Where did life begin? (Merged)

[LouderVol]

Does Jesus have a G-d?


John 20:17
Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.

Clearly this is alliteration (can't think of a better word for redundancy to make a point). Jesus was constantly teaching us to see God as a father figure. does not mean there were two separate figures/entities. unless you are arguing he is ascending to two different "people", which is a big leap.

 

[LouderVol]

LV You should watch that video that I just posted. Its very interesting.

I am generally only ever on VN at work (computer programs take forever to save). can't/won't do videos here.

also the title is a bit confusing to me and doesn't interest me.

 

[LouderVol]

Of all my pagans you’re my favorite.

I bet you say that to all the pretty girls

 

[Orangeslice13]

Clearly this is alliteration (can't think of a better word for redundancy to make a point). Jesus was constantly teaching us to see God as a father figure. does not mean there were two separate figures/entities. unless you are arguing he is ascending to two different "people", which is a big leap.

My point isn’t his use of two separate terms for G-d but rather He is here and G-d is there. Jesus/Yeshua says he’s not yet assented to G-d. Imo making them 2 separate beings. One Begotten from the other

 

[Orangeslice13]

I bet you say that to all the pretty girls

Red likes you.
That’s good enough for me.
She’s the better judge of character

 

[UT-Rex]

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigO95 View Post
Saturday night which belongs to the following day or perhaps early Sunday morning. In Corinthians they met on the first day of the week. Also, I believe that every day is a good day for church! I am not at all against meeting on Saturday.

Some have argued that the first day reference in 1 cor 16 is about payday at the time and not about church meetings. I am currently without opinion on this vs. just giving the opposing view point.

In acts 20.
And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight.

You’ve already stipulated that the evening starts the day so if they got together on the first day to break bread and Paul taught till midnight would that be Saturday night as there’s only one midnight per day?


Again not questioning when anyone churches. Learning about G-d is always good regardless of the day. Just trying to understand the “lords day” thinking.

Re: And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread (as quoted above).

It appears, according to what you just wrote ("And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread,"), that you've confirmed that this group met on the 1st day of the week, not on the 7th day (Jewish sabbath day).

What are we suppose to be in question about?

On the 6th day of the week, the Hebrews were to gather enough bread for 2 days (enough for both the 6th, and 7th days) --

Ex 16:26, "Six days ye shall gather it; but on the seventh day, which is the sabbath, in it there shall be none" (KJV),

Ex 16:23, "And he said unto them, This is that which the LORD hath said, To morrow is the rest of the holy sabbath unto the LORD: bake that which ye will bake to day, and seethe that ye will seethe; and that which remaineth over lay up for you to be kept until the morning" (KVJ),

and yet, some still didn't prepare on the 6th day, and went out on the 7th day in attempts to find bread

Ex 16:27-29, "And it came to pass, that there went out some of the people on the seventh day for to gather, and they found none. And the LORD said unto Moses, How long refuse ye to keep my commandments and my laws? See, for that the LORD hath given you the sabbath, therefore he giveth you on the sixth day the bread of two days; abide ye every man in his place, let no man go out of his place on the seventh day."

Question for introspection: How is a Christian (Gentile of non-Jewish descent, or one of Jewish descent) supposed to go outside, and gather/pick-up "manna" from the ground, as was instructed to be done by the Hebrew on the day of sabbath of Ex 16:26?

Jesus, in the New Testament, is "the bread of life."

Col 2:16-17 -- "Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ" >>

Gal 3:24, "Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith" >>

Col 2:14, "Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross."

 

[BigO95]

I am generally only ever on VN at work (computer programs take forever to save). can't/won't do videos here.

also the title is a bit confusing to me and doesn't interest me.

He is an ex-catholic teaching Baptist history. It involves a lot of Catholic and Protestant history as well. You can pull it up on YouTube easy. I highly recommend watching the entire video.
Thank you for your honesty LV. I know that we don't see eye-to-eye on things but I do genuinely care about you and do actually pray for you.

 

[LouderVol]

My point isn’t his use of two separate terms for G-d but rather He is here and G-d is there. Jesus/Yeshua says he’s not yet assented to G-d. Imo making them 2 separate beings. One Begotten from the other

Dear Lord, we will make a Catholic of you yet.

 

[LouderVol]

He is an ex-catholic teaching Baptist history. It involves a lot of Catholic and Protestant history as well. You can pull it up on YouTube easy. I highly recommend watching the entire video.
Thank you for your honesty LV. I know that we don't see eye-to-eye on things but I do genuinely care about you and do actually pray for you.

frankly when it comes to an established religion I find most talks to be incredibly boring, and often very hard to substantiate. and this even includes the Catholic church. and as it becomes a pseudo history it starts to bother me.

*haven't watched the video just giving some background*

 

[LouderVol]

Red likes you.
That’s good enough for me.
She’s the better judge of character

does Red have your login?

 

[Orangeslice13]

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigO95 View Post
Saturday night which belongs to the following day or perhaps early Sunday morning. In Corinthians they met on the first day of the week. Also, I believe that every day is a good day for church! I am not at all against meeting on Saturday.



Re: And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread (as quoted above).

It appears, according to what you just wrote ("And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread,"), that you've confirmed that this group met on the 1st day of the week, not on the 7th day (Jewish sabbath day).

What are we suppose to be in question about?

On the 6th day of the week, the Hebrews were to gather enough bread for 2 days (enough for both the 6th, and 7th days) --

Ex 16:26, "Six days ye shall gather it; but on the seventh day, which is the sabbath, in it there shall be none" (KJV),

Ex 16:23, "And he said unto them, This is that which the LORD hath said, To morrow is the rest of the holy sabbath unto the LORD: bake that which ye will bake to day, and seethe that ye will seethe; and that which remaineth over lay up for you to be kept until the morning" (KVJ),

and yet, some still didn't prepare on the 6th day, and went out on the 7th day in attempts to find bread

Ex 16:27-29, "And it came to pass, that there went out some of the people on the seventh day for to gather, and they found none. And the LORD said unto Moses, How long refuse ye to keep my commandments and my laws? See, for that the LORD hath given you the sabbath, therefore he giveth you on the sixth day the bread of two days; abide ye every man in his place, let no man go out of his place on the seventh day."

Question for introspection: How is a Christian (Gentile of non-Jewish descent, or one of Jewish descent) supposed to go outside, and gather/pick-up "manna" from the ground, as was instructed to be done by the Hebrew on the day of sabbath of Ex 16:26?

Jesus, in the New Testament, is "the bread of life."

Col 2:16-17 -- "Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ" >>

Gal 3:24, "Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith" >>

Col 2:14, "Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross."

Rex
That verse has more to do with Paul traveling on Sunday morning than anything else and doesn’t speak as to what Paul was doing earlier in the day Saturday. My bet is keeping sabbath.

Our conversation is now about the terminology of “lords day” not when do you go to church.

Try to keep up. Things are moving quickly around here
Besides You’ve got questions to answer before we move on.

 

[Orangeslice13]

Dear Lord, we will make a Catholic of you yet.

Haven’t you been paying attention
That’s why all the baptist are now praying for me to die

 

[UT-Rex]

Quote:
Originally Posted by LouderVol View Post
Clearly this is alliteration (can't think of a better word for redundancy to make a point). Jesus was constantly teaching us to see God as a father figure. does not mean there were two separate figures/entities. unless you are arguing he is ascending to two different "people", which is a big leap.

My point isn’t his use of two separate terms for G-d but rather He is here and G-d is there. Jesus/Yeshua says he’s not yet assented to G-d. Imo making them 2 separate beings. One Begotten from the other

LV, you say "Jesus was constantly teaching us to see God as a father figure" (my emphasis/bold-type, on "father figure")-- essentially, you're saying we can find evidence of this, all throughout the New Testament / 4-books of the gospels (i.e. "constantly teaching").

Yes, Jesus regularly (to equate to how you describe it as "was constantly") taught in parables, but, for example, when he spoke in parable of a "landowner" he was speaking of "a landowner" (not a landowner "figure" of).

Likewise, when Jesus spoke of God (and he regularly spoke of God), he spoke of God not as a "father figure" but as "My Father" / "your Father."

What I'm suggesting is: Jesus spoke to / taught about his Father (not a "father figure"). A football coach can be a "father figure" but not the father of a player.

If someone will (so I / any other can understand the thinking behind it),

send us at least 1 example / 1 passage (of the many described as Jesus was "constantly teaching") where Jesus directly addresses God (e.g. in prayer) or speaks about God for us to see God as "a father figure."

 

[Orangeslice13]

Rex.

Is your quote button broken?

 

[LouderVol]

Quote:
Originally Posted by LouderVol View Post
Clearly this is alliteration (can't think of a better word for redundancy to make a point). Jesus was constantly teaching us to see God as a father figure. does not mean there were two separate figures/entities. unless you are arguing he is ascending to two different "people", which is a big leap.



LV, you say "Jesus was constantly teaching us to see God as a father figure" (my emphasis/bold-type, on "father figure")-- essentially, you're saying we can find evidence of this, all throughout the New Testament / 4-books of the gospels (i.e. "constantly teaching").

Yes, Jesus regularly (to equate to how you describe it as "was constantly") taught in parables, but, for example, when he spoke in parable of a "landowner" he was speaking of "a landowner" (not a landowner "figure" of).

Likewise, when Jesus spoke of God (and he regularly spoke of God), he spoke of God not as a "father figure" but as "My Father" / "your Father."

What I'm suggesting is: Jesus spoke to / taught about his Father (not a "father figure"). A football coach can be a "father figure" but not the father of a player.

If someone will (so I / any other can understand the thinking behind it),

send us at least 1 example / 1 passage (of the many described as Jesus was "constantly teaching") where Jesus directly addresses God (e.g. in prayer) or speaks about God for us to see God as "a father figure."

Are you just hung up on the "father FIGURE" part or the whole construct of God as a father to us?

 

[UT-Rex]

Rex
That verse has more to do with Paul traveling on Sunday morning than anything else and doesn’t speak as to what Paul was doing earlier in the day Saturday. My bet is keeping sabbath.

Our conversation is now about the terminology of “lords day” not when do you go to church.

Try to keep up. Things are moving quickly around here
Besides You’ve got questions to answer before we move on.

I'll try to answer:

again, "And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread" so

as their days, and first days of the week, did not end at midnite (as do ours), and as that first day began about 6 hours prior to midnite, Paul preached on, until midnite; they broke bread after midnite, which is still within the time of that first day of the week; Paul spoke again, "until daybreak" and then departed (i.e. he departed on the 2nd day of the week / just after sunrise / just moments after the ending of the first day).

Acts 20:7-11

 

[UT-Rex]

Rex.

Is your quote button broken?

I think it's working. What indication is there that it's not?

 

[Orange_Crush]

I think it's working. What indication is there that it's not?

You have broken quotes.

 

[UT-Rex]

Rex
That verse has more to do with Paul traveling on Sunday morning than anything else and doesn’t speak as to what Paul was doing earlier in the day Saturday. My bet is keeping sabbath.

Our conversation is now about the terminology of “lords day” not when do you go to church.

Try to keep up. Things are moving quickly around here
Besides You’ve got questions to answer before we move on.

Ahh, I missed this part (I was addressing another question, which you had posed to BigO95).

So, as to this scenario, "as to what Paul was doing earlier in the day Saturday" let me say --

Paul was doing / he was attending / visiting / going around to the synagogues, in order to teach the Gospel of Christ.

See Acts 17:1-3.

"As was his custom, Paul went into the synagogue" -- this "custom" was to teach Christ and "reason" with the Jews, where the Jews were congregating, but not to further the cause of Judaism and the laws of OT.

This was his reasoning: "explaining and proving that the Messiah had to suffer and rise from the dead. "This Jesus I am proclaiming to you is the Messiah."

If it's to be understood that Paul was in the synagogues as a way to STILL further Judaism / as still practicing all facets of Judaism, and,

if it is true that Paul was preaching this regularly in the synagogues as the new way for Judaism (this, i.e. "explaining and proving that the Messiah had to suffer and rise from the dead. This Jesus I am proclaiming to you is the Messiah"), then

one should wonder, as to why Judaism, today, does not accept Jesus as Messiah (and, if that message of Paul is allowed in synagogues today, regularly).

I'm trying to keep up, so just bear with me.

 

[UT-Rex]

Quote:
Originally Posted by UT-Rex View Post
I think it's working. What indication is there that it's not?

You have broken quotes.

This one looks good (if I had a broken one, maybe something happened / sorry).

 

[LouderVol]

Quote:
Originally Posted by UT-Rex View Post
I think it's working. What indication is there that it's not?




This one looks good (if I had a broken one, maybe something happened / sorry).

this is what I am seeing. seems to be the multiquote is the issue. imo.

 

[BigO95]

Haven’t you been paying attention
That’s why all the baptist are now praying for me to die

Now Slice, I haven't started praying that yet.

 

[Orangeslice13]

Ahh, I missed this part (I was addressing another question, which you had posed to BigO95).

So, as to this scenario, "as to what Paul was doing earlier in the day Saturday" let me say --

Paul was doing / he was attending / visiting / going around to the synagogues, in order to teach the Gospel of Christ.

See Acts 17:1-3.

"As was his custom, Paul went into the synagogue" -- this "custom" was to teach Christ and "reason" with the Jews, where the Jews were congregating, but not to further the cause of Judaism and the laws of OT.

This was his reasoning: "explaining and proving that the Messiah had to suffer and rise from the dead. "This Jesus I am proclaiming to you is the Messiah."

If it's to be understood that Paul was in the synagogues as a way to STILL further Judaism / as still practicing all facets of Judaism, and,

if it is true that Paul was preaching this regularly in the synagogues as the new way for Judaism (this, i.e. "explaining and proving that the Messiah had to suffer and rise from the dead. This Jesus I am proclaiming to you is the Messiah"), then

one should wonder, as to why Judaism, today, does not accept Jesus as Messiah (and, if that message of Paul is allowed in synagogues today, regularly).

I'm trying to keep up, so just bear with me.

Thanks for taking that as the joke it was intended to be.
There have always been Jewish believers in Messiah. (There’s always a remnant) I hesitate to call them Jewish Christians because the term Christian by almost everyone is the baptist/Catholic/40k denominations we have today. As to why the current majority of Jews practice Judaism as opposed to being Messianic/Christian basically I’d go with what scripture says.


In Romans 11

25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.

26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:

 

[Orangeslice13]

Quote:
Originally Posted by UT-Rex View Post
I think it's working. What indication is there that it's not?




This one looks good (if I had a broken one, maybe something happened / sorry).

So you’re doing that on purpose to help understand what you’re quoting and why?


Looks like I need to keep up too

 

[UT-Rex]

Quote:
Originally Posted by UT-Rex View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by UT-Rex View Post
I think it's working. What indication is there that it's not?

This one looks good (if I had a broken one, maybe something happened / sorry).

this is what I am seeing. seems to be the multiquote is the issue. imo.

At times, I'm just manually copying/pasting prior comments (and the source/poster name) into new quotes (when using the Quote button).