/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

>>560951

no

Why don't you believe in the spiritual world? That's kind of the ultimate point of believing in God and praying to him, because it's a real spiritual entity.

>>560951

No. Jesus Christ is either exactly who He says He is, or He's a lying lunatic. You cannot have it both ways.

Jesus believed in God and the supernatural, he told his followers to not talk much about his miracles though, so if you value his teachings you would value the supernatural realm and Christ's divine connection to the Father, as well as the Holy Spirit. etc

>>560951

There is literally no way to be Christian and reject the spiritual. Christian philosophy and theology is centered around God, Christ, the Holy Spirit, Heaven, Hell, prayer, sin, atonement, resurrection from the dead, the Son of Man, the day of judgement, Satan, demons, angels, spirits, and divine law. Without anything spiritual, Christianity is just a group of moral imperatives with no common philosophy binding them together.

Every single belief system out there requires belief in the supernatural. Even naturalists in explaining Genesis have to explain the supernatural odds.

If God exists then He can do anything at all. It would be ridiculous to say God exists and in the other hand that miracles are not real.

I don't think that the OP wants to "have it both ways" or reject Christ.

A lot of people are like Thomas the Apostle. They have difficulty believing in the supernatural. A lot of people fully agree with christian doctrine, but they take it as a philosophical system, some reject the supernatural but some others are honest and can't believe it, like Thomas who had to touch Jesus wounds.

I met a lot of people who fully agree with everything the Church says, but can't believe the virgin birth, the eucharist, etc. This is not new, even in Mark you find "Lord, I want to believe, help Thou my unbelief!"

We know that faith is of supernatural nature, and a grace of God. You should ask, and God will provide.

>>560969

This is what I meant. Would going to Church and being around Christians help me develop faith? I think Jesus is a great person and his whole "died to save humanity" thing appeals to me. I am not an atheist or whatever, I just can't make myself believe in anything supernatural no matter how much I try, it just feels silly to me (like ghosts, demons, spirits etc).

>>560974

For sure. That's one of the many reasons why you can't do christianity alone, and the church (community) is so important. You get to find out how people came to the faith. Most people are simple minded and humble, so that probably won't help you. In my case (not that I'm a brainiac) I was always amazed at the space. The sheer size of it, the scales are something that's so far our human capabilities that astound me. And it's not chaotic. It's ordered, and very precisely. And someone made that. Someone ordered it. When I realized that God made the stars, the galaxies and the universe, becoming bread or having a virgin conceive seems like a cheap party trick in comparison.

But there's a lot of literature of people struggling with that matter too. Sadly I can't recommend anything, hope other posters can.

>Is it possible to be a Christian without believing in any of the supernatural stuff?

No. Unless you believe in God, and believe that Jesus Christ is the Messiah and the Son of God, and that Jesus was crucified and died, and was dead for three days, and came back from the dead, all in order to atone for humanity's sins, and save anyone who puts their faith in Him from Hell, then you aren't a Christian at all. Sorry. That's the bare minimum. (Or rather, google the Apostles' Creed and learn the official minimum.)

If you're interested in Christianity, please read the Gospels and the rest of the Bible, and research the religion, and go to church, and talk with Christians about the faith, but don't call yourself a Christian unless you actually have faith in Jesus as described in the Bible. I hope you one day can call yourself a Christian. I was an atheist materialist and converted around the age of 20. It's the great journey.

>>560974

Demons and spirits are real. "Ghosts" aren't what you think they are, but what you think they are isn't real. The idea of spirits might seem ridiculous to you, but please hold off judgement on that aspect of the religion until you've investigated the faith and considered the existence and nature of God and His relationship to His creation. Researching such subjects without any faith is a dangerous path. Focus on God first, and if you believe in God and the Jesus of the Gospels, then examine and expand your understanding of spirits.

No and you'll still burn in hell

>>560974

Jesus is not the mad hippie you have made up. Jesus doesn't preach about "niceness", and "saving humanity" is not an empty, materialistic slogan.

>>560957

Yes you can, you can say that people lied about him, his actual words may of never been recorded

>>560963

I'd say Athiesm or at least Progressism is a belief system and it doesn't require a belief in the supernatural

>>560995

yea your right atheists don't belive in philosophy or maths

Man, someone comes up with an honest doubt about faith and you people all you do is insult him all arrogant. Great display of christian charity.

Haven't you learned about the attitude of St. Paul when he goes to Athens?

>>560998

Christian charity is what has ruined christianity in the first place

>>560951

No

Get over Jordan Peterson

>>560995

The definition of supernatural is something that is not adherent to the natural order. Everyone believes in the supernatural, even naturalists. A naturalist believes in two things that are supernatural:

1. Biogenesis - the creation of life, and all of its immeasurably complex components, from non-life

2. Creation - the creation of something from nothing

These are supernatural beliefs.

>>560995

>>>560963

>>560995

>Yes you can, you can say that people lied about him, his actual words may of never been recorded

At that point you aren't talking about JEsus, but about some fictional figure you made up, hijacking the name "Jesus". What defines Jesus, what makes him remarkable. And that is what every single witness records. Not eventhe jews tried to deny his miracles.

>>561015

Indeed. The Pharisees' Talmud itself admits that Jesus performed miracles, but claims that His powers derived from sorcery, which is consistent with the Pharisees' reactions to witnessing Jesus' miracles given in the Gospels.

Even His biggest haters admit Jesus has game.

>>560951

>>560974

>Would going to Church and being around Christians help me develop faith?

Possibly. If you're like me and i suspect most people who've LARPed before, you can see the world from different perspectives. You may have it within you to convince yourself of anything. Atheist, pagan, Christian, liberal, conservative… it's all the same. Only one can be true, it's very easy to take up a well-articulated position of someone as your own.

Observe the people at churches. Are you ready to join their community? If you truly are ready, then I think you'll find that your skepticism is much weaker than you think. The hive mind can and will override yours. If it doesn't happen, then don't fret. It will eventually. The human heart desires ideological companionship/circlejerking. In the end, either your pro-religious nature will lead you to God or your skepticism will lead you to anti-religion. You have to pick one.

Remember: join the collective that has fewer trannies.

>>560995

>his actual words may of never been recorded

Then you're not really following Jesus, just those immoral people who lied about Him.

You can either accept that Jesus claimed to be God, or you can have no certainty about what He actually said.

>>561025

For sure, this was a very good input. Knowing about God gives a tremendous traction to faith, and as your faith grows, you desire to know more about God.

Credo ut intelligam

>>560957

Lord, Liar, or Lunatic is a bad argument. We don't know exactly what Jesus said, he never wrote anything down. We have to trust that the Gospels are reliable sources and tell accurate stories. We don't know if Jesus claimed to come back in power and glory to judge planet earth. We don't know if he claimed to rise from the dead before he was killed. We can't "simply" use the Bible to prove the Bible. We must analyze it and study it historically and critically.

I used to use the LLL argument all the time against atheists, but after studying the NT, the historical Jesus, and the development of early Christianity more I came to the conclusion that it is a pretty weak argument against those who know their stuff.

>>560951

No. Read The Epistle to the Romans - Christ's death and resurrection is vital to Christianity.

No.

>Now if Christ is preached that He has been raised from the dead, how do some among you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ is not risen. And if Christ is not risen, then our preaching is empty and your faith is also empty. Yes, and we are found false witnesses of God, because we have testified of God that He raised up Christ, whom He did not raise up—if in fact the dead do not rise. For if the dead do not rise, then Christ is not risen.

>>561067

> it is both a legal disclaimer and useful description

We have IDs, you know. What you're doing is an obvious mantra and it makes you look childish.

Personally, I don't argue with atheists. I find you all to be childish - as you're proving with your mantra - and children are to be taught, not argued with. Fortunately, we have this nice little "filter by ID' option.

>>561063

>I am an atheist and anti-theist here for discussion - not fellowship.

>G-d

>I am an atheist and anti-theist who refuses to offend my yid-god with usage of the letter 'o'.

Schlomo… are you trying to convince more people who think that your (((nature))) comes from evolution? If so, why?

>>561063

>Jesus didn't claim to be God

You fell for the Islamic meme

>>561063

>Jesus didn't claim to be G-d

>Jesus was described as the (or a) lesser countenance (or limited expression) of Yahweh, in purely human form.

(Matthew 1:23) "Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us."

(John 8:54-59)

{54} "Jesus answered, If I honour myself, my honour is nothing: it is my Father that honoureth me; of whom ye say, that he is your God:

{55} Yet ye have not known him; but I know him: and if I should say, I know him not, I shall be a liar like unto you: but I know him, and keep his saying.

{56} Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad.

{57} Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham?

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

{59} Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by."

(John 10:30) "I and my Father are one."

(John 17:5) "And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was."

(John 18:4-9)

{4}"Jesus therefore, knowing all things that should come upon him, went forth, and said unto them, Whom seek ye?

{5} They answered him, Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus saith unto them, I am he. And Judas also, which betrayed him, stood with them.

{6} As soon then as he had said unto them, I am he, they went backward, and fell to the ground.

{7} Then asked he them again, Whom seek ye? And they said, Jesus of Nazareth.

{8} Jesus answered, I have told you that I am he: if therefore ye seek me, let these go their way:

{9} That the saying might be fulfilled, which he spake, Of them which thou gavest me have I lost none."

>>560995

You don't know atheism if you don't think it's incredibly built on the supernatural.

>>561063

>everything is built out of quarks

Okay… And? How does in any way answer the super natural claims of a world devoid of God? In order for there to be no God, then it is necessary for A) something to come from nothing and B) life to come from non life. These are super natural claims.

A naturalist is someone who believes that only nature exists - no God. Atheists would be counted here, minus some less normal sects.

>>561104

>oy vey i'm one of you goyim

>retarded map

>jesus didn't say that he was the son of god.

Demons did, and so did his Father during the transfiguration. And so did he before the Pharisees.

… Also, I don't think you know what anti-theist means. No one uses such a term thinks Jesus went on a hippy trip to India. This is grade a religious thinking.

t. atheist/antitheist for years.

>>561104

> "and the life was manifested, and we have seen and testify and proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and was manifested to us–" 1 John 1 2

It is shown that Jesus Christ is eternal life itself

> who alone possesses immortality and dwells in unapproachable light, whom no man has seen or can see. To Him be honor and eternal dominion! Amen. 1 Timothy 6.16

Eternal life possesses immortality or else eternal life no longer is immortal. That would be a logical contradiction.

Key word here is: ALONE

God alone possess immortality, adding that eternal life is Jesus Christ, it concludes therefore that Jesus is God.

> Hence also it follows by consequence, that the Apostle Paul did not say, "Who alone has immortality" of the Father merely; but of the One and only God, which is the Trinity itself. For that which is itself eternal life is not mortal according to any changeableness; and hence the Son of God, because He is Eternal Life, is also Himself understood with the Father, where it is said, "Who only has immortality" For we, too, are made partakers of this eternal life, and become, in our own measure, immortal. But the eternal life itself, of which we are made partakers, is one thing; we ourselves, who, by partaking of it, shall live eternally, are another. St Augustine On The Holy Trinity

>Atheism makes no positive claims. It is a default state.

Oh, to be young and naive again. Atheism created the SJWs. I bear that blood on my hands, and no matter how hard I wash, I can't wash it away. Transgender kids are a fad because of atheism!

Understand that your ideology is self-defeating, and God will win in the end (He doesn't need to exist to beat newfriends like you.) Religion begets fertility. While libshit atheists are breeding themselves out of existence due to the inherent selfishness of human nature, the religious are inheriting the earth. That is what the so-called white genocide is. It's the abandonment of all culture in favor of fleeting YOLO bullshit.

Take one Spengler pill and post in the morning.

>>561129

My keyboard's fucked up. God cursed me in a previous thread, so it's harder than usual to type.

>15 He said to them, “And who do you say that I am?” 16 Simon Peter answered, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” 17 And Jesus answered him, “You are blessed, Simon son of Jonah, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but my Father in heaven!” (Matthew 16:15-17).

Anyway.

>As for my being an anti-theist and having accurate knowledge of my own proclivities… there are faith-based criminals and faith-based crime in this world.

Much bigger fish to fry. If you lived through 2012-2016 and still really think that religiosity is a problem, then I would encourage you to revisit those years. Religion exists to hold society together, and in this post-religious haze, society is fragmenting. Political extremism on either side has amplified. As it turns out, you to become either a Communist or a Fascist once you forget about religion. Something will fill that void, and it won't be nearly as constructive as what was taken out.

Religious practice has been going on for tens of thousands of years now. It is ingrained into the human consciousness. This is why new religions are being created and spread on Youtube, even as we speak. You can't fight it, and moreover, I would suggest that trying is a particularly bad idea.

>>561112

>A world devoid of a god does not have inherent super-natural claims.

You can not reduce the world to particles. In fact, much of the understanding of quantum mechanics is an inherently flawed system. It's like reifying space and time, saying that mass has an affect on time, saying that space itself is an actual thing. Which, of course, is what it does say. Completely insane. I suggest you read "electromagnetic retardation and theory of relativity", it explains pretty aptly why much of our modern understanding of the universe is flawed.

>quarks and gluons

There's an infinite amount of points in a line and in infinite amount of lines in a point. The logical conclusion of your thought process is that everything is infinitely reducible.

>>561160

>"…the Son of the living God."

>

>Not *the* or *a* god. An expression of the god.

Exactly. He's the son of -the- divine figure. The details are irrelevant unless you believe in the tenets of the religion in question. You don't.

>I very barely lived through most of those years,

Not surprising. You would agree with me if you had.

>What "sides" are you referring to?

The city and the countryside. It is the same in every sufficiently developed society.

>I happen to be a Cosmopolitan Democratic Socialist.

Not a coincidence, comrade. See my original point.

>No. It is socially maintained. Faith is neither inherent, nor beneficial.

Evidence? I can point toward the omnipresence of religion throughout recorded and even pre-history to demonstrate that religion grows organically and continues to do so in the face of all reason and scientific evidence. Your tabula rasa-tier bullshit has fallen to the wayside in recent times. That was the point of the second part of my previous post, but perhaps it was beyond 'leading authority' such as yourself (that was apparently not old enough to look around in 2015).

>>561154

> It is shown that Jesus was a MANIFESTATION of Yahweh (God).

Okay you just restated my point.

> A physical representation of a metaphysical god.

No. Manifested does not equal representation. They are different words

Other translations read "revealed".

> ALL OF THE ABOVE ARE VERY OBVIOUSLY REFERRING TO THE GREATER COUNTENANCE OF YAHWEH. Oi vey.

If Jesus is God, wouldn't the attributes of God be the attributes of Jesus?

> How's that crucifixion working out for you?

The human nature of our beloved Lamb, Jesus Christ died on the cross. Not his Divine Nature. Therefore he still possesses eternal life.

> You might need to read it again. Don't compel me to translate from the Greek.

No that's alright, i can give you a clearer verse to forward our discussion.

< And we know that the Son of God has come, and has given us understanding so that we may know Him who is true; and we are in Him who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life. 1 John 5.20

Jesus Christ is eternal life itself.

I am an authentic replica of a Yahoo! Answers Religion troll. I like to advance long-since discredited worldviews, and I tip my fedora to the upcoming Science Superstate.

>>561169

>No. There is a point at which matter is irreducible: quarks, and gluons.

And this is tested?

>No. I have consistently stated that everything is made of the same base stuff, and that the base stuff is quarks and gluons.

So space and time is made up of quarks and gluons?

>Yes. The world can be reduced to particles.

You haven't demonstrated this.

>Mass has an affect on time. Space is an actual thing.

Read "electromagnetic retardation and theory of relativity".

>If you reject particle physics as "completely insane", then you aren't someone worth discussing the topic with.

It's not an undeniable fact, which is why people DO argue against it. It's only real utility is that everyone is familiar with it.

>It appears to attempt to offer a new field.

It extends on already existing fields, as in it's explaining the universe with already existent understandings of it. Jefimenko suggests that electromagnetic equations can be converted to their gravitational-cogravitational equivalent by replacing electromagnetic symbols and constants with their corresponding gravitational-cogravitational symbols and constants.

/r/atheism's 9/11. NEVER FORGET!

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Elevatorgate

>>561042

>then we are forced to reconcile that Jesus made a deliberate effort not to create a record.

John 17:18

As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world.

>We are also forced to accept that by virtue of presupposed omniscience, that the posthumous record that was created was flawed and/or has been perverted with divine sanction of Yahweh.

2 Timothy 3:16-17

All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

>Jesus didn't claim to be G-d.

Matthew 26:63-64

But Jesus held his peace. And the high priest answered and said unto him, I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God.

Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

>Jesus was described as the (or a) lesser countenance (or limited expression) of Yahweh, in purely human form.

Colossians 2:9

For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

>This statement is not exclusive of the lesser countenance and one-ness of Yahweh.

Hebrews 1:8

But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.

>It is shown that Jesus was a MANIFESTATION of Yahweh.

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

>>561177

I am an atheist and anti-theist here for discussion - not fellowship. I like to argue, and prefer brunt and forthcoming discourse.

>>No. There is a point at which matter is irreducible: quarks, and gluons.

>And this is tested?

No.

>>No. I have consistently stated that everything is made of the same base stuff, and that the base stuff is quarks and gluons.

>So space and time is made up of quarks and gluons?

Yes, space is made of quarks and gluons. Time, is intangible.

>>Yes. The world can be reduced to particles.

>You haven't demonstrated this.

Pic related.

>>Mass has an affect on time. Space is an actual thing.

>Read "electromagnetic retardation and theory of relativity".

>>If you reject particle physics as "completely insane", then you aren't someone worth discussing the topic with.

>It's not an undeniable fact, which is why people DO argue against it. It's only real utility is that everyone is familiar with it.

>>It appears to attempt to offer a new field.

>It extends on already existing fields, as in it's explaining the universe with already existent understandings of it. Jefimenko suggests that electromagnetic equations can be converted to their gravitational-cogravitational equivalent by replacing electromagnetic symbols and constants with their corresponding gravitational-cogravitational symbols and constants.

>>561190

>Jesus ISN'T Yahweh.

Philippians 2:11

And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Romans 14:11

For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.

Isaiah 45:22-23

Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else.

I have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of my mouth in righteousness, and shall not return, That unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear.

>>561188

I am an atheist and anti-theist here for discussion - not fellowship. I like to argue, and prefer brunt and forthcoming discourse.

>>The "Son" of is symbolic… what is important is that the "Son" is a conceivable representation or expression of the inconceivable greater countenance.

>No, it's not. Read the text again. Moroever, your ignorance of Biblical textual criticism is showing. There were a series of parables that come from a document known as 'Q'. Certain stories about Jesus were gleamed from this document and put into the Synoptic Gospels. It may not have contained the belief that Jesus was the Son of God, but the Gospels absolutely do. To pretend otherwise is to LARP as a contrarian troll on 8chan /christian/.

The "Q" document is theoretical, only.

>educate yourself:

>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_source

I don't need to click on that to know that of the two of us, you are the one that needs to read it.

>>The political extremism between city and countryside has not amplified.

>Yes, yes it has. Feel free to continue denying reality.

Nope. No it hasn't.

>>You wouldn't apply that standard to other works of fiction. The "magic" performer isn't worthless because I know some of the tricks. A comic book isn't worthless because I don't believe it to be true.

>yeah yeah. whatever. point conceded.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-kmqKZQpaDZ0/T8udSD0T7-I/AAAAAAAAAOk/vZfMsBJnqpY/s1600/trophy1.gif

>>That people without religion closer resemble Jesus? I think I will have to agree.

>Your response in on way addresses my assertion that political extremism manifests from decreasing religiosity. Go over to /pol/ now and create a strawpoll asking them their true religious beliefs. If the mods don't lock it, you'll see my point.

Political extremism INCREASES from theological underpinnings, it doesn't decrease.

>>You cannot prove the omnipresence of religion throughout all of humanity, and all of time. That is the most ignorant claim you have made thus far. To refute it, one need only provide a single culture in which religion has not thrived. I won't be bothered.

>Show me evidence of a culture which started out as pure atheist with no religion whatsoever.

All of individual human culture starts out as purely atheist with no religion whatsoever.

>Cultures unite around religiosity, and as that religion declines, so does any civilization that the culture spawned.

Mass delusions do not equate to civilization. Civilization is the result of law, not theology.

>This is happening now. When you're older and society collapses a little more, maybe you'll understand.

Again, you don't know me. You don't know how old I am, and you choose to express yourself in a condescending manner because you just. can't. stand. on. merit.

>Spengler pill didn't suit you. Have a glub pill.

>http://people.uncw.edu/kozloffm/glubb.pdf

https://media.giphy.com/media/3ofT5yFjWxh15lsl0s/giphy.gif

>>561197

>Political extremism INCREASES from theological underpinnings, it doesn't decrease.

I assure you that I'm less politically extreme as a religious person than I was as an atheist. some of the things your professors, Sesame Street hosts, or whoever taught you simply aren't right.

>more bs in denial of reality

I don't have time for this.

>You don't know how old I am, and you choose to express yourself in a condescending manner because you just. can't. stand. on. merit.

>>561160

>I very barely lived through most of those years [2012-2016], because of the "religiosity" of faith based criminals (including murderers), and don't have need to revisit them. 2017 hasn't been any improvement.

You implied you were quite young.

>>561197

>All of individual human culture starts out as purely atheist with no religion whatsoever.

No, it's the contrary. People naturally seek God.

>Mass delusions do not equate to civilization

Glad you admit atheism does not equate civilization

>Civilization is the result of law, not theology.

The basis of the law is good and evil, which can only be justified through theology. This is pretty basic and it is amazing that you don't understand it. Civilization stems from virtue. In atheism there is no virtue, only mindless hedonism and degeneracy, which is why atheist countries like France, Germany, Spain or Sweden are pure degeneracy,

>>561203

You missed the meaning of the verses in the process. Try to focus for a minute.

Philippians 2:11 shows that Jesus Christ is Lord (Kyrios). Now what's important to note is that every single time the Old Testament is quoted in the New Testament, the tetragrammaton is translated as this same word!

This is why for instance the JW's refuse to translate Philippians 2:11 consistently. They will translate every occurence of the word Lord (Kyrios) as Jehovah in their version instead of "Lord." Every occurence, EXCEPT PHILIPPIANS 2:11. Because then Philippians 2:11 would say "that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Jehovah."

Romans 14:11 is one example (of many, with no counterexample) of the New Testament translating the tetragrammaton as "Lord" in its quote of Old Testament Scripture. Every single other instance renders Jehovah as "Lord" in Greek the same way. Romans 14:11 in particular is also relevant to Philippians 2:11, they are both referring to the same scripture.

And in Isaiah 45 the final proof, as YHWH is speaking in the first person about himself that every knee shall bow to Him.

The only way these verses can be true is if Jesus is Jehovah, and also, that these three are one.

>>561180

>>then we are forced to reconcile that Jesus made a deliberate effort not to create a record.

>John 17:18

>As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world.

The only written word that was commanded by any expression of Yahweh in Post-Prophetic Judaism was the final prophetic work of Revelations.

>>We are also forced to accept that by virtue of presupposed omniscience, that the posthumous record that was created was flawed and/or has been perverted with divine sanction of Yahweh.

>2 Timothy 3:16-17

>All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

Quoting the Impostle Paul is unlikely to gain any ground with me. A cursory examination of Paul's own heresy is enough to establish that he didn't believe his own words. If you find yourself arguing about "Christianity" with "Christ"… its time to take perspective.

>>Jesus didn't claim to be G-d.

>Matthew 26:63-64

>But Jesus held his peace. And the high priest answered and said unto him, I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God.

>Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

64 Jesus said to him, Thou hast said…

Jesus said the High Priest had said that Jesus was G-d.

…nevertheless I say to you, hereafter ye shall see man's Son…

Jesus said that even though he had been called G-d, in the future, Elijah (John The Baptist)…

…sitting at the right half of the virtue of God, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

…would be seen accompanying Jesus.

>>Jesus was described as the (or a) lesser countenance (or limited expression) of Yahweh, in purely human form.

>Colossians 2:9

>For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

Quoting the Impostle Paul is unlikely to gain any ground with me. A cursory examination of Paul's own heresy is enough to establish that he didn't believe his own words. If you find yourself arguing about "Christianity" with "Christ"… its time to take perspective.

>>This statement is not exclusive of the lesser countenance and one-ness of Yahweh.

>Hebrews 1:8

>But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.

Quoting the Impostle Paul is unlikely to gain any ground with me. A cursory examination of Paul's own heresy is enough to establish that he didn't believe his own words. If you find yourself arguing about "Christianity" with "Christ"… its time to take perspective.

>>It is shown that Jesus was a MANIFESTATION of Yahweh.

>In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

To help you with your point, and my own… in the beginning, was a manifestation of Yahweh that had a likeness of form of the image of humans.

https://www.jesuswordsonly.com/books/175-pauls-contradictions-of-jesus.html

>>561212

John 17:18-20

<As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world.

<And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth.

<Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;

Hmm, don't see anything specifying "written" word here.

>Quoting the Impostle Paul

lol.

2 Peter 3:15-16

<And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;

<As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

<as they do also the other scriptures

<scriptures

Also Acts. And lastly, you should know full well the implications of being the Son of God. As it says in the Second Psalm: "Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee."

>>561190

> No, you said that "It is shown that Jesus Christ is eternal life itself", when that qualifier belongs to Yahweh in that context.

Lmao, enroll in a philosophy 101 class at your local community college. An attribute of God Is being eternal. The qualifier belongs to God therefore also to Jesus because Jesus is Eternal, as shown.

> I have provided the definition of manifested, and will reiterate:

You cant argue a point with a definition, please clarify

>Jesus is the (or *a*) human manifestation of Yahweh.

Okay that's a claim. Can you back it up with evidence?

> To infer eternal life or divine nature to Jesus is to disqualify the entirety of the Gospels. Any man could do the works of Jesus, who was Himself a human representation, if only they prized the worthlessness of faith. The mustard seed.

Jesus was Himself a human representation? Who then was He really?

> You must be a Poe. You surely are a Poe. There is no way that you can function behind a computer and not be able to read those words which I suspect are in your very own mother tongue

I don't know what a Poe is. But yes i guess i am then. Still my argument stands regardless who i am.

> And we know that the Son (JESUS) of God (YAHWEH) has come, and has given us understanding so that we may know Him (YAHWEH) who is true; and we are in Him (YAHWEH) who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God (YAHWEH) and eternal life. 1 John 5.20

"God" is a Substance not a Person.

An attribute of Divinity is eternal life, and Jesus Christ as shown in 1 John 5 20 possesses eternal life.

Alright how about we move form the "eternal life" proof of the Divinity of Jesus to the God vs creation approach.

< All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. John 1.3

"Him"in this context being Jesus. How is it that all things that were MADE were MADE through Jesus, if he was not God.

< if He was not made, then He is not a creature; but if He is not a creature, then He is of the same substance with the Father. St. Augustine On The Holy Trinity

>>561212

<Muh impostle Paul!

I’m sure you must feel good about spouting a Muslim meme and insulting one of the greatest saints in Christianity. Now tell me, do you reject Acts, which informs us that his work was set apart for him by the Holy Spirit, and where he was accepted and respected by the other apostles? If so, do you even believe the Gospel of Luke, unquestionably written by the same man? If the Gospel itself is suspect then surely you must see how farcical your Judaiser bullshit is. Now read the Bible again without (((guidance))) from whoever taught you that heresy and read up on the early Church.

>>561197

>All of individual human culture starts out as purely atheist with no religion whatsoever.

Yeah that's some convincing evidence you provided for this claim.

>>561221

>> No, you said that "It is shown that Jesus Christ is eternal life itself", when that qualifier belongs to Yahweh in that context.

>Lmao, enroll in a philosophy 101 class at your local community college. An attribute of God Is being eternal. The qualifier belongs to God therefore also to Jesus because Jesus is Eternal, as shown.

"God" is not "Jesus". The latter is an expression of the former. Its God For Dummies. The lesser countenance of Yahweh in human form is not eternal. The expression is eternal… the form is not.

>> I have provided the definition of manifested, and will reiterate:

>You cant argue a point with a definition, please clarify

The point is that manifestation in this sense is to denote an aspect, or a limited perspective of a greater form.

>>Jesus is the (or *a*) human manifestation of Yahweh.

>Okay that's a claim. Can you back it up with evidence?

Evidence is reserved for claims that are based in reality. We are discussing 2000-2500 year old theology. What I can say, is that those texts indicate that Jesus is the (or *a*) human manifestation of Yahweh. I have provided and/or translated relevant scripture repeatedly.

>> To infer eternal life or divine nature to Jesus is to disqualify the entirety of the Gospels. Any man could do the works of Jesus, who was Himself a human representation, if only they prized the worthlessness of faith. The mustard seed.

>Jesus was Himself a human representation? Who then was He really?

The Bible portrays Jesus as a unmagical, human, Jew, with not only faith… but experience of the fullness of G-d. Yahweh is Deep Blue… Jesus is a PDA that has synced to Deep Blue.

Really? Like, reaallly REAALLLY?!? Jesus was an eccentric preacher and social justice warrior who pulled off the greatest cultural advancement that any one man has ever achieved.

>> You must be a Poe. You surely are a Poe. There is no way that you can function behind a computer and not be able to read those words which I suspect are in your very own mother tongue

>I don't know what a Poe is. But yes i guess i am then. Still my argument stands regardless who i am.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe%27s_law

>> And we know that the Son (JESUS) of God (YAHWEH) has come, and has given us understanding so that we may know Him (YAHWEH) who is true; and we are in Him (YAHWEH) who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God (YAHWEH) and eternal life. 1 John 5.20

>"God" is a Substance not a Person.

Yahweh is not inert. Yahweh is described as having extreme agency.

>An attribute of Divinity is eternal life, and Jesus Christ as shown in 1 John 5 20 possesses eternal life.

From a theological standing, Jesus is not the body of Jesus. You and I are bodies. Jesus was and/or is a recognizable expression of something that is impossible to understand.

>Alright how about we move form the "eternal life" proof of the Divinity of Jesus to the God vs creation approach.

>< All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. John 1.3

>"Him"in this context being Jesus. How is it that all things that were MADE were MADE through Jesus, if he was not God.

No. "Him" in that context being Yahweh.

John1:18 No man saw ever God [No man ever saw God], but the one begotten Son, that is in the bosom of the Father, he hath told out.

>< if He was not made, then He is not a creature; but if He is not a creature, then He is of the same substance with the Father. St. Augustine On The Holy Trinity

You - or perhaps St. Augustine - or the two of you, have raised an interesting dilemma. Timeless Genesis Jesus necessarily has form for man to be made in the image of. Yahweh is in your deck chairs and the essence of every solar wind… Jesus, has a limited physical form.

I don't like St. Augustine. He posits things that are immediately falsifiable. Jesus is an expression of Yahweh. It would make some reasonable sense that the lesser expression of something would be predated by the complete expression, but it is not necessarily so. The realm of limitless possibility and ability is… well… limitless. To say that Jesus must be made of the same substance as Yahweh isn't necessarily correct, either. They have differing forms. They have differing attributes. One is metaphysical, and the other physical.

>>561191

>No.

Then your belief is based off of faith rather than empirical evidence.

>Yes, space is made of quarks and gluons.

You have an incoherent view of what space is. And since time isn't made of quarks and gluons then not everything is made of it. But we both know that everything can't be reduced to quarks and gluons by now.

>I can't be compelled.

There is no point in arguing with someone who doesn't deal with facts.

>>561260

> "God" is not "Jesus". The latter is an expression of the former. Its God For Dummies. The lesser countenance of Yahweh in human form is not eternal. The expression is eternal… the form is not.

Are you equating Yahweh to "The Father" or to Divinity?

> The point is that manifestation in this sense is to denote an aspect, or a limited perspective of a greater form.

Where does it say manifestation necessarily denotes?

> Evidence is reserved for claims that are based in reality. We are discussing 2000-2500 year old theology.

The atheist retreats from scripture based evidence when he asserts a claim about scripture.

> What I can say, is that those texts indicate that Jesus is the (or *a*) human manifestation of Yahweh. I have provided and/or translated relevant scripture repeatedly.

No all you have proved is that The Father is not The Son, which i totally agree.

>The Bible portrays Jesus as a unmagical, human, Jew, with not only faith… but experience of the fullness of G-d. Yahweh is Deep Blue… Jesus is a PDA that has synced to Deep Blue.

Provide scriptural evidence please, i want to learn too.

>From a theological standing, Jesus is not the body of Jesus. You and I are bodies. Jesus was and/or is a recognizable expression of something that is impossible to understand.

I never asserted anything about the Body of Jesus Christ. All i said was that Jesus Christ possesses eternal life.

> John1:18 No man saw ever God [No man ever saw God], but the one begotten Son, that is in the bosom of the Father, he hath told out.

I absolutely agree with this. Except how youre interpreting it. i think other scripture would disagree.

< So Jacob named the place Peniel, for he said, "I have seen God face to face, yet my life has been preserved."

Or

< Thus the LORD used to speak to Moses face to face, just as a man speaks to his friend. When Moses returned to the camp, his servant Joshua, the son of Nun, a young man, would not depart from the tent.

Or

< With him I speak mouth to mouth, clearly, and not in riddles, and he beholds the form of the LORD. Why then were you not afraid to speak against my servant Moses?”

> Jesus, has a limited physical form.

Body, not form

>They have differing forms. They have differing attributes. One is metaphysical, and the other physical.

No The Father and The Son have the same form and attributes according to their Divine nature. The possession of Human nature in one, does not limit His Divinity.

>>560955

Is this satire? Has this guy never heard of James Randi?

>>561295

This guy also confirms the demon soul selling into magic claims.

>>561063

>Math neither requires nor necessarily inspires belief

Numbers are supernatural you have to believe the numbers actually exist otherwise you are not actually doing anything other than making marks on a page.

>>561353

And again when you do Philosophy you are using logic and reason two more things which do not actually exist in the natural world. and so are either illusions or they are supernatural