Did Jesus teach he was GOD himself?

Tanachreader

Well-known member
Prayed to, bowed to, worshipped the Father. Never reciprocated.

One person is God, the Father, Exodus 20:3-6. No other God before me.


Angels, Israel, David, etc., are called sons of God.

Notice the child above is called son of God after birth, not before.

Bye bye 👋
The Son of God spoke of Himself
The NT even speaks of God speaking of His Son.
God said
While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.

The cup of denial won’t hold water when your time comes.
 

Jewjitzu

Well-known member
Jesus was in the flesh born a man.
That's all he was - man.

John 10:30
I and [my] Father are one.
Jesus said this of his disciples too.

4 Who has ascended to heaven and come down?
Who has gathered the wind in his fists?
Who has wrapped up the waters in a garment?
Who has established all the ends of the earth?
What is his name, and what is his son’s name?
Surely you know!
Moses for one.

The“Son” is identified with the Creator also involved in Creation, thus making Him equal with the Creator.
Not in Proverbs he isn't.

John 1:1-5; Colossians 1:13-17; Hebrews 1:3.
Tanakh refutes this as the Father spoke creation, created Jesus from womb, who acknowledged someone else as God.
 

Jewjitzu

Well-known member
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
God the Father spoke the word and created. He also created Jesus in the womb.
 

Jewjitzu

Well-known member
The Son of God spoke of Himself
The NT even speaks of God speaking of His Son.
God said
While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.

The cup of denial won’t hold water when your time comes.
And God speaks of everyone with knees and a tongue that they will bow to the true God.
 

Tanachreader

Well-known member
That's all he was - man.
The Holy one who came down from Heaven
Jesus said this of his disciples too.

Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou [then], Shew us the Father?


Moses for one.
Moses would be angry with you for saying that.
Not in Proverbs he isn't.
Yes He is
Tanakh refutes this as the Father spoke creation, created Jesus from womb, who acknowledged someone else as God.
He and His Father.
The preincarnate became the man Jesus.
 

Jewjitzu

Well-known member
Except for the NT, and the life death and resurrection of Jesus.
That isn't evidence. The resurrection is very questionable and most likely his bones were transferred to Talpiot. James Tabor has a good book on it.

BTW, why can't you admit you made a mistake previously? Also, why can't you comment on the fact that Jesus didn't make monetary payments for all sins that require it?

Really? Says who? Did I miss something in my reading of the OT?
Says the Tanakh. I think if you read Deut 12, it's clear what Israel was supposed to do when they settled in the land.

Oh yeah, you can read all of 1 Kings 8 as well. ;)

Don't know what you're talking about.
Didn't you agree that sacrifices are not required in exile or without a temple?

Jesus is God, and messiah.
Neither is true nor proven.

I don't know what you think we are spiritualizing, but whatever.
Not keeping of the commandments in Jesus case where convenient.

If the difficulty rests in the hardheadedness of the reader, what can be done?
You haven't done anything yet, so if you think you have a credible paper, go for it. I would have expected you to keep from personal attacks, but I figured you'd crack when things got difficult for you.

For since the law has but a shadow of the good things to come instead of the true form of these realities, it can never, by the same sacrifices that are continually offered every year, make perfect those who draw near. Otherwise, would they not have ceased to be offered, since the worshipers, having once been cleansed, would no longer have any consciousness of sins? But in these sacrifices there is a reminder of sins every year. For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to takeaway sins. Consequently, when Christ came into the world, he said, “Sacrifices and offerings you have not desired, but a body have you prepared for me; in burnt offerings and sin offering you have taken no pleasure. Then I said, ‘Behold, I have come to do your will, O God, as it is written of me in the scroll of the book.’” When he said above, “You have neither desired nor taken pleasure in sacrifices and offerings and burnt offerings and sin offerings” (these are offered according to the law), then he added, “Behold, I have come to do your will.”
Actually, Tanakh really says:

Sacrifice and meal-offering Thou hast no delight in; Mine ears hast Thou opened; Burnt-offering and sin-offering hast Thou not required....your law is within my heart.

He does away with the first inorder to establish the second. And by that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. And every priest stands daily at his service, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God, waiting from that time until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet. For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified. Hebrews 10:1-12
Sorry, but the Tanakh doesn't say it's a shadow or a type of Messiah so this fails.

There are about 39 references to the Hebrew root for mashiach, https://biblehub.com/hebrew/4899.htm. In reading them, they don't support your story that Messiah is the focus, shadow, type, in Tanakh.

Do you have any idea which passage I'm referring to? I'm trying to show you how silly your critiques about following rituals are in light of the claims we are making.
Show me in Tanakh where rituals are abolished?

I'm quoting Scripture.
Not really.

Silly comments.
Yours have been.

Not. The requirement is human Sacrifice. The substitute is the ram, the main sacrifice was Christ:
False. Show where human sacrifice is a commandment?

Sacrifices that haven't been done in almost 2000 years. Think of it; 2000 years of Jews dying in the sin without any atonement.
Think of it. Jesus didn't make any monetary payments for sins that required it. He fell way short.

Daniel's generation survived without sacrifices.

We in Hosea 3:4 -
For the children of Israel shall sit solitary many days without king, and without prince, and without sacrifice, and without pillar, and without ephod or teraphim;

And in Hosea 14:2 -
Take with you words, And return unto the LORD; Say unto Him: 'Forgive all iniquity, And accept that which is good; So will we render for bullocks the offering of our lips.

And in 1 Kings 8 -
46When they sin against You—for there is no one who does not sin—and You become angry with them and deliver them to an enemy who takes them as captives to his own land, whether far or near, 47and when they come to their senses in the land to which they were taken, and they repent and plead with You in the land of their captors, saying, ‘We have sinned and done wrong; we have acted wickedly,’ 48and when they return to You with all their heart and soul in the land of the enemies who took them captive, and when they pray to You in the direction of the land that You gave to their fathers, the city You have chosen, and the house I have built for Your Name, 49then may You hear from heaven, Your dwelling place, their prayer and petition, and may You uphold their cause. 50May You forgive Your people who have sinned against You and all the transgressions they have committed against You, and may You grant them compassion in the eyes of their captors to show them mercy.


God Bless
Likewise
 
Last edited:

johnny guitar

Well-known member
The scripture does not say God is a trinity...


In order for someone to be called God they must be a God...if each of them is a God then you have three Gods

That is foolishness Those are not parts of a man. Man is not a spirit Man is a body with a spirit.

No it is not the sam with God. God is a spirit and he has a son named Jesus.

You have not stated any facts, just rubbish.

Nope I am not arguing with God You are.The only true God said Jesus is his son, you are saying Jesus is God
In order for someone to be called God, HE(NOT they. Where did you learn grammar?)must be God, NOT a God.
 

Jewjitzu

Well-known member
In order for someone to be called God, HE(NOT they. Where did you learn grammar?)must be God, NOT a God.
Moses as God, Exodus 7:1.
Judges as God, Exodus 21:6, 22:8-9, Psalm 82:6.
Abraham as God, Genesis 23:6.
Angels as God, Psalm 8:5.
Kings as God, Zechariah 12:8.
Altar as God, Genesis 35:7.

Look at the Hebrew.
 

Newbirth

Well-known member
In order for someone to be called God, HE(NOT they. Where did you learn grammar?)must be God, NOT a God.
Then there are many Gods in your belief. Are you a Hindu? You have God the father who is God by himself, God the Son who is God by himself, and God the HS who is God by himself. Three Gods, are you doing to ask me where I learned Maths?
 

Anthony

Active member
Any point before creation God can measure as He was their doing something with His Son.
This is totally nonsense! You don't understand 6 days of creation nor Shabbat. How difficult for you and alike to come out of your tradition!

There is no time before creation. The beginning is the point of creation - Gen 1:1, John 1:1; 1John 1:1.

Many a times God speaks of before the world - but must understand the world refers to the man/mankind - John 17:5. God so loved the world.... Well He didn't love stones or soil. John uses the peculiar word 'world' to refer to man/mankind and not before time of creation.

There is nothing before the beginning but God - Not as Father or Son which is purely relevant to covenant relationship with Israel (His firstborn son - Exod 4:22).

The only begotten Son is representative and Mediator of Israel, the firstborn son as an heir to God's promises - Gal 4:1-5.
 
Last edited:

Tanachreader

Well-known member
This is totally nonsense! You don't understand 6 days of creation nor Shabbat. How difficult for you and alike to come out of your tradition!

There is no time before creation. The beginning is the point of creation - Gen 1:1, John 1:1; 1John 1:1.

Many a times God speaks of before the world - but must understand the world refers to the man/mankind - John 17:5. God so loved the world.... Well He didn't love stones or soil. John uses the peculiar word 'world' to refer to man/mankind and not before time of creation.

There is nothing before the beginning but God - Not as Father or Son which is purely relevant to covenant relationship with Israel (His firstborn son - Exod 4:22).

The only begotten Son is representative and Mediator of Israel, the firstborn son as an heir to God's promises - Gal 4:1-5.
My tradition is Christian
Explain 6 days of creation
The earth is billions of years old
 

DoctrinesofGraceBapt

Well-known member
Except for the NT, and the life death and resurrection of Jesus.
That isn't evidence. The resurrection is very questionable and most likely his bones were transferred to Talpiot. James Tabor has a good book on it.

BTW, why can't you admit you made a mistake previously? Also, why can't you comment on the fact that Jesus didn't make monetary payments for all sins that require it?

Your rejection of evidence doesn't make it not evidence.

DoctrinesofGraceBapt said:
Really? Says who? Did I miss something in my reading of the OT?
Says the Tanakh. I think if you read Deut 12, it's clear what Israel was supposed to do when they settled in the land.

Oh yeah, you can read all of 1 Kings 8 as well. ;)

Not one word about not sacrificing for 2000 years because you don't have the ideal political situation. Not one word that once the temple was built and latter destroyed without the ability to build again, one couldn't create another temporary house, according the commandments, to faithfully for fill the commands of the Lord to sacrifice.

DoctrinesofGraceBapt said:
I don't know what you think we are spiritualizing, but whatever.
Not keeping of the commandments in Jesus case where convenient.

We are not Jews. We are not under those commands. Therefore, nothing was spiritualized.

DoctrinesofGraceBapt said:
For since the law has but a shadow of the good things to come instead of the true form of these realities, it can never, by the same sacrifices that are continually offered every year, make perfect those who draw near. Otherwise, would they not have ceased to be offered, since the worshipers, having once been cleansed, would no longer have any consciousness of sins? But in these sacrifices there is a reminder of sins every year. For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to takeaway sins. Consequently, when Christ came into the world, he said, “Sacrifices and offerings you have not desired, but a body have you prepared for me; in burnt offerings and sin offering you have taken no pleasure. Then I said, ‘Behold, I have come to do your will, O God, as it is written of me in the scroll of the book.’” When he said above, “You have neither desired nor taken pleasure in sacrifices and offerings and burnt offerings and sin offerings” (these are offered according to the law), then he added, “Behold, I have come to do your will.”
Actually, Tanakh really says:

Sacrifice and meal-offering Thou hast no delight in; Mine ears hast Thou opened; Burnt-offering and sin-offering hast Thou not required....your law is within my heart.

Talk about nitpicking over translational issues found in your septuagint.

DoctrinesofGraceBapt said:
He does away with the first in order to establish the second. And by that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. And every priest stands daily at his service, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God, waiting from that time until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet. For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified. Hebrews 10:1-12
Sorry, but the Tanakh doesn't say it's a shadow or a type of Messiah so this fails.

There are about 39 references to the Hebrew root for mashiach, https://biblehub.com/hebrew/4899.htm. In reading them, they don't support your story that Messiah is the focus, shadow, type, in Tanakh.

Talk about rejecting our position for the flimsiest of reasons.

DoctrinesofGraceBapt said:
Do you have any idea which passage I'm referring to? I'm trying to show you how silly your critiques about following rituals are in light of the claims we are making.
Show me in Tanakh where rituals are abolished?

God through his Apostles and Prophets has the right to make a new covenant given that you broke the original one.

DoctrinesofGraceBapt said:
Not. The requirement is human Sacrifice. The substitute is the ram, the main sacrifice was Christ:
False. Show where human sacrifice is a commandment?

I already did, Genesis 22.

DoctrinesofGraceBapt said:
Sacrifices that haven't been done in almost 2000 years. Think of it; 2000 years of Jews dying in the sin without any atonement.
Think of it. Jesus didn't make any monetary payments for sins that required it. He fell way short.

A non response if I ever heard one. We are talking about atonement of sins before God, and you are bringing up righting the physical wrongs we done to our neighbors. These are different things. Making monetary payments is in a different category from the sprinkling the blood on the mercy seat. One relates to paying our debts to God; the other is paying back our debts to our fellow man. One is dealing with the sin that can bar us from heaven; the other is an issue of doing what's right to another person. That Jesus paid our debt to God doesn't mean we believe we can just treat our fellow man as trash. That God has forgiven us doesn't mean we don't have to make amends with our neighbor. The category error in your logic is shocking.

Daniel's generation survived without sacrifices.
We in Hosea 3:4 -
...
And in Hosea 14:2 -
...
And in 1 Kings 8 -
...

For a specified time under the guidance of prophets. You haven't had a prophet come to you in at least 2000 years because you rejected the Messiah God sent. The Messiah prophesied the destruction of the Temple. The Messiah and his Apostles/Prophets expressed why the sacrifices have ended and why they are no longer necessary. We have been guided into this new dispensation by God through Prophets just like those in the exile. You got nothing. Zip, zero, nothing. It's almost like God took his remnant and left you with nothing but the existence of his Church with gentiles graphed in to his people. As Paul said "So I ask, did they (the Jews) stumble in order that they might fall? By no means! Rather, through their trespass salvation has come to the Gentiles, so as to make Israel jealous." Romans 11:11. But don't worry, you can always repent and come back to God:
Now if their trespass means riches for the world, and if their failure means riches for the Gentiles, how much more will their full inclusion mean!
Now I am speaking to you Gentiles. In as much then as I am an apostle to the Gentiles, I magnify my ministry in order somehow to make my fellow Jews jealous, and thus save some of them. For if their rejection means the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance mean but life from the dead? If the dough offered as first fruits is holy, so is the whole lump, and if the root is holy, so are the branches. Romans 11;12-16.
God Bless
 

Jewjitzu

Well-known member
Your rejection of evidence doesn't make it not evidence.
That's what I was thinking of you rejecting what James Tabor says regarding Jesus' ossuary found at Talpiot.

Your inability to reply to Jesus' lack of payment for all monetary debts for mankind says a lot.

Again, your inability to admit your mistakes show to me that continued conversations with you will be unfruitful.

Not one word about not sacrificing for 2000 years because you don't have the ideal political situation. Not one word that once the temple was built and latter destroyed without the ability to build again, one couldn't create another temporary house, according the commandments, to faithfully for fill the commands of the Lord to sacrifice.
The tabernacle isn't used anymore so it isn't in the picture, so there is no temporary housing. It must be a house like Solomon built, and returns when the Davidic kingship does, Jeremiah 33:17-26.

BTW, there's no word of human sacrifices being acceptable per the commandments, and not on the altar per the commandments. ;)

We are not Jews. We are not under those commands. Therefore, nothing was spiritualized.
Jesus was, and he fell short. So, what laws are gentiles obligated to?

Talk about nitpicking over translational issues found in your septuagint.
Actually, the septuagint found today isn't the one created by us. The church doctored what you have today.

Talk about rejecting our position for the flimsiest of reasons.
It's a reason and debunks what you've said. ;)

God through his Apostles and Prophets has the right to make a new covenant given that you broke the original one.
But God never had a mass revelation again as He did with the original to show everyone that's true. Besides, He said attempts to change the law would be at the hands of false teachers and prophets.

I already did, Genesis 22.
No, the original plan was for Abraham to return and slaughter a Ram.

A non response if I ever heard one. We are talking about atonement of sins before God, and you are bringing up righting the physical wrongs we done to our neighbors. These are different things.
It's a sin, and you haven't accounted for ìt. Neither did Jesus. So I would agree you response fails.

Making monetary payments is in a different category from the sprinkling the blood on the mercy seat. One relates to paying our debts to God; the other is paying back our debts to our fellow man. One is dealing with the sin that can bar us from heaven; the other is an issue of doing what's right to another person. That Jesus paid our debt to God doesn't mean we believe we can just treat our fellow man as trash. That God has forgiven us doesn't mean we don't have to make amends with our neighbor. The category error in your logic is shocking.
God is concerned with all sins. Since Jesus didn't account for them, he fell short. If you've bothered reading your own NT, even Rev 22:15 says all manner of falsehood, like stealing, are barred from heaven.

For a specified time under the guidance of prophets. You haven't had a prophet come to you in at least 2000 years because you rejected the Messiah God sent. The Messiah prophesied the destruction of the Temple. The Messiah and his Apostles/Prophets expressed why the sacrifices have ended and why they are no longer necessary.
Interesting because neither Jesus nor the NT calls out Daniel 9 as being fulfilled by him. ;)

We have been guided into this new dispensation by God through Prophets just like those in the exile.
Prophets don't teach abrogation of the law, Deut 13 and 18.

You got nothing. Zip, zero, nothing. It's almost like God took his remnant and left you with nothing but the existence of his Church with gentiles graphed in to his people. As Paul said "So I ask, did they (the Jews) stumble in order that they might fall? By no means! Rather, through their trespass salvation has come to the Gentiles, so as to make Israel jealous." Romans 11:11. But don't worry, you can always repent and come back to God:
Now if their trespass means riches for the world, and if their failure means riches for the Gentiles, how much more will their full inclusion mean!
Now I am speaking to you Gentiles. In as much then as I am an apostle to the Gentiles, I magnify my ministry in order somehow to make my fellow Jews jealous, and thus save some of them. For if their rejection means the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance mean but life from the dead? If the dough offered as first fruits is holy, so is the whole lump, and if the root is holy, so are the branches. Romans 11;12-16.
Rotfl... Fortunately, Jeremiah 31:31-34 deals exclusively with Israel, not the church. You can join Israel, Isaiah 56:1-8. There's no other way of grafting per the commandments. One law for the native and stranger.

God Bless
Likewise
 

DoctrinesofGraceBapt

Well-known member
Your rejection of evidence doesn't make it not evidence.
That's what I was thinking of you rejecting what James Tabor says regarding Jesus' ossuary found at Talpiot.
Your inability to reply to Jesus' lack of payment for all monetary debts for mankind says a lot.
Again, your inability to admit your mistakes show to me that continued conversations with you will be unfruitful.

ROFL. This is your response? LOL
  1. Laughable silly, non-historical nonsense.
  2. Category error.
  3. What mistakes?

DoctrinesofGraceBapt said:
Not one word about not sacrificing for 2000 years because you don't have the ideal political situation. Not one word that once the temple was built and latter destroyed without the ability to build again, one couldn't create another temporary house, according the commandments, to faithfully for fill the commands of the Lord to sacrifice.
The tabernacle isn't used anymore so it isn't in the picture, so there is no temporary housing. It must be a house like Solomon built, and returns when the Davidic kingship does, Jeremiah 33:17-26.

BTW, there's no word of human sacrifices being acceptable per the commandments, and not on the altar per the commandments. ;)

So, it's better to refuse to obey God and Sacrifice as opposed to building another Tabernacle. Question: why do you keep on quoting passages that don't teach what you claim?

DoctrinesofGraceBapt said:
We are not Jews. We are not under those commands. Therefore, nothing was spiritualized.
Jesus was, and he fell short. So, what laws are gentiles obligated to?

In what way did Jesus fall short? FYI, Jesus was literally perfect. Gentiles are not obligated to any of the dietary or ceremonial laws. We are obligated to the moral laws: Loving God and Loving our Neighbor stuff. For example.
  • 10 commandments: moral law.
  • When and how one should celebrate Passover: Cerimonial law.
  • Don't each a cheese burger: Dietary law.

DoctrinesofGraceBapt said:
Talk about nitpicking over translational issues found in your septuagint.
Actually, the septuagint found today isn't the one created by us. The church doctored what you have today.

Conspiracy theory. Either way, your nitpicking amounted to nothing of consequence.

DoctrinesofGraceBapt said:
God through his Apostles and Prophets has the right to make a new covenant given that you broke the original one.
But God never had a mass revelation again as He did with the original to show everyone that's true. Besides, He said attempts to change the law would be at the hands of false teachers and prophets.

A vacuous denial of our position without even considering what we are truly saying.

DoctrinesofGraceBapt said:
I already did, Genesis 22.
No, the original plan was for Abraham to return and slaughter a Ram.

Funny because that's not what Genesis 22 says. The ram was sacrificed instead of the Issac.

DoctrinesofGraceBapt said:
A non response if I ever heard one. We are talking about atonement of sins before God, and you are bringing up righting the physical wrongs we done to our neighbors. These are different things.
It's a sin, and you haven't accounted for ìt. Neither did Jesus. So I would agree you response fails.

And when we sin, typically be wrong both God and man. Jesus' death paid the debt to God. Paying our debts to our fellow men are different.

DoctrinesofGraceBapt said:
Making monetary payments is in a different category from the sprinkling the blood on the mercy seat. One relates to paying our debts to God; the other is paying back our debts to our fellow man. One is dealing with the sin that can bar us from heaven; the other is an issue of doing what's right to another person. That Jesus paid our debt to God doesn't mean we believe we can just treat our fellow man as trash. That God has forgiven us doesn't mean we don't have to make amends with our neighbor. The category error in your logic is shocking.
God is concerned with all sins. Since Jesus didn't account for them, he fell short. If you've bothered reading your own NT, even Rev 22:15 says all manner of falsehood, like stealing, are barred from heaven.

Jesus' death paid the debt to God. Paying our debts to our fellow men are different.

DoctrinesofGraceBapt said:
For a specified time under the guidance of prophets. You haven't had a prophet come to you in at least 2000 years because you rejected the Messiah God sent. The Messiah prophesied the destruction of the Temple. The Messiah and his Apostles/Prophets expressed why the sacrifices have ended and why they are no longer necessary.
Interesting because neither Jesus nor the NT calls out Daniel 9 as being fulfilled by him. ;)
DoctrinesofGraceBapt said:
We have been guided into this new dispensation by God through Prophets just like those in the exile.
Prophets don't teach abrogation of the law, Deut 13 and 18.
DoctrinesofGraceBapt said:
You got nothing. Zip, zero, nothing. It's almost like God took his remnant and left you with nothing but the existence of his Church with gentiles graphed in to his people. As Paul said "So I ask, did they (the Jews) stumble in order that they might fall? By no means! Rather, through their trespass salvation has come to the Gentiles, so as to make Israel jealous." Romans 11:11. But don't worry, you can always repent and come back to God:
Now if their trespass means riches for the world, and if their failure means riches for the Gentiles, how much more will their full inclusion mean!
Now I am speaking to you Gentiles. In as much then as I am an apostle to the Gentiles, I magnify my ministry in order somehow to make my fellow Jews jealous, and thus save some of them. For if their rejection means the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance mean but life from the dead? If the dough offered as first fruits is holy, so is the whole lump, and if the root is holy, so are the branches.
Romans 11;12-16.
Rotfl... Fortunately, Jeremiah 31:31-34 deals exclusively with Israel, not the church. You can join Israel, Isaiah 56:1-8. There's no other way of grafting per the commandments. One law for the native and stranger.

  1. "Jesus nor the NT calls out Daniel 9 as being fulfilled by him." Non sequitur.
  2. No one is talking about abrogation of the Law. Perhaps, you shouldn't make unjustified jumps in logic as to ignore the point I'm making.
  3. The remnant received the New Covenant, the rest were abandoned in their rebellion against God's Messiah. And, this new Covenant was opened to all people to make Israel jealous that they might repent of their rebellion and return to God.

God Bless
 

Jewjitzu

Well-known member
ROFL. This is your response? LOL
  1. Laughable silly, non-historical nonsense.
  2. Category error.
  3. What mistakes?
Rotfl... what historical data do you have for Jesus' resurrection? Your inability to respond to Jesus' insufficient sacrifice concerning monetary debts since God's concerned over all sins? Your inability to admit that you mistakenly said all sins required sacrifices but instead wave off the specific examples I provided?

So, it's better to refuse to obey God and Sacrifice as opposed to building another Tabernacle.
A temporary structure doesn't meet the requirements once Israel was established.

Question: why do you keep on quoting passages that don't teach what you claim?
I've supported what I've said. Why didn't Jesus apply his blood on the altar in Jerusalem per the commandments while the temple stood? His blood sacrifice is invalidated as a result, besides being idolatrous.

In what way did Jesus fall short? FYI, Jesus was literally perfect.
Rotfl... for one thing, he broke his vow of abstaining from wine at the cross. He donated to the temple funds showing his shortcomings. He was defiled at the Praetorium requiring cleansing for the purification of sins, etc.

But, my point was he fell short on payment for all sins requiring monetary compensation.

Gentiles are not obligated to any of the dietary or ceremonial laws.
Actually false. If you look at the Jerusalem council in Acts 15 abstaining from blood, strangled animals, etc., are required for initiates into the fold on the way to more. One law for native and sranger.

We are obligated to the moral laws: Loving God and Loving our Neighbor stuff. For example.
10 commandments: moral law.
Really? You keep the Sabbath? Why do you have another god before God and bow to him? Reread Exodus 20.

  • When and how one should celebrate Passover: Cerimonial law.
So you understand you can't participate of the Passover lamb without being circumcised?

Conspiracy theory. Either way, your nitpicking amounted to nothing of consequence.
Factual. The original Septuagint contained only the Pentateuch, not the apocryphal books, etc. Another mistake on your part.

A vacuous denial of our position without even considering what we are truly saying.
Not vacuous at all. If you've checked all the laws given starting from Adam, Noah, Abraham, and Moses, they were given personally or publicly at Mt. Sinai. A change would require the same revelation to all of Israel. Reread what false teachers and prophets do in Deut 13 and 18. They teach abrogation of the law.

Funny because that's not what Genesis 22 says. The ram was sacrificed instead of the Issac.
Really? Because I think Genesis 22:5,8, is pretty clear what was going to happen. BTW, why do you think Adam didn't sacrifice any of his sons, etc., since you think human sacrifice was required and so clearly what God expected?

And when we sin, typically be wrong both God and man. Jesus' death paid the debt to God. Paying our debts to our fellow men are different.
It's all sin. Do you understand what the asham in Isaiah entails? It doesn't cover all sins. Did you know that?

Jesus' death paid the debt to God. Paying our debts to our fellow men are different.
It's all sins against God. Why did God wipe out mankind in Noah's time? All forms of violence, stealing woman, etc. Isn't murder against people and not God? How do you pay for that?

  1. "Jesus nor the NT calls out Daniel 9 as being fulfilled by him." Non sequitur.
It goes to evidence that he wasn't the messiah if you think Daniel 9 talks that.

  1. No one is talking about abrogation of the Law. Perhaps, you shouldn't make unjustified jumps in logic as to ignore the point I'm making.
Calling people in the NT prophets who turn around and teach abrogation, like Paul did, is clearly called out as false prophets in Deut 13 and 18.

  1. The remnant received the New Covenant, the rest were abandoned in their rebellion against God's Messiah. And, this new Covenant was opened to all people to make Israel jealous that they might repent of their rebellion and return to God.
The remnant keeps the commandments of God. Nothing has changed by the implement the laws are written on - the hearts and minds. It applies to only Israel as clearly stated in Jeremiah 31:31-34. Strangers have been invited since the beginning, as there is one law for the native and stranger, Isaiah 56:1-8.

God Bless
Likewise

Shabbat Shalom
 

DoctrinesofGraceBapt

Well-known member
Rotfl... what historical data do you have for Jesus' resurrection? Your inability to respond to Jesus' insufficient sacrifice concerning monetary debts since God's concerned over all sins? Your inability to admit that you mistakenly said all sins required sacrifices but instead wave off the specific examples I provided?

You reject mean books written by eye witnesses supported by the rest of history?

DoctrinesofGraceBapt said:
Question: why do you keep on quoting passages that don't teach what you claim?
I've supported what I've said. Why didn't Jesus apply his blood on the altar in Jerusalem per the commandments while the temple stood? His blood sacrifice is invalidated as a result, besides being idolatrous.

No, you read into passages things they don't say to justify your opinions.

DoctrinesofGraceBapt said:
In what way did Jesus fall short? FYI, Jesus was literally perfect.
Rotfl... for one thing, he broke his vow of abstaining from wine at the cross. He donated to the temple funds showing his shortcomings. He was defiled at the Praetorium requiring cleansing for the purification of sins, etc.

Not one of these is actually falling short.

But, my point was he fell short on payment for all sins requiring monetary compensation.

Still a category error.

DoctrinesofGraceBapt said:
Gentiles are not obligated to any of the dietary or ceremonial laws.
Actually false. If you look at the Jerusalem council in Acts 15 abstaining from blood, strangled animals, etc., are required for initiates into the fold on the way to more. One law for native and sranger.

Yet for some reason we can still eat bacon. Besides this is another category error.

DoctrinesofGraceBapt said:
We are obligated to the moral laws: Loving God and Loving our Neighbor stuff. For example.
10 commandments: moral law.
Really? You keep the Sabbath?

I celebrate the Lord's Day.

Why do you have another god before God and bow to him? Reread Exodus 20.

We don't.

Factual. The original Septuagint contained only the Pentateuch, not the apocryphal books, etc. Another mistake on your part.

And, it was expanded in the three hundred years, BY JEWS, to include the whole OT and the apocrypha by the turn of the 1st century.

Not vacuous at all. If you've checked all the laws given starting from Adam, Noah, Abraham, and Moses, they were given personally or publicly at Mt. Sinai. A change would require the same revelation to all of Israel. Reread what false teachers and prophets do in Deut 13 and 18. They teach abrogation of the law.

Really? The Jewish response to new revelation regularly included rejection, persecution, and murdering the messenger (Zechariah and Jesus). Why on earth would anyone think these deserve such requirements in light of the revelation that was given: the miracles, the following, the sky darkened, the earth shook, the covering torn, the resurrection of Christ...

DoctrinesofGraceBapt said:
Funny because that's not what Genesis 22 says. The ram was sacrificed instead of the Issac.
Really? Because I think Genesis 22:5,8, is pretty clear what was going to happen. BTW, why do you think Adam didn't sacrifice any of his sons, etc., since you think human sacrifice was required and so clearly what God expected?

Adam is irrelevant to this conversation. And, Abraham thought he must actually kill his son. You dodging the story because it doesn't fit your human made non-sacrificial religion.

DoctrinesofGraceBapt said:
And when we sin, typically be wrong both God and man. Jesus' death paid the debt to God. Paying our debts to our fellow men are different.
It's all sin. Do you understand what the asham in Isaiah entails? It doesn't cover all sins. Did you know that?
DoctrinesofGraceBapt said:
Jesus' death paid the debt to God. Paying our debts to our fellow men are different.
It's all sins against God. Why did God wipe out mankind in Noah's time? All forms of violence, stealing woman, etc. Isn't murder against people and not God? How do you pay for that?

Not relevant to what Christians are talking about.

DoctrinesofGraceBapt said:
  1. "Jesus nor the NT calls out Daniel 9 as being fulfilled by him." Non sequitur.
It goes to evidence that he wasn't the messiah if you think Daniel 9 talks that.
DoctrinesofGraceBapt said:
  1. No one is talking about abrogation of the Law. Perhaps, you shouldn't make unjustified jumps in logic as to ignore the point I'm making.
Calling people in the NT prophets who turn around and teach abrogation, like Paul did, is clearly called out as false prophets in Deut 13 and 18.

In other words, it's more important to you that a prophet support your understanding of religion as opposed to conveying what God wants.

DoctrinesofGraceBapt said:
  1. The remnant received the New Covenant, the rest were abandoned in their rebellion against God's Messiah. And, this new Covenant was opened to all people to make Israel jealous that they might repent of their rebellion and return to God.
The remnant keeps the commandments of God. Nothing has changed by the implement the laws are written on - the hearts and minds. It applies to only Israel as clearly stated in Jeremiah 31:31-34. Strangers have been invited since the beginning, as there is one law for the native and stranger, Isaiah 56:1-8.

You rejected the messiah. Until you repent of this sin, you are lost. BTW, I'm purposefully ignoring the interpretations you add to passages like Jeremiah 31:31-34 as to reject Christ.

God Bless
 

Anthony

Active member
My tradition is Christian
Explain 6 days of creation
The earth is billions of years old
How deceived you are and you don't even know about it. I think Darwin is successful in deceiving people. Next you will post something on evolution. I will leave you in your deception.
 

Tanachreader

Well-known member
How deceived you are and you don't even know about it. I think Darwin is successful in deceiving people. Next you will post something on evolution. I will leave you in your deception.
Darwin?
I believe in the 6 24hr days creation but the earth is older than 6k years.
 
Top