God's grace to forgive and transform is not conditioned to recognizing Jesus' deity, blood atonement or physical resurrection

Again, you attack the Apostles. The Apostles did not "twist" anything.

The Apostles followed the Septuagint and called Jesus κυριος (Lord) which is the Greek name for YHWH and Adonai. They did not use the name "Lord" (κυριος) for anyone besides Jesus and God the Father in the New Testament. While κυριος could be used culturally as a term of respect or authority, the Apostles specifically used "Lord" (κυριος) to indicate divine authority, reverence, or worship when referring to Jesus or God the Father.

For example, Peter addresses Jesus as "Lord" (κυριος) with the understanding of His divine nature, particularly after Jesus' resurrection (Acts 2:36). Similarly, "Lord"(κυριος) is also used in prayers addressed to God the Father (as in Acts 4:24). The Apostles reserve the title of κυριος (Lord) in its spiritual sense, for the divine alone, and there is no record of them calling any other human "Lord" in the same way as they did for Jesus and the Father.

As if that wasn't enough, Jesus explicitly declared himself "I Am" (John 8:58), the very name of the OT God (Ex 3:14). Also, John declared the Word (the Preincarnate Jesus) in John 1:1 as being God, translated from θεὸς in Greek and from Elohim in Hebrew.
All you folks ever put in front of me are bits and pieces of words and half verses that are scattered all over the Bible. Also there's no teaching on why God would come to the earth as a man. Such a concept accomplishes nothing. Romans says a man (Adam) caused sin to enter into the world, and also that a man would have to redeem it from sin. Some theologians teach that only God could pay for the sins of mankind, but the Bible specifically says that a man must do it. The book of Corinthians makes the same point Romans does when it says “For since by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead” (1 Corinthians 15:21).

If there is a trinity then why not just come out and say it? Why do we have to jump all over the Bible cutting and pasting pieces of words that are scattered all over the Bible? Why not just teach it? I know enough about how the Bible is written in the New Testament and in the Gospels to know if there was a trinity it would have been taught. The Gospels would have clearly said...


Verily, verily I say unto you that I am Jesus and I'm also God.

The Epistles would have writings like...

Yay, I Paul do testify that Jesus who is God came down from heaven to be a man for us. And we do know and testify that this same Jesus who you crucified is God. And so let us bow our knee to the one and only true God-Man Jesus Christ.

And yet there's nothing like that anywhere. Not in the Old or New Testament. Not even one complete verse like that.
 
All you folks ever put in front of me are bits and pieces of words and half verses that are scattered all over the Bible. Also there's no teaching on why God would come to the earth as a man. Such a concept accomplishes nothing. Romans says a man (Adam) caused sin to enter into the world, and also that a man would have to redeem it from sin. Some theologians teach that only God could pay for the sins of mankind, but the Bible specifically says that a man must do it. The book of Corinthians makes the same point Romans does when it says “For since by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead” (1 Corinthians 15:21).

If there is a trinity then why not just come out and say it? Why do we have to jump all over the Bible cutting and pasting pieces of words that are scattered all over the Bible? Why not just teach it? I know enough about how the Bible is written in the New Testament and in the Gospels to know if there was a trinity it would have been taught. The Gospels would have clearly said...


Verily, verily I say unto you that I am Jesus and I'm also God.

The Epistles would have writings like...

Yay, I Paul do testify that Jesus who is God came down from heaven to be a man for us. And we do know and testify that this same Jesus who you crucified is God. And so let us bow our knee to the one and only true God-Man Jesus Christ.

And yet there's nothing like that anywhere. Not in the Old or New Testament. Not even one complete verse like that.
The gospels would have the Father saying

"I'm the Father, your God, the one and only God."

Except the Father never said that did He ?

NO HE DID NOT.

Just like your false claim you made about Jesus with the same criteria.

next FALLACY

hope this helps !!!
 
All you folks ever put in front of me are bits and pieces of words and half verses that are scattered all over the Bible. Also there's no teaching on why God would come to the earth as a man. Such a concept accomplishes nothing. Romans says a man (Adam) caused sin to enter into the world, and also that a man would have to redeem it from sin. Some theologians teach that only God could pay for the sins of mankind, but the Bible specifically says that a man must do it. The book of Corinthians makes the same point Romans does when it says “For since by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead” (1 Corinthians 15:21).

If there is a trinity then why not just come out and say it? Why do we have to jump all over the Bible cutting and pasting pieces of words that are scattered all over the Bible? Why not just teach it? I know enough about how the Bible is written in the New Testament and in the Gospels to know if there was a trinity it would have been taught. The Gospels would have clearly said...


Verily, verily I say unto you that I am Jesus and I'm also God.

The Epistles would have writings like...

Yay, I Paul do testify that Jesus who is God came down from heaven to be a man for us. And we do know and testify that this same Jesus who you crucified is God. And so let us bow our knee to the one and only true God-Man Jesus Christ.

And yet there's nothing like that anywhere. Not in the Old or New Testament. Not even one complete verse like that.
God dwelling with man is all over the OT for those with EYES to see.

Zechariah 2:10

Sing and rejoice, O daughter of Zion: for, lo, I come, and I will dwell in the midst of thee, saith the LORD

Isaiah 12:6
Cry out and sing, O citizen of Zion, for great among you is the Holy One of Israel.”

Isaiah 9:6-7
For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given, and the government will be upon His shoulders. And He will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. / Of the increase of His government and peace there will be no end.

Isaiah 62:11
Behold, the LORD has proclaimed to the ends of the earth, “Say to Daughter Zion: See, your Savior comes! Look, His reward is with Him, and His recompense goes before Him.”

Isaiah 40:9
Go up on a high mountain, O Zion, herald of good news. Raise your voice loudly, O Jerusalem, herald of good news. Lift it up, do not be afraid! Say to the cities of Judah, “Here is your God!”

Micah 5:2
But as for you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, Too little to be among the clans of Judah, From you One will go forth for Me to be ruler in Israel. His goings forth are from long ago, From the days of eternity.”

Isaiah 7:14
Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin will be with child and give birth to a son, and will call Him Immanuel. (God with us )

Zephaniah 3:14-17
Sing for joy, O Daughter of Zion; shout aloud, O Israel! Be glad and rejoice with all your heart, O Daughter of Jerusalem! / The LORD has taken away your punishment; He has turned back your enemy. Israel’s King, the LORD, is among you; no longer will you fear any harm. / On that day they will say to Jerusalem: “Do not fear, O Zion; do not let your hands fall limp.

Zechariah 12:10
“And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and supplication. They will look on me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child, and grieve bitterly for him as one grieves for a firstborn son.

Revelation 1:7
Behold, He is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see Him—even those who pierced Him. And all the tribes of the earth will mourn because of Him. So shall it be! Amen.

Zechariah 14:5
And ye shall flee to the valley of the mountains; for the valley of the mountains shall reach unto Azal: yea, ye shall flee, like as ye fled from before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah: and the LORD my God shall come, and all the saints with thee.
 
Your reasoning aligns closely with that of Muslim scholars and their interpretations, as well as your re-interpretation of our Scriptures. Considering that you don’t even identify as a Christian, it begs the question-what exactly are you?
I’m a Baha’i, Johann
As for your appeal to @civic and @Administrator, accusing me of relying on ChatGPT is
I’m not accusing you. Please read my post again. If after reading it again you have questions about what I mean, please let me know

, especially since ChatGPT can easily refute and debunk your philosophical claims about our Scriptures.
ChatGPT is not designed or programmed to refute philosophical claims in any debate.

It’s no surprise that you want to ignore me, as I continue to expose your hidden tactics and your attempts to reinterpret MY Bible.
It is not YOUR Bible.
I have no hidden tactics.
 
Nice copy and Paste AI response.

But I'm simply pointing out that God/Allah/Tiānzhǔ (天主) is a not a "a Jew-hating cut-throat demon". You are free to promote the philosophies of whatever religious business you want.

I’m a Baha’i, Johann

I’m not accusing you. Please read my post again. If after reading it again you have questions about what I mean, please let me know


ChatGPT is not designed or programmed to refute philosophical claims in any debate.


It is not YOUR Bible.
I have no hidden tactics.
It seems your philosophical reasoning and arguments against the Scriptures are bearing fruit-and there are no real apologists present in the house, which has been strangely silent for the past few days.

J.
 
It seems your philosophical reasoning and arguments against the Scriptures are bearing fruit-and there are no real apologists present in the house, which has been strangely silent for the past few days.

J.

I knew who you were and the religious philosophies you have adopted and are promoting long before Pancho joined in the discussion Johann. There is no argument in any of my posts against Scriptures. Now the religious philosophy you have adopted and are promoting, that is a different story.
 
It seems your philosophical reasoning and arguments against the Scriptures are bearing fruit-and there are no real apologists present in the house, which has been strangely silent for the past few days.

J.
there is no apologist who can argue against the Divine Son. By trying one is by default arguing against God and the Scriptures.
 
Nice copy and Paste AI response.

But I'm simply pointing out that God/Allah/Tiānzhǔ (天主) is a not a "a Jew-hating cut-throat demon". You are free to promote the philosophies of whatever religious business you want.
Good morning, my brother

@Johann response was another example of an impulsive, thoughtless use of AI.
Allah is Arabic word to refer to The One and Only Almighty, All Merciful, All Wise, Eternal Being who is Creator and Sustainer of our lives.
The God of Jesus is The One and Only Almighty, All Merciful, All Wise, Eternal Being who is Creator and Sustainer of our lives.
So, Allah is the Arabic term to refer to the God and Father of Jesus.

There are hundreds or thousands of theologies about what God is and wants. But God is only One, regardless of our limited and flawed theologies.

The very fact that we keep exchanging views in this Forum using the word “God” is evidence that we accept that we all are talking about the same Being and worshiping the same God.
This question is for sectarian literalist evangelicals: Would we be debating about dogs in a Dog Forum with people who are convinced that dogs are birds? Wouldn’t it be a waste of time?
 
Last edited:
Good morning, my brother

@Johann response was another example of an impulsive, thoughtless use of AI.
Allah is Arabic word to refer to The One and Only Almighty, All Merciful, All Wise, Eternal Being who is Creator and Sustainer of our lives.
The God of Jesus is The One and Only Almighty, All Merciful, All Wise, Eternal Being who is Creator and Sustainer of our lives.
So, Allah is the Arabic term to refer to the God and Father of Jesus.

There are hundreds or thousands of theologies about what God is and wants. But God is only One, regardless of our limited and flawed theologies,
and a husband and wife are one, the church is one, the body of Christ is one, there is one faith, one gospel etc......

one doesn't mean a single person in the bible.

one can and does mean UNITY in many passages.

see below :

Indeed, `echadh (אחד) is the Hebrew word for "one", that is, the cardinal numeral "1". That is its main meaning. The semantic field is often expanded (as is the case in the English word "one"); you use the example "one flesh" in Genesis 2:24, and I think its clear that this meaning of unity (i.e., no more separate parts) is inherent in both English and Hebrew to a virtually equivalent degree. Having said this, there are a few places where we get an indication that in Hebrew the unity, or rather the uniqueness aspect of the unity of "one", is more pronounced and more significant than in English. For example, in Genesis 1:5 the "first" day is, literally from the Hebrew, "day one" (i.e., a really special day as the first one in the sequence), although the remaining days do have the ordinal numerals (second, third, fourth, etc.; this happens frequently in the O.T. with the number "one"). While this is not generally recognized today, this deference to "one" over "first" in such cases was clearly understood throughout scripture, for we find John in Revelation's account of the seven seals speaking of "seal one" instead of "the first seal" (whereas the remainder are again ordinals: second, third, fourth, etc.). And both Greek and Hebrew do have heavily used ordinals for "first" (protos [πρῶτος] and rishon [ראשון] respectively), so that there is a clear choice being made here, undoubtedly for emphasis.

The best parallels I can offer for this aspect of "one" in the sense of uniqueness are Job 23:13: "but He [the Lord] is unique [be-`echadh, באחד], and who can turn Him? NASB; Ezek.7:5 "a unique disaster" [ra'ah 'achath, רעה אחת]; and also 2Sam.7:23 (cf. 1Chron.17:21): "and who is like Your people, a unique [`echadh, אחד] nation on the earth". None of the versions do this special use of `echadh justice as far as I know, but this really is the correct way to translate the passage as the context shows. Even the BDB Hebrew lexicon, a superb instrument of scholarship which has yet to be equaled let alone replaced, does not quite "get" `echadh in this sense. There are many places in the scripture where "special/unique" is, in fact, the best translation for `echadh (like the "shema" for instance): "Hear O Israel, the Lord [is] our God; the Lord [is] unique" (Deut.6:4; cf. also Zech.14:7). That is to say, it is not just that there is only one God (which is not what the verse says at all, in any language). Our God is an absolutely unique God beyond comparison with anyone or anything (as only God in three Persons with absolute unity of purpose can be).

Since this idea of an undivided [special] unity is pretty much inherent in the whole notion of a single, uncorrupted integer ("one"), we don't need to push it, but I think this is where the translation you suggest of "united/composite one" in Genesis 2:24 may come from.https://ichthys.com/mail-Hebrew%20word%20for%20one.htm

For more on God's uniqueness and unity, see the following links:

For more on what the Bible has to say about marriage, you might have a look at the following:

 
there is no apologist who can argue against the Divine Son. By trying one is by default arguing against God and the Scriptures.
1Pe 3:15 But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:
1Pe 3:16 Having a good conscience; that, whereas they speak evil of you, as of evildoers, they may be ashamed that falsely accuse your good conversation in Christ.

This is what I mean.

J.
 
1Pe 3:15 But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:
1Pe 3:16 Having a good conscience; that, whereas they speak evil of you, as of evildoers, they may be ashamed that falsely accuse your good conversation in Christ.

This is what I mean.

J.
I know what you meant I was letting the readers know they are kicking against the pricks arguing against the deity of Christ.
 
Good morning, my brother

@Johann response was another example of an impulsive, thoughtless use of AI.
Allah is Arabic word to refer to The One and Only Almighty, All Merciful, All Wise, Eternal Being who is Creator and Sustainer of our lives.
The God of Jesus is The One and Only Almighty, All Merciful, All Wise, Eternal Being who is Creator and Sustainer of our lives.
So, Allah is the Arabic term to refer to the God and Father of Jesus.

There are hundreds or thousands of theologies about what God is and wants. But God is only One, regardless of our limited and flawed theologies.

The very fact that we keep exchanging views in this Forum using the word “God” is evidence that we accept that we all are talking about the same Being and worshiping the same God.
This question is for sectarian literalist evangelicals: Would we be debating about dogs in a Dog Forum with people who are convinced that dogs are birds? Wouldn’t it be a waste of time?

LOL, Indeed, it would be a waste of time.

Except perhaps there might be an actual Dog Lover on the forum that might be edified or encouraged to know there are others who don't believe dogs are birds.
 
LOL, Indeed, it would be a waste of time.

Except perhaps there might be an actual Dog Lover on the forum that might be edified or encouraged to know there are others who don't believe dogs are birds.
way off and there is no comparison just another fallacious argument.
 
So, Allah is the Arabic term to refer to the God and Father of Jesus.

There are hundreds or thousands of theologies about what God is and wants. But God is only One, regardless of our limited and flawed theologies.

The very fact that we keep exchanging views in this Forum using the word “God” is evidence that we accept that we all are talking about the same Being and worshiping the same God.
Incorrect. Muslim Arabs do not mean the "Father of Jesus" when they mention the name Allah. In fact Islam proclaims that it is shirk to say that God has a son. You've got it all wrong. There is no way that the Muslim Allah is the same God as the God of the Bible. It's back to the drawing board for Baha'i and all other heretics.
 
Incorrect. Muslim Arabs do not mean the "Father of Jesus" when they mention the name Allah. In fact Islam proclaims that it is shirk to say that God has a son. You've got it all wrong. There is no way that the Muslim Allah is the same God as the God of the Bible. It's back to the drawing board for Baha'i and all other heretics.
correct 2 different gods, 2 different prophets, 2 different ways of salvation, 2 different books of beliefs, 2 different sources for truth- the differences are as vast as the wide and narrow roads.
 
Incorrect. Muslim Arabs do not mean the "Father of Jesus" when they mention the name Allah. In fact Islam proclaims that it is shirk to say that God has a son. You've got it all wrong. There is no way that the Muslim Allah is the same God as the God of the Bible. It's back to the drawing board for Baha'i and all other heretics.
You appreciation is incorrect.
Muslims recognize the inspiration of the gospels and therefore the title of "Father" that Jesus gave to Allah.
What they believe, though, is that "Father" and "Son" are just symbolic titles, which in no way terms that convey a literal meaning.
More importantly, this does not apply only to the relationship of God and Jesus, but God and humans.
We are not literally "children of God" and God is not literally our "Father", inasmuch as He is not literally our "Mother".
It would be more appropriate, if we want to stick to more literal and objective language, to say we are his creatures and He is our Creator.

Do you believe that Jesus is the Lamb of God?
Literally, no.
Symbolically, yes.

In the same way, Jesus is not literally the Son of God, nor God is our Father.
We like to call God Father to emphasize his love, and because of the tradition we have received from the language used in the Bible.
I challenge you to start calling God "Our Mother"... let me know how you feel.
 
You appreciation is incorrect.
Muslims recognize the inspiration of the gospels and therefore the title of "Father" that Jesus gave to Allah.
What they believe, though, is that "Father" and "Son" are just symbolic titles, which in no way terms that convey a literal meaning.
More importantly, this does not apply only to the relationship of God and Jesus, but God and humans.
We are not literally "children of God" and God is not literally our "Father", inasmuch as He is not literally our "Mother".
It would be more appropriate, if we want to stick to more literal and objective language, to say we are his creatures and He is our Creator.

Do you believe that Jesus is the Lamb of God?
Literally, no.
Symbolically, yes.

In the same way, Jesus is not literally the Son of God, nor God is our Father.
We like to call God Father to emphasize his love, and because of the tradition we have received from the language used in the Bible.
I challenge you to start calling God "Our Mother"... let me know how you feel.
So Muslims can symbolically say that Allah has partners and associates. And Muslims can also symbolically say that each one of us possesses the same attributes that Allah possesses. Got it.
 
Back
Top Bottom