HAS THE CHURCH ALWAYS BEEN CORRUPT ?

Douglas Hendrickson · Mar 23, 2017

DrBubbaLove said:
Sadly no, but that description of a peculiar belief in a "Trinity" and it following a history of people making all sorts of errors regarding God will be ignored just as my post on numerous quotes have been ignored, ignored even when those quotes were requested.

So no, it clearly does describe someone who has asked for and was given twice now numerous quotes demonstrating a lack of belief in the Trinity Doctrine, as well as lacking any rational or understandable idea of a human nature that is at it's conception the union of the immaterial with material, a human soul created by God and joined with material that will become that particular person's body which is all created at that moment, conception.

Would your "someone" be me? Your way of smearing without being up front about it?

Are the "numerous quotes" anything I said? If so I wasn't able to understand you were quoting me. And I don't recall noticing you quoting Scripture.
Perhaps IF you are talking about me you could take something I actually said and put quotation marks around it and mention by name who said it, who you take yourself as addressing?

On your "... that particular person's body which is all created at that moment, conception."
A human being body ALL created in one moment? Are you kidding?
Do you know what a body is? I know you don't know what a human being is.

DrBubbaLove · Mar 23, 2017

Douglas Hendrickson said:
Would your "someone" be me? Your way of smearing without being up front about it?

Are the "numerous quotes" anything I said? If so I wasn't able to understand you were quoting me. And I don't recall noticing you quoting Scripture.
Perhaps IF you are talking about me you could take something I actually said and put quotation marks around it and mention by name who said it, who you take yourself as addressing?

On your "... that particular person's body which is all created at that moment, conception."
A human being body ALL created in one moment? Are you kidding?
Do you know what a body is? I know you don't know what a human being is.

Not a smear. It is simple really. And am not in the habit of making up quotes of someone's statements that they did not actually post. This reply will be the fifth time I have offered or referred to these quotes. Those quotes have been ignored 4 times now, twice in this thread already. Twice in another thread where each quote has a link to original post by this poster.

These quotes are from posts scattered over about a year and half worth of posting that either indicate no understanding of what the Trinity Doctrine actually teaches or a poster that holds no belief in it.

Here is a LINK (click on blue below) to my second post in this thread giving quotes from this poster that contradict a belief in the Trinity Doctrine (which was ignored):
HAS THE CHURCH ALWAYS BEEN CORRUPT ?

The poster's statements would be the ones already in "quotes" when I posted that. Went back and edited the above post to [add] more clarification as there seems to be some confusion about who the poster being quoted in the quotes that already had " " around them is.

Here is a LINK to my first post in this thread referencing those same quotes by offering LINKS to another thread started by same poster: HAS THE CHURCH ALWAYS BEEN CORRUPT ? - That post was ignored in this thread too as far as the quotes go even though the poster was actually named as the one being quoted in the other thread. The two posts in the other thread have LINKS to each and every one of those quotes. Those quotes were ignored in that thread also (the links are blue and clicking on it will take one there).

If all those quotes are stated in error over the last year and half, the error is huge and many. So if those statements were made in error there is a chance to correct it and stop doing it hopefully. That there is error or non-belief is evident in remarks that, for just one example, equate a characteristic of God's Nature with the idea of Persons. Three Persons is not a label for just another element, characteristic or feature of God (like Love, Just, Omniscience, Omnipotence...etc all are). A person is an individual we can know, so the Three Persons are Three Individuals, Who we can know.

Here are links to the other thread and posts which were also ignored. CAN HOLY SPIRIT OPERATE INSIDE A WOMB ?
CAN HOLY SPIRIT OPERATE INSIDE A WOMB ?

SPF · Mar 23, 2017

Douglas, I realize this will never happen. But just for fun, let's say that you decided to agree with the straight forward, basic Greek language which clearly and unambiguously says in Luke that John, himself, leaped for joy in his mother's womb. We know that this is clearly what the author intended to say, because frankly, he says it very clearly. The Greek is clear, and the Church, even in its divided state, has universally agreed with the clear Greek.

So let's just say for fun that you disregarded your fabricated and made up interpretation of the Greek and actually believe what it really says - which again is that John leaped in his mother's womb out of his own joy.

Just for fun, if you accepted the passage as being conveyed in that manner - what would it do to your view that there is no such thing as a human being until it exists outside a womb?

Secondly, with a simple yes or no, can you tell me whether you agree with the following quote?

"That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; Neither confounding the Persons; nor dividing the Essence. For there is one Person of the Father; another of the Son; and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, is all one; the Glory equal, the Majesty coeternal. Such as the Father is; such is the Son; and such is the Holy Ghost. The Father uncreated; the Son uncreated; and the Holy Ghost uncreated. The Father unlimited; the Son unlimited; and the Holy Ghost unlimited. The Father eternal; the Son eternal; and the Holy Ghost eternal. And yet they are not three eternals; but one eternal. As also there are not three uncreated; nor three infinites, but one uncreated; and one infinite. So likewise the Father is Almighty; the Son Almighty; and the Holy Ghost Almighty. And yet they are not three Almighties; but one Almighty. So the Father is God; the Son is God; and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet they are not three Gods; but one God. So likewise the Father is Lord; the Son Lord; and the Holy Ghost Lord. And yet not three Lords; but one Lord"

Yes or no, do you agree with that?

Douglas Hendrickson · Mar 23, 2017

SPF said:
Douglas, I realize this will never happen. But just for fun, let's say that you decided to agree with the straight forward, basic Greek language which clearly and unambiguously says in Luke that John, himself, leaped for joy in his mother's womb.

IT DOES NOT SAY THAT.

Sorry, it does not say: "JOHN," "HIMSELF," "LEAPED" "FOR" "JOY" "IN" "HIS" "MOTHER'S" "WOMB".
Where is the original Greek you were praising so much, where is the Greek for any of that, except the "leaped" and "for" and "joy."?
Not in Luke!
edit: Mostly your fabrication, in case you didn't notice.

Douglas Hendrickson · Mar 23, 2017

DrBubbaLove said:
Not a smear. It is simple really. And am not in the habit of making up quotes of someone's statements that they did not actually post. This reply will be the fifth time I have offered or referred to these quotes. Those quotes have been ignored 4 times now, twice in this thread already. Twice in another thread where each quote has a link to original post by this poster.

These quotes are from posts scattered over about a year and half worth of posting that either indicate no understanding of what the Trinity Doctrine actually teaches or a poster that holds no belief in it.

Here is a LINK (click on blue below) to my second post in this thread giving quotes from this poster that contradict a belief in the Trinity Doctrine (which was ignored):
HAS THE CHURCH ALWAYS BEEN CORRUPT ?

The poster's statements would be the ones already in "quotes" when I posted that. Went back and edited the above post to [add] more clarification as there seems to be some confusion about who the poster being quoted in the quotes that already had " " around them is.

Here is a LINK to my first post in this thread referencing those same quotes by offering LINKS to another thread started by same poster: HAS THE CHURCH ALWAYS BEEN CORRUPT ? - That post was ignored in this thread too as far as the quotes go even though the poster was actually named as the one being quoted in the other thread. The two posts in the other thread have LINKS to each and every one of those quotes. Those quotes were ignored in that thread also (the links are blue and clicking on it will take one there).

If all those quotes are stated in error over the last year and half, the error is huge and many. So if those statements were made in error there is a chance to correct it and stop doing it hopefully. That there is error or non-belief is evident in remarks that, for just one example, equate a characteristic of God's Nature with the idea of Persons. Three Persons is not a label for just another element, characteristic or feature of God (like Love, Just, Omniscience, Omnipotence...etc all are). A person is an individual we can know, so the Three Persons are Three Individuals, Who we can know.

Here are links to the other thread and posts which were also ignored. CAN HOLY SPIRIT OPERATE INSIDE A WOMB ?
CAN HOLY SPIRIT OPERATE INSIDE A WOMB ?

Weren't you reprimanded last time you posted a bunch of links to other threads? Your post removed at least?

Also, there is a rule at CF about being OFF TOPIC.

I know 'bout all you want to do is attack me (THE PERSON); I suppose we should just try to ignore you more.

DrBubbaLove · Mar 23, 2017

Douglas Hendrickson said:
IT DOES NOT SAY THAT.

Sorry, it does not say: "JOHN," "HIMSELF," "LEAPED" "FOR" "JOY" "IN" "HIS" "MOTHER'S" "WOMB".
Where is the original Greek you were praising so much, where is the Greek for any of that, except the "leaped" and "for" and "joy."?
Not in Luke!
edit: Mostly your fabrication, in case you didn't notice.

At least there is a consistent refusal to address the Trinity Doctrine question regardless of who asks. Wonder why???

Douglas Hendrickson · Mar 23, 2017

SPF said:
So let's just say for fun that you disregarded your fabricated and made up interpretation of the Greek and actually believe what it really says - which again is that John leaped in his mother's womb out of his own joy.

I suspect, don't know for sure for sure,
that most people through the ages, Christian or not, have known (know or understand, perhaps without thinking too much about it), there was no John before he was born.

Douglas Hendrickson · Mar 23, 2017

DrBubbaLove said:
At least there is a consistent refusal to address the Trinity Doctrine question regardless of who asks. Wonder why???

NUMBER 1: Because it is OFF TOPIC.

Douglas Hendrickson · Mar 23, 2017

SPF said:
with a simple yes or no, can you tell me whether you agree with the following quote?
"That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; Neither confounding the Persons; nor dividing the Essence. For there is one Person of the Father; another of the Son; and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, is all one; the Glory equal, the Majesty coeternal. Such as the Father is; such is the Son; and such is the Holy Ghost. The Father uncreated; the Son uncreated; and the Holy Ghost uncreated. The Father unlimited; the Son unlimited; and the Holy Ghost unlimited. The Father eternal; the Son eternal; and the Holy Ghost eternal. And yet they are not three eternals; but one eternal. As also there are not three uncreated; nor three infinites, but one uncreated; and one infinite. So likewise the Father is Almighty; the Son Almighty; and the Holy Ghost Almighty. And yet they are not three Almighties; but one Almighty. So the Father is God; the Son is God; and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet they are not three Gods; but one God. So likewise the Father is Lord; the Son Lord; and the Holy Ghost Lord. And yet not three Lords; but one Lord"
Yes or no, do you agree with that?

I'll give you that, YES I AGREE WITH THAT.

I usually announce the Apostle's Creed in church; I would have no trouble substituting this for it, at least once in a while.

Philip_B · Mar 23, 2017

Douglas Hendrickson said:
I usually announce the Apostle's Creed in church; I would have no trouble substituting this for it, at least once in a while.

I, for one, would be better informed if your explained you position on the Nicene Creed, where the Christology is much clearer.

DrBubbaLove · Mar 23, 2017

Douglas Hendrickson said:
Weren't you reprimanded last time you posted a bunch of links to other threads? Your post removed at least?

Also, there is a rule at CF about being OFF TOPIC.

I know 'bout all you want to do is attack me (THE PERSON); I suppose we should just try to ignore you more.

No, am attacking an idea presented in many posts that there is no concept of Persons with God like just people are individual persons. So "nothing" present (as in person) in the Mother of God's womb but flesh could view no more alive than a "tumor" or "gangrenous arm" (yes quotes mean that was said by someone other than me). Or literally "nothing" for the Holy Spirit to work with (so Saint John cannot jump or be filled with the Spirit) in Elizabeth's womb until the Baptizer is born/breathing.

The contrary to Trinity Doctrine concept expressed repeatedly (and never denied it was said when presented with posts saying it) an imagined belief that Three Persons is just a label for some element, or characteristic or feature of God's Nature - like Just, or Good or Love are properly called attributes of His Nature. Persons is not one of those - at least not in the Trinity Doctrine. The same fuller expression of Doctrine SPF just asked to be confirmed in total and was also ignored. (off topic???)

Also attacking the idea vaguely presented repeatedly and never denied when quotes given showing or at least suggesting, that there is perhaps NOT any immaterial aspect of spirit(soul or both if one believes in a trichomoty of our nature) at all in our human nature - anything spiritual there imagined to be either breathing (perhaps from God) or a gift passed down biologically from God from Adam and Eve (which rather suggests material also).

Both of these concepts would need to be clearly understood as starting points (or not) in discussions like the ones we have had lately. We have to agree on something or there is no containing where these discussions will wonder. Refusing to establish either a common (either on Trinity Doctrine or concept of a soul) or uncommon (either with non-Trinity Doctrine or non-traditional view of the soul/spirit) we will continue to digress "off topic" because there are too many points of disagreement to even intelligently talk about, in this case for instance what could be present in the womb that the teaching of the Church has apparently corrupted for nearly 2000 years..

Have not been reprimanded in years at CF, so am unclear what is being eluded to. My posts are still there and still go unanswered. If a report was made and even if those posts of mine are considered off topic - it would be a little difficult to do anything to me about it because the poster that made those quotes actually asked me to show where those statements were made - so I did as I was asked. If someone does not want to be reminded of what they posted, they probably should not make a habit of asking people to prove it.

Besides, avoiding answering the questions by me, SPF and others or suggesting it is "off topic" rather supports the idea it is realized that beliefs contrary to the Trinity Doctrine cannot be posted in this section of CF or used as points in debating other topics here like abortion. In the Controversial section there would be no problem with presenting all sort of beliefs about God, but not here. I don't make the rules but am rather glad they have them so every conversation does not derail into a Doctrine discussion on the Trinity, as these threads have/will and as many in Controversial Theology do.

SPF · Mar 23, 2017

Douglas Hendrickson said:
IT DOES NOT SAY THAT.

Sorry, it does not say: "JOHN," "HIMSELF," "LEAPED" "FOR" "JOY" "IN" "HIS" "MOTHER'S" "WOMB".
Where is the original Greek you were praising so much, where is the Greek for any of that, except the "leaped" and "for" and "joy."?
Not in Luke!
edit: Mostly your fabrication, in case you didn't notice.

Hi Douglas, you must be new to this thread, because it has been outlined numerous times, and explained numerous times to people that it was John, in his mother's womb who leaped, and the reason he leaped was for joy. The joy was his. This has been explained to you numerous times. It's how the Greek is written. It's what is written down. The ONLY reason you're arguing against this is because of a personally fabricated view of humanity.

Luke 1:44 For, lo, as soon as the voice of thy salutation sounded in mine ears, the babe leaped in my womb for joy.

The verse is very clear in English, and even more clear in Greek. Period. Factual. Not something debated. This is why every single theologian and commentator, spanning every single branch of Christianity has agreed. This is not something that anyone in the Church has debated for the simple reason that the passage is quite clear in what it's saying. Frankly, you're the first person I know of in the history of Christianity to rage against it. And I daresay, that the only reason you're doing so is because of a fabricated belief that isn't based on Scripture.

Not only is the verse clear that the baby leaped because he was joyful, it's also clear that Scripture calls John in the womb a baby! I pointed this out to you before.

The Greek word used for "baby" in Luke 1:41 is used 8 times in the NT.

Luke 1:41 and 44 as we have been discussing, as well as the following.

Luke 2:12 - This will be a sign for you: you will find a baby wrapped in cloths....

Luke 2:16 - So they came in a hurry and found their way to Mary and Joseph, and the baby as he lay in the manger.

Luke 18:15 - And they were bringing even their babies to Him so that He would touch them...

Acts 7:19 - It was he who took shrewd advantage of our race and mistreated our fathers so that they would expose their infants and they would not survive.

I Timothy 3:15 - and that from childhood you have known the sacred writings....

I Peter 2:2 - Like newborn babies, long for the pure milk of the word...

I'm sure you'll see where this is going. If the life inside Elizabeth's womb was not considered a person, why would Scripture not use a different word?

The bottom line is that your fabricated position about fetus' not being real human beings is at odds with Scripture. You are not capable of justifying your position with Scripture. What's worse than that, is that you're not even capable of justifying your position with Science. Both Scripture and science are at odds with your fabricated position.

No amount of magical word-smithing will change the clear Greek sentence structure that is presented in Scripture.

Basically, you came up with an idea in your head about human life, what it is inside the womb, what is outside the womb, and how it all goes together - you fabricated this idea in your head. The problem is that you did this without first looking to Scripture. Now you're faced with the problem of actually learning that Scripture doesn't support your made up view. The right answer is to alter your view to align with Scripture. The wrong answer is to hold onto your false view and keep trying to twist Scripture to fit it.

DrBubbaLove · Mar 23, 2017

Douglas Hendrickson said:
I'll give you that, YES I AGREE WITH THAT.

I usually announce the Apostle's Creed in church; I would have no trouble substituting this for it, at least once in a while.

Again claiming a belief in a Trinity of the godhead or reading the Apostles Creed is less than definitive given I have heard Mormons make the same statements and they obviously do not agree with the Trinity Doctrine. They simply substitute understandings of the words in the Creed and claim everyone else has just "made stuff up" about it. (sound familiar?).

If one scratches the surface of the Mormons statement to that effect we quickly see there is no agreement at all. We don't have to scratch here in this case as we have over 900 posts now to look at. Comments like the Person of the Holy Spirit is like wood in the forest, the wood is not the forest because the forest is much more than wood. Or the idea the Father is Incarnated as the Son.

Douglas Hendrickson said:
NUMBER 1: Because it is OFF TOPIC.

Not when a posters asks another poster to prove from their own statements that they do not believe in the Trinity Doctrine. It is all made up stuff from the corrupt Church remember???

Douglas Hendrickson · Mar 23, 2017

SPF said:
If the life inside Elizabeth's womb was not considered a person, why would Scripture not use a different word?

For the same reason many speak today of "the baby is going to be born soon," etc. etc., when they know full well and understand it is not a babe or baby until it is a "babe in arms."

Note that in the case of what Elizabeth said, it was a quote and I don't think the Holy Spirit would favor being unfaithful to what she said, and make up some other thing. Even though Luke is to be inspired and she was supposedly inspired, and there might conceivably be more inspired things for her to say, I think Luke was at least a truthful stenographer. She would speak in common parlance, and even today when the law of the land says otherwise and probably most people understand otherwise, there is still a tendency among almost everyone not to call the fetus what it is, but instead call it what it only might become.

At the point where a birth is immanent, and even well before that, the outcome is anticipated, sometimes very much anticipated, sometimes with much trepidation. Even more in Scripture times the outcome was pretty well inevitable, so it came rather natural to refer to it as what it would be. In ancient times they were probably even less scrupulous to refer to it more properly, and did not think in clinical medical scientific terms; even now even those who understand (if pressed about the matter) that it is a fetus and not a child will rather more endearingly often refer to it as a child.

Douglas Hendrickson · Mar 23, 2017

DrBubbaLove said:
Comments like the Person of the Holy Spirit is like wood in the forest, the wood is not the forest because the forest is much more than wood. Or the idea the Father is Incarnated as the Son.

It's hard to know whether to bother to respond to your CONSTANT MISREPRESENTATION. Perhaps you could take a reading course or something?

In response to you claiming God is Holy Spirit, something like that (again, you do not actually quote me nor your self, only give your misrepresentation), which seemed to be you claiming God and Holy Spirit were the same thing, I gave an illustration of how something may be part of something else. Holy Spirit is "part" of God, not (all) God. You totally don't get it, but perhaps my wording could have been better - not for your understanding, I doubt it would have made any difference in that regard.
I am very sure I never said "the Father is Incarnated as the Son," but of course you have to pretend I did.

DrBubbaLove · Mar 23, 2017

Douglas Hendrickson said:
It's hard to know whether to bother to respond to your CONSTANT MISREPRESENTATION. Perhaps you could take a reading course or something?

In response to you claiming God is Holy Spirit, something like that (again, you do not actually quote me nor your self, only give your misrepresentation), which seemed to be you claiming God and Holy Spirit were the same thing, I gave an illustration of how something may be part of something else. Holy Spirit is "part" of God, not (all) God. You totally don't get it, but perhaps my wording could have been better - not for your understanding, I doubt it would have made any difference in that regard.
I am very sure I never said "the Father is Incarnated as the Son," but of course you have to pretend I did.

LOL, you don't get it.
I have 30 odd posts where the Trinity Doctrine is totally contradicted and no attempt to address just 1/3 of those in this thread in spite of my asking about it three times - even at your request. But no matter the idea was just double down on by repeating very clearly an error again in the above reply.

News flash, according to the Trinity Doctrine the Holy Spirit is God, not a part of God.

Thanks for pointing out again what I have been continually been saying all along. The blatant and obstinate refusal to admit one does not hold a belief in the Trinity Doctrine is rather obvious to everyone except the person making comments like the one just made above. Thanks for admitting it again in the above reply. It is not like no one noticed before. Until this reply was just made, was about to ask if you thought someone hijacked your account and was posting anti-Trinity Doctrine stuff.

Am still hoping there is just a lack of knowledge here that one does not even realize the opinions expressed like "Holy Spirit is a "part" of God, not (all) of God" are totally contradictory to the Trinity Doctrine. But I also have my doubts, mostly because of the smugness of the replies. So pleading ignorance and needing correction is a long shot now. Am seeing a pride here that one does not believe in the so called "made up" stuff of the Trinity Doctrine.

In case it was not understood let me be most clear. The idea that the Holy Spirit is not (all) God but a "part" of God is totally contradictory to a belief in the Trinity Doctrine - but we knew this all along as Trinity Doctrine is no doubt considered more "made up stuff" by this poster.

Douglas Hendrickson · Mar 23, 2017

DrBubbaLove said:
LOL, you don't get it.
I have 30 odd posts where the Trinity Doctrine is totally contradicted and no attempt to address just 1/3 of those in this thread in spite of my asking about it three times - even at your request. But no matter the idea was just double down on by repeating very clearly an error again in the above reply.

News flash, according to the Trinity Doctrine the Holy Spirit is God, not a part of God.

Thanks for pointing out again what I have been continually been saying all along. The blatant and obstinate refusal to admit one does not hold a belief in the Trinity Doctrine is rather obvious to everyone except the person making comments like the one just made above. Thanks for admitting it again in the above reply. It is not like no one noticed before. Until this reply was just made, was about to ask if you thought someone hijacked your account and was posting anti-Trinity Doctrine stuff.

Am still hoping there is just a lack of knowledge here that one does not even realize the opinions expressed like "Holy Spirit is a "part" of God, not (all) of God" are totally contradictory to the Trinity Doctrine. But I also have my doubts, mostly because of the smugness of the replies. So pleading ignorance and needing correction is a long shot now. Am seeing a pride here that one does not believe in the so called "made up" stuff of the Trinity Doctrine.

In case it was not understood let me be most clear. The idea that the Holy Spirit is not (all) God but a "part" of God is totally contradictory to a belief in the Trinity Doctrine - but we knew this all along as Trinity Doctrine is no doubt considered more "made up stuff" by this poster.

I certainly would never say the Trinity is "made up stuff." BUT YOUR ACCUSATION IS CERTAINLY MADE-UP STUFF.
That "part" is usually called a "person." Perhaps you don't know what "part" means?

Do you think you understand everything about the Trinity and there is no mystery about it?

DrBubbaLove · Mar 24, 2017

Douglas Hendrickson said:
I certainly would never say the Trinity is "made up stuff." BUT YOUR ACCUSATION IS CERTAINLY MADE-UP STUFF.
That "part" is usually called a "person." Perhaps you don't know what "part" means?

Do you think you understand everything about the Trinity and there is no mystery about it?

Made up stuff would be like saying "God is not Holy Spirit, somewhat like forest is not only wood" (Douglas Hendrickson 3/18/17 CAN HOLY SPIRIT OPERATE INSIDE A WOMB ? )

My claim was not that Mormons or some Christians do not believe in a "Trinity". Mormons do and probably most Christians do believe in a Trinity. However, clearly not all ideas of a Trinity are the same. Some are a very, very different view of God and His Nature than most of Christianity and so actually qualify as "made up stuff". In Mormons case made up by a few people in modern days. Since no source was ever offered though others have asked, in the person starting all these pro-abortion threads lately, we can only say it is his "made up stuff" which apparently he has taught and wants to teach other Christians here at CF.

There are plenty of mysteries about God without having to make up more by refusing to believe what He has revealed to us about Himself. There are obviously Christians and other groups that have made up plenty of stuff, and those are indeed corruptions worthy of being talked about.

Like most Christians, I accept the teachings He has revealed of Himself to us, which among other things is Three Persons, One God. Those Persons are Individuals just like we are individuals. We are called persons and no one understands that to mean my identity is a part or piece of me like my arm or hair or leg is a "part" of me, or like a tree is part of a forest.

DrBubbaLove · Mar 24, 2017

Douglas Hendrickson said:
In response to you claiming God is Holy Spirit, something like that (again, you do not actually quote me nor your self, only give your misrepresentation),
[.............edit out]
I am very sure I never said "the Father is Incarnated as the Son," but of course you have to pretend I did.

Seem very sure of a lot of things that are not true.

“Holy Spirit incarnated God as a man (Son Jesus). He the Father became incarnated as the Son.
Do you want to contest those two statements. It seems like we pretty well must hold to them to be true to Scripture."
[Douglas Hendrickson Jul 9, 2016 Neutering God for Women's Rights )

Douglas Hendrickson · Mar 24, 2017

DrBubbaLove said:
Made up stuff would be like saying "God is not Holy Spirit, somewhat like forest is not only wood" (Douglas Hendrickson 3/18/17 CAN HOLY SPIRIT OPERATE INSIDE A WOMB ? )

My claim was not that Mormons or some Christians do not believe in a "Trinity". Mormons do and probably most Christians do believe in a Trinity. However, clearly not all ideas of a Trinity are the same. Some are a very, very different view of God and His Nature than most of Christianity and so actually qualify as "made up stuff". In Mormons case made up by a few people in modern days. Since no source was ever offered though others have asked, in the person starting all these pro-abortion threads lately, we can only say it is his "made up stuff" which apparently he has taught and wants to teach other Christians here at CF.

There are plenty of mysteries about God without having to make up more by refusing to believe what He has revealed to us about Himself. There are obviously Christians and other groups that have made up plenty of stuff, and those are indeed corruptions worthy of being talked about.

Like most Christians, I accept the teachings He has revealed of Himself to us, which among other things is Three Persons, One God. Those Persons are Individuals just like we are individuals. We are called persons and no one understands that to mean my identity is a part or piece of me like my arm or hair or leg is a "part" of me, or like a tree is part of a forest.

What is it about, "God is not Holy Spirit, somewhat like (a) forest is not only wood," that you don't understand? I think probably you are failing to notice the "only."
God is more than Holy Spirit (especially should a believer in Christ know THE SON OF GOD is art of God, (part of God that is!), though Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Thee Christ. That is all I am saying with that simile. (Smile!) :amen:

I think you should notice that, that GOD IS MORE THAN HOLY SPIRIT.

Perhaps someone you respect more than me can correct you on that.

(And if you see fit to quote this, please don't change my godly color to some ucky brown!)

HAS THE CHURCH ALWAYS BEEN CORRUPT ?

Well-Known Member

Roman Catholic convert from Southern Baptist

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Roman Catholic convert from Southern Baptist

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Bread is Blessed & Broken Wine is Blessed & Poured

Roman Catholic convert from Southern Baptist

Well-Known Member

Roman Catholic convert from Southern Baptist

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Roman Catholic convert from Southern Baptist

Well-Known Member

Roman Catholic convert from Southern Baptist

Roman Catholic convert from Southern Baptist

Well-Known Member

Similar threads