How many "Gods" can you count?
- Thread starter edpobre
- Start date
- Status
Smilin
Spirit of the Wolf
- Jun 18, 2002
- 5,650
- 244
- 57
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Married
/me scratching head...
Are by chance the Mennonites or Amish listed under these cults?
I would ask there opinion...wait...they would NEVER own a computer....darn!
What about someone who grew up in an isolated community, with no real world knowledge of other Christian viewpoints? Would they be considered a cult?
What about people who dress up as Star Trek characters? are they a cult?
What about those pesky 'indians'...that refused to be wiped out, yet keep mainly to themselves (with a FEW exceptions). Are there beliefs classified as a 'cult'????
Don't confuse me...I'm having a rough day...
Are by chance the Mennonites or Amish listed under these cults?
I would ask there opinion...wait...they would NEVER own a computer....darn!
What about someone who grew up in an isolated community, with no real world knowledge of other Christian viewpoints? Would they be considered a cult?
What about people who dress up as Star Trek characters? are they a cult?
What about those pesky 'indians'...that refused to be wiped out, yet keep mainly to themselves (with a FEW exceptions). Are there beliefs classified as a 'cult'????
Don't confuse me...I'm having a rough day...
Upvote
0
HOW is a religion regarded as "unorthodox" or "spurious?" WHO determines whether a religion is in accordance with "established" doctrines or not? WHO and HOW are these docrines "established?"
Ed
Upvote
0
There is only one God. A lack of a clear definition does not mean there is more then one.
It just means my mom sees me differently then my brother.
It just means my mom sees me differently then my brother.
Upvote
0
I am sorry, but I have never come across the expression......."God the son" .......in the Bible. Perhaps you can tell me where exactly it is located. Thank-you.
Upvote
0
How Could Jesus Be Both Divine and Human?
by R.C. Sproul
How can a person have a divine nature and a human nature at the same time in the way that we believe Jesus Christ did?
One of the great crises in evangelical Christianity today is a lack of understanding about the person of Christ. Almost every time I watch Christian television I hear one of the classical creeds of the Christian faith being denied blatantly, unknowingly, unwittingly. And of course, part of the reason is that it is so difficult for us to understand how one person can have two natures. You are asking me the question, "How?" I don't know how; I know that Jesus is one person with two natures. How can that be? Long before there was a human nature there was a second person of the Trinity. Here the second person of the Trinity, very God of very God, God himself, was able to take upon himself a human nature. No human being could reverse the process and take upon himself a divine nature. I cannot add deity to my humanity. It's not as if Christ changed from deity into humanity. That's what I hear all the time. I hear that there was this great eternal God who suddenly stopped being God and became a man. That's not what the Bible teaches. The divine person took upon himself a human nature. We really can't understand the mystery of how this happened. But it is conceivable, certainly, that God, with his power, can add to himself a human nature and do it in such a way as to unite two natures in one person.
The most important council about this in the history of the church, whose decision has stood for centuries as the model of Christian orthodoxy and is embraced by Lutherans, Presbyterians, Methodists, Roman Catholics, Baptists -- virtually every branch of Christendom -- is the Council of Chalcedon. It was held in the year 451, in which the church confessed its belief about Jesus in this way: They said that we believe that Jesus is verus homus, verus Deus -truly man, truly God. Then they went on to set boundaries for how we're to think about the way in which these two natures relate to each other. They said that these two natures are in perfect unity, without mixture, division, confusion, or separation. When we think about the Incarnation, we don't want to get the two natures mixed up and think that Jesus had a deified human nature or a humanized divine nature. We can distinguish them, but we can't tear them apart because they exist in perfect unity.
When Paul wrote that Jesus emptied himself and became a servant and yet he was God, in what ways did he retain or not retain his powers of being God?
The concept of "emptying" was a raging controversy in the nineteenth century, and elements of it remain today. The Greek word used by Paul in the second chapter of Philippians, kenosis, is translated as "emptying" in most Bible versions. The question is, Of what did Jesus, in his human (incarnate) state, empty himself?
The popular view in certain circles in the nineteenth century was that at the time of the Incarnation, the eternal God, the second person of the Trinity, laid aside -- emptied himself of -- his divine attributes so that he could become a man. And in becoming a man in the very real sense, he stopped being God. And so there is the transformation from deity to humanity because he set aside his omniscience, his omnipotence, his self-existence, and all of those other attributes that are proper to the nature of God.
There was on orthodox theologian during the middle of that controversy who said somewhat caustically that the only emptying that theory proved was the emptying of the minds of theologians who would teach such a thing as God stopping for one second to be God. If God laid aside one of his attributes, the immutable undergoes a mutation, the infinite suddenly stops being infinite; it would be the end of the universe. God cannot stop being God and still be God. So we can't talk properly of God laying aside his deity to take humanity upon himself. That is why orthodox Christianity has always declared that Jesus was verus homus, verus Deus -- truly man, truly God; fully man and fully God. His human nature was fully human, and his divine nature always and everywhere was fully divine.
Nevertheless, the apostle Paul does speak of Christ emptying himself of something. I think the context of Philippians 2 makes it very clear that what he emptied himself of was not his deity, not his divine attributes, but his prerogatives -- his glory and his privileges. He willingly cloaked his glory under the veil of this human nature that he took upon himself. It's not that the divine nature stops being divine in order to become human. In the Transfiguration, for example (Matthew 17:1-13), we see the invisible divine nature break through and become visible, and Jesus is transfigured before the eyes of his disciples. But for the most part, Jesus concealed that glory. I think Paul is saying in Philippians 2 that we're to imitate a willingness to relinquish our own glory and our own privileges and prerogatives.
by R.C. Sproul
How can a person have a divine nature and a human nature at the same time in the way that we believe Jesus Christ did?
One of the great crises in evangelical Christianity today is a lack of understanding about the person of Christ. Almost every time I watch Christian television I hear one of the classical creeds of the Christian faith being denied blatantly, unknowingly, unwittingly. And of course, part of the reason is that it is so difficult for us to understand how one person can have two natures. You are asking me the question, "How?" I don't know how; I know that Jesus is one person with two natures. How can that be? Long before there was a human nature there was a second person of the Trinity. Here the second person of the Trinity, very God of very God, God himself, was able to take upon himself a human nature. No human being could reverse the process and take upon himself a divine nature. I cannot add deity to my humanity. It's not as if Christ changed from deity into humanity. That's what I hear all the time. I hear that there was this great eternal God who suddenly stopped being God and became a man. That's not what the Bible teaches. The divine person took upon himself a human nature. We really can't understand the mystery of how this happened. But it is conceivable, certainly, that God, with his power, can add to himself a human nature and do it in such a way as to unite two natures in one person.
The most important council about this in the history of the church, whose decision has stood for centuries as the model of Christian orthodoxy and is embraced by Lutherans, Presbyterians, Methodists, Roman Catholics, Baptists -- virtually every branch of Christendom -- is the Council of Chalcedon. It was held in the year 451, in which the church confessed its belief about Jesus in this way: They said that we believe that Jesus is verus homus, verus Deus -truly man, truly God. Then they went on to set boundaries for how we're to think about the way in which these two natures relate to each other. They said that these two natures are in perfect unity, without mixture, division, confusion, or separation. When we think about the Incarnation, we don't want to get the two natures mixed up and think that Jesus had a deified human nature or a humanized divine nature. We can distinguish them, but we can't tear them apart because they exist in perfect unity.
When Paul wrote that Jesus emptied himself and became a servant and yet he was God, in what ways did he retain or not retain his powers of being God?
The concept of "emptying" was a raging controversy in the nineteenth century, and elements of it remain today. The Greek word used by Paul in the second chapter of Philippians, kenosis, is translated as "emptying" in most Bible versions. The question is, Of what did Jesus, in his human (incarnate) state, empty himself?
The popular view in certain circles in the nineteenth century was that at the time of the Incarnation, the eternal God, the second person of the Trinity, laid aside -- emptied himself of -- his divine attributes so that he could become a man. And in becoming a man in the very real sense, he stopped being God. And so there is the transformation from deity to humanity because he set aside his omniscience, his omnipotence, his self-existence, and all of those other attributes that are proper to the nature of God.
There was on orthodox theologian during the middle of that controversy who said somewhat caustically that the only emptying that theory proved was the emptying of the minds of theologians who would teach such a thing as God stopping for one second to be God. If God laid aside one of his attributes, the immutable undergoes a mutation, the infinite suddenly stops being infinite; it would be the end of the universe. God cannot stop being God and still be God. So we can't talk properly of God laying aside his deity to take humanity upon himself. That is why orthodox Christianity has always declared that Jesus was verus homus, verus Deus -- truly man, truly God; fully man and fully God. His human nature was fully human, and his divine nature always and everywhere was fully divine.
Nevertheless, the apostle Paul does speak of Christ emptying himself of something. I think the context of Philippians 2 makes it very clear that what he emptied himself of was not his deity, not his divine attributes, but his prerogatives -- his glory and his privileges. He willingly cloaked his glory under the veil of this human nature that he took upon himself. It's not that the divine nature stops being divine in order to become human. In the Transfiguration, for example (Matthew 17:1-13), we see the invisible divine nature break through and become visible, and Jesus is transfigured before the eyes of his disciples. But for the most part, Jesus concealed that glory. I think Paul is saying in Philippians 2 that we're to imitate a willingness to relinquish our own glory and our own privileges and prerogatives.
Upvote
0
- I think that's the point. All of them are equally spurious, since all of them mandate and establish their own doctrines. It's in the link.
Upvote
0
I am sorry, but I have never come across the expression......."God the son" .......in the Bible. Perhaps you can tell me where exactly it is located. Thank-you.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
franklin
Sexed up atheism = Pantheism
Simple math, that equals three God's ! The bible says there is only one God :
Mark 12:29, "And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord:"
Jesus Himself even taught that there is only one God and not three!
That my friends is inspiration! Good thread again Ed, keep up the good work!
FR
Upvote
0
Franklin... then perhaps you might want to respond to this... ed nor kain have yet
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Kain: "Can an apple be an orange at the same time? A logical fallacy. By definition, an apple is not an oragne and vice versa. Also by definition, a God is not a man and vice versa. God says He is not a man and He doesn't change."
So you think that God can not change... since you're using this to assume 'state of being'... then I guess I could assume that He can not change His covenant??? God doesn't 'change' right??? What exactly does change mean then... guess He can't 'change the world' either ........ Exactly my point... God saying that He does not change has nothing to do with 'state of being'.... it has everything to do with who GOD is... which goes far beyond any particular 'form'. God became a man... while at the same time... being God. He became the Son...making Himself nothing... TAKING the nature of a servant... of a man, (this does not mean that He IS a man...no more, no less... like you or I... which is the 'man' thing that you referred to), so that He could become our sin.
God cannot be in the presence of sin, but out of His love for us He desired to take away that sin. This is why He took the nature of men... and took its penalty of death... even death on a cross. He became subservient to Himself... the Father. Now you say... He can't do that... and I tell you the truth... YES HE CAN!
Read this dialoge between myself and edpobre... it is one with which he has yet to respond to.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by ed: I know what is in the Bible fow. But that is not my question. I said you are NOT being RATIONAL because you said that this "thing" who is at the the side of the Father is "one and the SAME thing as the Father." BTW, what is this you cal "thing" fow?
you are the one that refered to 'thing'
Posted by ed: "Then show me the verse which says that the Father BECAME the SON."
The Bible says: (John 14:5-10) Thomas said to him, "Lord, we don't know where you are going, so how can we know the way?" Jesus answered, "I am the way the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. If you really knew me, you would know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him." Philip said, "Lord, show us the Father and that will be enough for us." Jesus answered: "Don't you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, 'Show us the Father'? Don't you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you are not just my own. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work."
The Bible says: (John 1:1-5, 14) In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it... The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.
The Bible says: (Revelation 19:13) He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God.
The Bible says: (Phil 2:5-10) Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus: Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in APPEARANCE as a man, he HUMBLED HIMSELF and BECAME obedient to death--even death on a cross! Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name, (Reminder: God will not give His glory to another... He is the LORD and Him alone), that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
The Bible says this was necessary: (Hebrews 9:14) How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that we may serve the living God!
The Bible says: (Hebrews 9:16-17) In the cse of a will, it is necessary to prove the death of the one who made it, because a will is in force only when somebody has died; it never takes effect while THE ONE WHO MADE IT is living.
Did God not make the covenant???
The Bible says: (Rev 19:16) On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written: KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS. (Remeber God says that I am the LORD; that is my name! I will not give my glory to another or my praise to idols. (Isaiah 42:8)
well ed.... Christ says that HE is the Alapha and the Omega... the Beginning and the End... the First and the Last..... as does the Father. I ask you ed... are they not claiming the saim thing??? if two things come in first in a race... are they not of equal speed??? simple
ed's reply: If that's how you think, do you admit then that you believe there are two "Gods" whom you pass off as "things?"
No ed... that's not how I think.. They both say it ed... God says that there are no others... therefore they are one... they are both the Alpha and the Omega... the Beginning and the End... ther FIRST AND THE LAST!!!
Why did God create the earth ed??? It was because He desired a love relationship with a creation... Love ed... "Through Him all things were made that have been made" (John 1)... God is Love (1st John 4:8)... and through His love, He came to us. (also John 1) There are not two separate 'things' as you say ed... there is one Living God who is omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent. He is undescribable... and says that He IS.
When God made Himself a man... it was His love.... Jesus Christ... and He subjected himself to endure mans punishment, and subservience. This was His sacrifice, that He became our sins... God the Father can not be in the presence of sin, much less become it. Therefore, out of His uncomprehendible love... He made Himself nothing. He came to us and His name is Jesus Christ-Emmanuel-God with us: Yes... God can do that, even becoming something on earth, while at the same time being God the Father in Heaven. Yes... God can do any number of "evens" that one could fathom asking.
Christ, who being in very nature God, who made Himself nothing, became subject to God the Father... and at the end when all things were finished, was taken again into glory and given the title KING OF KINGS AND LORD OR LORDS... ALL CAPS ED. This is the title reserved for the LORD HIMSELF... WHO WILL NOT GIVE HIS GLORY TO ANOTHER... IT IS THE TITLE OF MY LORD CHRIST WHO IS RISEN FROM THE GRAVE HAVING DEFEATED DEATH... AND THE KEYS OF DEATH AND HADES RESIDE IN HIS HANDS! And after it is all over... Christ will subject Himself to the Father thus the Father becomes all in all. Christ is God... who made>HIMSELF<a man... and who was then again glorified by Him from whom He came
I believe
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Kain: "Can an apple be an orange at the same time? A logical fallacy. By definition, an apple is not an oragne and vice versa. Also by definition, a God is not a man and vice versa. God says He is not a man and He doesn't change."
So you think that God can not change... since you're using this to assume 'state of being'... then I guess I could assume that He can not change His covenant??? God doesn't 'change' right??? What exactly does change mean then... guess He can't 'change the world' either ........ Exactly my point... God saying that He does not change has nothing to do with 'state of being'.... it has everything to do with who GOD is... which goes far beyond any particular 'form'. God became a man... while at the same time... being God. He became the Son...making Himself nothing... TAKING the nature of a servant... of a man, (this does not mean that He IS a man...no more, no less... like you or I... which is the 'man' thing that you referred to), so that He could become our sin.
God cannot be in the presence of sin, but out of His love for us He desired to take away that sin. This is why He took the nature of men... and took its penalty of death... even death on a cross. He became subservient to Himself... the Father. Now you say... He can't do that... and I tell you the truth... YES HE CAN!
Read this dialoge between myself and edpobre... it is one with which he has yet to respond to.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by ed: I know what is in the Bible fow. But that is not my question. I said you are NOT being RATIONAL because you said that this "thing" who is at the the side of the Father is "one and the SAME thing as the Father." BTW, what is this you cal "thing" fow?
you are the one that refered to 'thing'
Posted by ed: "Then show me the verse which says that the Father BECAME the SON."
The Bible says: (John 14:5-10) Thomas said to him, "Lord, we don't know where you are going, so how can we know the way?" Jesus answered, "I am the way the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. If you really knew me, you would know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him." Philip said, "Lord, show us the Father and that will be enough for us." Jesus answered: "Don't you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, 'Show us the Father'? Don't you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you are not just my own. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work."
The Bible says: (John 1:1-5, 14) In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it... The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.
The Bible says: (Revelation 19:13) He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God.
The Bible says: (Phil 2:5-10) Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus: Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in APPEARANCE as a man, he HUMBLED HIMSELF and BECAME obedient to death--even death on a cross! Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name, (Reminder: God will not give His glory to another... He is the LORD and Him alone), that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
The Bible says this was necessary: (Hebrews 9:14) How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that we may serve the living God!
The Bible says: (Hebrews 9:16-17) In the cse of a will, it is necessary to prove the death of the one who made it, because a will is in force only when somebody has died; it never takes effect while THE ONE WHO MADE IT is living.
Did God not make the covenant???
The Bible says: (Rev 19:16) On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written: KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS. (Remeber God says that I am the LORD; that is my name! I will not give my glory to another or my praise to idols. (Isaiah 42:8)
well ed.... Christ says that HE is the Alapha and the Omega... the Beginning and the End... the First and the Last..... as does the Father. I ask you ed... are they not claiming the saim thing??? if two things come in first in a race... are they not of equal speed??? simple
ed's reply: If that's how you think, do you admit then that you believe there are two "Gods" whom you pass off as "things?"
No ed... that's not how I think.. They both say it ed... God says that there are no others... therefore they are one... they are both the Alpha and the Omega... the Beginning and the End... ther FIRST AND THE LAST!!!
Why did God create the earth ed??? It was because He desired a love relationship with a creation... Love ed... "Through Him all things were made that have been made" (John 1)... God is Love (1st John 4:8)... and through His love, He came to us. (also John 1) There are not two separate 'things' as you say ed... there is one Living God who is omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent. He is undescribable... and says that He IS.
When God made Himself a man... it was His love.... Jesus Christ... and He subjected himself to endure mans punishment, and subservience. This was His sacrifice, that He became our sins... God the Father can not be in the presence of sin, much less become it. Therefore, out of His uncomprehendible love... He made Himself nothing. He came to us and His name is Jesus Christ-Emmanuel-God with us: Yes... God can do that, even becoming something on earth, while at the same time being God the Father in Heaven. Yes... God can do any number of "evens" that one could fathom asking.
Christ, who being in very nature God, who made Himself nothing, became subject to God the Father... and at the end when all things were finished, was taken again into glory and given the title KING OF KINGS AND LORD OR LORDS... ALL CAPS ED. This is the title reserved for the LORD HIMSELF... WHO WILL NOT GIVE HIS GLORY TO ANOTHER... IT IS THE TITLE OF MY LORD CHRIST WHO IS RISEN FROM THE GRAVE HAVING DEFEATED DEATH... AND THE KEYS OF DEATH AND HADES RESIDE IN HIS HANDS! And after it is all over... Christ will subject Himself to the Father thus the Father becomes all in all. Christ is God... who made>HIMSELF<a man... and who was then again glorified by Him from whom He came
I believe
Upvote
0
OldShepherd
Zaqunraah
Simple math is it? How many times does the word God appear in this sentence? God the Redeemer, God the Savior, God the Father, God the lord of Hosts, and God the Deliverer.
Trinitarians do not worship three Gods and if you were a Trintarian a year ago, as you claim, then you know that. So either you are being deliberately dishonest about that or about this claim.
Inspiration is it? Praising Pobre, a man who considers you a liar and a lost sinner no less than anyone else who is not Filipino and does not belong to the Iglesias ni Manolo. You don't believe me ask him. After all you praising and support if he doesn't feel that way.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
May God bless you, Old Shepherd, for your defending the Gospel of Jesus Christ, Our Lord and Savior!!!
Upvote
0
franklin
Sexed up atheism = Pantheism
Sounds like your still defining 3 gods OS! There is still no trinity even in your own little description and it's an unscriptural one at that! simple math? yes it's that simple! you like all trinitarians are following the traditions and speculations of mans teaching.
Weather you know it or not OS, that's exactly what you are doing! You are worshipping 3 and not just one! And your right about what I used to believe about the trinity but back then I was lying to myself and I'm here to admit that, how bout you? Are you willing to admit your deceiving yourself? Or would you rather remain in your ignorance and follow the traditional crowd? It's a whole lot easier to follow the crowd isn't it? I can imagine what Jesus and the Apostles would say if they walked into some of the churches today while everyone is singing "God in three persons" ? I think a very large rebuke would be in order!
OS.... Ed has never called me a liar.... give it a rest why don't you! He and I both agree that the trinity is false and not founded in the word of God!
Upvote
0
OldShepherd
Zaqunraah
I do not follow traditions and speculations of men. You do. If I am correct you belong to a false cult that can be traced to 1913.
How can I be describing 3 gods when I quote from the O.T.? God the Redeemer, God the Savior, God the Father, God the lord of Hosts, and God the Deliverer. Appears that someone isn't reading the posts just posting blind attacks.
The fact that you are a self-confessed liar does not prove that I or anyone else is. I know what I believe you haven't proved anything I have posted false.
Nope! And I haven't seen the slightest shred of evidence that I am.
So in addition to calling me a liar because you are self-confessed, now you are calling me ignorant.
I don't follow the crowd you do. If I am correct, you belong to a false cult which began in 1913. I have documented everything I believe from scriptures, with exegesis from the original languages, and supported that by the teaching of the early church. No I don't consider them inspired but they were taught by the disciples and they read both Biblical languages. Do you? And I don't seem to recall any response to 99% of what I have posted.
You give it a rest. Is that your only requirement? That someone believes that the Trinity is false and has not called you a liar? As I said his church teaches if you do not belong tto that church you are not saved. Do you speak Tagalog? If his teaching on membership in his church being required for salvation is false then how can you rely on anything else he teaches being true?
How about Muslims they must be OK too they believe that the Trinity is false.
Upvote
0
I am sorry, but I have never come across the expression......."God the son" .......in the Bible. Perhaps you can tell me where exactly it is located. Thank-you.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
OldShepherd
Zaqunraah
Oh I am sorry, I have been a believer since six months before the six day war and that reply is just so clever and so original, I have never heard it before (more than several dozen times, that is.)
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
