Jesus is God: Jesus committed no sin

[Wootah]

You are a sinner, God is not and has no sin.

Jesus is not a sinner.

Therefore Jesus is God.

Did Jesus commit sin? Is Jesus a sinner?

[Wootah]

Yes I agree JW and 1213 both. Undistributed middle (the same fallacy as Lord, Liar or lunatic). All people are alive, Starfish are alive, this starfish are people. Or All cars have wheels, bicycles have wheels, therefore a bicycle is a car.

The subsequent effort to pare it down to ONLY what is sinless, which is required to make the Holmes dictum work, as distinct fro Occams'razor which works as a theoretics preference not a as the only possible conclusion.

Yes they took the obvious and instead of wondering how they ever believed what they did JW made one of his non posts.

And yet tomorrow they will see a duck ... and if it looks like a duck walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, JW will say to the farmer undistributed middle.

Now I am wondering if it's worth the energy to fortify the syllogism.

[Wootah]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #2]

What other living beings are without sin?

I presume the faithful angels.

I think they are declared rightous. Anything not God is clearly imperfect in some way and so at some point, in order for that thing or being, to be near God, God has to permit it. But if an Angel came to Earth and became Jesus was the righteousness of that angel from the beginning or was it declared rightous by God first?

If the angel was rightous from the beginning then we have two Gods. If the angel was declared righteous then it was not of that angels doing. Then why doesn't God declare all things righteous? What is the point of the cross?

Which leaves us with Jesus.

Did God declare Jesus righteous but he was actually a sinner? Then why doesn't God save anyone? What is the point of the cross?

So Jesus was either the first non God creature to be sinless (either impossible or means there are two Gods) or Jesus is God.

Since no non God creature is sinless (some are delcared righteous, just like Christians are), Jesus is God.

[TRANSPONDER]

Jesus is treated like God in the Bible. It says he is perfect, good, sinless and without fault or flaw, when the Bible itself makes it clear this isn't the case.

It is clear we something like cult membership, propaganda and mental exploitation of those who Buy Into the big lie and will not see or hear anything other than the bill of goods they have been sold.

It is worth having the argument, then? I think so. Let the Bible apologists do their best. Let the reader understand by having the case explained, and maybe a few atheists will learn a trick or two - as I did - in what was wrong with Theists apologetics, because they for sure won';t hear it without discussion.

[JehovahsWitness]

Anything not God is clearly imperfect in some way...

Do you have scriptural support for this notion ? Are angels not part of God's work?

DEUTERONOMY 32:4

The Rock, his work is perfect ...

[TRANSPONDER]

Anything not God is clearly imperfect in some way...

Do you have scriptural support for this notion ? Are angels not part of God's work?

DEUTERONOMY 32:4

The Rock, his work is perfect ...

It seems you dropped the ball. Angels are (supposedly) part of God's creation. Wasn't the rest of creation? I know that there have been all sorts of attempts to clean up God's work as it was even before the fall (with laughable ineptitude) allowed Adam's scrumping to take down all of God's creation so bad that he had to wipe most of it out along with humankind, from C.S Lewis' creation on Malacandra which he tries to sanitize or at least laugh off (1) the fact that even a pre -fall creation is not perfect.

So Angels are not perfect or rather do not have the qualities God has, (or should, or he is just an angel who has grabbed the power) like they don't know everything. That may not be a sin, but imperfection doesn't mean sin. To give an example, long ago I read a lady apologist who confessed that the one problem she had with God is the messy way he devised of reproducing. It should have been done, as Spock says, 'by mail'.

(1) even as an enthusiast from that first book, I could see the wangling with the space traveller to Mars assuring us that Malacandrian droppings son't stink and are used in cultivation. Nothing nasty about God's pre -fall creation. The problem with needing to work with post - fall drudgery and wages of sin so we have at least the creature comforts the Christian Luddites would rather not do without, asked of the Pffiltriggi (Martian dwarves' "Who keeps you working?" Who indeed in a pre -fall Eden on Mars? "Our wives" laughs Pffiltriggi and you can sense the relieved laughter of the fidgetty audience of believers as the the problem is laughed off.

[Wootah]

Anything not God is clearly imperfect in some way...

Do you have scriptural support for this notion ? Are angels not part of God's work?

DEUTERONOMY 32:4

The Rock, his work is perfect ...

Only God is perfect. Are you going to argue against that? Go on ....

[JehovahsWitness]

Anything not God is clearly imperfect in some way...

Do you have scriptural support for this notion ? Are angels not part of God's work?

DEUTERONOMY 32:4

The Rock, his work is perfect ...

Only God is perfect. Are you going to argue against that? Go on ....

Are you going to ignore scripture and not comment on a challenge made to your reasoning ? (see above)



J W

[1213]

According to Luke Jesus let his parents go off while he stayed behind chatting with the priests. Now aside this is Luke's invention, doubtless based on Josephus and I heard the excuses like the parents assumed he was with the other kids, his 'you don't matter' attitude when his parents found him is Diss, just as his dismissive attitude towards his mother, and the remark that the cult matters more than the family (1) if this wasn't made clear with the talk of letting someone else bury their father.

Nothing of that means he didn't respect his parents. I think telling the truth is form of respect. And I don't think Jesus is implying that cult matters. I think his teaching is that people matter and it is important to do good for as many people as possible. Withholding the good news from everyone, because of selfish love for parents is not different than selfish love for a cult.

The worst example of Jesus looking like Frodo when the ring is taking over is his snarling at Peter who is only concerned about his master's welfare. Though of course this is Matthew's invention, and the market traders did not deserve his exhibition violence. Nor his persistent long sufferring sighing and head -shaking over his disciples' shortcomings. He was displaying what I call'foreman syndrome' where someone who has been doing the job for years gets ratty when a new lad doesn't pick up the job immediately. No, if I'd been a disciple (no 13 ) like a Trump secretary, I'd have seen the red flags and left after the tea party with the Pharisee where Jesus roundly abuses his host. Which is pretty bad manners even if we assume he hadn't cleaned his plate and asked for a doggy bad.

I think you read too much of own bias to that. And in any case, I don't think you gave any reason to think Jesus sinned.

...but God is far away from being sinless or even Good, and what we get is not a narrative of a sinless being but a divine dictator who controls the state media so it claims everything vile and nasty the dictatorial bully does is Good and indeed his nature sinless which it plainly isn't

By what I have understood, sin means to reject God. I don't think there is any intelligent reason to claim God has rejected Himself.

Well isn't that just what I said, (Belief in God/Jesus is what saves, not Works) but you argued that it is works/deeds (following God's instructions - you remember Abraham believed God' (what God said) what what made him Righteous? If you are going to invent a new religion, at least try to memorize the dogma.

I say, it is God who saves, not anything people do. And God gives eternal life to those who are righteous. And if person is righteous, it will show in his actions.

[TRANSPONDER]

According to Luke Jesus let his parents go off while he stayed behind chatting with the priests. Now aside this is Luke's invention, doubtless based on Josephus and I heard the excuses like the parents assumed he was with the other kids, his 'you don't matter' attitude when his parents found him is Diss, just as his dismissive attitude towards his mother, and the remark that the cult matters more than the family (1) if this wasn't made clear with the talk of letting someone else bury their father.

Nothing of that means he didn't respect his parents. I think telling the truth is form of respect. And I don't think Jesus is implying that cult matters. I think his teaching is that people matter and it is important to do good for as many people as possible. Withholding the good news from everyone, because of selfish love for parents is not different than selfish love for a cult.

Well I say he disrepects hisparents several times and repeatedly points to the cult that matters not family, and as usual you ignore and deny. your excuse is so diffuse and remote from the clear and evidentially supported argument that the Gospels consistently point to preferring Cult over family and that means disregarding the commandment to respect parents. Your apologetic, excuse and denial faiths.

The worst example of Jesus looking like Frodo when the ring is taking over is his snarling at Peter who is only concerned about his master's welfare. Though of course this is Matthew's invention, and the market traders did not deserve his exhibition violence. Nor his persistent long sufferring sighing and head -shaking over his disciples' shortcomings. He was displaying what I call'foreman syndrome' where someone who has been doing the job for years gets ratty when a new lad doesn't pick up the job immediately. No, if I'd been a disciple (no 13 ) like a Trump secretary, I'd have seen the red flags and left after the tea party with the Pharisee where Jesus roundly abuses his host. Which is pretty bad manners even if we assume he hadn't cleaned his plate and asked for a doggy bad.

I think you read too much of own bias to that. And in any case, I don't think you gave any reason to think Jesus sinned.

You clearly suffer too much from your own bias and - yet again - you dismiss without any good argument anything you don't like. And (also a common apologetics ploy) accuse the other side of the bias, fiddling and denial the Bible apologists do themselves.

...but God is far away from being sinless or even Good, and what we get is not a narrative of a sinless being but a divine dictator who controls the state media so it claims everything vile and nasty the dictatorial bully does is Good and indeed his nature sinless which it plainly isn't

By what I have understood, sin means to reject God. I don't think there is any intelligent reason to claim God has rejected Himself.

Well isn't that just what I said, (Belief in God/Jesus is what saves, not Works) but you argued that it is works/deeds (following God's instructions - you remember Abraham believed God' (what God said) what what made him Righteous? If you are going to invent a new religion, at least try to memorize the dogma.

I say, it is God who saves, not anything people do. And God gives eternal life to those who are righteous. And if person is righteous, it will show in his actions.

Rather than preaching your doctrines (as though your opinion mattered) it would eb good if you even kept the argument in your head. I agree that salvation is not in works, but in belonging to the club. That is, if you have Faith, that is the Righteousness that saves, not doing what God says, which was the argument you were making before and I was saying that only Jesusgod -faith saves and not works (doing what God says) and here you are agreeing with me now and pretending somehow you are saying something else.

I do recall you ascribed good actions to being God -believers, but this is open to question since I have found almost exclusively in Bible apologetics (even before we get into the outside world of snarky, pushy and uptight exhibition Christians) is dishonestly, fiddling, denial, craftiness and holding up as admirable what is despicable. Religious Faith may make flawed men become good, but there is nothing like it to made good men to bad things.

Just looks at wossname Phelps ex cult member exposing what it like.

cue "Not Real Christians". It is the flaw and fail of Godfaith makes people good that requires the 'No real Christian'throwing under the bus of those whose actions undermine the claim to the high moral ground.

[Wootah]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #17]

https://biblehub.com/text/deuteronomy/32-4.htm

Check the verse in hebrew and the key word tamim.

https://biblehub.com/hebrew/tamim_8549.htm

I think blameless or without blemish is better.

God is without blemish. It means you cannot blame God when God acts. No one can look at God's work and blame God.