djhwoodwerks
Well-Known Member
So you don't believe the following verse is for everyone?
Matthew 28:19 (ESV Strong's) Go therefore and make disciples of all nations,
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Let's Talk About the Holy Spirit
- Thread starter Deeje
- Start date
So you don't believe the following verse is for everyone?
Matthew 28:19 (ESV Strong's) Go therefore and make disciples of all nations,
That is the English version. The question mark is in the wrong spot.
What, after all, is Apollos? And what is Paul? Only servants, through whom you came to believe---------as the Lord has assigned to each his task. I planted the seed, Apollos watered it, but God has been making it grow.
Put a question mark after believe. I think only is added. Oh God!
I have never, ever, said preaching and teaching is not a command. Making is a false command. Teaching and preaching does not make a person. Preaching keeps people humble and teaching keeps them educated. Neither makes them want to learn.
Are you kidding me?
djhwoodwerks
Well-Known Member
I think we have totally hijacked this thread! We should take it to your thread if you wish to continue.
I am sorry @Deeje. I realize that everything about Jesus concerns the Holy Spirit, especially what he said that sounds like a command, but it seems that I am alone seeing it. I apologize for seemingly going off track.
I do not think my constitution is strong enough to debate this making vs not making much more. I can't explain why what looks simple to me is a mountain of confession to everyone else. It is almost as though they who care to engage me are not reading all the words that I have noted in each response.
I think i have no more ways to say it.
What, after all, is Apollos? And what is Paul? Only servants, through whom you came to believe ? as Though the Lord has assigned to each his task. I planted the seed, Apollos watered it, but God has been making it grow.
Belief is through Jesus. Correct?
Belief is through Jesus. Correct?
Last edited:
Matthew 1:23:
“See, the virgin will become pregnant and give birth to a son,
and they will name Him Immanuel,
which is translated “God is with us.” (HCSB)
Matthew was quoting Isaiah 7:14 which reads...."Therefore, Jehovah himself will give you a sign: Look! The young woman will become pregnant and will give birth to a son, and she will name him Im·manʹu·el."
Looks like it could have something to do with the name "Immanuel"....which means "God is with us". Jesus was God's representative so THE God (ho theos) was indeed with the people Jesus preached to because many of them came to the son by being "drawn" by his Father. (John 6:44)
Really?
"Then fear came over everyone, and they glorified God, saying, “A great prophet has risen among us,” and “God has visited His people.”” (HCSB)
Perhaps a "quick search" was your undoing james.
God "visited" his people by several means in ancient times. Sometimes in dreams and visions, sometimes by an angelic visitation, sometimes through the powerful messages delivered by his prophets. Did the people really think that God was one of his own prophets? Seriously.
Nice try...its called grammar. Satan is THE god of this world.....he has many guises and is worshipped under many names but he is the only other "god" in this world who is seeking worship. Jesus never did. He directed all worship to his God and Father. (Luke 4:8)
Pathetic examples...sorry.
Not well researched at all. Please do your homework and study your subject before you post....its saves the inevitable egg on the face when you rely on yourself to interpret scripture.
Why do you bother to post this stuff?
Jesus said that God called human judges "gods"...it just means someone in a position of power. Do you even comprehend that? "Theos" does not just mean Almighty God.
The Greeks worships a multitude of "gods" so their language reflected their understanding of the word.
You really invite egg on your face djhw....
John 10:34-36:
"Jesus answered them, “Isn’t it written in your scripture, I said, you are gods? 35 If He called those whom the word of God came to ‘gods’—and the Scripture cannot be broken— 36 do you say, ‘You are blaspheming’ to the One the Father set apart and sent into the world, because I said: I am the Son of God?"
This is not a doctrine, but a belief based on other scripture. There is no direct statement, so we cannot make it a doctrine....unlike Christendom does with the trinity, building their whole belief system on it something that is not taught directly by eithe Jesus or his Father, nor any of God's prophets.
You have seen it all right, but "none so blind", as they say.
All you need to know about the NWT is available online, as is the Bible in its entirety.
http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/binav/r1/lp-e
We have several translations available including the Kingdom Interlinear. There you go....knock yourself out......
No, I am not being funny at all. I thought you wanted to know about today.
The words that were spoken and written applied first to the people who heard them. Do you agree?
Did Matthew 28:19 apply to those people who gathered together per order of Jesus?
I don't know how else to put it, except to say that the student also teaches the teacher. They provide you with important feedback, , show you what works, what doesn't, what they need, etc.
Yes.
Yet you presume to do the same to me....don't like it? Hmmmm...
Look at that...referring to the words of men as if they were scripture.....didn't the Pharisees do that? Didn't Jesus say that they had invalidated God's word because of sticking to their man-made traditions.
Mark 7:6-7:
He [Jesus] answered them, “Isaiah prophesied correctly about you hypocrites, as it is written:
These people honor Me with their lips,
but their heart is far from Me.
7 They worship Me in vain,
teaching as doctrines the commands of men." (HCSB)
These are images from those in the church from which the trinity was formulated.
All these have been covered, but I will address them individually later....I am off to my meeting now.
I am curious how you came up with the idea that the pre-incarnate Christ was a created entity. The traditional formulation was that Christ was "begotten, not made."
Also, I don't see how he could be functionally, yet not ontologically, equal to God. God is defined by the power he or she has. So if Christ has the same power, then Christ is God.
The rule abut the indefinite article has to do with whether or not you are dealing with a predicative nominative. In Jn. we are, so it is ten ruled out. Also, as I alluded to earlier, putting teh indefinite article in leads to a problem: If Christ is a god, then the Father is a god, etc. So how many gods are we dealing with? Did the Bible suddenly become polytheistic?
Yet you presume to do the same to me....don't like it? Hmmmm...
Look at that...referring to the words of men as if they were scripture.....didn't the Pharisees do that? Didn't Jesus say that they had invalidated God's word because of sticking to their man-made traditions.
Mark 7:6-7:
He [Jesus] answered them, “Isaiah prophesied correctly about you hypocrites, as it is written:
These people honor Me with their lips,
but their heart is far from Me.
7 They worship Me in vain,
teaching as doctrines the commands of men." (HCSB)
These are images from those in the church from which the trinity was formulated.
All these have been covered, but I will address them individually later....I am off to my meeting now.
No, I most certainly did not to that to you. The problem I had with your posts is that they were largely an attack on the Christian religion. You were not merely expressing just what you believe. Had you done only that, I would have no trouble with you. However, you took advantage of the situation and went way over the line, trying to invalidate my faith and the faith of other Christians. Your comments were most ignorant and disrespectful. I know I have a right and an obligation to really get on you about that. In modern-day theological discussions, the emphasis is on dialogue and mutual respect and understanding, not finger-pointing and denunciations, labeling others as apostate simply because they don't agree with your belief system. It is recognized that no religion is all right and no religion is all wrong either. Modern-day Christian thinkers are very open to feedback from nonChristain religions, but it should be in the form of constructive criticism, and denouncing our faith as all apostasy, as you did, is not constructive criticism, nothing but self-righteous bigotry. And I am not about to put up with it.
If you would have read my post, you would see I explained to you what Christian-based images of God with three faces meant and how you misconstrued it to mean three gods in one head. Also, I am not sure all those photos have to do with Christian-based images. Can you specify the sources for each of those photos?
The fact something is a tradition has nothing to do with its validity. The fact Christ blasted the tradition of the Pharisees does not mean any and all religious traditions are wrong. If so, you'd be up the creek but good. I do think it interesting you brought up about the Pharisees, because they continually sought to invalidate his ministry by denying his Deity. Seems like you are very much following in the tradition of the Pharisees.
You seem to resent the fact I bought up material from he creeds and confessions, which is irrational on your part. If you want to understand what Christians believe about the Trinity, then you need to carefully examine what the major creeds, confessions, and doctrines state. Apparently, that is something you have failed to do, which, in turn, led you into some serious misconceptions, no doubt helped by the anti-Christian propaganda your cult generates.
FYI, Deeje. Suspicious as I am of your photos of a three-faced Deity, I did some research. More than one of your photos is from Hinduism and therefore definitely irrelevant to the discussion. It is true that during the Middle Ages, three-faced images of God appeared in Christendom,. However, you neglected these were all banned eventually by church leaders such as Pope Urban VIII, Pope Benedict XIV, and also the Protestant Reformation. They survived only in areas far from church control. Hence, they are not an accurate expression of Christian Trinitarian beliefs, as you falsely took them to be.
djhwoodwerks
Well-Known Member
Maybe you're seeing the egg on your own face.
John 10:35-36 (ESV Strong's) 35 If he called them gods to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be broken— 36 do you say of him whom the Father consecrated and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’?
The writers of the Bible must have forgotten He said that, or, never heard Him say it because it isn't ever recorded. Give one verse of Jesus saying that in present tense, not past tense.
I don't get where you claim Christians "build their whole belief system" on the Trinity, my whole belief is in Jesus, nothing else! I do believe in the Trinity, but it's not the core of my belief.
You have seen it all right, but "none so blind", as they say.Perhaps you need a stronger light on your path?
Another false use of the scriptures! It's the path of the righteous that gets brighter, "it is like" the light of dawn. That verse does not say, "the light shines brighter on the path"!
Proverbs 4:18 (ESV Strong's) 18 But the path of the righteous is like the light of dawn, which shines brighter and brighter until full day.
"You" said I was not a professing Christian.....yet I say I am, and I will debate any Christian topic with you using only the Bible. I do not need to resort to the creeds of men as if they are a substitute for scripture.
I understand that you are a theologian and have studied theology......but you have apparently studied only church doctrine, but not so much the Bible. That is evident by your replies.
In saying that I have "no business interpreting or representing our faith".....that was the faith that I grew up in. I am speaking about my own former religion...so that gives me the right to expose what I came to understand about Christendom. I have been on both sides of this fence.....have you?
As I said, I have never attacked the "Christian religion".....like Jesus, I have merely exposed the teachings of those frauds masquerading as Christ's representatives for the last two thousand years, breaking every command that Jesus gave.
The apostle Paul warned....
Acts 20:29, 30:
"I know that after my going away oppressive wolves will enter in among you and will not treat the flock with tenderness, and from among you yourselves men will rise and speak twisted things to draw away the disciples after themselves."
You think this didn't happen?
Or Peter's words....
2 Peter 2:1-3:
"However, there also came to be false prophets among the people, as there will also be false teachers among you. These will quietly bring in destructive sects, and they will even disown the owner who bought them, bringing speedy destruction upon themselves. 2 Furthermore, many will follow their brazen conduct, and because of them the way of the truth will be spoken of abusively. 3 Also, they will greedily exploit you with counterfeit words. But their judgment, decided long ago, is not moving slowly, and their destruction is not sleeping."
Which "brand" of Christianity would you like to claim as the real one ashkat? If Jesus returned tomorrow, which sect would he accept as the one "doing the will of the Father"? (Matthew 7:21-23) Christ's disciples were supposed to be united in their beliefs...is that what you see in Christendom? (1 Corinthians 1:10)
Sectarianism is described by Peter as something undesirable and because of the conduct of those who support this kind of Christianity, Jesus gets a bad reputation.
And self-righteous bigotry is why I left Christendom. Since when would Christ allow non-Christian input into anything he taught? Do you really think true Christians need unbelievers to teach them something better about Christianity?
"It is recognized" is a phrase I think you use to stop anyone from questioning your assertions.....but don't we have to ask..."recognized by whom?" I don't believe any of the things you say are "recognized" by Christ.
There are only "wheat" and "weeds" in this world when Christ arrives to judge its inhabitants. I have a duty to expose error and inform people about the truth. What they do with it is up to them, but you came here flashing your credentials as if that somehow made you more knowledgeable than others....I soon discovered that all you know is theology....the things that the church teaches, but it is apparent that you know little about the teachings of the Christ as they are conveyed in the Bible.
I did......and all I had to do was a quick Google search and there they were. Then I Googled pagan trinities and the others came up.....you don't notice a similarity? The trinity was formulated when those pagan trinities were already in existence, so who copied whom?
Marie Sinclair, Countess of Caithness, in her 1876 book Old Truths in a New Light, states: “It is generally, although erroneously, supposed that the doctrine of the Trinity is of Christian origin. Nearly every nation of antiquity possessed a similar doctrine. [The early Catholic theologian] St. Jerome testifies unequivocally, ‘All the ancient nations believed in the Trinity’ ” (p. 382).
Egyptologist Arthur Weigall, while himself a Trinitarian, summed up the influence of ancient beliefs on the adoption of the Trinity doctrine by the Catholic Church in the following excerpt from his book: "Paganism in Our Christianity" (1928)
“It must not be forgotten that Jesus Christ never mentioned such a phenomenon [the Trinity], and nowhere in the New Testament does the word ‘Trinity’ appear. The idea was only adopted by the Church three hundred years after the death of our Lord; and the origin of the conception is entirely pagan . . .“The early Christians, however, did not at first think of applying the idea to their own faith. They paid their devotions to God the Father and to Jesus Christ, the Son of God, and they recognized the mysterious and undefined existence of the Holy Spirit; but there was no thought of these three being an actual Trinity, co-equal and united in One . . .“The idea of the Spirit being co-equal with God was not generally recognised until the second half of the Fourth Century A.D. … In the year 381 the Council of Constantinople added to the earlier Nicene Creed a description of the Holy Spirit as ‘the Lord, and giver of life, who proceedeth from the Father, who with the Father and Son together is worshipped and glorified.’ …“Thus, the Athanasian creed, which is a later composition but reflects the general conceptions of Athanasius [the 4th-century Trinitarian whose view eventually became official doctrine] and his school, formulated the conception of a co-equal Trinity wherein the Holy Spirit was the third ‘Person’; and so it was made a dogma of the faith, and belief in the Three in One and One in Three became a paramount doctrine of Christianity, though not without terrible riots and bloodshed . . ."
Was this information missing from your theology classes?
Should there have been bloodshed over the decision to make the Father, Jesus and the holy spirit into one God?
Indeed...the traditions that were passed on by the apostles became bound in NT scripture....the trinity is entirely missing. If they are missing from the Bible, then they are not valid.
That was probably because they were seeking to pin a charge of blasphemy on him by claiming that he said he was God (John 10:34-36)...he corrected them and said he was "the son of God".
Not once did Jesus claim to be Almighty God or equal to him in any way. How do you build a foundation doctrine with no materials?
I grew up in Christendom, and had the creeds fed to me all the time. I think I know what they say and I dismiss them outright as the teachings of an apostate church.
You are free to accept them if you wish.
Since Jesus and his followers were considered a Jewish cult in the first century, I will be grateful to be considered in a similar fashion. (John 15:18-21)
The truth hides in strange places and is told by the most unlikely people. It's never been about the numbers.
I was talking about origins.....those images are closer to what people really believed about their god in those early times.
The pagan trinities pre-date Christianity by centuries.
Well, forgive me for the error....but isn't "I am" present tense?
Admit it...you said he never said it....the scripture shows you that he did.
If Jesus is your god, then your whole belief system rests on that one truth. If it is false, then the whole system collapses.
If you are breaking the first Commandment and putting another god in place of the Father, you can expect consequences. (Exodus 20:3)
Yes, on "the path of the righteous" ones, things become clearer and clearer until full daylight comes.....no light shines on the path of those who teach lies and pass them off as truth. (Matthew 6:22-23) Those ones are still bumping around in the dark and time is running out.
