Where Christianity Diverges from Scripture

[The Pixie]

The body will be resurrected....the spirit returns to the Lord at death.

But the point is that this is a Christian belief, not Biblical. Where in the Bible does it say the dead (who accepted Jesus) go to heaven?

Think this through. On the day of judgement, God decides who goes to life eternal. So does that mean some people who go to heaven before that time may end up in hell? Or will some people currently in hell get judged for eternal life?

Of course I can....but the carnal mind cannot accept the things of the spirit...so regardless of what I show you, you cannot accept it.

Which is pretty much my point.

A plain reading of the Bible will not reveal any teaching of the Trinity, as you tacitly admit. You have to already be convinced that it is there to be able to pick out the vague hints and construct them into the whole cloth.

The teaching is in the bible...that's where it came from.

It came from centuries of wrangling over the nature of Jesus, and was as much a reaction to Arianism.

The old law was fulfilled.

And what does "fulfilled" mean in that context?

 

[4Him]

But the point is that this is a Christian belief, not Biblical. Where in the Bible does it say the dead (who accepted Jesus) go to heaven?

Absent from the body, present with the Lord...that is but one verse.
Who do you think are the believers that will return with Jesus at His Second Coming?

Think this through.

LOL....YOU think this through.

On the day of judgement, God decides who goes to life eternal.

Eternal life is granted upon belief. Believers are not judged unto life, we have it already....the Last Judgment is not of believers.

Which is pretty much my point.

So you know you don't have the ability to discern the Spiritual, yet you're trying to do what you can't do.

A plain reading of the Bible will not reveal any teaching of the Trinity, as you tacitly admit.

Except I didn't admit that.

You have to already be convinced that it is there to be able to pick out the vague hints and construct them into the whole cloth.

I'm sure that's what you think.

And what does "fulfilled" mean in that context?

You tell me what you think it means...

 

[SteveB]

I see you are not actually disagreeing with anything so far.

My initial post wasn't about disagreement. It was about your lack of knowledge of where these ideas originated.
I was simply asking you to provide the source for them, as noted in the two which you did provide a source/basis.

Well for one thing you have regular access to a computer.

So?
My county library has computers for patrons to use regularly.
Or is that your belief that you have the right to decide who does and who does not have the right to own property?

But again, you are not saying I am wrong.

Then get over yourself and provide a basis for your statements.

And again and again and again. So far you have not actually stated I have got anything wrong, so I must be o a roll here.

And again and again I've asked you to provide a basis for your beliefs.

Get back to me when you want to dispute any of them.

I have a far simpler idea.

Provide a basis for them.
Give us the sources from which you have pulled these ideas.

Once you do this, I can go to the next level with it.

 

[Howie]

According to the book of Job, God was responsible for what Satan did.

Quote where the text says that. Give me the verse. Also, look at Lk 22:22.

Most Christians - and perhaps this is not true of yourself - say the dead (who accepted Jesus) are already in heaven. See here for example:

https://unlockingthebible.org/2020/09/what-happens-when-christian-dies/

They are, but in spirit not bodily

I saw the text, I just read it differently.

To me, Paul is talking about what will happen on the day of judgement. Read 1 Cor 15:

51 Behold, I am telling you a [w]mystery; we will not all sleep, but we will all be changed, 52 in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet; for the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised [x]imperishable, and we will be changed.​

The dead will be raised when the last trumpet sounds. This is what Pauls refers to with "For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive compensation for [e]his deeds done through the body, in accordance with what he has done, whether good or bad." Verse 51 I just quoted makes clear Paul expected this to be within his life time, as he says it will happen before some of those he is writing to will die (fall asleep).

If Paul expected the resurrection to happen in his lifetime he would have said so, but he doesn't say that. In the life of the church, some some will die before the day of final judgment, and some won't. Jesus says no one knows when the day of judgment will occur, non one -- except the Father -- that includes Jesus, Paul, and the other apostles.

Well let us see who can find more - your verses saying Jesus is equal to God, or my verses saying God is superior to Jesus. Here are some to get us going.

In this verse Jesus is tempted with the authory of all the kingdoms of the world; that makes no sense if he already had all the authority of God

Luke 4:5-8: "The devil led him up to a high place and showed him in an instant all the kingdoms of the world. And he said to him, "I will give you all their authority and splendor; it has been given to me, and I can give it to anyone I want to. If you worship me, it will all be yours." Jesus answered, "It is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God and serve him only.’"​

Here he prays to God, kneeing; clearly God is his superior.

Luke 22: 41 He withdrew about a stone’s throw beyond them, knelt down and prayed, 42 ‘Father, if you are willing, take this cup from me; yet not my will, but yours be done.’ 43 An angel from heaven appeared to him and strengthened him. 44 And being in anguish, he prayed more earnestly, and his sweat was like drops of blood falling to the ground.​

Again he pleads with God for something here:

Mark 15:34 And at three in the afternoon Jesus cried out in a loud voice, ‘Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani?’ (which means ‘My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?’).​

Jesus makes clear that disowning him is neither blasphemy nor is it unforgivable, unlike blaspheming against the Holy Spirit (and presumably God).

Luke 12:8 ‘I tell you, whoever publicly acknowledges me before others, the Son of Man will also acknowledge before the angels of God. 9 But whoever disowns me before others will be disowned before the angels of God. 10 And everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven.​

3 Do nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, but with humility consider one another as more important than yourselves; 4 do not merely look out for your own personal interests, but also for the interests of others. 5 Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, as He already existed in the form of God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, 7 but emptied Himself by taking the form of a bond-servant and being born in the likeness of men. Php 2:3-7.


1 In the beginning was the Word [Jesus] and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him not even one thing came into being that has come into being. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the Light of mankind. 5 And the Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not grasp it. John 1


15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation: 16 for by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones, or dominions, or rulers, or authorities—all things have been created through Him and for Him. 17 He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together. 18 He is also the head of the body, the church; and He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, so that He Himself will come to have first place in everything. 19 For it was the Father’s good pleasure for all the fullness to dwell in Him, 20 and through Him to reconcile all things to Himself, whether things on earth or things in heaven, having made peace through the blood of His cross. Col 1:15-20.

From the OT:


For a Child will be born to us, a Son will be given to us; And the government will rest on His shoulders; And His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace.

Also, in Hebrew, the coming Jesus is called, Imm anu El -- God with us -- Immanuel.

To the disciples.

Correct. That is an instruction to the disciples. They are to rely on God to meet their needs as they go out. The same is true in most churches today. Missionary families all over the world are supported by their sending church(es).

That is why I quoted the full passage, to make clear it starts "22 And He said to His disciples,".

Thanks

So the word "fulfill" in that verses mean to keep the law perfectly?

Pretty much as I said in the OP: Christians pretend "fulfill" has some weird meaning so that Jesus fulfilling laws means those laws no longer need to be observed.

Well certainly the OT ritual, sacrificial, food and clothing laws are gone. However, every human being is responsible to keep the moral law. Further, it should be noted, keeping the moral law cannot save you. A caveat, if the you're entertaining the idea you can be saved by rejecting God and keeping rhe law, YOU CANNOT. You have been breaking the law continually since the time you learned good from bad

This is a great strategy for Christians avoiding having to support what they believe.

That's rubbish. I support my beliefs all the time, and do do others. You tend to seek out and hound those who aren't as able.

Just declare non-Christians as wrong because the are non-Christians, and you can just ignore them when they point out how ridiculous Christianity actually is.

EDITED BY MOD--RULE 12

 

[The Pixie]

But the point is that this is a Christian belief, not Biblical. Where in the Bible does it say the dead (who accepted Jesus) go to heaven?

Absent from the body, present with the Lord...that is but one verse.
Who do you think are the believers that will return with Jesus at His Second Coming?

Right. And can you now answer the question. Where in the Bible does it say the dead (who accepted Jesus) go to heaven?

LOL....YOU think this through.

Do you think this is a response? It makes it look like you have no answer; that I was spot on here.

Well, so be it.

Eternal life is granted upon belief. Believers are not judged unto life, we have it already....the Last Judgment is not of believers.

So what is it?

And where is the Bible verse that say that?

So you know you don't have the ability to discern the Spiritual, yet you're trying to do what you can't do.

To judge from the way you are ducking the question so often, I get the impression you cannot either.

Except I didn't admit that.

So point me to the verse that makes clear - to a plain reading - the teaching of the trinity.

I am sure you cannot, otherwise you - or someone - would have done so already.

I'm sure that's what you think.

And every response I see on this thread on the issue - such as this one - re-affirms that view. If the trinity was there in the Bible, someone would point me to it. It is not.

You tell me what you think it means...

And again, evasion. Why is it that you cannot answer these questions plainly? You took the time to respond, but I see no actual content in your post, just evasion after evasion. Why is that?

In this case it is because Christianity has twisted the word "fulfilled" to give it some weird meaning that makes no sense, and so, when pressed, Christians routinely evade the question.

You tell me what you think it means...

In my view "fulfilled" in this context, means completed. Here is the verse again:

Mat 5:17 “Do not presume that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish, but to fulfill.​

Jesus is not saying anything about the laws. This is where Christianity goes awry; it is, I suspect, trying to justify ignoring the laws of the old covenant, and so has seized on this verse, without actually knowing or caring what it means, and so ends up in this ridiculous situation of saying Jesus "fulfilled" the laws by observing them perfectly.

The reality is the "The Law" refers to the first five books of the Hebrew Bible, the Law of Moses, while "The Prophets" refers to most of the rest.

Law and the Prophets | Encyclopedia.com

Law and the Prophets Two major divisions of the Old Testament. Source for information on Law and the Prophets: World Encyclopedia dictionary.

www.encyclopedia.com

Jesus is saying he has fulfilled - or completed - the prophecies in the Hebrew Bible. It is no more complicated that that.

 

[The Pixie]

So?
My county library has computers for patrons to use regularly.
Or is that your belief that you have the right to decide who does and who does not have the right to own property?

What is your point here Steve?

Are you telling me that actually you have given up all your material goods, and you live as Jesus told his followers?

Despite your point about country libraries, I still feel confident saying that that is not true.

Then get over yourself and provide a basis for your statements.

And again and again I've asked you to provide a basis for your beliefs.

I have a far simpler idea.

Provide a basis for them.
Give us the sources from which you have pulled these ideas.

Once you do this, I can go to the next level with it.

I am not sure I can be bothered. If you look at my responses to other posters, you will see I have provided a basis for my claims, scattered though them. If you want to focus on one claim, the sure, we can do that. But given your record here, I strongly suspect your response will be that I am going to get tortured for eternity unless I just accept whatever you say as true on faith.

 

[4Him]

Right. And can you now answer the question. Where in the Bible does it say the dead (who accepted Jesus) go to heaven?

Already addressed....Where is the Lord? Absent from the body, present with the Lord...

The Spirit returns to God....where is God?

Do you think this is a response? It makes it look like you have no answer; that I was spot on here.

Well, so be it.

Your entire OP is not even remotely on spot. That you, an unbeliever, thinks they can understand the Spiritual is laughable.

So what is it?

And where is the Bible verse that say that?

John 5:24

To judge from the way you are ducking the question so often, I get the impression you cannot either.

No one has ducked anything....trying to convince an unregenerate of the things of God is a waste of time.

So point me to the verse that makes clear - to a plain reading - the teaching of the trinity.

You can start here: https://carm.org/dictionary/trinity/

And every response I see on this thread on the issue - such as this one - re-affirms that view. If the trinity was there in the Bible, someone would point me to it. It is not.

Of course it is....where do you think it came from.....SCRIPTURE.

And again, evasion. In this case it is because Christianity has twisted the word "fulfilled" to give it some weird meaning that makes no sense, and so, when pressed, Christians routinely evade the question.

Nope. I want to know what it is you think you know....I want to know what it is you think you understand.

And you still can't tell us what it is that was twisted.

In my view "fulfilled" in this context, means completed. Here is the verse again:

Mat 5:17 “Do not presume that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish, but to fulfill.​

Jesus is not saying anything about the laws. This is where Christianity goes awry; it is, I suspect, trying to justify ignoring the laws of the old covenant, and so has seized on this verse, without actually knowing or caring what it means, and so ends up in this ridiculous situation of saying Jesus "fulfilled" the laws by observing them perfectly.

The reality is the "The Law" refers to the first five books of the Hebrew Bible, the Law of Moses, while "The Prophets" refers to most of the rest.

Law and the Prophets | Encyclopedia.com

Law and the Prophets Two major divisions of the Old Testament. Source for information on Law and the Prophets: World Encyclopedia dictionary.

www.encyclopedia.com

Jesus is saying he has fulfilled - or completed - the prophecies in the Hebrew Bible. It is no more complicated that that.

What does it mean that Jesus fulfilled the Law?

Jesus came to fulfill the true meaning and purpose of what the Law was about. He fulfilled its prophecies and predictions. He accomplished what it demanded.

carm.org

 

[stiggy wiggy]

To these atheists who keep bleating about how the Trinity is not taught in scripture, since the word "Trinity" is not found in the Bible:

That's like saying the Bhagavad Gita is not pantheistic because the word "pantheism" is not found in it.

John 1 tells us the Son is God. Plus we have: Philippians 2:

5 In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus:

6 Who, being in very nature God,
did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;

And the Holy Spirit is the VERY Spirit of God.

 

[Howie]

Right. And can you now answer the question. Where in the Bible does it say the dead (who accepted Jesus) go to heaven?


Do you think this is a response? It makes it look like you have no answer; that I was spot on here.

Well, so be it.


So what is it?

And where is the Bible verse that say that?


To judge from the way you are ducking the question so often, I get the impression you cannot either.


So point me to the verse that makes clear - to a plain reading - the teaching of the trinity.

I am sure you cannot, otherwise you - or someone - would have done so already.


And every response I see on this thread on the issue - such as this one - re-affirms that view. If the trinity was there in the Bible, someone would point me to it. It is not.


And again, evasion. Why is it that you cannot answer these questions plainly? You took the time to respond, but I see no actual content in your post, just evasion after evasion. Why is that?

In this case it is because Christianity has twisted the word "fulfilled" to give it some weird meaning that makes no sense, and so, when pressed, Christians routinely evade the question.


In my view "fulfilled" in this context, means completed. Here is the verse again:

Mat 5:17 “Do not presume that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish, but to fulfill.​

Jesus is not saying anything about the laws. This is where Christianity goes awry; it is, I suspect, trying to justify ignoring the laws of the old covenant, and so has seized on this verse, without actually knowing or caring what it means, and so ends up in this ridiculous situation of saying Jesus "fulfilled" the laws by observing them perfectly.

The reality is the "The Law" refers to the first five books of the Hebrew Bible, the Law of Moses, while "The Prophets" refers to most of the rest.

Law and the Prophets | Encyclopedia.com

Law and the Prophets Two major divisions of the Old Testament. Source for information on Law and the Prophets: World Encyclopedia dictionary.

www.encyclopedia.com

Jesus is saying he has fulfilled - or completed - the prophecies in the Hebrew Bible. It is no more complicated that that.

For God's sake, Pixie how many times do Christians have to prove you wrong? You don't want to learn. You want him and haw and ignore and kvetch.

You prove reasoning with a fool is pointless. 🙄

 

[SteveB]

What is your point here Steve?

I'm giving you the opportunity to engage and provide the basis for your opinions here.

Are you telling me that actually you have given up all your material goods, and you live as Jesus told his followers?

If I did, I wouldn't tell you.

Despite your point about country libraries, I still feel confident saying that that is not true.

Exactly. I see no reason to believe you have the courage to follow Jesus. So by all means, please prove me wrong.

I am not sure I can be bothered. If you look at my responses to other posters, you will see I have provided a basis for my claims, scattered though them. If you want to focus on one claim, the sure, we can do that. But given your record here, I strongly suspect your response will be that I am going to get tortured for eternity unless I just accept whatever you say as true on faith.

Then your op is a fraud, and a waste of time.
Your unwillingness to provide a basis for your beliefs about these things shows that you don't actually want to know the truth and understand what the bible says about these things.

I see however that your buddy nouveau has liked your post, so it's pretty clear that you have received the praise you wanted.

Jesus said something about this issue.

Luk 16:15 WEB He said to them, “You are those who justify yourselves in the sight of men, but God knows your hearts. For that which is exalted among men is an abomination in the sight of God.

 

[The Pixie]

Another one, with thanks to SteveB.

12. Wrath

Wrath means extreme anger. When the Bible says God's wrath, it means that God was exceedingly angry.

Christianity does not like the idea of God loosing his temper, so re-defined the word to make the Bible mean something else:

"Wrath is the response where you wash your hands in disgust, and walk away."

𝅴 - God's Wrath

In another OP, a poster asked what I thought the wrath of God is, in response to my question about what what they thought wrath was. They responded correctly that wrath is extreme anger, but they didn't appear to understand the difference between that and an explosive outburst of anger or rage...

forums.carm.org

 

[The Pixie]

Quote where the text says that. Give me the verse. Also, look at Lk 22:22.

Here:

Job 42:11 Then all his brothers, all his sisters, and all who had known him before came to him, and they ate bread with him in his house; and they sympathized with him and comforted him for all the adversities that the Lord had brought on him. ...​

They are, but in spirit not bodily

Okay... Now think back to the point of the thread. I am saying Christian belief has diverged from scripture. I said Christianity posits that the dead go immediately to heaven - we agree so far.

Now the big question: Do you agree with me that this is non-Biblical or can you point me to the Bible verses that confirm this position?

If Paul expected the resurrection to happen in his lifetime he would have said so, but he doesn't say that. In the life of the church, some some will die before the day of final judgment, and some won't. Jesus says no one knows when the day of judgment will occur, non one -- except the Father -- that includes Jesus, Paul, and the other apostles.

Again, Christianity ignoring the Bible. I already quoted the verse where Paul makes this clear. The "church" was a specific set of people, not a building. Those people probably all died by about AD 100. Paul made a prediction (though not in the sense of prophesy), and he got it wrong. His vision of Jesus led him to believe the day of judgment, the day the righteous would be resurrected was approaching first. He called Jesus the "first fruits" because he saw Jesus as the prototype for that event, a sign that it was nearly there.

Obviously, it failed to happen, and Christianity has been spinning the verses ever since.

3 Do nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, but with humility consider one another as more important than yourselves; 4 do not merely look out for your own personal interests, but also for the interests of others. 5 Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, as He already existed in the form of God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, 7 but emptied Himself by taking the form of a bond-servant and being born in the likeness of men. Php 2:3-7.

Okay, that is not bad.

1 In the beginning was the Word [Jesus] and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him not even one thing came into being that has come into being. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the Light of mankind. 5 And the Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not grasp it. John 1

That does not say Jesus (the Word) was equal to God, only that Jesus was there from the start.

15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation: 16 for by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones, or dominions, or rulers, or authorities—all things have been created through Him and for Him. 17 He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together. 18 He is also the head of the body, the church; and He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, so that He Himself will come to have first place in everything. 19 For it was the Father’s good pleasure for all the fullness to dwell in Him, 20 and through Him to reconcile all things to Himself, whether things on earth or things in heaven, having made peace through the blood of His cross. Col 1:15-20.

The phrase "the firstborn of all creation" indicates Jesus is subordinate to God, as he was created by God.

For a Child will be born to us, a Son will be given to us; And the government will rest on His shoulders; And His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace.

Interesting... you can explain why it says Jesus will be called "Eternal Father", right?

And why does this make Jesus equal to God? Because they are both called "father"?

Also, in Hebrew, the coming Jesus is called, Imm anu El -- God with us -- Immanuel.

Just for the record, Jesus was named "Jesus", not "Emmanuel".


Here are a few more verses that further confirm Jesus is subordinate to God:

Col 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation:​

​

John 5:19 Jesus gave them this answer: ‘Very truly I tell you, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does.​

​

John 8:25 ‘Who are you?’ they asked.​

‘Just what I have been telling you from the beginning,’ Jesus replied. 26 ‘I have much to say in judgment of you. But he who sent me is trustworthy, and what I have heard from him I tell the world.’​

Correct. That is an instruction to the disciples. They are to rely on God to meet their needs as they go out. The same is true in most churches today. Missionary families all over the world are supported by their sending church(es).

Well at least you have abandoned the rich young ruler nonsense...

So the word "fulfill" in that verses mean to keep the law perfectly?

Pretty much as I said in the OP: Christians pretend "fulfill" has some weird meaning so that Jesus fulfilling laws means those laws no longer need to be observed.

Well certainly the OT ritual, sacrificial, food and clothing laws are gone. However, every human being is responsible to keep the moral law. Further, it should be noted, keeping the moral law cannot save you. A caveat, if the you're entertaining the idea you can be saved by rejecting God and keeping rhe law, YOU CANNOT. You have been breaking the law continually since the time you learned good from bad

So what exactly does "fulfill" mean in this context?

Because your premise of life is wrong (God does not exist), you are wrong about everything.

This is a great strategy for Christians avoiding having to support what they believe.

That's rubbish. I support my beliefs all the time, and do do others. You tend to seek out and hound those who aren't as able.

I never said you never support your beliefs. I pointed out that your prior statement was a useful, and sadly common, tactic to avoid doing so.

If you do not like the accusation, do not persist in it!

 

[The Pixie]

Already addressed....Where is the Lord? Absent from the body, present with the Lord...

The Spirit returns to God....where is God?

More evasion.

Your entire OP is not even remotely on spot. That you, an unbeliever, thinks they can understand the Spiritual is laughable.

More evasion.

This idea of "spiritual discernment" looks to me like the emperors new clothes. Only a true believer can really understand the Bible; if you do not choose to twist the text to mean what Christianity says it means, you are not a true believer and lack "spiritual discernment".

And really, this is tacitly admitting I am right - that Christianity has indeed diverged from the Bible, and that nowadays a Christian needs to use this supposed "spiritual discernment" to understand how Christianity wants you to believe the Bible says.

John 5:24

I think that can be interpreted another way, but okay.

No one has ducked anything....trying to convince an unregenerate of the things of God is a waste of time.

Of course, another useful excuse for nt supporting your claims.

You can start here: https://carm.org/dictionary/trinity/

Of course it is....where do you think it came from.....SCRIPTURE.

But you cannot point to a specific passage, right, because... excuses.

Nope. I want to know what it is you think you know....I want to know what it is you think you understand.

And I told you.

Can you now tell me what you think "fulfill" means in that context? I guess not.

And you still can't tell us what it is that was twisted.

But only because Christians are so scared to admit what it means. I keep asking you, and you keep evading. And not just you.

Why can you not just tell me what you think the word means?

Because Christianity has twisted it so much that it is now nonsense, and on some level you know it. You know full well that if you actually state what it means I will point out what arrant nonsense it is.

What does it mean that Jesus fulfilled the Law?

Jesus came to fulfill the true meaning and purpose of what the Law was about. He fulfilled its prophecies and predictions. He accomplished what it demanded.

carm.org

What does it say the meaning is. I will quote it, so we can see it in all its glory:

Instead, he came to fulfill the true meaning and purpose of what the Law was about.​

Great, the Christian position on "fulfill" is that it means "fulfill"!

Evasion after evasion after evasion! Do you ever stop to think about why you are forced to evade? If the truth is on your side, why can you not simply state "fulfill means..."?

 

[4Him]

More evasion.


More evasion.

From you, yes.

This idea of "spiritual discernment" looks to me like the emperors new clothes.

To a God denier, of course it does.

Only a true believer can really understand the Bible;

So says God.

if you do not choose to twist the text to mean what Christianity says it means, you are not a true believer and lack "spiritual discernment".

Your OP and your posts show your lack of discernment.

And really, this is tacitly admitting I am right - that Christianity has indeed diverged from the Bible, and that nowadays a Christian needs to use this supposed "spiritual discernment" to understand how Christianity wants you to believe the Bible says.

Again, you have no understanding of His word. It's not about believing what "Christianity" wants you to believe, it's about actually believing what God says.

Of course, another useful excuse for nt supporting your claims.

I have....you don't have the ability to understand. This is just a fact.

But you cannot point to a specific passage, right, because... excuses.

The verses are given you you.

And I told you.

Can you now tell me what you think "fulfill" means in that context? I guess not.

I did.

But only because Christians are so scared to admit what it means. I keep asking you, and you keep evading. And not just you.

And here you are again, empty handed, evading, not able to provide an answer.

Why can you not just tell me what you think the word means?

Because Christianity has twisted it so much that it is now nonsense, and on some level you know it. You know full well that if you actually state what it means I will point out what arrant nonsense it is.

The only nonsense I see is this ridiculous thread by a God hater that thinks they know more than His children. It's laughable.

What does it say the meaning is. I will quote it, so we can see it in all its glory:

Instead, he came to fulfill the true meaning and purpose of what the Law was about.​

Great, the Christian position on "fulfill" is that it means "fulfill"!

Evasion after evasion after evasion! Do you ever stop to think about why you are forced to evade? If the truth is on your side, why can you not simply state "fulfill means..."?

So that's the only sentence you read out of the article? I don't know what you think we think it means other than exactly what it means.

That's like picking a word, we tell you what it means and you don't like the fact that we tell you what it means.

There is no evasion, except by you.

 

[Howie]

Nt

 

[Howie]

Here:

Job 42:11 Then all his brothers, all his sisters, and all who had known him before came to him, and they ate bread with him in his house; and they sympathized with him and comforted him for all the adversities that the Lord had brought on him. ...​

Doesn't support your point. See Lk 22:22. Satan is responsible for what he did, not God.

So far, you are a very bad learner, or disciple.

Okay... Now think back to the point of the thread. I am saying Christian belief has diverged from scripture. I said Christianity posits that the dead go immediately to heaven - we agree so far.

Already answered: 2 Cor 5:8; Rev 5:8 (24 elders); Lk 23:43; 16:19ff.

Now the big question: Do you agree with me that this is non-Biblical or can you point me to the Bible verses that confirm this position?


Again, Christianity ignoring the Bible. I already quoted the verse where Paul makes this clear. The "church" was a specific set of people, not a building. Those people probably all died by about AD 100. Paul made a prediction (though not in the sense of prophesy), and he got it wrong. His vision of Jesus led him to believe the day of judgment, the day the righteous would be resurrected was approaching first. He called Jesus the "first fruits" because he saw Jesus as the prototype for that event, a sign that it was nearly there.

You ignore the Bible, sport. The bible says "believe," and you won't ... Christians don't ignore the bible, you do.

See Heb 9:27. FYI, there is more than 1 judgment, but only 1 final judgment. That is when the resurrection occurs, and it is still in the future.

Obviously, it failed to happen, and Christianity has been spinning the verses ever since.

(sigh) obvious to whom? An obstinate unbeliever? Get real.

Okay, that is not bad.


That does not say Jesus (the Word) was equal to God, only that Jesus was there from the start


The phrase "the firstborn of all creation" indicates Jesus is subordinate to God, as he was created by God.

All of those say Jesus is God. Read them again.

Interesting... you can explain why it says Jesus will be called "Eternal Father", right?

You're not asking about Him Mighty God, why not? Because it identifies Jesus as God.

And why does this make Jesus equal to God? Because they are both called "father"?

Just for the record, Jesus was named "Jesus", not "Emmanuel".

Jesus has many names and many titles, and many of each are used to identify the 3, Father, Son, Spirit.

Here are a few more verses that further confirm Jesus is subordinate to God:

Col 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation:​

​

John 5:19 Jesus gave them this answer: ‘Very truly I tell you, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does.​

​

John 8:25 ‘Who are you?’ they asked.​

‘Just what I have been telling you from the beginning,’ Jesus replied. 26 ‘I have much to say in judgment of you. But he who sent me is trustworthy, and what I have heard from him I tell the world.’​

Jesus is subordinate to the Father only as the Saviour. Jesus repeatedly says He has come to do the will of the Father. It isn't anything new, you're not on to some new-found truth.

I believe I cited Php 2:5-8, go read that again. It says Jesus is God, but He emptied Himself (of His Divine rights) and became a bond servant, and He humbled Himself becoming obedient even to death on the cross. It's all there.

Well at least you have abandoned the rich young ruler nonsense...

(Sigh). Jesus told the rich young ruler to give away his wealth, he did not tell the church to do that. The church was not in existence then. Do it's time for you stop the rich young ruler nonsense. 🙄

So what exactly does "fulfill" mean in this context?

I've answered you. Jesus kept all of the law. And His sacrifice did what none of the Old Testament sacrifices could not do. Read the epistle to the Hebrews and note, I'm shuddering as I think of you butchering that.

I never said you never support your beliefs. I pointed out that your prior statement was a useful, and sadly common, tactic to avoid doing so.

If you do not like the accusation, do not persist in it!

Shall I whine, as you did?

 

[The Pixie]

From you, yes.

To a God denier, of course it does.

So says God.

Your OP and your posts show your lack of discernment.

You seem certain I am wrong, and yet unable to correct me, to tell me what is right.

Again, you have no understanding of His word. It's not about believing what "Christianity" wants you to believe, it's about actually believing what God says.

Which obviously you cannot say because....

I have....you don't have the ability to understand. This is just a fact.

And yet once again your post is devoid of substance. Telling me I am wrong is easy. Showing how I am wrong, telling me what is right... well, that seems beyond you.

And here you are again, empty handed, evading, not able to provide an answer.

And yet already did. See, this is where you come unstuck. I have already stated my position, I did so in post #45. You can go back and check, but I will repeat it here, mainly to emphasise how easy this is to do.

Mat 5:17 “Do not presume that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish, but to fulfill.​

​

Jesus is not saying anything about the laws. This is where Christianity goes awry; it is, I suspect, trying to justify ignoring the laws of the old covenant, and so has seized on this verse, without actually knowing or caring what it means, and so ends up in this ridiculous situation of saying Jesus "fulfilled" the laws by observing them perfectly.​

​

The reality is the "The Law" refers to the first five books of the Hebrew Bible, the Law of Moses, while "The Prophets" refers to most of the rest.​

See, I am not empty-handed. I can tell you what "fulfilled" means, I can tell you how Christianity twists the word.

How about you? Can you state what "fulfilled" means in that context? Or can I expect more and more evasion?

So that's the only sentence you read out of the article?

You think because I only quoted one sentence I must have only read that one sentence?

I note that you did not quote any sentences from the article. Am I safe in assuming you therefore did not read any sentences in it? Or does this logic only apply to non-Christians?

I quoted the most relevant sentence from the article. Can you find a better one? Of course not! Because evasion, dodge, duck...

That's like picking a word, we tell you what it means and you don't like the fact that we tell you what it means.

Except for the bit where you tell me what it means, of course.

I keep asking you what it means, and you keep ducking the question!

 

[Howie]

You seem certain I am wrong, and yet unable to correct me, to tell me what is right.


Which obviously you cannot say because....


And yet once again your post is devoid of substance. Telling me I am wrong is easy. Showing how I am wrong, telling me what is right... well, that seems beyond you.


And yet already did. See, this is where you come unstuck. I have already stated my position, I did so in post #45. You can go back and check, but I will repeat it here, mainly to emphasise how easy this is to do.

Mat 5:17 “Do not presume that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish, but to fulfill.​

​

Jesus is not saying anything about the laws. This is where Christianity goes awry; it is, I suspect, trying to justify ignoring the laws of the old covenant, and so has seized on this verse, without actually knowing or caring what it means, and so ends up in this ridiculous situation of saying Jesus "fulfilled" the laws by observing them perfectly.​

​

The reality is the "The Law" refers to the first five books of the Hebrew Bible, the Law of Moses, while "The Prophets" refers to most of the rest.​

See, I am not empty-handed. I can tell you what "fulfilled" means, I can tell you how Christianity twists the word.

How about you? Can you state what "fulfilled" means in that context? Or can I expect more and more evasion?


You think because I only quoted one sentence I must have only read that one sentence?

I note that you did not quote any sentences from the article. Am I safe in assuming you therefore did not read any sentences in it? Or does this logic only apply to non-Christians?

I quoted the most relevant sentence from the article. Can you find a better one? Of course not! Because evasion, dodge, duck...


Except for the bit where you tell me what it means, of course.

I keep asking you what it means, and you keep ducking the question!

You need to repent of your sin, Pixie, or you will petish, and from the looks of bit, you'll bevtakingbyour kids with you.

I'm done with you.

 

[4Him]

You seem certain I am wrong, and yet unable to correct me, to tell me what is right.

You won't take 'correction' as you've shown throughout this thread.

Which obviously you cannot say

Oh, but I can.

And yet once again your post is devoid of substance. Telling me I am wrong is easy. Showing how I am wrong, telling me what is right... well, that seems beyond you.

I've already shown you....yet here you are, saying you weren't shown.

And yet already did. See, this is where you come unstuck. I have already stated my position, I did so in post #45. You can go back and check, but I will repeat it here, mainly to emphasise how easy this is to do.

Mat 5:17 “Do not presume that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish, but to fulfill.​

​

Jesus is not saying anything about the laws. This is where Christianity goes awry; it is, I suspect, trying to justify ignoring the laws of the old covenant, and so has seized on this verse, without actually knowing or caring what it means, and so ends up in this ridiculous situation of saying Jesus "fulfilled" the laws by observing them perfectly.​

​

The reality is the "The Law" refers to the first five books of the Hebrew Bible, the Law of Moses, while "The Prophets" refers to most of the rest.​

OOF.....Gods laws are in those books. I'm not sure where anyone has argued otherwise.

See, I am not empty-handed. I can tell you what "fulfilled" means, I can tell you how Christianity twists the word.

Yet you didn't tell us what fulfilled means.

How about you? Can you state what "fulfilled" means in that context? Or can I expect more and more evasion?

You've already been told...so you are proving you can't take correction.

 

[The Pixie]

You need to repent of your sin, Pixie, or you will petish, and from the looks of bit, you'll bevtakingbyour kids with you.

I'm done with you.

Thanks, the usual believe-me-or-suffer-in-hell argument. Seen it before and not convinced.