Bible Teachings or Traditions of Men?

ALTER2EGO —to- EVERYONE:
The word "eternal" refers to anyone or anything that does not have a beginning or an end. Since I am presently discussing eternal life, and that's "life" as in LIVING BEINGS and specifically discussing Jesus Christ's mortality, I therefore applied the definition of the word "eternal" to LIVING BEINGS when I posed a question to several individuals in this thread, as follows:

quote:

---

ALTER2EGO (previous quote):
DEFINITION OF "ETERNAL": Eternal means not having a beginning or an end.
http://www.yourdictionary.com/eternal

​

DEFINITION OF "ETERNAL": "without beginning or end; existing through all time; everlasting" (Source: Webster's New World College Dictionary)

​

QUESTION #2 to RINGO: By definition, an eternal person can never die because an eternal person must exist through all time. During the three days that Jesus was dead, did he continue to exist as a living being? YES or NO?

---

ALTER2EGO to EVERYONE:
As you can see, several skeptics have now shown up in this thread playing semantics by claiming that I am adding to the definition of "eternal" simply because I applied the word "eternal" to LIVING BEINGS. Mind you, these individuals know perfectly well that the discussion is about whether or not Jesus Christ--a LIVING BEING--is eternal.Everyone who has been following this thread and seen what I posted about Jesus Christ's death should have been able to figure out by now that I am specifically discussing LIVING BEINGS. So my question #2 above is not an attempt at adding to the definition of "eternal" but, rather, it is an application of the definition "eternal" to what is being discussed here, namely, LIVING BEINGS.Recall that I raised the issue of Jesus Christ not being eternal after a Trinitarian used John 20:28 as proof of a 3-prong god. There, Thomas referred to the recently resurrected from the dead Jesus Christ as: "My Lord and my God." I pointed the Trinitarian to the context of John 20:28 where it states at John 20:1-3 and 9 that Jesus Christ died. Therefore, even if Thomas thought Jesus was also Jehovah in trinity, the context debunks that argument because eternal persons cannot die. The pagan-inspired Trinity dogma contradicts the Bible by saying the Son (Jesus Christ) is CO-ETERNAL with Jehovah, as follows: Christendom's trinity, written in Article I of The Catholic Faith, is defined as follows:
"There is but one living and true God, everlasting, without body, parts, or passions; of infinite power, wisdom, and goodness; the maker and preserver of all things both visible and indivisible. And in unity of this Godhead there be THREE PERSONS, of ONE substance, power, and ETERNITY; the Father, the SON, and the Holy Ghost."
http://www.sevenwholedays.org/2011/03/10/article-i/
http://mb-soft.com/believe/txc/thirtyni.htmBy definition, an eternal LIVING BEING cannot have a beginning or an end and must exist through all time as a LIVING BEING. Jesus did not exist as a LIVING BEING for three days. Therefore, he did not exist as a LIVING BEING "through all time."By paying attention to the context of scriptures in the Judeo-Christian Bible, honest-hearted ones are able to see that the trinity dogma that was dreamed up by the Christianized Romans (who later called themselves Roman Catholics) is a false religious teaching that was debunked by Jesus Christ's death.Edited by Alter2Ego, : No reason given.

Why are you having so much trouble with the simple concept that many here have answered you with in one way or another? Again, Jesus' BODY is not eternal, it had a beginning, at His conception in the womb of Mary, and it died, while His SPIRIT is eternal, pre-existing the body and existing while the body was dead.Something similar is true of human beings in general although our spirits have a beginning and His didn't: our bodies die but our spirits/souls are going to live on forever -- and our bodies will also ultimately be resurrected as well according to scripture.You keep insisting on your own definition that has been answered over and over.

Or alternatively, it suggests time extending infinitely far into the past, and God existing at all these times. This is what Augustine wished to avoid, and why he proposed his alternative.Anyway, it's a minor point and not really on topic.

We understand that you are discussing living beings and we understand that you applied the first meaning of the word eternal to living beings. Eternal in the Bible is really about not having an end, not about not having a beginning depending on how it is used. Having neither beginning nor end is usually saved for the Creator.The problem with your argument that the death of Jesus means he isn't an eternal being, is that we don't know what constitutes death for an eternal being or what constitutes living for such a being. Notice that God is everlasting, without body, parts, or passions. The three are of one substance. (What is the Trinity?)This eternal being is without body or parts. He is the maker of all things. According to the story he made a son who could live and die as a human, but then continue to exist with him throughout eternity.Now whether one believes that Jesus was preexistent or just human, the fact of the story is that Jesus exists as an eternal being. We know this because Jesus communicated with Paul. Again, that doesn't mean he is YHWH.The death of Jesus in the story isn't evidence against the Trinity just because he died. The trick is to show that he didn't become part of the One or that the writer's didn't view the risen Jesus as part of the One. IMO, they had no problem with there being separate eternal beings who are godlike without being part of the One.

quote:

---

By definition, an eternal LIVING BEING cannot have a beginning or an end and must exist through all time as a LIVING BEING. Jesus did not exist as a LIVING BEING for three days. Therefore, he did not exist as a LIVING BEING "through all time."

---

You may not like semantics, but you are basing your argument on the meaning of eternal and applying the first meaning to a supernatural being.Notice Article I says there is one living and true God. This is a living deity, not a human being. What constitutes an end for a supernatural being?You're assuming to know rules of existence for supernatural beings not covered by the story. (Message 165, Message 218, Message 234, Message 298)We understand what you are saying and are disagreeing that the story supports the meaning you are applying.As I said before, Christians look forward to eternal life after they die. They then become eternal beings. They will have a beginning.The Bible doesn't support your use of the English meaning of eternal. When used in the New Testament the idea of no beginning and no end is more of a always has been and always will be; not that there can't be a beginning. It's our perspective, not a rule. Eternal in the BibleHaving died as a human and being resurrected doesn't exclude Jesus from being an eternal being. It also doesn't make him YHWH.

Hi PD, In regards to the above and the entire eternal being thing.JC said the following: So it would appear JC was with God BEFORE the universe existed. That's a long time ago and since he's still around that's close enough to eternal for me. That he picked up a body to live and work among us and then dropped it off has nothing to do with being eternal. It might matter to you if you are fixated on the idea of your being a body, actually quite common among religious people and atheists.Edited by petrophysics1, : sp

I don't ever intend to do that. It is unimportant to my argument. I've already refuted your position and you have refused to address it.

False. An eternal being could become a living being, and then stop being a living one and go back to what it was before. At no point did it have a beginning or an end of its existence, even though its time as a living being had both a beginning or an end. The Bible distinguishes between being alive in the body, and being alive in the spirit. Jesus was always alive in the spirit, then he became alive in the body, then his body died, and he continued to live in spirit. Even though his body had a beginning and end, his spirit did not. Therefore, the end of his body's life doesn't make him not eternal.

quote:

---

quote:

---

ALTER2EGO -to- CATHOLIC SCIENTIST:
Since the verse is "still sitting there" in your previous post, you should have no trouble quoting it again, and this time, bolding the words that indicate: "Jesus was alive in the spirit and preaching to imprisoned spirits during the three days the Bible says he was dead."

​

When do you intend to do that?

---

​

CATHOLIC SCIENTIST:
I don't ever intend to do that. It is unimportant to my argument. I've already refuted your position and you have refused to address it.

---

ALTER2EGO -to- CATHOLIC SCIENTIST:
Of course it's not important to your argument, being that you know full well the verses at 1 Peter 3:18-19 don't say a thing resembling your fallacious claim that, to summarize: "Jesus was alive in the spirit and preaching to imprisoned spirits during the three days the Bible says he was dead."Whenever I ask people to prove what's not in the Bible, they usually evade. That's what you're doing. All of a sudden, it's "not important to [your] argument" to show the forum where 1 Peter 3:18-19 indicates Jesus was preaching when he was supposed to be dead.

quote:

---

quote:

---

ALTER2EGO:
By definition, an eternal LIVING BEING cannot have a beginning or an end and must exist through all time as a LIVING BEING.

---

​

CATHOLIC SCIENTIST:
False. An eternal being could become a living being, and then stop being a living one and go back to what it was before. At no point did it have a beginning or an end of its existence, even though its time as a living being had both a beginning or an end.

---

ALTER2EGO -to- CATHOLIC SCIENTIST:
I'm sure the people down at Webster's Dictionary, whose definition of "eternal" I used in this thread, would like to hear your take on what eternal beings can do--namely, they can die and come back to life whenever they have a mind to do so. Be sure and tell them that bit about: At no point did it have a beginning or an end of its existence, even though its time as a living being had both a beginning or an end."

I think you are a tad confused here. You say it better in your following paragraph where you distinguish between the body and spirit, the spirit being eternal although the body it clothes itself in is not.But when you speak of an eternal being this way: "its time as a living being" you are mixing things up. God, the only eternal being, IS a living Being, does not need to enter earthly life to become a living being. We speak of "the living God" after all.**************************************************************************************************************I think we've done this subject to death myself. We'll never convince Alter2Ego but his/her argument has been blown to bits by at least four of us here, there's no point in continuing.**************************************************************************************************************

Alter, the answer to you is that a "being" is not the simple single unit you keep insisting on, as the "eternal being" made flesh, that is the Son of God, has both spirit and body just like human beings, a body which is mortal and dies, a spirit which lives forever, and in the case of the Son of God having no beginning or end.=======================================================================================Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

quote:

---

ALTER2EGO -to- CATHOLIC SCIENTIST:
I'm sure the people down at Webster's Dictionary, whose definition of "eternal" I used in this thread, would like to hear your take on what eternal beings can do--namely, they can die and come back to life whenever they have a mind to do so. Be sure and tell them that bit about: At no point did it have a beginning or an end of its existence, even though its time as a living being had both a beginning or an end."

---

I'm sure they would tell you that their meaning of eternal, which you attached to being, doesn't constitute the rules of existence for an eternal being. It does not say cannot, Just because we don't know the beginning or end doesn't mean it cannot be. The meaning is generated from our perspective.You the one saying cannot have a beginning and cannot have an end.Not having a beginning or end is only one meaning and as you have been told that meaning usually only applies to the Creator. All birds don't have the same lifespan. Why assume all eternal beings are the same? Eternity (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)You need to expand on your argument. The definition of eternal doesn't carry the load for you. It doesn't determine the rules of existence for eternal beings.

From Message 353: It sure does say something that resembles that, it mentions that Jesus dies in flesh, but was still alive in the spirit, and then he went and made proclamations to the imprisoned spirits. It doesn't take a genius to make sense out of that. But I guess you have to not be a complete moron. Its not important for it to say it in the way that you're requiring it to. You're acting as if the Bible has to say things specifically and explicitly in order for us to understand them. But in this case it is really easy to understand the implications of what it does say even though it isn't as explicit as you'd like.I've already mentioned this to you in Message 327:

quote:

---

FYI: There are no scriptures in the Judeo-Christian Bible that say Jesus made proclamations to imprisoned spirits during the three days he was dead. If you can find such a scripture, please quote it for the benefit of the forum and show us where it says Jesus was dead when he was making the proclamations.

​

There's all kinds of inferences that can be made from the Bible that are not explicitly stated. We don't need to find passages that state things exactly in order to understand them as we've phrased them.

---

But you chose to dodge that point.From Message 354: Well that's stupid, why would they include the abilities of eternal beings in the definition of eternal? Would you also have them include the properties of red apples in the definition of the word red? Actually, I guess you would. Then you could argue that a firetruck isn't red because if doesn't have the juicy properties of an apple. That's how inane your argument is. And now, in an act of ultimate desperation, you deliberately misrepresent me (aka lie) with the use of bolding and color. If you were actually interested in what I was saying, you would have done it like this:

quote:

---

At no point did it have a beginning or an end of its existence, even though its time as a living being had both a beginning or an end.

---

But we all already suspected that you weren't an honest person. Thank you for proving it.

Actually, I was just speaking more generally there.For example, in the Dungeons and Dragons Forgotten Realms world, they have all sorts of deities. When the gods want to visit people in the world, they employ an avatar. Those avatars can be killed, but the god still exists before and after that.The point is that an eternal being could enter into another phase of existence, I was using "living" to mean appearing in the material world, and that existence can be finite even though the being as a whole is still eternal.But you're right, A2E is a dishonest person who is not interested in understand our arguments, so we're just wasting our time on them.Oh, to answer your earlier question about Jesus floating above the water, that was just the way I was imagining it. All glowing and angels singing n'stuff, I think it'd look pretty sweet if he was floating too But you're right that that isn't necessarily implied by the text.

Its time as an incarnate being.I think everyone participating on this thread now knows what the Bible says, there's no use in you lying to us about it.