In the bible the term "eternal son" does not exist, so don't bother using it. The man Jesus Christ was given that name from His Father (John 5:43), and that name is the name above every name (Philippians 2:9-11), not only in this age but in the one to come ( Ephesians 1:19-21).
@MrPentecostal93 "In the bible the term "eternal son" does not exist, so don't bother using it."
ROFLOL please do NOT trot out this stupid argument again. PLEASE! Who cares whether or NOT technical terms appear in the Bible? Do the ideas appear? Yes!
Now YOU don't bother to blaspheme and say Jesus (the Son) ONLY was a thought, idea, proposal, plan, etc.. Do NOT deny the Son's existence! REPENT!
@Blogrich55 You could've shown 1 Timothy 3:16 to be a corrupted add-on instead. Sir Isaac Newton. Have you read "Two Notable Corruptions in Scripture"?
You are assuming it IS corrupted or spurious. THAT has NEVER been proved. As for Sir Isaac Newton, who I am convince was a good Christian, he is NOT a biblical scholar. You have appealed to authority.
Newton's books on Daniel and Revelation are strange indeed to say the least.
@Blogrich55 Newton argued that, by a small alteration in the Greek text, the word "God" was substituted to make the phrase read "God was manifest in the flesh." instead of "He was manifest in the flesh." He demonstrated that early Church writers in referring to the verse knew nothing of such an alteration.
@Blogrich55 One is the word "God" from 1 Tim 3:16 and the second is the entire verse of 1 John 5:7; both of which did not exist in any of the 500+ Greek manuscripts (only the Vulgate.) 1 John 5:7 is commonly referred to as the Comma Johanneum. Besides the NIV, these two passages are also corrected to reflect the Greek majority in the following versions: ASV, RSV, NRSV, NASB, ESV, NWT, etc.
God manifest, or revealed, Himself in the flesh of a man to Abraham too in Genesis chapter 18.
watch?v=1cjXj6TMOAM
Regarding the name Jesus, even the J didn't even get put on until the middle ages. The Hebrew name of the Messiah is Yahshua (Yeshua) which means YHWH saves, rescues or delivers.
@PeteWaldo "God manifest, or revealed, Himself in the flesh..."
Yes God, the Holy Trinity did manifest Himself to Abraham. However, God does NOT mean Father exclusively. Many Christians and cult members (such as the JWs) think that when they see the word God it ONLY means Father. You are right about the names/name of God. We do tend to acknowledge and use the various names used for God in different languages; Jesús in Spanish, for example. God bless.
The Arabic name "Allah" however was the NAME of one of 360 idols the Quraish pagans venerated at their Kaaba. It is a NAME of blasphemy when used in place of God's NAME. Though it occurs in Arabic bibles that doesn't change that it's blasphemy.
@Blogrich55 When working with Muslims I try to use the names Yahweh and Yeshua interchangeably, depending on appropriateness, to help emphasize that they DO NOT worship Yeshua but instead follow the EXACT OPPOSITE of the WHOLE SUBJECT of the Gospel.
brotherpete. com
watch?v=ujUOZyrnewE
It is a little terrifying to ponder as to how Yahweh could be exhibiting his anger against bible believers that use the name "Allah" instead of Yahweh. For example
THE BIBLE DOES THE WORD EVEN MENTION TRINITY OR EVEN ONESS. "ONE GOD, ONE FAITH, ONE BAPTISM.... " "HEAR O' IRASEL THE LORD OUR GOD IS ONE LORD..." JESUS--GOD IS OUR FATHER, SINCE HE DID CREATE US. HE IS THE SON, SINCE SHE DID COME FROM A WOMEN BUT THE SEED WAS FROM GOD. AND HE IS THE HOLY SPIRIT, SINCE HE IS ALWAYS WITH US. WE CAN FEEL HIM BUT WE CANT SEE HIM.... THUS, THE HOLY SPIRIT.
JESUS IS GOD... NOT GOD THE SON... BUT SON OF GOD!!!!!!
wow, this video is just as ridiculous as its claim.
consider if you will, the cartoon character in this video is just like trinitarian beleivers, moving by the volition of their own flesh to make it up the stairs of truth, taking flights as quickly as they know how to make it to truth, to explain by reason of carnal understanding, that God is three persons, when he clearly stated He was,is,and always be one person. With God all things are possible, but like this video, God is placed in a box
If you want a real good thigh slapper and guffawing laughterr, try reading THE ONENESS OF GOD by Apostolic apologist Dr. David K. Bernard. I have read in it in both Spanish and English and neither makes any sense.
Show me a scripture where God says He is only one PERSON. You can't do it! One God, of course all Trinitarians believe this. One Being but NOT one person. Being and person are NOT the same thing no matter how obtuse you Jesus Onlyists are. You limit God and make Jesus His own Father!
i'll pray for you and the power of the Holy Ghost will overshadow you, and give you understanding, but one thing i will never claim...that is to give you understanding
So are you going to produce a single scripture that says God is ONE PERSON ? Don't bother quoting the scriptures that teach there is only one God. We agree on that.
Yes and I will believe Almighty God who has eternally existed as 3 distinct person when He spoke from Heaven as the Father in Matt 3:17 about the Son and the Holy Spirit descended in the form of a dove on the Son. The Father said clearly:
"THIS is My beloved Son in whom I am well pleased."' Mtt 3:17 He did NOT say:
"I am my beloved Son and I''m pretty pleased with myself."
By claiming the Father dwelt in the purely human Christ and deny the Eternal Son or Word, you deny Christ's deity as well
Can anyone tell me WHO we will see when we get to heaven? We will see Jesus right? HE is The King of kings, the judge, the high priest, the lamb of God, the lion of the tribe of judah, the creator, the Son, the alpha and omega, the ancient of days, the I AM, the everlasting Father, the Mighty God, the Light, the Rock, the Holy One, the Almighty, the Word. Now I have not listed 17 persons of the Godhead here but roles or positions that belong to the same ONE GOD and his name is JESUS.
No, you have named various titles of the Son of God whose name is Jesus. So do you now admit you believe He is His own Father? If you believe Jesus is BOTH the Son and the Father then LOGICALLY you must believe He is His own Father. What nonsense.
I named titles "The everlasting Father and The Mighty God" so according to your response you agree with meJesus is indeed the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost. Base you doctrine of the Godhead on scripture and don't try to make the Father and the Son in the image of man. I have a Father and I am his Son but I can not say I and my father are one because we are two persons. Jesus said, "I and my father are ONE" Jesus is the Father in the flesh and he calls that flesh the Son of God
Everlasting Father is better translated as Father of eternity. Of course Jesus is the Mighty God. And to YOU this means I think He is the Father and the Holy Ghost? You must have strange reasoning skills friend.
No one is making the Father and the Son conform to the image of man. NOTE WELL: "I and My Father are one" is NOT saying either:
1. I and My Father are one and the same person
2. I am My Father
If the Father is in the flesh and the flesh is the son you have a possession not incarnation.
So you do believe according to Isa. 9:6 is talking of Jesus. No doubt on that. You say this refers to Father of eternity, not Everlasting Father. Where did you get your reasoning...you just said the same thing. Do you think this verse speaks of another Father? Who do you think will be in eternity on the throne to judge as King of kings. Jesus is. Oh yeah, "I and my Father are one" is definitely saying me and God are 2 persons. And where is 3rd person in all this?
Jesus is The King of kings and The Prince of Peace. How can he be the King and Prince at the same time? Jesus is the Lamb of God and the Lion of Judah? How can he be a lamb and lion at the same time? Jesus is The Mighty God and the Son of God at the same time. How can these things be? BECAUSE Jesus is God all by Himself and He can be whatever He wants to be at any time he wants. Jesus is God and God is Jesus And I would not wanna be the trinitarian who tells Him He can't.
I wouldn't want to be the nut telling Him He is His own Father either. Yet if He is both the Father and the Son this is the result. Think and PRAY about it and STUDY your Bible sir.
Let me get it straight. I am a nut for believing that Jesus is Father, Son, and Holy Ghost? Did he not say "I and my Father are one and He that hath seen me hath seen the Father". Also Jesus said "I am come in my Father's name". He also prayed in the garden saying, "I have manifested thy name" speaking of the Father. Jesus said it is not I that doeth the works, but the Father that DWELLETH IN ME. To wit, that God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself. This is the incarnation.
Isaiah 9:6 "For unto us a child(Jesus) is born, unto us a son(Jesus) is given: and the government shall be upon his(Jesus) shoulder: and his name(Jesus) shall be called Wonderfull, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace." So, Jesus is called The everlasting Father and The Prince of Peace. But Jesus is ONE person right? This verse calls him a Father and a Son. That can't be good for the trinity doctrine. But that's Bible so too bad. Jesus Is The One God
Isaiah 9:6 is better translated Father of eternity. Do you see the name Jesus written there? No! Yet I freely admit it is talking of Him. Yet the Bible has Jesus speaking of His Father. Is He the Father? Then He must be His own Father according to your nonsense.
Even you can see the oneness but it's hard for you to explain the "RELATIONSHIP" between Father and Son. It can be understood properly without believing in multiple persons. Multiple persons is never written in the Bible, not one verse. The word trinity, not in the Bible. Holy One is in Bible over and over but never a Holy Three. That is a tradition of men originating with the catholic church and their coucils of men who decided they knew more than the apostles and created new doctrines.
Of course the Bible mentions the Holy One and NOT Holy Three. Deuteronomy 6:4 plainly tells us there is one God. Trinitarians do NOT believe in 3 gods no matter how much propaganda is slung at them by the Oneness.
No multiple persons? What about the baptism of Jesus Christ in Matthew 3:16-17 was Jesus a magician doing a dove act? Was He a ventriloquist throwing His voice from heaven?
Your parrot is repeating his schtick about the word Trinity not being in the bible. I do have some crackers.XD
I will gladly debate the biblical teaching of Who Jesus Christ is, but not if you want to make senseless jokes in the mean time. This turns it into your ego against mine which is not profitable. I would rather hear your BEST explanations than your worst jokes.
Sorry about that bro. But do you REALIZE how many times I have heard the genetic fallacy concerning the supposed Roman Catholic origin of the doctrine of the Holy Trinity??
It is no secret that Joe was a Mormon and ripped off all their secret signs and mumbojumbo as the basis of his temple ceremonies. He even gave masonic signs when he was being killed.
I would of loved to meet someone like that. and picked their brain to see what makes them tick..
I know alot about the Mason/ Mormons and occultic practice.. But I just don`t get why they do it.. Do they think it works in some magical way?
I personally don`t see the connection to living a life of symbols, unless your using it to get a advantage from others whom know the symbols and would chose you over another person to do work for them on any type of project etc...
You want scripture. Look up 1 John 5:17 in the King James bible. Now look it up in ANY other bible, NIV, AMP, NASV, etc.
Jesus did not believe in the Trinity. Don't you think he would have stated something clear about this central doctrine? The word "Trinity" is not in the Bible, nor is the doctrine explicitly taught there.
The clearest early expression of the concept came with Tertullian, a Latin theologian who wrote in the early third century.
"Jesus did not believe in the Trinity." CONSIDERyou
How do you know that? This is an argument from silence. Many doctrines are not laid out but must be built from scripture. Do the words hermeneutics and exegesis mean anything to you?
Your accusations against me say a lot. And your disrespect of Jesus, your "building" your doctrines on hearsay, from your private interpretation, and feeling so dogmatically certain about so many things Jesus never wrote down or explicitly decreed, says a lot about your arrogance.
"All that rubbish about Personhood, Jesus never mentioned. That was committees of men, after Jesus died. Yes, disrespect." Cyou
So you deny Jesus was a person? A lot of you deny God is a person as well. Jesus NEVER wrote down anything for your information. Do you even bother to read the Bible? Or do you just turn the pages and pretend you are studying His word?
To deny His very existence is the ultimate in disrespect. You Apostolics say Christ was the man in whom the Father dwelt! No person!
Jesus only wrote in the sand. That was my point. It really scares me that there are people like you who feel so certain that they know about the nature of God, and claim to know of the nature of Jesus. Do your arrogance and hypocrisy know no bounds?
"Jesus only wrote in the sand. That was my point. It really scares me that there are people like you who feel so certain that they know about the nature of God, and claim to know of the nature of Jesus. Do your arrogance and hypocrisy know no bounds?" CONDISDERyou
Well what scares me is mindless people like you who know absolutely nothing about theology or the Bible and think they speak the truth. You are not beyond repeating lies and accusations. Jesus also never mentioned a lot of things.
No argument here. Jesus also never mentioned a lot of things. I suppose if that line of reasoning comforts you, than appeal to it when you face your Maker.
"No argument here. Jesus also never mentioned a lot of things. I suppose if that line of reasoning comforts you, than appeal to it when you face your Maker." CONSIDERyou
Your argument is still an assumption. You do NOT know what Jesus did or did NOT believe. He sure did NOT say He was the Father. He called the Father as a 2nd witness to His veracity. Pretty hard to do when you ARE the Father. Does the word MY have any meaning for you? If so why did Jesus refer to MY Father? Sent BY His Father!
It's really not that complicated. The problem is that so many are raised from youth with understanding that in eternity there are 3 distinct seperate beings that somehow add up to one God and call it a trinity. So as people go reading scripture they apply what they read to what they already have been taught and believe rather than reading the scripture and forming their belief around what they have read. So verses like "He that hath seen me hath seen the Father" are hard to explain. Jn. 14:9
I don't know what Bible you use but the Holy Bible is a declaration of ONENESS. The suffix "ness" simply means the state or condition of being. So what we r sayin is that Jesus is God and our God is one in all his state and condition of being. This goes right along with the Bible because the Bible constantly in Old and New Testament affirms ONE GOD not made up of any but of a singular essense and being. Jesus is the incarnation of that ONE. Need answers, I'll find em in the Word. God Bless
well the word says that God was manifested in the flesh. we ALL know that God is the father. So if God/the Father was manifested in the flesh then Jesus has got to be God the Father in the flesh. maybe thats y his name should be called Emmanuel meaning GOD WITH US! whoa so u mean Jesus is really GOD WITH US. so 1 tim 3:16 is right. God/the father was manifested in the flesh.....aka Jesus Christ!
God is the Father....yes! God is the Son....yes! God is the Holy Spirit...yes! now the name of the father is JESUS (remember Jesus=God in the flesh). the name of the son is JESUS. his name emmanuel means God with US! wow! the name of the Holy spirit is JESUS. he sent his spirit to comfort us who was not able to walk and talk with him. this is where the 120 believers recieved his spirit on the blessed day of pentecost. so they know for themselves that JESUS is NOT DEAD but is ALIVE!
If Jesus was the Father why did he pray to the Father? Simple question. I wish the oneness guys would give a simple answer. I guess Gods will was talking to the Father. It just does not make sense
"If Jesus was the Father why did he pray to the Father? Simple question. I wish the oneness guys would give a simple answer. I guess Gods will was talking to the Father. It just does not make sense"--synodofdort
Excellent point brother! They act as if we have never refuted them and yet it is only because they refuse to acknowledge their logical defeat.
Only God's grace can break down the barrier of their deception and lovingly open their blind eyes to the truth. God bless.
To answer that question takes an understanding of the difference between spirit & soul. If one understands the difference then they'll know that it was the human soul submitting itself to the will of the Spirit both within the man Christ. God became something he had never been before, God became a living soul within a human body.
When the term "God the Son" is found in scripture then yet. Did "God the Son" die on the cross or the Son of God die? There's only 1 God, the Father 1 Cor 8:6. I agree w/scripture.
"To answer that question takes an understanding of the difference between spirit & soul. If one understands the difference then they'll know that it was the human soul submitting itself to the will of the Spirit both within the man Christ. God became something he had never been before, God became a living soul within a human body."
You assume there is a difference etween soul and spirit. So God the Father was his soul and submitted to the will of the Spirit? I thought the Father was the spirit?
Heb 4:12 "..piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and [is] a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart." Obviously there's a difference between soul & spirit, bone & marrow, thoughts & intents. God the Father is that Spirit. Only those w/the Spirit of Truth can be lead into truth. It gets easier if scripture & scriptural terms are used instead of opinions & non-scriptural terms are used.
"It gets easier if scripture & scriptural terms are used instead of opinions & non-scriptural terms are used."
RinnEgade
I have been challenging you to use scriptural terms. Oneness is not a biblical term to my knowledge. Also, the challenge is to find A SINGLE SCRIPTURE that directly calls the Father Jesus. You can't do it!
And as to the soul and spirit being two different things, the Greek word kai or "and" can mean "which is to say" or "ëven" which would equate the soul and spirit.
The word of God is able to divide soul & spirit, if u can't, then the word of God is not w/u. The bible is given to us line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little & there a little. If u can't properly use the word of God to discern & rightly divide the word of truth then the Spirit of Truth is not w/u. Trinity is not a scriptural term either. Isa 9:6 & Matt 28:19 speak of the same Father. If not then there are 2 Fathers. To us there is but 1 God, the Father & he is Everlasting.
". Isa 9:6 & Matt 28:19 speak of the same Father. If not then there are 2 Fathers. To us there is but 1 God, the Father & he is Everlasting. " RinnEgade
And Abraham is called the Father of the faitful so how does he fit into your goofy eisegetical theory?
For 1 thing, the subject is Jesus not Abraham. It's spelled "exegetical" not "eisegetical" Use that spell check if u never learned to spell in school. Use the Spirit of Truth also when u don't know the truth.
"For 1 thing, the subject is Jesus not Abraham. It's spelled "exegetical" not "eisegetical" Use that spell check if u never learned to spell in school. Use the Spirit of Truth also when u don't know the truth."
--RinnEgade
No fella, the word IS eisegetical. Whether the ignorant spell checker knows the word or not is NOT my problem. Try googling the eisegesis and you will find it means to read INTO a biblical text where as exegesis means to take OUT of a biblical text. God bless you!
Ah, my wrong on the exetical/eisegetical thing. Only thing i've been wrong on so far. At least i'm not wrong on scripture though. Spell check wasn't your problem but your personal own idea or eisegetical is. U still need that Spirit of Truth instead of $100 greek words. The simplicity in Christ is that there's only 1 God (1 Cor 8:6) & God was manifest in the flesh (1 Tim 3:16). The Spirit of Truth is greater than greek, hebrew, latin, etc.
"The simplicity in Christ is that there's only 1 God (1 Cor 8:6) & God was manifest in the flesh (1 Tim 3:16). The Spirit of Truth is greater than greek, hebrew, latin, etc." RinnEgade
In 1 Cor 8:6 Paul calls Jesus kurios or Lord the word used to translate adonai or Jehovah in the septuagint. There is only one God or Jehovah. All 3 persons of the Holy Trinity can be called YHWH either collectively or individually.
None of this proves the Father was manifested in the Flesh or called Jesus.
Where does it say in scripture "All 3 persons of the Holy Trinity can be called YHWH..." Jehovah of the OT is the Jesus of the NT. Jehovah in the OT was YHWH. Just as muslims will say, "Jesus never said 'I am God worship me'". Jesus is the Everlasting Father & there's only 1 Father. It takes the Spirit of Truth which only the unrighteous can't have, to know & understand that Jesus is the 1 true God manifest in the flesh. Jehovah (YHWH) in the OT is Jesus in the NT.
"Where does it say in scripture "All 3 persons of the Holy Trinity can be called YHWH" --RinnEgade
Where does it say in the Bible "Blogrich55" is a sinner? Where does it Joseph Smith is a false prophet? Where does it say in the Bible not to smoke Marijuana? Where does it say in the Bible that abortion is wrong? Where does it say in the Bible that padiphiles are sinners? Where is the word Oneness or Apostolic in the Bible? Where is the word King James Bible in the Bible? I could go on.....
Just as muslims will say, "Jesus never said 'I am God worship me'". --RinnEgade
Who even cares what the Muslims say or think on matters of theology? You? Of course because you both worship the same god. Your god is a one personality god. He is NOT 3 distinct person which does make it hard to explain the interactivity between Father and Son.
No it is true Jesus never demanded worship or solicited it but Jesus ACCEPTED worship which would have been sin if He weren't God in the flesh.Use logic!
U mean 'pedophiles'? The whole point is that your question is a loaded question. If the exact quote isn't in the bible according to the questionnaire then it's not good enuff for the 1 asking. God's logic is not ours. His ways & thoughts are above ours. The muslim god & trinity god is the same god. The relationship between Father & Son is easily understood & explained just as we've done. According to trinitarians the trinity is a mystery & can't be understood in this life or the next. rubbish.
1. "The whole point is that your question is a loaded question. If the exact quote isn't in the bible according to the questionnaire then it's not good enuff for the 1 asking."
So you got my point, huh? What do you think you people are doing when you complain the "word" Trinity isn't in the Bible. You've been schooled by yourself.
Because the word 'trinity' literally isn't in the bible. Just as the word 'oneness' isn't there either. However, the Lord our God has always revealed himself as one numerically having no other equal. Deut 6:4 declares that it is the Lord Jehovah or Yahweh that is the 1 true God. Nowhere in scripture does that the Father is YHWH, the Son is YHWH, etc. We should be apt to teach others as well as ourselves. It was the Lord who taught me & not man.
If this is so, why do you try to use it at all? You fail in the effort, of course, but you TRY. Look, I don't want to sound mean and appologize if I do BUT you really blundered when you compared Allah to the God of the Trinity. Seriously, Allah is ALSO a Unitarian or single person type of god. How is he like Jehovah as conceived by Trinitarians? He is like either the Oneness god or the Watchtower god but he is ANYTHING BUT like the Trinitaruan God at all.
I'm not using logic but that which the Spirit of Truth has taught me. As Christ said "He who is sent by God speaks the words of God". I have yet to hear or meet a trinitarian that says they were taught the trinity by the triune god. Trinitarians will also insist that the trinity is found in the quran. No Jesus name person will say that the god of the quran is the same as the God of the bible. Trinitarians will say it is though.
"I'm not using logic but that which the Spirit of Truth has taught me. As Christ said "He who is sent by God speaks the words of God". I have yet to hear or meet a trinitarian that says they were taught the trinity by the triune god. Trinitarians will also insist that the trinity is found in the quran. No Jesus name person will say that the god of the quran is the same as the God of the bible. Trinitarians will say it is though" RinnEgade
1.
Please don't blame the Holy Spirit for your ideas.
2. No well studied, prayed-up, Bible informed Christian will deny the Holy Trinity or confuse God with the false Moon god Allah.
3. The Holy Trinity is NOT found in the Koran. Muhamed did not understand the doctrine for one thing. Some say he included Mary in the trinity as he conceived it. He was reacting to the Roman Catholic church of his day NOT the real gospel or theology.
My advice to you is to study logic as well. God is logic just as He is love. God is NOT illogical or irrational!
No christian will deny the trinity? Not scriptural but your opinion which everybody has 1. Where does it say in scripture that "God is logic just as he is love"? God never refers to himself in the scripture as triune but one. To us there is but one God, the Father. 1 Cor 8:6. That comma is the point of declaration saying "To us there is one God, (and that one God is) the Father." Where in scripture does Jesus say he is 1 w/a 3rd person or Holy Spirit'?
Not placing blame just giving credit where it's due. Who taught u the doctrine u speak of? Scripture teaches that it is the Spirit of Truth that leads us into all truth.
Crazy asks, "To the 3s: can a person who believes in oneness go to heaven?"
On one hand the Bible says that those who have the Son have the Father. Many are not sure, also, how much one must know to go to heaven.
Having said that, my opinion is that the Oneness deny Christ's deity,in fact, His real existence by denying His eternal existence. This coupled with their works salvation system is a sign of warranting a "no!" on my behalf. HOWEVER,I believe may be saved but confused.God is sovereign.
Those who have the Son have the Father, not trinity. To receive the Son takes baptism in his name. Can't take on the name of the Son without it. We have both the Father & the Son, namely Jesus Christ. Trinitarianism is confusing being as how Tertullian coined it & Constantine forced it upon all or had them killed. We can't deny the deity of Christ it's something we uphold by scripture. To say Jesus is a 2d person in a 3 part godhead is heresy & can't be found in scripture.
Rin says, "To receive the Son takes baptism in his name."
Show me this written in the Bible please! Also we trinitarians do NOT deny the deity of Christ. You Oneness are the ones who deny His deity, in fact His very existence by claiming He only existed as a plan. The Trinity is found all through the Bible.
Gal 3:27. How or in what way do we deny the deity of Christ. It's all we know & preach is Jesus Christ is our great God & Savior. Our only wise God & Savior who alone is immortal & invisible. Not another god or angel.
Rinn says, "Gal 3:27. How or in what way do we deny the deity of Christ."
You are confusing the sign of water baptism with the thing signified or the baptism in the Holy Spirit.
You rob Christ not only of His deity but His personhood as well. He simply doesn't exist ither than as a disguise the Father wears for a while. He didn't exist in eternity past, according to you, though He is the Father of eternity and the Word who was in the beginning with God. He was only a thought or idea. Robbery!
No confusion here. "For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ." The scripture speaks for itself. The sign of receiving the HG is tongues. God is my judge not u, if i have robbed him of anything. The bible itself states that it was 'in the beginning' not 'eternity past'. Logos means thought or plan.
Rin says, "No confusion here. "For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ." The scripture speaks for itself."
Then you turn right around and confuse the sign and the the thing signified again. Read Titus 3:4-6 You assert,"The sign of receiving the HG is tongues." This is not what the Bible teaches. The Bible also says David danced before the Lord. Is this a necessary sign to? You cannot base doctrine on historical passages of the Bible. Study more carefully please.
Still no confusion here & the scripture i gave accurately answers for itself. Acts 10:46 "For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God." Clearly you're wrong for the bible teaches what u say it doesn't. It's ok for u to be wrong, u've been wrong before & u're wrong now. The fruit of the Spirit is how we know them. Doctrine is based on the bible, don't be stupid. U keep going to extremes which have noting to do w/the subject.
Speaking in tongues doesn't necessitate salvation, it's a single step that's part of the entire walk. There's more than 1 type of tongues. Just 'cos someone speaks in tongues doesn't mean they're higher up on the spiritual pole. Do all speak in tongues? No, Paul of course is speaking of the gift not the initial evidence of receiving the HG which are of the same Spirit but different functions. I don't have the gift of tongues but i have spoken in tongues.
Acts 10:1-48 was Gods way of showing that all men are accepted by God for they heard them speak w/tongues & magnify God. This is what some call Spirit baptism, etc. 1 Cor 12:10 "..divers kinds of tongues..". Divers mean diverse, many or differing. Not all speak in divers kinds of tongues which is not to be confused w/tongues that the HG provides initially. That's a step in the entire walk. After that ppl need to progress of being children & become mature. Does speaking in tongues cease? No.
"Acts 10:1-48 was Gods way of showing that all men are accepted by God for they heard them speak w/tongues & magnify God. This is what some call Spirit baptism, etc." - RinnEgade
What I've always found interesting is that the tongues spoken of in Acts (especially chapter 2) were "real" languages of the time (which the speakers did not happen to know). This was not some heavenly language. Notice that it says that the witnesses at pentecost heard them speak in their own languages.
What I find interesting is that people like to ignore the identity of those who spoke in tongues in Acts 10 and Acts 19, NOT the Apostles, but those they were ministering to. The Apostles were not said to have understood a word they uttered and didn't need to as those speaking were NEW converts(KEY).
Furthermore, when the Gentiles spoke in tongues- the Jews were suprised because they RECEIVED THE HOLY GHOST THE SAME WAY THAT THE JEWS DID, which is very enlightening. Read over Acts 11 again.
Brother Murray says, "Furthermore, when the Gentiles spoke in tongues- the Jews were suprised because they RECEIVED THE HOLY GHOST THE SAME WAY THAT THE JEWS DID, which is very enlightening. Read over Acts 11 again."
No brother, YOU read it again and read John 3:16 rightr along with it and MAYBE you will begin to see what the significance of the term world really is in that passage.
It was astonishing to Jews who considered gentiles unclean that God was saving them too. The WORLD=not just Jews
crazy says, "What I've always found interesting is that the tongues spoken of in Acts (especially chapter 2) were "real" languages of the time (which the speakers did not happen to know). This was not some heavenly language. Notice that it says that the witnesses at pentecost heard them speak in their own languages."
I agree with you, at least on this point. Glossolalia in the modern Charismatic/Pentecostal movement seems different. I was an ordained Pentecostal preacher in my youth.
Rin says,"Divers mean diverse, many or differing. Not all speak in divers kinds of tongues which is not to be confused w/tongues that the HG provides initially. That's a step in the entire walk. After that ppl need to progress of being children & become mature. Does speaking in tongues cease? No."
Please don't waste the space in my comments box with your red herring as to whether tongues have ceased.
This is a subject for another video and time. You might consider 1 Corinthians 13:8 however.
Has that which is perfect come back already, which is Jesus Christ at his 2d coming? No, therefore, they have not ceased. U should consider the truth. At least submit to Jesus so that lies & falseness flees from u when its master flees.
1. Rin asks,"Has that which is perfect come back already, which is Jesus Christ at his 2d coming?"
I guess it must have been a rhetorical question because he answers it in the next sentence before I even get a shot at it thusly:
"No, therefore, they have not ceased."
It is because Jesus did return when He said He would that the gift of tongues has ceased. He said THAT generation would not pass away in Matt 24:34 In Rev 1:1-3 He tells us when He is coming back.James 5:8-9 makes it clear too.
2, All of you King James only types should know it is mistranslated in Matt 24:3 which is the end of the age NOT world in the Greek.
The 2nd coming of Jesus was not about the end of the World but the end of the Jewish age of animal sacrifices and the punishment of the Harlot who had committed spiritual adultery.
Galatians 4:21-31 gets in to this. The end of the world and resurredtion are future events even to partial preterists.
The mythological gap between Daniels 69th and 70th week is fake
Now you're going to give us your own opinion or private interpretation of the prophetic scripture. The generation he spoke of was the generation that sees Israel become a nation again & beings to bud. 1948 is when Israel became a nation again & that generation has yet to pass. Forbid not to speak in tongues...keep on baptizing in Jesus name, speaking in tongues & prophecying. The Spirit's been doing that since pentecost. Join him or perish.
shadair says "Now you're going to give us your own opinion or private interpretation of the prophetic scripture. The generation he spoke of was the generation that sees Israel become a nation again & beings to bud. 1948 is when Israel became a nation again & that generation has yet to pass."
I am a bit knowledgeable on the topic. Enough to know a generation is only 40 years. Some want to stretch it out to 69. Well Israel became a nation in 1948 so what does that do to your eschatology? Hmmmm?
Actually shadair was my wife's account which i accidently logged on & answered. Who has the authority to set an exact # value on a generation? Has the generation that was born in 1948 or saw those events all died by now? No. So, that generation has yet to be done with. Certain experts these days say a generation is every 5-7 years.
Rin says, "Who has the authority to set an exact # value on a generation? Has the generation that was born in 1948 or saw those events all died by now? No. So, that generation has yet to be done with."
The Bible is what tells us how long a generation is and it has usually been agreed by Bible scholars to be 40 years.
Also, Jesus NEVER said the generation that saw Israel become a nation BUT He said THIS generation. HIs not future.If He was talking about the future he would have said THAT.
An evil & adulterous sought after a sign in his days also, did that only apply to THAT generation or is the spirit of that generation still w/us today seeking after signs & wonders?Matt 12:39 Was he only speaking of THIS generation when he said if they're ashamed of him & his words?Mk 8:38...Mk 13:24-30 correlates w/"This generation" also it shall not pass. Speaks the same thing as Matt. Scripture proves u wrong.
"An evil & adulterous sought after a sign in his days also, did that only apply to THAT generation or is the spirit of that generation still w/us today seeking after signs & wonders?Matt 12:39 Was he only speaking of THIS generation when he said if they're ashamed of him & his words?Mk 8:38...Mk 13:24-30 correlates w/"This generation" also it shall not pass. Speaks the same thing as Matt. Scripture proves u wrong."
CONTEXT
If Jesus had mean ANOTHER generation He would has said THAT generation.
And who are u to say what Jesus meant or didn't mean? apostles, prophet, or what? Scripture still shows u in error. This generation hasn't passed yet & we're seeing these things fulfilled before our very eyes.
Rin asks "And who are u to say what Jesus meant or didn't mean? apostles, prophet, or what? Scripture still shows u in error. This generation hasn't passed yet & we're seeing these things fulfilled before our very eyes."
I might ask you the same question. I am going by context and hermeneutics which seem to be strangers to Oneness folks.
Do you really think we have sufficient space in these little boxes to cover the issue of eschatology? Not only that but this is a video on another topic.
Your assertion that THIS is the generation is NOT supported by exegesis. As I pointed out and you ignored, had Jesus meant to say ANY other generation but His, He would not have said THIS generation but THAT generation.
James %:8-9 tells us when He was to return as does Ap 1:1-3 and 22:20 The book was written in about AD 65-68 not in 95.
Having said that, please stay on the subject will you? Your red herring will NOT change the fact that you CANNOT produce a scripture calling the Father Jesus.
I hate getting off the main subject myself. I prefer to use actual scripture instead of hermeneutics or any comments section that man places in the bible. As a matter of fact rip out every page except for the actual wording itself. It's the Spirit of Truth we're to be lead by not comments or anything. And no there's not really enough space to type comments in.
Rin says, "God is my judge not u, if i have robbed him of anything. The bible itself states that it was 'in the beginning' not 'eternity past'. Logos means thought or plan."
You rob Christ of His deity as well as His personhood by claiming, blasphemously that He was just a thought or plan in the Father's mind and NOT a person in His own right! YES!! God IS your judge.
So are you a Greek expert? You sure don't know the full meaning of Logos do you? Read Dr. Gordon H Clark's THE JOHANNINE LOGOS.
Still wrong in your assumption of my robbing Christ of his being God. The man Christ is a 'holy thing' born of Mary. A 2d person wasn't born but the God of the OT became manifest in the flesh. Don't need to be a greek expert. The full meaning of logos isn't necessary to get the pt across. U're the only 1 in confusion.
I never said it was the full meaning of it. Logos means: word, reason, plan, statement, principle, law, proportion, thought, concept, logic, etc..the list goes on depending if u want philosophy or religion or science. The man Christ Jesus is the personification of God. You're right about 1 thing, my mind has been made up for me, however, it's by God himself.
rin says, "You're right about 1 thing, my mind has been made up for me, however, it's by God himself."
So are you infallible or a prophet or something? You have yet to explain how the Word can be WITH God.If the Word was just a plan God the Father meant to put into action, it could hardly have said to be WIIH Him. And WAS God nothing more than a plan for the Word was God?
Only a person can be with a person as the Greek word expresses it here in John 1:1 a different person not the same person.
I'm not infallible. If i be the man of God then let God bear witness of it: 2 Ki 1:10-12. If any man does the will of God then he will of the doctrine: John 7:17. Is the word that God speaks separate from God? Is the manner in which God revealed himself to mankind in the OT separate from God? The word was w/God & was God. Never separate or called another person. God did away w/his fathering of children under the law & became an Everlasting Father to children under Christ.
'Only a person can be with a person as the Greek word expresses it here in John 1:1 a different person not the same person.'
The Will of God was with God. Wow. Mind blowing isn't it? Jesus was the embodiment of God, THE IMAGE OF GOD. Given the fact that God wants us to be like him, would not his Will be such an image, especially when made flesh?
Brother Murray says, "The Will of God was with God. Wow. Mind blowing isn't it? Jesus was the embodiment of God, THE IMAGE OF GOD. Given the fact that God wants us to be like him, would not his Will be such an image, especially when made flesh?"
You Oneness folk never quit do ya? I see ya buck wing, side steppin', and cuttin' the rug all kinds of fancy was to avoid the plane meaning of the text.
SOMEONE was WITH God. He was NOT by Himself. You can NOT be WITH yourself.You fracture the English!
Brother M says, "You are calling the Word a SEPERATE PERSON, A SEPERATE ENTITY."
The 3 persons are distinct NOT separate. I may have said separate in the past and on other videos and was WRONG in doing so. I publicly acknowledge sloppy wording and correct such error here and now.
"
"Paul also said that there is neither Jew or Gentile in Christ Jesus, which is completely contrary to RCC and Protestant theology."
Where do you get this garbage? It is the essence of Calvinist Reformed theology!!
You always want to use the word 'persons' to describe God, though in that way it is never used in the Bible. The Bible really speaks more along the lines of manifestations, God being a Spirit and all. The Bible refers to the person of Jesus Christ but never once calls the Father or Holy Ghost AKA Spirit of God/Christ a person.
Do the Son and the Holy Ghost perform different operations according to your doctrine?
BroM says, "You always want to use the word 'persons' to describe God, though in that way it is never used in the Bible. The Bible really speaks more along the lines of manifestations, God being a Spirit and all. The Bible refers to the person of Jesus Christ but never once calls the Father or Holy Ghost AKA Spirit of God/Christ a person."
1.Take your Oneness blinders off and read Acts (your favorite book) chapters 5 and 13 and tell me:
How do you lie to the Holy Ghost if He is not a person?
2. Then in chapter 13 the Holy Spirit says I and Me which can only be used by person. He is called the Spirit of God and Christ because He proceeds from both of them.
He then asks, "Do the Son and the Holy Ghost perform different operations according to your doctrine?"
Well duhhh! To any NORMAL thinking person they do! The Holy Spirit over shadowed the Virgin and she concieved the Son of God the Father. He didn't overshadow her and she conceived Him or the Father...not to normal thinkers.
God is a person. The question is whether he consists of SEPERATE persons. And yes, SEPERATE and DISTINCT in that context mean exactly the same thing.
If the Son and the Holy Spirit occupy seperate offices and seperate roles then why was the Spirit of Christ the Spirit of prophecy? Why did the Spirit of Christ also prophecy in the Old Testament (1 Peter 1:10), if they are seperate, distinct persons?
"Having said that, my opinion is that the Oneness deny Christ's deity,in fact, His real existence by denying His eternal existence. This coupled with their works salvation system is a sign of warranting a "no!" on my behalf." - Rich
Dont you find it strange that many religious people claim that the bible is "truth" when they can't even agree on what this truth is? In fact, they go around calling others heretics because their understanding is slightly different.
And, this fighting isnt new, as its been going on for thousands of years, resulting in people doing horrible evils in the name of god. This is one of the reasons the bible is NOT an axiom.
What makes this worse is that they beat their chests because they think that only their understanding is correct, even when this "truth" is contradicted by an equally valid argument. Additionally, they despise science, saying that it offers no truth.
Here is what I propose: absolute "truth" does exist, but can never be fully known. So, all we can do is try to understand it to the best of our ability. What separates science and religion though, is that science offers testable hypotheses and religion does not.
I'd have to disagree on some pts. Jesus is the way, the truth & the life. To know him is to know absolute truth in its fullness. To get the true Jesus is the challenge 'cos nearly 3-4 billion ppl will say they know or have Jesus. The fighting is spiritual not in words only.
The scientific method is a classic example of asserting the consequent: X implies Y and Y is true, therefore, X is true. Rich
Ok, now you have me rolling on the floor, and not in Pentecostal way. You should be very familiar with affirming the consequent, as this is the christians favorite way to argue.
Now, this is very important to understand: a conclusion that was induced can also be used to deduce its premises (or facts in the case of science.) and vice-versa.
"Scientists don't usually go this far but say the experiment only gives support or evidence for their hypothesis." - Rich
Exactly. The reason is because it is impossible to test every scenario in order to "prove" something is true. However, if you show only one instance where it is false, then the hypothesis is false. And when a hypothesis has made many predictions and shown to be accurate by many different scientists, it might become a theory.
On the other hand, the bible offers no evidence for its "truth." And, when a "truth" is shown to be false, the response is "you misunderstood it, because the bible cannot be wrong."
On the other hand, the bible offers no evidence for its "truth." And, when a "truth" is shown to be false, the response is "you misunderstood it, because the bible cannot be wrong."
Even if I could prove someone named Jesus existed and died on a cross, how could I further prove His death was a sacrifice for sin? How could I prove we are justified by faith? (Romans 5:1)
These things are unprovable by the very nature of the case. They must be accepted axiomatically.Proof therefore is irrelevent
"Even if I could prove someone named Jesus existed and died on a cross, how could I further prove His death was a sacrifice for sin? How could I prove we are justified by faith? (Romans 5:1)"- Rich
Well, what if I showed you the bible contradicted itself? Would you be willing to listen or would you ready to try to show I am wrong? This is the difference between science and religion. Religion is not open to being the possibility it is wrong.
I'd have to ask where are these perceived contradictions u speak of in the bible? It can be shown easily that the perception of contradiction is in error. All religions are wrong if it tries to negate Jesus Christ & his word. Even science starts its theories off w/a faith or belief the difference is science is dependable on things that can be seen physically seen or measured.
"I'd have to ask where are these perceived contradictions u speak of in the bible?" - RinnEgade
There are many and I can go into detail if you'd like. We should probably do this via private message, as big Rich has already given me one warning to keep my posts relatively short. On my next violation, I'm afraid I might go to hell; I guess he knows god :-)
"All religions are wrong if it tries to negate Jesus Christ & his word"
How do you know this to be true? Other religions wouldn't agree.
This is true. Science can prove something false but never prove something true only probable. That which is only probably true is also possibly not true.
This is why science doesn't have the truth. It is extremely useful and no one appreciates all of its advantages more than I do. Look at all the neat stuff it gives. Unfortunately, truth is not one of them.
"This is why science doesn't have the truth" - Rich
Ok, I've conceded this. But you forget the flip side in which deduction relies on premises that are the conclusions from induction. So, how much better is it really?
"Science although useful is always false."
Really? Just because an understanding of something is incomplete, is it necessarily false? Do you doubt atomic theory or cell theory? Although we cannot "prove" these things "true," we use them as if they are.
Crazy says, "Now, this is very important to understand: a conclusion that was induced can also be used to deduce its premises (or facts in the case of science.) and vice-versa."
Logic is not exactly your forte is it? You can quit with the abusive ad hominems please. If you want to accuse me of affirming the consequent do so. Give a specific example.
From the fact that X implies Y it does not follow logically that Y implies X and no amount of scientific experimentation will make it so Steve.
Crazy says, "And, this fighting isnt new, as its been going on for thousands of years, resulting in people doing horrible evils in the name of god. This is one of the reasons the bible is NOT an axiom."
Are you sure you even understand the concept of philosophical axioms or maxims, Steve?
Crazy says,"Please demonstrate that the bible is self-evident and its denial is self-refuting. This should be a simple."
No, Steve, it is not simple. An axiom is a philosophical starting point beyond which you cannot retreat further. If you could go back further and have prior principles,then the axiom would not be a first principle or starting place that is to say an axiom at all.
"An axiom is a philosophical starting point beyond which you cannot retreat further." - Rich
I am so glad you're not a philosophy teacher (and, this is not an ad hominem, by the way).
Do you know the difference between a presupposition and an axiom? By your definition, I could say that "pink unicorns exist," and you'd have to accept it because it's our starting point. This, of course, would be ridiculous.
An axiom is self-evident, and if its denial is not self-refuting, it is NOT an axiom.
Let's hear what a teacher of philosophy for many years had to say:
"...that revelation should be accepted without proofs or reasons, undeduced from something admittedly true, seems odd when first proposed. It will not seem so odd, however, when the nature of axioms is kept in mind. Axioms...are never deduced from more original principles...We can judge the acceptability of an axiom only by its success in producing a system." G.H.Clark
5. Parallel postulate. If two lines intersect a third in such a way that the sum of the inner angles on one side is less than two right angles, then the two lines inevitably must intersect each other on that side if extended far enough.
Now the difference here is that these postulates are self-evident. There is no need to "prove" them because to anyone who reads them, they are "intuitively obvious." This is not the case with the bible.
In the bible the term "eternal son" does not exist, so don't bother using it. The man Jesus Christ was given that name from His Father (John 5:43), and that name is the name above every name (Philippians 2:9-11), not only in this age but in the one to come ( Ephesians 1:19-21).
MrPentecostal93 6 months ago
@MrPentecostal93 "In the bible the term "eternal son" does not exist, so don't bother using it."
ROFLOL please do NOT trot out this stupid argument again. PLEASE! Who cares whether or NOT technical terms appear in the Bible? Do the ideas appear? Yes!
Now YOU don't bother to blaspheme and say Jesus (the Son) ONLY was a thought, idea, proposal, plan, etc.. Do NOT deny the Son's existence! REPENT!
Blogrich55 6 months ago
@Blogrich55 You could've shown 1 Timothy 3:16 to be a corrupted add-on instead. Sir Isaac Newton. Have you read "Two Notable Corruptions in Scripture"?
Danielezerable 2 months ago
@Danielezerable "You could've shown..."
You are assuming it IS corrupted or spurious. THAT has NEVER been proved. As for Sir Isaac Newton, who I am convince was a good Christian, he is NOT a biblical scholar. You have appealed to authority.
Newton's books on Daniel and Revelation are strange indeed to say the least.
Blogrich55 2 months ago
@Blogrich55 It is corrupted. Almost all scholars would agree that the original context should read "he who".
Barnes: The Vulgate and the Syriac read it: "who," or "which."
Clarke: To me there is ample reason to believe that the Codex Alexandrinus originally read ΘΣ, God, in this place
Vincent: But the correct reading is ὃς who.
Corrupted. Out of curiosity, why is the KJV the only Bible with this translation?
Danielezerable 2 months ago
@Blogrich55 Newton argued that, by a small alteration in the Greek text, the word "God" was substituted to make the phrase read "God was manifest in the flesh." instead of "He was manifest in the flesh." He demonstrated that early Church writers in referring to the verse knew nothing of such an alteration.
wiki
Danielezerable 2 months ago
@Blogrich55 One is the word "God" from 1 Tim 3:16 and the second is the entire verse of 1 John 5:7; both of which did not exist in any of the 500+ Greek manuscripts (only the Vulgate.) 1 John 5:7 is commonly referred to as the Comma Johanneum. Besides the NIV, these two passages are also corrected to reflect the Greek majority in the following versions: ASV, RSV, NRSV, NASB, ESV, NWT, etc.
wiki
Danielezerable 2 months ago
Comment removed
PeteWaldo 9 months ago
God manifest, or revealed, Himself in the flesh of a man to Abraham too in Genesis chapter 18.
watch?v=1cjXj6TMOAM
Regarding the name Jesus, even the J didn't even get put on until the middle ages. The Hebrew name of the Messiah is Yahshua (Yeshua) which means YHWH saves, rescues or delivers.
PeteWaldo 9 months ago
@PeteWaldo "God manifest, or revealed, Himself in the flesh..."
Yes God, the Holy Trinity did manifest Himself to Abraham. However, God does NOT mean Father exclusively. Many Christians and cult members (such as the JWs) think that when they see the word God it ONLY means Father. You are right about the names/name of God. We do tend to acknowledge and use the various names used for God in different languages; Jesús in Spanish, for example. God bless.
Blogrich55 9 months ago
@Blogrich55 The substitutes used to refer to Yahweh are descriptive titles and not names. These were the result of a much later doctrine in Judaism.
en. wikipedia. org/wiki/Tetragrammaton#In_later_Judaism
The Arabic name "Allah" however was the NAME of one of 360 idols the Quraish pagans venerated at their Kaaba. It is a NAME of blasphemy when used in place of God's NAME. Though it occurs in Arabic bibles that doesn't change that it's blasphemy.
watch?v=slLBam06iyg
watch?v=dJODE7Q2KcM
PeteWaldo 9 months ago
@Blogrich55 When working with Muslims I try to use the names Yahweh and Yeshua interchangeably, depending on appropriateness, to help emphasize that they DO NOT worship Yeshua but instead follow the EXACT OPPOSITE of the WHOLE SUBJECT of the Gospel.
brotherpete. com
watch?v=ujUOZyrnewE
It is a little terrifying to ponder as to how Yahweh could be exhibiting his anger against bible believers that use the name "Allah" instead of Yahweh. For example
brotherpete. com/index. php?topic=894.0
PeteWaldo 9 months ago
THE BIBLE DOES THE WORD EVEN MENTION TRINITY OR EVEN ONESS. "ONE GOD, ONE FAITH, ONE BAPTISM.... " "HEAR O' IRASEL THE LORD OUR GOD IS ONE LORD..." JESUS--GOD IS OUR FATHER, SINCE HE DID CREATE US. HE IS THE SON, SINCE SHE DID COME FROM A WOMEN BUT THE SEED WAS FROM GOD. AND HE IS THE HOLY SPIRIT, SINCE HE IS ALWAYS WITH US. WE CAN FEEL HIM BUT WE CANT SEE HIM.... THUS, THE HOLY SPIRIT.
JESUS IS GOD... NOT GOD THE SON... BUT SON OF GOD!!!!!!
jade123465 1 year ago
@jade123465 FLAME ON! But you have proved nothing!
Blogrich55 1 year ago
wow, this video is just as ridiculous as its claim.
consider if you will, the cartoon character in this video is just like trinitarian beleivers, moving by the volition of their own flesh to make it up the stairs of truth, taking flights as quickly as they know how to make it to truth, to explain by reason of carnal understanding, that God is three persons, when he clearly stated He was,is,and always be one person. With God all things are possible, but like this video, God is placed in a box
LSPNUEMA 2 years ago
If you want a real good thigh slapper and guffawing laughterr, try reading THE ONENESS OF GOD by Apostolic apologist Dr. David K. Bernard. I have read in it in both Spanish and English and neither makes any sense.
Show me a scripture where God says He is only one PERSON. You can't do it! One God, of course all Trinitarians believe this. One Being but NOT one person. Being and person are NOT the same thing no matter how obtuse you Jesus Onlyists are. You limit God and make Jesus His own Father!
Blogrich55 2 years ago
i'll pray for you and the power of the Holy Ghost will overshadow you, and give you understanding, but one thing i will never claim...that is to give you understanding
LSPNUEMA 2 years ago
So are you going to produce a single scripture that says God is ONE PERSON ? Don't bother quoting the scriptures that teach there is only one God. We agree on that.
Blogrich55 2 years ago
His NAME shall be called the everlasting Father said the prophet Isaiah in his holy book.
If you do not know what that name that is I will tell you...it is the name ABOVE every name.
the name of JESUS!
The name of Jesus shall be called the everlasting Father.
I will believe Isaiah over you!
wonone100 2 years ago
Yes and I will believe Almighty God who has eternally existed as 3 distinct person when He spoke from Heaven as the Father in Matt 3:17 about the Son and the Holy Spirit descended in the form of a dove on the Son. The Father said clearly:
"THIS is My beloved Son in whom I am well pleased."' Mtt 3:17 He did NOT say:
"I am my beloved Son and I''m pretty pleased with myself."
By claiming the Father dwelt in the purely human Christ and deny the Eternal Son or Word, you deny Christ's deity as well
Blogrich55 2 years ago
Can anyone tell me WHO we will see when we get to heaven? We will see Jesus right? HE is The King of kings, the judge, the high priest, the lamb of God, the lion of the tribe of judah, the creator, the Son, the alpha and omega, the ancient of days, the I AM, the everlasting Father, the Mighty God, the Light, the Rock, the Holy One, the Almighty, the Word. Now I have not listed 17 persons of the Godhead here but roles or positions that belong to the same ONE GOD and his name is JESUS.
nrhouse777 2 years ago
No, you have named various titles of the Son of God whose name is Jesus. So do you now admit you believe He is His own Father? If you believe Jesus is BOTH the Son and the Father then LOGICALLY you must believe He is His own Father. What nonsense.
Blogrich55 2 years ago
I named titles "The everlasting Father and The Mighty God" so according to your response you agree with meJesus is indeed the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost. Base you doctrine of the Godhead on scripture and don't try to make the Father and the Son in the image of man. I have a Father and I am his Son but I can not say I and my father are one because we are two persons. Jesus said, "I and my father are ONE" Jesus is the Father in the flesh and he calls that flesh the Son of God
nrhouse777 2 years ago
Everlasting Father is better translated as Father of eternity. Of course Jesus is the Mighty God. And to YOU this means I think He is the Father and the Holy Ghost? You must have strange reasoning skills friend.
No one is making the Father and the Son conform to the image of man. NOTE WELL: "I and My Father are one" is NOT saying either:
1. I and My Father are one and the same person
2. I am My Father
If the Father is in the flesh and the flesh is the son you have a possession not incarnation.
Blogrich55 2 years ago
So you do believe according to Isa. 9:6 is talking of Jesus. No doubt on that. You say this refers to Father of eternity, not Everlasting Father. Where did you get your reasoning...you just said the same thing. Do you think this verse speaks of another Father? Who do you think will be in eternity on the throne to judge as King of kings. Jesus is. Oh yeah, "I and my Father are one" is definitely saying me and God are 2 persons. And where is 3rd person in all this?
nrhouse777 2 years ago
Jesus is The King of kings and The Prince of Peace. How can he be the King and Prince at the same time? Jesus is the Lamb of God and the Lion of Judah? How can he be a lamb and lion at the same time? Jesus is The Mighty God and the Son of God at the same time. How can these things be? BECAUSE Jesus is God all by Himself and He can be whatever He wants to be at any time he wants. Jesus is God and God is Jesus And I would not wanna be the trinitarian who tells Him He can't.
nrhouse777 2 years ago
I wouldn't want to be the nut telling Him He is His own Father either. Yet if He is both the Father and the Son this is the result. Think and PRAY about it and STUDY your Bible sir.
Blogrich55 2 years ago
Let me get it straight. I am a nut for believing that Jesus is Father, Son, and Holy Ghost? Did he not say "I and my Father are one and He that hath seen me hath seen the Father". Also Jesus said "I am come in my Father's name". He also prayed in the garden saying, "I have manifested thy name" speaking of the Father. Jesus said it is not I that doeth the works, but the Father that DWELLETH IN ME. To wit, that God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself. This is the incarnation.
nrhouse777 2 years ago
Isaiah 9:6 "For unto us a child(Jesus) is born, unto us a son(Jesus) is given: and the government shall be upon his(Jesus) shoulder: and his name(Jesus) shall be called Wonderfull, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace." So, Jesus is called The everlasting Father and The Prince of Peace. But Jesus is ONE person right? This verse calls him a Father and a Son. That can't be good for the trinity doctrine. But that's Bible so too bad. Jesus Is The One God
nrhouse777 2 years ago
Isaiah 9:6 is better translated Father of eternity. Do you see the name Jesus written there? No! Yet I freely admit it is talking of Him. Yet the Bible has Jesus speaking of His Father. Is He the Father? Then He must be His own Father according to your nonsense.
Blogrich55 2 years ago
Even you can see the oneness but it's hard for you to explain the "RELATIONSHIP" between Father and Son. It can be understood properly without believing in multiple persons. Multiple persons is never written in the Bible, not one verse. The word trinity, not in the Bible. Holy One is in Bible over and over but never a Holy Three. That is a tradition of men originating with the catholic church and their coucils of men who decided they knew more than the apostles and created new doctrines.
nrhouse777 2 years ago
Of course the Bible mentions the Holy One and NOT Holy Three. Deuteronomy 6:4 plainly tells us there is one God. Trinitarians do NOT believe in 3 gods no matter how much propaganda is slung at them by the Oneness.
No multiple persons? What about the baptism of Jesus Christ in Matthew 3:16-17 was Jesus a magician doing a dove act? Was He a ventriloquist throwing His voice from heaven?
Your parrot is repeating his schtick about the word Trinity not being in the bible. I do have some crackers.XD
Blogrich55 2 years ago
I will gladly debate the biblical teaching of Who Jesus Christ is, but not if you want to make senseless jokes in the mean time. This turns it into your ego against mine which is not profitable. I would rather hear your BEST explanations than your worst jokes.
nrhouse777 2 years ago
Sorry about that bro. But do you REALIZE how many times I have heard the genetic fallacy concerning the supposed Roman Catholic origin of the doctrine of the Holy Trinity??
Blogrich55 2 years ago
good stuff..so I can go a be god now....that you......LOL
clnmyjts 2 years ago
good stuff..so I can go a be god now....that you......LOL
I think you should consult the Mormons if you want to be a god. They have the market on that cornered dudeXD
Blogrich55 2 years ago
Yeah...your right
And a lot of them are Masons...
clnmyjts 2 years ago
"And a lot of them are Masons... " cinmyjts
It is no secret that Joe was a Mormon and ripped off all their secret signs and mumbojumbo as the basis of his temple ceremonies. He even gave masonic signs when he was being killed.
Blogrich55 2 years ago
who Was Joe?
I would of loved to meet someone like that. and picked their brain to see what makes them tick..
I know alot about the Mason/ Mormons and occultic practice.. But I just don`t get why they do it.. Do they think it works in some magical way?
I personally don`t see the connection to living a life of symbols, unless your using it to get a advantage from others whom know the symbols and would chose you over another person to do work for them on any type of project etc...
clnmyjts 2 years ago
Great vid on how the doctrine of the Holy Trinity was invented by a Roman Catholic bishop hundreds of years after Christ died.
CONSIDERyou 2 years ago
"Great vid on how the doctrine of the Holy Trinity was invented by a Roman Catholic bishop hundreds of years after Christ died." CONSIDERyou
Repeating lies doesn't make them true Polly. It just shows you for the parrot you are. Wanna cracker?
Mindless rhetoric on your part with no scripture.
Blogrich55 2 years ago
You want scripture. Look up 1 John 5:17 in the King James bible. Now look it up in ANY other bible, NIV, AMP, NASV, etc.
Jesus did not believe in the Trinity. Don't you think he would have stated something clear about this central doctrine? The word "Trinity" is not in the Bible, nor is the doctrine explicitly taught there.
The clearest early expression of the concept came with Tertullian, a Latin theologian who wrote in the early third century.
CONSIDERyou 2 years ago
"Jesus did not believe in the Trinity." CONSIDERyou
How do you know that? This is an argument from silence. Many doctrines are not laid out but must be built from scripture. Do the words hermeneutics and exegesis mean anything to you?
Your repitions of lies and propaganda says a lot.
Blogrich55 2 years ago
Your accusations against me say a lot. And your disrespect of Jesus, your "building" your doctrines on hearsay, from your private interpretation, and feeling so dogmatically certain about so many things Jesus never wrote down or explicitly decreed, says a lot about your arrogance.
CONSIDERyou 2 years ago
"And your disrespect of Jesus" Cyou
My disrespect? You mean like denying His personhood and saying He was with the Father only as a plan or idea?
Blogrich55 2 years ago
All that rubbish about Personhood, Jesus never mentioned. That was committees of men, after Jesus died. Yes, disrespect.
CONSIDERyou 2 years ago
"All that rubbish about Personhood, Jesus never mentioned. That was committees of men, after Jesus died. Yes, disrespect." Cyou
So you deny Jesus was a person? A lot of you deny God is a person as well. Jesus NEVER wrote down anything for your information. Do you even bother to read the Bible? Or do you just turn the pages and pretend you are studying His word?
To deny His very existence is the ultimate in disrespect. You Apostolics say Christ was the man in whom the Father dwelt! No person!
Blogrich55 2 years ago
Jesus only wrote in the sand. That was my point. It really scares me that there are people like you who feel so certain that they know about the nature of God, and claim to know of the nature of Jesus. Do your arrogance and hypocrisy know no bounds?
CONSIDERyou 2 years ago
"Jesus only wrote in the sand. That was my point. It really scares me that there are people like you who feel so certain that they know about the nature of God, and claim to know of the nature of Jesus. Do your arrogance and hypocrisy know no bounds?" CONDISDERyou
Well what scares me is mindless people like you who know absolutely nothing about theology or the Bible and think they speak the truth. You are not beyond repeating lies and accusations. Jesus also never mentioned a lot of things.
Blogrich55 2 years ago
No argument here. Jesus also never mentioned a lot of things. I suppose if that line of reasoning comforts you, than appeal to it when you face your Maker.
CONSIDERyou 2 years ago
"No argument here. Jesus also never mentioned a lot of things. I suppose if that line of reasoning comforts you, than appeal to it when you face your Maker." CONSIDERyou
Your argument is still an assumption. You do NOT know what Jesus did or did NOT believe. He sure did NOT say He was the Father. He called the Father as a 2nd witness to His veracity. Pretty hard to do when you ARE the Father. Does the word MY have any meaning for you? If so why did Jesus refer to MY Father? Sent BY His Father!
Blogrich55 2 years ago
It's really not that complicated. The problem is that so many are raised from youth with understanding that in eternity there are 3 distinct seperate beings that somehow add up to one God and call it a trinity. So as people go reading scripture they apply what they read to what they already have been taught and believe rather than reading the scripture and forming their belief around what they have read. So verses like "He that hath seen me hath seen the Father" are hard to explain. Jn. 14:9
nrhouse777 2 years ago
So are verses like where the Father says "I am my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased." and also
"I will be to Me a Father and I will be to Me a Son." or the other which says "Not my will but mine be done."OOOPS!
I forgot these are the way the passages read in the New Oneness Translation or NOT.
Blogrich55 2 years ago
I don't know what Bible you use but the Holy Bible is a declaration of ONENESS. The suffix "ness" simply means the state or condition of being. So what we r sayin is that Jesus is God and our God is one in all his state and condition of being. This goes right along with the Bible because the Bible constantly in Old and New Testament affirms ONE GOD not made up of any but of a singular essense and being. Jesus is the incarnation of that ONE. Need answers, I'll find em in the Word. God Bless
nrhouse777 2 years ago
well the word says that God was manifested in the flesh. we ALL know that God is the father. So if God/the Father was manifested in the flesh then Jesus has got to be God the Father in the flesh. maybe thats y his name should be called Emmanuel meaning GOD WITH US! whoa so u mean Jesus is really GOD WITH US. so 1 tim 3:16 is right. God/the father was manifested in the flesh.....aka Jesus Christ!
~God Bless~
Meganazu 2 years ago
"whoa so u mean Jesus is really GOD WITH US. so 1 tim 3:16 is right. God/the father was manifested in the flesh.....aka Jesus Christ!" Megan
Hi Megan:D Yes, Jesus was God the Son manifested in the flesh. He is not His own Father any more than you are your father or I am mine.
God bless you:D
Blogrich55 2 years ago
God is the Father....yes! God is the Son....yes! God is the Holy Spirit...yes! now the name of the father is JESUS (remember Jesus=God in the flesh). the name of the son is JESUS. his name emmanuel means God with US! wow! the name of the Holy spirit is JESUS. he sent his spirit to comfort us who was not able to walk and talk with him. this is where the 120 believers recieved his spirit on the blessed day of pentecost. so they know for themselves that JESUS is NOT DEAD but is ALIVE!
Meganazu 2 years ago
The Father=God
The Son = God
The Holy Ghost= God BUT
God does NOT = Father, Son, or Holy Ghost
Woman= human BUT
human does NOT= woman
Understand sister?
Blogrich55 2 years ago
very entertaining
liberatedvialove 3 years ago
Thanks. Hopefully it is informative and challanging too. God bless.
Blogrich55 3 years ago
If Jesus was the Father why did he pray to the Father? Simple question. I wish the oneness guys would give a simple answer. I guess Gods will was talking to the Father. It just does not make sense
synodofdort 3 years ago
"If Jesus was the Father why did he pray to the Father? Simple question. I wish the oneness guys would give a simple answer. I guess Gods will was talking to the Father. It just does not make sense"--synodofdort
Excellent point brother! They act as if we have never refuted them and yet it is only because they refuse to acknowledge their logical defeat.
Only God's grace can break down the barrier of their deception and lovingly open their blind eyes to the truth. God bless.
Blogrich55 3 years ago
To answer that question takes an understanding of the difference between spirit & soul. If one understands the difference then they'll know that it was the human soul submitting itself to the will of the Spirit both within the man Christ. God became something he had never been before, God became a living soul within a human body.
RinnEgade 3 years ago
I dont agree. But that is ok. I do belive that God became flesh (God the Son that is)
synodofdort 3 years ago
When the term "God the Son" is found in scripture then yet. Did "God the Son" die on the cross or the Son of God die? There's only 1 God, the Father 1 Cor 8:6. I agree w/scripture.
RinnEgade 3 years ago
"To answer that question takes an understanding of the difference between spirit & soul. If one understands the difference then they'll know that it was the human soul submitting itself to the will of the Spirit both within the man Christ. God became something he had never been before, God became a living soul within a human body."
You assume there is a difference etween soul and spirit. So God the Father was his soul and submitted to the will of the Spirit? I thought the Father was the spirit?
Blogrich55 3 years ago
Heb 4:12 "..piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and [is] a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart." Obviously there's a difference between soul & spirit, bone & marrow, thoughts & intents. God the Father is that Spirit. Only those w/the Spirit of Truth can be lead into truth. It gets easier if scripture & scriptural terms are used instead of opinions & non-scriptural terms are used.
RinnEgade 3 years ago
"It gets easier if scripture & scriptural terms are used instead of opinions & non-scriptural terms are used."
RinnEgade
I have been challenging you to use scriptural terms. Oneness is not a biblical term to my knowledge. Also, the challenge is to find A SINGLE SCRIPTURE that directly calls the Father Jesus. You can't do it!
And as to the soul and spirit being two different things, the Greek word kai or "and" can mean "which is to say" or "ëven" which would equate the soul and spirit.
Blogrich55 3 years ago
The word of God is able to divide soul & spirit, if u can't, then the word of God is not w/u. The bible is given to us line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little & there a little. If u can't properly use the word of God to discern & rightly divide the word of truth then the Spirit of Truth is not w/u. Trinity is not a scriptural term either. Isa 9:6 & Matt 28:19 speak of the same Father. If not then there are 2 Fathers. To us there is but 1 God, the Father & he is Everlasting.
RinnEgade 3 years ago
". Isa 9:6 & Matt 28:19 speak of the same Father. If not then there are 2 Fathers. To us there is but 1 God, the Father & he is Everlasting. " RinnEgade
And Abraham is called the Father of the faitful so how does he fit into your goofy eisegetical theory?
Blogrich55 3 years ago
For 1 thing, the subject is Jesus not Abraham. It's spelled "exegetical" not "eisegetical" Use that spell check if u never learned to spell in school. Use the Spirit of Truth also when u don't know the truth.
RinnEgade 3 years ago
"For 1 thing, the subject is Jesus not Abraham. It's spelled "exegetical" not "eisegetical" Use that spell check if u never learned to spell in school. Use the Spirit of Truth also when u don't know the truth."
--RinnEgade
No fella, the word IS eisegetical. Whether the ignorant spell checker knows the word or not is NOT my problem. Try googling the eisegesis and you will find it means to read INTO a biblical text where as exegesis means to take OUT of a biblical text. God bless you!
Blogrich55 3 years ago
Ah, my wrong on the exetical/eisegetical thing. Only thing i've been wrong on so far. At least i'm not wrong on scripture though. Spell check wasn't your problem but your personal own idea or eisegetical is. U still need that Spirit of Truth instead of $100 greek words. The simplicity in Christ is that there's only 1 God (1 Cor 8:6) & God was manifest in the flesh (1 Tim 3:16). The Spirit of Truth is greater than greek, hebrew, latin, etc.
RinnEgade 3 years ago
"The simplicity in Christ is that there's only 1 God (1 Cor 8:6) & God was manifest in the flesh (1 Tim 3:16). The Spirit of Truth is greater than greek, hebrew, latin, etc." RinnEgade
In 1 Cor 8:6 Paul calls Jesus kurios or Lord the word used to translate adonai or Jehovah in the septuagint. There is only one God or Jehovah. All 3 persons of the Holy Trinity can be called YHWH either collectively or individually.
None of this proves the Father was manifested in the Flesh or called Jesus.
Blogrich55 3 years ago
Where does it say in scripture "All 3 persons of the Holy Trinity can be called YHWH..." Jehovah of the OT is the Jesus of the NT. Jehovah in the OT was YHWH. Just as muslims will say, "Jesus never said 'I am God worship me'". Jesus is the Everlasting Father & there's only 1 Father. It takes the Spirit of Truth which only the unrighteous can't have, to know & understand that Jesus is the 1 true God manifest in the flesh. Jehovah (YHWH) in the OT is Jesus in the NT.
RinnEgade 3 years ago
"Where does it say in scripture "All 3 persons of the Holy Trinity can be called YHWH" --RinnEgade
Where does it say in the Bible "Blogrich55" is a sinner? Where does it Joseph Smith is a false prophet? Where does it say in the Bible not to smoke Marijuana? Where does it say in the Bible that abortion is wrong? Where does it say in the Bible that padiphiles are sinners? Where is the word Oneness or Apostolic in the Bible? Where is the word King James Bible in the Bible? I could go on.....
Blogrich55 3 years ago
Just as muslims will say, "Jesus never said 'I am God worship me'". --RinnEgade
Who even cares what the Muslims say or think on matters of theology? You? Of course because you both worship the same god. Your god is a one personality god. He is NOT 3 distinct person which does make it hard to explain the interactivity between Father and Son.
No it is true Jesus never demanded worship or solicited it but Jesus ACCEPTED worship which would have been sin if He weren't God in the flesh.Use logic!
Blogrich55 3 years ago
The God of the bible is a Spirit & the bible never says "3 distinct persons". Jesus is the OT Jehovah (YHWH) manifest in the flesh.
RinnEgade 3 years ago
"The God of the bible is a Spirit & the bible never says "3 distinct persons". Jesus is the OT Jehovah (YHWH) manifest in the flesh."
The Bible also never says One Person manifested in 3 ways, roles, offices,etc...either!
No one is denying Jesus is Jehovah of the OT. Of course He is.
Blogrich55 3 years ago
U mean 'pedophiles'? The whole point is that your question is a loaded question. If the exact quote isn't in the bible according to the questionnaire then it's not good enuff for the 1 asking. God's logic is not ours. His ways & thoughts are above ours. The muslim god & trinity god is the same god. The relationship between Father & Son is easily understood & explained just as we've done. According to trinitarians the trinity is a mystery & can't be understood in this life or the next. rubbish.
RinnEgade 3 years ago
1. "The whole point is that your question is a loaded question. If the exact quote isn't in the bible according to the questionnaire then it's not good enuff for the 1 asking."
So you got my point, huh? What do you think you people are doing when you complain the "word" Trinity isn't in the Bible. You've been schooled by yourself.
Blogrich55 3 years ago
Because the word 'trinity' literally isn't in the bible. Just as the word 'oneness' isn't there either. However, the Lord our God has always revealed himself as one numerically having no other equal. Deut 6:4 declares that it is the Lord Jehovah or Yahweh that is the 1 true God. Nowhere in scripture does that the Father is YHWH, the Son is YHWH, etc. We should be apt to teach others as well as ourselves. It was the Lord who taught me & not man.
RinnEgade 3 years ago
"God's logic is not ours." RinnEgade
If this is so, why do you try to use it at all? You fail in the effort, of course, but you TRY. Look, I don't want to sound mean and appologize if I do BUT you really blundered when you compared Allah to the God of the Trinity. Seriously, Allah is ALSO a Unitarian or single person type of god. How is he like Jehovah as conceived by Trinitarians? He is like either the Oneness god or the Watchtower god but he is ANYTHING BUT like the Trinitaruan God at all.
Blogrich55 3 years ago
I'm not using logic but that which the Spirit of Truth has taught me. As Christ said "He who is sent by God speaks the words of God". I have yet to hear or meet a trinitarian that says they were taught the trinity by the triune god. Trinitarians will also insist that the trinity is found in the quran. No Jesus name person will say that the god of the quran is the same as the God of the bible. Trinitarians will say it is though.
RinnEgade 3 years ago
"I'm not using logic but that which the Spirit of Truth has taught me. As Christ said "He who is sent by God speaks the words of God". I have yet to hear or meet a trinitarian that says they were taught the trinity by the triune god. Trinitarians will also insist that the trinity is found in the quran. No Jesus name person will say that the god of the quran is the same as the God of the bible. Trinitarians will say it is though" RinnEgade
1.
Please don't blame the Holy Spirit for your ideas.
Blogrich55 3 years ago
2. No well studied, prayed-up, Bible informed Christian will deny the Holy Trinity or confuse God with the false Moon god Allah.
3. The Holy Trinity is NOT found in the Koran. Muhamed did not understand the doctrine for one thing. Some say he included Mary in the trinity as he conceived it. He was reacting to the Roman Catholic church of his day NOT the real gospel or theology.
My advice to you is to study logic as well. God is logic just as He is love. God is NOT illogical or irrational!
Blogrich55 3 years ago
No christian will deny the trinity? Not scriptural but your opinion which everybody has 1. Where does it say in scripture that "God is logic just as he is love"? God never refers to himself in the scripture as triune but one. To us there is but one God, the Father. 1 Cor 8:6. That comma is the point of declaration saying "To us there is one God, (and that one God is) the Father." Where in scripture does Jesus say he is 1 w/a 3rd person or Holy Spirit'?
RinnEgade 3 years ago
Not placing blame just giving credit where it's due. Who taught u the doctrine u speak of? Scripture teaches that it is the Spirit of Truth that leads us into all truth.
RinnEgade 3 years ago
freakie says, "Jesus is the LORD.
trintiy is the forsaking of truth."
So offer some proof against the challenge.
Blogrich55 3 years ago
I love it! Aman!!!
troy1387 3 years ago
Ok, I have to ask this question again since I didn't get an answer last time. This time I'll ask it to both groups.
To the 3s: can a person who believes in oneness go to heaven?
To the 1s: can a person who believes in the trinity go to heaven?
crazypills2 3 years ago
Crazy asks, "To the 3s: can a person who believes in oneness go to heaven?"
On one hand the Bible says that those who have the Son have the Father. Many are not sure, also, how much one must know to go to heaven.
Having said that, my opinion is that the Oneness deny Christ's deity,in fact, His real existence by denying His eternal existence. This coupled with their works salvation system is a sign of warranting a "no!" on my behalf. HOWEVER,I believe may be saved but confused.God is sovereign.
Blogrich55 3 years ago
Those who have the Son have the Father, not trinity. To receive the Son takes baptism in his name. Can't take on the name of the Son without it. We have both the Father & the Son, namely Jesus Christ. Trinitarianism is confusing being as how Tertullian coined it & Constantine forced it upon all or had them killed. We can't deny the deity of Christ it's something we uphold by scripture. To say Jesus is a 2d person in a 3 part godhead is heresy & can't be found in scripture.
RinnEgade 3 years ago
Rin says, "To receive the Son takes baptism in his name."
Show me this written in the Bible please! Also we trinitarians do NOT deny the deity of Christ. You Oneness are the ones who deny His deity, in fact His very existence by claiming He only existed as a plan. The Trinity is found all through the Bible.
Blogrich55 3 years ago
Gal 3:27. How or in what way do we deny the deity of Christ. It's all we know & preach is Jesus Christ is our great God & Savior. Our only wise God & Savior who alone is immortal & invisible. Not another god or angel.
RinnEgade 3 years ago
Rinn says, "Gal 3:27. How or in what way do we deny the deity of Christ."
You are confusing the sign of water baptism with the thing signified or the baptism in the Holy Spirit.
You rob Christ not only of His deity but His personhood as well. He simply doesn't exist ither than as a disguise the Father wears for a while. He didn't exist in eternity past, according to you, though He is the Father of eternity and the Word who was in the beginning with God. He was only a thought or idea. Robbery!
Blogrich55 3 years ago
No confusion here. "For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ." The scripture speaks for itself. The sign of receiving the HG is tongues. God is my judge not u, if i have robbed him of anything. The bible itself states that it was 'in the beginning' not 'eternity past'. Logos means thought or plan.
RinnEgade 3 years ago
Rin says, "No confusion here. "For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ." The scripture speaks for itself."
Then you turn right around and confuse the sign and the the thing signified again. Read Titus 3:4-6 You assert,"The sign of receiving the HG is tongues." This is not what the Bible teaches. The Bible also says David danced before the Lord. Is this a necessary sign to? You cannot base doctrine on historical passages of the Bible. Study more carefully please.
Blogrich55 3 years ago
Still no confusion here & the scripture i gave accurately answers for itself. Acts 10:46 "For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God." Clearly you're wrong for the bible teaches what u say it doesn't. It's ok for u to be wrong, u've been wrong before & u're wrong now. The fruit of the Spirit is how we know them. Doctrine is based on the bible, don't be stupid. U keep going to extremes which have noting to do w/the subject.
RinnEgade 3 years ago
Rin says, "Clearly you're wrong for the bible teaches what u say it doesn't."
Answer this question then:
1. IF speaking in tongues is necessary for salvation for it is the sign of having the Holy Spirit and if you don't have Him you are not saved, and...
2. If Paul was right when he said "ALL do not speak with tongues"
3. Wouldn't the Bible contradict itself?
BTW did the Ethopian eunuch speak in tongues? No? I guess the poor fella just wasn't saved according to your doctrine! Too bad!
Blogrich55 3 years ago
Speaking in tongues doesn't necessitate salvation, it's a single step that's part of the entire walk. There's more than 1 type of tongues. Just 'cos someone speaks in tongues doesn't mean they're higher up on the spiritual pole. Do all speak in tongues? No, Paul of course is speaking of the gift not the initial evidence of receiving the HG which are of the same Spirit but different functions. I don't have the gift of tongues but i have spoken in tongues.
RinnEgade 3 years ago
Rin says, "There's more than 1 type of tongues."
chapter and verse please! Oh, don't even bother trying to rip 1 Cor 13:1 out of its context to support your nonsense.
Blogrich55 3 years ago
Acts 10:1-48 was Gods way of showing that all men are accepted by God for they heard them speak w/tongues & magnify God. This is what some call Spirit baptism, etc. 1 Cor 12:10 "..divers kinds of tongues..". Divers mean diverse, many or differing. Not all speak in divers kinds of tongues which is not to be confused w/tongues that the HG provides initially. That's a step in the entire walk. After that ppl need to progress of being children & become mature. Does speaking in tongues cease? No.
RinnEgade 3 years ago
"Acts 10:1-48 was Gods way of showing that all men are accepted by God for they heard them speak w/tongues & magnify God. This is what some call Spirit baptism, etc." - RinnEgade
What I've always found interesting is that the tongues spoken of in Acts (especially chapter 2) were "real" languages of the time (which the speakers did not happen to know). This was not some heavenly language. Notice that it says that the witnesses at pentecost heard them speak in their own languages.
crazypills2 3 years ago
What I find interesting is that people like to ignore the identity of those who spoke in tongues in Acts 10 and Acts 19, NOT the Apostles, but those they were ministering to. The Apostles were not said to have understood a word they uttered and didn't need to as those speaking were NEW converts(KEY).
Furthermore, when the Gentiles spoke in tongues- the Jews were suprised because they RECEIVED THE HOLY GHOST THE SAME WAY THAT THE JEWS DID, which is very enlightening. Read over Acts 11 again.
BrotherMurray 3 years ago
Brother Murray says, "Furthermore, when the Gentiles spoke in tongues- the Jews were suprised because they RECEIVED THE HOLY GHOST THE SAME WAY THAT THE JEWS DID, which is very enlightening. Read over Acts 11 again."
No brother, YOU read it again and read John 3:16 rightr along with it and MAYBE you will begin to see what the significance of the term world really is in that passage.
It was astonishing to Jews who considered gentiles unclean that God was saving them too. The WORLD=not just Jews
Blogrich55 3 years ago
crazy says, "What I've always found interesting is that the tongues spoken of in Acts (especially chapter 2) were "real" languages of the time (which the speakers did not happen to know). This was not some heavenly language. Notice that it says that the witnesses at pentecost heard them speak in their own languages."
I agree with you, at least on this point. Glossolalia in the modern Charismatic/Pentecostal movement seems different. I was an ordained Pentecostal preacher in my youth.
Blogrich55 3 years ago
Rin says,"Divers mean diverse, many or differing. Not all speak in divers kinds of tongues which is not to be confused w/tongues that the HG provides initially. That's a step in the entire walk. After that ppl need to progress of being children & become mature. Does speaking in tongues cease? No."
Please don't waste the space in my comments box with your red herring as to whether tongues have ceased.
This is a subject for another video and time. You might consider 1 Corinthians 13:8 however.
Blogrich55 3 years ago
Has that which is perfect come back already, which is Jesus Christ at his 2d coming? No, therefore, they have not ceased. U should consider the truth. At least submit to Jesus so that lies & falseness flees from u when its master flees.
RinnEgade 3 years ago
1. Rin asks,"Has that which is perfect come back already, which is Jesus Christ at his 2d coming?"
I guess it must have been a rhetorical question because he answers it in the next sentence before I even get a shot at it thusly:
"No, therefore, they have not ceased."
It is because Jesus did return when He said He would that the gift of tongues has ceased. He said THAT generation would not pass away in Matt 24:34 In Rev 1:1-3 He tells us when He is coming back.James 5:8-9 makes it clear too.
Blogrich55 3 years ago
2, All of you King James only types should know it is mistranslated in Matt 24:3 which is the end of the age NOT world in the Greek.
The 2nd coming of Jesus was not about the end of the World but the end of the Jewish age of animal sacrifices and the punishment of the Harlot who had committed spiritual adultery.
Galatians 4:21-31 gets in to this. The end of the world and resurredtion are future events even to partial preterists.
The mythological gap between Daniels 69th and 70th week is fake
Blogrich55 3 years ago
Now you're going to give us your own opinion or private interpretation of the prophetic scripture. The generation he spoke of was the generation that sees Israel become a nation again & beings to bud. 1948 is when Israel became a nation again & that generation has yet to pass. Forbid not to speak in tongues...keep on baptizing in Jesus name, speaking in tongues & prophecying. The Spirit's been doing that since pentecost. Join him or perish.
shadair123 3 years ago
shadair says "Now you're going to give us your own opinion or private interpretation of the prophetic scripture. The generation he spoke of was the generation that sees Israel become a nation again & beings to bud. 1948 is when Israel became a nation again & that generation has yet to pass."
I am a bit knowledgeable on the topic. Enough to know a generation is only 40 years. Some want to stretch it out to 69. Well Israel became a nation in 1948 so what does that do to your eschatology? Hmmmm?
Blogrich55 3 years ago
Actually shadair was my wife's account which i accidently logged on & answered. Who has the authority to set an exact # value on a generation? Has the generation that was born in 1948 or saw those events all died by now? No. So, that generation has yet to be done with. Certain experts these days say a generation is every 5-7 years.
RinnEgade 3 years ago
Rin says, "Who has the authority to set an exact # value on a generation? Has the generation that was born in 1948 or saw those events all died by now? No. So, that generation has yet to be done with."
The Bible is what tells us how long a generation is and it has usually been agreed by Bible scholars to be 40 years.
Also, Jesus NEVER said the generation that saw Israel become a nation BUT He said THIS generation. HIs not future.If He was talking about the future he would have said THAT.
Blogrich55 3 years ago
An evil & adulterous sought after a sign in his days also, did that only apply to THAT generation or is the spirit of that generation still w/us today seeking after signs & wonders?Matt 12:39 Was he only speaking of THIS generation when he said if they're ashamed of him & his words?Mk 8:38...Mk 13:24-30 correlates w/"This generation" also it shall not pass. Speaks the same thing as Matt. Scripture proves u wrong.
RinnEgade 3 years ago
"An evil & adulterous sought after a sign in his days also, did that only apply to THAT generation or is the spirit of that generation still w/us today seeking after signs & wonders?Matt 12:39 Was he only speaking of THIS generation when he said if they're ashamed of him & his words?Mk 8:38...Mk 13:24-30 correlates w/"This generation" also it shall not pass. Speaks the same thing as Matt. Scripture proves u wrong."
CONTEXT
If Jesus had mean ANOTHER generation He would has said THAT generation.
Blogrich55 3 years ago
And who are u to say what Jesus meant or didn't mean? apostles, prophet, or what? Scripture still shows u in error. This generation hasn't passed yet & we're seeing these things fulfilled before our very eyes.
RinnEgade 3 years ago
Rin asks "And who are u to say what Jesus meant or didn't mean? apostles, prophet, or what? Scripture still shows u in error. This generation hasn't passed yet & we're seeing these things fulfilled before our very eyes."
I might ask you the same question. I am going by context and hermeneutics which seem to be strangers to Oneness folks.
Do you really think we have sufficient space in these little boxes to cover the issue of eschatology? Not only that but this is a video on another topic.
Blogrich55 3 years ago
Your assertion that THIS is the generation is NOT supported by exegesis. As I pointed out and you ignored, had Jesus meant to say ANY other generation but His, He would not have said THIS generation but THAT generation.
James %:8-9 tells us when He was to return as does Ap 1:1-3 and 22:20 The book was written in about AD 65-68 not in 95.
Having said that, please stay on the subject will you? Your red herring will NOT change the fact that you CANNOT produce a scripture calling the Father Jesus.
Blogrich55 3 years ago
I hate getting off the main subject myself. I prefer to use actual scripture instead of hermeneutics or any comments section that man places in the bible. As a matter of fact rip out every page except for the actual wording itself. It's the Spirit of Truth we're to be lead by not comments or anything. And no there's not really enough space to type comments in.
RinnEgade 3 years ago
Rin says, "God is my judge not u, if i have robbed him of anything. The bible itself states that it was 'in the beginning' not 'eternity past'. Logos means thought or plan."
You rob Christ of His deity as well as His personhood by claiming, blasphemously that He was just a thought or plan in the Father's mind and NOT a person in His own right! YES!! God IS your judge.
So are you a Greek expert? You sure don't know the full meaning of Logos do you? Read Dr. Gordon H Clark's THE JOHANNINE LOGOS.
Blogrich55 3 years ago
Still wrong in your assumption of my robbing Christ of his being God. The man Christ is a 'holy thing' born of Mary. A 2d person wasn't born but the God of the OT became manifest in the flesh. Don't need to be a greek expert. The full meaning of logos isn't necessary to get the pt across. U're the only 1 in confusion.
RinnEgade 3 years ago
Rin says "The full meaning of logos"
Are you SERIOUSLY trying to tell us that plan or idea is the FULL meaning of the Greek word Logos?
You have NOT explained how the Word was with God. Of course you don't need Greek. Your mind has been made up for you and you are deceived.
Blogrich55 3 years ago
I never said it was the full meaning of it. Logos means: word, reason, plan, statement, principle, law, proportion, thought, concept, logic, etc..the list goes on depending if u want philosophy or religion or science. The man Christ Jesus is the personification of God. You're right about 1 thing, my mind has been made up for me, however, it's by God himself.
RinnEgade 3 years ago
rin says, "You're right about 1 thing, my mind has been made up for me, however, it's by God himself."
So are you infallible or a prophet or something? You have yet to explain how the Word can be WITH God.If the Word was just a plan God the Father meant to put into action, it could hardly have said to be WIIH Him. And WAS God nothing more than a plan for the Word was God?
Only a person can be with a person as the Greek word expresses it here in John 1:1 a different person not the same person.
Blogrich55 3 years ago
I'm not infallible. If i be the man of God then let God bear witness of it: 2 Ki 1:10-12. If any man does the will of God then he will of the doctrine: John 7:17. Is the word that God speaks separate from God? Is the manner in which God revealed himself to mankind in the OT separate from God? The word was w/God & was God. Never separate or called another person. God did away w/his fathering of children under the law & became an Everlasting Father to children under Christ.
RinnEgade 3 years ago
'Only a person can be with a person as the Greek word expresses it here in John 1:1 a different person not the same person.'
The Will of God was with God. Wow. Mind blowing isn't it? Jesus was the embodiment of God, THE IMAGE OF GOD. Given the fact that God wants us to be like him, would not his Will be such an image, especially when made flesh?
BrotherMurray 3 years ago
Brother Murray says, "The Will of God was with God. Wow. Mind blowing isn't it? Jesus was the embodiment of God, THE IMAGE OF GOD. Given the fact that God wants us to be like him, would not his Will be such an image, especially when made flesh?"
You Oneness folk never quit do ya? I see ya buck wing, side steppin', and cuttin' the rug all kinds of fancy was to avoid the plane meaning of the text.
SOMEONE was WITH God. He was NOT by Himself. You can NOT be WITH yourself.You fracture the English!
Blogrich55 3 years ago
You are calling the Word a SEPERATE PERSON, A SEPERATE ENTITY.
Acts 10 and 11 shows that the Gentiles received the Holy Ghost the very same way that the Jews received it. Not at the same time, but the same way.
JAMES 2:19: Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.
Paul also said that there is neither Jew or Gentile in Christ Jesus, which is completely contrary to RCC and Protestant theology.
BrotherMurray 3 years ago
Brother M says, "You are calling the Word a SEPERATE PERSON, A SEPERATE ENTITY."
The 3 persons are distinct NOT separate. I may have said separate in the past and on other videos and was WRONG in doing so. I publicly acknowledge sloppy wording and correct such error here and now.
"
"Paul also said that there is neither Jew or Gentile in Christ Jesus, which is completely contrary to RCC and Protestant theology."
Where do you get this garbage? It is the essence of Calvinist Reformed theology!!
Blogrich55 3 years ago
You always want to use the word 'persons' to describe God, though in that way it is never used in the Bible. The Bible really speaks more along the lines of manifestations, God being a Spirit and all. The Bible refers to the person of Jesus Christ but never once calls the Father or Holy Ghost AKA Spirit of God/Christ a person.
Do the Son and the Holy Ghost perform different operations according to your doctrine?
BrotherMurray 3 years ago
BroM says, "You always want to use the word 'persons' to describe God, though in that way it is never used in the Bible. The Bible really speaks more along the lines of manifestations, God being a Spirit and all. The Bible refers to the person of Jesus Christ but never once calls the Father or Holy Ghost AKA Spirit of God/Christ a person."
1.Take your Oneness blinders off and read Acts (your favorite book) chapters 5 and 13 and tell me:
How do you lie to the Holy Ghost if He is not a person?
Blogrich55 3 years ago
2. Then in chapter 13 the Holy Spirit says I and Me which can only be used by person. He is called the Spirit of God and Christ because He proceeds from both of them.
He then asks, "Do the Son and the Holy Ghost perform different operations according to your doctrine?"
Well duhhh! To any NORMAL thinking person they do! The Holy Spirit over shadowed the Virgin and she concieved the Son of God the Father. He didn't overshadow her and she conceived Him or the Father...not to normal thinkers.
Blogrich55 3 years ago
God is a person. The question is whether he consists of SEPERATE persons. And yes, SEPERATE and DISTINCT in that context mean exactly the same thing.
If the Son and the Holy Spirit occupy seperate offices and seperate roles then why was the Spirit of Christ the Spirit of prophecy? Why did the Spirit of Christ also prophecy in the Old Testament (1 Peter 1:10), if they are seperate, distinct persons?
BrotherMurray 3 years ago
(1 of 3)
"Having said that, my opinion is that the Oneness deny Christ's deity,in fact, His real existence by denying His eternal existence. This coupled with their works salvation system is a sign of warranting a "no!" on my behalf." - Rich
Dont you find it strange that many religious people claim that the bible is "truth" when they can't even agree on what this truth is? In fact, they go around calling others heretics because their understanding is slightly different.
crazypills2 3 years ago
(2 of 3)
And, this fighting isnt new, as its been going on for thousands of years, resulting in people doing horrible evils in the name of god. This is one of the reasons the bible is NOT an axiom.
What makes this worse is that they beat their chests because they think that only their understanding is correct, even when this "truth" is contradicted by an equally valid argument. Additionally, they despise science, saying that it offers no truth.
crazypills2 3 years ago
(3 of 3)
Here is what I propose: absolute "truth" does exist, but can never be fully known. So, all we can do is try to understand it to the best of our ability. What separates science and religion though, is that science offers testable hypotheses and religion does not.
crazypills2 3 years ago
I'd have to disagree on some pts. Jesus is the way, the truth & the life. To know him is to know absolute truth in its fullness. To get the true Jesus is the challenge 'cos nearly 3-4 billion ppl will say they know or have Jesus. The fighting is spiritual not in words only.
RinnEgade 3 years ago
Crazy says, "What separates science and religion though, is that science offers testable hypotheses and religion does not."
The scientific method is a classic example of asserting the consequent: X implies Y and Y is true, therefore, X is true.
If my hypothesis is true, I would expect certain results from experiments.Well I did get those results so my hypothesis must be true.
Scientists don't usually go this far but say the experiment only gives support or evidence for their hypothesis.
Blogrich55 3 years ago
(1 of 2)
The scientific method is a classic example of asserting the consequent: X implies Y and Y is true, therefore, X is true. Rich
Ok, now you have me rolling on the floor, and not in Pentecostal way. You should be very familiar with affirming the consequent, as this is the christians favorite way to argue.
Now, this is very important to understand: a conclusion that was induced can also be used to deduce its premises (or facts in the case of science.) and vice-versa.
crazypills2 3 years ago
(2 of 3)
"Scientists don't usually go this far but say the experiment only gives support or evidence for their hypothesis." - Rich
Exactly. The reason is because it is impossible to test every scenario in order to "prove" something is true. However, if you show only one instance where it is false, then the hypothesis is false. And when a hypothesis has made many predictions and shown to be accurate by many different scientists, it might become a theory.
Its falsifiability is its strength.
crazypills2 3 years ago
(3 of 3)
On the other hand, the bible offers no evidence for its "truth." And, when a "truth" is shown to be false, the response is "you misunderstood it, because the bible cannot be wrong."
crazypills2 3 years ago
On the other hand, the bible offers no evidence for its "truth." And, when a "truth" is shown to be false, the response is "you misunderstood it, because the bible cannot be wrong."
Even if I could prove someone named Jesus existed and died on a cross, how could I further prove His death was a sacrifice for sin? How could I prove we are justified by faith? (Romans 5:1)
These things are unprovable by the very nature of the case. They must be accepted axiomatically.Proof therefore is irrelevent
Blogrich55 3 years ago
"Even if I could prove someone named Jesus existed and died on a cross, how could I further prove His death was a sacrifice for sin? How could I prove we are justified by faith? (Romans 5:1)"- Rich
Well, what if I showed you the bible contradicted itself? Would you be willing to listen or would you ready to try to show I am wrong? This is the difference between science and religion. Religion is not open to being the possibility it is wrong.
crazypills2 3 years ago
I'd have to ask where are these perceived contradictions u speak of in the bible? It can be shown easily that the perception of contradiction is in error. All religions are wrong if it tries to negate Jesus Christ & his word. Even science starts its theories off w/a faith or belief the difference is science is dependable on things that can be seen physically seen or measured.
RinnEgade 3 years ago
"I'd have to ask where are these perceived contradictions u speak of in the bible?" - RinnEgade
There are many and I can go into detail if you'd like. We should probably do this via private message, as big Rich has already given me one warning to keep my posts relatively short. On my next violation, I'm afraid I might go to hell; I guess he knows god :-)
"All religions are wrong if it tries to negate Jesus Christ & his word"
How do you know this to be true? Other religions wouldn't agree.
crazypills2 3 years ago
Crazypills says "I'm afraid I might go to hell; I guess he knows god :-)"
Do not pass go, do not collect $200 ROFLOL
Blogrich55 3 years ago
Crazy says, "Its falsifiability is its strength."
This is true. Science can prove something false but never prove something true only probable. That which is only probably true is also possibly not true.
This is why science doesn't have the truth. It is extremely useful and no one appreciates all of its advantages more than I do. Look at all the neat stuff it gives. Unfortunately, truth is not one of them.
Science although useful is always false.
Blogrich55 3 years ago
"This is why science doesn't have the truth" - Rich
Ok, I've conceded this. But you forget the flip side in which deduction relies on premises that are the conclusions from induction. So, how much better is it really?
"Science although useful is always false."
Really? Just because an understanding of something is incomplete, is it necessarily false? Do you doubt atomic theory or cell theory? Although we cannot "prove" these things "true," we use them as if they are.
crazypills2 3 years ago
Crazy says, "Now, this is very important to understand: a conclusion that was induced can also be used to deduce its premises (or facts in the case of science.) and vice-versa."
Logic is not exactly your forte is it? You can quit with the abusive ad hominems please. If you want to accuse me of affirming the consequent do so. Give a specific example.
From the fact that X implies Y it does not follow logically that Y implies X and no amount of scientific experimentation will make it so Steve.
Blogrich55 3 years ago
"Logic is not exactly your forte is it?" Rich
Should I take this as an ad hominem attack? lol.
Do you deny that the premises of a deductive argument can be induced from its conclusion?
You always throw out statements like this without ever backing them up. Did you learn this from Red Beetle?
crazypills2 3 years ago
Crazy says, "And, this fighting isnt new, as its been going on for thousands of years, resulting in people doing horrible evils in the name of god. This is one of the reasons the bible is NOT an axiom."
Are you sure you even understand the concept of philosophical axioms or maxims, Steve?
Blogrich55 3 years ago
"Are you sure you even understand the concept of philosophical axioms or maxims, Steve?" - Rich
Please demonstrate that the bible is self-evident and its denial is self-refuting. This should be a simple.
crazypills2 3 years ago
Crazy says,"Please demonstrate that the bible is self-evident and its denial is self-refuting. This should be a simple."
No, Steve, it is not simple. An axiom is a philosophical starting point beyond which you cannot retreat further. If you could go back further and have prior principles,then the axiom would not be a first principle or starting place that is to say an axiom at all.
Blogrich55 3 years ago
"An axiom is a philosophical starting point beyond which you cannot retreat further." - Rich
I am so glad you're not a philosophy teacher (and, this is not an ad hominem, by the way).
Do you know the difference between a presupposition and an axiom? By your definition, I could say that "pink unicorns exist," and you'd have to accept it because it's our starting point. This, of course, would be ridiculous.
An axiom is self-evident, and if its denial is not self-refuting, it is NOT an axiom.
crazypills2 3 years ago
"I am so glad you're not a philosophy teacher"
Let's hear what a teacher of philosophy for many years had to say:
"...that revelation should be accepted without proofs or reasons, undeduced from something admittedly true, seems odd when first proposed. It will not seem so odd, however, when the nature of axioms is kept in mind. Axioms...are never deduced from more original principles...We can judge the acceptability of an axiom only by its success in producing a system." G.H.Clark
lightspeed52 3 years ago
(1 of 3)
"Let's hear what a teacher of philosophy for many years had to say" - lightspeed52
Although I think Clark was a very intelligent man, I do not believe what he asserts qualifies as an axiomatic system.
The following are Euclids five axioms (taken from Wikepedia):
crazypills2 3 years ago
(2 of 3)
1. Any two points can be joined by a straight line.
2. Any straight line segment can be extended indefinitely in a straight line.
3. Given any straight line segment, a circle can be drawn having the segment as radius and one endpoint as center.
4. All right angles are congruent.
crazypills2 3 years ago
(3 of 3)
5. Parallel postulate. If two lines intersect a third in such a way that the sum of the inner angles on one side is less than two right angles, then the two lines inevitably must intersect each other on that side if extended far enough.
Now the difference here is that these postulates are self-evident. There is no need to "prove" them because to anyone who reads them, they are "intuitively obvious." This is not the case with the bible.
crazypills2 3 years ago