11 Jan 12
1 edit
Here's an analogy:
A strong Universalist will tell you that since Christ died for all then naturally ALL, but ALL, but ALL will be redeemed and saved.
Have you ever talked to a strong Universalist ? Now though I often would like to believe that ALL will be saved, and though I TRIED hard to see Universalism, I have not yet been able in good conscience to say I see it in the Bible.
Now though Christ died to redeem all men, to those who believe, theologians have said "Substitution" takes place. In other words the redemption is applied only when one receives Christ and "Substitution" takes place though Christ died to redeem ALL.
I think that that is a truth taught in the Bible. But here's the thing. Nowhere does Jesus mention the word "Substitution". Nowhere does Paul or any of the other writers of the New Testament mention the word "Substitution".
In my opinion, you have in the New Testament the FACT of so-called "substitution" without the explicit mentioning of a doctrine called "Substitution".
I think it is somewhat of a useful concept.
Now let's apply the same matter to "Triune God" and/or "Trinity".
True, Jesus NEVER mentions the word Trinity. Neither does Paul, Peter, or John. There is no mention of a doctrine of "Trinity" in a creedal or formal theological way.
I think the FACT of the Trinity is obviously there. I think it is there in the same way that the FACT of what some theologians call "Substitution" is there.
I can defend from the Bible my usage of a word Substitution which is not found in the Bible, in order to show that Universalism is not taught in the Bible.
I can also defend from the Bible my usage of "Triune God" or "Trinity" given you understand what I mean, regardless that no explicit mention of the word or phrases are in the Bible.
12 Jan 12
1 edit
Originally posted by RJHindsSo the one part of God that is not Jesus that gave him all the power and authority stepped down from this in charge position and is now not in charge but Jesus is now and the holy spirit has never been the head and in charge, right?
All authority has been given to the Son at present. He is the head of all. 😏
Will he ever have a turn as he's been left out of that opportunity?
So this is still strange as the trinity doctine says they are all equal, all knowing, and all powerful, etc, etc.
So this doesn't fly with your comment, does it?
12 Jan 12
Originally posted by jaywillI don't see the word "Universalism" in the Holy Bible either. I bet
Here's an analogy:
A strong Universalist will tell you that since Christ died for all then naturally ALL, but ALL, but ALL will be redeemed and saved.
Have you ever talked to a strong Universalist ? Now though I often would like to believe that ALL will be saved, and though I TRIED hard to see Universalism, I have not yet been able in good conscienc ...[text shortened]... ess that no explicit mention of the word or phrases are in the Bible.
there are a lot of words not in the Holy Bible. So maybe we should
not believe anything in which the word is not in the Holy Bible, like
evolution. Or we could do like the JWs and make our own Bible
and add all the words we wanted to believe in and delete those we
did not want to believe in. What about that? 😏
12 Jan 12
1 edit
Originally posted by RJHindsWe have have added nothing. We've shown you proof of that but you say you don't read anything we post from legitimate sourses which is a very stupid thing to do if one is wanting to serve god with truth.
I don't see the word "Universalism" in the Holy Bible either. I bet
there are a lot of words not in the Holy Bible. So maybe we should
not believe anything in which the word is not in the Holy Bible, like
evolution. Or we could do like the JWs and make our own Bible
and add all the words we wanted to believe in and delete those we
did not want to believe in. What about that? 😏
A no brainer if one has a working mind.
And yes the word trinity is not in the Bible and not even a hint of it as all of historical evidence shows. But again you wouldn't know that would you? It's like you drive a car with your eyes closed. Unbelieveable.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
12 Jan 12
Originally posted by RJHindsGood luck doing that while using a computer connected to the internet owning and
So maybe we should not believe anything in which the word is not in the Holy Bible, like
evolution.
driving an automobile going on holidays to far off places in an aeroplane including to
places like Australia where you can see Kangaroo's or if you don't feel like travelling
you can watch them on your plasma TV which allows you to catch the weather forecast made
possible by orbiting weather satellites or you can listen to rock n' roll on your
radio all whilst stuffing down a beef burger.....
So, you go ahead, don't believe in, or use, any device or word not mentioned in the bible.
Just try it.
Meanwhile the best of luck with your doctrinal dispute... let me know if you ever actually agree anything...
well don't actually cos I don't care but have fun anyway :-p
12 Jan 12
Originally posted by galveston75I didn't say I did not read anything you post from legitmate sources.
We have have added nothing. We've shown you proof of that but you say you don't read anything we post from legitimate sourses which is a very stupid thing to do if one is wanting to serve god with truth.
A no brainer if one has a working mind.
And yes the word trinity is not in the Bible and not even a hint of it as all of historical evidence show ...[text shortened]... ouldn't know that would you? It's like you drive a car with your eyes closed. Unbelieveable.
I admitted that I did not read one or two of your links but you and
robbie carobbie do the same thing. So what's the beef? 😏
12 Jan 12
Originally posted by googlefudgeI think most of us do agree on the major Christian doctrines. It is
Good luck doing that while using a [b]computer connected to the internet owning and
driving an automobile going on holidays to far off places in an aeroplane including to
places like Australia where you can see Kangaroo's or if you don't feel like travelling
you can watch them on your plasma TV which al ...[text shortened]... r actually agree anything...
well don't actually cos I don't care but have fun anyway :-p[/b]
these cults that we disagree with. And I was just being facetious
to make fun of the JWs and Rajk999 for demanding that the word
"trinity" must be in the Holy Bible to believe in such a concept.
Sure, not believing in something, even evolution, because the
word is not in the Holy Bible is stupid. That was the idea I was
trying to get across in my facetious way. However, it went over
everyones head. You almost got it for you saw how stupid it was.
😏
12 Jan 12
Originally posted by jaywillno, it's the other way around. copts are in various places in the middle east and horn areas, but centered in egypt. the coptic-variant chruches have been infiltrated by catholic and protestant doctrine however, as has the armenian apostolic chruch.
[b]i have reviewed many positions of the christian church and have a greater deal of familiarity of the variety than most christians. my own background is from the armenian apostoloic church, which is fairly close to the coptic/syrian variants.
Isn't coptic the Eastern Orthodoxy of Ethiopia ?
I consider Coptic to be the result of the spread of Eastern Orthodoxy down into Africa in early centries CE.
i think the copts would disagree. they trace their origins to st. mark (the alleged author of the gospel of mark). my personal theory is that they are the remnants of the jerusalem church christian-jews who fled persecution by going to egypt.
Interesting backround. Sorry you're sick and tired. You seem bitter.
Was Jesus ever real to you ?
recovering from the flu yes, but that has nothing to do with lack of faith in a fairytale. don't mistake my honest analysis of a fictional book of literature as being "bitter" in any way.
jesus was real when i was young and naive, before the age of reason, before i could think for myself, before i had read the bible and knew the nature of the 'god' we were taught to worship without question. then i set off on a journey that took me to gnosticism -- kabala -- eastern mysticism -- spiritualism -- atheism -- until finally i found refuge in the void spirit.
it was the simplest of solutions, yet it took me a long road to reach it. it can be summed up by the french phrase: "que sera sera." doris day even sings a fine song on the subject.
12 Jan 12
Originally posted by VoidSpiritThat is a shame. Sorry.
no, it's the other way around. copts are in various places in the middle east and horn areas, but centered in egypt. the coptic-variant chruches have been infiltrated by catholic and protestant doctrine however, as has the armenian apostolic chruch.
[quote]
I consider Coptic to be the result of the spread of Eastern Orthodoxy down into Africa in ...[text shortened]... y the french phrase: "que sera sera." doris day even sings a fine song on the subject.
12 Jan 12
2 edits
Originally posted by VoidSpirit
no, it's the other way around. copts are in various places in the middle east and horn areas, but centered in egypt. the coptic-variant chruches have been infiltrated by catholic and protestant doctrine however, as has the armenian apostolic chruch.
[quote]
I consider Coptic to be the result of the spread of Eastern Orthodoxy down into Africa in y the french phrase: "que sera sera." doris day even sings a fine song on the subject.
jesus was real when i was young and naive, before the age of reason, before i could think for myself, before i had read the bible and knew the nature of the 'god' we were taught to worship without question. then i set off on a journey that took me to gnosticism -- kabala -- eastern mysticism -- spiritualism -- atheism -- until finally i found refuge in the void spirit.
Are there forums in which they discuss the kabala, eastern mysticism, spiritualism, atheism where you unleash your disgust as forcefully as you do against Jesus Christ ?
Where do you fume against the kabala ?
Where do you snort "fairytale!" against eastern mysticism ?
Where could we go to see your forceful arguments debunking spiritualism and trying to expose the falacious weaknesses of atheism ?
I don't mistake your errors in Bible interpretation for "honest analysis" or your assertions for indications that you know what you're talking about.
And while " que sra sera " is a nice song, I also like the Proverb -
"When a man's way brings him to ruin his heart rages against the Lord." (Prov. 19:3)
12 Jan 12
Originally posted by jaywillthe force of my disgust is only unleashed against disgusting characters and dogmas.
[b][quote] jesus was real when i was young and naive, before the age of reason, before i could think for myself, before i had read the bible and knew the nature of the 'god' we were taught to worship without question. then i set off on a journey that took me to gnosticism -- kabala -- eastern mysticism -- spiritualism -- atheism -- until finally i found refuge ...[text shortened]... piritualism, atheism where you unleash your disgust as forcefully as you do against Jesus Christ ?
Where do you fume against the kabala ?
the god of the kabala is the same one found in the bible.
Where do you snort "fairytale!" against eastern mysticism ?
see one of my replies to dasa.
Where could we go to see your forceful arguments debunking spiritualism and trying to expose the falacious weaknesses of atheism ?
there is nothing to debunk in spiritualism and religion does not have a monopoly on the same. atheism is a state of disbelief in god or gods, there is no weakness there.
I don't mistake your errors in Bible interpretation for "honest analysis" or your assertions for indications that you know what you're talking about.
your opinion is noted. my bible interpretations remain unassailed, your arguments have failed to convince me otherwise.
And while " que sra sera " is a nice song, I also like the Proverb -
"When a man's way brings him to ruin his heart rages against the Lord." (Prov. 19:3) [/b]
my way has not brought me to ruin, so either my heart does not rage against the lord, or the "lord" it rages against is not the lord, or that passage is not a proverb.
i think the latter one is the best explanation. there is no wisdom or truth in that verse.
here is a zen proverb that is much better.
"if you understand, things are just as they are; if you do not understand, things are just as they are."