₦airaland Forum

Logicboy03: New atheism is simply atheism of the 21st century where atheists are more outspoken on their views. Simple and short. The only difference between atheism of the 21st century and the old atheism is that we have science/technology/internet that is beneficial.

Lol, if you say so, however, I hope you do realize that this has not in any way given "new atheism any meaningful definition.
We both know that science, technology and the internet have nothing to do with atheism anymore than how we don't proclaim "New Islam" because muslims have become more vocal and now employ science technology and the internet to spread their message

Defining concepts by the most popular proponents is silly and will always be silly.

Yet it is not silly to define Classical Greek Philosophy by the works of Plato, Aristotle and co. neither is it silly to define Renaissance art by the works of Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci and co.
Why must we employ special pleading for New Atheism?

You have to stop this dubious style of debating. I clearly gave examples of what they (the horsemen) have said on belief in God. But you went to anonynize and ask for arguments that God doesnt exist....

You really have to stop appealing to "anonyism" when you can't make a point.

Plain and simple, they have said that there is no reason to believe in a God. Dawkins especially said that he cant prove that God doesnt exist and that as an atheist, he is also an agnostic.

This proves my point again. If he cannot provide any arguments to prove that God doesn't exist, then he cannot be an atheist or that his atheism is a properly rational worldview to hold. There is no such thing as "an agnostic atheist"

Their argument is simple- there is no valid reason to believe in god. God is useless and unavailable in our current life. Our evolution, our big bang is explained without God. Nothing biological or physical needs God as an explanation.

Again exactly what I've been saying: They haven't actually made any argument to lead to their conclusion. All they've done is sit back and claim that arguments made in favour of God are not good. Please provide an actual New Atheist argument that disproves God for us to talk about.

I wont go into the philosophical arguments on the problem of evil. That is too long.

Good choice for you. Besides, The problem of evil argument is not a new atheist argument.

False claim alert in bold!!!

Dawkins does not set up any parallel between science and religion. Rather, it is you christians and muslims that claim that science and religion can co-exist together or are complimentary.

i wonder why Christians and muslims would need to do that. Maybe it's because someone is suggesting they are not compatible.

Dawkins has nothing to do with religion. He actually wants religion removed from science. Let science be. No creationism in evolution classes. So, for you to claim that Dawkins sets up a parallel between science and religion is not only false but slander.

@ bold. Yet he thinks they can coexist? I think the problem here is that you don't seem to understand what it means to set up parallels. Mr Dawkins simply doesn't think that it is right for one to be both religious and at the same time scientific. He thinks they a parallels that shouldn't meet. You have confirmed as much in your post. My contention is that Dawkins and co are wrong and such a parallel is a false one. Science and religious beliefs can and do co-exist and that both inform us about the true nature of reality.

Furthermore, even atheists criticise Dawkins and some take a different stance- take for instace Neil degrasse Tyson who said that Dawkins should focus more on teaching rather than mocking (not that he disagreed with the mocking- he just wanted focus on the teaching of science).

You have conceded that Dawkins at least employs mockery as a tool to a large extent and that Neil DeGrrasse does not disagree with employing mockery as a tool though he would like to see more teaching.

For you to even compare the way many atheist praise Dawkins to the way christians revere their priests......you are very dubious. Apples and oranges.

Lol really? You should watch how the crowd responds to Dawkins at atheist conferences and compare it to how the crowd responds to Oyedepo at Winners chapel conferences

Read my first paragraph

Read mine too

Frank4YAHWEH: One does not have to be fluent in "the two languages" to legitimately claim a mistranslation has occured.

Lol, really? how does that work exactly? How exactly do you go about correcting the translation of a language you don't understand?

As I have made known in previous posts, Yahshua did not LITERALLY "come down from heaven":
http://frank4yahweh.xanga.com/708052764/yahshua-came-down-from-heaven

Lol, did He literally ascend into Heaven? Mind you in John 6:62 He said He would ascend to Heaven where He was before. So if you think He didn't really descend from heaven, you cannot hold that He ascended either. You need to be consistent.

When Yahshua parabolically discribed himself as the "bread from heaven" he was speaking of his being the spokesman of his and our Father Yahweh's word in this last time period, not that he pre-existed his birth. Yahshua was not the spokesman of his and our Father Yahweh's word until long after his birth. The prophets of old were the spokesmen of Father Yahweh's word before Yahshua came into existence as Hebrews 1:1-2 makes perfectly clear.

Lol, this is just you trying to desperately dig yourself out of a hole. No prophet was ever referred to as the bread of life so your argument that "bread of life" means "God's spokesman" is moot. Also it was very clear to everyone present there that Christ was talking of coming from heaven in a very literal sense.

Note that my statement still stands true that nowhere in Scripture is it ever said "Jesus pre-exited his birth." This is a prime example of one twisting Scripture in that they are saying Scripture says something that it plainly does not.

lololol, this is the funniest bit of your reply. Are you seriously demanding for theexact phrase "Jesus pre-existed His birth" to be provided? Surely you know how irrational such a demand is.
Secondly, I wonder what scripture you think I 'twisted' when all I did was post the passages verbatim.

frosbel: I asked you a question, in fact 2 , where are my answers ?

Lol, I wonder how you can legitimately expect answers from people while dodging other people's questions. Did you not read in your bible that whatever measure you use shall be measured to you?

Please frosbel we need your response to this:

https://www.nairaland.com/1321883/did-jesus-preexist-birth-honeychild/6#16527706

Frosbel, you have claimed that Jesus did not exist before he was physically born

Jesus has answered by saying:

No one has ascended into heaven except the one who descended from heaven, the Son of Man.(John 3:13)


Everything that the Father gives me will come to me, and anyone who comes to me I will never drive away; for I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me. (John 6:37-38)

......When many of his disciples heard it, they said, "This teaching is difficult; who can accept it?" But Jesus, being aware that his disciples were complaining about it, said to them, "Does this offend you? Then what if you were to see [size=14pt]the Son of Man ascending to where he was before[/size]? (John 6:60-62)

I believe the words of Christ are clear. Now please respond and stop being a coward.

alexleo: Thanks my brother. This is exactly what frosbel does. This is also how 419ners behave. When you catch them in their trick they device another one immediately. Frosbel is always opening threads which contains junks and useless teachings that deceives souls into eternal damnation. One good thing that is happening here is that people are beginning to see the falsehood in him.

No mind the guy, he can't hide under the wool cloak anymore.

Frank4YAHWEH: "This passage in Hebrews 1:8-9 is actually a quote from Psalms 45:6-7 . The K.J.V. reads as follows:

"But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom."

Verses five and seven are clear and plain; only verse six, as it reads in the K.J.V. is ambiguous. However, other versions clearly take away this ambiguity so that verse six agrees with other Scriptures: namely, there is only One true Mighty One ["Elohim, God, deity"]. This one true Mighty One is Yahweh (Deuteronomy 6:4; John 17:3; Ephesians 4:4). According to many scholars Psalm 45:6 reads "Thy throne O Judge" instead of "O God" which in Hebrew or Greek has the same meanings so that in Hebrew it also could mean Judge instead of a trinitarian translation of the word theos which is generic and has many meanings." SOURCE: http://frank4yahweh.xanga.com/734899456/did-father-yahweh-call-his-son-god

Boomark: Hebrews 1:8-9

King James Version (KJV)

8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.
9 Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.

I think it is better this way so we can know how many Gods we are looking at.

@alexleo
I thought someone asked you which of the Gods you are thanking?

The two of you have not addressed the question hisblud asked. He wants to know. Who is being spoken of in Hebrews 1:8 and who is doing the speaking.

Please answer him



P/s: @boomark, we shall yet break bread on 1corinthians 15:28

frosbel: Heb 1:9


How can GOD have a GOD ?

That does not answer the question he asked you. He asked who was speaking in Hebrews 1:8 and who was being spoken of?

frosbel: you have resorted to name calling, something must be biting you deep inside

I really have no further time for circular , endless and pointless arguments on topics that have been flogged into the ground tens times over.

The point has been made, you are either a Polytheist by believing in 3 gods which you are , or a monotheist who believes in one GOD as Jesus did.

Lol, I knew you'll be quick to respond to my post while evading hisblud's question. Typical

This is my take on it. Hom[color=#000000]ose[/color]xuality is a s[color=#000000]exu[/color]al perversion much like i[color=#000000]nce[/color]st, pedophilia and bestiality. I wouldn't really call it a 'choice thing' however choosing to engage in homose[color=#000000]xu[/color]al activities is sinful.

^^^^ Lolololol.....I love how you are calling out frosbel and exposing him. Unfortunately, I doubt frosbel will respond to the challenge, he'll rather ignore it and open another thread "to discuss the topic" next 2 weeks. He's a coward like that.

Deep Sight: Okay then. I await your production of the other verses you will tag "in support".

In the meantime, I shall produce and tag my verses "against."

It will be my intention to show that all scripture taken into account, the bible does not support the doctrine of the trinity.

I have now edited my post and added the verses. Let us find out what the bible teaches us about God's nature as He leads us.

Reyginus: I don't think that is the case. Let's say we repent and accept christ, but as humans, we still commit sin, will God then forgive us without our asking because of our repentance?

That's a very good question. Now let us look at it with a bit more depth.

Think about these critically.

1. Why would someone who loves God commit sin and not repent of it? Does such a person really love God, is such a person saved?
Imagine you had a wife and you installed video cameras all over your house. While you were at work, your wife committed adultery with the houseboy and was caught on camera. Your wife knows that you saw the video yet she feels no remorse about what she did. Can you really say that this woman is your wife in the right sense of the word?

2. Despite all this, you love your wife and will readily forgive her. You open your arms wide and invite her to embrace you reassuring her that she is forgiven, yet she refuses and turns her back to you. Should you force her into your embrace?

3. Christ has made the sacrifice for our sins once and for all. The Father calls out to us to come unto him. If we reject His grace, God will not force us into eternal life against our will.

frosbel: here we go again, the get out clause of gibberish theology.

Mr Man, I am still awaiting your response to this:
https://www.nairaland.com/1321883/did-jesus-preexist-birth-honeychild/6#16527706

Please let us focus on the topic of your thread.

Deep Sight: Yes I am VERY up for it indeed. I have had thousands of Trinity discussions on this forum in the past: many of them very fiery and extensive. However I don't think I have ever done a verse by verse in this way, and I am looking forward to it. Happily, this comes at as close a time as I think I will ever be to being open to religious ideas, on account of certain deep personal experiences. As such, I can promise to keep a keen eye out for truth and to concede wherever I see a valid point made. I will ask the same of you.

I will wait for you to add to the verses above first, as the verses you intend to rely upon, and then I will list my verses. We will start the verse-by-verse with your verses.

For each verse, where appropriate, since we agreed to take a fairly academic approach to this, we should discuss -

1. History

2. Authenticity

3. Context

4. Linguistic Interpretation (Hebrew/ Greek) original meanings.

5. Logical interpretation.

6. Association with comparative scripture on same topic.

7. Scholastic views.

Agree?

Beautiful. I agree

ijawkid: Your comment is off the hook my bro...

You have already refuted God as one God......

You just refuted God as not monadic...

Your teachn is what the scriptures describes as philosophies of men.......


And please did the holy spirit know the day and hour at that point Jesus was playing ignorant??.......

We cannot proceed if you cannot answer a simple question

plaetton: The bolded is a big lie.
There is no forgiveness from god.
How can you even think that?
A god that holds a 200,000 yr old grudge against Adam, an equivalent of a newborn child in the garden of eden?
A god that holds the same grudge against Adams future generations, all of humankind for that matter, and then requires blood sacrifice as atonement?
C'mon, give me a break. Think man, think.

Where in the bible did Yahweh ever forgive any transgressor with out first punishing that person or group and their offsprings? Read your bible, man.

And by the way, if god has forgiven humanity for Adam's sin, then WTF(excuse my language) is hell being kept warm for?
The fact that hell exist is clear contradiction of the ridiculous delusion that god forgives.

What is the purpose of commandments if there are no statutory punishment for transgressions?

The idea, more like delusions of forgiveness, is just another one of those contradictory delusions that only makes sense to those who ingest the opium of blind faith religion.

Ok, you have had your little rant. You can move along now.

ijawkid: Oh and may I also engage in philosophy and mathematics with my deluded brothers........

1 God splits himself into 3......

One third of this one God comes to earth(becomes flesh),two third stays back in heaven....meaning once upon a time God was no longer a complete GOD but one third/Two third......then I wonder who everybody,including this proposed one third of God was worshipping.....they were all worshipping an incomplete God(two third if not one third of God)

So one wonders how even a one third of this God would have exclusive knowledge that another one third does not even know about .......

Or why should any of them even know more than the other at any given point in time when they are not complete........neither of these divided parts of GOD should have complete knowledge while the other remains ignorant....never!!!!....

And the funny part is the last one third of this GOD was not even mentioned as to wether he knows about this secret or not.........

.




.......

This is what the trinity can do to sane people............

This just shows your ignorance of God's nature

frosbel: But 3 persons is 1 person, no ?

Don't derail your thread now.

I am still awaiting your response to this:
https://www.nairaland.com/1321883/did-jesus-preexist-birth-honeychild/6#16527706

ijawkid: Oboy nothing dey to think about...if this is how you guys run around the truth with philosophies of men then you are all in trouble.......

John 17:4-5
4 I y glorified you on earth,
z having accomplished the work that you gave
me to do. 5 And now, Father, a glorify me in
your own presence with the glory b that I
had with you c before the world existed


This same Jesus who knew that he had something with the Father(he was in flesh when he made this statement up there) is the same Jesus you guys are claiming was ignorant of an information which only the Father knew because he was in flesh,

How are we to even trust Jesus' words at all if his being in flesh impaired his reasoning and the things he said..........

And may I ask for the last time...

Jesus knew the angels didn't know the day and hour(I wonder how he even knew that since he was flesh),,he knew he himself didn't know(which you guys are running away from),he said only the Father knows.....where is the supposed 3rd person of the Godhead or trinity in this all important scene??.......did the holy spirit know or did not know or did Jesus miss one person in the Godhead and in heaven as to this important information??.......




Oya please beg anony or maybe you can use some plato philosophy to run around this one.....

Rubbish!!!!....

First question you need to answer: Do you believe that God is omniscient? Yes or no.

The reason I'm asking the above is because if yes then we can proceed, if no then you would have no basis to argue about what the Son didn't know.


P/s: I am sure frosbel is happy to have his thread derailed because it allows him to escape without answering the questions posed to him.

Interesting. Are you sure you are up for this? The verses are plenty o. Please permit me to delay a bit in giving a response I'll use the NKJV just like you have as well So that we are completely on the same page.

Watch this space

Edit: As promised, I have put up an additional 10 passages (All passages are from the NKJV translation):

A11 - John 17:5 And now, O Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.


A12- Galatians 4:6 And because you are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying out, “Abba, Father!”
(compare with Romans 8:14-16 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God. For you did not receive the spirit of bondage again to fear, but you received the Spirit of adoption by whom we cry out, “Abba, Father.” The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God,)


A13 - 2 Corinthians 3:14-18 But their minds were blinded. For until this day the same veil remains unlifted in the reading of the Old Testament, because the veil is taken away in Christ. But even to this day, when Moses is read, a veil lies on their heart. Nevertheless when one turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away. Now the Lord is the Spirit; and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as by the Spirit of the Lord.
(Notice how the passage equates Christ to God and the Holy spirit)


A14 - Titus 2:10-13 not pilfering, but showing all good fidelity, that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Savior in all things. For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men, teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly in the present age, looking for the blessed hope and glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ,


A15 - 2Peter 1:1 Simon Peter, a bondservant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who have obtained like precious faith with us by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ:


A16 - Revelations 22:12-16 “And behold, I am coming quickly, and My reward is with Me. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End, the First and the Last.” Blessed are those who do His commandments, that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter through the gate into the city. But outside are dogs and sorcerers and sexually immoral and murderers and idolaters, and whoever loves and practices a lie.“I, Jesus, have sent My angel to testify to you these things in the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, the Bright and Morning Star.”


A17 - Philipians 2:5-7 Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men.


A18 - Hebrews 1:8 But to the Son He says: “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever; A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom.


A19 - Matthew 3:3 For this is he who was spoken of by the prophet Isaiah, saying: “The voice of one crying in the wilderness: ‘Prepare the way of the Lord; Make His paths straight.’”
(Compare with Isaiah 40:3 The voice of one crying in the wilderness: “Prepare the way of the Lord; Make straight in the desert A highway for our God.)


A20 - Zecheriah 2:5-13 For I,’ says the Lord, ‘will be a wall of fire all around her, and I will be the glory in her midst.’” “Up, up! Flee from the land of the north,” says the Lord; “for I have spread you abroad like the four winds of heaven,” says the Lord. “Up, Zion! Escape, you who dwell with the daughter of Babylon.” For thus says the Lord of hosts: “He sent Me after glory, to the nations which plunder you; for he who touches you touches the apple of His eye. For surely I will shake My hand against them, and they shall become spoil for their servants. Then you will know that the Lord of hosts has sent Me. “Sing and rejoice, O daughter of Zion! For behold, I am coming and I will dwell in your midst,” says the Lord. “Many nations shall be joined to the Lord in that day, and they shall become My people. And I will dwell in your midst. Then you will know that the Lord of hosts has sent Me to you. And the Lord will take possession of Judah as His inheritance in the Holy Land, and will again choose Jerusalem. Be silent, all flesh, before the Lord, for He is aroused from His holy habitation!”
(the above is quite a long passage but I'll suggest you read it carefully and try to figure out how many Lords are in the passage)


The above should do for now. I believe that as we continue, more and more passages will show up.


A little word of caution: Let us not fall into the trap of pitting verses against each other to cancel each other out, rather let us seek to find out what the scripture points to altogether.

ijawkid: You can keep your garbage to yourself......

A dogs vomit is worth paying attention to than to your twisted and satanic philosophy which you spew here........

Godhead(accomodating 3 persons) and trinity my foot.......

Meanwhile deepsight is waiting for you......

Deep Sight? where?

ijawkid: You are just plain foolish..........

So you look at what anony wrote and run around happy......

Anony just gave a philosophical comment which has no bible backing.....

And you are the fool who just said some few comments ago that this Jesus is YHWH.....

Aren't you a confused mumu??......

Jesus simply stated.....I don't know......anony and co says no he knows,its just that being in flesh made him suffer from amnesia and could no longer know what he knew before he came down to the earth...

I spit on this thread......

Tufiakwa!!!!........

Lol, insults are the first sign of irrationality you know. Go back home and think carefully about the scripture you claim to believe.

ijawkid: Na philosophy your oga just write for there o if your brain no know...

Anony just declared that God is not one GOD.....

Clap for yourself and anony......

It is obvious I'm discussing with philosophers and not bible students.....

I have never said that God is not one God. I have only posed questions that should make you think and examine what your concept of God is. You are free to ignore them and stick to your dogma. I really can't be bothered anymore

ijawkid: Please can you list out the God priviledges that this GOD of yours abandoned in heaven??........

If I can remember well his knowledge was not amongst the list of things my bro.....

This same Jesus had the ability to read the minds of people......

Jesus remained the Jesus he was....the only change was that he wasn't a spirit but was flesh and blood......

Jesus was well aware of who he was and where he came from and so had his memory and his knowledge of what ever he knew before descending intact............


Now this is your theory bro.......

Lmao.....anony the philosopher.......na ya type them propound trinity.......

Now for your info God created this Jesus we are talking about and loved him.......

And what do you understand by Godhead....don't tell me you are that cheap to be talking about Godhead as if it is a 3 way in manifold that accomodates 3 persons......




And this is your philosophy.........

No biblical basis for the shit you just wrote........


Kindly open just a verse that says there is trinity and also a second person of the trinity??......

Can you see your whole life has been basterdized with human philosophies.....

And may I put it to you that the Father nor the son nor who ever you choose to add does not belong to any Godhead......

It is your head that is telling you this and not the scriptures.....

Chei...........

And the one God remains the Father alone and not a combo of 2 other persons....





I can't undertand thrash....

All you wrote is arrant thrash.......

If you believe the persons making up your proposed Godhead are distinct persons and each of them God,then you have no choice but agree that you are enforcing 3 Gods on christianity........


No philosophy can drag you out of this mess you are in........

And talking about who could have reDeemed us from sin.....a perfect life was needed to balance that of adam.......and Jesus who is Gods firstborn was sent and not God himself coming down.......


If God came down we would die ehhh......

No one has seen God at anytime.....

You know what, we have had this same discussion over and over and over again on this forum and today I don't have the time to go into another endless fruitless wild goose chase with you. I'll return to waiting for frosbel to respond to me. That's my main interest in this thread.

Reyginus: It's like I have to make the question clear.
My question is this, why is it a sin when we refuse to forgive an offender who is yet to ask for forgiveness, but not a sin when God forgives not a sinner until he asks for forgiveness?

But God has already forgiven us by sending Christ to die for us while we were still sinners. The question before us now is whether we will repent from our sins and accept Christ.

shdemidemi: I gave up on this guy long time, the guy comes with an already made up mind set that is not ready to learn. Who ever tries to share the word with him is only wasting time. I am sure the fellow came in through his parent to the religion, if not he would not accept who he calls the father all together.

Ijawkid is the side attraction here. It is really frosbel's response I am interested in. Especially as pertains the topic of this thread.

ijawkid: How can YHWH drop his God priviledges??....are you sick or something??......

if I go by your rubbish "drop God priviledge ish" how should that make YHWH ignorant of anything but rather recognize that someone else knows something he is ignorant of.....

Philipians 2:5-6 cannot help you o.......

And you had better make sense of what ever I write because you guys are very sick people who have rubbished who the Father is.......

Lol, this is very simple.
1. Can God humble Himself? Yes He can. Why?
1a. If He can't humble Himself then He is demanding from man something that is beyond His ability and therefore cannot be God.
1b. If He can humble Himself, then He can indeed take upon Himself the form of a man and to do that He'll have to let go of some of His God privileges.

2. Does God have infinite love? Yes He does. How?
2a. If God is monadic in nature, then before creation, there was no other person to love because love can only exist in a relationship between persons. It would only be possible for God to love after creation and hence God would have to learn to love and therefore cannot be said to be omniscient.
2b. If God is Trinity, then Love can easily exist eternally in the Godhead i.e. God is Love

Now if he second Person of the Trinity (the Son) gives up His God privileges and takes the form of flesh, it is perfectly easy to see how He (Christ) won't know what the Father knows while He remains in the flesh. However this doesn't contradict the fact that God knows all things.

The problem is that you conceive the Trinity as 3 Gods rather than 3 Persons of one God. Until you can understand that, you will find the scripture difficult. In fact it is impossible for salvation by grace through faith to happen if God is monadic in nature. The sacrifice of the life of a mere man simply cannot atone for sin

frosbel: try this first and maybe we can have a civil discussion.

https://www.nairaland.com/1321883/did-jesus-preexist-birth-honeychild#16388031

Finally after much dancing around, he agrees to defend his position. Let us examine his work shall we?

First remember that the question is:Did Jesus Christ exist before He was born physically as a man?

frosbel: "This is how Jesus the Messiah was born. His mother, Mary, was engaged to be married to Joseph. But before the marriage took place, while she was still a virgin, she became pregnant through the power of the Holy Spirit." - This is how Jesus the Messiah was born. His mother, Mary, was engaged to be married to Joseph. But before the marriage took place, while she was still a virgin, she became pregnant through the power of the Holy Spirit - Matthew 1:18

Notice that how Christ was born tells us absolutely nothing about whether or not He existed before His birth.

The verse above explains, if you remove all the complex theology of incarnation , the simple and natural process by which Jesus came into the world just like any other MAN ,with one small difference, his mother conceived not by the implanted seed of MAN ,but by the Power of the Holy Spirit.

Notice that you have not given any reason why we should remove "the complex theology of incarnation". You have merely suggested we do so. Secondly, what does it mean to be concieved by the power of the Holy Ghost and how does this disprove anything about the pre-existence of Christ? I sincerely hope for your sake that you are not trying to suggest that Mary and the Holy Ghost had some sort of Spiritual se[color=#000000]xua[/color]l intercourse.

You begin to wonder why Jesus said these things have been revealed to babes, it is the wise who form volumes and volumes of garbage called theology and end up muddling the simple process by which the Messiah was born into the world.

An unnecessary addendum since you haven't yet said anything that would convince any one that Christ did not exist before His physical birth

In fact this was predicted in Psalms by David when he said :

"The king proclaims the LORD's decree: "The LORD said to me, 'You are my son. Today I have become your Father." - Psalm 2:7


Clearly there was a DAY that Jesus became the Son of GOD and this was when Mary gave birth to him.

And where in the bible did you read that this "DAY" referred to in Psalms was the same day Mary gave birth to Jesus? (mind you Hebrews chapter 1 tells a whole different story because there the Father goes on to say in verse 10 that the Son laid the foundations of the earth in the beginning and the heavens are the works of His hands.)

The Messiah came in the flesh, he did not come as some greek mythological half god and half man, that is the stuff of Pagans.

Another unnecessary point because we all agree that the Messaih came in the flesh. The question is: Did He exist before He came in the flesh?

Let's look at another beautiful scripture :

Psalm 80:17-19
New International Version (NIV)
17 Let your hand rest on the man at your right hand,
the son of man you have raised up for yourself.
18 Then we will not turn away from you;
revive us, and we will call on your name.


Clearly Jesus was raised up for a purpose that God has planned throughout the ages , for the salvation of his people and thus the entire world.

And this proves that Christ did not exist before His birth how?

Moses attested to this when he said :

"The LORD your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your fellow Israelites. You must listen to him." - Deuteronomy 18:15

Clearly God was going to raise his SON from among the people of GOD , for the salvation of the whole world.

Jesus was a 100% MAN and Son of the living GOD.

Why make a simple case complex ?

Once again, you have told us absolutely nothing about whether Christ existed before His birth or not. You have not even made a simple case to start with not to talk of "complex"

For further reference read Matthew 1:21 .

Matthew 1:21 And she shall bear a son, and you shall call His name JESUS: for He shall save His people from their sins.

I don't see how Matthew 1:21 tells us anything about whether or not Jesus Christ existed before His birth.

Now let us look at what Jesus actually said about where He came from before coming to earth in the flesh. I'll just repeat myself again.

"Brethren, why don't we end this nonsense once and for all.

Frosbel has claimed that Jesus did not exist before he was physically born

Jesus has answered by saying:

No one has ascended into heaven except the one who descended from heaven, the Son of Man.(John 3:13)


Everything that the Father gives me will come to me, and anyone who comes to me I will never drive away; for I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me. (John 6:37-38)

......When many of his disciples heard it, they said, "This teaching is difficult; who can accept it?" But Jesus, being aware that his disciples were complaining about it, said to them, "Does this offend you? Then what if you were to see [size=14pt]the Son of Man ascending to where he was before[/size]? (John 6:60-62)

The above words of Jesus Christ himself are explicitly clear and unambiguous."

How do you respond?

ijawkid: I have never read philippians and mistook it to mean what you guys propagate it to be......only a twisted mind reads those verses and think otherwise....

I am asking you mr Anony to help Yahweh explain why he was starkly ignorant of a fact but someone else knew.....

The reason why I say don't quote philipians again is because it would choke you up...

Because at the end of the day this Jesus never dropped his divinity but ,rather he is even YHWH that came from heaven....

........

I really can't make any sense of what you wrote up there. What don't you understand by God laying down His God privileges and humbling Himself to becoming the man Jesus Christ?

frosbel: Phew!!

Okay for those who want us to continue this debate without the usual detractors, let's carry on.

@shdemidemi: , let's carry on from where stopped.

Respond to this and stop dodging.

https://www.nairaland.com/1321883/did-jesus-preexist-birth-honeychild/5#16525203

frosbel: It's only a mouse click away, Page 1.

Which of your posts in particular on page 1 are you referring to?

frosbel: in which case you may have problems with reasoning.

Hahahaha, frosbel is it really that hard to link me to this post of yours?

ijawkid: Deny what!!...

Now you are happy that hisblud dug out the HRV which I'm still struggling to find the next verse online........

Now you just agreed that Yahweh came from heaven......

Oya just tell us why Yahweh who is Yahweh himself did not know when the world would end....

Don't quote phillipians anymore.....Yahweh came to the earth as a man by your conclusion..........

You guys don't even understand the gravity of your assertions.......

Nonsense!!!!!!.........

Please tell hisblud to quote the next verse from the HRV and let's see....

Lol, do you now have a problem with Phillipians because it doesn't fit into your doctrine?