Stars, Dust & Sand

[bluto]

Wow RR! You sure posted a lot of stuff making the point that five simple words, "My Lord and my God" do not mean what they say? And btw, in the Greek Thomas literally said, "The Lord of me and the God of me." Your first mistake is in your very first sentence when you said, "Hmmm ... yes, this is one of those verses often used in an attempt to prove the Trinity doctrine."

This is not about the Trinity, it's about "Who is Jesus Christ." You then make this foolish statement, "Let's notice Thomas didn't mention the holy Spirit." In logic this statement is known as an argument from silence. This means you cannot make a positive assertion of truth based on WHAT IS NOT SAID.

The proper way to determine truth is to understand WHAT IS SAID. Have you ever noticed the word "monotheism" is not found in the Bible but yet we do know that God is ONE. I also noticed one of your excuses is Thoams exclaimed/expressing surprise or saying, "Oh my God." Jesus did resurrect. This is a Jehovah's Witnesses answer and no orthodox Jew would ever say such a thing. Besides, Jesus would have corrected him.

As far as the rest of your answer I can easily address but I will close with this last question? Your brought up John 10:36 where Jesus claimed to be the "Son of God." Tell me why at Matthew 26:63 the high priest Caiaphas ask Jesus to swear as to His identity? "I adjure You by the living God, that You tell us whether you are (1) the Christ/Messiah, and (2) the Son of God?"

When Jesus at Luke 22:70 says, "Yes, I am" why did the high priest say Jesus was blaspheming resulting in Jesus' death? This in view of the fact that the Jews themselves claim to be the sons of God?

IN GOD THE SON,
bluto

 

[RR]

Your brought up John 10:36 where Jesus claimed to be the "Son of God." Tell me why at Matthew 26:63 the high priest Caiaphas ask Jesus to swear as to His identity? "I adjure You by the living God, that You tell us whether you are (1) the Christ/Messiah, and (2) the Son of God?"

Actually, what he asked was "“I put You under oath by the living God: Tell us if You are the Christ, the Son of God!” So why do you need to add "and" as if he was asking him 2 questions? In NONE of the dozes of translations, does it read that way.

When Jesus at Luke 22:70 says, "Yes, I am" why did the high priest say Jesus was blaspheming resulting in Jesus' death? This in view of the fact that the Jews themselves claim to be the sons of God?

Again, I don't what translation you're using (Bluto's Holy Bible?) Jesus said “You say that I am.” He was throwing it back in their face. Tell me Bluto, what verse do the Jews claim to be "sons of God?"

 

[Nehemiah6]

Wow RR! You sure posted a lot of stuff making the point that five simple words, "My Lord and my God" do not mean what they say?

RR does not believe anything that means what it says in Scripture.

 

[bluto]

Actually, what he asked was "“I put You under oath by the living God: Tell us if You are the Christ, the Son of God!” So why do you need to add "and" as if he was asking him 2 questions? In NONE of the dozes of translations, does it read that way.



Again, I don't what translation you're using (Bluto's Holy Bible?) Jesus said “You say that I am.” He was throwing it back in their face. Tell me Bluto, what verse do the Jews claim to be "sons of God?"

 

[bluto]

Ok RR, let's do this by the numbers. Hopefully you will learn something? First of all I use the NASB. Secondly, the word "whether" is not actually in the text. But it does not have to be in the text. As well, "whether" means, "doubt or a choice between two possibilities."

The context of Matthew 26:57-65, At the Jewish trial of Jesus, the high priest Caiaphas found himself in a dilemma. He was losing his case before the Roman Governor Pilate. The evidence did not add up. The false witnesses did not agree with one another, (Mark 14:59; Matthew 26:59-62). And the star witness Judas did not show up.

Suddenly in desperation Caiaphas turned on Jesus and demanded, "I charge You under oath by the living God that You tell us "whether" (1) You are the Christ, (2) the Son of God. Now wait a second RR, I'm going to explain the use of the word "other." The form of the question put forth to Jesus by Caiaphas was "brilliant."

If, Caiaphas had asked if Jesus were the Messiah, it would not have been a capital offense. In other words, it's not a crime nor is it blasphemy to claim to be the Messiah. People have made the claim even before Jesus appeared on the scene. In fact, they even do it today. So what were left with is the question by Caiaphas, "Are you the Son of God?"

And like I told you Jesus said, "Yes, I am" at Luke 22:70. To back all of this up (starting at) John 5:17-18 the Jews accusing Jesus of making Himself equal with God. At John 8:56-57, Jesus claimed to the great "I AM" from Exodus 3. then there is John 10:30 where Jesus literally said, "I and the Father WE are one." It's already a given that Jesus and His Father are one in purpose. What Jesus is saying here is the fact that He and His Father are one in nature or essence. The Jews confirm this at John 8:33, "For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out God."

Then there is John 19:7, "The Jews answered him, we have a law, and by that law He ought to die because HE MADE HIMSELF OUT THE SON OF GOD." And btw, Isaiah 63:16-17 have the Jews identifying God as their Father. Also at Deuteronomy 14:1-2 in which you can read for yourself.

In conclusion, the Jews rightfully accused Jesus of blasphemy (in their minds) by accusing Jesus of breaking the law at Leviticus 24:16. There was one GIANT problem, like the Jews and you, they did not believe Jesus.

IN GOD THE SON,
bluto

 

[RR]

In conclusion, the Jews rightfully accused Jesus of blasphemy (in their minds) by accusing Jesus of breaking the law at Leviticus 24:16. There was one GIANT problem, like the Jews and you, they did not believe Jesus.

The problem is .... I believe that Jesus is the Son of God, it's what He said He was. What I deny is that Jesus is God the Son. There's a difference.

 

[bluto]

Time to bring out the "big guns" RR. Do you know why Jesus Christ often referred to Himself as the "Son of God" and as the "Son of Man?" He's the Son of God on His Fathers side which is deity. He's the Son of Man on His mothers side which is human being. Jesus Christ had two natures, one of deity and one of human. This is why at John 3:16 Jesus Christ is the one and only Son of God, as in there are no others.

Now, you can prove me wrong by giving me an example of a son that DOES NOT share the same nature as its father. It is Gods nature that separates Him from all that is not God. Your human nature you received from your father and so did I. Our human nature separates us from all that is not human. Dogs begat dogs, birds beget birds and so on.

Remember you told me yesterday about where is the Holy Spirit? I'm now talking about the trinity. God chose to manifest Himself as three distinct persons, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. These three persons have one thing in common? They share the same nature. The Father is not the Son. Nor is the Father the Person of the Holy Spirit.

You are a distinct person from your father and your mother just as I am and everybody else. What we have in common is our shared nature which is human. Now, getting back to the "Son of God" issue. The Jews have what is called, "the son of" idiom. It can be found in the Old Testament and in the New Testament. The following article explains it in detail and this is not new. Please read it.

https://biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/grace-journal/06-2_16.pdf

IN GOD THE SON,
bluto

 

[RR]

Time to bring out the "big guns" RR. Do you know why Jesus Christ often referred to Himself as the "Son of God" and as the "Son of Man?" He's the Son of God on His Fathers side which is deity. He's the Son of Man on His mothers side which is human being. Jesus Christ had two natures, one of deity and one of human. This is why at John 3:16 Jesus Christ is the one and only Son of God, as in there are no others.

A nature he left behind when he came to earth, not as a God-Man but as fully human, it's the only way he could be a ransom. a life for a life.

 

[bluto]

What nature did Jesus leave behind when He came to earth?

IN HIM,
bluto

 

[RR]

What nature did Jesus leave behind when He came to earth?

His spirit nature.

 

[bluto]

A nature he left behind when he came to earth, not as a God-Man but as fully human, it's the only way he could be a ransom. a life for a life.

 

[bluto]

Ok RR, were done here. I posted an article explaining the "Son of God" idiom and 2 minutes later you post "A nature he left behind." In other words, you playing games and you cannot be taken seriously as far as I'm concerned. You could NOT have read the article that fast. In short, your lost and I pray that someday God will open your eyes.

IN GOD THE SON,
bluto

 

[RR]

Ok RR, were done here. I posted an article explaining the "Son of God" idiom and 2 minutes later you post "A nature he left behind." In other words, you playing games and you cannot be taken seriously as far as I'm concerned. You could NOT have read the article that fast. In short, your lost and I pray that someday God will open your eyes.

I did read the article, all 20 plus pages, and I've read dozens of others just like it. I have a dozen books on my shelf by renown theologians on the doctrine of the trinity, NONE of them have convince me. So yes, we're done. See you in the Kingdom.

 

[UnoiAmarah]

What nature did Jesus leave behind when He came to earth?

IN HIM,
bluto

How does it say that Jesus came to earth?

"... for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost." Matt 1:20

"... his name was called JESUS, which was so named of the angel before he was conceived in the womb." Luke 2:21

 

[bluto]

How does it say that Jesus came to earth?

"... for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost." Matt 1:20

"... his name was called JESUS, which was so named of the angel before he was conceived in the womb." Luke 2:21

 

[bluto]

I'm not saying it, RR is saying it. Please read his post #28. In short, he does not know what he's talking about.

IN GOD THE SON,
bluto

 

[RR]

The man Christ Jesus provided his perfect human life as a ransom or corresponding price for Father Adam. Because a perfect man [Adam] sinned, it would take the life of a perfect man to take Adam’s place under the penalty of death and hence, provide mankind with an opportunity for salvation. Because all of Adam’s descendants were under his condemnation, “No man can by any means redeem his brother Or give to God a ransom for him.” (Psa. 49:7 NASB) Therefore, someone from outside the fallen was needed to pay the redemption price.

However, in his pre-human existence as the Logos or the angel Michael, our Lord could not provide for man’s salvation. Instead, as the apostle Paul writes in Heb. 2:9 (NASB): “But we do see Him who was made for a little while lower than the angels, namely, Jesus, because of the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, so that by the grace of God He might taste death for everyone.”

It was “the man Christ Jesus, (6) who gave Himself as a ransom for all.” (1 Tim. 2:5,6 NASB) The apostle Paul explains it further in 1 Cor. 15:21-23 (NASB): “For since by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead. (22) For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive. (23) But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, after that those who are Christ’s at His coming.” Christ provides salvation for all mankind – first for his followers [the first-fruits] and then for all mankind, [those who are Christ’s at His coming or return].

Since Jesus’ earthly life took Adam’s place under the penalty of death, it requires that Jesus be resurrected not as a man but as spirit being where he can apply the value of sacrifice to divine justice and then help mankind gain everlasting life in his earthly kingdom. Paul writes in Heb. 9:11-12 (NASB): “But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things to come, He entered through the greater and more perfect tabernacle [heaven], not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation; (12) and not through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood, He entered the holy place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption.”

He adds in Heb. 5:9-10 (Philips) that because of his faithfulness unto death, Jesus was raised as a great spiritual priest to bring life to mankind. “Then, when he had been proved the perfect Son, he became the source of eternal salvation to all who should obey him, being now recognised by God himself as High Priest ‘after the order of Melchizedek.'”

 

[bluto]

The man Christ Jesus provided his perfect human life as a ransom or corresponding price for Father Adam. Because a perfect man [Adam] sinned, it would take the life of a perfect man to take Adam’s place under the penalty of death and hence, provide mankind with an opportunity for salvation. Because all of Adam’s descendants were under his condemnation, “No man can by any means redeem his brother Or give to God a ransom for him.” (Psa. 49:7 NASB) Therefore, someone from outside the fallen was needed to pay the redemption price.

However, in his pre-human existence as the Logos or the angel Michael, our Lord could not provide for man’s salvation. Instead, as the apostle Paul writes in Heb. 2:9 (NASB): “But we do see Him who was made for a little while lower than the angels, namely, Jesus, because of the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, so that by the grace of God He might taste death for everyone.”

It was “the man Christ Jesus, (6) who gave Himself as a ransom for all.” (1 Tim. 2:5,6 NASB) The apostle Paul explains it further in 1 Cor. 15:21-23 (NASB): “For since by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead. (22) For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive. (23) But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, after that those who are Christ’s at His coming.” Christ provides salvation for all mankind – first for his followers [the first-fruits] and then for all mankind, [those who are Christ’s at His coming or return].

Since Jesus’ earthly life took Adam’s place under the penalty of death, it requires that Jesus be resurrected not as a man but as spirit being where he can apply the value of sacrifice to divine justice and then help mankind gain everlasting life in his earthly kingdom. Paul writes in Heb. 9:11-12 (NASB): “But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things to come, He entered through the greater and more perfect tabernacle [heaven], not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation; (12) and not through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood, He entered the holy place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption.”

He adds in Heb. 5:9-10 (Philips) that because of his faithfulness unto death, Jesus was raised as a great spiritual priest to bring life to mankind. “Then, when he had been proved the perfect Son, he became the source of eternal salvation to all who should obey him, being now recognised by God himself as High Priest ‘after the order of Melchizedek.'”

I agree with just about everything you stated but what does you in is the fact that you deny the deity of Jesus Christ.

IN GOD THE SON,
bluto

 

[RR]

I agree with just about everything you stated but what does you in is the fact that you deny the deity of Jesus Christ.

I don't deny the diety of Christ, I deny that Christ is God Almighty. There's a difference.

 

[bluto]

Well then RR, please explain Revelation 1:8. "I am the Alpha and the Omega, says the Lord God, who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty." This cannot be God the Father because the Father is not the one coming or was dead. Revelation 1:17, "And when I saw Him/Jesus Christ I fell at His feet as a dead man. And He laid His right hand upon me, saying, "Do not be afraid; I am the first and the last, vs18, and the living One; and I was dead and behold I am alive forevermore, and I have the keys of death and Hades." Now what RR?

IN GOD THE SON,
bluto