@sonship saidThe intent is for Christians to live in harmony with the will of God, to please Him, to be internally immersed in the Holy Spirit, not to be deified themselves.
Christians have taken the typology of the Old Testament offerings very seriously. Ghost may want to move the goalpost around. But the Christ as the one to whom the offerings of Leviticus symbolize is not trivial to many.
The atheist is now into argument by ho-hum apathy, nervously shifting around the goalpost, raising the bar of skepticism incessantly.
...[text shortened]... e all things and through whom are all things, in leading many sons into glory . . ." (Heb. 1:10)[/b]
@sonship saidI worry about you sometimes.
@Ghost-of-a-Duke
You have been asked to show us your biblcal support for athiesm - that God does not exist. Since you are appealing to the Scripture as the bearer of truth.
Are you going to show from the Bible that God does not exist ?
If not, and you're looking for a charlaton, a cheater playing fast and loose truth . . .
do you have a mirror?
I do not recognize scripture.
You corrupt it.
People, the Lord Jesus promised that the Holy Spirit would lead the church into all the truth. Now there are two extremes as I see it. There are two opposite extremes in wrong thinking:
1.) The Holy Spirit will speak something against what Jesus said, ie. like the teaching of Mohammed and the Quran.
2,) The other extreme is that words will never be uttered by a Spirit led servants which cannot be found literally in the Bible. In other words there will always be a kind "traditional flavor" and no new expressions.
These are two extremes on opposite ends of the spectrum.
Ghost of a Duke is trying the argue that if a new expression not found in the text of the Bible it follows that it CANNOT be of God.
That is not true.
And if a new expression is used it may be more of a test to listening public than a
test to the teacher using it.
The fact of the matter is that Ghost has no intention of being "God-ized" WHATEVER it may mean. It is not his major problem that he can't locate "God-ized" in the Bible.
Then again he can't locate God in reality either!
The intent is for Christians to live in harmony with the will of God, to please Him, to be internally immersed in the Holy Spirit, not to be deified themselves.
Ghost, what . . . pleases . . . Him . . . is . . . that . . . we . . . RECEIVE . . . Him . . . and . . . our souls . . . be fully permerated with Jesus Christ.
Guaranteed!
Take it to the bank.
He wants you to OPEN UP in trust, in faith and RECEIVE Him in His resurrection presence. Its supernateral. No apolgies.
"He was in the world, and the world came into being through Him, yet the world did not know Him. He came to His own, yet those who were His own did not receive Him.
But as many as received Him, to them He gave the authority to become children of God, to those who believe into His name,
Who were BEGOTTEN not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God." (John 1:11-13)
Ask Witness Lee. He made it up.
I don't need to ask.
Oh, poor, poor little Brother Witness Lee.
Like he needs me to defend him.
Did you yet show us where the Bible teaches that everybody needs to have a lack of belief in God?
That Bible that you depend on to tell you TRUTH, where did it teach atheism?
Thanks
@sonship saidAgain, your request for a biblical reference advocating atheism is nonsensical and a little embarrassing.
@Ghost-of-a-DukeAsk Witness Lee. He made it up.
I don't need to ask.
Oh, poor, poor little Brother Witness Lee.
Like he needs me to defend him.
Did you yet show us where the Bible teaches that everybody needs to have a lack of belief in God?
That Bible that you depend on to tell you TRUTH, where did it teach atheism?
Thanks
@Ghost-of-a-Duke
Its silly for you to play great defender of Orthodoxy when the whole Bible to you has nothing but lies in it.
Its silly for you to play cult fighter when you define the entire community of faith for two millennia a group of the deluded chasing after lies anyway.
@sonship saidI can look at 2 separate things in a detached and clinical fashion. The things 'you' believe in and try and flog here are not to be found in the NT.
@Ghost-of-a-Duke
Its silly for you to play great defender of Orthodoxy when the whole Bible to you has nothing but lies in it.
Its silly for you to play cult fighter when you define the entire community of faith for two millennia a group of the deluded chasing after lies anyway.
(I actually think part of you knows that, hence the sneaky deceptions.)
@sonship saidIn fairness to Duke, Sonship, he has said in the past that he can read the bible as you would novel (or words to that effect) and quote from it. That doesn't mean that he has to believe it.
@Ghost-of-a-Duke
Its silly for you to play great defender of Orthodoxy when the whole Bible to you has nothing but lies in it.
Its silly for you to play cult fighter when you define the entire community of faith for two millennia a group of the deluded chasing after lies anyway.
From some of his quotes I sometimes think that he is better acquainted with it than I am, yet I'm supposed to be the believer.
@medullah
The Bible states the essential and most important things in different ways.
If you can't receive it from here or there or a typology you don't trust, there are other ways in which His purpose can be stated.
I don't think everything stands or falls on whether we use extra-biblical expressions like "trinity," "rapture," "son-ize," "God-ize,".
If anyone wants to couch the dispute such that everything about God's economy stands or falls on usage of such well meaning phrases, I don't believe it does.
@divegeester
No. Not as far as I know.
It was a perfectly typical retort as far as I know.
If you want to get me on something wrong, get me wrong on 2 Pet. 1:4.