Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

David Bokovoy

The Biblical God as Literal Father

Recommended Posts

mnn727,

Since it appears you have a grasp on the English language and its grammer then please explain to me how "God is Spirit" reveals that God has a body and a Spirit.

I already explained that it does not preclude it.

For me in the English language, saying "man is human" is the same as saying "man is a human".

That's idiotic. If I had jaundice would you tell me that if I said I'm orange it's the same as saying I'm an orange? If I said my wife was beautiful would that mean I'm saying my wife is a beautiful? "Spirit" can be both a noun and an adjective, but they do not mean the same thing both ways. That argument is a freaking joke.

Eph 4:6 reveals God is incorporeal.

Eph 4

[6] One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.

I already quoted scriptures showing that people can leave the presence of God. I asked you how God could both be everywhere and not be everywhere, but you refused to address my point. Care to address it now?

Share this post


Link to post

maklelan,

I already explained that it does not preclude it.

It does if you look at other scripture like Eph 4:6 which reveal that God is incorporeal.

I already quoted scriptures showing that people can leave the presence of God. I asked you how God could both be everywhere and not be everywhere, but you refused to address my point. Care to address it now?

Do you really believe that people can leave the presence of God ... please explain?

I addressed it earlier see the link below:

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index.php...mp;p=1208092520

I said:

- If God fills heaven and earth then they could not hid from the presence of God ...

- If God fills heaven and earth then Cain was was still in the presence of God ...

Share this post


Link to post

maklelan,

It does if you look at other scripture like Eph 4:6 which reveal that God is incorporeal.

THat scripture doesn't say that. You're just reading that into that scripture, and it is a poor job considering that the Bible says that God cannot fill all creation the way you want him to.

Do you really believe that people can leave the presence of God ... please explain?

Why would you not take Eph 4:6 and Jer 23:24 literally?

If God fills heaven and earth then they could not hid from the presence of God ...

If God fills heaven and earth then Cain was was still in the presence of God ...

Why should I take Ephesians and JEremiah literally when you don't take any of Genesis literally? Are you saying that the scriptures are lying when they say Cain went out from the presence of God? You're using one of many interpretations of a scripture to force another interpretation upon other scriptures. Like I've said before, you're so deep in the hermeneutic circle you can't see the light of day anymore, but you don't even appear to know what that means! This is utter nonsense!

Share this post


Link to post

maklelan,

THat scripture doesn't say that. You're just reading that into that scripture, and it is a poor job considering that the Bible says that God cannot fill all creation the way you want him to.

Please explain what Eph 4:6 reveal ... explain the words "Father of all" ... explain how God can be "above all" and "through all".

Eph 4

[6] One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.

Are you saying that the scriptures are lying when they say Cain went out from the presence of God?

I am saying that God transcends ... God can be "above all" (e.g. out from the presence of God) and God can be "through all" (e.g. fills heaven and earth).

Share this post


Link to post

Why not? we are but embryo's in godhood.

"As man is, God once was, as God is, man may become"

Sure, believe whatever you want.

Though of course, that was a quote from a "man", not from "God".

Share this post


Link to post

maklelan,

It does if you look at other scripture like Eph 4:6 which reveal that God is incorporeal.

Do you really believe that people can leave the presence of God ... please explain?

I addressed it earlier see the link below:

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index.php...mp;p=1208092520

I said:

- If God fills heaven and earth then they could not hid from the presence of God ...

- If God fills heaven and earth then Cain was was still in the presence of God ...

But in what way does God "fill" it. The scriptures clearly show that God can only be in one place at a time as he moves from point A to point B. Just a few examples should suffice

Genesis 11:5,7 "And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of the men builded...Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language.."

Genesis 18:33 "And the Lord went his way, as soon as he had left communing with Abraham: and Abraham returned unto his place"

Genesis 17:22 "And he left off talking with him, and God went up from Abraham."

Genesis 35:13 "And God went up from him in the place where he talked with him"

Exodus 20:21 "And the people stood afar off, and Moses drew near unto the thick darkness where God was"

Exodus. 34:5 "And the Lord descended in the cloud, and stood with him there, and proclaimed the name of the Lord"

This one is good because not only did the Lord come down in a cloud, showing God moving from Point A to to Point B but God was in the cloud which means the cloud encompassed a larger area that the entire area that God encompasses. Also God stood there which implies that God has legs and feet of some sort.

Share this post


Link to post

maklelan,

Please explain what Eph 4:6 reveal ... explain the words "Father of all" ... explain how God can be "above all" and "through all".

Eph 4

[6] One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.

Everything exists because of him, and his influence acts in everything. He is thus in all. If we accept your idea that God, as an incorporeal spirit is physically a part of absolutely everything then he must be a part of sin and perversion. The scriptures must also be false that say people left his presence, or that he withdrew his presence. That's too much wresting of the scriptures for me just to accept a neo-platonic doctrine that was never a part of the gospel to begin with.

I am saying that God transcends ... God can be "above all" (e.g. out from the presence of God) and God can be "through all" (e.g. fills heaven and earth).

Someone cannot be both out of his presence and in his presence at the same time. Now you're just making weak attempts to reconcile the ideas. Freakin a man provides a few more examples of how God has to have a body that occupies specific space. You can continue to just dismiss the scriptures as in error if you wish, but don't try to make any of us do it.

Share this post


Link to post

So now you're telling me exactly what my experiences are without even knowing anything about them?

No, not at all. Your experiences are unique to you.

All I'm saying is that religious experiences, whatever the outcome, are caused by emotion and feeling.

I don't use them to kill people, steal from people, immasculate myself or kill myself. When people are motivated to do this kind of stuff it is because of abnormal catalysts, not the same ones that act upon the billions of believers in the world who do good throughout their lives. That you equate their motivations to all belief in God is disgusting and perverse. That's a ridiculous argument and it shows complete and utter disrespect for people who have done more good with that motivation than you ever will. It's the fallacy of equivocation and it disgusts me that you would reduce faith down to that level.

(Bold added by me)

OH, BS. Give me a break. You have no clue what I have done. Pot-Kettle-Black. Interesting how an intellectual argument goes to ad hominem attacks when one party realizes they can't win.

I'm glad that you don't use them in destructive ways, but the motivations are the same. There is a belief that we are doing "God's will", whatever we determine what that will is.

Look at the world today.

Do you think the Jihadists would be wanting to kill people if they didn't think "God" told them to do it?

Do you think people would tithe to your church if they didn't believe "God" wanted them to do it?

Do you think the Jews would be so adamant about staying in Isreal if they didn't think "God" gave them the land?

Do you think people would follow the Pope if they didn't think "God" wanted them to?

Whatever we determine what "God's will" for us is, that will be our worldview.

Some do good with it, others kill people. Hitler professed to be a Christian. What do you think he saw "God's will" as?

It all boils down to our own feelings and emotions.

Share this post


Link to post

freakin a man,

But in what way does God "fill" it. The scriptures clearly show that God can only be in one place at a time as he moves from point A to point B. Just a few examples should suffice

God transcends ... he can be "above all" ... he can be "through all" ... he can be move from "above all" to "through all".

Share this post


Link to post

Jesus is called the only Begotten because He is the only one who came from God. Christ is the only one who did not have a mortal father or sinful nature. God did breathe life into each of His creations but we did not come from God, we came from the dust.

Share this post


Link to post

maklelan,

Everything exists because of him, and his influence acts in everything. He is thus in all. If we accept your idea that God, as an incorporeal spirit is physically a part of absolutely everything then he must be a part of sin and perversion.

Scripture says the following:

Pss.139

[8] If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there: if I make my bed in hell, behold, thou art there.

The scriptures must also be false that say people left his presence, or that he withdrew his presence.

The scripture is true if God transcends ...

Someone cannot be both out of his presence and in his presence at the same time.

God can be "above all" ... and he can be "through all" ... God transcends ...

Share this post


Link to post

freakin a man,

God transcends ... he can be "above all" ... he can be "through all" ... he can be move from "above all" to "through all".

That does not explain anything. Just that there is no place God can't penetrate in some capacity. The fact is God is a local being. He moves from point A to point B. He is not at Point A and Point B at the same time.

Numbers 12:5, 9-10 "And the Lord came down in the pillar of the cloud, and stood in the door of the tabernacle...And the anger of the Lord was kindled against them; and he departed. And the cloud departed from off the tabernacle..."

If JK Rowlings where to write in the next Harry Potter novel ""And Harry Potter went up from him in the place where he talked with him" would you conclude that Harry Potter is some sort of omnipresent being? If not then why should you even begin to think God is Genesis 35:13 "And God went up from him in the place where he talked with him" The only difference between the two is I subsituted the words Harry Potter and God.

Share this post


Link to post

freakin a man,

God transcends ... he can be "above all" ... he can be "through all" ... he can be move from "above all" to "through all".

So now you say that he is divisible and does occupy specific space? You think it literally means that he hovers in the space above everything else? What a joke!

The scripture is true if God transcends ...

That doesn't solve anything!

Share this post


Link to post

freakin a man,

The fact is God is a local being.

Where is he local, 2Cor 5:19 says God was in Christ ...

2Cor 5

[19] To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.

Share this post


Link to post

No, not at all. Your experiences are unique to you.

But you will define them for me as emotional and "feelings"?

All I'm saying is that religious experiences, whatever the outcome, are caused by emotion and feeling.

(Bold added by me)

And here is where I am saying that you are an individual who has no empirical evidence of this. You're using a couple of examples of which you have knowledge to judge all religious experience. That's a fallacy and a bad one at that.

OH, BS. Give me a break. You have no clue what I have done. Pot-Kettle-Black. Interesting how an intellectual argument goes to ad hominem attacks when one party realizes they can't win.

I'm glad that you don't use them in destructive ways, but the motivations are the same. There is a belief that we are doing "God's will", whatever we determine what that will is.

Look at the world today.

Do you think the Jihadists would be wanting to kill people if they didn't think "God" told them to do it?

Do you think people would tithe to your church if they didn't believe "God" wanted them to do it?

Do you think the Jews would be so adamant about staying in Isreal if they didn't think "God" gave them the land?

Do you think people would follow the Pope if they didn't think "God" wanted them to?

Whatever we determine what "God's will" for us is, that will be our worldview.

Some do good with it, others kill people. Hitler professed to be a Christian. What do you think he saw "God's will" as?

It all boils down to our own feelings and emotions.

There you go telling me what motivates my faith. You have no clue what motivates me and what motivates others. To assume based on nothing other than your own qualia is a joke. Are you going to actually back up[ your assertion or just continue to tell me that all of my faith is emotion based?

Share this post


Link to post

maklelan,

So now you say that he is divisible and does occupy specific space?

I am saying God transcends ... do you understand what transcends means?

That doesn't solve anything!

It solves how God can be "above all" ...and ...how he can be "through all" .

Share this post


Link to post

freakin a man,

Where is he local, 2Cor 5:19 says God was in Christ ...

2Cor 5

[19] To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.

In what way was God in Christ. Was God sort of like a parasite where CHrist's body was the host? Here is another passage

Eccl. 5:2 "...for God is in heaven, and thou upon the earth..." Are we to conclude that the earth is in heaven? If God is at Point A (heaven) and we are on the earth (Point cool.gif then God is not currently at point B. If he was at both places at the same time, it would say "..for God is in heaven, and upon the earth..."

If Joe comes down in a cloud of smoke from 10000 feet to 1000 feet, do we conclude that when Joe was at 10000 feet, he was at 1000 feet at the same time. Of course not. So should we say that in Num. 11:25 "And the Lord came down in a cloud..." that the Lord was already there on the surface before he came down in the cloud? :P

Share this post


Link to post

freakin a man,

Where is he local, 2Cor 5:19 says God was in Christ ...

2Cor 5

[19] To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.

John 15 says that we should abide in Christ and Christ will abide in us. Unless one abides in Christ they are cast off. Does that mean we are all "in" Christ in the exact same way as God the Father? It's clear you're just isolating random scriptures that appear to support your argument, but as a whole they only serve to illustrate the weakness of your preparation and the unbiblical nature of your dogma. The more you refuse to admit you're wrong the deeper the hole that you dig around your doctrine.

Share this post


Link to post

freakin a man,

In what way was God in Christ. Was God sort of like a parasite where CHrist's body was the host?

Sounds like God is spirit ...

Here is another passage

Your passages reveals that God transcends ... here is another passage that shows God is not a local being like you have indicated.

John 14

[10] Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.

Share this post


Link to post

maklelan,

John 15 says that we should abide in Christ and Christ will abide in us. Unless one abides in Christ they are cast off. Does that mean we are all "in" Christ in the exact same way as God the Father?

No ...

It's clear you're just isolating random scriptures that appear to support your argument, but as a whole they only serve to illustrate the weakness of your preparation and the unbiblical nature of your dogma.

As whole the illustration that God transcends supports the scriptures that you have presented.

God is not a local being, scripture reveals that God transcends.

Share this post


Link to post

maklelan,

No ...

So, for the second time, when the exact same phrase is used for humans you will insist that it means something completely different than when it is used to talk about God, despite not a single shred of evidence that it should be so interpreted. What a joke.

God is not a local being, scripture reveals that God transcends.

Transcendance does not preclude locality.

Share this post


Link to post

But you will define them for me as emotional and "feelings"?

Yes, because, that's what they are. Show me some scientific evidence. Do you have verifiable, repeatable, physical evidence that God exists? Hard evidence. If so, please show us. People have been waiting for this for generations. Where is He? Can I see Him, touch Him, talk to Him (not through prayer - face to face)?

Can you?

If not, then it's all smoke and mirrors, and you're relying on your, yes, feelings and emotions.

Not to say those aren't valid, and fit in with your worldview, but to deny that's what they are is putting your fingers in your ears.

And here is where I am saying that you are an individual who has no empirical evidence of this. You're using a couple of examples of which you have knowledge to judge all religious experience. That's a fallacy and a bad one at that.

Tell me where what I wrote is wrong. Again, where is the empirical evidence of God? Where does He live? What does He eat? What does He breathe? What does He look like? Can I touch Him again and again?

There you go telling me what motivates my faith. You have no clue what motivates me and what motivates others. To assume based on nothing other than your own qualia is a joke. Are you going to actually back up[ your assertion or just continue to tell me that all of my faith is emotion based?

Of course it is. I'm not saying it's a bad thing, but it is all based on feelings and emotions.

If it's not, then show me the evidence. Pure, hard, physical evidence. Show me God.

You can't.

Of course, neither can I.

So, whatever it is that motivates you, or not, is not based on some hard physical evidence.

Share this post


Link to post

freakin a man,

Sounds like God is spirit ...

Yeah I know John 4:24 but as the following notes of that passage:

â??God is spiritual, we do not mean that he has no body . . . but rather that he is the source of a mysterious life-giving power and energy that animates the human body, and himself possesses this energy in the fullest measure.â?(Christopher Stead, Philosophy in Christian Antiquity (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1994) 98)

Your passages reveals that God transcends ... here is another passage that shows God is not a local being like you have indicated.

John 14

[10] Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.

Share this post


Link to post

maklelan,

So, for the second time, when the exact same phrase is used for humans you will insist that it means something completely different than when it is used to talk about God, despite not a single shred of evidence that it should be so interpreted.

I will insist that a person needs to look the whole of scripture and the context of scripture. The idea that God transcends is supported by scripture.

The idea that God is a local being is not supported by scripture unless a person ignores a lot of scriptures.

Transcendance does not preclude locality.

Transcendance does preclude ONLY locaility as the scriptures reveal.

Share this post


Link to post

Yes, because, that's what they are.

I try to make it a habit to avoid trying to debate with people who tell me exactly why I have faith. Have a good one.

The idea that God is a local being is not supported by scripture unless a person ignores a lot of scriptures.

And yet you have no scriptures to back this up and we keep dumping scriptures on you that prove the opposite and you refuse to respond to them. You're a joke.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...