Originally posted by jaywillWho do you think is the greater authority Christ or Isaiah? Christ or Paul? CHrist is the authority on who He is. He said He is the SON OF GOD .... AMEN to that!
They are distinct but not separate.
I would not go along with any concept which waters down the impact of Isaiah 9:6.
I would not go along with any concept which weakens 2 Cor. 3:17 or 1 Cor. 15:45.
It is very mysterious. But some of us always want to let the Bible speak what it speaks the way it speaks it without preference. We should just say Amen to what it says the way it says it.
Originally posted by Rajk999++++++++++++++++++++++++
Who do you think is the greater authority Christ or Isaiah? Christ or Paul? CHrist is the authority on who He is. He said He is the SON OF GOD .... AMEN to that!
Who do you think is the greater authority Christ or Isaiah? Christ or Paul? CHrist is the authority on who He is. He said He is the SON OF GOD .... AMEN to that!
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I believe that we are brothers in Christ. And I assure you that I do say Amen to Jesus Christ being the Son of God.
I never said that any of those passages you collected and sited was WRONG. Did I?
They are all true. I only pointed out the other side of all that is written about this Wonderful One.
Originally posted by Rajk999Again, your assumptions far surpass your reach. Nothing in my post implies what opinion I hold on this issue.
I am definitely not, I assure you. You seem to be trying to judge others. I do not think that whether or not you believe that Christ is God or Christ is the Son of God has any bearing on whether or not you get salvation.
Question:
Romans 8:10 says that Christ is in the believers. Romans 8:34 says that He is at the right hand of God interceding for the believers.
How can He be both places at once?
Should I believe Rom. 8:10 and say Rom. 8:34 is wrong?
Or should I believe Rom. 8:34 and say Rom. 8:10 is wrong?
Or should I believe that both statments are the word of God and believe both, even if I cannot logically reconcile them?
Originally posted by jaywillWhy not? Clearly you don't put much stock in Romans 12:14-21.
Question:
[b]Romans 8:10 says that Christ is in the believers. Romans 8:34 says that He is at the right hand of God interceding for the believers.
How can He be both places at once?
Should I believe Rom. 8:10 and say Rom. 8:34 is wrong?
Or should I believe Rom. 8:34 and say Rom. 8:10 is wrong?
Or should I believe that both statments are the word of God and believe both, even if I cannot logically reconcile them?[/b]
Originally posted by jaywillMy point here is that paradoxes do appear in the Bible. Faith receives both sides of the truth.
Question:
[b]Romans 8:10 says that Christ is in the believers. Romans 8:34 says that He is at the right hand of God interceding for the believers.
How can He be both places at once?
Should I believe Rom. 8:10 and say Rom. 8:34 is wrong?
Or should I believe Rom. 8:34 and say Rom. 8:10 is wrong?
Or should I believe that both statments are the word of God and believe both, even if I cannot logically reconcile them?[/b]
Originally posted by jaywillUnsurprisingly, you are misapplying those verses. That passage -- indeed, the epistle itself -- concerns Paul's need to establish his authority as an apostle, vis-a-vis other apostles appearing to the Corinthians. The letter is about Paul's message to an existing group of believers, and the basis on which those believers value his message.
[b]1 Cor. 4:3,4[/b]
Your postings, on the other hand, are written in the context of a public forum chockablock with non-believers; we're outsiders to your faith.
In other words, those verses don't apply in this situation.
Colossians 4:5-6, on the other hand, applies directly. Where's the grace in your speech? Do you conduct yourself with wisdom around us? Are you words appropriately seasoned with the grace of Christ, or are they sour with the vinegar of personal rancor?
Blackbuxzzrd,
++++++++++++++++++
Unsurprisingly, you are misapplying those verses. That passage -- indeed, the epistle itself -- concerns Paul's need to establish his authority as an apostle, vis-a-vis other apostles appearing to the Corinthians. The letter is about Paul's message to an existing group of believers, and the basis on which those believers value his message.
+++++++++++++++++
I wasn't interpreting the passage. I was applying the passage. Since you want to show that you're an old hand at Bible study you surely know the difference between interpretation and application.
I applied it to you judging me that I didn't take the virtues elaborated on in that chapter seriously.
Frankly, I didn't see what your reference to the second half of Romans 12 had to do with paradoxes in Scriptures like Romans 8:10 and 8:34. You could have done a better job in explaining why you felt my question about Rom. 8:10 verses 8:34 indicated I put no stock in the second half of Romans 12.
If you think there is a connection between my personal belief in the Romans 8:10 and 8:34 and the virtues developed in those passages, then spell out the connection.
++++++++++++++++++
Your postings, on the other hand, are written in the context of a public forum chockablock with non-believers; we're outsiders to your faith.
In other words, those verses don't apply in this situation.
++++++++++++++++++++++
"It is a small thing that I be judged by YOU ... " can apply to either believers or non-believers. And that is how I respond to you're judging whether I put credence in the virtues of the passage.
I don't retract that.
I don't apologize for it.
And I don't recognize anything improper with my usage of that verse in response to your vague axe to grind with my reference to the parodox of Rom. 8:10 verses 8:34.
Maybe if you do a little work and spell out the connection between my question on how I should believe and the virtues of the passage you refered to, I'll see what you want me to see.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Colossians 4:5-6, on the other hand, applies directly. Where's the grace in your speech? Do you conduct yourself with wisdom around us? Are you words appropriately seasoned with the grace of Christ, or are they sour with the vinegar of personal rancor?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I'm still a work in progress. I have a long long way to grow.
You see, if I waited until the perfect Christian came by to teach me something about Jesus I'd probably go to my grave waiting.
On the other hand I do put all my cards out on the table. People know where I stand. For some reason some people find it sport to conceal their identity. I guess they like to pretend and keep people guessing what they really believe.
You don't get anything from my posts? Ignore them and find somebody more profitable to talk with. What are you? Sore because some Christians can come back at you with a retort? Not quite as easy as you thought, maybe, to bully me around?
I'll give you one point. Sometimes I could be more specific about WHO it is any particular post is addressed to. Yea, I may get a little sloppy in that sense. Welcome to the Internet.
Blackbuzzrd,
+++++++++++++++++++++
Colossians 4:5-6, on the other hand, applies directly. Where's the grace in your speech? Do you conduct yourself with wisdom around us? Are you words appropriately seasoned with the grace of Christ, or are they sour with the vinegar of personal rancor?
++++++++++++++++++++++++
Most debating skeptics on forums like this who are indeed non-believers couldn't give a flip about where the "grace" in my speech is. They don't even believe in grace.
Are you having an identity crisis of some kind?
Or is Thumpin on Bible Thumpers with their own Bible your particular specialty?
Originally posted by whodeyAs far as divine, I am saying that Jesus is not of human origin.
Yes, this is important to come to terms with. As far as divine, I am saying that Jesus is not of human origin. In addition, I would say that he is also part of the Trinity and this is my reasoning.
1. Christ existed before he was born into this material word in his weakened human state. This can be seen Biblically in Revelation 1:8 as Christ says he is ...[text shortened]... what it says this simply is not the case. What other explanations are there other than this?
That cannot be your whole working criterion. Monkeys and octopi, as random examples, are not "of human origin" either, and yet you do not consider these creatures to be 'divine'. Is this just a minimal consideration for divinity?
Originally posted by LemonJelloChrist said that he existed before the time of Abraham. Who else or what else can make this cleim? How can one come to terms with it?
[b]As far as divine, I am saying that Jesus is not of human origin.
That cannot be your whole working criterion. Monkeys and octopi, as random examples, are not "of human origin" either, and yet you do not consider these creatures to be 'divine'. Is this just a minimal consideration for divinity?[/b]