@sonship saidJesus will ask you
@Ghost-of-a-DukeBut these vital truths you are peddling are non-biblical.
Empty bluster.
Not one reference from the New Testament I gave can you declare as "non-biblical".
Sonship how can you call my teachings and commandments works salvation, legalistic and Phraisacial ?
@sonship saidWe have identified at least 5 non-biblical references you have made, some bizarrely manufactured by yourself.
@Ghost-of-a-DukeBut these vital truths you are peddling are non-biblical.
Empty bluster.
Not one reference from the New Testament I gave can you declare as "non-biblical".
Adding to scripture is a slippery slope.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
@Ghost-of-a-Duke
If a Christian came to you not using such terms as "four-in-one" and "God-man" and "reproduction" and "propagation" would you then believe in God and receive Christ as your Lord and Savior ?
@sonship saidI don't know why you use this rhetorical gimmick so often. It's such a blatant dodge, and it's particularly clumsy in light of your recent defensive secrecy over the issue of whether you have the ability to convert anyone.
If a Christian came to you not using such terms as "four-in-one" and "God-man" and "reproduction" and "propagation" would you then believe in God and receive Christ as your Lord and Savior ?
@sonship saidThese debates are all about our shared interest in credibility, truths, and opinions. "Waiting to see which way the crowd goes" has got nothing to do with it. Another rhetorical gimmick from you.
So you don't care about the truth. You're just waiting to see which way the crowd goes?
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
@divegeester saidWhen it comes to the OP my behavior is a red herring issue.
Do you feel that you behaviour and posting in this forum brings you more, or less, credibility?
You have done an incompetent job at the task of showing that such words as
"reproduction, propagation, God-man, God-men, organism of the triune God, four-in-one" are all that outlandish in describing the economy of God.
I think you all have failed to show such concepts are not in the Bible.
So instead you all have opted for playing the inefficient evangelist card and the bad behavior card as red herrings.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
"Reproduction" has been dealt with. Such a concept of the Son of God being of sorts reproduced is a major, major theme of the Bible.
"Expansion" is not that outlandish a phrase to speak of either.
John the Baptist told of the people being added to the discipleship of Jesus as His bride as the ENCREASE of Jesus.
"He who has the bride is he bridegroom; but the friend of the bridegroom, who stands and hears him, rejoices with joy because of the bridegroom's voice. Thisjoy of mine therefore is made full.
He must increase, but I most decrease." (John 3:29,30)
John the Baptist was not jealous the he was losing followers of himself who were going to Jesus. This was John the Baptist decreasing and Jesus increasing.
And when Jesus gets INTO them via Him becoming the indwelling "life giving Spirit" they are His expansion as to be the Body of Christ.
"Now you are the Body of Christ, and members individually" (1 Cor. 12:27)
Christ's expansion if you will.
"For even as the body is one and has many members, yet all the members of the body, being many, are one body, so also is the Christ." (1 Cor. 12:12)
Christ's expansion if you will. "So also is THE Christ"
God's eternal purpose is to reproduce the prototype of Christ in a mass reproduction.
God's eternal purpose is to indwell the saved making them a Body for Christ - making them the corporate Christ as His expansion.
@sonship saidQuite the opposite is true. It is has been clearly argued why those concepts are non-biblical and why you should abandon them immediately.
I think you all have failed to show such concepts are not in the Bible.
So instead you all have opted for playing the inefficient evangelist card and the bad behavior card as red herrings.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
@ghost-of-a-duke saidI disagree.
Quite the opposite is true. It is has been clearly argued why those concepts are non-biblical and why you should abandon them immediately.
In fact I went back to show you a Christian wrote similarly in the 4th century.
I could probably go back further.
We do not insist Christians use "propagation" or "expansion" or "organism of the triune God". But neither have we any reason to recoil from their use ourselves.
And certainly not because some atheist finds the more traditionally worded old-time-religion a better target for his disbelief.
@sonship saidI'm targeting the non-biblical concepts you are flogging here.
I disagree.
In fact I went back to show you a Christian wrote similarly in the 4th century.
I could probably go back further.
We do not insist Christians use "propagation" or "expansion" or "organism of the triune God". But neither have we any reason to recoil from their use ourselves.
And certainly not because some atheist finds the more traditionally worded old-time-religion a better target for his disbelief.