Originally posted by epiphinehas
That's why it's so important to get the Good News out there! As a Christian, one of my responsibilities is to preach the Gospel to whoever is willing to listen, within my own 'circle of relationships' -- friends, family and strangers alike. Not everyone I witness to will believe in Jesus Christ and, frankly, that's not my problem; neither is it my prob ...[text shortened]... to the one who created it, “Why have you made me like this?” (Romans 9:14-16, 18-20).

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
It's a valid question.

Originally posted by kirksey957
Yes, and what an affirmation to the creator that his creation is so self-aware as to be able to ask such a question.

Originally posted by kirksey957
Yes, and what an affirmation to the creator that his creation is so self-aware as to be able to ask such a question.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Cursed, cursed creator!

Why did I live ?

Originally posted by epiphinehas
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God" (John 1:1).

The word for 'word' is logos, a Hellenistic construct with a much
greater significance than 'word' (although there isn't a good single-word
translation for it). However, the translation 'and the Word was made
flesh' is inaccurate, or rather insufficient. Better capturing the words
of the author, it should read 'and the Word was enfleshed.' No
Christian could possibly deny that Jesus had the Spirit of God in Him,
but then again, no Christian would deny that the Spirit of God is in
everyone. The author here (as evinced by the other quotations I
offered above) is clearly saying that the purest of Spirit was in Jesus,
the very logos (wisdom, knowledge, conviction, &c) was in Jesus
in a way that it hasn't been with humankind before.

"Because in him doth tabernacle all the fulness of the Godhead bodily" (Colossians 2:9).

Interesting that you would quote the most damning letter to your
claim, in which, at the beginning, St Paul clearly states that Jesus is
the image/reflection of God, 'the first born of all creation.' God, by
definition, is above and beyond creation -- He is the Creator. Jesus,
explicitly, is a creation, preordained from the beginning of time,
from before all other created things (who sits at the right hand of God
[not as God], Col 3:1) to whom Christians give thanks to God through
Christ (again, not as God, Col 3:17). Of all of St Paul's letters, Colossians
is the worst for you to cite as evidence of Jesus' Divinity since
St Paul takes repeated and explicit efforts to set the two up in diachotomy.

"Christ Jesus, who, being in the form of God, thought [it] not robbery to be equal to God" (Philippians 2:5-6).

Once again, a single line ignoring the rest of St Paul's glorious hymn.
First of all, the translation of verse six is disingenous; it better reads
'...though He was in the form of God, did not regard equality with God
something to be grasped.' Again, like logos, the concept of
form (morphe) is much bigger than a single word can express.
Obviously, it doesn't refer (at all) to the outward appearance. It refers
to the inward substance, the same thing that St John's Gospel points
to when he uses the word logos. It is exactly the same construction
(though in Hebrew) as Adam's being in God's image (Genesis 1:26-27).
And, unlike Adam, He did not grasp at becoming God, did not fall into
the temptation of sin. St Paul contrasts Adam and Jesus more than a
few times. I'm surprised that you missed this one. Again, Jesus was the
image or reflection or morphe of God (St Paul is clear), not
God Himself. But continuing on, to give this verse greater clarity through
context. Jesus, firstborn of all creation, came down and was
enfleshed, died on the cross (next two verses), then 'Because of this
God greatly exalted him......and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ
is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. (verses 9, 11).

Once again Jesus is placed in contrast -- juxtaposition even -- with
God. God exalted Jesus, not 'Himself.' God gets the glory through
the Jesus, His Son, His creation, His mediator for humankind (cf. I Tim
2:5-6).

"Because of this, then, were the Jews seeking the more to kill him, because not only was he breaking the sabbath, but he also called God his own Father, making himself equal to God" (John 5:18).

Jesus explicitly tells all of His followers to call His Father in heaven as
'Father.' Does that make His followers equal to God? No, of course not. You have forgotten who made this claim: the Jews. Well, so what
of the Jews said 'Jesus said He was equal to God;' the Jews lied about
what Jesus said and did all the time. You will notice, of course, that
the Jews never claimed that Jesus said 'He was God,' for even that
would be outlandish for even the lying Pharisee sects who were challenged
by Jesus' authority, which by their own reactions, they regarded as remarkable. Consider that Jesus also said, 'If God were your Father, you would
love me, for I came from God and am here; I did not come on my own
but he sent me.' (St John 8:42) This hardly bespeaks of equality.
So, the Jews out for Jesus' death made a false claim while records of
Jesus' words testifies to the opposite. Hardly another strong claim for
Jesus' Divinity.

"He (God) Saith . . . unto the Son, "Thy throne, O God, [is] to the age of the age; a scepter of righteousness [is] the scepter of thy reign; thou didst love righteousness, and didst hate lawlessness; because of this did He anoint thee -- God, thy God -- with oil of gladness above thy partners;' and, `Thou, at the beginning, Lord, the earth didst found, and a work of thy hands are the heavens; these shall perish, and Thou dost remain, and all, as a garment, shall become old, and as a mantle Thou shall roll them together, and they shall be changed, and Thou art the same, and Thy years shall not fail.' And unto which of the messengers said He ever, `Sit at My right hand, till I may make thine enemies thy footstool?' (Hebrews 1:6, 8-13).

You forgot part of verse six, wherein it refers to Jesus (again) as the
'first-born of the world.' Again, a creation of God's, not God Himself. Verse eight even says 'God, your God,' the 'your' referring to
Jesus Himself! Jesus's God annnointed Jesus with the oil of gladness
above His companions!!!! How much more clear could it be?
How about 2:9 -- ...we do see Jesus 'crowned with glory and honor' because
he suffered death, he who 'for a little while' was made 'lower than the
angels,' that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone.
Again, God guides and directs the course that Jesus takes. Crystal clear
writing all of which points to God as distinct from Jesus, God's
supreme servant.

Just like the JW's, you would relegate Jesus to mere angel, a messenger, of God, though the author of Hebrews clearly points out here that He is no mere angel, but God Himself? The scriptural evidence is clear, whether your 'church fathers' see it or not.

You have started with a credal position and are reading that into a
text which clearly points to something else. Once again, it's totally
fine with me that you take a credal position, but don't claim some BS
like you are from a sola scriptura camp; you're not. The authors
of the Bible are unequivocal in their separation of Jesus from God, even
in words they attribute to Jesus Himself.

Do you want me to quote scriptures concerning the Holy Spirit, too? Are we going to get into a dispute over the Triune nature of God now?

Snore. Perhaps you missed it before: I don't care whether you believe
God has a triune nature or not. However, that dogma is post-Biblical;
it is the product of a century of dispute, the winners of which established
Orthodoxy. However, the idea that the Trinity -- Three Persons, One God --
is a transparent Biblical teaching is absurd.

I don't dispute your scripture references which piont to Christ as separate from the Father (Father and Son), for their is a clear difference between the two.

The authors are absolutely crystal clear -- God is distinct from Jesus
countless times. If God is Father and God is Son, then God cannot be
distinct from Son. Indeed, there are some passages that contrast
Father and Son, but there are many more which contrast God and
Son. And, you never, ever, ever, ever see 'God the Son' anywhere
in Scripture. If it were such an obvious, transparent, and central teaching
of the NT authors, why is it so glaringly absent?

...I am not denying the claims of any scripture, it is you who are denying the claims of scripture, in that you explain away all references to Christ' divinity to fit your own ends.

You are imposing claims upon Scriptures because you have started
with a conclusion and manipulated the unequivocal texts to suit that
conclusion. Once again: I don't care one iota (jot or tittle) that you
think Jesus is God. Good for you, you are a traditionalist, resting on
centuries of dogmatic formation. Bravo, you have my admiration and
respect. You could be Greek Orthodox for all I care. I don't have an
end here except that you be honest about that claim. The NT
authors say what they say, repeatedly placing Jesus in direct contrast
with God, to the point of even having Jesus saying 'God is good, not me.'

Do you think the actual nature of God is just going to make complete semantic sense to you? Ridiculous.

I make no claims to know the 'actual' or even 'fractional' nature of God.
I am not that pretentious. I do know what the NT authors say, and they
are unanimous. Jesus was very important, the enfleshed logos of
God -- of God, not God Himself.

Nemesio

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
It's a valid question.

Originally posted by kirksey957
Why is it when something comes up that flies in the face of your theology you simply say, "take it up with the Lord as it is not for me to answer"? If God does indeed show compassion to whomever He desires, then you should have no problem whatsoever with non-believers being "saved." Don't end up being bitter about that like Jonah.

Originally posted by Nemesio
Originally posted by epiphinehas
[b]"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God" (John 1:1).

The word for 'word' is logos, a Hellenistic construct with a much
greater significance than 'word' (although there isn't a good single-word
translation for it). However, the translation 'and the Word was ma ...[text shortened]... .

Nemesio[/b]

Originally posted by Nemesio
Originally posted by epiphinehas
[b]"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God" (John 1:1).

The word for 'word' is logos, a Hellenistic construct with a much
greater significance than 'word' (although there isn't a good single-word
translation for it). However, the translation 'and the Word was ma ...[text shortened]... .

Nemesio[/b]

Originally posted by epiphinehas
Everyone? That is not scriptural. Only those who believe in Jesus Christ receive the Holy Spirit. Wrong again.

Originally posted by checkbaiter
1 Cor 15:28
28 Now when all things are made subject to Him, then the Son Himself will also be subject to Him who put all things under Him, that God may be all in all.
(NKJ)

Originally posted by epiphinehas
Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am" (John 8:58).

Originally posted by epiphinehas
You're insinuating that non-believers might be saved without ever hearing of Christ. I say, no, because His compassion is received through faith in Christ, not through faith in anyone else and not through faith in nothing.

Originally posted by Nemesio
So what? The Gospel of Saint John uses the turn of phrase 'I am' some
several dozen times -- I am the bread of life, I am the vine, I am the
living water. Jesus says earlier (as I pointed out) that He came from
God (not was God, you'll notice), that He did not come of His own
volition but was sent by God. St Paul clearly believes that Jesus
...[text shortened]... uld make the most sense
in the context of the verses I mentioned before (42 ff).

Nemesio