Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - lapwing

Pages: 1 ... 101 102 [103] 104 105 ... 491
1531
Choose Your Own Topic / Re: Deity of Christ and Matthew 28:18
« on: June 01, 2016, 05:16:44 PM »
In my last post, I'm just pointing out that Jem is engaging in dishonest tactics. Ignoring this will do nothing, as I intend to make sure this is brought up on every new page of this thread till she acknowledges it.

Based on past history I doubt that Jem will admit such a thing but I don't say you shouldn't try.

1532
Choose Your Own Topic / Re: Deity of Christ and Matthew 28:18
« on: June 01, 2016, 01:10:53 PM »
This thread seems to be getting confused by a number of parallel meta-arguments which have moved away from matters of substance. I think some of the recent posts would benefit from clarification.

1533
Quote
say Trump will immediately blow somebody up with nuke
Hmm I didn't write anything like that of course.

When the downside of something is huge, even a small increase in the chance of it happening is significant: insurance premiums work on that basis.

1534
Not everyone acts rationally all the time. Trump appears often to be driven by personal petulance whereas Stalin acted with low cunning. USSR was always outgunned and knew it.

1535
Choose Your Own Topic / Re: Deity of Christ and Matthew 28:18
« on: June 01, 2016, 04:40:38 AM »
Hi jbejon,

Thanks I hadn't seen that post of Jem's. Sadly it shows that Jem has been dishonest in this thread when she wrote:
Quote from: Jem
if "son" is translated from "theos" in verse 18, then it should also be translated the same way in verse 1.

when she actually knows that:
Quote
The majority of the oldest Greek manuscripts show, not “the only Son,” but “the only-begotten god.”

Jem,

The issue I raised with you has not yet been addressed.

In the earlier post of yours that jbejon quoted, you showed that you know some manuscripts have theos (god) and others have huios (son) in Jn 1:18

So why did you suggest that some Bible translations translate theos (god) as "son" in Jn 1:18 when you know that some manuscripts of Jn 1:18 have the Greek word for "son"? Isn't it obvious that those versions preferred the manuscripts with the word "son"?

1536
Choose Your Own Topic / Re: Deity of Christ and Matthew 28:18
« on: May 31, 2016, 07:18:26 PM »
Babylonian Sun Wheel:


I don't know if you've ever ridden a push bike, Jem, but did you realize you would have been really worshipping a pagan god?

1537
Choose Your Own Topic / Re: Deity of Christ and Matthew 28:18
« on: May 31, 2016, 04:42:59 PM »
Your contributions are always welcome idunno.

1538
Choose Your Own Topic / Re: Deity of Christ and Matthew 28:18
« on: May 31, 2016, 10:49:56 AM »
Hi jbejon,

Thanks I hadn't seen that post of Jem's. Sadly it shows that Jem has been dishonest in this thread when she wrote:
Quote from: Jem
if "son" is translated from "theos" in verse 18, then it should also be translated the same way in verse 1.

when she actually knows that:
Quote
The majority of the oldest Greek manuscripts show, not “the only Son,” but “the only-begotten god.”

1539
Steve, your argument is silly. If I was a presidential candidate in a legal case and said the judge should recuse himself because he was a "Christian," you would rightly call me to task for bigotry.

You actually raise a lot of great points here Soren.

First Christianity gives us lenses by which to view the individual as valuable in and of themselves.  This fact lends itself to both left wing as well as right wing thinking. . . because both wings of thought are really just trying to do what they believe is best for their fellow man when it comes to running a government. 

That's what the US Constitution does. . . it tries to give everyone their rights regardless of their religious beliefs.  That's why I believe all judges should be constitutional originalists. . . you can be sure that such judges won't try to project their own individual conscience onto you or anyone else.

See all the dots that I'm connecting?  There are many. . .

Anyways.

Even if you don't the fact remains that the judge in question is part of an organization that explicitly and deliberately opposes Trump's views regarding control of the southern border.  The fact that he is part of such a specific group of political activist thinking with regard to the southern border ought to be immediate grounds for recusal. 

This particular judge has a very narrow idea about a particular subject (border patrol) that creates a legitimate grounds for recusal.  Comparing it to Christianity, which allows for both left wing as well as right wing thought, just doesn't make sense.
You didn't actually follow my example. You said that when Trump said "Mexican" he actually meant "member of La Raza." My hypothetical involved a presidential candidate in a lawsuit who objected to a judge being a "Christian" then (like Trump) claimed that he actually meant that the judge was a member of a specific organization that opposed a policy position the candidate had. My point was that no one would excuse the candidate who objected to a judge being Christian -- they would not believe his explanation and would say he had an obligation not to sound bigoted in the first place -- and thus no one should excuse Trump referring to the judge as "Mexican" either.

As I also stated, Trump's argument for recusal is legally very, very weak. Judges hear cases all the time involving parties they vehemently disagree with politically. Trump just doesn't like the fact that he might be held accountable to the people he swindled through Trump University and that his unsavory practices are coming out.

Steve,

Soren has said it all for me. You (and Trump) are condemning this judge and ignoring the simple fact that judges are paid to leave their personal views outside the courtroom and judge cases objectively according to law. Trump is actually attacking the quality of this judge as a judge and a person.  And judges are themselves subject to controls and judgments within their profession - based on what they do in court not outside - though obviously they must keep the law themselves.

Of course, Trump's campaign so far has been a long list of nasty personal attacks on opponents and uppity journalists who dare to ask him awkward questions.

The obvious conclusion is this: Trump is a nasty piece of work and you plan to give him the nuclear button.

1540
Choose Your Own Topic / Re: Deity of Christ and Matthew 28:18
« on: May 31, 2016, 07:04:21 AM »
Your post #249 Jem.

So many smilies and so little substance. I'm not saying you shouldn't use smilies of course, but shouldn't you at least make an attempt at responding to what other posters say.

I've carefully explained to you your misunderstanding of how textual criticism in Jn 1:18 works. You haven't properly acknowledged this, or shown any gratitude. Now will you repeat the same mistake in the future, or do you understand there are legitimate reasons why some versions have "only begotten God" whereas others have "only begotten Son" namely the Gk words for "God" and "son" appear in variant manuscripts. Have you really got it, or will you make the same mistake again in some future thread? I'm labouring this point because your refusal to acknowledge this strongly suggests you haven't really understood it yet.

And note that I've responded to your favourite "no man has seen God" snippet in #258.

Quote
Isaiah 6 is the rendered the way Jews understood it...they had no trinity, remember? This was a prophesy about their Messiah, whom they never expected to be God
A lot of unproven assumptions here eh Jem!

Ok so which usage by Isaiah of the word used for God in 9:6 did Isaiah actually mean?
(a sticky wicket question which you will no doubt neatly sidestep - oops all 3 of your JW stumps spreadeagled)

Quote
Can mere humans kill God?
That's funny 'cos in my Bible I read that death couldn't hold Jesus and that he defeated death on the cross! That was the point of Jesus' coming and dying Jem! To defeat death.

But God raised him from the dead, freeing him from the agony of death, because it was impossible for death to keep its hold on him.
Note it says  impossible for death to hold Jesus, not impossible to prevent God from raising Him (that was impossible as well)

Quote
There is no trinity in the OT
And of course you've sidestepped TheCross' question as to whether a concept has to be named in order to be a valid concept. It doesn't of course and there's an example in Euclid's definition of a circle. Euclid doesn't name the idea of the centre of a circle in his definition of circle, but it's definitely there.

You could think about:
https://jewsforjesus.org/publications/newsletter/june-1987/trinity
https://carm.org/plurality-god-old-and-new-testaments
http://biblestudyplanet.com/2009/04/10/the-trinity-in-the-old-testament/


Quote
There are the strawmen as usual..
Er these were your strawmen, Jem!
Quote
Jehovah called human judges "gods" (John 10:34-36) and even satan is called a god (2 Cor 4:4)....so the adjective describing this "god" (one who hold authority) in Isaiah 6, is "mighty" but not "Almighty". Only the Father  is ever called "Almighty God".
Can Jesus be described as an "Eternal Father"? Yes again. The term "father" according to Strongs can mean....
"father of an individual

Quote
I believe that Jesus could well be Michael the Archangel
So he became as much superior to the angels as the name he has inherited is superior to theirs Heb 1:4
That means Jesus is not an angel Jem!

Quote
I can't even begin to understand a thing you just said here
That's because you don't understand how to properly study the Bible Jem: you've been badly taught.

Quote
The word "angel" means what in scripture lapwing?
There can be human messengers and angelic messengers. Being a messenger is a primary function of angels, but that doesn't mean all messengers are angels. Is your postman an angel in the biblical sense?

1541
Choose Your Own Topic / Re: Deity of Christ and Matthew 28:18
« on: May 31, 2016, 06:24:29 AM »
Jem,

So the next time I throw a stone into a pool and create circular pools I'm really creating a Babylonian sun wheel! Hmm!

I think you might find that "circle" has wider meaning in human thought than Babylonian sun wheels. You could start with Euclid and you might even have learnt about them in school geometry!

Quote
A circle is a plane figure contained by one line such that all the straight lines falling upon it from one point among those lying within the figure equal one another.

1542
Choose Your Own Topic / Re: Deity of Christ and Matthew 28:18
« on: May 31, 2016, 06:14:15 AM »
Hi Snooch,

It's getting late down under but not so late that you've missed Jem's tactic of avoiding sticky wickets - any question/issue/Bible passage which shows the wrongness of her theology is neatly side-stepped, and she prefers to latch onto a side issue, or reverts back to her JW tram-lines of thought such as "no one has seen God".

She ignores the obvious truth that this refers to the Father and that the several cases of seeing God in the OT must consequently refer to Jesus who is God.

1543
Steve,

A dictator can still use "legitimate" levers to further illegitimate ends.

A judge is meant to be impartial when judging cases despite personal views. But that doesn't mean judges aren't allowed to have personal views e.g. to vote in elections. You seem too hasty to condemn this judge just because your hero didn't want him to act as judge in his case. The case in question is about Trump university not Mexican walls! So Trump is attacking the judge as a person - it's a personal attack. He's alleging that the judge will act according to alleged animosity and bias against him (Trump). Spot the egocentricity!

Quote
Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.
Note it is up to the judge not the accused/plaintiff to decide such matters

1544
I would certainly be worried if a presidential candidate thought it ok to get any judge that opposes him removed. That's the kind of thing that dictators do (or the Mafia in Sicily, but with a different way of understanding the word "remove").

1545
Choose Your Own Topic / Re: Deity of Christ and Matthew 28:18
« on: May 30, 2016, 11:44:45 PM »
Good one Lightfoot on "all in all". I look forward to John Bee's verbal gymnastics as he tries to avoid the truth you have explained so clearly to him.

Pages: 1 ... 101 102 [103] 104 105 ... 491