Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
First it is always a denial of your interpretation of scripture . . . NOT a denial of scripture. But I am curious . . . you have made this absurd claim before . . . on whose authority do you make it? As for your continued judging of who is and isn't Christian . . . please desist. You have no authority in that matter.
No judgement here at all, or can't you all discern the difference?
What I am saying, if you don't believe in the first miracle of Jesus Christ, then how can you believe in Jesus Christ? It's contradictory and against Christ, therefore, antichrist. My authority is the scripture, and that is what it says.
Deal with it, or not....your choice, but I choose to believe, unadulterated, and without question...that is the difference between me, part of the New Covenant, and others, outside of the gates.
No casting stones here, just stating the fact that is in the scripture.
I would ask what a Full Preterist means, but I do not want to derail the thread.
Satan has no power up here, but only his influence on men and women is what you see now. He is in the LOF.
A Full Preterist believes all prophetic scripture has ceased and has been fulfilled, specifically culminating with the destruction of the Temple in the first century.
That was the climax, and the New Heavens and Earth were ushered in.
Well I do want you to understand my position. My position is that Jesus was human. It explicitly states that to deny Jesus came in the flesh is well absurd, antichrist behavior . God is spirit and in 1 Kings is described as not being able to be contained by house or temple...
So with those two facts in mind I then look at Jesus' life. He was sinless.. I have to ask myself if God can be sinless.. if he does not sin can he ever be sinless as a human would be sinless, by choice?
Also, can God suffer and die? I know that some state it was not God but the flesh that suffered and died but that poses a question of how God was supposed to experience suffering and death if in fact he really can't suffer nor die?
Also, God faking the suffering, death and sinless-ness of himself in flesh doesn't make sense to me.
Furthermore, God created suffering, death, and sin.. so why would he have need to experience suffering, death, and being sinless to atone for the human race to himself?
What atonement do you need if you are going to pay yourself back..
Taking into consideration these things, the spiritual message in the scripture, and the gospel as a whole... I cannot believe that Jesus is God.
To me that does nothing to diminish the importance of Jesus' teachings or glory but rather enhances his display of brotherly love and points directly to God the creator and savior of all men.
This is exactly the way most people, who don't believe Jesus is God, see it. Thanks for that wonderful explanation.
Yet that is not a "everlasting" curse apparently because we see:
"'On that day,' declares the LORD Almighty, 'I will take you, my servant Zerubbabel son of Shealtiel,' declares the LORD, 'and I will make you like my signet ring, for I have chosen you,' declares the LORD Almighty." (Haggai 2:23)
Zerubbabel being the grandson of Jehoiachin and was governor of Judah at the time.
I still don't see where Mary's genealogy is shown.
It isn't. Don't let them delude you.
Because they don't "see" it, they reason it away, using the original doctrine of the Catholics as their own. It gives Mary immense power.
Because they don't "see" it, they reason it away, using the original doctrine of the Catholics as their own. It gives Mary immense power.
I wondered.. because if the signet ring was taken from one and given to another further down the line that indicates that the royal line is Joseph's line and we know nothing about Mary's line from scripture.
Anyway, it hardly matters who conceived Jesus except that he was anointed by God as the one who would talk to the people for God.
It's odd, but it doesn't appear that those who believe in the divinity of Christ were able to do a very good job of showing the Lady why we're right...LOL Why is this, if the doctrine is so clear in scripture? Are we not rightly dividing the word of truth:
2Ti 2:15 be diligent to present thyself approved to God--a workman irreproachable, rightly dividing the word of the truth;
Most of what's been presented has been, quite candidly, either refuted or shown to have another valid interpretation, and it's been done so IMO without clear violations of scripture. She has also demonstrated, when using a literal translation, why we have differences in our doctrinal positions. We may not agree with the Lady's interpretations, but I'm hard pressed to find fault with her handling of scripture. I don't agree with her conclusions, but that is another matter. But why don't we all come to the same conclusions? Particularly if this doctrine is so crucial to the foundation of our faith (for those that believe Jesus is Jehovah of the OT in the flesh).
Here are some possibilities to explain this:
1. The Lady is just messing with us. But I don't think so .
2. The Lady is right. Now what do we do? There is not a big enough towel to clear the egg off our faces if this be so! I don't think so, though.
3. Something besides scripture tells us (me at least) that Jesus is Jehovah. Possibly inward revelation? And how valid is this when confronted with others who think otherwise, and also say too that the Lord showed them the opposite of our faith?
Luke 1:5 There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife [was] of the daughters of Aaron, and her name [was] Elisabeth.
Luke 1:36 And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren.
Th gospel speaks the truth. We have all shown this and have done a very good job in doing so, but it is up to God whether she sees or not. That is call being quickened by the Spirit. This she has not received IMO
Th gospel speaks the truth. We have all shown this and have done a very good job in doing so, but it is up to God whether she sees or not. That is call being quickened by the Spirit. This she has not received IMO
Sciotamicks... I could say the same about you...
You obviously don't see that you are ignoring scripture as a whole in lieu of a verse or to that you sensationalize. It is too bad no one hear ascribes to the Oneness theory.. It is interesting how all things point to Jesus (or so it seems) in that theory but in the bible everything (including Jesus) points to God...
Anyway, it hardly matters who conceived Jesus except that he was anointed by God as the one who would talk to the people for God.
This is what makes this entire deity debate moot. The practical realities for humans are that Jesus is our connection to God (whether you realize that means He is the same or not). Apparently my rationale does not "resonate" with you, kat . . . but the distinction being pushed in these various threads really makes no difference whatsoever (no matter what the sciotas of the world think).
Last edited by MysticPhD; 12-16-2009 at 11:20 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.