Originally posted by robbie carrobieWhy do you find the concept so hilarious? Was not Paul led into the desert and taught directly by God (Christ)through the Holy Spirit? The same Holy Spirit taught the apostles after Christ's ascension. Or perhaps you do not believe in a triune God.
hahahahahahahaha, hehehehe, please stop the laughter is agony!
3 edits
Originally posted by robbie carrobie"i have done nothing of the sort and you know it and your insinuation of such is dastardly and underhand and you should be ashamed of yourself for resorting to such trickery and deception,"
i have done nothing of the sort and you know it and your insinuation of such is dastardly and underhand and you should be ashamed of yourself for resorting to such trickery and deception, the reference to Paul's words were clearly to show that all humans are in a state of imperfection, we make mistakes !, it is unavoidable !, because of this fact we adopt, because then you will be able to ascertain the complete picture, rather than snapshots!
There is nothing "underhand[ed]" about it. You cited Paul to back your assertion which is contradictory to what Jesus said in Matthew 5:48. I qualified my assertion with "From what I can tell..". That's all I had to go on with what you posted.
"the reference to Paul's words were clearly to show that all humans are in a state of imperfection, we make mistakes !, it is unavoidable !, because of this fact we sin...humans can never truly be righteous while in a state of imperfection in the absolute sense due to the sin that is inherent, inherited from Adam).
Jesus believes otherwise.
Jesus says that by following Him, one can be made free from committing sin:
John 8:32-36
"...If you continue in My word, then you are truly disciples of Mine; and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free...Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is the slave of sin."
Jesus says that one can be made "complete" in one's righteousness in Matthew 5:48 .
Ask yourself where you get your belief that one cannot overcome sin. Jesus did not teach this. In fact, Jesus taught otherwise.
Originally posted by AThousandYoungHe backed off from this on page 2.
Why don't you offer the verses in question on the thread and give your explanation for why they show that the verse was being taken out of context?
It's a common cheap cop-out for Christians to simply say "you're interpreting it wrong, it's out of context, read more" without elaboration. Many Christians do this and it shows intellectual laziness or dishonesty in my opinion.
1 edit
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneTalking of backing off , any chance whether you could clarify whether you believe in God at all? If not then none of this really has any application to your life at all because it's all defunct and meaningless.
He backed off from this on page 2.
It's just completely bizarre that you waste so many words writing about someone who believed that God was his Father when you don't believe in the Father who He said we should love. Why don't you focus on the teachings of Sartre or some other Atheist like yourself? Just what is it you are trying to prove?
(BTW- Just because you are ignoring me doesn't mean I don't think you are still reading)
2 edits
Originally posted by knightmeisterYou continue to state as fact things of which you are ignorant.
Talking of backing off , any chance whether you could clarify whether you believe in God at all? If not then none of this really has any application to your life at all because it's all defunct and meaningless.
It's just completely bizarre that you waste so many words writing about someone who believed that God was his Father when you don't believe
(BTW- Just because you are ignoring me doesn't mean I don't think you are still reading)
Therefore you continue to be a liar.
You continue to do so willingly and knowingly.
This from someone who professes to follow the God of Truth.
Luke 6:46
"Why do you call me 'Lord, Lord,' and not do what I tell you?"
Perhaps you should consider following the teachings of Jesus instead of your ego.
2 edits
Originally posted by ale1552not only do i not, 'believe in a triune god', which is essentially not only blasphemous, but is clearly of a pagan origin. there is NO CONCEPT OF A TRIUNE GOD IN THE HEBREW SCRIPTURES NOR IN THE GREEK SCRIPTURES, IT IS A DISHONOR TO GOD AND BETRAYS A REAL LACK OF UNDERSTANDING AS TO THE NATURE AND DIVINITY OF CHRIST. It is a concept of Hellenistic origin , which after the great apostasy foretold by Christ entered into church doctrine like so many other false teachings and 'mysterious', misconceptions.
Why do you find the concept so hilarious? Was not Paul led into the desert and taught directly by God (Christ)through the Holy Spirit? The same Holy Spirit taught the apostles after Christ's ascension. Or perhaps you do not believe in a triune God.
i provide the following references for your perusal
The New Encyclopedia Britannica says and i quote: 'Neither the word Trinity, nor the explicit doctrine as such, appears in the New Testament, nor did Jesus and his followers intend to contradict the Shema in the Old Testament, ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord’ - Deuteronomy 6:4...The doctrine developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies....by the end of the 4th century....the doctrine of the Trinity took substantially the form it has maintained ever since.'— Micropaedia, Vol. 10, p. 126.
The New Catholic Encyclopedia states, (not that i completely trust the text but it provides an interesting reference), 'The formulation ‘one God in three Persons’ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century. But it is precisely this formulation that has first claim to the title the Trinitarian dogma. Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective.', Vol. 14, p. 299.
in the encyclopedia Americana we read, 'Christianity derived from Judaism and Judaism was strictly Unitarian (believing that God is one person), the road which led from Jerusalem to Nicea was scarcely a straight one. fourth century Trinitarianism did not reflect accurately early Christian teaching regarding the nature of God; it was, on the contrary, a deviation from this teaching.' , Vol. 27, p. 294
and just to make sure we are getting the import of these words according to the Nouveau Dictionnaire Universel, 'the Platonic trinity, itself merely a rearrangement of older trinities dating back to earlier peoples, appears to be the rational philosophic trinity of attributes that gave birth to the three hypostases or divine persons taught by the Christian churches.....this Greek philosopher’s (Plato, fourth century before Christ) conception of the divine trinity . . . can be found in all the ancient (pagan) religions.”—Paris, 1865-1870, edited by M. Lachâtre, Vol. 2, p. 1467.
and finally John L. McKenzie, S.J., in his Dictionary of the Bible, says: 'the trinity of persons within the unity of nature is defined in terms of ‘person’ and ‘nature’ which are Greek philosophical terms; actually the terms do not appear in the Bible. The trinitarian definitions arose as the result of long controversies in which these terms and others such as ‘essence’ and ‘substance’ were erroneously applied to God by some theologians.'—New York, 1965, p. 899.
hopefully these references will prove helpful, but i doubt it, considering no one likes to be told that a long held cherished belief is essentially pre christian and total complete 100% unadulterated tosh!
but before i go, i would like to say it has been fun, 'rapping', with you guys, but i am neglecting my games of chess which is the real reason why i came to this site, anyhow i may pop in from time to time, just as my friend and nemesis black beetle states, 'to check my variations', i really do wish everyone well -
regards - robbie carrobie son of a thousand opening traps, usually by his opponents!
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI am silent because you have a way of making these grandiose statements but then leaving the board when they begin to unravel.
whats this, are the trinitarians silent, man thats a first!
So I thought, "If this is like his grandiose pronouncement about there being no eternal punishment in the Bible, he might discontinue when I labor to correct his errors."
I guess you and I have one discontinued and outstanding debate going. I don't feel to start another.
1 edit
Originally posted by jaywillalas i am but a poor sinner, you must correct my erroneous statements and save me from eternal damnation (if it actually existed), or acknowledge their potency, because nothing is as potent as the truth my friend! it is your duty as a disciple of the greatest man who ever graced the earth with his presence!
I am silent because you have a way of making these grandiose statements but then leaving the board when they begin to unravel.
So I thought, "If this is like his grandiose pronouncement about there being no eternal punishment in the Bible, he might discontinue when I labor to correct his errors."
I guess you and I have one discontinued and outstanding debate going. I don't feel to start another.
as for the other debate, we shall return their, no doubt, but things move so fast on this forum that i think you will agree that we can easily get sidetracked!
3 edits
Originally posted by robbie carrobie[/b] This is how you concluded our previous discussion:
[b]
=====================================
excuse me, i have had enough, i am going back to the chess only forum, its not that i cannot give reasonable arguments, its just the futility of the thing, the citations that you mention are clearly and readily understandable and are easily explicable, but i have neither the energy nor the appetite, i have had enough, i knew it was a mistake to come here in the first place, its a minefield of misconception and preconception and debates about words and trivialities, sorry but i can take no more, - regards to all Robert.
===========================================
And now you're being somewhat bitterly sarcastic. Come on now.
============================================
alas i am but a poor sinner,
===============================================
Aren't we all sinners? Some of us are simply sinners saved by grace.
===============================
you must correct my erroneous statements
=================================
I notice that you wish to correct mine. C'mon Robert
==========================================
and save me from eternal damnation (if it actually existed),
========================================
You're making too many assumptions. This exchange we had was not about the state of your personal salvation.
==========================================
or acknowledge their potency, because nothing is as potent as the truth my friend! it is your duty as a disciple of the greatest man who ever graced the earth with his presence
=====================================
You were wrong about eternal punishment. And I believe you are reactionary and also wrong concerning the Trinity.
Originally posted by jaywilljaywill, at the time i really did feel that i had had enough, and the only reason that i came back was that black beetle, an excellent fellow, if a little given to drink and song, 'the ruination of Scotland,' as the Calvinists would have us believe coaxed me into doing so.
This is how you concluded our previous discussion:
=====================================
excuse me, i have had enough, i am going back to the chess only forum, its not that i cannot give reasonable arguments, its just the futility of the thing, the citations that you mention are clearly and readily understandable and are easily explicable, but ...[text shortened]... eternal punishment. And I believe you are rreactionary and also wrong concerning the Trinity.
yes i am a little mocking in my tone, but the line it is drawn and the statements have been made, if they are refutable then lets get on with it, put them to the sword, if not you must acknowledge that you are erroneous and readjust your understanding accordingly, or prove otherwise, in either way, we are both helped!
all that i can say is that of all the forum contributors i really do think that you are one of the most sincere, if IMHO, misguided, and what is more, i can prove it with the references i made originally!
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobie======================================
jaywill, at the time i really did feel that i had had enough, and the only reason that i came back was that black beetle, an excellent fellow, if a little given to drink and song, 'the ruination of Scotland,' as the Calvinists would have us believe coaxed me into doing so.
yes i am a little mocking in my tone, but the line it is drawn and the stat ...[text shortened]... e, if IMHO, misguided, and what is more, i can prove it with the references i made originally!
yes i am a little mocking in my tone, but the line it is drawn and the statements have been made, if they are refutable then lets get on with it, put them to the sword, if not you must acknowledge that you are erroneous and readjust your understanding accordingly, or prove otherwise, in either way, we are both helped!
all that i can say is that of all the forum contributors i really do think that you are one of the most sincere, if IMHO, misguided, and what is more, i can prove it with the references i made originally!
==========================================
Thankyou for the compliment. There are a number of others who are sincere on both sides of the issues. We just don't always agree.
Now which discussion do you want to have, Hell or the Trinity ? I think the Trinity is a little more appettizing. But as you know it has been debated for centries. At best I can lay out what and why I believe that a Triune God is biblical.
Let me say this, I think it is good to carefully examine a teaching as you have. Often real problems may be exposed. Often the truth is somewhere in the middle area between two extremes.
There are also some unknowns. We have to be willing to admit that there are things which we don't know.
For instance, that the Son is God and the Father is God and the Holy Spirit is also God, is entirely bibilcal. If you press me "How can this be ?" I would have to admit that I don't know.
But I do know that we can experience this Triune God and enjoy Him.
1 edit
Originally posted by jaywillman, im done with hell at the moment, lay what you got about the trinity on me! because i do not accept that christ is the father, nor that the holy spirit is a person.
[b]======================================
yes i am a little mocking in my tone, but the line it is drawn and the statements have been made, if they are refutable then lets get on with it, put them to the sword, if not you must acknowledge that you are erroneous and readjust your understanding accordingly, or prove otherwise, in either way, we are both hel that I don't know.
But I do know that we can experience this Triune God and enjoy Him.
3 edits
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThere are two extremes to avoid. One is Tritheism - the teaching of three Gods.
man, im done with hell at the moment, lay what you got about the trinity on me! because i do not accept that christ is the father, nor that the holy spirit is a person.
The other extreme is Modalism - a teaching that only one of the Trinity can be in existence at one time.
Between these two opposite extremes - Tritheism and Modalism, I believe the truth lies. The Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God.
I guess that I would say that the term "eternal life" not only means to be everlasting duration. Nor would it simply mean qualitatively perfect.
At this time I think "eternal life" should also mean a life which is beyond limitation. This God is beyond limitation in His being.
Really to give the believer in Christ eternal life means for God to give Himself to man. He brings man up into this limitless matter of the Three living within each another.
Some theologians call this "coinherance" - within each of the Trinity the Other lives. They mutually coinhere within one another.
And this eternal life which is the Triune God is what God intende to dispense into man.
We can never separate what God is from what God does. He is a Trinity not so people can have a doctrine of the Trinity. He is a Trinity because He intends to dispense His life and nature into man, to unite humanity with Divinity, to impart Himself as the eternal life to man.
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneYou continue to state as fact things of which you are ignorant.
You continue to state as fact things of which you are ignorant.
Therefore you continue to be a liar.
You continue to do so willingly and knowingly.
This from someone who professes to follow the God of Truth.
Luke 6:46
"Why do you call me 'Lord, Lord,' and not do what I tell you?"
Perhaps you should consider following the teachings of Jesus instead of your ego.
----------ToOne---------------------------
If you really believed in the active Father God of Jesus then you would just openly declare it , there would be nothing stopping you. It's reasonable assumption. There is also evidence from our other discussions (eg omniscience) that you find the idea of God contradictory and you have a tendency to fall on the side of the Atheists in discussions about God.
It's also reasonable to assume that the reason why you keep this aspect of you position a secret is because to reveal it would undermine you greatly. Therefore , it's not exactly a great leap of faith to assume that you don't actually believe in Jesus's claim that he was God's Son.
So what happens ? You play this smart alec BS game hiding what you really believe behind a veil. I am certain you don't believe in God and I'm not a liar. The definition of a liar is someone who knowingly states something as true which they know to be false. I'm just saying that I know something by faith. Jesus suggested that we should state all sorts of things confidently as true without really knowing for sure , we can do it via faith. I have faith that you don't really believe in God. If you did it wouldn't bother you so much that I keep confronting you on it.
Mind you , I didn't know whether there were WMD's in iraq , but I could smell the BS a mile off and was hardly walking on thin ice when I told my friend they wouldn't find any.