Mikeboll64 vs francis

[mikeboll64]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 14 2011,05:54)

No kidding Mike! Seriously are you making this stuff up as you go along? Of course the Hebrews had a word for “god” it is “”el”,  or “elohim”!

No Keith,

“El” means “mighty one” or “leader”.  What word did the Hebrews have that explicitely meant “supernatural supreme being who created the universe”?  None, right?

Yet that's what the word “god” means to most of us.  And it causes confusion for many people because Jesus was simply called a “judge” or “ruler” or “leader”.  And none of those words by themselves say Jesus is the “supernatural supreme being who created the universe”.  But because that's how we today understand the word “god”, many of us think Jesus must BE God because he is called by that title.

But most of us don't know the truth behind it.  But you and I know that “el” and “elohim” and “theos” were TITLES given to people who judged or ruled over others, and that those words in and of themselves in no way implied a supernatural being at all.

That's why men were also called by these titles.  Why is it that you and SF eagerly agree that Exodus 22:8-9 refers to men who were judges and who were NOT God Almighty, but you think when that same exact word that means “leader” is used of Jesus, it must mean he IS God Almighty?    This is called “reaching”, Keith.  You WANT Jesus to be God Almighty so badly that you are willing to ignore clear scriptural evidence that makes it clear that being called by the title of “elohim” or “theos” does NOT mean you are God Almighty.

I love that Dennison, at the young age of 21, has such an in depth knowledge of scripture and spends his days thinking about God.  I love you and Jack for teaching me so many things about the scriptures and for being my catalyst to delve even deeper into them every day.  But at times like this, I start to wonder how you can HONESTLY claim “Jesus is God because he is called elohim or theos when you KNOW the words meant “leader” and were used for angels and men also.

Here, talk you way out of this one:

Judges 5:8 NIV
God chose new leaders
  when war came to the city gates,
but not a shield or spear was seen
  among forty thousand in Israel.

Judges 5:8 NASB
“New gods were chosen; Then war was in the gates. Not a shield or a spear was seen Among forty thousand in Israel.

NETNotes says the actual Hebrew is “He chose new gods”.

Who were these “new elohim” that God chose?  They were the human beings Deborah and Barak during the time that Deborah was the Judge of Israel.

So does being called by the title “god” make one God Almighty or not?  YES or NO?

Does being called by the title “god” make Deborah and Barak “false gods” or “imposters”? YES or NO?

peace and love,
mike

[mikeboll64]

Really guys?  Still nothing?  I'll post it a THIRD time.  

Jack, prove that you're not running and hiding right now.  You seem to have plenty of time for ridicules………how about for one little answer?

Scripture says our only one true God is THE FATHER.  How do you “include” the Son into this very specific statement?

Jack, would you try to answer it?  Keith and SF, I would also be interested in your HONEST, SCRIPTURAL, and TO THE POINT answers.

peace and love to all of you,
mike

[mikeboll64]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 14 2011,09:01)

Hi Mike No fear, I will respect your wish, even though you didn't respect my wish when I created a different thread here to address the debate.   WJ

Hi Keith,

Enough is enough already.    Look at your response to JA two weeks ago.  Read your own words and see if I'm saying something different to you than you said to him:

Quote (Istari @ Jan. 02 2011,20:06)

I'm not sure what this thread is about – there are two of them but people are posting in them even though it says “Mikeboll64 vs francis”. I'm sure i got told of as Astaria in the other thread? Why are there two and how come some can post in here and not et told off.

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 03 2011,09:01)

Hi Istari Because the other thread is in the debate catagory and this one is not. In the debate catagory only the two that are debating can reply in that thread unless the two have agreed to let others respond. The purpose is so that others cannot interrupt the debate. This thread was created to allow others to comment on the debate but notice it was not created in the debates thread.

Keith, if it is that important to you, then pm t8 and ask him to move it back to the debates section.  I honestly thought you made a mistake like I've done in the past.  I've had t8 move some of my threads to the right section before.  

mike

[mikeboll64]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 14 2011,09:42)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 13 2011,17:25) As long as they don't start kicking “yellow snow” in my face, I'll be just fine.   Mike QUICKLY – DUCK!!! WJ

[mikeboll64]

Quote (SimplyForgiven @ Jan. 13 2011,16:31)

Its fallacy is present when you state that every time the word “elohim” is used, it simply means “judge” or “ruler” when we all know that it also used to present the Identity of a “supreme being” because thats what the bible teaches.

Hi Dennison,

You are mistaken my good man.  The word “elohim” DOES SIMPLY MEAN “judge”, “ruler”, or “leader”.  Just because the Hebrews used that term in referrence to YHVH doesn't mean the term itself has any conotation of “Supreme Spiritual Being” or “Perfection”.  It doesn't.  It just means “judge”, and was used of YHVH, human judges and rulers and angels.  There is no supernatural implication in the word at all.

I'm sorry, man.  I'm sorry that the truth goes against your belief about the word “god”.  I'm sorry for you that you cannot honestly ever say, “Jesus is God because he is called 'god' in the Bible”.  You'll have to work harder on your other “Jesus is God” proofs, because being called by the title of “elohim” or “theos” does NOT mean that Jesus is our “Supreme Spiritual Ruler”.  

Quote (SimplyForgiven @ Jan. 13 2011,16:31)

According to other Scriptures, that you do not deny, that Christ Created.

What are you talking about?    There is no scripture that says Jesus created anything.  Except maybe a whip out of cords.  

Quote (SimplyForgiven @ Jan. 13 2011,16:31)

So Christ is given the Title of “Elohim” because he fullfilled that role, like no other.

And why then were the others who were given the same title given it?  Like say, Deborah, the judge over Israel whom God appointed?

Quote (SimplyForgiven @ Jan. 13 2011,16:31)

You agree that Jesus is called God, but excuse it as only a “title”.

I agree that Jesus is called “ruler” and “judge”.  I know for a fact that Jesus is never called “God Almighty”.  And if he's not God Almighty, then he is A “god”, or “powerful ruler” and not THE GOD, or “ALL-POWERFUL RULER”.

So IS HE God Almighty, D?  Show me the scripture that says so.

Quote (SimplyForgiven @ Jan. 13 2011,16:31)

Here is the other problem that You only define “Elohim” as “Judge” and “Ruler” in reference to anything else but YHVH.

No, even in referrence to YHVH, the word itself STILL only means “judge” or “ruler”.

Quote (SimplyForgiven @ Jan. 13 2011,16:31)

Your second fallacy, is that “theos” does not have the same meaning as “elohim” in Preeminent results.

Theos is the word the Greeks used to translate “elohim”.  It means “judge” or “ruler” just like “elohim” does.  Where we got off track was by not sticking with “judge” or “ruler” when translating these words into English.  Instead, we opted for the word “god”, that in and of itself carries the conotation of “Supreme Spiritual Being”.  And that is a conotation that “elohim” and “theos” didn't carry in and of themselves.

Quote (SimplyForgiven @ Jan. 13 2011,16:31)

In other words, the verse is saying that “the false god Satan is blinding unbelievers from the glorious good news

Paul doesn't call Satan a “false god” though, does he?

That's enough for now.  Hey D, I've posted a little post to Jack and Keith and you three times now.  Will you look for it and answer the purple question?  Also, I made a post including Judges 5:8 to Keith today.  Would you comment on the “elohim” mentioned in that scripture?

peace and love,
mike

[Ed J]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 14 2011,13:00)

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 14 2011,09:01) Hi Mike No fear, I will respect your wish, even though you didn't respect my wish when I created a different thread here to address the debate.   WJ Hi Keith, Enough is enough already.    Look at your response to JA two weeks ago.  Read your own words and see if I'm saying something different to you than you said to him: Quote (Istari @ Jan. 02 2011,20:06) I'm not sure what this thread is about – there are two of them but people are posting in them even though it says “Mikeboll64 vs francis”. I'm sure i got told of as Astaria in the other thread? Why are there two and how come some can post in here and not et told off. Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 03 2011,09:01) Hi Istari Because the other thread is in the debate catagory and this one is not. In the debate catagory only the two that are debating can reply in that thread unless the two have agreed to let others respond. The purpose is so that others cannot interrupt the debate. This thread was created to allow others to comment on the debate but notice it was not created in the debates thread. Keith, if it is that important to you, then pm t8 and ask him to move it back to the debates section.  I honestly thought you made a mistake like I've done in the past.  I've had t8 move some of my threads to the right section before.   mike

Hi Mike,

If it gets moved back, it needs to have more in the title bar: like..
“Mikeboll64 vs francis: comments on debate from those following it”.
It seems that it interests other members as well and is probably the most read debate at h-net!
I have not even bothered to read most debates, but this one between you and Francis is one that interests me.

God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

[SimplyForgiven]

Hi Mike,

Quote

Hi Dennison, You are mistaken my good man.  The word “elohim” DOES SIMPLY MEAN “judge”, “ruler”, or “leader”.  Just because the Hebrews used that term in referrence to YHVH doesn't mean the term itself has any conotation of “Supreme Spiritual Being” or “Perfection”.  It doesn't.  It just means “judge”, and was used of YHVH, human judges and rulers and angels.  There is no supernatural implication in the word at all.

Mike than you didnt understand the gist of what i was saying.
ill repeat it, Its a fallacy to say that the interpretation of Elohim solely means “Judge” or “Ruler.  why? because as you said in your second to last post, that “Elohim” is interpreted by the CONTEXT!
How do you understand what the words mean by the Context!
How do we know that “El” “Elohim” Mentioned in Genesis 1:1 is a supernatural being because of the CONTEXT.
Notice, the beginning of the bible never claims that there are “other elohims” that created.
We know the identity of Elohim by his works, ethics, and character in the state of Perfection.

Quote

I'm sorry, man.  I'm sorry that the truth goes against your belief about the word “god”.  I'm sorry for you that you cannot honestly ever say, “Jesus is God because he is called 'god' in the Bible”.  You'll have to work harder on your other “Jesus is God” proofs, because being called by the title of “elohim” or “theos” does NOT mean that Jesus is our “Supreme Spiritual Ruler”.

You know Mike, I wish i can take these words sincerely, but I have to rebuke your apology with all my heart.   Why? because the words dont match the message that is hidden between the lines.
spiritually speaking, it doesnt match.  
You admit Jesus is called “Elohim” and “Theos”, I dont have to prove that any further because we agree on that.
My proof relies within the Context of what makes the One True God a Supreme being and the proof is within Jesus works, ethics, and Character which is in the state of perfection which is proven within the bible which is why He is truely the God.

Quote

What are you talking about?    There is no scripture that says Jesus created anything.  Except maybe a whip out of cords.

Mike, you cant deny this? Lol, whether you believe Jesus is God or not, Jesus did Create.  In the other thread you claimed that God created the word THROUGH Jesus.  Ok so you still claiming that Jesus created.  Either way you cant deny it.

Quote

And why then were the others who were given the same title given it?  Like say, Deborah, the judge over Israel whom God appointed?

And how would you know its exactly the same?
Were they really gods? its proven within the CONTEXT that in fact they are not gods but mere mortals.
Again your debating title vs title, and not Title vs Identity.

Quote

I agree that Jesus is called “ruler” and “judge”.  I know for a fact that Jesus is never called “God Almighty”.  And if he's not God Almighty, then he is A “god”, or “powerful ruler” and not THE GOD, or “ALL-POWERFUL RULER”. So IS HE God Almighty, D?  Show me the scripture that says so.

Lol Mike, so you admit he is called God, but not THE GOD. You already have the verses that we agree on that Jesus is called God, and the Context of course proves that He is God.
The same with Genesis 1:1.  

Quote

No, even in referrence to YHVH, the word itself STILL only means “judge” or “ruler”.

So God's Name is ONLY a Title? thats what your saying?

Quote

Theos is the word the Greeks used to translate “elohim”.  It means “judge” or “ruler” just like “elohim” does.  Where we got off track was by not sticking with “judge” or “ruler” when translating these words into English.  Instead, we opted for the word “god”, that in and of itself carries the conotation of “Supreme Spiritual Being”.  And that is a conotation that “elohim” and “theos” didn't carry in and of themselves.

Actually thats Incorrect, Theos is used to present the identity or divinity of a God.NETnotes
Theos
1) a god or goddess, a general name of deities or divinities 2) the Godhead, trinity 2a) God the Father, the first person in the trinity 2b) Christ, the second person of the trinity 2c) Holy Spirit, the third person in the trinity 3) spoken of the only and true God 3a) refers to the things of God 3b) his counsels, interests, things due to him 4) whatever can in any respect be likened unto God, or resemble him in any way 4a) God's representative or viceregent 4a1) of magistrates and judges
and Acts 17:23 Pauls mentions the Unknown “Theos” of the greeks.  He wasnt talking about a Title, but about the Identity.

In fact let me stop your nonesense.  IN REALITY MIKE every one who uses the word “God” or “Theos” are talking about a “supreme being” not a title.
Even paul was talking about the many “Supreme beings” that the GREEKS WORSHIP AS GODS, not titles, not rulers, but literaly as supreme mystical beings.

Quote

Paul doesn't call Satan a “false god” though, does he?

Mike, we interpret scripture with scripture, and its clear that the Devil is a father of liars, and is false in general.  In him is darkness and wickeness, and he blinds people.  He is nothing but a deceiver.  So if a liar told you that he was God, you would believe him?  and Paul claims that satan is a god of the unbelievers who are blinded by him. What is PAUL SAYING, ITs logical that Paul is in fact not calling him God, but a deceiver of unbelivers.

Quote

Scripture says our only one true God is THE FATHER.  How do you “include” the Son into this very specific statement?

1. Father cannot be a Father without a Son.
2. Jesus claims that the FAth
er is IN HIM, and he is IN THE FATHER.

Easy.

Quote

Judges 5:8 NIV God chose new leaders  when war came to the city gates, but not a shield or spear was seen  among forty thousand in Israel. Judges 5:8 NASB “New gods were chosen; Then war was in the gates. Not a shield or a spear was seen Among forty thousand in Israel. NETNotes says the actual Hebrew is “He chose new gods”. Who were these “new elohim” that God chose?  They were the human beings Deborah and Barak during the time that Deborah was the Judge of Israel.

Mike, The context specfically mentions the story about how they needed “warriors” and what not until deborah arose.
Context mike, context.

again you have a fallacy in yourlogic.  We are talking about the IDENTITY of God, not the title.  Your focusing so much that “elohim” is only a title.
Im saying that though satan was called “god of this age” he was never a god.
and though “ceaser was worshiped as a god” he was never god.
Though david, or moses, or deborah, or judges, or kings, or rulers were ever called “Elohim” or “God” they were never truely GODS BECAUSE they were not SUPREME, they were not PERFECT, NOR SINLESS, NOR CREATED THE HEAVENS OR THE EARTH, NOR THE CREATOR.

This is why they are NOT GODS MIKE, and never were.
Its like trying to use a word in spanish, and depending on the way I use it, it would make sense to a spanish speaker.  But if i were to translate it to english it woudnt make sense, so i would have to change a few things, here and there, to make sense of it in english.

More netnotes for you
NET © Notes 1 tn The two verbs in this verse are synonyms: קָלַל (qalal) means “to treat lightly, curse,” and אָרַר (’arar) means “to curse.”

2 tn The word אֱלֹהִים (’elohim) is “gods” or “God.” If taken as the simple plural, it could refer to the human judges, as it has in the section of laws; this would match the parallelism in the verse. If it was taken to refer to God, then the idea of cursing God would be more along the line of blasphemy. B. Jacob says that the word refers to functioning judges, and that would indirectly mean God, for they represented the religious authority, and the prince the civil authority (Exodus, 708).p
This is why they were called Elohim mike.
If you can note, that The reference has deep meaning to it.
There is always a reason why.
Exodus 22:28
NETBible  “You must not blaspheme God  or curse the ruler of your people.
So who is who?  Is God solely used as a Title or a Identity?
You have the notes right there as a fair explantions of why other humans were called “elohim” becuase they compeletly represented Gods civil authority here on earth by Jacobs rule.

And it also makes sense beacuse Moses did the very same thing. He coudnt do it all by himself, so God commanded him to find judges and what not.

Point is mike, they were called Elohim for a reason, but of course were not Elohim himself, because they were merely human, they died like people, were not sinless, not the creator, nor were part of eternity since the beginning.

But you know what? Jesus was not merely human, he resurrected, was Sinless, Perfect, Creator, and was always part of Eternity because he was never created.

[SimplyForgiven]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 14 2011,05:32)

I love that Dennison, at the young age of 21, has such an in depth knowledge of scripture and spends his days thinking about God.  I love you and Jack for teaching me so many things about the scriptures and for being my catalyst to delve even deeper into them every day.  But at times like this, I start to wonder how you can HONESTLY claim “Jesus is God because he is called elohim or theos when you KNOW the words meant “leader” and were used for angels and men also.

Spending my days thinking about God doesnt save me Mike.
And The reason why is because you regard “Elohim” as just at title, and we are debating about “Elohim” as a Identity.

[Kangaroo Jack Jr.]

Quote

And The reason why is because you regard “Elohim” as just at title, and we are debating about “Elohim” as a Identity.

Boom! You got it SF. This is why Mike's definition of elohim works against him for if “elohim” simply means “ruler”, then God is not above Christ for Christ is the Sovereign Ruler. Christ is our only despotes which means “sovereign ruler” and there is no one that is above a sovereign ruler.

Mike is not a skillful thinker.

KJ

[Kangaroo Jack Jr.]

Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Jan. 14 2011,09:26)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 13 2011,17:17) Quote (Kangaroo Jack Jr. @ Jan. 14 2011,08:06) Kangaroo Jack Jr. vs. Mikeboll64 Roo Jr.       That is HILARIOUS!   And that's just like Roo to sneak up from behind…………like he tries to do with scripture!    He's always looking for a “backdoor” way in.  He's forever searching the Greek and Hebrew words for any possible way to make a scripture say “Jesus is God” when it doesn't.  And he doesn't care how many people who are quietly meditating on scripture beside a pond that he has to kick in from behind, hoping to cause them to stop speaking scriptural truth!   peace and love, mike Mike Come on. That is all untrue!

Keith,

It was meant for clowning around and Mike is taking it seriously.

Jack

[princess]

after all the debates,

i still ponder how man tries to name or label, invisible, immeasurable, eternal, pure, holy, incorrrupitible, perfection. the quality/quanity, where time cannot be appointed, one that does not receive anything from another. blessedness.

did not christ receive, ask, teach. the measuring rod that some use i think is either short, or way too long.

however, continue to debate the matter.

[Kangaroo Jack Jr.]

Quote (princess @ Jan. 14 2011,21:04)

after all the debates, i still ponder how man tries to name or label, invisible, immeasurable, eternal, pure, holy, incorrrupitible, perfection. the quality/quanity, where time cannot be appointed, one that does not receive anything from another. blessedness. did not christ receive, ask, teach. the measuring rod that some use i think is either short, or way too long. however, continue to debate the matter.

princess,

Your statement above essentially means that God is unknowable which is partially correct. That's why He had to become flesh so we could perceive Him.

KJ Jr.

[942767]

Hi WJ & Francis:

If God confirms what you are teaching with miracles and signs and wonders following as he did in the ministry of our Lord and the Apostles, then it is “Orthodox Christianity” otherwise it is not the church that the Lord established.

Love in Christ,
Marty

[francis]

Hello Marty…

Quote

If God confirms what you are teaching with miracles and signs and wonders following as he did in the ministry of our Lord and the Apostles, then it is “Orthodox Christianity” otherwise it is not the church that the Lord established.

Not sure why you wrote this.  

I will say this though, in my debate with Mike, it appeared he had an issue with the term “Orthodox Christianity”.  And since I didn't feel it was an important issue within the context of the debate he and I was having, I switched “Orthodox Christianity” with “Traditional Christianity”.  To me they both mean the same, but what I have been defending in my debate with Mike, is traditional Christianity.

And I personally believe that traditional Chrisianity is simply passing down the original teachings of Christ as given to His followers.

That is my opinion.

God Bless
Francis

[Kangaroo Jack Jr.]

Mike said to Francis:

Quote

I appreciate the fact that you stand and defend your beliefs and so I finally might get a chance to discuss some things that most of the trinitarians want to avoid.

Francis replied:

Quote

I don't see any of the trinitarians on the other thread avoiding you or any issue you've brought up.  So I'm not sure why you feel that you are finally getting a chance to discuss some things that most of the trinitarians want to avoid.  I just don't see the connection you're trying to make. Indeed, they are doing so well, that I'm not even sure why you and I are having this debate.  But I'm willing to continue, although everyone else on the other thread are also bursting at the seams and may come to a resolution far quicker than you and I in here because it is going fast and furious over there. Respectfully Francis

Francis,

This is to give you heads up. I have engaged with Mike in two debates in the debates section. In the beginning of the first debate Mike twice said “bravo” to my ability to defend my trinitarian beliefs. But when he found out his arguments were weak he just repeated them over and over again only wording them differently. I would not answer the same arguments over and over again. This is what he calls “hiding.”

Note that in the second debate “plural God” he started whining about the terms in the middle of it. He called me “under handed” on another thread though he agreed to the terms. Note also that Dennison was the judge of the second debate and he held Mike accountable to the terms of the debate.

When Mike does not like your answers he just says that you are “hiding.” And he whined about the terms we mutually agreed upon because he was getting his tush kicked. Only the loser whines.

And I am not surprised that you have seen through Mike's false claims.

Jack

[942767]

Quote (francis @ Jan. 15 2011,03:32)

Hello Marty… Quote If God confirms what you are teaching with miracles and signs and wonders following as he did in the ministry of our Lord and the Apostles, then it is “Orthodox Christianity” otherwise it is not the church that the Lord established. Not sure why you wrote this.   I will say this though, in my debate with Mike, it appeared he had an issue with the term “Orthodox Christianity”.  And since I didn't feel it was an important issue within the context of the debate he and I was having, I switched “Orthodox Christianity” with “Traditional Christianity”.  To me they both mean the same, but what I have been defending in my debate with Mike, is traditional Christianity. And I personally believe that traditional Chrisianity is simply passing down the original teachings of Christ as given to His followers. That is my opinion. God Bless Francis

Hi Francis:

Orthodox = right doctrine Traditional = “Trinity doctrine” which may or may not be right doctrine. God will not confirm something if it not His Word otherwise He would be a party to a lie.

Jesus did not teach “God in three persons”. He taught:

Quote

John 17 1These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee: 2As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him. 3And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

Love in Christ,
Marty

[Kangaroo Jack Jr.]

Marty wrote:

Quote

Jesus did not teach “God in three persons”.  He taught: John 17 1These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee: 2As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him. 3And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. Love in Christ, Marty

Marty,

First, your use of scripture is selective. Jesus indeed taught three persons

Quote

19 Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, Matthew 28:19

One name three persons.

Second, the prayer of Jesus to which you refer was spoken while He still existed in His state of humility. You left out the part “glorify Your Son….” Jesus is your Lord and your God now.

Third, you speak about God not being party to a lie. God is not a party to you because you speak from scripture selectively and you don't tell the whole story of Jesus. You are outside the truth.

Roo

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Jan. 13 2011,20:39)

Really guys?  Still nothing?  I'll post it a THIRD time.   Jack, prove that you're not running and hiding right now.  You seem to have plenty of time for ridicules………how about for one little answer? Scripture says our only one true God is THE FATHER.  How do you “include” the Son into this very specific statement? Jack, would you try to answer it?  Keith and SF, I would also be interested in your HONEST, SCRIPTURAL, and TO THE POINT answers. peace and love to all of you, mike

Mike

There you go again. Asking me the same question I have already answered here…

Now why don't you answer some of my questions found here 5th post down?

[Worshipping Jesus]

Quote (942767 @ Jan. 14 2011,12:00)

Jesus did not teach “God in three persons”.

Marty

You are wrong! Jesus said…

Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Matt 28:19

You can choose not to believe his words if you like. But do your research. This scripture is found in its tripart form in every extant manuscript and including the “Didache”.

Notice Jesus words right after that he says…

Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, [even] unto the end of the world. Amen. Matt 28:20

All true followers of Jesus teach “all things” that he had said including the fact that he mentions the three “the Father, the Son. and the Holy Spirit”, all having the definite article and a singular name. We know Hebrew names represented the character of the One who had it and we also know that the name Jesus is the name by which all are saved and it is in that name that all the authority and power and attributes of God dwell.

Blessings Keith

[Worshipping Jesus]

Hmmm!

I didn't see your post Jack!

WJ

[Author]

Posts