I have a question that remains unanswered:

[Wrangler]

• I asked you to produce one of those threats and you didn't reply.
• I don't deny that it happens. I think I said that already.
• Do two wrongs then make a right?
• Are you really going with the "He started it" defense?
• Presumption of superiority? Not here, Friend.
• Is it possible you could be suffering from an inferiority or martyr complex?

Attack in the form of questions. Given that you are not denying trinitarians threaten others with eternal damnation, there is no reason for me to provide evidence.

To ask if 2 wrongs make a right, implies 2 wrongs - which remain unstated by you. See how you are? Speaking in implication then denying what you are implying.

I cannot invoke a He started it" defense if I’m on the attack. Make up your mind how you want to Appeal to Diversion and Ad Hominem and we’ll go from there.

 

[BarneyFife]

Attack in the form of questions. Given that you are not denying trinitarians threaten others with eternal damnation, there is no reason for me to provide evidence.

To ask if 2 wrongs make a right, implies 2 wrongs - which remain unstated by you. See how you are? Speaking in implication then denying what you are implying.

I cannot invoke a He started it" defense if I’m on the attack. Make up your mind how you want to Appeal to Diversion and Ad Hominem and we’ll go from there.

I'd like to visit your planet someday.

 

[bbyrd009]

“Mormon” theology doesn’t incorporate Greek/Roman/Classical philosophy the way Creedal theology does. For example, both believe God is all powerful, but an LDS Christian doesn’t usually go about phrasing things as “God is omnipotent”, so that can fumble up communication. Yes, God is all-powerful, all present, all knowing etc. And also all/perfectly loving, just, and merciful (huge points in LDS Christian theology). His goodness & glory don’t change. He is everlasting and without end.

Some of the terms on your list (immaterial, impassable, immutable) conceptually lean heavily into Greek/Roman/Classical philosophy, and hence get harder to discuss with just scripture. Usually it requires a detour into “Hey let’s have a philosophy class”, which while I love that, vast majority of folks don’t.

how ya been, jd? been missing your posts :)

 

[Jane_Doe22]

how ya been, jd? been missing your posts :)

Family and work stuff has been majorly depleting my time and energy.

 

[Aunty Jane]

There were no "some" to include myself in when I replied to your name-calling. If you're going to be crafty, you should try to keep track of the postings and their order. Unfortunately, I "include" myself in what you call "Christendom."

I used to be part of Christendom, but their teachings drove me out.....none of which I could find in the Bible.....and their complete hypocrisy was nothing short of nauseating......but if you choose to belong, then that is not my problem....it is entirely between you and your god....whoever he might prove to be. We choose our god for our own reasons.....and he knows them better than we do.

You missed the point. I wasn't quoting a verse as much as I was asking a real question, so in your effort to answer in the context of Acts 16 your Gospel presentation fell pretty flat to my mind.

Don’t we first have to establish what it means to “believe”? Unless we get that right, we can be fooled into believing whatever appeals to us. What are we being “saved” from after all?

It seems to consist of a pat answer followed by a warning to be on guard, lest our faith be found to be the same as that of demons. Concise, but completely devoid of the elements of repentance, confession, regeneration, abiding in assurance, seeking Christ with all of our hearts to find rest, I could go on.

Just following the teachings of the Master....he laid groundwork for further discussion. It was a starting point....I was hoping for some acknowledgment of those basic elements first......it was something to build on.
Do we “believe” like the demons, or is our belief based on something deeper. I asked because the kind of “belief” I found in the “hellfire” obsessed Christians I have encountered over the years begs the question.

I'm just not a quick-and-dirty Gospel kinda guy, myself.

Really? “Quick and dirty” doesn’t apply to you then....?

I think people ought to know a fair amount about what they can expect out of a life of eternity with Jesus. I wonder how you'll spin, dodge, or deflect this one.

Me too, but it should be based on scripture not on imagination.

What is your vision of eternity with Jesus?

I believe a Gospel presentation should include as many and as much of the following as is practically possible:

• 
  
  • God's Love for Man
  • The Sinner's Need of Christ
  • Repentance
  • Confession
  • Consecration
  • Faith and Acceptance
  • The Test of Discipleship
  • Growing Up Into Christ
  • The Work and the Life
  • A Knowledge of God
  • The Privilege of Prayer
  • What to Do with Doubt
  • Rejoicing in the Lord

As do I....but first things first.

What does "get saved" mean? And how does "the 'context' of James 2:19" just pop in out of nowhere? Isn't that kind of the opposite of context?

What are we being “saved” from? Is it not God’s anger when it is expressed through the final showdown, when Christ separates the “sheep” from the “goats” and deals with all who have denied and falsely represented him? The “sheep” and the “goats” include the “wheat and the weeds” do they not?

Whether you like it or not, you present yourself as an expert on what the scriptures teach, and that people who do not agree with you are on a dangerous path. Deny it all you want--a simple review of your posting history reveals the truth.

Did you review my posting history......? So you know that scripture is my main “weapon”...”the sword of the spirit” that cuts through the fantasy and into the reality of what it really means to be a Christian.
It is powerful.
Hebrews 4:12....
“For the word of God is alive and exerts power and is sharper than any two-edged sword and pierces even to the dividing of soul and spirit, and of joints from the marrow, and is able to discern thoughts and intentions of the heart.”

Imagine! Every time we read scripture, our heart is telling God all about our thoughts and intentions...even the ones we do not acknowledge.

It is human nature to refuse to see unfortunate traits in oneself.

Yep...none of us are immune....but confidence has to be a trait of those who know what they believe and why they believe it. After all, this is a truth worth giving your life for. Do you not have the same kind of confidence in what you believe? If you do, then nothing anyone says will unravel you or make you feel unsure of yourself. There is a fine line that allows confidence in your God and his word, without it being self-assured arrogance.

If you are one of God’s own, he will draw you to his truth... correct? (John 6:44) So wherever we find ourselves, it will be either where God put us, or where he allowed us to remain. He is separating all humanity as we speak....at the end there are only “sheep” and “goats”....so at this point in time, we are pretty much established in our mindset, unless God sees something in us worth saving at this late hour. Is sincerity enough? Was it enough for Saul of Tarsus? Or did God need to give him an opportunity to readjust his thinking and redirect his zeal?

You're a new member here and barging in and assuming authority is no way to endear yourself to folks. If that is of no concern to you, then have at it.

What has my being a new member got to do with anything? I have been posting on Bible discussion forums for as long as they have existed. Barging in? I beg your pardon... I wasn’t aware that you old timers owned the place.

I am not here to endear myself to anyone, but I am not here to make enemies either. I am just here to tell the truth as I understand it as a Christian of strong faith. I have been in Christendom and out of it....my posts are my own opinions and you can like them or lump them.

Do Christians expect opposition from other Christians? Answer that by asking if Jesus expected opposition from his fellow Jews? He preached to them from their own scripture and they hated him for it....Jesus said that our opposers would hate us too, (John 15:18-21) and for all the same reasons......who wants to hear an inconvenient truth?

 

[Abaxvahl]

There a some points of disagreement / non-applicable. most notably the Athanasian Creed’s statement about the substance of God. Forgive me for not quoting it- I’m on my phone.

I got it, there are four statements about the substance of God in that Creed which I do confess, the first on the Trinity:

"We worship one God in the Trinity and the Trinity in unity. Neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the substance."

The second on the Incarnation:

"As God, He was begotten of the substance of the Father before time; as man, He was born in time of the substance of His Mother. He is perfect God; and He is perfect man, with a rational soul and human flesh. He is equal to the Father in His divinity, but inferior to the Father in His humanity. Although He is God and man, He is not two, but one Christ. And He is one, not because His divinity was changed into flesh, but because His humanity was assumed unto God. He is one, not by a mingling of substances, but by unity of person."

Where would y'all disagree?

 

[Jane_Doe22]

I got it, there are four statements about the substance of God in that Creed which I do confess, the first on the Trinity:

"We worship one God in the Trinity and the Trinity in unity. Neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the substance."

The second on the Incarnation:

"As God, He was begotten of the substance of the Father before time; as man, He was born in time of the substance of His Mother. He is perfect God; and He is perfect man, with a rational soul and human flesh. He is equal to the Father in His divinity, but inferior to the Father in His humanity. Although He is God and man, He is not two, but one Christ. And He is one, not because His divinity was changed into flesh, but because His humanity was assumed unto God. He is one, not by a mingling of substances, but by unity of person."

Where would y'all disagree?

This passage... what is this "substance" you are talking about? (Obviously not "you" personally). What scripture verses can plainly tell me of "substance"? What do you mean here?

To be honest: I don't find scriptures that support this. I don't find reason to support this. And on the rare occasion I ask a Creedal Christian who is studied enough to actually know this passage, I get conflicting responses. And many times have been told "it doesn't matter what you think or read- just accept and believe it else you're going to be damned". All in all, it's not a statement/sentiment that I can ratify. That the Father, Son, and Spirit are 3 persons in 1 God -- yes, totally behind that. But not this part of substance.

 

[Abaxvahl]

This passage... what is this "substance" you are talking about? (Obviously not "you" personally). What scripture verses can plainly tell me of "substance"? What do you mean here?

To be honest: I don't find scriptures that support this. I don't find reason to support this. And on the rare occasion I ask a Creedal Christian who is studied enough to actually know this passage, I get conflicting responses. And many times have been told "it doesn't matter what you think or read- just accept and believe it else you're going to be damned". All in all, it's not a statement/sentiment that I can ratify. That the Father, Son, and Spirit are 3 persons in 1 God -- yes, totally behind that. But not this part of substance.

I see. "Substance" here I think is just equivalent to essence/nature, what a thing is, which is just related to the universal in it AFAIK. So there is a human essence which makes us distinct from everything else and all things have an essence/substance. Although the concept of a thing having a "whatness" by which we can know what things are I find to be self-evident (for we speak of "human nature" or we call many distinct chairs "a chair" signifying that they are the same thing/have the same whatness) I see Scriptural support for it by the fact that Scripture names many distinct things as one thing. For instance waters of the Nile, the waters of the pool in John, the waters of baptism, the waters of the Jordan, the waters of the seas, are all designated by the same word, and their substance/essence/nature is "water" despite the specific things named being distinct. The same with humans, Peter, James, and John are distinct persons, so is Ahab, Jezebel, David, Solomon, and many others, yet Scripture calls all of these "men" or "man" or "humanity" which is their essence/substance. The substance/essence of God means the same thing, what God is.

So the first simply means that they have the same nature, same essence, same whatness. Although you probably are getting at something else I missed as I think you already know this.

 

[Jane_Doe22]

I see. "Substance" here I think is just equivalent to essence/nature, what a thing is, which is just related to the universal in it AFAIK. So there is a human essence which makes us distinct from everything else and all things have an essence/substance. Although the concept of a thing having a "whatness" by which we can know what things are I find to be self-evident (for we speak of "human nature" or we call many distinct chairs "a chair" signifying that they are the same thing/have the same whatness) I see Scriptural support for it by the fact that Scripture names many distinct things as one thing. For instance waters of the Nile, the waters of the pool in John, the waters of baptism, the waters of the Jordan, the waters of the seas, are all designated by the same word, and their substance/essence/nature is "water" despite the specific things named being distinct. The same with humans, Peter, James, and John are distinct persons, so is Ahab, Jezebel, David, Solomon, and many others, yet Scripture calls all of these "men" or "man" or "humanity" which is their essence/substance. The substance/essence of God means the same thing, what God is.

So the first simply means that they have the same nature, same essence, same whatness. Although you probably are getting at something else as I think you already know this.

I am familiar with such a framework. But i find it has roots in literature such as Plato's "The Cave".

If believing this is so central (especially if one views it as essential to salvation), why is it not plainly in scripture?

 

[David in NJ]

Attack in the form of questions. Given that you are not denying trinitarians threaten others with eternal damnation, there is no reason for me to provide evidence.

To ask if 2 wrongs make a right, implies 2 wrongs - which remain unstated by you. See how you are? Speaking in implication then denying what you are implying.

I cannot invoke a He started it" defense if I’m on the attack. Make up your mind how you want to Appeal to Diversion and Ad Hominem and we’ll go from there.

God defends His Truth when it comes under attack as well, dear friend, His Truth sets us Free.
If you feel you are being attacked - make sure you are on the Right Hand of God and not the left.

 

[Abaxvahl]

I am familiar with such a framework. But i find it has roots in literature such as Plato's "The Cave".

If believing this is so central (especially if one views it as essential to salvation), why is it not plainly in scripture?

I view it as essential to salvation in that everyone who is saved will acknowledge it, although not everyone in the way of salvation necessarily knows it. The concept of the virtuous pagan and that non-Christians or otherwise may be saved shows this. But it is truly revealed by God to me even in Scripture.

I genuinely do see it plainly in there when I read it, for the Son it is easy for if "the Word was God" but it also calls the Word distinct from God (innumerable times, "God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ..."), and the Son does all, truly all, the Father does, then it must reduce to Him being God, for one thing the Father most certainly does is give being to all things, which is an operation one can only do if they have the divine nature. Every time I read over the Gospel according to St. John I see that clear as day, it is a thing of necessity or else the Word does not really mean He does all He sees the Father doing or the other option is going down some contradictory road (like Modalism). And of course all know of Acts 5 and the Holy Spirit, but that there have one name "in the name of" not "in the names of..." must mean the Holy Spirit shares the substance, for all that is said to be "in the name of God" (which the One God is the Father) must be also said of Him, if they truly have only one name (which is identified with who/what a person is in the Psalter for instance, "the name of Yahweh is a strong tower" and so on). In addition to that I add John 16 which also indicates a personal agency, and the Psalms along with Job "you send the Spirit and they are created" or "the Spirit gave me life," yet "Yahweh gives life" says Samuel (note I think the name "Yahweh" is not the name of the Father but of the Godhead).

I see no tighter resolution of all this possible (that either does not break a verse, merely say "it could mean differently," or devolves into some odd invention or a contradiction), even then combined with the works ("if you don't believe the words believe the words") that Jesus does such as creating out of the dust new things, and to that added history with how broad the doctrine is (and such is a means of discerning what is the Apostolic Faith and what isn't, for they were sent into the whole world, so if an error popped up in one part but not the others one can see it's an innovation, but if all the places the Apostles established teach the same it is sure they taught it).

To me it is very plain in Scripture to see it that is a reason I believe it. But different people see differently from the same text, and that is no fault of Scripture but fault in us, for it is a law of the world that any sufficiently complex text will have a multitude of interpretations that are inconsistent with one another but consistent with the letters of the text, which requires an appeal to another standard.

 

[Jane_Doe22]

I view it as essential to salvation in that everyone who is saved will acknowledge it, although not everyone in the way of salvation necessarily knows it. The concept of the virtuous pagan and that non-Christians or otherwise may be saved shows this. But it is truly revealed by God to me even in Scripture.

I genuinely do see it plainly in there when I read it, for the Son it is easy for if "the Word was God" but it also calls the Word distinct from God (innumerable times, "God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ..."), and the Son does all, truly all, the Father does, then it must reduce to Him being God, for one thing the Father most certainly does is give being to all things, which is an operation one can only do if they have the divine nature. Every time I read over the Gospel according to St. John I see that clear as day, it is a thing of necessity or else the Word does not really mean He does all He sees the Father doing or the other option is going down some contradictory road (like Modalism). And of course all know of Acts 5 and the Holy Spirit, but that there have one name "in the name of" not "in the names of..." must mean the Holy Spirit shares the substance, for all that is said to be "in the name of God" (which the One God is the Father) must be also said of Him, if they truly have only one name (which is identified with who/what a person is in the Psalter for instance, "the name of Yahweh is a strong tower" and so on). In addition to that I add John 16 which also indicates a personal agency, and the Psalms along with Job "you send the Spirit and they are created" or "the Spirit gave me life," yet "Yahweh gives life" says Samuel (note I think the name "Yahweh" is not the name of the Father but of the Godhead).

I see no tighter resolution of all this possible (that either does not break a verse, merely say "it could mean differently," or devolves into some odd invention or a contradiction), even then combined with the works ("if you don't believe the words believe the words") that Jesus does such as creating out of the dust new things, and to that added history with how broad the doctrine is (and such is a means of discerning what is the Apostolic Faith and what isn't, for they were sent into the whole world, so if an error popped up in one part but not the others one can see it's an innovation, but if all the places the Apostles established teach the same it is sure they taught it).

To me it is very plain in Scripture to see it that is a reason I believe it. But different people see differently from the same text, and that is no fault of Scripture but fault in us, for it is a law of the world that any sufficiently complex text will have a multitude of interpretations that are inconsistent with one another but consistent with the letters of the text, which requires an appeal to another standard.

@Abaxvahl, I majorly appreciate your very thoughtful comments throughs this thread. They are a joy to read.

I do see/understand things differently. I am debating the best place/way to explain this difference, and honestly not sure the best place to start.

 

[amigo de christo]

Rejoice in the Lord always. And again I say rejoice.

Thats right my dear sister . Its now two thirty five in the uk . I bet my dear sister is sleeping peacefully .
You are loved and prayed for my dear sister . Now let all that has breath praise the glorious Lord .

 

[Aunty Jane]

Lady Jane - Where did God first communicate with man?
Answer: In the Garden
How do we know this?
Answer: Genesis
Who told us that more then one Person created us - God did.
How do we know?
Answer: Genesis
Who are the THREE that created ALL Things? "The Let Us make man in Our Image according to Our Likeness."
Answer: Father, Son and Holy Spirit
How do we know?
Answer: God said so in Genesis.
How do we know?
Answer: He confirmed it in Exodus 3:14-15
Is that it???
Answer: No, He continued building from Genesis through Revelation of the One Eternal God who is Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
How do we know???
Answer: Luke 3:22 And the Holy Spirit descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased.

There is no way that your mind and heart is open to anything...not even the plain scripture that you have seen with your own eyes. What you are shown completely undoes what you believe, and yet denial is all I see.
What is the point of trying to wet a duck?

Go in peace.....we will all find out sooner or later whether we measured up or not.

Matthew 7:21-23...
“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ 23 Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’" (NIV)

To whom is Jesus speaking here? When does this take place? If they acknowledge Jesus as their "Lord", then they are thinking that they are Christ's disciples.....doing all manner of things "in his name"....and yet what is his response to their excuses? When he says "I never knew you"....that means he has never recognized these ones as his own...NEVER.....he then calls them "evildoers"! or in other versions "workers of lawlessness".....how then are professed Christians guilty of such things when they are obviously not aware of it? What laws are they breaking that makes Jesus denounce them as "evildoers" or "lawbreakers"? Whose laws are they breaking? And what is it that they are not doing that Jesus said they should?

 

[Jane_Doe22]

@Abaxvahl, I majorly appreciate your very thoughtful comments throughs this thread. They are a joy to read.

I do see/understand things differently. I am debating the best place/way to explain this difference, and honestly not sure the best place to start.

The Father, Son, and Spirit are three different persons. One, two, three. They are one God through unity: sharing that same perfect Goodness, Will, Justice, Mercy, etc. That is the core of divinity. You can't listen to the Spirit and not be listening the Son. You can't honor the Son without also honoring the Father. You can't love the Father without also loving the Sprit. They are one, and united together exponentially more than us bickering some mortals can comprehend. But none of that talks about metaphysical substance.

 

[David in NJ]

There is no way that your mind and heart is open to anything...not even the plain scripture that you have seen with your own eyes. What you are shown completely undoes what you believe, and yet denial is all I see.
What is the point of trying to wet a duck?

Go in peace.....we will all find out sooner or later whether we measured up or not.

Matthew 7:21-23...
“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ 23 Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’" (NIV)

To whom is Jesus speaking here? When does this take place? If they acknowledge Jesus as their "Lord", then they are thinking that they are Christ's disciples.....doing all manner of things "in his name"....and yet what is his response to their excuses? When he says "I never knew you"....that means he has never recognized these ones as his own...NEVER.....he then calls them "evildoers"! or in other versions "workers of lawlessness".....how then are professed Christians guilty of such things when they are obviously not aware of it? What laws are they breaking that makes Jesus denounce them as "evildoers" or "lawbreakers"? Whose laws are they breaking? And what is it that they are not doing that Jesus said they should?

You keep saying things like this but you never show any evidence of such - but you ramble on.
i said this before, the amount of scripture you post is irrelevent if it does not address the substance we are discussing.
Begin in Genesis and give an account of who the "Let Us make man in Our Image according to Our Likeness"

If you are unable to show evidence who These are then you really have nothing to say over me.

 

[Abaxvahl]

The Father, Son, and Spirit are three different persons. One, two, three. They are one God through unity: sharing that same perfect Goodness, Will, Justice, Mercy, etc. That is the core of divinity. You can't listen to the Spirit and not be listening the Son. You can't honor the Son without also honoring the Father. You can't love the Father without also loving the Sprit. They are one, and united together exponentially more than us bickering some mortals can comprehend. But none of that talks about metaphysical substance.

I see, so it seems like a form of Social Trinitarianism. I do have question about it though, for instance what are these persons? Why is the Father called Father and what is His relationship to the Son? Is one prior to the other in some way or how does this work? None of this speaks of a metaphysical substance that is true but I don't know how it is escaped if things have natures we can know (or know of in the case of God). I also do not see how the Father-Son relationship is explained, or what it means for the Spirit to "proceed" from the Father.

 

[David in NJ]

The Father, Son, and Spirit are three different persons. One, two, three. They are one God through unity: sharing that same perfect Goodness, Will, Justice, Mercy, etc. That is the core of divinity. You can't listen to the Spirit and not be listening the Son. You can't honor the Son without also honoring the Father. You can't love the Father without also loving the Sprit. They are one, and united together exponentially more than us bickering some mortals can comprehend. But none of that talks about metaphysical substance.

Beautiful my Sister - thank you

 

[Jane_Doe22]

I see, so it seems like a form of Social Trinitarianism. I do have question about it though, for instance what are these persons? Why is the Father called Father and what is His relationship to the Son? Is one prior to the other in some way or how does this work? None of this speaks of a metaphysical substance that is true but I don't know how it is escaped if things have natures we can know (or know of in the case of God). I also do not see how the Father-Son relationship is explained, or what it means for the Spirit to "proceed" from the Father.

The Father is the Son's Father-- "Abba". Spiritually, speaking that is. Both have always existed.

 

[Truth7t7]

Sadly so.

You say this:
Really? Then you do this:

... you use a NASB Bible to claim that my KJV version of this scripture was worded wrong???

You've annihilated your credibility in this thread alone.
I don't have to want it to say anything and I certainly don't have to read it again. It clearly says what it says. Sorry to burst your delusional bubble.

" ... to the ONLY wise God our Savior ..."
Jude 25 KJV

You can throw your NASB in the trash. The KJV Bible has been around since 1611. Your absolute nonsense NASB version wasn't released until 1963. Very likely by the Catholic Church which was in full swing in its efforts to destroy all protestant doctrines by that time and to twist all scripture to align with its completely heretical anti-christian false doctrines with all manner of NEW versions of Bibles.

Your credibility is in shambles.

Forget everything you think you know, pick up a KJV and start from scratch.

Throw the NASB in the trash?

You forgot the NIV, ESV, and all the rest of the counterfeits

King James Version, Gods Words To The English Speaking World, 410 Years And Going Strong!