The Book of Revelation: Mystery Or Profitable?

[Omniskeptical]

You admit to believing that God is arbitrary?

Wow! You're only the second person I've ever seen do that.

How do you square the idea that God is arbitrary (an idea that is completely foreign to the bible) with the utterly undeniably biblical fact that God is just?

I didn't know the definition of arbitrary, but I know God is just. Because of JWs, people like you think a Unitarian God cannot be just.

And we also know it is impossible for Jesus to have the commands specified for women. So we can all say it is impossible for men to obey the entire code of Moses.

 

[Idolater]

...Because of JWs, people like you think a Unitarian God cannot be just.

Because of the Scripture corroborating the most ancient and unchanging testimony of the Church, we know "a Unitarian God" is fictional.

And we also know it is impossible for Jesus to have the commands specified for women. So we can all say it is impossible for men to obey the entire code of Moses.

Technically, true enough.

 

[Omniskeptical]

Because of the Scripture corroborating the most ancient and unchanging testimony of the Church, we know "a Unitarian God" is fictional.

Actually, the Trinity Dogma is fictionally, and the implications of it do not appear in the original LXX.

Technically, true enough.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Baloney!!

Another appeal to the stone.

Since I misunderstood what arbitrary meant, I will argue the trinity dogma is the one arbitrary.

Saying it doesn't make it so.

And I have presented the argument to the contrary.

1) It is good because we are not God.

What does us not being God have to do with it? The question is about God's relationship with what is good, not man's.

Thus, no.
2) It is good because God is Just. Thus, no

But you just said God is arbitrary. God cannot be both arbitrary and just. The two stand diametrically opposed to each other.

And none of these has to do with the Trinity dogma, again.

See Post #486.

But you argue the trinity dogma is just how it has split personality disorder. Classic

No, not split personality.

One God. Three PERSONS.

Yes, but you don't know when Judah became Israel, and Revelations rejects the idea that Israel became Judah with its 144,000 raptured.

See what Clete posted.

 

[JudgeRightly]

I didn't know the definition of arbitrary,

I gave you it already.

Here it is again:

Arbitrary - based on random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system.
Just - based on or behaving according to what is morally right and fair.

but I know God is just.

The question I asked previously challenges you to think about WHY He is just, and not just blindly accept it.

Because of JWs,

Last I checked, JWs are unitarians.

people like you think a Unitarian God cannot be just.

A unitarian god CANNOT KNOW if he is good, and cannot validate his own claim to goodness, based on the standard given in the Bible of "two or three witnesses.

A Triune God has no such limitation, as any two of the Persons can testify of the third that He has never wronged the other.

And we also know it is impossible for Jesus to have the commands specified for women. So we can all say it is impossible for men to obey the entire code of Moses.

Irrelevant to the discussion.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Actually, the Trinity Dogma is fictionally,

Saying it doesn't make it so, and repeating it won't make it become so.

and the implications of it do not appear in the original LXX.

So what?

 

[Omniskeptical]

Saying it doesn't make it so, and repeating it won't make it become so.



So what?

The LXX is quoted by the New Testament.

 

[Omniskeptical]

The question I asked previously challenges you to think about WHY He is just, and not just blindly accept it.

God is just because he is the creator. He could not wished you into existence. Thus no blindly accepts it

Last I checked, JWs are unitarians.

A unitarian god CANNOT KNOW if he is good, and cannot validate his own claim to goodness, based on the standard given in the Bible of "two or three witnesses.

Not true at all, because he is omniscient. Is God reasonable? Creating life from nonlife is very reasonable. He could have done nothing when he started the clock.

A Triune God has no such limitation, as any two of the Persons can testify of the third that He has never wronged the other.

As if. Imagine a camera with unlimited perspective and unlimited memory.

Irrelevant to the discussion.

I think otherwise. We are asking if God is reasonable and just.

 

[JudgeRightly]

The LXX is quoted by the New Testament.

Again, SO WHAT?

God is just because he is the creator.

Just because God is the Creator doesn't make Him just.

He could not wished you into existence. Thus no blindly accepts it

I have no idea what you just said...

Not true at all, because he is omniscient.

Begging the question and scripture says otherwise, and there are other threads for that discussion. Suffice it to say that God shows Himself throughout scripture to be able to learn, and find out things, and even to forget things and ignore things, all of which show Him to not have the pagan greek attribute of "omniscience."

Is God reasonable? Creating life from nonlife is very reasonable. He could have done nothing when he started the clock.

Irrelevant to the discussion.

As if. Imagine a camera with unlimited perspective and unlimited memory.

No, that would be irrational. God is not irrational.

I think otherwise. We are asking if God is reasonable and just.

Which, if He is a unitarian God, he CANNOT meet His own just standard of "two or three witnesses to establish a matter," because if God is singular in nature, then he is only one witness. Your proposed "camera" would also fail this test, because it is only a single camera.

However, since God is triune, He meets that standard, and can testify that He IS good.

Face it, Omni, you're arguing against scripture at this point. You need to seriously examine what it is that you believe and take what you have been shown in this thread, humble yourself, and ask God for the humility to learn.

 

[Omniskeptical]

Just because God is the Creator doesn't make Him just.

It must certainly does.

Which, if He is a unitarian God, he CANNOT meet His own just standard of "two or three witnesses to establish a matter," because if God is singular in nature, then he is only one witness. Your proposed "camera" would also fail this test, because it is only a single camera.

There is no double standard. God doesn't have to follow human rules.

 

[Omniskeptical]

show Him to not have the pagan greek attribute of "omniscience."

I have to laugh at this statement. You don't how stupid that statement is.

 

[glorydaz]

I have to laugh at this statement. You don't how stupid that statement is.

Made you laugh, didn't it?

 

[JudgeRightly]

It must certainly does.

No. That's begging the question.

There is no double standard. God doesn't have to follow human rules.

Who said anything about human rules?

I didn't.

Again: If He is a unitarian God, he CANNOT meet His own just standard of "two or three witnesses to establish a matter," because if God is singular in nature, then he is only one witness.

You keep ignoring the "two or three witnesses" bit.

That's the standard GOD gave to MAN.

Here it is in scripture:

Whoever is deserving of death shall be put to death on the testimony of two or three witnesses; he shall not be put to death on the testimony of one witness. - Deuteronomy 17:6 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy17:6&version=NKJV

“One witness shall not rise against a man concerning any iniquity or any sin that he commits; by the mouth of two or three witnesses the matter shall be established. - Deuteronomy 19:15 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy19:15&version=NKJV

But if he will not hear, take with you one or two more, that ‘by the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.’ - Matthew 18:16 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew18:16&version=NKJV

This will be the third time I am coming to you. “By the mouth of two or three witnesses every word shall be established.” - 2 Corinthians 13:1 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2Corinthians13:1&version=NKJV

Do not receive an accusation against an elder except from two or three witnesses. - 1 Timothy 5:19 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1Timothy5:19&version=NKJV

Anyone who has rejected Moses’ law dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. - Hebrews 10:28 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews10:28&version=NKJV

A unitarian God cannot meet His own standard which He gave in the Bible for His own accountability.

Again, you're arguing against scripture at this point. You should realize what that means.

I have to laugh at this statement. You don't how stupid that statement is.

For like the crackling of thorns under a pot, So is the laughter of the fool. This also is vanity. - Ecclesiastes 7:6 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ecclesiastes7:6&version=NKJV

 

[Omniskeptical]

No. That's begging the question.



Who said anything about human rules?

I didn't.

Again: If He is a unitarian God, he CANNOT meet His own just standard of "two or three witnesses to establish a matter," because if God is singular in nature, then he is only one witness.

You keep ignoring the "two or three witnesses" bit.

That's the standard GOD gave to MAN.

Here it is in scripture:

Whoever is deserving of death shall be put to death on the testimony of two or three witnesses; he shall not be put to death on the testimony of one witness. - Deuteronomy 17:6 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy17:6&version=NKJV

“One witness shall not rise against a man concerning any iniquity or any sin that he commits; by the mouth of two or three witnesses the matter shall be established. - Deuteronomy 19:15 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy19:15&version=NKJV

But if he will not hear, take with you one or two more, that ‘by the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.’ - Matthew 18:16 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew18:16&version=NKJV

This will be the third time I am coming to you. “By the mouth of two or three witnesses every word shall be established.” - 2 Corinthians 13:1 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2Corinthians13:1&version=NKJV

Do not receive an accusation against an elder except from two or three witnesses. - 1 Timothy 5:19 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1Timothy5:19&version=NKJV

Anyone who has rejected Moses’ law dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. - Hebrews 10:28 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews10:28&version=NKJV

A unitarian God cannot meet His own standard which He gave in the Bible for His own accountability.

Again, you're arguing against scripture at this point. You should realize what that means.



For like the crackling of thorns under a pot, So is the laughter of the fool. This also is vanity. - Ecclesiastes 7:6 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ecclesiastes7:6&version=NKJV

Is it important to you that God "meet" the Kosher laws or even the menstrual laws? He must be unKosher, if he can't obey these laws by your reasoning. Get it.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Is it important to you that God "meet" the Kosher laws or even the menstrual laws? He must be unKosher, if he can't obey these laws by your reasoning. Get it.

Talk about missing the point!

Clearly I'm referring to a moral standard. Not symbolic laws given specifically to Israel that in any other circumstance would be completely arbitrary and not valid laws at all!

By the mouth of two or three witnesses a matter shall be established.

That's what God's Word says.

A UNItarian god's testimony of his own goodness throughout eternity past, because AS CHRIST HIMSELF SAID:

“If I bear witness of Myself, My witness is not true.There is another who bears witness of Me, and I know that the witness which He witnesses of Me is true. - John 5:31-32 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John5:31-32&version=NKJV

Which is COMPLETELY in line with the above verses regarding "two or three witnesses."

 

[JudgeRightly]

@Omniskeptical if you would like to respond when you return, please do not blaspheme God when you do so.

TOL is a mainline Christian trinitarian board. Differing opinions are allowed, but we will not allow you to mock God according to our beliefs.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Got a link that's free to read or listen to?

Would You Sell Your Pirated Songs? | KGOV.com

kgov.com

Use Policy | KGOV.com

kgov.com

Kgov's use policy does not include sharing online the mp3s of those Bible studies. You'll have to purchase a copy yourself.

 

[Clete]

I have to laugh at this statement. You don't how stupid that statement is.

No, apparently I don't!
What's so stupid about it?

If....​

• Aristotle was a pagan Greek philosopher, which he was, and...
• "Omniscience" is an Aristotelian concept, which it is, and...
• "Omniscience" means to know absolutely every detail of existence, which is what it definitely meant to Aristotle and what it normally means to this day, and....
• The bible teaches that God learns and intentionally forgets and ignores things.

then....​

• The bible shows God to not have the pagan Greek attribute of "omniscience". - by definition.

QED​

Do you understand the concept of a "argument by definition" or does that make you laugh too?
To refute it you have to show that either omniscience does not mean what I've suggested it means or that the bible does not show God doing things that are contrary to that definition. It's an intellectual feat that you won't even attempt.

Clete

 

[Tambora]

Would You Sell Your Pirated Songs? | KGOV.com

kgov.com

Use Policy | KGOV.com

kgov.com

Kgov's use policy does not include sharing online the mp3s of those Bible studies. You'll have to purchase a copy yourself.

OK, thanks anyway.

 

[Omniskeptical]

No, apparently I don't!
What's so stupid about it?

If....​

• Aristotle was a pagan Greek philosopher, which he was, and...

• "Omniscience" is an Aristotelian concept, which it is, and...

An all-knowing mankind is a pagan concept. Howabout you prove it an unjewish concept first; and then prove it Aristotelian only. I don't think you can do it.

• "Omniscience" means to know absolutely every detail of existence, which is what it definitely meant to Aristotle and what it normally means to this day, and....

So?

• The bible teaches that God learns and intentionally forgets and ignores things.

then....​

You are confusing the Bible with the Mohammed's Koran.

• The bible shows God to not have the pagan Greek attribute of "omniscience". - by definition.

Only when the New Testament is garbled into English to make it look so.

Do you understand the concept of a "argument by definition" or does that make you laugh too?

Semantic irrelevance here.

To refute it you have to show that either omniscience does not mean what I've suggested it means or that the bible does not show God doing things that are contrary to that definition. It's an intellectual feat that you won't even attempt.

It is an intellectual feat that only succeeds in making the fictional Allah look dumb. I understand your argument to be weak and self deceptive.