Everyone Who Argues Against the Deity of Jesus

[marks]

This thread is about your delicate feelings regarding whether or not those kinds of discussions should even be permitted.

Is it fear that drives your concern? What is it really that you are afraid of?

You really are not getting this.

I believe in the Trinity-

I didn't realize that. Thank you for clarifying. So then you are not posting against the Statement of Faith regarding the Trinity, right?

Much love!

 

[marks]

I don't hold to your narrow definitions and understanding of Him?

My what?

Gotta love that loaded language!

Much love!!

 

[marks]

This thread is about your delicate feelings regarding whether or not those kinds of discussions should even be permitted.

This thread is poking at a soft spot.

Anti-Trinitatians, and those against the Deity of Christ have a soft spot on this forum, and I'm poking it, to see what happens. And for the most part, it's denied, or turned back on me, as though there is something wrong with me, or I'm doing something wrong.

I expected that result, as I see that kind of thing routinely. I like to shine lights on things. Today, I'm shining a light on not only how various people post contrary to the SoF they "agreed" with, but also on how some people just refuse to acknowledge that, regarless of it being true.

It just happens to be true.

But rather than admit it, and just be real, all this other comes up to the surface. Humility, Honesty, Courage, These are all character traits that would lead someone to say, "Yes, you're right". Which is all I'm looking for.

I'm not trying to control your posts. I happen to know that the new ownership is showing a greater tolerance for unothodox Christian views. I have ZERO expectation of convincing anyone of my view. I thought it would be interesting to poke the soft spot, and to see, if anyone, anyone, would just come out and admit it.

But that seems out of reach for some. Easier to say I'm must be running scared. But what kind of way is that to approach reality, and truth?

Much love!

 

[David H.]

In yer dreams mate..
Of course Jesus is the Lord Jesus, but that doesn't make him God, just as saying Elvis is the King doesn't make him a king, right Elv?-

It does not say "Jesus is the Lord Jesus" It says, "Jesus is THE Lord" With the definitive article. Which lines up with other scriptures, which you fail to address such as Zechariah 12:10, Isaiah 9:6, 1 Timothy 3:16 (God was manifest in the flesh), John 1:1-14, etc.

The 'Trinity' thing was just something cooked up by the catholic church to sucker people into thinking Jesus was split up into 3 parts..

This is another lie, as it was taught by the earliest church Fathers, before the Roman Catholic church existed.

Respectfully, that's not what this thread is about.

This thread is about this platform. Not about "Christianity" as a whole, or what Muslims might believe about Jesus, whether he is God or not, nor His ability to save them.

It's about the ability of someone like you subjectively deciding for example, that John wrote both the gospel of John, and the epistles of John and pronouncing that idea to be 'the truth' and deplatforming anyone who disagrees with that premise. Silencing any dissenting opinion, restricting any discussion that offers actual evidence to the contrary and ultimately banning anyone who even mentions that there might be plenty of room for doubt.

That's what this thread is about. The rest of your post is simply noise and off topic.

Neither is it about the authorship of the Gospel and Epistles of John... Your point was a flawed one and I exposed it as such, with a simple common-sense point, that all should be able to verify. It is Obvious, that not many people have a problem with believing that Jesus was a man, Where the problem lies is in believing Jesus was God incarnate, "God manifest in the flesh" as is indicated by the number of dissenters of this point on this post. Proof is in the pudding....

 

[marks]

It's about the ability of someone like you subjectively deciding for example,

The point of this thread is to pose a pointed challenge to anyone who posts denying the Trinity or the deity of Jesus Christ to stand up and declare that they understand that their posts are contrary to the SoF that they agreed to in joining.

Something seemingly very difficult for some to do. I'm just putting you into a corner to see what you'll do. You, that is, who deny the Trinity, or deity of Jesus. Whomever you may be.

Much love!

 

[Mr E]

It does not say "Jesus is the Lord Jesus" It says, "Jesus is THE Lord" With the definitive article. Which lines up with other scriptures, which you fail to address such as Zechariah 12:10, Isaiah 9:6, 1 Timothy 3:16 (God was manifest in the flesh), John 1:1-14, etc.



This is another lie, as it was taught by the earliest church Fathers, before the Roman Catholic church existed.



Neither is it about the authorship of the Gospel and Epistles of John... Your point was a flawed one and I exposed it as such, with a simple common-sense point, that all should be able to verify. It is Obvious, that not many people have a problem with believing that Jesus was a man, Where the problem lies is in believing Jesus was God incarnate, "God manifest in the flesh" as is indicated by the number of dissenters of this point on this post. Proof is in the pudding....

Yawn.
Why can’t you and @marks (and others so bothered) find the grace (and humility) to realize and say you believe such and such, while there are others who have a different understanding?

As @Wrangler pointed out earlier in the thread, it’s ‘an appeal to authority’ you are making, hoping to provoke a response from the forum owner. We get our coffee from the same place in Temecula. I probably have a better chance of having a face to face with him than any of you.

 

[marks]

As @Wrangler pointed out earlier in the thread, it’s ‘an appeal to authority’ you are making, hoping to provoke a response from the forum owner.

I already know the position of the forum owner.

So that's not it.

You can either accept what I'm saying or not. Even your response in this regard is revealing.

If this were boyhood and insects, I'd be compared to someone poking a bee hive. Let's see what happens! And, this is what is happening.

So the interesting thing to me is the reluctance to just accept what is real, the facts on the ground, as it were.

My supposition is that those who know they are contrary to the SoF feel like they have to somehow obfuscate, and if not, to compensate, and both show something about the speaker.

But who can just simply, say, "Yeah, that's true", and just leave it at that?

I suspected that would not be people's reply. And I think I was right. If you are paying attention, I'm showing you something about yourself.

Internal consistency, or a lack thereof, reveals itself in the external communications.

Much love!

 

[Mr E]

I already know the position of the forum owner.

So that's not it.

You can either accept what I'm saying or not. Even your response in this regard is revealing.

If this were boyhood and insects, I'd be compared to someone poking a bee hive. Let's see what happens! And, this is what is happening.

So the interesting thing to me is the reluctance to just accept what is real, the facts on the ground, as it were.

My supposition is that those who know they are contrary to the SoF feel like they have to somehow obfuscate, and if not, to compensate, and both show something about the speaker.

But who can just simply, say, "Yeah, that's true", and just leave it at that?

I suspected that would not be people's reply. And I think I was right. If you are paying attention, I'm showing you something about yourself.

Internal consistency, or a lack thereof, reveals itself in the external communications.

Much love!

You are self-aggrandizing and presumptuous.
No one cares about your childish attempts to buttonhole or label them.

Need proof? This will be my last post in the thread. I said my piece, so it’s peace-out.

Mush love!

 

[Michiah-Imla]

How can a group of people be soo zealous and intolerant over a doctrine not plainly stated nor explained in scripture?

How?

This is the paramount thing that true Bible believing Christians should be unified in:

“Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.” (1 John 2:22)

 

[marks]

You are self-aggrandizing and presumptuous.

Ad hominems are another very common response on this forum.

I said my peace, so it’s peace-out.

Ok.

Much love!

 

[marks]

This is the paramount thing that true Bible believing Christians should be unified in:

“Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.” (1 John 2:22)

Amen!

Much love!

 

[David H.]

Yawn.
Why can’t you and @marks (and others so bothered) find the grace (and humility) to realize and say you believe such and such, while there are others who have a different understanding?

As @Wrangler pointed out earlier in the thread, it’s ‘an appeal to authority’ you are making, hoping to provoke a response from the forum owner. We get our coffee from the same place in Temecula. I probably have a better chance of having a face to face with him than any of you.

If say, you were about to walk off of a cliff would you want me to graciously say "excuse me your about to fall" or shout "watch your step" and reach out and grab you and pull you away? That is the way I view this debate in Spiritual terms.... Many are on the wide road that leads to destruction, and if perchance that I can save one from destruction, I know there will be rejoicing in heaven. (Jude 1:22-23) Whether that is done graciously and in humility, or by shouting and grabbing is not as important as getting them to avoid destruction. As for you, your test of the spirits is inadequate, and i clearly pointed this out to you and explained why. perhaps this will cause you to take heed, and avoid the spirits that have been seducing you, or you may ignore what i have said, and continue in falling for those seducing spirits.

 

[Dropship]

The 'Trinity' thing was just something cooked up by the catholic church to sucker people into thinking Jesus was split up into 3 parts..

This is another lie, as it was taught by the earliest church Fathers, before the Roman Catholic church existed..

In that case some of the early churches were as wrong as the catholic church...

 

[Dropship]

..This is the paramount thing that true Bible believing Christians should be unified in:
“Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.” (1 John 2:22)

The word 'Christ' means 'anointed' which means "given authority" by someone else, just as Jesus was given authority by God.
So obviously Jesus couldn't have anointed himself if he was God..
Dictionary-
Christ- Latin Christus, from Greek Khristos, noun use of an adjective meaning ‘anointed’, from khriein ‘anoint’, translating Hebrew māšīaḥ ‘Messiah’.

 

[Michiah-Imla]

So obviously Jesus couldn't have anointed himself if he was God..
Dictionary-
Christ- Latin Christus, from Greek Khristos, noun use of an adjective meaning ‘anointed’, from khriein ‘anoint’, translating Hebrew māšīaḥ ‘Messiah’.

You’re preaching to the choir sir.

 

[Dropship]

You’re preaching to the choir sir.

Sorry if I didn't make it clear I was agreeing with you..
Here Jesus tells the woman at the well that he was the Messiah, ie the one anointed by God-

 

[David H.]

In that case some of the early churches were as wrong as the catholic church...

Some of them were disciples of the twelve Apostles themselves. Maybe it is you who are wrong...

 

[Dropship]

In that case some of the early churches were as wrong as the catholic church...

Some of them were disciples of the twelve Apostles themselves. Maybe it is you who are wrong...

Some early churches certainly got some things wrong, that's why Paul had to go straighten them out..-
Paul said- "I already gave you a warning when I was with you the second time. I now repeat it while absent: On my return I won't spare those who sinned earlier or any of the others" (2 Corinthians 13:2)

 

[David H.]

Some early churches certainly got some things wrong, that's why Paul had to go straighten them out..-
Paul said- "I already gave you a warning when I was with you the second time. I now repeat it while absent: On my return I won't spare those who sinned earlier or any of the others" (2 Corinthians 13:2)

But Paul taught the Trinity and deity of Christ....

Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. (Acts 20:28)
And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory. (1 Timothy 3:16)
Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; (Romans 3:25)

It is the blood of God that has the power to remit our sins, the blood of man is insufficient to accomplish this otherwise the sacrifice of children to Baal would have remitted sin. The blood of Bulls and goats only atoned (covered) for sin for a brief time, this is why Jesus had to be God incarnate for His blood to remove the sin from us and cleanse us.

So did John.

For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. (1 John 5:7)
I wonder why so many Hort and Wescott based modern bibles leave this verse out? Could it be that Hort And Wescott were anti trinitarians?

So did Peter:
Simeon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who have obtained a faith of equal standing with ours in the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ:
(2 Peter 1:1)
It is God's righteousness that is imputed to us through Jesus and His blood, which is the righteousness of God and the Blood of God. There is no power in the blood of men to accomplish this.

 

[Dropship]

But Paul taught the Trinity and deity of Christ..

Only if you interpret him as saying so.
Paul knew Jesus was full of the holy spirit and could therefore "see" God in him, but that didn't mean he thought Jesus WAS God..
If people say Jesus WAS God, they're denying that he was the SON of God, they can't have it both ways and are making themselves candidates for the naughty step-
"Who is it that overcomes the world? Only he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God" (1 John 5:5)