Pagan basis of the trinity.

Originally posted by Badwater
My apologies for the misinterpretation.

You better read John 5 again to see if you can see the most important point.
The black beetle understood part of it, but did not see the most important
point.

Originally posted by RJHinds
You better read John 5 again to see if you can see the most important point.
The black beetle understood part of it, but did not see the most important
point.

bb and I disagree with you on what John is driving at in John 5. bb used exegesis, where you did not.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Apparently you are an unlearned preacher without common sense then.

And the ignorant are always experts - just ask them.

Originally posted by Badwater
bb and I disagree with you on what John is driving at in John 5. bb used exegesis, where you did not.

actually RJ may have a point. Try reading Matthew Henry's commentary, he seems to agree, at least in part, with RJ

Originally posted by Doward
actually RJ may have a point. Try reading Matthew Henry's commentary, he seems to agree, at least in part, with RJ

Anyone can have a point; merely utter it. But whereas RJ ripped verses from their context on the one hand, and then applied perspectives and ideas that are plainly not said on the other hand, bb took the story solely on its own merits, without adding anything of his own to it, and treated the story on its own, in context. John 5 is rich enough to carry several exegetical perspectives worthy of sermon and introspection; none of which RJ examined.

So the main point is that Jesus performed this miracle as a sign to
demonstrate that He was the promised Messiah mentioned of by Moses
and the rest of the scriptures and that He is equal with God.

This is not the main point. It's not the point at all. This is not the why of Jesus having to explain himself for healing someone on the Sabbath.

Originally posted by Badwater
Anyone can have a point; merely utter it. But whereas RJ ripped verses from their context on the one hand, and then applied perspectives and ideas that are plainly not said on the other hand, bb took the story solely on its own merits, without adding anything of his own to it, and treated the story on its own, in context. John 5 is rich enough to carry several exegetical perspectives worthy of sermon and introspection; none of which RJ examined.

his methods may be clusmy, but to ignore the implied point because he didn't connect the dots in the way you prefer is...well...no offense, but a tad arrogant. The text clearly implies that Christ is to be honored the same as God, and that all present and future authority rests in him. Henry says this about verses 24-29:

Our Lord declared his authority and character, as the Messiah. The time was come when the dead should hear his voice, as the Son of God, and live. Our Lord first refers to his raising those who were dead in sin, to newness of life, by the power of the Spirit, and then to his raising the dead in their graves. The office of Judge of all men, can only be exercised by one who has all knowledge, and almighty power. May we believe His testimony; thus our faith and hope will be in God, and we shall not come into condemnation. And may His voice reach the hearts of those dead in sin; that they may do works meet for repentance, and prepare for the solemn day.



I think RJ's point may be valid, clumsily put but valid nonetheless

Originally posted by Doward
his methods may be clusmy, but to ignore the implied point because he didn't connect the dots in the way you prefer is...well...no offense, but a tad arrogant. The text clearly implies that Christ is to be honored the same as God, and that all present and future authority rests in him. Henry says this about verses 24-29:

Our Lord declared his authority and ...[text shortened]... for the solemn day.



I think RJ's point may be valid, clumsily put but valid nonetheless

If you had read my post you would have known before you responded that I clearly disagree with you as well.

his methods may be clusmy, but to ignore the implied point because he didn't connect the dots in the way you prefer is...well...no offense, but a tad arrogant.

That is not what I said. I was clear in what I said. If you consider that arrogant then you must not have understood my post.

Originally posted by Badwater
If you had read my post you would have known before you responded that I clearly disagree with you as well.

I read your post, and I don't care if you agree with me. For a man of the cloth you have a very dismissive attitude towards people you regard as inferior....you may want to pray and meditate on that one.


Edit:

In reviewing the last 10 pages, it was not RJ that referenced John 5 it was Galvo 75, RJ simply disagrees with the interpretation. Perhaps you should re-read the pages and remove your personal prejudice against him as you do.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

please tell me what it is about this statement that you fail to comprehend?

Important : Posts on this board may be subject to moderation. Please refrain from spamming, flaming or using excessively offensive language on this board. If you do not wish to post this message, click here to return to the forums. Review posting guidelines in full.

in this regard you make a mockery of the term Christian and the terms of agreement, you should be put in solitary confinement for a period of thirty days to reflect on your attitude, there you can speak abusively to yourself as much as you like.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
please tell me what it is about this statement that you fail to comprehend?

Important : Posts on this board may be subject to moderation. Please refrain from spamming, flaming or using excessively [b]offensive language on this board. If you do not wish to post this message, click here to return to the forums. Review posting guidelines in full. ...[text shortened]... days to reflect on your attitude, there you can speak abusively to yourself as much as you like.[/b]

Make a complaint against me and see if they do anything. They did
not do anything when I complained about the atheist evolutionists
using this spirituality forum instead of the science forum to debate evolution.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
please tell me what it is about this statement that you fail to comprehend?

Important : Posts on this board may be subject to moderation. Please refrain from spamming, flaming or using excessively [b]offensive language on this board. If you do not wish to post this message, click here to return to the forums. Review posting guidelines in full. ...[text shortened]... days to reflect on your attitude, there you can speak abusively to yourself as much as you like.[/b]

Well, that's like the black hole calling the kettle black.

Originally posted by Badwater
My apologies for the misinterpretation.

No problem... 🙂

Originally posted by Badwater
I am a preacher. You're off base with this interpretation of John 5.

Try something that's exegetical.

I told you I was not a preacher when I gave you the summary of the
important point of John 5. I don't know anything about these things
you call exegetical. That shouldn't concern the average Joe who wants
to know the truth. That is the only thing I want to present.

Originally posted by Soothfast
Well, that's like the black hole calling the kettle black.

see how i absorb your burning missiles and turn them into roses, whence as they strike the earth I gather them up and lay them on the path before, every thorn lending itself to the comfort of my journey.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Make a complaint against me and see if they do anything. They did
not do anything when I complained about the atheist evolutionists
using this spirituality forum instead of the science forum to debate evolution.

i have made a complaint against you and i will do so again unless you refrain from needlessly insulting the users of this forum. Yes we can get caught up in the heat of debate and say things we regret later, but gratuitously issuing insults is a very poor reflection of character. You think that because you can hind behind the safety and comfort of your pc you can say what you like, whereas in real life you wouldn't say half the things you do to a persons face, its nothing short of cowardly hypocrisy.