Political Crossfire Forums

issaiah1332 · Joined: 29 Jun 2006 Posts: 465 Location: Wv

cap'n queasy wrote: issaiah1332 wrote: cap'n queasy wrote: Here, I'll help you.

This is one of the most profound passages in the scripture.
Quote: 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. 5 The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.

Do you understand?

In that case human beings are a part of God, that makes no direct comment about jesus christ.

How you came up with that argument I do not understand. That is a direct statement Christ IS God. Who existed from the beginning of time and created the Universe, and as the source of Life itself, everything in it. Additionally it says absolutely nothing about human beings being part of God.

However, your statement does underline the truth of verse 5.

It says that everything came into being through him. I am not sure what your argument is on this passage, it could be taken many ways, and no nowhere does it say anything about Christ, Savior, ect. therefore not a direct statement.

John · Joined: 02 Jun 2004 Posts: 24189

issaiah1332 wrote: cap'n queasy wrote: issaiah1332 wrote: cap'n queasy wrote: Here, I'll help you.

This is one of the most profound passages in the scripture.
Quote: 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. 5 The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.

Do you understand?

In that case human beings are a part of God, that makes no direct comment about jesus christ.

How you came up with that argument I do not understand. That is a direct statement Christ IS God. Who existed from the beginning of time and created the Universe, and as the source of Life itself, everything in it. Additionally it says absolutely nothing about human beings being part of God.

However, your statement does underline the truth of verse 5.

It says that everything came into being through him. I am not sure what your argument is on this passage, it could be taken many ways, and no nowhere does it say anything about Christ, Savior, ect. therefore not a direct statement.

The Bible needs to be understood as a whole. Doctrine should never be based off one "direct statement" in scripture. What you're asking for is a bad practice and leads to false doctrine (like psholtz trying to justify reincarnation from one verse in the Bible). The Trinity is seen when the bible is taken into context as a whole.....there is no arguing that.

John · Joined: 02 Jun 2004 Posts: 24189

psholtz wrote: John wrote: Not true. "Elohim" is always accompanied with a singular verb and with adjectives and pronouns in the singular, which connotates a singular God with more than one identity or "person".
Yes, that's true.

But in no way whatsoever does that fact necessarily imply the conclusion you tried to draw from it.

It's one clue of many.

The Bible taken as a whole most definitely brings one to that conclusion.

Saf · Joined: 23 Mar 2006 Posts: 377

The Word bit is almost directly out of Plato. It's a Greek taking the man you call your savior and twisting his life to fit his own ends, and you swallow it hook, line and sinker.

cap'n queasy · Joined: 15 May 2004 Posts: 34968

Quote: The Word bit is almost directly out of Plato.

No, it's not. Plato, Socrates, and Aristotle used the term to describe a quality of the human mind. The faculty of reason.

A usage that leads one to the exact opposite conclusion than what is written here by Yochannon.

Does this make sense in the context of the scripture?
Quote: :1 -
In the beginning was human reason, and human reason was with God, and human reason was God.

Perhaps this appeals to you, the idea that human reason is the highest thing there is, I know it appealed to Plato and company. But it is a far cry from what is meant in the scripture, as a cursory examination of it's other content shows adequately.

And unless you think human reason existed in the beginning of time, you are being intellectually dishonest to attribute this meaning to this passage.

Quote: It's a Greek taking the man you call your savior and twisting his life to fit his own ends, and you swallow it hook, line and sinker.
Yochannon was not a Greek, He was an Israelite.

And you have no reason to even comment on it, other than it bothers you for some reason.

Perhaps you would be doing yourself a service to figure out why this is.

issaiah1332 · Joined: 29 Jun 2006 Posts: 465 Location: Wv

John wrote: issaiah1332 wrote: cap'n queasy wrote: issaiah1332 wrote: cap'n queasy wrote: Here, I'll help you.

This is one of the most profound passages in the scripture.
Quote: 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. 5 The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.

Do you understand?

In that case human beings are a part of God, that makes no direct comment about jesus christ.

How you came up with that argument I do not understand. That is a direct statement Christ IS God. Who existed from the beginning of time and created the Universe, and as the source of Life itself, everything in it. Additionally it says absolutely nothing about human beings being part of God.

However, your statement does underline the truth of verse 5.

It says that everything came into being through him. I am not sure what your argument is on this passage, it could be taken many ways, and no nowhere does it say anything about Christ, Savior, ect. therefore not a direct statement.

The Bible needs to be understood as a whole. Doctrine should never be based off one "direct statement" in scripture. What you're asking for is a bad practice and leads to false doctrine (like psholtz trying to justify reincarnation from one verse in the Bible). The Trinity is seen when the bible is taken into context as a whole.....there is no arguing that.

Sir Isaac Newton himself (mind you the catholic church mad him a saint) said that trinity was based completely of false doctrine. Tell me why Jesus would pray to himself and ask himself to give him strength, and why would he forsaken himself? None of this makes sense, why in the new testament does he repeatedly differentiate himself from God?

perdidochas · Joined: 06 Mar 2006 Posts: 15424 Location: Florida

issaiah1332 wrote:
Sir Isaac Newton himself (mind you the catholic church mad him a saint) said that trinity was based completely of false doctrine. Tell me why Jesus would pray to himself and ask himself to give him strength, and why would he forsaken himself? None of this makes sense, why in the new testament does he repeatedly differentiate himself from God?

Where do you get your info?

Newton was not a Catholic saint (heck, he wasn't even Catholic).

Aqualung · Joined: 03 Jun 2006 Posts: 2260 Location: Washington

John wrote: Yeah....the Word is God.

Keep reading...

John 1
14 And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.

15 John testified about Him and cried out, saying, "This was He of whom I said, 'He who comes after me has a higher rank than I, for He existed before me.'"
Yeah, I kept reading. :roll: Seriously.

The word became flesh, but nobody has yet shown that the Word is the father. After all, IF YOU KEEP READING, you will see that the Word is the only begotten of the Father, not the Father himself.

John wrote: Christianity is monotheistic.
No it isn't. There are many times in the Bible where people speak of more than one god. For example, there is the phrase, there are many gods and many lords, but we have one god, and one lord. We are monolotrous, not monotheistic.

John wrote: The Bible needs to be understood as a whole. Doctrine should never be based off one "direct statement" in scripture.
Indeed. Such as the one statement that I and my Father are One.

John wrote: The Bible taken as a whole most definitely brings one to that conclusion.
I have offered another conclusion, and you have yet to offer any evidence that it is false.

John · Joined: 02 Jun 2004 Posts: 24189

CrossEyedMary wrote: John wrote: Yeah....the Word is God.

Keep reading...

John 1
14 And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.

15 John testified about Him and cried out, saying, "This was He of whom I said, 'He who comes after me has a higher rank than I, for He existed before me.'"
Yeah, I kept reading. :roll: Seriously.

The word became flesh, but nobody has yet shown that the Word is the father. After all, IF YOU KEEP READING, you will see that the Word is the only begotten of the Father, not the Father himself.

John wrote: Christianity is monotheistic.
No it isn't. There are many times in the Bible where people speak of more than one god. For example, there is the phrase, there are many gods and many lords, but we have one god, and one lord. We are monolotrous, not monotheistic.

John wrote: The Bible needs to be understood as a whole. Doctrine should never be based off one "direct statement" in scripture.
Indeed. Such as the one statement that I and my Father are One.

John wrote: The Bible taken as a whole most definitely brings one to that conclusion.
I have offered another conclusion, and you have yet to offer any evidence that it is false.

OK....answer me this.

Is the Father's name YHVH (Yahweh, Jehovah)?

issaiah1332 · Joined: 29 Jun 2006 Posts: 465 Location: Wv

Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD" (Deuteronomy 6:4) (the Shema), "Thou shalt have no other gods before me" (Deuteronomy 5:7) and, "Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel and his redeemer the LORD of hosts: I am the first and I am the last; and beside me there is no God." (Isaiah 44:6)

"The Lord our God is one Lord," read this and then read John 17:17

cap'n queasy · Joined: 15 May 2004 Posts: 34968

Quote: We are monolotrous, not monotheistic.

No offense, but your "we" doesn't include Christianity.

You are a Mormon. That is not Christianity.

John · Joined: 02 Jun 2004 Posts: 24189

issaiah1332 wrote: Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD" (Deuteronomy 6:4) (the Shema), "Thou shalt have no other gods before me" (Deuteronomy 5:7) and, "Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel and his redeemer the LORD of hosts: I am the first and I am the last; and beside me there is no God." (Isaiah 44:6)

"The Lord our God is one Lord," read this and then read John 17:17

We're not denying that the LORD is One.

He is....there's no doubt about that.

BTW...the word for one used in the Shema is the Hebrew word echad, which is the same word used in the Bible where it says that a man and woman marry and become one (echad) flesh.

cap'n queasy · Joined: 15 May 2004 Posts: 34968

perdidochas wrote: issaiah1332 wrote:
Sir Isaac Newton himself (mind you the catholic church mad him a saint) said that trinity was based completely of false doctrine. Tell me why Jesus would pray to himself and ask himself to give him strength, and why would he forsaken himself? None of this makes sense, why in the new testament does he repeatedly differentiate himself from God?

Where do you get your info?

Newton was not a Catholic saint (heck, he wasn't even Catholic).

:lol: Oh man.

issaiah1332 · Joined: 29 Jun 2006 Posts: 465 Location: Wv

cap'n queasy wrote: perdidochas wrote: issaiah1332 wrote:
Sir Isaac Newton himself (mind you the catholic church mad him a saint) said that trinity was based completely of false doctrine. Tell me why Jesus would pray to himself and ask himself to give him strength, and why would he forsaken himself? None of this makes sense, why in the new testament does he repeatedly differentiate himself from God?

Where do you get your info?

Newton was not a Catholic saint (heck, he wasn't even Catholic).

:lol: Oh man.

No you are right he was not a saint, that was false info from a dumb site, but he grew up catholic. His latter views on religion are unsure, but he frequently said that trinity was completely false.

issaiah1332 · Joined: 29 Jun 2006 Posts: 465 Location: Wv

John wrote: issaiah1332 wrote: Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD" (Deuteronomy 6:4) (the Shema), "Thou shalt have no other gods before me" (Deuteronomy 5:7) and, "Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel and his redeemer the LORD of hosts: I am the first and I am the last; and beside me there is no God." (Isaiah 44:6)

"The Lord our God is one Lord," read this and then read John 17:17

We're not denying that the LORD is One.

He is....there's no doubt about that.

BTW...the word for one used in the Shema is the Hebrew word echad, which is the same word used in the Bible where it says that a man and woman marry and become one (echad) flesh.

I think that if trinity is true in any sense of the word, that it is meant to be viewed as a marriage, not in any other literal sense.

John · Joined: 02 Jun 2004 Posts: 24189

issaiah1332 wrote: John wrote: issaiah1332 wrote: Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD" (Deuteronomy 6:4) (the Shema), "Thou shalt have no other gods before me" (Deuteronomy 5:7) and, "Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel and his redeemer the LORD of hosts: I am the first and I am the last; and beside me there is no God." (Isaiah 44:6)

"The Lord our God is one Lord," read this and then read John 17:17

We're not denying that the LORD is One.

He is....there's no doubt about that.

BTW...the word for one used in the Shema is the Hebrew word echad, which is the same word used in the Bible where it says that a man and woman marry and become one (echad) flesh.

I think that if trinity is true in any sense of the word, that it is meant to be viewed as a marriage, not in any other literal sense.

Actually...I think it's the other way around... that marriage exists to help us better understand the Trinity.

I think it has more to do with God being multi or extra dimensional.

issaiah1332 · Joined: 29 Jun 2006 Posts: 465 Location: Wv

John wrote: issaiah1332 wrote: John wrote: issaiah1332 wrote: Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD" (Deuteronomy 6:4) (the Shema), "Thou shalt have no other gods before me" (Deuteronomy 5:7) and, "Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel and his redeemer the LORD of hosts: I am the first and I am the last; and beside me there is no God." (Isaiah 44:6)

"The Lord our God is one Lord," read this and then read John 17:17

We're not denying that the LORD is One.

He is....there's no doubt about that.

BTW...the word for one used in the Shema is the Hebrew word echad, which is the same word used in the Bible where it says that a man and woman marry and become one (echad) flesh.

I think that if trinity is true in any sense of the word, that it is meant to be viewed as a marriage, not in any other literal sense.

Actually...I think it's the other way around... that marriage exists to help us better understand the Trinity.

I think it has more to do with God being multi or extra dimensional.

Now that i can better agree with, but i will never say that Jesus is literally God.

John · Joined: 02 Jun 2004 Posts: 24189

issaiah1332 wrote: John wrote: issaiah1332 wrote: John wrote: issaiah1332 wrote: Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD" (Deuteronomy 6:4) (the Shema), "Thou shalt have no other gods before me" (Deuteronomy 5:7) and, "Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel and his redeemer the LORD of hosts: I am the first and I am the last; and beside me there is no God." (Isaiah 44:6)

"The Lord our God is one Lord," read this and then read John 17:17

We're not denying that the LORD is One.

He is....there's no doubt about that.

BTW...the word for one used in the Shema is the Hebrew word echad, which is the same word used in the Bible where it says that a man and woman marry and become one (echad) flesh.

I think that if trinity is true in any sense of the word, that it is meant to be viewed as a marriage, not in any other literal sense.

Actually...I think it's the other way around... that marriage exists to help us better understand the Trinity.

I think it has more to do with God being multi or extra dimensional.

Now that i can better agree with, but i will never say that Jesus is literally God.

Well, He is.

I can show you if you want...from the Old and New Testament.

issaiah1332 · Joined: 29 Jun 2006 Posts: 465 Location: Wv

John wrote: issaiah1332 wrote: John wrote: issaiah1332 wrote: John wrote: issaiah1332 wrote: Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD" (Deuteronomy 6:4) (the Shema), "Thou shalt have no other gods before me" (Deuteronomy 5:7) and, "Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel and his redeemer the LORD of hosts: I am the first and I am the last; and beside me there is no God." (Isaiah 44:6)

"The Lord our God is one Lord," read this and then read John 17:17

We're not denying that the LORD is One.

He is....there's no doubt about that.

BTW...the word for one used in the Shema is the Hebrew word echad, which is the same word used in the Bible where it says that a man and woman marry and become one (echad) flesh.

I think that if trinity is true in any sense of the word, that it is meant to be viewed as a marriage, not in any other literal sense.

Actually...I think it's the other way around... that marriage exists to help us better understand the Trinity.

I think it has more to do with God being multi or extra dimensional.

Now that i can better agree with, but i will never say that Jesus is literally God.

Well, He is.

I can show you if you want...from the Old and New Testament.

Ok. I don't understand why jesus would say that he was not God if he is, and why would he pray to himself throughout his life?

perdidochas · Joined: 06 Mar 2006 Posts: 15424 Location: Florida

issaiah1332 wrote: cap'n queasy wrote: perdidochas wrote: issaiah1332 wrote:
Sir Isaac Newton himself (mind you the catholic church mad him a saint) said that trinity was based completely of false doctrine. Tell me why Jesus would pray to himself and ask himself to give him strength, and why would he forsaken himself? None of this makes sense, why in the new testament does he repeatedly differentiate himself from God?

Where do you get your info?

Newton was not a Catholic saint (heck, he wasn't even Catholic).

:lol: Oh man.

No you are right he was not a saint, that was false info from a dumb site, but he grew up catholic. His latter views on religion are unsure, but he frequently said that trinity was completely false.

Newton was NOT raised Catholic, either. He was raised Protestant, and was known for being staunchly Protestant. In later life, he could be best described as unitarian, due to his anti-trinitarian views.