Originally Posted by Walks_in_islam (Post 1313869)

Seems your needle just jumps all over your record doesn't it. Thought you left. Welcome back

Originally Posted by Walks_in_islam (Post 1313868)

We were discussing Isaiah. It was claimed to be "fulfilled"

Here is what it says: "Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever"

I asked - where is the kingdom, peace, and government?

I answered - it is in the future. Summary: These passages are not fulfilled and no possible combination of completely unrelated passages will ever convince even the most unlearned that they are

Originally Posted by mfblume (Post 1313871)

Can you deal with that passage instead of insult?

Originally Posted by Pressing-On (Post 1313879)

Hebrews 1:1 says that God who at "sundry times", meaning in allotments or in sections spoke to us. IOW, He revealed Himself and things pertaining to our relationship with Him in a "piecemeal" fashion.

My post still stands in reference to His Spirit/Comforter/HolyGhost, as He is speaking of the Kingdom of God being "in us". Luke 17 states that the Kingdom comes without observation and that it lies within us.



The kingdom, peace and government lies within those who have obeyed the gospel. Nothing outside of Jesus Christ will bring us lasting peace.

Originally Posted by Walks_in_islam (Post 1313903)

We both know this is a future rule.

What is the Gospel? What did Jesus say about the Kingdom of God?

Do share. Jesus will judge, we both believe this. What did He say he will consider when those He judges stand in front of him? Some of it is in Matthew 25. There is a lot more. Line it up, text by text, then tell me is what is said here by Jesus the same gospel that is taught in your pulpits?

THEN look in a mirror and ask yourself - do I obey?

Originally Posted by Walks_in_islam (Post 1313900)

That wasn't an insult.

Can you deal with the 50 or so that I referenced? No? Well, I'm not leaving over it. Guess we are back to word by word.

Originally Posted by Walks_in_islam (Post 1313900)

That wasn't an insult.

Originally Posted by WII

Seems your needle just jumps all over your record doesn't it.

Originally Posted by mfblume (Post 1313915)

I proposed my argument for the question after which this thread is entitled. You responded and never once dealt with my proposition.

THE ALPHA AND OMEGA IS THE ALMIGHTY and also THE ONE WHO DIED AND IS ALIVE.

Deal with it. You can't. I'll hold your feet to the fire over this one. It is MY argument for the point of this thread. And you cannot respond to it, but tell me to respond to your issues. It;s like asking someone what sports game they favour, and then when someone tells you, you respond and talk about everything except what they provided for their answer. But somehow you are convincing yourself you avoided nothing.

Originally Posted by jfrog (Post 1313918)

Ummmm, he did deal with that. He quoted

Revelation 22:13 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.

Was that Jesus speaking or the angel? If Jesus then Revelation 22:9-16 appears to be Jesus speaking and saying don't worship me. If it was the angel speaking then the angel by your reasoning must be both God and Jesus as well since the angel is also the Alpha and Omega.

So your kinda backed into a corner on this one with no escape. If I was you I'd let the Alpha and Omega thing go because there's nothing good than can come of that for you.

Originally Posted by mfblume (Post 1313919)

That is not dealing with the issue! What is it with you guys? lol

Now you are avoiding it.

I already said that Revelation 22 has a verse proving that the angel was not Jesus, but was quoting Jesus. We read that JESUS SENT HIS ANGEL.

Revelation 22:16 KJV I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.

Now, why would the ALPHA AND OMEGA say he is the ALMIGHTY? And then say He was dead and is alive?

Do you not believe the ALMIGHTY IS GOD?

Originally Posted by Praxeas (Post 1313925)

Rev 22:6 And he said to me, "These words are trustworthy and true. And the Lord, the God of the spirits of the prophets, has sent his angel to show his servants what must soon take place."

Rev 22:16 "I, Jesus, have sent my angel to testify to you about these things for the churches. I am the root and the descendant of David, the bright morning star."

Originally Posted by mfblume (Post 1313920)

One simple point refutes all the arguments saying Jesus is not God. Jesus is ALPHA AND OMEGA who died and is alive. And the ALPHA AND OMEGA IS THE ALMIGHTY!

How can you guys be that dishonest to think you are cornering me and yet neither of you can deal with that single point? ...THE ONE POINT I made in answer to this whole issue.

One Islamic dude said I cannot use this reference in Revelation because Revelation is not part of the New Testament. lol. I told him he needs to be edumacated a bit. He knew the first chapter of Revelation showed Jesus as God. At least -- and that's a stretch -- he responded to my point.

Originally Posted by Praxeas (Post 1313925)

Rev 22:6 And he said to me, "These words are trustworthy and true. And the Lord, the God of the spirits of the prophets, has sent his angel to show his servants what must soon take place."

Rev 22:16 "I, Jesus, have sent my angel to testify to you about these things for the churches. I am the root and the descendant of David, the bright morning star."

Originally Posted by Pressing-On (Post 1313914)

Matthew 25 is speaking about our expectant and vigilant attitude toward faith. That is reiterated in Hebrews 9:28 - "So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation."

Matthew 25 doesn't take away the fact that the "kingdom" of God is within us via the Holy Spirit, and that someday when we lay aside this tabernacle (2 Pet 1:14) we will reign with him in eternity.

Originally Posted by mfblume (Post 1313916)

It sure was:

Ministers live of the gospel, sir. It's bible.

Originally Posted by mfblume (Post 1313915)

I proposed my argument for the question after which this thread is entitled. You responded and never once dealt with my proposition.

THE ALPHA AND OMEGA IS THE ALMIGHTY and also THE ONE WHO DIED AND IS ALIVE.

Deal with it. You can't. I'll hold your feet to the fire over this one. It is MY argument for the point of this thread. And you cannot respond to it, but tell me to respond to your issues. It;s like asking someone what sports game they favour, and then when someone tells you, you respond and talk about everything except what they provided for their answer. But somehow you are convincing yourself you avoided nothing.

Originally Posted by jfrog (Post 1313921)

Stop acting like we are not dealing with that passage.

Originally Posted by mfblume (Post 1313945)

Sorry. You aren't.

You have not explained why the Alpha and Omega is both the one who died and is alive (Jesus), and the Almighty. You just dodge the issue and go to Rev 22. I addressed Rev 22, which you claim I did not.

You, on the other hand, applied the principle of me saying Jesus is both the Almighty and the one who died and rose again to the Rev 22 chapter, which I debunked. But you did not explain why He is both Almighty and the resurrected one. Please do so! The focus of my point is THE ALMIGHTY reference.



You dealt with with general thought but never gave one explanation as to why Jesus would be called Almighty.

Only GOD is Almighty. Jesus is not AN Almighty. But THE Almighty. There are not a multitude of Almighties. Just one.



Sure does!

Walks in Islam said that the ANGEL in Rev 1:1 was JESUS, Hiimself. I disagreed. And He insisted, and cited Rev 22 as evidence, like you have done. But if the angel is Jesus, then it wreaks havoc on what Rev 22:16 says about Jesus SENDING HIS ANGEL. The only way Jesus could say He sent His angel was for the Angel in Rev 1:1 to not be Jesus but THIS DISTINCT being called the angel whom he sent in Rev 22.

Rev 22:16 demands that the angel in Rev 1:1 NOT BE JESUS.



The only way you could come to that conclusion is to WANT TO DISBELIEVE THAT JESUS IS GOD.



Wrong. You WANT a way out for some odd reason, likely due to pride of not being wrong. ;)

There is a good solid reason why Jesus is not the angel in Rev 22. A solid piece of evidence that disallows it. Verse 16!!! There is nothing like that in chapter 1.

And notice how I debunked Rev 22 issue, and you see it! So you STILL jump back to Rev 1 and find some grain of a loophole. It's my own argument of Rev 22! You really do not want to believe Jesus is God, do you? Even at the cost of seeing your argument of Rev 22 debunked.

Originally Posted by Walks_in_islam (Post 1313777)

I am busy. We are returning to Saudi shortly however I will answer your post.

The famous passage: John 10:30.

What does ONE (Greek word HEN) mean?

John 11

52 and not for the nation only, but that also the children of God, who have been scattered abroad, he may gather together into one. If this word word (HEN - ONE) means what you say it means then that means that somehow the people of God are all the same individual. It does not.

John 17: (Interestingly enough, Jesus who you say is proven to be God in the book of John, is praying to God in John 17 but not a one of you have ever explained this or brought this up)

11 and no more am I in the world, and these are in the world, and I come unto Thee. Holy Father, keep them in Thy name, whom Thou hast given to me, that they may be one as we

Same word - HEN - ONE - does NOT mean that each disciple is the same as the other disciple. It is used to show sameness in purpose/beliefs/feelings/goals (which I believe we all agree that Jesus was same in purpose with God)

Again in John 17 - here Jesus himself explains what (HEN - ONE) means which is much closer to what I believe it means than what you believe it means:

21 that they all may be one, as Thou Father [art] in me, and I in Thee; that they also in us may be one, that the world may believe that Thou didst send me. ONE in US? The disciples were gods also? By your logic they are (speaking of peril yah? but by mine they are not)

22 `And I, the glory that thou hast given to me, have given to them, that they may be one as we are one;

23 I in them, and Thou in me, that they may be perfected into one, and that the world may know that Thou didst send me, and didst love them as Thou didst love me.

Summary:

"I and my father are one" does not mean that they are the same entity. It means that they are two different distinct entities with completely common goals and purposes - this does not make Jesus God any more than becoming ONE makes the disciples Peter the same as the Disciple John.

Another example: 1 Cor 6:16

16 have ye not known that he who is joined to the harlot is one body? `for they shall be -- saith He -- the two for one flesh.'

17 And he who is joined to the Lord is one spirit;

Being joined as ONE to your wife which is the reference here does not make you a wife any more than being joined as ONE to God makes you a god.

With that said I believe I saw you post He will judge all men

Not what your book says. Book says many will judge. I will let you find the passages because I think you (not just you, all of you) need to study it more.

Jesus said to them, "Truly I tell you, at the renewal of all things, when the Son of Man sits on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel."

And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given to them, and the souls of those who have been beheaded because of the testimony of Jesus, and because of the word of God, and who did not bow before the beast, nor his image, and did not receive the mark upon their forehead and upon their hand, and they did live and reign with Christ the thousand years

Or do you not know that the Lord's people will judge the world? And if you are to judge the world, are you not competent to judge trivial cases?

Originally Posted by Pressing-On (Post 1313961)

From a previous discussion on the definition of "Hen":

While it is true that the neuter hen generally means "one" in the sense of unity, as I would imagine you know, there are numerous places in the NT where it can also means "one" in person.

Romans 12:5 So we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another.

The above verse will perhaps help illustrate what I am saying. Here is the exact parsing of the verse:

http://interlinearbible.org/romans/12-5.htm

As you will see, the first "one," as in "one body" is the neuter sing. "hen," while the second "one," as in "individually members 'ONE' of another" is the masc. sing. heis. And, it even contains the same plural verb (ἐσμεν/esmen) as in Jn. 10.30.

The "one" that appears in the independent clause could be taken to mean "one person" inasmuch as "one body" is never more "one person." Conversely, it could also be interpreted to mean "one in unity" due to "many members" clearly are not "one person." Here is where context will enter the picture to be the final judge.

However, the "one" that appears in the dependent clause is clearly talking about "one 'individual' person" (talk about demolishing the "multiple-divine-persons," or "Trinity".....the Masc. Sing. does it!).


Personally, due to context, I think Jesus intended one-person in Jn. 10.30 based upon the response of those standing on the spot. "You being a man are MAKING YOURSELF GOD."

There was something in the force of His usage of "one" which caused them understand His assertion as a statement of identity as not just "in unity" with the Father....But in reality "making yourself God."

28 I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand. 30 I and the Father are one.”


He seems to be telling them, "I and the Father have the same Hand....We are 'ONE'." This is what incited the Jews extreme anger, whereas, IMO, a statement of "unity" would not have elicited their precise wording (esp. since the pious Pharisee's-Chief Priests made the same assertion all the time).

http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...&postcount=225

Originally Posted by mfblume (Post 1313945)

Sorry. You aren't.

You have not explained why the Alpha and Omega is both the one who died and is alive (Jesus), and the Almighty. You just dodge the issue and go to Rev 22. I addressed Rev 22, which you claim I did not.

You, on the other hand, applied the principle of me saying Jesus is both the Almighty and the one who died and rose again to the Rev 22 chapter, which I debunked. But you did not explain why He is both Almighty and the resurrected one. Please do so! The focus of my point is THE ALMIGHTY reference.



You dealt with with general thought but never gave one explanation as to why Jesus would be called Almighty.

Only GOD is Almighty. Jesus is not AN Almighty. But THE Almighty. There are not a multitude of Almighties. Just one.



Sure does!

Walks in Islam said that the ANGEL in Rev 1:1 was JESUS, Hiimself. I disagreed. And He insisted, and cited Rev 22 as evidence, like you have done. But if the angel is Jesus, then it wreaks havoc on what Rev 22:16 says about Jesus SENDING HIS ANGEL. The only way Jesus could say He sent His angel was for the Angel in Rev 1:1 to not be Jesus but THIS DISTINCT being called the angel whom he sent in Rev 22.

Rev 22:16 demands that the angel in Rev 1:1 NOT BE JESUS.



The only way you could come to that conclusion is to WANT TO DISBELIEVE THAT JESUS IS GOD.



Wrong. You WANT a way out for some odd reason, likely due to pride of not being wrong. ;)

There is a good solid reason why Jesus is not the angel in Rev 22. A solid piece of evidence that disallows it. Verse 16!!! There is nothing like that in chapter 1.

And notice how I debunked Rev 22 issue, and you see it! So you STILL jump back to Rev 1 and find some grain of a loophole. It's my own argument of Rev 22! You really do not want to believe Jesus is God, do you? Even at the cost of seeing your argument of Rev 22 debunked.

Originally Posted by Walks_in_islam (Post 1313969)

Thank you for your polite response. I also believe that what Jesus did and what Jesus said was directly inspired by and given by God and certainly Jesus Himself declared the same. I am wondering that if this statement means he WAS God why He used the same terminology (HEN) in John 17 - while adding what appears to be a direct comparison to His oneness with God to the Oneness of the disciples to God and to one another (while praying to God, I am also wondering why nobody picks that up and explains why if Jesus is God - who does Jesus pray to while making this very direct comparison)

IF: Jesus was God and HEN means this and Jesus asked that the disciples be made HEN as he was HEN how can that be possible? To be of one purpose, goal, mindset, is possible, but for the disciples to actually take the place of God is not. May I know why one statement using this term would mean one thing and another statement using the same term would mean something completely different?

Originally Posted by Sean (Post 1314017)

JFROG...just read vs 12- 13, it will explain who the Alpha and Omega is of vs 8 and vs 11...

Revelation 1:12-13
King James Version (KJV)

12 And I turned to see the "voice" that "spake" with me. And being turned, I saw seven golden candlesticks;

13 And in the midst of the seven candlesticks one like unto the "Son of man", clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle.

The more you read of this passage, the more you will see who it is.

Originally Posted by Pressing-On (Post 1313961)

...
Personally, due to context, I think Jesus intended one-person in Jn. 10.30 based upon the response of those standing on the spot. "You being a man are MAKING YOURSELF GOD."

There was something in the force of His usage of "one" which caused them understand His assertion as a statement of identity as not just "in unity" with the Father....But in reality "making yourself God."

28 I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand. 30 I and the Father are one.”


He seems to be telling them, "I and the Father have the same Hand....We are 'ONE'." This is what incited the Jews extreme anger, whereas, IMO, a statement of "unity" would not have elicited their precise wording (esp. since the pious Pharisee's-Chief Priests made the same assertion all the time).

http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...&postcount=225

Originally Posted by jfrog (Post 1314048)

You want to read it that way so you do. In verse 8 the Lord God speaks and we know this because verse 8 tells us he speaks. In verse 9 John starts speaking again and doesn't stop till verse 10. In verse 11 and onward we have a new speaker that is identified as Jesus by the alive and dead verse.

Originally Posted by Sean (Post 1314065)

I am simply saying to keep reading the passage. It tells you clearly who is talking in the passage.

Originally Posted by jfrog (Post 1314074)

verse 8 is a different speaker than verse 11 and on.

Originally Posted by Sean (Post 1314075)

It dont look like it to me. Maybe theres 2 "alpha and omegas".?...

Originally Posted by Walks_in_islam (Post 1313944)

Smart of you to leave off the rest of my post.

"For I have not spoken on my own authority, but the Father who sent me has himself given me a commandment—what to say and what to speak."

Still dealing with that? Several more pending.

Originally Posted by jfrog (Post 1314077)

Do you know what alpha and omega means? I sure don't. Do you know if Alpha and Omega is a unique phrase or one that can apply to more than one person? I sure don't because I don't even know what an "Alpha and Omega" is.

So before you can say there is only 1 alpha and omega first you must know what the phrase means and then there must be some kind of uniqueness associated with it such that it can only apply to one person. I don't think you can show either and so basing a doctrine about who Jesus is off the phrase alpha and omega is more like grasping for straws. Especially when verse 8 clearly tells us who is speaking, the Lord. (You know God?)

Originally Posted by jfrog (Post 1314077)

Do you know what alpha and omega means? I sure don't. Do you know if Alpha and Omega is a unique phrase or one that can apply to more than one person? I sure don't because I don't even know what an "Alpha and Omega" is.

So before you can say there is only 1 alpha and omega first you must know what the phrase means and then there must be some kind of uniqueness associated with it such that it can only apply to one person. I don't think you can show either and so basing a doctrine about who Jesus is off the phrase alpha and omega is more like grasping for straws. Especially when verse 8 clearly tells us who is speaking, the Lord. (You know God?)

Originally Posted by jfrog (Post 1314007)

God is the only almighty.

Originally Posted by Sean (Post 1314080)

I think your argument ran out of gas. 2 Alpha and Omegas....cmon bro. ya hurt me in a bad kinda way...LOL