Threaded Mode | Linear Mode

08-08-2011, 02:51 PM

(08-05-2011 07:23 AM)RedOctober Wrote: 2 Thessalonian 2

[14] To this he called you through our gospel, so that you may obtain the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.
[15] So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter.

So since Jesus Christ is clearly designated and called Lord and in Deut 6:4 we are told quite unambiguously and quite undeniably to the point: “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one! Great find of wisdom for 24/7 and not just for the weekend.

Always Observing & Listening

***RedOctober*** · 08-11-2011, 03:44 PM

That logic doesn't hold up. First, "Lord" is used in what context? Throughout feudal and ancient history Lord has been a nobility title to denote one who has ownership of property and allegiance (and many time ownership as well) of people. So using your logic, if someone calls their superior "Lord" they are calling him Christ. Lord in Deuteronomy is used in the context as a people belonging to God. When referring to Christ its often in context to redeeming us.

Another example, When Christ says we are all "gods" its in a different context.

And even more telling...nowhere does Christ say "I am the Lord your God" in the New Testament. And in 1 Peter 3, it explains the context and condition of Christ and Lord:

[14] But even if you do suffer for righteousness' sake, you will be blessed. Have no fear of them, nor be troubled,
[15] but in your hearts reverence Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to make a defense to any one who calls you to account for the hope that is in you, yet do it with gentleness and reverence;
[16] and keep your conscience clear, so that, when you are abused, those who revile your good behavior in Christ may be put to shame.

Finally, you usually post on the anti Molokan site....whatever purpose do you have here? I ask because I value my time and would prefer honest questions from people who question the Trinity Doctrine, but if your just looking for some sort of "gotcha" thing....

08-24-2011, 01:20 PM

(08-11-2011 03:44 PM)RedOctober Wrote: That logic doesn't hold up. First, "Lord" is used in what context? Throughout feudal and ancient history Lord has been a nobility title to denote one who has ownership of property and allegiance (and many time ownership as well) of people. So using your logic, if someone calls their superior "Lord" they are calling him Christ. Lord in Deuteronomy is used in the context as a people belonging to God. When referring to Christ its often in context to redeeming us.

Easy now, the context is clear as my newly washed windshield. The term is not in any way feudal. God, speaking in a manner that the Israelites understood by their interaction with Him by seeing His many miracles. Yes, Christ is considered our Redeemer but Apostle Paul also sacredly pledged to being the property of Christ as a slave and pleasingly called himself a bondservent.

Galatians 1:10 For do I now persuade men, or God? Or do I seek to please men? For if I still pleased men, I would not be a bondservant of Christ, as I do, also.

Always Listening & Observing

***RedOctober*** · 08-26-2011, 08:03 AM

On the contrary...you just contradicted yourself. Instead of observing and listening...maybe you should start reading. Re-read what you wrote, you just gave an example of a feudal relationship.You trying so hard to prove doctrine, that in the effort you disprove the Bible. Furthermore, God made covenants with the Israelite s, it had nothing to do with "miracles" other than God can deliver on his end. Ask any staunch Jew, they are often proud of the fact that they have a "contract" with God. Again, reaffirming the feudal relationship.

And you still haven't answered my question, why are you here?

(08-24-2011 01:20 PM)Guest Wrote:
(08-11-2011 03:44 PM)RedOctober Wrote: That logic doesn't hold up. First, "Lord" is used in what context? Throughout feudal and ancient history Lord has been a nobility title to denote one who has ownership of property and allegiance (and many time ownership as well) of people. So using your logic, if someone calls their superior "Lord" they are calling him Christ. Lord in Deuteronomy is used in the context as a people belonging to God. When referring to Christ its often in context to redeeming us.
Easy now, the context is clear as my newly washed windshield. The term is not in any way feudal. God, speaking in a manner that the Israelites understood by their interaction with Him by seeing His many miracles. Yes, Christ is considered our Redeemer but Apostle Paul also sacredly pledged to being the property of Christ as a slave and pleasingly called himself a bondservent.

Galatians 1:10 For do I now persuade men, or God? Or do I seek to please men? For if I still pleased men, I would not be a bondservant of Christ, as I do, also.

Always Listening & Observing

08-31-2011, 08:19 PM

I'm here why? To stand for the Truth, lest I fall.

1 Peter 3:15 But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts, and always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you, with meekness and fear;

It can hardly be called a feudal relationship, where by the faith of one man Abraham, the Israelites were given the opportunity to have it all, merely by being obedient to God, Who always delivered on His promises, with miracle after miracle. Also, for a committed Christian, it is also not a feudal arrangement where Grace, says it all.

God's
Riches
At
Christ's
Expence

Always Observing & Listening

(08-26-2011 08:03 AM)RedOctober Wrote: On the contrary...you just contradicted yourself. Instead of observing and listening...maybe you should start reading. Re-read what you wrote, you just gave an example of a feudal relationship.You trying so hard to prove doctrine, that in the effort you disprove the Bible. Furthermore, God made covenants with the Israelite s, it had nothing to do with "miracles" other than God can deliver on his end. Ask any staunch Jew, they are often proud of the fact that they have a "contract" with God. Again, reaffirming the feudal relationship.

And you still haven't answered my question, why are you here?

(08-24-2011 01:20 PM)Guest Wrote:
(08-11-2011 03:44 PM)RedOctober Wrote: That logic doesn't hold up. First, "Lord" is used in what context? Throughout feudal and ancient history Lord has been a nobility title to denote one who has ownership of property and allegiance (and many time ownership as well) of people. So using your logic, if someone calls their superior "Lord" they are calling him Christ. Lord in Deuteronomy is used in the context as a people belonging to God. When referring to Christ its often in context to redeeming us.
Easy now, the context is clear as my newly washed windshield. The term is not in any way feudal. God, speaking in a manner that the Israelites understood by their interaction with Him by seeing His many miracles. Yes, Christ is considered our Redeemer but Apostle Paul also sacredly pledged to being the property of Christ as a slave and pleasingly called himself a bondservent.

Galatians 1:10 For do I now persuade men, or God? Or do I seek to please men? For if I still pleased men, I would not be a bondservant of Christ, as I do, also.

Always Listening & Observing

***RedOctober*** · 09-02-2011, 08:10 AM

Quote:I'm here why? To stand for the Truth, lest I fall.

Yeah....sure you are (heavy sarcasm included).

As for the feudal relationship the Bible and historical context disagree with you. No matter how much you don't want it to be so. Don't like it, take it up with God.