- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Mormans also believe that John is still alive,
and that God was once a Man,
and a bunch of things,OK WE GET IT, THEY ARE CLEARLY LOST,
What now?
back to the thread or how to save the mormons?lets make a thread about countering mormon beliefs in the truth and tradition area
SF,
Your suggestion for a thread on Mormons is the correct thing to do.Ok, a new thread from the old, yes, but not a new thread IN the old. What was the saying, 'for the old will give way and the whole cloth is lost', something like that. Please, a Gospel expert fill in the blanks for me.
Yes, SF, back to this 'old cloth'.
So we have refined the thread topic: did the author understand their own question? Create or Procreate. Not a new thread, just refinement of the old. Did the author mean 'procreate'?
We also defined 'Create' and 'ProCreate'. Did the definition change anyones mind and thoughts or give clarity to the thread question?
Or does someone think the two words are interchangeable?Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 03 2010,11:52) Quote (shimmer @ Oct. 03 2010,15:55) Quote (terraricca @ Sep. 29 2010,13:58) Quote (shimmer @ Sep. 28 2010,23:43) Mike, theres nothing at all wrong with delving into scripture, But Mike, if a few people here agree with you that doesnt prove it as truth, theres a whole world, millions of people,
If it was a conversation where others could join in, fine, isn't that what forums are for ? Why do you think theres people reading here but only speaking now and then ? Theres a reason for that, and you should ask – why ?
BTW the original word wasnt knowledge,
Young's Literal TranslationAnd this is the life age-during, that they may know Thee, the only true God, and him whom Thou didst send — Jesus Christ;
shimmeri agree with you there in nothing wrong with delving in scriptures BUT BE CAREFULL WHAT YOU ARE LOOKING FOR.
pierre
Terrarica, also be carefull what we read here, how do you think the Early church fell into apostacy ?Through mixing and debating.
hi shimmer
yeah,i remember i had a visit of Mormons one day they came in with the bible and quickly pull their book out from Joseph smith,then i show them the door.if it is for the truth you are looking for then you have to do your work.and not letting someone else do it for you ,there would be a cost on this you would believe men in stead of God words.
and you right some here are out of truth and talk about useless knowledge.
PierreTerrarica,
Ecclesiasticus 13:1.
He that toucheth pitch shall be defiled therewith …(We cant handle….read ideas without some of them sticking to our thinking).
Ecclesiasticus 13:11
Affect not to be made equal unto them in talk, and believe not their many words: for with much communication will they tempt thee,Ecclesiastes 12:12
And further, from these, my son, be warned; the making of many books hath no end, and much study is a weariness of the flesh.Quote (JustAskin @ Oct. 03 2010,08:32) Ok, back to 'unscriptural'. Mike, the whole of the forum speaks of your unscriptural posting. Or at least, you cannot post 'scripturally enough' to lock your point home.
JA,You prove your own statement about me to be a lie in your own words.
Which is it……that I post “unscriptural” things, or that I don't post “scripturally enough in your opinion to lock my point home”?They are two completely different things you know, and I'm still waiting for you to show one time I posted unscripturally. You imply that there are “too many times to count” – so it should be fairly easy for you to show an instance. Or could it be that we disagree on the interpretation of a certain scripture and because you don't understand the scripture that same as I do, you claim what I say is “unscriptural”?
Btw, the story about my brother was intended to benefit you. I thought maybe you would look in the mirror and see yourself in that story. A person is able to help others without bringing them low while putting themselves up high.
Your personal attacks of the people here don't represent Christian behavior at all. It's one thing to disagree and discuss scripture JA. It's a totally different thing to make almost every disagreement you have with others into a “verbal fistfight”.
mike
Mike,
It was without doubt where the direction was in your story.You perhaps underestimate me. Perhaps even fear me because i represent that 'older brother'.
Mike, i embraced you as, ' a brother'…it was you who cut the tie. I spoke to you with understanding, compassion, guidance and with lots of rope in our pm's. I gave you the option, the choice. I warned you about you misScripturedness and offered you even a painful but brilliant solution, a get out door, but yiu remained locked into yourself, 'i like debating' you said.Well Mike, you have become the Master Debator of this form.
Quote (JustAskin @ Oct. 03 2010,21:44) We also defined 'Create' and 'ProCreate'. Did the definition change anyones mind and thoughts or give clarity to the thread question?
Hi All,The thread isn't even about the difference between “create” and “procreate”. It started as a poll about whether or not God Procreates. So once more from Dictionary.com:
pro·cre·ate /ˈproʊkriˌeɪt/ Show Spelled
[proh-kree-eyt] Show IPA
verb, -at·ed, -at·ing.
–verb (used with object)
1. to beget or generate (offspring).
2. to produce; bring into being.
–verb (used without object)
3. to beget offspring.
4. to produce; bring into being.So the question is really, “Did God bring Jesus into being?”
WJ and SF say “no”, I think all else on HN say “yes”. The results of this poll are misleading because of people's preconcieved idea of what the word “procreate” means. I'm sure there are many “yes” votes here that would immeditately be changed to “no” if we all realized that “procreate” simply means to “cause to exist”……..in whatever manner.
mike
JA:
Quote Mike,
It was without doubt where the direction was in your story.
Good……glad you got the point.JA:
Quote You perhaps underestimate me. Perhaps even fear me because i represent that 'older brother'.
I underestimated the lengths to which you will go to belittle another poster. And maybe you missed the point that while I was a little kid, my bother's comments hurt to the core. But now, as an adult, I realize that what he thinks about me doesn't amount to a hill of beans. I don't “fear” you JA…….I pity you.JA:
Quote Mike, i embraced you as, ' a brother'…it was you who cut the tie.
But not until your words became venomous.JA:
Quote I spoke to you with understanding, compassion, guidance and with lots of rope in our pm's.
You tried to bring me over to your “understanding” about “begotten”. You “compassionately” tried to “guide” me to your way of thinking. And the pm's involved two friends discussing scriptures with respect for each other……even though we disagreed. As soon as that discussion went public, you turned on me with personal attacks like a long loved dog who suddenly went rabid.JA:
Quote I warned you about you misScripturedness
Is “misScripturedness” a word you just made up to cover your previous lie about me posting “unscriptural” things?JA:
Quote Well Mike, you have become the Master Debator of this form.
Okay. I learn something new about the scriptures in every “debate”. So I'm cool with that.peace and love,
mikeAh, Mike,
I see you not satisfied that we already defined and redefined.Pity you didn't think to do that earlier, i did, first time, too.
I instantly saw that 'proCreate' was the 'Wallace and Grommit': 'the wrong… word'.
Seeing that there was no one else around, no one previous from whom 'Jesus' could come from, and Spirits cannot 'procreate', cannot give birth, cannot …create… Their own life, who, how then could one of them be 'pro'created, brought forth from another of it's own kind….Mike, unless you are saying that God 'Procreated' another God?
Mike, is that what you are saying?
Do you see your unscriptural blundering has led you into a blind alley.If not then you would have to say that God 'Created' something new. A free spirit, intelligence that would serve him, a servant class who would aid him in His great plan, and he would need plenty of them of differing powers, abilities, purpose and positions, some great, some lesser, some minor and some major, and so it is with his image in the flesh, mankind. There are rulers ordained by God, there are doers and thinkers and designers and refiners, there are great and there are small, the strong and the weak, the haughty and the weak, some at the base and some at the peak, yet they are all in the image of God and all can become Son's of God.
Quote (shimmer @ Oct. 03 2010,04:56) Hi WJ. Thought you weren't going to say anymore on this thread, haha.
Hi shimmerActually I never said I wouldn't post on this thread again. I started the thread. In regards to continuing to go over and over the same thing with Mike I said…
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Sep. 27 2010,22:06) At this time I have said all I can say and to continue is vain, though I may have some new insight in the future. Blessings WJ
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Oct. 03 2010,07:32) But a short answer is verse 4 does not prove that Jesus is not God.
Hi Keith,But it says this shepherd will rule in the power and majesty of his “Elohim”.
Jesus cannot possibly be a part OF “Elohim” if he is someone other than “Elohim”, right?
And your “rationalization” that Jesus calls his God “God” only because he is now “part man” is just wrong on so many levels.
1. Can God be “a man” and be killed by the mere mortals that He Himself created?
2. Does God have anyone He calls “my God”?
3. Does God rule in the authority of “his God”?What you trinitarians try to do is make 3 separate “Gods” fit into a monotheistic belief system. But Micah 5:4, along with many other scriptures, makes it clear that Jehovah is “Elohim”, and Jesus is someone other than and lessor to “Elohim”.
peace and love,
mikeQuote (Lightenup @ Oct. 02 2010,23:29) Or perhaps you want to establish a quote that has someone teaching about the spirit wives of the Father. You won't find it and neither will you Keith.
KathiDid I say that? Read my post again, I said that you come short of that, but procreation is still the same thing. The Forefathers did not teach the procreation of Jesus but rather that he is “eternally begotten”.
Of course you wil find a few Arian Fathers that believed that Jesus had a beginning by being born from the Father.
But why would God stop with Only One “Only Begotten Son”?
The Father was always the Father and the Son was always the Son and that is what the Fathers taught.
Everything that had its beginning or came into existence is part of the begining and therefore is not God at all but a creature.
WJ
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 03 2010,12:23) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Oct. 03 2010,07:32) But a short answer is verse 4 does not prove that Jesus is not God.
Hi Keith,But it says this shepherd will rule in the power and majesty of his “Elohim”.
Jesus cannot possibly be a part OF “Elohim” if he is someone other than “Elohim”, right?
And your “rationalization” that Jesus calls his God “God” only because he is now “part man” is just wrong on so many levels.
1. Can God be “a man” and be killed by the mere mortals that He Himself created?
2. Does God have anyone He calls “my God”?
3. Does God rule in the authority of “his God”?What you trinitarians try to do is make 3 separate “Gods” fit into a monotheistic belief system. But Micah 5:4, along with many other scriptures, makes it clear that Jehovah is “Elohim”, and Jesus is someone other than and lessor to “Elohim”.
peace and love,
mike
MikeYes we are not Madalist but believe there are three persons that exist as “One True God”. Many of the Fathers believed this and it is found in the whole of scriptures. Starting with Matt 28:19 and John 1:1.
All of your questions has been addressed on this sight over and over again.
WJ
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 03 2010,12:23) Jesus cannot possibly be a part OF “Elohim” if he is someone other than “Elohim”, right?
MikeAre you part of your wife? The scriptures says you are “One flesh”. Paul says this is a mystery, but it is a fact and not a myth. Now tell us how it is not possible for Jesus to be One with his Father sharing the same nature and Spirit, when in fact he said he and the Father are One?
WJ
Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 04 2010,04:11) Mike and JA so what it gone 'n be ?? pro-creation or creation of the WORD (Jesus)
Pierre
Hi Pierre,I will go with what scripture says. Jesus was said to be:
1. “Brought forth” as the first of God's works
2. “Begotten” by his God
3. The “firstborn” of his God
4. The “beginning of the creation” of his God
5. The “firstborn of all creation”
6. The “only begotten Son of God”Jesus is the first creation God ever brought forth. He was created in a way unique to himself, and through him the universe and everything else in it was created in a different manner. That's how I understand it.
Dictionary.com lists “to cause to come into being” for “create”. And it lists “to bring into being” for “procreate”. I don't see a big distinction. When I “begot” my son, I “procreated” him. I also with the help of God “created” a new being where there was none before.
My son was “begotten”, “procreated” and “created”. And if we want to get technical, he was also “born”, “birthed”, “brought forth” and “made”.
peace and love,
mikeQuote (WorshippingJesus @ Oct. 04 2010,04:30) Mike Yes we are not Madalist but believe there are three persons that exist as “One True God”. Many of the Fathers believed this and it is found in the whole of scriptures. Starting with Matt 28:19 and John 1:1.
All of your questions has been addressed on this sight over and over again.
WJ
Keith,Matt 28:19 doesn't come close to claiming a “trinity Godhead”.
And John 1:1 says the Word was with THE God, and was [a] god.
You can't BE “THE GOD”, and at the same time be WITH “THE GOD” Keith.
You run from thread to thread making the same lame claims, but you don't ever take it any farther than the initial “claim”.
All of your “trinity proof texts” have been soundly refuted……you just fail to follow up with anyone who shows you the error of your doctrine.
Now, back to my point, how can Jesus be a part OF “Elohim” when it is clear from Micah 5:4 that he is someone other than and lessor to “Elohim”?
peace and love,
mikeQuote (WorshippingJesus @ Oct. 04 2010,04:34) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 03 2010,12:23) Jesus cannot possibly be a part OF “Elohim” if he is someone other than “Elohim”, right?
MikeAre you part of your wife? The scriptures says you are “One flesh”. Paul says this is a mystery, but it is a fact and not a myth. Now tell us how it is not possible for Jesus to be One with his Father sharing the same nature and Spirit, when in fact he said he and the Father are One?
WJ
Hi Keith,If you would like to discuss the “one flesh” wording in the Bible, let's start a thread. But I don't want to start another one just for you to ignore it.
Do you really think this applies to Jesus/Jehovah? Are they made of “flesh”? Scripture also says we will become “ONE” with our Lord AND with our God – does this mean we will become members of the “Godhead” too?
There are many lines of logical thinking about the “one flesh” thing Keith. Would you like to delve into it or not?
mike
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 03 2010,12:46) Keith, Matt 28:19 doesn't come close to claiming a “trinity Godhead”.
And John 1:1 says the Word was with THE God, and was [a] god.
Hi allThis is a corruption of the text and no major translation or credible scholar does violence to John 1:1 like the NWT.
The NWT was translated by men with no credentials or experience in Biblical Hebrew or Greek languages.
WJ
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
