A Christian who deny Jesus is God in Flesh

[Wrangler]

Soul,

I'm just going to put you on ignore.

Have a blessed day.

Wrangler

 

[justbyfaith]

Soul,

I'm just going to put you on ignore.

Have a blessed day.

Wrangler

@soul,

Don't despair over this...it means you got through to him with something and he doesn't want to deal with it in his mind.

 

[jaybird]

@soul,

Don't despair over this...it means you got through to him with something and he doesn't want to deal with it in his mind.

He dealt with it just fine. You guys just don't agree with the answer.
It could have been worse, he could have asked a simple question like who destroyed sodom. You guys sure didn't want to deal with that one.

 

[justbyfaith]

He dealt with it just fine. You guys just don't agree with the answer.
It could have been worse, he could have asked a simple question like who destroyed sodom. You guys sure didn't want to deal with that one.

Sorry, I wasn't paying attention to the majority of the conversation so I don't know how well he dealt with it.

I just know that when someone puts someone else on Ignore, it is usually because that someone else got to them in some way, shape, or form and they don't want to deal with the realities presented by the argument in question in their minds or by a continued dialogue.

 

[jaybird]

Is not standing by a statement dealing with it "just fine?"

Is leaving several questions unanswered dealing with it "just fine?"

Is not acknowledging having been corrected in science and language dealing with it "just fine?"

Is repeatedly removing the words from a question of mine, thereby changing the context, so as to avoid giving an answer to what I actually asked, which he never gave, dealing with it "just fine?" Is accusing my actual question of being a "trap," and refusing to explain why, dealing with it "just fine?"

Is deciding to ignore me without giving a reason dealing with it "just fine?"



Lie. I dealt with that one in another thread. You just do not agree with the answer. Additionally, Wrangler nor you answered this grade school science question with a "yes" or "no:" Do you now understand water (singular) exists in the following states: liquid, solid, and gas (vapor)?

you dealt with it by telling me its not relevant, at least wrangler answered the question and didnt run from it.

 

[jaybird]

I explained why the answer to who destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah was an insufficient comparison to Gen. 1:26-27 and thus irrelevant. Care to apologize for lying saying I did not "deal with that one?"

exactly, you dodged it and ran away rather than just answer.

and its plenty relevent. again for the 50 thousandth time but i dont mind. angels destroyed sodom, after all was done, it was still the Lord that destroyed sodom because the angels act on the name of the Lord. not their own name. "let us create" could just as easy be the Lord speaking to angels, angels co creating, in the end it is still the Lord that created.

and the other question you refused to answer, how was sodom destroyed, in the way of angels or the way of the Lord? you wouldnt touch that one either.

As for Wrangler, one of several questions he did not answer was this following grade school science question: "Do you understand water (singular) exists in the following states: liquid, solid, and gas (vapor)? You did not answer either, nor any of the questions in post #954.

at least he gave you an answer rather than plead the 5th with a bunch of nonesense answers such as "its irrelevant" "see post ##" and any other statement he could think of to deflect the question.

 

[justbyfaith]

Sodom and Gommorrah were destroyed when the Lord rained down fire and brimstone on them from heaven.

How were angels involved in that?

Is there a scripture that says that angels were the destroyers in that instance?

 

[jaybird]

Sodom and Gommorrah were destroyed when the Lord rained down fire and brimstone on them from heaven.

How were angels involved in that?

Is there a scripture that says that angels were the destroyers in that instance?

yes this one

Genesis 19 12-13

12Then the men said to Lot, “Have you anyone else here? Sons-in-law, sons, daughters, or anyone you have in the city, bring them out of the place. 13For we are about to destroy this place, because the outcry against its people has become great before the Lord, and the Lord has sent us to destroy it.”

 

[Wrangler]

Sorry, I wasn't paying attention to the majority of the conversation so I don't know how well he dealt with it.

Yet, you express what is not admittedly an ignorant and inflammatory opinion.

I just know that when someone puts someone else on Ignore, it is usually because that someone else got to them in some way...

Yea, rather than humbly admit you are making statements you don't know about, you assert statistics. So, even though you are wrong, you are, from a certain POV right eh? How humble!

...for the 50 thousandth time...

It began to feel that way with soul.

IMO, at some level much less than 50K times, it makes sense to leave as friends rather than continue to laps. Your holding on to who destroyed Sodom reveals soul's project of ignoring questions - and the implications of the answers. It is so funny.

I don't know how many times I asked soul to admit what is driving her to deny 'brother' means biological is her theology. For instance, Aaron is repeatedly identified as the brother of Moses. No one doubts what this means in that relationship. But James and Jesus; oh, it's too complicated to reach a conclusion. LOL

In another thread, we are talking about being not being damned who did not accept Christ, including infants. I have no problem admitting it is my theology that drives my view on that topic.

 

[justbyfaith]

yes this one

Genesis 19 12-13

12Then the men said to Lot, “Have you anyone else here? Sons-in-law, sons, daughters, or anyone you have in the city, bring them out of the place. 13For we are about to destroy this place, because the outcry against its people has become great before the Lord, and the Lord has sent us to destroy it.”

They said that as representatives of Elohim; which is the plural for God and can refer to all the angelic host of God.

Did the two angels in question rain down fire and brimstone from heaven on Sodom and Gommorah?

I think that God is the one who did that.

 

[Wrangler]

Elohim; which is the plural for God

Untrue. Elohim means heavenly beings. There is only one God, which by definition, is singular.

 

[justbyfaith]

Untrue. Elohim means heavenly beings. There is only one God, which by definition, is singular.

The "im" at the end of the word denotes plurality. Learn your Hebrew grammar.

 

[Wrangler]

The "im" at the end of the word denotes plurality. Learn your Hebrew grammar.

Heavenly beings IS PLURAL. Learn the difference between genus and species.

 

[justbyfaith]

Elohim is the Hebrew term for God in not a few places in holy scripture.

 

[Wrangler]

Elohim is the Hebrew term for God in not a few places in holy scripture.

Wrong. Elohim is a Hebrew term for heavenly beings. Proof that you are wrong is the Unitarian/Monotheist authors reject the trinity. That is, for 1,000's of years they do not take GE 1:26 as plurality of the one God. It is mere trinitarian projection onto unitarian text.

 

[justbyfaith]

Wrong. Elohim is a Hebrew term for heavenly beings. Proof that you are wrong is the Unitarian/Monotheist authors reject the trinity. That is, for 1,000's of years they do not take GE 1:26 as plurality of the one God. It is mere trinitarian projection onto unitarian text.

Elohim is the Hebrew word for God in Deuteronomy 6:4.

You are the one who is wrong.

 

[justbyfaith]

Deuteronomy 6 :: King James Version (KJV)

 

[jaybird]

They said that as representatives of Elohim; which is the plural for God and can refer to all the angelic host of God.

ok they said "as" this and that, and you can call it the "plural" form of the Most High, maybe throw in some more terms if you like. but lets not forget that one thing, angles destroyed sodom.

Did the two angels in question rain down fire and brimstone from heaven on Sodom and Gommorah?

I think that God is the one who did that.

i dont think it would matter if one angel threw a fire cracker and the Most High dropped 50 million atom bombs, that one act of throwing a fire cracker means an angel was involved, and according to your logic, this is a conflict because the Lord Himself has to carry out every action without angels because apparently they are beings that act 100% independent of the Lord.

 

[jaybird]

Elohim is the Hebrew word for God in Deuteronomy 6:4.

You are the one who is wrong.

elohim is a heavenly being, there are many of them in the heavens. the Heavenly Father is an elohim, but not all elohim are the Heavenly Father.

 

[justbyfaith]

but lets not forget that one thing, angels <fify> destroyed sodom.

How did angels destroy Sodom and Gomorrah?

Did they fly in outer space and direct the meteors in outer space so that they would fall on Sodom and Gomorrah?

Do you think that it was the same angels who spoke to Lot and led him out of Sodom that did this?

That would be some fast flying!

And they also would have had to have done this many years in advance in order for the meteors to reach Sodom and Gomorrah at just the right time.

But they said, "We will destroy this city" so they were going to do it in the future. They didn't say, "we have sent destruction on this city" which would have been more accurate if the destruction were accomplished by only a few angels rather than God.

I will say that God (Elohim) destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah. The angelic heavenly host; the whole number of which equals the host of heaven which is considered to be God in holy scripture; while the one true God is the eternal Spirit that dwells in all of his fulness in each member of the those who are included in the host of heaven.