There is no Hell!

[GuardianShua]

This is a piture of the statue Jupiter giving a Trinitarian sign.


The statue was renamed Peter. http://www.remnantofgod.org/peter-jupiter.jpg I repeat, This Pagan statue of Jupiter was renamed Peter. Jupiter is giving the Trinitarian sign.

 

[heavensprings]

This is a piture of the statue Jupiter giving a Trinitarian sign.


The statue was renamed Peter. http://www.remnantofgod.org/peter-jupiter.jpg I repeat, This Pagan statue of Jupiter was renamed Peter. Jupiter is giving the Trinitarian sign.

Aside from the link and statue, if you don't believe in the trinity, what do you believe?

Do you believe that the Father, Jesus Christ and Holy Spirit are all God? If not, why?

 

[GuardianShua]

Aside from the link and statue, if you don't believe in the trinity, what do you believe?

Do you believe that the Father, Jesus Christ and Holy Spirit are all God? If not, why?

God our Father is also called Holy Spirit. His personal name is Yahwah, which translated into English means: Life Began. His other personal name is Elohiym, which translated into English means: God of The Living. Yahshua is a created being, whom lived before this creation of the Universe.

 

[heavensprings]

God our Father is also called Holy Spirit. His personal name is Yahwah, which translated into English means: Life Began. His other personal name is Elohiym, which translated into English means: God of The Living. Yahshua is a created being, whom lived before this creation of the Universe.

Isn't Elohiym plural? More than one?

I see the Holy Spirit as the Spirit of the Father and Jesus as the Word of the Father.

 

[GuardianShua]

Isn't Elohiym plural? More than one?

I see the Holy Spirit as the Spirit of the Father and Jesus as the Word of the Father.

It's plural because of the word "Living." Thats what makes it plural. Yahshua's name title "The word" is parabolic.

 

[GuardianShua]

Yahshua is called "The Word" because what ever he says is to be viewed as if Yahwah had said it Himself.

 

[Tavita]

It's plural because of the word "Living." Thats what makes it plural. Yahshua's name title "The word" is parabolic.

Well, from the definitions below, it's not plural because of the word 'Living'. Chayim means life.

The Living God

Elohim Chayim.
The Living God (Deut. 5:26; Jos. 3:10; 1 Sam. 17:26, 36; 2 Ki. 19:4, 16; Hos. 1:10; Matt. 16:16; 26:63; Rom. 9:26; 2 Co. 3:3; 6:16; 1 Tim. 3:15; 4:10; 6:17; Heb. 3:12; 9:14; 10:31; 12:22; Rev. 7:2).


God

Elohim. [The basic form]
God; gods. The plural form of El, meaning “Strong One.” The Name Elohim occurs 2,570 times in the Tanakh. See Isa. 54:5; Jer. 32:27; Gen. 1:1; Isa. 45:18; Deut. 5:23; etc.


Yes, Yeshua's name 'the Word' is parabolic, but it also means God:

Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

 

[FreeinChrist]

God our Father is also called Holy Spirit. His personal name is Yahwah, which translated into English means: Life Began. His other personal name is Elohiym, which translated into English means: God of The Living. Yahshua is a created being, whom lived before this creation of the Universe.

great. A belief (a heretical one) of the jehovah Witnesses is being promoted here.

 

[GuardianShua]

great. A belief (a heretical one) of the jehovah Witnesses is being promoted here.

Jehovah Witnesses do not use the name Yahwah, which is derived from the more ancient Hebrew and Aramaic.

 

[GuardianShua]

Well, from the definitions below, it's not plural because of the word 'Living'. Chayim means life.

The Living God

Elohim Chayim.
The Living God (Deut. 5:26; Jos. 3:10; 1 Sam. 17:26, 36; 2 Ki. 19:4, 16; Hos. 1:10; Matt. 16:16; 26:63; Rom. 9:26; 2 Co. 3:3; 6:16; 1 Tim. 3:15; 4:10; 6:17; Heb. 3:12; 9:14; 10:31; 12:22; Rev. 7:2).


God

Elohim. [The basic form]
God; gods. The plural form of El, meaning “Strong One.” The Name Elohim occurs 2,570 times in the Tanakh. See Isa. 54:5; Jer. 32:27; Gen. 1:1; Isa. 45:18; Deut. 5:23; etc.


Yes, Yeshua's name 'the Word' is parabolic, but it also means God:

Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Your explanation is fine for the more modern Hebrew. Im going by the oldest Hebrew and Aramaic.

 

[GuardianShua]

great. A belief (a heretical one) of the jehovah Witnesses is being promoted here.

Thats what I have been told by the Mods. You may want to delete that before they see it.

 

[Nadiine]

God our Father is also called Holy Spirit. His personal name is Yahwah, which translated into English means: Life Began. His other personal name is Elohiym, which translated into English means: God of The Living. Yahshua is a created being, whom lived before this creation of the Universe.

great. A belief (a heretical one) of the jehovah Witnesses is being promoted here.

Ya, now that Erwin opened things up, we have some people coming around that promote that Jesus is 'CREATED' rather than God.

Lord help us all.

 

[Tavita]

Your explanation is fine for the more modern Hebrew. Im going by the oldest Hebrew and Aramaic.

I'll have to go check that out then. I find it hard to believe that Ancient and Modern Hebrew are soooo different. But I will keep an open mind.

 

[Tavita]

What is so wrong with you people that you can't discuss anything with anyone without charges of heresy? You may not like it and you obviously don't but these forums ARE open now.

Use your God given gifts to witness and lead people to truth without condemnation. Is this how you normally witness to unbelievers?

Good grief! :o

 

[Nadiine]

What is so wrong with you people that you can't discuss anything with anyone without charges of heresy? You may not like it and you obviously don't but these forums ARE open now.

Use your God given gifts to witness and lead people to truth without condemnation. Is this how you normally witness to unbelievers?

Good grief!

It's teaching that Jesus is a created being (ie pure human and not Eternal) - not GOD who took on flesh.

I have equal right (and responsiblity) to bring a correction to such a statement/teaching. it IS a big deal too; it's what defines who God is and which God we serve.
It's a central doctrine to Christianity - well worth the mention.
That's why - good grief.

What's next? "who cares if someone says Jesus is just ' a god' ?

 

[Tavita]

It's teaching that Jesus is a created being (ie pure human and not Eternal) - not GOD who took on flesh.

I have equal right (and responsiblity) to bring a correction to such a statement/teaching. it IS a big deal too; it's what defines who God is and which God we serve.
It's a central doctrine to Christianity - well worth the mention.
That's why - good grief.

What's next? "who cares if someone says Jesus is just ' a god' ?

And I'll say it again.. good grief!

If you feel it your 'job' to rebuke, then I would give you a rebuke as well, sister.

If you think that others who don't believe Jesus is God means they are not a christian then you are not to 'rebuke'.. rebuking is for brothers and sisters in the faith.

I hope you're not one of those who stands at the door and 'rebukes' the JW's when they come around. I hope you either say you don't want to talk or you show them the truth with gentleness and patience.

When you try and 'correct', why not show where they err by using the scriptures instead of just railing. Railing does absolutely NOTHING to change a person's mind. All you are doing is putting an obstacle in their minds to learning truth, and sets the stage for quarreling and fighting. Which all lacks of the fruit of the Spirit.

 

[Nadiine]

And I'll say it again.. good grief!

If you feel it your 'job' to rebuke, then I would give you a rebuke as well, sister.

I don't care if you rebuke me. You rebuke me for agreeing with another member that calling Jesus "created" is wrong? So be it. I'll GLADLY take it for something so serious.

If you think that others who don't believe Jesus is God means they are not a christian then you are not to 'rebuke'.. rebuking is for brothers and sisters in the faith.

I hope you're not one of those who stands at the door and 'rebukes' the JW's when they come around. I hope you either say you don't want to talk or you show them the truth with gentleness and patience.

I didn't give a "rebuke" to Michael tho, did I? I agreed with another post that it was heretical teaching. How is that directly rebuking him?
I guess if anyone disagrees with ANY doctrines or beliefs anyone carries here, you automatically coin that "rebuke"?

Also, HE claims he's a Christian; he puts himself 'INSIDE THE CHURCH' by proclamation - he isn't just dissassociating himself from God as an "unbeliever" (those are "outside the church" as per 1 Cor. 5).
It's his claims of being a Christian that are the issue. He's put himself inside the church so yes I could use rebuke rightfully with him if I did it directly and still be in compliance w/ Pauls guidelines on judging.

And what I said in my post wasn't "HOSTILE" or crude, it was a general statement about the doctrinal problem itself; God forbid if somebody doesn't tack on the warm fuzzies to appease people I guess?. who knows.

When you try and 'correct', why not show where they err by using the scriptures instead of just railing. Railing does absolutely NOTHING to change a person's mind. All you are doing is putting an obstacle in their minds to learning truth, and sets the stage for quarreling and fighting. Which all lacks of the fruit of the Spirit

I was AGREEING with another person's post about it being false - ask her to provide her proofs if you want to be fair -- you picked on me rather than her who brought the original correction and claim.

I've already been on 2 threads just recently on the Trinity, so I know how lengthy it is to provide all the biblical supports and go back and forth - it would also take this thread off topic to do so.
That's why.

 

[Tavita]

I don't care if you rebuke me. You rebuke me for agreeing with another member that calling Jesus "created" is wrong? So be it. I'll GLADLY take it for something so serious.


I didn't give a "rebuke" to Michael tho, did I? I agreed with another post that it was heretical teaching. How is that directly rebuking him?
I guess if anyone disagrees with ANY doctrines or beliefs anyone carries here, you automatically coin that "rebuke"?

Also, HE claims he's a Christian; he puts himself 'INSIDE THE CHURCH' by proclamation - he isn't just dissassociating himself from God as an "unbeliever" (those are "outside the church" as per 1 Cor. 5).
It's his claims of being a Christian that are the issue. He's put himself inside the church so yes I could use rebuke rightfully with him if I did it directly and still be in compliance w/ Pauls guidelines on judging.

And what I said in my post wasn't "HOSTILE" or crude, it was a general statement about the doctrinal problem itself; God forbid if somebody doesn't tack on the warm fuzzies to appease people I guess?. who knows.



I was AGREEING with another person's post about it being false - ask her to provide her proofs if you want to be fair -- you picked on me rather than her who brought the original correction and claim.

I've already been on 2 threads just recently on the Trinity, so I know how lengthy it is to provide all the biblical supports and go back and forth - it would also take this thread off topic to do so.
That's why.

To agree with someone is to agree to what they're saying.

So, because you've been in two other threads concerning trinity, you can't do it anymore.

Okay, whatever.

Just be good to some, and brush others out of the way with some condemnation thrown in... good on ya.

I hope our mod is happy now.

 

[Nadiine]

To agree with someone is to agree to what they're saying.

So, because you've been in two other threads concerning trinity, you can't do it anymore.

Why not point your challenge to the original poster rather than pick me out of the crowd here???
I can agree without having to go into a full blown dissertation on God's being I would think.

Okay, whatever.

Just be good to some, and brush others out of the way with some condemnation thrown in... good on ya.

I hope our mod is happy now.

It sounds to me like you have the issue here, not me. Being mad at me personally isn't any reason to go after me for agreeing with somoene else that JESUS ISN'T CREATED...
You made this into a separate issue of rebuke (of which I'm not even guilty) then want to pass the blame onto me for the "condemnation" & upsetting a mod?
Sorry, that doesn't work - I'll accept blame where it's due but not in this case.

(and even if I were "guilty" of this, I'd gladly take it becuz the doctrine is important enough to take a firm stand on - and I'd do just that).
I would hope that people would recognize that not injecting some coddly fuzzy words into a statement doesn't make it rude, hateful or meanspirited; the NT is packed with firm statements they all made.

If I didn't LOVE people (esp. the ones that can be misled into serious error), I wouldn't waste my time here at all - I wouldn't CARE what they believed becuz it wasn't important.

 

[Tavita]

Why not point your challenge to the original poster rather than pick me out of the crowd here???
I can agree without having to go into a full blown dissertation on God's being I would think.



It sounds to me like you have the issue here, not me. Being mad at me personally isn't any reason to go after me for agreeing with somoene else that JESUS ISN'T CREATED...
You made this into a separate issue of rebuke (of which I'm not even guilty) then want to pass the blame onto me for the "condemnation" & upsetting a mod?
Sorry, that doesn't work - I'll accept blame where it's due but not in this case.

(and even if I were "guilty" of this, I'd gladly take it becuz the doctrine is important enough to take a firm stand on - and I'd do just that).
I would hope that people would recognize that not injecting some coddly fuzzy words into a statement doesn't make it rude, hateful or meanspirited; the NT is packed with firm statements they all made.

If I didn't LOVE people (esp. the ones that can be misled into serious error), I wouldn't waste my time here at all - I wouldn't CARE what they believed becuz it wasn't important.

You and our resident mod made it into an issue of rebuke. The rules say that this area is open to anyone and their beliefs.
It's not a matter of what you and I want, these are the rules.

The NT was written under the inspiration of Holy Spirit. When Paul or anyone rebuked or corrected it was done with much prayer, consideration and intelligence, and done by the inspiration of Holy Spirit.

This is the last I will post on this, just so it won't get into another flame war.