JOHN 1:1 who is the WORD?

[Catholic Apologist]

Quote (t8 @ Sep. 27 2009,19:05)

Quote (CatholicApologist @ Sep. 27 2009,18:57) If I remember rightly….Martin Luther BELIEVED IN INDULGENCES.  Or have you never read the 95 theses of his? It matters little what he believed in reference to justifying something. What matters is the truth and no age has had all the truth. But woe to those who oppose the march of truth and the rising of the morning star. Woe to those who try to bind up rather than set free.

So look at what I said. The Council of Trent condemned the selling of indulgences. So your West Wing of the Vatican built on indulgence marketing argument is mute.

Can you show me ONE Church documented official teaching where indulgences are to be sold?

This should be good.

[Not3in1]

Quote (Nick Hassan @ Sep. 27 2009,19:00)

Hi Mandy, Can you see the bad fruit of trinity? Folk do not know who to worship or how to pray. Round one to Satan it seems and men still cower before him.

Do we really want to talk about bad fruit?

I'm going to bed. Duke it out, boys.

Love,
Mandy

[Proclaimer]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Sep. 27 2009,19:07)

Quote (t8 @ Sep. 27 2009,03:02) Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Sep. 27 2009,19:00) CA These guys do not assemble at any church. In fact I do not think they assemble at all, but are merely spiritual gypsies that belong to nothing except maybe this sight. They claim to be members of the Body of Christ which they never assemble with that I know of. WJ You are wrong about that WJ. If you are wrong about that, then you may also be wrong about your Trinity Doctrine. t8 Well then enlighten us. Do you have regular gatherings with the saints like they did in the book of Acts? Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but let us encourage one another–and all the more as you see the Day approaching. Heb 10:25 WJ

Absolutely. Have done for years.

I believe that we need to fellowship with real believers. If there are none where you live, then make some disciples.

The early Church worked this way.

Anyway, are we getting off topic here.

It is about John 1:1.

[Catholic Apologist]

Quote (t8 @ Sep. 27 2009,19:08)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Sep. 27 2009,19:03) Quote (Nick Hassan @ Sep. 27 2009,03:00) Hi Mandy, Can you see the bad fruit of trinity? Folk do not know who to worship or how to pray. Round one to Satan it seems and men still cower before him. NH Do you find fault in a Trinitarian bowing the knee to Jesus and giving him the same honour as the Father? WJ I personally do not. But if the honour is that he is God as well as the Father, then that is just simply error. Jesus is the lamb of God, the messiah, the son of God, the image of God, the first-born of all creation. If you want to ignore that, then it does reflect on your attitude to Christ. But that is truly between you and him. We simply point out error only so that others will not believe it.

No, dude, let's get more specific.

Do you find fault in a person bowing in worship (latria) to Jesus as to the Father?

[Proclaimer]

Quote (Not3in1 @ Sep. 27 2009,19:09)

Do we really want to talk about bad fruit?   I'm going to bed.  Duke it out, boys.   Love, Mandy

Do we really want to talk about the truth.

Bad fruit shows a bad root. If we ignore this, we do so to our own peril.

[Proclaimer]

Quote (CatholicApologist @ Sep. 27 2009,19:09)

Quote (t8 @ Sep. 27 2009,19:05) Quote (CatholicApologist @ Sep. 27 2009,18:57) If I remember rightly….Martin Luther BELIEVED IN INDULGENCES.  Or have you never read the 95 theses of his? It matters little what he believed in reference to justifying something. What matters is the truth and no age has had all the truth. But woe to those who oppose the march of truth and the rising of the morning star. Woe to those who try to bind up rather than set free. So look at what I said.  The Council of Trent condemned the selling of indulgences.  So your West Wing of the Vatican built on indulgence marketing argument is mute. Can you show me ONE Church documented official teaching where indulgences are to be sold? This should be good.

Sorry but what happened to the money for indulgences.

Sure, you can say one thing and do another.

But guess what?

It is the fruit that we should judge by.

I couldn't care less if the RCC said that we all need to be saved. If they turn around and block the way, then that is what matters.

Actions speak louder than words.

History is a story that we should learn from.
I do not want to be doomed to repeat the mistakes of the past. Why would I want to embrace an organisation that claims to be the body of Christ and has persecuted many for speaking the truth.

Not interested and never will be.

I prefer to be in the body of Christ.

[Proclaimer]

Are you saying that the indulgences never happened or that it was not the wishes of those in command of the RCC?

[KangarooJack]

t8 said:

Quote

God made Jesus Lord not LORD. Perhaps you should be humble and open enough to see that it is you who cannot see it.

t8,
You dodged my point. You still believe that the Father and Jesus are both Lord thus denying that there is only one Lord. So you have no right to fault trinitarians. The Septuagint uses “Lord” and not “LORD.” Since Jesus and the apostles cited from the Septuagint then it has a whole lot of authority.

Your distinction between LORD and Lord is old covenant. There is no such distinction in the new covenant. Even if the distinction still remained does not matter for Moses called the Messenger who appeared to Hagar “LORD.” And the Messiah was called “the LORD our righteousness” in Jeremiah.

You guys argue from “LORD” which was used interchangeably in the old testament and does not even appear in the new testament. It is simply “one Lord” in the new testament.

Yet you have two “Lords.”

thinker

[NickHassan]

Hi TT,
Just diversions are the refuge of the desperate.
You should know both your God and your Lord if you are in Christ.[1Cor8]

Are you not?

[Proclaimer]

Quote (thethinker @ Sep. 27 2009,20:29)

t8, You dodged my point. You still believe that the Father and Jesus are both Lord thus denying that there is only one Lord. So you have no right to fault trinitarians. The Septuagint uses “Lord” and not “LORD.” Since Jesus and the apostles cited from the Septuagint then it has a whole lot of authority.

I think the mis-understanding is with you.

YHWH was translated LORD in the English OT.
Kurios is translated lord in the New Testament.

The two words are not the same.
One is a name and the other a title.

God made Jesus lord and christ.

Therefore for us there is one lord, the lord Jesus Christ.
And there is one God, the Father.

I with Paul on this one.

[KangarooJack]

t8 said:

Quote

Oh sure in reality they contradict, but when you play the Pretend Game, you can pretend they don't. Is that how the game is played? Am I understanding the rules WJ?

WorshippingJesus replied:

So lets test your theory and see whose faith the scriptures contradict!:

Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.

The Trinitarians believe in “One True God”!

The Henotheist believe in “One Big God” who is True, and “One little god” who is true!

Ephesians 4:4-6
5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism;
6 one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.

The Trinitarians believe their is “One God and Father of all” and “One Lord” who is over all and in all!

The Henotheist believe in “One God and Father of all” who is also LORD, and yet “another Lord” who is a smaller lord and a smaller god!

1 Corinthians 8:6
6 yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.

The Trinitarian believes in “One God the Father” and One Lord Jesus Christ!

The Henotheist believe in “One God the Father” who is also LORD, and “another lord” who is a smaller lord and god!

There is only “One True God” and not a big one and a little one.

And there is only one LORD who is LORD over all!

Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD: Deut 6:4

So live with your contradictions.

WJ
———————————————————–

[Proclaimer]

Ha ha. Thinker you add in your own ideas.

The reality is that I believe in

Ephesians 4:4-6
5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism;
6 one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.

1 Corinthians 8:6
6 yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.

And you do not believe the above.

Simple as that.

Conclusion: I believe what Paul said here and you do not.

BTW, that is not a Trinity. Don't look too hard at the 3 graphics. It is not a secret doctrine that teaches the Trinity. Just 3 graphics okay.

[KangarooJack]

t8 said:

Quote

YHWH was translated LORD in the English OT. Kurios is translated lord in the New Testament. The two words are not the same. One is a name and the other a title.

t8,
This is more of the same double speak. The Messiah was called “The LORD our righteousness” (Jeremiah 23:6).

Quote

In His days Judah will be saved,      And Israel will dwell safely;      Now this is HIS NAME by which He will be called:      The LORD our righteousness.

You must have been aware of this verse. You must have been aware also that Christ's PERSONAL NAME is “Jesus” which means “Jehovah saves.”

A name may be shared by more than one! If you come back and say that “Joshua” means the same thing then you establish my point that the name “LORD” may be shared. Yet we know that Jesus was Savior and Joshua was not.

Many shared the name “LORD” but only one has the title “Lord.”

thinker

[Proclaimer]

Thinker.

Playing with words cannot make something wrong, right.

In the New Testament, it is written that there is ONE Lord, the Lord Jesus Christ. And there is one God, the Father.

I believe this and you do not.

Argue with Paul about it. He wrote it not me. I can't be blamed for what Paul wrote.

You know that the words Spirit, Father, God, (and I am sure many others) are used of God, but also others. Angels are called spirits, Abraham was a father, Jesus said to some “you are gods”.

Get over it. Trying to make Abraham the Father or an Angel the Spirit is wrong. Same with trying to make Jesus YHWH.

Jesus may have YHWH's name in him, but so do many others.

It is normal to have a name that means God's grace, or God is good, or something like that. It is not meant to be taken that a person with a name which references God means that he is God.

Simple stuff thinker. I think you need a name change. I don't believe that you really think things through at all. Just a bias and you go from there.

[KangarooJack]

Quote (t8 @ Sep. 27 2009,21:09)

Thinker. Playing with words cannot make something wrong, right. In the New Testament, it is written that there is ONE Lord, the Lord Jesus Christ. And there is one God, the Father. I believe this and you do not. Argue with Paul about it. He wrote it not me. I can't be blamed for what Paul wrote. You know that the words Spirit, Father, God, (and I am sure many others) are used of God, but also others. Angels are called spirits, Abraham was a father, Jesus said to some “you are gods”. Get over it. Trying to make Abraham the Father or an Angel the Spirit is wrong. Same with trying to make Jesus YHWH. Jesus may have YHWH's name in him, but so do many others. It is normal to have a name that means God's grace, or God is good, or something like that. It is not meant to be taken that a person with a name which references God means that he is God. Simple stuff thinker. I think you need a name change. I don't believe that you really think things through at all. Just a bias and you go from there.

t8,
Please analyze what you wrote above. You admit that the name “YHWH” and “God” may be shared by others but only Jesus is Lord (kurios). This implies that the name “Lord” or “kurios” is a higher name if Jesus alone has it.

So it is you who argues with Paul for He said that the name “Lord” (kurios) in reference to Jesus is ABOVE every other name. You have substantiated this by admitting that “YHWH” and “God” may be shared while Christ alone is “Lord.”

thinker

[georg]

t8

I like your debate with thinker, but how do you describe colors to a blind person?

Georg

[georg]

Quote (thethinker @ Sep. 27 2009,20:29)

t8 said: Quote God made Jesus Lord not LORD. Perhaps you should be humble and open enough to see that it is you who cannot see it. t8, You dodged my point. You still believe that the Father and Jesus are both Lord thus denying that there is only one Lord. So you have no right to fault trinitarians. The Septuagint uses “Lord” and not “LORD.” Since Jesus and the apostles cited from the Septuagint then it has a whole lot of authority. Your distinction between LORD and Lord is old covenant. There is no such distinction in the new covenant. Even if the distinction still remained does not matter for Moses called the Messenger who appeared to Hagar “LORD.” And the Messiah was called “the LORD our righteousness” in Jeremiah. You guys argue from “LORD” which was used interchangeably in the old testament and does not even appear in the new testament. It is simply “one Lord” in the new testament. Yet you have two “Lords.” thinker

thinker you don't know the Old Testament that much!!!!
Psalm 6:1
Psalm 5:1
Judges 5:3,4,5
Deut.6:1
Deut.5:2
Deut.4:1
Numbers 18:1
Just to show a few or more
LORD is always describing our Heavenly Father.
While Lord is always Jesus Christ our Savior and JKing of Kings and Lord of Lords.
Irene

[Not3in1]

Quote (t8 @ Sep. 27 2009,19:12)

Quote (Not3in1 @ Sep. 27 2009,19:09) Do we really want to talk about bad fruit?   I'm going to bed.  Duke it out, boys.   Love, Mandy Do we really want to talk about the truth. Bad fruit shows a bad root. If we ignore this, we do so to our own peril.

One man's “truth” is another man's “false doctrine”.

Share your version of the truth all you like, but obviously it's not the ONLY truth available here.

We certainly can't fall-back on the bible to help us out either. From it you can form whatever teaching you fancy.

I'd say we're pretty much on our own here.

Love,
Mandy

[NickHassan]

Hi Not3,
So, like Pilate, you do not believe truth actually exists?

[Proclaimer]

Quote (georg @ Sep. 28 2009,01:05)

t8 I like your debate with thinker, but how do you describe colors to a blind person? Georg

You say to them, that which you can see now is black.

Your right though.

You cannot make a blind person see. They first of all have to want to see.

[Author]

Posts