John 20:28 and the Trinity

[NWL]

Your knowledge of scripture is...well....nearly zero.

logical fallacy in the form of ad hominem. Put me down to bolster you weak argument, you're losing Bowman.

I already provided Titus 2 as proof positive that Jesus is God, that Jesus is our Savior, and that Jesus ransomed us.

Where did Titus 2 come from?

That's right, the OT.

Now, chucky....tell us from where in the OT it came from...

Show me where I asked for proof that Jesus was God and paid the ransom?? I never asked such a question, we both know this so stop playing dumb.

My question, from the beginning, was where does the bible express that Jesus had to "be God" for his ransom to mean something? You have yet to give a proper answer to this point, man up and answer it, if you can't answer it then man up and be humble enough to admit you cant.

Also, the other questions you refuse to answer, (no doubt because you know by answering them you'll incriminate and nullify your own reasoning):

Who were sin offerings offered to under the law in the OT?

Who was the Passover lamb sacrificed to under the law in the OT?

Was Jesus the Passover lamb according to scripture? (1 Cor 5:7)

How was the law a "shadow of the things to come" when speaking about animal sacrifices as detailed in Hebrews 10:1-5?

Confirm you believe YHWH gave his holy spirit to sorcerers and the magic practicing priests who worshiped false gods of Egypt to empower them work against himself and explain why YHWH would do so?

Do God or kingdoms work against themselves according to the principles of Jesus teachings?(Matthew 12:22-26)

A. When is says that Jesus apēlthen/went away does it simply mean that he left the location he was in? Does it have anymore meaning? Answer please.

Matthew 16:4 - "Jesus then left them and apēlthen/went away"

B. Since the Angel apēlthen/went away, does that mean he was bound as you believe Satan was or does it simply mean he left the location, which one is it?

Luke 1:38 - An Angel apēlthen/went away from speaking with Mary

C. Since this apparently proves your point, namely, that when "Satan apēlthen/went away" according to Matthew 13:25 that what it really means is that 'Satan was bound', are you saying that Joseph was bound the same way Satan was bound?

 

[NWL]

I'm not asking if the Demons had permission to occupy flesh as you answered, I'm sure you you're well aware of this. I'm asking if Demons occupied flesh by means of possession or in the same fashion as Jesus, by becoming flesh (John 1:14). Answer the question. Deal with the question.

No.

"No" is not a grammatically correct answer to my question, the question was multiple choice. Once again, it' clear you can't answer it but instead pretend to give an answer for whatever deceitful reason. If you don't agree with either choice then simply explain exactly what it means for demons to "occupy flesh".

If Demons occupied flesh was it by means of possession or in the same fashion as Jesus by becoming flesh (John 1:14). Answer the question, deal with the question.

 

[NWL]

Satan is not spoken as roaring like a lion to begin with.

I already went over the exegetical reasoning as to why this is.

Let's review once again, for your limited intellect...


νηψατε γρηγορησατε ο αντιδικος υμων διαβολος ως λεων ωρυομενος περιπατει ζητων καταπιειν

nēpsate grēgorēsate ho antidikos hymōn diabolos hōs leōn ōryomenos peripatei zētōn tina katapiein

Be sober-minded, watch, the adversary devil of you walks about in the same manner as a roaring lion seeking whom to devour;


This passage does not refer to ‘The Devil’ himself, for several reasons:

• ‘Diabolos’ is anarthrous (i.e. it lacks a preceding Greek definite article). Thus, rather than referring to ‘The Devil’ it refers to ‘A devil’, a demon – of which, the NT often refers to demons as devils.

• ‘Ho antidikos’ (the adversary) is used in only one other NT passage, Mat 5.25, and is in the context of being thrown into prison.

• The key word ‘hōs’ literally means ‘in the same manner as’, and is used to describe demons in Revelation, ‘in the same manner as’ a lion (Rev 9.8).

• This passage does not pertain to 'The Devil"....but 'A devil'...i.e. a demon...

Now what, chap....?

I acknowledged this in the wording of my question Bowman, hence the "Satan/Demons". If these locust having "teeth like lions" is proof that they're demons by your earlier reasoning, then why exclude Jesus and other angels who are also described as lions?

Either your previous example of the locusts having teeth like lions as proof of them being demons or having the authority of Satan is wrong, or you need to explain how other persons (Jesus, Angels) are described as lions, but this magically doesn't make them Demons. Explain the inconsistency. In short does something being described as a lion prove that they are Demon(s)?

In case you forgot you earlier stated in reference to 1 Peter 5:8 "The key word ‘hōs’ literally means ‘in the same manner as’, and is used to describe demons in Revelation, ‘in the same manner as’ a lion (Rev 9.8). This passage does not pertain to 'The Devil"....but 'A devil'...i.e. a demon..."

 

[NWL]

Ever heard of context?

The angel mentioned in Rev 1 is NOT the Messenger described in Rev 20.

There is a break in the Rev 1 narrative, beginning at Rev 1.9, in which Jesus is described, by John, as holding the keys.

Do some research for once.

Chucky.

Sorry my mistake, I accidentally quoted Revelation 1:1-3 instead of Rev 9:1-3. Who is the identity of the Angel in Revelation 9:1-3 who has the key of the Abyss, who opens the shaft of the abyss to let the locusts (demons according to you) out of the abyss after which they receive authority?

Also, if Satan is bound having no authority but only his demons, who gives authority to these locust(apparent Demons)?

(Revelation 9:1-3) "..The fifth angel blew his trumpet. And I saw a star that had fallen from heaven to the earth, and the key to the shaft of the abyss was given to him. 2 He opened the shaft of the abyss, and smoke ascended out of the shaft like the smoke of a great furnace, and the sun was darkened, also the air, by the smoke of the shaft. 3 And locusts came out of the smoke onto the earth, and authority was given to them, the same authority that the scorpions of the earth have.."

 

[NWL]

We can see how you just hate context.

Keep running!

This has nothing to do with context and everything to do with you not providing the verses that show the context. Once again I asked you for the verses which showed something you claimed, you provided Titus 2:14, a single scripture, I then asked you were it showed what you claimed according to the verse YOU provided and then you claimed I ignored the context that was in the preceding verse, well then why didn't YOU provide it!

Deceit is among your all recent post.

Once again, I knew your position prior to you providing the verse, you believe Jesus God and that he was the ransom, the verse according to you shows nothing but that statement of faith, so how does that answer the question I originally asked of where the scriptures express that Jesus needed to be "God" for the ransom to mean something? How does Titus 2:14 answer it?

Deal with the question: If the conquering is regarding the conquering of Satan himself, then why does Jesus say that others will conquer just as he conquered if the conquering(Satan) has already been done?"

Scripture?

If you had answered the question when I originally asked it instead of running from the it you would have known the scripture.

(Revelation 3:21) "..To the one who conquers I will grant to sit down with me on my throne, just as I conquered and sat down with my Father on his throne.."

If the conquering (Rev 12:11) is regarding the binding of Satan himself, then why does Jesus say that others will conquer just as he conquered if the conquering(Satan) has already been done?

 

[Apple7]

This has nothing to do with context and everything to do with you not providing the verses that show the context. Once again I asked you for the verses which showed something you claimed, you provided Titus 2:14, a single scripture, I then asked you were it showed what you claimed according to the verse YOU provided and then you claimed I ignored the context that was in the preceding verse, well then why didn't YOU provide it!

Deceit is among your all recent post.

Titus 2 declares the following:

That Jesus is God

That Jesus is Savior

That Jesus ransomed us

You cannot refute ANY of these claims of Titus 2, nor do you even attempt to.

You can only blame yourself for not considering context, of which, you never do, even now, when you were led like a horse to water.....you still whine about how unfair everything is.

We pity you....Chuck.

 

[Dartman]

THE Devil is "a devil". THE Devil is also called Satan, "the serpent", and "dragon".... (which is seems to be a type of serpent).

'The' Devil is arthrous.

'A' devil is anarthrous.

That doesn't alter the point in any way.

 

[Apple7]

That doesn't alter the point in any way.

Actually, it utterly destroys your so-called 'argument'.

 

[Dartman]

Titus 2 declares the following:

That Jesus is God

Of course not! It mentions the appearance of Jehovah/YHVH God "the great God", and it mentions the appearance of Jesus.

Titus 2:13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; KJV
Titus 2:13 looking for the blessed hope and appearing of the glory of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; ASV
Titus 2:13 while continuing to expect the blessed fulfillment of our certain hope, which is the appearing of the Sh’khinah of our great God and the appearing of our Deliverer, Yeshua the Messiah. CJB

That Jesus is Savior

That Jesus ransomed us

Correct.

 

[Apple7]

Sorry my mistake, I accidentally quoted Revelation 1:1-3 instead of Rev 9:1-3.

Hmmm...is the fact that you don't even know what you are posting my fault as well, chucktard?

:loser:

 

[Apple7]

Of course not! It mentions the appearance of Jehovah/YHVH God "the great God", and it mentions the appearance of Jesus.

Titus 2:13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; KJV
Titus 2:13 looking for the blessed hope and appearing of the glory of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; ASV
Titus 2:13 while continuing to expect the blessed fulfillment of our certain hope, which is the appearing of the Sh’khinah of our great God and the appearing of our Deliverer, Yeshua the Messiah. CJB

TSKS Greek grammar mandates that both God and Savior have the same referent, Jesus Christ.

Study up...

 

[Apple7]

You peeps are making a box of rocks look like a genius...

 

[Dartman]

TSKS Greek grammar mandates that both God and Savior have the same referent, Jesus Christ.

Study up...

they are wrong, repent.

 

[Apple7]

If you had answered the question when I originally asked it instead of running from the it you would have known the scripture.

(Revelation 3:21) "..To the one who conquers I will grant to sit down with me on my throne, just as I conquered and sat down with my Father on his throne.."

If the conquering (Rev 12:11) is regarding the binding of Satan himself, then why does Jesus say that others will conquer just as he conquered if the conquering(Satan) has already been done?

You don't even have a clue as to the definition of the Greek word used in your Trinitarian English translation.

Who knew that you were actually a closet Trinitarian?

Further, you already answered yourself with your Trinitarian selection, which states that we become victorious AFTER Jesus first became victorious.

Further still, all 29 Greek inflections pertain to becoming victorious over evil....again, yet more proof that Jesus bound Satan and became victorious first, for us to follow.

Study up, 'ol chap...

 

[Apple7]

Sorry my mistake, I accidentally quoted Revelation 1:1-3 instead of Rev 9:1-3. Who is the identity of the Angel in Revelation 9:1-3 who has the key of the Abyss, who opens the shaft of the abyss to let the locusts (demons according to you) out of the abyss after which they receive authority?

Also, if Satan is bound having no authority but only his demons, who gives authority to these locust(apparent Demons)?

(Revelation 9:1-3) "..The fifth angel blew his trumpet. And I saw a star that had fallen from heaven to the earth, and the key to the shaft of the abyss was given to him. 2 He opened the shaft of the abyss, and smoke ascended out of the shaft like the smoke of a great furnace, and the sun was darkened, also the air, by the smoke of the shaft. 3 And locusts came out of the smoke onto the earth, and authority was given to them, the same authority that the scorpions of the earth have.."

Eazy-peasy.

Satan.

 

[Apple7]

I acknowledged this in the wording of my question Bowman, hence the "Satan/Demons". If these locust having "teeth like lions" is proof that they're demons by your earlier reasoning, then why exclude Jesus and other angels who are also described as lions?




Either your previous example of the locusts having teeth like lions as proof of them being demons or having the authority of Satan is wrong, or you need to explain how other persons (Jesus, Angels) are described as lions, but this magically doesn't make them Demons. Explain the inconsistency. In short does something being described as a lion prove that they are Demon(s)?

This is your reasoning, not mine.

 

[Apple7]

"No" is not a grammatically correct answer to my question, the question was multiple choice.

What are the 'multiple choices' that you now wish to make up?

 

[Apple7]

logical fallacy in the form of ad hominem. Put me down to bolster you weak argument, you're losing Bowman.

Stating that your knowledge of scripture to be weak, is fact.

Is this where you invoke self pity?

:guitar:

 

[Apple7]

.

My question, from the beginning, was where does the bible express that Jesus had to "be God" for his ransom to mean something? You have yet to give a proper answer to this point, man up and answer it, if you can't answer it then man up and be humble enough to admit you cant.

A man cannot at all ransom a brother, nor give to God a ransom for him, for the ransom of their soul is precious, and it ceases forever, (Psalm 49.7 – 8); but God will ransom my soul from the grave. (Psalm 49.15)

Now what, chap?

Gonna cry?:cigar:

 

[NWL]

Titus 2 declares the following:

That Jesus is God

That Jesus is Savior

That Jesus ransomed us

You cannot refute ANY of these claims of Titus 2, nor do you even attempt to.

You can only blame yourself for not considering context, of which, you never do, even now, when you were led like a horse to water.....you still whine about how unfair everything is.

We pity you....Chuck.

Stop trying to deflect Bowman and try and stay on topic, I've asked you to show where scripture states Jesus needed to be God for the ransom to mean anyhting, you've provided Titus 2, how does it or any other scripture express that Jesus needed to be "God" for the ransom to mean something? How does Titus 2:14 answer it?

Trying to bring in the argument about "how Jesus is God" according to Titus 2 is you attempting to deflect and draw attention away from the fact you can't answer my question. Be man enough to admit it! And deal with my question!

Sorry my mistake, I accidentally quoted Revelation 1:1-3 instead of Rev 9:1-3.

Hmmm...is the fact that you don't even know what you are posting my fault as well chucktard? :loser:

Nice mature Christ like qualities you have there friend. For someone who claims they have an accurate knowledge of scripture you sure do have a way of displaying that knowledge.

(Matthew 7:16) "..By their fruits you will recognize them.."