Who died on the cross? - a Hall of Fame thread.

[godrulz]

Incredible.

Yes, A for effort and content (what I read).

 

[godrulz]

Go to hell, Newman. You're as much a pervert as AMR is.

What a grouch!:shocked:

I disagree with AMR and he does not always like me, but he is an asset to the Church as are you and I. We need to learn to appreciate our differences and have love and unity without compromising truth. Some of these things are difficult subjects. You totally ad hominem the debate instead of engaging substantially with his detailed arguments (he will accuse me of the exact same thing, but so be it).

Cmon, take the anti-grouch pills (sshhh.....they are placebos, but they should work) I sent you.:wazzup:

 

[Z Man]

You do know that implied profanity is a no-no, right? You do know that the topic is one of the most sacred topics of the Scripture, no?

Persons that don't care end up erecting false intellectual idols and go off worshiping them. God does not expect the faithful to be ignorant rubes that thump bibles and are unable to give an answer for the reasons for their faith.

If you don't care no one is compelling you to.

First of all, I didn't swear. For some reason this website thinks that the 'c' word ending in py is bad.

Secondly, the only important matter regarding Jesus dying on the cross is did he really raise from the dead. Arguing who or what Jesus was while on the cross is retarded because no one knows. So, everything that has been argued on this forum topic has been nothing but mere speculation. Yet, you all act as if your opinions are from God himself! At least you argue that way.

Details this minuscule, tedious, and speculative are irrelevant.

 

[Evoken]

First of all, I didn't swear. For some reason this website thinks that the 'c' word ending in py is bad.

Secondly, the only important matter regarding Jesus dying on the cross is did he really raise from the dead. Arguing who or what Jesus was while on the cross is retarded because no one knows. So, everything that has been argued on this forum topic has been nothing but mere speculation. Yet, you all act as if your opinions are from God himself! At least you argue that way.

Details this minuscule, tedious, and speculative are irrelevant.

Ok, since you "rather be flying!", why don't you just let people who do care about this carry on with the conversation? Or is there any substantial contribution you plan to make to this thread?


Evo

 

[godrulz]

You can forge quotes all day and attribute them to me, Sozo, but it does not diminish your error. You are embarrassing yourself with these tactics.

I seriously cannot understand why the moderators allow a post's content to be forged. I can see how it would get out of hand quickly as forged posts traverse pages of threads. Ultimately a historical record that is left behind, absent the current context, will be an unjust and an inaccurate rendering of the supposed discourse these forums are intended to be used for.

This is a bad precedent to be allowed to stand without action being taken.

I commend you for your godly grace. I think I have been patient with him in the face of personal attacks.

Are you sure it is just God dealing with him or is he moving in selfish flesh and even demonic oppression?

 

[beloved57]

Yes I did. You confuse the form Christ took at the Incarnation with the essential essence of God. God is one essence with three personal subsistences in the Persons of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

There is no confusion about no form..Christ is eternal , the man christ..and I am going to put it to you like this..I percieve that you are denying that christ came in the flesh..and 1 jn 4 says


2Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:
3And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

Notice it says he that denieth or confesseth not that Jesus christ is come in the flesh is not of God and in fact is antichrist..

Notice it does not say he that confesseth not that the Son of God has come in the flesh..but jesus christ..
You are doing just that ..because you are denying the eternal exsistence of jesus christ, not as God the son but as the man christ jesus set up from eternity and anointed before the world began to be prophet priest and King of Gods elect.., it was then that Jesus christ was Joined to the eternal word God the son , who you teach was begotten according to His Divine Nature..That is Blasphemy. You are of the spirit of antichrist amr..

 

[Z Man]

Ok, since you "rather be flying!", why don't you just let people who do care about this carry on with the conversation? Or is there any substantial contribution you plan to make to this thread?


Evo

Because I feel that it is my duty to stamp out ignorance on this website, just like I assume you feel that it is your duty to continue to argue moot points.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

Arguing who or what Jesus was while on the cross is retarded because no one knows. So, everything that has been argued on this forum topic has been nothing but mere speculation.

How so? Have you not reviewed the Scriptural support given in the numerous posts for the various aspects of the Incarnation. How is that speculation? Even if, for the sake of argument, I grant your position, is speculation on worthy topics something we should not do with the God-given intellects we possess? Is not the pursuit of truth, even if unsuccessful, a worthy endeavor?

What exactly is your issue?

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

2Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:
3And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

Notice it says he that denieth or confesseth not that Jesus christ is come in the flesh is not of God and in fact is antichrist..

Notice it does not say he that confesseth not that the Son of God has come in the flesh..but jesus christ..
You are doing just that ..because you are denying the eternal exsistence of jesus christ, not as God the son but as the man christ jesus set up from eternity and anointed before the world began to be prophet priest and King of Gods elect.., it was then that Jesus christ was Joined to the eternal word God the son , who you teach was begotten according to His Divine Nature

I agree completely with the verse in question and have never maintained anything but the truth of the verses.

The issue is that you make an unwarranted leap from the passage to conclude that Christ is "the man christ jesus set up from eternity". What in world are you talking about? Who is this "man" that "Christ Jesus set up from eternity" that you are talking about?

It is a challenge to make sense of your posts as they are often grammatical train wrecks so please be very clear about what you are trying to say in your next post so I do not misunderstand you.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

Because I feel that it is my duty to stamp out ignorance on this website

Duty presumes some moral or legal force. From whence does your obligation arise? If you say 'God', then you land directly on the horns of a dilemma, for God clearly commands us to seek out the truth of the Scriptures.

Can you give us your laundry list of "ignorance" that you feel obliged to "stamp out"? I will go out on a limb here and assume first on the list is 'Calvinism', right?:chuckle:

 

[Lighthouse]

This whole forum is nothing but people's speculation. Why do any of you think your 'opinions' are the truth?

A lot of people died on the cross. Jesus was one of them. Why speculate any further? Who cares if he changed forms or not, if he was man or spirit, etc... Who freakin' cares? I fail to see how any of this nonsense is relevant.

It matters who Jesus was. And if you can't see that, then your Calvinism is the least of your worries.

 

[beloved57]

amr says

Who is this "man" that "Christ Jesus set up from eternity" that you are talking about?

The messiah who was to come from God..

lk 23 35

And the people stood beholding. And the rulers also with them derided him, saying, He saved others; let him save himself, if he be Christ, the chosen of God.

I agree completely with the verse in question and have never maintained anything but the truth of the verses

.


No you do not..You believe christ the man did not exist until the virgin birth, right ?

Christ exsisted before then..he exsisted from eternity and you deny this..

That makes you antichrist..

micah 5:

2But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.

prov says about the wisdom of God 8:22

22(A) "The LORD(B) possessed[a] me at the beginning of his work,
the first of his acts of old.

Jesus was telling the jews of his time that he exsited prior abraham..jn 8 58

Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.

 

[Traditio]

Please don't tell me you think Christ existed as a man before the virgin birth. And don't tell you think a change in form somehow equates to a change in the essential unchangeable essence of God.:doh:

I think that it's an irrelevent distinction. Yes, I do believe that the Incarnation occured at a specific moment im time, but for an Immutable God, temporality is irrelevent. God willed ex aeternitate to become man.

Furthermore, I don't see how it matters in this occassion. Christ rose from the dead and ascended into Heaven bearing His human nature...didn't he?

 

[Z Man]

Have you not reviewed the Scriptural support given in the numerous posts for the various aspects of the Incarnation. How is that speculation?

How is one suppose to interpret the 'Scriptural support'? Obviously, many of you disagree as to what the correct interpretation is suppose to be. Again, mere speculation.

Even if, for the sake of argument, I grant your position, is speculation on worthy topics something we should not do with the God-given intellects we possess? Is not the pursuit of truth, even if unsuccessful, a worthy endeavor?

Not if it leads no where. All this topic has proved is that no one can agree on how to interpret the 'Scriptural evidence'. This 'pursuit of truth' on the matter of Christ's nature on the cross has led to several 'truths'. Which one is right? Do we pick and choose? Why is it important in the grand scheme of life? If no one can agree, and if there is no straight forward answer in the Bible, why speculate? Why pursue a dead end?

If creating some sort of magical imaginative road to truth on mere speculation - then arguing that others should travel your made-up road - tickles your fancy, go right ahead. But I think its a waste of time. There are other things more important to do than argue over who's imagination is better...

 

[Z Man]

Can you give us your laundry list of "ignorance" that you feel obliged to "stamp out"?

That could take a while, and I don't want to hijack this thread.

I will go out on a limb here and assume first on the list is 'Calvinism', right?:chuckle:

Actually, I have made quite a reputation on this forum as THE Calvinist many have loved to hate. Just ask Knight.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Actually, I have made quite a reputation on this forum as THE Calvinist many have loved to hate. Just ask Knight.

Z Man, I will say this.... at least you are a consistent Calvinist.

Most TOL resident Calvinists aren't comfortable with the consequences of their theology so they dance around the issues. Many of them try extremely hard to say very little, while posting a great deal.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Secondly, the only important matter regarding Jesus dying on the cross is did he really raise from the dead. Arguing who or what Jesus was while on the cross is retarded because no one knows. So, everything that has been argued on this forum topic has been nothing but mere speculation. Yet, you all act as if your opinions are from God himself! At least you argue that way.

That's what we do here. :idunno:

Forums aren't for everyone. If you don't like discussing these types of things then don't! Nobody is twisting your arm.

 

[Z Man]

That's what we do here. :idunno:

I've been better topics to discuss than this though. Your question has no answer. People can speculate, but to argue over their opinions is pointless. That, of course, is just my opinion.

Forums aren't for everyone. If you don't like discussing these types of things then don't! Nobody is twisting your arm.

I like discussing stuff here. Sometimes I like to drop in and ask questions or post comments just to get people to think. That's all...

 

[Nathon Detroit]

I've been better topics to discuss than this though. Your question has no answer. People can speculate, but to argue over their opinions is pointless. That, of course, is just my opinion.

So... according to you, discussing this type of topic is pointless, yet discussing the pointlessness of this topic is OK by you? Makes perfect sense. :nono:

I like discussing stuff here. Sometimes I like to drop in and ask questions or post comments just to get people to think. That's all...

:thumb:

 

[Lighthouse]

So... according to you, discussing this type of topic is pointless, yet discussing the pointlessness of this topic is OK by you? Makes perfect sense. :nono:

That's not really any different than most anything else he says.