All these people judging Mark should check out the plank in their own eye for once, and for two, ask themselves who is reaching more people for Christs name? Driscoll doing what he does, you you making youtube comments about how wrong he is.
“If I where making fun of the real Jesus that would be offensive.” YES it would Mark. It would also be blasphemous and you’ve done both on many occasions!
It's sad to see Christians judging other christian in such a legalistic pharisee like way. When judged by those same standards, how will you do before Jesus?
God's holiness is not a 'secondary' issue. I'm not convinced Mr. Driscoll. Show that you love the saviour by learning about reverence for the name of the most Holy One, and edifying speech.
If it looks like a snake and smells like one, it probably is one.
Hi, I like your videos since I saw several of them and your topics are great and you make your point very well and plus they are even fun to listen. The topics are attractive but also very interesting to listen to your preachings. God bless you :D
I liked this video with you speaking in a serious way and patiently explaining .ptl. I think the cussing and being too silly at time's are going to haunt you for a while. I love you in Christ, I like your encouragement and especially about missions in this video. Amen.
OK, well, it looks like you are starting to perform evasive tactics because you are unable to deal with the text. So, how about we really go for the jugular, and deal with a text that expounds both the Trinity and the deity of Christ.
John 1:1 (in context of course). How do you read this verse(s)?
@jselvrom Too bad you haven't got any likes... Sad really. Impressed, however, with your childishness. At least the other adults here actually engage in conversation over the matter and not use cowardice...
@jselvrom I prefer chapters for context. Adults can read through chapters. As well as the Bible as a whole for perspective. Not just picking and choosing versus that line up with their particular doctrines. Ignorance would be the complete antithesis of what I stand for.
4) In regards to John 10:34 and following, I understand the text, but I first need to understand how you are using it before I address it any further. Are you thinking that Jesus, the Jewish Monotheist, somehow believed that His opponents were mini-gods? Please let me know.
@JesusMostHigh Yahoshua is referring to the Judges of Yisrael. Also known as the "Sons of God". In other words Yahoshua is declaring himself an equal to the the hierarchy of Jewish leadership. He clearly stays completely away from deity claim by showing what he is saying. A clever way of exposing what the Pharisees were trying to call him out on, and hence forth why they continued to try and stone him even after shaking of the deity claim.
Actually that is exactly wrong, and the complete opposite of why the Pharisees attempted to stone him. "The Jews answered him: "it is not for a good work that we are going to stone you but for BLASPHEMY, because you, being a man, make yourself GOD"
You see, you, like the Pharisees, see Jesus as just a man.
@JesusMostHigh Then show me in the following versus where "Jesus" tells them he is indeed what they say he is. You have trouble putting scripture in context. It's not your fault, you've been force fed a doctrine that you have decided to swallow. What part of John 1:1 would you like to "exegete"? Please do not tell me your going to spin your whole doctrine on "The word was god" non-sense. If that is what you are referring to I implore you to study the oldest Greek and Coptic manuscripts.
Actually, I haven't been indoctrinated as you assert that I have been. I study the Scriptures with an open-mind and merely want to be faithful to the text. I am also open to correction, I hope you are too.
Now, in John 10:34 Jesus' statement must be understood as part of his overall reasoning in context of his a fortiori argument: "If God even called human judges 'gods', then how much more can I call myself the Son of God."...
...Christ had just pronounced Himself one with the Father, saying, "I and My Father are one" (10:30). The Jews wanted to stone Him because they thought Christ was blaspheming, making Himself out to be equal with God (vv. 31-33). Jesus responded by quoting Psalm 82:6 which says, "I said, you are gods". So, Jesus reasoned, if human judges could be called "gods," then why can't the Son of God be called "God"?
@JesusMostHigh So what you're saying is your open minded reasoning has no room for context of what is being said? This is just the wrong place to be having this conversation. I apparently would have to walk you through verse by verse. You keep picking out snipits that are lining up with your logic, and leaving the rest.
In regards to John 1:1 and following - how about we go directly to the Greek because I have that right in front of me. So, let's go over the first few verses in Greek verse by verse. Also, please direct me to these manuscripts you speak of.
@JesusMostHigh Do some research. I want you to find out what the Coptic and oldest Greek manuscript say. They pre-date your version, and therefore have less confusion. When you look at the oldest of manuscripts of scripture you see even punctuation added at later dates changes the whole meaning.
Well, it looks like you are unable to substantiate your assertions. Moreover, I have done my research which is why I am a trinitarian Christian. Also I have good scholarly sources in regards to textual criticism and textual variations. If you wish to carry this conversation via PM then go ahead.
@JesusMostHigh Let me guess... Your scholarly sources are... Trinitarian? How can I substantiate anything when I'm telling you to do the research. I'm not going to hand you answers. You obviously just take what's given to you from biased sources. I used to be in the same shoes. I got put on the right track by being asked questions I didn't have the answer to. Did some research and figured out most of "mainstream Christianity" is falsified. If you decide to research hit me up in a PM.
My sources are textual scholars who probably have studied this issue longer than you have been alive. Some are Trinitarian some are not. Moreover, I would stop assuming I haven't done the research, I have and I am challenging your conclusions. Also, you are aware that there have been people in the shoes you are currently wearing, who have come to embrace "mainstream Christianity" as well, right?
@JesusMostHigh Again your sources and scholars are indoctrinated. Doesn't matter how long they've studied. Again I used to be a devout Trinitarian and I "Converted" to what I and many would call true "Christianity". Again I'm not assuming you have not studied. Only that you stick to biased sources of your doctrine. Would you trust a "secular" scholar on Bible matters? Some one who does not even believe a God exists? I'm merely stating that you are not as open as you state.
1) Why do assume that I stick to biased sources when I converted to Christianity from Atheism? I converted from Atheism to adopt the truth; therefore, I had absolutely no vested interest in the Trinity if the doctrine wasn't true. Thus, your accusation that I am not open to the truth is utterly false.
All of these scholars have been studying textual criticism longer than you have been alive, and I highly dobut you would have a leg to stand on in a debate with any of them. However, with that said, can you please give me some names of the scholars you use for sources?
@JesusMostHigh Ehrman? An Agnostic who sites the "NT" is too full of errors and inconsistency to be accurate and correct? This is one of your sources for scholarship? It's no wonder Paul warned against following scholars. And such as the case one must even pay close attention to Paul's own words. If you can not link the Tenakh with the New Testament then you can not comprehend The Bible in it's entirety. New Testament scholarship is a farce with out the equivalent in Tenakh.
I use Ehrman for his work on textual criticism because this is his area of expetise. I don't always agree with his conclusions (I'm a Christian), and I brought his name up to demonstrate that not all my scholars are Trinitarian.
Teachers/scholars (not Ehrman of course) are actually a gift to the Church, and they should be utilized for the building up of the Body of Christ.
I see that you haven't listed any sources that you use for textual analysis, why not? Also, I absolutely agree that the OT is critical for understanding the NT. I especially appreciate the work of OT Messianic scholar Dr. Michael Brown (a Trinitarian as well).
@JesusMostHigh You understand scholars do almost the exact opposite. Scholars are what brought us every denomination of "Christianity". Not every denomination can be right. So why no go directly to the sources? Find transcriptions of the oldest copies of all of the NT (Not talking about modern codex non-sense). The Tenakh has obviously stayed more pure, but if you grasp certain terminology in Hebrew and Greek you can see where the "Church" (that is built on Trinitrianism).
@halfie25 Actually, in the history of the church it has been non-educated people who start the divisions, i.e. denominations. Driscoll is one example. Read Iain Murray's "Revival and Revivalism" for a good introduction to the problem, specifically in the USA.
@60HzSignal I see your point, but if we want to be technical The Romans Drew the first line in the sand. With their own Doctrines and Dogma's in their councils. Only after that do we start to see major divisions, and lets be honest. The Romans were some of the most educated people of the time.
@JesusMostHigh (con'd) has changed things to benefit their own doctrines and dogma. Ehrman is the perfect example. There are clear facts he points out that no "Trinitarian" can answer. Sir Anthony Buzzard another who puts out clear points that can't even be handled correctly by the likes of James White. Mr. Baptist Trinitrian scholar himself. Schoalrs are not the answer, and do not help. They only bring division amongst people who follow "Apollo" and people who follow "Pau'l.
Are you affiliated with any denomination? Are you JW? Have you not studied the usage of OT passages that refer to the GOD of Israel that are applied to Jesus by NT authors? Was Thomas blaspheming when he cried out "My Lord and my God!"? Was Jesus implying that he was not good when he said, "Only God is good." Was Jesus saying that the one who lays down his life for his sheep is not good? I will ask my brother about the early texts. He has a degree in Koine Biblical Greek.
@philosophy7575 I do not affiliate with any creed or doctrine or religion for that matter. I follow scripture. Throwing quotes out of context has gotten those with your beliefs no where. Where you there when Thomas said "My Lord and my God"? Do the oldest manuscripts actually translate that way? What if Christ was truly stating YHWH is the only one who is good? What if he was showing he was merely human? If your brother is Trinitarian, then why ask him? Biased sources are pointless.
I have no desire to be at odds with anybody for having different viewpoints on interpretations of scriptures as long as we are united in Christ. But if you are going to judge Driscoll or myself based on your rules or your interpretations of the bible and not the major issues of the Bible, I have a huge problem with that. I will not play the game of church dividing over these issues. I used to be divided over these issues, but no more.
restless, use the missional living as an excuse to live in the world , drink dress act talk like the world becuase they have not sat down and counted the cost and be like Christ not like the world or driscoll,, hey even benny hinn has his fiollowers every false teacher will have followers...
@bachsoc You sir have no idea what "the world" means biblically. It does not mean the culture, it means opposing God's world. If you think Driscoll is a false teacher, you are ignorant. Keep your version of social propriety to yourself. If you are gonna respond with bible verses, you better do it in context and not thump it.
"And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life." 1 John 5:20
I can agree with Mark Driscoll that there is only one true Jesus, and He is the true God and eternal life.
However I do think he has a carnal view on certain Bible passages, particularly in Song of Solomon. An example of this is from 5:00-5:12 in the clip.
The Bible does not teach eternal punishment. God's love and mercy endures forever. Does it really endure forever or only in this life? How can it be Good News if it doesn't translate to the afterlife?
1 Timothy 4:10- This is why we work hard and continue to struggle, for our hope is in the living God, who is the Savior of all people and particularly of all believers.
It is not a metaphor I'm Christ bride not His wife. The bride is adorned and dressed in white linen of righteousness. Christ never called the Church a wife. A wife is one in most cases consummated with her husband. Christ is clear we are His Bride our intimacy in Spirit is One. Not to be confused with those under law. We are washed with water of the Word.The Bride is the picture of attention a saving groom has delivered.Without spot or wringle a Virgin Church, redeemed, not a wife.
@halfie25 thats the thing. i do not claim to understand the trinity. nor do i ever think i will. but i do kno its in the bible and i cannot edit the word. "oh how unserachable are the ways of God' says paul in romans 11.
@Real777Truth The "ways" of God, not who God is as a person. I think the Tenakh is very clear about who YHWH is. I think the New testament is very clear about who Yahoshua is. There s no room for a Trinity n scripture.
"the GOD said let US make man in OUR image, after OUR likeness" Genesis 1:26. how could there have been a we or and our if there was just God at this time?
@halfie25 no, your twisting that. if you claim to understand the trinity or even the attributes of God fully than you contradict scripture to the fullest. my Point was that there was just God at this time so the us would have to be to three persons of God. God the father, God the Spirit (as it says in gensis 1 that God's spirit was hoovering over the waters, how would that occure when he was still in heaven at this time).
@halfie25 and lastley God the Son (which the word says all things were mae by himand through him, and isaiah says all things were made by God and through God. wouldnt that make them the same?).
@Real777Truth I think you should study some Hebrew. Then go back and read Genisis 1:26. It is very clear who the "our" is in context of the whole chapter in the Hebrew. So "God's" ways maybe not always be understood, but you can understand who He is from scripture. It's pretty clear, and your Trinity is not, making it unfounded.
@halfie25 i have studied Hebrew. Maybe you should re-study and then read the New Testament. and then if you want to study Greek. Read Galations ch.1. How bout the majority of Ephesians. OH! Isaiah is a good one too. I bet you don't believe God is omnipresent either do you?
@halfie25 you still did not explain to me why Isaiah says all things were made by God and the New Testement says all things were made by the Son. Hmmm?
@halfie25 And Jesus came to the and said, "all authority in Heaven and Earth has been given to me" Matthew 28:18. So if i took this scripture based on what you believe God gave Jesus his authority. that doesnt make God very God like. This scripture seems pretty Jesus is God to me.
@Real777Truth Was that fun? Did you have a fun little rant? If you would like to understand where I am coming from more, do it where we have room to speak. BY the way. Yahoshua is Mashiach. The promised one to the Jews who is never said to be YHWH (God) in the Tenakh. Why all the sudden would he claim to be, and more importantly why would Jews perceive him to be?
@Real777Truth In the context of the original Hebrew you see the "our" in Genesis is YHWH speaking to other "beings" in Heaven. Not HIm speaking to Himself. Elohim is used for people and angels. El is used to describe trees and mountains. FUnny how your first comment said "I have studied Hebrew", and your last said "Btw i am currently and have been studying". A retraction that shows perhaps the lax in your understanding of what I've said to this point.
@Real777Truth Now that I have shown you there is in fact a "Hebraic basis" for what I have said we can drop that and move on to your claim that Christ is creator of all things. You will first have to drop some scripture that uses those exact words.
Also Matthew 28:18 makes complete sense. The only way YHWH could redeem the first Adam was with the second. Again if you want more PM me. I used to be a Trinitarian, and you can not throw anything new at me that has not been refuted.
@halfie25 Colossians 1:15-18 He is the image of the invisible God, the First born of all creation. For BY HIM ALL THINGS WERE CREATED, in heaven and on EARTH, visible and invisible, whether thrones dominions or rulers or authorities. ALL things were CREATED through HIM and for HIM.
good enough? i can give more. i can also give the the literal Greek word for word translation for this verse if you would like.
@halfie25 And another thing why would it say our if it was talking about a singular God? i do not argue that its talking about God but if God was a singular personality it should say "my" not "our". so you claim makes no sense.
@Real777Truth How can the first born of all creation be the agent of all creation? What god has to create to create. Sounds a bit pagan to me... Maybe you should do a little more study on what 'Paul" is saying in the whole chapter instead of sighting me one liners all the time. Also, I already showed you the proper context of the "our". "Our" is translated from Elohim. YHWH is literally speaking to other beings in Heaven. Not Himself, or persons of HImself. Recite She'ma. It's clear.
@halfie25 so if the "our" is talking about angels and beings in heaven then you are say we were made in the image of angels and being in heaven and not God. right?
@Real777Truth Who created the Angels in Heaven? What form are Angelic beings seen by humans in scripture? We just need to put all the pieces together.
@halfie25 thats the thing man just right there you said you dont have all the pieces put together. and neither do i. but i do know that scripture says i was made in the image of God not his angels. Satan was an angel. the most beautiful one at that. and i know for a fact i wasnt made in his image. fact remains that scripture says i was made in God image. not his angels.
@Real777Truth My point was for you to think about my point.... LOL. I missed that mark apparently. God created us in His image. Who's image were the Angels created in? Why are angels seen in the form of a human in scripture? Why is God literally talking to His angels and creation when He says "our"? I'm not asking for your answer. Merely asking you to look into answers so you can find truths. Not doctrine, or things fed to you.
@halfie25 okay well give them to me. because like i just posted in colossians it says christ is the image of the invisable God. so i guess paul was wrong then?
@halfie25 If paul is dead on then YHWH was made visable through Jesus. But you just said earlier that Jesus said YHWH is invisible. (without giving scripture reference). So someone has to be wrong. is it you or Paul?
@Real777Truth Paul and I are both correct. 1 John 4:12, EX. 33:18, 1 Tim. 6:16, John:4:24. There is more if you want. Now... Give me the definition of image.
@Real777Truth How many men did it take for all of man kind to fell? Answer: One Adam. Second, How many men did it take to redeem all man kind? Answer: One Yahoshua. What did both of these men have to experience? Answer: Death.
@halfie25 Isaiah 9:6 - For unto us a Child is born, Unto us a Son is given; And the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
Isaiah 43:10,11 - “You are My witnesses,” says the Lord, “And My servant whom I have chosen, That you may know and believe Me, and understand that I am He. Before Me there was no God formed, Nor shall there be after Me. I, even I, am the Lord, and besides Me there is no savior
@Real777Truth John 5:17,18 - “My Father has been working until now, and I have been working.” Therefore the Jews sought to kill Him, because He not only broke the Sabbath, but also said that God was His Father, making Himself equal with God.
@Real777Truth John 10:30-33 - Jesus answered them, “I and My Father are one.” Then the Jews took up stones again to stone Him. Jesus answered them, “Many good works I have shown you from My Father. For which of those works do you stone Me?” The Jews answered Him, saying, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a Man, make Yourself God.”
@Real777Truth You're Isaiah quote doesn't read like that from the original Hebrew... All your other quotes are again one liners taken out of context. I too can say I am one with the Father if I am in his will... Does this make me "God"? Or even "Christ" Himself. The Father was responsible for the son's resurrection and ascension. These are not things Christ did on his own strength, but things the Father did. You have to see that to put scripture in proper context.
@halfie25 Explain to me why every other lord in the new and old testament besides Jesus was a lower case l but Jesus was Lord, and LORD. now if you are skilled in Hebrew and Greek you know the significance of upper case letters.
@Real777Truth Now you are just lying or really lack understanding of the Hebrew and Greek Languages. There is not one place in the Bible where "Jesus" is called LORD. Not one! The upper case Lord is used all over the Bible. For men and so forth. You need to keep studying. Why do you think Jews hold fast to "Jesus" not being "God" Himself? Jewish scholars know and understand Hebraic texts more than any Christian sect. Be blessed on your journey. Shalom!
Because I am interested in your thoughts on his material in which he defends the doctrine of the Trinity. As you know, he is a OT Messianic Jewish scholar. So, have you read/watched his material on this topic?
@JesusMostHigh Dr. Brown by definition is no longer practicing Judaism. Therefore he can not identify himself as Jewish which means not only does he alienate himself from Jewish scholars, but also from Yahoshua himself who as you know was Jewish and taught there is only one true God. He went as far as to have a Jewish scribe recite She'ma, then told him he was on the right track. Dr. Brown has lost and forsaken any Biblical identity.
@halfie25 In other words, you have not read/watched his material on the doctrine of the Trinity in the OT. Dr. Brown has debated many Jewish scholars that disagree with him, have you seen any of those?
Dr. Michael Brown thankfully is not practicing apostate Judaism, but rather, New Covenant Judaism - also known as Christianity.
The original Jewish Christian's also practiced New Covenant Judaism (Christianity), just liike Dr. Brown. The apostate Jews chose to reject New Covenant Judaism (Christianity).
@JesusMostHigh Your "New Covenant Christianity" is the complete antithesis of what Christ preached. Christ was not a "New Covenant" Jew. He was in fact a Jew that practiced Judaism and worshiped the God of the Tenakh. Go through the new testament and read only what Christ has to say. It will paint a new picture for you, or make you really confused, and you will think he is contradicting himself. in either case you will be in a better position than you are now...
I have read what Christ has to say. I am also aware that He was Jewish and practiced the law, because He was the Messiah, and went to the cross as the spotless lamb of God. Christ was also ushering in the Kingdom of God and He chose the Apostles to initiate the Church here on earth - where God/Christ unites Jew and Gentile as One new Man, which comprises the body of Christ.
I also have a question for you: Do you believe the Pauline Epistles are God-breathed Scripture?
@JesusMostHigh I believe Paul knew what he was talking about if that/s what you're asking. He went through great lengths in scripture to separate the son and the Father. To show they are not one and the same.
1) Jesus was not sent for the Gentiles as well? Perhaps we can exegete John 10:16 - what do you think Jesus is saying there?
2) Once again, Jesus used the name of God revealed to Moses in Exodus when he stated: "Before Abraham was, I AM". Notice He did not state "Before Abraham was, I was too". He used the name of God and applied it to Himself.
3) You still need to deal with John 10:33 - the Jews picked up stones to stone Jesus, why exactly?
2. Again ego eimi is not a claim of deity. That is the "I am" you refer to there.
3. I find it strange that first you can't get out of the book of John to prove any of your points. You throw out verses instead of chapters, and you have the gall to ask me to explain why the Jews picked up stones against Christ when I asked you to continue reading and tell me what it says the reasons were. Read all of Chapter 10 and get back to me.
@halfie25 Actually there are plenty of places in the bible where Jesus is called Lord don't be so quick to say things. And there are plenty of Jewish people who have converted to Christian sects and understand the Hebrew just as well. Where are you getting these erroneous ascertains.
@halfie25 I have, you know Dr James White has a great debate with Sir Anthony Buzzard on the topic also. They go over it, and White goes into great detail. You should research it too.
@halfie25 You are seriously sitting here to tell me that Jesus was not called LORD. Yes, He was. Can you give me more context of your argument? I really would like to know your thinking.
@jselvrom LORD is Translated from an unknown Hebrew word for the Most High. Many would say YHWH. So for lack of a better term. There is not one place in scripture where Yahoshua is called YHWH... Not one!
@halfie25 Well, I think they got you above, I Am is the same context. I'm not sure how your belief lines up with denying Jesus or not... But He is the only messiah/religious prophet or leader, to claim that He himself is God. No other religion has their leader saying this, rather they assume it.
@jselvrom Actually you're way off based. Study all the Ancient religions. There is nothing but "GodMen" running around. That is a completely ignorant, and off base statement.
@jselvrom What!? Really!? Looks like some one is too indoctrinated to do the studying themselves. I AM and I am are completely different. You can not flip flop back and forth from the Greek and Hebrew when using ego eimi. Ego eimi is used many times in the NT by the disciples and others. Does this make them "God" Himself...? Second, let's get you a head start on "Godmen". Horus, Hercules, Krishna... Need I go on? Study up and show thy self approved. No more self satisfying statements
In regards to John 8:58, you accept Jesus' eternality yet reject His divinity? Also, can you explain why the Jews picked up stones to stone Jesus after He stated: "I AM".
@JesusMostHigh I do not except anything, but study everything. It is quite possible Yahoshua did indeed pre-exist. Is knowing this necessary for salvation? No. The reason the Jews picked up stones are many actually. You see this happen to Christ multiple times in the Bible. Not every time is he claiming to be "God". This is more of the political posturing against Christ. Read Ephesians 1:4. Does this mean we all pre-exist in corporation with YHWH?Christ is stating he was planned Before Abraham
Actually, Jesus didn't merely pre-exist. Jesus used the name of God revealed to Moses in Exodus 3:14-15 in reference to Himself. The name conveys the idea of eternal self-existence - which is reserved for God alone.
Also, John 10:33 tells us why the Jews picked up stones to stone Jesus:
"We are not stoning you for any of these," replied the Jews, "but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God."
@JesusMostHigh NO place in scripture does Yahoshua claim to be "I AM THAT I AM", or "I WILL BE WHAT I WILL BE"Sure. Ego eimi does not equate to either of those. Try again there.
Read John 10:33. Then you need to keep reading. What did Christ say when told "You are making yourself equal to God"? Funny how you just stop where it is convenient for your doctrine.
@halfie25 John 20:28 - And Thomas answered and said to Him, “My Lord and my God!”
Pay careful attention to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to care for the church of God, which he obtained with his own blood. Acts 20:28
@halfie25 1 Timothy 3:16 - And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifested in the flesh, Justified in the Spirit, Seen by angels, Preached among the Gentiles, Believed on in the world, Received up in glory.
@halfie25 Revelation 22:13 - “I AM the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End, the First and the Last.”... 22:16 - “I, Jesus, have sent My angel to testify to you these things in the churches.”
@halfie25 now sorry i had to post a gazillion comments. but if you can justify all that you believe with those many verse to prove Jesus is God then please do. but im done with this conversation because i have faith in the word of God even when there are things i cannot explain fully. i feel foolish arguing this truth with you. i hope and pray you find the truth. but you cannot argue those scriptures.
@halfie25 John 10:30-33 - Jesus answered them, “I and My Father are one.” Then the Jews took up stones again to stone Him. Jesus answered them, “Many good works I have shown you from My Father. For which of those works do you stone Me?” The Jews answered Him, saying, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a Man, make Yourself God.”
@Real777Truth Whew... I've been away for a bit too long, and you still can not put any of these scripture's in context. If all of scripture can swing around one verse than we believe in a very inconsistent system. And wasn't "Jesus" Jewish? Therefore he understood She'ma and actually made a scribe recite it to him. Why? I promise you The actual Yahoshua, son of YHWH did not believe he was God.
Just know, the 'Real Jesus' and 'Fake Jesus' discussion has little to do with Christ.
Personally I find any human claiming to Know and Understand the essential Truth of Gods word to be arrogant and at worse a false prophet... A mortal mind comprehending the Omniscient wisdom and Absolute Infinitude of God, ISN'T. one can only Surrender to the One God.
Same goes for guys who talk like they lived 2000 years ago as Jesus' next door neighbor acting as if they could predict his behavior Now.
Driscoll's missionary work is to contextualize the Calvinistic Gospel of salvation which is:-
You are dead in your sin and trespasses (as dead as Lazarus' cadaver in the tomb) and need to be made alive (resurrected) by a sovereign and supernatural act of God (no faith is required because a corpse cannot hear and neither can it believe). And that is why Saul's journey to Damascus is to them the epitome of "salvation" when he was flung off his horse. Nonsense! he was saved later in Ananias' house
And then there is also the Calvinistic Jesus who is none the better than the Mormon Jesus or any other false Jesus. This Jesus, according to John MacArthur, loves all people but did not die for all people. Paul Washer believes the same thing - that the Calvinistic Jesus "died the death of his people" and not all people.
So Mark, please make sure that you are following the Jesus of the Bible and not a false Jesus.
If Phil Johnson sent a letter to Mark Driscoll, I am sure there was good reason. And I am MOST certain that Mark Driscoll was not above board on everything even though he makes this post seem like he was! I never once heard Mark say, "Thank you Phil for pointing out my sin. I will seek the Lord on the many other questions you asked..." Everything he said was "justifying" himself and not "humbly" accepting that he might be wrong... So sad....such pride!
We as the body of Christ are too quick to judge. We often make statements and are critical before we get all of the facts. We all make mistakes, even Mark, and even me. We need to stop majoring on the petty small issues and focus on Jesus. We need to speak in private in some cases and not air our laundry in public. We NEED to remember that sinners are watching. I think Mark is great! God Bless You all!
I lack the body of evidence, the witnesses and the authority, so this is not supporting, or rebuking for the allegations leveled by Johnson. I was in awe however, that a man holding the office of overseer would display such folly!! Publicly rebuking peers, BY NAME!!?... And he's concerned w/ the discretion of other Elders? How many private rebukes were attempted? Rebukes with 2 or 3 others? Publicly disgrace the office of Elder, while accusing others for the same! Oh Father, please forgive us!
For the guy who in his preaching tells us that some dudes enjoyed getting plowed in the rear helps him ejaculate and take a biblical view of Christ and the bride of Christ as being too gay. Now, saying this is not a point of being against this man, when gays, Lesbians, and transgendered people go to your church, would not accusing the bible of demasculating Christian men as "The bride" of Christ seem like a bad thing? Isn't this minoring on the minors-how about preaching what u r for!
The Peasant Princess-go to MarsHillChurchDOTorg & use the title at the beginning of this sentence.
Then listen to godly pastors response to the specifics as to what is said. Be prepared to spend over 11 hours listening & taking notes & get your Bible.
Also if you type in key phrase "The Rape of Solomon's Song" at gtyDOTorg, there you can get explicit detail. This is not personal 4me; God has blessed the world w/truly faithful & godly pastors, so I avoid the controversial one's.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Also, remember that Satan does not come as Satan, but rather as an "Angel of Light". Most of Dricoll's theology is very solid, but how much perversion is needed to disqualify a person in God's sight & how much perversion would God tolerate? That is a question 4 each person 2 discern; as for me, I would never listen to him again regardless; because there are many faithful Pastors who are above the reproach Mark has brought upon himself. Most people do these things to drawl attention to self.
Is there a particular sermon you have listened to that you could point us to? You make some strong accusations against the man, could you provide some evidence, perhaps a link, so that we could listen and discern for ourselves?
Just listen to the man; not one I would want to associate with nor one who reflects the Christians i know and love. Also, just go to his website and listen to his sermons, they speak for themselves. He treatment of the Song of Solomon is sad and borders pornographic-not fitting for a "Christian"; especially a minister.
Anyone who turns the Song of Solomon into a form or pornography has serious issues; all Pastors are required by God to be above reproach; especially when interpreting God's word and teaching or rightly dividing the word of God, then bringing it out to the world, much less his congregation. I would not want to face God in light of what he has done, not repented of and still stands behind his pornographic view of The Song of Solomon. It made me nausea & could not bear to hear it's perversion.
why does he have so much problem with us,even as individual, being spiritually the "bride" of the Christ in the sense that we must spiritually prepare ourselves to be spotless and pure in the sight of God so that we are ready for Christ's second coming?!? why does he have to associate everything to sexuality in some degree when it does not apply that way? Why does he have to keep emphasize that he is a "macho" "heterosexual" male, when the scriptural application does not point to that direction?
@canzo0378:He's referring to the feminization of the church. He agrees with the metaphor of being the bride of christ, but many pastors do not explain this to show that we are (as a church) to be the bride of Christ. Pastors should correctly teach scripture, and in many churches, pastors misinterpret this metaphor. Nowhere does it say we are to be individually the bride of Christ. It concerns the church as seen in Rev 19:7-9, Rev 21:1-2, Eph. 5:24, 5:25
@MrSB1274 The subject is so obvious, whether it be individual or church, and you don't need to point out again it is the church, that what scripture was referring to was in a spiritual sense, and it was so unnecessary to even point that out that and go on to explain that the pastor "feels uncomfortable" being referred to as a "bride" because he is such a "heterosexual macho man." Some things are not even mentioned since they are so unnecessary, and when mentioned, it only escalates inappropriety
All these people judging Mark should check out the plank in their own eye for once, and for two, ask themselves who is reaching more people for Christs name? Driscoll doing what he does, you you making youtube comments about how wrong he is.
michaelmannucci 3 days ago
“If I where making fun of the real Jesus that would be offensive.” YES it would Mark. It would also be blasphemous and you’ve done both on many occasions!
310revelation 1 week ago
It's sad to see Christians judging other christian in such a legalistic pharisee like way. When judged by those same standards, how will you do before Jesus?
IDCreation1 2 weeks ago
God's holiness is not a 'secondary' issue. I'm not convinced Mr. Driscoll. Show that you love the saviour by learning about reverence for the name of the most Holy One, and edifying speech.
If it looks like a snake and smells like one, it probably is one.
izone12ful 2 weeks ago
Hi, I like your videos since I saw several of them and your topics are great and you make your point very well and plus they are even fun to listen. The topics are attractive but also very interesting to listen to your preachings. God bless you :D
safetrance1 3 weeks ago
I liked this video with you speaking in a serious way and patiently explaining .ptl. I think the cussing and being too silly at time's are going to haunt you for a while. I love you in Christ, I like your encouragement and especially about missions in this video. Amen.
Savethelostones 1 month ago
It's a problem because of manly pride and a "sexualized" mind. Just be a bride.
weasel1613 2 months ago
wedding of the bride groom is this: it's a feast.
jarell19 3 months ago
OK, well, it looks like you are starting to perform evasive tactics because you are unable to deal with the text. So, how about we really go for the jugular, and deal with a text that expounds both the Trinity and the deity of Christ.
John 1:1 (in context of course). How do you read this verse(s)?
JesusMostHigh 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@JesusMostHigh
and his name shall be called Wonderful Counselor, Might God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
ttty2t1j3 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@JesusMostHigh Looks like youtube decided to glitch. Are you accusing me of being evasive?
halfie25 2 months ago
Who's against halfie25's interpretation of who Jesus is go ahead and like this.
jselvrom 3 months ago
@jselvrom Really?
halfie25 2 months ago
@halfie25 yep
jselvrom 2 months ago
@jselvrom Too bad you haven't got any likes... Sad really. Impressed, however, with your childishness. At least the other adults here actually engage in conversation over the matter and not use cowardice...
halfie25 2 months ago
@halfie25 At least the other adults understand the bible and don't shy away from verses addressed with ignorance.
jselvrom 2 months ago
@jselvrom I prefer chapters for context. Adults can read through chapters. As well as the Bible as a whole for perspective. Not just picking and choosing versus that line up with their particular doctrines. Ignorance would be the complete antithesis of what I stand for.
halfie25 2 months ago
4) In regards to John 10:34 and following, I understand the text, but I first need to understand how you are using it before I address it any further. Are you thinking that Jesus, the Jewish Monotheist, somehow believed that His opponents were mini-gods? Please let me know.
JesusMostHigh 3 months ago
@JesusMostHigh Yahoshua is referring to the "Judges" of "Yisrael".
halfie25 2 months ago
@halfie25
Correct. And did Jesus the monotheist believe that they were literal gods?
JesusMostHigh 2 months ago
@JesusMostHigh Yahoshua is referring to the Judges of Yisrael. Also known as the "Sons of God". In other words Yahoshua is declaring himself an equal to the the hierarchy of Jewish leadership. He clearly stays completely away from deity claim by showing what he is saying. A clever way of exposing what the Pharisees were trying to call him out on, and hence forth why they continued to try and stone him even after shaking of the deity claim.
halfie25 2 months ago
@halfie25
Actually that is exactly wrong, and the complete opposite of why the Pharisees attempted to stone him. "The Jews answered him: "it is not for a good work that we are going to stone you but for BLASPHEMY, because you, being a man, make yourself GOD"
You see, you, like the Pharisees, see Jesus as just a man.
Also, when are we going to exegete John 1:1?
JesusMostHigh 2 months ago
@JesusMostHigh Then show me in the following versus where "Jesus" tells them he is indeed what they say he is. You have trouble putting scripture in context. It's not your fault, you've been force fed a doctrine that you have decided to swallow. What part of John 1:1 would you like to "exegete"? Please do not tell me your going to spin your whole doctrine on "The word was god" non-sense. If that is what you are referring to I implore you to study the oldest Greek and Coptic manuscripts.
halfie25 2 months ago
@halfie25
Actually, I haven't been indoctrinated as you assert that I have been. I study the Scriptures with an open-mind and merely want to be faithful to the text. I am also open to correction, I hope you are too.
Now, in John 10:34 Jesus' statement must be understood as part of his overall reasoning in context of his a fortiori argument: "If God even called human judges 'gods', then how much more can I call myself the Son of God."...
JesusMostHigh 2 months ago
@halfie25
...Christ had just pronounced Himself one with the Father, saying, "I and My Father are one" (10:30). The Jews wanted to stone Him because they thought Christ was blaspheming, making Himself out to be equal with God (vv. 31-33). Jesus responded by quoting Psalm 82:6 which says, "I said, you are gods". So, Jesus reasoned, if human judges could be called "gods," then why can't the Son of God be called "God"?
JesusMostHigh 2 months ago
@JesusMostHigh So what you're saying is your open minded reasoning has no room for context of what is being said? This is just the wrong place to be having this conversation. I apparently would have to walk you through verse by verse. You keep picking out snipits that are lining up with your logic, and leaving the rest.
halfie25 2 months ago
@halfie25
In regards to John 1:1 and following - how about we go directly to the Greek because I have that right in front of me. So, let's go over the first few verses in Greek verse by verse. Also, please direct me to these manuscripts you speak of.
JesusMostHigh 2 months ago
@JesusMostHigh Do some research. I want you to find out what the Coptic and oldest Greek manuscript say. They pre-date your version, and therefore have less confusion. When you look at the oldest of manuscripts of scripture you see even punctuation added at later dates changes the whole meaning.
halfie25 2 months ago
@halfie25
Well, it looks like you are unable to substantiate your assertions. Moreover, I have done my research which is why I am a trinitarian Christian. Also I have good scholarly sources in regards to textual criticism and textual variations. If you wish to carry this conversation via PM then go ahead.
JesusMostHigh 2 months ago
@JesusMostHigh Let me guess... Your scholarly sources are... Trinitarian? How can I substantiate anything when I'm telling you to do the research. I'm not going to hand you answers. You obviously just take what's given to you from biased sources. I used to be in the same shoes. I got put on the right track by being asked questions I didn't have the answer to. Did some research and figured out most of "mainstream Christianity" is falsified. If you decide to research hit me up in a PM.
halfie25 2 months ago
@halfie25
My sources are textual scholars who probably have studied this issue longer than you have been alive. Some are Trinitarian some are not. Moreover, I would stop assuming I haven't done the research, I have and I am challenging your conclusions. Also, you are aware that there have been people in the shoes you are currently wearing, who have come to embrace "mainstream Christianity" as well, right?
JesusMostHigh 2 months ago
@JesusMostHigh Again your sources and scholars are indoctrinated. Doesn't matter how long they've studied. Again I used to be a devout Trinitarian and I "Converted" to what I and many would call true "Christianity". Again I'm not assuming you have not studied. Only that you stick to biased sources of your doctrine. Would you trust a "secular" scholar on Bible matters? Some one who does not even believe a God exists? I'm merely stating that you are not as open as you state.
halfie25 2 months ago
@halfie25
1) Why do assume that I stick to biased sources when I converted to Christianity from Atheism? I converted from Atheism to adopt the truth; therefore, I had absolutely no vested interest in the Trinity if the doctrine wasn't true. Thus, your accusation that I am not open to the truth is utterly false.
JesusMostHigh 2 months ago
@halfie25
2) Some textual scholars I use are:
Bart D. Ehrman
Daniel B. Wallace
Bruce Metzger
All of these scholars have been studying textual criticism longer than you have been alive, and I highly dobut you would have a leg to stand on in a debate with any of them. However, with that said, can you please give me some names of the scholars you use for sources?
Thanks!
JesusMostHigh 2 months ago
@JesusMostHigh Ehrman? An Agnostic who sites the "NT" is too full of errors and inconsistency to be accurate and correct? This is one of your sources for scholarship? It's no wonder Paul warned against following scholars. And such as the case one must even pay close attention to Paul's own words. If you can not link the Tenakh with the New Testament then you can not comprehend The Bible in it's entirety. New Testament scholarship is a farce with out the equivalent in Tenakh.
halfie25 1 month ago
@halfie25
I use Ehrman for his work on textual criticism because this is his area of expetise. I don't always agree with his conclusions (I'm a Christian), and I brought his name up to demonstrate that not all my scholars are Trinitarian.
Teachers/scholars (not Ehrman of course) are actually a gift to the Church, and they should be utilized for the building up of the Body of Christ.
JesusMostHigh 1 month ago
@halfie25
I see that you haven't listed any sources that you use for textual analysis, why not? Also, I absolutely agree that the OT is critical for understanding the NT. I especially appreciate the work of OT Messianic scholar Dr. Michael Brown (a Trinitarian as well).
=)
JesusMostHigh 1 month ago
@JesusMostHigh You understand scholars do almost the exact opposite. Scholars are what brought us every denomination of "Christianity". Not every denomination can be right. So why no go directly to the sources? Find transcriptions of the oldest copies of all of the NT (Not talking about modern codex non-sense). The Tenakh has obviously stayed more pure, but if you grasp certain terminology in Hebrew and Greek you can see where the "Church" (that is built on Trinitrianism).
halfie25 1 month ago
@halfie25 Actually, in the history of the church it has been non-educated people who start the divisions, i.e. denominations. Driscoll is one example. Read Iain Murray's "Revival and Revivalism" for a good introduction to the problem, specifically in the USA.
60HzSignal 1 month ago
@60HzSignal I see your point, but if we want to be technical The Romans Drew the first line in the sand. With their own Doctrines and Dogma's in their councils. Only after that do we start to see major divisions, and lets be honest. The Romans were some of the most educated people of the time.
halfie25 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@JesusMostHigh (con'd) has changed things to benefit their own doctrines and dogma. Ehrman is the perfect example. There are clear facts he points out that no "Trinitarian" can answer. Sir Anthony Buzzard another who puts out clear points that can't even be handled correctly by the likes of James White. Mr. Baptist Trinitrian scholar himself. Schoalrs are not the answer, and do not help. They only bring division amongst people who follow "Apollo" and people who follow "Pau'l.
halfie25 1 month ago
@halfie25
Are you affiliated with any denomination? Are you JW? Have you not studied the usage of OT passages that refer to the GOD of Israel that are applied to Jesus by NT authors? Was Thomas blaspheming when he cried out "My Lord and my God!"? Was Jesus implying that he was not good when he said, "Only God is good." Was Jesus saying that the one who lays down his life for his sheep is not good? I will ask my brother about the early texts. He has a degree in Koine Biblical Greek.
philosophy7575 2 months ago
@philosophy7575 I do not affiliate with any creed or doctrine or religion for that matter. I follow scripture. Throwing quotes out of context has gotten those with your beliefs no where. Where you there when Thomas said "My Lord and my God"? Do the oldest manuscripts actually translate that way? What if Christ was truly stating YHWH is the only one who is good? What if he was showing he was merely human? If your brother is Trinitarian, then why ask him? Biased sources are pointless.
halfie25 2 months ago
I have no desire to be at odds with anybody for having different viewpoints on interpretations of scriptures as long as we are united in Christ. But if you are going to judge Driscoll or myself based on your rules or your interpretations of the bible and not the major issues of the Bible, I have a huge problem with that. I will not play the game of church dividing over these issues. I used to be divided over these issues, but no more.
devmanification 3 months ago
Well taught
daystatewaspe1 3 months ago
restless, use the missional living as an excuse to live in the world , drink dress act talk like the world becuase they have not sat down and counted the cost and be like Christ not like the world or driscoll,, hey even benny hinn has his fiollowers every false teacher will have followers...
bachsoc 4 months ago 2
@bachsoc You sir have no idea what "the world" means biblically. It does not mean the culture, it means opposing God's world. If you think Driscoll is a false teacher, you are ignorant. Keep your version of social propriety to yourself. If you are gonna respond with bible verses, you better do it in context and not thump it.
devmanification 3 months ago
@devmanification i see u like fighting and mma,,shoulda known...
bachsoc 3 months ago
"And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life." 1 John 5:20
I can agree with Mark Driscoll that there is only one true Jesus, and He is the true God and eternal life.
However I do think he has a carnal view on certain Bible passages, particularly in Song of Solomon. An example of this is from 5:00-5:12 in the clip.
lilAinthamorning 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The Bible does not teach eternal punishment. God's love and mercy endures forever. Does it really endure forever or only in this life? How can it be Good News if it doesn't translate to the afterlife?
1 Timothy 4:10- This is why we work hard and continue to struggle, for our hope is in the living God, who is the Savior of all people and particularly of all believers.
whatthehellbook . com
whatthehellbook 4 months ago
Ooooo Phil Johnson HUH? BLAH BALH BLAH :((
MRWBBIII 4 months ago
It is not a metaphor I'm Christ bride not His wife. The bride is adorned and dressed in white linen of righteousness. Christ never called the Church a wife. A wife is one in most cases consummated with her husband. Christ is clear we are His Bride our intimacy in Spirit is One. Not to be confused with those under law. We are washed with water of the Word.The Bride is the picture of attention a saving groom has delivered.Without spot or wringle a Virgin Church, redeemed, not a wife.
polopowers1 5 months ago
Mr. Driscoll, Your Trinity requires you to believe in more than one Deity.
halfie25 5 months ago
@halfie25 thats not the trinity
Real777Truth 5 months ago
@Real777Truth You believe in Three distinct personalities Correct? Yet you want to make them one person. Can't have your cake and eat it too.
halfie25 5 months ago
@halfie25 thats the thing. i do not claim to understand the trinity. nor do i ever think i will. but i do kno its in the bible and i cannot edit the word. "oh how unserachable are the ways of God' says paul in romans 11.
Real777Truth 5 months ago
@Real777Truth The "ways" of God, not who God is as a person. I think the Tenakh is very clear about who YHWH is. I think the New testament is very clear about who Yahoshua is. There s no room for a Trinity n scripture.
halfie25 5 months ago
@halfie25
"the GOD said let US make man in OUR image, after OUR likeness" Genesis 1:26. how could there have been a we or and our if there was just God at this time?
Real777Truth 5 months ago
@Real777Truth then* sorry i cant type.lol
Real777Truth 5 months ago
@Real777Truth So, again you you admit the Trinity requires more than one God.
halfie25 5 months ago
@halfie25 no, your twisting that. if you claim to understand the trinity or even the attributes of God fully than you contradict scripture to the fullest. my Point was that there was just God at this time so the us would have to be to three persons of God. God the father, God the Spirit (as it says in gensis 1 that God's spirit was hoovering over the waters, how would that occure when he was still in heaven at this time).
Real777Truth 5 months ago
@halfie25 and lastley God the Son (which the word says all things were mae by himand through him, and isaiah says all things were made by God and through God. wouldnt that make them the same?).
Real777Truth 5 months ago
@Real777Truth I think you should study some Hebrew. Then go back and read Genisis 1:26. It is very clear who the "our" is in context of the whole chapter in the Hebrew. So "God's" ways maybe not always be understood, but you can understand who He is from scripture. It's pretty clear, and your Trinity is not, making it unfounded.
halfie25 5 months ago
@halfie25 i have studied Hebrew. Maybe you should re-study and then read the New Testament. and then if you want to study Greek. Read Galations ch.1. How bout the majority of Ephesians. OH! Isaiah is a good one too. I bet you don't believe God is omnipresent either do you?
Real777Truth 5 months ago
@halfie25 you still did not explain to me why Isaiah says all things were made by God and the New Testement says all things were made by the Son. Hmmm?
Real777Truth 5 months ago
@halfie25 And Jesus came to the and said, "all authority in Heaven and Earth has been given to me" Matthew 28:18. So if i took this scripture based on what you believe God gave Jesus his authority. that doesnt make God very God like. This scripture seems pretty Jesus is God to me.
Real777Truth 5 months ago
@halfie25 Btw i am currently and have been studying Hebrew. Maybe you should re-study my friend. the is no Hebrew basis to what you just said.
Real777Truth 5 months ago
@Real777Truth Was that fun? Did you have a fun little rant? If you would like to understand where I am coming from more, do it where we have room to speak. BY the way. Yahoshua is Mashiach. The promised one to the Jews who is never said to be YHWH (God) in the Tenakh. Why all the sudden would he claim to be, and more importantly why would Jews perceive him to be?
halfie25 5 months ago
@Real777Truth In the context of the original Hebrew you see the "our" in Genesis is YHWH speaking to other "beings" in Heaven. Not HIm speaking to Himself. Elohim is used for people and angels. El is used to describe trees and mountains. FUnny how your first comment said "I have studied Hebrew", and your last said "Btw i am currently and have been studying". A retraction that shows perhaps the lax in your understanding of what I've said to this point.
halfie25 5 months ago
@Real777Truth Now that I have shown you there is in fact a "Hebraic basis" for what I have said we can drop that and move on to your claim that Christ is creator of all things. You will first have to drop some scripture that uses those exact words.
Also Matthew 28:18 makes complete sense. The only way YHWH could redeem the first Adam was with the second. Again if you want more PM me. I used to be a Trinitarian, and you can not throw anything new at me that has not been refuted.
halfie25 5 months ago
@halfie25 Colossians 1:15-18 He is the image of the invisible God, the First born of all creation. For BY HIM ALL THINGS WERE CREATED, in heaven and on EARTH, visible and invisible, whether thrones dominions or rulers or authorities. ALL things were CREATED through HIM and for HIM.
good enough? i can give more. i can also give the the literal Greek word for word translation for this verse if you would like.
Real777Truth 5 months ago
@halfie25 And another thing why would it say our if it was talking about a singular God? i do not argue that its talking about God but if God was a singular personality it should say "my" not "our". so you claim makes no sense.
Real777Truth 5 months ago
@Real777Truth How can the first born of all creation be the agent of all creation? What god has to create to create. Sounds a bit pagan to me... Maybe you should do a little more study on what 'Paul" is saying in the whole chapter instead of sighting me one liners all the time. Also, I already showed you the proper context of the "our". "Our" is translated from Elohim. YHWH is literally speaking to other beings in Heaven. Not Himself, or persons of HImself. Recite She'ma. It's clear.
halfie25 5 months ago
@halfie25 so if the "our" is talking about angels and beings in heaven then you are say we were made in the image of angels and being in heaven and not God. right?
Real777Truth 5 months ago
@Real777Truth Who created the Angels in Heaven? What form are Angelic beings seen by humans in scripture? We just need to put all the pieces together.
halfie25 5 months ago
@halfie25 thats the thing man just right there you said you dont have all the pieces put together. and neither do i. but i do know that scripture says i was made in the image of God not his angels. Satan was an angel. the most beautiful one at that. and i know for a fact i wasnt made in his image. fact remains that scripture says i was made in God image. not his angels.
Real777Truth 5 months ago
@Real777Truth My point was for you to think about my point.... LOL. I missed that mark apparently. God created us in His image. Who's image were the Angels created in? Why are angels seen in the form of a human in scripture? Why is God literally talking to His angels and creation when He says "our"? I'm not asking for your answer. Merely asking you to look into answers so you can find truths. Not doctrine, or things fed to you.
halfie25 5 months ago
@halfie25 "For behold the LORD is coming out of his place and will come down and tread upon the high places of earth" Micah 1:3
Real777Truth 5 months ago
@halfie25 after this it says "all this is for the transgressions of Jacob and for the sins of Isreal" Micah 1:5
Real777Truth 5 months ago
@Real777Truth You're getting of track again, but Funny how Christ himself said YHWH is invisible... That no man can see him... Weird huh?
halfie25 5 months ago
@halfie25 Give me that verse. cause i recall him saying "If you have seen me, you have also seen the father"
Real777Truth 5 months ago
@Real777Truth There are several verses in John that make this reference.
halfie25 5 months ago
@halfie25 okay well give them to me. because like i just posted in colossians it says christ is the image of the invisable God. so i guess paul was wrong then?
Real777Truth 5 months ago
@Real777Truth What is the definition of image? Paul is dead on.
halfie25 5 months ago
@halfie25 If paul is dead on then YHWH was made visable through Jesus. But you just said earlier that Jesus said YHWH is invisible. (without giving scripture reference). So someone has to be wrong. is it you or Paul?
Real777Truth 5 months ago
@Real777Truth Paul and I are both correct. 1 John 4:12, EX. 33:18, 1 Tim. 6:16, John:4:24. There is more if you want. Now... Give me the definition of image.
halfie25 5 months ago
@halfie25 how do you recieve salvation?
Real777Truth 5 months ago
@Real777Truth By the grace of YHWH through the teachings of His son Yahoshua.
halfie25 5 months ago
@halfie25 so you do not believe that the death of Jesus has anything to do with your salvation?
Real777Truth 5 months ago
@Real777Truth How many men did it take for all of man kind to fell? Answer: One Adam. Second, How many men did it take to redeem all man kind? Answer: One Yahoshua. What did both of these men have to experience? Answer: Death.
halfie25 5 months ago
@halfie25 But there was only one that rose from the dead. It's not about death as much as it is about ressurection. and adam never did that.
Real777Truth 5 months ago
@Real777Truth Now how did Christ resurrect?
halfie25 5 months ago
@halfie25 I know what you want me to say. you want me to say the father did it. smooth.
Real777Truth 5 months ago
@halfie25 Isaiah 9:6 - For unto us a Child is born, Unto us a Son is given; And the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
Isaiah 43:10,11 - “You are My witnesses,” says the Lord, “And My servant whom I have chosen, That you may know and believe Me, and understand that I am He. Before Me there was no God formed, Nor shall there be after Me. I, even I, am the Lord, and besides Me there is no savior
Real777Truth 5 months ago
@Real777Truth John 5:17,18 - “My Father has been working until now, and I have been working.” Therefore the Jews sought to kill Him, because He not only broke the Sabbath, but also said that God was His Father, making Himself equal with God.
Real777Truth 5 months ago
@Real777Truth John 10:30-33 - Jesus answered them, “I and My Father are one.” Then the Jews took up stones again to stone Him. Jesus answered them, “Many good works I have shown you from My Father. For which of those works do you stone Me?” The Jews answered Him, saying, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a Man, make Yourself God.”
Real777Truth 5 months ago
@Real777Truth You're Isaiah quote doesn't read like that from the original Hebrew... All your other quotes are again one liners taken out of context. I too can say I am one with the Father if I am in his will... Does this make me "God"? Or even "Christ" Himself. The Father was responsible for the son's resurrection and ascension. These are not things Christ did on his own strength, but things the Father did. You have to see that to put scripture in proper context.
halfie25 5 months ago
@halfie25 Explain to me why every other lord in the new and old testament besides Jesus was a lower case l but Jesus was Lord, and LORD. now if you are skilled in Hebrew and Greek you know the significance of upper case letters.
Real777Truth 5 months ago
@Real777Truth Now you are just lying or really lack understanding of the Hebrew and Greek Languages. There is not one place in the Bible where "Jesus" is called LORD. Not one! The upper case Lord is used all over the Bible. For men and so forth. You need to keep studying. Why do you think Jews hold fast to "Jesus" not being "God" Himself? Jewish scholars know and understand Hebraic texts more than any Christian sect. Be blessed on your journey. Shalom!
halfie25 5 months ago
@halfie25 so you're Jewish?
Real777Truth 5 months ago
@halfie25
Have you ever heard of Dr. Michael Brown?
JesusMostHigh 4 months ago
@JesusMostHigh Of course... Do you know what h actually believes?
halfie25 4 months ago
@halfie25
I'm sure Dr. Brown believes many things, what do you specifically have in mind?
JesusMostHigh 4 months ago
@JesusMostHigh You asked the question... Why are you asking me about the man?
halfie25 4 months ago
@halfie25
Because I am interested in your thoughts on his material in which he defends the doctrine of the Trinity. As you know, he is a OT Messianic Jewish scholar. So, have you read/watched his material on this topic?
JesusMostHigh 4 months ago
@JesusMostHigh Dr. Brown by definition is no longer practicing Judaism. Therefore he can not identify himself as Jewish which means not only does he alienate himself from Jewish scholars, but also from Yahoshua himself who as you know was Jewish and taught there is only one true God. He went as far as to have a Jewish scribe recite She'ma, then told him he was on the right track. Dr. Brown has lost and forsaken any Biblical identity.
halfie25 4 months ago
@halfie25 In other words, you have not read/watched his material on the doctrine of the Trinity in the OT. Dr. Brown has debated many Jewish scholars that disagree with him, have you seen any of those?
Dr. Michael Brown thankfully is not practicing apostate Judaism, but rather, New Covenant Judaism - also known as Christianity.
JesusMostHigh 4 months ago
@JesusMostHigh Funny that The original "Jewish Christians" believed nothing like Dr. Brown then eh?
halfie25 3 months ago
@halfie25
The original Jewish Christian's also practiced New Covenant Judaism (Christianity), just liike Dr. Brown. The apostate Jews chose to reject New Covenant Judaism (Christianity).
JesusMostHigh 3 months ago
@JesusMostHigh Your "New Covenant Christianity" is the complete antithesis of what Christ preached. Christ was not a "New Covenant" Jew. He was in fact a Jew that practiced Judaism and worshiped the God of the Tenakh. Go through the new testament and read only what Christ has to say. It will paint a new picture for you, or make you really confused, and you will think he is contradicting himself. in either case you will be in a better position than you are now...
halfie25 3 months ago
@halfie25
I have read what Christ has to say. I am also aware that He was Jewish and practiced the law, because He was the Messiah, and went to the cross as the spotless lamb of God. Christ was also ushering in the Kingdom of God and He chose the Apostles to initiate the Church here on earth - where God/Christ unites Jew and Gentile as One new Man, which comprises the body of Christ.
I also have a question for you: Do you believe the Pauline Epistles are God-breathed Scripture?
JesusMostHigh 3 months ago
@JesusMostHigh Yahoshua was not sent for the gentile, but for the Jew.
halfie25 3 months ago
@JesusMostHigh I believe Paul knew what he was talking about if that/s what you're asking. He went through great lengths in scripture to separate the son and the Father. To show they are not one and the same.
halfie25 3 months ago
@halfie25
1) Jesus was not sent for the Gentiles as well? Perhaps we can exegete John 10:16 - what do you think Jesus is saying there?
2) Once again, Jesus used the name of God revealed to Moses in Exodus when he stated: "Before Abraham was, I AM". Notice He did not state "Before Abraham was, I was too". He used the name of God and applied it to Himself.
3) You still need to deal with John 10:33 - the Jews picked up stones to stone Jesus, why exactly?
JesusMostHigh 3 months ago
@JesusMostHigh
1. Pay attention. Not of the flock.
2. Again ego eimi is not a claim of deity. That is the "I am" you refer to there.
3. I find it strange that first you can't get out of the book of John to prove any of your points. You throw out verses instead of chapters, and you have the gall to ask me to explain why the Jews picked up stones against Christ when I asked you to continue reading and tell me what it says the reasons were. Read all of Chapter 10 and get back to me.
halfie25 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@halfie25
I'm sure Dr. Brown believes many things, what do you specifically have in mind?
JesusMostHigh 4 months ago
@halfie25 Actually there are plenty of places in the bible where Jesus is called Lord don't be so quick to say things. And there are plenty of Jewish people who have converted to Christian sects and understand the Hebrew just as well. Where are you getting these erroneous ascertains.
jselvrom 4 months ago
@jselvrom Yes... yeshua is called Lord many times. Not LORD. Second, what is the difference between you and a "Christian" Jew?
halfie25 4 months ago
@halfie25 Hebrews 1:8-12
Follower172 4 months ago
@Follower172 Please research what is being quoted from Psalms there.
halfie25 4 months ago
@halfie25 I have, you know Dr James White has a great debate with Sir Anthony Buzzard on the topic also. They go over it, and White goes into great detail. You should research it too.
Follower172 4 months ago
@halfie25 I haven't really studied that but I'd like to think we are very similar in our understanding of Jesus being the Messiah and the LORD.
jselvrom 4 months ago
@jselvrom Messiah yes. LORD... No
halfie25 4 months ago
@halfie25 You are seriously sitting here to tell me that Jesus was not called LORD. Yes, He was. Can you give me more context of your argument? I really would like to know your thinking.
jselvrom 4 months ago
@jselvrom LORD is Translated from an unknown Hebrew word for the Most High. Many would say YHWH. So for lack of a better term. There is not one place in scripture where Yahoshua is called YHWH... Not one!
halfie25 3 months ago
@halfie25 Well, I think they got you above, I Am is the same context. I'm not sure how your belief lines up with denying Jesus or not... But He is the only messiah/religious prophet or leader, to claim that He himself is God. No other religion has their leader saying this, rather they assume it.
jselvrom 3 months ago
@jselvrom Actually you're way off based. Study all the Ancient religions. There is nothing but "GodMen" running around. That is a completely ignorant, and off base statement.
halfie25 3 months ago
@halfie25 Looks like you're just trying to start arguments when you have none. Sorry for your inconvenience.
jselvrom 3 months ago
@jselvrom What!? Really!? Looks like some one is too indoctrinated to do the studying themselves. I AM and I am are completely different. You can not flip flop back and forth from the Greek and Hebrew when using ego eimi. Ego eimi is used many times in the NT by the disciples and others. Does this make them "God" Himself...? Second, let's get you a head start on "Godmen". Horus, Hercules, Krishna... Need I go on? Study up and show thy self approved. No more self satisfying statements
halfie25 3 months ago
@halfie25 You're funny, just unsure about the truth.
jselvrom 3 months ago
@jselvrom I study to understand truth. You only take what you are fed.
halfie25 3 months ago
@halfie25
"Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am" (John 8:58). LORD yes.
JesusMostHigh 4 months ago
@JesusMostHigh This may be a wonderful case for a pre-existant Christ, but a horrible one for him being "God" Himself.
halfie25 3 months ago
@halfie25
In regards to John 8:58, you accept Jesus' eternality yet reject His divinity? Also, can you explain why the Jews picked up stones to stone Jesus after He stated: "I AM".
JesusMostHigh 3 months ago
@JesusMostHigh I do not except anything, but study everything. It is quite possible Yahoshua did indeed pre-exist. Is knowing this necessary for salvation? No. The reason the Jews picked up stones are many actually. You see this happen to Christ multiple times in the Bible. Not every time is he claiming to be "God". This is more of the political posturing against Christ. Read Ephesians 1:4. Does this mean we all pre-exist in corporation with YHWH?Christ is stating he was planned Before Abraham
halfie25 3 months ago
@halfie25
Actually, Jesus didn't merely pre-exist. Jesus used the name of God revealed to Moses in Exodus 3:14-15 in reference to Himself. The name conveys the idea of eternal self-existence - which is reserved for God alone.
Also, John 10:33 tells us why the Jews picked up stones to stone Jesus:
"We are not stoning you for any of these," replied the Jews, "but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God."
JesusMostHigh 3 months ago
@JesusMostHigh NO place in scripture does Yahoshua claim to be "I AM THAT I AM", or "I WILL BE WHAT I WILL BE"Sure. Ego eimi does not equate to either of those. Try again there.
Read John 10:33. Then you need to keep reading. What did Christ say when told "You are making yourself equal to God"? Funny how you just stop where it is convenient for your doctrine.
halfie25 3 months ago
@halfie25 John 20:28 - And Thomas answered and said to Him, “My Lord and my God!”
Pay careful attention to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to care for the church of God, which he obtained with his own blood. Acts 20:28
Real777Truth 5 months ago
@halfie25 1 Timothy 3:16 - And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifested in the flesh, Justified in the Spirit, Seen by angels, Preached among the Gentiles, Believed on in the world, Received up in glory.
Real777Truth 5 months ago
@halfie25 Revelation 22:13 - “I AM the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End, the First and the Last.”... 22:16 - “I, Jesus, have sent My angel to testify to you these things in the churches.”
Real777Truth 5 months ago
@halfie25 now sorry i had to post a gazillion comments. but if you can justify all that you believe with those many verse to prove Jesus is God then please do. but im done with this conversation because i have faith in the word of God even when there are things i cannot explain fully. i feel foolish arguing this truth with you. i hope and pray you find the truth. but you cannot argue those scriptures.
Real777Truth 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@halfie25 John 10:30-33 - Jesus answered them, “I and My Father are one.” Then the Jews took up stones again to stone Him. Jesus answered them, “Many good works I have shown you from My Father. For which of those works do you stone Me?” The Jews answered Him, saying, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a Man, make Yourself God.”
Real777Truth 5 months ago
@Real777Truth Whew... I've been away for a bit too long, and you still can not put any of these scripture's in context. If all of scripture can swing around one verse than we believe in a very inconsistent system. And wasn't "Jesus" Jewish? Therefore he understood She'ma and actually made a scribe recite it to him. Why? I promise you The actual Yahoshua, son of YHWH did not believe he was God.
halfie25 4 months ago
Just know, the 'Real Jesus' and 'Fake Jesus' discussion has little to do with Christ.
Personally I find any human claiming to Know and Understand the essential Truth of Gods word to be arrogant and at worse a false prophet... A mortal mind comprehending the Omniscient wisdom and Absolute Infinitude of God, ISN'T. one can only Surrender to the One God.
Same goes for guys who talk like they lived 2000 years ago as Jesus' next door neighbor acting as if they could predict his behavior Now.
Brahmanfire 6 months ago
If you could drop some scriptures on how what he is saying is unbiblical, that would be awesome. Thanks.
taylordrake4 6 months ago
Driscoll's missionary work is to contextualize the Calvinistic Gospel of salvation which is:-
You are dead in your sin and trespasses (as dead as Lazarus' cadaver in the tomb) and need to be made alive (resurrected) by a sovereign and supernatural act of God (no faith is required because a corpse cannot hear and neither can it believe). And that is why Saul's journey to Damascus is to them the epitome of "salvation" when he was flung off his horse. Nonsense! he was saved later in Ananias' house
lessingtom 6 months ago
And then there is also the Calvinistic Jesus who is none the better than the Mormon Jesus or any other false Jesus. This Jesus, according to John MacArthur, loves all people but did not die for all people. Paul Washer believes the same thing - that the Calvinistic Jesus "died the death of his people" and not all people.
So Mark, please make sure that you are following the Jesus of the Bible and not a false Jesus.
lessingtom 6 months ago
he served you? 9:13
i dont think so you serve him not the other way around
BoundtoJesus 7 months ago
If Phil Johnson sent a letter to Mark Driscoll, I am sure there was good reason. And I am MOST certain that Mark Driscoll was not above board on everything even though he makes this post seem like he was! I never once heard Mark say, "Thank you Phil for pointing out my sin. I will seek the Lord on the many other questions you asked..." Everything he said was "justifying" himself and not "humbly" accepting that he might be wrong... So sad....such pride!
WorldofAthletes 7 months ago
Listening to someone who likes his own words is a much better experience than listening to someone who doesn't even try.
iwannagrowup 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This guy likes his own words
ryanedward816 7 months ago
We as the body of Christ are too quick to judge. We often make statements and are critical before we get all of the facts. We all make mistakes, even Mark, and even me. We need to stop majoring on the petty small issues and focus on Jesus. We need to speak in private in some cases and not air our laundry in public. We NEED to remember that sinners are watching. I think Mark is great! God Bless You all!
2259269587 7 months ago 3
deluded twat!
marcohorowitz8 8 months ago
All I read on these posts is religion, religion, religion. Mark Driscoll is not a False Teacher or the antichrist. And the sky is not falling.
MrSB1274 9 months ago
I lack the body of evidence, the witnesses and the authority, so this is not supporting, or rebuking for the allegations leveled by Johnson. I was in awe however, that a man holding the office of overseer would display such folly!! Publicly rebuking peers, BY NAME!!?... And he's concerned w/ the discretion of other Elders? How many private rebukes were attempted? Rebukes with 2 or 3 others? Publicly disgrace the office of Elder, while accusing others for the same! Oh Father, please forgive us!
nachral 10 months ago
Comment removed
nachral 10 months ago
Comment removed
nachral 10 months ago
For the guy who in his preaching tells us that some dudes enjoyed getting plowed in the rear helps him ejaculate and take a biblical view of Christ and the bride of Christ as being too gay. Now, saying this is not a point of being against this man, when gays, Lesbians, and transgendered people go to your church, would not accusing the bible of demasculating Christian men as "The bride" of Christ seem like a bad thing? Isn't this minoring on the minors-how about preaching what u r for!
daveme7 11 months ago
Att:euroyouth
The Peasant Princess-go to MarsHillChurchDOTorg & use the title at the beginning of this sentence.
Then listen to godly pastors response to the specifics as to what is said. Be prepared to spend over 11 hours listening & taking notes & get your Bible.
Also if you type in key phrase "The Rape of Solomon's Song" at gtyDOTorg, there you can get explicit detail. This is not personal 4me; God has blessed the world w/truly faithful & godly pastors, so I avoid the controversial one's.
7801Croc 11 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Also, remember that Satan does not come as Satan, but rather as an "Angel of Light". Most of Dricoll's theology is very solid, but how much perversion is needed to disqualify a person in God's sight & how much perversion would God tolerate? That is a question 4 each person 2 discern; as for me, I would never listen to him again regardless; because there are many faithful Pastors who are above the reproach Mark has brought upon himself. Most people do these things to drawl attention to self.
7801Croc 11 months ago
@7801Croc
Is there a particular sermon you have listened to that you could point us to? You make some strong accusations against the man, could you provide some evidence, perhaps a link, so that we could listen and discern for ourselves?
euroyouth 11 months ago 17
@euroyouth "Sound Doctrine; Sound Words (Phil Johnson)"
BenElderTunes 9 months ago
@r3v001 & @euroyouth QUOTE: "You make some strong accusations against the man"
wwwDOTchalliesDOTcom{Fwd Slash)book-reviews(Fwd Slash)confessions-of-a-reformission-rev
Just listen to the man; not one I would want to associate with nor one who reflects the Christians i know and love. Also, just go to his website and listen to his sermons, they speak for themselves. He treatment of the Song of Solomon is sad and borders pornographic-not fitting for a "Christian"; especially a minister.
7801Croc 5 months ago
@7801Croc I would also be interested in a link. Thanks!
r3v001 5 months ago
Anyone who turns the Song of Solomon into a form or pornography has serious issues; all Pastors are required by God to be above reproach; especially when interpreting God's word and teaching or rightly dividing the word of God, then bringing it out to the world, much less his congregation. I would not want to face God in light of what he has done, not repented of and still stands behind his pornographic view of The Song of Solomon. It made me nausea & could not bear to hear it's perversion.
7801Croc 11 months ago
I agree with Phil Johson 100% and I do not agree with mark driscoll
LEXX1212 11 months ago
why does he have so much problem with us,even as individual, being spiritually the "bride" of the Christ in the sense that we must spiritually prepare ourselves to be spotless and pure in the sight of God so that we are ready for Christ's second coming?!? why does he have to associate everything to sexuality in some degree when it does not apply that way? Why does he have to keep emphasize that he is a "macho" "heterosexual" male, when the scriptural application does not point to that direction?
canzo0378 1 year ago
@canzo0378:He's referring to the feminization of the church. He agrees with the metaphor of being the bride of christ, but many pastors do not explain this to show that we are (as a church) to be the bride of Christ. Pastors should correctly teach scripture, and in many churches, pastors misinterpret this metaphor. Nowhere does it say we are to be individually the bride of Christ. It concerns the church as seen in Rev 19:7-9, Rev 21:1-2, Eph. 5:24, 5:25
MrSB1274 1 year ago
@MrSB1274 The subject is so obvious, whether it be individual or church, and you don't need to point out again it is the church, that what scripture was referring to was in a spiritual sense, and it was so unnecessary to even point that out that and go on to explain that the pastor "feels uncomfortable" being referred to as a "bride" because he is such a "heterosexual macho man." Some things are not even mentioned since they are so unnecessary, and when mentioned, it only escalates inappropriety
canzo0378 1 year ago