person of Jesus and once Jesus ascended into heaven the Holy Spirit was sent to convict and show people who God is. God now works with us individually, God says He will reveal himself through knowledge to those who truly seek and accept Jesus. You can't fool God, He knows that no matter what He did those who do not want Him will make every excuse they can. An omnipresent being knows all the excuses that will be.

Quote:


Tonus Wrote:Adam and Eve were not bound by sin; they were perfect.  The only rule that God gives them is not to eat from a specific tree.  The fruit does not appear to have been poisonous and its only effect was to give them more knowledge, so the rule was designed to show their acceptance of God as their sovereign.  Instead, they decided to follow the suggestion of a lowly snake over the command of God.  Hence, they rejected him.  He was no longer their God-- the serpent was.

They disobeyed God, He never abandoned them, on the contrary He saved them from their sin. Satan wasn't their god, though he wished he could be. He had a fatal flaw he could not create anything except lies. Disobedience is not total rejection, I disobey God yet I haven't rejected Him, I would think this is quite evident by my comments on this forum, disobedience is sin, rejection is disbelief
Quote:


Tonus Wrote:I see it as a moral fable, or multiple moral fables mashed into one.  We can see the effects of Adam and Eve's rejection of God in two ways-- he curses them and removes them from the garden and into a life that will be painful and difficult, and he does not remove their death sentence.

How do you think you could ever find God when you reject the very beginning of His book. Adam and Eve knew the punishment for their disobedience and for God not to carry out His providential judgment would be for Him to deny His providence, justice, who He is. The sinful couple could not be allowed to reach the Tree of Life, that would have doomed them to live in sin for eternity, this is what hell is, God saved them from this torment.

Tonus Wrote:why nudity was such an issue that even God decided he had to kill animals to provide them with loin coverings.

They had obtained the knowledge of good and evil, nudity would have invited them and others to sin sexually, if God had left them in that state it could have been considered as God leading them into temptation. It was a necessity, thus blood split because of sin.

Quote:


Tonus Wrote:It's not difficult to reason it out, as I've been doing.  He gave them a rule with very dire consequences, and they broke it deliberately.  I see that as a rejection of God.

They rejected his authority, not quite as severe but, when someone speeds on the highway you have rejected the speed limit law but not the law as a whole.

Quote:


Tonus Wrote:I think your explanation is pretty good, but let's assume that Judas felt that Jesus was not the messiah and decided to betray him for this reason.  We still have three years of witnessing Jesus perform miracles and give talks that left crowds awestruck.  Judas either saw or heard of Jesus resurrecting the dead, healing the blind, feeding multitudes with a few fish and loaves, turning water to wine, and so on.  He either saw or heard of the time that Jesus read the thoughts of the Pharisees and healed a paralytic man!  Why did it apparently take the events of Jesus' crucifixion to finally open his eyes?  It's one of the stranger things in the Bible, that a man who saw and experienced the things he did nonetheless sold out Jesus.  How many people do you know that would spend three years with Jesus and not be absolutely convinced that he was God?

I can't say you, but many on this forum would make every excuse they could. Many of the Jews rejected who Jesus was and especially the religious leaders, Jesus said this himself, "you have seen yet you reject what your eyes have shown you."

Quote:


Tonus Wrote:I 'knew God' in the manner you described for many years, and knew many people who also did.  To know God in this manner is to put aside any reasoning or thoughts that might cast doubt on his existence.  And that never made sense to me, even as a worshipper of God.  How can anyone not know God?  How can reason or logic not lead us straight to God?  Yet so many theists that I knew felt that 'to think for yourself' was dangerous and might lead away from God.  The only way this is possible is if God does not exist.

I do not know who taught you you couldn't think for yourself as a Christian, that is ridiculous it's how we can come to know God in a deeper relationship. I know many Christians who would agree with me, they are strong Christians. To many weak Christians have control of the churches and want to keep control, why, because they do not want God or anyone else to push them aside. Pharisees and Sadduces come to mind. Many of the young Christians I talk with have a better grasp on what being a Christian means, they are strong biblical Christians that seek God's truth through the Bible. God does exist, He is mans only hope.

Quote:


Tonus Wrote:What this proves is that God is above our judgment due to his power.  God is absolute power and thus can do as he pleases and we have no recourse but to accept it.  That is different from claiming that all he does is good, but it works out in the same way.  But to recognize this is to recognize the scary part of it, which I mentioned before.

What you described is God's providence and His love, justice, mercy, grace and ect. are all part of that providence. God is creator He is omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent this in itself is enough for Him not to be judged. If God was this terrible being people here want to make Him out to be, He could and would make life hell for all people all the time but, that is not who He is. Don't you think if God was as arrogant as some say He is that He would reveal himself to the suffering of all people. God has all that power yet chose to give His Son so that man could be redeemed into the relationship Adam had with God before sin. God has chosen to work through man, even to the point of His Son becoming man. With all that power we still have the choice, I call that love.

Quote:


Tonus Wrote:A righteous, just, and loving God would invite judgment; he would have nothing to fear from it.  

You left out perfect, perfection has no judge, it can't be improved on, this is more than reasonable, it's absolute truth. God being perfect can't have a legitimate judge, thus He by default is the ultimate judge.

Tonus Wrote:A God that follows the moral precepts that he gives to us would be easier to trust than one who does as he pleases and expects me to accept that under the threat of eternal pain.

Rejecting His Son will get people the eternal punishment. God is our morals our morals come from who God is.

Tonus Wrote: God is not bound by our morals and laws, so he could decide to make heaven less than awesome and we would be helpless to do anything about it.  Not only that, if we even thought that his actions were questionable he might send us to hell.  You trust that God will act a certain way, but God's nature means he is not limited in any way-- he would still be 'good' if he did things that you don't expect him to do.

Our moral laws come from who God is and God must be who He is because He does not lie. Thus being truthful He must create the eternal life He promised.
God can send believers to hell it would be against who He is, you're trying to bring an impossibility into a reality. God can do many unexpected things because we do not know Him completely, but He can't go against who He says He is, He would then be a liar and that is impossible. All that you have stated in this last quoted section is nothing but excuses, why not give them up and look for the truth.
Talk to you next week if you decide to continue.

GC
God loves those who believe and those who do not and the same goes for me, you have no choice in this matter. That puts the matter of total free will to rest.
Reply



Messages In This Thread
Who was "he" talking to? - by Idontbelieveit - January 2, 2017 at 7:17 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Loading Please Wait - January 2, 2017 at 7:22 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by LostLocke - January 2, 2017 at 7:33 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by GUBU - January 5, 2017 at 5:21 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Natachan - January 16, 2017 at 8:26 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by vorlon13 - January 2, 2017 at 7:37 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Chad32 - January 2, 2017 at 7:37 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by ignoramus - January 2, 2017 at 8:45 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Astonished - January 2, 2017 at 8:51 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by brewer - January 2, 2017 at 10:37 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Lek - January 3, 2017 at 11:12 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Astonished - January 3, 2017 at 11:26 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by robvalue - January 4, 2017 at 1:34 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Astonished - January 4, 2017 at 1:39 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Minimalist - January 4, 2017 at 1:42 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Astonished - January 4, 2017 at 2:28 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by robvalue - January 4, 2017 at 2:29 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Godschild - January 4, 2017 at 2:23 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by chimp3 - January 4, 2017 at 6:30 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Astonished - January 4, 2017 at 2:10 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Godschild - January 4, 2017 at 4:53 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by chimp3 - January 4, 2017 at 8:37 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Godschild - January 5, 2017 at 12:40 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by chimp3 - January 5, 2017 at 6:55 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Godschild - January 5, 2017 at 9:05 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by GUBU - January 8, 2017 at 9:31 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Minimalist - January 5, 2017 at 2:09 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by chimp3 - January 6, 2017 at 7:20 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Godschild - January 6, 2017 at 12:15 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by chimp3 - January 6, 2017 at 7:50 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Tonus - January 8, 2017 at 9:35 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Godschild - January 9, 2017 at 12:19 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Tonus - January 9, 2017 at 7:30 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Godschild - January 9, 2017 at 4:21 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Cyberman - January 9, 2017 at 4:40 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by robvalue - January 9, 2017 at 10:15 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Tonus - January 9, 2017 at 6:56 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Godschild - January 9, 2017 at 7:30 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Tonus - January 10, 2017 at 8:14 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Godschild - January 10, 2017 at 4:38 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Tonus - January 11, 2017 at 7:25 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Godschild - January 11, 2017 at 9:58 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Tonus - January 12, 2017 at 9:04 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Godschild - January 12, 2017 at 10:29 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Tonus - January 13, 2017 at 8:54 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Crossless1 - January 13, 2017 at 9:43 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Godschild - January 13, 2017 at 1:43 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Tonus - January 14, 2017 at 9:41 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Godschild - January 14, 2017 at 11:03 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Tonus - January 15, 2017 at 6:59 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Godschild - January 16, 2017 at 6:33 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by chimp3 - January 16, 2017 at 6:42 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Godschild - January 16, 2017 at 4:22 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by chimp3 - January 16, 2017 at 9:21 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Godschild - January 17, 2017 at 12:23 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Tonus - January 16, 2017 at 11:15 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Godschild - January 16, 2017 at 7:16 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Tonus - January 17, 2017 at 7:48 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Godschild - January 17, 2017 at 6:52 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Tonus - January 19, 2017 at 7:50 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Godschild - January 20, 2017 at 4:11 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Tonus - January 21, 2017 at 10:29 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Wyrd of Gawd - January 21, 2017 at 7:08 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Godschild - January 24, 2017 at 5:15 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Tonus - January 25, 2017 at 8:01 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Godschild - January 28, 2017 at 3:52 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Tonus - January 30, 2017 at 10:42 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Godschild - February 1, 2017 at 4:58 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Tonus - February 7, 2017 at 9:24 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Godschild - February 13, 2017 at 7:08 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Godschild - February 14, 2017 at 3:06 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Godschild - February 4, 2017 at 3:14 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Godschild - January 27, 2017 at 1:53 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Secular Elf - January 11, 2017 at 2:50 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by rexbeccarox - January 9, 2017 at 12:46 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Godschild - January 9, 2017 at 3:02 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by vorlon13 - January 4, 2017 at 2:32 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Alex K - January 4, 2017 at 6:23 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by TheRealJoeFish - January 4, 2017 at 5:52 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Bravo - January 5, 2017 at 3:42 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Cyberman - January 6, 2017 at 10:12 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Godschild - January 7, 2017 at 1:32 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Minimalist - January 9, 2017 at 12:56 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Minimalist - January 5, 2017 at 12:33 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by downbeatplumb - January 5, 2017 at 1:59 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Godschild - January 5, 2017 at 6:28 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by downbeatplumb - January 6, 2017 at 12:51 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Godschild - January 6, 2017 at 4:33 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by downbeatplumb - January 11, 2017 at 2:24 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by GUBU - January 12, 2017 at 5:42 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Wyrd of Gawd - January 20, 2017 at 11:19 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Drich - January 6, 2017 at 12:21 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Catholic_Lady - January 6, 2017 at 7:59 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Minimalist - January 6, 2017 at 10:33 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by ignoramus - January 7, 2017 at 3:09 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Minimalist - January 9, 2017 at 9:53 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by ignoramus - January 10, 2017 at 3:19 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Cyberman - January 10, 2017 at 10:10 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Godschild - January 11, 2017 at 1:23 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Minimalist - January 11, 2017 at 1:43 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by GUBU - January 11, 2017 at 1:28 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Cyberman - January 11, 2017 at 2:17 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Godschild - January 11, 2017 at 7:51 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Secular Elf - January 18, 2017 at 3:30 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Godschild - January 18, 2017 at 4:54 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Edwardo Piet - January 11, 2017 at 10:02 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Catholic_Lady - January 11, 2017 at 1:26 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Godschild - January 11, 2017 at 10:10 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by robvalue - January 11, 2017 at 1:41 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by robvalue - January 11, 2017 at 1:56 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Godschild - January 11, 2017 at 10:29 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Edwardo Piet - January 11, 2017 at 10:35 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Godschild - January 11, 2017 at 10:50 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Edwardo Piet - January 11, 2017 at 10:14 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Edwardo Piet - January 11, 2017 at 10:53 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Cyberman - January 11, 2017 at 8:28 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by The Grand Nudger - January 14, 2017 at 11:23 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Godschild - January 14, 2017 at 4:30 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Cyberman - January 14, 2017 at 4:54 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by The Grand Nudger - January 14, 2017 at 5:01 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Cyberman - January 14, 2017 at 8:18 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by robvalue - January 15, 2017 at 3:42 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by robvalue - January 15, 2017 at 7:06 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by robvalue - January 16, 2017 at 7:09 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by The Grand Nudger - January 19, 2017 at 12:19 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Minimalist - January 20, 2017 at 11:32 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by The Grand Nudger - February 1, 2017 at 5:49 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Wyrd of Gawd - February 5, 2017 at 6:15 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Godschild - February 6, 2017 at 10:50 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Wyrd of Gawd - February 6, 2017 at 10:53 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Godschild - February 7, 2017 at 1:23 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by The Grand Nudger - February 7, 2017 at 1:26 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Godschild - February 7, 2017 at 1:54 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Aroura - February 7, 2017 at 1:27 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Cyberman - February 7, 2017 at 9:24 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by The Grand Nudger - February 7, 2017 at 1:55 am
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by Godschild - February 11, 2017 at 6:06 pm
RE: Who was "he" talking to? - by The Grand Nudger - February 13, 2017 at 11:50 pm

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Talking animal books LinuxGal 2 492 October 16, 2023 at 8:20 am
Last Post: zebo-the-fat
  Talking to mormons Ferrocyanide 31 2950 October 9, 2020 at 7:37 pm
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
  Why did god only make exactly the number of talking animals that he needed? godlessheatheness 41 8559 March 26, 2017 at 10:04 pm
Last Post: The Industrial Atheist
  Oh NOES! Talking Animals In Fantasy Stories Nope 13 2881 February 27, 2015 at 7:34 pm
Last Post: Minimalist
  talking snake justin 16 7599 February 11, 2013 at 5:33 am
Last Post: Confused Ape
  "Talking Jesus" (Urban Dictionary definition) RichardP 1 1529 December 17, 2012 at 11:21 pm
Last Post: Minimalist
  Talking to Christians Loading Please Wait 21 6032 October 3, 2011 at 12:00 pm
Last Post: frankiej
  Okay, am I preaching now or just talking? Stucky 30 7296 September 26, 2011 at 10:39 pm
Last Post: The Grand Nudger



Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)