Jesus Christ is our only 'mediator' as stated by St. Paul

[elvisman]

Much of the article I posted does debunk the trinity doctrine. For the believers of the trinity doctrine believe that Jesus Christ, is himself God the Father and has always been God the Father. Yet, scripture disagrees with you.

We Christians (which you are not) do** NOT**** believe that the Son is the Father. We believe that they are 2 distinct persons of the Godhead – which Scripture ABSOLUTELY confirms, which I’ve already shown and will further illustrate below.**

Scripture teaches us that Jesus is of the Father, being made a life unto himself, being both of the Father and yet his own person. John 5:26 Scripture teaches us that Jesus is the image of the Father, being begotten of the Father, being the first of all creatures, the first of all creation. In the beginning was the Word. Jesus was begotten of the Father, in the beginning, even before the creation of the heavens and the earth.

WRONG**.**
John 1:3-4** emphatically states:**
All things*** came to be through him, and without him nothing came to be***. What came to be **through him was life, and this life was the light of the human race; **

---

You see – John wrote his gospel during the time of the Gnostic heresy. this is why he emphacizes certain things so boldly. He dedicates and entire chapter to the Eucharist and the Real Presence (ch. 6) and boldly proclaims the nature of Jesus at the beginning of his Gospel. There were 2 issues that the Gnostics had perverted – much like the Oneness believers of today.

Yet, we must examine why it is not robbery to call the Son God. Firstly, the Son is filled with the Holy Spirit of the Father, without measure. So his will is that only of his Father. So all he says and does is by way of the Father through the unction of his Holy Spirit. So because the Father has given his Son his Holy Spirit without measure, it is not robbery to call the Son God, or Father. Yet, when the Son offers up the kingdom unto the Father, he will relinquish over his authority of the Godhead, for there can be only one God.

You refuse to believe this because you do not think Jesus is a life unto himself, apart from his Father, but it is written in scripture.

Secondly, in Hebrews 1, the Father himself refers to the Son as God, so who are we to not do likewise?

As for 1 Cor. 15:24-28, it says what it says. Your argument is not with me, but with what is written. You want to argue that what it says is not what it means. So you argue against the Word of God, you argue against God himself.

I’m not arguing with 1 Cor. 15:24-28 – just your misunderstanding of it. When you look at the CONTEXT of Scripture – you see the Trinitarian doctrine is glaringly apparent. Unfortunately, people of your ilk are afraid of Scriptural CONTEXT. You’d rather pick a verse here and there out of context so that you can distort the Scriptures to your own destruction (1 Pet. 3:16).

---

In 1 Col. 1:16, Paul is not content to just say that he created all things. He makes it painfully clear to the unbeliever (you) just what he means:**
“For in him were created*** all things in heaven and on earth, the visible and the invisible*, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers; all things were created through him and for him.”**

---

Sorry, pal – you lose . . .

 

[1beleevr]

altabz: That is correct, Believe, Repent, Confess, be Baptized in the Name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit! Som people say that you must be baptized in the name of Jesus only, but matthew 28:19-20, clearly tells us to baptize those that WE make disciples of, in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost(Spirit). Jesus’s words were also meant for US believers today!

 

[avflf]

**I already ****HAVE provided you with OT passages a few posts back.
Your problem is that you continue to blind yourself to the Trinitarian truths found in them.
As for the Septuagint – that IS what Jesus studied from and that can be proven by the dozens and dozens of NT references to it.
My objection to Protestant Christians – AND Oneness believers – is that you all choose to accept the decision of a 1st-century Post-Christ, Post-Temple non-official instead of the OT that Jesus learned from. These were the very people (next generation) who rejected Jesus as the Messiah.
***Just ***doesn’t add up . . .

Nope – it means that you should try seeing things God’s way and not your way. You are a flawed human being – he is not. It means to believe from the beginning what the APOSTLES taught, then understanding.

What cracks me up about people like you is that you honestly believe that the Church had it wrong for almost 2000 years until you guys came along and got it right. If that is so, then Jesus is a liar (Matt. 16:15-19).
Ummm . . . I’m not ready to make that assertion - even though you are . . .

The problem with all denominations that preach the Trinity is the way they approach the Bible. It is an almost universal requirement by Protestant churches to steer every new convert to the Gospel of John as the very first Biblical book to read/study. After John the rest of the New Testament by any order of preference depending on the Church group. The Old Testament is relegated to the role of confirming what the New Testament says. Who has ever started reading a book 2/3 into the story? Instead of making the New Testament fit into the Old, the churches try to fit the Old Testament into the New … and that spells “problem”. If one does not understand the Old Testament such one does not understand the New.
The writers of the Old Testament went out of their way to proclaim that God is One - One God and, despite your belief that there are hundreds, or perhaps thousands, of instances in the text that point to One God of 3 Persons or 3 Persons in One God, the Jewish people never believed that at the time of the writing of the books nor do they believe it now, or in the inbetween years. They were and are fiercely “oneness” - One God, One Person. They accept, however, that their One God manifested himself in many ways, i.e. a Burning Bush, a Cloud, A Pillar of Fire and even as a Human Being, but they maintain that, being God, he could do that and much more without requiring help from 2 other persons.
So, if one studies the Bible the correct and logical way one starts at the beginning of the book, the Old Testament. Now, if the Old Testament is so emphatic on proclaiming that God is ONE, as is attested by:
“(Isa 41:14) Fear not, thou worm of Jacob, you that are dead of Israel: I have helped thee, saith the LORD: and thy **Redeemer **the Holy One of Israel.
(Isa 43:3) For I am the Lord thy God, the Holy One of Israel, thy Saviour: I have given Egypt for thy atonement, Ethiopia and Saba for thee.
(Isa 43:11) I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no Saviour.
(Isa 43:15) I am the LORD, your Holy One, the creator of Israel, your King.
(Isa 45:5) I am the Lord, and there is none else: there is no God besides me: I girded thee, and thou hast not known me:
(Isa 45:21) Tell ye, and bring them near; yea, let them take counsel together: who hath declared this from ancient time? who hath told it from that time? have not I the LORD? and there is no God else beside me; a just God and a Saviour; there is none beside me.
(Isa 47:4) Our redeemer, the Lord of hosts is his name, the Holy One of Israel.
(Isa 49:26) And I will feed them that oppress thee with their own flesh; and they shall be drunken with their own blood, as with sweet wine: and all flesh shall know that I the LORD am thy **Saviour **and thy Redeemer, the mighty One of Jacob.
(Isa 54:5) For thy Maker is thine husband; the LORD of hosts is his name; and thy Redeemer the Holy One of Israel; The God of the whole earth shall he be called.”
should one come across a verse in the New Testament that appeared to casts some doubt on the Oneness of God, one would automatically be on guard and would seek a different meaning to the verse. What you are doing, elvisman, is trying to find in the Old Testament some sort of support for a belief you took from reading the last part of the book first. You went about it back wards. And note that the word “LORD” in the quotes above means “Jehovah” which, in your way of thinking, is God the Father. Now, I understand that Jesus, God the Son in your view, was the Redeemer and Saviour of his people by purchasing such redemption and salvation with his blood at the crucifixion, but Jehovah sys that HE was the Saviour and Redeemer of his people. A good thing the Ghost doesn’t say much throughout the book otherwise he would also claim the salvation and redemption was his to give. Consider another thing, if the Jews used,as you say, words that point to a Triune God why the camouflaging of their true belief. Why not come out and shout it from the rooftops that GOD is a Trio. I mean, they proclaimed loud and clear that He was ONE but you say that they knew that buried somewhere in that ONE lurked two more and left clues for us to follow?
And what is your point with Mt.16:15-19 regarding the Trinity? Peter, quite correctly called Jesus the son of the living God. Now, had he called him God the Son, you might have had a point.

 

[elvisman]

So, if one studies the Bible the correct and logical way one starts at the beginning of the book, the Old Testament. Now, if the Old Testament is so emphatic on proclaiming that God is ONE, as is attested by:

“(Isa 41:14) Fear not, thou worm of Jacob, you that are dead of Israel: I have helped thee, saith the LORD: and thy **Redeemer **the Holy One of Israel.
(Isa 43:3) For I am the Lord thy God, the Holy One of Israel, thy Saviour: I have given Egypt for thy atonement, Ethiopia and Saba for thee.
(Isa 43:11) I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no Saviour.
(Isa 43:15) I am the LORD, your Holy One, the creator of Israel, your King.
(Isa 45:5) I am the Lord, and there is none else: there is no God besides me: I girded thee, and thou hast not known me:
(Isa 45:21) Tell ye, and bring them near; yea, let them take counsel together: who hath declared this from ancient time? who hath told it from that time? have not I the LORD? and there is no God else beside me; a just God and a Saviour; there is none beside me.
(Isa 47:4) Our redeemer, the Lord of hosts is his name, the Holy One of Israel.
(Isa 49:26) And I will feed them that oppress thee with their own flesh; and they shall be drunken with their own blood, as with sweet wine: and all flesh shall know that I the LORD am thy **Saviour **and thy Redeemer, the mighty One of Jacob.
(Isa 54:5) For thy Maker is thine husband; the LORD of hosts is his name; and thy Redeemer the Holy One of Israel; The God of the whole earth shall he be called.”
I don’t see how you can read these passages and see that God is in NO WAY calling himself the Father – but the Lord, the Redeemer, the Saviour and the Holy one of Israel.
The Lord god IS one – but he is manifested in 3 distinct persons.

 

[elvisman]

You went about it back wards. And note that the word “LORD” in the quotes above means “Jehovah” which, in your way of thinking, is God the Father. Now, I understand that Jesus, God the Son in your view, was the Redeemer and Saviour of his people by purchasing such redemption and salvation with his blood at the crucifixion, but Jehovah sys that HE was the Saviour and Redeemer of his people. A good thing the Ghost doesn’t say much throughout the book otherwise he would also claim the salvation and redemption was his to give. Consider another thing, if the Jews used, as you say, words that point to a Triune God why the camouflaging of their true belief. Why not come out and shout it from the rooftops that GOD is a Trio. I mean, they proclaimed loud and clear that He was ONE but you say that they knew that buried somewhere in that ONE lurked two more and left clues for us to follow? And what is your point with Mt.16:15-19 regarding the Trinity?

Neither I** nor**** the Church has read the Bible backwards. It is only in the knowledge of the OT that we can see the reality of the NT.**

**God revealed to Israel what they ****needed ****to know for the Law. The Law was merely a ****shadow ****of what was to come, which was Jesus - the fulfillment of the Law and he was revealed later. Until then – they didn’t know the *****reality ***of that fulfillment.
Neither Abraham, nor Moses, nor Isaac, nor Samuel nor David knew Jesus – NONE of them. they – like the rest of Israel had to wait until God chose to reveal it to them.

Unfortunately, like you – many of them didn’t have enough faith to believe in what God revealed and therefore rejected Jesus.

Like Paul said in Philippians 2:6 –
“Who, though he was in the form of God, did not regard equality with God something to be grasped. **
Rather, he (God the son) emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, coming in human likeness; and found human in appearance, he humbled himself, becoming obedient to death, even death on a cross. **
Because of this, God (the father)** greatly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bend, of those in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.”**

As for Matt. 16:15-19 – I was showing you that Jesus promised that the gates of hell** wouldn’t**** prevails against his Church. According to you – hell HAS prevailed because the Trinitarian view is the one held by the Body of Christ since the beginning.**

As I stated before – it makes me chuckle when people like you think that the Church had it wrong for almost 2000 years until you guys came along and got it right.

Tell me something:
What was the motive for the Early Church – many of whom were hideously martyred – to teach this heretical Trinitarian view??
Can*** you answer that?***

***PS – ***I had to delete some of your post to fit my responses.

 

[elvisman]

So, if one studies the Bible the correct and logical way one starts at the beginning of the book, the Old Testament. Now, if the Old Testament is so emphatic on proclaiming that God is ONE, as is attested by:

“(Isa 41:14) Fear not, thou worm of Jacob, you that are dead of Israel: I have helped thee, saith the LORD: and thy **Redeemer **the Holy One of Israel.
(Isa 43:3) For I am the Lord thy God, the Holy One of Israel, thy Saviour: I have given Egypt for thy atonement, Ethiopia and Saba for thee.
(Isa 43:11) I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no Saviour.
(Isa 43:15) I am the LORD, your Holy One, the creator of Israel, your King.
and thy Redeemer, the mighty One of Jacob.
(Isa 54:5) For thy Maker is thine husband; the LORD of hosts is his name; and thy Redeemer the Holy One of Israel; The God of the whole earth shall he be called.”
I don’t see how you can read these passages and see that God is in NO WAY calling himself the Father – but the Lord, the Redeemer, the Saviour and the Holy one of Israel.
The Lord god IS one – but he is manifested in 3 distinct persons.

 

[elvisman]

You went about it back wards. And note that the word “LORD” in the quotes above means “Jehovah” which, in your way of thinking, is God the Father. Now, I understand that Jesus, God the Son in your view, was the Redeemer and Saviour of his people by purchasing such redemption and salvation with his blood at the crucifixion, but Jehovah sys that HE was the Saviour and Redeemer of his people. A good thing the Ghost doesn’t say much throughout the book otherwise he would also claim the salvation and redemption was his to give. Consider another thing, if the Jews used, as you say, words that point to a Triune God why the camouflaging of their true belief. Why not come out and shout it from the rooftops that GOD is a Trio. I mean, they proclaimed loud and clear that He was ONE but you say that they knew that buried somewhere in that ONE lurked two more and left clues for us to follow? And what is your point with Mt.16:15-19 regarding the Trinity?

Neither I** nor**** the Church has read the Bible backwards. It is only in the knowledge of the OT that we can see the reality of the NT.**

**God revealed to Israel what they ****needed ****to know for the Law. The Law was merely a ****shadow ****of what was to come, which was Jesus - the fulfillment of the Law and he was revealed later. Until then – they didn’t know the *****reality ***of that fulfillment.
Neither Abraham, nor Moses, nor Isaac, nor Samuel nor David knew Jesus – NONE of them. they – like the rest of Israel had to wait until God chose to reveal it to them.

Unfortunately, like you – many of them didn’t have enough faith to believe in what God revealed and therefore rejected Jesus.

Like Paul said in Philippians 2:6 –
“Who, though he was in the form of God, did not regard equality with God something to be grasped. **
Rather, he (God the son) emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, coming in human likeness; and found human in appearance, he humbled himself, becoming obedient to death, even death on a cross. **
Because of this, God (the father)** greatly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bend, of those in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.”**

As for Matt. 16:15-19 – I was showing you that Jesus promised that the gates of hell** wouldn’t**** prevails against his Church. According to you – hell HAS prevailed because the Trinitarian view is the one held by the Body of Christ since the beginning.**

As I stated before – it makes me chuckle when people like you think that the Church had it wrong for almost 2000 years until you guys came along and got it right.

Tell me something:
What was the motive for the Early Church – many of whom were hideously martyred – to teach this heretical Trinitarian view??
Can** you answer that?**

PS – I had to delete some of your post to fit my responses

 

[heiscominginthe]

=elvisman;5640716]We Christians (which you are not) do** NOT**** believe that the Son is the Father. We believe that they are 2 distinct persons of the Godhead – which Scripture ABSOLUTELY confirms, which I’ve already shown and will further illustrate below.**

It is written, judge and ye shall be judged. You claim I am not christian and that is alright, for I know your interpretation of what a christian is versus what scripture says is not one in the same. My understanding of what a christian is goes not only occurred in my life, but it aligns perfectly of what scripture describes happens to a new believer in Christ.

As for your two person theory, to say God is more than God is to add to the Word of God. God begat his Son, Jesus Christ the Lord, in the beginning, even before the creation of the heavens and the earth. What makes it possible to call the Son God is what I have posted from scripture. The Father fills the Son with his Holy Spirit without measure. And when the Son offers up the kingdom unto the Father, he will relinquish is Godhead authority, for there can be only one God. You choose to believe in two Gods, that that is against the written Word of God.

WRONG**.**
John 1:3-4** emphatically states:**
All things*** came to be through him, and without him nothing came to be***. What came to be through him was life, and this life was the light of the human race;

---

You see – John wrote his gospel during the time of the Gnostic heresy. this is why he emphacizes certain things so boldly. He dedicates and entire chapter to the Eucharist and the Real Presence (ch. 6) and boldly proclaims the nature of Jesus at the beginning of his Gospel. There were 2 issues that the Gnostics had perverted – much like the Oneness believers of today.

There is only one God. He is the Father of all Creation.

John 1
In the beginning was the Word.
The bible tells us that Jesus Christ is the Word of God. In the beginning God begat his Son the Word, even before he created the heavens and the earth. And by the Son the Word of God, and through the Son the Word of God, God spoke all things into existence through the ministry of his Holy Spirit. God begat his Son who is the expressed image of the Father, a life unto himself. John 5:25

And the Word was with God. God begat his Son the Word, and God was a Father unto the Son and Jesus was a Son unto the Father.

And the Word was God. God the Father gave his Son his Holy Spirit without measure. The Son did only the will of his Father. Thus, making him God, for it is written, no man cometh unto the Father, but through the Son. In Hebrews 1, the Father himself refers to the Son as God so who do we do any less.

When all things have been brought into submission, the Son will offer up the kingdom unto his Father where he will relinquish the authority of the Godhead given him by his Father to do his will. For there is only one God. 1 Cor. 15:24-28

I’m not arguing with 1 Cor. 15:24-28 – just your misunderstanding of it. When you look at the CONTEXT of Scripture – you see the Trinitarian doctrine is glaringly apparent. Unfortunately, people of your ilk are afraid of Scriptural CONTEXT. You’d rather pick a verse here and there out of context so that you can distort the Scriptures to your own destruction (1 Pet. 3:16).

---

In 1 Col. 1:16, Paul is not content to just say that he created all things. He makes it painfully clear to the unbeliever* (you*) just what he means:
“For in him were created*** all things in heaven and on earth, the visible and the invisible***, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers; all things were created through him and for him.”

---

Sorry, pal – you lose . . .

When it comes to something this important, I believe the apostles themselves would have told us there is a trinity, not the CC. The trinity doctrines is nothing more than a doctrine created by men, PERIOD.

 

[elvisman]

It is written, judge and ye shall be judged. You claim I am not christian and that is alright, for I know your interpretation of what a christian is versus what scripture says is not one in the same. My understanding of what a christian is goes not only occurred in my life, but it aligns perfectly of what scripture describes happens to a new believer in Christ.

As for your two person theory, to say God is more than God is to add to the Word of God. God begat his Son, Jesus Christ the Lord, in the beginning, even before the creation of the heavens and the earth. What makes it possible to call the Son God is what I have posted from scripture. The Father fills the Son with his Holy Spirit without measure. And when the Son offers up the kingdom unto the Father, he will relinquish is Godhead authority, for there can be only one God. You choose to believe in two Gods, that that is against the written Word of God.

When I say that you’re not a Christian - it’s because you reject the teachings of the historic Christian faith and instead believe in heresy. I’m not being judgmental - just observant.

As for the Father and the Son - Jesus is begotten of the Father- not made.
Just as I showed your friend avflf, I will also illustrate this to you - using the Scriptures:

Philippians 2:6-11:
“Who, though he was in the form of God, did not regard equality with God something to be grasped. **
Rather, he (God the son) emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, coming in human likeness; and found human in appearance, he humbled himself, becoming obedient to death, even death on a cross. **
Because of this, God (the father)** greatly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bend, of those in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.”**

There is only one God. He is the Father of all Creation.
John 1
In the beginning was the Word.
The bible tells us that Jesus Christ is the Word of God. In the beginning God begat his Son the Word, even before he created the heavens and the earth. And by the Son the Word of God, and through the Son the Word of God, God spoke all things into existence through the ministry of his Holy Spirit. God begat his Son who is the expressed image of the Father, a life unto himself. John 5:25

John 5:25 speaks about the Father giving life to the Son - IN THE FLESH:
For just as the Father has life in himself, so also he gave to his Son the possession of life in himself.

And he gave him power to exercise judgment, because he is the Son of Man.
And the Word was with God. God begat his Son the Word, and God was a Father unto the Son and Jesus was a Son unto the Father.

And the Word was God. God the Father gave his Son his Holy Spirit without measure. The Son did only the will of his Father. Thus, making him God, for it is written, no man cometh unto the Father, but through the Son. In Hebrews 1, the Father himself refers to the Son as God so who do we do any less.

Man - you are ALL pver the board on this one.
We acknowledge that the Son is God - just as the Father is and the Holy Spirit is. The difference is that you guys think that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are all the same person. Scripture totally blasts that theory away.

When all things have been brought into submission, the Son will offer up the kingdom unto his Father where he will relinquish the authority of the Godhead given him by his Father to do his will. For there is only one God. 1 Cor. 15:24-28

When it comes to something this important, I believe the apostles themselves would have told us there is a trinity, not the CC. The trinity doctrines is nothing more than a doctrine created by men, PERIOD.

**That’s completely ignorant of you to say that.
Did the Apostles declare the canon of Scripture? Ummm . . . NOPE!
It was the Church, which is the voice of Christ here on earth, guided by the Holy Spirit, which leads her to ALL truth (John 16:13-15).

While we’re on that subject, the Aostles DID teach Baptismal regeneration and the Real Presence in the Eucharist, yet many Protestants reject those teachings.

 

[heiscominginthe]

altabz: That is correct, Believe, Repent, Confess, be Baptized in the Name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit! Som people say that you must be baptized in the name of Jesus only, but matthew 28:19-20, clearly tells us to baptize those that WE make disciples of, in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost(Spirit). Jesus’s words were also meant for US believers today!

Hum, why do people claim that to be baptized in water is to be done in the name of Jesus? For it is WRITTEN. Show me ONE place, ONE place where a believer was baptized in water in any other name and I will believe you. Yet, you cannot, but you still will not believe.

To be baptized in the Holy Spirit is to be down in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Do you not remember the words of John the baptist as he spoke of our Lord in that one greater than himself was coming who would baptize in the Holy Spirit and fire.

Luke 3:16 John answered them all, "I indeed baptize you with water, but he comes who is mightier than I, the latchet of whose sandals I am not worthy to loosen. He will baptize you in the Holy Spirit and fire,

 

[heiscominginthe]

elvisman;5645228]When I say that you’re not a Christian - it’s because you reject the teachings of the historic Christian faith and instead believe in heresy. I’m not being judgmental - just observant.

I reject your interpretation of the Word of God, for it is contrray to the Word of God. As for not being judgemental, it is God who can see into the hearts of men, not elvisman. So as you have judged, so shall you be judged, regardless of your back tracking.

As for the Father and the Son - Jesus is begotten of the Father- not made.
Just as I showed your friend avflf, I will also illustrate this to you - using the Scriptures:

Jesus is of the same material of the Father, being begotten, born of the Father, the expressed inage of the Father. Jesus is the Son of God the Father.

Now, in a prior post you made the claim that Jesus in not the Father, yet Isaiah disagrees with you. Yet, if it is not robbery to call Jesus the Father, what is it that makes it possible to do so. If you knew this, you would not be arguing with.

John 5:25 speaks about the Father giving life to the Son - IN THE FLESH:
For just as the Father has life in himself, so also he gave to his Son the possession of life in himself.

Care to share with me where it says that it is talking of Jesus in the flesh? Do you not know that Jesus was begotten of the Father, in the beginning, even before the creation of the heavens and the earth. In the beginning WAS THE WORD.

Man - you are ALL pver the board on this one.
We acknowledge that the Son is God - just as the Father is and the Holy Spirit is. The difference is that you guys think that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are all the same person. Scripture totally blasts that theory away.

You don’t even know my stand, but you say you do.

I believe there is one God, the Father, the Holy Spirit. Who begat his Son, the Word, in the beginning. For Jesus is the beginning of all of creation. And by the Son, the Word, and through the Son, the Word, all things were spoken into existance through the ministry, through the unction of the Holy Spirit who filled the Son without measure.

**That’s completely *ignorant ***of you to say that.
Did the Apostles declare the canon of Scripture? Ummm . . . NOPE!
It was the Church, which is the voice of Christ here on earth, guided by the Holy Spirit, which leads her to ALL truth (John 16:13-15).

So the apostles were not the church? So the scriptures were given to the body of Christ through the CC, not the apostles? What is ignorant is not understanding that the Church was established by the apostles who were ordained by Christ himself, the head of the church and that scripture came by way of the unction of the Holy Spirit through the apostles.

While we’re on that subject, the Aostles DID teach Baptismal regeneration and the Real Presence in the Eucharist, yet many Protestants reject those teachings.

You do not even understand the baptisms. You only regard what you have been taught which is contrary to the Word of God. As for the passover supper, Jesus said to do this in rememberance of him, which is what all believers are commanded to do.

 

[elvisman]

I reject your interpretation of the Word of God, for it is contrray to the Word of God. As for not being judgemental, it is God who can see into the hearts of men, not elvisman. So as you have judged, so shall you be judged, regardless of your back tracking.

I am called upon to judge rightly – and I have.
I am told that I will know people like you by your fruits – and I have. You preach a FALSE Gospel and I have called you out and that angers you.

Jesus is of the same material of the Father, being begotten, born of the Father, the expressed inage of the Father. Jesus is the Son of God the Father. Now, in a prior post you made the claim that Jesus in not the Father, yet Isaiah disagrees with you. Yet, if it is not robbery to call Jesus the Father, what is it that makes it possible to do so. If you knew this, you would not be arguing with.

Jesus had no birth in eternity – THAT’S why it’s ETERNITY. He was only born in his incarnation. John 1:1 speaks of Jesus as the eternal Word.
I realize that this subject may be too heavy for you to follow, but TRY.

Care to share with me where it says that it is talking of Jesus in the flesh? Do you not know that Jesus was begotten of the Father, in the beginning, even before the creation of the heavens and the earth. In the beginning WAS THE WORD.

Yes – but Jesus wasn’t incarnate in the beginning. All throughout the NT, Jesus speaks of the relationship between the Son and the Father – two distinct persons who are BOTH God. Jesus is a divine person – completely man and completely** God. When Jesus speaks of the Son submitting to the Father – it’s because the Son of Man must submit.**

You don’t even know my stand, but you say you do.
I believe there is one God, the Father, the Holy Spirit. Who begat his Son, the Word, in the beginning. For Jesus is the beginning of all of creation. And by the Son, the Word, and through the Son, the Word, all things were spoken into existance through the ministry, through the unction of the Holy Spirit who filled the Son without measure.

There is the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit – 3 persons in ONE God – the Triune Godhead – period. Scripture is replete with those references. YOUR problem is that you fail to see the Scriptures in CONTEXT. This is the tragedy of the Reformation – thousands of wacky misinterpretations.
Virtually every major heresy begins with the misconception of the nature of God and your heresy is no different.

 

[elvisman]

So the apostles were not the church? So the scriptures were given to the body of Christ through the CC, not the apostles? What is ignorant is not understanding that the Church was established by the apostles who were ordained by Christ himself, the head of the church and that scripture came by way of the unction of the Holy Spirit through the apostles.

The Apostles were indeed the first leaders of the Church that JESUS established (Matt. 16:18). BUT – they were not around when the canon of Scripture was declared – their SUCCESSORS were.

You do not even understand the baptisms. You only regard what you have been taught which is contrary to the Word of God. As for the passover supper, Jesus said to do this in rememberance of him, which is what all believers are commanded to do.

WRONG**.**
It is you who rejects the word of God because Jesus told Nicodemus emphatically:
**Jesus answered, "Amen, amen, I say to you, no one can enter the kingdom of God without being born of water and Spirit. **

As for the Last Supper, Jesus ALSO said:
"This is my body*, which will be given for you; do this in memory of me." ***
AND
"Drink from it, all of you, for this is my blood*** of the covenant, which will be* shed on behalf of many for the forgiveness of sins."**

Look - I’ll ask you the same thing I asked AVFLF:
What was the motive for the Early Church – many of whom were hideously martyred – to teach this heretical Trinitarian view??****
****Can you answer that?

 

[1beleevr]

heiscominginthe: Jesus tells His disciples, and ultimately US as believers, and Christians, to, "Go Ye there fore into all nations, making disciples, BAPTIZING them in the Name of the Father, and the Son(that would be Jesus), and the Holy Spirit(Matthew 28:19-20). Some non-catholic religions believe that:1) You must be baptized in the Name of Jesus, only, and 2) that if you don’t speak in tongues, immediately after coming up out of the water, your baptism is void! In Acts 2:38-40, Peter tells the crowd, to repent of their sins, turn back to God for forgiveness of sins, confess said sins, annd be baptized in the Name of Jesus. They would then receive the gift of the Holy Spirit! Jesus Himself was baptized in water, even though He was sinless So why do you suppose He got baptized? Was it an act of obedience to the Father; or to show us that we needed to be baptized, on top of believing on the Son of God? Some believe that, based on Acts 2:38-40one can be baptized in the Name of Jesus, have hands laid upon them, and receive the Holy Spirit. Makes me wonder, exactly what confirmation is all aboutDoes the young person or adult, make a public confession, and ask Jesus into their life, or what? Let me ask you, when you, heiscominginthe, accepted Christ, and was baptized, whose name was it in? For me it was, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, ala Matthew 28:19-20. There really is no point in arguing, or debating baptism, unless one wants to presume to be God,and tell others how to do it. God bless you, my brother/sister in Christ!

 

[avflf]

Neither I** nor**** the Church has read the Bible backwards. It is only in the knowledge of the OT that we can see the reality of the NT.**

**God revealed to Israel what they ****needed ****to know for the Law. The Law was merely a ****shadow ****of what was to come, which was Jesus - the fulfillment of the Law and he was revealed later. Until then – they didn’t know the *****reality ***of that fulfillment.
Neither Abraham, nor Moses, nor Isaac, nor Samuel nor David knew Jesus – NONE of them. they – like the rest of Israel had to wait until God chose to reveal it to them.

So you are saying that the God that spoke to Abram, Moses, etc. was God the Father? And yes, Jesus fulfilled the Sacrificial Law only, the others are still in force,

Unfortunately, like you – many of them didn’t have enough faith to believe in what God revealed and therefore rejected Jesus.

Your argument is not so much based on what God revealed but rather on what the CC thought He revealed, and you have had it wrong for around 2,000 years and no doubt will happily continue in your blindness for many more

Like Paul said in Philippians 2:6 –
“Who, though he was in the form of God, did not regard equality with God something to be grasped. **
Rather, he (God the son) emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, coming in human likeness; and found human in appearance, he humbled himself, becoming obedient to death, even death on a cross. **
Because of this, God (the father)** greatly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bend, of those in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.”**

Go back to the roots of the Bible - “Hear O Israel Jehovah your God is one Jehovah”.
And why do you keep emphasizing tittles that do not appear in the Bible such as “God the Son”. Where in heaven’s name did this non-scriptural fantasy first appeared?

As for Matt. 16:15-19 – I was showing you that Jesus promised that the gates of hell** wouldn’t**** prevails against his Church. According to you – hell HAS prevailed because the Trinitarian view is the one held by the Body of Christ since the beginning**.

Nothing to do with “hell” as you think but rather the “grave”. But it does not mean the Apostles would not err. It could have also been just an expression used at the time like “You’ll do fine”. Remember God (the Father) was also very sure that the human pair in Gen.1 were “very good” but by Gen.6 he was not so sure, or should I say He was damn sure they were not.

As I stated before – it makes me chuckle when people like you think that the Church had it wrong** for almost 2000 years until you guys came along and got it right.**

Just make sure you don’t choke.

Tell me something:
What was the motive for the Early Church – many of whom were hideously martyred – to teach this heretical Trinitarian view??
Can** you answer that?**

Not necessarily done deliberately, but errors do crop in … still, it took the CC 300 + years to formulate it into a doctrine.

**PS – **I had to delete some of your post to fit my responses

I’m magnanimous so I forgive you … and it has also been forgiven in heaven.

 

[elvisman]

So you are saying that the God that spoke to Abram, Moses, etc. was God the Father? And yes, Jesus fulfilled the Sacrificial Law only, the others are still in force,

The Triune God spoke to them.
As for the Law – we are still bound by the Moral Law (i.e., the Commandments)**.

Your argument is not so much based on what God revealed but rather on what the CC thought He revealed, and you have had it wrong for around 2,000 years and no doubt will happily continue in your blindness for many more

Jesus revealed this truth – but you refuse to accept it because it doesn’t fit your idea of the nature of God.

Go back to the roots of the Bible - “Hear O Israel Jehovah your God is one Jehovah”.

And why do you keep emphasizing tittles that do not appear in the Bible such as “God the Son”. Where in heaven’s name did this non-scriptural fantasy first appeared?God IS one – nobody is arguing that.

Nothing to do with “hell” as you think but rather the “grave”. But it does not mean the Apostles would not err. It could have also been just an expression used at the time like “You’ll do fine”. Remember God (the Father) was also very sure that the human pair in Gen.1 were “very good” but by Gen.6 he was not so sure, or should I say He was damn sure they were not.

Are you serious? That is the mose ridiculous thing you’ve said so far. "You’ll do fine"??? That’s what you think Jesus was telling them in Matt. 16:18? That’s the BEST you can come up with??
WOW.

As for the *“human pair”*, God said that it was not good for man to be alone – and he was right. He never thought any differently – in Gen. 6, or otherwise.

Not necessarily done deliberately, but errors do crop in … still, it took the CC 300 + years to formulate it into a doctrine.

WRONG**. Doctrines are declared when certain teachings are called into question and when heresies arise surrounding that teaching.**

As for the Fathers – you haven’t completely answered the question – you’re dodging it:
What was the motive for the Early Church – many of whom were hideously martyred – to teach this heretical Trinitarian view??
AND**, since we have explicit writings from them as early as the 2nd Century – were they wrong and were they teaching a**** false**** Gospel?**

 

[1beleevr]

So, when Paul rants about the Law in Romans, is he telling us that we are bound by the Law, or not? The Law(Commandments) cannot save us, right? In Romans 7:4, he states emphatically,“You died to the power of the Law, when you died with Christ.” I know you’ll probably point out that he meant the Jewish customs rituals, and laws, but I believe he also meant the Ten Commandments. This of course does not mean we shouldn’t strive to keep them all(nearly impossible on our own)

 

[avflf]

The Triune God spoke to them.

There you go again with names that appear nowhere in Scripture - Triune, indeed.

As for the Law – we are still bound by the Moral Law (i.e., the Commandments)**.
Jesus revealed this truth – but you refuse to accept it because it doesn’t fit your idea of the nature of God.
God IS one – nobody is arguing that. Are you sure that Jesus (the 2nd person revealed it or was it the "Spirit of truth (the 3rd person)?

Are you serious

? That is the mose ridiculous thing you’ve said so far. "You’ll do fine"??? That’s what you think Jesus was telling them in Matt. 16:18? That’s the BEST you can come up with??
WOW.

As for the “human pair”, God said that it was not good for man to be alone – and he was right. He never thought any differently – in Gen. 6, or otherwise.
WRONG*. Doctrines are declared when certain teachings are called into question and when heresies arise surrounding that teaching.*

As for the Fathers – you haven’t completely answered the question – you’re dodging it:
What was the motive for the Early Church – many of whom were hideously martyred – to teach this heretical Trinitarian view??
AND**, since we have explicit writings from them as early as the 2nd Century – were they wrong and were they teaching a**** false**** Gospel?**

You didn’t get my drift on the Genesis Story. God also thought that the human pair was going to do him proud (Gen 1:31)* And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good*. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.but by Gen 6 the belief and faith God had had been shattered (Gen 6:6) And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.
Jesus, as his Father, may have well had great expectations for Peter and those that followed him in the CC hierarchy but, alas, all went horribly wrong, although they thought and believed in their heart of hearts that they were teaching the truth.

 

[heiscominginthe]

elvisman;5646365]I am called upon to judge rightly – and I have.
I am told that I will know people like you by your fruits – and I have. You preach a FALSE Gospel and I have called you out and that angers you.

Firstly, you go against the Words of our Lord, claiming you have the right to judge. By calling me not christian because I do not fit the catholic interpretation of being christian, in other words, being baptized into the catholic church, you judge me not christian and in that sense, you judge yourself not christian.

As for getting angry, that is silly. I love you and if I was to be angry, then how could I then love you.

Jesus had no birth in eternity – THAT’S why it’s ETERNITY. He was only born in his incarnation. John 1:1 speaks of Jesus as the eternal Word.
**I realize that this subject may be too heavy for you to follow, but **TRY.

I suggest you learn the meaning of begotten.

Yes – but Jesus wasn’t incarnate in the beginning. All throughout the NT, Jesus speaks of the relationship between the Son and the Father – two distinct persons who are BOTH God. Jesus is a divine person – completely man and completely God. When Jesus speaks of the Son submitting to the Father – it’s because the Son of Man must submit.

I can’t seem to find that word incarnate in scripture, is it in the catholic bible?

Now, I know that Jesus, who existed long before being sent unto the earth to be born in the flesh, came by way of the Holy Spirit of God. Yet, he already was with God. He just didn’t come to be when God the Father, through his Holy Spirit, conceived his Son in Mary. Scripture teaches that Jesus was already begotten of the Father before coming to earth.

There is the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit – 3 persons in ONE God – the Triune Godhead – period. Scripture is replete with those references. YOUR** problem is that you fail to see the Scriptures in CONTEXT. This is the tragedy of the Reformation – thousands of wacky misinterpretations.**
**Virtually **every major heresy begins with the misconception of the nature of God and your heresy is no different.

Now you contradict yourself. Above, didn’t you claim there was two person that make up one God. Now you claim there are three. You are slightly confused.

There is only one God, the Father, who is the Holy Spirit. And he begat his Son, Jesus Christ our Lord giving him life unto himself, filling the Son with his Holy Spirit without measure, thus making him God for a time until his plan of salvation is complete. For Jesus Christ is the beginning and the end of God’s plan of salvation for mankind.

 

[elvisman]

So, when Paul rants about the Law in Romans, is he telling us that we are bound by the Law, or not? The Law(Commandments) cannot save us, right? In Romans 7:4, he states emphatically,“You died to the power of the Law, when you died with Christ.” I know you’ll probably point out that he meant the Jewish customs rituals, and laws, but I believe he also meant the Ten Commandments. This of course does not mean we shouldn’t strive to keep them all(nearly impossible on our own)

When Paul is speaking of the Law - he is speaking of the Mosaic Law that was fulfilled by Jesus.
The Moral Law is binding on all of us until we leave this world.