Support NeoGAF

[ServBotPhil]

I didn't say it was required for salvation. I said it was a requirement for being a Christian.

But "Christian" is just a made-up title. True Christianity - what really matters - is invisible.

 

[JGS]

But "Christian" is just a made-up title. True Christianity - what really matters - is invisible.

Ok so you don't really have to be a Christian to be a Christian then correct?

 

[Sabotage]

I explained this repeatedly and you refused to even acknowlege the reasons.
Originally Posted by me:
Isaiah 44 is clearly talking about idolotry. Isaiah 44:24 is discussing how God needed no help from foreign gods that other worship.

I refused to acknowledge it? Again, you're just reacting without reading
post 2549

Wrong, there are 3 "Thus saith the LORD" in Isaiah 44

"Thus saith the LORD" denotes the beginning of a NEW topic/decree/act etc...

Isaiah 44:24-28 has nothing to do with idolatry...

Isaiah 44:1-5, talks about Jacob/Israel being chosen
Isaiah 44:6-23, talks about idols
Isaiah 44:24, talks about creation and building of Jerusalem

You still cannot account for the fact that in Isaiah 44:24 says The LORD makes all things, heaven alone, earth by himself.

If God created all things through Jesus, how exactly is God BY HIMSELF and ALONE?

It would make more sense for God &/or Jesus to be the represent wisdom at which point you could have linked them together some kind of way. However, that doesn't work either since it's talking about something being created by God and used in creation which would mean Jesus obviously still fits the bill.

Are you sure about that? Wisdom seems to be represented by a woman....

8:1 Does not wisdom call out? Does not understanding raise HER voice? 2At the highest point along the way, where the paths meet, SHE takes HER stand; 3 beside the gate leading into the city, at the entrance, SHE cries aloud:
V11 for wisdom is more precious than rubies, and nothing you desire can compare with HER.

How about some more of Proverbs:
P 1:20 Out in the open wisdom calls aloud, SHE raises HER voice in the public square;
p 4:7 The beginning of wisdom is this: Get wisdom. Though it cost all you have, get understanding. 8 Cherish HER, and SHE will exalt you; embrace HER, and SHE will honor you. 9 SHE will give you a garland to grace your head and present you with a glorious crown.”
P 9:1 Wisdom has built HER house; SHE has set up its seven pillars. 2 SHE has prepared HER meat and mixed HER wine; SHE has also set HER table.

Jesus fits the bill? She fits the bill? It's a figure of speech to personify wisdom, which is what Solomon is doing.

You keep saying this but you are making a connection that simply isn't there. There is NO connection between trinity and Jesus & God between the verses you mentioned.

There's none, none at all?

Isaiah 44:24Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am The LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;

Col1:16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

No connection?

Isaiah: I am the LORD that makes all things
Colossians: For by him were all things created

Isaiah: I am the LORD that makes all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone
Colossians: For by him were all things created, that are in heaven

Isaiah: I am the LORD that makes all things; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself
Colossians: For by him were all things created, that are in earth

Both talking about creating all things, both talking about creating heaven, both talking about creating earth.

NO connection?

If I were one of Jehovah's Witnesses...

Actually I'm leaning towards this, you deny Christ being God which jw's do, you capitalized the J and W, you brought up Proverbs 8 which no one was talking about and coincidentally is part of watchtower propaganda "Should You Believe in the Trinity?". If you're not a jw, then what denomination are you part of?

 

[JGS]

I refused to acknowledge it? Again, you're just reacting without reading
post 2549

Ah, so I did answer and you just have a skipping needle. Got it.

Are you sure about that? Wisdom seems to be represented by a woman....

This is true, but that doesn't mean it couldn't represent Jesus' role in creation that is verified in Colossians 1.

Actually I'm leaning towards this, you deny Christ being God which jw's do, you capitalized the J and W, you brought up Proverbs 8 which no one was talking about and coincidentally is part of watchtower propaganda "Should You Believe in the Trinity?". If you're not a jw, then what denomination are you part of?

Well, if you think I'm lying about being a Jehovah's Witness than so be it. I capitalize Catholic too, it doesn't mean I am one. I just like capitalizing when using proper nouns. I brought up Proverbs 8 because it coincides with Jesus role in creation, just like Colossians does. I mistakenly minimized wisdom in the chapter, but it doesn't diminish jesus playing the part. Both of them fit better than merging Isaiah 44 and Colossians and than asking the same inane question over and over so you can restate you take.

I'm still not sure why that is something I would lie about. At the end of the day, I don't qualify to be one of them nor am I particularly upset about that. Further, I have many family members who are Jehovah's Witnesses and read their literature often. I've mentioned this on this thread as well as the Religion one. Millions of people do so it's far from shocking.

Maybe if you came out with a piece of propaganda entitled "How Isaiah = Colossians, you could have millions believing you too. Oh wait, that's right, billions blindly follow the trinity without the link you provide.

Non-belief in the trinity has little to do with denomination since it's not a Bible teaching. The trinity is a denominational teaching. Just because the two largest denominations believe in it does not change it's status as a fringe teaching away from Doctrine.

 

[Fedos]

I know. It's the only one you used to link it to the trinity. I'm only working with the material given and the other verses don't link with a trinity either.

It's not the only passage that indicates the trinity.

7Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another's speech.

8So the LORD scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city.

9Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the LORD did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the LORD scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth.

Genesis 11: 7-9

In this passage we have God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit confounding the languages of the people at the tower of Babel.

Also here, a passage which points to the deity of Christ: He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God. Daniel 3: 25

I'm not disputing this at all.

Ok. But you said for instance that you don't believe in the docrtine of hell.
What do you believe in? Annhilation?

This isn't correct. You are generally not Christian if you don't get baptized although it's possible there are exceptions. Again I couldn't find them Biblically. The general rule from scripture requires it. It's just that salvation is not necessarily dependent on you being a Christian.

I certainly agree that you can follow the steps toward baptism:
1. Knowledge
2. Repentance
3. Turning away from the sin once repentant
4. Dedication

In fact, you have to do all of that before you qualify. However, that doesn't change the last step needing to be done too. The difference might lie in the question:

"If you do everything that Christians are supposed to do, then what the heck is stopping you from getting baptized?" If it walks like a duck, looks like a duck, & quacks lke a duck, why not let it be known you're a duck? If something is physically inhibiting you from the act, it's a different story, but those kinds of hindrances are few and far between and baptism is easy for ones who claim to be Christain.

There could be many reasons why a person isn't baptized at the start of their walk with Christ. They could be going to a church that doesn't have a baptismal pool for instance. They could be living in a foreign country (say an Islamic country) hear the Gospel preached to them over the air waves (over Christian broadcasting) and get converted that way. How long would it take for someone who was bought up in an Islamic country to get baptized, for instance? Salvation is by grace through faith; placing our trust and hope in the finished work of Jesus Christ on the cross. We're not supposed to add anything to our salvation.

8For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

9Not of works, lest any man should boast.
Ephesians 2: 8-9

With the exception of the God is Son part which is entirely a translation issue, I'm not seeing the dispute.

As I have shown from the book of Daniel, Jesus stood in the fiery furnace with the Hebrew boys, and Nebechadnezzer owned him to be the Son of God.

 

[ecurbj]

Hi JGS, I'm new here kinda been a lurker for awhile and been following this thread for some time now but I have a few questions if you don't mind me asking.

~what denomination are you with? Or do you label yourself just a Christian? Because each Christian will hold an denomination doctrine or ways regardless.

~And why is your interpretation of the Scripture true than anyone else's?

 

[JGS]

Hi JGS, I'm new here kinda been a lurker for awhile and been following this thread for some time now but I have a few questions if you don't mind me asking.

~what denomination are you with? Or do you label yourself just a Christian? Because each Christian will hold an denomination doctrine or ways regardless.

For board purposes, I label myself as Christian only which I like to think was Fernando's intention to begin with.

It helps when I'm debating non-religious people, plus other Christians make their own deductions about you anyway. For example, people are thinking I have a reason to hide that I'm one of Jehovah's Witnesses. The only reason I deny it (Besides it not being true) is because I hold views that are contrary to theirs as well. Non-trinitarian = JW and I'm somehow ashamed to admit that although I have no problems questioning the trinity.

Actually, I'm not devout enough to explain my own religion's beliefs completely since a large dose of my views are purely opinion based on Scripture reading and research outside of canon. No need to drag a religious denomination into a personal conversation. I'm not here to convert after all.

For board purposes, I primarily use a Bible and a concordance and the then google translation help. I don't have a lot of time to research far beyond that and rely on ones with deffering beliefs to explain themselves rather than disprove them and to back up why they think I'm wrong. I'm pretty open minded since that's how I realized I could never believe the trinity was a Biblical teaching, so if something is shown that the trinity is taught throughout the Scriptures over the few verses constantly mention, I wil believe it. It's just unlikely to happen.

~And why is your interpretation of the Scripture true than anyone else's?

Everyone with a belief thinks their belief is the correct one. Otherwise, they lack faith/confidence/conviction in what they were taught. This argument has gone on for a few pages primarily because ones are absolutely convinced that the trinity is true and they have enough proof for themselves to hold fast to that. That's a good thing. I'm just contrarian to the group so it stands out. Faith isn't based on peer pressure, but rather persuasion.

 

[JGS]

It's not the only passage that indicates the trinity.

7Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another's speech.

8So the LORD scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city.

9Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the LORD did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the LORD scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth.

Genesis 11: 7-9

In this passage we have God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit confounding the languages of the people at the tower of Babel.

Again, why isn't that simply a conversation? Why does the trinity need to talk to itself? Reading that just helps me see that God's actions are carried out by servants or that more than he is looking down on men.

Also here, a passage which points to the deity of Christ: He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God. Daniel 3: 25

I had to doublecheck that one. KJV is the only one referring to it like that that I could find. Here is what NIV says:

25 “Look!” Nebuchadnezzar shouted. “I see four men, unbound, walking around in the fire unharmed! And the fourth looks like a god[a]!

Since Nebuchadnezzar, a non-Jew and reason they were in the furnace to begin with, he worshipped other gods and would have not know who the son of God would be.

In any event, ”Son of God" oftentimes referred to angels. They use the term way back in Genesis 6:

1 When human beings began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to them, 2 the sons of God saw that the daughters of humans were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose.

Ok. But you said for instance that you don't believe in the docrtine of hell.
What do you believe in? Annhilation?

I don't believe God is loiving if he has no problem torturing people eternally. This would be the case even with Scriptural support. However, the first punishment was death, the wages sin pays is death, & quite frankly death is more than sufficient considering no one happy actually wants to experience. Eternal torture is literally overkill and pure evil.

The opposite of life is not torture, but death.

There could be many reasons why a person isn't baptized at the start of their walk with Christ. They could be going to a church that doesn't have a baptismal pool for instance.

A baptismal pool isn't required for baptism. I've known people who get baptized in pools, lakes, bathtubs, etc... I may be a bit clueless on this, but is there any denomination that doesn't baptized either literally or symbolically (Like with sprinkles)?

They could be living in a foreign country (say an Islamic country) hear the Gospel preached to them over the air waves (over Christian broadcasting) and get converted that way. How long would it take for someone who was bought up in an Islamic country to get baptized, for instance?

That could be a problem although extremely remote, and I mentioned exceptions everytime I mentioned it as a requirement.

Salvation is by grace through faith; placing our trust and hope in the finished work of Jesus Christ on the cross. We're not supposed to add anything to our salvation.

I never dsiputed that salvation is by grace. However, it is incorrect that Christians were not expected to get baptized. You almost seem to be wroding it as a discouragement which I can't grasp since it was a Scriptural mandate. So even if I'm wrong and baptism isn't necessary, it's certainnly encourages by Jesus and the early Christians.

True, baptism is not a magic cure. It is a public display of what you put faith in...unless you are afraid of the repercussions. Not getting baptized is possibly a sign, with the exceptions you mentioned, that you aren't ready to commit to that level. Not want baptism is similar to not wanting to dedicate yourself to belief in the first place. Basically, dedication leads to baptism even if there is an anomaly that holds up the inevitable.

Baptism is not a "work" anymore than knowledge is a "work" or repentance is a "work". Paul references baptism often and does so as an afterthought since it's a basic requirement although not a forced one.

 

[ServBotPhil]

Ok so you don't really have to be a Christian to be a Christian then correct?

What's your definition of a "Christian"?

 

[JGS]

What's your definition of a "Christian"?

A disciple of Jesus. Someone who believes as Jesus believes.

That's not symbolic in any event.

 

[Fedos]

Again, why isn't that simply a conversation? Why does the trinity need to talk to itself? Reading that just helps me see that God's actions are carried out by servants or that more than he is looking down on men.

It is a conversation. A conversation between God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. Love for instance, is not just true, but God himself is love. Love is an eternal truth, from everlasting to everlasting. And in the Trinity God can be love, before there was anything else. Fellowship is true too. It is good for man to have fellowship (particularly Christian fellowship). But the trinity being true even God has fellowship with himself.

I had to doublecheck that one. KJV is the only one referring to it like that that I could find. Here is what NIV says:
Since Nebuchadnezzar, a non-Jew and reason they were in the furnace to begin with, he worshipped other gods and would have not know who the son of God would be.

In any event, ”Son of God" oftentimes referred to angels. They use the term way back in Genesis 6:

Yes, son of God was used to describe angels in the Old Testament. So it could have been an angel spoken of here, or it could have been a theophony (ie a time when Jesus Christ manifested himself in the form of an angel). This happened many times throughout the Old Testament.

I don't believe God is loiving if he has no problem torturing people eternally. This would be the case even with Scriptural support. However, the first punishment was death, the wages sin pays is death, & quite frankly death is more than sufficient considering no one happy actually wants to experience. Eternal torture is literally overkill and pure evil.

The opposite of life is not torture, but death.

But if you read what is written here in Revelation: 'And the smoke of their torment rises for ever and ever. There is no rest day or night for those who worship the beast and his image, or for anyone who receives the mark of his name." Revelation 14: 11

And here: 'But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.'

Revelation 21: 8. One cannot but help after reading these verses that there is very real danger in losing ones soul of being tormented in fire. It even speaks of death here, calling it 'the second death.'

God is indeed love, but he is also just. Sinning against God is an infinite offense, since he is infinitely holy. When you die in your sins, you have to pay the debt of your sin. Since God is infinitely holy and worthy of our adoration, you pay the price of an infinite offense.

A baptismal pool isn't required for baptism. I've known people who get baptized in pools, lakes, bathtubs, etc... I may be a bit clueless on this, but is there any denomination that doesn't baptized either literally or symbolically (Like with sprinkles)?

I don't know. I've heard of water baptism with sprinkling, but never seen it performed.

That could be a problem although extremely remote, and I mentioned exceptions everytime I mentioned it as a requirement.
I never dsiputed that salvation is by grace. However, it is incorrect that Christians were not expected to get baptized. You almost seem to be wroding it as a discouragement which I can't grasp since it was a Scriptural mandate. So even if I'm wrong and baptism isn't necessary, it's certainnly encourages by Jesus and the early Christians.

Well, I'm not discouraging anything. It's just that I've personally experienced being saved for a long time without being baptized, and I'm still saved. Still living a holy life, still suffering as a Christian can only suffer (persecution by the devil for instance--that's not to say that all Christians are attacked of the devil), God the Father taking steps to discipline me for sins I committed a very long time ago). The church I was going to in years past didn't have a baptismal pool, and didn't consider it necessary.

True, baptism is not a magic cure. It is a public display of what you put faith in...unless you are afraid of the repercussions. Not getting baptized is possibly a sign, with the exceptions you mentioned, that you aren't ready to commit to that level. Not want baptism is similar to not wanting to dedicate yourself to belief in the first place. Basically, dedication leads to baptism even if there is an anomaly that holds up the inevitable.

Well, I have been wholeheartedly dedicated to Christianity from the word go, despite the struggles I have faced in my walk with the Lord. I don't think not being baptized has had much effect on my dedication to the Christian faith.

Baptism is not a "work" anymore than knowledge is a "work" or repentance is a "work". Paul references baptism often and does so as an afterthought since it's a basic requirement although not a forced one.

Let me ask you this: what is your position on communion? Do you also believe communion is necessary to remain Christian?

 

[JGS]

It is a conversation. A conversation between God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. Love for instance, is not just true, but God himself is love. Love is an eternal truth, from everlasting to everlasting. And in the Trinity God can be love, before there was anything else. Fellowship is true too. It is good for man to have fellowship (particularly Christian fellowship). But the trinity being true even God has fellowship with himself.

You can't have fellowship with yourself. The trinity is 3 beings into ONE. One does not normally talk to themselves. There's no reason to communicate in that manner unless you are talking to another distinct individual. That's what I'm trying to get clarification on or else it sounds as if we're saying the same thing except I'm not entwining them since there's not a need to in order to reflect communication.

Yes, son of God was used to describe angels in the Old Testament. So it could have been an angel spoken of here, or it could have been a theophony (ie a time when Jesus Christ manifested himself in the form of an angel). This happened many times throughout the Old Testament.

Ok. No issues regarding this difference. I'm moving onto something that touches on this in regards to Michael. If Jesus can appear as an anonymous angel, then what's wrong with thinking he's the bos of the angels - Michael? This isn't something you brought out, but something that was taken issue with & I didn't realize there was a controversy about it beyond simple disagreement.

But if you read what is written here in Revelation: 'And the smoke of their torment rises for ever and ever. There is no rest day or night for those who worship the beast and his image, or for anyone who receives the mark of his name." Revelation 14: 11

Admittedly Revelation and me do not get along and I primarily like reading it for the visuals. However, John makes it clear it's largely a book of sign and symbols to grasp what will happen in the future- something that was already very common in OT.

IMO, it's tough to take a book filled with imagery and symbolism and then take part of that symbolism and apply it to something literal. No one is literally worshipping a wild beast or has a mark on their head, so why would anyone assume that the torment is literal (Or that it's even happening at death) too? Is The Lamb (Jesus) actually witnessing this torment forever and ever? Further, it only appears that part of wicked people actually experience this torment.

And here: 'But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.'

Revelation 21: 8. One cannot but help after reading these verses that there is very real danger in losing ones soul of being tormented in fire. It even speaks of death here, calling it 'the second death.'

Death does not mean torture. Fire has never acros any culture meant torture. Fire in judgement terms, almost always means destruction since that is what fire does. Revelation 20 discusses the resurrection for judgement of the the dead (Where were they all this time?). Basically they were resurrected from their first death. After judgement, they face a second death if wicked. That does not mean torture forever and ever.

God is indeed love, but he is also just. Sinning against God is an infinite offense, since he is infinitely holy. When you die in your sins, you have to pay the debt of your sin. Since God is infinitely holy and worthy of our adoration, you pay the price of an infinite offense.

Justice is not torture. The debt paid for sin since Adam has been death. That's fair and just and people still have a hard time with that. It makes perfect sense why they would have a problem with something worse than waterboarding happening eternally for all time against their loved ones. That is a debt that can never be paid. How is that just?

Well, I'm not discouraging anything. It's just that I've personally experienced being saved for a long time without being baptized, and I'm still saved. Still living a holy life, still suffering as a Christian can only suffer (persecution by the devil for instance--that's not to say that all Christians are attacked of the devil), God the Father taking steps to discipline me for sins I committed a very long time ago). The church I was going to in years past didn't have a baptismal pool, and didn't consider it necessary.

This is the point. It all boils down to religious belief. I'm not saying anything about your Church, but the one I left didn't have answers for why they did things. Again, if baptism isn't that important to begin with, I don't see what the issue is in doing it if it's Scripturally encouraged. You've already experienced the hard stuff. Despite my views of the trinity (I am in the minority), I am going to avoid debating particular denominational beliefs- especially since I don't share mine and the ones mentioned against JW's have been disturbing. Speaking of JW's...

Let me ask you this: what is your position on communion? Do you also believe communion is necessary to remain Christian?

I probably don't have a position on it and it's drivng me loco. I think of it largely as a ritual. Since I view it rather dogmatically, I tend to go to my uncle's Kingdom Hall (Or another spot as they get huge in comparison to normal meetings) and no one actually participates since no one is "annointed" there. They have a talk, pass the bread and wine, then it's over. I like that because it's passive. The information they provide makes perfect sense if you are one of Jehovah's Witnesses.

Until I figure it out, however, I don't really participate in my own church's at all. Not saying it's not important, I just can't figure out how it is important. Once I get the whole who goes to heaven thing down and why it's supposed to be done so often (There's no particular Scriptural reference) past annually, I'll have a better grasp of what I need to do there. Basically, no one is hassling me about it, so I'm not hassling myself.

 

[Fedos]

You can't have fellowship with yourself. The trinity is 3 beings into ONE. One does not normally talk to themselves. There's no reason to communicate in that manner unless you are talking to another distinct individual. That's what I'm trying to get clarification on or else it sounds as if we're saying the same thing except I'm not entwining them since there's not a need to in order to reflect communication.

Well, the trinity is one God in three persons. God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit, all are distinct and (for instance) all have differing roles in salvation, but yet all God. There was nothing that was created without the Son. Similarly there was nothing that was created without the Holy Spirit.

Ok. No issues regarding this difference. I'm moving onto something that touches on this in regards to Michael. If Jesus can appear as an anonymous angel, then what's wrong with thinking he's the bos of the angels - Michael? This isn't something you brought out, but something that was taken issue with & I didn't realize there was a controversy about it beyond simple disagreement.

Well, because the Bible doesn't say he's Michael the archangel, it says that he is God the Son. For instance: 'For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?'

Hebrews 1:5

Michael the archangel is the watcher over the nation of Israel, according to what the Bible says.

Admittedly Revelation and me do not get along and I primarily like reading it for the visuals. However, John makes it clear it's largely a book of sign and symbols to grasp what will happen in the future- something that was already very common in OT.

IMO, it's tough to take a book filled with imagery and symbolism and then take part of that symbolism and apply it to something literal. No one is literally worshipping a wild beast or has a mark on their head, so why would anyone assume that the torment is literal (Or that it's even happening at death) too? Is The Lamb (Jesus) actually witnessing this torment forever and ever? Further, it only appears that part of wicked people actually experience this torment.

Well that happens in the future, after the rapture of the church. Just for instance, fifty years ago it was hard to imagine how someone could force everyone on the planet to take a mark in their right hand or forehead without which you wouldn't be able to buy or sell. But technology today is moving in that direction, and fast. The mark of the beast is very possible in today's computer age.

Death does not mean torture. Fire has never acros any culture meant torture. Fire in judgement terms, almost always means destruction since that is what fire does. Revelation 20 discusses the resurrection for judgement of the the dead (Where were they all this time?). [/B

Well they were in hell, which is not the lake of fire, called the second death. Hell is in the center of the earth. At the end of the millenium, death and hell will be cast into the lake of fire, which is the second death that the book of Revelation speaks of. But before that happens they have to stand before Jesus at the judgement.

Basically they were resurrected from their first death. After judgement, they face a second death if wicked. That does not mean torture forever and ever.
Justice is not torture. The debt paid for sin since Adam has been death. That's fair and just and people still have a hard time with that. It makes perfect sense why they would have a problem with something worse than waterboarding happening eternally for all time against their loved ones. That is a debt that can never be paid. How is that just?

Well the Bible teaches that God will wipe away all tears from the saints eyes when they get to heaven. God will not allow another persons decision to reject him effect the saints enjoyment of heaven.

This is the point. It all boils down to religious belief. I'm not saying anything about your Church, but the one I left didn't have answers for why they did things. Again, if baptism isn't that important to begin with, I don't see what the issue is in doing it if it's Scripturally encouraged. You've already experienced the hard stuff. Despite my views of the trinity (I am in the minority), I am going to avoid debating particular denominational beliefs- especially since I don't share mine and the ones mentioned against JW's have been disturbing. Speaking of JW's...

Well the church I'm attending now does not have a baptismal pool either, but at the end of September we're going to another church to be baptized. But I've been Christian since August 1st of 2002, and not being baptized has not had an effect on my lifestyle (ie holy living), the fact that God has chastised and continued to chastise me (for sins I committed when I first accepted Christ) or from Satanic attacks (though as I have said not all Christians experience Satanic attacks).

I probably don't have a position on it and it's drivng me loco. I think of it largely as a ritual. Since I view it rather dogmatically, I tend to go to my uncle's Kingdom Hall (Or another spot as they get huge in comparison to normal meetings) and no one actually participates since no one is "annointed" there. They have a talk, pass the bread and wine, then it's over. I like that because it's passive. The information they provide makes perfect sense if you are one of Jehovah's Witnesses.

Until I figure it out, however, I don't really participate in my own church's at all. Not saying it's not important, I just can't figure out how it is important. Once I get the whole who goes to heaven thing down and why it's supposed to be done so often (There's no particular Scriptural reference) past annually, I'll have a better grasp of what I need to do there. Basically, no one is hassling me about it, so I'm not hassling myself.

Ok. Just curious.

 

[Chaplain]

Some awesome lessons to learn from.

 

[Fernando Rocker]

Game Analyst

I really enjoy the articles you post (I'm pretty sure most of us in this thread likes to read them). And to b honest, I have learned a lot by reading them.

But I would love to hear your personal opinion in some things... for example, the topic being discussed in these days (very interesting, by the way).

 

[Chaplain]

Game Analyst

I really enjoy the articles you post (I'm pretty sure most of us in this thread likes to read them). And to b honest, I have learned a lot by reading them.

This makes me happy. To hear that you are growing in your understanding of our Lord, growing in faith and the knowledge of His Word, blesses me immensely.

I want all of our brothers and sisters to grow in Christ. This is why I post the verse by verse commentaries. Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God.

But I would love to hear your personal opinion in some things... for example, the topic being discussed in these days (very interesting, by the way).

I will answer one right now because I have to get ready for work.

1. Jesus is God

The whole message of the Bible is about God's message to mankind, that he would come down and save us in the body of Jesus. Jesus said no man has seen God the father at any time. We have a huge problem then because Moses said he saw God, Jacob said he saw God, Hagar said that she saw God & Isaiah said he saw God (just to name a few in the OT who saw God). This is an easy problem to understand when we realize who it is that they saw.

The prophet Isaiah said, "It was in the year King Uzziah died that I saw the Lord. He was sitting on a lofty throne, and the train of his robe filled the Temple." - Isaiah 6:1

Now turn with me to John 12:

But despite all the miraculous signs Jesus had done, most of the people still did not believe in him. This is exactly what Isaiah the prophet had predicted:

“Lord, who has believed our message?
To whom has the Lord revealed his powerful arm?”

But the people couldn’t believe, for as Isaiah also said,

“The Lord has blinded their eyes
and hardened their hearts—
so that their eyes cannot see,
and their hearts cannot understand,
and they cannot turn to me
and have me heal them.”

These things Isaiah said when he saw His glory and spoke of Him.

Isaiah saw Jesus. Jesus is the one who walked with Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. This is the central message of the Bible. This is what the Biblical faith is about: Jesus is God!

Have a good day. I have to go.

"Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are their ancestors, and Christ himself was an Israelite as far as his human nature is concerned. And he is God, the one who rules over everything and is worthy of eternal praise! Amen." - Romans 9:5

 

[JGS]

1. Jesus is God

The whole message of the Bible is about God's message to mankind, that he would come down and save us in the body of Jesus. Jesus said no man has seen God the father at any time. We have a huge problem then because Moses said he saw God, Jacob said he saw God, Hagar said that she saw God & Isaiah said he saw God (just to name a few in the OT who saw God). This is an easy problem to understand when we realize who it is that they saw.

This isn't correct unless you believe the trinity. It's a tail wagging the dog scenario.

If you don't believe the trinity, it doesn't affect the theme of the Bible in the slightest which concerns God's right to rule and our opportunity to be reconciled with him. I know Game Analyst doesn't have time, but he brought up so new verses which is appreciated. However, I would again recommended looking at it as chapter over verse in order to appreciate the verse and leave it at that.

 

[JGS]

There was nothing that was created without the Son. Similarly there was nothing that was created without the Holy Spirit.

I agree with this, but there still remains the difference.

Well, because the Bible doesn't say he's Michael the archangel, it says that he is God the Son. For instance: 'For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?'

Hebrews 1:5

Michael the archangel is the watcher over the nation of Israel, according to what the Bible says.

The Bible also doesn't indicate the anonymous angels mentioned are Jesus either, but the assumption may be there.

An archangel, by definition, is not normal spirit being. If there is someone that leads all other angels, it fits in line with the one whom his Father has entrusted everything. Contrast with the only other angel mentioned by name Gabriel, and it seems clear that Michael is a whole other can of worms.

1 Thesalonaians may link Jesus with that role, but I'm not saying I believe Michael & Jesus are the same. I just can't find any info indicating they are different. I'm not sure why it's a cultist thing to say. We really only know Jesus' name in context of his time on Earth and there's no particualr reason to think that Jesus was his name in heaven.

Well that happens in the future, after the rapture of the church. Just for instance, fifty years ago it was hard to imagine how someone could force everyone on the planet to take a mark in their right hand or forehead without which you wouldn't be able to buy or sell. But technology today is moving in that direction, and fast. The mark of the beast is very possible in today's computer age.

So you believe that Revelation is possibly not largely symbolic?

Well they were in hell, which is not the lake of fire, called the second death. Hell is in the center of the earth. At the end of the millenium, death and hell will be cast into the lake of fire, which is the second death that the book of Revelation speaks of. But before that happens they have to stand before Jesus at the judgement.

This doesn't have much to do with eternal torment though. Why couldn't the 2nd death = death?

Well the Bible teaches that God will wipe away all tears from the saints eyes when they get to heaven. God will not allow another persons decision to reject him effect the saints enjoyment of heaven.

What kind of sick, twisted individual would lose happiness knowing that wicked people merely died? Why would they seek enjoyment ensuring the wicked suffer for all eternity?

Well the church I'm attending now does not have a baptismal pool either, but at the end of September we're going to another church to be baptized. But I've been Christian since August 1st of 2002, and not being baptized has not had an effect on my lifestyle (ie holy living), the fact that God has chastised and continued to chastise me (for sins I committed when I first accepted Christ) or from Satanic attacks (though as I have said not all Christians experience Satanic attacks).

Again, baptism isn't about way of life since your way of life has already changed before you even qualify for baptism (I know different churches have different timeframes for that). It's simply about acknowledgement. Honestly, I was under the impression that baptisms were how religions kept track of their numbers which makes sense since that is what Acts did.

 

[Chaplain]

Jesus’ triumphant entry into Jerusalem as the Messiah of the world

 

[Chaplain]

Is love selfish?

 

[Meus Renaissance]

My understanding of what happened to Lot's wife is that she was turned into a pillar stone for disobeying God's command not to turn around and look. But why forbid her to look? It's described in scripture that by the time Lot's family managed to get to a safe enough distance, the Sun had rised so they were evidently travelling for a while. The only thing they could have seen would have been the cities on fire. So why the command for them not to look back when in reality they would have had the opportunity to see God's power up front in the way the Israelites did when Moses parted the sea?

Something horrible happened, and you are not therefore allowed to watch. If you, something horrible will happen to yourself? It doesn't make sense to me.

 

[Chaplain]

So why the command for them not to look back when in reality they would have had the opportunity to see God's power up front in the way the Israelites did when Moses parted the sea?

Jesus gives a commentary on this situation:

“And the world will be as it was in the days of Lot. People went about their daily business—eating and drinking, buying and selling, farming and building—until the morning Lot left Sodom. Then fire and burning sulfur rained down from heaven and destroyed them all. Yes, it will be ‘business as usual’ right up to the day when the Son of Man is revealed. On that day a person out on the deck of a roof must not go down into the house to pack. A person out in the field must not return home. Remember what happened to Lot’s wife! If you cling to your life, you will lose it, and if you let your life go, you will save it.

 

[Meus Renaissance]

Jesus gives a commentary on this situation:

“And the world will be as it was in the days of Lot. People went about their daily business—eating and drinking, buying and selling, farming and building—until the morning Lot left Sodom. Then fire and burning sulfur rained down from heaven and destroyed them all. Yes, it will be ‘business as usual’ right up to the day when the Son of Man is revealed. On that day a person out on the deck of a roof must not go down into the house to pack. A person out in the field must not return home. Remember what happened to Lot’s wife! If you cling to your life, you will lose it, and if you let your life go, you will save it.

So her looking back wasn't mere curiousity but rather a display of attachment to that city, that society, in which God condemned?

 

[Chaplain]

So her looking back wasn't mere curiousity but rather a display of attachment to that city, that society, in which God condemned?

She didn't want to let go of her past life. That is why Jesus says, "If you cling to your life, you will lose it, and if you let your life go, you will save it." God calls his children to live for the spiritual. Lot's wife was living for the material. God knows that if his children live for the material, human nature, they will not be in fellowship with him or focused on the eternal.

Did that make sense?

 

[Sabotage]

Ah, so I did answer and you just have a skipping needle. Got it.

What?! Is this another reaction, you're not making any sense. "Ah, so I did answer..."

You haven't answered anything. This is what you said:

I explained this repeatedly and you refused to even acknowlege the reasons.
Originally Posted by me:
Isaiah 44 is clearly talking about idolotry. Isaiah 44:24 is discussing how God needed no help from foreign gods that other worship.

This is what I replied:

Wrong, there are 3 "Thus saith the LORD" in Isaiah 44

"Thus saith the LORD" denotes the beginning of a NEW topic/decree/act etc...

Isaiah 44:24-28 has nothing to do with idolatry...

Isaiah 44:1-5, talks about Jacob/Israel being chosen
Isaiah 44:6-23, talks about idols
Isaiah 44:24-28, talks about creation and building of Jerusalem

...

I brought up Proverbs 8 because it coincides with Jesus role in creation, just like Colossians does. I mistakenly minimized wisdom in the chapter, but it doesn't diminish jesus playing the part.

Except Colossians says "Christ" in it. Proverbs 8 has wisdom personified as a WOMAN.

By your "wisdom", in Proverbs 8, Solomon describes wisdom as a woman which represent Jesus.

Maybe if you came out with a piece of propaganda entitled "How Isaiah = Colossians...

If you want to call the Bible propaganda, then so be it.....

Isaiah 44:24Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am The LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;

Col1:16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

Non-belief in the trinity has little to do with denomination since it's not a Bible teaching. The trinity is a denominational teaching. Just because the two largest denominations believe in it does not change it's status as a fringe teaching away from Doctrine.

Non-belief that Christ is God has much to do with denomination since it's a Biblical teaching. The non-belief that Christ is God is a denominational teaching, a fringe teaching away from Doctrine.


Jesus is God

 

[JGS]

So her looking back wasn't mere curiousity but rather a display of attachment to that city, that society, in which God condemned?

Lot has never been that good of an example to me. Lot and his whole family had a problem with letting go of stuff. Lot landed in Sodom to begin with because he wasn't satisfied with hanging around Abraham. He starts out living on the edge of the city but by the time the city is destroyed, he is actually in the city and hanging out in the town square.

The angels then tell him he needs to leave but he hangs around until the last minute and literally has to be picked up by the angels to get out of the city. If anything Lot was only slightly more obedient than his wife (Which is why he routinely gets himself in minor or major trouble). He even whines about going to a particular place God tells him to go after Sodom's destruction.

His daughters are so distraught at losing their fiances in the city that they have sex with Lot after getting him drunk in order to have kids. I think Lot and his family were the first ghetto/redneck family in the Bible.

Sodom & Gomorrah is a good story about God's mercy & His judgement which is often the focus (God hates teh gays).

EDIT:Sabotage, you take way too long to debate. I've been arguing with atheists these past fews days over bigger concepts than the trinity. Nothing you stated has added an inch to my view that the trinity is real. Nothing I say will convince you otherwise. In short, I am way burned out on it. When a topic allides to it, then maybe I'll debate it again. Otherwise, assume everything I say is with a non-trinitarian view and avoid it like the plague. I've said I don't really care what I'm viewed as for not believing the trinity and I'll just have to live by those words.

 

[Fernando Rocker]

Hello, guys...

I want to share a testimony later today... I'm currently at work, but I will share an experience I had. As soon as I time (around lunch time) I will post my story.

 

[Chaplain]

Jesus: The Way, the Truth, and the Life!

 

[Chaplain]

Jesus teaches on why people hate Christians, why people hate him, why hating Jesus means people hate God, that the Holy Spirits job is to convict people of their unbelief in Jesus, of God’s righteousness, and of His coming judgment.

 

[The Lamp]

Just wanted to say that Gungor's new album is out today (I told some of you about them)
Here's an acoustic rendition of one of their new songs:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9vHFsXOdTt0

And you can preview their album here:
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B005DZMQA4/?tag=neogaf0e-20

They wrote this album as a narrative to try to explain the beauty of God's character, creation, and bemoaning its darkness and frailty. One of the songs itself attempts to musically express the moment of creation itself. I just ordered mine, can't wait for it to come in :]

 

[Fernando Rocker]

Just wanted to say that Gungor's new album is out today (I told some of you about them)
Here's an acoustic rendition of one of their new songs:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9vHFsXOdTt0

And you can preview their album here:
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B005DZMQA4/?tag=neogaf0e-20

They wrote this album as a narrative to try to explain the beauty of God's character, creation, and bemoaning its darkness and frailty. One of the songs itself attempts to musically express the moment of creation itself. I just ordered mine, can't wait for it to come in :]

Thanks. I have been listening to some Christian music lately, so I appreciate the links.

 

[The Lamp]

Thanks. I have been listening to some Christian music lately, so I appreciate the links.

No problem. You might appreciate this quick interview about the album:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGtvtLDicwA

This quote really inspired me, when they talked about how they got the name for the album:
"♫ There is nothing, yet in truest form we walk like ghosts upon the earth, the ground it groans.♫

Sometimes we think of these ideas like God, and love, and heaven, and you know the ethereal ideas we have as the more ghostly, less-concrete, real ideas, and we think of ourselves as the concrete ideas. This kind of calls it into question: what if we're more like the ghosts walking upon the earth, longing to become real?"

 

[Chaplain]

Iranian Pastor Sentenced to Death: Nadarkhani Refuses to Convert

http://img.ibtimes.com/www/articles/20110929/222139_iranian-pastor-sentenced-to-death.htm

September 29, 2011 10:35 AM EDT

Iranian Pastor Youcef Nadarkhani, who is facing the death penalty, again refused to convert to Islam to save his life.

Nadarkhani was arrested in 2009 for the crime of apostasy because he allegedly abandoned Islam for Christianity. As a pastor, Iranian clerics believe that Nadarkhani was preaching in order to convert Muslims.

 

[archnemesis]

Sadly apostasy is still punishable by death in:

• Afghanistan
• Iran
• Mauritania
• Qatar
• Saudi Arabia
• South Sudan
• Sudan
• Yemen

I don't really see the point of him throwing away his life though. Why not "convert", leave for a civilized country and then deconvert again?

 

[Chaplain]

Why not "convert", leave for a civilized country and the deconvert again?

Jesus said, "But everyone who denies me here on earth, I will also deny before my Father in heaven."

 

[archnemesis]

Well I guess that would be a problem for a believer. Maybe he'll be better off in the afterlife then.

 

[Atramental]

I don't really see the point of him throwing away his life though. Why not "convert", leave for a civilized country and the deconvert again?

Then that means he wasn't a "true" Christian to begin with.

When I was still religious, if someone had put a gun to my head and said, "Renounce Christ or I'll put a bullet in your head." I would've taken that bullet because of my fear of betraying Jesus.

It's a good thing that never happened. Haha...

 

[Chaplain]

Maybe he'll be better off in the afterlife then.

Maybe?

That life is going to be way better there. New bodies, no more aging, seeing loved ones again, being with God and no more having to experience evil again (no more rape, slander, anger, backstabbing, lying, being alone, etc.). We also get to see Moses, Paul, Peter, David, Adam, Jacob, Solomon, Isaiah and all of the other believers from the beginning of the world. It will be amazing getting to hear first hand accounts at what God did at those times through their lives.

 

[Chaplain]

When I was still religious, if someone had put a gun to my head and said, "Renounce Christ or I'll put a bullet in your head." I would've taken that bullet because of my fear of betraying Jesus.

This happened during the Columbine massacre.

Columbine Girl "Martyred" for Faith
26 April, 1999

(CNS) –Cassie Bernall, the 17-year-old who was shot after telling one of two teen-age gunmen she believed in God, is due to be buried Monday.

Her story has made an impact around the world.

According to the Denver Post one of the perpetrators of last Tuesday's armed assault had taunted Bernall: "Do you believe in God?" When she replied that she did, "he pulled the trigger," said an eyewitness.

 

[archnemesis]

That's assuming he'll make it to the good place.

 

[Dunk#7]

Then that means he wasn't a "true" Christian to begin with.

When I was still religious, if someone had put a gun to my head and said, "Renounce Christ or I'll put a bullet in your head." I would've taken that bullet because of my fear of betraying Jesus.

It's a good thing that never happened. Haha...

It is easier to die for Christ than it is to live for Christ

 

[Atramental]

This happened during the Columbine massacre.

I know. My private Christian school teachers used her death as a means to teach my eight year old self and my fellow classmates the importance of not denying Christ. Even at gunpoint.

It is easier to die for Christ than it is to live for Christ

Yeah, because if you live long enough you might find out that this whole Christ thing is an elaborate tale told by superstitious men.

 

[mrbagdt]

just finished the 'basic' series of films by francis chan at our college-age ministry group. was a pretty good set of films and we were able to do a lot of small group discussions afterwards. dunno if anyone else is involved in things like that, but i would recommend it to others.

 

[Orayn]

I don't mean to start an argument, but that Columbine story has since been disputed by multiple witnesses.

 

[KodMoS]

I refused to acknowledge it? Again, you're just reacting without reading
post 2549


Isaiah 44:1-5, talks about Jacob/Israel being chosen
Isaiah 44:6-23, talks about idols
Isaiah 44:24, talks about creation and building of Jerusalem

You still cannot account for the fact that in Isaiah 44:24 says The LORD makes all things, heaven alone, earth by himself.

If God created all things through Jesus, how exactly is God BY HIMSELF and ALONE?



Are you sure about that? Wisdom seems to be represented by a woman....

8:1 Does not wisdom call out? Does not understanding raise HER voice? 2At the highest point along the way, where the paths meet, SHE takes HER stand; 3 beside the gate leading into the city, at the entrance, SHE cries aloud:
V11 for wisdom is more precious than rubies, and nothing you desire can compare with HER.

How about some more of Proverbs:
P 1:20 Out in the open wisdom calls aloud, SHE raises HER voice in the public square;
p 4:7 The beginning of wisdom is this: Get wisdom. Though it cost all you have, get understanding. 8 Cherish HER, and SHE will exalt you; embrace HER, and SHE will honor you. 9 SHE will give you a garland to grace your head and present you with a glorious crown.”
P 9:1 Wisdom has built HER house; SHE has set up its seven pillars. 2 SHE has prepared HER meat and mixed HER wine; SHE has also set HER table.

Jesus fits the bill? She fits the bill? It's a figure of speech to personify wisdom, which is what Solomon is doing.



There's none, none at all?

Isaiah 44:24Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am The LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;

Col1:16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

No connection?

Isaiah: I am the LORD that makes all things
Colossians: For by him were all things created

Isaiah: I am the LORD that makes all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone
Colossians: For by him were all things created, that are in heaven

Isaiah: I am the LORD that makes all things; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself
Colossians: For by him were all things created, that are in earth

Both talking about creating all things, both talking about creating heaven, both talking about creating earth.

NO connection?



Actually I'm leaning towards this, you deny Christ being God which jw's do, you capitalized the J and W, you brought up Proverbs 8 which no one was talking about and coincidentally is part of watchtower propaganda "Should You Believe in the Trinity?". If you're not a jw, then what denomination are you part of?

The mere doctrine of Jesus being God is based on human logic, and it is not based on an actual biblical teaching.

Now if this logic proves Jesus is God, then it also has to prove others are God also - when in fact the same logic can be applied.



EXAMPLE 1:

GENESIS 19:12
12 The two men said to Lot, “Do you have anyone else here—sons-in-law, sons or daughters, or anyone else in the city who belongs to you? Get them out of here, 13 because we are going to destroy this place. The outcry to the LORD against its people is so great that he has sent us to destroy it.”


The angels (two men) clearly said that the Lord sent "us" to destroy the city. The angels did not tell Lot God was going to destroy the city, they said "us."

GENESIS 19:19,24
14 So Lot went out and spoke to his sons-in-law, who were pledged to marry[a] his daughters. He said, “Hurry and get out of this place, because the LORD is about to destroy the city!” But his sons-in-law thought he was joking.

24 Then the LORD rained down burning sulfur on Sodom and Gomorrah—from the LORD out of the heavens. 25 Thus he overthrew those cities and the entire plain, destroying all those living in the cities—and also the vegetation in the land. 26 But Lot’s wife looked back, and she became a pillar of salt.'



If we were to use your logic on this matter, this would also prove that the angels are God too.




So did God create the earth alone? Yes, he did.

Did Jesus create. No.

Did he help? Yes.

God used Jesus in creating the Earth and the Heavens. The source of all this power came from God himself, and not Jesus. To understand this better, we can use an example from the apostles. The apostles resurrected and cure men and women. Now one can say someone such as Mark resurrected a woman, yet in reality Mark did not resurrected that woman because it was by means of God power that woman was resurrected.

1 CORINTHIANS 8:6
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.


This passage is translated the same in most Bibles, and it shows us that all things came from Jesus and not through him.


COLOSSIANS 1:16

New Living Translation (©2007)
for through him God created everything in the heavenly realms and on earth. He made the things we can see and the things we can't see--such as thrones, kingdoms, rulers, and authorities in the unseen world. Everything was created through him and for him.

American King James Version
For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

English Revised Version
for in him were all things created, in the heavens and upon the earth, things visible and things invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers; all things have been created through him, and unto him;

There are different ways you can render this verse, and if bibles were consistent, they would render this verse by using he word "through," or "by means" and not "by."

JOHN 1:3
New Living Translation (©2007)
God created everything through him, and nothing was created except through him.

American King James Version
All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

English Standard Version (©2001)
All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.

Constancy is needed when rendering these versus. When taking the entire Bible into consideration, the Bible teaches all things were made Through Jesus and not By him.

 

[JGS]

Yeah, because if you live long enough you might find out that this whole Christ thing is an elaborate tale told by superstitious men.

Highly unlikely as it is difficult to collaborate across years when it's the same writer, much less so when there are different writers across decades.

It is true that eventually Christians can mirror the same downhearted qualities of non-believers (After all, we face the same stuff and then some). Therefore the beliefs of the masses can change the views of the once faithful even when there's no reason to do so.

 

[KodMoS]

Individuals like Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, etc. who clearly supported the full divinity of Jesus are portrayed as arguing the very opposite.

Based on their writings, their beliefs differ from the mass majority of Christians today. Some of their statements do support beliefs of the Jehovah's Witnesses, when others do not. These so called early Christians believe Jesus to be an Angel. If you walk to a Church that teaches the Trinity and say Jesus is an angel, they will think you're crazy. What's funny about that is many Trinitarians agree that Jesus was identified as the Angel of the LORD in the Book of Genesis. This is not to say Jesus was called Michael the Archangel as the Jehovah's Witnesses teach, but they clearly called Jesus an angel (angel literally means messenger).

 

[KodMoS]

Firstborn is a title that has nothing to do with rank of birth/creation, it's a title of distinguishment, excellence, or preeminence.

This is totally not true. The literal meaning of prōtotokos (First-Born) literally means first produced. It's alternate use denotes excellence or pre-eminence.


prōtotokos

(root)

prōto -

first in time or place
in any succession of things or persons
first in rank
influence, honour
chief
principal
first, at the first

tokos -

to bring forth, bear, produce (fruit from the seed)
of a woman giving birth
of the earth bringing forth its fruits
metaph. to bear, bring forth

 

[Fedos]

Then that means he wasn't a "true" Christian to begin with.

When I was still religious, if someone had put a gun to my head and said, "Renounce Christ or I'll put a bullet in your head." I would've taken that bullet because of my fear of betraying Jesus.

It's a good thing that never happened. Haha...

So you basically admit that you weren't a true Christian. According to this verse: 'They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.'

1 John 2: 19

 

[Orayn]

So you basically admit that you weren't a true Christian. According to this verse: 'They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.'

1 John 2: 19

I bet he's not a true Scotsman either.