Originally posted by TheBear
"We should define CULT in the context with which it is used on people who do NOT conform with "mainstream" or "orthodox" Christianity. For example: why are Non-Trinitarians called CULT? why are people who do NOT adhere to the "faith alone" doctrine called CULT?"
Who uses this term with this criteria, Ed?
Originally posted by amie
where in this definition does it say that?
Oxford essential dictionary: cult: 1.a ritualistic religious system. 2. a devotion to a person or thing (cult of aestheticism)
are you altering the definition to conform to your perception of what a cult is?
I THINK FIRST WE WOULD HAVE TO DECIDE ON AN ACCURATE DEFINITION OF CULT WHICH IS DIFFICULT SINCE TECHNICALLY SPEAKING IT MEANS DIFFERENT THINGS TO DIFERENT PEOPLE.
ed, obviously people that are involved in cults do not perceive themselves as such so your statement of "come out" is a bit hard when people tend to not think of their religions as being "In" cults to begin with...
My leader is the Christ, the Son of the living God! Who do you say He is sarge? Oh, that's right, you say He is God right? Contrary to what the scripture says! Your the one with the cultish attitude about the whole issue here! Because it's guys like you that are so blind to what the scripture is really saying that it's pathetic to the core! Originally posted by gunnysgt
So who is your cult leader, Franklin?
Ed's is Felix Manalo. Men that want to be glorified, as God. Jesus isn't God according to you gents so basically you or Ed could have paid sin's penalty on the cross, right? [/B]
Please don't tell me a mere man did that, I don't buy it and any Christian born again of God's Spirit doesn't buy it. [/B]
You take away Christ's diety, what are you left with, a man specially empowered from God for awhile. An angel, a prophet, a good teacher. [/B]
Originally posted by gunnysgt
May God's peace and blessings be with you, Franklin.
Originally posted by edpobre
Which God are you referring to now gunnysgt? Ed
This contradicts Jesus' words---"No good tree produces bad fruit, no bad tree produces good; therefore you will KNOW THEM by their FRUIT" (Matt7)I don't think anyone can say whether someone is saved or not
Originally posted by Ben johnson
It's interesting that Ed's entire theology is founded upon two verses, which proclaim:
1. Jesus is a MAN
2. God is the ONLY GOD
...neither of which is contradicted by the "TRINITY THEOLOGY".
We-who-hold-to-Trinity, ALSO believe that "Jesus is a MAN". But obviously, if Jesus was concieved by the Holy Spirit, and has the soul of God, Jesus COULD be fully man, AND fully God!
And if there is only ONE GOD, Who is the ONLY SAVIOR (Is43:11), then that ONE GOD having THREE PERSONALITIES, meshes perfectly with the claims of Jesus being GOD---for JESUS is THE SAVIOR! If Jesus is not God, then how can Jesus be the Savior? Only one answer---God CHANGED!
But God CHANGING is commensurate with this theology; Ed has said, "Only GOD can be worshipped, but He GAVE that privilege to Jesus!" And, "Only GOD can forgive sins, but He GAVE that privilege to Jesus!"
So we re-define the attributes of deity, assigning certain qualities to a mere man in defense of our "JESUS-ISN'T-GOD" theology, based on verses that do not dispute the JESUS-IS-GOD theology.
What then is our motivation to reject the idea that Jesus is God? It certainly can't be Scripture, there is no verse that says "JESUS-ISN'T GOD".
We (literarily representing the INC) cannot find a single verse that speaks of Jesus having a beginning, but we cling to the idea that He HAD---contradicting many clear Scriptures.
(Not the LEAST of which is, "and apart from Him came nothing into being that has COME into being"---how then did Jesus create Himself???)
..what then would be my motivation? "Jesus is a MAN. There is only ONE GOD. A MAN cannot be GOD". Wait a minute, the first two statements can be found in Scripture, the third cannot. So am I to base my eternal future on an OPINION???
Surely I can find something more solid than an unsupportable opinion...
Originally posted by LouisBooth
"1. Jesus is a MAN (John 8:40); and
2. The FATHER is the ONLY true God. "
And that's what the trinity docterine says as well.
Originally posted by Ben johnson
Ed, please remind me (you know how old & forgetful I can be), what your "take" is on John1. Specifically, do you understand "JESUS" to be "The Word"?
(Excellent post, Louis!)
Originally posted by Pastor N.B.
Perhaps the problem arises by the way one studies the Word of God?
Christ said that we are to live by EVERY WORD that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. (mistakes are because of our poor diet).
Originally posted by edpobre
Agreed!
Most people THINK that CONCLUSIONS arrived at as a result of INTERPRETATION of some verses can ALTER the meaning of CLEARLY-STATED (self-explanatory) TRUTHS written in the Bible.
Agreed!
But do you AGREE that EVERY word that CAME out of Jesus' mouth are WORDS of God? Do you also AGREE that EVERY word of God is TRUE? Therefore, do you AGREE that EVERY word that CAME out of Jesus' mouth is TRUE?
Now, if you TRULY agree to these and CHANGE the way you study the Bible by MAKING those CLEARLY-STATED (self-explanatory) TRUTHS be your GUIDE in INTERPRETING scriptures, don't you think that would be a better solution to the problem?
Let's do an exercise Pastor.
Take John 8:40 where Jesus CLEARLY states the TRUTH that he is a MAN. Take John 17:1 where apostle John CLEARLY states the TRUTH that Jesus was PRAYING to the FATHER and in John 17:3 where Jesus CLEARLY states that the Father is the ONLY true God.
In the light of John 8:40 and John 17:3 which YOU say are WORDS of God and are TRUE, do you then agree the CONCLUSION that Jesus is God because of HOW one INTERPRETS John 1:1, John 14:9, John 10:30 and John 8:58 is FALSE?
Ed
Originally posted by Pastor N.B.
Hi Ed,
Yes it seems that we see things 'somewhat' alike!
Yet, how about Matt., Mark, Luke, & John that we call the four Gospels?
If their 'inspirational' recording was the EXACT WORDINGS of God, why have FOUR, and with much of the same thoughts in their description? Or do we not see eye to eye on this? (even contredictions)
I believe with the only EXCEPTION being the Royal Law of God, (see Isa. 8:20) and that these 'holy men of God spake as they were [moved] by the Holy Ghost'. Yet using their own words for descriptive meaning in most if not all cases.
Case in point: Do you think that the Holy Spirit, or God the Father as we know Him, or our blessed Savior's inspired the words seen in these verses?
(I would print them but something else comes up, .
Heb. 12:8, Isa. 36:12, 1 kings 14:10, (FOR JUST A FEW)
I believe that ALL 66 Bks. are the Word of God (CHRIST) in mans discriptive common day language. Try 2 Tim. 3:16!