1. You are seriously arguing that Matthew 27:50 are merely "bodies being raised out of the ground" and not "came to life?" Just what are you imagining happened here? That an earthquake happened and dead bodies were being moved around like puppets on strings?
Did you read my post I alluded to in my last post to you? How can you asked me If I arguing "bodies being raised out of the ground" over them "coming to life" when the verse only mentions them "raising out of the ground" and NOT c"coming to life", it should be simple conclude which of the those two things are correct. Do you think its just a coincidence that an earthquake was mention precisely before the dead were raised out of the tombs? And no, it does not mentioned them walking and talking but simply that the bodies "went into the Holy City, where many people saw them", Jerusalem, if you have ever been or seen pictures is a hilly area, so they could have easily have rolled from the tombs into the city.
Don't you think its also weird that if they were in fact resurrected that all other bible account leave out such a feat as its only mentioned in the book of Matthew.
All that to defend your theory that "Jesus is the first and the last to be raised by God?" I'm seriously doubting your integrity and/or sanity right now.
When you start attacking someones character in a debate your clearly on the loosing side and trying to appeal to the "Ad hominem" argument.
2. Your question is flawed, scripture does not say that "God cannot die." God is omnipotent, which means he can die as many times as he wants. God is immortal and has immortality in himself, meaning that it is not possible that he should be held by death, because he can bring himself back to life. He has life in himself thus he can raise himself. (see Acts 2:24 KJV, John 5:26 KJV, John 2:19 KJV.)
That wasn't a very good question.
Its difficult to know what you're talking about when you don't quote my points you addressing directly. What question are you referring to? Immortality
means not being able to die, God cannot die. The verse you showed (acts 2:24) is in relation to Jesus, Death wasn't
not able to hold Jesus because Jesus was God, but rather, it was because he wasn't deserving of death as he was sinless, only the sinful deserve to die, see Romans 6:23. Since Jesus wasn't deserving of death and had yet died, death could not hold him.
Despite God being all powerful it does not mean he can do literally anything, God cannot lie, he cannot be tempted, he cannot wish himself out of existence (die), he cannot sin, he cannot make an object be in any quantity of minus. If God can die then he is no God.
3. If you don't think Acts 17:31 and John 5:22 make sense then it is likely that the fault lies with your underlying theology, that which you should be willing to subject to scripture, rather than demanding that scripture make way for your theology. Acts 17:31 says that God judges the dead but through means of the Christ, and John 5:22 says that Jesus judges the dead and not the Father. By your construction those two verses would render Jesus as "God" and "the Father" as "not God."
It was your understanding and contradictory answers that I did not agree with, not the verses in question.
Scripture should be used to interpret scripture, scripture does not override or contradict other scripture.
Answer me if you will, the Father as mentioned in John 5:22, the God who Judges the world through the man who was appointed to Judge?
Is God appointing Jesus to judge the world in acts 17:31 and the Father entrusting Jesus to do all the in John 5:22 referring to the same idea of Jesus receiving authority to judge?
4. To clarify, an absurd blasphemer can attempt to apply "I am the first and the last" to a normal person. It's a title claimed by God in most definite and certain terms. Am I that clear now?
5. To clarify, the phrase "I am the first and the last" in scripture is never used with any lesser qualification, such as "I am the first and the last janitor to eat a ham sandwich while cleaning the toilet" or "I am the first and the last person to blaspheme the LORD and live" or anything else like that. It says, "I am the first and the last" and clarifies with "I am the beginning and the end" and "I am the Alpha and Omega." Your argument has reached the level of stupidity and it should be quickly abandoned as a dead end.
More put me down to try and bolster your argument! Good work my
Christian friend!
You say no scripture ever speak of the F&L in any other way other being the "I am the beginning and the end" and "I am the Alpha and Omega", yet you ignore my original argument that Rev 1:17,18 and Rev 2:8 don't! The context nowhere refers to Jesus being God or almighty but rather refer to his death and resurrection, you can keep ignoring this fact, but it won't make it go away.
I'm not suggesting scripture states the following when I ask the following, so please don't use it as an excuse not to answer this time:
Satan is the first adversary of God and he will be the last adversary of God, Can someone say Satan is "the First and the last of God adversaries". Yes or no?
Can Adam be referred to as the "first and the last person whom God made out for dust"(this question relates to this present and not future events of Resurrection)?
6. Your argument that the phrase "first and the last" is not meant in the sense of uniqueness, that one can be declared the "first and the last" and not really be the first and not really be the last is just plain dumb. God doesn't give any such qualifier when he says "I am the first and the last" to mean "I am the first and the last but there's going to be another that will make this passage obsolete."
When you say that someone is "the Last Samurai" you don't mean that they are the MOST RECENT Samurai. When you say that a person was "the Last Jedi" you don't mean that they were the most recent Jedi recruit. When God says "I am the first and the last, and beside which there is no other God" he doesn't mean that he is the MOST RECENT God and that more Gods will follow.
Stop using put me downs to bolster your arguments and just answer the questions, why must it be such a struggle.
Satan is the first adversary of God and he will be the last adversary of God, Can someone say Satan is "the First and the last of God adversaries". Yes or no?
Can Adam be referred to as the "first and the last person whom God made out for dust"(this question relates to this present and not future events of Resurrection)?
7. You SERIOUSLY are playing the Jehovah's Witness Hail Mary desperation play here? The "your bible doesn't use the English word Jehovah in every other passage? If you want to talk about the New World Translation, perhaps you could present one (even one) Greek manuscript that uses the name "Jehovah" in the New Testament, to justify the plethora of "Jehovah" words that are "translated" there. Again, do you seriously want to go there, when considering the warning that God has about adding to his words? "LORD" is a translation in the theme of the tetragrammaton whereas "Jehovah" isn't a translation of the Greek text at all.
Stop trying to deflect, you were plainly wrong when you stated using the phrase the F&L would be
"taking the name of the LORD in vain". Again, using the LORDs's name in vain is using Jehovah's name in vain, NOT using the phrase F&L. You are meant to be Christian and show humility, right now all you're showing is arrogance.
Revelation 19:1, Revelation 19:3, Revelation 19 :4
8. Finally, that the last may be first, your argument that "the first and the last" is an everyday descriptive is just stupid. Even your example of "saviour" fails to make the distinction between descriptive and title. In the context of the salvation of mankind and eternal life, of which there is no greater context, we are told there is one savior. And we are told that is God and Jesus Christ.
Are Ehuh and Othniel both saviors according to scripture, yes or no?
(Judges 3:9) When the Israelites called to Jehovah for help, Jehovah raised up a savior to rescue the Israelites, Othʹni·el the son of Keʹnaz, the younger brother of Caʹleb.
(Judges 3:15) Then the Israelites called to Jehovah for help, so Jehovah raised up for them a savior, Eʹhud the son of Geʹra, a Benʹja·min·ite who was left-handed. In time the Israelites sent tribute through him to Egʹlon the king of Moʹab.
I don't know how to break you out of Jehovah's Witness brainwashing, but it's sad to see the gymnastics engaged in to avoid the plain stated revelation. Is JW status really more important than God and Christ? What they say is more important than what he says? There doesn't seem to be any name or title you won't dismiss, holding your doctrine as more precious. When Jesus says that one must "sell all that they have and follow him" doesn't it seem to you that might also include selfish doctrines and systems?
You have yet to answer a question I keep posing, this is now the 3rd attempt, please answer it.
4. If the F&L is in relation to Jesus being Almighty God as in Rev 1:8 then how is it possible the "first and the last became dead" according to both Rev 1:18 and Rev 2:8 since God cannot die. Please do not say its speaking about his humanity as Jesus is clearly speaking in regards to his divine nature (according to your reasoning of F&L being the same as Rev 1:8 A&O the almighty). How is it possible immortal God died. If you have answered this question, please show me where.
]
