Important Announcement

See here for an important message regarding the community which has become a read-only site as of October 31.

 
Post Reply
Page 7 of 9  •  Prev 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Switch to Forum Live View Do we pray to same God?
6 years ago  ::  May 05, 2012 - 3:06PM #61
57
Posts: 28,191

May 5, 2012 -- 12:13PM, Seefan wrote:


Hand waving???  Ignorant???  I used the same String's 541 you used to show through their words the truth of what I say.  I'm not the one espousing doctrine, even against scripture and logic.  Check it out yourself and think on your own.  But I suspect you are so steeped in the doctrine you follow that you can't see anything else so I'm going to leave it at that ...


It's been interesting to say the least ...


 




You're still doing it.  By the way, it's Strong's not String's.....secondly you didn't use Strong's..your post said you used "google".  

Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  May 05, 2012 - 5:19PM #62
Seefan
Posts: 4,017

May 5, 2012 -- 3:06PM, 57 wrote:

 

May 5, 2012 -- 12:13PM, Seefan wrote:


Hand waving???  Ignorant???  I used the same String's 541 you used to show through their words the truth of what I say.  I'm not the one espousing doctrine, even against scripture and logic.  Check it out yourself and think on your own.  But I suspect you are so steeped in the doctrine you follow that you can't see anything else so I'm going to leave it at that ...


It's been interesting to say the least ...  



You're still doing it.  By the way, it's Strong's not String's.....secondly you didn't use Strong's..your post said you used "google".  



RESPONSE .....


....................................................................................................
Post #54 reads from seefan in response to 57 ...


But you are very selective in what you try to use as proof.  If you read on, Strong continues .... is only used in Heb 1:3 where it refers to Christ's eternal radiancesupremely reflecting the effulgent glory of the Godhead! 


You notice again reflecting?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Both Strong's and google say essentially the same thing if you read both with much more care.  I think you must read into post what you want to read or you just skim read to find something to respond to and ignore what's not to your liking.  I used the same dictionary you've used as pointed out above but you've ignored it or didn't read it.  I'm really not sure what to make of you other than you must have blinders on or your only purpose is to be right?  You haven't proved any of your points and failured to address anything of my comments on same.  So unless you do so there's not much else for you to say on this topic that's of any value ...


In the human world, if we do not understand the divine world, is that a proof that the world of God does not exist?  (Divine Philosophy, p. 117 ... Baha'i Writings)
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  May 05, 2012 - 8:24PM #63
57
Posts: 28,191

May 5, 2012 -- 5:19PM, Seefan wrote:


May 5, 2012 -- 3:06PM, 57 wrote:

 

May 5, 2012 -- 12:13PM, Seefan wrote:


Hand waving???  Ignorant???  I used the same String's 541 you used to show through their words the truth of what I say.  I'm not the one espousing doctrine, even against scripture and logic.  Check it out yourself and think on your own.  But I suspect you are so steeped in the doctrine you follow that you can't see anything else so I'm going to leave it at that ...


It's been interesting to say the least ...  



You're still doing it.  By the way, it's Strong's not String's.....secondly you didn't use Strong's..your post said you used "google".  



RESPONSE .....


....................................................................................................
Post #54 reads from seefan in response to 57 ...


But you are very selective in what you try to use as proof.  If you read on, Strong continues .... is only used in Heb 1:3 where it refers to Christ's eternal radiancesupremely reflecting the effulgent glory of the Godhead! 


You notice again reflecting?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Both Strong's and google say essentially the same thing if you read both with much more care.  I think you must read into post what you want to read or you just skim read to find something to respond to and ignore what's not to your liking.  I used the same dictionary you've used as pointed out above but you've ignored it or didn't read it.  I'm really not sure what to make of you other than you must have blinders on or your only purpose is to be right?  You haven't proved any of your points and failured to address anything of my comments on same.  So unless you do so there's not much else for you to say on this topic that's of any value ...





You can keep on trying...but once again you're wrong. 


Strongs doesn't even use the word reflecting in the definition.


In fact look at all the other translations.  None of them use reflecting.

Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  May 05, 2012 - 10:15PM #64
Seefan
Posts: 4,017

May 5, 2012 -- 8:24PM, 57 wrote:


You can keep on trying...but once again you're wrong.


Strongs doesn't even use the word reflecting in the definition.


In fact look at all the other translations. None of them use reflecting.




Ok!  Let’s try this again.  From the site you gave to me from post #51 of which you need to read with care is says the following (notice the bold underlines and esp what’s in red:


541 apaúgasma (from 575 /apó, "from" which intensifies 826 /augázo, "shine," derived from auge/"dawn") – properly, someone who literally "shines," (is radiant). 541 (apaúgasma) is only used in Heb 1:3 where it refers to Christ's eternal radiancesupremely reflecting the effulgent glory of the Godhead. His eternal light breaks through all the darkness that keeps someone in spiritual ignorance (bondage), i.e. every resistance exerted by sin.


"Effulgent glory of the Godhead is talking about a quality and not being God ...


Now as to this post where you’ve given me other translations and you say that it doesn’t use the word reflection, once again you need to read more carefully. 


1st of all let me say once again that "The Son is the radiance of God's glory ..." – God’s glory is an attribute of God and is not God.  You are not clear on this point ...


Now to the word reflect that you say is not in the translations on the page you gave ...


1.)  International Standard Version (©2008) – He is the reflection of God's glory and the exact likeness of his being


2.)  GOD'S WORD ® Translation (©1995) – His Son is the reflection of God's glory and the exact likeness of God's being.


3.)  KJV – brightness, 4.)  AB in plain English – brilliance, 5.)  Weymouth Eng Version – brightly reflects


All the above is talking about qualities of God and doesn’t state that having such qualities make Him God.  Also each translation clearly states that this refers to an "image of his substance", "a likeness" and others such words ...


 

In the human world, if we do not understand the divine world, is that a proof that the world of God does not exist?  (Divine Philosophy, p. 117 ... Baha'i Writings)
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  May 06, 2012 - 7:32AM #65
57
Posts: 28,191

May 5, 2012 -- 10:15PM, Seefan wrote:


May 5, 2012 -- 8:24PM, 57 wrote:


You can keep on trying...but once again you're wrong.


Strongs doesn't even use the word reflecting in the definition.


In fact look at all the other translations. None of them use reflecting.




Ok!  Let’s try this again.  From the site you gave to me from post #51 of which you need to read with care is says the following (notice the bold underlines and esp what’s in red:


541 apaúgasma (from 575 /apó, "from" which intensifies 826 /augázo, "shine," derived from auge/"dawn") – properly, someone who literally "shines," (is radiant). 541 (apaúgasma) is only used in Heb 1:3 where it refers to Christ's eternal radiancesupremely reflecting the effulgent glory of the Godhead. His eternal light breaks through all the darkness that keeps someone in spiritual ignorance (bondage), i.e. every resistance exerted by sin.


"Effulgent glory of the Godhead is talking about a quality and not being God ...


Now as to this post where you’ve given me other translations and you say that it doesn’t use the word reflection, once again you need to read more carefully. 


1st of all let me say once again that "The Son is the radiance of God's glory ..." – God’s glory is an attribute of God and is not God.  You are not clear on this point ...


Now to the word reflect that you say is not in the translations on the page you gave ...


1.)  International Standard Version (©2008) – He is the reflection of God's glory and the exact likeness of his being


2.)  GOD'S WORD ® Translation (©1995) – His Son is the reflection of God's glory and the exact likeness of God's being.


3.)  KJV – brightness, 4.)  AB in plain English – brilliance, 5.)  Weymouth Eng Version – brightly reflects


All the above is talking about qualities of God and doesn’t state that having such qualities make Him God.  Also each translation clearly states that this refers to an "image of his substance", "a likeness" and others such words ...


 




Seefan, I don't really care what you believe.  The word used is radiance.  If you want to go find bibles that say otherwise, hve at it. 


I consider it to be just another of the many verse that shows Jesus is God.  Why you can't accept tht biblical fact is beyond me. 


Everyone who tries to disprove Jesus is God always has to stretch or add to scripture in someway always throwing out the natural meaning.  You included.


The bottom line is this...your "jesus" is not my Jesus. 

Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  May 06, 2012 - 7:53AM #66
Seefan
Posts: 4,017

May 6, 2012 -- 7:32AM, 57 wrote:


May 5, 2012 -- 10:15PM, Seefan wrote:


May 5, 2012 -- 8:24PM, 57 wrote:


You can keep on trying...but once again you're wrong.


Strongs doesn't even use the word reflecting in the definition.


In fact look at all the other translations. None of them use reflecting.




Ok!  Let’s try this again.  From the site you gave to me from post #51 of which you need to read with care is says the following (notice the bold underlines and esp what’s in red:


541 apaúgasma (from 575 /apó, "from" which intensifies 826 /augázo, "shine," derived from auge/"dawn") – properly, someone who literally "shines," (is radiant). 541 (apaúgasma) is only used in Heb 1:3 where it refers to Christ's eternal radiancesupremely reflecting the effulgent glory of the Godhead. His eternal light breaks through all the darkness that keeps someone in spiritual ignorance (bondage), i.e. every resistance exerted by sin.


"Effulgent glory of the Godhead is talking about a quality and not being God ...


Now as to this post where you’ve given me other translations and you say that it doesn’t use the word reflection, once again you need to read more carefully. 


1st of all let me say once again that "The Son is the radiance of God's glory ..." – God’s glory is an attribute of God and is not God.  You are not clear on this point ...


Now to the word reflect that you say is not in the translations on the page you gave ...


1.)  International Standard Version (©2008) – He is the reflection of God's glory and the exact likeness of his being


2.)  GOD'S WORD ® Translation (©1995) – His Son is the reflection of God's glory and the exact likeness of God's being.


3.)  KJV – brightness, 4.)  AB in plain English – brilliance, 5.)  Weymouth Eng Version – brightly reflects


All the above is talking about qualities of God and doesn’t state that having such qualities make Him God.  Also each translation clearly states that this refers to an "image of his substance", "a likeness" and others such words ...


 




Seefan, I don't really care what you believe.  The word used is radiance.  If you want to go find bibles that say otherwise, hve at it. 


I consider it to be just another of the many verse that shows Jesus is God.  Why you can't accept tht biblical fact is beyond me. 


Everyone who tries to disprove Jesus is God always has to stretch or add to scripture in someway always throwing out the natural meaning.  You included.


The bottom line is this...your "jesus" is not my Jesus. 





Everything I've pointed out had to do with your references and how you didn't even see the words you denigned was there in black and white.  It appears you have your own justification so-be-it!  Relating to your last line - that's for sure 57!  Your understanding of who Jesus is certainly is not mine as to this subject.  And I'll leave you to your thoughts on erroneous and unproven belief!  In what you post you really are a contraction unto yourself ......


 PS:  radiance is for something to be emit from as is reflection!  You're trying to hinge you whole premise that Jesus is God on one word which it a far cry from making anyone think Jesus is God ...


Also your statement about you not caring what I believe is evident in that you don't look at why anyone believes differently than you.  You simply on the attack.  I like the quote I've read sometime ago from a christian minister -- "There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance –That principle is contempt prior to investigation." -Herbert Spence


 

In the human world, if we do not understand the divine world, is that a proof that the world of God does not exist?  (Divine Philosophy, p. 117 ... Baha'i Writings)
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  May 06, 2012 - 8:21AM #67
57
Posts: 28,191

May 6, 2012 -- 7:53AM, Seefan wrote:


May 6, 2012 -- 7:32AM, 57 wrote:


May 5, 2012 -- 10:15PM, Seefan wrote:


May 5, 2012 -- 8:24PM, 57 wrote:


You can keep on trying...but once again you're wrong.


Strongs doesn't even use the word reflecting in the definition.


In fact look at all the other translations. None of them use reflecting.




Ok!  Let’s try this again.  From the site you gave to me from post #51 of which you need to read with care is says the following (notice the bold underlines and esp what’s in red:


541 apaúgasma (from 575 /apó, "from" which intensifies 826 /augázo, "shine," derived from auge/"dawn") – properly, someone who literally "shines," (is radiant). 541 (apaúgasma) is only used in Heb 1:3 where it refers to Christ's eternal radiancesupremely reflecting the effulgent glory of the Godhead. His eternal light breaks through all the darkness that keeps someone in spiritual ignorance (bondage), i.e. every resistance exerted by sin.


"Effulgent glory of the Godhead is talking about a quality and not being God ...


Now as to this post where you’ve given me other translations and you say that it doesn’t use the word reflection, once again you need to read more carefully. 


1st of all let me say once again that "The Son is the radiance of God's glory ..." – God’s glory is an attribute of God and is not God.  You are not clear on this point ...


Now to the word reflect that you say is not in the translations on the page you gave ...


1.)  International Standard Version (©2008) – He is the reflection of God's glory and the exact likeness of his being


2.)  GOD'S WORD ® Translation (©1995) – His Son is the reflection of God's glory and the exact likeness of God's being.


3.)  KJV – brightness, 4.)  AB in plain English – brilliance, 5.)  Weymouth Eng Version – brightly reflects


All the above is talking about qualities of God and doesn’t state that having such qualities make Him God.  Also each translation clearly states that this refers to an "image of his substance", "a likeness" and others such words ...


 




Seefan, I don't really care what you believe.  The word used is radiance.  If you want to go find bibles that say otherwise, hve at it. 


I consider it to be just another of the many verse that shows Jesus is God.  Why you can't accept tht biblical fact is beyond me. 


Everyone who tries to disprove Jesus is God always has to stretch or add to scripture in someway always throwing out the natural meaning.  You included.


The bottom line is this...your "jesus" is not my Jesus. 





Everything I've pointed out had to do with your references and how you didn't even see the words you denigned was there in black and white.  It appears you have your own justification so-be-it!  Relating to your last line - that's for sure 57!  Your understanding of who Jesus is certainly is not mine as to this subject.  And I'll leave you to your thoughts on erroneous and unproven belief!  In what you post you really are a contraction unto yourself ......


 PS:  radiance is for something to be emit from as is reflection!  You're trying to hinge you whole premise that Jesus is God on one word which it a far cry from making anyone think Jesus is God ...


Also your statement about you not caring what I believe is evident in that you don't look at why anyone believes differently than you.  You simply on the attack.  I like the quote I've read sometime ago from a christian minister -- "There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance –That principle is contempt prior to investigation." -Herbert Spence


 




I don't care...anymore... because your point was not made.  Sorry.  There is no use in arguing with you on this topic.  Your mind is closed.  


If Jesus Christ is just a mere reflection to you...rather than actually radiating His Divinity as the second part of the Godhead then it appears you are following a different Jesus than me.  My Jesus is GOD! Who is your Jesus?

Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  May 06, 2012 - 9:02AM #68
Ed.W
Posts: 9,451

Re: House of Mirrors



Ephesians 4,5


One Lord, one faith, one baptism,


Ephesians 3,21


Unto him [be] glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages, world without end. Amen.


‘Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength, while loving someone deeply gives you courage.’ --Lao Tzu
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  May 06, 2012 - 3:49PM #69
Seefan
Posts: 4,017

May 6, 2012 -- 8:21AM, 57 wrote:

I don't care...anymore... because your point was not made. Sorry. There is no use in arguing with you on this topic. Your mind is closed.


If Jesus Christ is just a mere reflection to you...rather than actually radiating His Divinity as the second part of the Godhead then it appears you are following a different Jesus than me. My Jesus is GOD! Who is your Jesus?



I believe my point was made quite well!  Jesus Christ is the Glory of God who emitted God’s divine qualities through His life and teachings!  In this ‘station’ Jesus, given the title the Son of God, was given the ability to 'radiate' His Divinity – in the sense that Jesus had divine qualities as the bible points out, is below God in stature, but is above all other human being, being the Perfect Man. 


What you say about Jesus radiating divine qualities certainly is true but for God, the Uncreated, the Infinite, to personally manifest Himself into His created world cannot be.  It would be far, far easier to combine water and oil to form a cohesive mixture or to take the sun out of the universe into the Uncreated world of God.  For God to manifest His qualities for the benefit of humanity and creation, a created being is needed.  The created and Uncreated cannot become one.  God’s vehicle used for this task to take place was Jesus, the Perfect Man.  This does not take away from Jesus but explains His divinity and reality.  While the Christ spirit comes from God and is an emanation of God it is not the essence of God ...


You mention I follow a different Jesus than you.  Jesus is Jesus so let’s say that my understanding of Jesus is different than yours, especially in this one area.


You’ve asked who is ‘my’ Jesus?  I believe my Jesus to be the Jesus described in the bible ...


As to God there is only One God and of creation was created by Him, including the Perfect Man, Jesus ...


 


 

In the human world, if we do not understand the divine world, is that a proof that the world of God does not exist?  (Divine Philosophy, p. 117 ... Baha'i Writings)
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  May 06, 2012 - 6:45PM #70
Aussiesoul
Posts: 315

Apr 29, 2012 -- 3:54PM, rocketjsquirell wrote:

Hi,

I am posting this on the DJ, DI and DC boards because I want to know what people think about this guys' theory.

Personally, I have also thought that Islam is closer to Judaism because of its strict and uncompromising monotheism, its community structure, and its tradition of oral law (I know that the Muslims on these boards do not like it called that, but I have no other word for it). On the other hand there is no question that the direct connection between Judaism and Christianity through the person of Jesus, who was after all, Jewish, is not found between Judaism and Islam or Christianity and Islam. There is also the fact that the Christians pay more attention to  and place more emphasis and reliance on the Hebrew Bible than do Muslims.

So what do you think?

Frankly, I believe his premise that we may not be praying to the same G-d is nonsense.  If one believes that there is only one G-d, then it is only logical that there is only one G-d to which anyone may address their prayers. Thus no matter our intentions (and I believe we share the same intention), we must all pray to the one G-d.

    

Do we pray to same God?

Op-ed: Judaism, Christianity have much more in common with each other than either have with Islam

Dan Calic

How many times have you heard it said "we all pray to the same god?" These days we are hearing this from a growing number of people. To some degree one can excuse the average person from espousing such a viewpoint, as most people have not read the Bible and are not well schooled in matters of theology or eschatology.
. . .

One doesn't have to look very far to discover why this view is problematic.

 

The "Shahada," which is the statement of faith for the followers of Allah, reads, "there is no god but Allah, and Mohammed is his prophet." This statement clearly differentiates Allah from any other "god."

. . .

The Quran, which is the holy book of Allah's followers, says "the religion in the sight of Allah is Islam." As this makes it clear a believer in Allah must follow Islam, one might ask if other religions are tolerated. According to the Quran, "if anyone desires a religion other than Islam, never will it be accepted…" So much for Islam's tolerance of other religions.

 
The Quran also is highly critical of Christians and Jews. Some quotes include: "Jews and Christians are evil-livers,” "Evil is the handwork of rabbis and priests,” "Don't take Jews or Christians for friends. If you do Allah will consider you to be one of them."

 
Different values

Fundamental values for Christians and Jews include forgiveness, in addition to prohibitions against lying, adultery, and murder. Fundamental values for Allah's followers sanction judgment (fatwa,) lying (taqiyya,) men having multiple wives, and murder/suicide (martyrdom.)

 
While anyone is free to leave Christianity or Judaism, if a Muslim leaves the faith, or criticizes Allah, a fatwa is issued for their execution.

 

These distinctions make it clear Allah is a separate deity, with fundamentally different values, and has nothing in common with the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Moreover, Allah has disdain for any religion other than Islam, and is highly critical of Christians and Jews.
. . .
 full article:
 http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4221932,00.html


 


I believe God is above all religions. The idea that there is only one exclusive path to God comes from religion not from God.

Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 7 of 9  •  Prev 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook