Freethought & Rationalism Archive

goozlefotz · 06-21-2005, 08:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NOGO

I know what you claim. In my book verse [2] refers to he, the Word of God who created the world. Genesis does not have any He creating the world other than Yahweh or Elohim, but that is another story.

You should care about the virgin birth because it was then that Matthew and Like claim that the Word became flesh even though the scene at Jesus' baptism does not fit any more as I have point out.

Back to the GJohn.

The teaching is not the man's teaching but God's.
Note the "It is of God or whether I speak speak from myself".
I put a uncapitilized "m" otherwise it makes no sense.
If Myself is God then the sentence is simply silly.
Jesus is saying that what he teaches is not his own.

A clear distinction between the messenger and the He whom he represents.

This is one of my favorite. The Father abiding in me does His works.
Jesus is saying that the Father in him does the works not himself, ie not the man.

When did Jesus receive the Spirit of the Father which abides in him and does His works???
At his baptism.
Keep in mind the bit in Mark

Note the Spirit descends upon him in verse [10]
In verse [12] the Spirit impels him into the wilderness.

Jesus, the man, is possessed by the Spirit of God.

This is the nature of the incarnation described in John.

It is the Spirit of God which speaks and acts through the man.
This is what John 14:10 is saying.

You need to reread GJohn and not just assume what you have been told.

Tell me about the Trinity - God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit.
You can skip the insults; they add nothing to the discussion.

NOGO · 06-22-2005, 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by goozlefotz

Tell me about the Trinity - God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit.
You can skip the insults; they add nothing to the discussion.

I am sorry that you see insults here. None were intended. I was mearly suggesting that you reread GJohn putting aside what we have all been told that it was about.

The trinity was a later addition.
Still the Son need not be a human.
The Word of God was the firstborn.
When Yahweh said "let there be light"
The Word was begotten, not created because he was already there with the Father right from the start. John 1:18 says "in the bosom of the Father".

John 1:3 says that the Word created everything.
"let there be light" and there was. Yahweh created the world throught the WORD. Paul says that God created the world through Jesus.

Note the word "through".

In short the trinity came later but can equally exist with or without the human in the picture. In fact it makes much more sense without the human, so that all three are then spiritual entities.

What is your angle on the trinity?

goozlefotz · 06-22-2005, 09:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NOGO

I am sorry that you see insults here. None were intended. I was mearly suggesting that you reread GJohn putting aside what we have all been told that it was about.

What is your angle on the trinity?

I was baiting you. You do not discuss, you preach. "NOGO the oracle". I am bored with this "discussion"; find someone who cares what you think to preach to.
:down:

NOGO · 06-23-2005, 07:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by goozlefotz

I was baiting you. You do not discuss, you preach. "NOGO the oracle". I am bored with this "discussion"; find someone who cares what you think to preach to.
:down:

As you wsh.
Preaching is saying things which you cannot backup with evidence.
Absolute truths which you get from God himself.
When you lack evidence you start preaching or just get out of the debate.

Californian · 06-24-2005, 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by goozlefotz

I was baiting you. You do not discuss, you preach. "NOGO the oracle". I am bored with this "discussion"; find someone who cares what you think to preach to.
:down:

What IS your angle on the Trinity?

NOGO · 06-24-2005, 05:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Californian

What IS your angle on the Trinity?

Don't waste your time.
Here's a guy who asked me my interpretation of GJohn 1 verse 14.
I gave it to him.
You can see the childish reaction.

andrewcriddle · 06-25-2005, 09:59 AM

This may be of interest Da Vinci Code and Codex Bezae

Andrew Criddle

John A. Broussard · 06-25-2005, 01:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewcriddle

This may be of interest Da Vinci Code and Codex Bezae

Andrew Criddle

Great link. It's nice to see such thorough research and good reproductions to go with it.

It does seem a bit silly, though, to do this in order to refute a piece of fiction.

But, I've run into so many people who think Brown's novel is "for real" that I guess refutations--however out of place--aren't entirely without benefit.

And the site is a great piece of research!

NOGO · 06-25-2005, 10:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John A. Broussard

It does seem a bit silly, though, to do this in order to refute a piece of fiction.

But, I've run into so many people who think Brown's novel is "for real" that I guess refutations--however out of place--aren't entirely without benefit.

Thank you.
This is exactly the point that I was trying to make.

NOGO · 06-26-2005, 12:20 PM

This morning I read in the papaers that a poll showed that 16% of the population read the Davinci Code.

Out of those about 32% believed the story about Mary Mag being the 12th disciple and Jesus having children from her.

Not bad for a book that is in the "fiction" area of the bookstores.

If Dan Brown wrote a story which took place on Pluto the 32% would go dosn to zero. Why? because the expectation would be "all fiction".

But when you deal with things like the Davinci code then the expectation is that some parts of the story are true.

Not all fictions are the same.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-25-2005, 09:59 AM	#107
andrewcriddle Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Birmingham UK Posts: 4,876	This may be of interest Da Vinci Code and Codex Bezae Andrew Criddle

06-26-2005, 12:20 PM	#110
NOGO Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Canada Posts: 1,562	This morning I read in the papaers that a poll showed that 16% of the population read the Davinci Code. Out of those about 32% believed the story about Mary Mag being the 12th disciple and Jesus having children from her. Not bad for a book that is in the "fiction" area of the bookstores. If Dan Brown wrote a story which took place on Pluto the 32% would go dosn to zero. Why? because the expectation would be "all fiction". But when you deal with things like the Davinci code then the expectation is that some parts of the story are true. Not all fictions are the same.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.