Can God do anything?

[Logician Man]

Sinners send themselves to hell by rejecting life with Jesus in heaven.

Is racism a sin?

 

[RAMOSS]

And you make Jesus out to be a liar when he said...

“I have not spoken out of my own impulse, but the Father himself who sent me has given me a commandment as to what to tell and what to speak.” John 12:49...Jesus’ teachings did not come from him; they came from the Father...

“If you loved me, you would rejoice that I am going my way to the Father, because the Father is greater than I am.” John 14:28...Jesus acknowledged that he and his Father are not equals...

“I am ascending to my Father and your Father and to my God and your God.” John 20:17...Jesus did not speak of himself as God but spoke of God as a separate Person...

Jesus claimed to be the Son of God, not Almighty God. If Jesus were God, to whom was he praying while here on earth? Matthew 14:23; 26:26-29...surely Jesus was not just pretending to talk to someone else...

When two of Jesus’ disciples asked him for special positions in his Kingdom, he answered: “This sitting down at my right hand and at my left is not mine to give, but it belongs to those for whom it has been prepared by my Father.” Matthew 20:23

Was Jesus telling them a lie when he stated that he did not have the authority to grant their request? Hardly...rather, he humbly acknowledged that only God has the authority to make such decisions. Jesus even explained that there were some things that neither he nor the angels knew but that were known only by his Father.​...Mark 13:32

Was Jesus lower than God only while he was a man here on earth? No...even after his death and resurrection, Jesus is described in the Bible as being subordinate to God...the apostle Paul reminds us that “God is supreme over Christ.” 1 Corinthians 11:3

The Bible says that in the future “when all things have been placed under Christ’s rule, then he himself, the Son, will place himself under God, who placed all things under him; and God will rule completely over all.”​ 1 Corinthians 15:28

Clearly, Jesus is not God Almighty...that is why he spoke of his Father as “my God”​ even after ascending back into the heavens...Revelation 3:2, 12; 2 Corinthians 1:3, 4

That makes absolutely no sense what so ever. That explanation seems very contrived in fact.

 

[Divine_Wind]

Sinners send themselves to hell by rejecting life with Jesus in heaven.

So Hell is where the party is?

So you are saying Jesus = God and that God put himself on Earth. Correct?

 

[Xelor]

And you make Jesus out to be a liar when he said...

“I have not spoken out of my own impulse, but the Father himself who sent me has given me a commandment as to what to tell and what to speak.” John 12:49...Jesus’ teachings did not come from him; they came from the Father...

“If you loved me, you would rejoice that I am going my way to the Father, because the Father is greater than I am.” John 14:28...Jesus acknowledged that he and his Father are not equals...

“I am ascending to my Father and your Father and to my God and your God.” John 20:17...Jesus did not speak of himself as God but spoke of God as a separate Person...

Jesus claimed to be the Son of God, not Almighty God. If Jesus were God, to whom was he praying while here on earth? Matthew 14:23; 26:26-29...surely Jesus was not just pretending to talk to someone else...

When two of Jesus’ disciples asked him for special positions in his Kingdom, he answered: “This sitting down at my right hand and at my left is not mine to give, but it belongs to those for whom it has been prepared by my Father.” Matthew 20:23

Was Jesus telling them a lie when he stated that he did not have the authority to grant their request? Hardly...rather, he humbly acknowledged that only God has the authority to make such decisions. Jesus even explained that there were some things that neither he nor the angels knew but that were known only by his Father.​...Mark 13:32

Was Jesus lower than God only while he was a man here on earth? No...even after his death and resurrection, Jesus is described in the Bible as being subordinate to God...the apostle Paul reminds us that “God is supreme over Christ.” 1 Corinthians 11:3

The Bible says that in the future “when all things have been placed under Christ’s rule, then he himself, the Son, will place himself under God, who placed all things under him; and God will rule completely over all.”​ 1 Corinthians 15:28

Clearly, Jesus is not God Almighty...that is why he spoke of his Father as “my God”​ even after ascending back into the heavens...Revelation 3:2, 12; 2 Corinthians 1:3, 4

....And so is shown the lacuna between Bible verse and catechism.

 

[Daisy]

....And so is shown the lacuna between Bible verse and catechism.

I'll take Bible verse any day over man's contrived interpretation...

 

[RAMOSS]

God cannot save a sinner from going to hell if that sinner will not repent of his sins

So you are saying that God is not Omnipotent . Ok. Good to know.

 

[Xelor]

So Hell is where the party is?

So you are saying Jesus = God and that God put himself on Earth. Correct?

Red:
That is a central tenet of most, perhaps all, Trinitarian Christian catechisms.

Whether the "red" assertion/concept is one the other member has proffered isn't known to me; I haven't dug back through his posts in this thread to see whether it is or isn't.

 

[Xelor]

I'll take Bible verse any day over man's contrived interpretation...

I'll take your word for that.

 

[Divine_Wind]

Red:
That is a central tenet of most, perhaps all, Trinitarian Christian catechisms.

Whether the "red" assertion/concept is one the other member has proffered isn't known to me; I haven't dug back through his posts in this thread to see whether it is or isn't.

Agreed about central tenet, but depending upon the denomination, some push it a lot harder than others....especially the “you’re going to Hell!” Part.

 

[Daisy]

I'll take your word for that.

The only time there is a lacuna is when a person fails to read scripture in context and it happens quite often...

 

[Xelor]

The only time there is a lacuna is when a person fails to read scripture in context and it happens quite often...

I don't think failing to read the Bible has/had anything to do with the nature or extent of the lacuna. If anything, the discrepancy exists because folks read the Bible and didn't like what they found there. The readers' dissatisfaction may have economic, political or logical, or a combo thereof, underpinnings. The political and economic sources are fairly self-explanatory; however, the Bible contains plenty that defies all reason.

• General categories of bizarreness in the Bible
• Top 10 Most Illogical Moments in the Bible

 

[Daisy]

I don't think failing to read the Bible has/had anything to do with the nature or extent of the lacuna. If anything, the discrepancy exists because folks read the Bible and didn't like what they found there. The readers' dissatisfaction may have economic, political or logical, or a combo thereof, underpinnings. The political and economic sources are fairly self-explanatory; however, the Bible contains plenty that defies all reason.

• General categories of bizarreness in the Bible
• Top 10 Most Illogical Moments in the Bible

You either accept the Bible as the Word of God or you don't...I believe what it says.."with God all things are possible."

Sadly, there are those who believe it is truly God's Word but still insist on reading texts out of context in order to come to their own conclusions about hellfire, immortality of the soul, and the trinity...for what perverted pleasure, I don't know...

 

[Xelor]

You either accept the Bible as the Word of God or you don't...I believe what it says.."with God all things are possible."

Sadly, there are those who believe it is truly God's Word but still insist on reading texts out of context in order to come to their own conclusions about hellfire, immortality of the soul, and the trinity...for what perverted pleasure, I don't know...

Red:
No, that'd be you.

 

[Daisy]

Red:
No, that'd be you.

No, that would be anybody...

 

[Xelor]

You either accept the Bible as the Word of God or you don't...I believe what it says.."with God all things are possible."

Sadly, there are those who believe it is truly God's Word but still insist on reading texts out of context in order to come to their own conclusions about hellfire, immortality of the soul, and the trinity...for what perverted pleasure, I don't know...

Red:
No, that'd be you.

No, that would be anybody...

I'm quite sure there are some folks who think some of what's in the Bible is the "word of God" and some of what one there finds is not.

Take a foray onto a city street corner and ask passers by, "Do you think the Bible is the word of God?"

I see you live in the South, so it may take a little longer there than it will in D.C. or other cosmopolitan cities, but it shouldn't take too long for you find someone whose answer is roughly, "Some of it, yes. Other parts, no." Given the nature of your assertion -- "that would be anybody" -- you need only find one person who answers thus.

Be that as it may, there are folks who think some of the Bible is not the word of God. I'm one of them. To wit, all that business about "so and so" was the son of "so and so" doesn't at all strike me as God's utterances. Similarly, it strikes me as more plausible that the Ten Commandments resulted from Moses', realizing his people were given to theism and knowing damn well that there was no way the people were going to construe him as a god, having pondered what set of rules he needed to invent to control his people and move them to comport themselves in a somewhat civilized and orderly fashion.

If that makes the Commandments sound like an instrument of well-considered "crowd management," as it were, you're spot on. Such a set of guidelines is precisely what I'd expect a general, which is one of the things Moses was, to institute. Furthermore, as a general, Moses was also politically savvy enough to know that he/they who control, articulate and interpret what the gods/the god says is also who reigns over the polity. Indeed, it's better to have a god(s) than to be one, if only because the former bids one to maintain fewer fictions. Likewise is it better to have just one god than to have a ton of them, for where there are many gods, god X may "say" one thing and god Y may "say" something contradictory to X's "declaration." Now, some earthly individual has to reconcile between them. Matters are even worse if different groups within one's community thinks god X is superior to god y, while others feel differently. It doesn't take genius to see that it's a hell of a lot more efficient and easier to lead/manage a bunch of folks who all cleave to the notion of there being only one god.



Aside:

An interesting notion that I don't know how deeply it's been examined is that the folks whom Moses led out of Egypt were pre or post Atenists. After all, though it's conceivable that Akhenaten coined Atenism all on his own, far more likely was that there were rumblings of monotheism and it so happened that he, an adherent to it, assumed the throne. Indeed, such a progression is very much like what we've observed with Trump's apprehension of the presidency.

You'll recall that Akhenaten was the pharaoh who ruled in the mid-to-late 14th century BC, slightly ahead of the 13th century date that, given the reference to Ramses II, aligns relatively well with the Exodus. It not much of a stretch at all to think there were throngs of those early monotheists who were dissatisfied with the resumption of polytheism and among those throngs were some elites, generals, political power wielders, high priests, etc. who, disaffected upon the rise of the 19th Dynasty's rulers, were more than adequately move, literally and socio-politically, to get out of Egypt.​

 

[Mircea]

Can omnipotent God literally do and be anything?

Your god can't heal amputees, despite their desperate pleas in their prayers.

 

[Xelor]

Your god can't heal amputees, despite their desperate pleas in their prayers.

Oh, this'll be interesting...What god do you presume is mine?

Note, I'm asking for a variety of reasons, one of which is that you quoted the OP in posting your above remark, and the OP contains no indication of what be "my god."

 

[ThoughtEx.]

Here is a question, can God create a being that is his equal, and completely outside of his control.

Maybe that's the purpose of evolution...

 

[Logicman]

I'd rather walk down the street with an atheist any day over walking down the street with a wolf in sheep's clothing...

Nuts.

You're still stuck on why you're making Jesus out to be a liar in John 2:19.

 

[Logicman]

Yes, but that wasn’t the universal idea at the time. Early Christianity didn’t immediately see Jesus as divine. Even the four Gospels has discrepancies between them.

They saw Jesus as divine from early on - as Lord of the Sabbath; for declaring he is I AM while walking on the water; declaring he is I AM in John 8:58, etc.

Any so-called discrepancies between the four Gospels can be easily reconciled. If you think you have one that can't, cite the scripture #'s and make your case.

 

[Logician Man]

Nuts.

You're still stuck on why you're making Jesus out to be a liar in John 2:19.

Where did she make Jesus out to be a liar in John 2:19 ? She certainly seems to be much more knowledgeable about biblical scripture than you do....and she always backs up her statements biblically, which you don't always do.

 

[Logicman]

Where did she make Jesus out to be a liar in John 2:19 ? She certainly seems to be much more knowledgeable about biblical scripture than you do....and she always backs up her statements biblically, which you don't always do.

That nonsense is about as far from the truth as one can get. And your theology is about as lame as it can get also.

John 2:19 - "Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days.”

She claims Jesus was wrong, that he didn't raise himself from the dead.

As was explained previously,

"So, would it have been possible that Jesus through His divine nature even while His human body lay dead could have displayed His power through resurrection? Absolutely. Jesus, speaking of His body said, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” (John 2:19) Certainly, it was “God” who raised His body (Rom. 10:9, 1 Pet. 1:21), and Jesus is God. But Scripture also teaches that the Father raised Him (Gal. 1:1; Eph. 1:17, 20). Even the Holy Spirit is said to have raised Him (Romans 8:11). So, the act of raising Jesus from the dead was not the operation merely of one person within the Trinity but was a cooperative act done by the power of the divine substance. The fact that the Bible teaches that God raised Jesus from the dead and that Jesus raised Himself is yet another testament to Christ’s divinity.”

https://carm.org/jesus-raise-himself

So why did Elvira lie and claim Jesus was wrong? Answer that why don't you.

 

[Logician Man]

that nonsense is about as far from the truth as one can get. And your theology is about as lame as it can get also.

John 2:19 - "destroy this temple, and i will raise it again in three days.”

she claims jesus was wrong, that he didn't raise himself from the dead.

As was explained previously,

"so, would it have been possible that jesus through his divine nature even while his human body lay dead could have displayed his power through resurrection? Absolutely. Jesus, speaking of his body said, “destroy this temple, and in three days i will raise it up.” (john 2:19) certainly, it was “god” who raised his body (rom. 10:9, 1 pet. 1:21), and jesus is god. But scripture also teaches that the father raised him (gal. 1:1; eph. 1:17, 20). Even the holy spirit is said to have raised him (romans 8:11). so, the act of raising jesus from the dead was not the operation merely of one person within the trinity but was a cooperative act done by the power of the divine substance. The fact that the bible teaches that god raised jesus from the dead and that jesus raised himself is yet another testament to christ’s divinity.”

https://carm.org/jesus-raise-himself

so why did elvira lie and claim jesus was wrong? Answer that why don't you.

fail.

 

[Logician Man]

That nonsense is about as far from the truth as one can get. And your theology is about as lame as it can get also.

John 2:19 - "Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days.”

She claims Jesus was wrong, that he didn't raise himself from the dead.

As was explained previously,

"So, would it have been possible that Jesus through His divine nature even while His human body lay dead could have displayed His power through resurrection? Absolutely. Jesus, speaking of His body said, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” (John 2:19) Certainly, it was “God” who raised His body (Rom. 10:9, 1 Pet. 1:21), and Jesus is God. But Scripture also teaches that the Father raised Him (Gal. 1:1; Eph. 1:17, 20). Even the Holy Spirit is said to have raised Him (Romans 8:11). So, the act of raising Jesus from the dead was not the operation merely of one person within the Trinity but was a cooperative act done by the power of the divine substance. The fact that the Bible teaches that God raised Jesus from the dead and that Jesus raised Himself is yet another testament to Christ’s divinity.”

https://carm.org/jesus-raise-himself

So why did Elvira lie and claim Jesus was wrong? Answer that why don't you.

Please tell me 'precisely' what my 'lame theology' you speak of is.

 

[marke]

Is racism a sin?

Yes. God made of one blood all nations of men, but He still divided them according to races at Babylon. God loves all men except those who are determined to serve sin and the devil in spite of everything He does to turn them away from evil.