codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

NCNJ1217 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

codker92 said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

codker92 said:

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

codker92 said:

---

Catag94 said:

---

Would His divine nature be too simple an answer?

---

It has nothing to do with whether the answer is simple or not. Point is Jesus wasn't reading the church fathers. Jesus did read second temple literature. If you aren't reading the New Testament in context you are going to miss major points. You wouldn't use the communist manifesto to decide how the magma carta is interpreted. Why would you use the church fathers to interpret Jesus commentary in OT

---

I have to be honest, half the time I have no idea what the point of your posts are but I feel bad when you have no replies so I just throw something up to see what sticks. The theological questions you pose are a little too challenging for me bc I often cannot figure out the reason why the question needs an answer in the first place.

---

The question I posed is not theological. The question I posed is whether Jesus read books or whether he had information beamed into his head under the conclusory label of inspiration. The second temple literature in circulation at the time of Christ included nearly all of the major points in Jesus' sermon on the mount. This fact directly contradicts the idea of inspiration. Jesus did not just make up his sermon from nothing. He read scripture.

---

Where is the Scripture that says Jesus studied Scripture?

The only place I know of Scripture even saying he read Scripture is when he reads Isaiah aloud in the synagogue.

And if Jesus is God, why would he need any info or Scripture beamed into his head.

---

Jesus is the king of Israel, and the King of Israel is commanded to write for himself a copy of the law, approved by the Levitical priests, and he shall read it all the days of his life.

They took the branches of the palm trees and went out to meet Him, and began to shout, " Hosanna! Blessed in He who comes in the NAME of the LORD, even the King of Israel!! John 12:13

And when he sits on the throne of his kingdom, he shall write for himself in a book a copy of this law, approved by the Levitical priests. And it shall be with him, and he shall read in it all the days of his life, that he may learn to fear the Lord his God by keeping all the words of this law and these statues, and doing them. Deut. 16:18.

---

Jesus is commanded by who? Your posts sometimes seem almost anti-trinitarian

---

What about the post is anti-trinitarian?

---

Because Jesus is fully human and, at the same time, fully God, which makes the entire thread moot


Edit: you'd have to reject the above idea of the Trinity to take the stance you're taking

---

Sound like a conclusion to me. Have anything to support what you are saying other than your opinion? There are many many many passages about Jesus doing the will of Yahweh. The will of Yahweh is found in his law, which cites the King of Israel's duty to read scripture. In Daniel, the Son of Man aka Jesus is given thrones, including the throne of Israel, partially to fulfill God's promise to David.

---

What conclusion would you like us to draw?

The best we can tell, you are purposefully being vague to avoid revealing your real position.

---

Real position about what? A theological concept?

---

We don't know. That's the point. What theological concepts are you claiming?

---

Ever think that maybe God is bigger than theology?

---

You avoided answering my question again.

And yes, the theological concept of God acknowledges that we only have access to what God has revealed to us. There is an unknown amount of information about God that we do not have access to in this life, but we hope in the next life we will truly be able to understand God.

None of that changes anything about Jesus role within the Trinity and His nature.

---

That sounds like your opinion.

---

An opinion would be if someone made the claim that Jesus only knew the scriptures through reading them.

Progressive revelation about God and His desires for us is an undisputable fact of the Bible.

For example, we know more today than any Jew in the OT because Jesus walked this earth. However, to presume that we know everything about God because of that is certainly not a claim that any reasonable person would make because there's no evidence for that claim.

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

NCNJ1217 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

codker92 said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

codker92 said:

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

codker92 said:

---

Catag94 said:

---

Would His divine nature be too simple an answer?

---

It has nothing to do with whether the answer is simple or not. Point is Jesus wasn't reading the church fathers. Jesus did read second temple literature. If you aren't reading the New Testament in context you are going to miss major points. You wouldn't use the communist manifesto to decide how the magma carta is interpreted. Why would you use the church fathers to interpret Jesus commentary in OT

---

I have to be honest, half the time I have no idea what the point of your posts are but I feel bad when you have no replies so I just throw something up to see what sticks. The theological questions you pose are a little too challenging for me bc I often cannot figure out the reason why the question needs an answer in the first place.

---

The question I posed is not theological. The question I posed is whether Jesus read books or whether he had information beamed into his head under the conclusory label of inspiration. The second temple literature in circulation at the time of Christ included nearly all of the major points in Jesus' sermon on the mount. This fact directly contradicts the idea of inspiration. Jesus did not just make up his sermon from nothing. He read scripture.

---

Where is the Scripture that says Jesus studied Scripture?

The only place I know of Scripture even saying he read Scripture is when he reads Isaiah aloud in the synagogue.

And if Jesus is God, why would he need any info or Scripture beamed into his head.

---

Jesus is the king of Israel, and the King of Israel is commanded to write for himself a copy of the law, approved by the Levitical priests, and he shall read it all the days of his life.

They took the branches of the palm trees and went out to meet Him, and began to shout, " Hosanna! Blessed in He who comes in the NAME of the LORD, even the King of Israel!! John 12:13

And when he sits on the throne of his kingdom, he shall write for himself in a book a copy of this law, approved by the Levitical priests. And it shall be with him, and he shall read in it all the days of his life, that he may learn to fear the Lord his God by keeping all the words of this law and these statues, and doing them. Deut. 16:18.

---

Jesus is commanded by who? Your posts sometimes seem almost anti-trinitarian

---

What about the post is anti-trinitarian?

---

Because Jesus is fully human and, at the same time, fully God, which makes the entire thread moot


Edit: you'd have to reject the above idea of the Trinity to take the stance you're taking

---

Sound like a conclusion to me. Have anything to support what you are saying other than your opinion? There are many many many passages about Jesus doing the will of Yahweh. The will of Yahweh is found in his law, which cites the King of Israel's duty to read scripture. In Daniel, the Son of Man aka Jesus is given thrones, including the throne of Israel, partially to fulfill God's promise to David.

---

What conclusion would you like us to draw?

The best we can tell, you are purposefully being vague to avoid revealing your real position.

---

Real position about what? A theological concept?

---

We don't know. That's the point. What theological concepts are you claiming?

---

Ever think that maybe God is bigger than theology?

---

You avoided answering my question again.

And yes, the theological concept of God acknowledges that we only have access to what God has revealed to us. There is an unknown amount of information about God that we do not have access to in this life, but we hope in the next life we will truly be able to understand God.

None of that changes anything about Jesus role within the Trinity and His nature.

---

That sounds like your opinion.

---

An opinion would be if someone made the claim that Jesus only knew the scriptures through reading them.

Progressive revelation about God and His desires for us is an undisputable fact of the Bible.

For example, we know more today than any Jew in the OT because Jesus walked this earth. However, to presume that we know everything about God because of that is certainly not a claim that any reasonable person would make because there's no evidence for that claim.

---

Ok well since you don't know everything about God I am going to kindly disregard your opinion since it apparently just that, an opinion. If you have read the scripture you would know that Abraham was taken into heaven so he would know more than you. Same with Moses, etc.

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

NCNJ1217 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

codker92 said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

codker92 said:

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

codker92 said:

---

Catag94 said:

---

Would His divine nature be too simple an answer?

---

It has nothing to do with whether the answer is simple or not. Point is Jesus wasn't reading the church fathers. Jesus did read second temple literature. If you aren't reading the New Testament in context you are going to miss major points. You wouldn't use the communist manifesto to decide how the magma carta is interpreted. Why would you use the church fathers to interpret Jesus commentary in OT

---

I have to be honest, half the time I have no idea what the point of your posts are but I feel bad when you have no replies so I just throw something up to see what sticks. The theological questions you pose are a little too challenging for me bc I often cannot figure out the reason why the question needs an answer in the first place.

---

The question I posed is not theological. The question I posed is whether Jesus read books or whether he had information beamed into his head under the conclusory label of inspiration. The second temple literature in circulation at the time of Christ included nearly all of the major points in Jesus' sermon on the mount. This fact directly contradicts the idea of inspiration. Jesus did not just make up his sermon from nothing. He read scripture.

---

Where is the Scripture that says Jesus studied Scripture?

The only place I know of Scripture even saying he read Scripture is when he reads Isaiah aloud in the synagogue.

And if Jesus is God, why would he need any info or Scripture beamed into his head.

---

Jesus is the king of Israel, and the King of Israel is commanded to write for himself a copy of the law, approved by the Levitical priests, and he shall read it all the days of his life.

They took the branches of the palm trees and went out to meet Him, and began to shout, " Hosanna! Blessed in He who comes in the NAME of the LORD, even the King of Israel!! John 12:13

And when he sits on the throne of his kingdom, he shall write for himself in a book a copy of this law, approved by the Levitical priests. And it shall be with him, and he shall read in it all the days of his life, that he may learn to fear the Lord his God by keeping all the words of this law and these statues, and doing them. Deut. 16:18.

---

Jesus is commanded by who? Your posts sometimes seem almost anti-trinitarian

---

What about the post is anti-trinitarian?

---

Because Jesus is fully human and, at the same time, fully God, which makes the entire thread moot


Edit: you'd have to reject the above idea of the Trinity to take the stance you're taking

---

Sound like a conclusion to me. Have anything to support what you are saying other than your opinion? There are many many many passages about Jesus doing the will of Yahweh. The will of Yahweh is found in his law, which cites the King of Israel's duty to read scripture. In Daniel, the Son of Man aka Jesus is given thrones, including the throne of Israel, partially to fulfill God's promise to David.

---

What conclusion would you like us to draw?

The best we can tell, you are purposefully being vague to avoid revealing your real position.

---

Real position about what? A theological concept?

---

We don't know. That's the point. What theological concepts are you claiming?

---

Ever think that maybe God is bigger than theology?

---

You avoided answering my question again.

And yes, the theological concept of God acknowledges that we only have access to what God has revealed to us. There is an unknown amount of information about God that we do not have access to in this life, but we hope in the next life we will truly be able to understand God.

None of that changes anything about Jesus role within the Trinity and His nature.

---

That sounds like your opinion.

---

An opinion would be if someone made the claim that Jesus only knew the scriptures through reading them.

Progressive revelation about God and His desires for us is an undisputable fact of the Bible.

For example, we know more today than any Jew in the OT because Jesus walked this earth. However, to presume that we know everything about God because of that is certainly not a claim that any reasonable person would make because there's no evidence for that claim.

---

Ok well since you don't know everything about God I am going to kindly disregard your opinion since it apparently just that, an opinion. If you have read the scripture you would know that Abraham was taken into heaven so he would know more than you. Same with Moses, etc.

---

You've asked for peoples opinions here, so why disregard? You don't have to agree.

BluHorseShu said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

NCNJ1217 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

codker92 said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

codker92 said:

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

codker92 said:

---

Catag94 said:

---

Would His divine nature be too simple an answer?

---

It has nothing to do with whether the answer is simple or not. Point is Jesus wasn't reading the church fathers. Jesus did read second temple literature. If you aren't reading the New Testament in context you are going to miss major points. You wouldn't use the communist manifesto to decide how the magma carta is interpreted. Why would you use the church fathers to interpret Jesus commentary in OT

---

I have to be honest, half the time I have no idea what the point of your posts are but I feel bad when you have no replies so I just throw something up to see what sticks. The theological questions you pose are a little too challenging for me bc I often cannot figure out the reason why the question needs an answer in the first place.

---

The question I posed is not theological. The question I posed is whether Jesus read books or whether he had information beamed into his head under the conclusory label of inspiration. The second temple literature in circulation at the time of Christ included nearly all of the major points in Jesus' sermon on the mount. This fact directly contradicts the idea of inspiration. Jesus did not just make up his sermon from nothing. He read scripture.

---

Where is the Scripture that says Jesus studied Scripture?

The only place I know of Scripture even saying he read Scripture is when he reads Isaiah aloud in the synagogue.

And if Jesus is God, why would he need any info or Scripture beamed into his head.

---

Jesus is the king of Israel, and the King of Israel is commanded to write for himself a copy of the law, approved by the Levitical priests, and he shall read it all the days of his life.

They took the branches of the palm trees and went out to meet Him, and began to shout, " Hosanna! Blessed in He who comes in the NAME of the LORD, even the King of Israel!! John 12:13

And when he sits on the throne of his kingdom, he shall write for himself in a book a copy of this law, approved by the Levitical priests. And it shall be with him, and he shall read in it all the days of his life, that he may learn to fear the Lord his God by keeping all the words of this law and these statues, and doing them. Deut. 16:18.

---

Jesus is commanded by who? Your posts sometimes seem almost anti-trinitarian

---

What about the post is anti-trinitarian?

---

Because Jesus is fully human and, at the same time, fully God, which makes the entire thread moot


Edit: you'd have to reject the above idea of the Trinity to take the stance you're taking

---

Sound like a conclusion to me. Have anything to support what you are saying other than your opinion? There are many many many passages about Jesus doing the will of Yahweh. The will of Yahweh is found in his law, which cites the King of Israel's duty to read scripture. In Daniel, the Son of Man aka Jesus is given thrones, including the throne of Israel, partially to fulfill God's promise to David.

---

What conclusion would you like us to draw?

The best we can tell, you are purposefully being vague to avoid revealing your real position.

---

Real position about what? A theological concept?

---

We don't know. That's the point. What theological concepts are you claiming?

---

Ever think that maybe God is bigger than theology?

---

You avoided answering my question again.

And yes, the theological concept of God acknowledges that we only have access to what God has revealed to us. There is an unknown amount of information about God that we do not have access to in this life, but we hope in the next life we will truly be able to understand God.

None of that changes anything about Jesus role within the Trinity and His nature.

---

That sounds like your opinion.

---

An opinion would be if someone made the claim that Jesus only knew the scriptures through reading them.

Progressive revelation about God and His desires for us is an undisputable fact of the Bible.

For example, we know more today than any Jew in the OT because Jesus walked this earth. However, to presume that we know everything about God because of that is certainly not a claim that any reasonable person would make because there's no evidence for that claim.

---

Ok well since you don't know everything about God I am going to kindly disregard your opinion since it apparently just that, an opinion. If you have read the scripture you would know that Abraham was taken into heaven so he would know more than you. Same with Moses, etc.

---

Couldn't that be said about your opinions on Jesus reading scriptures?

---

He has two options.

1. Either he has to acknowledge that he does not know everything about God, and, as you said, he has to reject even his own thoughts.

or

2. He must claim he is the first person in history (outside of God Himself) who knows everything about God.

BluHorseShu said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

NCNJ1217 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

codker92 said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

codker92 said:

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

codker92 said:

---

Catag94 said:

---

Would His divine nature be too simple an answer?

---

It has nothing to do with whether the answer is simple or not. Point is Jesus wasn't reading the church fathers. Jesus did read second temple literature. If you aren't reading the New Testament in context you are going to miss major points. You wouldn't use the communist manifesto to decide how the magma carta is interpreted. Why would you use the church fathers to interpret Jesus commentary in OT

---

I have to be honest, half the time I have no idea what the point of your posts are but I feel bad when you have no replies so I just throw something up to see what sticks. The theological questions you pose are a little too challenging for me bc I often cannot figure out the reason why the question needs an answer in the first place.

---

The question I posed is not theological. The question I posed is whether Jesus read books or whether he had information beamed into his head under the conclusory label of inspiration. The second temple literature in circulation at the time of Christ included nearly all of the major points in Jesus' sermon on the mount. This fact directly contradicts the idea of inspiration. Jesus did not just make up his sermon from nothing. He read scripture.

---

Where is the Scripture that says Jesus studied Scripture?

The only place I know of Scripture even saying he read Scripture is when he reads Isaiah aloud in the synagogue.

And if Jesus is God, why would he need any info or Scripture beamed into his head.

---

Jesus is the king of Israel, and the King of Israel is commanded to write for himself a copy of the law, approved by the Levitical priests, and he shall read it all the days of his life.

They took the branches of the palm trees and went out to meet Him, and began to shout, " Hosanna! Blessed in He who comes in the NAME of the LORD, even the King of Israel!! John 12:13

And when he sits on the throne of his kingdom, he shall write for himself in a book a copy of this law, approved by the Levitical priests. And it shall be with him, and he shall read in it all the days of his life, that he may learn to fear the Lord his God by keeping all the words of this law and these statues, and doing them. Deut. 16:18.

---

Jesus is commanded by who? Your posts sometimes seem almost anti-trinitarian

---

What about the post is anti-trinitarian?

---

Because Jesus is fully human and, at the same time, fully God, which makes the entire thread moot


Edit: you'd have to reject the above idea of the Trinity to take the stance you're taking

---

Sound like a conclusion to me. Have anything to support what you are saying other than your opinion? There are many many many passages about Jesus doing the will of Yahweh. The will of Yahweh is found in his law, which cites the King of Israel's duty to read scripture. In Daniel, the Son of Man aka Jesus is given thrones, including the throne of Israel, partially to fulfill God's promise to David.

---

What conclusion would you like us to draw?

The best we can tell, you are purposefully being vague to avoid revealing your real position.

---

Real position about what? A theological concept?

---

We don't know. That's the point. What theological concepts are you claiming?

---

Ever think that maybe God is bigger than theology?

---

You avoided answering my question again.

And yes, the theological concept of God acknowledges that we only have access to what God has revealed to us. There is an unknown amount of information about God that we do not have access to in this life, but we hope in the next life we will truly be able to understand God.

None of that changes anything about Jesus role within the Trinity and His nature.

---

That sounds like your opinion.

---

An opinion would be if someone made the claim that Jesus only knew the scriptures through reading them.

Progressive revelation about God and His desires for us is an undisputable fact of the Bible.

For example, we know more today than any Jew in the OT because Jesus walked this earth. However, to presume that we know everything about God because of that is certainly not a claim that any reasonable person would make because there's no evidence for that claim.

---

Ok well since you don't know everything about God I am going to kindly disregard your opinion since it apparently just that, an opinion. If you have read the scripture you would know that Abraham was taken into heaven so he would know more than you. Same with Moses, etc.

---

Couldn't that be said about your opinions on Jesus reading scriptures?

---

Ok well if Jesus did not read scripture then he is in violation of the law and subject to be removed from the throne of Israel.

BluHorseShu said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

NCNJ1217 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

codker92 said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

codker92 said:

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

codker92 said:

---

Catag94 said:

---

Would His divine nature be too simple an answer?

---

It has nothing to do with whether the answer is simple or not. Point is Jesus wasn't reading the church fathers. Jesus did read second temple literature. If you aren't reading the New Testament in context you are going to miss major points. You wouldn't use the communist manifesto to decide how the magma carta is interpreted. Why would you use the church fathers to interpret Jesus commentary in OT

---

I have to be honest, half the time I have no idea what the point of your posts are but I feel bad when you have no replies so I just throw something up to see what sticks. The theological questions you pose are a little too challenging for me bc I often cannot figure out the reason why the question needs an answer in the first place.

---

The question I posed is not theological. The question I posed is whether Jesus read books or whether he had information beamed into his head under the conclusory label of inspiration. The second temple literature in circulation at the time of Christ included nearly all of the major points in Jesus' sermon on the mount. This fact directly contradicts the idea of inspiration. Jesus did not just make up his sermon from nothing. He read scripture.

---

Where is the Scripture that says Jesus studied Scripture?

The only place I know of Scripture even saying he read Scripture is when he reads Isaiah aloud in the synagogue.

And if Jesus is God, why would he need any info or Scripture beamed into his head.

---

Jesus is the king of Israel, and the King of Israel is commanded to write for himself a copy of the law, approved by the Levitical priests, and he shall read it all the days of his life.

They took the branches of the palm trees and went out to meet Him, and began to shout, " Hosanna! Blessed in He who comes in the NAME of the LORD, even the King of Israel!! John 12:13

And when he sits on the throne of his kingdom, he shall write for himself in a book a copy of this law, approved by the Levitical priests. And it shall be with him, and he shall read in it all the days of his life, that he may learn to fear the Lord his God by keeping all the words of this law and these statues, and doing them. Deut. 16:18.

---

Jesus is commanded by who? Your posts sometimes seem almost anti-trinitarian

---

What about the post is anti-trinitarian?

---

Because Jesus is fully human and, at the same time, fully God, which makes the entire thread moot


Edit: you'd have to reject the above idea of the Trinity to take the stance you're taking

---

Sound like a conclusion to me. Have anything to support what you are saying other than your opinion? There are many many many passages about Jesus doing the will of Yahweh. The will of Yahweh is found in his law, which cites the King of Israel's duty to read scripture. In Daniel, the Son of Man aka Jesus is given thrones, including the throne of Israel, partially to fulfill God's promise to David.

---

What conclusion would you like us to draw?

The best we can tell, you are purposefully being vague to avoid revealing your real position.

---

Real position about what? A theological concept?

---

We don't know. That's the point. What theological concepts are you claiming?

---

Ever think that maybe God is bigger than theology?

---

You avoided answering my question again.

And yes, the theological concept of God acknowledges that we only have access to what God has revealed to us. There is an unknown amount of information about God that we do not have access to in this life, but we hope in the next life we will truly be able to understand God.

None of that changes anything about Jesus role within the Trinity and His nature.

---

That sounds like your opinion.

---

An opinion would be if someone made the claim that Jesus only knew the scriptures through reading them.

Progressive revelation about God and His desires for us is an undisputable fact of the Bible.

For example, we know more today than any Jew in the OT because Jesus walked this earth. However, to presume that we know everything about God because of that is certainly not a claim that any reasonable person would make because there's no evidence for that claim.

---

Ok well since you don't know everything about God I am going to kindly disregard your opinion since it apparently just that, an opinion. If you have read the scripture you would know that Abraham was taken into heaven so he would know more than you. Same with Moses, etc.

---

Couldn't that be said about your opinions on Jesus reading scriptures?

---

Not really. Because I am creating a logical inference. If Jesus folllows the law he reads scripture.

AgLiving06 said:

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

NCNJ1217 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

codker92 said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

codker92 said:

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

codker92 said:

---

Catag94 said:

---

Would His divine nature be too simple an answer?

---

It has nothing to do with whether the answer is simple or not. Point is Jesus wasn't reading the church fathers. Jesus did read second temple literature. If you aren't reading the New Testament in context you are going to miss major points. You wouldn't use the communist manifesto to decide how the magma carta is interpreted. Why would you use the church fathers to interpret Jesus commentary in OT

---

I have to be honest, half the time I have no idea what the point of your posts are but I feel bad when you have no replies so I just throw something up to see what sticks. The theological questions you pose are a little too challenging for me bc I often cannot figure out the reason why the question needs an answer in the first place.

---

The question I posed is not theological. The question I posed is whether Jesus read books or whether he had information beamed into his head under the conclusory label of inspiration. The second temple literature in circulation at the time of Christ included nearly all of the major points in Jesus' sermon on the mount. This fact directly contradicts the idea of inspiration. Jesus did not just make up his sermon from nothing. He read scripture.

---

Where is the Scripture that says Jesus studied Scripture?

The only place I know of Scripture even saying he read Scripture is when he reads Isaiah aloud in the synagogue.

And if Jesus is God, why would he need any info or Scripture beamed into his head.

---

Jesus is the king of Israel, and the King of Israel is commanded to write for himself a copy of the law, approved by the Levitical priests, and he shall read it all the days of his life.

They took the branches of the palm trees and went out to meet Him, and began to shout, " Hosanna! Blessed in He who comes in the NAME of the LORD, even the King of Israel!! John 12:13

And when he sits on the throne of his kingdom, he shall write for himself in a book a copy of this law, approved by the Levitical priests. And it shall be with him, and he shall read in it all the days of his life, that he may learn to fear the Lord his God by keeping all the words of this law and these statues, and doing them. Deut. 16:18.

---

Jesus is commanded by who? Your posts sometimes seem almost anti-trinitarian

---

What about the post is anti-trinitarian?

---

Because Jesus is fully human and, at the same time, fully God, which makes the entire thread moot


Edit: you'd have to reject the above idea of the Trinity to take the stance you're taking

---

Sound like a conclusion to me. Have anything to support what you are saying other than your opinion? There are many many many passages about Jesus doing the will of Yahweh. The will of Yahweh is found in his law, which cites the King of Israel's duty to read scripture. In Daniel, the Son of Man aka Jesus is given thrones, including the throne of Israel, partially to fulfill God's promise to David.

---

What conclusion would you like us to draw?

The best we can tell, you are purposefully being vague to avoid revealing your real position.

---

Real position about what? A theological concept?

---

We don't know. That's the point. What theological concepts are you claiming?

---

Ever think that maybe God is bigger than theology?

---

You avoided answering my question again.

And yes, the theological concept of God acknowledges that we only have access to what God has revealed to us. There is an unknown amount of information about God that we do not have access to in this life, but we hope in the next life we will truly be able to understand God.

None of that changes anything about Jesus role within the Trinity and His nature.

---

That sounds like your opinion.

---

An opinion would be if someone made the claim that Jesus only knew the scriptures through reading them.

Progressive revelation about God and His desires for us is an undisputable fact of the Bible.

For example, we know more today than any Jew in the OT because Jesus walked this earth. However, to presume that we know everything about God because of that is certainly not a claim that any reasonable person would make because there's no evidence for that claim.

---

Ok well since you don't know everything about God I am going to kindly disregard your opinion since it apparently just that, an opinion. If you have read the scripture you would know that Abraham was taken into heaven so he would know more than you. Same with Moses, etc.

---

Couldn't that be said about your opinions on Jesus reading scriptures?

---

He has two options.

1. Either he has to acknowledge that he does not know everything about God, and, as you said, he has to reject even his own thoughts.

or

2. He must claim he is the first person in history (outside of God Himself) who knows everything about God.

---

Or I can just state that I do know for certain the Jesus read second temple literature because he used it to craft his sermon on the mount.

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

NCNJ1217 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

codker92 said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

codker92 said:

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

codker92 said:

---

Catag94 said:

---

Would His divine nature be too simple an answer?

---

It has nothing to do with whether the answer is simple or not. Point is Jesus wasn't reading the church fathers. Jesus did read second temple literature. If you aren't reading the New Testament in context you are going to miss major points. You wouldn't use the communist manifesto to decide how the magma carta is interpreted. Why would you use the church fathers to interpret Jesus commentary in OT

---

I have to be honest, half the time I have no idea what the point of your posts are but I feel bad when you have no replies so I just throw something up to see what sticks. The theological questions you pose are a little too challenging for me bc I often cannot figure out the reason why the question needs an answer in the first place.

---

The question I posed is not theological. The question I posed is whether Jesus read books or whether he had information beamed into his head under the conclusory label of inspiration. The second temple literature in circulation at the time of Christ included nearly all of the major points in Jesus' sermon on the mount. This fact directly contradicts the idea of inspiration. Jesus did not just make up his sermon from nothing. He read scripture.

---

Where is the Scripture that says Jesus studied Scripture?

The only place I know of Scripture even saying he read Scripture is when he reads Isaiah aloud in the synagogue.

And if Jesus is God, why would he need any info or Scripture beamed into his head.

---

Jesus is the king of Israel, and the King of Israel is commanded to write for himself a copy of the law, approved by the Levitical priests, and he shall read it all the days of his life.

They took the branches of the palm trees and went out to meet Him, and began to shout, " Hosanna! Blessed in He who comes in the NAME of the LORD, even the King of Israel!! John 12:13

And when he sits on the throne of his kingdom, he shall write for himself in a book a copy of this law, approved by the Levitical priests. And it shall be with him, and he shall read in it all the days of his life, that he may learn to fear the Lord his God by keeping all the words of this law and these statues, and doing them. Deut. 16:18.

---

Jesus is commanded by who? Your posts sometimes seem almost anti-trinitarian

---

What about the post is anti-trinitarian?

---

Because Jesus is fully human and, at the same time, fully God, which makes the entire thread moot


Edit: you'd have to reject the above idea of the Trinity to take the stance you're taking

---

Sound like a conclusion to me. Have anything to support what you are saying other than your opinion? There are many many many passages about Jesus doing the will of Yahweh. The will of Yahweh is found in his law, which cites the King of Israel's duty to read scripture. In Daniel, the Son of Man aka Jesus is given thrones, including the throne of Israel, partially to fulfill God's promise to David.

---

What conclusion would you like us to draw?

The best we can tell, you are purposefully being vague to avoid revealing your real position.

---

Real position about what? A theological concept?

---

We don't know. That's the point. What theological concepts are you claiming?

---

Ever think that maybe God is bigger than theology?

---

You avoided answering my question again.

And yes, the theological concept of God acknowledges that we only have access to what God has revealed to us. There is an unknown amount of information about God that we do not have access to in this life, but we hope in the next life we will truly be able to understand God.

None of that changes anything about Jesus role within the Trinity and His nature.

---

That sounds like your opinion.

---

An opinion would be if someone made the claim that Jesus only knew the scriptures through reading them.

Progressive revelation about God and His desires for us is an undisputable fact of the Bible.

For example, we know more today than any Jew in the OT because Jesus walked this earth. However, to presume that we know everything about God because of that is certainly not a claim that any reasonable person would make because there's no evidence for that claim.

---

Ok well since you don't know everything about God I am going to kindly disregard your opinion since it apparently just that, an opinion. If you have read the scripture you would know that Abraham was taken into heaven so he would know more than you. Same with Moses, etc.

---

Couldn't that be said about your opinions on Jesus reading scriptures?

---

He has two options.

1. Either he has to acknowledge that he does not know everything about God, and, as you said, he has to reject even his own thoughts.

or

2. He must claim he is the first person in history (outside of God Himself) who knows everything about God.

---

Or I can just state that I do know for certain the Jesus read second temple literature because he used it to craft his sermon on the mount.

---

So option 1.

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

NCNJ1217 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

codker92 said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

codker92 said:

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

codker92 said:

---

Catag94 said:

---

Would His divine nature be too simple an answer?

---

It has nothing to do with whether the answer is simple or not. Point is Jesus wasn't reading the church fathers. Jesus did read second temple literature. If you aren't reading the New Testament in context you are going to miss major points. You wouldn't use the communist manifesto to decide how the magma carta is interpreted. Why would you use the church fathers to interpret Jesus commentary in OT

---

I have to be honest, half the time I have no idea what the point of your posts are but I feel bad when you have no replies so I just throw something up to see what sticks. The theological questions you pose are a little too challenging for me bc I often cannot figure out the reason why the question needs an answer in the first place.

---

The question I posed is not theological. The question I posed is whether Jesus read books or whether he had information beamed into his head under the conclusory label of inspiration. The second temple literature in circulation at the time of Christ included nearly all of the major points in Jesus' sermon on the mount. This fact directly contradicts the idea of inspiration. Jesus did not just make up his sermon from nothing. He read scripture.

---

Where is the Scripture that says Jesus studied Scripture?

The only place I know of Scripture even saying he read Scripture is when he reads Isaiah aloud in the synagogue.

And if Jesus is God, why would he need any info or Scripture beamed into his head.

---

Jesus is the king of Israel, and the King of Israel is commanded to write for himself a copy of the law, approved by the Levitical priests, and he shall read it all the days of his life.

They took the branches of the palm trees and went out to meet Him, and began to shout, " Hosanna! Blessed in He who comes in the NAME of the LORD, even the King of Israel!! John 12:13

And when he sits on the throne of his kingdom, he shall write for himself in a book a copy of this law, approved by the Levitical priests. And it shall be with him, and he shall read in it all the days of his life, that he may learn to fear the Lord his God by keeping all the words of this law and these statues, and doing them. Deut. 16:18.

---

Jesus is commanded by who? Your posts sometimes seem almost anti-trinitarian

---

What about the post is anti-trinitarian?

---

Because Jesus is fully human and, at the same time, fully God, which makes the entire thread moot


Edit: you'd have to reject the above idea of the Trinity to take the stance you're taking

---

Sound like a conclusion to me. Have anything to support what you are saying other than your opinion? There are many many many passages about Jesus doing the will of Yahweh. The will of Yahweh is found in his law, which cites the King of Israel's duty to read scripture. In Daniel, the Son of Man aka Jesus is given thrones, including the throne of Israel, partially to fulfill God's promise to David.

---

What conclusion would you like us to draw?

The best we can tell, you are purposefully being vague to avoid revealing your real position.

---

Real position about what? A theological concept?

---

We don't know. That's the point. What theological concepts are you claiming?

---

Ever think that maybe God is bigger than theology?

---

You avoided answering my question again.

And yes, the theological concept of God acknowledges that we only have access to what God has revealed to us. There is an unknown amount of information about God that we do not have access to in this life, but we hope in the next life we will truly be able to understand God.

None of that changes anything about Jesus role within the Trinity and His nature.

---

That sounds like your opinion.

---

An opinion would be if someone made the claim that Jesus only knew the scriptures through reading them.

Progressive revelation about God and His desires for us is an undisputable fact of the Bible.

For example, we know more today than any Jew in the OT because Jesus walked this earth. However, to presume that we know everything about God because of that is certainly not a claim that any reasonable person would make because there's no evidence for that claim.

---

Ok well since you don't know everything about God I am going to kindly disregard your opinion since it apparently just that, an opinion. If you have read the scripture you would know that Abraham was taken into heaven so he would know more than you. Same with Moses, etc.

---

Couldn't that be said about your opinions on Jesus reading scriptures?

---

He has two options.

1. Either he has to acknowledge that he does not know everything about God, and, as you said, he has to reject even his own thoughts.

or

2. He must claim he is the first person in history (outside of God Himself) who knows everything about God.

---

Or I can just state that I do know for certain the Jesus read second temple literature because he used it to craft his sermon on the mount.

---

So option 1.

---

Well as I have shown, clearly you do not know everything about god. You really don't know how much I know about God and you really don't know whether I know everything about God. You are simply making bald assertions and stating your opinion. Admit it, you really aren't sure I don't know everything about God.

I'll go with John 1:1-2
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God.

So who exactly said it first?

codker92 said:

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

NCNJ1217 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

codker92 said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

codker92 said:

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

codker92 said:

---

Catag94 said:

---

Would His divine nature be too simple an answer?

---

It has nothing to do with whether the answer is simple or not. Point is Jesus wasn't reading the church fathers. Jesus did read second temple literature. If you aren't reading the New Testament in context you are going to miss major points. You wouldn't use the communist manifesto to decide how the magma carta is interpreted. Why would you use the church fathers to interpret Jesus commentary in OT

---

I have to be honest, half the time I have no idea what the point of your posts are but I feel bad when you have no replies so I just throw something up to see what sticks. The theological questions you pose are a little too challenging for me bc I often cannot figure out the reason why the question needs an answer in the first place.

---

The question I posed is not theological. The question I posed is whether Jesus read books or whether he had information beamed into his head under the conclusory label of inspiration. The second temple literature in circulation at the time of Christ included nearly all of the major points in Jesus' sermon on the mount. This fact directly contradicts the idea of inspiration. Jesus did not just make up his sermon from nothing. He read scripture.

---

Where is the Scripture that says Jesus studied Scripture?

The only place I know of Scripture even saying he read Scripture is when he reads Isaiah aloud in the synagogue.

And if Jesus is God, why would he need any info or Scripture beamed into his head.

---

Jesus is the king of Israel, and the King of Israel is commanded to write for himself a copy of the law, approved by the Levitical priests, and he shall read it all the days of his life.

They took the branches of the palm trees and went out to meet Him, and began to shout, " Hosanna! Blessed in He who comes in the NAME of the LORD, even the King of Israel!! John 12:13

And when he sits on the throne of his kingdom, he shall write for himself in a book a copy of this law, approved by the Levitical priests. And it shall be with him, and he shall read in it all the days of his life, that he may learn to fear the Lord his God by keeping all the words of this law and these statues, and doing them. Deut. 16:18.

---

Jesus is commanded by who? Your posts sometimes seem almost anti-trinitarian

---

What about the post is anti-trinitarian?

---

Because Jesus is fully human and, at the same time, fully God, which makes the entire thread moot


Edit: you'd have to reject the above idea of the Trinity to take the stance you're taking

---

Sound like a conclusion to me. Have anything to support what you are saying other than your opinion? There are many many many passages about Jesus doing the will of Yahweh. The will of Yahweh is found in his law, which cites the King of Israel's duty to read scripture. In Daniel, the Son of Man aka Jesus is given thrones, including the throne of Israel, partially to fulfill God's promise to David.

---

What conclusion would you like us to draw?

The best we can tell, you are purposefully being vague to avoid revealing your real position.

---

Real position about what? A theological concept?

---

We don't know. That's the point. What theological concepts are you claiming?

---

Ever think that maybe God is bigger than theology?

---

You avoided answering my question again.

And yes, the theological concept of God acknowledges that we only have access to what God has revealed to us. There is an unknown amount of information about God that we do not have access to in this life, but we hope in the next life we will truly be able to understand God.

None of that changes anything about Jesus role within the Trinity and His nature.

---

That sounds like your opinion.

---

An opinion would be if someone made the claim that Jesus only knew the scriptures through reading them.

Progressive revelation about God and His desires for us is an undisputable fact of the Bible.

For example, we know more today than any Jew in the OT because Jesus walked this earth. However, to presume that we know everything about God because of that is certainly not a claim that any reasonable person would make because there's no evidence for that claim.

---

Ok well since you don't know everything about God I am going to kindly disregard your opinion since it apparently just that, an opinion. If you have read the scripture you would know that Abraham was taken into heaven so he would know more than you. Same with Moses, etc.

---

Couldn't that be said about your opinions on Jesus reading scriptures?

---

Ok well if Jesus did not read scripture then he is in violation of the law and subject to be removed from the throne of Israel.

---

I should have been more specific. I meant it in reference to your belief that he must have read scripture to inspire his sermon on the mount vs the content already being known by him (but is in the scriptures). I'm just saying its your opinion that he must have physically read vs intellectually/inspirationally known the scriptures

Quote:

---

Well as I have shown, clearly you do not know everything about god. You really don't know how much I know about God and you really don't know whether I know everything about God. You are simply making bald assertions and stating your opinion. Admit it, you really aren't sure I don't know everything about God.

---

You haven't shown anything....I, and everybody else here, will freely admit that we do not know everything about God.

But you can certainly clarify your position. Are you claiming to know everything about God? It's a pretty simple yes or no question.

AgLiving06 said:

---

Quote:

---

Well as I have shown, clearly you do not know everything about god. You really don't know how much I know about God and you really don't know whether I know everything about God. You are simply making bald assertions and stating your opinion. Admit it, you really aren't sure I don't know everything about God.

---

You haven't shown anything....I, and everybody else here, will freely admit that we do not know everything about God.

But you can certainly clarify your position. Are you claiming to know everything about God? It's a pretty simple yes or no question.

---

I'll answer your question when you answer mine. Admit you don't know whether I know everything about God

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

Quote:

---

Well as I have shown, clearly you do not know everything about god. You really don't know how much I know about God and you really don't know whether I know everything about God. You are simply making bald assertions and stating your opinion. Admit it, you really aren't sure I don't know everything about God.

---

You haven't shown anything....I, and everybody else here, will freely admit that we do not know everything about God.

But you can certainly clarify your position. Are you claiming to know everything about God? It's a pretty simple yes or no question.

---

I'll answer your question when you answer mine. Admit you don't know whether I know everything about God

---

What an odd attempt at a gotcha, but I'll play along. I know that you don't know everything about God.

Your turn.

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

Quote:

---

Well as I have shown, clearly you do not know everything about god. You really don't know how much I know about God and you really don't know whether I know everything about God. You are simply making bald assertions and stating your opinion. Admit it, you really aren't sure I don't know everything about God.

---

You haven't shown anything....I, and everybody else here, will freely admit that we do not know everything about God.

But you can certainly clarify your position. Are you claiming to know everything about God? It's a pretty simple yes or no question.

---

I'll answer your question when you answer mine. Admit you don't know whether I know everything about God

---

What an odd attempt at a gotcha, but I'll play along. I know that you don't know everything about God.

Your turn.

---

Prove it. Prove I don't know everything about God. You are a hypocrite. You think that I should care what your opinion is? I don't give two rips about your worthless opinion. Truth is, I spoke with God and He told me he read the War Scroll and He preached it to the Sons of Light.

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

Quote:

---

Well as I have shown, clearly you do not know everything about god. You really don't know how much I know about God and you really don't know whether I know everything about God. You are simply making bald assertions and stating your opinion. Admit it, you really aren't sure I don't know everything about God.

---

You haven't shown anything....I, and everybody else here, will freely admit that we do not know everything about God.

But you can certainly clarify your position. Are you claiming to know everything about God? It's a pretty simple yes or no question.

---

I'll answer your question when you answer mine. Admit you don't know whether I know everything about God

---

What an odd attempt at a gotcha, but I'll play along. I know that you don't know everything about God.

Your turn.

---

Prove it. Prove I don't know everything about God. You are a hypocrite. You think that I should care what your opinion is? I don't give two rips about your worthless opinion. Truth is, I spoke with God and He told me he read the War Scroll and He preached it to the Sons of Light.

---

That wasnt the agreement. The agreement was I answer your question and you answer mine.

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

Quote:

---

Well as I have shown, clearly you do not know everything about god. You really don't know how much I know about God and you really don't know whether I know everything about God. You are simply making bald assertions and stating your opinion. Admit it, you really aren't sure I don't know everything about God.

---

You haven't shown anything....I, and everybody else here, will freely admit that we do not know everything about God.

But you can certainly clarify your position. Are you claiming to know everything about God? It's a pretty simple yes or no question.

---

I'll answer your question when you answer mine. Admit you don't know whether I know everything about God

---

What an odd attempt at a gotcha, but I'll play along. I know that you don't know everything about God.

Your turn.

---

Prove it. Prove I don't know everything about God. You are a hypocrite. You think that I should care what your opinion is? I don't give two rips about your worthless opinion. Truth is, I spoke with God and He told me he read the War Scroll and He preached it to the Sons of Light.

---

That wasnt the agreement. The agreement was I answer your question and you answer mine.

---

You haven't answered my question. You didn't answer my question. You just gave me your opinion that I didn't know everything about God. You didn't prove to me that you don't really think I don't know everything about God. An answer without proof isn't an answer at all, its just an opinion.

FURTHER: you haven't shown me you really and truly and sincerely believe I don't know everything about God. What evidence do you have other than your opinion?

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

Quote:

---

Well as I have shown, clearly you do not know everything about god. You really don't know how much I know about God and you really don't know whether I know everything about God. You are simply making bald assertions and stating your opinion. Admit it, you really aren't sure I don't know everything about God.

---

You haven't shown anything....I, and everybody else here, will freely admit that we do not know everything about God.

But you can certainly clarify your position. Are you claiming to know everything about God? It's a pretty simple yes or no question.

---

I'll answer your question when you answer mine. Admit you don't know whether I know everything about God

---

What an odd attempt at a gotcha, but I'll play along. I know that you don't know everything about God.

Your turn.

---

Prove it. Prove I don't know everything about God. You are a hypocrite. You think that I should care what your opinion is? I don't give two rips about your worthless opinion. Truth is, I spoke with God and He told me he read the War Scroll and He preached it to the Sons of Light.

---

That wasnt the agreement. The agreement was I answer your question and you answer mine.

---

Also, how are you 100% sure the thought you were thinking is your thought and not something else? Sorry, I am just not convinced.

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

Quote:

---

Well as I have shown, clearly you do not know everything about god. You really don't know how much I know about God and you really don't know whether I know everything about God. You are simply making bald assertions and stating your opinion. Admit it, you really aren't sure I don't know everything about God.

---

You haven't shown anything....I, and everybody else here, will freely admit that we do not know everything about God.

But you can certainly clarify your position. Are you claiming to know everything about God? It's a pretty simple yes or no question.

---

I'll answer your question when you answer mine. Admit you don't know whether I know everything about God

---

What an odd attempt at a gotcha, but I'll play along. I know that you don't know everything about God.

Your turn.

---

Prove it. Prove I don't know everything about God. You are a hypocrite. You think that I should care what your opinion is? I don't give two rips about your worthless opinion. Truth is, I spoke with God and He told me he read the War Scroll and He preached it to the Sons of Light.

---

That wasnt the agreement. The agreement was I answer your question and you answer mine.

---

You haven't answered my question. You didn't answer my question. You just gave me your opinion that I didn't know everything about God. You didn't prove to me that you don't really think I don't know everything about God. An answer without proof isn't an answer at all, its just an opinion.

FURTHER: you haven't shown me you really and truly and sincerely believe I don't know everything about God. What evidence do you have other than your opinion?

---

I answered your question exactly and chose my words carefully.

You asked: "Admit you don't know whether I know everything about God."

I responded: "I know that you don't know everything about God."

Nowhere in your question do you ask me to defend or prove my statement, but to either affirm or deny your statement? I denied it.

It's not my fault that you asked the question you did, but we could choose to explore the evidence after you answer the question that was posed to you.

Your turn?

I'll not respond further until you hold up your end of the agreement.

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

Quote:

---

Well as I have shown, clearly you do not know everything about god. You really don't know how much I know about God and you really don't know whether I know everything about God. You are simply making bald assertions and stating your opinion. Admit it, you really aren't sure I don't know everything about God.

---

You haven't shown anything....I, and everybody else here, will freely admit that we do not know everything about God.

But you can certainly clarify your position. Are you claiming to know everything about God? It's a pretty simple yes or no question.

---

I'll answer your question when you answer mine. Admit you don't know whether I know everything about God

---

What an odd attempt at a gotcha, but I'll play along. I know that you don't know everything about God.

Your turn.

---

Prove it. Prove I don't know everything about God. You are a hypocrite. You think that I should care what your opinion is? I don't give two rips about your worthless opinion. Truth is, I spoke with God and He told me he read the War Scroll and He preached it to the Sons of Light.

---

Well now this thread just took a whole new turn. If we all agree that you think God told you this, would that placate things here?

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

Quote:

---

Well as I have shown, clearly you do not know everything about god. You really don't know how much I know about God and you really don't know whether I know everything about God. You are simply making bald assertions and stating your opinion. Admit it, you really aren't sure I don't know everything about God.

---

You haven't shown anything....I, and everybody else here, will freely admit that we do not know everything about God.

But you can certainly clarify your position. Are you claiming to know everything about God? It's a pretty simple yes or no question.

---

I'll answer your question when you answer mine. Admit you don't know whether I know everything about God

---

What an odd attempt at a gotcha, but I'll play along. I know that you don't know everything about God.

Your turn.

---

Prove it. Prove I don't know everything about God. You are a hypocrite. You think that I should care what your opinion is? I don't give two rips about your worthless opinion. Truth is, I spoke with God and He told me he read the War Scroll and He preached it to the Sons of Light.

---

That wasnt the agreement. The agreement was I answer your question and you answer mine.

---

You haven't answered my question. You didn't answer my question. You just gave me your opinion that I didn't know everything about God. You didn't prove to me that you don't really think I don't know everything about God. An answer without proof isn't an answer at all, its just an opinion.

FURTHER: you haven't shown me you really and truly and sincerely believe I don't know everything about God. What evidence do you have other than your opinion?

---

I answered your question exactly and chose my words carefully.

You asked: "Admit you don't know whether I know everything about God."

I responded: "I know that you don't know everything about God."

Nowhere in your question do you ask me to defend or prove my statement, but to either affirm or deny your statement? I denied it.

It's not my fault that you asked the question you did, but we could choose to explore the evidence after you answer the question that was posed to you.

Your turn?

I'll not respond further until you hold up your end of the agreement.

---

You didn't answer anything you just gave an opinion. It is implied in any answer that it has some basis in fact or some sort of logical basis. You haven't provided any of that. Admit you don't have any basis for your opinion.

BluHorseShu said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

Quote:

---

Well as I have shown, clearly you do not know everything about god. You really don't know how much I know about God and you really don't know whether I know everything about God. You are simply making bald assertions and stating your opinion. Admit it, you really aren't sure I don't know everything about God.

---

You haven't shown anything....I, and everybody else here, will freely admit that we do not know everything about God.

But you can certainly clarify your position. Are you claiming to know everything about God? It's a pretty simple yes or no question.

---

I'll answer your question when you answer mine. Admit you don't know whether I know everything about God

---

What an odd attempt at a gotcha, but I'll play along. I know that you don't know everything about God.

Your turn.

---

Prove it. Prove I don't know everything about God. You are a hypocrite. You think that I should care what your opinion is? I don't give two rips about your worthless opinion. Truth is, I spoke with God and He told me he read the War Scroll and He preached it to the Sons of Light.

---

Well now this thread just took a whole new turn. If we all agree that you think God told you this, would that placate things here?

---

How you know know that I think God told me anything?

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

Quote:

---

Well as I have shown, clearly you do not know everything about god. You really don't know how much I know about God and you really don't know whether I know everything about God. You are simply making bald assertions and stating your opinion. Admit it, you really aren't sure I don't know everything about God.

---

You haven't shown anything....I, and everybody else here, will freely admit that we do not know everything about God.

But you can certainly clarify your position. Are you claiming to know everything about God? It's a pretty simple yes or no question.

---

I'll answer your question when you answer mine. Admit you don't know whether I know everything about God

---

What an odd attempt at a gotcha, but I'll play along. I know that you don't know everything about God.

Your turn.

---

Prove it. Prove I don't know everything about God. You are a hypocrite. You think that I should care what your opinion is? I don't give two rips about your worthless opinion. Truth is, I spoke with God and He told me he read the War Scroll and He preached it to the Sons of Light.

---

That wasnt the agreement. The agreement was I answer your question and you answer mine.

---

You haven't answered my question. You didn't answer my question. You just gave me your opinion that I didn't know everything about God. You didn't prove to me that you don't really think I don't know everything about God. An answer without proof isn't an answer at all, its just an opinion.

FURTHER: you haven't shown me you really and truly and sincerely believe I don't know everything about God. What evidence do you have other than your opinion?

---

I answered your question exactly and chose my words carefully.

You asked: "Admit you don't know whether I know everything about God."

I responded: "I know that you don't know everything about God."

Nowhere in your question do you ask me to defend or prove my statement, but to either affirm or deny your statement? I denied it.

It's not my fault that you asked the question you did, but we could choose to explore the evidence after you answer the question that was posed to you.

Your turn?

I'll not respond further until you hold up your end of the agreement.

---

How do you know I answered the question? Tell me if you know anything at all.

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

Quote:

---

Well as I have shown, clearly you do not know everything about god. You really don't know how much I know about God and you really don't know whether I know everything about God. You are simply making bald assertions and stating your opinion. Admit it, you really aren't sure I don't know everything about God.

---

You haven't shown anything....I, and everybody else here, will freely admit that we do not know everything about God.

But you can certainly clarify your position. Are you claiming to know everything about God? It's a pretty simple yes or no question.

---

I'll answer your question when you answer mine. Admit you don't know whether I know everything about God

---

What an odd attempt at a gotcha, but I'll play along. I know that you don't know everything about God.

Your turn.

---

Prove it. Prove I don't know everything about God. You are a hypocrite. You think that I should care what your opinion is? I don't give two rips about your worthless opinion. Truth is, I spoke with God and He told me he read the War Scroll and He preached it to the Sons of Light.

---

That wasnt the agreement. The agreement was I answer your question and you answer mine.

---

You haven't answered my question. You didn't answer my question. You just gave me your opinion that I didn't know everything about God. You didn't prove to me that you don't really think I don't know everything about God. An answer without proof isn't an answer at all, its just an opinion.

FURTHER: you haven't shown me you really and truly and sincerely believe I don't know everything about God. What evidence do you have other than your opinion?

---

I answered your question exactly and chose my words carefully.

You asked: "Admit you don't know whether I know everything about God."

I responded: "I know that you don't know everything about God."

Nowhere in your question do you ask me to defend or prove my statement, but to either affirm or deny your statement? I denied it.

It's not my fault that you asked the question you did, but we could choose to explore the evidence after you answer the question that was posed to you.

Your turn?

I'll not respond further until you hold up your end of the agreement.

---

Im waiting. Im growing a beard. How do you know you answered the question? How do you know I did not answer the question?

BluHorseShu said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

Quote:

---

Well as I have shown, clearly you do not know everything about god. You really don't know how much I know about God and you really don't know whether I know everything about God. You are simply making bald assertions and stating your opinion. Admit it, you really aren't sure I don't know everything about God.

---

You haven't shown anything....I, and everybody else here, will freely admit that we do not know everything about God.

But you can certainly clarify your position. Are you claiming to know everything about God? It's a pretty simple yes or no question.

---

I'll answer your question when you answer mine. Admit you don't know whether I know everything about God

---

What an odd attempt at a gotcha, but I'll play along. I know that you don't know everything about God.

Your turn.

---

Prove it. Prove I don't know everything about God. You are a hypocrite. You think that I should care what your opinion is? I don't give two rips about your worthless opinion. Truth is, I spoke with God and He told me he read the War Scroll and He preached it to the Sons of Light.

---

Well now this thread just took a whole new turn. If we all agree that you think God told you this, would that placate things here?

---

Interesting way to end a discussion, don't you think.

Either he is unhinged and really believes he knows everything about God (does that imply he thinks he is God?) or he is going down a deep metaphysical rabbit hole regarding how anyone can know anything. Doesn't really matter which, because any discussion is useless at this point.

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

Quote:

---

Well as I have shown, clearly you do not know everything about god. You really don't know how much I know about God and you really don't know whether I know everything about God. You are simply making bald assertions and stating your opinion. Admit it, you really aren't sure I don't know everything about God.

---

You haven't shown anything....I, and everybody else here, will freely admit that we do not know everything about God.

But you can certainly clarify your position. Are you claiming to know everything about God? It's a pretty simple yes or no question.

---

I'll answer your question when you answer mine. Admit you don't know whether I know everything about God

---

What an odd attempt at a gotcha, but I'll play along. I know that you don't know everything about God.

Your turn.

---

Prove it. Prove I don't know everything about God. You are a hypocrite. You think that I should care what your opinion is? I don't give two rips about your worthless opinion. Truth is, I spoke with God and He told me he read the War Scroll and He preached it to the Sons of Light.

---

That wasnt the agreement. The agreement was I answer your question and you answer mine.

---

You haven't answered my question. You didn't answer my question. You just gave me your opinion that I didn't know everything about God. You didn't prove to me that you don't really think I don't know everything about God. An answer without proof isn't an answer at all, its just an opinion.

FURTHER: you haven't shown me you really and truly and sincerely believe I don't know everything about God. What evidence do you have other than your opinion?

---

I answered your question exactly and chose my words carefully.

You asked: "Admit you don't know whether I know everything about God."

I responded: "I know that you don't know everything about God."

Nowhere in your question do you ask me to defend or prove my statement, but to either affirm or deny your statement? I denied it.

It's not my fault that you asked the question you did, but we could choose to explore the evidence after you answer the question that was posed to you.

Your turn?

I'll not respond further until you hold up your end of the agreement.

---

He'll never answer, cause he can't in an honest factual way. Probably best to just leave this one be otherwise everyone is just playing into his game which he apparently craves. Hope he accepts the truth someday. Really do.

BiochemAg97 said:

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

Quote:

---

Well as I have shown, clearly you do not know everything about god. You really don't know how much I know about God and you really don't know whether I know everything about God. You are simply making bald assertions and stating your opinion. Admit it, you really aren't sure I don't know everything about God.

---

You haven't shown anything....I, and everybody else here, will freely admit that we do not know everything about God.

But you can certainly clarify your position. Are you claiming to know everything about God? It's a pretty simple yes or no question.

---

I'll answer your question when you answer mine. Admit you don't know whether I know everything about God

---

What an odd attempt at a gotcha, but I'll play along. I know that you don't know everything about God.

Your turn.

---

Prove it. Prove I don't know everything about God. You are a hypocrite. You think that I should care what your opinion is? I don't give two rips about your worthless opinion. Truth is, I spoke with God and He told me he read the War Scroll and He preached it to the Sons of Light.

---

Well now this thread just took a whole new turn. If we all agree that you think God told you this, would that placate things here?

---

Interesting way to end a discussion, don't you think.

Either he is unhinged and really believes he knows everything about God (does that imply he thinks he is God?) or he is going down a deep metaphysical rabbit hole regarding how anyone can know anything. Doesn't really matter which, because any discussion is useless at this point.

---

How do you know I don't know everything about God?

Loyalty said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

Quote:

---

Well as I have shown, clearly you do not know everything about god. You really don't know how much I know about God and you really don't know whether I know everything about God. You are simply making bald assertions and stating your opinion. Admit it, you really aren't sure I don't know everything about God.

---

You haven't shown anything....I, and everybody else here, will freely admit that we do not know everything about God.

But you can certainly clarify your position. Are you claiming to know everything about God? It's a pretty simple yes or no question.

---

I'll answer your question when you answer mine. Admit you don't know whether I know everything about God

---

What an odd attempt at a gotcha, but I'll play along. I know that you don't know everything about God.

Your turn.

---

Prove it. Prove I don't know everything about God. You are a hypocrite. You think that I should care what your opinion is? I don't give two rips about your worthless opinion. Truth is, I spoke with God and He told me he read the War Scroll and He preached it to the Sons of Light.

---

That wasnt the agreement. The agreement was I answer your question and you answer mine.

---

You haven't answered my question. You didn't answer my question. You just gave me your opinion that I didn't know everything about God. You didn't prove to me that you don't really think I don't know everything about God. An answer without proof isn't an answer at all, its just an opinion.

FURTHER: you haven't shown me you really and truly and sincerely believe I don't know everything about God. What evidence do you have other than your opinion?

---

I answered your question exactly and chose my words carefully.

You asked: "Admit you don't know whether I know everything about God."

I responded: "I know that you don't know everything about God."

Nowhere in your question do you ask me to defend or prove my statement, but to either affirm or deny your statement? I denied it.

It's not my fault that you asked the question you did, but we could choose to explore the evidence after you answer the question that was posed to you.

Your turn?

I'll not respond further until you hold up your end of the agreement.

---

He'll never answer, cause he can't in an honest factual way. Probably best to just leave this one be otherwise everyone is just playing into his game which he apparently craves. Hope he accepts the truth someday. Really do.

---

How do you know I did not already answer?

codker92 said:

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

Quote:

---

Well as I have shown, clearly you do not know everything about god. You really don't know how much I know about God and you really don't know whether I know everything about God. You are simply making bald assertions and stating your opinion. Admit it, you really aren't sure I don't know everything about God.

---

You haven't shown anything....I, and everybody else here, will freely admit that we do not know everything about God.

But you can certainly clarify your position. Are you claiming to know everything about God? It's a pretty simple yes or no question.

---

I'll answer your question when you answer mine. Admit you don't know whether I know everything about God

---

What an odd attempt at a gotcha, but I'll play along. I know that you don't know everything about God.

Your turn.

---

Prove it. Prove I don't know everything about God. You are a hypocrite. You think that I should care what your opinion is? I don't give two rips about your worthless opinion. Truth is, I spoke with God and He told me he read the War Scroll and He preached it to the Sons of Light.

---

Well now this thread just took a whole new turn. If we all agree that you think God told you this, would that placate things here?

---

How you know know that I think God told me anything?

---

Sorry, I probably misread. I thought you said you spoke with God and He told you he read the War Scroll.

BluHorseShu said:

---

codker92 said:

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

Quote:

---

Well as I have shown, clearly you do not know everything about god. You really don't know how much I know about God and you really don't know whether I know everything about God. You are simply making bald assertions and stating your opinion. Admit it, you really aren't sure I don't know everything about God.

---

You haven't shown anything....I, and everybody else here, will freely admit that we do not know everything about God.

But you can certainly clarify your position. Are you claiming to know everything about God? It's a pretty simple yes or no question.

---

I'll answer your question when you answer mine. Admit you don't know whether I know everything about God

---

What an odd attempt at a gotcha, but I'll play along. I know that you don't know everything about God.

Your turn.

---

Prove it. Prove I don't know everything about God. You are a hypocrite. You think that I should care what your opinion is? I don't give two rips about your worthless opinion. Truth is, I spoke with God and He told me he read the War Scroll and He preached it to the Sons of Light.

---

Well now this thread just took a whole new turn. If we all agree that you think God told you this, would that placate things here?

---

How you know know that I think God told me anything?

---

Sorry, I probably misread. I thought you said you spoke with God and He told you he read the War Scroll.

---

How do you know I said that? Where did I say that?

BluHorseShu said:

---

codker92 said:

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

Quote:

---

Well as I have shown, clearly you do not know everything about god. You really don't know how much I know about God and you really don't know whether I know everything about God. You are simply making bald assertions and stating your opinion. Admit it, you really aren't sure I don't know everything about God.

---

You haven't shown anything....I, and everybody else here, will freely admit that we do not know everything about God.

But you can certainly clarify your position. Are you claiming to know everything about God? It's a pretty simple yes or no question.

---

I'll answer your question when you answer mine. Admit you don't know whether I know everything about God

---

What an odd attempt at a gotcha, but I'll play along. I know that you don't know everything about God.

Your turn.

---

Prove it. Prove I don't know everything about God. You are a hypocrite. You think that I should care what your opinion is? I don't give two rips about your worthless opinion. Truth is, I spoke with God and He told me he read the War Scroll and He preached it to the Sons of Light.

---

Well now this thread just took a whole new turn. If we all agree that you think God told you this, would that placate things here?

---

How you know know that I think God told me anything?

---

Sorry, I probably misread. I thought you said you spoke with God and He told you he read the War Scroll.

---

Make baseless allegations much? Next time think before you speak please.

Loyalty said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

Quote:

---

Well as I have shown, clearly you do not know everything about god. You really don't know how much I know about God and you really don't know whether I know everything about God. You are simply making bald assertions and stating your opinion. Admit it, you really aren't sure I don't know everything about God.

---

You haven't shown anything....I, and everybody else here, will freely admit that we do not know everything about God.

But you can certainly clarify your position. Are you claiming to know everything about God? It's a pretty simple yes or no question.

---

I'll answer your question when you answer mine. Admit you don't know whether I know everything about God

---

What an odd attempt at a gotcha, but I'll play along. I know that you don't know everything about God.

Your turn.

---

Prove it. Prove I don't know everything about God. You are a hypocrite. You think that I should care what your opinion is? I don't give two rips about your worthless opinion. Truth is, I spoke with God and He told me he read the War Scroll and He preached it to the Sons of Light.

---

That wasnt the agreement. The agreement was I answer your question and you answer mine.

---

You haven't answered my question. You didn't answer my question. You just gave me your opinion that I didn't know everything about God. You didn't prove to me that you don't really think I don't know everything about God. An answer without proof isn't an answer at all, its just an opinion.

FURTHER: you haven't shown me you really and truly and sincerely believe I don't know everything about God. What evidence do you have other than your opinion?

---

I answered your question exactly and chose my words carefully.

You asked: "Admit you don't know whether I know everything about God."

I responded: "I know that you don't know everything about God."

Nowhere in your question do you ask me to defend or prove my statement, but to either affirm or deny your statement? I denied it.

It's not my fault that you asked the question you did, but we could choose to explore the evidence after you answer the question that was posed to you.

Your turn?

I'll not respond further until you hold up your end of the agreement.

---

He'll never answer, cause he can't in an honest factual way. Probably best to just leave this one be otherwise everyone is just playing into his game which he apparently craves. Hope he accepts the truth someday. Really do.

---

I know he's not likely to answer, but I wanted to give him a fair chance.

I'll certainly hold to my statement to not respond to him until he answers the question I posed to him.

AgLiving06 said:

---

Loyalty said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

Quote:

---

Well as I have shown, clearly you do not know everything about god. You really don't know how much I know about God and you really don't know whether I know everything about God. You are simply making bald assertions and stating your opinion. Admit it, you really aren't sure I don't know everything about God.

---

You haven't shown anything....I, and everybody else here, will freely admit that we do not know everything about God.

But you can certainly clarify your position. Are you claiming to know everything about God? It's a pretty simple yes or no question.

---

I'll answer your question when you answer mine. Admit you don't know whether I know everything about God

---

What an odd attempt at a gotcha, but I'll play along. I know that you don't know everything about God.

Your turn.

---

Prove it. Prove I don't know everything about God. You are a hypocrite. You think that I should care what your opinion is? I don't give two rips about your worthless opinion. Truth is, I spoke with God and He told me he read the War Scroll and He preached it to the Sons of Light.

---

That wasnt the agreement. The agreement was I answer your question and you answer mine.

---

You haven't answered my question. You didn't answer my question. You just gave me your opinion that I didn't know everything about God. You didn't prove to me that you don't really think I don't know everything about God. An answer without proof isn't an answer at all, its just an opinion.

FURTHER: you haven't shown me you really and truly and sincerely believe I don't know everything about God. What evidence do you have other than your opinion?

---

I answered your question exactly and chose my words carefully.

You asked: "Admit you don't know whether I know everything about God."

I responded: "I know that you don't know everything about God."

Nowhere in your question do you ask me to defend or prove my statement, but to either affirm or deny your statement? I denied it.

It's not my fault that you asked the question you did, but we could choose to explore the evidence after you answer the question that was posed to you.

Your turn?

I'll not respond further until you hold up your end of the agreement.

---

He'll never answer, cause he can't in an honest factual way. Probably best to just leave this one be otherwise everyone is just playing into his game which he apparently craves. Hope he accepts the truth someday. Really do.

---

I know he's not likely to answer, but I wanted to give him a fair chance.

I'll certainly hold to my statement to not respond to him until he answers the question I posed to him.

---

What question did you pose to me? You didn't ask me anything.

codker92 said:

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

codker92 said:

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

codker92 said:

---

AgLiving06 said:

---

Quote:

---

Well as I have shown, clearly you do not know everything about god. You really don't know how much I know about God and you really don't know whether I know everything about God. You are simply making bald assertions and stating your opinion. Admit it, you really aren't sure I don't know everything about God.

---

You haven't shown anything....I, and everybody else here, will freely admit that we do not know everything about God.

But you can certainly clarify your position. Are you claiming to know everything about God? It's a pretty simple yes or no question.

---

I'll answer your question when you answer mine. Admit you don't know whether I know everything about God

---

What an odd attempt at a gotcha, but I'll play along. I know that you don't know everything about God.

Your turn.

---

Prove it. Prove I don't know everything about God. You are a hypocrite. You think that I should care what your opinion is? I don't give two rips about your worthless opinion. Truth is, I spoke with God and He told me he read the War Scroll and He preached it to the Sons of Light.

---

Well now this thread just took a whole new turn. If we all agree that you think God told you this, would that placate things here?

---

How you know know that I think God told me anything?

---

Sorry, I probably misread. I thought you said you spoke with God and He told you he read the War Scroll.

---

Make baseless allegations much? Next time think before you speak please.

---

I shouldn't have taken the bolded part you wrote literally.

ETA: this is what you wrote above...."Truth is, I spoke with God and He told me he read the War Scroll and He preached it to the Sons of Light."