Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Spin Julie, spinnnnnn!
There should be an animated gif of that scene where she's singing, "the hills are alive with the sound of muuuuusic...." , and then spins right off the edge of the mountain behind her. (Waiting for retort from someone saying, so a Christian wants to see an animated death gif featuring Julie Andrews? In three, two one....)
“Don't use words too big for the subject. Don't say infinitely when you mean very; otherwise you'll have no word left when you want to talk about something really infinite.” C.S Lewis.
Unfortunately, it also seems to happen in threads that revolve around Exegisis that the charge of heresy inevitably enters in. Using big words is sometimes a method of at once appearing as an authority who can rightly make the charge based on what is presumed that person's knowledge of the so called heresies they accuse a poster of. It's meant to minimalize their targeted posters remarks and influence others to ignore what that individual accuser deems is unworthy of respect. And should therein be something that, labeled by them as heresy, is the central focus of future posts that will then devalue further that targeted posters prior remarks. Essentially , the accuser intends to shut someone out of the discussion with their accusation of heresy.
Unfortunately, that's a tactic that is employed in topics like those that encompass Exegesis, Soterology, and other scriptural subjects and very often by those cannot objectively discuss the topic without throwing daggers at those who do not hold their own views on the issue.
Typically that method is cause to say the accuser has voluntarily lost the argument by conceding they cannot discuss without branding opponent views as heresy.
It isn't heresy to disagree with the individual. It's common sense at times.
Nothing I have said is heresy. In fact it can be noted by the objective reader that it is all supported by scripture. Which is linked or already known by the Christian Bible reader.
That should be a given, yes. However, when false accusations arise that's something else.Everyone is entitled to an opinion. The post is what it is
Thank you.Yeah I dont get the feeling its being too honest at all. That was a very perceptive post thanks for posting this.
God bless you
If my labeling that post as modelism was false then we should be able to distinguish the difference between what that post presented and modelism. As someone who has studied heresies has already confirmed my guess am not sure that proving I made a false accusation would be a fruitful endeavor.That should be a given, yes. However, when false accusations arise that's something else.
That dos jot explain at all, Berean777, how you have provided a Trinity, one God, and not three separate ones. Also, you need to explore more the claim that the Son became fully human. True, that was claimed in c by teh church fathers; but they killed this with a million qualifiers, such as arguing that Christ consider of two separate natures.
Sorry, but I'm afraid I could say the same to you.
Before I either get dizzy from going round in circles, or give up with this thread completely; it seems that your position, from posts on this and other threads, could be summarised as follows, (correct me if I'm wrong):
1. Jesus was created by God the Father. The Father made him to be a god, but he was created and is lower than the Father.
2. The Father and Jesus - who is actually the Spirit mentioned in Genesis 1:2 - created the universe.
3. Jesus was born of Mary and conceived by the Holy Spirit. He is God; so there are two gods. But Jesus is not literally one with his Father, because there is only one, true God.
4. The stars, which are actually angels, were created on day 4.
5. Angels are spirits. They are from God so they are holy, and they help and minister to people, so there are many Holy spirits, and each person can have their own.
6 The trinity exists but it is an unequal trinity.
Someone else wrote a thread in this forum saying that the trinity cannot be true because it is difficult to understand and something that is "convoluted" cannot be from God. With respect, it is a lot easier to understand the trinity than your teaching, which is, at times, contradictory, not to mention unscriptural.
And by the way, "Scriptural" does not mean that you find a verse, take it out of context, interpret it a certain way and then say, "it's ok; it's in the Bible." Otherwise we could say that committing suicide is a scriptural teaching; "then Judas went and hanged himself", Matthew 27:5. "Go and do likewise", Luke 10:37. "What you have to do, do quickly", John 13:27. Do you see? I have just given Scriptural teaching for taking your own life!
(In case anyone is in any doubt, by the way, I do NOT believe this and do NOT recommend treating Scripture this way - I did this only to make a point.)
If a teaching is scriptural, it means that it is taught, repeated, proclaimed and held to in Scripture - not just once or twice in selected verses, but often.
For example, I said that it is a Jewish belief, taught in the OT, that there is only one God. There is plenty of evidence for this - not just the Shema in Deuteronomy 6:4, but the fact that the nation was punished again and again for rejecting the God who saved them and appeared to them at Sinai, and going after false gods. God's servants were told to tear down the altars belonging to these false gods and urged the people to repent; Elijah gave a brilliant demonstration of the power of God on Mt Carmel. The Jews have always believed this; Jesus did as well, because he was a Jew.
When it comes to a doctrine like "God created Jesus", you may have found a verse, or two, that could be interpreted in that way; but does that fit with the rest of Scripture; God's revelation of himself to us? I don't believe so, for the reasons, and Scriptures, I have quoted. The mainstream churches don't believe so either; anyone who presented with the beliefs that you hold, and said they wanted to become a member of that church, would be enrolled in Bible classes or very quickly given some 1-1 tuition. If anyone approached me on the streets with those views, I would almost certainly feel they belonged to a cult and, if I didn't feel able or led to argue, I would ignore them.
I am certain that you are very sincere in what you believe and maintain that it is has a scriptural basis; but you have to understand that very, very few others share your view - and there is a VERY good reason for that.
The flaming that goes on here and elsewhere on this site id largely due to the fact that many posters did not have a solid adult education in theology and do not know how to go about a theological debate. I don't mean to put people down, but that is the truth.
I have never said there is a trinity, there isn't. The holy spirit is not one being, but many holy spirits. So there is not "big three" as the doctrine of the trinity teaches. There is only the Father, then the Son, then holy angels who are holy spirits, and then the elect.
Angels are not literally stars, but angels are indeed associated figuratively with stars.
Yep, it gets curiousier and curiousier.....Did you say that there is not only one Holy Spirit? Hmmmmmm........oh dear!
No idea where you to that idea from.Berean 777, the fact is that the church fathers and creeds stated that Christ has tow wholly separate natures. If so, then, as I said, both God and man are part of some larger whole which transcends either one of them. Also, God did not become fully human, as the God part is described as totally incapable of emotion and experiencing suffering.
There is one Spirit as Jesus said.......
God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth." (John 4:24)
Now @cgaviria you said on previous posts that sons of God are demi-gods and in another post #789 you say "holy angels are holy spirits".
I cannot help but draw the conclusion that you are somehow advocating the worship of angels, since you have unwittingly blurred the lines of John 4:24, where Jesus says Spirit not Spirits.
Why would you say in post #789....
The holy spirit is not one being, but many holy spirits.
Again, Berean777, that is precisely the problem with the doctrine of the two natures. The Son, God, never does experience the human, as teh divine is incapable of emotion and suffering, as I just said. That's one of the reasons why teh Trinity has been such a major problem.
Hosea 2:19-23
19 I will make you my wife forever, showing you righteousness and justice, unfailing love and compassion.
20I will be faithful to you and make you mine, and you will finally know me as the LORD.
21“In that day I will respond,” declares the Lord—“I will respond to the skies, and they will respond to the earth;
22and the earth will respond to the grain,
the new wine and the olive oil, and they will respond to Jezreel.
23I will plant her for myself in the land;
I will show my love to the one I called ‘Not my loved one. I will say to those called ‘Not my people, ’ ‘You are my people’; and they will say, ‘You are my God.’ ”
Isaiah 63:9-10
9In all their affliction he was afflicted, and the angel of his presence saved them: in his love and in his pity he redeemed them; and he bare them, and carried them all the days of old.
10But they rebelled, and vexed his holy Spirit: therefore he was turned to be their enemy, and he fought against them.
Exodus 20;5
You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me,
Deu 6:15
for the LORD your God, who is among you, is a jealous God and his anger will burn against you, and he will destroy you from the face of the land.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?