Spirituality
22 Oct 11
24 Oct 11
2 edits
Originally posted by SuzianneThis is an utterly nonsensical statement.
.... I'd wager that the writers of the Bible ... thought not to include it since it seems so obvious....
Paul in his writings included the obvious, the not-so-obvious and the totally obscure doctrines, as long as it was important for ones salvation.
Paul was sent to preach and Christ told him what to preach ..
Rom_15:19 Through mighty signs and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of God; so that from Jerusalem, and round about unto Illyricum, I have fully preached the gospel of Christ.
Fully preached .. he spoke at length about everything from women's role in the church to the death and resurrection of Christ, listed details about living righteous lives.
Maybe you dont appreciate the underlying implications of your statment. You are in effect accusing Paul of not preaching the whole truth about God and Christ. But since we know Paul preached what Christ told him to preach, then you are accusing Christ of not telling Paul all the doctrines that he should preach.
Either way you demonstrate a kind of arrogance which Christ will not take kindly to since you are placing man's fallible interpretation over the Apostles clear and complete teachings.
24 Oct 11
Originally posted by SuzianneTrinity is a relatively new concept. I'd wager that the writers of the Bible (the ones living AFTER Christ, since how would those living before Christ even conceive of there one day being a Jesus Christ?) thought not to include it since it seems so obvious.
Why on earth do you fight more with Christians than with the unbelievers amongst us?
As to your statement above, how many "prophets, seers, acolytes" have there been SINCE the Son of God?
Trinity is a relatively new concept. I'd wager that the writers of the Bible (the ones living AFTER Christ, since how would those living before Christ even conceive ...[text shortened]... ehement about this.
"nope, I don't buy it, it's baloney" would suffice, I would think.
How would they? Because his coming is fortold in the old testament; the fact that there one day would be a messiah is the reason they sacrifice lambs or the best take from their crops... why Jesus is called "The Lamb of God."
D'oh!
24 Oct 11
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThe parrot is flying from thread to thread. Shew Parrot, don't bother me. 😀
i don't wish to believe anything, i just accept what is before me. place the bible before me and i will not find a trinity in it. neither will you. consider the entire scripture as you must. there is no trinity. read every page carefully, still no trinity. read it backwards and sideways. no trinity.
ask any of the alleged prophets, seers, acolytes ...[text shortened]... y thing you have considered is what the church has told you, you have not considered the bible.
24 Oct 11
Originally posted by tomtom232The Latin term we call "trinity" was first written down by Irenaeus to
[b]Trinity is a relatively new concept. I'd wager that the writers of the Bible (the ones living AFTER Christ, since how would those living before Christ even conceive of there one day being a Jesus Christ?) thought not to include it since it seems so obvious.
How would they? Because his coming is fortold in the old testament; the fact that there o ...[text shortened]... lambs or the best take from their crops... why Jesus is called "The Lamb of God."
D'oh![/b]
help him present the ideas he had received from Polycarp, who was
a disciple of John, a disciple of Christ. So even though the term had
not been used before, the idea was presented as can be see in John's
gospel. See the following on Irenaeus:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus
24 Oct 11
Originally posted by RJHindsTell that to Suzianne... what is in bold came forth from her fingers hitting the keyboard not mine.
The Latin term we call "trinity" was first written down by Irenaeus to
help him present the ideas he had received from Polycarp, who was
a disciple of John, a disciple of Christ. So even though the term had
not been used before, the idea was presented as can be see in John's
gospel. See the following on Irenaeus:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus
24 Oct 11
Originally posted by robbie carrobieOk I know you're not retarded, so I'm going to have assume you are deliberately avoiding the question in the OP for last 200+ posts because you can't answer it not because you don't understand it.
where does Jesus claim that he is almighty God incarnate as you have publicly stated ?
either produce it or you are a liar. They were your words, were they not? so where
does he say it?
24 Oct 11
Originally posted by divegeesteryou stated, and i quote, Christ is claiming that he is Almighty God incarnate, evidence
Ok I know you're not retarded, so I'm going to have assume you are deliberately avoiding the question in the OP for last 200+ posts because you can't answer it not because you don't understand it.
nill, conclusion, fat lie, action, end of story.
24 Oct 11
1 edit
Originally posted by divegeesterbecause he told a big fat lie and could not substantiate it, but wait, that means you
...so they were going to stone him for...what, being a bit rude?
should be stoned as well, Noobster, another for stoning, we could stone them together.