JeSoul:

thanks for the response DS

Raised a gracious gentleman who would never ignore a lady's inquiries.

So what is your explanation of John 1 -
In the beginning was the Word,
and the Word was with God,
and the Word was God . . .
14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us.
We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only,
who came from the Father, full of grace and truth. 

  I am interested in your take on this scripture where we're clearly told Jesus was the Word, and the Word was God and the Word was at the same time - with God.

If you will read the greek in which Jn 1:1 was written, you will see that it does  not suggest tthat Jesus was God. Jn. 1:1 contains a mistranslation.

Aside this, the Gospel of John was written more than a century after Christ died and it is clear that the human tendency to worship spiritual leaders had begun to set in; which is why that gospel singularly contains more allussions to divinity that the synoptics.

InesQor:

@Deep Sight does not seem to get the irony of the fact that his beliefs cannot withstand the same scrutiny he dishes out to other worldviews. Meanwhile you are dishonest to say I disagree because its Deep Sight. Posting as mavenbox, I was like maybe the only person who added a bit of context to your posts and I agreed with you on some points but where I believe you were crapping, I outlined as well.

Alright. Sincere apologies there. Sometimes it just feels that way. I feel certain that if i were to state that 1 + 1 = 2, you and some others would be inclined to disagree with that and inquire if that was revealed to me by OOI. I find it tiresome.

As to the containment, or rather, subsistence of God in human flesh, I guess it was people like you that also strongly believed that a single DNA strand of a man can never perfectly capture his physical essence of being.

This is a POOR example because DNA is NOT infinite in any terms. Moreso in the sense of the INTANGIBLE INFINITY of God.

You are yet to show me that an infinite element can be captutred in a finite vessel.

This is iron-cast logic that you cannot escape.

streetwize:

You seem to totally misunderstand the concept of BEING
Ontology makes it quite clear( as sartre did, that being is not individual) According to ontology(the study of being) a "being" refers to ones state of expressin or manifesting the attribute "to be". U can see where thats goin so I wont waste time

In essence God Is a being that consists three manifestations or if you prefer three persons. .  the father, son and holy spirit. Just as you are a being that consists of a spirit, a soul and a body. you are also three in one or howd you think your being could still manifest when your body is left to rot on earth.

You have referred me to the spirit, the body and the soul.

1. What about the mind? Has it no place in your dimensional human ontology?
2. What is the difference between the spirit and the soul?

In essence, I state to you that a human being is a SPIRIT.

For the short sojourn on earth, it requires a material body (never mind that some of your Christian cohorts believe such bodies to be used in heaven as well, lol).

There is no reason to suppose any “Trinity” of the human ontology: and I assert to you that that inference is made ONLY to support the paganistic and distinctly polytheist doctrine of the trinity. And please don’t waste my time with talk about tri-theism: I am not the one indicating a triad of any sort – you can go and sort out the mystical details of your paganism yourselves.

Jesus was the physical manifestation of the member of the God head called God the son.

Do you realize that this applies to every human  being? We are all a manifestation of God, no?

Indeed everything in existence is a manifestation of the mind of the Godhead.

Why should we presuppose one to be God and another not God?

God is compound, infinite, and omni-inherent in all things, (if I may use the word). This presupposes that you and I are sparks of spirit germs that emanated from God. No different from Mr. Jesus from Nazareth, no?

God the son did not die he was. . . if you want me to put it like this. .  the soul of the being whose total entity we called Jesus. It is just as your body will die and your soul will continue to live on.

Now you are invalidating the sacrifice of Christ.

For if he died as any normal mortal does, only to take up his soul again – which is the normal trajectory for all beings – then what was so special or different about his death? Indeed it emerges that he laid down nothing – because he was immaterial before coming to the world, used his material body in the world, and departed from it at death. So what exactly did he lay down? Not his immaterial essence, surely. Thus he laid down nothing.

I am not certain that you understand the business of the supposed sacrifice on which you hinge your faith.

Talking about sacrifices, I am sure you detest ritualists who engage in Human Sacrifice?

Why then do you ascribe such barbarism to God? Is God into human sacrifice? [/b]If Christian dogma is to be believed, he clearly revels in such.

AND YOU – you actually hinge your “salvation” on a supposed human sacrifice.

[b]I cannot think of any pagan spectre more ritualistic, sinister or repulsive than this.

Now for your very last and very careless statement. You say that the finite cannot hold the infinite?? what is your basisfor this silly rodomontade. .

The finite is limited. The infinite is limitless. A limitless being cannot be held in a limited vessel. That’s simply illogical.

so that I last longer that the t-shirt I am wearing means that I cannot wear the t-shirt. .

Your body is not infinite. It is very finite.

And for your information, it was actually the infinite that contained the finite

Yes. Looks like you are getting confused. Of course the finite can be contained within the infinite exactly because the infinite if limitless and can thus contain all limited things. But the reverse is logically impossible.

what your saying is like saying that because the distance from (1-2) cannot be expressed on the numberline because the number line is infinite, but (1-2) is finite. . .

Nice attempt. But those numbers are merely abstract indicative integers. It cannot be said that [1 – 2] is a “vessel” which contains infinity. It is not a vessel. It is an abstract indication of integers, and we may express integers infinitely.

This is different from a Cup – which like a human body is a finite vessel.

If an ocean is said to be infinite, no cup can contain it.

Thus no human body can contain God.

aletheia:


In 2010, I remain astonished that educated persons can believe things like the Oneness of Infinity. Aren't you being the hypocrite?

There we go again on the Oneness of Infinity.

Last time I checked this thread is about the Trinity.

Never mind that your own Bible describes God as ONE and INFINITE.

I wonder what’s the stress.

"Doubtless a messenger of God"? Once again, your very own words. What are you trying to do? Hedge your bets? What evidence do you Deep Sight have that Jesus Christ of Nazareth was a messenger of God?

Anybody who preaches love and harmony is in my view preaching the message of God and as such is acting as a messenger of God.

This applies as much to the Dalai Lama as it does to Jesus of Nazareth.

OOI is a transcendental truth? Give us a break man. You abandoned that thread because you were murdering mathematics, logic and language in a laboured effort to prove your god, but we would have none of it. We established. . .nada on that thread.You have a habit of making tendentious claims.

Please address the logic set forth and stop dribbling my friend.

I summarized it for you and yet this is all you can write in response.

Come on. You can do better. We both know that.

I challenge you to give me a point-by-point response to this summary –

1. That nothingness in itself implies timelessness

2. That a timeless state will remain eternal

3. That eternity is therefore implied in a state of nothingness

4. That a timeless state is indivisible and therefore ONE

5. That the intangible reality that has always existed is therefore both ONE and INFINITE -

6. Hence the term "Oneness of Infinity" which i use to describe the nature of God

That’s the summary. Address it point by point and I will hear you.

1. I am a Christian and I dispute that term. God describes Himself, His attributes and His nature in the bible. You only offer a god of your own imagining, an idol fashioned out of the desires of your heart.

There we go.

I predicted this.

Even if we describe God as loving and just, you have affirmed that you will dispute it - despite being a christian.

Tell me – if you have confirmed this – is there any use discussing the subject with you further?

Deep Sight:

You have referred me to the spirit, the body and the soul.

1. What about the mind? Has it no place in your dimensional human ontology?
2. What is the difference between the spirit and the soul?

In essence, I state to you that a human being is a SPIRIT.

For the short sojourn on earth, it requires a material body (never mind that some of your Christian cohorts believe such bodies to be used in heaven as well, lol).

There is no reason to suppose any “Trinity” of the human ontology: and I assert to you that that inference is made ONLY to support the paganistic and distinctly polytheist doctrine of the trinity. And please don’t waste my time with talk about tri-theism: I am not the one indicating a triad of any sort – you can go and sort out the mystical details of your paganism yourselves.

Do you realize that this applies to every human  being? We are all a manifestation of God, no?

Indeed everything in existence is a manifestation of the mind of the Godhead.

Why should we presuppose one to be God and another not God?

God is compound, infinite, and omni-inherent in all things, (if I may use the word). This presupposes that you and I are sparks of spirit germs that emanated from God. No different from Mr. Jesus from Nazareth, no?


Now you are invalidating the sacrifice of Christ.

For if he died as any normal mortal does, only to take up his soul again – which is the normal trajectory for all beings – then what was so special or different about his death? Indeed it emerges that he laid down nothing – because he was immaterial before coming to the world, used his material body in the world, and departed from it at death. So what exactly did he lay down? Not his immaterial essence, surely. Thus he laid down nothing.

I am not certain that you understand the business of the supposed sacrifice on which you hinge your faith.

Talking about sacrifices, I am sure you detest ritualists who engage in Human Sacrifice?

Why then do you ascribe such barbarism to God? Is God into human sacrifice? [/b]If Christian dogma is to be believed, he clearly revels in such.

AND YOU – you actually hinge your “salvation” on a supposed human sacrifice.

[b]I cannot think of any pagan spectre more ritualistic, sinister or repulsive than this.

The finite is limited. The infinite is limitless. A limitless being cannot be held in a limited vessel. That’s simply illogical.

Your body is not infinite. It is very finite.

Yes. Looks like you are getting confused. Of course the finite can be contained within the infinite exactly because the infinite if limitless and can thus contain all limited things. But the reverse is logically impossible.

Nice attempt. But those numbers are merely abstract indicative integers. It cannot be said that [1 – 2] is a “vessel” which contains infinity. It is not a vessel. It is an abstract indication of integers, and we may express integers infinitely.

This is different from a Cup – which like a human body is a finite vessel.

If an ocean is said to be infinite, no cup can contain it.

Thus no human body can contain God.

Haa this all comes down to time. . . oya let me quickly answer you

Your first answer is silly. . . It is the soul that constitutes the mind. Every beings spirit comes from God and would later return to him. ALL SPIRITS
Read your bible. . . it is the soul that would be damned to heaven or hell. you are a spirit, you have a soul(which includes your mind) and you live in a body. . .

Also thank God you have no answer to the concept of being and if I am right that is what this thread is all about,

where would you infer from what I posted that we are all manifestations of God?? we have a spirit that comes from God(this is what gives us life)
Jesus's soul( his mind and all) was God the son. . . . He was essentially God.

It is and indication of numbers, abstract not. . . this is a perfect analogy that indicates to you that the finite, can be part of the existence of the infinite. . . it is very simple.

And for your last retort I have explained it. . . God is infinite in matter of time(is this not what you are reffering to??) or are you saying that it is his MASS that is infinite . . . you have seen the perfect explanation. . .
what I am going to say after this is unwarranted but let me just address your wrong ocean analogy anyway
If an ocean is Infinte, it contains a localised body of water somewhere. . . are you sayin it cannot?? of which people point to this finite part (as they cannot see the whole ocean) and say "look at the ocean". . .

Deep Sight:

Raised a gracious gentleman who would never ignore a lady's inquiries.

  gracias

If you will read the greek in which Jn 1:1 was written, you will see that it does  not suggest tthat Jesus was God. Jn. 1:1 contains a mistranslation.

Aside this, the Gospel of John was written more than a century after Christ died and it is clear that the human tendency to worship spiritual leaders had begun to set in; which is why that gospel singularly contains more allussions to divinity that the synoptics.

Okay. Let us stipulate that Jn 1 has been corrupted and we throw that out as evidence.

What say you about these other verses,

~ones that speak to Jesus being God: (note I have omitted all verses from John since you don't ascribe any form of credibility to that book)

-1 Tim 3:16  And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

-Heb 1:6 But of the Son He says, "Your throne, O God, is forever and ever

-Col 2:9 For in Christ Jesus, there is the fullness of God in bodily form

-Phil 2:5 "Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, who, although He aexisted in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. Being found in appearance as a man

-2 Pet 1:1 To those who have received a faith of the same kind as ours, by the righteousness of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ:

-Titus 2:13 looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus

---

~ones that speak to seperate parts of the Trinity

-1 Cor 12:4-6 "Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit.  And there are varieties of ministries, and the same Lord.  And there are varieties of effects, but the same God who works all things in all persons."

-2 Cor 13:14 "The grace of the[b] Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit[/b], be with you all."

-Eph 4:4-7 "There is one body and one Spirit, just as also you were called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all who is over all and through all and in all.  7But to each one of us grace was given according to the measure of Christ’s gift."

-1 Pet. 1:2 according to the[b] foreknowledge of God the Father, by the sanctifying work of the Spirit, that you may obey Jesus Christ[/b] and be sprinkled with His blood: May grace and peace be yours in fullest measure.

-Jude 20-21 But you, beloved, building yourselves up on your most holy faith; praying in the Holy Spirit; keep yourselves in the love of God, waiting anxiously for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ to eternal life."

^^ just to mention a few. Is it your position that all these verses from the corresponding books are also illegitimate books in the bible? And going by the above, does it seem so outlandish and far-fetched that anyone would believe that Jesus is God? and that He is a part of the Trinity? can you at least admit that it is not an unreasonable position to hold by any stretch?

i perceive that its only deepsight that's on the divide. the guy has really tried for enduring till now

Deep Sight:

There we go again on the Oneness of Infinity.

Last time I checked this thread is about the Trinity.

Never mind that your own Bible describes God as ONE and INFINITE.

I wonder what’s the stress.

You are the one who introduced Oneness Of Infinity into this thread. It's your stress.

Deep Sight:

Anybody who preaches love and harmony is in my view preaching the message of God and as such is acting as a messenger of God.

This applies as much to the Dalai Lama as it does to Jesus of Nazareth.

What God?

Deep Sight:

Please address the logic set forth and stop dribbling my friend.

I summarized it for you and yet this is all you can write in response.

Come on. You can do better. We both know that.

I challenge you to give me a point-by-point response to this summary –

1. That nothingness in itself implies timelessness

2. That a timeless state will remain eternal

3. That eternity is therefore implied in a state of nothingness

4. That a timeless state is indivisible and therefore ONE

5. That the intangible reality that has always existed is therefore both ONE and INFINITE -

6. Hence the term "Oneness of Infinity" which i use to describe the nature of God

That’s the summary. Address it point by point and I will hear you.
There we go.

What an illogical and incoherent worldview. Balderdash. Your foundational statement is absolute rubbish: Nothingness does not imply timelessness (eternity). A house built on faulty foundations will fall. You couldn't prove it on the other thread. Is it here you will prove it?

Deep Sight:

I predicted this.

Even if we describe God as loving and just, you have affirmed that you will dispute it - despite being a christian.

Tell me – if you have confirmed this – is there any use discussing the subject with you further?

Aren't you the sage? Several false gods have been described as loving and just. It doesn't make them the True God. You can describe your Oneness Of Infinity as loving and just till you are blue in the face but it won't make your fictional construct YHWH. Pigs might as well fly.

And now that the inconsistency and illogic of your position is been shown you try your usual tactics:
1. Argue about the meaning of words?-You are yet to answer why the monotheistic Jews use a plural word (Elohim) to describe YHWH who revealed himself to them as One.
2. Keep conveniently quiet about points that undermine your position-You are yet to respond to my challenge on Psalm 22
3. You try to cloud the issue by raising several irrelevant objections-You are yet to provide the evidence that prompted you to say Jesus of Nazareth is a messenger of God.

You make this statement: In 2010, I remain astonished that educated persons can believe these things (Jesus is God). While conveniently forgetting that in 2010 it is astonishing for educated persons to believe your spiel about nothing being = eternal. Again I ask you: aren't you just being the hypocrite?

The evidence for the trinity exists in the bible both OT and NT. Unfortunately your words; even if it did reveals your position. So that leaves the question, why bother to debate the trinity when you have a priori dismissed the evidence; in other words you have already pronounced the defendant guilty even before considering the evidence. (Which is why you conveniently ignored 1 Tim 3:16: quoted by both JeSoul and myself).

aletheia:

You are the one who introduced Oneness Of Infinity into this thread. It's your stress.

That is not true. I did no such thing.

What God?

The Creator of all that exists.

What you need to understand is that being different people will always have different perspectives. And this applies across worldviews and religions.

It thus goes without saying that we cannot all apprehend the same attributes of God.

This does not in anyway suggest that we do not still refer to the One Creator God.

For example –

~ The Christian views God as a Trinity

~ The Muslim denies this

~ The Yoruba Traditionalist has a view of Olodumare (Oluwa) the creator who sent down certain personages to build the Earth starting at Ile – Ife.

~ The Deist perceives of a creator of all things but does not subscribe to the Trinitarian perspective.

Now it is ridiculous in the extreme to assert that all of these groups are referring to a “different” God.

It is rather the case that each group while apprehending the existence of the Supreme Creator, is only able to apprehend some of his attributes according to their worldview.

Thus your constant refrain – “which God” – makes no sense given that it is already stated that we refer to the Creator.

I would thus adjure you to question the applicability of the perceived attributes – rather than constantly saying – “which God” – because that makes no sense.

To elucidate the point further EVEN AMONGST CHRISTIAN DENOMINATIONS THERE ARE DISAGREEMENTS REGARDING THE ATTRIBUTES OF GOD - these disagreements surely do not mean that they refer to “different” Gods!

Jehovah’s witnesses for example reject the Trinity. Catholic ideas on the nature of Christ differ from some protestant ideas.

I ask you – does this mean that they worship different Gods? ? ? ?

Is it not rather obvious that while worshipping the SAME God, they have disagreements about some aspects of his nature? ? ?

Thus if I as a Deist have a disagreement with you as to the nature of the Creator, that is not sufficient to claim that we do not refer to the same Creator God.

I expect that this is the last time I should hear the tiresome refrain “which God” – from you.

What an illogical and incoherent worldview. Balderdash. Your foundational statement is absolute rubbish: Nothingness does not imply timelessness (eternity). A house built on faulty foundations will fall. You couldn't prove it on the other thread. Is it here you will prove it?

Simple question for you – Can nothingness be said to be imbued with time?

Since Nothingness refers to “nothing” – it therefore cannot have time.

Thus it is timeless.

Capisce?

And now that the inconsistency and illogic of your position is been shown you try your usual tactics:
1. Argue about the meaning of words?-You are yet to answer why the monotheistic Jews use a plural word (Elohim) to describe YHWH who revealed himself to them as One.

I provided the Wiki description which made it clear that the users of that word used it in a singular context when referring to God.

2. Keep conveniently quiet about points that undermine your position-You are yet to respond to my challenge on Psalm 22

I still see no reason why almighty God (Jesus) would begin to quote in a moment of anguish as verse which talks about being forsaken by God.

3. You try to cloud the issue by raising several irrelevant objections-You are yet to provide the evidence that prompted you to say Jesus of Nazareth is a messenger of God.

Sir, what part of my statement was hard to comprehend?

I stated that anybody who preaches love and harmony is preaching the message of God.

Jesus preached love and harmony. He was thus a messenger of God.
Just like the Dalai Lama.

What’s so hard for you in this?

Please at least show me a capacity to see and apprehend simplicity if you are to retain my interest.

You make this statement: In 2010, I remain astonished that educated persons can believe these things (Jesus is God). While conveniently forgetting that in 2010 it is astonishing for educated persons to believe your spiel about nothing being = eternal. Again I ask you: aren't you just being the hypocrite?

See above. Nothingness is undeniably timeless.

Unless you wish to propound the illogicality that there is time in nothingness.

JeSoul:


1 Tim 3:16  And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

The manifestation of God in the flesh does not mean that Jesus is God.

It simply means that the love of God was manifested through Jesus Christ. This is the understanding preached in the bible.

This is proved by the fact that it also says. . .”seen of angels”. . .

Reflect on this.

Was there any time that Jesus was not “seen of Angels?” Jesus was always seen of Angels once incarnated. Thus it could not be a reference to the person - Jesus.

It is rather an obvious reference to the great love of God which had been shown to all and sundry through the life of Jesus of Nazareth.

Secondly it should be noted that in Acts 3:26 it states – “When God raised up his servant, Jesus,[/b]he sent him first to you people of Israel, to bless you by turning each of you back from your sinful ways."

This makes it very very clear that the manifestation of Gods love is what is referred to in Tim 3;16 – and not the [b]person of Jesus who the Bible explicitly refers to as God’s servant.

-Heb 1:6 But of the Son He says, "Your throne, O God, is forever and ever

This again is symbolic. How could God’s servant (Acts 3:26) be the one being called God? Rather it is obvious that what is meant is that the son (as described in the  bible) had glorified the father by his life and as such affirmed the eternity of God’s [/b]throne.

-Col 2:9 [b]For in Christ Jesus, there is the fullness of God in bodily form

Of course: since Christ was supposd to be a perfect personification of God-likeness – that, is living in the perfect will of Almighty God. Thus the fullness of God is thus said to dwell in him. This should be the case for even you once you live perfectly within the Divine Will.

This also explains your next quote -

-Phil 2:5 "Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men.

- A clear inference that Christ was living in the perfect will of God. Even mere man is said to have been originally made in the “image of God!”

-2 Pet 1:1 To those who have received a faith of the same kind as ours, by the righteousness of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ:

Yes, by the Righteousness of our God, AND also by the righteous example of Jesus Christ who was called the SAVIOUR. The sentence is disjunctive and not conjunctive and so refers to God AND the Saviour.

-Titus 2:13 looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus [/color] [/i]

Same again. The appearing of our Great God AND the appearing of the saviour, Jesus. Two persons.

^^ just to mention a few. Is it your position that all these verses from the corresponding books are also illegitimate books in the bible? And going by the above, does it seem so outlandish and far-fetched that anyone would believe that Jesus is God? and that He is a part of the Trinity? can you at least admit that it is not an unreasonable position to hold by any stretch?

Now having answered your posers on Jesus being God, Let me ask you; does it not seem outlandish that you promote one EXPLICITY called a Servant of God by the bible into being God?

What do you say of the legions of verses which suggest clearly that he is NOT God?

Do you need me to post them all over again, or can I safely assume that you remember them all?

^^ awesome, I'm glad you put in some work on those verses, tanka. So in a nutshell based on the above, and please correct me if I'm misunderstanding you:

You choose to view every verse that speaks of Jesus being God - as symbolic?

-and on the flip side-

You[i] choose[/i] view every verse that may suggest He is not God - as literal?

^^^ Do you not realize how poetically that is also representative of YOUR approach -

You choose to view every verse that MIGHT INFER of Jesus being God - as literal

-and on the flip side-

You[i] choose[/i] view every verse that CLEARLY INDICATES He is not God - as symbolic.

JeSoul:

^^ awesome, I'm glad you put in some work on those verses, tanka. So in a nutshell based on the above, and please correct me if I'm misunderstanding you:

You choose to view every verse that speaks of Jesus being God - as symbolic?

-and on the flip side-

You[i] choose[/i] view every verse that may suggest He is not God - as literal?

Deep Sight:

^^^ Do you not realize how poetically that is also representative of YOUR approach -

You choose to view every verse that MIGHT INFER of Jesus being God - as literal

-and on the flip side-

You[i] choose[/i] view every verse that CLEARLY INDICATES He is not God - as symbolic.

Jesoul its ur turn to be twisted and turned by deepsight

^ Au contraire, I take the scripture verses pretty much[i] literally[/i]. So no, your position is not similar to mine - poetically or symbolically.

So what's the verdict? is this

JeSoul:
You choose to view every verse that speaks of Jesus being God - as symbolic?

-and on the flip side-

You[i] choose[/i] view every verse that may suggest He is not God - as literal?

your position or not? we shall get into what mine is in just a bit.

noetic16:



Jesoul its your turn to be twisted and turned by deepsight

Don't mind DS. He cleverly didn't answer my question but sought to turn my own table on me lol. We shall get at the root of the matter soon . . . stay tuned.

Deep Sight:


Simple question for you – Can nothingness be said to be imbued with time?

Since Nothingness refers to “nothing” – it therefore cannot have time.

Thus it is timeless.
. . .
See above. Nothingness is undeniably timeless.

Unless you wish to propound the illogicality that there is time in nothingness.

Again you play footloose with the meaning of words, redefining them to your heart's content and then expecting us to accept your faulty logic which is is premised upon the wrong meaning!
Your of a kind with Humpty Dumpty:

"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less."
"The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."

Let us examine the real meaning of these words that you bandy about.
From the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary:

nothingness
Function: noun
Date: circa 1631
1 : the quality or state of being nothing: as a : nonexistence b : utter insignificance c : death
2 : something insignificant or valueless
3 : void, emptiness

time·less
Function: adjective
Date: circa 1560
1 archaic : premature, untimely
2 a : having no beginning or end : eternal b : not restricted to a particular time or date
3 : not affected by time : ageless

eter·nal
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French, from Late Latin aeternalis, from Latin aeternus eternal, from aevum age, eternity — more at aye
Date: 14th century
1 a : having infinite duration : everlasting <eternal damnation> b : of or relating to eternity c : characterized by abiding fellowship with God <good teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life? — Mark 10:17(Revised Standard Version)>
2 a : continued without intermission : perpetual <an eternal flame> b : seemingly endless <eternal delays>
3 archaic : infernal <some eternal villain…devised this slander — Shakespeare>
4 : valid or existing at all times : timeless <eternal verities>

You argument has been based on your redefining the word timeless to mean "zero time or no time". Pray sir, what dictionary defines timeless in that way. Of course nothing refers as well to zero time, but unfortunately you cannot sustain the argument that zero time (0) is the same as timeless. So you see your conclusions collapse like a house built on sand.

As for propounding that there is time in nothingness. (your own argument stated in reverse), I wish to do no such thing, but unfortunately while you recognize the absurdity of that you cannot comprehend the illogicality of your postion that nothing (zero) equals something (an infinite duration of time).

On the subject of the trinity:
[quote][/quote]But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.

JeSoul:

  gracias
Okay. Let us stipulate that Jn 1 has been corrupted and we throw that out as evidence.

What say you about these other verses,

~ones that speak to Jesus being God: (note I have omitted all verses from John since you don't ascribe any form of credibility to that book)

-1 Tim 3:16  And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

-Heb 1:6 But of the Son He says, "Your throne, O God, is forever and ever

-Col 2:9 For in Christ Jesus, there is the fullness of God in bodily form

-Phil 2:5 "Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, who, although He aexisted in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. Being found in appearance as a man

-2 Pet 1:1 To those who have received a faith of the same kind as ours, by the righteousness of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ:

-Titus 2:13 looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus

---

~ones that speak to seperate parts of the Trinity

-1 Cor 12:4-6 "Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit.  And there are varieties of ministries, and the same Lord.  And there are varieties of effects, but the same God who works all things in all persons."

-2 Cor 13:14 "The grace of the[b] Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit[/b], be with you all."

-Eph 4:4-7 "There is one body and one Spirit, just as also you were called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all who is over all and through all and in all.  7But to each one of us grace was given according to the measure of Christ’s gift."

-1 Pet. 1:2 according to the[b] foreknowledge of God the Father, by the sanctifying work of the Spirit, that you may obey Jesus Christ[/b] and be sprinkled with His blood: May grace and peace be yours in fullest measure.

-Jude 20-21 But you, beloved, building yourselves up on your most holy faith; praying in the Holy Spirit; keep yourselves in the love of God, waiting anxiously for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ to eternal life."

@JeSoul et al
Are these quoted verses words spoken by Jesus to his disciple? Kindly verify this.
If not, then who speak those words. Can someone please explain.

AIRDIG:

@JeSoul et al
Are these quoted verses words spoken by Jesus to his disciple? Kindly verify this.
If not, then who speak those words. Can someone please explain.

Airdig, those ones above were written by Jesus' disciples such as Paul, Timothy etc. However, there are several other verses that could be shown here where Jesus Himself spoke from the book of John. But since DS had a problem with the book of John I decided to omit them for now.

^^^ Please be careful.

AIRDIG'S comment is someting i was going to bring up with you.

Beware the human tendency to deify spiritual leaders. It has happened all across the generations.

Thus the words of the apostles should be taken with reserve - especially because they contradict the words of Jesus himself.

The words of Jesus himself are clear on the subject -

The words of Jesus:



John 8:40: “, you are determined to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God.”



John 17:3: "Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent."



Mark 13:32:"No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father."



John 5:19: "Jesus gave them this answer: "I tell you the truth, 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 14:28: "You heard me say,'I am going away and I am coming back to you.' If you loved me, you would be glad that I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I."



John 20:17: "Jesus said, "Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them,'I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.”



Mark 10:18: “Do not call me good, only God is good.”



John 17:20-23: “My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one: I in them and you in me. May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.”

^^^
I assumed you dismissed the testimony of John but here you are quoting from it. How about these from the same book:

John 8:58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, [size=14pt]I am[/size].

John 10:30-33 I and my Father are one. Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him. Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me? The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.

rev.3.21
to him who overcomes i will grant to sit with me on my throne as I ALSO OVERCAME and sat down with my father ON HIS THRONE.

the father owns the throne cos he is GOD while jesus and us will sit with him if we overcome.

heb.2.11
for both he who sanctifies[jesus] and those who are being sanctified[us] are all of one[God]

how are we of God? he brought about us. i the same vein how is jesus of God? he brought about him too!

Quotes from aletheia -

John 8:58  Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.

And then when? This only suggests that he is an eternal being.

John 10:30-33  I and my Father are one. Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him. Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me? The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.

How many times on this forum will i have to explain this? ? ?

Bad students, you do not take notes in my class.

Jesus himself explained the term "I and my Father are one" severally. He stated unequivocally that he and his father were one in the same way as we should be one with him. Now are you Jesus? No. But you are one with him in spirit as a christian, yes?

Thus the oneness was a oneness of accord, and not an ontological or existential oneness as an entity.

This verse elucidates and proves the point:

John 17:20-23: “My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one: I in them and you in me. May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.”

Its abundantly clear that its a spiritual and not ontological or existential oneness. There. That's Bible proof.

@Deep Sight:
You understand Jesus statement in exactly the same way as the Jews, else why did you respond to this verse

John 8:58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.

with this:

Deep Sight:

And then when? This only suggests that he is an eternal being.

Isn't God the one who is eternal? You concede that Jesus is an eternal being, ergo Jesus is God.

But having conceded that Jesus is God, You shy away from the implications of your statement and try to explain it away.

Deep Sight:

Jesus himself explained the term "I and my Father are one" severally. He stated unequivocally that he and his father were one in the same way as we should be one with him. Now are you Jesus? No. But you are one with him in spirit as a christian, yes?

Thus the oneness was a oneness of accord, and not an ontological or existential oneness as an entity.

This verse elucidates and proves the point:

John 17:20-23: “My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one: I in them and you in me. May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.”

Its abundantly clear that its a spiritual and not ontological or existential oneness. There. That's Bible proof.

The Jews clearly understood what Jesus was saying. He claimed to be God, exercising the same prerogatives as God (the power to forgive sins, accepting worship &c). Which is why they accused him of this:

For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.

What do you think the charge for which Jesus was crucified for was: blasphemy. And why blasphemy, because He claimed to be God. Look at these verses in Chapter 10

John 10:28-30 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand. I and my Father are one.

Notice this:
1. neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.
2. no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.
He very well claimed ontological oneness! Jesus was direct in his claims, yet you choose not to see it.

Another encounter:

Mark 2:5-7 When Jesus saw their faith, he said unto the sick of the palsy, Son, thy sins be forgiven thee. But there were certain of the scribes sitting there, and reasoning in their hearts, Why doth this man thus speak blasphemies? who can forgive sins but God only?

Jesus made very direct claims as to who He is.

I don't even need to add anything, aletheia you have gone where I was going to go and done way better.

Oga Deepsight, don't you see how this is coming off?

-you say the gospel of John has been corrupted.

-but yet you quote from it when it supports your position

-but when it is quoted where is contradicts your belief, it should be taken with a grain of salt

so in essence, we should only read the entire bible literally where it suits you? and dismiss the other parts that don't as corrupted or symbolic? dude, like seriously? 

JeSoul:

I don't even need to add anything, aletheia you have gone where I was going to go and done way better.

Oga Deepsight, don't you see how this is coming off?

-you say the gospel of John has been corrupted.

-but yet you quote from it when it supports your position

-but when it is quoted where is contradicts your belief, it should be taken with a grain of salt

so in essence, we should only read the entire bible literally where it suits you? and dismiss the other parts that don't as corrupted or symbolic? dude, like seriously? 

Ah . . . mohammad and allah's favorite line of argument.

You can not use statistics to understand the mystery of God.

Trinity simply means:
If you accept the Father (God), automatically, Jesus His preset in your life and Holy spirit is also with you.

It means that when you are talking of the only true God, Jesus and Holy Spirit are involved.

That is the mystery and sign that help man to know the true God.

You cannot get to God without accepting Jesus as your lord and saviour and you cannot be in the presence of God without having Holy spirit.

So if you say you believe in God but you do not know Jesus or have Holy Spirit, then you are deceiving yourself.

JeSoul:

I don't even need to add anything, aletheia you have gone where I was going to go and done way better.

Oga Deepsight, don't you see how this is coming off?

-you say the gospel of John has been corrupted.

-but yet you quote from it when it supports your position

-but when it is quoted where is contradicts your belief, it should be taken with a grain of salt

so in essence, we should only read the entire bible literally where it suits you? and dismiss the other parts that don't as corrupted or symbolic? dude, like seriously?

Astonishing. Do you really mean to take the understanding of the Jews over Jesus' own explanation of his unity with the father?

Here is Jesus' own explanation for the umpteenth time -

John 17:20-23: “My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one: I in them and you in me. May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.”

Seriously babe? ? ?

@ Alethiea -

I do not know what your own understanding of an eternal being is.

But in my view there are many embodiments of the self-existent nature of God that are eternal.

I have often argued on this forum that darkness is perforce eternal.

That does not make Darkness God.

@ Jesoul - YES I POSITIVELY CONTEND THAT THE WRITERS OF THE NT WERE INFLUENCED BY DEIFICATION AND HERO WORSHIP OF JESUS.

I hope you are aware that the NT Gospels were not written by the apostles but ascribed to them.

If you will check out Jesus' OWN statements which i quoted above you will see that NO WAY did he regard himself as God.

Why are you so willing to IGNORE his own statements?

Notice this:
1. neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.
2. no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.
He very well claimed ontological oneness! Jesus was direct in his claims, yet you choose not to see it.

Excuse me sir: this is vacuous.

Any authourity who is representative of another authourity can speak like this, for crying out loud.

Just as an ambassador can speak about "his" Government.

Notwithstanding that he merely represents the President, who actually holds the Government.

Come on! ! !

Jesus states that he has been GIVEN all power in heaven and on Earth.

WHO GAVE it to him? The air? Please.

Revelation states that he sits on the right hand side . . .

OF WHOM? ? ?

Sango? ? ?

Come on giuys. This thing is clear.

Deep sight, 1john 5v7 was removed from where, by who, at what time and the reasoning behind it's removal.

Fortunately the revelation that God gave about himself in the Holy Bible is that He is One. However the 'oneness' could mean one as a unit or one as in 'class'. We have one Homosapien with same anatomical characteristics despite being different in skin colour, height, size etc.
'Elohim' is a plural name, He said he is one. Jesus Christ confirmed that 'God' is one, however revealed in the Holy Bible as the Triune God- the Father, The Son and The Holy Ghost.
The acronym 'God' therefore could not be a name like John, Joshua, Sarah etc (which are names of homosapien), but rather the 'class' reference to the Supreme Being who is one in essence and so united in Love (unlike homosapien) that there is no desire in the Father , Son and Holy Ghost to claim individuality.
God is ONE but revealed Himself as The Father, The Word (who incarnated as the Son) and The Holy Ghost, specifically in relation to the redemption of Mankind.