The Trinity

[razzelflabben]

The case the scripture is making is that someone/something proceeded from God. Scripture isn't indicating that God proceeded from God, but that the Son of God proceeded from God.

hum...so in your line of reasoning, it is impossible for my doing the dishes to proceed from me because it isn't a new completely different being? How odd...sorry, just an odd way of trying to explain away the trinity.

 

[justlookinla]

or...as scripture says and the post right above this one pointed out, God Himself came to earth by clothing Himself in the flesh of a human and giving Himself the name of Jesus so that by that name we would know to associate the humility of His suffering and death for our sins with who God is at the core of His being....just saying, there are other explanations than you offer here, like the one offered in scripture for example.

Scripture says that God was manifest in the flesh, not that God robed Himself in a flesh suit. As scripture indicates, Jesus was the express image (manifest) of God, but that doesn't make Him God....

Heb 1:3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;

Heb 1:3 He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,

 

[razzelflabben]

Scripture says that God was manifest in the flesh, not that God robed Himself in a flesh suit. As scripture indicates, Jesus was the express image (manifest) of God, but that doesn't make Him God....

well, websters says this about manifest....
: able to be seen : clearly shown or visible

strongs offers us this....

1. to make manifest or visible or known what has been hidden or unknown, to manifest, whether by words, or deeds, or in any other way
   
   
   1. make actual and visible, realised
      
      
   2. to make known by teaching
      
      
   3. to become manifest, be made known
      
      
   4. of a person
      
      1. expose to view, make manifest, to show one's self, appear
         
   5. to become known, to be plainly recognised, thoroughly understood
      
      
      1. who and what one is
         

so since both websters and Thayers Lexicon (the primary source for translational issues) disagree with you as does the totality of scripture, I personally don't have anything to add other than we disagree.

Heb 1:3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;

I'm on strongs and they have Thayer handy, let's look..express image...

1. the instrument used for engraving or carving
   
   
2. the mark stamped upon that instrument or wrought out on it
   
   
   1. a mark or figure burned in (Lev. 13:28) or stamped on, an impression
      
      
   2. the exact expression (the image) of any person or thing, marked likeness, precise reproduction in every respect, i.e facsimile
      

thus consistent with the Timothy passage of the invisible being made visible...you know as God is the invisible God but Jesus is the same God made visible.

Heb 1:3 He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,

since you put Heb. 1:3 twice, I'm not sure what else you want me to look up for you.

 

[7xlightray]

.

This is my sentence: “Only God the Father could bring salvation to man, and I don't mean die for man (God cannot die, that's why He had to send the man Jesus Christ to die). I mean, it was Hisplan, His work, and His wisdom.”

In my post, if you read carefully, you should understand, I am not making a case for whether God can die, or not. What is in parenthesis [a word, clause, or sentence inserted as an explanation or afterthought into a passage that is grammatically complete without it] was an after thought, of what I hold to be true, but I did not put forth any kind of argument as to prove this, because that is not what my post was about. Even though you claim I am, by saying “so nothing is evidenced by this long drawn out appeal to claim God cannot die.” I made no long drawn out appeal, to claim God cannot die. All I made was a brief comment.

I was referring to God the Father's plan, work, and wisdom. My post was about how could the Father be called the only saviour of: “Isaiah 43:10-12, is referring to God the Father as the only savior “beside me there is no saviour,” yet Jesus is also called our saviour. Nowhere in my post did I make an argument, try to prove, or make a case for God cannot die. It is something you are reading into it. I would also suggest you look up the meaning of straw man argument.

 

[justlookinla]

well, websters says this about manifest....
: able to be seen : clearly shown or visible

strongs offers us this....

1. to make manifest or visible or known what has been hidden or unknown, to manifest, whether by words, or deeds, or in any other way
   
   1. make actual and visible, realised
      
      
   2. to make known by teaching
      
      
   3. to become manifest, be made known
      
      
   4. of a person
      1. expose to view, make manifest, to show one's self, appear
   5. to become known, to be plainly recognised, thoroughly understood
      
      1. who and what one is

so since both websters and Thayers Lexicon (the primary source for translational issues) disagree with you as does the totality of scripture, I personally don't have anything to add other than we disagree. I'm on strongs and they have Thayer handy, let's look..express image...

1. the instrument used for engraving or carving
   
   
2. the mark stamped upon that instrument or wrought out on it
   
   1. a mark or figure burned in (Lev. 13:28) or stamped on, an impression
      
      
   2. the exact expression (the image) of any person or thing, marked likeness, precise reproduction in every respect, i.e facsimile

thus consistent with the Timothy passage of the invisible being made visible...you know as God is the invisible God but Jesus is the same God made visible. since you put Heb. 1:3 twice, I'm not sure what else you want me to look up for you.

I posted Heb 1:3 in two different translations. Neither indicate anything other than Jesus being the representation of God, not God being the representation of God.

 

[7xlightray]

.

Now as to God dying. It is something I believe, because for God to say He is immortal and can't die, as a man can die, is meaningless, if all He has to do is put on human body and die, then it's not true that God can't die, because God can die, just as a man can die. He just has to become a man, put on a human body, and he becomes mortal, just as a man. And if it means, even though God can die in body, as a man, yet at the same time, still mean God is immortal, then for scripture to say, that man is mortal, only because his body dies, not his soul, is meaningless, for man is immortal as God is immortal, there is no difference. Again, if man is called mortal, because only his body dies, then God is also mortal, because His body died. Romans 1 ...Romans 1 ...Romans 1.

I know all about the doctrine you are putting forth, I use to believe the same, because that is what I was taught to believe, from the time I started going to church, as I was taught the Trinity. Though trinity is in the Bible, it's not what many would hope for. I know from experience, for myself, when trained in a certain doctrine, to understand a passages in a certain way, it is very, very difficult to see them any other way. Like, I don't know how many commentaries I've read that state Hebrews 1:10-12 is the Father speaking to, and about the Son (I think all of them, though I've read a couple that suggested that this refers to Jesus being a lesser god). And it was very difficult for me not to see it any other way, then what I was taught.

That Hebrews passage is taken from Psalm 102, and it sure is not the Father speaking to the Son, in fact it's the opposite way around. There is no way that passage is the Father speaking to the Son. So, I don't care about man's doctrine, because I know, just as scripture prophesied, that we would inherit lies from our fathers. Even the Trinity was prophesied about. I know with certainty that Hebrews 1:10-12, is not speaking of the Son, all ya have to do is read Psalm 102, to know this. Yet I don't know how many still try to used that passage as proof Jesus is God. And I'm talking about well known commentators, and theologians, as well.

 

[razzelflabben]

This is my sentence: “Only God the Father could bring salvation to man, and I don't mean die for man (God cannot die, that's why He had to send the man Jesus Christ to die). I mean, it was Hisplan, His work, and His wisdom.”

why not quote the whole post in context...oh, wait, I did and you just pretend it wasn't what you said...

In my post, if you read carefully, you should understand, I am not making a case for whether God can die, or not. What is in parenthesis [a word, clause, or sentence inserted as an explanation or afterthought into a passage that is grammatically complete without it] was an after thought, of what I hold to be true, but I did not put forth any kind of argument as to prove this, because that is not what my post was about. Even though you claim I am, by saying “so nothing is evidenced by this long drawn out appeal to claim God cannot die.” I made no long drawn out appeal, to claim God cannot die. All I made was a brief comment.

lol honestly, most of what you write seems like gibberish to me because of how many times you seem to change your mind and how often it seems like you try to confuse the topic...but that is perceptions, so carry on.

I was referring to God the Father's plan, work, and wisdom. My post was about how could the Father be called the only saviour of: “Isaiah 43:10-12, is referring to God the Father as the only savior “beside me there is no saviour,” yet Jesus is also called our saviour. Nowhere in my post did I make an argument, try to prove, or make a case for God cannot die. It is something you are reading into it. I would also suggest you look up the meaning of straw man argument.

and yet, your own quote here shows you talking about God being able or not able to die...interesting isn't it, that what you claim isn't there, is evidenced to be there by your own hand...the rest, I will leave for another day.

 

[razzelflabben]

I posted Heb 1:3 in two different translations. Neither indicate anything other than Jesus being the representation of God, not God being the representation of God.

look at the translational issues that Thayer's presents, I listed them for you but you don't seem to understand what I cut and pasted, so give it a whirl, the easiest way to get there from my experience is through Strong's website.

 

[razzelflabben]

Now as to God dying. It is something I believe, because for God to say He is immortal and can't die, as a man can die, is meaningless, if all He has to do is put on human body and die, then it's not true that God can't die, because God can die, just as a man can die. He just has to become a man, put on a human body, and he becomes mortal, just as a man. And if it means, even though God can die in body, as a man, yet at the same time, still mean God is immortal, then for scripture to say, that man is mortal, only because his body dies, not his soul, is meaningless, for man is immortal as God is immortal, there is no difference. Again, if man is called mortal, because only his body dies, then God is also mortal, because His body died. Romans 1 ...Romans 1 ...Romans 1.

mortal and immortal, which is the point of Jesus being fully man and fully God, but then again, you have been told this enough and shown it enough that at this point you are just being stiff necked.

I know all about the doctrine you are putting forth, I use to believe the same, because that is what I was taught to believe, from the time I started going to church, as I was taught the Trinity. Though trinity is in the Bible, it's not what many would hope for. I know from experience, for myself, when trained in a certain doctrine, to understand a passages in a certain way, it is very, very difficult to see them any other way. Like, I don't know how many commentaries I've read that state Hebrews 1:10-12 is the Father speaking to, and about the Son (I think all of them, though I've read a couple that suggested that this refers to Jesus being a lesser god). And it was very difficult for me not to see it any other way, then what I was taught.

yeah...so now everyone in this world but you are just coming to the conclusion of trinity because that is what they have been taught, even if they put the time into study for themselves and even if only the HS taught them...cause that is how you function, you judge with an unrighteous judgment and call it holy. No thank you.

That Hebrews passage is taken from Psalm 102, and it sure is not the Father speaking to the Son, in fact it's the opposite way around. There is no way that passage is the Father speaking to the Son. So, I don't care about man's doctrine, because I know, just as scripture prophesied, that we would inherit lies from our fathers. Even the Trinity was prophesied about. I know with certainty that Hebrews 1:10-12, is not speaking of the Son, all ya have to do is read Psalm 102, to know this. Yet I don't know how many still try to used that passage as proof Jesus is God. And I'm talking about well known commentators, and theologians, as well.

not even a clue what you want to try to prove here....certainly nothing related to what has been said on this thread...

 

[donfish06]

No, He doesn't have to be God no more than Adam had to be God. The Father always exists before a Son and can and does exist without having a Son. A Son cannot exist without a Father. The Son isn't the Father and the Father isn't the Son

"I and my Father are ONE"

 

[justlookinla]

"I and my Father are ONE"

Not only that, but He and we are one....

Joh 17:11 And I am no longer in the world, but they are in the world, and I am coming to you. Holy Father, keep them in your name, which you have given me, that they may be one, even as we are one.

 

[str8_TALK]

"Fully God, fully man" ... this not only makes no sense, but is not an idea of scripture. (100% + 100% = 200%)

There is not one place in all of scripture that indicates that Jesus the Christ is also "fully God". This type of dichotomy exists only in philosophy. And because the Bible, not the traditions and tenets of men, is the authority here, we can know which philosophies are misleading.

There are several worldly philosophies that orthodoxy has embraced that inhibit its millions of followers from seeing the truth. One of the primary fallacies in orthodoxy, be it Roman Catholic or mainstream Christianity, is that all men are inherently immortal, when the Bible teaches that man is mortal and can die permanently in the lake of fire. God GIVES immortality to those who believe, Rom 6:23, John 3:16. The Bible teaches us what happens when we die the first temporary death prior to the respective resurrections (an entire other topic, but bears significance in the facts of Jesus Christ), Eccles. 3:19-20, Rev. 20:4-5. The breath (ruach) of God returns to him when we die and we know nothing until we are resurrected in one of the respective resurrections, Ecc. 9:5, I Cor. 15:20-21, 15:50-53. David has not ascended, Acts 2:34. Only Jesus Christ has been raised to immortality by God and ascended to heaven to this very moment, John 3:13, which is why he is called the "firstborn from the DEAD", and the "firstfruits of the resurrection". No one else is raised to permanent life (immortality) until the return of Christ at the last trump, at which time the dead in Christ and those alive, will be changed (not before). I Cor. 15:20-22, 50-53

(So, the dead in all the graves we see are just that ... DEAD. No one is invisibly floating around in heaven, and conversely, no one is alive in conscious burning torture either. The final judgment hasn't even happened yet! ... several other topics here to discuss in another section)

The whole significance of Jesus Christ is that he willingly left heaven's glory as a servant of God (messenger of the covenant for one, Malachi 3:1), and willingly became an embryo in a human womb to become flesh and blood ... because God requires the shedding of blood (life for life!) for the remission of sins, Lev. 17:11, Heb. 9:22. This same Christ did no sin while he walked the earth as flesh and blood like we are, I Pet. 2:21-23. So, when he died, he was not subject to the death penalty (permanent death, Rom. 6:23) because he committed no sin on which to be judged by God, thus, he gained victory over permanent death, and instead was given permanent life by the Lifegiver Himself, God the Father, the ONLY inherently immortal One, I Tim. 6:15-16.

This is the doctrine of Jesus Christ, that he came in flesh and blood, like we are, II John 7-9, and because of that quality, died like we do, but was not subject to the permanent death penalty because he did no sin. He did not stay dead, or corrupt in the ground, but God raised him to life the third day, and then he ascended to heaven 50 days later. Jesus is the chief servant of God and is always subject to God because he is not God, I Cor. 15:2-28. And because of Jesus' high and special status, God says he is our lord and master, our brother and teacher, our mediator between ourselves and God, and our savior who willingly laid down his life and became the propitiation for the sins of the whole world, effective to those who believe ... but he is not God. We are to love, honor, and follow Jesus. But he is not the God of the first commandment that we are to have no other gods before.

So, one false idea leads to another. If one does not understand what the Bible teaches happens at death, then one can be lead astray by the "immortal soul" philosophy that enables yet another totally false idea that the Jesus is also THE God because he had immortality to begin with, making it all just some sort of pantomime ... but that's orthodoxy! Too bad orthodoxy deviated from the truth of scripture long ago, something the writers of the New Testament warned about.

 

[str8_TALK]

Regarding I Tim 3:16 ... The accurate translation reads, "And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: which was manifest in the flesh,..." It was due to a scribe that the Greek word “OC” was changed into “theos.” The earliest manuscripts available, do not read God (theos) but “he”, “who” or “which.”

So, "godliness" was manifest in the flesh ... perfectly harmonious with all teachings regarding Jesus Christ as the Son of God, who came to do and speak as commanded by the Father, thereby representing God expressly.

Jesus said, “… the Father who sent me has Himself given me commandment what to say and what to speak.” John 12:49

Jesus said, "Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing; for whatever He does, that the Son does likewise." John 5:19

Jesus said, "When you have lifted up the Son of man, then you will know that I am he, and I do nothing on my own authority but speak thus as the Father taught me. And He who sent me is with me; He has not left me alone, for I always do what is pleasing to Him." John 8:28-29

Jesus said, "For I have not spoken on my own authority; the Father who sent me has Himself given me commandment what to say and what to speak. And I know that His commandment is eternal life. What I say, therefore, I say as the Father has bidden me." John 12:49-50

 

[7xlightray]

why not quote the whole post in context...oh, wait, I did and you just pretend it wasn't what you said... lol honestly, most of what you write seems like gibberish to me because of how many times you seem to change your mind and how often it seems like you try to confuse the topic...but that is perceptions, so carry on. and yet, your own quote here shows you talking about God being able or not able to die...interesting isn't it, that what you claim isn't there, is evidenced to be there by your own hand...the rest, I will leave for another day.

I'm pretty sure I know why I responded to djkms post.

No, the reason I wrote that post #412, was because djkms was saying because Jesus is called our savior, and in Isaiah 43:10-11 it says, “I, even I, am the LORD, And besides Me there is no savior.” that therefore Jesus is LORD.

And my point is, this speaks of the Father, and how the Father could be referred to as the only savior, and yet, Jesus is our savior. And that it is the same as how God is said to only have immortality, and yet, we know there are others that also have immortality.

This will be my last word with you, on what my intent was in writing that post #412. I don't need to repost it, it's there for all to read, and they can judge for themselves why I wrote it. And I know God knows why I wrote it, and that is all that matters to me.

 

[elbato]

I've had this debate with Jehovah witness's a few weeks ago regarding the Trinity.
I believe the Trinity is Bible based. But then I wondered does it really matter in relation to my salvation?
I'm not sure of the answer, I think in most part because as humans we cannot fully understand the concept of a three in one God. I have always compared it to the three states of water, liquid, solid and steam.

 

[justlookinla]

I've had this debate with Jehovah witness's a few weeks ago regarding the Trinity.
I believe the Trinity is Bible based. But then I wondered does it really matter in relation to my salvation?
I'm not sure of the answer, I think in most part because as humans we cannot fully understand the concept of a three in one God. I have always compared it to the three states of water, liquid, solid and steam.

I don't think it makes a difference to one's salvation. Probably most Christians would disagree with that though.

 

[AphroditeGoneAwry]

All that matters to your salvation is love of, and belief in, Jesus.

If the trinity mattered for salvation, it would be spelled out clearly in the Bible, which it is not.

 

[razzelflabben]

Not only that, but He and we are one...

Joh 17:11 And I am no longer in the world, but they are in the world, and I am coming to you. Holy Father, keep them in your name, which you have given me, that they may be one, even as we are one.

"Fully God, fully man" ... this not only makes no sense, but is not an idea of scripture. (100% + 100% = 200%)

so now, since God doesn't think and do math like man does, it isn't possible? What happened to Is 55:8, did you cut it from your Bible? But as I said, some here are trying to see with the flesh what only the spirit can see...creates quite a problems

There is not one place in all of scripture that indicates that Jesus the Christ is also "fully God". This type of dichotomy exists only in philosophy. And because the Bible, not the traditions and tenets of men, is the authority here, we can know which philosophies are misleading.

your right, there isn't one scripture, there are several places in scripture where Jesus is said to be fully God (not with exact wording, that is such a lame excuse to dismiss things clearly stated in scripture) ....but the none trinitarians just pretend they aren't there, so no need pointing them out to you.

There are several worldly philosophies that orthodoxy has embraced that inhibit its millions of followers from seeing the truth. One of the primary fallacies in orthodoxy, be it Roman Catholic or mainstream Christianity, is that all men are inherently immortal, when the Bible teaches that man is mortal and can die permanently in the lake of fire. God GIVES immortality to those who believe, Rom 6:23, John 3:16. The Bible teaches us what happens when we die the first temporary death prior to the respective resurrections (an entire other topic, but bears significance in the facts of Jesus Christ), Eccles. 3:19-20, Rev. 20:4-5. The breath (ruach) of God returns to him when we die and we know nothing until we are resurrected in one of the respective resurrections, Ecc. 9:5, I Cor. 15:20-21, 15:50-53. David has not ascended, Acts 2:34. Only Jesus Christ has been raised to immortality by God and ascended to heaven to this very moment, John 3:13, which is why he is called the "firstborn from the DEAD", and the "firstfruits of the resurrection". No one else is raised to permanent life (immortality) until the return of Christ at the last trump, at which time the dead in Christ and those alive, will be changed (not before). I Cor. 15:20-22, 50-53

for someone who claims the authority of scripture, you rely an awful lot on the teachings of man to try to make your case.

(So, the dead in all the graves we see are just that ... DEAD. No one is invisibly floating around in heaven, and conversely, no one is alive in conscious burning torture either. The final judgment hasn't even happened yet! ... several other topics here to discuss in another section)

now your confusing physical death with spiritual death, but I'm guessing it's just you playing dumb so your point sounds wise to you...

The whole significance of Jesus Christ is that he willingly left heaven's glory as a servant of God (messenger of the covenant for one, Malachi 3:1), and willingly became an embryo in a human womb to become flesh and blood ... because God requires the shedding of blood (life for life!) for the remission of sins, Lev. 17:11, Heb. 9:22. This same Christ did no sin while he walked the earth as flesh and blood like we are, I Pet. 2:21-23. So, when he died, he was not subject to the death penalty (permanent death, Rom. 6:23) because he committed no sin on which to be judged by God, thus, he gained victory over permanent death, and instead was given permanent life by the Lifegiver Himself, God the Father, the ONLY inherently immortal One, I Tim. 6:15-16.

if you would be willing to look at scripture, I have a whole list of passages that show the humility of Christ, as in all that He gave up to come to be our Savior and some of them are pretty pointed about the divine nature of Christ...But since you won't even address the passages that directly state Jesus is God, I'm betting on posting the list as being a waste of my time.

This is the doctrine of Jesus Christ, that he came in flesh and blood, like we are, II John 7-9, and because of that quality, died like we do, but was not subject to the permanent death penalty because he did no sin. He did not stay dead, or corrupt in the ground, but God raised him to life the third day, and then he ascended to heaven 50 days later. Jesus is the chief servant of God and is always subject to God because he is not God, I Cor. 15:2-28. And because of Jesus' high and special status, God says he is our lord and master, our brother and teacher, our mediator between ourselves and God, and our savior who willingly laid down his life and became the propitiation for the sins of the whole world, effective to those who believe ... but he is not God. We are to love, honor, and follow Jesus. But he is not the God of the first commandment that we are to have no other gods before.

well, you got part of it right...that is progress...now just go the rest of the way...'

So, one false idea leads to another. If one does not understand what the Bible teaches happens at death, then one can be lead astray by the "immortal soul" philosophy that enables yet another totally false idea that the Jesus is also THE God because he had immortality to begin with, making it all just some sort of pantomime ... but that's orthodoxy! Too bad orthodoxy deviated from the truth of scripture long ago, something the writers of the New Testament warned about.

I find it fascinating that you fail to listen to what is being said then claim we are falling into bad orthodoxy when you don't even know what is being said or taught....I mean, how could you know if it is good or bad teaching when you have no clue what is being taught?

 

[razzelflabben]

Regarding I Tim 3:16 ... The accurate translation reads, "And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: which was manifest in the flesh,..." It was due to a scribe that the Greek word “OC” was changed into “theos.” The earliest manuscripts available, do not read God (theos) but “he”, “who” or “which.”

So, "godliness" was manifest in the flesh ... perfectly harmonious with all teachings regarding Jesus Christ as the Son of God, who came to do and speak as commanded by the Father, thereby representing God expressly.

I actually did a very deep study of this passage not long ago and I would suggest before you try to teach it, you do the same, cause you are quite frankly wrong about what you are suggesting the meaning here is. At least as far as how you are presenting it....

Jesus said, “… the Father who sent me has Himself given me commandment what to say and what to speak.” John 12:49

Jesus said, "Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing; for whatever He does, that the Son does likewise." John 5:19

Jesus said, "When you have lifted up the Son of man, then you will know that I am he, and I do nothing on my own authority but speak thus as the Father taught me. And He who sent me is with me; He has not left me alone, for I always do what is pleasing to Him." John 8:28-29

Jesus said, "For I have not spoken on my own authority; the Father who sent me has Himself given me commandment what to say and what to speak. And I know that His commandment is eternal life. What I say, therefore, I say as the Father has bidden me." John 12:49-50

all this was addressed...in fact, I asked a question of all this as to you alls teaching and not a single one of you was brave enough to even try to answer it, which makes you alls comments smell like regurgitated teaching and nothing more.

 

[razzelflabben]

I'm pretty sure I know why I responded to djkms post.

No, the reason I wrote that post #412, was because djkms was saying because Jesus is called our savior, and in Isaiah 43:10-11 it says, “I, even I, am the LORD, And besides Me there is no savior.” that therefore Jesus is LORD.

And my point is, this speaks of the Father, and how the Father could be referred to as the only savior, and yet, Jesus is our savior. And that it is the same as how God is said to only have immortality, and yet, we know there are others that also have immortality.

This will be my last word with you, on what my intent was in writing that post #412. I don't need to repost it, it's there for all to read, and they can judge for themselves why I wrote it. And I know God knows why I wrote it, and that is all that matters to me.

huh? you said nothing at all that was directed at my post which you quoted as if you were responding to me....