11 Mar 06
1 edit
Originally posted by FreakyKBH
'Guess I can't read! However, in the interest of clarifying the soup, what is the Trinity, if not the Godhead? And who are the members of the Godhead, if not one of the three Persons? When you repeatedly claim Jesus is not God, how can Jesus be a member of the Godhead?
Your first sentence is the only one that is correct. I've never stated that Jesus isn't God.
I've stated the the Bible does not support this conclusion, given all of the statements to
the contrary by St Paul and the lack of direct affirmation in the Gospels.
Nemesio
11 Mar 06
1 edit
Originally posted by NemesioOkay, I'll grant you that you've never specifically stated this exact phrase. However, are you saying that Jesus is God? If so, based on what?
Originally posted by FreakyKBH
[b]'Guess I can't read! However, in the interest of clarifying the soup, what is the Trinity, if not the Godhead? And who are the members of the Godhead, if not one of the three Persons? When you repeatedly claim Jesus is not God, how can Jesus be a member of the Godhead?
Your first sentence is the only one th s to
the contrary by St Paul and the lack of direct affirmation in the Gospels.
Nemesio[/b]
11 Mar 06
Originally posted by FreakyKBHI am not making a statement of faith (whether Jesus is or is not God). I have never
Okay, I'll grant you that you've never specifically stated this exact phrase. However, are you saying that Jesus is God? If so, based on what?
made such a statement in this forum. I shall never make such a statement in this
forum for, as I have said a multitude of times, I consider such matters to be a private
affair, between me and God.
I have made the statement (with supporting Scriptural citation) that the Bible
does not assert that Jesus is God and there is much that suggests that He is not God.
As it pertains to this thread, I am observing the flaw in Lucifershammer's thinking
that a Lutheran has a (more) incoherent understanding of Christianity than a Roman
Catholic on the basis of the Lutheran's believing in certain dogmas ratified by the Church
and disbelieving others.
Take a few hours to sort this out in your head before you post again.
Nemesio
11 Mar 06
Originally posted by NemesioWhile you're waiting Nem, how about moving in our game 🙂
I am not making a statement of faith (whether Jesus is or is not God). I have never
made such a statement in this forum. I shall never make such a statement in this
forum for, as I have said a multitude of times, I consider such matters to be a private
affair, between me and God.
I have made the statement (with supporting Scriptural citation) ...[text shortened]... ng others.
Take a few hours to sort this out in your head before you post again.
Nemesio
11 Mar 06
1 edit
Originally posted by NemesioWell, I guess I'll just call you out on the carpet, then. You say it's a matter between you and God, but want others to prove scripturally that He is God. The fact remains, when Scripture is viewed in total, it claims, unequivocally, that He is God.
I am not making a statement of faith (whether Jesus is or is not God). I have never
made such a statement in this forum. I shall never make such a statement in this
forum for, as I have said a multitude of times, I consider such matters to be a private
affair, between me and God.
I have made the statement (with supporting Scriptural citation) ng others.
Take a few hours to sort this out in your head before you post again.
Nemesio
Edit: Holy cr@p! That took me three minutes!
11 Mar 06
2 edits
Originally posted by FreakyKBHLOL!
Well, I guess I'll just call you out on the carpet, then. You say it's a matter between you and God, but want others to prove scripturally that He is God. The fact remains, when Scripture is viewed in total, it claims, unequivocally, that He is God.
Unequivocally? With all those distinctions by St Paul? With Jesus' saying that
none, even He, is greater than the Father?
You never cease to amuse. 🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄
Nemesio
Edit: I don't want anything. I'm plenty familiar with Scripture, so I hardly need
clumsy-footed, blind-faithed oafs such as yourself to try to 'learn me' my Bible.
12 Mar 06
Originally posted by NemesioWhenever you're ready to take it up, son, let me know.
LOL!
Unequivocally? With all those distinctions by St Paul? With Jesus' saying that
none, even He, is greater than the Father?
You never cease to amuse. 🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄
Nemesio
Edit: I don't want anything. I'm plenty familiar with Scripture, so I hardly need
clumsy-footed, blind-faithed oafs such as yourself to try to 'learn me' my Bible.
12 Mar 06
1 edit
Originally posted by DoctorScribbles"Ring" would suggest there exists some format, replete with rules of engagement, a point system and the ability to determine a decision at the termination of the event.
LOL. What a great return to the ring for Nemesio! It makes one wonder why he would have ever left!
Son. LOL.
What Nemmy has done on a number of times is make unfounded charges, and, when pressed, he has attempted to back these up with (at best) specious support which folds at first nudge.
When pressed further for decision, he drops the issue altogether, or lapses into the typical stance of too many so-called skeptics around here, the attack of the person... as witnessed with his last post.
Questioning my understanding of the NT? Why not? He clearly couldn't refute the few proofs offered during the last go-round, so why not call into question my grasp of theological concepts. What else could he have done, really?
12 Mar 06
4 edits
Originally posted by NemesioWell, I don't know how you can say that, when it was prophesied in the Bible that the Messiah would come, and a star would signify his coming. And, why would three wise men follow the sign of Christ's coming to a manger in Bethlehem. Jesus must have been pretty special if He wasn't God in the flesh. Yep, I don't think I would traipse all over the arid deserts and mountain ranges only to come to a manger holding a common man... even if he was Ghandi or Mother Theresa. I believe they would only have traveled there to witness the newly born Son of God, the Messiah foretold from the ancients. But, because God did not come on a white horse arrayed in gold and raiment, many did not accept Him and denied Him just as prophesied. It makes complete sense for the Messiah, Jesus Christ, to come as a common man if he were to come in the flesh. How would He be able to indentify with our sufferings? How would he be tested to the fullest extent if He were living the life of luxury in a palace of gold? No, Jesus was the Messiah, and the Savior of the World. The man who accepts Jesus into His heart will be accepted by the Savior and God the Father also. No book of history is as accurate as the Bible. No historian in all of time has disproven the accuracies of the Word of God - the Holy Bible perserved throughout hundreds, thousands, of years. A man who says there is no God is only a fool! For Jesus who sits at the right hand of the Father will judge all men for their wrongs and reward them for their good deeds done in His name. But, it is not by works a man enters into the Kingdom of Heaven, but by the Grace of the Living God who sent His Son Jesus Christ to save us from our sins. Even a good man may go to hell, for if he has denied the Son of God Jesus Christ even after other men have told Him of the Blessing and the Glory and the Hope, the unsaved good man will surely die in the Lake of Fire. It is not a joke. It is not a story. It is not a myth you can foresake. Jesus Christ will return soon, and His reward is with Him, and Blessed is He who believes in the Christ and has not seen Him! He loves all of us!
Originally posted by FreakyKBH
[b]'Guess I can't read! However, in the interest of clarifying the soup, what is the Trinity, if not the Godhead? And who are the members of the Godhead, if not one of the three Persons? When you repeatedly claim Jesus is not God, how can Jesus be a member of the Godhead?
Your first sentence is the only one th s to
the contrary by St Paul and the lack of direct affirmation in the Gospels.
Nemesio[/b]
13 Mar 06
Originally posted by FreakyKBHDo you consider yourself to be of superior Christian intellect than Nemesio? These forums have a proud tradition of debate, and formal debate as of late. Would you consider debating Nemesio on a theological issue that you two disagree with? There are many capable impartial judges in these forums.
Whenever you're ready to take it up, son, let me know.
13 Mar 06
Originally posted by kirksey957As Nemmy has yet to engage in actual debate, it would difficult to determine intellect, per se. I blanch at the phrase "a proud tradition of debate" within these forums. A more apt description would be intellectual mastrubation.
Do you consider yourself to be of superior Christian intellect than Nemesio? These forums have a proud tradition of debate, and formal debate as of late. Would you consider debating Nemesio on a theological issue that you two disagree with? There are many capable impartial judges in these forums.
No, I am not interested. In the least.
In fact, I'd dare say my days visting this cess pool of pseudo-intelligentsia are coming to a swift close. I think I've wasted enough of your time with my random distribution of baseless minutia.
Good night, and good luck.
13 Mar 06
Originally posted by FreakyKBHLame.
As Nemmy has yet to engage in actual debate, it would difficult to determine intellect, per se. I blanch at the phrase "a proud tradition of debate" within these forums. A more apt description would be intellectual mastrubation.
No, I am not interested. In the least.
In fact, I'd dare say my days visting this cess pool of pseudo-intelligentsia are com ...[text shortened]... gh of your time with my random distribution of baseless minutia.
Good night, and good luck.
13 Mar 06
Originally posted by FreakyKBHYou're right to walk away because Nemesio would probably chew you up and spit you out. Concerning "intellectual mastrubation [sic]", those are ironic words coming from the author of the "The Attributes of God" thread.
As Nemmy has yet to engage in actual debate, it would difficult to determine intellect, per se. I blanch at the phrase "a proud tradition of debate" within these forums. A more apt description would be intellectual mastrubation.
No, I am not interested. In the least.
In fact, I'd dare say my days visting this cess pool of pseudo-intelligentsia are com ...[text shortened]... gh of your time with my random distribution of baseless minutia.
Good night, and good luck.