The memorial of Christs death

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
You are wasting your time, i did not read anything beyond the first line of your text. You are unable to believe anything but your own propaganda. Thats enough for me to understand that no truth that has passed your lips.

I said it makes no difference to me if you read or do not. Its a public forum you opened.

Your flattery gushing on the memorial of Christ's death I take as the masquerading of a wolf in sheep's clothing.

You played hard ball. You get hardball in response.

Originally posted by sonship
I said it makes no difference to me if you read or do not. Its a public forum you opened.

Your flattery gushing on the memorial of Christ's death I take as the masquerading of e wolf in sheep's clothing.

take it how you like again you are incapable of believing anything other than your own propaganda. Your words are hollow and have literally no meaning beyond that which you wish to imbue them with borne from the contortions of a prejudiced mind.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
take it how you like again you are incapable of believing anything other than your own propaganda.

Propaganda can be true. There is such a thing as true "propaganda".

Why should not the truth be propagated ?

Originally posted by sonship
[b] Propaganda can be true. There is such a thing as true "propaganda".

Why should not the truth be propagated ?[/b]

The truth should be propagated then again who is to say that what you are saying is true?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
You are unable to believe anything but your own propaganda.

Oh the irony.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
The truth should be propagated then again who is to say that what you are saying is true?

It was propagated in the book of Hebrews that the man Christ, the King with a scepter and kingdom, was God.

"But of the Son, 'Your throne, O God, is forever and ever,' ..." (Hebrews 1:8a)

So the phrase "Godman" is appropriate if not explicitly a text quotation.


I think you referred to this as something like "well worn cow trails" or some such blasphemous description of the oracles of God.

Originally posted by sonship
I think you referred to this as something like "well worn cow trails" or some such blasphemous description of the oracles of God.

"Drooling zombies slobbering over the internet..."

"Balloon heads incapable of rational thought..."

"Self-certified nominal Christians spouting their own propaganda..."

Of course robbie only likes to engage with people who don't make personal comments about the poster.



😵

Originally posted by sonship
It was propagated in the book of [b]Hebrews that the man Christ, the King with a scepter and kingdom, was God.

"But of the Son, 'Your throne, O God, is forever and ever,' ..." (Hebrews 1:8a)

So the phrase "Godman" is appropriate if not explicitly a text quotation.


I think you referred to this as something like "well worn cow trails" or some such blasphemous description of the oracles of God.[/b]

Can you therfore tell us how it was that Paul under inspiration, you do believe Paul was inspired don't you? wrote the following?

Keep this mental attitude in you that was also in Christ Jesus, who, although he was existing in God’s form, gave no consideration to a seizure, namely, that he should be equal to God.

The verse seems quite clear, so either we believe your dubious interpretation that the O God is made with reference to Jesus Christ or we can believe Philipians 2:6 that Jesus never gave consideration to the idea that he should be made equal to God. I know which one I will be choosing, the truth of Gods word as opposed to your deceitful attempts to make something of a verse which can read either way. Just like a trinitarian to scour the Bible looking for verses which support your extra biblical pagan doctrines rather than letting Gods word speak for itself.

The correct and proper rendering of Hebrews 1:8 which leaves no room for the deceitful trinitarian to make anything of the seeming duplicity in the verse is as follows,

But about the Son, he says: “God is your throne forever and ever, and the scepter of your Kingdom is the scepter of uprightness. - Hebrews 1:8

and before you try any more tricks, the verse is rendered accurately. Revised standard version reads: “Of the Son he says, ‘Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever.’” (KJ, NE, TEV, Dy, JB, NAB have similar renderings.)

However, New world translation reads: “But with reference to the Son: ‘God is your throne forever and ever.’” (AT, Mo, TC, By convey the same idea.)

Which rendering is harmonious with the context? The preceding verses say that God is speaking, not that he is being addressed; and the following verse uses the expression “God, thy God,” showing that the one addressed is not the Most High God but is a worshiper of that God. Hebrews 1:8 quotes from Psalm 45:6, which originally was addressed to a human king of Israel.

Obviously, the Bible writer of this psalm did not think that this human king was Almighty God. Rather, Psalm 45:6, in Revised Standard, reads “Your divine throne.” Solomon, who was possibly the king originally addressed in Psalm 45, was said to sit “upon Jehovah’s throne.” (1 Chron. 29:23, NW) In harmony with the fact that God is the “throne,” or Source and Upholder of Christ’s kingship, Daniel 7:13, 14 and Luke 1:32 show that God confers such authority on him.

I have been through this many times before, the reasoning is solid, the logic sound and it made little impression on you previously because as I have said you are incapable of believing anything than what you want to believe, regardless of the logic. What a waste of time it is.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Can you therfore tell us how it was that Paul under inspiration, you do believe Paul was inspired don't you? wrote the following?

[b]Keep this mental attitude in you that was also in Christ Jesus, who, although he was existing in God’s form, gave no consideration to a seizure, namely, that he should be equal to God.

The verse seems quite cl ...[text shortened]... ng anything than what you want to believe, regardless of the logic. What a waste of time it is.[/b]

I'm not a trinitarian but you, Galveston75, roigam and the entire JW leadership fail quite epically on the godhead. Let's look at what you believe:

Jesus was not Almighty God but he was Mighty God - so you have at least 2 gods...

Jesus and Jehovah are both saviours - so you have two saviours...

Jesus is the angel Micheal - so one of your Gods and Saviours is an angel...

Originally posted by divegeester
I'm not a trinitarian but you, Galveston75, roigam and the entire JW leadership fail quite epically on the godhead. Let's look at what you believe:

Jesus was not Almighty God but he was Mighty God - so you have at least 2 gods...

Jesus and Jehovah are both saviours - so you have two saviours...

Jesus is the angel Micheal - so one of your Gods and Saviours is an angel...

the brothers were out this morning teaching and preaching about the glorious Good news of Gods Kingdom, St Cyprians church near where I live was having a car boot sale, says it all really.

The Bible states that there are many that are called Gods. Satan is called a God of the System, human Judges In Israel were termed Gods, there is the Gods of the nation which surrounded Israel. How this could possibly have evaded you is quite beyond me. Perhaps you should do research on the Biblical term God prior to formulating these questions. As for me i refuse to argue with someone who holds a position of ignorance. Let me know what you find then we can talk.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
The Bible states that there are many that are called Gods. Satan is called a God of the System, human Judges In Israel were termed Gods, there is the Gods of the nation which surrounded Israel. How this could possibly have evaded you is quite beyond me. Perhaps you should do research on the Biblical term God prior to formulating these questions. As ...[text shortened]... rgue with someone who holds a position of ignorance. Let me know what you find then we can talk.

Are you a "polytheist"?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie

Can you therfore tell us how it was that Paul under inspiration, you do believe Paul was inspired don't you? wrote the following?

Keep this mental attitude in you that was also in Christ Jesus, who, although he was existing in God’s form, gave no consideration to a seizure, namely, that he should be equal to God.

The central question is whether "be equal with God" is something Christ HAD or did not HAVE. He HAD "be equal with God". And in incarnation He STILL had "be equal with God".

It is that the glory, dignity, splendor of that equality He set aside in humility to take on the emblem of perfect submission and obedience. Since "the Word was with God and the Word was God" (John 1:1) Paul is speaking of something Christ HAD.

You mistakenly have represented Philippians 2:6.
You teach equality with God is something He did NOT have and would not seize. But what Paul teaches is that He DID HAVE equality with God and yet would not hold on to the glory of that but humbled Himself.

"Who existing in the form of God, did not consider being equal with God a treasure to be grasped, But emptied Himself, taking the form of a slave, becoming in the likeness of men; And being found in fashion as a man, He humbled Himself, becoming obedient unto death, and that the death of a cross." (Recovery Version)

It is not a matter of something Christ DIDN'T have and would not seize.
It is a matter of something Christ HAD and its glory (not its nature) relinquished in humility.

The verse seems quite clear, so either we believe your dubious interpretation that the O God is made with reference to Jesus Christ or we can believe Philipians 2:6 that Jesus never gave consideration to the idea that he should be made equal to God.

1.) "Existing in the form of God" denotes existing from the beginning, implying the Lord's eternal preexistence. IE. As long as God was, the Word was with God and was God. So Philppians 2:6 indicates He is uncreated and eternal.

This agrees with Hebrews 1:8 that the Son is addressed as "God".

And the verses just previous to Hebrews 1:8 clearly prove that no angel is being discussed, including Michael -

For to which of the angels has He ever said, "You are My Son; this day I have begotten You" ? (Heb 1:5)

2.) The phrase "in the form of God" means the expression, not the fashion, of God's being (Heb. 1:3) -

" Who, being the effulgence of His glory and the impress of His substance ..." (v.3)

"In the form of God" identified with the essence and nature of God's person and therefore expressing them. This expresses Christ's deity.

3.) Although Christ was equal with God, He did not consider being equal with God a treasure to be grasped and retained; rather, He laid aside the form of God (not the nature of God) and emptied Himself, taking the form of a slave.

He laid aside what He indeed did possess - the form of God. When the Word who was with God and was God became flesh (John 1:1,14) He retained the nature of God and became Godman.

4.) Christ laid aside what He did possess, not what He did not possess. For "the form of God" laid aside, emptying Himself to take up "the form of a slave".

He did not lay aside the nature of being a mighty archangel.

In His incarnation the Lord did not alter His divine nature; He changed only His outward expression, from the form of God, the highest form, to that of a slave, the lowest form.

This was not a change of essence but of state.

The correct and proper rendering of Hebrews 1:8 which leaves no room for the deceitful trinitarian to make anything of the seeming duplicity in the verse is as follows,

But about the Son, he says: “God is your throne forever and ever, and the scepter of your Kingdom is the scepter of uprightness. - Hebrews 1:8

The Son is being addressed. And He is addressed with "O God" .
The conclusive proof that the Son is God is reinforced by the next passage quotation of Psalm 102:25

And, means that verse 10 is a continuation of the speaking to the Son in verses 8 and 9.

And, "You in the beginning, Lord, laid the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the works of Your hands.

They will perish, but You remain perpetually; and they all will become old like a garment, And like a mantle You will roll them up; like a garment they will also be changed, but You [the Son who is God] are the same, and Your years will not fail. (Hebrews 1:10-12 QUOTING Psalm 102:25-27)

Now go read in its entirety Psalm 102 and try to find it referring to any angel/archangel or anyone other than Jehovah God. Psalm 102 begins with the words -

"O JEHOVAH, hear my prayer; And let my cry come unto You. (v.1)

I do believe in the Trinity.

And no one came come to Christ unless it is given to that one by the Father. So I you do what you want.

"Jesus answered and said to them, Do not murmur among yourselves. No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up in the last day." (John 6:44)

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
The Bible states that there are many that are called Gods. Satan is called a God of the System, human Judges In Israel were termed Gods, there is the Gods of the nation which surrounded Israel. How this could possibly have evaded you is quite beyond me. Perhaps you should do research on the Biblical term God prior to formulating these questions. As ...[text shortened]... rgue with someone who holds a position of ignorance. Let me know what you find then we can talk.

You are the ignorant one. You abuse people here just be uses they disagree with you. You are a disgrace to your religious cult. If you leaders could see the way you behave here what would they ink of you?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
the brothers were out this morning teaching and preaching about the glorious Good news of Gods Kingdom, St Cyprians church near where I live was having a car boot sale, says it all really.

The Bible states that there are many that are called Gods. Satan is called a God of the System, human Judges In Israel were termed Gods, there is the Gods of th ...[text shortened]... rgue with someone who holds a position of ignorance. Let me know what you find then we can talk.

Meanwhile..

For unto us a Child is born,
Unto us a Son is given;
And the government will be upon His shoulder.
And His name will be called
Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
Of the increase of His government and peace
There will be no end

I hardly think the terms: "Mighty God" "Everlasting Father" "wonderful, Councillor" "Prince of Peace"...can be applied to either Satan or the Angel Michael. That you think they can is a fantastic indictment of your error.

Originally posted by divegeester
You are the ignorant one. You abuse people here just be uses they disagree with you. You are a disgrace to your religious cult. If you leaders could see the way you behave here what would they ink of you?

Nail on the head.

Find it hard to reconcile a man who claims to be polite and diplomatic while doing his missionary work and yet is a total plimsoll on this site.

Yeah, yeah, i know Robbie, my negative posts depress you. Blah blah...