None Of This Make Any Sense

voj

Established
Joined
Aug 21, 2021
Messages
174
Nikon is trying to confuse u with antichristian rhetoric because they can't get their head around the doctrine of the trinity.
Truth is always in the eyes of the beholder, one get deceived with lack of knowledge.
 






Nikōn

Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2021
Messages
573
Anyway the appeal to mystery fallacy isn't convincing when you can trace the doctrine of the trinity down to specific people and their specific philosophically-derived thought (usually a movement known as Middle Platonism, and in the case of Augustine; Neoplatonism) in the 3rd and 4th centuries.
It is not a doctrine present in any of the books contained in the canonized Bible and was not known by Jesus or any of the Apostles, period. To even need to explain this is just an insult to the intellect and the spirit.
 






Joined
May 15, 2017
Messages
2,095
Anyway the appeal to mystery fallacy isn't convincing when you can trace the doctrine of the trinity down to specific people and their specific philosophically-derived thought (usually a movement known as Middle Platonism, and in the case of Augustine; Neoplatonism) in the 3rd and 4th centuries.
It is not a doctrine present in any of the books contained in the canonized Bible and was not known by Jesus or any of the Apostles, period. To even need to explain this is just an insult to the intellect and the spirit.
What are you talking about. At the very least in the new testament Jesus is referred to as God and saviour. The holy spirit can be blasphemed as a specific differentiated person. This is silly.

It's ironic that someone that leans toward islamic teaching can't seem to grasp progressive revelation.

This really sprung to mind and I think really speaks to learned people that just can't face the truth about who GOD is and I've been coming across alot of them lately.

The corrupt governor Felix is what springs to mind -

Luke notes that Felix is "well acquainted with the Way." But Felix and his wife Drusilla, who is Jewish, enjoy talking with Paul. It's entertaining. And Paul uses the opportunity to tell the governor about Jesus.

"[Felix] sent for Paul and listened to him as he spoke about faith in Christ Jesus. As Paul discoursed on righteousness, self-control and the judgment to come, Felix was afraid and said, 'That's enough for now! You may leave. When I find it convenient, I will send for you.'" (Acts 24:24-25)

Felix is uncomfortable when Paul talks about righteousness and judgment. Such talk is not "convenient."[431] But then Felix brings him back "frequently"[432] for discussions over the next two years, so long as Felix remains as governor. Paul's passion for Jesus fascinates him, but he never commits to faith in Christ.

Felix fits Paul's description to Timothy as one who is "always learning and never able to arrive at a knowledge of the truth" (2 Timothy 3:7, ESV
 






Nikōn

Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2021
Messages
573
What are you talking about. At the very least in the new testament Jesus is referred to as God and saviour. The holy spirit can be blasphemed as a specific differentiated person. This is silly.

It's ironic that someone that leans toward islamic teaching can't seem to grasp progressive revelation.

This really sprung to mind and I think really speaks to learned people that just can't face the truth about who GOD is and I've been coming across alot of them lately.
Dispensationalism is highly contradictory of what the Bible teaches.
You're very mistaken if you think that either Jews or Muslims believe in Dispensationalism. Both Jews and Muslims believe that salvation is a consistent thing that originated in the garden of Eden itself with God. Jesus never taught anything that contradicted this.
 






Joined
May 15, 2017
Messages
2,095
Dispensationalism is highly contradictory of what the Bible teaches.
You're very mistaken if you think that either Jews or Muslims believe in Dispensationalism. Both Jews and Muslims believe that salvation is a consistent thing that originated in the garden of Eden itself with God. Jesus never taught anything that contradicted this.
You are very correct it did begin Eden with the first prophecy regarding Jesus

Genesis 3:15

International Version
And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel.”


You know when you are enamoured with Hinduism and Islam but proclaim Jesus as an idol you really show your true colours. You make 0 sense and your rhetoric is based on every anti Christian exegesis you can find.

Btw Jews have the Talmud which wasn't revealed til later on. Muslims also believe in end times eschatology. Muhammad was writing the Qur'an as he went along there's nothing more dispensational than that.
 






Nikōn

Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2021
Messages
573
You know when you are enamoured with Hinduism
Excuse me?

I am no fan of Hinduism and non-Abrahamic faiths, my views towards Hinduism are strictly negative. You just pulled that out of thin air to try and attack me personally. :D


And for my only mention of Hinduism prior to you mentioning it here: https://vigilantcitizenforums.com/threads/do-all-religions-lead-us-to-god.8991/post-421052

Muhammad was writing the Qur'an as he went along there's nothing more dispensational than that.
You are conflating the mode of salvation with revelation itself, which in this context have nothing to do with each other.
The Book of Isaiah, to take an analogy, has many 'revelations' in it, each is it's own piece, but this does not make the Book of Isaiah an example of 'progressive revelation' (wherein the mode of salvation changes over time); instead it only makes it a book which contains revelations.
Nor is the book of Numbers an example of dispensationalism. God appearing, or angels appearing, successively, is not the definition of either 'progressive revelation' and dispensationalism. For you to conflate them causes me to greatly doubt your knowledge of the meanings of these terms.

In terms of the Qur'an in-and-of-itself, it's mode of salvation also does not change throughout. In terms of Islamic soteriology, the Islamic belief in salvation is (just as the Jewish one), one wherein salvation occurs identical across time and the aforementioned mode of salvation is permanent across time. Between Adam, to the most recent prophet (to Jews it is Malachi, to Muslims it is Muhammad), both Jews and Muslims do not believe that any particular event in history changes the mode of salvation. This, both Jews and Muslims believe, are in contradiction to the nature and concept of salvation itself, of which both Jews and Muslims believe to be fundamentally of an ahistorical nature.
 






Last edited:

Nikōn

Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2021
Messages
573
Yes, I've practiced various things in the past. This doesn't contradict that I have a negative view of Hinduism, Pantheism and related ideas.
Even in your screenshotted post I say "what I said about Hindu metaphysics still very much stands".

And to quote what I had said prior about Hindu metaphysics:

My guess is that they likely believe in the nihilistic monist-monadic-nondual view of God, which is not really "God" at all (at least in any meaningful sense other than being a stand in of "that transcendent ultimate reality"). Their type of ontology and eschatology is generally cyclical and is ultimately lax about both meaning and consequence within manifest existence ('Creation' to us Abrahamics, but for instances what the Dharmics would call 'Samsara').
Despite what they say, their "God" is a dumb, ignorant, sleepy "nothingness" which, when it comes down to it, validates rejection of morality.
 






Nikōn

Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2021
Messages
573
Anywho, so what in ur view is the mode of salvation for Jews and Muslims?
Y
Repentance, loving God and following God's commandments/laws. The Bible repeats this consistently, in Islam the same belief directly applies.
 






Nikōn

Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2021
Messages
573
also how do you come to the conclusion the Bible doesn't teach salvation through Christ atoning death
Because the Torah doesn't teach this whatsoever, nor do any of the Prophets. The belief in vicarious atonement is not Biblical, Moses didn't teach it, Jesus didn't teach it.
At that, it is entirely inferior to the model of salvation already outlined.

Why do you keep trying to tell me what the Bible teaches I already know what it teaches lol.
Then you will have to concede that "Repentance, loving God and following God's commandments/laws." is in every way superior to vicarious atonement (and any variations of it). In fact "Repentance, loving God and following God's commandments/laws." is so superior that it makes the very idea of any kind of vicarious atonement redundant and worthy of ridicule, given how much of a step backwards it is from the salvific model of the ancient Israelite patriarchs.
 






elsbet

Superstar
Joined
Jun 4, 2017
Messages
5,007
I don't understand...
I'm sorry you dont understand my post.

It seems like you stopped reading the bible around Genesis 6... is that correct? It's an important chapter but there's more to it.
Why regret creating humans if you did not like them?
And God repented
or​
regretted
He had made man

I'm paraphrasing there... but a lot of people wonder about this verse. I think it's about TRANSLATION.
There are Hebrew & Greek words that don't translate well into English-- however, Cambridge (study material) says it was anthropothy-- attributing human qualities to God, who is decidedly not human. Perhaps it was...

"... the dread of any expression of... irreverence towards the Almighty, which led to the strange renderings of this verse ... LXX renders “repented” by ἐνεθυμήθη = “considered,” and “grieved” by διενοήθη = “purposed"..."

The Septuagint reads just as it says, above... correctly, I think.

Brenton Septuagint Translation
then God laid it to heart that he had made man upon the earth, and he pondered it deeply.

That makes more sense, imo, because God does not "regret"-- He is omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent... He does not change. He certainly doesn't second guess Himself. -.- Anyway-- Genesis 6 is another conversation, altogether.

Your next thought--

And when the end comes we die and go to heaven and praise God forever and that's it?

Are you concerned it might be a ghetto up there? Or worse--> boring?

... as it is written:

“Eye has not seen,
nor ear heard,
Nor have entered into
the heart of man
The things
which God has prepared
for those who love Him.”

In other words---> unfathomable (but spectacular).
---
 






Joined
Jul 3, 2020
Messages
578
Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
He did, but by that he meant you have to live like he did and follow exactly what he taught, which isn’t easy. He also said that very few will make it.
God also detailed what would happen if we didn’t follow what he commands us to do in Deuteronomy. We’re basically going back into slavery because we didn’t do as we were commanded.


Deuteronomy 31:16 And the LORD said unto Moses, Behold, thou shalt sleep with thy fathers; and this people will rise up, and go a whoring after the gods of the strangers of the land, whither they go to be among them, and will forsake me, and break my covenant which I have made with them.
Deuteronomy 31:17 Then my anger shall be kindled against them in that day, and I will forsake them, and I will hide my face from them, and they shall be devoured, and many evils and troubles shall befall them; so that they will say in that day, Are not these evils come upon us, because our God is not among us?
Deuteronomy 31:18 And I will surely hide my face in that day for all the evils which they shall have wrought, in that they are turned unto other gods.
Deuteronomy 31:19 Now therefore write ye this song for you, and teach it the children of Israel: put it in their mouths, that this song may be a witness for me against the children of Israel.
 






Last edited:
Joined
May 15, 2017
Messages
2,095
Because the Torah doesn't teach this whatsoever, nor do any of the Prophets. The belief in vicarious atonement is not Biblical, Moses didn't teach it, Jesus didn't teach it.
At that, it is entirely inferior to the model of salvation already outlined.



Then you will have to concede that "Repentance, loving God and following God's commandments/laws." is in every way superior to vicarious atonement (and any variations of it). In fact "Repentance, loving God and following God's commandments/laws." is so superior that it makes the very idea of any kind of vicarious atonement redundant and worthy of ridicule, given how much of a step backwards it is from the salvific model of the ancient Israelite patriarchs.
So we should bring back stoning etc? This argument is cyclical and always comes up with Muslims about the law and living under it. It's boring. And in no way biblical you are saying Bible and leaving out the new testament.

Jesus is the golden thread of the Bible when you overlook typology you do the Bible a huge disservice and prophecy and you are now even claiming he didn't teach his atoning death

Don't know how u can think a stagnant dead religion is superior to a fulfilment of prophecy that teaches glorious good news and was what all prophets spoke of and looked forward to. As Jesus said the prophets rejoiced at his day. I've heard these arguments before lol sound very familiar.

Not convincing sorry and I'm so glad it's not true if I thought that that was reality I'd probably despair.
 






voj

Established
Joined
Aug 21, 2021
Messages
174
I'm sorry you dont understand my post.

It seems like you stopped reading the bible around Genesis 6... is that correct? It's an important chapter but there's more to it.

And God repented
or​
regretted
He had made man

I'm paraphrasing there... but a lot of people wonder about this verse. I think it's about TRANSLATION.
There are Hebrew & Greek words that don't translate well into English-- however, Cambridge (study material) says it was anthropothy-- attributing human qualities to God, who is decidedly not human. Perhaps it was...

"... the dread of any expression of... irreverence towards the Almighty, which led to the strange renderings of this verse ... LXX renders “repented” by ἐνεθυμήθη = “considered,” and “grieved” by διενοήθη = “purposed"..."

The Septuagint reads just as it says, above... correctly, I think.

Brenton Septuagint Translation
then God laid it to heart that he had made man upon the earth, and he pondered it deeply.

That makes more sense, imo, because God does not "regret"-- He is omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent... He does not change. He certainly doesn't second guess Himself. -.- Anyway-- Genesis 6 is another conversation, altogether.

Your next thought--

And when the end comes we die and go to heaven and praise God forever and that's it?

Are you concerned it might be a ghetto up there? Or worse--> boring?

... as it is written:

“Eye has not seen,
nor ear heard,
Nor have entered into
the heart of man
The things
which God has prepared
for those who love Him.”

In other words---> unfathomable (but spectacular).
---
Yes! I stopped reading the bible because i was reading it with blocked heads, i began to understand it when i stopped living my life through a lens and please stop complexicating it.

The genesis chapter is plainly written and it is the place you get see who God really is compared to the new testament. Which makes no sense saying God is unchangeable and then you see the changes in new testament and the revelations written in symbols.

The same God gave us instinct and still says our thought is deceitful and still yet he still use that our instinct to spread his words.

Nothing feels right at all, we are all in the void of God and no matter the choices we make it always have consequences be it good or bad.

Think about that.
 






elsbet

Superstar
Joined
Jun 4, 2017
Messages
5,007
The same God gave us instinct and still says our thought is deceitful...
---
Think about that.
Wait...
You said say God gave us deceitful instincts-- but you just read the chapter telling us ALL flesh had been corrupted. Destroyed.
Except for Noah.

Consider that, instead-- it does not make sense.
 






Top