U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-01-2010, 04:33 AM
 
Location: Oxford, England
1,266 posts, read 950,049 times
Reputation: 115

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
I did explain the hypostatic union. You don't like the idea that it can't be fully understood by man's finite mind. Therefore you reject it.
No, I just wanted you to state, like you do here, that it's can't be understood, but it has to be accepted anyway. You're basically saying 1+1=1, and we can't know how or why, but we just have to accept it. Why do we have to accept it? Even if you accept the inerrancy of the Bible, it's not anywhere in the Bible. It comes from councils that met centuries after the New Testament was written to debate and vote over Christianity.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
Actually, it is more like 1500 or1600 hundred years.
No, it's not. The majority of the Pentateuch was originally penned at the very earliest around the 8th or 9th century BCE (and that's a conservative estimate). The final texts of the New Testament were written shortly after 100 CE.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
And it is the complete and connected thought of God with regard to what He desired to communicate to man.
Of course, this isn't anywhere in the Bible. This is just a fact that people make up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
You show that you don't believe that the Bible is the word of God.
I believe it's the word of God, I just don't believe that that means humanity didn't influence it at all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
None of the above objections to what I said need be addressed. Readers may simply refer back to what I said.
A staggeringly juvenile evasion of topics that you're clearly not nearly informed enough to tackle.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
To reject something that pertains to God because the infinite can't be understood by the finite human mind is arrogant.
And to pretend that you can just assert made up facts about God and defend them with the notion that it's arrogant to expect them to be logical is elementary school argumentation. I can't believe I have to point this out.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
Here you are rejecting the immutability of God. I have given Scripture references for each of the three Persons of the Godhead that substantiates His immutability.
And I have given a single scripture which shows your interpretations are mistaken. You've not bothered to respond to that, you've only burped up "Nu-uh!"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
Jonah 1:3, Job 1:12 and 2:7 also say that that Jonah and Satan went out from the presence of the Lord. It doesn't mean that they literally went someplace where the Lord isn't.
Actually that's exactly what it means. You cited Ps 139:7, which says "where can I hide from your face?" Jonah 1:3 says Jonah "fled from the face of the Lord." It says Jonah did exactly what the Psalmist said he couldn't.

No, I just want to dismiss your reading because it's demonstrably not correct. You begging the question by saying "Nu-uh!" and that doesn't even begin to respond to my concerns.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
God's Omnipresence:

God is everywhere and also personally present. He is not limited by time or space and is both immanent and transcendent. That simply means that God is everywhere at the same time.
And as I've shown, the Bible absolutely precludes that belief.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
a.)Of the Father: Jer. 23:23,24 The Father fills heaven and earth. ''Am I a God who is near,'' declares the LORD, ''And not a God far off? 24) ''Can a man hide himself in hiding places, so I do not see him?'' declares the LORD. ''Do I not fill the heavens and the earth?'' declares the LORD.

b.) Of the Son: The Son promises to be with the believer always. Matt 28:20 ...and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.'' At the same time, He is in the Father and in the believer. John 14:20. ''In that day you shall know that I am in My Father, and you in Me, and I in you.

c.) Of the Holy Spirit: You cannot escape the presence of the Holy Spirit. Psalms 139:7 Where can I go from Thy Spirit? Or where can I flee from Thy presence? 8) If I ascend to heaven, Thou art there; If I make my bed in Sheol, behold, Thou art there.
You're stuck in the hermeneutic circle. You've taken a dogma and you've found a bunch of proof texts for it. When you're confronted with texts that don't agree with the proof texts you just assert that their interpretation must align with your dogma. Then, despite twisting scriptures because they disagree with your dogma, you assert your dogma is derived from scripture. This is the single most common fallacy among amateur fundamentalist Bible exegetes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
God is everywhere simultaneously, and yet He is free to be local. He usually manifested Himself in some way when communicating with man. In Satan's case, Satan had gone up into the throneroom of God in Job 1:12 and 2:7. When he left to go back to the earth, he was said to have gone out from the presence of the Lord.
Again, you're twisting the text to try to make it say something different so it does not conflict with your dogma. Weak and fallacious exegesis.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
I just showed you the Scriptures with regard to God's immutability and omnipresence. I could show you the Scriptures for the rest of His attributes as well, but I'll just show one more of His attributes. His Veracity.

God's Veracity (Truth):

Of the Father: John 7:28 Jesus speaking: ''You both know Me and know where I am from; and I have not come of Myself, but He who sent Me is true, whom you do not know. John 17:3 ''And this is eternal life, that they may know Thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom Thou hast sent.

Of the Son: John 14:6 Jesus said to him, ''I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one vomes to the Father but through Me.

Of the Holy Spirit: 1 John 5:7 And it is the Spirit who bears witness, because the Spirit is the truth.

I have now shown Scripture for three of God's attributes. The scriptures exist for the other seven of God's attributes as well. But I am not going to take the time to list them.
Silly eisegesis. Immutability as a philosophical principle wasn't even around when the Bible was being written and edited. It's a modern concept and you're retrojecting it into texts that have nothing to do with it. In addition, you haven't responded to my concerns, you've just reasserted your original thesis without further argument.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
Again, I have already shown Scripture for three of God's attributes.
But you haven't responded to my concerns.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
Yes, it is. The Bible makes it quite clear that the deity of Christ, and His humanity are separate and distinct. Just one example is in Matthew 4:4 where the humanity of Jesus is fasting and is weak and Satan is tempting Jesus to use His deity to turn stones into bread. Phil 2:6-8 make it clear that Jesus Christ existing in the form of God was made in the likeness of man.
You're reading stuff into the text that simply isn't there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
Again, it is not necessary for the finite mind of man to be able to understand the things that God does.
But it's not in the Bible, so where did it come from?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
I will refer readers to the two links shown above regarding the hypostatic union of Jesus Christ.

Fella, I've just posted two threads full of Scripture which show that God is triune.
No, you've posted scriptures and simply asserted that they show a triune God. You can't even respond intelligently to criticisms of your assertion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
Yes, it is Echad. And as I said in the original post, anti-trinitarians will deny that Echad means a unified one.
Both very fine assertions, but you have no argument to support them, and when exposed to informed lexicography they simply fall apart. I've even shown you numerous scriptures that show unequivocally that the word just means numerical singularity. You've just flat ignored them. What unbelievable ignorance.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
The myths and mythologies of man have nothing to do with the reality of the Bible.

When The Bible uses the word Elohim it refers to the fact that God is 3 Pesons but ONE God. Not three Gods.
I've already explained exactly why this is incredibly uninformed, and your only response so far has been "Nu-uh!" Brilliant.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
Strong's is an excellent resource.
For people who don't know Greek or Hebrew it may seem excellent, but it just perpetuates ignorance and atrocious exegesis.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
And I might have chosen better links. I was in a hurry. These are better:

The Elohim

Where Does Elohim Come From?
Actually they're much worse. The first claims yhwh is a late interpolation, and the second cites only the Encyclopedia Brittanica. It's clear neither author knows a lick of Hebrew.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
Your masters hardly puts you in a position to contradict men such as Dr. Lewis Sperry Chafer who founded Dallas Theological Seminary. Or someone like R. B. Thieme JR. who was pastor of Berachah Church for over 50 years, and had a total of nine years of Greek and five years of Hebrew by the time he graduated from Dallas Theological Seminary.
You've got to be joking. Not only is this a textbook appeal to authority, but I have five years of formal Hebrew at better schools. Why on earth would you think that five years of Hebrew would impress me?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
I will point out that at this point you're not even addressing me. You've no intention of devoting a single word to responding to my comments.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
Regarding 1 Corinthians 8:5, I was in a hurry and didn't bother to look at it.
Which is how most of this discussion is feeling. You just automatically bark "Nu-uh!" whether the Bible supports you or not. At the same time, even where you take the time you're stuck in horribly fallacious methodological traps.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
The use of the word gods in 1 Cor 8:5, refers to the fact that the pagans had those whom they called ''gods'', for instance, Dagon and Baal in David's day. Anything that is placed before God in one's heart may be said to be a god. 2 Tim 3:2-4.
That's not what Paul said. He said there are many gods, whether in heaven or earth, but to Christians there is one. This is the very definition of monolatry: belief in multiple deities with dedication only to one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
Human rulers, judges were indeed sometimes referred to as gods.

In Exodus 21:6 and 22:8; Psalms 82:1 and 82:6, judges are referred to as gods- Elohim.
No, none of those texts refer to judges. I discussed that here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
You're referring to Psalms 97:7. Here it is. ''Confounded be all those who serve carved images, who boast themselves of idols; worship Him, all ye gods.
Yes. The juxtaposition in this verse of a discussion of idols next to an imperative for gods to worship Yhwh does not in any corner of this universe mean the gods are idols. Your exegesis is growing increasingly grotesque.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
The passage is in reference to those involved in idol worship.

Psalm 97:7 All who worship images are put to shame, those who boast in idols--worship him, all you gods!

You're being foolish. All three members of the Godheas have co-existed eternally. There never was a time when the Persons of the Godhead didn't exist.
Again, not in the Bible. Revelation, however, does explain that Christ was the first creation of God.

I've already explained this. Please respond to my comments.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
No I didn't. Both Psalm 45 and Hebrews 1:8-9 refer to Jesus Christ.

Here is the entire Hebrews passage.

Hebrews 1:1 God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, 2) in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world. 3) And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power. When He had made purification of sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high; 4) having become as much better than the angels, as He has inherited a more excellent name than they. 5) For to which of the angels did He ever say, ''Thou art My Son, Today I have begotten thee?''? And again, ''I will be a Father to Him, And He shall be a Son to Me?'' 6) And when He again brings the first-born into the world, He says, ''And let all the angels of GOd worship Him.''7) And of the angels He says, ''Who makes His angels winds, And His ministers a flame of fire.''8) But of the Son He says, ''Thy throne, O GOD, IS FOREVER AND EVER, and the righteous scepter is the scepter of His kingdom. ''Thou shast loved righteousness and hated lawlessness; Therefore God, Thy God, hath anointed thee.

Jesus Christ is the Messiah, the anointed one.
I've already explained this. Please respond to my comments.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
You would have others think that John 1:1 doesn't say the Jesus Christ is the Word and that the Word was God and that the Word was with God? You are again being foolish.

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 14) And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.
I've already explained this, but I give a more full discussion here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
Your criticism is meaningless.
Again, this is not a legitimate response to criticisms of your conclusions. It's literally nothing more than yelling "Nu-uh!"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
The Holy Spirit is clearly shown to be a Person, and the fact that He is spoken of with personal pronouns demonstrates that.
No, it absolutely does not. I've already explained this in detail.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
And as I said earlier, Yes it is true. And here are some passages that demonstrate it. In these passages, human rulers are referred to as gods-Elohim. Exodus 21:6; Exodus 22:8; Psalm 82:1 and Psalm 82:6.

Whenever the word God is used, it is used either for the one true God, or for false gods-idols, or for human rulers.
This is the presupposition you start out with, but starting out with such a dogmatic presupposition only leads to poor exegesis, and the text of the Bible preclude it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
Fella, you haven't said one thing that is correct. You sound like you're trying to get a seat on the Jesus Seminar. They seek to discredit fundamental Christianity, and you would be right at home with them.
No, I disagree with most of what the Jesus Seminar concludes. Your blind and naive conviction notwithstanding, you've yet to respond intelligently to a single word of my criticisms. I'm beginning to think you can't.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-01-2010, 10:34 AM
 
20,299 posts, read 15,647,071 times
Reputation: 7409
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel O. McClellan View Post
No, I just wanted you to state, like you do here, that it's can't be understood, but it has to be accepted anyway. You're basically saying 1+1=1, and we can't know how or why, but we just have to accept it. Why do we have to accept it? Even if you accept the inerrancy of the Bible, it's not anywhere in the Bible. It comes from councils that met centuries after the New Testament was written to debate and vote over Christianity.



No, it's not. The majority of the Pentateuch was originally penned at the very earliest around the 8th or 9th century BCE (and that's a conservative estimate). The final texts of the New Testament were written shortly after 100 CE.



Of course, this isn't anywhere in the Bible. This is just a fact that people make up.



I believe it's the word of God, I just don't believe that that means humanity didn't influence it at all.



A staggeringly juvenile evasion of topics that you're clearly not nearly informed enough to tackle.



And to pretend that you can just assert made up facts about God and defend them with the notion that it's arrogant to expect them to be logical is elementary school argumentation. I can't believe I have to point this out.



And I have given a single scripture which shows your interpretations are mistaken. You've not bothered to respond to that, you've only burped up "Nu-uh!"



Actually that's exactly what it means. You cited Ps 139:7, which says "where can I hide from your face?" Jonah 1:3 says Jonah "fled from the face of the Lord." It says Jonah did exactly what the Psalmist said he couldn't.



No, I just want to dismiss your reading because it's demonstrably not correct. You begging the question by saying "Nu-uh!" and that doesn't even begin to respond to my concerns.



And as I've shown, the Bible absolutely precludes that belief.



You're stuck in the hermeneutic circle. You've taken a dogma and you've found a bunch of proof texts for it. When you're confronted with texts that don't agree with the proof texts you just assert that their interpretation must align with your dogma. Then, despite twisting scriptures because they disagree with your dogma, you assert your dogma is derived from scripture. This is the single most common fallacy among amateur fundamentalist Bible exegetes.



Again, you're twisting the text to try to make it say something different so it does not conflict with your dogma. Weak and fallacious exegesis.



Silly eisegesis. Immutability as a philosophical principle wasn't even around when the Bible was being written and edited. It's a modern concept and you're retrojecting it into texts that have nothing to do with it. In addition, you haven't responded to my concerns, you've just reasserted your original thesis without further argument.



But you haven't responded to my concerns.



You're reading stuff into the text that simply isn't there.



But it's not in the Bible, so where did it come from?



No, you've posted scriptures and simply asserted that they show a triune God. You can't even respond intelligently to criticisms of your assertion.



Both very fine assertions, but you have no argument to support them, and when exposed to informed lexicography they simply fall apart. I've even shown you numerous scriptures that show unequivocally that the word just means numerical singularity. You've just flat ignored them. What unbelievable ignorance.



I've already explained exactly why this is incredibly uninformed, and your only response so far has been "Nu-uh!" Brilliant.



For people who don't know Greek or Hebrew it may seem excellent, but it just perpetuates ignorance and atrocious exegesis.



Actually they're much worse. The first claims yhwh is a late interpolation, and the second cites only the Encyclopedia Brittanica. It's clear neither author knows a lick of Hebrew.



You've got to be joking. Not only is this a textbook appeal to authority, but I have five years of formal Hebrew at better schools. Why on earth would you think that five years of Hebrew would impress me?



I will point out that at this point you're not even addressing me. You've no intention of devoting a single word to responding to my comments.



Which is how most of this discussion is feeling. You just automatically bark "Nu-uh!" whether the Bible supports you or not. At the same time, even where you take the time you're stuck in horribly fallacious methodological traps.



That's not what Paul said. He said there are many gods, whether in heaven or earth, but to Christians there is one. This is the very definition of monolatry: belief in multiple deities with dedication only to one.



No, none of those texts refer to judges. I discussed that here.



Yes. The juxtaposition in this verse of a discussion of idols next to an imperative for gods to worship Yhwh does not in any corner of this universe mean the gods are idols. Your exegesis is growing increasingly grotesque.



Again, not in the Bible. Revelation, however, does explain that Christ was the first creation of God.



I've already explained this. Please respond to my comments.



I've already explained this. Please respond to my comments.



I've already explained this, but I give a more full discussion here.



Again, this is not a legitimate response to criticisms of your conclusions. It's literally nothing more than yelling "Nu-uh!"



No, it absolutely does not. I've already explained this in detail.



This is the presupposition you start out with, but starting out with such a dogmatic presupposition only leads to poor exegesis, and the text of the Bible preclude it.



No, I disagree with most of what the Jesus Seminar concludes. Your blind and naive conviction notwithstanding, you've yet to respond intelligently to a single word of my criticisms. I'm beginning to think you can't.
Fella, since you have shown that you simply ignore and dismiss the scriptures which put the lie to everything that you say, I am not going to spend my time going over every single criticism and 'concern' that you have. Your concern should be that you reject Biblical truth. If the things that you're trying to promote are what they are teaching in schools today, than you should consider returning your diploma and trying to get your money back.

You reject the deity of Christ. You reject the trinity. You reject the absolute attributes of God. For instance, despite being shown scripture for each of the 3 Persons of the Godhead with respect to their immutability, omnipresence, and veracity, you still deny it. You were shown Scripture that clearly shows the immutability of God and you say that all I've done is shown Scripture and made an assertion that that they show immutability. You seem to think that there are other deities besides the one true God, or that the Bible teaches it. You refuse to acknowledge that in ancient Israel, judges and rulers were sometimes referred to as keep saying that this or that is not in the Bible when in fact it is.

Fella, it seems that you have set for yourself, the task of opposing and discrediting the word of God and the fundmentals of the Christian faith.

Oh. And your use of the designations BCE and CE, instead of B.C. (before Christ), and A.D. (ANNO DOMINI, In the year of our Lord) says a lot about your beliefs as well.

You may or may not have a degree in theology. But the fact is, you know nothing about the word of God.

This is my final comment to you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-01-2010, 11:27 AM
 
Location: Oxford, England
1,266 posts, read 950,049 times
Reputation: 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
Fella, since you have shown that you simply ignore and dismiss the scriptures which put the lie to everything that you say, I am not going to spend my time going over every single criticism and 'concern' that you have.
You haven't spent any time addressing anything I've said up to this point. You know very well that you don't have the tools to engage this discussion on the appropriate level, but this kind of cognitive dissonance is honestly sickening.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
Your concern should be that you reject Biblical truth.
Your concern should be that you don't read what the Bible says, but read into the Bible what tradition tells you it should be saying.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
If the things that you're trying to promote are what they are teaching in schools today, than you should consider returning your diploma and trying to get your money back.
It's sad that you seem to think this is true.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
You reject the deity of Christ.
I do no such thing. Please keep your assumptions to yourself.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
You reject the trinity.
It's a non-biblical doctrine that's logically impossible.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
You reject the absolute attributes of God.
I reject some of them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
For instance, despite being shown scripture for each of the 3 Persons of the Godhead with respect to their immutability, omnipresence, and veracity, you still deny it.
And despite being shown why you're misreading those scriptures, you still haven't been able to respond. You can pretend that my responses were invalid all you want, but you know quite well that's not true.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
You were shown Scripture that clearly shows the immutability of God and you say that all I've done is shown Scripture and made an assertion that that they show immutability. You seem to think that there are other deities besides the one true God, or that the Bible teaches it.
The Bible absolutely does teach it, and you've not responded to a word of that argument. You just barked "Nu-uh!"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
You refuse to acknowledge that in ancient Israel, judges and rulers were sometimes referred to as keep saying that this or that is not in the Bible when in fact it is.
I linked to an explanation that shows it's simply not true that judges were referred to as gods in ancient Israel. There's no debate there. It's simply false. Notice you were unable to respond to a word of that as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
Fella, it seems that you have set for yourself, the task of opposing and discrediting the word of God and the fundmentals of the Christian faith.

Oh. And your use of the designations BCE and CE, instead of B.C. (before Christ), and A.D. (ANNO DOMINI, In the year of our Lord) says a lot about your beliefs as well.
The fact that you don't seem to know where those terms come from or why they were developed says a lot about how little you understand about any of this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
You may or may not have a degree in theology. But the fact is, you know nothing about the word of God.

This is my final comment to you.
I wish you could have responded intelligently to at least one of my criticisms. Instead you just barked "Nu-uh!" at me repeatedly and appealed to some of the most ignorant and fallacious argumentation I've ever seen, both on your part and on the part of those ridiculous websites to which you linked.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-01-2010, 11:57 AM
 
Location: New York City
5,556 posts, read 6,712,380 times
Reputation: 1351
Quote:
Originally Posted by I LOVE NORTH CAROLINA View Post
If you are a Christian, listening to the Holy Spirit, you know that the Bible is very clear about the Trinity.
Since when?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-01-2010, 12:02 PM
 
Location: God's Country
21,417 posts, read 29,542,083 times
Reputation: 29927
Quote:
Originally Posted by InsaneInDaMembrane View Post
Since when?
Since the day it was written.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-01-2010, 12:12 PM
 
Location: New York City
5,556 posts, read 6,712,380 times
Reputation: 1351
Quote:
Originally Posted by I LOVE NORTH CAROLINA View Post
Since the day it was written.
ILNC, have you ever taken the time to read church history. Are you even aware of HOW the doctrine of the trinity came to be? Have you ever heard of Arius and Athanasius and how their theological war brought about said doctrine (it existed before them in arguuments like this thread and countless others, but they took it to another level)? May I suggest reading up on these things (if you dare) just so you would be educated on what REALLY happened. Just to be fair.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-01-2010, 12:22 PM
 
Location: Seattle, Wa
5,302 posts, read 5,286,831 times
Reputation: 420
Quote:
Originally Posted by katjonjj View Post
God coulda done that without putting himself in a man's body. Really I wonder where you find the need for God to come to earth to sacrifice himself.
I really wonder how you claim to be Christian, yet you question the very God you claim to worship in what He can and cannot do?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-01-2010, 12:23 PM
 
Location: Seattle, Washington
8,435 posts, read 8,387,998 times
Reputation: 1690
Quote:
Originally Posted by I LOVE NORTH CAROLINA View Post
Since the day it was written.
Bible-truth.org states: "From the Second Century to our present age many people have found the biblical doctrine of the Trinity hard to understand. The doctrine states that the Godhead, the Father, Son and Holy Spirit consist of three distinct Persons, yet these three are one God. In our material existence the concept that God is only One God, yet He exists as three distinct persons is foreign to us. There are many arguments espoused by those that deny the Trinity, but the most prevalent is that it doesn't make sense. How can God be One God and three Persons? The word "Trinity" is not found in Scripture and no verse says "God is three Persons" or "God is a Trinity."


Yet you state it is clear?


Catholic Encyclopedia:
"It is manifest that a dogma so mysterious presupposes a Divine revelation. When the fact of revelation, understood in its full sense as the speech of God to man, is no longer admitted, the rejection of the doctrine follows as a necessary consequence. For this reason it has no place in the Liberal Protestantism of today. The writers of this school contend that the doctrine of the Trinity, as professed by the Church, is not contained in the New Testament, but that it was first formulated in the second century and received final approbation in the fourth, as the result of the Arian and Macedonian controversies."

Yet it is clear?

Even trinitarian scholars admit it is mysterious, and hard to understand.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-01-2010, 12:27 PM
 
Location: Seattle, Washington
8,435 posts, read 8,387,998 times
Reputation: 1690
Quote:
Originally Posted by sciotamicks View Post
I really wonder how you claim to be Christian, yet you question the very God you claim to worship in what He can and cannot do?
Way to rebut!

I actually suggested that he is more than capable of taking a normal human being (as he is said to have done in the OT) and bringing salvation through that normal human being. So I am saying that you limit God by claiming he HAD to come down to earth in a human body.

I notice you didn't answer any of my questions.

Why did God need to come to earth in a human body?

To start... or you can simply reply to my previous post in full.

You can answer or not.. but it is very telling that trinitarians are not able to answer even the most basic question.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-01-2010, 12:37 PM
 
5,925 posts, read 5,683,225 times
Reputation: 639
God is an ever expanding family of which all mankind will be included when each is ready.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top