Posted on 10/17/2015 8:41:38 AM PDT by ealgeone
“You tried that with the bush and were shown wrong.”
Wow, you seem to invent things as you go along. I stated that God - in His power - can manifest himself through a burning bush. I did not say God “change[s] to whatever form [He] needs.” Nor did I say that about Mary.
This is EXACTLY, WORD-FOR-WORD, WHAT I SAID:
“If God can speak through a burning bush and change bread into His flesh, He can have a woman appear any way He wishes - especially if He’s interested in using that woman to help convert millions of Aztecs.”
NOTICE? I said God SPOKE through a burning bush. I never said anything about Him “changing” into a burning bush. I said, “He can have a woman appear any way He wishes” - which is indisputable. Even Jesus was unrecognizable in His appearance to those closest to Him after His resurrection.
I don’t care if you attack what I post, but do you think you could actually attack what I post and not claim I posted things I never did?
“The bush did not change its form.”
Who claimed it did? No one.
No.
“Every traditionally chrstian ethnic group sees G-d as “one of us.””
God became one of us - in all ways except sin. Thus, Christians see Him for Who He is. It is not their ethnicity they see in Him. It is their humanity and His divine love that they see in Him.
“The idea that G-d becomes whatever ethnicity we happen to be is loaded with both nationalism and relativism.”
Actually, neither.
God became man and had a definite ethnicity and nationality as a man. Your claim, however, falls flat. My nationality is American. I do not see Jesus as American. I do not see Jesus as being my ethnicity either. None of this is relative because all things involved are definite.
Jesus is God and man. And every Jew will one day know that too. You can’t stop it.
And yet we never see any of the disciples or apostles baptizing infants.
Sometimes I really wonder if catholics read the Word in context or just cherry pick a verse here or there.
They all became Christians - Catholic Christians.
And a new class of believers.
And without a single Protestant in sight. One of the largest conversions in history and something no Protestant could ever hold a candle to throughout history.
I'm not familiar with these Protestants you refer to....are they new like the catholic Christians you mention?
Deal with it. God will continue to do things you apparently don’t like. You’re not going to be able to stop Him.
Yes, God will do as He pleases. And these false apparitions are not from Him.
Deal with it.
As always vlad it's been interesting.
This will be my last post on this thread.
You've got the last word.
“And yet we never see any of the disciples or apostles baptizing infants.”
So? We don’t see any of them reading a gospel either. None had been written yet. That doesn’t mean they didn’t believe what would be written in them.
“As always vlad it’s been interesting.”
And as always eagleone, you were wrong, and it wasn’t particularly interesting.
“Yes and if you follow the flow of the conversation you’d understand (?) the reference.”
I posted.
You posted.
Everything I posted was correct.
What you posted - claiming I said it - was not correct.
That was the “flow” of the “conversation”.
“This will be my last post on this thread.”
Well, I think everyone could see that coming.
“You’ve got the last word.”
If I do, it’s only because what I post is accurate. And so it is.
Officially, yes. But where the rubber meets the road every traditional chrstian ethnic group sees itself as the "new chosen people" who have taken the place of Israel. That's why we have militant national chrstianity in every such country (whether Spain, Armenia, Ethiopia, America [Black J*sus and Redneck J*sus], Poland, etc.). On this very forum we have seen ethnicity celebrated and converts insulted as "strangers" and "foreigners" (xenoi).
Jesus is God and man. And every Jew will one day know that too. You can’t stop it.
Yes, I know you believe that and that you enjoy trying to get under my skin. But your belief in J*sus comes from your submission to the infallible church that says this, just as Protestants' belief comes from their bible. For you the Church authorizes G-d while for the Protestants the bible does.
The only time in history G-d Himself (and not a man claiming to be G-d or claiming to have received a communication from G-d) manifested himself publicly to between two and three million people was the Revelation at Sinai, where G-d authorized the religion and not vice versa. This claim of revelation could not have been faked or introduced later and it MUST sit in judgment on all further claims of revelation and judge them. To accept the "old testament" on the authority of a man who lived a thousand years after the event was already known and manifest is to engage in "affirmation of the consequent" on an epic scale.
And every human being, whatever his current religious beliefs, will know that one day. You can't stop it.
No. I have no doubt that there are some people who view Jesus only through their ethnic lens (the only group that does that really are some fringe groups who believe in the black Jesus). The rest of what you said - like so much of what you post - doesn’t make any sense.
You wrote:
“But your belief in J*sus comes from your submission to the infallible church that says this,”
No. My belief in Jesus is strengthened by the Church and in many ways fulfilled in the offices of the Church but my belief in Christ is grounded in Christ.
“...just as Protestants’ belief comes from their bible.”
I see no evidence of that either. Can you get anything right?
“For you the Church authorizes G-d while for the Protestants the bible does.”
Actually, neither. God authorizes the Church while Protestants twist scripture to their own desires.
Do what you’re compelled to do.
I believe this is what is called a "tautology." It isn't a good argument.
Protestants twist scripture to their own desires.
You mean like how they twist the first eleven chapters of Genesis so that it means what it actually says? How ever do they live with themselves???
Do what you’re compelled to do.
Okay.
You know . . . you and I used to be friends (or at least so I thought). What happened?
“I believe this is what is called a “tautology.””
No, it is not.
“It isn’t a good argument.”
It wasn’t an argument. It was merely a statement of fact.
“You mean like how they twist the first eleven chapters of Genesis so that it means what it actually says? How ever do they live with themselves???”
And there it is. And knowing that the compulsion, the obsession would show up yet again, I wrote: “Do what you’re compelled to do.”
“You know . . . you and I used to be friends (or at least so I thought). What happened?”
When someone has an obsession, a compulsion, that is so obvious and so overpowering that it is 100% predictable it can damage any friendship. We’ve talked about this before. Have you forgotten? I doubt it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.