Thomas... My Lord and my God

[Peterlag]

This is correct.

There is a similarity between physical death and spiritual death: both are a separation from the source of life, but they are not the same. You were talking to someone who was physically alive, but spiritually dead (as are the vast majority of humanity). One must be spiritually resurrected in Christ in order to be both physically and spiritually alive. If one dies physically while being spiritually dead, they go to Hell where they are eternally separated from God, the source of all life. If one dies physically while being spiritually alive, they go to Heaven to spend eternity with God.

Physical life and death are almost immaterial in Scripture, for the most part. It is spiritual death that is most often discussed, and it is spiritual death that is the most important.

Holy Smokes you believe in hell too? Are you Catholic? Cause if you are we are done with our conversation.

 

[Doug Brents]

Holy Smokes you believe in hell too? Are you Catholic? Cause if you are we are done with our conversation.

Nope, not catholic. But Scripture is very clear that there is a "lake of fire", a place of eternal torment and punishment, where Satan, his angels, and all those whose names are not written in the Book of Life will spend eternity. Call it Hell, call it whatever you like; it is very clear that it is a real (spiritual to be sure) place.

But I find it interesting that when you can't counter the truth in posts, you pick something in them way off topic on which to focus in order to take the conversation in a new direction.

 

[Peterlag]

Nope, not catholic. But Scripture is very clear that there is a "lake of fire", a place of eternal torment and punishment, where Satan, his angels, and all those whose names are not written in the Book of Life will spend eternity. Call it Hell, call it whatever you like; it is very clear that it is a real (spiritual to be sure) place.

But I find it interesting that when you can't counter the truth in posts, you pick something in them way off topic on which to focus in order to take the conversation in a new direction.

I do the same as you when I pick what to comment on and I'm still here but done with what we were talking about since I can't see us agreeing. You have very different views than I do. The word you often use is "clear" when you say the Scriptures are clear and then you post something that is not even mentioned in the Bible much less clear. Like "hell" where you confuse it with the "lake of fire" and then say it's clear. Like the trinity that's not taught anywhere and you say it's clear.

 

[Doug Brents]

I do the same as you when I pick what to comment on and I'm still here but done with what we were talking about since I can't see us agreeing.

You have one thing right: I am never going to agree with you when you disagree with Scripture.

You have very different views than I do. The word you often use is "clear" when you say the Scriptures are clear and then you post something that is not even mentioned in the Bible much less clear.

Yes, many things in Scripture are very clear. The fact that you have different thoughts, and then try to support them with twisted Scripture, doesn't change the truth in Scripture.

Like "hell" where you confuse it with the "lake of fire" and then say it's clear.

The lake of fire is hell. No, hell is not a word used in Scripture, but that is the commonly used word denoting the place of eternal punishment that is referred to in Revelation and other places in Scripture.

Like the trinity that's not taught anywhere and you say it's clear.

As has been demonstrated to you many times, the existence of the three persons of God is evident all through the NT. The fact that you hide from that truth, refusing to read/accept the passages which demonstrate that God is three parts, doesn't change that truth.

You come to the Scripture with a preconceived idea, and then you look for proof statements to support that idea. The right way to approach Scripture is to let it inform your ideas, and form your doctrine from what it says. Until your doctrine is in agreement with ALL of Scripture, you have a flawed doctrine.

 

[Peterlag]

You have one thing right: I am never going to agree with you when you disagree with Scripture.

Yes, many things in Scripture are very clear. The fact that you have different thoughts, and then try to support them with twisted Scripture, doesn't change the truth in Scripture.

The lake of fire is hell. No, hell is not a word used in Scripture, but that is the commonly used word denoting the place of eternal punishment that is referred to in Revelation and other places in Scripture.

As has been demonstrated to you many times, the existence of the three persons of God is evident all through the NT. The fact that you hide from that truth, refusing to read/accept the passages which demonstrate that God is three parts, doesn't change that truth.

You come to the Scripture with a preconceived idea, and then you look for proof statements to support that idea. The right way to approach Scripture is to let it inform your ideas, and form your doctrine from what it says. Until your doctrine is in agreement with ALL of Scripture, you have a flawed doctrine.

Here's the bottom line...

I never cared for the Catholic doctrine or the philosophy of its protestant sisters.

I cannot find one single biblical verse that clearly teaches that we should believe or confess that Jesus is God. Nor has there ever been a teaching on it anywhere in the Bible. A teaching... a whole paragraph or chapter. The Jews never saw it anywhere in the entire Old Testament nor anyone in the New Testament ever taught it. Trinitarians piece together statements that are scattered all over the Bible. They basically use bits and pieces of words and half verses along with their own human reasoning, imagination, speculation and assumptions as they pick one verse here, and another verse there, a hint here, and a clue there, and then they construct their "own God" which is the product of their own human thinking. This is why they cannot present one single biblical verse that clearly teaches that we should believe or confess that Jesus is God.

 

[mikesw]

Here's the bottom line...

I never cared for the Catholic doctrine or the philosophy of its protestant sisters.

I cannot find one single biblical verse that clearly teaches that we should believe or confess that Jesus is God. Nor has there ever been a teaching on it anywhere in the Bible. A teaching... a whole paragraph or chapter. The Jews never saw it anywhere in the entire Old Testament nor anyone in the New Testament ever taught it. Trinitarians piece together statements that are scattered all over the Bible. They basically use bits and pieces of words and half verses along with their own human reasoning, imagination, speculation and assumptions as they pick one verse here, and another verse there, a hint here, and a clue there, and then they construct their "own God" which is the product of their own human thinking. This is why they cannot present one single biblical verse that clearly teaches that we should believe or confess that Jesus is God.

Ah. You have cared for the heretical teachings and seek to promote those. That is quite an odd resistance to teachings that have been clear even in the 2nd century teachings -- and even to the Two Powers of Heaven debated among Jews by the first century. I wonder where you connect your beliefs into the history of Christianity.

 

[Runningman]

Ah. You have cared for the heretical teachings and seek to promote those. That is quite an odd resistance to teachings that have been clear even in the 2nd century teachings -- and even to the Two Powers of Heaven debated among Jews by the first century. I wonder where you connect your beliefs into the history of Christianity.

Let me introduce you to the Bible. It defines that one and only God as the Father. It's clear, explicit, and you deny it to your own judgement.

1 Cor. 8
4So about eating food sacrificed to idols: We know that an idol is nothing at all in the world, and that there is no God but one. 5For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as there are many so-called gods and lords), 6yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we exist. And there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we exist.

 

[Peterlag]

I never saw a trinity person answer my one little itty bitty question.

Not one out of all the debates I have seen on so many sites over the years. At best they say God did not have to tell us that. The question:

Where in the Bible does it say we should believe or confess that Jesus is God.

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.

 

[mikesw]

I never saw a trinity person answer my one little itty bitty question.

Not one out of all the debates I have seen on so many sites over the years. At best they say God did not have to tell us that. The question:

Where in the Bible does it say we should believe or confess that Jesus is God.

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.

I guess you would have to ask God in heaven, but you might not ever get there.