Originally posted by @dj2beckerWell, you have essentially ignored or pointedly not engaged, in a genuine way, any of the non-Christian posters who addressed your OP and now you are declaring that their worldviews "don't seem to offer them any kind of hope"?
Wow 8 thumb downs must be some sort of new record here. Amazing how people are pissed off by the fact that that their world view doesn't seem to offer them any kind of hope.
Originally posted by @dj2beckerThey thumbed it down because it was an epistemological FAIL.
Wow 8 thumb downs must be some sort of new record here. Amazing how people are pissed off by the fact that that their world view doesn't seem to offer them any kind of hope.
Originally posted by @bigdoggproblemI thought it was a daft OP that, regardless of what anyone said or didn't say, was absolutely and unavoidably destined to culminate in his rather teenage-thinking 'ah ha, so you don't have as much hope as me' punchline above. And yet I didn't bother to click on Thumbs Down as I never do. So it could have been 9. It could have been even more hopeless for him! 😛
They thumbed it down because it was an epistemological FAIL.
Originally posted by @fmfLet's see if I thumbed it down...nope. Hadn't yet. 😀
I thought it was a daft OP that, regardless of what anyone said or didn't say, was absolutely and unavoidably destined to culminate in his rather teenage-thinking 'ah ha, so you don't have as much hope as me' punchline above. And yet I didn't bother to click on Thumbs Down as I never do. So it could have been 9. It could have been even more hopeless for him! 😛
Originally posted by @suzianneWell I do appreciate your comment and the time to make it. I'm serious.
As I have schooled Robbie in this many, many times, the word firstborn in Colossians 1:15 does not mean born first. It rather means preeminent. "...he is before (or above) all things..."
Take Colossians 1:15-18 as a paragraph, which presents the same idea throughout:
Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every ...[text shortened]... eminent" to that, and is therefore "firstbegotten" (thus the "firstborn" ), not "first created".
But is that really what it's saying? If it were saying what your explanation is, then why didn't it simply say so in that scripture? Many scriptures speak of the power and authority that Jesus was given after he ascended back to heaven to his father. But he didn't have that authority before that event as the bible explains. He was never mentioned being in a seat of authority, at his father right hand sitting on a throne until he went back to heaven after his resurrection.
But yes the bible does describe the special fondness that Jehovah had for his firstborn son just as an earthly parent might have for their firstborn. But all thru the bible the term "firstborn" means just what it says, the firstborn whether it is an angel or a human is the one born first.
Again that scripture says exactly what it says. Jesus was the first thing God created. Sorry but the bible says that, not just me.
Originally posted by @galveston75
ot just me.[/b]
But he didn't have that authority before that event as the bible explains. He was never mentioned being in a seat of authority, at his father right hand sitting on a throne until he went back to heaven after his resurrection.
" Who, existing in the form of God did not consider being equal with God a treasure to be grasped." (Phil. 2:6)
That would include the treasure of having ultimate authority.
The meaning here is not that He grasped at something He had not, but of something He had.
Going on.
"But emptied Himself, taking the form of a slave, becoming in the likeness of men;" (v.7)
From "in the form of God" to "the form of a slave, becoming in the likeness of men." . That is not emptying Himself of something He had NOT (divine authority) to take on the form of an obedience slave. Rather it is to let go of what He had in order to appear in the form in which He was not ... as a slave, in the likeness of submissive man , under God's authority.
Going on.
"And being found in fashion as a man He humbled Himself, becoming obedient even unto death, and that the death of a cross." (v.8)
This is not about Christ relinquishing what was NOT His to relinquish. It is about Him letting go of what He DID HAVE ... to not grasp at. And that included all the glory and authority of God, to become obedient in the form of a man, even dying on His cross.
- Joined
- 01 Oct 04
- Moves
- 12095
Originally posted by @fmfIf there was any hope offered by any of them that you could point you I'm sure you would.
Well, you have essentially ignored or pointedly not engaged, in a genuine way, any of the non-Christian posters who addressed your OP and now you are declaring that their worldviews "don't seem to offer them any kind of hope"?
Originally posted by @dj2beckerOld Viennese saying; "The situation is desperate* but not serious."
This is a chance for all skeptics of the Christian faith to provide me with a better alternative. I challenge you all to provide me with a better worldview that you feel is superior to the Christian faith. I am inclined to agree with someone who once said, apart from the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, I see no hope for the human race.
* Latin: deprived of hope