The Trinity

[Yes]

Modalism is a heresy.

I care very little about what your false teachers call heresy

I am not a modalist no more than I am a trinitarian.

Modalists teach that there are three but that the three do not exist at the same time.
Trinitarians teach that there are three but that the three are separate and different.

Both those teachings are false.

 

[Yes]

are the angels holy spirits to ? just how many angels are there ?

Angels are spirits, but we are discussing the Spirit that saves. Angels are not spirits that save.

 

[sojourner]

I care very little about what your false teachers call heresy

Of course you don't. That's why you buy the heresy.

I am not a modalist no more than I am a trinitarian.

Hmmm... but your statements are modalist statements.

Modalists teach that there are three but that the three do not exist at the same time.
Trinitarians teach that there are three but that the three are separate and different.

Both those teachings are false.

I see. you're more strictly a Sabellianist. Still heretical. The Trinitarian view is the orthodox expression.

 

[Yes]

Of course you don't. That's why you buy the heresy.

Go ahead and debate me.

However, your mere insults mean nothing.

Hmmm... but your statements are modalist statements.

I see. you're more strictly a Sabellianist. Still heretical. The Trinitarian view is the orthodox expression.

You are trying to put a label on me. Notice that you do not speak according to the scriptures. It is because you do not have the light of dawn.

 

[Yes]

Sojourner thinks that joining a big group that calls another group 'heretics' means something to me.

Lets discuss the scriptures; not what your denomination teaches.

Do you want God's Truth, or some denomination's truth?

 

[sojourner]

Go ahead and debate me.

Well, that's the intention of the forum, os it not?

However, your mere insults mean nothing.

First of all, it must mean something, or you wouldn't have bothered to respond. Second, it wasn't an insult. It was an observation in response to your statement wherein you labeled "my teachers" as "false." This sort of noncompliant dismissal of generally agreed upon definitions is expected from one who doctrinally swims against the current, as you have chosen to do.

You are trying to put a label on me.

Well, yeah, since your views fall outside orthodoxy, there's gotta be a name for what you embrace. You call yourself "Christian," but that label seems inconsistent with the available information coupled with a previous statement you made elsewhere. You said something to the effect that "not all people who call themselves 'Christian' are Christian." That begs the question, "What are the criteria for being Christian?" The generally-accepted criterion is orthodoxy -- "right belief." The Trinitarian view of God has been the orthodox view since nearly the beginning -- long before the Council of Nicea in 325. Nicea simply put the "USDA" stamp on the view. Since you hold to a non-orthodox view -- a heresy -- you are not orthodox and, therefore, not particularly Christian, as that term is understood by the criterion that has been set for thousands of years. So, we have to call you something, and that "something" may as well be what differentiates you from orthodoxy. Hence: "Sabellianist." Which, by definition, is a heretical POV.

Notice that you do not speak according to the scriptures.

Neither do you. In the scriptures, Jesus (the Son) prayed to the Father. If Father and Son are simultaneously the same being (as your post above, arguing that you're not a Modalist, suggests), how and why would Jesus pray to himself? IOW, "you do not speak according to the scriptures." That's fine. I'm not (unlike you) attaching a judgment to that stance. You are what you are and that's fine.

It is because you do not have the light of dawn.

See the judgment inherent in that statement? I've never claimed that you're not enlightened. You, however...

All I'm doing is pointing out your misrepresentations of the doctrine of the Trinity, addressing the issues of why the Trinity is a valid theological construct, and trying to pin you down to your beliefs, which I've identified as "Sabellian." I find it interesting that you apparently don't like that.

 

[Yes]

Modalists do not believe that God the Father, Jesus Christ the Son, and the Holy Spirit exist at the same time.

Trinitarians believe that God the Father, Jesus Christ the Son, and the Holy Spirit exist at the same time, and are separate and distinct.

The Truth is that God the Father, Jesus Christ the Son, and the Holy Spirit exist at the same time, and they are one and the same.

 

[sojourner]

Sojourner thinks that joining a big group that calls another group 'heretics' means something to me.

You're the one bringing it up -- it must mean something...

Lets discuss the scriptures; not what your denomination teaches.

This isn't denominational teaching. And before we can discuss the biblical arguments for or against the Trinity, we have to define what, exactly, the doctrine states, which you've neglected to do.

Do you want God's Truth, or some denomination's truth?

Hint: The same "denomination" (although, at the time the actions were undertaken, there were no "denominations") that defined the doctrine also set the canon of scripture. Therefore, "God's Truth" (found only in the canon texts) and "the denomination's truth" are the same. One can't divide out the bible from the rest of the tradition that produced it. The problem here is that you don't seem to think that "the Church" has the truth -- at least in matters that you happen to disagree with. Even though "the Church" produced the source you're using as "Truth" to denounce them. It's a non-argument. you're spinning your wheels. If you deny the validity of the Trinity, you must, by definition, deny the validity of the bible, because they are both the purview of the Church.

 

[sojourner]

Modalists do not believe that God the Father, Jesus Christ the Son, and the Holy Spirit exist at the same time.

Trinitarians believe that God the Father, Jesus Christ the Son, and the Holy Spirit exist at the same time, and are separate and distinct.

The Truth is that God the Father, Jesus Christ the Son, and the Holy Spirit exist at the same time, and they are one and the same.

IOW: Sabellianism. It's a heresy, denounced by the same Church that produced the bible.

 

[Yes]

Well, that's the intention of the forum, os it not?

First of all, it must mean something, or you wouldn't have bothered to respond. Second, it wasn't an insult. It was an observation in response to your statement wherein you labeled "my teachers" as "false." This sort of noncompliant dismissal of generally agreed upon definitions is expected from one who doctrinally swims against the current, as you have chosen to do.

I do not do what you accuse me of doing. You need to use scripture instead of merely insulting. You called me a heretic, and that is according to your false teachers.

Well, yeah, since your views fall outside orthodoxy, there's gotta be a name for what you embrace. You call yourself "Christian," but that label seems inconsistent with the available information coupled with a previous statement you made elsewhere.

All denominations teach falseness. Lets discuss the scriptures. Do you think I really care so much about what some men from long ago, or even from today sit around and write as truth?

I only care about God's Truth, not some denomination's truth.

You said something to the effect that "not all people who call themselves 'Christian' are Christian." That begs the question, "What are the criteria for being Christian?"

Being a Christian is getting Jesus' teachings and obeying them.

The generally-accepted criterion is orthodoxy -- "right belief." The Trinitarian view of God has been the orthodox view since nearly the beginning -- long before the Council of Nicea in 325. Nicea simply put the "USDA" stamp on the view. Since you hold to a non-orthodox view -- a heresy -- you are not orthodox and, therefore, not particularly Christian, as that term is understood by the criterion that has been set for thousands of years. So, we have to call you something, and that "something" may as well be what differentiates you from orthodoxy. Hence: "Sabellianist." Which, by definition, is a heretical POV.

Again, it means nothing that some men got together and calls something true.

If you want to know God's Truth, then you have to search for God. We search for God by getting Jesus' teachings. We find God by obeying Jesus' teachings. Jesus reveals himself to those who get his teachings and obeys them, see John 14:21.

Neither do you. In the scriptures, Jesus (the Son) prayed to the Father. If Father and Son are simultaneously the same being (as your post above, arguing that you're not a Modalist, suggests), how and why would Jesus pray to himself? IOW, "you do not speak according to the scriptures." That's fine. I'm not (unlike you) attaching a judgment to that stance. You are what you are and that's fine.

Jesus is God come as a human Son. God did not pretend to come as a Man He really came as a Man. To whom do you want a man to pray to?

See the judgment inherent in that statement? I've never claimed that you're not enlightened. You, however...

All I'm doing is pointing out your misrepresentations of the doctrine of the Trinity, addressing the issues of why the Trinity is a valid theological construct, and trying to pin you down to your beliefs, which I've identified as "Sabellian." I find it interesting that you apparently don't like that.

I explained to you what modalists believe and what trinitarians believe. I explained to you what God's Trut is.

 

[Yes]

IOW: Sabellianism. It's a heresy, denounced by the same Church that produced the bible.

The New Testament teachings were by letter and books right from the beginning. In 1 Timothy 5:18 Paul joins a New Testament scripture (Luke 10:7) to an Old Testament scripture (Deuteronomy 25:4) and calls them both scripture. In addition, we can see in 2 Peter 3:15-16 Peter recognizes what Paul writes as scripture.


2 Peter 3:15 Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.


Again, the believers from the beginning used these books and letters. Many think the Catholics determined what books were to be included in the Bible, because they over the centuries publicly listed the books that they used.


There were canons put together and used by people even before the Catholics.


Different people gave personal statements about the books, but they were only commenting on the books and letters that the first Christians used from the beginning. They had only acknowledged those books early Christian communities already accepted as scripture.


The Catholic denominations started to introduce heresies in approximately 310 A.D.


The Roman Catholic Church, which taught things contrary to the Bible, began with the prayers for the dead and the sign of the Cross.

 

[sojourner]

I do not do what you accuse me of doing.

You didn't call "my teachers" "false?" Here (You're doing it again!):

your false teachers.

You didn't dismiss generally accepted definitions? Here:

I care very little about what your false teachers call heresy

And here:

All denominations teach falseness. Lets discuss the scriptures. Do you think I really care so much about what some men from long ago, or even from today sit around and write as truth?

I only care about God's Truth, not some denomination's truth.

You are doing as I accuse you of doing.

You need to use scripture instead of merely insulting.

Again: not an insult; an observation.

You called me a heretic, and that is according to your false teachers.

No, it's according to the church Fathers.

All denominations teach falseness.

Do they?

Do you think I really care so much about what some men from long ago, or even from today sit around and write as truth?

Those "some men" were the church Fathers. You don't care what they thought -- the ones who wrote the NT and canonized the texts? The ones who perpetuated Christianity in the face of persecution? You don't care what they thought? Really!

I only care about God's Truth, not some denomination's truth.

The Church that formulated the doctrine of the Trinity wasn't "some denomination." It was the Church.

Being a Christian is getting Jesus' teachings and obeying them.

Not according to orthodoxy.

Again, it means nothing that some men got together and calls something true.

It means nothing that the church Fathers called something true? Oh, you mean, like the bible, for instance?

If you want to know God's Truth, then you have to search for God. We search for God by getting Jesus' teachings. We find God by obeying Jesus' teachings. Jesus reveals himself to those who get his teachings and obeys them

And you don't think Jesus revealed himself to those who ratified the sacred texts?

Jesus is God come as a human Son.

So far so good. Very much in line with Trinitarian thinking.

God did not pretend to come as a Man He really came as a Man.

Yep. Still Trinitarian.

To whom do you want a man to pray to?

I thought you said Jesus was the Father -- that it was the Father who came to earth as a man. Surely you don't want a man to pray to himself?

I explained to you what modalists believe and what trinitarians believe. I explained to you what God's Trut is.

No you didn't. You misrepresented what Trinitarians believe. And you claim that God's truth is Sabellianism, not Christianity. That's OK -- just trying to pin you down.

The New Testament teachings were by letter and books right from the beginning.

No they weren't. The gospels weren't written until at least 40 years after Jesus, and they probably weren't widely distributed in the beginning. And the letters weren't widely distributed in the beginning, either.

Again, the believers from the beginning used these books and letters.

No. They didn't.

Many think the Catholics determined what books were to be included in the Bible, because they over the centuries publicly listed the books that they used.


There were canons put together and used by people even before the Catholics.

And these were the same people who formulated the doctrine of the Trinity. They're the ones you ostensibly don't care about what they said or believed. They're the ones you dismiss.

The Catholic denominations started to introduce heresies in approximately 310 A.D.

There are no "Catholic Denominations." There was no RCC as its own entity before the year 1054. The heresies were begun long before 310.

 

[Yes]

You didn't call "my teachers" "false?" Here (You're doing it again!):

They are false, because you are saying what they say to go against me. You are the one who said your teachers call what I believe 'heresy'.

Those "some men" were the church Fathers. You don't care what they thought -- the ones who wrote the NT and canonized the texts? The ones who perpetuated Christianity in the face of persecution? You don't care what they thought? Really!

No, they did not write the New Testament. Jesus said not to call our brothers in Christ 'father'. You are in a false denomination that call them 'fathers'.

The Church that formulated the doctrine of the Trinity wasn't "some denomination." It was the Church.

No one can add to the Bible. They were not the church, they were a false denomination.

And you don't think Jesus revealed himself to those who ratified the sacred texts?

The books and letters were used by the Christians from the beginning, which is what determined them as scripture.

So far so good. Very much in line with Trinitarian thinking.

Yep. Still Trinitarian.

I thought you said Jesus was the Father -- that it was the Father who came to earth as a man. Surely you don't want a man to pray to himself?

There is only One God and He is the Father. If Jesus is God, and he is, then he is also the Father.

No you didn't. You misrepresented what Trinitarians believe. And you claim that God's truth is Sabellianism, not Christianity. That's OK -- just trying to pin you down.

You just lied. I tell the truth about what the trinitarians believe, and I did not say Sabellianism is God's Truth. You are a false witness.

No they weren't. The gospels weren't written until at least 40 years after Jesus,

Lol...Do you think Luke could have went along with Peter and then Paul through so much traveling? Do you think he would have been up to all that traveling and writing...for a man in his 70's?

and they probably weren't widely distributed in the beginning. And the letters weren't widely distributed in the beginning, either.

Of course, they were distributed. Paul commanded that they share the letters with the churches.

Colossians 4:16 After this letter has been read to you, see that it is also read in the church of the Laodiceans and that you in turn read the letter from Laodicea.

1 Thessalonians 5:27 I charge you before the Lord to have this letter read to all the brothers and sisters.

There are no "Catholic Denominations." There was no RCC as its own entity before the year 1054. The heresies were begun long before 310.

The Catholic religion, even the Orthodox Catholics teach falseness They have been apostate from Jesus' teachings from their beginning.

 

[sojourner]

They are false, because you are saying what they say to go against me.

They disagree with what you believe, so that automatically makes them "false?" That's one heck of an ego. Could it be possible that you're wrong?

No, they did not write the New Testament.

So Paul, the other letter writers, and the authors of the gospels weren't church Fathers?

Jesus said not to call our brothers in Christ 'father'.

Jesus also said not to judge. What's your excuse?

You are in a false denomination that call them 'fathers'.

Huh. It's not a denominational title. It's pre-denominational.

No one can add to the Bible.

i didn't say they added to it. I said they wrote and compiled and canonized it.

They were not the church, they were a false denomination.

Based on what evidence? This all happened before denominations -- way before the Great Schism.

The books and letters were used by the Christians from the beginning, which is what determined them as scripture.

No. They weren't. The gospels weren't written for at least 40 years following Jesus. That's at least 40 years of "beginning" before they had anything of Jesus' teachings to read.

There is only One God and He is the Father.

God is also the Son. Oh, and the Holy Spirit.

If Jesus is God, and he is, then he is also the Father.

Nope. Not according to the orthodoxy set by the church Fathers. This is Sabellianism. Read up on it.

You just lied.

Stop it!

I tell the truth about what the trinitarians believe

No, you said that the doctrine of the Trinity says that the three Persons do not constitute one God.

and I did not say Sabellianism is God's Truth.

You assert that what you believe is truth. What you believe is Sabellianism. Again: read up on it.

You are a false witness.

Stop projecting.

Lol...Do you think Luke could have went along with Peter and then Paul through so much traveling? Do you think he would have been up to all that traveling and writing...for a man in his 70's?

LOL. He thinks Luke wrote Luke. And that he traveled with Paul. Luke wasn't written until at least 80-85 c.e. That's 50 years after the fact. None of the gospel writers was an eyewitness, so far as we know.

Of course, they were distributed. Paul commanded that they share the letters with the churches.

It's not like they had the internet or even a printing press. Do you have any idea how long it would take for a scribe to copy a letter, and for those copies to be widely distributed? They weren't widely distributed for quite some time.

The Catholic religion, even the Orthodox Catholics teach falseness

Says you. And you have no credibility on the subject.

They have been apostate from Jesus' teachings from their beginning.

Uh huh. That's why they're "orthodox." Because they got it "wrong." Mm-hm.
You've been watching too many cartoons and listening to too many conspiracy theorists. Next you'll be telling us that the Illuminati have all the original manuscripts penned by Jesus Himself, who was actually an alien that is now living in tunnels under Washington DC.

 

[Yes]

They disagree with what you believe, so that automatically makes them "false?" That's one heck of an ego.

YOU are the one who said they said I am a heretic.

 

[sojourner]

YOU are the one who said they said I am a heretic.

Sabellianism is a heresy. Sorry. We can't all, and some don't. That's just How It Is.

 

[Yes]

So Paul, the other letter writers, and the authors of the gospels weren't church Fathers?

We are not to call our brothers in Christ 'father', and you were NOT talking about those who wrote the Bible.

The trinity doctrine is not in the scriptures, it goes against the scriptures.

Jesus also said not to judge. What's your excuse?

Huh. It's not a denominational title. It's pre-denominational.

i didn't say they added to it. I said they wrote and compiled and canonized it.

Based on what evidence? This all happened before denominations -- way before the Great Schism.

No. They weren't. The gospels weren't written for at least 40 years following Jesus. That's at least 40 years of "beginning" before they had anything of Jesus' teachings to read.

God is also the Son. Oh, and the Holy Spirit.

Nope. Not according to the orthodoxy set by the church Fathers. This is Sabellianism. Read up on it.

Stop it!

No, you said that the doctrine of the Trinity says that the three Persons do not constitute one God.

You assert that what you believe is truth. What you believe is Sabellianism. Again: read up on it.

Stop projecting.

LOL. He thinks Luke wrote Luke. And that he traveled with Paul. Luke wasn't written until at least 80-85 c.e. That's 50 years after the fact. None of the gospel writers was an eyewitness, so far as we know.

It's not like they had the internet or even a printing press. Do you have any idea how long it would take for a scribe to copy a letter, and for those copies to be widely distributed? They weren't widely distributed for quite some time.

Says you. And you have no credibility on the subject.

Uh huh. That's why they're "orthodox." Because they got it "wrong." Mm-hm.
You've been watching too many cartoons and listening to too many conspiracy theorists. Next you'll be telling us that the Illuminati have all the original manuscripts penned by Jesus Himself, who was actually an alien that is now living in tunnels under Washington DC.

The Catholic denominations are false.

They started introducing false teachings around 310 AD.

The New Testament writings were books and letters that were used by the first Christians.

Luke wrote The Gospel of Luke, and Acts.

The writings in the New Testament were not written at least 40 years later, as you say. They would be old men by then.

 

[sojourner]

We are not to call our brothers in Christ 'father',

Well, that's what they're called. I didn't name them. We are also not to wear 50/50 cotton/poly shirts. But I bet you have some in your closet.

and you were NOT talking about those who wrote the Bible.

The church Fathers are the church Fathers. They did all the stuff in the beginning, as far as doctrine, writings, theology, etc.

The trinity doctrine is not in the scriptures, it goes against the scriptures.

Of course not -- but it is rooted in the scriptures.

The Catholic denominations are false.

There are no "Catholic denominations." There is the Roman Catholic Church. It's not false.

They started introducing false teachings around 310 AD.

In your dreams. Revelation is ongoing.

The New Testament writings were books and letters that were used by the first Christians.

No, they were used by the second-gen Christians. But not all writings were used by all Christians at first.

Luke wrote The Gospel of Luke, and Acts.

The same writer wrote Luke and Acts (they were originally parts of the same text), but the writer is ANONYMOUS.

The writings in the New Testament were not written at least 40 years later, as you say. They would be old men by then.

Sorry -- they are what they are. 1 Thess. is the earliest and was written about 45 c.e. John wasn't written until around 100. Sorry to bust your bubble.

You obviously don't have a good grasp of either church history or biblical history. And that's what lies at the heart of your embracing a heretical construct such as Sabellianism. Kind of sucks for you I suppose, always being at odds with your fellow Christians, who you *believe* are "false."

 

[kjv4me2you]

Jesus is God come as a Man. God did not pretend to come as a Man He really came as a Man.



Who said there was a double anointing?


Jesus had no biological earthly father.


As to Jesus' earthly side he is a descendant of David.

Romans 1:3 regarding his Son, who as to his earthly life was a descendant of David,



John says that Jesus is the one who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.


Matthew 3:11 "I baptize you with water for repentance. But after me comes one who is more powerful than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.


I do not know what you are trying to say with all that.

No scripture speaks of a Double or Dual Anointing but if according to your statement, "Jesus was the holy spirit before he was born", then you are making the holy spirit-Mashach to be Jesus before he was born as Jesus of Nazareth the seed-sperma of his father King David.

The holy spirit-Mashach has no age whereas Jesus has a know age verified in scripture from his birth to his anointing at about 30 years of age unto his death and resurrection at age 33 AD. Jesus in heaven has an age of 33 since he said from heaven in the Hebrew tongue " I am Jesus of Nazareth".

(Acts 22:8 KJV) And I answered, Who art thou,Master? And he said unto me, I am Jesus of Nazareth, whom thou persecutest.

YHWH-YaH God a Spirit has no age He is immortal and cannot age, He is invisible and cannot be seen, He is the only wise God and He is the King of Saints.

There are no only wise essences of God. There is the only wise God.

(Rev 15:3 KJV) And they sing the song of Moses the servant of God, and the song of the Lamb, saying, Great and marvellous are thy works, YHWH-YaH God Almighty; just and true are thy ways, thou King of saints.

YHWH-YaH is King of all the earth and King of all saints whereas Jesus is the chief corner stone for the apostolic foundation of Hebrew Apostles .
(Eph 2:20 KJV) And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;

(Psa 47:7 KJV) For God is the King of all the earth: sing ye praises with understanding.

(Psa 47:8 KJV) God reigneth over the heathen: God sitteth upon the throne of His holiness.

(1 Tim 1:17 KJV) Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen.

THE HOLY SPIRIT MASHACH
If Jesus was the holy spirit as Mashach the one who anoints and this before he was born, then your saying that Jesus the holy spirit at about age 30, in Luke 3:22-23, anointed himself;

Why would Jesus the holy spirit Mashach the anointer before he was born be anointing Jesus with the holy spirit Mashach anointing after he was born?

JESUS RECEIVES THE THRONE OF HIS FATHER DAVID. REMEMBER THE PROPHET SAMUEL ANOINTED DAVID WHO IS THE FATHER SEED-SPERMA OF JESUS.
YHWH-YAh SAID OF JESUS (Luke 1:32 KJV) He ( Jesus ) shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and YHWH-YaH God shall give unto him (Jesus) the throne of his father David:

If Jesus was the holy spirit (Mashach) before he was born was he not already the great Son of the Highest? (Gal 4:6 KJV) And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father.

But Jesus is not yet called the Son of the Highest in scripture because YHWH-YaH said " he shall be called the Son of the Highest " this calling Jesus the Son of the Highest has yet to occur but it will.

JESUS THE SEED-SPERMA OF HIS FATHER DAVID WAS ALSO THAT SEED OF EVE (Gen 3:15).
(2 Tim 2:8 KJV) Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel:

SEED=G4690=sperma
sper'-mah
From G4687; somethng sown, that is, seed (including the male “sperm”); by implication offspring; specifically a remnant (figuratively as if kept over for planting): - issue, seed.

JESUS THE SEED OF EVE
(Gen 3:15 KJV) And I will put enmity between thee( the serpent) and the woman ( Eve) , and between thy ( the serpents) seed and her-(Eve's) seed; it-(Eve's seed) shall bruise thy-(the serpents) head, and thou-(the serpent) shalt bruise his heel.

........................

Nowhere in Luke 1:41 does it say Jesus was the spirit Mashach before he was born nor that Jesus developing in the womb of Mary was who filled Elizabeth and her 6 month old babe John developing in his mothers womb.

Scripture does teach because Elizabeth was of Israel she could be filled with the spirit MASHACH-Christ-the anointing like the prophets of Israel which is what did happened to her. Elizabeth and John her prophet son were of Israel the Son of YHWH-YaH even YHWH-YaH's firstborn ( Exo 4:22). Elizabeth and John Baptist were of the spirit of Christ ( 1 Peter 1:11) Israel of God ( Gal 6:16).

(1 Pet 1:11 KJV) Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.

(Gal 6:16 KJV) And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God.

MANY THOUGHT JOHN BAPTIST WAS CHRIST
(Luke 1:15 KJV) For he shall be great in the sight of YHWH-YaH, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled by the Holy Mashach with the anointing, even from his mother's womb.

(John 1:25 KJV) And they asked him, and said unto him, Why baptizest thou then, if thou be not that Christ, nor Elias, neither that prophet?

Israel expected the spirit Mashach to anoint a Jew-Hebrew who would be that anointed anointer Christ-Messias-Mashiach that was to come.

THE SPIRIT OF CHRIST THE ANOINTING IN ISRAEL THE SON OF YAH EVEN YaH'S FIRSTBORN SON.
When Israel was delivered out of Egypt by YHWH-YaH, He gave Israel His Son the name YHWH-YaH ( Exodus 3:15) by which He wanted Israel to call Him forever.

YHWH-YaH also gave to Israel His BOOK which He said He wrote and also gave them the spirit Mashach the anointer. The prophets of Israel searched diligently YHWH-YaH's BOOK regarding the grace of Christ that should come unto Israel.

(Exo 32:33 KJV) And YHWH-YaH said unto Moses, Whosoever hath sinned against me, him will I blot out of my book.
(Exo 24:12 KJV) And YHWH-YaH said unto Moses, Come up to me into the mount, and be there: and I will give thee tables of stone, and a law, and commandments which I-YHWH-YaH have written; that thou mayest teach them.

THE SPIRIT MASHACH-CHRIST WAS IN THE NATION ISRAEL THE SON OF YHWH-YaH AS SEEN IN 1 PETER 1:10-11
(1 Pet 1:10 KJV) Of which salvation the prophets have inquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you:

(1 Pet 1:11 KJV) Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.

The sufferings of Christ and not the sufferings of YHWH-YaH of Jesus.
(Isa 53:10 KJV) Yet it pleased YHWH-YaH to bruise him-Christ; He YHWH-YaH hath put him-Christ to grief: when thou shalt make his-Christ's soul an offering for sin, He-YHWH-YaH shall see his-Christ's seed, He-YHWH shall prolong his-Christ's days, and the pleasure of YHWH-YaH shall prosper in his-Christ's hand.

willyah

 

[Yes]

Well, that's what they're called. I didn't name them. We are also not to wear 50/50 cotton/poly shirts. But I bet you have some in your closet.

We are to obey the teachings of Jesus. Jesus is in the New Testament. The New Testament does not tell us not to wear mixed material. The New Testament does tell us not to call our brothers in Christ 'father'.

The church Fathers are the church Fathers. They did all the stuff in the beginning, as far as doctrine, writings, theology, etc.

I only go by the Bible.

Of course not -- but it is rooted in the scriptures.

There are no "Catholic denominations." There is the Roman Catholic Church. It's not false.

It is a denomination, and it is false.

In your dreams. Revelation is ongoing.

No, they were used by the second-gen Christians. But not all writings were used by all Christians at first.

Most the New Testament are letters from the Apostles. The letters were written to the first Christians.

The same writer wrote Luke and Acts (they were originally parts of the same text), but the writer is ANONYMOUS.

I believe it was Luke. You want me to believe you over what the Bible says.

Sorry -- they are what they are. 1 Thess. is the earliest and was written about 45 c.e. John wasn't written until around 100. Sorry to bust your bubble.

What man are you believing about these dates? You refused to be reasoned with about this. The scriptures were not written by men that long after Jesus died and rose.

You obviously don't have a good grasp of either church history or biblical history. And that's what lies at the heart of your embracing a heretical construct such as Sabellianism. Kind of sucks for you I suppose, always being at odds with your fellow Christians, who you *believe* are "false."

I am trying to help you to know God better.