It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Holy Spirit is my Proof

page: 16
6
<< 13  14  15    17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 7 2011 @ 10:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by jmdewey60
 


Who said satan was dead? I said he has already been judged. This is what Christ said, not I. And you're wrong, David was "born in iniquity". Meaning he was born a sinner, just like all of us. Christ pre-existed the world and the Word says all things were created "by Him and for Him".

You didn't answer my question.. If Jesus tells the devil in the wilderness that man shall worship God alone then why does He not just allow but encourage people to worship Him? I've never said Jesus was the father, so i don't know why you mentioned that. Jesus is God the Son. He's not the Father and He's not the Holy Spirit. John declared Christ God, Peter does, Paul does, and Thomas. Christ Himself says He is the "Alpha and Omega" and the "Almighty" in Revelation 1:8, and in Revelation chapter 22 He specifically says "I Jesus" after referring to Himself yet again as the "Alpha and Omega".
I answered your question by explaining what Thomas was doing which was suddenly understanding what Jesus said earlier in his hearing that when you see him you have seen the Father.
David was a good person when he was young and that is a little weird I think to portray him otherwise. Why do you think God called David a man after His own heart? He did sin later on and the Bible talks about that. It never said he ever sinned outside of those few things. If there was some sort of loophole to where David was born sinful, Jesus escaped that loophole by being born from the immaculate conception.
Jesus taking part in creation is beside the point.
There is no mention of God the Son, in the Bible so I don't know why you bring that up.
All you are doing is repeating all the arguments I already refuted, without any further support for your earlier argument. Saying the same thing repeatedly does not prove it is true.
Why don't you try to come up with a counter argument to demonstrate how my interpretation is wrong?




posted on Aug, 7 2011 @ 11:36 PM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 



There is no mention of God the Son, in the Bible so I don't know why you bring that up.


Because I can read at a minimum 3rd grade level:


Jesus is "the Word" of God: (John 1:1-5,1:14)


"In the beginning was (Jesus), and (Jesus) was with God, and (Jesus) was God. 2 (Jesus) was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through (Jesus), and without (Jesus) was not any thing made that was made... And (Jesus) became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen (Jesus's) glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth."


All things were made by Jesus and for Jesus: (Colossians 1:16)


"For by Him (Jesus) all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through Him (Jesus) and for Him (Jesus)."


Err, wait, I thought the Lord created all things according to Nehemiah 9:6...


"You alone are the LORD. You made the heavens, even the highest heavens, and all their starry host, the earth and all that is on it, the seas and all that is in them. You give life to everything, and the multitudes of heavenworship you."


Even though Christ, the LORD, made the Earth and all that was in it, the world didn't recognize Him, (apparently some still don't). (John 1:10)


"He (Jesus) was in the world, and though the world was made through him (Jesus), the world did not recognize him (Jesus)."


Christ is God over all and worthy of all praise. (Romans 9:5)


"Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of Christ, who is God over all, forever praised! Amen."


All things came from and through God the Father. Wait, spoke too fast, all things came from and through Jesus Christ. (1 Corinthians 8:6)


"yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live."



All you are doing is repeating all the arguments I already refuted,


Stop right there. You didn't refute a single thing, you voiced your disagreement, and that's your right to do so. But that's pretty much it. The text speaks for itself.



posted on Aug, 8 2011 @ 12:05 AM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 

Christ is God over all and worthy of all praise. (Romans 9:5)
There are three other ways that can be translated.
“the Christ, who is over all, God blessed forever,” or “the Messiah. God who is over all be blessed forever!” or “the Messiah who is over all. God be blessed forever!”

Stop right there. You didn't refute a single thing, you voiced your disagreement, and that's your right to do so. But that's pretty much it. The text speaks for itself.
Then you have no counter argument to refute my claims so you are going to just quote more verses.




edit on 8-8-2011 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 8 2011 @ 01:43 AM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 



You didn't answer my question.. If Jesus tells the devil in the wilderness that man shall worship God alone then why does He not just allow but encourage people to worship Him?



posted on Aug, 8 2011 @ 08:24 AM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 



Then you have no counter argument to refute my claims so you are going to just quote more verses.


The Word of God doesn't need my help and commentary, it's the final authority is all disputes.
I do notice however, that you like to refer to your own thoughts rather than scripture a majority of the time.
edit on 8-8-2011 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 8 2011 @ 08:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by jmdewey60
 



You didn't answer my question.. If Jesus tells the devil in the wilderness that man shall worship God alone then why does He not just allow but encourage people to worship Him?
I explained the instance of Thomas. Do you have another example besides that?



posted on Aug, 8 2011 @ 09:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by jmdewey60

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by jmdewey60
 



You didn't answer my question.. If Jesus tells the devil in the wilderness that man shall worship God alone then why does He not just allow but encourage people to worship Him?
I explained the instance of Thomas. Do you have another example besides that?


Dozens actually, here are a sample:

Luke 4:8


"And Jesus answered and said unto him, Get thee behind me, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve."



"And, behold, there came a leper and worshipped him, saying, Lord, if thou wilt, thou canst make me clean." - Matthew 8:2

"While he spake these things unto them, behold, there came a certain ruler, and worshipped him, saying, My daughter is even now dead: but come and lay thy hand upon her, and she shall live." - Matthew 9:18

"Then they that were in the ship came and worshipped him, saying, Of a truth thou art the Son of God." -Matthew 14:33

"Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me." - Matthew 15:25

"Then came to him the mother of Zebedee's children with her sons, worshipping him, and desiring a certain thing of him." - Matthew 20:20

"And as they went to tell his disciples, behold, Jesus met them, saying, All hail. And they came and held him by the feet, and worshipped him." - Matthew 28:9

"And when they saw him, they worshipped him: but some doubted." - Matthew 28:17

"And when he was come out of the ship, immediately there met him out of the tombs a man with an unclean spirit...But when he saw Jesus afar off, he ran and worshipped him" - Mark 5:2, 6





So again, why was Jesus worshiped as God? Why did Jesus not rebuke people who worshiped Him? Why do angels rebuke humans who worship them? Jesus said only God is to be worshiped, Jesus accepted worship, therefore Jesus is God.





edit on 8-8-2011 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 8 2011 @ 10:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Joecroft
 


Yup that is what I was talking about.
Have you read the Secret Book of John yet?
Its a bit of a mind bender for me though LOL.

LOTZA LUV



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 04:48 PM
link   

So again, why was Jesus worshiped as God? Why did Jesus not rebuke people who worshiped Him? Why do angels rebuke humans who worship them? Jesus said only God is to be worshiped, Jesus accepted worship, therefore Jesus is God.



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 04:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

So again, why was Jesus worshiped as God? Why did Jesus not rebuke people who worshiped Him? Why do angels rebuke humans who worship them? Jesus said only God is to be worshiped, Jesus accepted worship, therefore Jesus is God.
You talking to me?
No rely necessary, seeing what verses you quoted.
Obviously nothing to do with your commentary.



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 05:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by jmdewey60

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

So again, why was Jesus worshiped as God? Why did Jesus not rebuke people who worshiped Him? Why do angels rebuke humans who worship them? Jesus said only God is to be worshiped, Jesus accepted worship, therefore Jesus is God.
You talking to me?
No rely necessary, seeing what verses you quoted.
Obviously nothing to do with your commentary.


Hey, you asked this:


Do you have another example besides that?


To which I included a short sample of dozens of situations where the Lord Jesus Christ not only accepted worship without rebuking people, but encouraged it. Why does Jesus not rebuke people who worship Him when He is the one that tells the devil that only God is to be worshiped and other instances when men worship angels the angels rebuke them saying "Do not worship me, i am a fellow servant."??

So why is this that the Lord doesn't rebuke worshipers when previously He maintained that only God was to be worshiped?



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 06:24 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 
Ok, I get you now.
Only God can be worshipped.
Before, I thought you were saying they were worshipping him as God.
So you are interpreting worship, any sort of worship, according to Jesus, being god-worship.
That's an opinion I do not share.



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 06:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 
Ok, I get you now.
Only God can be worshipped.
Before, I thought you were saying they were worshipping him as God.
So you are interpreting worship, any sort of worship, according to Jesus, being god-worship.
That's an opinion I do not share.




Jesus said only God is to be worshiped. Jesus didn't identify anything else we could worship. That's idolatry, the worship of anything other than the one true God.

So why did Jesus not rebuke people who worshiped Him?



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 06:47 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 
Again, an opinion which which I do not agree.
I don't want to be mean.
I said earlier that I don't think you are some sort of ringleader in this thing you have taken upon yourself. I had to think about it a bit and that is what I think, that you are more like an average person despite your posting name or whatever. I think in some places this sort of ideology is a bit of the norm, so again not what your screen name might imply.
You seem to be presenting yourself as if you were the innovator of this sort of non-religious belief, so I may have taken that seriously at some point and was probably harder on you than necessary.
But I am actually trying to be helpful and I don't hate you or even have bad feelings towards you. You are actually educating me into this philosophy beyond a point I would normally be interested in looking into.
It's not like it would not exist if not for you.
That being said, you need to differentiate between when someone is saying something original, and when they are quoting something someone else said a long time previously.
Just like when Jesus said, Know ye not that ye are gods? Jesus was not calling the scribes gods, but maybe only in a secondary way, but was quoting scripture to counter whatever they may have been misquoting, such as what Jesus was saying about himself.
In the case of the temptation in the wilderness, the devil was misquoting scripture and Jesus countered by properly quoting scripture. You don't take this as Jesus presenting a new definition of worship. I'm saying all this because it seems to be the Modus operandi of this philosophy, to confuse Old Testament scripture with NT scripture, without acknowledging it as being a quote. My advice is to face the reality that this thing really is a religion despite permeating several religions with slightly different names.

edit on 9-8-2011 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 07:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 
Again, an opinion which which I do not agree.


Which "opinion"? That Jesus didn't rebuke people who worshiped Him? He didn't, had He rebuked them it would be in the text. If worship of Jesus was wrong the Holy Spirit who inspired all scripture would make that known in the text that Jesus rebuked the worship of Him. What are you referring to as an opinion you don't agree with?



I said earlier that I don't think you are some sort of ringleader in this thing you have taken upon yourself. I had to think about it a bit and that is what I think, that you are more like an average person despite your posting name or whatever. I think in some places this sort of ideology is a bit of the norm, so again not what your screen name might imply.


My screename has nothing to do with Christianity, it's just a name for one thing. And the deity of Jesus has been affirmed since the first century and was codified at the Council of Nicea in 325 A.D., and technically not even then. His deity wasn't established at the council, but how to define His already accepted deity. The council was convened primarily to address the Aryan heresy that had crept up in the church. So yes, it's a "bit of the norm", it's historical orthodox Christianity.


You seem to be presenting yourself as if you were the innovator of this sort of non-religious belief, so I may have taken that seriously at some point and was probably harder on you than necessary.


I'm lost there, I've never claimed to be the innovator or portrayed myself to be of any philosophy. You'd have to further explain that.


But I am actually trying to be helpful and I don't hate you or even have bad feelings towards you. You are actually educating me into this philosophy beyond a point I would normally be interested in looking into.
It's not like it would not exist if not for you.


Again, what philosophy are you talking about specifically? We've debated much in the past month.


Just like when Jesus said, Know ye not that ye are gods? Jesus was not calling the scribes gods, but maybe only in a secondary way, but was quoting scripture to counter whatever they may have been misquoting, such as what Jesus was saying about himself.


No, they were called "gods" in the simple sense they were permitted to judge God's people. Nothing more than that, we both know these people were not divine.


In the case of the temptation in the wilderness, the devil was misquoting scripture and Jesus countered by properly quoting scripture. You don't take this as Jesus presenting a new definition of worship.


In the instance I referenced, the devil wasn't quoting any scripture but was attempting to offer Jesus the kingdom, the power and the glory by worshiping him instead of going through with the cross. And Christ's rebuke was exactly that, a rebuke that man was to worship God alone, nothing else. With that said, in all the numerous instances people worshiped Him, He didn't once rebuke the people, He welcomed the worship. Even angels in the text rebuke people for worshiping them as God saying "Do not worship me, I am too a fellow servant..".


I'm saying all this because it seems to be the Modus operandi of this philosophy, to confuse Old Testament scripture with NT scripture, without acknowledging it as being a quote. My advice is to face the reality that this thing really is a religion despite permeating several religions with slightly different names.


I haven't demonstrated any confusing of scriptures. I've tried to present as doctrine the simple, literal reading of the text. I realize there are people alive today who do not adhere to a strict Hermaneutical approach to the text. That's fine, but I don't see how it's an issue to take the text as literally as possible in most instances. That's not a denial that the Holy Spirit uses puns and other literary devices, He does, but it's prudent to acknowledge that there are many who adhere to a loose Hermaneutical approach.



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 10:07 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 

Hermaneutical
I don't even know what this means and I never want to know. It makes me feel ill just looking at it. It may as well just say "Satan's method of interpretation" for all I know.
I really have no idea what you are up to but it is something you are getting off blogs and web sites and who knows. I don't think you do the tiniest bit of interpretation yourself because you have a complete lack of ability to understand anything I write so I am writing you off as just a copy and paste artist and not capable of any independent thought.



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 10:34 PM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 


Theological hermeneutics as traditional Christian Biblical exegesisThis form of theological hermeneutics in the mainstream Protestant tradition considers Christian Biblical hermeneutics in the tradition of explication of the text, or exegesis, to deal with various principles that can be applied to the study of Scripture. If the canon of Scripture is considered as an organic whole, rather than an accumulation of disparate individual texts written and edited in the course of history, then any interpretation that contradicts any other part of scripture is not considered to be sound. Biblical hermeneutics differs from hermeneutics and within traditional Protestant theology, there are a variety of interpretive formulae. Such formulae are generally not mutually exclusive, and interpreters may adhere to several of these approaches at once.

Wikipedia Link

I believe based off of this meaning is what Notyour means.
He see's the bible as a whole. A complete book from genisis to revelations.
There for what ever princables are in the NT can be found in the OT to back it up.
ie, prophocies pretaining to Jesus can be found in the OT. Gods forgiveness can be found
in the OT.

But I think he may be better at explaining it the I am.

LOTZA LUV
edit on 9-8-2011 by Mividau because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 10 2011 @ 01:09 AM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 


Lol, hermaneutics is the theory of Biblical interpretation. One can have a strict belief for hermaneutics or a loose one.



posted on Aug, 10 2011 @ 01:43 AM
link   
I can't believe you.
(Sarcasm)
I told you I never wanted to know the ways of Satan.
So what did you do.I noticed you launched into a definition and luckily was able to scroll very quickly before I could read what it was.
Don't expect me to ever open this thread again and you are talking to yourself from now on because you are not to be trusted. Moderators can remove this post.



posted on Aug, 10 2011 @ 02:41 AM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 


Ways of satan? It's basic Systematic Theology. If anyone opens a Bible they have a hermaneutical approach to scripture. Mine happens to be one of a strict literalist.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 13  14  15    17 >>

log in

join