Search results

I’ve always believed that God intervened miraculously. I’ve never in my life said, nor believed, that God did not intervene miraculously. The birth narratives in Matthew and Luke are decisive for me. I’m sorry to see you bow out of the thread but I want to thank you for the conversation...

I don’t understand how you can take my statements - I’ve said it several times now - amd then say that I am saying that God did not intervene miraculously. I’ll say it again and see what happens: God intervened miraculously.

The Hebrew word for worship has the same meaning as the Greek words for worship.

I agree that God intervened miraculously. I’m a Christian. I’ve ruled out physically and I don’t know of any third method. Yes. Another important point here is that the angel says that it if for this reason that Jesus is called the Son of God. That's not the reason your theology gives for...

Yes. And is. The same in the New Testament. Worshipping in spirit doesn’t change the meaning of OT and NT definition of worship. That’s not correct.

* I‘ve stayed in a lot of hotels but only one I stayed in had this carpet pattern. It struggled to walk on it and I avoided staying in the hotel whenever possible. *

I’m sorry to hear that but not surprised. If I were in your place and observing what you’re observing, I might also no longer be interested. The thing people in your position must do in order to become interested is to focus on Jesus - what he said, what he did, and what he says he will do in...

So “man” and “mere man” are synonymous terms. There it is again -> “using today’s definition”. Scripture doesn’t use what you are calling “today’s definition”. You’re understanding of “worship” is narrower than theirs. For example, the same Hebrew word used for worship applies to homage paid...

This is a critical point that you’re making. If we define words differently than the way they defined words then when we use the words they used we don’t mean what they meant. Our understanding would be different from theirs. The concept / idea isn’t the same. For me it isn’t different, and...

You did misunderstand. I agree that God intervened. I don’t believe that God intervened miraculously / supernaturally to breed a God. I’ve met other Christians who believe as you do and I was asking if anyone else here believes what you believe. So far ni one has come forward to say that they do.

That’s right. That’s not right. God intervened miraculously. God.

That’s right. Whether you consider me to be a Christian or not makes no difference. Jesus and the Apostles are Jewish monotheists. The concept of Jewish monotheism isn’t the concept of Nicene Christianity. That Nicene Christianity labels Jewish monotheism heresy establishes the fact. The...

I do believe God intervened miraculously. God himself caused the virgin to conceive, not Joseph. “Blessed be the God and Father of our lord Jesus Christ.” Yahweh is the father of Jesus.

What is a “mere man”? How does a “mere man” differ from a “man”?

Of course it matters. It makes all the difference between you being able to acknowledge that I’m a Jewish Christian and not being able to acknowledge me as a Christian at all.

I don’t.

I’m a first century Christian living in the twenty-first century. What worship meant then is what worship means now to me.

I don’t agree that the concept / idea of what the Nicene Creed affirms were held from the beginning.

Jesus is the Messianic King. David wasn’t the Messianic King but had I lived when he did I would have worshipped both he and God (1 Chronicles 29:20). No.

You’ve defined orthodoxy as afiirmation of the Nicene Creed. The Nicene Creed didn’t exist at the time Tertuallian became a Montanist. P.S. His theology concerning the nature of God wasn’t affected by his becoming a Montanist. What he believed about the nature of God before he became a...