Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2022 16:42:21 GMT -5
D"Sorry Robert – No biology in spiritual heaven – only spirit Jesus was changed – different than we are – no longer as we are R" So you don't have a 3D biological Jesus in our human flesh in heaven as our High Priest? Explain than how Jesus atones for our sinning today, if there is no blood reminder for atonement?
Jesus blood was shed once, yes, but surely the blood has to remind the Father of the sacrifice?
Or are you saying Jesus can change and go back to another form, so our High Priest is changed, no longer is us, nor a simile of us?
D"You just NEED to deny the spirit R" I thought Jesus came down in human form to rescue humans in human form. You claim Jesus came down as a spirit, clad in human form only temporarily, and now is in heaven in spirit form. To make your theory sound nice, all humans have spirit forms too, as their soul, the body is just a tool.
Why does the spirit form require a body, so it can put up with RA affects and have free will. How strange is your theories.
Why can't GOD just have spirit forms and place a RA spirit component into the spirit form, thus develop free will that way? Your logic is weird.
No need for matter at all, or inherent RA in matter.
D"THERE ARE NOT MULTIPLE GODS R" There are NOT multiple cells within your heart either. Otherwise you would be dead. Echad, compound unity, something Dave cannot fathom.
RP" Otherwise how can GOD be love, if God cannot demonstrate love within the Family Elohiym power? D" Why do you doubt that God is able to LOVE His creation? R" Oh, so you acknowledge my question is true, and you have no answer? Sure I acknowledge God can love creatures. but loving creatures is different to loving within your own kind.
Adam got lonely for this kind of love. So God created this love for him. Your Father is solitary can cannot demonstrate love that us relational within divinity....so cannot love relationally.
I pity your theory Dave.
D"So – you have a god of biology sitting on a throne somewhere looking like Moses with a long white beard R" Mocking again Dave. No, I have a Family Divine great uncaused cause not of matter, space or time, but functions as a simile as human families function.
Do you understand what a simile is? Its a picture of something real that is compared to something else that us real, but not like that picture.
Love is a river, a Dam fed you some Clear was it's water, traditionally done.
Love is real, a dam is real, love is made of spirit a dam is made of matter.They are different yet literal, and made of two different things, yet function the same. Hence a simile.
Who is the Dam? The Father is. Who is the woman here? The Shadday is.
Why is love a river and not a simile of water?
Poetry is complex stuff isn't it? and fun.
D"Why do you doubt that God is able to LOVE His creation? R" I don't. But your God cannot demonstrate love within Himself relationally.
My God can. Our theories are different.
RP" Why didn't your Father make Adam androgynous than? SO Adam would not have felt lonely? D" DUH – please read Gen 2 R" can't answer my question hey?
RP" Better still why didn't the Father make all the creatures on earth androgynous D" DUH - There are many androgynous creatures on earth R" really? The earthworm can sex itself, but prefers to sex the other gender if it can find one in the soil
Bacteria also sex other gender forms.
SO come on Dave, show me the many androgynous creatures on earth, do not mention asexual reproduction
D"Who are God’s parents – that he must Honor and Obey as you claim
R" If you look at the Hebrew word "family" not a single verse exists in the OT under the context of God? Why? because God has no origin. But since sin came, things changed.
The collector added humanity to Himself and becomes the father of the redeemed race He rescues (yet proof He retains biological flesh)
Thus the Divine Family for what of a term, is truly renamed as Eph 3:15 suggests, and we have a "family" picture of elohiym in the NT.
D"So you teach that death and sheol and all the wicked within RETURN in 3 days R" mocking again, Jesus had the right to return from the second death, because Jesus never sinned, not even once. Wicked people can never return because of their sins.
Shalom
|
|
|
Post by Dave on Aug 21, 2022 21:02:18 GMT -5
D"Sorry Robert – No biology in spiritual heaven – only spirit Jesus was changed – different than we are – no longer as we are R" So you don't have a 3D biological Jesus in our human flesh in heaven as our High Priest? Explain than how Jesus atones for our sinning today, if there is no blood reminder for atonement? ONCE WAS ALL IT TOOK
Jesus blood was shed once, yes, but surely the blood has to remind the Father of the sacrifice? Why do you need reminding – don’t you believe Or do you not trust in your salvation – and teach you can loose it
D"You just NEED to deny the spirit R" I thought Jesus came down in human form to rescue humans in human form. NO Jesus did not – Jesus was born of Mary – 100% biology – Son of Man God came down as Christ – Son of God
You claim Jesus came down as a spirit, clad in human form only temporarily, NO – God came down as Christ – God incarnate - clothed in Jesus = Jesus Christ
and now is in heaven in spirit form. To make your theory sound nice, all humans have spirit forms too, as their soul, the body is just a tool. Correct – we are created in the image of God – from God we came – souljourn here to Jer 1:5 – and upon mortal death return to God Just like Christ
Why does the spirit form require a body, so it can put up with RA affects and have free will. How strange is your theories. You cannot Jer 1:5 to the WORLD without a body Remember the meaning of life – remember your purpose – to Jer 1:5
No need for matter at all, or inherent RA in matter. CORRECT – no need for matter at all = THE FIRST AGE CORRECT – there is no need for RA in the New Heaven and Earth – the Last Age NOT OUR TIME – NOT OUR AGE
RP" Otherwise how can GOD be love, if God cannot demonstrate love within the Family Elohiym power? D" Why do you doubt that God is able to LOVE His creation? R" Oh, so you acknowledge my question is true, and you have no answer? God’s love is unrequited – God loves His creation even if His creation doesn’t love Him back
Sure I acknowledge God can love creatures. but loving creatures is different to loving within your own kind. ABSOLUTE reason man exist – we are the creatures that can choose
RP" Better still why didn't the Father make all the creatures on earth androgynous D" DUH - There are many androgynous creatures on earth Bacteria also sex other gender forms. – no they don’t – all the same with sex pilli
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2022 14:00:06 GMT -5
D"NO Jesus did not – Jesus was born of Mary – 100% biology – Son of Man God came down as Christ – Son of God R" What? So you do not have Jesus pre-existing as YHWH, in His full divinity?
Jesus-YHWH was born and made by His Father and Mother, the earth mother Mary was just a surrogate. IN other words getting humanity unto divinity required family divinity as a process, not human processes of gamete meet gamete.
(I will do as you do and not discuss my words, you need to explain yourself Dave)
D"NO – God came down as Christ – God incarnate - clothed in Jesus = Jesus Christ R" What is going on here in your writings? In my view, the Jesus-YHWH was clad in humanity using an egg from Mary, but engineered by the Father and Mother in Mary's womb, thus the pre-existing divine Son came down to redeem mankind .
What Dave is saying, "the Father came down as Christ, the Father was incarnate clothed in a biological wrap, and expressed Himself as Jesus in human form".
D"Correct – we are created in the image of God – from God we came – souljourn here to Jer 1:5 – and upon mortal death return to God R" Be sure to read my post on Messanic Jews emailed to me, because you are very, very wrong.
D"God’s love is unrequited – God loves His creation even if His creation doesn’t love Him back R" IN other words Dave, your God cannot demonstrate love within Himself, rationally, because three expressions of one Father, makes three Fathers, one Father is female and other Father is male, but their relational loving each other is more or less like the "fluid gender gays talk about". In other words you have no family, relational concept of love at all, all your God can do is love waiting for creatures to love Him back? Is that love? I don't think so. Adam found this loving boring and wanted a help mate. You don't have a help mate do you, your Father-god is all solitary and all alone. I pity your theory and your ignorance of Scripture.
D"no they don’t – all the same with sex pilli R" clever answer Dave, my point is even bacteria share DNA, I am still waiting for the many androgynous creatures on earth, you claim exist.... ?
Name me one true androgynous creature on earth , where the creature has no need of gender male and female , not just for sex, and no need for the two kinds of loving?
Shalom
|
|
|
Post by Dave on Aug 22, 2022 21:38:33 GMT -5
Jesus was born of Mary – 100% biology – Son of Man God came down as Christ – Son of GodR" What? So you do not have Jesus pre-existing as YHWH, in His full divinity? NO – Christ is the full divinityJesus-YHWH was born and made by His Father and Mother, the earth mother Mary was just a surrogate. IN other words getting humanity unto divinity required family divinity as a process, not human processes of gamete meet gamete. Jesus was born of Mary – 100% biology with (yester ra) Just like all men everywhere But the spirit within = God Himself – the Image of God – the definition of (yester tov) 100% spirit Jesus Christ = Jesus + Christ = (Jesus – Son of Man / biology) + (Christ – the only begotten Son of God) Jesus Christ = (Jesus / Flesh) + (God incarnate – spirit) God came down as Christ – God incarnate - clothed in Jesus = Jesus ChristWhat Dave is saying, "the Father came down as Christ, the Father was incarnate clothed in a biological wrap, and expressed Himself as Jesus in human form".Thank you – you are correct and I have always said thisD"Correct – we are created in the image of God – from God we came – souljourn here to Jer 1:5 – and upon mortal death return to God R" Be sure to read my post on Messanic Jews emailed to me, because you are very, very wrong. I have already ad already posted – I enjoyed the validation – thank youD"God’s love is unrequited – God loves His creation even if His creation doesn’t love Him back R" IN other words Dave, your God cannot demonstrate love within Himself Religious mumbo jumbo-------------- D"no they don’t – all the same with sex pilli R" clever answer Dave, my point is even bacteria share DNA, I am still waiting for the many androgynous creatures on earth, you claim exist.... ? Do bacteria have genders? If yes, what are the characteristics ... www.quora.com › Do-bacteria-have-genders-If-yes... Jul 11, 2017 — No. Primarily a bacterial cell is prokaryotic and they don't have genders.Bacteria Reproduction | CK-12 Foundation flexbooks.ck12.org › section › primary › lesson Apr 19, 2019 — Bacteria, being single-celled prokaryotic organisms, do not have a male or female versionDo microorganisms have a gender? | Homework.Study.com study.com › Science › Reproduction Microorganisms do not have genders Species Numbers in Bacteria - PMC - NCBI www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov › articles › PMC3160642 by D Dykhuizen · 2005 · — There are 5 × 1011 bacteria in 30 grams of soil
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 23, 2022 13:18:10 GMT -5
RP" What Dave is saying, "the Father came down as Christ, the Father was incarnate clothed in a biological wrap, and expressed Himself as Jesus in human form". D" Thank you – you are correct and I have always said this R" Your expression idea is wrong Dave.
When the Father expression dies the second death, and the Father expression does not allow the body to decay, I get that because the Father is outside the body keeping the body alive, while the Father expression is dead in the grave 3 days and 3 nights, so the Father expression comes back to life again, when the Father breathes life into the Father expression again. You theory can work except it seems weird. The Father expression praying to the Father, is also weird.
The theory also mocks the idea of the "one and only SON" of the Father. Why can't the Father make as many Father expressions as He likes ?
The theory also breaks down the ability to sin, since the Father outside of the Father expression will override the Father expression, so the Father expression cannot sin, even if the two minds allowed this. However there cannot be two minds, otherwise you would have two Father forms in expression. Again you theory is weird.
Biologically speaking and simile speaking your theory is also weird, as I could demonstrate by Bible verses.
Already I showed you the Father cannot demonstrate relational love within Himself. All the Father can do is love waiting for creatures to love Him back. This is hardly the definition of love, because love is relational within it's own kind. I have a huge problem accepting that Jesus is just the Father in a different expression. It make a mockery of the word "malak" messenger. The messenger is not really carrying a message from the Father is He, if the messenger is already the Father in a different expression?
Your theories mock plain reading of Scripture, why does the Scripture use the term Father and SON, than, if these terms are not similes of things Humans understand. This violates the poetry concept of similes. Not only that but completely destroys similes altogether. So the entire Bible collapses into a pile of role playing and useless word games.
In order to make Jewish ideas of elohiym work, the Jew has to create polysemy in the Hebrew, thus of the thousands of concepts from elohiym, they ignore 6 verses of elohiym because it does not fit their grand human precepts of the elohiym in heaven. This also violates the torah. Thus the torah no longer has harmony.
Jews do not consider there are two YHWH's even, why even the very word has two "Hey" letters, the meaning is "Behold the Divine Being" in it. A Father and SON function of the divine. Again the Jew violates reading the letters in Hebrew, meaning Ancient Hebrew, a language they say does not exist. Jews also never consider the "hey" letter is a picture logogram of a Divine Being.
Explain to me how the Father can die for sins, when the Father is also alive to resurrect Himself at the appropriate time? So one expression dies while the other expression lives? This is role playing NOT true love laying down His life for His friends. There is no risk in doing this either. Why I would love a marriage built on the feminine expression of me and the masculine expression of me, than I would not have to risk not understanding my responder's love all the time. Again your theory is weird and makes no sense. It's not love at all. If all I have is self expressions of me, it would get boring. Talking to myself, playing to myself, feeling myself, no risk, fluid gender, gay and very boring, predictable too much...
It's fluid gender, both male and female expressions of me, the great uncaused SELF.
I am solitary and all I can do is create creatures to love me back. Boring. I will you allow you time to respond to my questions....with discussions please.
D"I have already ad already posted – I enjoyed the validation – thank you R" Hmm?
DP"God’s love is unrequited – God loves His creation even if His creation doesn’t love Him back RP" IN other words Dave, your God cannot demonstrate love within Himself D" Religious mumbo jumbo R" So we have lost relational love. Relational risk. Also free will. If the Father cannot sin, and if the Father cannot demonstrate relational love, why should the Father expect His creatures to demonstrate this relational love, with relational risk and relational free will? Why did the Father create binary creatures in the first place, when He could have DNA exchange of material within a different biological process, so binary creatures are not required?
If the Father is only solitary, why aren't all the creatures also solitary, and given the ability to make male and female expressions of themselves?
You mock that there are TWO hebrew words for love, hence the reason for binary creatures is because love is binary. Has anybody ever considered this before? Love comes in three basic uncaused caused forms. Three fundament units they are independent of each other. They are
1) provider love 2) responder love 3) collective love (blending the first two like a child does) The first two types of love function like parental love.
But your Father cannot demonstrate this because your Father is solitary. And making three expressions of Himself is NOT demonstrating binary love. It's role playing.
And you term all this "Religious mumbo jumbo"?
--------------------------
D"Do bacteria have genders? If yes, what are the characteristics ... R" Is that the best you can do, so no higher creatures, so the Father can only demonstrate Himself as a lowly bacteria? Again your theories are weird?
Why are these simple but complex creatures necessary ?
I suspect the bacteria like the fungi, interface the mineral inorganic world with the organic world, so organic creatures can live. These creatures have the ability to eat inorganic food and thus make organic food for humans.
Does science know this? All our salt intake comes in organic form, attached to Carbon molecules? K, Ca, Fe, Mg, Mn, etc (I leave out Na and Al) But you consider such creatures as simple and the precursors of higher creatures??
D"There are 5 × 1011 bacteria in 30 grams of soil R" Yes, simple but complex creatures to interface the inorganic world to the organic world.
So where are these higher examples of "androgynous creature on earth" you claimed? Still waiting?
SHalom
|
|
|
Post by Dave on Aug 24, 2022 10:53:43 GMT -5
RP" What Dave is saying, "the Father came down as Christ, the Father was incarnate clothed in a biological wrap, and expressed Himself as Jesus in human form". D" Thank you – you are correct and I have always said this R" Your expression idea is wrong Dave. When the Father expression dies the second death, Robert – I must confess – I no longer take you seriously You are not here to study – you just choose to oppose me and scripture because you think it qute Enjoy your game – demonstrate to God and everyone the respect toy have for the word of God Jesus died a mortal death upon the cross – this is the death of flesh The spirit – Christ – was poured out / released and continued to minister to the lost in hadesThe theory also mocks the idea of the "one and only SON" of the Father. Why can't the Father make as many Father expressions as He likes ? God came to earth – and was BORN - as a man only once – the only begotten SonI have a huge problem accepting that Jesus is just the Father in a different expression. It make a mockery of the word "malak" messenger. The messenger is not really carrying a message from the Father is He, if the messenger is already the Father in a different expression? Whatever – be small – limit God to the abilities of mortal man – You deny the spirit – so you cannot understand the spiritual – you do – you just refuseYour theories mock plain reading of Scripture, why does the Scripture use the term Father and SON, than, if these terms are not similes of things Humans understand. Father in heaven – superior to all – unapproachable – uncomprehendable But the Father – came to earth (God incarnate) to be on your level – so you could relate to HimJews do not consider there are two YHWH's even, why even the very word has two "Hey" letters, the meaning is "Behold the Divine Being" in it. A Father and SON function of the divine. Again the Jew violates reading the letters in Hebrew, meaning Ancient Hebrew, a language they say does not exist. Jews also never consider the "hey" letter is a picture logogram of a Divine Being. YES – all this is true the DAY BEFORE Jesus Christ – but now we have the Gospel to complete the theology Why do you deny the New testament Gospel – an call yourself a ChristianExplain to me how the Father can die for sinsABSOLUTE REJECTED - REDICULAS NONSENSE – your satan god did not kill the Creator Only Jesus died upon the cross – only flesh / biology died a mortal death upon the cross Christ – The Spirit – was poured out / released to minster to the lost in hades If the Father cannot sin, and if the Father cannot demonstrate relational love, ABSOLUTE REJECTED - REDICULAS NONSENSE – how could the Father disobey Himself Why did the Father create binary creatures in the first place, To give man the choice-------------------------- D"Do bacteria have genders? If yes, what are the characteristics ... R" Is that the best you can do, so no higher creatures, so the Father can only demonstrate Himself as a lowly bacteria? Again your theories are weird? Would you prefer to think of your god as a hermaphrodite? - BOTH MALE AND FEMALE
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 24, 2022 15:31:48 GMT -5
D"Robert – I must confess – I no longer take you seriously You are not here to study – you just choose to oppose me and scripture because you think it cute Enjoy your game – demonstrate to God and everyone the respect toy have for the word of God
R" I try to discuss with you, but you don't....your choice All you can do is mock and post crude images of your god as a hermaphrodite.
In my view, the Father shows masculine love, and Shadday shows feminine love and the SON shows collective child like love.
Each member of the divine family demonstrate relational love as unique personalities of loving. (something a solitary Father in your view can't do)
I see you no longer take my discussions seriously because you no longer can defend your spurious ways....
SHalom
|
|
|
Post by Dave on Aug 25, 2022 7:10:57 GMT -5
R" I try to discuss with you You post outrageous missrepresentations of what scripture and others sayAll you can do is mock and post crude images of your god as a hermaphrodite.You absolutely deny the term androgynous – so what else is thereAnd you do not understand English vocabulary - you need pictures so you understand In my view, the Father shows masculine love, and Shadday shows feminine love and the SON shows collective child like love. Each member of the divine family demonstrate relational love as unique personalities of loving. (something a solitary Father in your view can't do) YES – you have a pantheon of 4 or more gods – 3 as a family and a god of evil
TOTALLY REJECTED - ABSOLUTE PAGANISM
THERE IS ONLY ONE TRUE GOD I see you no longer take my discussions seriously because you no longer can defend your spurious ways....Bring it on satan boyPretend away Robert – fight against scripture – fight against the reality of the spirit and the spiritual – fight against the reality of the archon – fight against the idea of an intelligent design NOW – you are pushing the idea that your satan god is superior ro the Creator Your satan god KILLED the creator and sent Him to the Second Death But your satan god remains ABSOLUTE NONSENSE Now you teach that the CROSS was not sufficient for salvation – you must do more You have absolutely denied the concept of FIRST FRUITS for 3 years – suddenly Moses LIVES after his mortal death because you say he was FIRST FRUITS YOU JUST SAY ANYTHING to attack the Christian Faith – Mock scripture You deliberately misrepresent me – scripture – English – and others in a demonstration of academic honesty Robert – I must confess – I no longer take you seriously You are not here to study – you just choose to oppose me and scripture because you think it qute Enjoy your game – demonstrate to God and everyone the respect toy have for the word of God Your refusal to answer questions is a demonstration of your game – just attack – but never answer1- Why do you deny the New Testament Gospel and call yourself a Christian 2- Why do you think it a game to call the New Testament Gospel – Gnostic? 3- Why do you deny LIFE LIVES - but defend Moses as First Fruits 4- Why do you dent the spirit and the spiritual – and think of it as pagan mysticism 5- Why do you deny the Baptism of the Holy Spirit 6- Why do you doubt the action of the Holy Spirit today 7- Why do you teach that miracles are only the stuff of ancient history 8- Why do you deny that Jesus was more than just a man 9- Why do you teach that your satan is able to repent 10- Why do you deny Jusus Christ was God incarnate – yet you pray to Jesus You have painted yourself into a very large anti-Christian hole – from which there is no escape – except to admit you just enjoy attaching Christianity for sport – just a game you play to attack ChristianitySo I have been studying and learning, just vehemently disagree with your view and your Gnostic ways, because they oppose the Hebrew torah, which Hellenized Jews no longer seem to follow also.Why do you deny the New Testament Gospel and call it Gnostic Now you want to teach that the New Testament is a delusion You teach others NOT to embrace the New Testamant - but call yourself a Christian YOU JUST SAY ANYTHING to attack the Christian Faith – Mock scriptureA study – is an exchange of Q&A You – all Q no A ANSWER FOR YOUR BELIEFS – for your anti-Christian beliefs
|
|
|
Post by Dillon on Aug 25, 2022 9:07:54 GMT -5
I have been reading along. There really is much I could add, but I do wonder why Robert refuses to answer the question Dave puts to him. Robert talks himself into a corner, then refuses to explain himself. When Robert is caught in a miss statement, he does not explain himself, he changes the subject as if no question was asked.
I do agree with Dave that Robert thinks it a sport to damn Christianity.
-------------------- 1Pe 3:18 For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:
PUT TO DEATH IN THE FLESH – MORTAL DEATH – DEATH OF BIOLOGY
1Pe 3:19 By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison; 1Pe 3:20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.
R" How is this possible when you just whittled away every verse of the soul poured unto death, referring to the Second death?
Why do you teach us that the New Testament is wrong? ------------------------
R" So if God never died, the Muslims say Jesus is not God, because God cannot die? So now you are saying only a human died, and the god incarnate did not die? Can you explain this to us, the Muslim and me?
Mat 27:50 Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost. Mat 27:50 And Yeshua cried out again with a loud voice and gave up His spirit. Mat 27:50 And Jesus having again cried with a great voice, yielded the spirit;
Mar 15:37 And Jesus cried with a loud voice, and gave up the ghost. Mar 15:37 And Jesus having uttered a loud cry, yielded the spirit,
Why do you teach us that the New Testament is wrong? -------------------------
In my view Jesus is God and God did die, THERE YOU ARE - your satan must be so proud of you – you preach God is dead
Why do you teach us that the New Testament is wrong? ------------------------
D"I imagine it is difficult to be a spiritual Christian – if you deny the spirit R" Word game Dave. Either the word "ruwach" means one meaning or it meaning two meanings? It means spirit – no more no less
Spirit - It means spirit – no more no less God’s spirit Evil Spirits Demon Spirits Man’s spirit It means spirit – no more no less
Why do you teach us that the New Testament is wrong? ------------------------
D"Act 19:6 And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Spirit came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied. R" How come public miracles do not happen today so easily as laying hands on people in prayer? WOW Robert – there is so much all around you – stop denying it
Why do you teach us that the New Testament is wrong? Why do you teach that God cannot work in your life today? Is it because your god is dead? ---------------------------
Stop making this mean two kinds of baptism, one is biological and the other a spirit baptism. Paul says there is the baptism of John – which is only water Paul says there is the Baptism of the Holy Spirit
Why do you teach us that the New Testament is wrong? ---------------------------
Pride and SIN blocks the presence of GOD, thus creating umbra shadows, where little of GOD's power exists. REJECTED – you can be a prideful as you want – God can reach down and throw in into the belly of a fish if He wants - Jonah God can reach down and pull you into heaven for a talk – Paul
Why do you teach us that the New Testament is wrong? Why do you teach that you can resist God’s Will? --------------------------
This is why there are two comforters, the HS and Jesus CHRIST bring the power of the Father to humans. TRINITY - One God - two hands - Left Hand (feminine) + Right Hand (masculine) TRINITY – One God – two hands – spirit and image TRINITY – One God – two hands – Holy Spirit and Christ
You told Dave that the Jewish idea of two hands was pagan. You even declared the concept was a Hellenistic corruption of your pure torah ------------------------
D"2Co 5:8 We are confident, I say, and prefer rather to be absent from the body and at home with the Lord. Pretend there is no spirit – or LIFE outside of the body R" I see, you twist the context of faith into a spirit body... Explain how you can absent from your body
when you walk by faith Dave, you are not following your body and your bodies experience. Explain how you can absent from your body
Why do you teach us that the New Testament is wrong? Please explain why out of body experiences are mythical? -------------------------
I do agree with Dave that Robert thinks it a sport to damn Christianity.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 25, 2022 17:13:16 GMT -5
Greetings Dillon
I am glad you are reading along.
This is your first and largest post to date.
However because of time considerations, a debate over truth should be limited to one topic at a time.
We should discuss our discussions of that topic until the topic is resolved with one of us agreeing with the other side and thus one view of the discussion is falsified.
That is how a science discussion works, contrary to Masonic belief. Dillon you presented ten different topics here? What am I supposed to do? Answer all ten, than you discussion your discussions with all ten until we end up with a huge post?
I am happy to discuss any topic you have Dillon or Dave has, but it must be one topic at a time. Until we resolve the topic and break discussions so we end up agreeing with that person, I go to your side or you go to my side.
The reason why process is not working is because Dave refuses to discuss the discussions and thus we never resolve anything. We did resolve one topic though....
Ezekiel 28 similes of humans sin and cherub sin. Dave chooses to ignore the discussion, so the topic closed.
However once you close a topic, all the other topics related to it are changed in view Either the entire torah is inspired or it's not inspired. Dave listed some bastard texts as he terms it, so I get the impression the torah is not all inspired.
I find the problem is about fuzzy translations rather than the Hebrew not being inspired. The Hebrew is inspired, all of it. The Greek less so, ie NT because it is a translation of the Hebrew into Greek. But we have a HS tutor to make us discern truth, so the latter rain NT is just as important as the former rain OT. Both teach truth about Jesus our Saviour.
Now if you wish to discuss one topic question, I am happy to comply. Until we falsify our discussions and break our opinion of that topic. We must end up on one side or the other side, not leave the topic unresolved? Am I clear on how a science discovery of truth works?
Now this process is difficult with Dave, because his source of inspiration does not come from sola scriptoria, but from the Hellenized Gnostic edit of Hebrew torah as I am led to believe. He uses a larger source of books than I do, making the problems of debating discussions harder. If I make a hypothesis: Is the book of Enoch inspired?
The discussions we had over this book.
The conclusion is the book of Enoch is NOT inspired.
Therefore any writing clinging to this book is also falsified.
If I make a hypothesis: Did God create archons ? The discussion we have are over Moses torah verses the Gnostic torah. The Moses torah or other prophets in Moses collection of writings do not speak of archons as created. Therefore the term "SHAD" is a function term, not a created creature term. It means "breast or milk". So in order to seek whom these creatures are we have to go looking elsewhere, as there are only 2 verses using "Shedim" in tne OT. and plenty in the NT. but not once is the term explained as a creature created. Hence we have a problem.
We know "messengers" warred in heaven, so perhaps the "messengers" first lived in heaven long ago?
We know the only mention of creature created in heaven are the "cherub", and that according to Ezekiel 28, the cherub sinned. Hence I find this is the only answer to these messengers at war, some angels sinned in the past.
However Dave ignores the study and refuses to discuss the simile.
Once you refuse to discuss , the topic is unresolved. And the person discussing with you refuses to go over to your side, not because of logic but because he is stubborn and too proud to admit defeat over the discussions at hand.
I too have gone over to Dave's discussions once.
Hypothesis: Is darkness an example of RA?
Discussions went until Rob lost.
ANd I went over Dave's view, that darkness is an example of RA, SO not all the time have I attacked just for sport as your claim, sometimes I went over to Daves view of topics.
Another topic : Hypothesis: Is RA natural or a result of SIN? Dave sees RA as natural, Rob sees RA as a consequence of SIN. The debate has never been resolved. The reason why we refuse to resolve is our world view defend the debate and we mock and change topics, hoping to bag the other guy instead.
Now I have presented fairly how science discovery and debates work, and examples of both of us going to other sides, I am not aware of any discussion where Dave when over to my side? He sees my attempts as 8th grade childish, tongue in cheek. As you read previous posts we do go very deep at times, even discovering that Hebrew has words with opposite meanings, and Dave agreed, calling this some fancy term. Now if one says I am not serious in your discussions, than the discussion process is over, and the need to win over the other is no longer possible, hence the discussions is not longer worth while.
I remember once debating a JW, the topic was is parousia a term meaning literal presence or spiritual presence.
The JW pushed for spiritual presence. Rob pushed for literal presence. So I went to a scholar outside my church, an Anglican if I remember and asked him. He got his 1870 Epiglott written by JW and looked is up, literal presence.
So when they came again, I said this fact, but they said OH our older epiglott is error... OH I said really? And that allows you to continue to present truth?
Dave tried to find one error in Mrs White our prophet. But I have yet to find any errors in her messages she wrote from God. Some like coal seams is hard to falsify because the evidence is difficult to collect. I have studied over 30 words of Ellen White against the meaning Jeff benner presents and find she agrees 100% of the time, that on the balance of probabilities I find her words inspired, she writes Hebrew meanings in her English. Multiple 30 factorial and you get a large probability.
I have done the same to Luther and I get a lesser result, mostly due to a lack of published material.
I cannot study Gnostic words because the original words cannot be studied, nor are electronically allow searching with interlinear English. So the topic is a mystery and cannot be verified.
I also cannot study hebrew prefix or suffux as the electronic searches are limited, hence my studies remain child like with Hebrew stem words only.
Now does all all sound like a person merely attacking one? Or am I serious about my search for truth?
Shalom Dillion
|
|
|
Post by Dave on Aug 25, 2022 20:43:38 GMT -5
However because of time considerations, a debate over truth should be limited to one topic at a time. What a cop out – you are the one that cannot stay on topic – give no answers – so you are the one who has spread the discussion into many topics at the same time. You refuse to answer, you just post new questions on a different topic and move on without giving a definitive answer
We should discuss our discussions of that topic until the topic is resolved with one of us agreeing with the other side and thus one view of the discussion is falsified.
Then at least answer why you teach to others that the New Testament is in error and can be ignored. Yet you call yourself a Christian
That is how a science discussion works, contrary to Masonic belief. No one is discussing Masonic beliefs – just another sidetrack away from answering direct question
Dillon you presented ten different topics here? What am I supposed to do? Answer all ten, than you discussion your discussions with all ten until we end up with a huge post? You have had 3 years to answer these question – when will you start?
I am happy to discuss any topic you have Dillon or Dave has, but it must be one topic at a time. Until we resolve the topic
Then at least answer why you teach to others that the New Testament is in error and can be ignored. Yet you call yourself a Christian
The reason why process is not working is because Dave refuses to discuss the discussions and thus we never resolve anything. BULL SHIT – I have answered all of your question – straight forward and honestly
Ezekiel 28 similes of humans sin and cherub sin. Dave chooses to ignore the discussion, so the topic closed. It is only closed – because precept upon precept, line upon line you cannot support your doctrine with scripture – so you call it closed There are 23+49 verse about your satan – NONE OPPOSE GOD But you refuse to see it – so you call the discussion closed – so you do not have to admit your folly
However once you close a topic, all the other topics related to it are changed in view YES - look at how your satan beliefs have altered all of your theology
Either the entire torah is inspired or it's not inspired. Dave listed some bastard texts as he terms it, so I get the impression the torah is not all inspired. STOP MISSREPRESENTING ME AND OTHERS – MR HONEST The 16 bastered verses all pertain to the agl/NT
Why you teach to others that the New Testament is in error and can be ignored. Yet you call yourself a Christian
Now if you wish to discuss one topic question, I am happy to comply. Why you teach to others that the New Testament is in error and can be ignored. Yet you call yourself a Christian
Now this process is difficult with Dave, because his source of inspiration does not come from sola scriptoria, Your only argument it to attack the source
If I make a hypothesis: Is the book of Enoch inspired? Your only argument it to attack the source
The conclusion is the book of Enoch is NOT inspired. Therefore any writing clinging to this book is also falsified. Jud 1:14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,
Why you teach to others that the New Testament is in error and can be ignored. Yet you call yourself a Christian Why are you afraid to even read the prophesy of Enoch – do you doubt the 2nd coming?
If I make a hypothesis: Did God create archons ? The discussion we have are over Moses torah verses the Gnostic torah. NO such thing as a Gnostic Torah -stop making imaginary you crap Col 1:16 – made by Him for Him Why you teach to others that the New Testament is in error and can be ignored. Yet you call yourself a Christian
We know the only mention of creature created in heaven are the "cherub", and that according to Ezekiel 28, the cherub sinned. Hence I find this is the only answer to these messengers at war, some angels sinned in the past. However Dave ignores the study and refuses to discuss the simile. NOW YOU ARE JUST LYING – Mr Honest There are 23+49 verses with scripture about your satan – we went through each and every verse In reach and evey verse your satan was a servant of the Lord opposing man You refuse to acknowledge it – you refuse to discuss it – you pretend it is my reluctance NOW YOU ARE JUST LYING – Mr Honest
Another topic : Hypothesis: Is RA natural or a result of SIN? Dave sees RA as natural, Rob sees RA as a consequence of SIN. The debate has never been resolved.
Why do you deny ahl/OT scripture Isa 45:5 I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me: I girded thee, though thou hast not known me: Isa 45:6 That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none beside me. I am the LORD, and there is none else. Isa 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.
Dave tried to find one error in Mrs White our prophet. But I have yet to find any errors in her messages she wrote from God. Some like coal seams is hard to falsify because the evidence is difficult to collect. YOU STOP ANSWEREING - and change the subject There are 50 contridictions still waiting for you – we never got past 6 or 8 when you stopped answering
I also cannot study hebrew prefix or suffux as the electronic searches are limited, hence my studies remain child like with Hebrew stem words only. You play word games – so you can change the meaning of scripture
|
|
|
Post by Dillon on Aug 25, 2022 22:52:34 GMT -5
Greetings Dillon However because of time considerations, a debate over truth should be limited to one topic at a time. Dillon you presented ten different topics here? What am I supposed to do? Answer all ten, than you discussion your discussions with all ten until we end up with a huge post? You could be considerate enough to answer at least one question! But you cannot even do that.Dave tried to find one error in Mrs White our prophet. But I have yet to find any errors in her messages she wrote from God. As I said, I have been reading along. It is obvious why I have never heard any Seventh Day Adventist teaching before. All I admit, is that my grandparents were Jewish. Satan has always been and angel of the lord doing God’s will; and devils lure you into temptation and error. When I churched, it was the Church of Christ, mostly because it was local. There is only one God and he is sovereign. No one can oppose God, the very idea is arrogant delusion. Man is a spirit. Man will enter heaven as a spirit. The heavens are filled with men and angels alike and they can all see us here on earth. There is a resurrection of the body, later, after the end times. We have had discussion about reincarnation and the conclusions were always; Elijah is coming back into a new and possibly better body, therefore, it is scriptural. Then someone will say, the resurrection is a type of reincarnation, therefore, it is scriptural. The Jewish idea of God being fair, speaks to me. So the idea of a ‘do over’ as Dave calls it, only seems fair to me. As for Dave’s archon, I never heard of them until Dave. The Church of Christ taught the principalities, devils just out of our sight. Eric did two tours in Iraq, up close and personal. He would tell you that the Arabs strongly believe in spirit demons. He would also tell you that allah describes himself as the satan deceiver and every Arab would agree. Eric thought Dave was closer to reality than church. Because of Dave, I bought my own Nag Hammadi. It is hard to read and seems strange. Some of it is right on and some of it is too complicated for me, over my head. But Eric would tell stories of telling Jokes overseas. Tell a Hebrew joke and no one in English understands the humor. Tell an English joke to and Arab and they just don’t get it. Read anything in English written 500 years ago and you wouldn’t understand much. So a multiple language pass through translation by lousy translators should not be ejected just because it is different. As for Christian beliefs, Dave sound just like every other preacher I have ever heard preaching the same Christianity I have ever heard. You are so opposite always, as a fellow Christian, even I wonder how that is possible, unless you are just being argumentative over scripture because you think it fun.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2022 22:42:14 GMT -5
D"you just post new questions on a different topic and move on without giving a definitive answer R" Oh I am so sorry, I didn't know I do this,
For now on I will stick to one discussion at a time until the discussion is resolved than.
We should discuss our discussions of that topic until the topic is resolved with one of us agreeing with the other side and thus one view of the discussion is falsified.
I will also do this at I have posted to you already.
D"Then at least answer why you teach to others that the New Testament is in error and can be ignored. R" I have never said that, is this a question you wish to discuss?
D"You have had 3 years to answer these question – when will you start? R" Pardon, historical accounts of baptism of the HS was raised two post ago, not 3 yrs ago?
RP" The reason why process is not working is because Dave refuses to discuss the discussions and thus we never resolve anything. D" BULL SHIT – I have answered all of your question – straight forward and honestly R" I didn't say you have answered my questions, I said you haven't discussed my discussions fully so that we have never resolved anything?
Can't you read a writers sentences correctly?
A science method of discovering truth is pose a question as a hypothesis, than discuss the discussions back and forth until we resolve to a single conclusion we MUST BOTH agree upon.
That is how a science method of discovery works.
Answering a discussion with a pithy remark is not a discussion or the other person's discussion. Sometimes you do this discussing idea, most times you are brevity Dave.
D"It is only closed – because precept upon precept, line upon line you cannot support your doctrine with scripture – so you call it closed R" If you wish to raise this you should have raised it during the discussion not afterwards like you do now.
D"The 16 bastered verses all pertain to the agl/NT R" so does this mean only the NT has possible errors than?
The OT is totally inspired?
Notice the emotional burst, I said Dave "so I get the impression the torah is not all inspired."I am not misrepresenting you at all, if only the NT has some probable errors, than my words do not misrepresent you at all.
D"Why you teach to others that the New Testament is in error and can be ignored. R" You just said "The 16 bastered verses all pertain to the agl/NT" than you pose to me why I " teach to others that the New Testament is in error " when you just admitted this yourself?
I have not ever said the NT was in error? Why do you assume this?
Maybe some fuzzy translations, but never have I said the NT has errors?
D"Why you teach to others that the New Testament is in error and can be ignored. R" You asked me this three time already? What specifically are you asking? what errors have I said?
D"Jud 1:14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints, R" Jude is quoting oral torah, not written torah, and therefore not from a written scroll such as the scroll of Enoch? Is this is a discussion you wish to discuss? Y/N?
D"Why you teach to others that the New Testament is in error and can be ignored. R" Four times you ask the same question? What errors are you talking about?
D"NO such thing as a Gnostic Torah R" Torah means "teachings" Surely one can call the Hellenized writings of long ago "Gnostic teachings" if you elevate these teaching to the same level as the Hebrew teachings, when you quote Gnostic side by side the Hebrew torah.
D" (1) NO such thing as a Gnostic Torah - (2) stop making imaginary you crap (3) Col 1:16 – made by Him for Him (4) Why you teach to others that the New Testament is in error and can be ignored. (5) Yet you call yourself a Christian R" Here is a good example, what do these 5 points have to do with each other in a discussion? Obviously by writing the term "Gnostic torah" I am making a poetic idiom, is this imaginary or crap as Dave suggests? What does (3) go to do with this discussion? no idea
What has (4) go to do this this as well?
Point (5) is a mocking outburst.
R" you elevate these teaching to the same level as the Hebrew teachings, when you quote Gnostic side by side the Hebrew torah, therefore I am correct to quote this idiom to you, it is valid.
D"In reach and evey verse your satan was a servant of the Lord opposing man R" OK let's test this idea
Dave's hypothesis : Is the HEY-Satan a servant of the Lord opposing man?
Introduction: The word "satan" in Hebrew means "adversary" or "opposer" both mean the same thing. The prefix "hey" refer to "The Opposer" as some creature who opposes.
Discussion:
Nu 22:22 God's messenger is opposing Balaam on the road.
R" God does oppose humans.
God sent the messenger to oppose Balaam.
The messenger is a servant of the Lord because the messenger must be sinless in character.
Question" Can a messenger be a servant if He is sinning? Well Balaam is sinning?
Nu 22:32 ..God's messenger went to oppose Balaam because he is perverse ..
R" God opposes this human because he is sinful, so in this case God compels the sinning human to be a servant of the Lord just long enough to bless Israel, rather than oppose Israel with a curse.
Does this mean Balaam is a permanent servant of the Lord? No, Balaam goes back to sinning after his blessing over Israel is over.
1Sa 29:4 lest in the battle he be an opposer to us: R" A human can oppose other humans
2Sa 19:22 R" A human can oppose other humans
1Ki 5:4 God energizes me without opposers or "ra".
R" God doesn't send opposers to humans "normally"
1Ki 11:14 God sent an opposer to Solomon R" God doesn't send opposers to humans , unless the humans sin first as a choice
Notice the verses before
1Ki 11:11 Wherefore the LORD said unto Solomon, Forasmuch as this is done of thee, and thou hast not kept my covenant and my statutes, which I have commanded thee, I will surely rend the kingdom from thee,
So when a servant is sinning GOD sends in the opposer as an agent for further sinning. Question" Does this sort of thing happen every time sin is chosen by the creature?
1Ki 11:23 1Ki 11:25 1Ch 21:1 And THE-opposer stood up against Israel. So when a servant is sinning GOD sends in the opposer as an agent for further sinning.
So does this mean David sinned first and than God allowed the opposer to be an agent for further sinning?
------------------------------
Job 1:6 THE-opposer comes to a meeting with God Question: Why is THE-opposer at this meeting?
Job 1:7 And the LORD said unto Satan, Whence comest thou? Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it.
This suggests the opposer is allowed to come at times to give account of his dealings a prince of the earth, walking up and down upon the earth.
It also suggests the prince (as Jesus calls this creature) is a king with a kingdom called earth.
Job 1:8 This verse asks the opposer have you considered my servant Job. Here we find the opposer cannot be a servant, because He is not termed this in this dialogue.
Is there any verse of "ebed" near the term "satan" ? none I can think of?
God asks the opposer about Job who is perfectly complete in Salvation.
Job 1:9 Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, Doth Job fear God for nought? If the opposer was God's servant, why does the servant attack God's declaration that Job is perfectly saved by His hedging grace? And the hedging process is a hedge to ward off opposers and attackers on Job, who would these agents be? And since Job is a human on the kingdom of earth under the prince termed opposer, than the servant of the Lord should treat Job with respect, as a normal servant / prince would, but this servant doesn't do this. He asks God to remove the hedge so the opposer can attack Job.
That does not make the opposer, only opposing man, but also opposing God.
Why? Because God has to remove His hedge.
Because the opposer challenged God's hedging process.
Question: Is the opposer intentionally designed to oppose man, thus do the dirty work of the Lord in tempting humans to sin?
Job 1:12 And the LORD said unto Satan, Behold, all that he hath is in thy power; only upon himself put not forth thine hand. So Satan went forth from the presence of the LORD.
Here God limits the opposer to not kill Job himself, and it seems the opposer obeys and does everything else to Job's family, killing everything very quickly using human agencies for the Opposer's dirty work.
Job 2:3 And the LORD said unto Satan, ....and still he holdeth fast his integrity, although thou movedst me against him, to destroy him without cause.
This verse suggests to me that the Opposer opposed Job and destroyed all Job had without reason, and this destruction did not come from God Himself, even though God allowed the opposer to express his own free power, so the opposer did.
So if the opposer is given free rein, what does the Opposer do? He destroys and kills and makes everything dead, void and formless.
Does this action also oppose the character of God Himself? To me it does.
Job 2:6 And the LORD said unto Satan, Behold, he is in thine hand; but save his life.
In yet another excuse the opposer suggests Job will curse God if Job is tortured, and yet God allows this senseless wounding of Job to occur, if Ghod knows all things, why does God allow it? Not for Job's sake? But for the opposers sake? The opposer thinks that that having another go at Job will make Job wicked again.
Question: Who tries to make Job wicked before He sought salvation? The opposer did. This serious presentation proves the opposer is no friend of the Lord.
If the opposer was God's servant, why the opposing of God over His hedging process?
If the opposer was God servant, why the need to limit His powers to stop killing Job? Obviously the opposer can and does kill humans normally, but doesn't because God prevents this. ------------------------
Ps 109:6 ¶ Set thou a wicked man over him: and let Satan stand at his right hand. Why is a wicked man established with the opposer on his right hand?
Zec 3:1 ¶ And he shewed me Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of the LORD, and Satan standing at his right hand to resist him.
If Joshua is functioning as a high priest and the opposer is standing on Joshua's right hand to oppose him, than the opposer is trying to make Joshua wicked again, not declared righteous as all high priests have to be. In Job, the opposer tries to get Job to become wicked, and curse God.
In Ps 109:6, the opposer naturally make the human wicked, and stands at the humans right hand.
Zec 3:2 And the LORD said unto Satan, The LORD rebuke thee, O Satan; even the LORD that hath chosen Jerusalem rebuke thee: is not this a brand plucked out of the fire?
God rebukes the claim of the opposer to make Joshua wicked, and declares Joshua righteous. is this NOT a human plucked from the fires of salvation?
Question: is the-opposer intentionally established as a prosecutor, to oppose man's right to salvation?
Isa 55:1 ¶ Ho, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters, and he that hath no money; come ye, buy, and eat; yea, come, buy wine and milk without money and without price.
Salvation is free, it come without cost, and therefore without prosecutors intentionally preventing your salvation from happening.
Now these are the verses using "satan" in the OT, what about verses that use "satan" in the NT?
Well we have a problem as Dave think "Satanas" is a different word mean to "satan" in the Greek.
I will stop here and allow you to discuss within my discussions. ------------------------------------------
We will limit our discussion here on this opposer topic
Shalom Dave
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Greetings Dillon
So glad that you write, and I admire your courage and convictions.
You have never heard of SDA before and I have never heard of Gnostic before.
SO all your grandparents are Jewish, how nice, no wonder my words seem strange to you.
It would be not right to take away your Jewish heritage my friend. I pray God judges you by the light you live up to, we can expect nothing more, and this is fair for us all.
You mention you have never heard of archons before, and me too, Dave was the first to bring these creatures up.
If I come across as different to you ways of living, I apologize.
I like Dave because he is creative and a prepper, just like me, and he avoids vaccines like I do. We have a lot in common, we both love posting long posts to each other, that alone makes us friends, even if we disagree?
I like his snowy home and his wind generator and his can do fix it attitude. He has a wonderful ministry that is so welcome and inviting. I imagine you both are great friends.
No I am not argumentative, in a social context I am shy and very quiet. If I ever came to visit you and Dave, I would probably not say much at all, and just look and praise what I see. I am a writer, not a speaker, and socially aloof from people, Not that I cannot talk, I just find it awkward to do so. No arguing over scripture is not fun, because salvation is serious and nobody wants to be deceived and lost. Just the other day I met a woman speaking for over an hour about God, and mineral salt, and chem trails and this and that. The great reset, and flat earth and more and more. After a while I stopped talking and listened in silence and said nothing. And left. My wife continued to chat to her another hour while I sat in the car. Since my numerous posts with Dave, I am learning witnessing to others is not a fruitful as it should be, because we are all stubborn to our own world view, so it makes you wonder why bother witnessing in the first place?
At least we meet together on the judgement hall with Jesus, you can't say I didn't help you, and if Dave is right, that He didn't help me, we are thorough and serious in our gnosis of the Lord, as we both see this function of salvation. Thanks for the kind post Dillon. Enjoy your day and your walking with the Lord Jesus
Shalom
|
|
|
Post by Dave on Aug 26, 2022 23:54:01 GMT -5
For now on I will stick to one discussion at a time until the discussion is resolved than. D"Then at least answer why you teach to others that the New Testament is in error and can be ignored. R" I have never said that, is this a question you wish to discuss?
More Robert double speak – Mr Honest
D"You have had 3 years to answer these question – when will you start? R" Pardon, historical accounts of baptism of the HS was raised two post ago, not 3 yrs ago? BULL SHIT Mr Honest - you have never accepted the spirit
RP" The reason why process is not working is because Dave refuses to discuss the discussions and thus we never resolve anything. D" BULL SHIT – I have answered all of your question – straight forward and honestly R" I didn't say you have answered my questions, I said you haven't discussed my discussions fully so that we have never resolved anything? Can't you read a writers sentences correctly?
I have no interest in your twist of scripture so that satan is the god of evil
Answering a discussion with a pithy remark is not a discussion or the other person's discussion. Why try answering with an answer
Sometimes you do this discussing idea, most times you are brevity Dave. I quote scripture to you - sorry if you do not understanbd it
D"It is only closed – because precept upon precept, line upon line you cannot support your doctrine with scripture – so you call it closed R" If you wish to raise this you should have raised it during the discussion not afterwards like you do now. [ Who gave up on this thread? Me or you?
D"Why you teach to others that the New Testament is in error and can be ignored. R" You just said "The 16 bastered verses all pertain to the agl/NT" than you pose to me why I " teach to others that the New Testament is in error " when you just admitted this yourself? So you admit – you do not support the New testament – yet call yourself a Christian
I have not ever said the NT was in error? Why do you assume this? NOPE – just quote you back to you and watch you NOT ANSWER
D"Why you teach to others that the New Testament is in error and can be ignored. R" You asked me this three time already? What specifically are you asking? what errors have I said? You are really so intelligent that you do not know the discussion you are involved in JUST MORE Robert double speak so you do not have to answer
D"Jud 1:14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints, R" Jude is quoting oral torah, not written torah, and therefore not from a written scroll such as the scroll of Enoch? Is this is a discussion you wish to discuss? Y/N? BULL SHIT – Enoch was a full part of the Temple Scrolls and Dead Sea Scrolls at the time of Jesus Christ Why are you trying to change the subject – WITHOUT ANSWERING THE QUESTIONS PUT TO YOU?
D"Why you teach to others that the New Testament is in error and can be ignored. R" Four times you ask the same question? What errors are you talking about?
You teach – God died the Second Death – from which there is no return Only your satan remains You Teach – no spirit life after death – but Christ went to hades to preach to the lost Either the New Testament is wrong – or you are
D" (1) NO such thing as a Gnostic Torah - (2) stop making imaginary you crap (3) Col 1:16 – made by Him for Him (4) Why you teach to others that the New Testament is in error and can be ignored. (5) Yet you call yourself a Christian R" Here is a good example, what do these 5 points have to do with each other in a discussion? See – you cannot read English and make sense of what is written
(4) Why you teach to others that the New Testament is in error and can be ignored. You teach that - (3) Col 1:16 – made by Him for Him – is error – cannot happen – you would never allow your god to do it
What does (3) go to do with this discussion? no idea What has (4) go to do this this as well? Why you teach to others that the New Testament is in error and can be ignored.
D"In reach and evey verse your satan was a servant of the Lord opposing man R" OK let's test this idea We did long ago - R" If you wish to raise this you should have raised it during the discussion not afterwards like you do now.
Who gave up on this thread? Me or you? ------------------------------
Job 1:6 THE-opposer comes to a meeting with God Question: Why is THE-opposer at this meeting? Because he is heaven prosecutor - DUH
Here God limits the opposer to not kill Job himself, and it seems the opposer obeys AND this prove your satan disobeys and opposes God – how? ------------------------
Ps 109:6 ¶ Set thou a wicked man over him: and let Satan stand at his right hand. Why is a wicked man established with the opposer on his right hand? Because he is heaven prosecutor - DUH
Zec 3:1 ¶ And he shewed me Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of the LORD, and Satan standing at his right hand to resist him. Because he is heaven prosecutor – DUH
If Joshua is functioning as a high priest and the opposer is standing on Joshua's right hand to oppose him, than the opposer is trying to make Joshua wicked again You just want to make everything evil To accuse Joshua if SIN - Because he is heaven prosecutor - DUH
In Job, the opposer tries to get Job to become wicked, and curse God. Didn’t work did it – so much for your idea of satan ruling all humanity
Zec 3:2 And the LORD said unto Satan, The LORD rebuke thee, O Satan; even the LORD that hath chosen Jerusalem rebuke thee: is not this a brand plucked out of the fire? God rebukes the claim of the opposer to make Joshua wicked, and declares Joshua righteous. is this NOT a human plucked from the fires of salvation? Don’t you believe in the Divine Pardon? – evidently not you preach the grave
Question: is the-opposer intentionally established as a prosecutor, to oppose man's right to salvation? Because he is heaven prosecutor - DUH
Now these are the verses using "satan" in the OT, what about verses that use "satan" in the NT? Well we have a problem as Dave think "Satanas" is a different word mean to "satan" in the Greek. I will stop here and allow you to discuss within my discussions.
I know you want to desperately change the subject – first you need to stop and catch up
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 27, 2022 5:51:56 GMT -5
D"Who gave up on this thread? Me or you? R" Hmm?
I will open it now, and we discuss until one of us goes to the other side ....
or the discussion is unresolved due to a lack of convincing discussion...
RP" Question: Why is THE-opposer at this meeting? D" Because he is heaven prosecutor - DUH R" The text doesn't say that?
What do we know of this "hey-satan" , not much from the OT sources.
There is no Hebrew word for "prosecutor" ? Jeff Benner yields no results. There is no verse that says the "hey-satan" is given any functional role such as a prosecutor? Discuss your evidence. -------------------
Consider my second reply to our discussion
Job 1:8 And the LORD said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil?
Does God say Job is completely perfect in his salvation process? Y/N
Does the "hey-satan" oppose God's declaration? Y/N
I will assume for now in this discussion you answer Yes to both questions. You say God intentionally chose an angel to become His prosecutor, so this "hey-satan" is a "good angel doing a bad job". His functional role is to prosecute humans of sin.
Question" A prosecutor does not cause harm to a human, as well as prosecute the human, that would be a conflict of interest, and a crime punishable by God. Do you agree that your prosecutor is actually guilty of crimes against humanity, and is not just a good angel doing the job of prosecuting humans over their sins?
-----------------
Job 1:9 The prosecutor asked "Doth Job fear God for nought?
Why would a prosecutor challenge God?
He should have presented some sinning's Job had that were overlooked? How could a prosecutor do that when God knows everything Job has ever done, even the sins He does tomorrow, no angel functioning as a prosecutor can read the future, so please explain the need for a prosecutor?
Maybe his role is just to make the judgement process look like a rubber stamp? Keep God honest?
But aren't there billions of angels recording every good and bad thing we do as humans already, just to keep God honest? Book or life,, Book of memories, maybe a book of sins recorded by angels? The Bible lacks deep details in this....? -------------------
Job 1:11 But put forth thine hand now, and touch all that he hath, Why doesn't the angel prosecutor ask God to send in His Shedim to tempt Job again....but there is no reference to this?
Isn't this going beyond a prosecutor's role?
--------------------------
Job 1:12 And the LORD said unto Satan, Behold, all that he hath is in thy power; only upon himself put not forth thine hand. What powers is suggested here, the prosecutor has? to harm Job, certainly not ?, that is a conflict of interest ? Is it not?
I do not see any prosecutor function here. Why is this angel seeking humans or shedim possessed humans to harm Job?
Why does this angel have this function to cause harm? A prosecutor is not a causer of harm, not his role?
-------------------------
OK now your turn to reply to my discussions
Shalom Dave.
|
|