1 edit
Originally posted by galveston75twist twist twist. You know you were wrong... you owe Conrau K an apology
Ok Duecer, please take your time here. Look up all the scriptures that are quoted and try to get what it is saying. I understand that when one believes in something so strong as the trinity it is hard at times to see what is being said. But there is a differance in God being called Father and the term father being used for Jesus.
FATHER
The Hebrew wo at Luke 16:24, 30 to “father Abraham,” this is basically in the sense of fleshly ancestry.
Originally posted by robbie carrobienot ad hominem, I proved you a liar in another thread, I am currently rebuking Galv 75 for his reprehensible behavior. stick around I'll do you next
Lol, worthy of the front page of any tabloid newspaper, nothing but ad hominen attacks and personal insults. When you have something worthy of our attention, that is something with content, then we shall have something to discuss, as for 'well thought out theological perspectives', like 'Christ went to heaven the same day as he was crucified along w ...[text shortened]... away without making comment, but hey i understand, nobody likes to look completely foolish.
The Lords work never ends.
1 edit
Originally posted by galveston75its not me that doesn't have the insight my friend. You quoted Matthew 23, yet you completely misunderstood the context and meaning of that passage. It is about pride and social structure. Jesus was warning his disciples not to submit to the authority of the Sanhedrin, the head of the Sanhedrin was called...father. If you take that scripture literally then you wouldn't be able to call your biological father father.
Ok.. If you don't have the insight and willingness to learn then whatever.
but of course if I disagree with you than I have no insight🙄
2 edits
Originally posted by duecerthe only thing that you have proven is that you have a propensity for losing arguments and then having lost, accuse the recipient of your slander of lying.
not ad hominem, I proved you a liar in another thread, I am currently rebuking Galv 75 for his reprehensible behavior. stick around I'll do you next
The Lords work never ends.
The lords work is preaching and teaching others who are interested to learn about the Kingdom of God, perhaps in one of your posts you might mention this theme that was central to Christ's teaching for the relatively short period that he was on earth. As yet i cannot recall either you, jaywill, manny, raj or any of the other 'evangelical', Christians mentioning it, no not once.
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieyou admitted I was correct in another thread and then later denied it. The proof is there for all to read Robbie. I would like to be civil in my discourse with you, but I will not stand for you lying to people when you have been proven wrong
the only thing that you have proven is that you have a propensity for losing arguments and then having lost, accuse the recipient of your slander of lying.
The lords work is preaching and teaching others who are interested to learn about the Kingdom of God, perhaps in one of your posts you might mention this theme that was central to Christ's te ...[text shortened]... jaywill, manny, raj or any of the other 'evangelical', Christians mentioning it, no not once.
Originally posted by galveston75its beautiful!
Ok Duecer, please take your time here. Look up all the scriptures that are quoted and try to get what it is saying. I understand that when one believes in something so strong as the trinity it is hard at times to see what is being said. But there is a differance in God being called Father and the term father being used for Jesus.
FATHER
The Hebrew wo ...[text shortened]... at Luke 16:24, 30 to “father Abraham,” this is basically in the sense of fleshly ancestry.
2 edits
Originally posted by dueceri admitted nothing of the sort, once again you are assigning values to me that i do not posses. Could it be that you were mistaken with regard to my intent?, could it be that i was mistaken in my interpretation of what you were saying?, we are after all, human beings and prone to aberration, therefore i reject your terms and I vehemently deny any accusation of knowingly misleading others. Once again i could not care less whether you stand for it, sit down, paint eyes on your bum and walk around on your hands, YOU HAVE PROVEN NOTHING except that you are a slanderer. Now unless you have anything with content, that is spiritual in nature, i would be pleased if you did not waste my time with your unfounded accusations.
you admitted I was correct in another thread and then later denied it. The proof is their for all to read Robbie. I would like to be civil in my discourse with you, but I will not stand for you lying to people when you have been proven wrong
Originally posted by robbie carrobiewhatever...you left the thread after being proved a liar...you've sadly become less and less credible here.
i admitted nothing of the sort, once again you are assigning values to me that i do not posses. Could it be that you were mistaken with regard to my intent?, could it be that i was mistaken in my interpretation of what you were saying?, we are after all, human beings and prone to aberration, therefore i reject your terms and I vehemently deny any ac ...[text shortened]... tual in nature, i would be pleased if you did not waste my time with your unfounded accusations.
1 edit
Originally posted by dueceras i stated, if you have anything other than your ego caressed opinion, anything other than i am right you are wrong, anything other than, you are a liar because you disagree with me, anything with spiritual content, let it be known otherwise, take it to the general forum spanky!
whatever...you left the thread after being proved a liar...you've sadly become less and less credible here.
Originally posted by duecerSo you really don't understand the different terms and uses for Father? Do you not understand the spiritual and the earthly aspects and the differances?
its not me that doesn't have the insight my friend. You quoted Matthew 23, yet you completely misunderstood the context and meaning of that passage. It is about pride and social structure. Jesus was warning his disciples not to submit to the authority of the Sanhedrin, the head of the Sanhedrin was called...father. If you take that scripture literally then yo ...[text shortened]... iological father father.
but of course if I disagree with you than I have no insight🙄
You really don't understand when it comes to spiritualness that when it comes to ones spiritual heart and mind that you only call Almighty God your Father? Jesus is called a father figure in the sence he is leading us towards salvation but he is not the Father God Almighty?
You really don't do you?
The point here is no man on this planet is to be called father in a spiritual sence. And Matt 23:9 is crystal clear: DO NOT CALL ANYONE ON THIS EARTH YOUR FATHER FOR ONLY ((((((( ONE ))))))) IS YOUR FATHER, THE HEAVENLY ONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
No tricks, no hidden meanings, no confusion, no riddles, just a black and white command from Jesus.
Anyone that can read knows this is not talking about a fleshly Father but is speaking of Almighty God and the reverance he deserves.
Again giving that to some old imperfect man is blasphemy.
Originally posted by galveston75But Jesus does not mention anything about the difference between spiritual and physical fatherhood. A literal interpretation of this passage would prohibit Christians even their biological father by that title. You must explain how this distinction is in the passage. Clearly Jesus did not intend for this teaching to be taken literally but it seems arbitrary for you to insist that only biological fatherhood is exempt.
So you really don't understand the different terms and uses for Father? Do you not understand the spiritual and the earthly aspects and the differances?
You really don't understand when it comes to spiritualness that when it comes to ones spiritual heart and mind that you only call Almighty God your Father? Jesus is called a father figure in the sence ...[text shortened]... od and the reverance he deserves.
Again giving that to some old imperfect man is blasphemy.
Originally posted by Conrau KLook at the context starting at verse 2. If he was speaking about aunt's and uncles and mothers and sisiters then you'd have a point. Right? But hes speaking of ones in spiritual positions including th Scribes and Pharisees and not in a good light. In fact he's condeming them for their arrogance and they way they treat others and they way they expect to be treated.
But Jesus does not mention anything about the difference between spiritual and physical fatherhood. A literal interpretation of this passage would prohibit Christians even their biological father by that title. You must explain how this distinction is in the passage. Clearly Jesus did not intend for this teaching to be taken literally but it seems arbitrary for you to insist that only biological fatherhood is exempt.
They make themselves very obvious with their dress and where they sit and the names they want to be called and do things only for gratification when viewed by men.
And then Jesus gave a list of things we are not to call them such as Rabbi, Father, leader, etc, because this is what they want to be called and Jesus made it very clear that he condemned those titles and this is all in a religious and spiritual setting.
Does this help at all?