24 Sep 12
Originally posted by galveston75They probably believe it all has been covered by now. So there is no point in keep repeating everything, because if it were going to get through your thick skull, it would have done so by now. I guess you will just have to hope that the Watchtower is right, however unlikely that may be.
It seems RJH's other trinity believing friends are abadoning him once again as he starts to get off with this weirdness he resorts to.
24 Sep 12
Originally posted by RJHindsAccording to the history of the trinty and the Bible that clearly says God is ((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( 1 ))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) God, I know we have it right.
They probably believe it all has been covered by now. So there is no point in keep repeating everything, because if it were going to get through your thick skull, it would have done so by now. I guess you will just have to hope that the Watchtower is right, however unlikely that may be.
24 Sep 12
4 edits
Originally posted by galveston75You understand that God is ((( 1 ))) GOD and the person of the PATHER is ((( 1)) GOD. So you have that right. We Christians also understand that the person of the SON is ((( 1 ))) GOD and the person of the Holy Spirit is ((( 1 ))) GOD.
According to the history of the trinty and the Bible that clearly says God is ((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((( 1 ))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) God, I know we have it right.
We Christians also understand there is ((( 1 ))) NAME by which we can and must be saved. We Christians also understand there is ((( 1 ))) BAPTISM in the ((( 1 ))) NAME of the FATHER, the SON, and HOLY SPIRIT.
Jehovah's Witnesses only have a partial understanding of what is required by the ((( 1 ))) GOD to be saved. It has nothing to do with how much work we do for GOD. It only has to do with our belief in HIM for we are saved by our faith and trust in HIM. Salvation is a free gift through the grace of GOD that we can not earn.
We can not honor the person of the FATHER without equally honoring the person of the SON and the person of the HOLY SPIRIT. He that does not honor the person of the SON as he honors the person of the FATHER does not honor the ((( 1 ))) GOD. He that speaks blasphemy against the person of the HOLY SPIRIT can not be forgiven of his sins in this world or the world to come because he is not honoring the ((( 1 ))) GOD.
HalleluYAH !!! Praise the LORD! HOLY! HOLY! HOLY!
24 Sep 12
Originally posted by RJHindsAs I said to you earlier enough proof has been shown to you from many here. You believe as you want, so be it.
You understand that God is ((( 1 ))) GOD and the person of the PATHER is ((( 1)) GOD. So you have that right. We Christians also understand that the person of the SON is ((( 1 ))) GOD and the person of the Holy Spirit is ((( 1 ))) GOD.
We Christians also understand there is ((( 1 ))) NAME by which we can and must be saved. We Christians also understand ...[text shortened]... ause he is not honoring the ((( 1 ))) GOD.
HalleluYAH !!! Praise the LORD! HOLY! HOLY! HOLY!
But you are no judge on any level to ever make the comment to anyone that they will burn in hell if you don't believe it or that anyone will not be accepted by God. NO where in the Bible is that ever said about the trinity and you know it.
If you still believe that, that's your problem. But never overstep God and his authority with his judgements on humans.
Shame on you for ever even stating that thought........
24 Sep 12
1 edit
Originally posted by galveston75I am only stating the truth from the Holy Bible and the early fathers of the Christian church. You do not have to believe me to be saved, unless I speak the truth. You too can believe what you wish for God gave each of us a free will so each of us can make our own decision to believe or not to believe.
As I said to you earlier enough proof has been shown to you from many here. You believe as you want, so be it.
But you are no judge on any level to ever make the comment to anyone that they will burn in hell if you don't believe it or that anyone will not be accepted by God. NO where in the Bible is that ever said about the trinity and you know it.
ority with his judgements on humans.
Shame on you for ever even stating that thought........
25 Sep 12
1 edit
Originally posted by RJHindsthe early fathers of the church never heard of a trinity, nor is it anywhere in the bible. what you [pretend] to believe is a council resolution that occurred centuries after christ's alleged passing.
I am only stating the truth from the Holy Bible and the early fathers of the Christian church. You do not have to believe me to be saved, unless I speak the truth. You too can believe what you wish for God gave each of us a free will so each of us can make our own decision to believe or not to believe.
- Joined
- 08 Dec 04
- Moves
- 100919
25 Sep 12
Originally posted by VoidSpiritYour are right on, the trinity was adopted from Greek Mythology, then to paraphrase, Constantine said "believe it or die", which made a lot of instant believers....the rest is history...🙂
the early fathers of the church never heard of a trinity, nor is it anywhere in the bible. what you [pretend] to believe is a council resolution that occurred centuries after christ's alleged passing.
25 Sep 12
Originally posted by checkbaiterYes it was established by the church leaders of that time which as you say caused fear into the minds of those people. How convienent and this pretty much started the dark ages. It was the time that the average person would be killed if caught with a bible of any kind. How convienent again as this kept them in the dark and from learning the truth of the trinity.
Your are right on, the trinity was adopted from Greek Mythology, then to paraphrase, Constantine said "believe it or die", which made a lot of instant believers....the rest is history...🙂
Jesus condemned the religious leaders of his time for the burdensome rules they imposed on their followers. He also said that the new things he was teaching added no further burdens to them and in fact make it easier.
So as he and his apostles warned, these things would eventually happen and ones would come into the congregations with false and burdensome teachings.
The trinity is the prime example of what was fortold.
"Believe it or you will burn in hell". Not a bible teaching at all.
25 Sep 12
Originally posted by galveston75......You really don't know anything about History at all
Yes it was established by the church leaders of that time which as you say caused fear into the minds of those people. How convienent and this pretty much started the dark ages. It was the time that the average person would be killed if caught with a bible of any kind. How convienent again as this kept them in the dark and from learning the truth of the ...[text shortened]... e of what was fortold.
"Believe it or you will burn in hell". Not a bible teaching at all.
Ignorance go get educated read a book or something other than you "Awake" crap
Manny
25 Sep 12
Originally posted by VoidSpiritIgnatius of Antioch is seen providing early support for the Trinity around 110, exhorting obedience to "Christ, and to the Father, and to the Spirit." Justin Martyr (AD 100–ca.165) also writes, "in the name of God, the Father and Lord of the universe, and of our Saviour Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit." However, the first of the early church fathers recorded as actually using the word Trinity was Theophilus of Antioch writing in the late second century. He defines the Trinity as God, His Word (Logos) and His Wisdom (Sophia) in the context of a discussion of the first three days of creation. The first defence of the doctrine of the Trinity was in the early third century by the early church father Tertullian. He explicitly defined the Trinity as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit and defended the Trinitarian theology against the "Praxean" heresy.
the early fathers of the church never heard of a trinity, nor is it anywhere in the bible. what you [pretend] to believe is a council resolution that occurred centuries after christ's alleged passing.
Although there is much debate as to whether the beliefs of the Apostles were merely articulated and explained in the Trinitarian Creeds, or were corrupted and replaced with new beliefs, all scholars recognize that the Creeds themselves were created in reaction to disagreements over the nature of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. These controversies, however, were great and many, and took some centuries to be resolved.
Of these controversies, the most significant developments were articulated in the first four centuries by the Church Fathers in reaction to Adoptionism, Sabellianism, and Arianism. Adoptionism was the belief that Jesus was an ordinary man, born of Joseph and Mary, who became the Christ and Son of God at his baptism. In 269, the Synods of Antioch condemned Paul of Samosata for his Adoptionist theology, and also condemned the term "homoousios" in the sense he used it.
Sabellianism taught that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are aspects of how humanity has interacted with or experienced God. In the role of the Father, God is the provider and creator of all. In the role of the Son, God is manifested in the flesh as a human to bring about the salvation of mankind. In the role of the Holy Spirit, God manifests himself from heaven through his actions on the earth and within the lives of Christians. This view was rejected as heresy by the Ecumenical Councils.
Arianism, which was coming into prominence during the 4th century along with Trinitarianism, taught that the Father came before the Son, and that the Son was a distinct being from the Holy Spirit. In 325, the Council of Nicaea adopted a term for the relationship between the Father and the Son that from then on was seen as the hallmark of orthodoxy; it declared that the Son is "of the same being" as the Father. This was further developed into the formula "three persons, one being".
Saint Athanasius, who was a participant in the Council, stated that the bishops were forced to use this terminology, which is not found in Scripture, because the Biblical phrases that they would have preferred to use were claimed by the Arians to be capable of being interpreted in what the bishops considered to be a heretical sense. They therefore "commandeered the non-scriptural term homoousios ('of the same being'😉 to safeguard the essential relation of the Son to the Father that had been denied by Arius."
Moreover, the meanings of "ousia" and "hypostasis" overlapped then, so that the latter term for some meant essence and for others person. Athanasius of Alexandria (293–373) helped to clarify the terms.
The Confession of the Council of Nicaea said little about the Holy Spirit. The doctrine of the divinity and personality of the Holy Spirit was developed by Athanasius in the last decades of his life. He defended and refined the Nicene formula. By the end of the 4th century, under the leadership of Basil of Caesarea, Gregory of Nyssa, and Gregory of Nazianzus (the Cappadocian Fathers), the doctrine had reached substantially its current form.
The Ante-Nicene Fathers, although likely foreign to the specifics of Trinitarian theology because they were not defined until the 4th century, nevertheless affirmed Christ's deity and referenced "Father, Son and Holy Spirit". Trinitarians view these as elements of the codified doctrine.
By the end of the 4th century, as a result of controversies concerning the proper sense in which to apply to God, Christ and the Holy Spirit terms such as "person", "nature", "essence", and "substance", the doctrine of the Trinity took the form that has since been maintained in all the historic confessions of Christianity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity
25 Sep 12
Originally posted by galveston75Why does the Watchtower add burdens to you, like having to go door-to-door, not being able to accept blood transfusions at the threat of excommunication, not being able to defend your country and family by serving in the military or as a policeman, not being able to vote for your representatives in government, not being able to accept the Holy Spirit as a Person in the Godhead, not being able to take the Lord's Passover Supper, Not being able to be baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit,etc.,etc.?
Yes it was established by the church leaders of that time which as you say caused fear into the minds of those people. How convienent and this pretty much started the dark ages. It was the time that the average person would be killed if caught with a bible of any kind. How convienent again as this kept them in the dark and from learning the truth of the ...[text shortened]... e of what was fortold.
"Believe it or you will burn in hell". Not a bible teaching at all.
25 Sep 12
Originally posted by RJHindsYou really don't understand all these issues with us do you? All these have been explained with scriptures from the Bible over and over and over, and you still don't see.
Why does the Watchtower add burdens to you, like having to go door-to-door, not being able to accept blood transfusions at the threat of excommunication, not being able to defend your country and family by serving in the military or as a policeman, not being able to vote for your representatives in government, not being able to accept the Holy Spirit as a Pe ...[text shortened]... ot being able to be baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit,etc.,etc.?
For example the Bible says not to kill does it not? Plain and simple "do not kill".
But now what has happened that clouds your understanding and the simple acceptance of that command, is your church does not understand that simple command so they have no way of helping you to understand, "do not kill".
And then your church like most churches stand behing the government that we have here in this country. This country is basically a miltary world ruler and has gotten where it is today because of it's military might.
Most all religions here are friends with the government just as Revelation clearly explains.
So with your church not understanding the simple command to "not kill" they don't know how to teach that to ones like you and the others there.
Instead of really listening to God and this command and staying true to him, it's blurry and cloudy to you and this leads to your rationalising and finding ways to get around it and then compromising and not staying loyal to God. You instead let your loyalty slip and finally give it to this government that simply does not obey God with hardly anything.
25 Sep 12
Originally posted by galveston75If that is so, why did God command the Israelites to kill all those animals and people and why did God rain fire and brimstone down to kill all those people in Sodom and turn Lot's wife into a pillar of salt? What do you think God did when he caused the great flood over all the Earth? You don't think many animals and people were killed then? Do you believe as Dasa does that we should not kill any animals to eat? Are you a vegetarian?
You really don't understand all these issues with us do you? All these have been explained with scriptures from the Bible over and over and over, and you still don't see.
For example the Bible says not to kill does it not? Plain and simple "do not kill".
But now what has happened that clouds your understanding and the simple acceptance of that comma ...[text shortened]... inally give it to this government that simply does not obey God with hardly anything.