- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Hi Andrew,
Ok, I will again go through your post and address each point.
you said:Quote I certainly have no problem with scripture and or any of the verses you posted other than a few that I believe have been misconstrued by the translators. So you admit that your ideas do not line up with all those scriptures as written, you have to change the wording, right? I don't. Why don't you show me which scriptures you think are 'misconstrued' and we will look at them.
Quote I certainly believe Christ is divine,He was conceived of the Holy Spirit and is the Son of God,the Lord and Christ and he is called God in scripture such as in Hebrews 1:9 Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.I noticed you quoted Heb1:8 but not vs9. I have no problem with vs. 9. That verse talks about being anointed as the mediatorial High Priest, not anointed to be God. The only way to be the divine God is to have existed eternally. You can't be anointed with divinity, the divinity of God is inherent…an attribute of original eternal nature. God, the Son became lower than the angels in order to become our High Priest. The office of High Priest was an office that He did not have previously and thus was anointed to.
Quote Now according to the trinitarian dogma God can't have a God because they are three equal persons,each being in and of themselves the one true God. And this is where you are wrong too. The creeds that the trinitarians are united by say that God the Father begot God the Son before the ages. See here:
Excerpt from the Nicene Creed:
We believe in one God,
the Father almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all things visible and invisible;
And in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
…the only begotten Son of God,
begotten from the Father before all ages,
light from light,
true God from true God,
begotten not made,
of one substance with the Father,…Excerpt from the Athanasius Creed:
…The Father is made of none: neither created nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone; not made, nor created, but begotten. The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Son: neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding…Quote When a person has to go to such absurd lengths as to posit the idea of divine amnesia and then just say Christ limited himself after realizing that doesn't work,trying to prove their untenable theology;what should that tell you about who is not understanding scripture properly. We are told that He emptied Himself to become a servant and exist in the form of man, even a baby. How could He truly be a baby if He held on to all His memories of His previous existence of being the only begotten God? I gave the suggestion that He gave His memories to the Father and then showed you how it is truly a possiblity to not remember your past and then gain the memory back little by little. I don't think that is absurd or far fetched, it happens to men all the time and in fact a friend has a son going through that right now.
Philippians 2:5 For, let this mind be in you that is also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal to God, 7 but did empty himself, the form of a servant having taken, in the likeness of men having been made, 8 and in fashion having been found as a man, he humbled himself, having become obedient unto death — death even of a cross, 9 wherefore, also, God did highly exalt him, and gave to him a name that is above every name, 10 that in the name of Jesus every knee may bow — of heavenlies, and earthlies, and what are under the earth — 11 and every tongue may confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
Quote All the confusing theological councils and debates would be unnecessary if we just accepted what scripture simply says. You have proved that wrong with your first sentence…you don't accept scripture as translated due to your bias. I await your scholarly translation because you know Greek and Hebrew, right? You must know Greek and or Hebrew better than the translators to make such statements that the translators are all wrong.
Quote The gospel of John is the most highly debated book of the bible over the issue of the trinity or Christ's divinity but what was the most important yet simple purpose of the author? John 20:31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name. Certainly this is a debated book and I dare say that you do not believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. He isn't anymore a son of God to you than Adam was. In fact He would be less a son of God than Adam was since He had an earthly mother but Adam had no earthly parents.
I truly believe that Jesus is the literal Son of God with God's eternal nature.
Blessings to you Andrew!
Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 30 2012,13:39) Quote (mikeboll @ 64) And if we were told that the First Adam has existed from eternity, would this mean the Second Adam – the one the first Adam begot at some time – has also existed from eternity? If the first Adam existed from eternity, then he would be God. If the second Adam was the son of the first Adam and had the exact nature as the first Adam, then the son would have existed from eternity also and be God also but as a son eternally existing within the first Adam.
If they both existed from eternity, then we wouldn't be able to even use the terms, “FIRST Adam” and “SECOND Adam” – for they would have BOTH been the “FIRST Adams”. They would have BOTH existed from the same time, making them BOTH the “first”.The word “second” means that one of them began his existence AFTER the “first” one. The fact that one came BEFORE the other is also implied by the terms “father”, “son”, and “begotten”.
Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 30 2012,14:39) Quote The reality is Jesus doesn't have a father and the Father doesn't have a son since they are both uncreated eternal Gods. Not if one was eternally within the other as an offspring.
Kathi, in what particular scripture can we read about Jesus being eternally within his Father and God?Quote (AndrewAD @ Sep. 30 2012,19:04) Revelation 13:8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.
Revelation 13:8
NASB ©
All who dwell on the earth will worship him, everyone whose name has not been written from the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who has been slain.NET ©
and all those who live on the earth will worship the beast, everyone whose name has not been written since the foundation of the world in the book of life belonging to the Lamb who was killed.NRSV ©
and all the inhabitants of the earth will worship it, everyone whose name has not been written from the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb that was slaughtered.Andrew, the above versions have translated 13:8 correctly. You can read Revelation 17:8 for confirmation.
Quote (AndrewAD @ Oct. 01 2012,15:04) Kathi,
My first question about this ancient Syriac document is if it was found with one of St.Peters teeth or an angel feather to help authenticate it.
Its interesting how the author uses Petrine and Johannine thought coupled with liturgical and much later theological expressions.Clearly something Peter would never preach.Compare with Acts 2:22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know: or
Acts 5:30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree.
Acts 5:31 Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins.
Christ was always preached as a man,the Christ,Lord and Saviour and never as God in the bible.And it's no surprise to find the words of the Eastern orthodox liturgy in this supposed sermon for they claim their liturgy and traditions such as icons and the worship of Mary,saints and angels all came from the apostles.And it's interesting how all these traditions from the apostles all came about after the Nicene creed.Jesus declared as God=Mother of God=saints and icons and statues;simply a natural progression.
And one of their beloved saints John of Damascus used this argument in favor of icons…
John replied to the criticism of it being unscriptural by admitting the fact, and adding that you will not find in scripture the Trinity, the homousian or the two natures of Christ either. But we know those doctrines are true. And so, having acknowledged that icons, the Trinity and the incarnation are innovations, John goes on to urge his reader to hold fast to them as venerable traditions delivered to us by the Fathers… a very good saint indeed
Wonderful post, Andrew!When Kathi first showed me that writing, I also seriously doubted that Peter ever wrote those words, and pointed out a few lines in it that contradicted what Peter said in scripture.
But you have addressed that writing in a far better way than I ever could have.
Good job and good points.
Quote (Lightenup @ Oct. 01 2012,22:45) Pierre,
This verse is translated in a variety of ways………..New International Version (©1984)
“Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever…..New Living Translation (©2007)
“Your throne, O God, endures forever and ever….New American Standard Bible (©1995)
“YOUR THRONE, O GOD, IS FOREVER AND EVER………King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever………International Standard Version (©2008)
“Your throne, O God, is forever and ever……Aramaic Bible in Plain English (©2010)
“Your throne, oh God, is to the eternity of eternities………
Don't forget the NWT version……………“God is your throne forever and ever…..
………a translation which is supported by footnote in the Trinitarian-produced CEV translation.
Also, don't forget about 1:9, which points out that the god mentioned in 1:8 has a God of his own – who set this other god above his companions. Surely God Almighty doesn't need to be set above His companions, right?
And finally, don't forget that this passage was originally a Psalm:
Psalm 45 NIV
6Your throne, O God,[c] will last for ever and ever;
a scepter of justice will be the scepter of your kingdom.
7 You love righteousness and hate wickedness;
therefore God, your God, has set you above your companions
by anointing you with the oil of joy.The NIV quoted above offers this for footnote [c];
Psalm 45:6
Here the king is addressed as God’s representative.Can we all see how far the apple falls from the tree when we place our WISHES over and above what the scriptures truly teach? How is it that in Ps 45, the word “god” refers to a king who is a REPRESENTATIVE of Jehovah………… but when those very same words are quoted in reference to Jesus, all of a sudden the scripture is saying Jesus IS God Almighty?
Quote (Lightenup @ Oct. 01 2012,22:45) ……the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David…. 1. Kathi, who is “the Lord God” mentioned here, since you preach that Jesus is the “Lord” part of God Almighty, and Jehovah is the “God” part of God Almighty?
2. God Almighty will receive the throne of HIS FATHER, King David? God has a human being as His father? And God Almighty will be GIVEN this throne? Who is it that GIVES God Almighty a throne?
Quote (Lightenup @ Oct. 01 2012,22:54) Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 01 2012,20:04) Kathi Tit 2:13, 14
…while we wait for the blessed hope—the glorious appearing of “our great God and Savior”, Jesus Christ, Who gave himself for us, “that he (Jesus) might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works”.should it not be “OUR GREAT GOD and SAVIOR JESUS CHRIST ” who gave himself for us.?
is this not more inline with all the scriptures
Pierre,
I believe that it is correct with the comma to indicate that Jesus Christ is both our great God and Savior.
But the structure of the scripture could easily be translated as “the glorious appearing of our great God, and of our Savior Jesus Christ”, since “savior”, “Christ”, and “Jesus” are also written in the genitive form – just like “God” is.Either way it works out, for Jesus IS called “god” in scripture, and he IS called “savior”.
Neither of these facts mean that Jesus is the very God he is the Son of, though. Nor does being called “god” or “savior” in scripture mean that that person is the Most High God.
Just refer back to the green footnote in my last post, where the NIV scholars reckon that “god” in Psalm 45 refers to a REPRESENTATIVE of Jehovah. It is only when this word “god” is used of Jesus that these scholars fall away from their previous ruling, and decide that it means “God Almighty”. Can anyone say “bias”?
Quote (AndrewAD @ Oct. 02 2012,01:09) Now according to the trinitarian dogma God can't have a God because they are three equal persons,each being in and of themselves the one true God.But this verse says God does have a God.
Another good post, Andrew.What you say is true of “real” Trinitarians, since they believe in ONE God, who consists of three persons.
Kathi finds another way around this dilemma you pointed out…………. she believes in TWO, completely individual Almighty Gods – “God Almighty the Father”, and “God Almighty the Son”.
Quote (Lightenup @ Oct. 02 2012,08:04) Certainly this is a debated book and I dare say that you do not believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God.
Really? Are you saying that unless Andrew believes Jesus is God Almighty, he can't believe Jesus is the Son of and Anointed One of God Almighty?
Kathi, why must we believe Jesus is the Most High God in order to believe he is the Son of the Most High God – like the scriptures actually teach? (Mark 5:7, Luke 1:32, 8:28)
Quote (Lightenup @ Oct. 03 2012,01:04) Hi Andrew,
Ok, I will again go through your post and address each point.
you said:Quote I certainly have no problem with scripture and or any of the verses you posted other than a few that I believe have been misconstrued by the translators. So you admit that your ideas do not line up with all those scriptures as written, you have to change the wording, right? I don't. Why don't you show me which scriptures you think are 'misconstrued' and we will look at them.
Quote I certainly believe Christ is divine,He was conceived of the Holy Spirit and is the Son of God,the Lord and Christ and he is called God in scripture such as in Hebrews 1:9 Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.I noticed you quoted Heb1:8 but not vs9. I have no problem with vs. 9. That verse talks about being anointed as the mediatorial High Priest, not anointed to be God. The only way to be the divine God is to have existed eternally. You can't be anointed with divinity, the divinity of God is inherent…an attribute of original eternal nature. God, the Son became lower than the angels in order to become our High Priest. The office of High Priest was an office that He did not have previously and thus was anointed to.
Quote Now according to the trinitarian dogma God can't have a God because they are three equal persons,each being in and of themselves the one true God. And this is where you are wrong too. The creeds that the trinitarians are united by say that God the Father begot God the Son before the ages. See here:
Excerpt from the Nicene Creed:
We believe in one God,
the Father almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all things visible and invisible;
And in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
…the only begotten Son of God,
begotten from the Father before all ages,
light from light,
true God from true God,
begotten not made,
of one substance with the Father,…Excerpt from the Athanasius Creed:
…The Father is made of none: neither created nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone; not made, nor created, but begotten. The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Son: neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding…Quote When a person has to go to such absurd lengths as to posit the idea of divine amnesia and then just say Christ limited himself after realizing that doesn't work,trying to prove their untenable theology;what should that tell you about who is not understanding scripture properly. We are told that He emptied Himself to become a servant and exist in the form of man, even a baby. How could He truly be a baby if He held on to all His memories of His previous existence of being the only begotten God? I gave the suggestion that He gave His memories to the Father and then showed you how it is truly a possiblity to not remember your past and then gain the memory back little by little. I don't think that is absurd or far fetched, it happens to men all the time and in fact a friend has a son going through that right now.
Philippians 2:5 For, let this mind be in you that is also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal to God, 7 but did empty himself, the form of a servant having taken, in the likeness of men having been made, 8 and in fashion having been found as a man, he humbled himself, having become obedient unto death — death even of a cross, 9 wherefore, also, God did highly exalt him, and gave to him a name that is above every name, 10 that in the name of Jesus every knee may bow — of heavenlies, and earthlies, and what are under the earth — 11 and every tongue may confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
Quote All the confusing theological councils and debates would be unnecessary if we just accepted what scripture simply says. You have proved that wrong with your first sentence…you don't accept scripture as translated due to your bias. I await your scholarly translation because you know Greek and Hebrew, right? You must know Greek and or Hebrew better than the translators to make such statements that the translators are all wrong.
Quote The gospel of John is the most highly debated book of the bible over the issue of the trinity or Christ's divinity but what was the most important yet simple purpose of the author? John 20:31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name. Certainly this is a debated book and I dare say that you do not believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. He isn't anymore a son of God to you than Adam was. In fact He would be less a son of God than Adam was since He had an earthly mother but Adam had no earthly parents.
I truly believe that Jesus is the literal Son of God with God's eternal nature.
Blessings to you Andrew!
No I don't know Hebrew or Greek,just have different translations and have read different articles about the way verses are translated,coupled with the fact that the translators are trinitarians.I'm sure I'm the only one that has any type of bias though
Could you please explain for me begotten before time and begotten not made? I've never quite understood what these words mean.It seems like made but not made? I just don't get it.
I dare say I do believe He is the literal Son of God based on these words NASB Lk1:35 The angel answered and said to her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; and for that reason the [a]holy Child shall be called the Son of God.
And if you wish to damn me like your Catholic and Calvinist brethren that's up to you.I know I have a Saviour in heaven.
If you wish to respond to me here thats fine and if not,thats fine too but I wish no more communication with you on this forum.Thanks But blessings to you as well!Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 03 2012,03:37) Quote (AndrewAD @ Oct. 02 2012,01:09) Now according to the trinitarian dogma God can't have a God because they are three equal persons,each being in and of themselves the one true God.But this verse says God does have a God.
Another good post, Andrew.What you say is true of “real” Trinitarians, since they believe in ONE God, who consists of three persons.
Kathi finds another way around this dilemma you pointed out…………. she believes in TWO, completely individual Almighty Gods – “God Almighty the Father”, and “God Almighty the Son”.
yes the rules and the truth always changes as you go alongQuote (Lightenup @ Oct. 02 2012,22:26) Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 01 2012,19:53) Kathi Quote Jude 1:4
For certain persons have crept in unnoticed, those who were long beforehand marked out for this condemnation, ungodly persons who turn the grace of our God into licentiousness and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ.do you believe that what it says is related to individuals or to a class of individuals
Pierre,
It seems to indicate individuals in that context of Jude 1.
Khow is that ?? Peter say something similar ,so you believed that people are not born equal
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 03 2012,02:53) Quote (AndrewAD @ Sep. 30 2012,19:04) Revelation 13:8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.
Revelation 13:8
NASB ©
All who dwell on the earth will worship him, everyone whose name has not been written from the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who has been slain.NET ©
and all those who live on the earth will worship the beast, everyone whose name has not been written since the foundation of the world in the book of life belonging to the Lamb who was killed.NRSV ©
and all the inhabitants of the earth will worship it, everyone whose name has not been written from the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb that was slaughtered.Andrew, the above versions have translated 13:8 correctly. You can read Revelation 17:8 for confirmation.
Hey Mike,I've noticed most of the newer translations have it worded that way while most of the older versions have the other while the NASB has it the newer way with or-the older way- in the footnote.
I have a Concordant Literal that's supposed to be like near Greek without knowing Greek and it has it the older way.
I get the feeling the newer versions have it that way for their own soteriological bent but I could be wrong.
Either way I believe it means the same since it's the Lambs book,Rev:21:27.And he wouldn't be called the Lamb except he's meant to be sacrificed for those redeemed in his book.Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 03 2012,02:57) Quote (AndrewAD @ Oct. 01 2012,15:04) Kathi,
My first question about this ancient Syriac document is if it was found with one of St.Peters teeth or an angel feather to help authenticate it.
Its interesting how the author uses Petrine and Johannine thought coupled with liturgical and much later theological expressions.Clearly something Peter would never preach.Compare with Acts 2:22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know: or
Acts 5:30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree.
Acts 5:31 Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins.
Christ was always preached as a man,the Christ,Lord and Saviour and never as God in the bible.And it's no surprise to find the words of the Eastern orthodox liturgy in this supposed sermon for they claim their liturgy and traditions such as icons and the worship of Mary,saints and angels all came from the apostles.And it's interesting how all these traditions from the apostles all came about after the Nicene creed.Jesus declared as God=Mother of God=saints and icons and statues;simply a natural progression.
And one of their beloved saints John of Damascus used this argument in favor of icons…
John replied to the criticism of it being unscriptural by admitting the fact, and adding that you will not find in scripture the Trinity, the homousian or the two natures of Christ either. But we know those doctrines are true. And so, having acknowledged that icons, the Trinity and the incarnation are innovations, John goes on to urge his reader to hold fast to them as venerable traditions delivered to us by the Fathers… a very good saint indeed
Wonderful post, Andrew!When Kathi first showed me that writing, I also seriously doubted that Peter ever wrote those words, and pointed out a few lines in it that contradicted what Peter said in scripture.
But you have addressed that writing in a far better way than I ever could have.
Good job and good points.
Actually I've read that before many years ago when I attended a couple classes at the Antiochion Orthodox Church down the street and read a book on reasons to accept their faith.I looked into the church a bit and felt tempted to join for the food alone;there's some wealthy Greeks who can really put on a wonderful spread.
But when they brought out the icons I literally felt sick to my stomach-it was eerie and I actually sensed the presence of Satan.Needless to say I've never been back.
But this document is just another among thousands of bogus concoctions invented after Nicea.Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 03 2012,03:37) Quote (AndrewAD @ Oct. 02 2012,01:09) Now according to the trinitarian dogma God can't have a God because they are three equal persons,each being in and of themselves the one true God.But this verse says God does have a God.
Another good post, Andrew.What you say is true of “real” Trinitarians, since they believe in ONE God, who consists of three persons.
If I understand the trinity doctrine correctly they do teach Jesus was 100% God and 100% man at the same time on earth and in heaven right?
And if there are three equal persons(gods) that make one God,then where or how do they get their rank? I've even heard and read that the three had a council in heaven and decided who would be who.
Does this not sound like acting to you? picking and playing a role?
Now I realize this role playing is just mens talk and such is not found in the creeds but isn't that the only thing that makes any sense?
In my studies on the trinity I haven't heard or read role playing brought up but these are my own thoughts.
In modalism we have one God playing three different roles whereas in trinitarianism we have three different persons or Gods playing individual roles since they are by nature each an Almighty God.
So when Jesus says in Mk10:6 God made them male and female,he could have just as well said I made them male and female.
Then in the parallel passage of Mat 19:4 he says He made them male and female which seems to exclude himself and point to another.
In Marks passage it could be said that when he said God made them he was really including himself too,but in Matthews passage how can he honestly say “He” made them and still be the God that did it unless he's just acting like a human? a god in a human suit that is acting like a man.Either he's a dishonest man,or an honest man and a dishonest god,or his statements are true and false at the same time-like true according to the human nature but false according to the God nature or he's actually an honest human messiah.
Does it seem to you that trinitarianism does make God an actor like modalism does only in a different way? or am I missing something? The examples could go on and on but I'm interested to know your thoughts on this.Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 02 2012,10:36) Quote (Lightenup @ Sep. 30 2012,13:39) Quote (mikeboll @ 64) And if we were told that the First Adam has existed from eternity, would this mean the Second Adam – the one the first Adam begot at some time – has also existed from eternity? If the first Adam existed from eternity, then he would be God. If the second Adam was the son of the first Adam and had the exact nature as the first Adam, then the son would have existed from eternity also and be God also but as a son eternally existing within the first Adam.
If they both existed from eternity, then we wouldn't be able to even use the terms, “FIRST Adam” and “SECOND Adam” – for they would have BOTH been the “FIRST Adams”. They would have BOTH existed from the same time, making them BOTH the “first”.The word “second” means that one of them began his existence AFTER the “first” one. The fact that one came BEFORE the other is also implied by the terms “father”, “son”, and “begotten”.
THINK Mike
Adam means man. Was Jesus a man before He came as a man?Quote (AndrewAD @ Oct. 02 2012,20:02) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 03 2012,03:37) Quote (AndrewAD @ Oct. 02 2012,01:09) Now according to the trinitarian dogma God can't have a God because they are three equal persons,each being in and of themselves the one true God.But this verse says God does have a God.
Another good post, Andrew.What you say is true of “real” Trinitarians, since they believe in ONE God, who consists of three persons.
Kathi finds another way around this dilemma you pointed out…………. she believes in TWO, completely individual Almighty Gods – “God Almighty the Father”, and “God Almighty the Son”.
yes the rules and the truth always changes as you go along
Actually this has been taught in the Bible and the early church. What has changed is terminology and the twisting of truth has misconstrued the truth. What would you expect with satan prowling around seeking whom he can devour? He hates the fact that Jesus is the Son of God. Now, we have a smorgasbord of sons to choose from. Which one would be the Son in the most literal, highest sense?For instance, Mike believes in the pre-existent Son of God and you don't believe in a pre-existent Son of God. He hasn't let you see that side of him though, yet.
Maybe you should ask him to show you his database of scriptures that claim the pre-existence of the Son of God. He has several verses.
Quote Kathi finds another way around this dilemma you pointed out…………. she believes in TWO, completely individual Almighty Gods – “God Almighty the Father”, and “God Almighty the Son”. Mike will say things like this in the quote. Let me ask you to think here…Is the Father called God? Is the Son called God? Does the Son have everything that the Father have?
Now for the bottomline:
Do you know of a mightier Father?
Do you know of a mightier Son?
If not, is the Father the mightiest Father, the Almighty Father?
Is the Son the mightiest Son, the Almighty Son?If you say no, then can you show me a Father or Son who is a mightier Father or Son?
If you can see that there is no mightier Father or mightier Son and that both are referred to as God, then it is obvious that we have one almighty God who is the Father and one almighty God who is the Son.
Would the two be in unity since they are perfect, or would the two be in dis-unity if they are both perfect?
Two perfect persons would be in unity or they would cease to be perfect, if you think about it.
BTW, where in the world did you get the idea that I was 'damning' you? I am challenging you Andrew and trying to help you see that you have not got the correct view of the trinity according to the creeds. What you describe is a twisted view and no wonder you are so put off by it. I showed you that what you have described disagrees with those excerpts from the creeds.
Andrew you asked me this:
Quote Could you please explain for me begotten before time and begotten not made? I've never quite understood what these words mean.It seems like made but not made? I just don't get it. Yes, I can explain but I will do it here where we are not disturbed any further:
Quote (AndrewAD @ Oct. 03 2012,16:42) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 03 2012,02:57) Quote (AndrewAD @ Oct. 01 2012,15:04) Kathi,
My first question about this ancient Syriac document is if it was found with one of St.Peters teeth or an angel feather to help authenticate it.
Its interesting how the author uses Petrine and Johannine thought coupled with liturgical and much later theological expressions.Clearly something Peter would never preach.Compare with Acts 2:22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know: or
Acts 5:30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree.
Acts 5:31 Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins.
Christ was always preached as a man,the Christ,Lord and Saviour and never as God in the bible.And it's no surprise to find the words of the Eastern orthodox liturgy in this supposed sermon for they claim their liturgy and traditions such as icons and the worship of Mary,saints and angels all came from the apostles.And it's interesting how all these traditions from the apostles all came about after the Nicene creed.Jesus declared as God=Mother of God=saints and icons and statues;simply a natural progression.
And one of their beloved saints John of Damascus used this argument in favor of icons…
John replied to the criticism of it being unscriptural by admitting the fact, and adding that you will not find in scripture the Trinity, the homousian or the two natures of Christ either. But we know those doctrines are true. And so, having acknowledged that icons, the Trinity and the incarnation are innovations, John goes on to urge his reader to hold fast to them as venerable traditions delivered to us by the Fathers… a very good saint indeed
Wonderful post, Andrew!When Kathi first showed me that writing, I also seriously doubted that Peter ever wrote those words, and pointed out a few lines in it that contradicted what Peter said in scripture.
But you have addressed that writing in a far better way than I ever could have.
Good job and good points.
Actually I've read that before many years ago when I attended a couple classes at the Antiochion Orthodox Church down the street and read a book on reasons to accept their faith.I looked into the church a bit and felt tempted to join for the food alone;there's some wealthy Greeks who can really put on a wonderful spread.
But when they brought out the icons I literally felt sick to my stomach-it was eerie and I actually sensed the presence of Satan.Needless to say I've never been back.
But this document is just another among thousands of bogus concoctions invented after Nicea.
That document was Aramaic, not Greek. Look to the Aramaic Christian church and see their view of the trinity. It is slightly different than what you seem to misunderstand.Quote (AndrewAD @ Oct. 03 2012,15:42) I looked into the church a bit and felt tempted to join for the food alone;there's some wealthy Greeks who can really put on a wonderful spread.
It is said that the way to a man's heart is through his stomach!Quote (AndrewAD @ Oct. 03 2012,15:42) But this document is just another among thousands of bogus concoctions invented after Nicea.
Agreed.Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 02 2012,21:22) Quote (Lightenup @ Oct. 02 2012,22:26) Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 01 2012,19:53) Kathi Quote Jude 1:4
For certain persons have crept in unnoticed, those who were long beforehand marked out for this condemnation, ungodly persons who turn the grace of our God into licentiousness and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ.do you believe that what it says is related to individuals or to a class of individuals
Pierre,
It seems to indicate individuals in that context of Jude 1.
Khow is that ?? Peter say something similar ,so you believed that people are not born equal
People were born equally able to accept or deny our only Master/Savior and Lord, Jesus Christ. The realization that some would deny was Him was determined before the foundation of the world.In Jude, it speaks of 'certain persons' which doesn't sound like an organization.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
