• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

New question for kurious_kathy...

slingblade said:
I'm afraid I have to disagree this time.

Kathy was asked where in the bible it said something, and she showed us.
She can't be criticised for doing as she was asked. Especially as it's so novel. :)

The bible does specifically say God says Christ is his son, at the baptism. {paraphrasing} "Behold my only begotten son, in whom I am well pleased. "

I agree 100% that when we ask Kathy to tell us something about her faith from her own perspective, she is wrong to go to the bible for the answer instead of to her own thoughts. But when you ask her where the bible says something, and she responds with the bible, well, what's the problem?

Not trying to lecture; just sayin'.
Click to expand...

I meant specifically fowlsound's original question. You actually did the answering and I'm not sure if I can give you her prize. (The rules are murky on this.)

But you're right. She did answer a question later on.
 
Still - it's good to see the return of so many CAPITAL LETTERS isn't it?

Now all we're waiting for is the addition of colours - especially red - and the very large letters ;)

YBW
 
LostAngeles said:
I meant specifically fowlsound's original question. You actually did the answering and I'm not sure if I can give you her prize. (The rules are murky on this.)

But you're right. She did answer a question later on.
Click to expand...

Oh, then I misunderstood, and apologize.

I thought this was about Dr. Adequate's question. My bad.

[grovel, grovel]

:)
 
slingblade said:
Oh, then I misunderstood, and apologize.

I thought this was about Dr. Adequate's question. My bad.

[grovel, grovel]

:)
Click to expand...

No, no. I figured that was the case, I just wanted to be get it all straightened out.

[accepts groveling graciously]

:)
 
Has Kathy ever answered a direct question in a clear and unambiguous manner?
 
kurious_kathy said:
I think if you read Hebrews 1 it is pretty clear...
God's Final Word in His Son
God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways,
in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world.
And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power When He had made purification of sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,
having become as much better than the angels, as He has inherited a more excellent name than they.

For to which of the angels did He ever say,
"YOU ARE MY SON,
TODAY I HAVE BEGOTTEN YOU"?
And again,
"I WILL BE A FATHER TO HIM
AND HE SHALL BE A SON TO ME"?
And when He again brings the firstborn into the world, He says,
"AND LET ALL THE ANGELS OF GOD WORSHIP HIM."
And of the angels He says,
"WHO MAKES HIS ANGELS WINDS,
AND HIS MINISTERS A FLAME OF FIRE."
But of the Son He says,
"YOUR THRONE, O GOD, IS FOREVER AND EVER,
AND THE RIGHTEOUS SCEPTER IS THE SCEPTER OF HIS KINGDOM.
"YOU HAVE LOVED RIGHTEOUSNESS AND HATED LAWLESSNESS;
THEREFORE GOD, YOUR GOD, HAS ANOINTED YOU
WITH THE OIL OF GLADNESS ABOVE YOUR COMPANIONS."
And,
"YOU, LORD, IN THE BEGINNING LAID THE FOUNDATION OF THE EARTH,
AND THE HEAVENS ARE THE WORKS OF YOUR HANDS;
THEY WILL PERISH, BUT YOU REMAIN;
AND THEY ALL WILL BECOME OLD LIKE A GARMENT,
AND LIKE A MANTLE YOU WILL ROLL THEM UP;
LIKE A GARMENT THEY WILL ALSO BE CHANGED
BUT YOU ARE THE SAME,
AND YOUR YEARS WILL NOT COME TO AN END."
But to which of the angels has He ever said,
"SIT AT MY RIGHT HAND,
UNTIL I MAKE YOUR ENEMIES
A FOOTSTOOL FOR YOUR FEET"?
Are they not all ministering spirits, sent out to render service for the sake of those who will inherit salvation?
Click to expand...
Kathy, I asked you a simple question.

Where does Jesus say that he is God incarnate and that salvation depends on believing this?

You've replied by quoting from St Paul.

Where does Jesus say that he is God incarnate and that salvation depends on believing this?

That's Jesus. You know, the big J?

Thank you.
 
Dr Adequate said:
Kathy, I asked you a simple question.

Where does Jesus say that he is God incarnate and that salvation depends on believing this?

You've replied by quoting from St Paul.

Where does Jesus say that he is God incarnate and that salvation depends on believing this?

That's Jesus. You know, the big J?

Thank you.
Click to expand...

Yes, this one is a little better but, "incarnate" .... this one is a little tricky, can you think of a shorter, simpler word?
 
Dr Adequate said:
Kathy, I asked you a simple question.

Where does Jesus say that he is God incarnate and that salvation depends on believing this?
Click to expand...

Whether or not he said it, it a bit silly to assume that it wasn't said. Or at bare minimum that it wasn't said about him. During his trial it was clear that the both the Jewish courts and Pilate were familiar to some extent with his claims, the most outrageous (to them) was the claim that he could tear down the temple and rebuild it again in three days. Feel free to check me on this cause I'm just doing a quick drive by this thread, but I think it appears in all three synoptic gospels. That's a very odd claim to appear in a court of law, and if just a story, it's a very odd literary device to be tossing in. Make of it what you want.

In the meantime, the gospels are full of claims to Jesus' divinity, so much so that there quickly rose a branch of Christianity that denied Jesus' humanity and the church had to work very early to establish that Jesus was in fact a human being, and denying his humanity was a thoughtless as denying his divinity.

Regardless of what claims are in the gospels, you've asked specifically for when Jesus says it. I assume you mean all the red letters in your grandma's bible?

The closest you will find Jesus "saying" He is God are in these passages:

John 8:58 / John 10:30 / John 14:8-9 / Revelation 1:8

Personally, I believe the best definition of eternal life in the Bible is John 17:3. Make of it what you will.

Peace,

Flick
 
stamenflicker said:
Whether or not he said it, it a bit silly to assume that it wasn't said. Or at bare minimum that it wasn't said about him. During his trial it was clear that the both the Jewish courts and Pilate were familiar to some extent with his claims, the most outrageous (to them) was the claim that he could tear down the temple and rebuild it again in three days. [/i]
Click to expand...
But this is a point to me. If the gospels record the accusations made against Jesus, and if his accusers reported the most (apparently) blasphemous of his claims, then it is significant that "he clais to be God" does not appear in the indictment. From the point of view of the Pharissees who arraigned Jesus, that would surely have been the ultimate blasphemy. Yet it goes without mention. Nor do the gospellers record that Jesus mentioned this al-important fact to them.

I don't know how far this questionm is relevantto you: I intended the question for KK. It depends on your view of salvation.

Consider: the "mere" Christian view is that Jesus was God and died to atone for the sins of men. However, KK also believes that in order for this atonement to work you have to believe that Jesus was God and died to atone for the sins of men.

Now if this view of salvation is true, then we have to wonder why Jesus had such a lot to say about love and forgiveness and never actually said, or was never recorded as having said: "If you don't believe that I'm God you'll go to Hell".

To summarize: if evangelical Christianity is true, then Jesus never mentioned the most important facts about himself, God, and religion.
 
Dr Adequate said:
But this is a point to me. If the gospels record the accusations made against Jesus, and if his accusers reported the most (apparently) blasphemous of his claims, then it is significant that "he clais to be God" does not appear in the indictment. From the point of view of the Pharissees who arraigned Jesus, that would surely have been the ultimate blasphemy. Yet it goes without mention. Nor do the gospellers record that Jesus mentioned this al-important fact to them.
Click to expand...

Well they tried to kill him when he said he was "I AM." The gospels record several accusations that are spoke of generally. They also state that Pilate was amazed at the numbers of accusations against him that he refused to answer. I suspect the temple issue was the "worst" of these accusations because it was made pubically and there would be enough testimony by others around to verify that he said it. His temple reference is enough to infer that he believed he was a new way to experience God. The power structure of the temple was to be removed and re-established after his resurrection, in a sense this a summary of most of the other claims I imagine.

I would compare the lack of a specific reference to MLK, Jr. not refering to himself specifically as a black man over and over in all his speeches. It kind of goes without saying. There may be a speech out there where he says specifically, "I am black," but even without the specific reference it would make no bearing on his race. That also doesn't change the reality that his biographers would mention that he was black.

I don't know how far this questionm is relevantto you: I intended the question for KK. It depends on your view of salvation.
Click to expand...

I pretty much believe that it is not up to me to decide, I however am sympathetic with the evangelistic view since it is both my tradition and my experience of God.

Consider: the "mere" Christian view is that Jesus was God and died to atone for the sins of men. However, KK also believes that in order for this atonement to work you have to believe that Jesus was God and died to atone for the sins of men.
Click to expand...

Again, I'm in no position to decide what it is or isn't, but I like the John 17:3 passage. I think it's pretty straightforward and one doesn't really have to delve into the kinds of things that either you or KK raise.

Now if this view of salvation is true, then we have to wonder why Jesus had such a lot to say about love and forgiveness and never actually said, or was never recorded as having said: "If you don't believe that I'm God you'll go to Hell".
Click to expand...

His talk in John 3 to Nicodemus is the closest we get. Jesus tended to talk less plainly than I'd like him to, but I'm not him and it's there none the less.

To summarize: if evangelical Christianity is true, then Jesus never mentioned the most important facts about himself, God, and religion.
Click to expand...

I think the claim about his divinity is clear enough, and the claim about salvation is fairly clear, but probably best left to an individual and his or her experience of God.

Flick
 
stamenflicker said:
Again, I'm in no position to decide what it is or isn't, but I like the John 17:3 passage. I think it's pretty straightforward ...
Click to expand...
Yes, it is:

"And this is eternal life, that they may know Thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom Thou hast sent."
Click to expand...
It straightforwardly talks of the only true God and of Jesus Christ. Two people.

The Jehovah's Witnesses use this as a proof text that Jesus was not divine [1] , so it is a bit of a stretch also to cite it as a straightforward statement of his divinity.

If you look further down John 17 [2] , you find Jesus saying to God: "And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are."

If the usual Christological doctrine is correct, then Jesus is asking God to make Christians into members of the Trinity, which seems absurd. But instead he seems to think that the degree of oneness which he has with God can be bestowed as a gift upon others.
 
Last edited:
Dr Adequate said:
The Jehovah's Witnesses use this as a proof text that Jesus was not divine [1] , so it is a bit of a stretch also to cite it as a straightforward statement of his divinity.
Click to expand...

To do this they pretty much have to avoid the above references I cited for you, but to each his own. If in one chapter Jesus claims to be "I AM" and in another he refers to He and God as seperate entities, then either he was lying in the first statement, or he means to maintain a seperate but equal clause in the instances of the latter.

I suppose in the scheme of things I would have to disagree with KK for a variety of reasons, namely her emphasis on the world belief and John 17:3's emphasis on the word "know." There is a passage in James that states, "You say you believe in God, good for you. The devils also believe and tremble." Clearly within the text itself, "salvation" is more than just believing in something. Or at least the authors are probably using belief in different ways.

Anyway, it's a question to her not me. Didn't mean to butt in here and push her out.

Flick
 
stamenflicker said:
To do this they pretty much have to avoid the above references I cited for you, but to each his own. If in one chapter Jesus claims to be "I AM" and in another he refers to He and God as seperate entities, then either he was lying in the first statement, or he means to maintain a seperate but equal clause in the instances of the latter.[/]
Click to expand...
"Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am." This is a remarkable claim, but not of divinity exactly. He is not naming himself "I am", he's just using the words. I must have said "I am" hundreds of times without meaning that I'm God.

As far as Revelation goes, that does nothing to reassure me of the thing that's bothering me --- that even if we take the Bible at face value, the claims for Jesus' divinity and the rest of the (evangelical) doctrine of salvation are more likely to have been made up by early Christians rather than being part of Jesus' original message.

If statements made by Jesus is allowed to include statements reportedly made by visions of Jesus seen while hallucinating, then that's just an open invitation for the nutters to run the asylum.

I suppose in the scheme of things I would have to disagree with KK for a variety of reasons, namely her emphasis on the world belief and John 17:3's emphasis on the word "know." There is a passage in James that states, "You say you believe in God, good for you. The devils also believe and tremble." Clearly within the text itself, "salvation" is more than just believing in something. Or at least the authors are probably using belief in different ways.
Click to expand...
I guess KK et al would argue that this belief is a necessary but not sufficient condition for salvation.
 
Last edited:
Dr A & stamenflicker

Sorry for the slight derail guys, but I'm really impressed by the discussion you two are having, and I look forward to it continuing!

YBW
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom