Originally posted by ahosyneyNot in this context.
What do you say when you are surprised with someone you don't expect. Don't you say "MY GOD".
If I belive that Jesus is a man and he is not GOD I will understand it this way.
Tomase was surprised that he sees Jesus while he knows that he is dead. So he said "MY GOD".
Does this make sense to you....
v.28 says clearly that Thomas was addressing Jesus.
If I belive that Jesus is a man and he is not GOD I will understand it this way.
If you try to approach the verse objectively you won't.
EDIT: If you don't want to believe the Bible, don't. No one's forcing you to. But stop trying to twist verses and take them out of context. If you want verses from the Bible that cast doubt on Jesus's divinity, there are a few that have been used throughout history. I'd say it's a better use of your time to find those and try to score points with them.
Originally posted by lucifershammerDo I appear not beliving in the Bible?
Not in this context.
v.28 says clearly that Thomas was addressing Jesus.
[b]If I belive that Jesus is a man and he is not GOD I will understand it this way.
If you try to approach the verse objectively you won't.
EDIT: If you don't want to believe the Bible, don't. No one's forcing you to. But stop trying to twist verses and take them . I'd say it's a better use of your time to find those and try to score points with them.[/b]
I don't belive that Jesus is GOD.
Jesus didn't say he is GOD and didn't ask worship, although you make him GOD and worship him. That is my problem.
I don't try to twist verses. You are the one who do that. You try to twist them to match what you belive.
Originally posted by ahosyneyJesus did say "I and the Father are one" -- many times and in many different ways. He clearly identified himself as divine in ways Jews could not mistake (e.g. forgiveness of sins, use of the "I AM" formula etc.). John ch.1 starts off by unequivocally stating that Jesus is the Logos (Word) is God.
Do I appear not beliving in the Bible?
I don't belive that Jesus is GOD.
Jesus didn't say he is GOD and didn't ask worship, although you make him GOD and worship him. That is my problem.
His disciples (e.g. Thomas and later Paul) clearly identify him as divine. Church Fathers identified him as divine well before the Arian controversy (and, in fact, so did the Arians!).
If you don't want to believe Jesus is God, that's your prerogative. No one is forcing you to.
EDIT: I don't try to twist verses.
Please. You've been squirming around Jn 20:28 since we started.
Not to mention you've been ignoring the context around virtually every one of the verses you've cited so far.
Even if Jesus say he and the Father is one, that doesn't imply he is GOD. It could imply their path is the same.
The whole bible say that there is only one GOD, It say that Jesus is a different Person. Although you claim Jesus is GOD.
If you say that John 20:28 imply that Jesus is GOD, But there are many others say not.
Jesus bow to his GOD. Can you tell me why did he do that.
Can you tell me who did Jesus was praying to.
Jesus said several times that he can't do anything by hemself and all the things that he did is given to him by GOD.
How could he be the same as GOD and depend on GOD to do his mericals.
You cann't prove that people considered him GOD during his life.
And you are not sure exactly when that happen.
GOD declared several times in the old testament about himself. And Jesus declared about GOD in the new Testament but Jesus didn't do that for himself.
You say jesus come to forgive our sin but Jesus didn't say anyting about that.
You claim that we all sinfull because of the original sin while GOD say in the Bible the son doesn't carry the sin of his father.
You claim that blood sacrifice is required to forgive sin while GOD say I will forgive sin if you just pray to me.
You say I twist and take things out of its context. And you try to understand from the bible what is not there.
You don't want to see that you are free I don't force you to do so.
But I have to show the truth as I see it.
Originally posted by sjegI know I don't like what I say.
I would use it like this:
e.g. 'My God, you're dim!'
which is more or less what I though reading your pathetic argument, ahosyney.
I also know that I'm not good. My English is poor and I cann't express my thoughts very will.
I also know that you don't want to debate with me because you think I'm some sort of devil.
But I would like to know what do you see wrong in what I said? That is the most important thing.
Originally posted by ahosyneyNo, I think your argumentation is weak and you are either very dim or disingenuous. You've an axe to grind with Christianity, probably due to you feeling inferior or deep down doubting your own perverse beliefs. Simple as that. i wouldn't waste my breath debating with you, as LH has done, or Whodey, because you're incapable of reason, either way.
I know I don't like what I say.
I also know that I'm not good. My English is poor and I cann't express my thoughts very will.
I also know that you don't want to debate with me because you think I'm some sort of devil.
But I would like to know what do you see wrong in what I said? That is the most important thing.
Originally posted by sjeg"No, I think your argumentation is weak"
No, I think your argumentation is weak and you are either very dim or disingenuous. You've an axe to grind with Christianity, probably due to you feeling inferior or deep down doubting your own perverse beliefs. Simple as that. i wouldn't waste my breath debating with you, as LH has done, or Whodey, because you're incapable of reason, either way.
I know it might be because of the language. I didn't say I'm perfect.
"you are either very dim or disingenuous"
My be because of my English I appear to you as dim but disingenuous I don't think so. I clearly declared my faith and my thoughts and I didn't hide anything so why do you say so.
"You've an axe to grind with Christianity"
I'm just saying what I belive , if you think that will grind christianity it is not my problem it is the problem of christianity.
"probably due to you feeling inferior"
Why should I. What do you think make me feel so. I'm so proud of what I'm but are you.
"or deep down doubting your own perverse beliefs"
Thank you for your good language. But prove it is perversed first.
"Simple as that. i wouldn't waste my breath debating with you, as LH has done, or Whodey, because you're incapable of reason, either way"
I didn't force you to come and debate with me. You are free to do what you want and me too. I'm trying to reason as much as I can but you didn't even try to understand me....
Thank you any way for the time you wasted with me.
Originally posted by ahosyney1) No, your english is ropy, but that's understandable - it's your lack of logic and proper thought that annoy. You've an agenda, an axe to grind - you believe what you believe - so why bother talking about it? To convince others to think like you is the only answer - and it is also your stated goal here.
"No, I think your argumentation is weak"
I know it might be because of the language. I didn't say I'm perfect.
"you are either very dim or disingenuous"
My be because of my English I appear to you as dim but disingenuous I don't think so. I clearly declared my faith and my thoughts and I didn't hide anything so why do you say so.
"You've an axe understand me....
Thank you any way for the time you wasted with me.
2) Your mistaken ideas are not Christianity's problem. I very much doubt Christianity gives a sh!t about you, frankly. Write to the Patriarch of Constantinople and ask if he is bothered by your nonsense. Or write to the Pope, and I'll pass by St.Peter's on Sunday and tell you if he mentions you in his Angelus sermon. (Irony aside, no one cares! Understand?)
Only I would say this - seek out the particularly dim to convert, or the particularly ugly and dim, as is often the case, and they might have time for this nonsense. But most of all try and someone who thinks less freely than you, and work on them. But give the people who post here some credit, please!
If, and God willing, one day you might, you change your approach, and actually want to understand Christianity and Christians, then come back, and talk to anyone here, or even me - I'll be glad to discuss things with you then.
For the rest of it, I'll talk about other subjects with you, and have accepted your challenge on the board. But until your approach changes, religion is not something I'll debate with you.
Otherwise, take it easy, mate! Egypt's a great country - I have links there!
Originally posted by sjegWhat do you want me to do?
1) No, your english is ropy, but that's understandable - it's your lack of logic and proper thought that annoy. You've an agenda, an axe to grind - you believe what you believe - so why bother talking about it? To convince others to think like you is the only answer - and it is also your stated goal here.
2) Your mistaken ideas are not Christianity's problem ...[text shortened]... h you.
Otherwise, take it easy, mate! Egypt's a great country - I have links there!
Many atheists here express their views and challange GOD existance and not only grind christianity but GOD himself. What is the difference here between my approach and their approach.
I belive GOD exists same as you do..
Our problem is that you belive something about GOD that I don't
For me you belive doesn't make sense. And I have evidences about that. What should I do to express that? Shut up and accept anything you say.
By the way I think the Pop care so much about me. If not why does he talk about Islam.
I decided to move my closing statement here to the top, so anyone who doesn’t want to read further, can skip the rest...
All that is a long-winded way of saying that, at the end of the day, I think sjeg is right on this point: the only way we can have fruitful discussions (even good arguments!) among followers of different religions is to let each one present their own religion as best they can—without telling a Muslim that s/he doesn’t know how to read the Qur’an, or a Christian that s/he doesn’t know how to read the Gospels, or a Jew that s/he doesn’t know how to read Torah!
____________________________
The issue in this discussion is two-fold:
(1) The incarnation of the logos tou theou in/as Jesus; and
(2) The authority of (scriptural) revelation and tradition (and specific interpretations of same).
Without getting into a particular doctrine of incarnation (‘cause I just don’t want to), and despite the fact that Jesus in the gospels makes no claim so clear-cut as “I am God incarnate, the second person of the trinity”—nevertheless some idea of God incarnate in humanity seems to be pretty well established in the earliest layers of the NT canon (and the earliest strands of oral tradition). Had Jesus, as the God-man, stated things as clearly as some Christians would like to think he had, it wouldn’t have taken the church so long to nail down the Chalcedonian understanding (the Arians and the monophysites and the monotheletes were/are not stupid people with inferior exegetical and hermeneutical skills)—and exactly how clear and non-paradoxical is the Chalcedonian statement?
At the end of the day, no traditional Muslim or Jew is going to admit the incarnation (under any doctrine more strict than something like “We all have ‘Buddha-nature’,” anyway). Nor are they going to admit the authority of any scriptures or interpretation of scriptures that do.
A Muslim is going to read the NT texts through the lens of the Qur’an, just as Christians read the Hebrew scriptures through the lens of the NT and (unless they are sola scripturists—a doctrine that emerged with Martin Luther in the 16th century) the apostolic tradition, and a Jew is going to read any of it through the lens of rabbinic tradition and the Oral Torah.
Can the doctrine of the Trinity—literally, the tri-une God—be articulated in a manner that is consistent with strict monotheism (or, again, monism for that matter)? I certainly think so. Is it the only reasonable understanding of the one Godhead? Of course not. I wish that Jews and Muslims and Christians (and Hindus and Buddhists) would simply start from the understanding that the others are just as honest, just as intellectually and spiritually capable as themselves, instead of assuming that the other must be ignorant, stupid or perverse—especially with regard to their own scriptures and traditions!
Let’s face it: just because of our backgrounds, interests and opportunities for study, very few Christians can exegete the Qur’an capably; very few Muslims or Jews can exegete the NT texts capably; very few Christians can exegete the Hebrew scriptures capably; etc., etc. And, among those scholars who can (and they are certainly out there—e.g., “Old Testament” studies in Christian seminaries), it is the rare bird who can set aside the hermeneutical and creedal lenses of their own religion when doing so, in order to grasp how the others interpret their own scriptures (Jewish exegesis is so far from conventional Christian methods as to constitute a whole other paradigm). And even within the religious traditions, exegesis of their own texts is not non-contentious—there has certainly been sufficient debate among Christians of various denominations on here to drive that point home!
Originally posted by vistesdOk I agree if that what will make a good discussion. I have no problem at all. What can we start with?
I decided to move my closing statement here to the top, so anyone who doesn’t want to read further, can skip the rest...
All that is a long-winded way of saying that, at the end of the day, I think sjeg is right on this point: the only way we can have fruitful discussions (even good arguments!) among followers of different religions is to let each one p ...[text shortened]... en sufficient debate among Christians of various denominations on here to drive that point home!
Originally posted by ahosyneyUgh... No comment.
What do you want me to do?
Many atheists here express their views and challange GOD existance and not only grind christianity but GOD himself. What is the difference here between my approach and their approach.
I belive GOD exists same as you do..
Our problem is that you belive something about GOD that I don't
For me you belive doesn't make sens ...[text shortened]... say.
By the way I think the Pop care so much about me. If not why does he talk about Islam.
By the way, your 'evidence' has been disproven by those nice and patient enough to converse with you.
The difference between you and me is that I believe that the atheists have the right to say what they want, with the proviso of decency, anyone does. Even you. Whether it offends God or not (well, I'd very much doubt it), well that's between God and them or you. And good luck with that. The same as the world of Christianity and the billions of Christians in this world are probably not hanging on your every word, I doubt God gives a toss about your nonsense either. But there you go. Have it out with him when the time comes. My personal prediction : a swift despatch to the fiery depths below... but you didn't hear it from me. Now, let's enjoy a game of chess before your scrotum bursts into everlasting flame - because you'd surely cite it a distraction when I thump you, which I plan on doing.
Salaam!
Originally posted by ahosyneyI really wasn’t trying to start a new discussion... 🙂 Just pointing out why this one seems to be at an impasse.
Ok I agree if that what will make a good discussion. I have no problem at all. What can we start with?
I’m a weird bird that wanders across the borders of various religions anyway...