Idolitry?

Originally posted by josephw
[b]"can God die?"

Can a man resurrect himself back to life?

"does God have a beginning?"

I don't see the relevance of this question.

"can anyone see god and yet live?"

You don't know the answer to this question?

"how you can believe that the Christ is God is beyond me!"

Beyond you is right.

If scripture te ...[text shortened]... to see it, then that one doesn't know the real Jesus.

Please respond to John 1:1.[/b]

can a man resurrect himself, what are you talking about himself, ??????

(Romans 8:11) . . .If, now, the spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he that raised up Christ Jesus from the dead will also make your mortal bodies alive through his spirit that resides in you.

who is it that raises Christ from the dead? that is correct it is God

what medium does he use to raise Christ from the dead, that is correct, his Holy Spirit

your assertion that Christ raises himself from the dead, is worthy to be mocked, but it in itself shows the stupidity of the doctrine without me having to do anything. feel like condescending to state that it is beyond me now?

the scriptures indicate that no one has seen God at any time, i refer you from the top of my head to the very same chapter of John 1 verse eighteen. in that 'no one has seen god at any time', now many persons evidently saw Jesus Christ, therefore either the scripture is lying, which i doubt, or you are wrong, which i strongly believe.

I do not hold that any of the translators had the authority to translate John 1:1 as the word was God, as in the almighty, for quite clearly this is entirely disharmonious with the rest of scripture, for example,

(Philippians 2:5-6) . . .Keep this mental attitude in you that was also in Christ Jesus,  who, although he was existing in God’s form, gave no consideration to a seizure, namely, that he should be equal to God.

i make reference to the sahidic coptic text, the translations of others scholars such as James Moffat, who render the verse as 'the word was a god', or in Moffats case, 'the word was divine'

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
its worthy to note that he was a powerful speaker and an eloquent man, well versed in scripture, litreally “powerful . . . in the Scriptures" - interlinear
(this must have been the Hebrew portion of the bible for the Christian Greek scriptures were not as we know them today however, this did not stop him from receiving readjustment, thus we note his ...[text shortened]... re disciples! clearly the trinity was unknown to either Paul, Christ and the early christians.

"clearly the trinity was unknown to either Paul, Christ and the early christians."

1 John 5:7
For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

This is a proof text for the God head. Modern versions, based on the work of Westcott and Hort, have all but eliminated it.

All extant manuscripts, belonging to the majority text, are in agreement as to the validity of this verse.

Originally posted by josephw
Can a man resurrect himself back to life?

According to the Bible more than one person was brought back to life. As far as I know, all these resurrections were attributed to God. Do you have any references of Jesus claiming to have done it himself?

Originally posted by josephw
[b]"clearly the trinity was unknown to either Paul, Christ and the early christians."

1 John 5:7
For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

This is a proof text for the God head. Modern versions, based on the work of Westcott and Hort, have all but eliminated it.

All extan ...[text shortened]... anuscripts, belonging to the majority text, are in agreement as to the validity of this verse.[/b]

they have eliminated it because it was not in the original manuscripts and is quite spurious and a lie! if you are having to resort to spurious text, then you are toast!

All extant manuscripts, belonging to the majority text, are in agreement as to the validity of this verse.

yes in agreement that it was an interpolation and should never have been there in the first place, keep it real for goodness sake.

Originally posted by twhitehead
According to the Bible more than one person was brought back to life. As far as I know, all these resurrections were attributed to God. Do you have any references of Jesus claiming to have done it himself?

although Christ 'performed', resurrections, he did so by means of Gods holy spirit, and you are correct, even the Jews of Christ's time, attributed this to God, for they held that Christ was a great prophet, its only these idolators that would have us believe something else.

(Luke 7:11-17) 11 Closely following this he traveled to a city called Nain, and his disciples and a great crowd were traveling with him.  As he got near the gate of the city, why, look! there was a dead man being carried out, the only-begotten son of his mother. Besides, she was a widow. A considerable crowd from the city was also with her.  And when the Lord caught sight of her, he was moved with pity for her, and he said to her: “Stop weeping.”  With that he approached and touched the bier, and the bearers stood still, and he said: “Young man, I say to you, Get up!”  And the dead man sat up and started to speak, and he gave him to his mother.  Now fear seized them all, and they began to glorify God, saying: “A great prophet has been raised up among us,” and, “God has turned his attention to his people.” And this news concerning him spread out into all Judea and all the surrounding country.

you will note that they held Christ to be a great Prophet and attributed the work to God.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
can a man resurrect himself, what are you talking about himself, ??????

[b](Romans 8:11) . . .If, now, the spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he that raised up Christ Jesus from the dead will also make your mortal bodies alive through his spirit that resides in you.

who is it that raises Christ from the dead? t ...[text shortened]... t, who render the verse as 'the word was a god', or in Moffats case, 'the word was divine'[/b]

"for quite clearly this is entirely disharmonious with the rest of scripture, for example,.."

No it isn't. I wish I had the time to correct the error you have fallen into.

If all sin is ultimately a sin against God Himself, as David says, then how can it be that a created being can be sufficient as a sacrifice for our sins?

Only God can forgive sin. Only God is worthy to pay the price for our sin against Him, which is death.

It defies logic and reason to think a created being can save us from death.

It is unfortunate that you have been sold on the interpretation you hold.

Don't you find it odd that for nearly four hundred years the King James version was used by the entire English speaking world, and that all those millions of people believed in vain that Jesus was God in the flesh.

Appearently they believed in the wrong Jesus and are now eternaly lost.

Originally posted by josephw
[b]"for quite clearly this is entirely disharmonious with the rest of scripture, for example,.."

No it isn't. I wish I had the time to correct the error you have fallen into.

If all sin is ultimately a sin against God Himself, as David says, then how can it be that a created being can be sufficient as a sacrifice for our sins?

Only God can for ...[text shortened]... e us from death.

It is unfortunate that you have been sold on the interpretation you hold.[/b]

do you care to answer any of the points that were raised, or shall you continue in your idolatrous course?

Originally posted by josephw
Don't you find it odd that for nearly four hundred years the King James version was used by the entire English speaking world, and that all those millions of people believed in vain that Jesus was God in the flesh.

Appearently they believed in the wrong Jesus and are now eternaly lost.

no they are not eternally lost, for do you not know that those who died without proper knowledge shall be resurrected, for both the righteous and the unrighteous are to be resurrected? nor did everyone believe it!

Originally posted by josephw
[b]"for quite clearly this is entirely disharmonious with the rest of scripture, for example,.."

No it isn't. I wish I had the time to correct the error you have fallen into.

If all sin is ultimately a sin against God Himself, as David says, then how can it be that a created being can be sufficient as a sacrifice for our sins?

Only God can for ...[text shortened]... e us from death.

It is unfortunate that you have been sold on the interpretation you hold.[/b]

quite easily, for a perfect man sold humanity into sin, therefore it took a perfect life, the life of Christ to balance, or propitiate for that what was lost!

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
no they are not eternally lost, for do you not know that those who died without proper knowledge shall be resurrected, for both the righteous and the unrighteous are to be resurrected? nor did everyone believe it!

Jesus said my people perish for the lack of knowledge.

False doctrine is false. Believing a lie leaves one in a lost condition.

The lack of belief in essential truth is the cause of, and the reason for, an individual being in sin.

Knowing OF Jesus isn't enough. One must know WHO Jesus is. There are many false Christs. Knowing the real Jesus is essential.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
quite easily, for a perfect man sold humanity into sin, therefore it took a perfect life, the life of Christ to balance, or propitiate for that what was lost!

True.

Adam was created. I can't fathom the idea that a created being could do any better than Adam.

Doesn't that make sense to you?

Why or how could Jesus, if He were a created being, and an ordinary man, not fall into sin just as Adam did?

It doesn't make sense.

Originally posted by josephw
True.

Adam was created. I can't fathom the idea that a created being could do any better than Adam.

Doesn't that make sense to you?

Why or how could Jesus, if He were a created being, and an ordinary man, not fall into sin just as Adam did?

It doesn't make sense.

But Jesus did not fall into sin. 1Pet 2:22 & Heb 7:26. Jesus just did something that Adam chose not to do.

Originally posted by josephw
True.

Adam was created. I can't fathom the idea that a created being could do any better than Adam.

Doesn't that make sense to you?

Why or how could Jesus, if He were a created being, and an ordinary man, not fall into sin just as Adam did?

It doesn't make sense.

nor is he an ordinary man!

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
hahaha, what utter nonsense, the one who sits upon the throne is God, not the lamb, and the Lamb is not being worshipped as you trinitarians would have us believe, he is being given honour. shall we look at other instances in scripture where created beings are also given glory and honour, shall we? does the scripture say that the lamb is on the thron ...[text shortened]... res trying to justify your preconception! Idolatry is what it is termed and idolatry it remains!

So all blessing, honor, glory, and power belongs to the Lamb AND he who sits upon the throne?

Sorry mate, I just don't think we are reading the same thing.