378
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 189:
Line 189: + + Line 195:
Line 197: − +
Conservapedia talk:Is the Bible Inerrant? (view source)
Revision as of 15:58, April 7, 2007
, 15:58, April 7, 2007→What's this article trying to achieve?
:::: I fail to grasp the distinction that you are making between Jesus as God and Jesus as man, therefore my answer stands. Are you suggesting that the man Jesus was totally oblivious to what He had done as God?
:::: I fail to grasp the distinction that you are making between Jesus as God and Jesus as man, therefore my answer stands. Are you suggesting that the man Jesus was totally oblivious to what He had done as God?
:::: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 09:33, 7 April 2007 (EDT)
:::: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 09:33, 7 April 2007 (EDT)
:::::''Who said'' Jesus is God? --[[User:Petrus|Petrus]] 11:58, 7 April 2007 (EDT)
:::Further proof of the need to read. I'm talking about assuming Jesus to be just a man, not a god. Try to consider that possibility...it will not harm your faith and you might even learn something in the process. Also, why not try (if you haven't, already) reading the bible without relying on exegesis or the opinions of others, there again you might learn something.
:::Further proof of the need to read. I'm talking about assuming Jesus to be just a man, not a god. Try to consider that possibility...it will not harm your faith and you might even learn something in the process. Also, why not try (if you haven't, already) reading the bible without relying on exegesis or the opinions of others, there again you might learn something.
::::Hey, if you want to get hypothetical and propose that Jesus was not God at all, then sure, he would not have known. But why not also hypothesise that Jesus didn't exist, or that the Bible was written by Shakespeare or something? The point is that I was answering a question about how I would know how Genesis was intended to be understood, and part of my answer was to rely on what Jesus understood it to mean. By "Jesus", I mean the bloke in the New Testament who was actually God and who was actually the Creator. That's what '''I''' meant by "Jesus". The response was to ask how Jesus would know if he ''wasn't'' God. Well sure, if He wasn't God, he wouldn't know, but I was answering the question according to my understanding of who Jesus was. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 11:49, 7 April 2007 (EDT)
::::Hey, if you want to get hypothetical and propose that Jesus was not God at all, then sure, he would not have known. But why not also hypothesise that Jesus didn't exist, or that the Bible was written by Shakespeare or something? The point is that I was answering a question about how I would know how Genesis was intended to be understood, and part of my answer was to rely on what Jesus understood it to mean. By "Jesus", I mean the bloke in the New Testament who was actually God and who was actually the Creator. That's what '''I''' meant by "Jesus". The response was to ask how Jesus would know if he ''wasn't'' God. Well sure, if He wasn't God, he wouldn't know, but I was answering the question according to my understanding of who Jesus was. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 11:49, 7 April 2007 (EDT)
On what basis? --[[User:Petrus|Petrus]] 11:55, 7 April 2007 (EDT)
:::::On the basis of what evidence? --[[User:Petrus|Petrus]] 11:55, 7 April 2007 (EDT)
== Protected debate page? ==
== Protected debate page? ==