The Way, the Truth, and the Life

[MattB .]

John 14

The Way, the Truth, and the Life

1 "Let not your heart be troubled; you believe in God, believe also
in Me. 2 In My Father�s house are many mansions; if it were not so, I
would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. 3 And if I go
and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to
Myself; that where I am, there you may be also. 4 And where I go you
know, and the way you know."

5 Thomas said to Him, "Lord, we do not know where You are going, and
how can we know the way?"

6 Jesus said to him, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one
comes to the Father except through Me.


God Bless You All

Matt

[r m]

Me like. :-)

[Mordecai]

You are aware that JC has denied he is G_d in this passage ... twice?
I will wait patiently for someone to explain.
Nobody will.

Everyone will think of the theology.
I am more concerned with the psychology.

--
Mordecai!

When words and actions disagree, believe actions.
When rhetoric and reality disagree, either rhetoric is wrong or reality is
wrong, and reality is Never wrong.

[r m]

On May 14, 7:48 am, Mordecai <"mldavis(please dont

spam)"@internode.on.net> wrote:
> r m wrote:
>
> > On May 14, 2:55 am, MattB    .  <trdell1...@spamnogmail.com> wrote:
> > > John 14
>
> > > The Way, the Truth, and the Life
>
> > >  1 "Let not your heart be troubled; you believe in God, believe also
> > > in Me. 2 In My Father s house are many mansions; if it were not so, I
> > > would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. 3 And if I go
> > > and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to
> > > Myself; that where I am, there you may be also. 4 And where I go you
> > > know, and the way you know."
>
> > > 5 Thomas said to Him, "Lord, we do not know where You are going, and
> > > how can we know the way?"
>
> > > 6 Jesus said to him, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one
> > > comes to the Father except through Me.
>
> > > God Bless You All
>
> > > Matt
>
> > Me like.  :-)
>
> You are aware that JC has denied he is G_d in this passage ... twice?

How, so?

[Michael Christ]

Jesus is the way, truth, and the life.

But you people do things your way, in your truth, and in your life;
all you do is what is right in your own eyes, like your parents before
you.

Abyss has his way.

Mordecai has his way.

IQN has his way.

RM has his way.

Ike has his way.

Pete has his way.

Rod has his way.

Terry has her way.

Linda has her way.

MattB has his way.

It is just the truth.



Michael Christ

[Mordecai]

r m wrote:
>
> On May 14, 7:48 am, Mordecai <"mldavis(please dont
> spam)"@internode.on.net> wrote:
> > r m wrote:
> >
> > > On May 14, 2:55 am, MattB . <trdell1...@spamnogmail.com> wrote:
> > > > John 14
> >
> > > > The Way, the Truth, and the Life
> >
> > > > 1 "Let not your heart be troubled; you believe in God, believe also
> > > > in Me. 2 In My Father s house are many mansions; if it were not so, I
> > > > would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. 3 And if I go
> > > > and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to
> > > > Myself; that where I am, there you may be also. 4 And where I go you
> > > > know, and the way you know."
> >
> > > > 5 Thomas said to Him, "Lord, we do not know where You are going, and
> > > > how can we know the way?"
> >
> > > > 6 Jesus said to him, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one
> > > > comes to the Father except through Me.
> >
> > > > God Bless You All
> >
> > > > Matt
> >
> > > Me like. :-)
> >
> > You are aware that JC has denied he is G_d in this passage ... twice?
>
> How, so?

In differentiating between himself and G_d as in a separate belief that is
to be believed.
You are to believe in G_d and you are ALSO to believe in him.
A belief in JC is not a belief in G_d, and a belief in G_d is not a belief
in JC.
And JC did not want a singular belief - he desired TWO beliefs.

Thus he wants you to think of himself as separate from G_d and for you to
approach him separately.
Different (specific) roles, different (specific) duties ... different
specific authority. Different specific relationships.

Heck - he even differentiated between those who are his (one mansion) and
those who are his fathers (many mansions.)

The other time is when he makes himself the way to the Father. You cannot
be a path to yourself or a path through G_d to G_d.

[MattB .]

Michael Christ has a way with deception and lies. Truly false teacher
with false teachings.

Your fruit is sour Michael.

Repent your arrogance.

Romans 3

God's Faithfulness

1 What advantage, then, is there in being a Jew, or what value is
there in circumcision? 2 Much in every way! First of all, they have
been entrusted with the very words of God. 3 What if some did not have
faith? Will their lack of faith nullify God's faithfulness? 4 Not at
all! Let God be true, and every man a liar. As it is written: "So that
you may be proved right when you speak and prevail when you judge." 5
But if our unrighteousness brings out God's righteousness more
clearly, what shall we say? That God is unjust in bringing his wrath
on us? (I am using a human argument.) 6 Certainly not! If that were
so, how could God judge the world? 7 Someone might argue, "If my
falsehood enhances God's truthfulness and so increases his glory, why
am I still condemned as a sinner?" 8 Why not say--as we are being
slanderously reported as saying and as some claim that we say--"Let us
do evil that good may result"? Their condemnation is deserved.


********************

In truth you Michael and I matter little for the love of God is
everlasting.

Luke 5:32, "I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to
repentance." and also Luke 13:3, "I tell you, Nay: but, except ye
repent, ye shall all likewise perish."

John 3:16, "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten
Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have
everlasting life."

You Michael reject the Bible

2 Corinthians 11:4, "For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus,
whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye
have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye
might well bear with him."

Michael your fruit is shown here by your manner

2 Corinthians 11:14, 15, "And no marvel; for Satan himself is
transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if
his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness;
whose end shall be according to their works."

Jesus Christ is the only way.

John 10:1, 9, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that entereth not by
the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up some other way, the same
is a thief and a robber... I am the door: by me if any man enter in,
he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture." John
14:6, "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no
man cometh unto the Father, but by me."

Be true to God Michael.

[Rod]

On 5/13/2013 4:48 PM, Mordecai wrote:
>
>
> r m wrote:
>>
>> On May 14, 2:55 am, MattB . <trdell1...@spamnogmail.com> wrote:
>>> John 14
>>>
>>> The Way, the Truth, and the Life
>>>
>>> 1 "Let not your heart be troubled; you believe in God, believe also
>>> in Me. 2 In My Father s house are many mansions; if it were not so, I
>>> would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. 3 And if I go
>>> and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to
>>> Myself; that where I am, there you may be also. 4 And where I go you
>>> know, and the way you know."
>>>
>>> 5 Thomas said to Him, "Lord, we do not know where You are going, and
>>> how can we know the way?"
>>>
>>> 6 Jesus said to him, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one
>>> comes to the Father except through Me.
>>>
>>> God Bless You All
>>>
>>> Matt
>>
>> Me like. :-)
>
> You are aware that JC has denied he is G_d in this passage ... twice?
> I will wait patiently for someone to explain.
> Nobody will.

Hi! Nobody here with AN explanation! The same God being alive in two
places and two beings at one time. We certainly cannot do that, but
spirit is like smoke, it can be in two places at once. It isn't solid
as we are. The wind isn't solid either, and it is in several places at once.

>
> Everyone will think of the theology.

I'm thinking "nature". Watch the wind, see it blowing the leaves on
the trees, several leaves moving at once ? Ever seen a prairie fire ?

Separate fires are still the same thing, fire. And smoke, see how it
moves in the air ? And sound ? Did you know that the willow tree has
sometimes hollow limbs that slap and rub against each other in the wind,
and that at times it sounds like a song ?


Oh well, I tried.

> I am more concerned with the psychology.
>

What would psychology say about nature being capable of her own
speech ?

[duke]

On Mon, 13 May 2013 16:37:24 -0700 (PDT), Michael Christ
<jesusisth...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>On May 14, 12:55�am, MattB . <trdell1...@spamnogmail.com> wrote:
>> John 14
>>
>> The Way, the Truth, and the Life
>>
>> �1 "Let not your heart be troubled; you believe in God, believe also
>> in Me. 2 In My Father s house are many mansions; if it were not so, I
>> would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. 3 And if I go
>> and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to
>> Myself; that where I am, there you may be also. 4 And where I go you
>> know, and the way you know."
>>
>> 5 Thomas said to Him, "Lord, we do not know where You are going, and
>> how can we know the way?"
>>
>> 6 Jesus said to him, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one
>> comes to the Father except through Me.
>>
>> God Bless You All
>>
>> Matt
>
>Jesus is the way, truth, and the life.
>
>But you people do things your way, in your truth, and in your life;
>all you do is what is right in your own eyes, like your parents before
>you.
>
>Abyss has his way.

mikey has his way.

>Mordecai has his way.
>
>IQN has his way.
>
>RM has his way.
>
>Ike has his way.
>
>Pete has his way.
>
>Rod has his way.
>
>Terry has her way.
>
>Linda has her way.
>
>MattB has his way.
>
>It is just the truth.
>
>
>
>Michael Christ

The dukester, American - American

********************************************
Repeal Obama
You simply can't fix stupid.
********************************************

[Terry Cross]

Darned nice try, too. Jewish theology is a prisoner of semantics, but
you are obviously not. The greatest gift of poetry is to use
semantics to escape semantics. And you have done well.

> > I am more concerned with the psychology.
>
>    What would psychology say about nature being capable of her own
>    speech ?

How would you answer if I told you that Jesus is both God and the son
of God? That God is also your father and mine, and we are also
children of God, even as Jesus is a child of God? For these are the
words of Jesus. Jesus said also, "You are gods."

Though Jehovah of the Torah, the tyrant-deity of Moses, said "dust
thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return," Moses left in the words
that God "breathed into [our] nostrils the breath of life," and we are
the eddy currents of God's own spirit.

TCross

[Mordecai]

Pete wrote:
>

Clipping everything because I have said for a long time "Nothing is as it
seems."

There are questions but they take us into another place.
What was presented here was a conflict between what people believed - and
what they read.
What people believed (and I know this is not you ...) is Trinity and that
JC is G_d.

What people read is "not so."

How do they resolve it?
"I cannot see that this precludes an idea that JC is G_d."
In one case - they presented "you cannot prove it" ... I can "get around
it." I do not have to give up my beliefs.

Again - this is "what it seems" but "nothing is as it seems."
Let us go deeper and at this level, everything we desire, and do - all our
reactions are accepted, declared genuine, and are instinctive.
This is the level I had to work on with my own body to get answers for the
back. I had to work with the instinctive, and then reject the instinctive
to do the counter-intuitive.

And I throw up another observation - what verses do they have that JC is
G_d?
The answer is damned few - and most cannot stand the rigor that they demand
of the many, many, many verses which deny this concept.
So there is a defence of ... something ... which does not really fit and
this thing which does not really fit has a double standard - the way it is
proved .. and the way it is defended.

What is being defended. It "seems" to be trinity but I repeat the
observation - nothing is as it seems.

Let us go deeper. Trinity comes from arguments about deity. Not bible per
se, arguments about deity, concepts about deity.
And trinity taps into a conceptual idea about deity which is instinctive.
I can tell you what they taped into ... because I can tell you the words.

I can examine the intuitive, instinctive power of these words within me ...
because I can see the effect of the words.
I can also see two more things ...

One is another word within me defining G_d ... which all Jews have.
The word written upon the soul of every Jew. And JC sure isn't our deity.
The other is plain logic. The NT was not written in the language or
thoughts or ideas of trinity and this conceptual idea of deity.

So I am examining things which are instinctive responses to words written
on my soul ...
and all I can watch is the way these instinctive ideas cause me to respond
- and what the reactions are.

Every reaction we have ... is the way we deal with the conflict to the
words within us which drive us.
Some of the words within us are ... taught. A person abused has a distorted
picture of the world.
A person raised in one culture has a different perspective from those of
another culture.

Some of these things are lingual. These interact with culture in a complex
dance where the culture creates the words of the language and the words of
the language creates the culture.

Some of the words are written upon the soul. Genetic ... and I cannot
differentiate between the "My ancestors have learned ...." genetic passing
down of idea sand "G_d has written" direct revelation. I actually do not
care if we learned it in evolution ... G_d taught is ... or G_d taught it
using this evolution method.

I am just looking at the words which drive us all, and the concepts this
deep are words written within us.

So I will tell you the words which convince everyone on Trinity.
"JC is the son of G_d ... he is the very SUBSTANCE of G_d ... therefore he
IS G_d!"

Don't worry about the logic or the inherent errors ...
Look at the emotions.
The power of the words is ... quite high.
It taps into something.

And I am trying to find what it taps into. The Intuitive, instinctive,
powerful words written upon the soul which cause us to believe in this.
The fact that this "instinctive" bit is wrong is also important.

As idle speculation - I have played with the idea that this is the "earthly
man, the instinctive man, the animal man and G_d seeks those who go, not as
an animal, but that responds to the part of us which is from above.

Ergo the instinctive response of the animal within as opposed to the
instinctive response to the breath of G_d which is also within ...
In this theory, the animal reacts to other animals as potential threat,
potential food, potential competition and even potential co-operation.
And a deity is "instinctively" looked at like another animal.

Idle speculation ... as I can only guess.
But it is an interesting theory.

I have taken you intellectually on a journey into the world of the still
clear voice.
It is ... the way I view the world.
The forces within us. The way we are moved to do the things we do.
And our choices.

It is not about trinity ... that is just the tool I am using to tap into
these forces which we can use to look at these forces.
And trying to deduce the words which drive us is ... impossible unless you
are shown them.

I have seen some of the words within me. "You are my people, I am your G_d"
are only a few of the words. And all I have been shown.
These are words written upon the soul of every Jew. Which can be shown by
the outcome.
The words on the soul are like wells of deep water to the point that the
words on paper in any language (I think in english) fail to convey the
words on the soul.
It is like taking a picture of a panorama from a thousand feet up with a
camera. You can see what is there but there is no clarity or details.

If you have not been shown ... and I suspect that very few are shown - this
can only be the way that mad Jew looks at the world - and you cannot know
if it is truth, delusion or lies.
And I who have seen can only say "I do not know if it is delusion or lies."
It is true ... but not necessarily truth. I believe it does not make it so.

So here is what I have found.

On trinity - we have a bum fight within the church at the council of nicea
and this idea was "decided."
The NT was changed to accommodate it. They added in things.
The translators deliberately mistranslated verses to deceive.
People refuse to read what is before them.
Explanations in "mere logic" have no power when you tap these forces deep
within us.
And people believe despite everything.

I even did (naughty me) an experiment.
I asked the christians what their goals were. Things like explaining,
evangelism, getting people saved, truth, light ... all of them.

I then presented the concept of G_d written upon the soul of every Jew ...
the one in charge, so our language approaches him in terms of power,
authority, strength, reputation, and the like.

And I asked them to explain IN OUR LANGUAGE - telling them in advance that
they could not.
Of course they could not as trinity is predicated upon "true G_d from true
G_d" and you cannot use this in a language of might and power, of love and
compassion.

I then raised the stakes and pointed out that every single goal they
purported to believe in failed ... and this was preventing Jews from
"coming to the light."

Trinity was more important than that ...
They set aside everything they "thought" was their goal for this greater
truth.

So you can see ... the power of these words which drive us all is far
greater than logic.
Far greater than what we "think" are our goals.
We think we are doing one thing. We are doing something else.
And this is all ... instinctive.

I note (as I have pointed out many times but few listen) that JC approached
it this way.
Jews know whom they worship.
Gentiles do not.
Jews are supposed to worship in a mew way, in the knowledge of who he is -
and also in spirit and truth.
Gentiles are supposed to worship him without knowledge of who and what he
is - in spirit and truth.

I am testing this. I can find no evidence to worship in spirit and truth -
but them again - what evidence is there? how can I know?
Ah - the problems of a man who cannot see the spiritual.
Still, I look, think ...and laugh at myself.

Nothing is as it seems. Ever.

And now you all have ... not answers.
I have none.
Nor of a deity.
But a way of looking at the world which may or may not be true.
Yet ... it is the way I look.
Shrug.

Everyone has to deal with me, one way or another.
Mostly by ignoring me.
Now everyone knows what I look for.
And that ... will make things worse.

It is a strange world where you are not in charge of your own mind. Your
thoughts? Yes. Your choices, yes. But ... watch the hand of the one who
directs us.
Nothing is as it seems. NOTHING.

This has never been about trinity, not to me. It is about psychology.

BTW - a slight change of topic.
Try this.

"I am the G_d who took you out of the land of Egypt ..."
If you approach G_d ... you can call upon the one who took ME out of the
land of Egypt" if and only if he did so, if you consider he took "ME" out.
You can approach the G_d who took my ancestors out of the land of Egypt" if
you are a Jew and think he took your ancestors out.
You can approach the G_d who took "the Jews" out of Egypt if you are not a
Jew and yet consider he did so.

By naming him, you define not only who he is, and what he did - but your
own relationship to it.
JC named a new named for G_d.
He called him father.
The relationship he described is as a son.
You can approach G_d as "the one who took me out of the land of Egypt" and
not approach him as father.
You can approach him as Father without the coming out of Egypt bit.

JC did not define the way to salvation with G_d.
JC defined the way to salvation to G_d in ONE specific name, one specific
relationship.
The only way to enter this specific relationship is ... though JC.

There are other ways to G_d.
There is only one way to G_d in the name of father.

Exclusivity was an eighth century idea.
A change of "the way" to "the only way."

This change of topic is called distraction.

Nobody will be able to talk about my way of looking at the world.
Everyone will discuss ... "Only christians are saved."

[Ike]

On 5/14/2013 7:22 PM, Mordecai wrote:
>
>
> Pete wrote:
>>
>
> Clipping everything because I have said for a long time "Nothing is as it
> seems."
>
> There are questions but they take us into another place.
> What was presented here was a conflict between what people believed - and
> what they read.
> What people believed (and I know this is not you ...) is Trinity and that
> JC is G_d.

Jesus IS God, and it's a fact proven throughout BOTH testaments, moron.

Ike

[Mordecai]

Thank you for proving the point.

[Ike]

On 5/19/2013 1:32 PM, Mordecai wrote:
>
>
> Ike wrote:
>>
>> On 5/14/2013 7:22 PM, Mordecai wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Pete wrote:
>>>>
>>>
>>> Clipping everything because I have said for a long time "Nothing is as it
>>> seems."
>>>
>>> There are questions but they take us into another place.
>>> What was presented here was a conflict between what people believed - and
>>> what they read.
>>> What people believed (and I know this is not you ...) is Trinity and that
>>> JC is G_d.
>>
>> Jesus IS God, and it's a fact proven throughout BOTH testaments, moron.
>>
>> Ike
>
> Thank you for proving the point.

Yes, that you don't have one, as usual.

Ike

[Linda Lee]

On May 19, 1:32 pm, Mordecai <"mldavis(please dont

Even the disbelieving Jews of the Messiah's day knew he was saying he
was God; why don't you understand it?

John 5:18, "Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he
not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his
Father, MAKING HIMSELF EQUAL WITH GOD."

[Up from the Abyss]

"Linda Lee" wrote:

> Mordecai wrote:
> >
> > Thank you for proving the point.

That he did.

> Even the disbelieving Jews of the Messiah's day knew he
> was saying he was God; why don't you understand it?

I still don't see it that way Linda. I see that they perceived
and understood it as they wished to see it.

> John 5:18, "Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him,
> because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also
> that God was his Father, MAKING HIMSELF EQUAL
> WITH GOD."

You claim to be a child of "God", are you making yourself
equal with "God"? Because that is the manner that your
claim must be understood in order to uphold the above.

Mal 2:10 Have we not all one father? hath not one God
created us? why do we deal treacherously every man
against his brother, profaning the covenant of our fathers?

[Linda Lee]

On May 21, 4:06 am, "Up from the Abyss" <U...@Abyss.net> wrote:
> "Linda Lee" wrote:
> > Mordecai wrote:
>
> > > Thank you for proving the point.
>
> That he did.

Yes, believers accept that Yahashua` the Messiah was God in the flesh
as the only Saviour.

>
> > Even the disbelieving Jews of the Messiah's day knew he
> > was saying he was God; why don't you understand it?
>
> I still don't see it that way Linda

Of course not; you don't see anything.

> I see that they perceived
> and understood it as they wished to see it.

Disbelieving Jews understood what he was saying and were offended by
it. That is why the Messiah said they were damned; they SAW, yet they
still rejected him and therefore would die in their sins.

Joh 9:35 Jesus heard that they had cast him out; and when he had
found him, he said unto him, Dost thou believe on the Son of God?
Joh 9:36 He answered and said, Who is he, Lord, that I might believe
on him?
Joh 9:37 And Jesus said unto him, Thou hast both seen him, and it is
he that talketh with thee.
Joh 9:38 And he said, Lord, I believe. And he worshipped him.
Joh 9:39 And Jesus said, For judgment I am come into this world, that
they which see not might see; and that they which see might be made
blind.
Joh 9:40 And some of the Pharisees which were with him heard these
words, and said unto him, Are we blind also?
Joh 9:41 Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no
sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth.


Mat_13:14 And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which
saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing
ye shall see, and shall not perceive:
Mat_13:15 For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are
dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time
they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should
understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should
heal the

>
> > John 5:18, "Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him,
> > because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also
> > that God was his Father, MAKING HIMSELF EQUAL
> > WITH GOD."
>
> You claim to be a child of "God", are you making yourself
> equal with "God"?  Because that is the manner that your
> claim must be understood in order to uphold the above.

That is baloney. The "only begotten Son of God" is different than the
children of God; the only begotten Son of God was God in the flesh as
THE Son of Man, i.e. The Messiah.

>
> Mal 2:10 Have we not all one father? hath not one God
> created us? why do we deal treacherously every man
> against his brother, profaning the covenant of our fathers?

Mal. 2:17 "Ye have wearied the LORD with your words. Yet ye say,
Wherein have we wearied him? When ye say, Every one that doeth evil is
good in the sight of the LORD, and he delighteth in them; or, Where is
the God of judgment?"

[Mordecai]

The issue is not Trinity ... but when a verse disagrees with Trinity, what
does the person do?

The issue. JC wanted his followers to believe in G_d and "ALSO" to believe
in him. Note, I can say JC wants this because ... HC SAID this is what he
wanted.
He was VERY SPECIFIC on both what he desired and what he commanded his
followers to do.

So along comes his followers and "fred nerk" told them how to think and how
to act.
Do they believe in G_d and ALSO believe in JC? or do they believe in JC as
G_d as fred told them to think? Thus just believing in G_d which includes
JC.

Thus the contradiction between what they are told to do by fred nerk ...
and what JC commands them to do.

Second issue. In defending Trinity - they THEN need to explain what JC
meant in this verse.
Note the amount of explanations. None.
They all teach on why they ought to believe in Trinity ... but none explain
how to deal with this verse.

We have had four responses ... none have explained.
One demanded I prove something to them .. one asked for clarification
(legitimate) and two ignored the verses entirely.
One has deliberately cut everything in their attempts to avoid the issue,
and the second accepted and legitimized the evasion.

So we have a unified faith in Trinity ... an acceptance of a problem with
this verse if you believe in Trinity (in this case, lack of a response is
itself a response)
And people explaining why they believe in trinity ... BUT NONE deal with
the verse.
They ignore it.

If they had a set of scissors, they would cut it out of the bible.

Interesting response to facts which disagree with them.
DO NOT DISCUSS IT.
Ignore it.
Pretend it does not exist.
No discussion of the verse is allowed.

As for the observation of the hidden motives of the heart ... that takes
people out of their safe zone where beliefs and choices are on the
intellectual level, and the idea of instinctive responses verses "another
way" is a positive threat.

As an aside to you, note that in dealing with your body in a non intuitive
way has had a positive result on your arthritic hands.
The same is true when dealing with everything from advertisements to
propaganda, a defence against others manipulating you.
If we understand why we behave like we do, we have some control and are not
compelled to act instinctively. we can act "counter intuitively."

I have been playing with these sorts of forces, physical and psychological
- for quite a while. Things are not what they seem. Not in terms of the
back, not in terms of people, not in any terms I can examine.

Discussing Trinity moves things back to the area where they are
comfortable.
Theology and beliefs without the demands of actually thinking.

This is very superficial psychology.
The move to theology changes the subject and when the subject is changed -
they do not have to deal with the issue.
If they cut out the verse, the do not have to deal with the issue.

And the reason they need an out so as not to deal with the issue ... is
they cannot deal with the issue.

Ike won the debate.
He changed the subject. That is the only thing that matters to him ...
avoiding the issue.
And alas, he already has his reward.

[Linda Lee]

On May 21, 5:57 am, Mordecai <"mldavis(please dont

There is no contradiction; the Messiah told us to PRAY TO THE FATHER
IN HIS [MESSIAH'S] NAME. Rack your brain, and you might find a reason
for that.

John 20:28 "And Thomas answered and said unto him [Christ], My Lord
and my God."

[Ike]

On 5/21/2013 4:06 AM, Up from the Abyss wrote:
> "Linda Lee" wrote:
>> Mordecai wrote:
>>>
>>> Thank you for proving the point.
>
> That he did.
>
>
>> Even the disbelieving Jews of the Messiah's day knew he
>> was saying he was God; why don't you understand it?
>
> I still don't see it that way Linda. I see that they perceived
> and understood it as they wished to see it.

That's bullshit: They saw it exactly as it was; so did Jesus, which is
why He gave the response He did, i.e. "is it not written, "ye are gods?"

In other words, Jesus CONFIRMED that He was God by not disputing the fact.

Then He made the Jews to choke on the rest of the story.

>> John 5:18, "Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him,
>> because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also
>> that God was his Father, MAKING HIMSELF EQUAL
>> WITH GOD."
>
> You claim to be a child of "God", are you making yourself
> equal with "God"?

And this is the part that people, even Christians, choke on.

There are three monikers for Jesus that, when said in reference to God,
never appear alone, but never appear together--King of kings, Lord of
lords, and, yes, God of gods.

Christians don't have a problem with the first two--the readily accept
that Jesus is the King and the believers are the kings, and that Jesus
is the Lord and the believers are the lords.

It's the last one they choke on, i.e. Jesus is God, and the believers
are gods, but always in the context of "One God," that is, God is the
many who are One and the One who is many. (As it is from the very
beginning of the Word, where the prophet who wrote Genesis toggled
between the singular and plural for both God and man.)

Even Linda Liar went so far as to try and change the text to "ye are
god's" in her blasphemous efforts to get around the plainly obvious facts.

> Because that is the manner that your
> claim must be understood in order to uphold the above.

And it should be, with the caveat that first comes the judgment, and no
one knows anything until then.

> Mal 2:10 Have we not all one father? hath not one God
> created us? why do we deal treacherously every man
> against his brother, profaning the covenant of our fathers?

Now go and read John 17 and learn what "One" is, i.e. a unified whole
derived from a composite.

(Same technique John uses in Revelation, where he introduces us to the
"seven Spirits of God," and doesn't even mention a unified (i.e. "Holy")
Spirit until the very last chapter of the book.)

Ike

[Ike]

On 5/21/2013 5:27 AM, Linda Lee wrote:
> On May 21, 4:06 am, "Up from the Abyss" <U...@Abyss.net> wrote:
>> "Linda Lee" wrote:
>>> Mordecai wrote:
>>
>>>> Thank you for proving the point.
>>
>> That he did.
>
> Yes, believers accept that Yahashua` the Messiah was God in the flesh
> as the only Saviour.
>
>>
>>> Even the disbelieving Jews of the Messiah's day knew he
>>> was saying he was God; why don't you understand it?
>>
>> I still don't see it that way Linda
>
> Of course not; you don't see anything.

Neither do you.

[snip to the proof]

>> You claim to be a child of "God", are you making yourself
>> equal with "God"? Because that is the manner that your
>> claim must be understood in order to uphold the above.
>
> That is baloney. The "only begotten Son of God" is different than the
> children of God;

Only in the sense that He is the elder brother of the brethren, and the
focal point of all forces as King of kings, Lord of lords, and, yes, God
of gods.

Romans 8:
16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the
children of God:
17 � And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with
Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified
together.

This is what Jesus was saying when He pointed to scripture that says "ye
are gods."

Don't choke on it.

Ike

[Ike]

On 5/21/2013 5:57 AM, Mordecai wrote:

> The issue is not Trinity ... but when a verse disagrees with Trinity, what
> does the person do?

There are no verses that disagree with the Trinity.

> The issue. JC wanted his followers to believe in G_d and "ALSO" to believe
> in him.

That doesn't conflict with the Trinity, moron; IT REINFORCES IT.

[snip the rest of the ignorant prattle]

Ike

[Dr. R. Knapp]

On May 21, 4:06 pm, "Up from the Abyss" <U...@Abyss.net> wrote:
> "Linda Lee" wrote:
> > Mordecai wrote:
>
> > > Thank you for proving the point.
>
> That he did.
>
> > Even the disbelieving Jews of the Messiah's day knew he
> > was saying he was God; why don't you understand it?
>
> I still don't see it that way Linda.  I see that they perceived
> and understood it as they wished to see it.

Which is what you just did!

>
> > John 5:18, "Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him,
> > because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also
> > that God was his Father, MAKING HIMSELF EQUAL
> > WITH GOD."

The capitals is not what the Bible used, that is your want to make a
point even if, it was not used as you wanted or need it to be, for
your view.

> You claim to be a child of "God", are you making yourself
> equal with "God"?  Because that is the manner that your
> claim must be understood in order to uphold the above.

That is stupid, no place did that remark make one equal with God or
anyone else. God says all that follow Him is His child and a true
believer is a child of God. Their is no "Because" or any "MUST BE
understood" No WAY, you think because you said it and so has to be
your way and you view. When the bible does not agree with you.
Do we now claim you are a child of the Devil and you now equal with
the Devil, would be as ignorant as your statements are here.

Dr. R. Knapp

[Linda Lee]

On May 21, 10:10 am, Ike <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/21/2013 5:27 AM, Linda Lee wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 21, 4:06 am, "Up from the Abyss" <U...@Abyss.net> wrote:
> >> "Linda Lee" wrote:
> >>> Mordecai wrote:
>
> >>>> Thank you for proving the point.
>
> >> That he did.
>
> > Yes, believers accept that Yahashua` the Messiah was God in the flesh
> > as the only Saviour.
>
> >>> Even the disbelieving Jews of the Messiah's day knew he
> >>> was saying he was God; why don't you understand it?
>
> >> I still don't see it that way Linda
>
> > Of course not; you don't see anything.
>
> Neither do you.
>
> [snip to the proof]
>
> >> You claim to be a child of "God", are you making yourself
> >> equal with "God"?  Because that is the manner that your
> >> claim must be understood in order to uphold the above.
>
> > That is baloney. The "only begotten Son of God" is different than the
> > children of God;
>
> Only in the sense that He is the elder brother of the brethren,

Are you Mormon? He was only so as the firstborn of many resurrected
brethren:

Rom 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be
conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn
among many brethren.
Rom 8:30 Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and
whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he
also glorified.

>and the
> focal point of all forces as King of kings, Lord of lords, and, yes, God
> of gods

In Matt. 23:8 Christ said, "one is your Master, even Christ; and all
ye are brethren".

>
> Romans 8:
> 16  The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the
> children of God:
> 17  And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with
> Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified
> together.
>
> This is what Jesus was saying when He pointed to scripture that says "ye
> are gods."

The translation 'Ye are God's [elohiym] and all of you children of the
most High' makes much more sense and prevents people like you thinking
you're equal to God.

[Linda Lee]

On May 21, 11:45 am, "Dr. R. Knapp" <rwkn...@aim.com> wrote:
> On May 21, 4:06 pm, "Up from the Abyss" <U...@Abyss.net> wrote:
>
> > "Linda Lee" wrote:
> > > Mordecai wrote:
>
> > > > Thank you for proving the point.
>
> > That he did.
>
> > > Even the disbelieving Jews of the Messiah's day knew he
> > > was saying he was God; why don't you understand it?
>
> > I still don't see it that way Linda.  I see that they perceived
> > and understood it as they wished to see it.
>
> Which is what you just did!
>
>
>
> > > John 5:18, "Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him,
> > > because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also
> > > that God was his Father, MAKING HIMSELF EQUAL
> > > WITH GOD."
>
> The capitals is not what the Bible used, that is your want to make a
> point even if, it was not used as you wanted or need it to be, for
> your view.

You're replying to "Abyss", but I wrote out John 5:18 and capitalized
what I wanted to emphasize; that the Jews had understood the Messiah,
but rejected what he was saying and claimed it was blasphemy.

You have to look at the > > >'s when looking at posts with more than
one author in them because the responses are mixed in with the
original.

[Ike]

On 5/22/2013 3:55 PM, Linda Lee wrote:
> On May 21, 10:10 am, Ike <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 5/21/2013 5:27 AM, Linda Lee wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On May 21, 4:06 am, "Up from the Abyss" <U...@Abyss.net> wrote:
>>>> "Linda Lee" wrote:
>>>>> Mordecai wrote:
>>
>>>>>> Thank you for proving the point.
>>
>>>> That he did.
>>
>>> Yes, believers accept that Yahashua` the Messiah was God in the flesh
>>> as the only Saviour.
>>
>>>>> Even the disbelieving Jews of the Messiah's day knew he
>>>>> was saying he was God; why don't you understand it?
>>
>>>> I still don't see it that way Linda
>>
>>> Of course not; you don't see anything.
>>
>> Neither do you.
>>
>> [snip to the proof]
>>
>>>> You claim to be a child of "God", are you making yourself
>>>> equal with "God"? Because that is the manner that your
>>>> claim must be understood in order to uphold the above.
>>
>>> That is baloney. The "only begotten Son of God" is different than the
>>> children of God;
>>
>> Only in the sense that He is the elder brother of the brethren,
>
> Are you Mormon?

Mormons don't have anything to do with it, moron.

> He was only so as the firstborn of many resurrected
> brethren:

Who themselves are "the sons of God."

What's your point, moron?

> Rom 8:29-30

...doesn't have anything to do with the point.

>> and the
>> focal point of all forces as King of kings, Lord of lords, and, yes, God
>> of gods
>
>
> In Matt. 23:8 Christ said, "one is your Master, even Christ; and all
> ye are brethren".

And that statement has nothing to do with the point.

In fact, it REINFORCES what I said: "...and the focal point of all
forces as King of kings, Lord of lords, and, YES, GOD OF gods."

At what point did you get lost, Jezebel?

>> Romans 8:
>> 16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the
>> children of God:
>> 17 And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with
>> Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified
>> together.
>>
>> This is what Jesus was saying when He pointed to scripture that says "ye
>> are gods."
>
> The translation 'Ye are God's [elohiym] and all of you children of the
> most High' makes much more sense and prevents people like you thinking
> you're equal to God.

NO, IT SHOWS HOW MUCH OF A BLASPHEMER YOU ARE, AND HOW DESPERATE YOU ARE
TO KEEP YOUR LIES INSTEAD OF DEALING WITH THE TRUTH, JEZEBEL.

It also proves that you're as evil as the Pharisees were, as you're
doing the same thing...

Mt 23:13 But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye
shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in
yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.

Jesus embarrassed the false Jewish leaders by pointing out that they
wouldn't accept the obvious, i.e. they were supposed to be "gods" in
their own right, and then chided them because they wouldn't allow anyone
else to believe it was possible, either.

Hence, you = Pharisees (and every other opponent of Christ, for that
matter).

Ike

[Linda Lee]

On May 23, 4:05 am, Ike <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com> wrote:

snip

Shut up, Elymas.

[Linda Lee]

On May 23, 4:05 am, Ike <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/22/2013 3:55 PM, Linda Lee wrote:
>
> >> Romans 8:
> >> 16  The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the
> >> children of God:
> >> 17  And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with
> >> Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified
> >> together.
>
> >> This is what Jesus was saying when He pointed to scripture that says "ye
> >> are gods."
>
> > The translation 'Ye are God's [elohiym] and all of you children of the
> > most High' makes much more sense and prevents people like you thinking
> > you're equal to God.
>
> NO, IT SHOWS HOW MUCH OF A BLASPHEMER YOU ARE, AND HOW DESPERATE YOU ARE
> TO KEEP YOUR LIES INSTEAD OF DEALING WITH THE TRUTH, JEZEBEL.

YOUR idea of the truth is that believers shall be as gods; that we
will be as gods is the same lie the serpent/the Devil told Eve:
Gen 3:1 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field
which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God
said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?
Gen 3:2 And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit
of the trees of the garden:
Gen 3:3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the
garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch
it, lest ye die.
Gen 3:4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely
die:
Gen 3:5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your
eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

There is only ONE god; Elymas, and that is true forever:

Deu_4:35 Unto thee it was shewed, that thou mightest know that the
LORD he is God; there is none else beside him.

Deu_4:39 Know therefore this day, and consider it in thine heart,
that the LORD he is God in heaven above, and upon the earth beneath:
there is none else.

1Ki_8:60 That all the people of the earth may know that the LORD is
God, and that there is none else.

Isa_45:5 I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God
beside me: I girded thee, though thou hast not known me:
.
Isa_45:22 Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth:
for I am God, and there is none else.

Isa_46:9 Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there
is none else; I am God, and there is none like me,

Eph_4:6 One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all,
and in you all.



"John 10:34
Jesus answered them, is it not written in your law,.... In the law
which was given unto them, of which they boasted, and pretended to
understand, and interpret, even in Psa_82:6; for the law includes not
only the Pentateuch, but all the books of the Old Testament: it is an
observation of one of the Jewish doctors (t), that

"with the wise men of blessed memory, it is found in many places that
the word law comprehends the Prophets and the Hagiographa.''

Among which last stands the book of Psalms; and this may be confirmed
by a passage out of the Talmud (u); it is asked,

"from whence does the resurrection of the dead appear, מן התורה, "out
of the law?"''

It is answered,

"as it is said in Psa_84:4, "Blessed are they that dwell in thy house,
they will still praise thee, Selah; they do praise thee", it is not
said, but "they will praise thee"; from hence is a proof of the
resurrection of the dead, "out of the law".''

The same question is again put, and then Isa_52:8 is cited, and the
like observation made upon it. Moreover, this is a way of speaking
used by the Jews, when they introduce another citing a passage of
Scripture thus (w), הלא כתיב בתורתכם, "is it not written in your law",
Deu_4:9, "only take heed to thyself", &c. so here the Scripture
follows,

I said, ye are gods? which is spoken to civil magistrates, so called,
because of their authority and power; and because they do, in some
sort, represent the divine majesty, in the government of nations and
kingdoms. Many of the Jewish writers, by "gods", understand "the
angels". The Targum paraphrases the words thus:

"I said ye are accounted as angels, as the angels on high, all of
you;''

and to this sense some of their commentators interpret it. Jarchi's
gloss is, ye are gods; that is, angels; for when I gave the law to
you, it was on this account, that the angel of death might not any
more rule over you: the note of Aben Ezra is, "and the children of the
Most High": as angels; and the sense is, your soul is as the soul of
angels: hence the (x) Jew charges Christ with seeking refuge in words,
that will not profit, or be any help to him, when he cites these
words, showing that magistrates are called gods, when the sense is
only, that they are like to the angels in respect of their souls: but
let it be observed, that it is not said, "ye are as gods", as in
Gen_3:5, but "ye are gods"; not like unto them only, but are in some
sense gods; and besides, to say that they are like to angels, with
respect to their souls, which come from above, is to say no more of
the judges of the earth, than what may be said of every man: to which
may be added, that this objector himself owns, that judges are called
אלהים, "gods", as in Exo_22:9; the cause of both parties shall come
before אלהים, "the judges"; and that even the word is used in this
sense in this very psalm, from whence these words are cited, Psa_82:1,
"he judgeth among" אלהים, "the gods"; and both Kimchi and Ben Melech
interpret this text itself in the same way, and observe, that judges
are called gods, when they judge truly and aright: all which is
sufficient to justify our Lord in the citation of this passage, and
the use he makes of it." - John gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible.



You aren't going to become a god; more likely, you'll wind up in Hell
wondering why Christ didn't believe one as evil and unrepentant as
yourself actually believed in him.

[Up from the Abyss]

"Linda Lee" wrote:

> Up from the Abyss wrote:
> > "Linda Lee" wrote:
> >> Mordecai wrote:
> >>
> >>> Thank you for proving the point.
> >
> > That he did.
>
> Yes, believers accept that Yahashua` the Messiah
> was God in the flesh as the only Saviour.

Got a reference for the name "Yahashua`", or is it
simply a made up name?

And where in your Bible does it specifically state
that anyone must believe that Yehoshua` / Yeshua` /
Jesus is "God" in the flesh?

> >> Even the disbelieving Jews of the Messiah's day knew he
> >> was saying he was God; why don't you understand it?
> >
> > I still don't see it that way Linda
>
> Of course not; you don't see anything.

Of course not. According to you, I have
always been blind.

> > I see that they perceived and understood it as they
> > wished to see it.
>
> Disbelieving Jews understood what he was saying and were
> offended by it. That is why the Messiah said they were
> damned; they SAW, yet they still rejected him and therefore
> would die in their sins.

Just as you are offended by those who keep the commands.
By those who do not believe that Jesus is "God".

> >> John 5:18, "Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him,
> >> because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also
> >> that God was his Father, MAKING HIMSELF EQUAL
> >> WITH GOD."
> >
> > You claim to be a child of "God", are you making yourself
> > equal with "God"? Because that is the manner that your
> > claim must be understood in order to uphold the above.
>
> That is baloney. The "only begotten Son of God" is different
> than the children of God; the only begotten Son of God was
> God in the flesh as THE Son of Man, i.e. The Messiah.

According to the John account, he simply called "God"
his Father.

Do you call "God" your Father?

> > Mal 2:10 Have we not all one father? hath not one God
> > created us? why do we deal treacherously every man
> > against his brother, profaning the covenant of our fathers?
>
> Mal. 2:17 "Ye have wearied the LORD with your words.
> Yet ye say, Wherein have we wearied him? When ye say,
> Every one that doeth evil is good in the sight of the LORD,
> and he delighteth in them; or, Where is the God of judgment?"

Yet in the above, it is clear: "Have we not all one father?"

Isa 66:3d Yea, they have chosen their own ways, and their
soul delighteth in their abominations: 4 I also will choose their
delusions, and will bring their fears upon them; because when
I called, none did answer; when I spake, they did not hear:
but they did that which was evil in mine eyes, and chose that
wherein I delighted not.

[Up from the Abyss]

"Mordecai" wrote:
> Up from the Abyss wrote:
> >
> > You claim to be a child of "God", are you making yourself
> > equal with "God"? Because that is the manner that your
> > claim must be understood in order to uphold the above.
> >
> > Mal 2:10 Have we not all one father? hath not one God
> > created us? why do we deal treacherously every man
> > against his brother, profaning the covenant of our fathers?
>
> The issue is not Trinity ... but when a verse disagrees with
> Trinity, what does the person do?

Indeed.

> The issue. JC wanted his followers to believe in G_d and
> "ALSO" to believe in him. Note, I can say JC wants this

> because ... JC SAID this is what he wanted.

> He was VERY SPECIFIC on both what he desired and
> what he commanded his followers to do.

Indeed.

> So along comes his followers and "fred nerk" told them how
> to think and how to act.
> Do they believe in G_d and ALSO believe in JC? or do they
> believe in JC as G_d as fred told them to think? Thus just
> believing in G_d which includes JC.
>
> Thus the contradiction between what they are told to do by
> fred nerk ... and what JC commands them to do.

Indeed.

Indeed.

[Up from the Abyss]

"Ike" wrote:
> Up from the Abyss wrote:
> > "Linda Lee" wrote:
> >>
> >> Even the disbelieving Jews of the Messiah's day knew he
> >> was saying he was God; why don't you understand it?
> >
> > I still don't see it that way Linda. I see that they perceived
> > and understood it as they wished to see it.
>
> That's bullshit: They saw it exactly as it was;

So, are you saying that their perception of Jesus
was accurate?

> so did Jesus, which is why He gave the response He did, i.e.
> "is it not written, "ye are gods?"

That is from the John 10 account. Not the John 5 account
that was being spoken of here.

And, Jesus simply referred to "God" as "my Father". Which
you no doubt likewise do.

Mal 2:10 Have we not all one father? hath not one God created
us? why do we deal treacherously every man against his brother,
profaning the covenant of our fathers?

Which, Malachi makes it clear, that they considered "God"
as their father.

<snip>

> Even Linda **** went so far as to try and change the text to
> "ye are god's"

I saw that. There is no justification for such.

<snip>

[Up from the Abyss]

"Dr. R. Knapp" wrote:
> Up from the Abyss wrote:
> > "Linda Lee" wrote:
> >>

> >> Even the disbelieving Jews of the Messiah's day knew he
> >> was saying he was God; why don't you understand it?
> >
> > I still don't see it that way Linda. I see that they perceived
> > and understood it as they wished to see it.
>
> Which is what you just did!

So, are you claiming that your perception is correct?

> > You claim to be a child of "God", are you making yourself
> > equal with "God"? Because that is the manner that your
> > claim must be understood in order to uphold the above.
>
> That is stupid, no place did that remark make one equal with
> God or anyone else.

Thank you for proving my point.

[sugarl...@gmail.com]

The real god would not have been the braggart our friend Jee-sickle Chry-nee-ah was. When one is that good, boasting is the anti-imperative.

A priori, we know that Jee-sickle had no divine attributes.


Lanskee aka Johnny "The Way" Khal'Day

[Ike]

On 5/30/2013 6:46 PM, Up from the Abyss wrote:
>
> "Ike" wrote:
>> Up from the Abyss wrote:
>>> "Linda Lee" wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Even the disbelieving Jews of the Messiah's day knew he
>>>> was saying he was God; why don't you understand it?
>>>
>>> I still don't see it that way Linda. I see that they perceived
>>> and understood it as they wished to see it.
>>
>> That's bullshit: They saw it exactly as it was;
>
> So, are you saying that their perception of Jesus
> was accurate?

The discussion wasn't "their perception of Jesus," moron; IT WAS THEIR
PERCEPTION OF WHAT JESUS SAID, and they were TAKING UP STONES to STONE
HIM FOR MAKING HIMSELF EQUAL TO GOD.

You must have ADD or something, because you can't keep your feeble mind
on any given subject.

>> so did Jesus, which is why He gave the response He did, i.e.
>> "is it not written, "ye are gods?"
>
> That is from the John 10 account. Not the John 5 account
> that was being spoken of here.

Bullshit.

The passage referred to was the same one all along, i.e. the one in
which Jesus said "YE ARE GODS," which Jezebel attempts to change to "ye
are god's," which is blasphemy.

> And, Jesus simply referred to "God" as "my Father". Which
> you no doubt likewise do.

NO, Jesus referred to "the Father," a new designation that He had to
employ to distinguish God the Father from God the Son, and God the Holy
Spirit.

Before that, NO ONE referred to God as "the Father" because the Old
Testament peoples didn't perceive of the Trinity (though the Trinity is
fully documented throughout the Old Testament).

> Which, Malachi makes it clear, that they considered "God"
> as their father.

Malachi says no such thing, which is why you didn't quote it.

Malachi COMPARES God to a father, as do many other OT prophets.

They also compare God to a mother, and a son as well.

But NOBODY referred to "the FATHER" as an aspect of God UNTIL JESUS CAME
ALONG.

>> Even Linda **** went so far as to try and change the text to
>> "ye are god's"
>
> I saw that. There is no justification for such.

And that was the point all along, into which you attempted to insert
yourself sideways.

Ike

[Ike]

On 5/24/2013 4:28 PM, Linda Lee wrote:
> On May 23, 4:05 am, Ike <xhermaneicklebe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 5/22/2013 3:55 PM, Linda Lee wrote:
>>
>>>> Romans 8:
>>>> 16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the
>>>> children of God:
>>>> 17 And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with
>>>> Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified
>>>> together.
>>
>>>> This is what Jesus was saying when He pointed to scripture that says "ye
>>>> are gods."
>>
>>> The translation 'Ye are God's [elohiym] and all of you children of the
>>> most High' makes much more sense and prevents people like you thinking
>>> you're equal to God.
>>
>> NO, IT SHOWS HOW MUCH OF A BLASPHEMER YOU ARE, AND HOW DESPERATE YOU ARE
>> TO KEEP YOUR LIES INSTEAD OF DEALING WITH THE TRUTH, JEZEBEL.
>
>
> YOUR idea of the truth is that believers shall be as gods;

That's not "my idea of truth;" that is THE Truth, Jezebel.

What three phrases, when uttered in reference to God, never appear
alone, but never appear all together?

Answer: KING of kings, LORD of lords, and, yes, GOD of gods.

> that we
> will be as gods is the same lie the serpent/the Devil told Eve:

No, it's not.

Satan's lie is that Adam and Eve could be LIKE God, that is, gods APART
from God, which is what Satan herself attempts to be.

(And the irony is that Adam and Eve were ALREADY gods..they just didn't
perceive it.)

> There is only ONE god...

WRONG, Jezebel.

"I have said, 'ye are gods, and children of THE MOST HIGH."

MOST HIGH requires "less high," moron.

And that's where Jesus enters into the picture, being the FIRSTBORN of MANY.

> and that is true forever:

You have no idea what's "true forever," Jezebel.

> Deu_4:35 Unto thee it was shewed, that thou mightest know that the
> LORD he is God; there is none else beside him.

Yes, Jesus is Lord of lords, and God of gods, and NO ONE ELSE sits in
that titular position.

But there are STILL "lords" and "gods" in addition to Jesus, Jezebel;
otherwise, there would be no one for Jesus to be KING, GOD, AND LORD OF,
as in "King of kings," "Lord of lords," and, yes, "GOD of gods."

[snip the rest of Jezebel's ignorant citation of scripture]

> You aren't going to become a god; more likely, you'll wind up in Hell
> wondering why Christ didn't believe one as evil and unrepentant as
> yourself actually believed in him.

I am neither evil nor unrepentant.

Those are YOUR failings, not mine, Jezebel.

Ike

[Up from the Abyss]

"Ike" wrote:
> Up from the Abyss wrote:

> > "Ike" wrote:
> >>
> >> That's bullshit: They saw it exactly as it was;
> >
> > So, are you saying that their perception of Jesus
> > was accurate?
>
> The discussion wasn't "their perception of Jesus," moron;
> IT WAS THEIR PERCEPTION OF WHAT JESUS
> SAID, and they were TAKING UP STONES to STONE
> HIM FOR MAKING HIMSELF EQUAL TO GOD.

So, you are claiming that they failed to understand what
Jesus in almost everything but this? LMAO!

<snip>

> > And, Jesus simply referred to "God" as "my Father".
> > Which you no doubt likewise do.
>
> NO, Jesus referred to "the Father," a new designation
> that He had to employ to distinguish God the Father
> from God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit.

LMAO! Do I really to cite references in which it was
"my father" or, father of me.

Of course, Jeremiah 3:19 spoke of no such thing LOL.

> Before that, NO ONE referred to God as "the Father"

Yet, you can not dismiss Malachi, in which it clearly
speaks of "God" as being one father to them all.

> because the Old Testament peoples didn't perceive of
> the Trinity

jwsheffield disagrees with you.

> (though the Trinity is fully documented
> throughout the Old Testament).

LMAO! And pigs have wings.

> > Which, Malachi makes it clear, that they considered
> > "God" as their father.
>
> Malachi says no such thing, which is why you didn't
> quote it.

Malachi 2:10. What, can't you find such a simple thing
within so short a book?

> Malachi COMPARES God to a father, as do many
> other OT prophets.
>
> They also compare God to a mother, and a son as well.

Cites?

> But NOBODY referred to "the FATHER" as an aspect
> of God UNTIL JESUS CAME ALONG.

Then Jesus failed Jeremiah 3:19.

<snip>

[duke]

On Wed, 10 Jul 2013 18:10:59 -0700, "Up from the Abyss" <U...@Abyss.net> wrote:

>
>"Ike" wrote:
>> Up from the Abyss wrote:
>> > "Ike" wrote:
>> >>
>> >> That's bullshit: They saw it exactly as it was;
>> >
>> > So, are you saying that their perception of Jesus
>> > was accurate?
>>
>> The discussion wasn't "their perception of Jesus," moron;
>> IT WAS THEIR PERCEPTION OF WHAT JESUS
>> SAID, and they were TAKING UP STONES to STONE
>> HIM FOR MAKING HIMSELF EQUAL TO GOD.

>So, you are claiming that they failed to understand what
>Jesus in almost everything but this? LMAO!

He never revealed himself as divine, and hence made others think in terms of
declaring himself as equal to God.

>> > And, Jesus simply referred to "God" as "my Father".
>> > Which you no doubt likewise do.
>>
>> NO, Jesus referred to "the Father," a new designation
>> that He had to employ to distinguish God the Father
>> from God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit.

>LMAO! Do I really to cite references in which it was
>"my father" or, father of me.
>Of course, Jeremiah 3:19 spoke of no such thing LOL.

OT Jews didn't know of the triune Godhead.

>> Before that, NO ONE referred to God as "the Father"
>Yet, you can not dismiss Malachi, in which it clearly
>speaks of "God" as being one father to them all.

Of course - creator.

>> because the Old Testament peoples didn't perceive of
>> the Trinity
>jwsheffield disagrees with you.

It's a fact.

>> (though the Trinity is fully documented
>> throughout the Old Testament).
>LMAO! And pigs have wings.

Jesus revealed the triune Godhead.


The dukester, American - American

********************************************
Repeal Obama - most impotent president ever.
Five major US scandals and still going strong:
a)Fast/Furious,b)IRS,c)NSA d)News Phone Records,
e)Selective enforcement of environmental laws
********************************************

[Ike]

On 7/11/2013 3:11 PM, duke wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Jul 2013 18:10:59 -0700, "Up from the Abyss" <U...@Abyss.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> "Ike" wrote:
>>> Up from the Abyss wrote:
>>>> "Ike" wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> That's bullshit: They saw it exactly as it was;
>>>>
>>>> So, are you saying that their perception of Jesus
>>>> was accurate?
>>>
>>> The discussion wasn't "their perception of Jesus," moron;
>>> IT WAS THEIR PERCEPTION OF WHAT JESUS
>>> SAID, and they were TAKING UP STONES to STONE
>>> HIM FOR MAKING HIMSELF EQUAL TO GOD.
>
>> So, you are claiming that they failed to understand what
>> Jesus in almost everything but this? LMAO!
>
> He never revealed himself as divine, and hence made others think in terms of
> declaring himself as equal to God.

Bullshit.

When Thomas said, "My Lord and My God," Jesus had two choices--rebuke
him for taking the Lord's Name in vain, or praise him for his insight.

Jesus did the latter.

And when the Jews wanted to stone Jesus for calling Himself "the Son of
man," He didn't deny it; He turned it on their heads.

>>>> And, Jesus simply referred to "God" as "my Father".
>>>> Which you no doubt likewise do.
>>>
>>> NO, Jesus referred to "the Father," a new designation
>>> that He had to employ to distinguish God the Father
>>> from God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit.
>
>> LMAO! Do I really to cite references in which it was
>> "my father" or, father of me.
>> Of course, Jeremiah 3:19 spoke of no such thing LOL.
>
> OT Jews didn't know of the triune Godhead.

You mean, the people who were so ignorant of their own scriptures that
they crucified their own Messiah?

Oh, and the Triune Godhead is declared all through Old Testament
prophecy, moron.

>>> Before that, NO ONE referred to God as "the Father"
>> Yet, you can not dismiss Malachi, in which it clearly
>> speaks of "God" as being one father to them all.
>
> Of course - creator.

Now try addressing the point, moron.

>>> because the Old Testament peoples didn't perceive of
>>> the Trinity
>> jwsheffield disagrees with you.
>
> It's a fact.

You wouldn't know "a fact" if it tap danced across your nose.

>>> (though the Trinity is fully documented
>>> throughout the Old Testament).
>> LMAO! And pigs have wings.
>
> Jesus revealed the triune Godhead.

False. The OLD TESTAMENT PROPHETS revealed the triune Godhead, as in
Isaiah 9:6.

Ike

[duke]

On Tue, 16 Jul 2013 06:27:02 -0400, Ike <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 7/11/2013 3:11 PM, duke wrote:
>> On Wed, 10 Jul 2013 18:10:59 -0700, "Up from the Abyss" <U...@Abyss.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "Ike" wrote:
>>>> Up from the Abyss wrote:
>>>>> "Ike" wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's bullshit: They saw it exactly as it was;
>>>>>
>>>>> So, are you saying that their perception of Jesus
>>>>> was accurate?
>>>>
>>>> The discussion wasn't "their perception of Jesus," moron;
>>>> IT WAS THEIR PERCEPTION OF WHAT JESUS
>>>> SAID, and they were TAKING UP STONES to STONE
>>>> HIM FOR MAKING HIMSELF EQUAL TO GOD.
>>
>>> So, you are claiming that they failed to understand what
>>> Jesus in almost everything but this? LMAO!
>>
>> He never revealed himself as divine, and hence made others think in terms of
>> declaring himself as equal to God.
>
>Bullshit.
>
>When Thomas said, "My Lord and My God," Jesus had two choices--rebuke
>him for taking the Lord's Name in vain, or praise him for his insight.
>Jesus did the latter.

That was the RISEN Lord Thomas was addressing.

>And when the Jews wanted to stone Jesus for calling Himself "the Son of
>man," He didn't deny it; He turned it on their heads.

For calling himself a man?

>> OT Jews didn't know of the triune Godhead.

>You mean, the people who were so ignorant of their own scriptures that
>they crucified their own Messiah?

They are still waiting on the messiah/warrior king in 2013.

>Oh, and the Triune Godhead is declared all through Old Testament
>prophecy, moron.

Never revealed as a triune Godhead.

>>>> Before that, NO ONE referred to God as "the Father"
>>> Yet, you can not dismiss Malachi, in which it clearly
>>> speaks of "God" as being one father to them all.
>> Of course - creator.
>Now try addressing the point, moron.

Done.

>>>> because the Old Testament peoples didn't perceive of
>>>> the Trinity
>>> jwsheffield disagrees with you.
>> It's a fact.

>You wouldn't know "a fact" if it tap danced across your nose.

Jesus revealed the triune Godhead.

>>>> (though the Trinity is fully documented
>>>> throughout the Old Testament).
>>> LMAO! And pigs have wings.
>>
>> Jesus revealed the triune Godhead.

>False. The OLD TESTAMENT PROPHETS revealed the triune Godhead, as in
>Isaiah 9:6.

Isaiah 9:6 (New International Version)
6 For to us a child is born,
to us a son is given,
and the government will be on his shoulders.
And he will be called
Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

Where God, where triune Godhead?

>Ike

[Ike]

On 7/16/2013 1:13 PM, duke wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Jul 2013 06:27:02 -0400, Ike <xhermanei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 7/11/2013 3:11 PM, duke wrote:
>>> On Wed, 10 Jul 2013 18:10:59 -0700, "Up from the Abyss" <U...@Abyss.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Ike" wrote:
>>>>> Up from the Abyss wrote:
>>>>>> "Ike" wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That's bullshit: They saw it exactly as it was;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, are you saying that their perception of Jesus
>>>>>> was accurate?
>>>>>
>>>>> The discussion wasn't "their perception of Jesus," moron;
>>>>> IT WAS THEIR PERCEPTION OF WHAT JESUS
>>>>> SAID, and they were TAKING UP STONES to STONE
>>>>> HIM FOR MAKING HIMSELF EQUAL TO GOD.
>>>
>>>> So, you are claiming that they failed to understand what
>>>> Jesus in almost everything but this? LMAO!
>>>
>>> He never revealed himself as divine, and hence made others think in terms of
>>> declaring himself as equal to God.
>>
>> Bullshit.
>>
>> When Thomas said, "My Lord and My God," Jesus had two choices--rebuke
>> him for taking the Lord's Name in vain, or praise him for his insight.
>> Jesus did the latter.
>
> That was the RISEN Lord Thomas was addressing.

Which was THE SAME LORD that WENT INTO THE GROUND, asshole.

>> And when the Jews wanted to stone Jesus for calling Himself "the Son of
>> man," He didn't deny it; He turned it on their heads.
>
> For calling himself a man?

Thanks for demonstrating your ignorance yet again, moron. In scripture,
"son of man" refers to God.

Then again, Jesus didn't say "son of Man;" He said "I and My Father are
One," which means that He declared Himself EQUAL TO GOD.

And that's precisely what the Jews said, fool:

30 I and my Father are one.
31 Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.
32 Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my
Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?
33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not;
but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.

>>> OT Jews didn't know of the triune Godhead.
>
>> You mean, the people who were so ignorant of their own scriptures that
>> they crucified their own Messiah?
>
> They are still waiting on the messiah/warrior king in 2013.

Which demonstrates how ignorant they STILL are of their own scriptures.

>> Oh, and the Triune Godhead is declared all through Old Testament
>> prophecy, moron.
>
> Never revealed as a triune Godhead.

Blasphemer.

Three Names for God--Addonai, Elohiym, Jehovah.

Three titles for Christ (but never held at the same time)...

Isa 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the
government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called
Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The
Prince of Peace.

As I've said many times before, you're an antichristian heretic even
according to CATHOLIC standards, and that takes some doing.

>>>>> Before that, NO ONE referred to God as "the Father"
>>>> Yet, you can not dismiss Malachi, in which it clearly
>>>> speaks of "God" as being one father to them all.
>>> Of course - creator.
>> Now try addressing the point, moron.
>
> Done.

Not even close.

>>>>> because the Old Testament peoples didn't perceive of
>>>>> the Trinity
>>>> jwsheffield disagrees with you.
>>> It's a fact.
>
>> You wouldn't know "a fact" if it tap danced across your nose.
>
> Jesus revealed the triune Godhead.

Nope.

The Godhead is revealed in the Old Testament.

Jud 13:
2 And there was a certain man of Zorah, of the family of the Danites,
whose name was Manoah; and his wife was barren, and bare not.
3 And the angel of the LORD appeared unto the woman, and said unto her,
Behold now, thou art barren, and bearest not: but thou shalt conceive,
and bear a son.
4 Now therefore beware, I pray thee, and drink not wine nor strong
drink, and eat not any unclean thing:
5 For, lo, thou shalt conceive, and bear a son; and no razor shall come
on his head: for the child shall be a Nazarite unto God from the womb:
and he shall begin to deliver Israel out of the hand of the Philistines.
6 Then the woman came and told her husband, saying, A man of God came
unto me, and his countenance was like the countenance of an angel of
God, very terrible: but I asked him not whence he was, neither told he
me his name:
7 But he said unto me, Behold, thou shalt conceive, and bear a son; and
now drink no wine nor strong drink, neither eat any unclean thing: for
the child shall be a Nazarite to God from the womb to the day of his death.
8 ś Then Manoah intreated the LORD, and said, O my Lord, let the man of
God which thou didst send come again unto us, and teach us what we shall
do unto the child that shall be born.
9 And God hearkened to the voice of Manoah; and the angel of God came
again unto the woman as she sat in the field: but Manoah her husband was
not with her.
10 And the woman made haste, and ran, and shewed her husband, and said
unto him, Behold, the man hath appeared unto me, that came unto me the
other day.
11 And Manoah arose, and went after his wife, and came to the man, and
said unto him, Art thou the man that spakest unto the woman? And he
said, I am.
12 And Manoah said, Now let thy words come to pass. How shall we order
the child, and how shall we do unto him?
13 And the angel of the LORD said unto Manoah, Of all that I said unto
the woman let her beware.
14 She may not eat of any thing that cometh of the vine, neither let
her drink wine or strong drink, nor eat any unclean thing: all that I
commanded her let her observe.
15 ś And Manoah said unto the angel of the LORD, I pray thee, let us
detain thee, until we shall have made ready a kid for thee.
16 And the angel of the LORD said unto Manoah, Though thou detain me, I
will not eat of thy bread: and if thou wilt offer a burnt offering, thou
must offer it unto the LORD. For Manoah knew not that he was an angel of
the LORD.
17 And Manoah said unto the angel of the LORD, What is thy name, that
when thy sayings come to pass we may do thee honour?
18 And the angel of the LORD said unto him, Why askest thou thus after
my name, seeing it is secret?
19 So Manoah took a kid with a meat offering, and offered it upon a
rock unto the LORD: and the angel did wondrously; and Manoah and his
wife looked on.
20 For it came to pass, when the flame went up toward heaven from off
the altar, that the angel of the LORD ascended in the flame of the
altar. And Manoah and his wife looked on it, and fell on their faces to
the ground.
21 But the angel of the LORD did no more appear to Manoah and to his
wife. Then Manoah knew that he was an angel of the LORD.
22 And Manoah said unto his wife, We shall surely die, because we have
seen God.
23 But his wife said unto him, If the LORD were pleased to kill us, he
would not have received a burnt offering and a meat offering at our
hands, neither would he have shewed us all these things, nor would as at
this time have told us such things as these.

>>>>> (though the Trinity is fully documented
>>>>> throughout the Old Testament).
>>>> LMAO! And pigs have wings.
>>>
>>> Jesus revealed the triune Godhead.
>
>> False. The OLD TESTAMENT PROPHETS revealed the triune Godhead, as in
>> Isaiah 9:6.
>
> Isaiah 9:6 (New International Version)
> 6 For to us a child is born,
> to us a son is given,
> and the government will be on his shoulders.
> And he will be called
> Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
> Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
>
> Where God, where triune Godhead?

Not only can't the moron read English, he can't write it, either.

Wonderful Counselor = Jesus in the role of Holy Spirit.
Mighty God = Jesus in the role of God all-in-all.
Everlasting Father = Jesus in the role of the Father.
Prince of Peace = Jesus in the role of the Son.

But at no time can Jesus hold all three positions at the same time,
leaving the third to others, as the three monikers for the Trinity--King
of kings, Lord of lords, and God of gods--cannot appear alone, but
cannot appear together at the same time, either.

Let me know when you get a clue that you don't have a clue,
antichristian blasphemer and anticatholic heretic.

Ike

[Up from the Abyss]

"Ike" wrote:
> duke wrote:
> >

<snip>

> In scripture, "son of man" refers to God.

No Ike. It refers to one born of man[kind].

That includes any man, and anyone born of
man [kind], of a woman.

It is used of Ezekiel, it is used of Enoch in the
book of Enoch. The usage in the book of Enoch,
while in places clearly of Enoch himself, in other
places, better fit the usage as it was used of your
"Jesus" than those in Ezekiel do.


Num 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie,
Neither the son of man, that he should repent:

Psa 146:3 Put not your trust in princes, Nor in
the son of man, in whom there is no help.

If it refers to your "God", then He is clearly of
no help. I don't think that's what you intend to
convey.


Eze 2:1 And he said unto me, son of man, stand
upon thy feet, and I will speak with thee. 2 And
the Spirit entered into me when he spake unto me,
and set me upon my feet; and I heard him that
spake unto me.


Job 16:21 That he would maintain the right of a man
with God, And of a son of man with his neighbor!

<snip>

[duke]

Perhaps you don't understand that a dead MAN was buried and God had to raise the
dead man to new life because of his love and obedience to his Father. Gee, I
hope to follow him..

>>> And when the Jews wanted to stone Jesus for calling Himself "the Son of
>>> man," He didn't deny it; He turned it on their heads.
>> For calling himself a man?

>Thanks for demonstrating your ignorance yet again, moron. In scripture,
>"son of man" refers to God.

No, idiot - Son of God refers to God. He was son of man because of his human
mother. Or is it really possible that you don't understand God became flesh in
order to show other flesh the way to eternal salvation thru love and obedience
to the Father.

Obviously you are stupid enough to think that other flesh think they can
satisfactorily follow divinity.

>Then again, Jesus didn't say "son of Man;" He said "I and My Father are
>One," which means that He declared Himself EQUAL TO GOD.

Really??? If I was Jesus, then I could say I am one with my Father in
spiritual beliefs.

>And that's precisely what the Jews said, fool:
>
>30 I and my Father are one.
>31 Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.
>32 Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my
>Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?
>33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not;
>but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.
>
>>>> OT Jews didn't know of the triune Godhead.
>>
>>> You mean, the people who were so ignorant of their own scriptures that
>>> they crucified their own Messiah?
>>
>> They are still waiting on the messiah/warrior king in 2013.
>
>Which demonstrates how ignorant they STILL are of their own scriptures.

The Jews CLEARLY didn't see Jesus as the promised one - a warrior king. They
still don't.

>>> Oh, and the Triune Godhead is declared all through Old Testament
>>> prophecy, moron.
>>
>> Never revealed as a triune Godhead.
>Blasphemer.
>Three Names for God--Addonai, Elohiym, Jehovah.

One God.

>Three titles for Christ (but never held at the same time)...

>Isa 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the
>government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called
>Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The
>Prince of Peace.

Names, but no separate persons.

[duke]

On Thu, 18 Jul 2013 07:09:39 -0700, "Up from the Abyss" <U...@Abyss.net> wrote:

>
>"Ike" wrote:
>> duke wrote:
>> >
>
><snip>
>
>> In scripture, "son of man" refers to God.
>
>No Ike. It refers to one born of man[kind].

Ike is an idiot.

>
>That includes any man, and anyone born of
>man [kind], of a woman.
>
>It is used of Ezekiel, it is used of Enoch in the
>book of Enoch. The usage in the book of Enoch,
>while in places clearly of Enoch himself, in other
>places, better fit the usage as it was used of your
>"Jesus" than those in Ezekiel do.
>
>
>Num 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie,
>Neither the son of man, that he should repent:
>
>Psa 146:3 Put not your trust in princes, Nor in
>the son of man, in whom there is no help.
>
>If it refers to your "God", then He is clearly of
>no help. I don't think that's what you intend to
>convey.
>
>
>Eze 2:1 And he said unto me, son of man, stand
>upon thy feet, and I will speak with thee. 2 And
>the Spirit entered into me when he spake unto me,
>and set me upon my feet; and I heard him that
>spake unto me.
>
>
>Job 16:21 That he would maintain the right of a man
>with God, And of a son of man with his neighbor!
>
><snip>
>