Trinity - Bible Teaching or Doctrine of Man

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
981

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
This “Re-formulated positively,” statement at 846 should be all the evidence anyone needs of the man made synthetic fabric of the impotent RCC. Anybody who thinks this was always what was meant by “Outside the Church there is no salvation” is willfully lying to themselves or an imbecile. Who does and doesn’t go to heaven and whether clearly unsaved pagans can be identified has changed.

Pat’s right, or so it appears. The RCC has declared the incomprehensibly holy God a hip n groovy dood who just accepts people doing the best they know how despite clear and unmistakable biblical evidence to the contrary. Wadda joke, and a bad one at that. How can anybody believe the Holy One of Israel could have anything to do with this feel good psychobabble.

But wait, we have not yet been treated to Chris’s response which will surely dig up some long convoluted explanation that contradicts all this, but not really. You just need to achieve a “higher understanding” provided in a load of ritual and religion and it’s all good.

OR, OR, OR, you can just accept the simple statements of scripture, accessible to a child, that all are born dead and those and only those who believe with their heart and confess with their mouth that Jesus Christ is Lord will be saved and that a flagrantly sinful life and or fatally heretical gospel evince the absence of saving grace.

See that’s what Paul preached. That’s What Peter preached and James and John and Stephen and Barnabas and Timothy and Titus. It wasn’t until the 20th century that we learn from that satanic lie in Rome that actually all kinds of religious and well meaning people are in God’s saving favor because… it feels good? Even they didn’t always believe that. In fact for most of the church age the RCC did not teach this. It’s now “reformulated positively”.

That’s what will be paid for Pat. Millions and millions of wailing lost souls will eternally die with the knowledge that that Molech in the vatican lied to them.[/quote]

Thanks for proving my point. You utter ignorance and nonsensical ramblings about the RCC prove you know nothing about it. Second, you pass judgment on the practitioners of the faith simply based on hate not fact.
At the bottom of each page is scriptural references for everything discussed in the that section. Look it up. There is a reason that is in there, Paul said it in Romans.

I don’t mind discussing things, but they have to be actual things, not made up hate filled passions.
The church you loath was created by Christ himself. The New testament was created by the church you loath. The Bible cannon was assembled by the Church you hate.
It’s in the bible, look it up.

If I am going to hell for my faith, I’ll see you there bud. Simply confessing that Jesus is Lord is a foregone conclusion for us, if you don’t believe that already, there is no point in going to church. It’s not enough. You gotta act right too.

[/quote]

does a dance

The Gospel According to Mark says, “He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned” and in the Gospel According to John, Jesus concurs, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of the water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God”; however, Paul strengthens the point that, “without faith it is impossible to please him. For whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him” and let it be said that we must believe as St. Fulgentius points out on his sermon on the Faith 1, Faith makes a relationship with God possible. Faith is the foundation of everything and the beginning of human salvation. Apart from the faith, one can neither be numbered among the sons of God nor obtain the grace of justification. Without faith, every human effort is empty.

Protestants misuse the same lines to show that they don’t need the Church or the authority of the Church (which I contest that these Protestants that deny authority of the Church are denying the authority of man to think), that we show that if a pagan on a desolate island yet has faith in the one true God, and does His will, he can be saved.[/quote]

What part of the Church you think disagrees with the referred scripture? Again you are making false allegations. There is nothing about the church that disagrees with the scriptures…So guess what? Making shit up out of thin air doesn’t really count as an argument.[/quote]

You talking to me or Tirib, because I don’t think I disagreed with you.[/quote]

tirib…

982

[quote]pat wrote:
<<< I didn’t take it in offense. I took this “Poor chap has no one supporting him” to mean something like “gang up”, but inflection isn’t well translated in forums.
I agree reconciliation without feeling the need to change one another, or declaring one’s faith an abomination is the best option. I have learned a lot about my faith from protestants. It is my opinion that sharing each others understanding of faith helps both parties…

Yes, I got what you wrote and I agree. We can be unified in Christ with out being like each other…
[/quote]That’s very ecumenical and open and tolerant of you. Everything the gospel is not. Which is my point.

983

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:
<<< Paul said it in Romans. >>>[/quote]No, Paul did not say it in Romans. Paul said the exact opposite in the 2nd of Romans, declaring a further exposition of his revelation of universal culpability (law unto themselves) from the 1st chapter. He is proclaiming the truth that every last single human since Adam is without excuse and equally damned in him in whom all died (1st Corinthians 15.) because God in His unquestionable justice has made it plain even to the deniers in this thread. I’ve quoted that passage in Romans 1 til I’m blue in the fingers.

In fact the whole book of Romans stands as a blaring indictment of that satanic, damnable doctrine of ignorance which is an abhorrent insult to the holiness and light of the most high God. I just gave you a clear example, like I have many times before, but that won’t stop you from jumping up and down and demanding that I stop running down the RCC and being hateful and come up with some proof. Why can you not see the crystal clear truths spelled out in the written Word of God Himself? Because you are just as dead as the atheists you argue with here.

This is just one way I know. Your profane abuse of the grace of the risen savior in telling universally recognized utter heretics and practicing Christ hating sodomites that God accepts them is unmistakable. You thereby display both your alienation from God and slap happy true hatred for those you lie to. You say I hate you? You lie. I say YOU hate THEM because you lead them to believe a lie that will cost them eternity if persisted in til the end. I care about them… and you. I won’t do that to them or you to make myself feel better in the name of some pagan god who is no god at all.

One thing I know for sure. We are not practicing the same gospel. We don’t even speak the same spiritual language. I would have much more respect for the RCC of old that actually had some testicles and would have gladly told me I was damned and burned me at the stake. You have no idea how nauseating it is to have you try n force filth and heresy down God’s throat by declaring clean that which He clearly condemns. If your church was actually Christ’s I should be on that list. As it is if she ever did bear any fragrance of the resurrection she has long since forfeited it and the scriptures she did indeed give us stand ironically as her loudest hostile witness.

All that said? One more time. There will be some catholics in heaven and folks from my church and every other good one in hell. You people just do not frickin get it which I expect, but it still frustrates me.

How did I get into this again? =[
[/quote]

Rom 2:12-24. Reread, preferable not a bastardized translation, like King James. The ESV reads:

“[God’s Judgment and the Law]
[12] For all who have sinned without the law will also perish without the law, and all who have sinned under the law will be judged by the law. [13] For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified. [14] For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. [15] They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them [16] on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus.
(Romans 2:12-16 ESV)”

I hate pasting scriptures…

Again making shit up out of thin air does not count as an argument. You can hate it, but if you want to discuss it, bring up real things, not made up stuff. We’re not that dumb and you continue to prove you rally out of complete ignorance and not fact.

And when did God make you his judge? I thought that was Jesus’s job. You know Catholics are going to hell? Tell me, then how many?

If I am going your going with me…[/quote]And around we go again. Really. I have stuff to do.
EDIT: I have not directly quoted the KJV even once the entire time I’ve been on this site, but what difference does it make?

984

This is from a dear big brother who is older than I am both naturally and in the Lord. I always know he’s watchin though he rarely posts, but every so often he drops me a PM. I greatly love and respect this man though we’ve never met and I’m sure we have a few differences.

He wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris stated,

“…God demands sacrifice…”

True, but not always and as long as it does not involve strange fire, for Samuel stated, “…to obey is better than sacrifice…” (I Sam. 15:22).

Obeying God’s word from the heart is better than any outward form of worship, service to God, or personal sacrifice. The RCC’s sin is in placing its own conception (tradition of man) of what is right above Biblical revelation; this sin will likewise be the focal point of the final apostasy predicted for the period just before Jesus returns to the earth. Worship, prayer, praise, spiritual gifts, and service to God is worthless in His sight if not accompanied by explicit obedience to Him and His righteous standards found in His Holy Word.

Hold fast the faith without wavering for His return will soon be upon us (Heb. 10:23,25), MARANATHA. [/quote]Maranatha indeed!! and the sooner the better (that’s pretty selfish I know, I’m a bit worn out today)

985

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:
<<< I didn’t take it in offense. I took this “Poor chap has no one supporting him” to mean something like “gang up”, but inflection isn’t well translated in forums.
I agree reconciliation without feeling the need to change one another, or declaring one’s faith an abomination is the best option. I have learned a lot about my faith from protestants. It is my opinion that sharing each others understanding of faith helps both parties…

Yes, I got what you wrote and I agree. We can be unified in Christ with out being like each other…
[/quote]That’s very ecumenical and open and tolerant of you. Everything the gospel is not. Which is my point.
[/quote]

Which is either a misunderstanding on your part or you’re lying. Show me, in the gospel where Jesus says that only protestants are pleasing to God and all others are damned strait to hell.

Let’s see who Jesus hung out with, hookers, tax collectors, lepers, poor, blind, smelly, adulterers, sinners of every kind…Yup, sounds like an intolerant dick to me!

The gospels are certainly not tolerant of arrogance and willful ignorance, see the 7 woe’s to the Pharisees, they thought they were right and everybody else was wrong too and they also had no point.
Make a point that exists, just one, even a small one.

986

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:
<<< Paul said it in Romans. >>>[/quote]No, Paul did not say it in Romans. Paul said the exact opposite in the 2nd of Romans, declaring a further exposition of his revelation of universal culpability (law unto themselves) from the 1st chapter. He is proclaiming the truth that every last single human since Adam is without excuse and equally damned in him in whom all died (1st Corinthians 15.) because God in His unquestionable justice has made it plain even to the deniers in this thread. I’ve quoted that passage in Romans 1 til I’m blue in the fingers.

In fact the whole book of Romans stands as a blaring indictment of that satanic, damnable doctrine of ignorance which is an abhorrent insult to the holiness and light of the most high God. I just gave you a clear example, like I have many times before, but that won’t stop you from jumping up and down and demanding that I stop running down the RCC and being hateful and come up with some proof. Why can you not see the crystal clear truths spelled out in the written Word of God Himself? Because you are just as dead as the atheists you argue with here.

This is just one way I know. Your profane abuse of the grace of the risen savior in telling universally recognized utter heretics and practicing Christ hating sodomites that God accepts them is unmistakable. You thereby display both your alienation from God and slap happy true hatred for those you lie to. You say I hate you? You lie. I say YOU hate THEM because you lead them to believe a lie that will cost them eternity if persisted in til the end. I care about them… and you. I won’t do that to them or you to make myself feel better in the name of some pagan god who is no god at all.

One thing I know for sure. We are not practicing the same gospel. We don’t even speak the same spiritual language. I would have much more respect for the RCC of old that actually had some testicles and would have gladly told me I was damned and burned me at the stake. You have no idea how nauseating it is to have you try n force filth and heresy down God’s throat by declaring clean that which He clearly condemns. If your church was actually Christ’s I should be on that list. As it is if she ever did bear any fragrance of the resurrection she has long since forfeited it and the scriptures she did indeed give us stand ironically as her loudest hostile witness.

All that said? One more time. There will be some catholics in heaven and folks from my church and every other good one in hell. You people just do not frickin get it which I expect, but it still frustrates me.

How did I get into this again? =[
[/quote]

Rom 2:12-24. Reread, preferable not a bastardized translation, like King James. The ESV reads:

“[God’s Judgment and the Law]
[12] For all who have sinned without the law will also perish without the law, and all who have sinned under the law will be judged by the law. [13] For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified. [14] For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. [15] They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them [16] on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus.
(Romans 2:12-16 ESV)”

I hate pasting scriptures…

Again making shit up out of thin air does not count as an argument. You can hate it, but if you want to discuss it, bring up real things, not made up stuff. We’re not that dumb and you continue to prove you rally out of complete ignorance and not fact.

And when did God make you his judge? I thought that was Jesus’s job. You know Catholics are going to hell? Tell me, then how many?

If I am going your going with me…[/quote]And around we go again. Really. I have stuff to do.
EDIT: I have not directly quoted the KJV even once the entire time I’ve been on this site, but what difference does it make?
[/quote]

King James is well known for it’s translational errors. That’s why. It was a Bible rewritten for the purpose of serving man.

Go do your stuff, and do some research while your at it. Maybe you’ll find something you don’t like that actually exist. I think it’s a pretty simple request. Argue against something that exists, not made up shit.

I don’t have to make stuff up to make my points, I am not sure why you do. You would be wasting less time if you were even remotely accurate.

987

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
This is from a dear big brother who is older than I am both naturally and in the Lord. I always know he’s watchin though he rarely posts, but every so often he drops me a PM. I greatly love and respect this man though we’ve never met and I’m sure we have a few differences.

He wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris stated,

“…God demands sacrifice…”

True, but not always and as long as it does not involve strange fire, for Samuel stated, “…to obey is better than sacrifice…” (I Sam. 15:22).

Obeying God’s word from the heart is better than any outward form of worship, service to God, or personal sacrifice. The RCC’s sin is in placing its own conception (tradition of man) of what is right above Biblical revelation; this sin will likewise be the focal point of the final apostasy predicted for the period just before Jesus returns to the earth. Worship, prayer, praise, spiritual gifts, and service to God is worthless in His sight if not accompanied by explicit obedience to Him and His righteous standards found in His Holy Word.

Hold fast the faith without wavering for His return will soon be upon us (Heb. 10:23,25), MARANATHA. [/quote]Maranatha indeed!! and the sooner the better (that’s pretty selfish I know, I’m a bit worn out today) [/quote]

Okay fine, show me where this “he RCC’s sin is in placing its own conception (tradition of man) of what is right above Biblical revelation; this sin will likewise be the focal point of the final apostasy predicted for the period just before Jesus returns to the earth.” is true.

It is a false point, it does not exist. If it’s true it should be really easy to prove. But it’s not so you can’t…Making shit up does not count, really how many times must I say that? You don’t know anything about the church at all, you speak out of pure unadulterated ignorance.

I guess if you lie to yourself enough you’ll believe anything…Prove the statement is true or STFU…Real simple.

988

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
This is from a dear big brother who is older than I am both naturally and in the Lord. I always know he’s watchin though he rarely posts, but every so often he drops me a PM. I greatly love and respect this man though we’ve never met and I’m sure we have a few differences.

He wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris stated,

“…God demands sacrifice…”

True, but not always and as long as it does not involve strange fire, for Samuel stated, “…to obey is better than sacrifice…” (I Sam. 15:22).

Obeying God’s word from the heart is better than any outward form of worship, service to God, or personal sacrifice. The RCC’s sin is in placing its own conception (tradition of man) of what is right above Biblical revelation; this sin will likewise be the focal point of the final apostasy predicted for the period just before Jesus returns to the earth. Worship, prayer, praise, spiritual gifts, and service to God is worthless in His sight if not accompanied by explicit obedience to Him and His righteous standards found in His Holy Word.

Hold fast the faith without wavering for His return will soon be upon us (Heb. 10:23,25), MARANATHA. [/quote]Maranatha indeed!! and the sooner the better (that’s pretty selfish I know, I’m a bit worn out today) [/quote]

Actually we hold the Bible as the most high authority. If it contradicts the Bible, then it is a negative. However, if it adds or goes a long with the Scriptures then it is a possibility.

Want proof of how high Catholics hold the Bible, especially the Gospel, over everything else? Go to a traditional mass where the priest is actually facing the tabernacle (that means facing away from the congregation). After the first two readings out of the Bible comes the reading out of the Gospel (the actual four gospels, not the entire Bible is called the Gospel), only the Priest can read out of the Gospel during Mass. And, is actually one of the two requirements for a valid Mass (one is consecration of the Eucharist, the second is reading out of the four Gospels).

You’ll see that the priest has a gold cup with incense burning inside, he’ll wave that as he goes up to the altar. When he gets up there he’ll hang it up, when it comes to reading the Gospel the congregation will sing Alleluia and the Priest will raise up the Gospels, sometimes even walking around and through the congregation as they sing, then set the Gospels to read the daily reading, wave incense over the gospels, kiss the gospels, and mark the gospels with three crosses as the congregation marks their forehead, mouth, and heart at the same time signaling to mind the Gospels, speak the Gospels, and love the Gospels. This comes with a little prayer that escapes me at the moment.

To say that we put traditions above the Gospels just because we have traditions is ridiculous.

That is like saying you are putting your friends above your wife, because you have friends. It is not logical, and it is not true.

989

It is now beyond evident that I cannot communicate with you Pat. You grasp exactly nothing I say and incessantly misrepresent my thought by like one trillion miles. I do not believe you do this on purpose. I really don’t.

990

[quote]forbes wrote:

Sure bro:

Natures of Jesus

  1. Jesus has two natures
    a. John 1:1,14, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God… 14 And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.”
    b. Colossians 2:9, “For in Him all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form.”

  2. Jesus is a man

    1. 1 Timothy 2:5, “For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.”

  3. Jesus is divine
    1. Isaiah 9:6, “For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us; And the government will rest on His shoulders; And His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace.”
    2. John 8:58, "Jesus said to them, �?�¢??Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am.�?�¢?? Compare to Exodus 3:14, "God said to Moses, �?�¢??I AM WHO I AM�?�¢??; and He said, �?�¢??Thus you shall say to the sons of Israel, �?�¢??I AM has sent me to you.�?�¢??�?�¢??
    3. Colossians 2:9, “For in Him all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form.”

  4. Unchangeable
    1. Heb. 13:8, “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.”

  5. Creator of All Things
    1. Col. 1:15, “For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authoritiesÃ??Ã?¢??all things have been created by Him and for Him.”

  6. Mediator
    1. 1 Timothy 2:5, “For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.”

  7. Reveals the Father
    1. Matthew 11:27, “All things have been handed over to Me by My Father; and no one knows the Son, except the Father; nor does anyone know the Father, except the Son, and anyone to whom the Son wills to reveal Him.”

  8. Save Sinners
    1. 1 Timothy 1:15, “It is a trustworthy statement, deserving full acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, among whom I am foremost of all.”
    2. Titus 1:4, “to Titus, my true child in a common faith: Grace and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Savior.”

Jesus contains all the elements of God. he can do what God does. What mere man can forgive sins, live a perfect life, create all things and he himself claim equality with God? What angel of heaven can say “I am the way, the truth and the life”? No created being of God can do that. ONLY God can fulfill these things. BUT we do see that Jesus communicates with the Father. So are they different gods? No. They are the same in WHAT they are (Deity) but they are different in person. Just like me and you are one in essence (we are human) but different persons. Time is past, present and future, but there is only one time, not two different types of time. [/quote]

I have to give you this. You feel that they are different in person. Saying you and me are of the same essence (human) but different people, that would be correct. Now, does that somehow mean that we are the same people? Not at all. Let’s say one of us was the president of a company and one was an employee. They both are of the same essence (they are both people) but surely you would agree that they are different in rank (just as Jesus and Jehovah are) and one would be subservient to the other. This is a key point. You mentioned that there is only one God and One mediator. This means that the mediator is not the God?

You also mentioned that no created being of God can say that he is the way and the truth and the life? Why do you say that? Because 1 Cor 1:15 shows that Jesus was created by Jehovah. It is very straight-forward in that scripture. “He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.”

There is no mincing of words. Jesus was the firstborn of all creation.

Notice what you wrote here. He had to rely on God the Father and God the Holy Spirit while on earth, but they you used Phil 2:6 as your reference scripture. That scripture says “Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped.”

So, at that time, Jesus was in God’s form, or a spirit creature. What did he say there? He said that he did not consider equality with God something to be grasped (or you used held on to). Because the english words could really have multiple meanings, I went to the Original Greek. Strongs G725 gives the definition of that word as Snatching or Pillaging. Those words very clearly carry the connotation of taking something that doesn’t belong to them. Now let me rewrite that scipture with the Strongs G725 word in it. "Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be Snatched.

Does that make the setting anymore clear?

[quote]You have every right to say its all based on opinion, but its not. I receive all my information from scriptures.

I do not mean to be rude or change the subject, but where does it say that Jesus was actually Michael. Where does it even hint at it? The doctrine of the Trinity was established well before the Watchtower Bible. [/quote]

With regard to Michael, I will get to that next, once we sort out this first issue.

991

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
It is now beyond evident that I cannot communicate with you Pat. You grasp exactly nothing I say and incessantly misrepresent my thought by like one trillion miles. I do not believe you do this on purpose. I really don’t.[/quote]

I grasp what your saying just fine but what you say is flat wrong, period. Second, you rally against the church with lies. What you say about it is not true. I can only imagine precious ego is what is keeping you from seeing the truth. It is the persistent danger in fundamentalism, it’s fundamentally wrong.

You talk and represent faith just like these clowns do:
http://www.westborobaptistchurch.com/

I agree it’s hard to talk with someone who rails in rage, but no basis in fact. You say the same sort of things that Fred Phelps says. That’s pretty crappy company.

All I asked was for you the bring up real actual points about the church to hate. Not lies, not made up stuff.

For instance, show me where the church places it’s own conception above the scriptures? It is in the scriptures where the church was conceived. The traditions are scripturally based.

You can hate the church all you want for no reason, but at least be honest and admit you don’t have a good reason.

992

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
This is from a dear big brother who is older than I am both naturally and in the Lord. I always know he’s watchin though he rarely posts, but every so often he drops me a PM. I greatly love and respect this man though we’ve never met and I’m sure we have a few differences.

He wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris stated,

“…God demands sacrifice…”

True, but not always and as long as it does not involve strange fire, for Samuel stated, “…to obey is better than sacrifice…” (I Sam. 15:22).

Obeying God’s word from the heart is better than any outward form of worship, service to God, or personal sacrifice. The RCC’s sin is in placing its own conception (tradition of man) of what is right above Biblical revelation; this sin will likewise be the focal point of the final apostasy predicted for the period just before Jesus returns to the earth. Worship, prayer, praise, spiritual gifts, and service to God is worthless in His sight if not accompanied by explicit obedience to Him and His righteous standards found in His Holy Word.

Hold fast the faith without wavering for His return will soon be upon us (Heb. 10:23,25), MARANATHA. [/quote]Maranatha indeed!! and the sooner the better (that’s pretty selfish I know, I’m a bit worn out today) [/quote]

Actually we hold the Bible as the most high authority. If it contradicts the Bible, then it is a negative. However, if it adds or goes a long with the Scriptures then it is a possibility.

Want proof of how high Catholics hold the Bible, especially the Gospel, over everything else? Go to a traditional mass where the priest is actually facing the tabernacle (that means facing away from the congregation). After the first two readings out of the Bible comes the reading out of the Gospel (the actual four gospels, not the entire Bible is called the Gospel), only the Priest can read out of the Gospel during Mass. And, is actually one of the two requirements for a valid Mass (one is consecration of the Eucharist, the second is reading out of the four Gospels).

You’ll see that the priest has a gold cup with incense burning inside, he’ll wave that as he goes up to the altar. When he gets up there he’ll hang it up, when it comes to reading the Gospel the congregation will sing Alleluia and the Priest will raise up the Gospels, sometimes even walking around and through the congregation as they sing, then set the Gospels to read the daily reading, wave incense over the gospels, kiss the gospels, and mark the gospels with three crosses as the congregation marks their forehead, mouth, and heart at the same time signaling to mind the Gospels, speak the Gospels, and love the Gospels. This comes with a little prayer that escapes me at the moment.

To say that we put traditions above the Gospels just because we have traditions is ridiculous.

That is like saying you are putting your friends above your wife, because you have friends. It is not logical, and it is not true. [/quote]

“Ignorance of Scripture is Ignorance of Christ”–St. Jerome

993

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:
<<< You feel that they are different in person. Saying you and me are of the same essence (human) but different people, that would be correct. Now, does that somehow mean that we are the same people? Not at all. >>>[/quote]And here is where EV REE BUDDY goes wrong. Not just you guys. Even many I would consider genuine Christian brothers go astray to a degree right here.

There is NO valid analogy between the infinite eternal most high God and any other actual or potential object of knowledge there is. People do this all the time. “Welllll, would you send somebody to hell for_____________”. It makes absolutely no difference whatsoever what I, or anybody else would do. The fact that we have no temporal experience with any being existing in more than one person says absolutely NOTHING about whether God exists as such a being. Unless you worship the puny pathetic intellect of man as your epistemological starting point.

I consider the entire incomprehensibility of the holy Trinity, indeed, the Godhead in general as a beautiful manifestation of God’s breathtaking majesty. You will not be able to resist seeing this as an opportunity to flank me into a debate about reason, but I am telling you ahead of time it probably won’t work. It might though. See, there is no point in discussing any other thing imaginable until it is established how we know anything at all.

I, along with the apostle Paul, Augustine and the protestant reformers of old start with God. Just about everybody else starts with the autonomy of man.

Des Carte said “I think, therefore I am”. People can propose a nearly infinite array of variations, but they all proceed pretty much with Des Carte.

I disagree. I say “God IS, therefore I think”. That one intellectual surrender, which is impossible without the Spirit of God, solves every single logical conundrum there could ever be. Not to the pagan of course. To him, that is the grand daddy of all copouts. To the man who has been graciously and mercifully subdued and resurrected by the living Christ it is not only the ultimate, but also the only possible freedom.

994

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:
<<< You feel that they are different in person. Saying you and me are of the same essence (human) but different people, that would be correct. Now, does that somehow mean that we are the same people? Not at all. >>>[/quote]And here is where EV REE BUDDY goes wrong. Not just you guys. Even many I would consider genuine Christian brothers go astray to a degree right here.

There is NO valid analogy between the infinite eternal most high God and any other actual or potential object of knowledge there is. People do this all the time. “Welllll, would you send somebody to hell for_____________”. It makes absolutely no difference whatsoever what I, or anybody else would do. The fact that we have no temporal experience with any being existing in more than one person says absolutely NOTHING about whether God exists as such a being. Unless you worship the puny pathetic intellect of man as your epistemological starting point.

I consider the entire incomprehensibility of the holy Trinity, indeed, the Godhead in general as a beautiful manifestation of God’s breathtaking majesty. You will not be able to resist seeing this as an opportunity to flank me into a debate about reason, but I am telling you ahead of time it probably won’t work. It might though. See, there is no point in discussing any other thing imaginable until it is established how we know anything at all.

I, along with the apostle Paul, Augustine and the protestant reformers of old start with God. Just about everybody else starts with the autonomy of man.

Des Carte said “I think, therefore I am”. People can propose a nearly infinite array of variations, but they all proceed pretty much with Des Carte.

I disagree. I say “God IS, therefore I think”. That one intellectual surrender, which is impossible without the Spirit of God, solves every single logical conundrum there could ever be. Not to the pagan of course. To him, that is the grand daddy of all copouts. To the man who has been graciously and mercifully subdued and resurrected by the living Christ it is not only the ultimate, but also the only possible freedom.
[/quote]

It is only natural for others, as well as me, to use analogies to try and explain the concept of Jesus and Jehovah and their relationship. You say “you consider the entire incomprehensibility of the holy Trinity, indeed, the Godhead in general as a beautiful manifestation of God’s breathtaking majesty.” I say, Jehovah and Jesus made their positions very clear, it was only when the idea of the trinity was introduced and people were forced to reconcile the Bible with the trinity that it became incomprehensible. I don’t know why you prefer to be left in the dark. That doesn’t make sense to me, and frankly, seems like you want God to be impossible to draw close to. (my opinion, not fact)

Jehovah’s Witnesses view our their religion as a very important part of their lives. We don’t get caught up in tradition, we don’t get caught up in any sort of mysticism surrounding God. We value the relationship we are privileged to have with Him, and we strive to learn more and more about His qualities, the qualities of His son, Jesus and what he has laid out as commandments for us to do.

995

[quote]
I have to give you this. You feel that they are different in person. Saying you and me are of the same essence (human) but different people, that would be correct. Now, does that somehow mean that we are the same people? Not at all. Let’s say one of us was the president of a company and one was an employee. They both are of the same essence (they are both people) but surely you would agree that they are different in rank (just as Jesus and Jehovah are) and one would be subservient to the other. This is a key point. You mentioned that there is only one God and One mediator. This means that the mediator is not the God?[/quote]

Yes, they are different persons. Yes, Jesus did submit himself to the Father, but that was only temporary. When Jesus was resurrected he was glorified back to his original position and authority and accepted worship. Even the Father says in Hebrews 1:8:

“but of the Son he says
â??Your throne, O God, is forever and ever,
and a righteous scepter is the scepter of your kingdom”

God the Father acknowledged him as God. They acknowledge each other as God. The one being of God is manifest in three persons. God the Son is the mediator, so yes the mediator in this case is God. In order to believe this you have to stop thinking of God as one individual person. Even in Genesis God says “Let US create man in OUR image”.

[quote]
You also mentioned that no created being of God can say that he is the way and the truth and the life? Why do you say that? Because 1 Cor 1:15 shows that Jesus was created by Jehovah. It is very straight-forward in that scripture. “He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.”

There is no mincing of words. Jesus was the firstborn of all creation.

Notice what you wrote here. He had to rely on God the Father and God the Holy Spirit while on earth, but they you used Phil 2:6 as your reference scripture. That scripture says “Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped.”

So, at that time, Jesus was in God’s form, or a spirit creature. What did he say there? He said that he did not consider equality with God something to be grasped (or you used held on to). Because the english words could really have multiple meanings, I went to the Original Greek. Strongs G725 gives the definition of that word as Snatching or Pillaging. Those words very clearly carry the connotation of taking something that doesn’t belong to them. Now let me rewrite that scipture with the Strongs G725 word in it. "Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be Snatched.

Does that make the setting anymore clear?[/quote]

Jesus is the firstborn of all creation. Some studying must be done here. First of all, you cannot decline the verses that state Jesus was with God and WAS God, that Jesus created the world, and that Jesus is worshiped, ONLY qualities belonging to God.

Then the Bible mentions Jesus as the firstborn. Well, Jesus cannot be eternal and “born” or created, so what does this verse mean?

The Greek word for “firstborn” is Prototokos. In ancient times, firstborn did not necessarily mean the order of birth. It meant inheritance and leadership. This verse you mentioned is talking about Jesus’ authority over all of God’s creation.

Also, it does not say Jesus is the “first created”. It says firstborn which is referring to his authority over creation. Thus, it proclaims his preeminence and authority over everything that has been created by God.

I would like to hear about Michael when you get the chance and get all your resources together. I am not saying “come at me bro”, but rather I express genuine interest in your interpretation of scripture, mainly that of Jesus being Michael.

Oh and I also wanted to ask you something. What are your interpretations of the verses that clearly show Jesus’ divinity? If no one but God can be worshiped, then why did Jesus not rebuke Thomas when he said “my Lord and my God”? If sin is disobeying God’s laws, then how can anyone BUT God forgive sins? And what are your thoughts on the prophesy of the Messiah in Isaiah when it says “to you a child will be given, and he shall be called Wonderful Counselor and Mighty GOD?”

996

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:
<<< frankly, seems like you want God to be impossible to draw close to. (my opinion, not fact) >>>[/quote]Oh no no no my dear friend and here is where we part company. A god who does not exist, such as the false idolatrous one worshiped by the WB&TS is impossible to draw close to. Actually, outside the blood of a Jesus who is God the Son, the true and living God is impossible to draw close to as well.

However, once He raises a man up in His own resurrection, makes that man aware of just how filthy and finite He is, God Himself draws close to him. This is NOT an intellectual exercise though the intellect is not disengaged. See what you just said? A God who is incomprehensible to you is impossible to draw close to. It is YOU who are on the outside, living in bondage to your own small fallen mind (mine is too).

Repent of this despicable idolatry. Confess it and and turn to He alone who is able to save and that to the uttermost. His fellowship and love is sweeter than anything. He lives in me and I say and pray with Paul that “for me to live IS Christ and to die is gain”. Philippians 1.

997

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:
<<< You feel that they are different in person. Saying you and me are of the same essence (human) but different people, that would be correct. Now, does that somehow mean that we are the same people? Not at all. >>>[/quote]And here is where EV REE BUDDY goes wrong. Not just you guys. Even many I would consider genuine Christian brothers go astray to a degree right here.

There is NO valid analogy between the infinite eternal most high God and any other actual or potential object of knowledge there is. People do this all the time. “Welllll, would you send somebody to hell for_____________”. It makes absolutely no difference whatsoever what I, or anybody else would do. The fact that we have no temporal experience with any being existing in more than one person says absolutely NOTHING about whether God exists as such a being. Unless you worship the puny pathetic intellect of man as your epistemological starting point.

I consider the entire incomprehensibility of the holy Trinity, indeed, the Godhead in general as a beautiful manifestation of God’s breathtaking majesty. You will not be able to resist seeing this as an opportunity to flank me into a debate about reason, but I am telling you ahead of time it probably won’t work. It might though. See, there is no point in discussing any other thing imaginable until it is established how we know anything at all.

I, along with the apostle Paul, Augustine and the protestant reformers of old start with God. Just about everybody else starts with the autonomy of man.

Des Carte said “I think, therefore I am”. People can propose a nearly infinite array of variations, but they all proceed pretty much with Des Carte.

I disagree. I say “God IS, therefore I think”. That one intellectual surrender, which is impossible without the Spirit of God, solves every single logical conundrum there could ever be. Not to the pagan of course. To him, that is the grand daddy of all copouts. To the man who has been graciously and mercifully subdued and resurrected by the living Christ it is not only the ultimate, but also the only possible freedom.
[/quote]

It is only natural for others, as well as me, to use analogies to try and explain the concept of Jesus and Jehovah and their relationship. You say “you consider the entire incomprehensibility of the holy Trinity, indeed, the Godhead in general as a beautiful manifestation of God’s breathtaking majesty.” I say, Jehovah and Jesus made their positions very clear, it was only when the idea of the trinity was introduced and people were forced to reconcile the Bible with the trinity that it became incomprehensible. I don’t know why you prefer to be left in the dark. That doesn’t make sense to me, and frankly, seems like you want God to be impossible to draw close to. (my opinion, not fact)

Jehovah’s Witnesses view our their religion as a very important part of their lives. We don’t get caught up in tradition, we don’t get caught up in any sort of mysticism surrounding God. We value the relationship we are privileged to have with Him, and we strive to learn more and more about His qualities, the qualities of His son, Jesus and what he has laid out as commandments for us to do. [/quote]

It’s easier to understand the Godhead and the persons as a family. There is one family (one God) and three persons in the family (three persons Father, Son, and Holy Ghost). I don’t know if that helps, but that is about as good as I can think of.

998

[quote]forbes wrote:

[quote]
I have to give you this. You feel that they are different in person. Saying you and me are of the same essence (human) but different people, that would be correct. Now, does that somehow mean that we are the same people? Not at all. Let’s say one of us was the president of a company and one was an employee. They both are of the same essence (they are both people) but surely you would agree that they are different in rank (just as Jesus and Jehovah are) and one would be subservient to the other. This is a key point. You mentioned that there is only one God and One mediator. This means that the mediator is not the God?[/quote]

Yes, they are different persons. Yes, Jesus did submit himself to the Father, but that was only temporary. When Jesus was resurrected he was glorified back to his original position and authority and accepted worship. Even the Father says in Hebrews 1:8:

“but of the Son he says
â??Your throne, O God, is forever and ever,
and a righteous scepter is the scepter of your kingdom”

God the Father acknowledged him as God. They acknowledge each other as God. The one being of God is manifest in three persons. God the Son is the mediator, so yes the mediator in this case is God. In order to believe this you have to stop thinking of God as one individual person. Even in Genesis God says “Let US create man in OUR image”.

[quote]
You also mentioned that no created being of God can say that he is the way and the truth and the life? Why do you say that? Because 1 Cor 1:15 shows that Jesus was created by Jehovah. It is very straight-forward in that scripture. “He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.”

There is no mincing of words. Jesus was the firstborn of all creation.

Notice what you wrote here. He had to rely on God the Father and God the Holy Spirit while on earth, but they you used Phil 2:6 as your reference scripture. That scripture says “Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped.”

So, at that time, Jesus was in God’s form, or a spirit creature. What did he say there? He said that he did not consider equality with God something to be grasped (or you used held on to). Because the english words could really have multiple meanings, I went to the Original Greek. Strongs G725 gives the definition of that word as Snatching or Pillaging. Those words very clearly carry the connotation of taking something that doesn’t belong to them. Now let me rewrite that scipture with the Strongs G725 word in it. "Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be Snatched.

Does that make the setting anymore clear?[/quote]

Jesus is the firstborn of all creation. Some studying must be done here. First of all, you cannot decline the verses that state Jesus was with God and WAS God, that Jesus created the world, and that Jesus is worshiped, ONLY qualities belonging to God.[/quote]
You are right, we don’t remove ANY verse in the Bible just to fit a point, that is very important. With regards John 1:1 calling Jesus God; that is not a correct rendering. The rendering is actually more accurately “Jesus was A god”. I can get into detail with that as well.

With regards Jesus creating the Earth? What scripture did you have in mind?

And about Jesus receiving worship:
Matthew 4:10 - Jesus said “It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service.” Now, there are two parts to this scripture: worship and sacred service. It says to Jehovah alone must SACRED SERVICE be rendered. Jesus is not Jehovah.

These are the two Greek words used. The first link is to WORSHIP and the second is to SACRED SERVICE:

Being divine does NOT mean being Almighty God. That, I think is where people confused. In the Bible, Satan is referred to as a god. Does that make him one with Jehovah? No, it doesn’t. With regards to Thomas’ comments, we have to look at the context of the whole book. A few verses prior Jesus shows that he has a God. The ONLY one referred to as “Almighty God” is Jehovah. There are many gods and there are many lords. Even Jesus is referred to as “Mighty God”. The distinctions are very clearly.

Some scriptures appear to be able to carry different meanings to them, but, just like you said, we have to look at other scriptures and see what harmonized result or answer we can get from the lot of them.

I will get to Michael, I promise, but I want to see your reaction to these scriptures.

999

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:
<<< You feel that they are different in person. Saying you and me are of the same essence (human) but different people, that would be correct. Now, does that somehow mean that we are the same people? Not at all. >>>[/quote]And here is where EV REE BUDDY goes wrong. Not just you guys. Even many I would consider genuine Christian brothers go astray to a degree right here.

There is NO valid analogy between the infinite eternal most high God and any other actual or potential object of knowledge there is. People do this all the time. “Welllll, would you send somebody to hell for_____________”. It makes absolutely no difference whatsoever what I, or anybody else would do. The fact that we have no temporal experience with any being existing in more than one person says absolutely NOTHING about whether God exists as such a being. Unless you worship the puny pathetic intellect of man as your epistemological starting point.

I consider the entire incomprehensibility of the holy Trinity, indeed, the Godhead in general as a beautiful manifestation of God’s breathtaking majesty. You will not be able to resist seeing this as an opportunity to flank me into a debate about reason, but I am telling you ahead of time it probably won’t work. It might though. See, there is no point in discussing any other thing imaginable until it is established how we know anything at all.

I, along with the apostle Paul, Augustine and the protestant reformers of old start with God. Just about everybody else starts with the autonomy of man.

Des Carte said “I think, therefore I am”. People can propose a nearly infinite array of variations, but they all proceed pretty much with Des Carte.

I disagree. I say “God IS, therefore I think”. That one intellectual surrender, which is impossible without the Spirit of God, solves every single logical conundrum there could ever be. Not to the pagan of course. To him, that is the grand daddy of all copouts. To the man who has been graciously and mercifully subdued and resurrected by the living Christ it is not only the ultimate, but also the only possible freedom.
[/quote]

It is only natural for others, as well as me, to use analogies to try and explain the concept of Jesus and Jehovah and their relationship. You say “you consider the entire incomprehensibility of the holy Trinity, indeed, the Godhead in general as a beautiful manifestation of God’s breathtaking majesty.” I say, Jehovah and Jesus made their positions very clear, it was only when the idea of the trinity was introduced and people were forced to reconcile the Bible with the trinity that it became incomprehensible. I don’t know why you prefer to be left in the dark. That doesn’t make sense to me, and frankly, seems like you want God to be impossible to draw close to. (my opinion, not fact)

Jehovah’s Witnesses view our their religion as a very important part of their lives. We don’t get caught up in tradition, we don’t get caught up in any sort of mysticism surrounding God. We value the relationship we are privileged to have with Him, and we strive to learn more and more about His qualities, the qualities of His son, Jesus and what he has laid out as commandments for us to do. [/quote]

It’s easier to understand the Godhead and the persons as a family. There is one family (one God) and three persons in the family (three persons Father, Son, and Holy Ghost). I don’t know if that helps, but that is about as good as I can think of.[/quote]

A question I would like you to reflect on is this: Father’s name: Jehovah; Son’s name: Jesus. What is the Holy Spirit’s name? If they are all individual people (and, as you suggest, the most powerful people in the universe) wouldn’t all 3 of them have names?

1000

[quote]honest_lifter wrote:

[quote]forbes wrote:

[quote]
I have to give you this. You feel that they are different in person. Saying you and me are of the same essence (human) but different people, that would be correct. Now, does that somehow mean that we are the same people? Not at all. Let’s say one of us was the president of a company and one was an employee. They both are of the same essence (they are both people) but surely you would agree that they are different in rank (just as Jesus and Jehovah are) and one would be subservient to the other. This is a key point. You mentioned that there is only one God and One mediator. This means that the mediator is not the God?[/quote]

Yes, they are different persons. Yes, Jesus did submit himself to the Father, but that was only temporary. When Jesus was resurrected he was glorified back to his original position and authority and accepted worship. Even the Father says in Hebrews 1:8:

“but of the Son he says
�¢??Your throne, O God, is forever and ever,
and a righteous scepter is the scepter of your kingdom”

God the Father acknowledged him as God. They acknowledge each other as God. The one being of God is manifest in three persons. God the Son is the mediator, so yes the mediator in this case is God. In order to believe this you have to stop thinking of God as one individual person. Even in Genesis God says “Let US create man in OUR image”.

[quote]
You also mentioned that no created being of God can say that he is the way and the truth and the life? Why do you say that? Because 1 Cor 1:15 shows that Jesus was created by Jehovah. It is very straight-forward in that scripture. “He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.”

There is no mincing of words. Jesus was the firstborn of all creation.

Notice what you wrote here. He had to rely on God the Father and God the Holy Spirit while on earth, but they you used Phil 2:6 as your reference scripture. That scripture says “Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped.”

So, at that time, Jesus was in God’s form, or a spirit creature. What did he say there? He said that he did not consider equality with God something to be grasped (or you used held on to). Because the english words could really have multiple meanings, I went to the Original Greek. Strongs G725 gives the definition of that word as Snatching or Pillaging. Those words very clearly carry the connotation of taking something that doesn’t belong to them. Now let me rewrite that scipture with the Strongs G725 word in it. "Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be Snatched.

Does that make the setting anymore clear?[/quote]

Jesus is the firstborn of all creation. Some studying must be done here. First of all, you cannot decline the verses that state Jesus was with God and WAS God, that Jesus created the world, and that Jesus is worshiped, ONLY qualities belonging to God.[/quote]
You are right, we don’t remove ANY verse in the Bible just to fit a point, that is very important. With regards John 1:1 calling Jesus God; that is not a correct rendering. The rendering is actually more accurately “Jesus was A god”. I can get into detail with that as well.

With regards Jesus creating the Earth? What scripture did you have in mind?

And about Jesus receiving worship:
Matthew 4:10 - Jesus said “It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service.” Now, there are two parts to this scripture: worship and sacred service. It says to Jehovah alone must SACRED SERVICE be rendered. Jesus is not Jehovah.

These are the two Greek words used. The first link is to WORSHIP and the second is to SACRED SERVICE:

Being divine does NOT mean being Almighty God. That, I think is where people confused. In the Bible, Satan is referred to as a god. Does that make him one with Jehovah? No, it doesn’t. With regards to Thomas’ comments, we have to look at the context of the whole book. A few verses prior Jesus shows that he has a God. The ONLY one referred to as “Almighty God” is Jehovah. There are many gods and there are many lords. Even Jesus is referred to as “Mighty God”. The distinctions are very clearly.

Some scriptures appear to be able to carry different meanings to them, but, just like you said, we have to look at other scriptures and see what harmonized result or answer we can get from the lot of them.

I will get to Michael, I promise, but I want to see your reaction to these scriptures. [/quote]

Ahh, good responses and good scripture. However I am studying for my psych exam so I will get back to you tomorrow, possible Monday, but we will see. I will also need to get some resources together to properly respond to you.

May you be blessed in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit…:wink: (ya I went there)