The Holy Trinity

[Fortigurn]

I'll begin a few clues and hope you catch on.

The formation of a Human being in the womb is an amazing thing. What percent of the DNA comes from the father and what percent comes from the mother? I'll let you find the answer on your own.

The miraculous birth of Jesus points out something neglected by Christadelphians: Jesus' Father. Bible states that the Holy Spirit and the power on High overshadowed Mary.

If the Holy Spirit is just only a creative force of God's divine power, then how could she conceive? Without a Father, the DNA percent is not complete. If a divine force can produce life, then who is Jesus' Father? Think on it for awhile. All I ask - just ponder it for awhile.

You seem to be insisting that God had a literal sexual union with Mary, and contributed His own physical 'God DNA' to the ovum which He fertilized. Is this what you are saying?

If the Holy Spirit is just only a creative force of God's divine power, then how could she conceive?

She could conceive precisely because the Holy Spirit God's Divine power, which is used as a creative force. God is all powerful, and can do as He pleases. He wants to create a fertizlied ovum, He can do so. He wants to make a virgin conceive, He can do so. He made barren women in the Old Testament conceive - do you think He had sex with them?

The bible adds a conjunction — and — between The Holy Spirit and power from on High denoting a difference: interesting.

It's called a parallelism, and indicates that the Holy Spirit is the 'power of the Most High'. It's not the only place where the Holy Spirit is referred to as a power.

If the Holy Spirit is God, then the gene DNA sequence remains intact. If the Holy Spirit is a creative divine wind, the DNA sequence remains intact: Who then is Jesus and Who was His Father?

How does this apply to your answers - See Next Frame…

I find this utterly pagan and totally distasteful. Your god is no better than the pagan gods who came down and had sex with women they liked.

[Fortigurn]

Endless bible quotes only cloud the issue in endless round robin debates. Let's cut the chase and get to the point. Christadelphians believe that Jesus Christ was only a sinless man, who kept the law and thus was able atone for sins by being without sin.

The Bible tells us the Jesus kept the law and remained sinless. This we both agree upon but how Jesus kept the law and remained sinless, we do not. For Christadelphians, Jesus remains a perfect man who kept the law and was thus sinless but how can this be?

If you say that Jesus kept the law by the power of God, he still remains a man.

Yes, that's right, he was kept by the power of God, and remains a man.

If He were only a man endowed with power from on High, just like the prophets of old were, how come Jesus never qualified His statements with the prophets phrase, Thus says the Lord? When the prophets spoke in the name of the Lord, they all qualified that they were only a messenger and spoke for God on God's behalf. Jesus never did this.

Jesus did do this:

John 5:
19 So Jesus answered them, “I tell you the solemn truth, the Son can do nothing on his own initiative, but only what he sees the Father doing. For whatever the Father does, the Son does likewise.

30 I can do nothing on my own initiative. Just as I hear, I judge, and my judgment is just, because I do not seek my own will, but the will of the one who sent me.

John 8:
28 Then Jesus said, “When you lift up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am he, and I do nothing on my own initiative, but I speak just what the Father taught me.

John 14:
10 Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father is in me? The words that I say to you, I do not speak on my own initiative, but the Father residing in me performs his miraculous deeds.

What could be clearer?

If Jesus were only a man, how could He say, “You are from below, I am from above; you are of this world, I am not of this world. I told you that you would die in your sins, for you will die in your sins unless you believe that I am He. (John 8:23-24 RSV)”

Because he was Divinely created and appointed by the Father.

And again in John 8:54-58 it declares - Jesus answered, "If I glorify myself, my glory is nothing; it is my Father who glorifies me, of whom you say that He is your God. But you have not known him; I know him. If I said, I do not know him, I should be a liar like you; but I do know him and I keep his word. Your father Abraham rejoiced that he was to see my day; he saw it and was glad. The Jews then said to him, "You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham? Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.” So they took up stones to throw at him; but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple (RSV).

What is this supposed to prove?

If Jesus was just a man influenced by a divine wind, he remains a man and if only a man he sinned by declaring that he existed before he was begotten. Jesus lied.

Where did Jesus say that he existed before he was begotten?

If Christadelphians say Jesus did not sin and clearly we see here that he did so: lied. If Christadelphians say that man wrote the scriptures and left out something then the fallacy of the illegitimate totality transfer applies.

Please stop using the phrase 'illegitimate totality transfer', since it is clear that you do not know what it means, and you consistently misapply it.

In John 10:30-31 Jesus said boldly states, without any thus saith the lord to qualify speaking on God's behalf that - I and the Father are one and then the Jewish religious leaders took up stones again to stone him for saying this.

He also explains that they have mistaken him when they think he is claiming to be equal with God.

If Christadelphians say Jesus was influenced, or inhabited by God's Spirit Power, then Jesus would be divine. To say this, denies that Jesus was only just a human man because He had to be divinely inspired to say these things. If only divinely inspired, Jesus remains only just a man, and thus sinned and is not perfect.

Please explain this process of reasoning. How is it that you argue that God cannot keep a mortal man from sinning?

If Jesus was only a man endowed with divine power, he remains a man, and if a man, he transgressed the law by blaspheming. According to Christadelphians, Jesus was only a sinless man who kept the law but we see clearly, that if Jesus were only just a man, he sinned.

When did Jesus ever say anything which would be blasphemy for a mortal man to say?

How could Jesus be sinless, when we can see clearly that he broke the law? If Christadelphians say that man wrote the scriptures and left out something then the fallacy of the illegitimate totality transfer applies. Or if Christadelphians say Jesus was inspired by God to say these things, the scriptures need to be stretched and contorted thus proving Christadelphians committing the illegitimate totality transfer to prove their bias.

Please stop using the phrase 'illegitimate totality transfer', since it is clear that you do not know what it means, and you consistently misapply it.

Christadelphians build their doctrine of atonement on the premise that Jesus was only a man endowed with power from on high. If this was the case, then Jesus could not say these things. If so, then Jesus was Divine. If not, He lied and committed sin. You cannot have it both ways.

If Jesus, only a man, sinned then the Christadelphians are still lost in sin and the atonement they declare is built upon false premises and construct. A divinely inspired man sinned by declaring that He existed before he was begotten and that he and the Father were one, all without declaring a qualifying statement of — thus says the lord proves Jesus sinned. Christadelphians believe that Jesus was sinless and kept the whole law. How could he? You cannot have it both ways.

I have already demonstrated that the apostles teach that the atonement was predicated on Christ being a man, not on Christ being God. I shall repeat my arguments for you tonight.

[B. W.]

You seem to be insisting that God had a literal sexual union with Mary, and contributed His own physical 'God DNA' to the ovum which He fertilized. Is this what you are saying?

If the Holy Spirit is just only a creative force of God's divine power, then how could she conceive?

It's called a parallelism, and indicates that the Holy Spirit is the 'power of the Most High'. It's not the only place where the Holy Spirit is referred to as a power.

I find this utterly pagan and totally distasteful. Your god is no better than the pagan gods who came down and had sex with women they liked.

Mr. Fortigurn, do not be so daffy! Christian's certainly do not believe that God had a physical union with Mary. I asked you to ponder the DNA question that is all. If your minds eye is so unclean to think of such thing, you know not what Christians truly believe, and have a mind set of impureness.

Therefore, are you declaring that God, the very God who created the entire heavenly universe and the earth by His spoken word could not speak and create life inside the womb and infuse it as He will by his power?

As God spoke out from the whirlwind to Job, He speaks to all, Job 38:2-33, "Who is this that darkens counsel by words without knowledge? 3 Gird up your loins like a man, I will question you, and you shall declare to me. 4 "Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth? Tell me, if you have understanding. 5 Who determined its measurements--surely you know! Or who stretched the line upon it? 6 On what were its bases sunk, or who laid its cornerstone…12 "Have you commanded the morning since your days began, and caused the dawn to know its place... 17 Have the gates of death been revealed to you, or have you seen the gates of deep darkness? 18 Have you comprehended the expanse of the earth? Declare, if you know all this.”

Fortigurn, can you answer as Job did? Job 42: 1-6 - Then Job answered the LORD: “I know that thou canst do all things, and that no purpose of Yours can be thwarted. 'Who is this that hides counsel without knowledge?' Therefore I have uttered what I did not understand, things too wonderful for me, which I did not know. 'Hear, and I will speak; I will question you, and you declare to me.' I had heard of thee by the hearing of the ear, but now my eye sees thee; therefore I despise myself, and repent in dust and ashes.”

Mr. Fortigurn, you dare say God cannot do the miraculous through his spoken word? God of very God, Who can do all things, even create DNA if He so chooses by the speaking it into existence? Who are you to say what God cannot do or can? Who are any of us! God speaks and does as He will, speak or not speak DNA into being — who are any of us to say — or deny - what He can do or not?

“God is not man, that he should lie, or a son of man, that he should repent. Has He said, and will He not also do it? Or has He spoken, and will He not fulfill it?” Numbers 23:19

We Christians do see the evidence of what He speaks as it is written; “Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.” John 3:13-14

And again it is written; “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God; all things were made through him, and without him was not anything made that was made” John 1:1-3

Truly, I Timothy 3:16 does not lie — “And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.”

Yes we Christians have evidence that shouts to the Heavens! God's expressed intelligence that would guide us into all truth has come in the flesh and dwelt amongst us. The Word - Logos - of God! Truly God and man reconciled! GLORY!!

As Jesus declared in John 8: 42-44, “but now you seek to kill me, a man who has told you the truth which I heard from God; this is not what Abraham did. You do what your father did." They said to him, "We were not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God." Jesus said to them, "If God were your Father, you would love me, for I proceeded and came forth from God; I came not of my own accord, but he sent me. Why do you not understand what I say? It is because you cannot bear to hear my word. You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks according to his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies.

John 8:54-58 - Jesus answered, "If I glorify myself, my glory is nothing; it is my Father who glorifies me, of whom you say that He is your God. But you have not known him; I know him. If I said, I do not know him, I should be a liar like you; but I do know him and I keep his word. Your father Abraham rejoiced that he was to see my day; he saw it and was glad. The Jews then said to him, "You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham? Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.” So they took up stones to throw at him; but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple (RSV).

In John 10:30-31 Jesus said boldly states, without any thus saith the lord to qualify speaking on God's behalf that - I and the Father are one and then the Jewish religious leaders took up stones again to stone him for saying this. Is this not what you are doing to God's people?
-
-
Mr. Fortigurn, God's word says what it says, do not add to it least ye be found a liar. Jesus is knocking at your door. A slow rap earlier but has now turned into a heavy pounding!
-
-
-
-
Can you not hear the Word, Mr. Fortigurn?
-
-
-
-
Can you not hear the Word pounding at your door, Mr. Fortigurn?
-
-
-
-
Can you not hear the Word beating upon your Heart, Mr. Fortigurn?
-
-
-
-
pounding ! Pounding !! POUNDING !!!

[B. W.]

I have already demonstrated that the apostles teach that the atonement was predicated on Christ being a man, not on Christ being God. I shall repeat my arguments for you tonight.

No, I'll repeat till you here for you again and again -

If Jesus was just a man influenced by a divine wind, he remains a man and if only a man he sinned by declaring that he existed before he was begotten. Jesus lied. If Christadelphians say Jesus did not sin and clearly we see here that he did so: He lied.

He said this in John 8:54-59 or have you forgotten?

Also, in John 10:30-31 Jesus said boldly states, without any thus says the lord to qualify speaking on God's behalf that - I and the Father are one and then the Jewish religious leaders took up stones again to stone him for saying this.

If Christadelphians say Jesus was influenced, or inhabited by God's Spirit Power, then Jesus would be divine. To say this, denies that Jesus was only just a human man because He had to be divinely inspired to say these things. If only divinely inspired, Jesus remains only just a man, and thus sinned and is not perfect.

How did he Blaspheme? - As a man he Violated the 1'st Commandment and second too: As God manifest in the flesh — he would not sin because Jesus would be speaking of Himself — not a power.

If Jesus was only a man endowed with divine power, he remains a man, and if a man, he transgressed the law by blaspheming. According to Christadelphians, Jesus was only a sinless man who kept the law but we see clearly, that if Jesus were only just a man, he sinned.

How could Jesus be sinless, when we can see clearly that he broke the law? If Christadelphians say that man wrote the scriptures and left out something then the error is theirs. If Christadelphians say Jesus was inspired by God to say these things, the scriptures are used, stretched, and contorted thus proving — Jesus a man — committed sin and the cross no effect.

Christadelphians build their doctrine of atonement on the premise that Jesus was only a man endowed with power from on high. If this was the case, then Jesus could not say he was with Abraham before — in the PAST. If so, then Jesus was Divine. If not, He lied and committed sin. You cannot have it both ways.

Again, A divinely inspired man, no matter how divinely winded would sin by declaring that He existed before he was begotten and that he and the Father were one, all without declaring a qualifying statement of — thus says the lord. Christadelphians believe that Jesus was sinless and yet, kept the whole law. How could he? You cannot have it both ways.

If Jesus, only a man, sinned then the Lord of the convent is being trampled underfoot and counts the blood of the covenant a common thing and thus insults the Spirit of Grace as you have done repeatedly stating the blood of Christ does not atone.

Hebrews 10: 29-31 “A man who has violated the law of Moses dies without mercy at the testimony of two or three witnesses. How much worse punishment do you think will be deserved by the man who has spurned the Son of God, and profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and outraged the Spirit of grace? For we know him who said, "Vengeance is mine, I will repay." And again, "The Lord will judge his people." It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

What is so fearful about annihilation at the time of judgment? Nothing! However, Eternity as damned is a fearful thing. The wicked live forever on too for this to be fearful, Mr. Fortigurn.
-
-
-
Mr. Fortigurn a great sin resides near by. Flee from it Sir!
-
-
FLEE!!!!
-
-

[B. W.]

I asked once before:
Fortigurn, can you call Jesus Christ your only Master and Lord?

Fortigurn, can you like Thomas says in John 20:28, "My Lord and my God!"

You answered - Yes.

My Answer again is:

Therefore the bible tells us not to place our trust in man but if you call Christ your only Master and Lord and My Lord and my God then what about God the Father? Is He not also your Lord and Master? You cannot serve two Masters.

If you say — Jesus is your Lord — you broke the first and second commandments. How can you say Jesus is your Lord, if He is not what the bible proclaims — both God and man?

Since you call Jesus Christ your only Lord and Master, are you not therefore committing idolatry as the law of God says plainly?

If you do not call Jesus Christ your only Lord and Master, then are you not disobeying the truth of God's word?

God is still calling for you - and He is knocking! For the love of God, you know not what path you are taking! Run to Christ who can truly save while you still can! Run !! Run!!! RUN!!!!

[Fortigurn]

You're not even reading my posts, are you?

[B. W.]

You're not even reading my posts, are you?

Yes, I read your post, both past and current. You can quote mass amounts of scriptures to back up your position. Likewise, I can use the same scriptures that you use to prove the Christian position. In the famous words of Moe Howard, “We are getting no-place fast.”

Illegitimate totality transfer: The various meanings that a word has in all its contexts in the Bible are all read into a single passage. You claim Christian's do this but you are mistaken.

It seems Christadelphians manipulate this transfer, as your massive post clearly pose. You state Jesus was only a man and go on blissfully quoting scriptures to prove your context. Is that not a form of illegitimate identity transfer instead that kisses up to the illegitimate totality transfer in a round robin kind of way?

Christians read the same scriptures, and see them differently: God in Christ reconciling the world unto Himself within the context of what all the bible teaches and declares about Jesus as true, not selected verses to prove He was not whom He claimed to be, based on every scripture where it states Jesus was only a man.

The Franciscan razor cuts through the illegitimate totality transfer and identity transfer and shaves each layer one layer at a time till one discovers theological truth. It is based on this principle found in scripture: Hebrews 4:12 “For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and spirit, of joints and marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart.”

Jesus used parables and stories to convey scriptural truth. Does using stories promote the illegitimate use of totality of transfer and identity? If Christadelphians have their way, it would, as it is not the accepted one hundred and one scriptures to prove a narrow point of view. You can use stories to convey scripture truths.

What the illegitimate totality of transfer really does is to look at all the various meanings that a single word has in all its contexts in the Bible and then all these meanings are all read into a single passage without making a distinction. Christian really do make distinctions based on the what the whole bible says and apply meanings within context, contextual continuity, and textual continuity.

It appears Christadelphians promote something else? You apply only one meaning to a word to mean the same thing everywhere, producing the illegitimate identity transfer. Even when the same word has more than one meaning, Christadelphians seem unable to accept words functioning in more than one capacity to convey a single scriptural truth.

Yes, using the theological methods- Attempts to deduce theological conclusions directly from the grammatical structure of a language; Attempts to deduce theological conclusions directly from the number and relation of vocabulary synonyms; Attempts to use etymology instead of the current meaning of a word; Attempts to deduce a particular world view on the basis of combining the various senses of a single word; illegitimate totality transfer; illegitimate identity transfer are all part of true theological discourse.

Arguing each of these positions is a waste of time and does not prove anyone more intelligent than another is. This can puff the mind of a snob like a balloon and cause reason to float away on the hot air of endless dialogue.

Doing so, does this, the bible is reduced to non-meaning and is in and of itself has become untranslatable. How? One cannot draw theological conclusions directly from the grammatical structure of a language because to deduce theological conclusions directly from the number and relation of vocabulary synonyms counter the use etymology instead of the current meaning of a word which to do so involves deducing a particular world view on the basis of combining the various senses of a single word, thus illegitimate totality transfer cannot make a distinction because illegitimate identity transfer occurs.

Is it any wonder Jesus spoke in parables? Scribes, Pharisees, and Sadducees truly swat at gnats but shallow a camel. “Oh NO! That is the illegitimate totality transfer, you cannot infer that from scripture about anyone living today — it does not mean that! Look I'll quote one thousands scriptures to prove you cannot do that,” say the modern Scribes, Pharisees, and Sadducees.

Truth is truth. The razor simply shaves the frost away so you can see the Lord and the salvation He brings. The Bible says what it says, and says what it means.

I am not interested in anything except this: You are on the verge of committing a great horrible sin. Your eternal destiny is hanging by a thread. For the Love of God, Fortigurn, cannot you see where you are heading?

You desire to argue in endless repetitive scripture wars. Why? Too proselytize? Too make all of Christendom bow before Christadelphians who believe blood cannot atone, and that only man can save? Save from what? Annihilation is nothing! Nothing to fear, as annihilation is nothing at all. We Christians cannot and will not bow before a religious system that offers no eternal hope and is without God in the world.

Why do you count the blood of the covenant an unholy thing and continue spurn the Son of God?

Hebrews 10: 29-31 “A man who has violated the law of Moses dies without mercy at the testimony of two or three witnesses. How much worse punishment do you think will be deserved by the man who has spurned the Son of God, and profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and outraged the Spirit of grace? For we know him who said, "Vengeance is mine, I will repay." And again, "The Lord will judge his people." It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

Hebrews 6: 4-8, “For it is impossible to restore again to repentance those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the age to come, if they then commit apostasy, since they crucify the Son of God on their own account and hold him up to contempt.”

Why are you holding the Son of God in such contempt? God manifest in the flesh to reconcile the world back to God? Why do you count the blood of the new covenant as a profane thing?

You are approaching a precipice. I worry about your eternal destiny, not to earn brownie points in some manner of round robin debate over the use and definitions of theological terms.

Fortigurn, cannot you hear Jesus calling you?

[Fortigurn]

Christian's certainly do not believe that God had a physical union with Mary.

Then why did you go on about God's DNA uniting with Mary?

I asked you to ponder the DNA question that is all.

Why?

If your minds eye is so unclean to think of such thing, you know not what Christians truly believe, and have a mind set of impureness.

I don't have a 'mind set of impureness'. You were the one who raised the idea of God sharing His DNA with Mary.

[quoteTherefore, are you declaring that God, the very God who created the entire heavenly universe and the earth by His spoken word could not speak and create life inside the womb and infuse it as He will by his power? [/quote]

No I am not. I said that myself. I said that God can do anything He likes. I said that particularly because you seemed intent on suggesting that Christ couldn't be the son of God unless God shared His 'DNA' with Mary, which is utterly ridiculous.

Mr. Fortigurn, you dare say God cannot do the miraculous through his spoken word? God of very God, Who can do all things, even create DNA if He so chooses by the speaking it into existence?

No I didn't say that, I said the complete opposite. Clearly you are not reading my posts.

Who are you to say what God cannot do or can? Who are any of us! God speaks and does as He will, speak or not speak DNA into being — who are any of us to say — or deny - what He can do or not?

I agree entirely. But you were the one who said it had to happen in a particular way, not me.

We Christians do see the evidence of what He speaks as it is written; “Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.” John 3:13-14

I agree.

And again it is written; “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God; all things were made through him, and without him was not anything made that was made” John 1:1-3

Well you need to correct that pronoun, but apart from that I agree.

Truly, I Timothy 3:16 does not lie — “And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.”

You need to read this in a modern translation, but apart from that, I agree - 1 Timothy 3:16 does not lie.

As Jesus declared in John 8: 42-44, “but now you seek to kill me, a man who has told you the truth which I heard from God; this is not what Abraham did. You do what your father did." They said to him, "We were not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God." Jesus said to them, "If God were your Father, you would love me, for I proceeded and came forth from God; I came not of my own accord, but he sent me. Why do you not understand what I say? It is because you cannot bear to hear my word. You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks according to his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies.

I agree.

John 8:54-58 - Jesus answered, "If I glorify myself, my glory is nothing; it is my Father who glorifies me, of whom you say that He is your God. But you have not known him; I know him. If I said, I do not know him, I should be a liar like you; but I do know him and I keep his word. Your father Abraham rejoiced that he was to see my day; he saw it and was glad. The Jews then said to him, "You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham? Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.” So they took up stones to throw at him; but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple (RSV).

I agree.

In John 10:30-31 Jesus said boldly states, without any thus saith the lord to qualify speaking on God's behalf that - I and the Father are one and then the Jewish religious leaders took up stones again to stone him for saying this.

I have already shown you that Christ made it utterly clear that he was not speaking on his own authority, and I have also shown you that Christ refuted the false belief the Jews held when they heard his words here in John 10-:30-31.

Is this not what you are doing to God's people?

No.

[Fortigurn]

I have already demonstrated that the apostles teach that the atonement was predicated on Christ being a man, not on Christ being God. I shall repeat my arguments for you tonight.

No, I'll repeat till you here for you again and again -

If Jesus was just a man influenced by a divine wind, he remains a man and if only a man he sinned by declaring that he existed before he was begotten. Jesus lied. If Christadelphians say Jesus did not sin and clearly we see here that he did so: He lied.

He said this in John 8:54-59 or have you forgotten?

I haven't forgotten. I already answered this.

Also, in John 10:30-31 Jesus said boldly states, without any thus says the lord to qualify speaking on God's behalf that - I and the Father are one and then the Jewish religious leaders took up stones again to stone him for saying this.

I answered this also. I have already shown you that Christ made it utterly clear that he was not speaking on his own authority, and I have also shown you that Christ refuted the false belief the Jews held when they heard his words here in John 10-:30-31.

You're not reading my posts.

If Jesus was only a man endowed with divine power, he remains a man, and if a man, he transgressed the law by blaspheming. According to Christadelphians, Jesus was only a sinless man who kept the law but we see clearly, that if Jesus were only just a man, he sinned.

He didn't blaspheme.

How could Jesus be sinless, when we can see clearly that he broke the law?

He didn't break the Law.

If Christadelphians say that man wrote the scriptures and left out something then the error is theirs.

We don't say any such thing.

Christadelphians build their doctrine of atonement on the premise that Jesus was only a man endowed with power from on high. If this was the case, then Jesus could not say he was with Abraham before — in the PAST. If so, then Jesus was Divine. If not, He lied and committed sin. You cannot have it both ways.

I have already answered this. Please address my reply.

What is so fearful about annihilation at the time of judgment? Nothing!

You don't think that anihilation is a fearful thing? How interesting.

All you're doing here is repeating yourself. You're not reading my posts, you're putting words in my mouth which I've never spoken, and you're not addressing my arguments.

[Fortigurn]

For Jesus not to lie, He would have to be God as it is written in I Timothy 3:16 - And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory (KJV).

First of all, you are begging the question when you say that for Jesus to not lie he would have had to be God. Secondly, that passage does not say that Jesus was, or is, God. Don't take my word for it, read for yourself in a modern evangelical translation like the NET.

Philippians 2:5-12 - …Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Where does this say Jesus is God?

We Christians affirm the scriptures without any fallacy of the illegitimate totality transfer.

You don't even understand what the fallacy of the illegitimate totality transfer is.

The Bible says what it says. We come to the bible in humble prayer and say, teach me Lord, how can this be? You are both God and Man show me how? He does so and we discover the great mystery of godliness - One God in three persons, blessed Trinity.

The Bible doesn't say this. If it did, I would have been given a list of quotes by now.

Christadelphians discover a man and sacrifice that can never atone and remain without hope and without God in this world and in the age to come. Why, Jesus as only a man truly sinned.

This is a gross misrepresentation of our beliefs.

You cannot have it both ways. Bible says Jesus kept the law and did not sin. How is this possible for a man who lied about existing before he was begotten and being one with the Father? Please, take up stones and throw at Jesus and not us. We did not declare this, Jesus did. The bible says what it says - stop adding to it.

I have already answered this. Jesus did not say he existed before he was born.

Fortigurn, haughty eyes are the look of disdain upon others that spend countless hours (as this thread clearly displays) attempting to destroy faith and hope in the true God that the bible really teaches. Are you doing this? Is this your purpose here?

No I am not doing this, and no that is not my purpose here. I am answering questions and arguments with which I am challenged.

You know not the work of the cross, nor do you know the real Jesus of the Bible. You cannot hide your haughty eyes looking down on the rest of Christendom because they cannot acknowledged a Jesus that lied and sinned as you do.

This is not only a grotesque character judgment and blatant ad hominem, it is also completely untrue. I do not believe in 'a Jesus that lied and sinned'.

You cannot have it both ways: Jesus, if only a man, sinned. To not have sinned - Jesus would have to be God. To be God, or even both God and man, Christadelphians disdain. Again, you cannot have it both ways in this matter. Choose pride or reason - choose.

I have answered this more than once, but you are not reading my posts.

I again implore you by the love of God do you want to know the real Jesus?

I already do know him.

Mr. Fortigurn, if the Holy Spirit is not also God, you could not blaspheme an - it.

Well that's a non-argument. If the tabernacle is not also God, you could not blaspheme 'it'? Try Revelation 13:6.

[Fortigurn]

I asked once before:
Fortigurn, can you call Jesus Christ your only Master and Lord?

Fortigurn, can you like Thomas says in John 20:28, "My Lord and my God!"

You answered - Yes.

My Answer again is:

Therefore the bible tells us not to place our trust in man but if you call Christ your only Master and Lord and My Lord and my God then what about God the Father? Is He not also your Lord and Master? You cannot serve two Masters.

If you say — Jesus is your Lord — you broke the first and second commandments. How can you say Jesus is your Lord, if He is not what the bible proclaims — both God and man?

Since you call Jesus Christ your only Lord and Master, are you not therefore committing idolatry as the law of God says plainly?

If you do not call Jesus Christ your only Lord and Master, then are you not disobeying the truth of God's word?

God is still calling for you - and He is knocking! For the love of God, you know not what path you are taking! Run to Christ who can truly save while you still can! Run !! Run!!! RUN!!!!

I have already answered all of this. Please respond to my posts.

[Fortigurn]

You're not even reading my posts, are you?

Yes, I read your post, both past and current.

Then why aren't you actually adressing them, why are you putting words in my mouth which I never used, and why are you repeating yourself without actually dealing with my arguments?

You can quote mass amounts of scriptures to back up your position. Likewise, I can use the same scriptures that you use to prove the Christian position.

I would love to see you do that.

Illegitimate totality transfer: The various meanings that a word has in all its contexts in the Bible are all read into a single passage.

I'm so glad you finally looked it up. Now please use it properly, or don't use it at all.

You claim Christian's do this but you are mistaken.

I didn't 'claim Christian's do this', I pointed out one instance in which it was done on this forum.

It seems Christadelphians manipulate this transfer, as your massive post clearly pose.

What does this mean?

You state Jesus was only a man and go on blissfully quoting scriptures to prove your context. Is that not a form of illegitimate identity transfer instead that kisses up to the illegitimate totality transfer in a round robin kind of way?

No it is not. I see you looked up the definition of this term, but you still don't know what it means.

Christians read the same scriptures, and see them differently: God in Christ reconciling the world unto Himself within the context of what all the bible teaches and declares about Jesus as true, not selected verses to prove He was not whom He claimed to be, based on every scripture where it states Jesus was only a man.

What are you talking about? I agree that God was in Christ reconciling the world unto Himself. It's you who believe that Christ was God reconciling the world unto Himself, not that God was in Christ.

The Franciscan razor cuts through the illegitimate totality transfer and identity transfer and shaves each layer one layer at a time till one discovers theological truth. It is based on this principle found in scripture: Hebrews 4:12 “For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and spirit, of joints and marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart.”

I agree.

Jesus used parables and stories to convey scriptural truth. Does using stories promote the illegitimate use of totality of transfer and identity?

No.

If Christadelphians have their way, it would, as it is not the accepted one hundred and one scriptures to prove a narrow point of view. You can use stories to convey scripture truths.

What are you talking about? We don't disagree with this.

What the illegitimate totality of transfer really does is to look at all the various meanings that a single word has in all its contexts in the Bible and then all these meanings are all read into a single passage without making a distinction.

I've told you this before.

Christian really do make distinctions based on the what the whole bible says and apply meanings within context, contextual continuity, and textual continuity.

No, not always.

It appears Christadelphians promote something else? You apply only one meaning to a word to mean the same thing everywhere, producing the illegitimate identity transfer.

No we do nothing of the kind.

Even when the same word has more than one meaning, Christadelphians seem unable to accept words functioning in more than one capacity to convey a single scriptural truth.

No we don't do this.

Yes, using the theological methods- Attempts to deduce theological conclusions directly from the grammatical structure of a language; Attempts to deduce theological conclusions directly from the number and relation of vocabulary synonyms; Attempts to use etymology instead of the current meaning of a word; Attempts to deduce a particular world view on the basis of combining the various senses of a single word; illegitimate totality transfer; illegitimate identity transfer are all part of true theological discourse.

Are you saying that all of these are 'part of true theological discourse'? Including the logical fallacies? I think you need to read and understand what you copy/paste. I don't think this is all 'part of true theological discourse' at all.

One cannot draw theological conclusions directly from the grammatical structure of a language because to deduce theological conclusions directly from the number and relation of vocabulary synonyms counter the use etymology instead of the current meaning of a word which to do so involves deducing a particular world view on the basis of combining the various senses of a single word, thus illegitimate totality transfer cannot make a distinction because illegitimate identity transfer occurs.

I see you're copy/pasting again, but it doesn't look like you understand what is written here. I do agree with it, however.

Is it any wonder Jesus spoke in parables? Scribes, Pharisees, and Sadducees truly swat at gnats but shallow a camel. “Oh NO! That is the illegitimate totality transfer, you cannot infer that from scripture about anyone living today — it does not mean that! Look I'll quote one thousands scriptures to prove you cannot do that,” say the modern Scribes, Pharisees, and Sadducees.

What has this to do with anything? It's a totally random statement.

Truth is truth. The razor simply shaves the frost away so you can see the Lord and the salvation He brings. The Bible says what it says, and says what it means.

I am not interested in anything except this: You are on the verge of committing a great horrible sin. Your eternal destiny is hanging by a thread. For the Love of God, Fortigurn, cannot you see where you are heading?

Now you're ranting freely, and not addressing the topic of this thread at all.

You desire to argue in endless repetitive scripture wars.

Believe me I don't. I find this extremely objectionable.

Why? Too proselytize?

No, I have already explained this.

Too make all of Christendom bow before Christadelphians who believe blood cannot atone, and that only man can save?

No.

Save from what? Annihilation is nothing! Nothing to fear, as annihilation is nothing at all.

How can you say this?

We Christians cannot and will not bow before a religious system that offers no eternal hope and is without God in the world.

What 'religious system' would that be?

Why do you count the blood of the covenant an unholy thing and continue spurn the Son of God?

I don't.

Why are you holding the Son of God in such contempt? God manifest in the flesh to reconcile the world back to God? Why do you count the blood of the new covenant as a profane thing?

I don't do any of these things.

You are approaching a precipice. I worry about your eternal destiny, not to earn brownie points in some manner of round robin debate over the use and definitions of theological terms.

In other words, you've reached the point at which you are both unwilling and unable to respond to my posts, so you're just throwing out a random rant.

Fortigurn, cannot you hear Jesus calling you?

He did that years ago. I answered.

[MHz]

Hi Guys,
Interesting read so far.

For myself, when I refer to God this is one, the creator of all, the only one that the Holy Spirit is a 'part of', referred to as 'hand of', and (if the voice is heard by man) it is this Spirit that is heard. The very first book is God speaking and the Spirit making those words manifest. The relationship is established in the first chapter also, image and likeness. These are two different 'things'. One deals with our appearance and the other is we were made male and female, two yet one.

God has thought and a voice, once a thought becomes spoken it is through the Spirit that this is made to come to pass.

Jesus is Christ, who existed, as Christ from before anything the Bible covers. He has words spoken in the OT;
Luke:24:27
And beginning at Moses and all the prophets,
he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.
It is important to note that only concerns things about Him, not about everything said by God in the OT.

Later

Proverbs:8 tells us about Christ and the wisdom He has about God.

[B. W.]

Mr. Fortigurn, the reason that it appears to you that I am not reading your post is that I am not answering you the way you want. If you read my post again, you'll discover that I do answer all your questions but not in a manner you are familiar with.

In the first page post of this thread you asked for Christians to give you specific scriptures that prove the doctrine of the Trinity and scripture evidence for it. It is there, you erred. First and foremost, what is doctrine? Doctrine means something taught; principles of a religion, political party, individual, etc; Tenet or tenets of a belief, etc.

The Doctrine of the Trinity is based on principles found in scripture. There is evidence for it within the scriptures. You want facts from the bible, don't you? You assume Christians cannot produce any. Thus you demand and demand proof of this Doctrine. Many have given you the proof which most of it comes from the same scriptures you use to refute this doctrine.

What you are doing reminds me of the paradigm of logical fallacy. What is that? The paradigm of logical fallacy is clearly exemplified by this story. A great college English professor stands before his class and ask, “Does anyone know what a paradigm is?” and one of his students reply, “It is about Twenty Cents.”

In other words, one hears what they want too and deduces by logic what they perceive as truth based on many varied factors which produce a fallacy of reason, worldview, outlook, doctrine, belief, and etc.

You asked for specific scriptures that prove the doctrine of the Trinity, therefore I will give them to you. However, we will do so according to a few rules. Why? To thwart this paradigm from happening: these rules will clarify what is truly meant in our endeavor and that no more misunderstanding occurs between us.

But before we begin, let me state clearly that the Doctrine of the Trinity stands or falls on who Jesus Christ is. To understand the Doctrine of the Trinity is to understand who Jesus is and what He did.

If you cannot grasp Jesus, you will not take hold of the Doctrine of the Trinity. Therefore, all of Christendom stands or falls on who Jesus is and what He did as well as the Doctrine of the Trinity.

The Doctrine of the Trinity is found in Christ Jesus. If you want proof of its existence, look no further than Jesus. If Jesus is not who he claims to be, then there is no Trinity. If no Trinity then there is no salvation Christians profess and you have won and can be content in this grand accomplishment. If you cannot disprove this Doctrine, what then?

If you agree, we will now begin to explore the Doctrine of the Trinity by looking at Jesus Christ and what the bible truly says on this matter a few scriptures at a time just like you asked before but this time by following a few rules to maintain order.

We will proceed in an orderly fashion, slowly, and take as long or short as it takes. I will begin with a scripture and then you will follow — one subject at a time wherever it leads. No more round robin endless debates on multiple themes. Others that read this thread please feel free to chime in and post but I ask everyone to stay within the topics theme presented within the frame under discussion.

We will begin with one scripture that sums it all up about Jesus and go from there. You asked for specific scriptures that prove the doctrine of the Trinity and scripture evidence for it. Now we will begin.

The Greek language is very specific here. It means what the English translations means. This is why I choose it.

I Timothy 3:16 “God was manifest in the flesh”

I ask, how so?
-
-
-

[Forge]

Err...

Who could save the world from its sins? A mere man?