Results 21 - 26 of 26
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: believer57 Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
21 | Is God ONE or is God THREE? | James 2:19 | believer57 | 37301 | ||
Dear Tim, My name is David, beliver 57 is my father, by his permission I am writing this in response to your last post. Answers to the points you have made. *Your explanation for Elohiym; True Abraham means father of multitudes...but what does that have to do with the fact that Elohiym is plural? *You reject any post apostolic teaching on the trinity. Why then does Paul in his letters use the greeting "Grace be to you and peace from God the Father and from our Lord Jesus Christ"? Why wouldnt he just say "...peace from Jesus Christ our God"? What did Paul mean in II Corinthians 13:14? What did he mean in Galatians 4:4-6 by "...God sent forth His Son..."? Sounds to me like Paul(the Apostle) understood the trinity very well. *Three persons, one God.(old Test) -Gen 1:26 "...let Us create man in Our image, after our likeness...". Who do you think God was talking to? If you are going to use the "majestic plurality" excuse, I will be requiring examples from other Hebrew writings were this same figure of speach was used. -Psalm 2:7-8 "...Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee..." -Psalm 110:1 "The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool" (Let me get this straight, God was telling himself, to sit on his own right hand, until he made his own enemies, his own footstool?) **New Testament** -Mark 1:11 "...Thou art my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased" -John 14:28 "...my Father is greater than I." -John 12:49 "For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me..." -John 6:38 "For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me" -Matt 26:39 "...nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt." -John 16:13 "...he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak..." (note: the fact that the Holy Spirit speaks indicates a PERSONALITY) -John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God..." *Your figurative definition for Son of God was a stretch, I couldnt find it in Webster's, The American Heritage College Dictionary, Strongs Greek Dictionary/Lexicon(huios), Youngs Analitical Concordance to the Bible. Wouldnt you agree that by applying "figurative or allegorical" interpritation to scripture, one could force the text to mean anything?. *You often refered to the verses that point to the fact that Christ was in God and God was in Christ. -Yes, this points obviously to the unity of God -However it does not support your theory that there is not a Trinity. Ex: John 6:56 "He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him"...just because I am in Jesus and Jesus is in me, does this mean that I am not a seperate person from Jesus? *Final note, to you and others that may be reading these posts. Sabellianism/Modalism is a heresy(by that I mean "a controversial or unorthodox opinion or doctrine, contrary to accepted dogma of Christianity"). Also, the simple fact that you "nay-say" the teachings of the early church fathers, in itself is a characteristic of a false prophet(Jude 1:8 "...speak evil of dignities.")...is it not..mon ami? Now, why dont you understand the trinity? Either, I Corinthians 2:14, a demon spirit, or pride. You were probably tought this non-sence when you were a kid and are simply too pridful to consider the truth. It is amazing to me how many cultist will stay in denial just out of pride. When you finally say to God, not my will, but thine be done...thats when the truth will you like a ton of bricks. But you have to deny yourself before you can follow Jesus. Lastly, as far as the salvation of a modalist is concerned, thats not my job, but I can tell you that your skating on thin ice. The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost be with you, -Believer 50mmH.G.C. |
||||||
22 | Is God ONE or is God THREE? | James 2:19 | believer57 | 37387 | ||
Dear Tim, *Jude 1:8 is talking about false prophets, therefore "dignities" is clearly speaking of dignities in the church. By continualy dodging my "logical and thoghtful" commentary on your previous post, and not responding. As you mentioned I will consider your retreat, and failure to respond "tacit admission of inability to do so"(as you put it). Trinitarians-1...Modalist-0 Final note to those who might be following these post. You will notice anytime you are dealing with a cult member(EX: Jehovahs whitness, modalist, the way international, etc...). In a debate situation they will ultimatly do what our friend Tim here has done...that is run with their tail tucked. That is why it is so important to learn the Bible, and the foundational doctrines. Because the Bible is absolutly perfect and without error, and when you get familiar with foundational doctrines, dealing with cultist is very easy, because one cannot argue with the TRUTH, only rebel against it. God Bless, David/Beliver 50mmH.G.C. |
||||||
23 | Is God ONE or is God THREE? | James 2:19 | believer57 | 37452 | ||
Pastor, I think my son did an outstanding job of refuting modalism. I think this has gone on far enough. You are unwilling to bend, (I actually admire that), but are not correct in your theology. I have been praying for guidance with regards to heresies in the church. They abound around us. Sabellian was rightly labelled a heretic by people who knew scripture better than you or I, (and they were pre-Nicene creeed).This was the reason I quoted their sayings regarding modalism. It, in my belief, simply does not make sense, nor did it to them. I do not understand these "offshoot" theologies, but they are here and I am trying to. You make statements like "you must" and that is simply not true. We must adhere to the Word of God, and how the Holy Ghost reveals it to us. I see what you are trying to prove, but it just does not make any sense. You deceive yourself, my friend. The thought of mentioning an animal like Adolf Hitler, in the same sentence as some of our church fathers, tells me that you have reached the desperation point. Of course you adhere to the teaching of men, (Sabellian). You can do better that, can't you? We can argue all day over whether a fire truck is red or not, (it is), but this will get us no where. It is frustrating dealing with the heresies that have sprung up, but it is something that us Christians must do. I apologize if this debate got a little "spicey", but my son is zealous for his Lord and Saviour, and he is not very patient with those who choose to "spiritualize" text. The Word does NOT say Jesus prayed from one part of himself to another, but if that is what you see, then so be it. According to your theology, the Father suffered on the cross, (Patriapassianism). I am not buying, nor are most of us, (praise God!). I did not mean to assume the posture of personal attacks, but my son is correct in his assessment. I too, have engaged "unitarians", and other "modalists", and it ALWAYS gets down to accusations of personal attacks, when they are overwhelmed with scriptural evidence contrary to their theology. It also appears evident, that their theology is almost entirely based in the Pauline Letters. This is consistent with Peter's warning, (2 Peter 3:16). Paul's letters to the churches were in response to problems in the church, but were not meant as foundational doctrine. You should know this. Are his letters the inspired word? Absolutely. It appears that your "cornerstone" is Colossians 2:9. This is clearly an example of "spiritualizing" scripture. Paul did not mean that Jesus was the completeness of the Father, and the Holy Spirit, encapsulated, so that the other two are not co-existent. Of course not. He is declaring the deity of Christ, whom had been annointed with the Holy Spirit. How many times does Paul, along with the prophets, and Christ himself, tell us that He was SENT? Too many to respond to. I understand. Did Jesus tell us that He would SEND a part of himself? Of course not. All Three are alive and well, my friend."The Lord said unto my Lord..." Did I miss your response to that one? I thought so... ( My son's signature means 50 MM Holy Ghost Cannon!). He is an arrow in my quiver....And to think, he started off as a "unitarian".He is now a spirit-filled Christian, a member of a rather large, non-denominational church in San Antonio....The Truth is indeed powerful, and it will set you free.. Remember, you started this, (Is God one or three? Please, spare me the theatrics. This is what you wanted..). Problem is, I am a player, and will play all night.. I do hold the popular, traditional view, it has worked pretty good so far..Why don't you? Oh, ALL of us are wrong, and your small number is right? Seek and preach the Truth, your ministry will explode....You have passion, the harvest is plenty... we need labourers..Jump on, the hour is late... God Bless.....believer57 | ||||||
24 | Is God ONE or is God THREE? | James 2:19 | believer57 | 37858 | ||
Tim, Please allow me to "substantiate" my claims...again. *You dont preach anything other than that which was founded by the apostles... -Acts 10:38 "...God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power..."(The way I understand your theology, this verse should be translated "...God anointed his other half with himself..." -You never answered my questions regarding Pauls introductions, II Corinthians 13:14, and Galatians 4:4-6 "...God sent forth his Son...God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son...", once again...sounds to me like the apostles understood the Trinity very well. -Just a quick side note: Do you honestly not realize just how stupid the Bible would sound if you substituted "Body of God" for "Son of God"? Then I guess we could say "Body of Man" rather than "Son of man"...since we are taking a figurative look at scripture. *Once again...3 persons one God, The following is a quote from some of Derek Prince's commentary on the Trinity. "In God both oneness and plurality are eternally combined. This mystery confronts us in the opening verse of the Bible: "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." In the origional Hebrew, elohim(the word for "God")is plural in form, but the verb bara(created) is singular. In other words, both oneness and plurality are combined. Further on, in Genesis 1:26, we are again confronted with the combination of singular and plural in reference to God: "Then God said, 'Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness...'" The verb "said" is singular in form, but the pronouns "Us" and "Our" are plural. This combination of singular and plural in reference to God recurs in other passages of Scripture. The prophet Isaiah had a vision of the Lord on His throne and then heard Him say, "Whom shall I send, and who will go for Us?" The pronoun "I" implies that one Person is speaking, but the pronoun "Us" indicates that He is speaking on behalf of more than one Person." -Your responce to the 110th Psalm is correct, but you see, I dont need to understand the "duel nature" of Christ, to see that God the Father is talking to his Son. -You still haven't responded to the fact that Jesus said "O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt." Your theology insinuates that God denied his own will...to do his own will...that God ask himself if it is possible let this cup pass from himself??????????????????????????????????????? -You still haven't responded to my commentary on John 6:56...? *In closing, I am getting very tired of your rhetorical sleight of hand. Since I have stepped in all you have done is dodge my responces...ANSWER UP MODALIST!! What seminary did you attend? What denomination is your church? What church were you raised in? Why do you have such a problem with the orthodox Christian Church? Right now I would guess that you are either a "Oneness Pentecostal"(modalist)or an "Apostolic"(modalist), with a degree in psychology, who does't care to conform his omniscient opninion with doctrtinal statements of the majority of Americas seminaries because they teach the erronious doctrine of the trinity....ANSWER UP MODALIST!! Kind regards, David III |
||||||
25 | distinction.....scriptures and inspired | 2 Pet 3:16 | believer57 | 34011 | ||
This is a powerful message from Peter. Many Christians, (my humble opinion), place too much emphasis on the Pauline letters. They, like all of the Bible, are the inspired Word of God, but they are not Foundational Doctrine in and of themselves. Many cults primarily build their doctrine from Paul's writings, (i.e. the way international, not capitalized for emphasis). This passage from Peter was a warning..Paul mainly wrote "meat" and not "milk". He wrote in response to problems brought to his attention in these churches. How many times does he say, "I think.."? His letters are for advanced Christians, that have moved beyond "basics". Hebrews 5:12-14 discusses this. If a Christian is struggling with the "milk of the word", they are not ready for "meat". Paul's letters can be classified as "meat". They are after the Gospels, are they not? This is for a reason. Absorb, receive the Gospel, then move forward. Too many Christians, (per the warning of Peter), get bogged down in the Pauline letters and Revelation. Put these to the latter, and not former. Learn about the ministry of Christ, his plan of salvation, baptism, repentance, then move to "meat"..God bless.. | ||||||
26 | distinction.....scriptures and inspired | 2 Pet 3:16 | believer57 | 34547 | ||
Jules, Greetings my brother/sister in Christ! I apologize if I misrepresented myself regarding the Pauline Letters. They are absolutely, as is every word in our beloved Bible, the inspired Word of God. Remember Jesus quoting Deut.8:3 to Satan, when he tempted Him in the desert: "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by EVERY word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God". Every word in the Bible, is the "Word of God". I believe that there is some typology present in this scripture. "Bread" as used in Deut. refers to Christ.(John 6:51). I believe that this scripture tells us to live by the entire Bible, not just the NT. Now, referencing the Pauline Letters, They are, as is all of it, vital to the every day life of a Christian. I too, am a big fan of Colossians. The point that I, perhaps not too well, tried to make is that the Pauline Letters were written in response to problems brought to Paul's attention in the various churches. They, I believe, were not intended for use as Foundational Doctrine. They are for clarification, reproof, and instruction, (2 Tim.3:16). Foundational Doctrine is found primarily in the Torah, and the Gospels. There is "doctrine" found in the Letters, some of the more powerful scriptures in the Bible are found here, but not Foundational Doctrine. Many Christians, as I stated earlier, make the mistake of getting "hung up in the Letters", and this is what Peter was warning us about. When he referenced the "unlearned and unstable", he was referencing "baby" Christians. Babies need milk, not meat. When "baby" Christians try to digest meat, this will lead to their destruction. When looking to "build" your foundation, look first to the OT, then the gospels. Who is God? What/how does He feel about certain things? Why was His Son sent to us? Why do we need His Son? What is His plan of salvation? What is His will for my life? Desire ye the sincere milk of the Word! Remember, Jesus told us to "become as little children". James tells us "..be not many masters, knowing that we shall receive the greater condemnation", (James 3:1). I hope this helped. If I further confused you, please let me know! God bless you my friend...believer57 | ||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 ] |