We're making big changes. Please try out the beta site at beta.ccel.org and send us feedback. Thank you!

Discussions on Jesus (combining Was Jesus God & Jesus in the Bread)

Loutzenhiser's picture

Both these threads are covering about the same territory now and getting long again. Continue both threads here.

duu1der's picture

Again, you ASSUME too much

ML said: "Well you appear to be a respecter of men and I am not. I respect ideas and logical arguments based on an infallible source - scripture."

Once again you have allowed your assumptions to lead you astray.

Col 2:8 – “Beware lest anyone cheat you THROUGH PHILOSOPHY and empty deceit, according to the TRADITION OF MEN, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ”.

And yet you espouse philosophy over all.

If you believe for one microsecond that I simply jumped from one to another without years of consideration, you are once again allowing your assumptions to mislead you.

From the age of 12 I have sought out the truth of scripture. Since you say you base your “philosophy” on scripture what I tried to show you, using more learned people than I, which you summarily dismissed since they do not hold your beliefs.

When I look at the original understanding of the character and nature of Jesus I go to the scripture.

Paul says in Rom 5: 17 – 19 that Jesus was a man… a human, since He is equated to Adam, who was merely human.

Peter, who was with Jesus and did not do any miracles while Jesus was alive, commands a paralyzed man to get up and walk (Acts 9: 33,34); and raises the dead (:36 – 41); and then explains “How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power, who went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, for God was with Him” (10:38).

Since Jesus did nothing that mere mortals did both before His birth and after His death, and since the Trinity doctrine is a doctrine developed by men under questionable circumstances (as displayed through history), it is my opinion that the Trinity doctrine does not make sense since you end up with a statement that you made:
God is God and is always God, no matter what He chooses to act like. If Jesus is to be considered as God then He could not be tempted by evil no matter which nature since they stem from the One God, unless of course if the natures act independently which leads to 2 not 1.

And with the evidence from the OT, especially in the Suffering Servant prophecies of Isaiah which include “Behold, My Servant shall deal prudently; He SHALL BE EXALTED AND EXTOLLED AND BE VERY HIGH”.

You wrongly assumed that I elevated Jesus to God, which I did not. I elevated Him to the level of being the Son of God, as He declared, who was born through Mary as merely human, empowered at His Baptism, and elevated to the right hand of God, a place where Hebrew custom would hold as the place for the most trusted servant (but, of course, you would have to have some training in that culture to know that).

You have taken “words” that are translated by the same word in English and applied them wrongly in your understanding, which again shows your lack of training in either the Hebrew or Greek languages, again adding to the amount of error in your “philosophy” or scriptural “proofs”. This I also tried to show you using well respected theologians and references, but again, you blew that off as well.

It sounds to me that you are the one who has locked in on a doctrine, Catholocism, and have applied every ounce of your resources to upholding it.

But, I guess, I’m just a nobody who has to bow at your infallible wisdom lord Michael, ruler of CCEL.