Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Is Jesus really God ?

Because the team there are experienced in a whole range of areas including communication, and mediating these kinds of discussions. Unfortunately it is yet to take off because, I believe, people are fearfull of such a structured environment.
No, that's probably not the reason at all. Forums just take a long time to get going, if they ever do.

In case you had not noticed, this is a very large forum. It would be a full-time job for several people to mediate every discussion.
 
back at you brother ...

Back at you nothing. You haven't provided any evidence to back up your historical contention. Thus, you should retract what you said about Constantine. Discussion on the Trinity, whether they are Biblically warranted or not, are ultimately dependent upon HOW you read the Scriptures and your paradigm before you begin. There is nothing you can "prove" at that level.

Is there really a point in discussing matters such as "Trinity" with someone who won't even listen to the word of God?

You forgot to add in "according to me". And that is my point. In these discussions on theology and the Trinity, it is going to end up being your interpretation and ignoring the implications of particular Scriptures vs what the Church has said those verses mean, such as Phil 2:5-11.

Certainly, you can take those verses and twist it to mean something else to fit your belief system. However, that is not how the writers of the Scriptures and those who immediately heard/read them interpreted them. This is why some knowledge of history is very helpful here (despite you considering them "inane")

Regards
 
Francisdesales has already stated "The doctrine of the Trinity is profound and requires looking at Scriptures through a particular mindset."

He and others have demonstraited they are only prepared to debate from their given 'mindset' and while I may have begun with an open mind, my mind has now become closed due to my perception of the combative environment.

Typical liberal gibberish foisted upon our society. This is right down the alley of what a liberal would say...

This in effect says that "Because my opinion is correct, any other possible deviation is a closing of the mind by my interlocutor". Thus, you must preach to the unwashed masses with your "open mind". The liberal mindset at work - who must think for the rest of us "closed minded" folks who happen to have a different opinion.

Don't you see your argument can be said completely without change right back at you? You claim to be a teacher, and this is how you address a difference of opinion? By an "argument from authority of self"? Declaring yourself "open minded" is a logical fallacy, especially when you have not really addressed any Scriptures. You merely reject them out of hand without comment.

But of course, since anything that confirms "Trinity" must be a closed-minded point of view. Notice how you must even ignore history to maintain your "open-minded" point of view...

Kettle, meet pot...

Regards
 
,He and others have demonstraited they are only prepared to debate from their given 'mindset' and while I may have begun with an open mind, my mind has now become closed due to my perception of the combative environment.
Umm, excuse me????

You have repeatedly ignored clear arguments that challenge your position.

This speaks rather loudly as to the "open-ness" of your mind.
 
You are excused ...

Chill ladies, no need to get your knickers all up in a bunch ...
The truth is there in 'black and white' , it only gets blury when you try to read between the lines. :)
 
You are excused ...

Chill ladies, no need to get your knickers all up in a bunch ...
The truth is there in 'black and white' , it only gets blury when you try to read between the lines. :)
You are still evading. The facts are clear: a number of clear arguments for Jesus' divinity have been presented that you have repeatedly been asked to engage.

And you continue your silence. The reader will only have one logical conclusion: Since you (ZW) are clearly motivated to find errors in these arguments, the fact that you refuse to respond to them suggests that you can find no errors in them.

This is a place where we debate. And this means actually dealing with arguments that challenge your position. A bald declaration that "its there in black and white" is clear evasion.
 
kettle met pot,lol
Excuse me?!

If you are suggesting that I am engaging in the same evasion as ZW, I suggest you have simply not been reading the thread. Perhaps this is not what you are implying, but it sure sounds like it.
 
Excuse me?!

If you are suggesting that I am engaging in the same evasion as ZW, I suggest you have simply not been reading the thread. Perhaps this is not what you are implying, but it sure sounds like it.

no, that was me laughing at what francis said.

rather the sarcastic way he said that.

i must use that as a sentence when the situation occurs elsewhere.
 
You are excused ...

Chill ladies, no need to get your knickers all up in a bunch ...
The truth is there in 'black and white' , it only gets blury when you try to read between the lines. :)
Please cease with the ad hominems.

For someone who has shamelessly plugged their website, you have given no reason for anyone to want to join.
 
i should have clarified that better.

when i posted that.
While we may not agree on some things, I want to say that I have noticed that you are a very polite, charitable poster who clearly demonstrates respect for others. This is, of course, a good witness and a model for the rest of us to follow.
 
You are still evading. The facts are clear: a number of clear arguments for Jesus' divinity have been presented that you have repeatedly been asked to engage.

And you continue your silence. The reader will only have one logical conclusion: Since you (ZW) are clearly motivated to find errors in these arguments, the fact that you refuse to respond to them suggests that you can find no errors in them.

This is a place where we debate. And this means actually dealing with arguments that challenge your position. A bald declaration that "its there in black and white" is clear evasion.

Sorry, wasnt it you that said a while back that its pointless to discuss at scripture level, and it must all be looked at as a whole ?

Ok, give me one clear un-convoluted argument that I can address ...
 
Sorry, wasnt it you that said a while back that its pointless to discuss at scripture level, and it must all be looked at as a whole ?

Ok, give me one clear un-convoluted argument that I can address ...

I have started a thread called: "Trinitarianism: What Non-Trinitarians believe". I have not finished editing it, but perhaps I will be done soon. When I'm done we will see if the Mods here will let me post it here, or post a link.
 
We see the Deity of Christ as God in His designation as the Mighty God Isa 9:

6For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

That same designation is used again in the same book a chapter later Isa 10:

20And it shall come to pass in that day, that the remnant of Israel, and such as are escaped of the house of Jacob, shall no more again stay upon him that smote them; but shall stay upon the LORD, the Holy One of Israel, in truth.

21The remnant shall return, even the remnant of Jacob, unto the mighty God.​
 
Sorry, wasnt it you that said a while back that its pointless to discuss at scripture level, and it must all be looked at as a whole ?

Ok, give me one clear un-convoluted argument that I can address ...
I know that you will not engage these arguments - you have seen them before, but they are in posts 121, 122, and 140.

But I will publically guarantee that you will not address these arguments in any fashion that would be considered serious by any objective reader.
 
Back
Top