25 Oct 08
4 edits
Originally posted by robbie carrobie=====================================
we haven't even discussed the holy spirit, as for the whole discussion with regard to Christ being one with the father, Nemesio has covered it quite comprehensively and i have nothing more to say that he has not already stated in the most convincing, clear and succinct manner.
it is the trinitarians who are lost here, i don know if you have notice ...[text shortened]... sed on what others perceive us to be, please do not make the same mistake!
regards Robert.
as to the question of what i am, i have already stated to jaywill that i am a human being and wish to be considered as such, my father is a roman catholic and my mother an Irish protestant, and where i live, with such close proximity to Ireland, i have seen enough religious prejudice to last a thousand lifetimes based on what others perceive us to be, please do not make the same mistake!
===========================================
Robert, that is very interesting about your backround and your greviences over religious tensions.
Let be remind you that you are the one coming to the board with grandstanding proclamations like "There is no Trinity in the Bible." And "There is no eternal punishment in the Bible - zilch, none at all. Trust me." (paraphrased)
You made these grand procouncements practically to challenge and invite contraversy. Please don't insinuate me as a source of religious tension because I didn't Amen your grandiose pronouncements which I think are both wrong.
You may have an amen corner with Nemesio. You do not with some of us other readers of the Holy Bible.
25 Oct 08
Originally posted by jaywillhi jaywill, i have accused you of many things, (speaking in tongues, promulgating false teachings etc etc) but never religious intolerance nor was the statement ever meant to insinuate that you were a source of religious tension, it was merely meant to point out that when we start to talk of different denominations sometimes prejudice can arise, therefore i have avoided all such, giving my own experience as justification for doing so, and yes, the statements were meant as a challenge, and yes they are controversial, but hey, we got to talk about something!!! and furthermore i feel it has been richly rewarding in the process, as, with regard to the trinity i always suspected it was mince, now i have it confirmed 100%, and guess what, i have you guys to thank for it, lol 😛
[b]=====================================
as to the question of what i am, i have already stated to jaywill that i am a human being and wish to be considered as such, my father is a roman catholic and my mother an Irish protestant, and where i live, with such close proximity to Ireland, i have seen enough religious prejudice to last a thousand lifetimes base ...[text shortened]... e an amen corner with Nemesio. You do not with some of us other readers of the Holy Bible.
25 Oct 08
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI'm sorry if I appear grumpy. The discussion for a large part has been constructive.
hi jaywill, i have accused you of many things, (speaking in tongues, promulgating false teachings etc etc) but never religious intolerance nor was the statement ever meant to insinuate that you were a source of religious tension, it was merely meant to point out that when we start to talk of different denominations sometimes prejudice can arise, ther ...[text shortened]... was mince, now i have it confirmed 100%, and guess what, i have you guys to thank for it, lol 😛
====================================
furthermore i feel it has been richly rewarding in the process, as, with regard to the trinity i always suspected it was mince, now i have it confirmed 100%, and guess what, i have you guys to thank for it, lol
=======================================
Yea, Yea. Gooood for you.
25 Oct 08
1 edit
Originally posted by jaywillhi jaywill, actually i must commend you actually, because of all the supporters of the aforementioned doctrine, you at least tried and continue to provide a scriptural basis for your arguments, and that is to be commended, really it is, however it must be pointed out that we cannot 'go beyond', the things that are written, otherwise we get into debates about things that are essentially non scriptural, and we end up having to explain things like 'essence', and , 'substance', which is a philosophical kind of debate and open to much interpretation!
I'm sorry if I appear grumpy. The discussion for a large part has been constructive.
[b]====================================
furthermore i feel it has been richly rewarding in the process, as, with regard to the trinity i always suspected it was mince, now i have it confirmed 100%, and guess what, i have you guys to thank for it, lol
=======================================
Yea, Yea. Gooood for you.[/b]
anyhow i do agree that for the most part it has been constructive, however due to the fast pace often we are unable to cover everything, thus i really wondered at your understanding of Mathew 5:5 which is with reference to the meek inheriting the earth, maybe if you have time at some point we could talk about this. what was also interesting was the different type of characters that came to the fore, both for and against the argument, it was really interesting, as you are now probably aware i am a joker !! also what kind of music do you compose ? i taught myself to compose four part harmony a long time ago, but have forgotten most things, but i really love music and have a great admiration for artists!
25 Oct 08
2 edits
Originally posted by robbie carrobieSome of us are not mostly concerned with doctrine. We are concerned for the experience of the Father - Son - Holy Spirit.
hi jaywill, actually i must commend you actually, because of all the supporters of the aforementioned doctrine, you at least tried and continue to provide a scriptural basis for your arguments, and that is to be commended, really it is, however it must be pointed out that we cannot 'go beyond', the things that are written, otherwise we get into deba ve forgotten most things, but i really love music and have a great admiration for artists!
Many people who raise objections to the doctrine of the Trinity seem to think that a group of people had nothing to do but imagine difficult and mind boggling concepts to confuse people. As if these critics would say "How foolish they were. Hoiw much more clear do we understand the Bible."
The Christians who defended attacks against the Person of Christ said in essence "Wait a minute. We experience something. We all have this experience in common. We touch Jesus and we touch God. We know it. And we know that we know it. Aside from this we have these many passages in the Bible. They may be difficult to reconcile and many seem contradictory. However our subjective experience bears witness that these statements are true."
How can enyone who has known Christ say that the Holy Spirit is not a Person ?
I am sorry to say, but when I hear statements like "The Holy Spirit is not God" or "The Holy Spirit is merely a force." I have a question mark. I ask myself "What has this person been experiencing anyway? Are they an unregenerated person who is religious and has read the Bible a lot and is trying to make sense of it all ? "
I find it very difficult to believe that a person who has been born of the Spirit of God so as to be a Christian cannot recognize that he is involved with a Living Person.
If makes me wonder if this person complaining that the Spirit is just a power is someone who can say "I know God in more than a merely objective and doctrinal way."
It also makes me wonder why such a person cannot embrace paradoxical statements from the Bible. If they are commited to the truth of Scripture, why cannot they embrace ALL Scripture ?
I CANNOT fully explain how the Word can be WITH God and also be God. That is very mysterious. But I know that that is what God chose to say in His Word. What I have to do is BELIEVE.
And since the day I called on Jesus God became real to me, I have no problem believing that the Word was with God and yet the Word was God.
I compose symphonic music. on an amatuer level. I also put Bible verses to music. I am mostly self taught. But I did attend a college composition curriculum years ago.
25 Oct 08
Originally posted by jaywillQuoting St Paul is hardly going to demonstrate your case. Note in Romans 8:33-34:
The Spirit of God = The Spirit of Christ = Christ = The Spirit of the One Who raised Christ Jesus from the dead.
Who will bring any charge against God's elect. It is God who justifies. Who is to condemn? It
is Christ Jesus, who died, yes, who was raised, who is at the right hand of God, who indeed intercedes
for us.
You would have us believe that St Paul was so clumsy a writer that he would say that Jesus is at
the right hand of Himself?
In chapter 15:5-6, St Paul writes:
May the God of steadfastness and encouragement grant you to live in harmony with one
another, in accordance with Christ Jesus, so that together you may with one voice glorify the
God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Again, St Paul is such a fumbling writer that he seems to think that God is Jesus' God just like
He is the God for everyone else.
This is all from the very same letter that you quoted from. I can cite another two dozen or so
similar juxtapositions.
You see, you aren't actually addressing my points. You're just raising points that appear to
support your claim. For example, you haven't explained how semantically Jesus could say,
'Believe in God, believe also in me,' and really mean that He was God. You've just ignored
it and said the 'son of God is God.' It doesn't address the point; it's just a reassertion of your
existing opinion without support. And, of course, you conveniently say that the sons and
daughters of God that believers become is somehow different. There is nothing in the Bible to
rule out the possibility that Jesus became the Son of God. Yes, I know you think it's heresy,
but your belief in it is Creedal, not Biblical.
But, I'll address your Romans point (a courtesy you won't return to me, I'm sure). Let's look
at the whole passage (which you of course did not cite):
But you are not in the flesh; you are in the Spirit, since the Spirit of God dwells in you. Anyone
who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him. But if Christ is in you, though
the body is dead because of sin, the Spirit is life because of righteousness. If the Spirit of him
who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will give life
to your mortal bodies also through his spirit that dwells in you.
And just a bit later (15b-17)
When we cry, 'Abba! Father!' it is that very Spirit bearing witness with our spirit that we are
children of God, and if children, then heirs, heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ -- if,
in fact, we suffer with him so that we may also be glorified with him.
Looking at verses 15b-17 first, we see that St Paul says that believers are children of God (as
in sons and daughters). Now, naturally you wouldn't say they don't become God. But further,
he says that believers become 'heirs of God' (kleronomoi theou) and 'joint heirs with Christ'
(sogkleronomoi Christou). Again we see a bracing and unequivocal dichotomy between God
and Jesus. Believers don't become heirs to God and Jesus. They become heirs to God's
kingdom along side Jesus, joining Him as a child of God.
So, with this unequivocal juxtaposition, we return to the first passage (9-11). One who does not
have the 'spirit of Christ' which can be understood as faith in Him, cannot come to God and
become joint heirs with Christ of the kingdom. That is, the spirit of Christ -- which, you will
recall, means the spirit of the anointed or spirit of the messiah -- leads to having the Spirit of
God in you. And, the verse 11 returns to the juxtaposition, where the spirit of God raised the
Anointed One from the dead.
So, again, you've only served to cite a passage that further illustrates the distinction that St
Paul saw between Jesus and God, not one that vindicates your Creedal belief.
Nemesio
25 Oct 08
Originally posted by jaywillThis is a doctrine, Jaywill. Basically, you're saying 'I'm not concerned with doctrines. I'm concerned
Some of us are not mostly concerned with doctrine. We are concerned for the experience of the Father - Son - Holy Spirit.
with a doctrine.'
Can you please, please try to avoid these blatant contradictions?
Nemesio
25 Oct 08
Originally posted by jaywillI'm not 'amenning' Robbie. I'm showing you what you refuse to see for yourself: how the Bible
You may have an amen corner with Nemesio.
actually reads.
I've said on a number of occasions that I think it's totally fine to have a Creedal faith. I have no
objection to it. I just insist that the individual be honest about it. If you want to believe in the
Trinity, then you have my explicit blessing, as it were. I'm just asking that you concede that it's
not a Sola Scriptura theological framework.
Nemesio
25 Oct 08
2 edits
Originally posted by NemesioWe are not concerned with right doctrine just for the sake of right doctrine in and of itself.
This is a doctrine, Jaywill. Basically, you're saying 'I'm not concerned with doctrines. I'm concerned
with a doctrine.'
Can you please, please try to avoid these blatant contradictions?
Nemesio
Some of us are not for wrong doctrinal teachings. That is for sure. But some of us are not concerned with right teachings just to be dead right. And neither is the New Testament.
You do have a problem with fine points. You seem to like to paint everything with a broad brush.
25 Oct 08
Originally posted by jaywillummm, is this a trick question, because it sure looks like it, no doubt however, you have a point to make jaywill me ol friend, so enough of this monkey business, make with the reddies and lets get on with it !
Robert,
Does the God Almighty appear in these books
[b]Exodus, Zechariah, Ezekiel ? [/b]
25 Oct 08
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI'll allow you to revize your answer if you do not like where it leads, if you can do so in good conscience.
ummm, is this a trick question, because it sure looks like it, no doubt however, you have a point to make jaywill me ol friend, so enough of this monkey business, make with the reddies and lets get on with it !
How about it? Does the Almighty God exist in the book of Zechariah ?
How would one know ?
25 Oct 08
2 edits
Robert,
is there ANY reason that I should believe that Jehovah in the books of Exodus or Zechariah or Psalms is NOT the Almighty God ?
For example is there any reason why I should not understand that Jehovah is God Almighty in the book of Zechariah ?
Speak now or forever hold your peace.
25 Oct 08
1 edit
Does this verse refer to Almighty God ?
" Thus says Jehovah of hosts, if you will walk in My ways and if you will keep My charge, then you will both judge My house and keep My courts, and I will grant you to walk among these standing here." (Zech. 3:7)
Is there any reason why we should think that this Jehovah is not God the Almighty ?
Is there any cause to reason that this Jehovah God is other than God Almighty ?
Can any of you give me an answer ?
25 Oct 08
Originally posted by jaywilllol, jaywill, i will give an answer to these most interestingly phrased questions after some careful examination of the text and the scriptures sited, because as in chess, one false move or one inaccuracy can lead us into peril, so i will need a little time for research and/meditation, so that as Solomon states, we may find the correct words
Robert,
is there ANY reason that I should believe that [b]Jehovah in the books of Exodus or Zechariah or Psalms is NOT the Almighty God ?
For example is there any reason why I should not understand that Jehovah is God Almighty in the book of Zechariah ?
Speak now or forever hold your peace.[/b]
Ecclesiastes 1:13 'And I gave my heart to seek and search out by wisdom concerning all things that are done under heaven', 😀