The Problem with 2 Peter 1:1

[Aunty Jane]

A man (or woman, in your case) sees what he wants to see, obviously. Yes, I'm well aware that you will try to turn that right back around to me, and I'll gracefully accept it; it is God, after all, Who makes the blind to see.

Yes, very true both ways.....Jesus will decide when that day comes, but ask yourself.....if there is no trinity expressly stated (and what you have provided as your ‘evidence’ proves it) then twisting the meaning of the scriptures to infer what neither the Father or the Son ever directly stated, will be viewed by them in what way?

If the one who sowed the “weeds” of Jesus parable is the devil, and he has swayed the “many” to adopt blasphemous teachings that have ‘spread like leaven through the whole lump’ what do you anticipate will be Christ’s reaction to something like that? Blasphemy carried the death penalty.....and since “few” accept that it is true, and God is the one who reveals his truth to those with the right attitude of heart and mind, (John 6:65) does it worry trinitarians to be among the “many”?

At the “harvest time”, in separating the “wheat from the weeds” Jesus sends his “reapers” to gather both at the same time. Jesus has clearly identified both. Then the “weeds” are separated from the “wheat” and burned in the fire, and only then are the “wheat” gathered into the storehouse. In that parable “the devil” sowed a counterfeit form of “Christianity” and all its teachings are based on lies....the trinity is only one of them, but it is the most reprehensible, because it has altered the very nature of God and the relationship of himself with his “firstborn” son. It has also made a “god” out of the holy spirit to place three “gods” into one being whilst claiming to worship only one God.
The ancient Jews never knew such a god (Deuteronomy 6:4) because he was the product of the foretold apostasy.

2 Thessalonians 2:1-4; 6-12.....
“Now we ask you, brothers and sisters, regarding the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, that you not be quickly shaken from your composure or be disturbed either by a spirit, or a message, or a letter as if from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come. No one is to deceive you in any way! For it will not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, who opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God. . . .And you know what restrains him now, so that he will be revealed in his time. For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only He who now restrains will do so until He is removed. Then that lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will eliminate with the breath of His mouth and bring to an end by the appearance of His coming; that is, the one whose coming is in accord with the activity of Satan, with all power and false signs and wonders, and with all the deception of wickedness for those who perish, because they did not accept the love of the truth so as to be saved. For this reason God will send upon them a deluding influence so that they will believe what is false, in order that they all may be judged who did not believe the truth, but took pleasure in wickedness. (NASB)

The teachings of Christendom are many and varied as they cannot agree on very much at all except the most deceitful lies that the devil planted.....the trinity, immortality of the soul and hellfire. In these three false teachings, IMO we see the devil’s most successful deception. He has created a delusion that appears to be truth.....and according to Paul’s words, the devil was being restrained even while the apostles were still alive, but God empowered them to keep him at bay until the last book of the Christian scriptures was penned. The last apostle, John died at the end of the first century. After that the restraint was removed and “Christianity” was on an irreparable path to apostasy.....something that Christendom denies ever happened. They swallowed the lies and have been swallowing them ever since.

It wasn’t until “the time of the end” that God was going to clean up his worship. (Daniel 12:4, 9-10) But how many would submit to the cleansing? According to Jesus and his prophetic words, the answer is “few”. How many responded to Jesus’ preaching? Compared to the number of Jews who heard him....again “few”....but a precious few.

So, we are at an impasse......one that only Yahweh’s appointed judge can decide. (John 5:22)

Some of us are going to hear “well done good and faithful servant”.....and others are going to hear a shocking rejection because they ‘took pleasure in” what was “wicked” or “unrighteous”....not in their own eyes, but in God’s eyes.

So may we all educate ourselves prayerfully with the truth, and face that day with no misplaced confidence, as is foretold for the “many”. (Matthew 7:13-14; 21-23)

 

[PinSeeker]

...ask yourself.....if there is no trinity...

No one should ever ask themselves anything after having presumed a Scriptural absurdity? Except to just reject any "answer" deduced out of hand because the presumption is a Scriptural absurdity, of course.

...we are at an impasse...

Yes, but we both knew where this was going.

Some of us are going to hear “well done good and faithful servant”...

Rest assured that whatever you think of... well, those not under the influence of... we'll just say the Watchtower for now, I, along with a multitude of others, would redirect right back at those who are.

So may we all educate ourselves prayerfully with the truth, and face that day with no misplaced confidence, as is foretold for the “many”. (Matthew 7:13-14; 21-23)

Well, agreed, in principle, but what you say, however unintentional, seems to make clear a staunch advocacy of leaning on one's own understanding, which of course is a Scriptural no-no. No, but understanding ~ that too is a work of the Holy Spirit, Who, like the wind, blows where He wishes (according to the will of the Father, of course), and you hear His sound, but you do not know where He comes from or where He goes. It is God Who makes the blind to see, unstops the ears of the deaf, makes the lame man leap like a deer, and causes the tongue of the mute sing for joy.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[Aunty Jane]

No one should ever ask themselves anything after having presumed a Scriptural absurdity? Except to just reject any "answer" deduced out of hand because the presumption is a Scriptural absurdity, of course.

So which is the scriptural absurdity? Something that has its roots in a foretold apostasy...or a simple truth that the Bible supports....the existence of a single all powerful entity that was revealed to Israel as YHWH? (Deuteronomy 6:4)

Yes, but we both knew where this was going.

You are ignoring a lot of scriptural evidence to protect your belief. But presenting the evidence here on a public forum allows others to examine both sides of this issue.....that is important because you can’t run away from the truth by ignoring it. You cannot be selective about the truth. It is what it is.

It is God Who makes the blind to see, unstops the ears of the deaf, makes the lame man leap like a deer, and causes the tongue of the mute sing for joy.

Yes indeed.....won’t it be amazing to see how Jesus’ decisions about how we have conducted ourselves as his disciples, will alter our future forever.....?

 

[PinSeeker]

So which is the scriptural absurdity?

That Jehovah is not triune. That is the absurdity, and the apostasy ~ "God is not God."

or a simple truth that the Bible supports....the existence of a single all powerful entity that was revealed to Israel as YHWH? (Deuteronomy 6:4)

I most wholeheartedly agree that YHVH is a single all powerful entity. Hey, facetiously speaking ~ yet indicative of a much greater truth ~ if I root for one football team, I root for every single player on that football team. :)

You are ignoring a lot of scriptural evidence to protect your belief.

And I most certainly say the same of you, Aunty Jane, as I said previously. Ignoring... or rewriting, as it were. Under the influence of antichrists that have come before, and in the same spirit. Yes, Aunty Jane, right back at you.

...you can’t run away from the truth by ignoring it.

Agreed.

You cannot be selective about the truth.

Well, you can, in this life, as is so evident in this and other threads. But only for so long.

It is what it is.

Agreed.

Yes indeed.....won’t it be amazing to see how Jesus’ decisions about how we have conducted ourselves as his disciples, will alter our future forever.....?

Sure. I'm eagerly anticipating that great day.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[Aunty Jane]

Sure. I'm eagerly anticipating that great day.

As am I and my brotherhood....a minority when compared to Christendom's massive empire.
Why did Jesus say that "few" are on the road to life, do you think? Does that support a majority view?

If I was searching for truth now, having taken all of Jesus words and the words of his apostles as he taught them his Father's truth, I would be looking for a peace-loving, hated minority who stick strictly to the Bible and would rather die themselves than take the life of even an enemy. (John 15:18-21; Matthew 5:43-44) By those two scriptures alone, I believe I can rule out the majority of Christendom's churches from qualifying as "Christian" from the Bible's definition of what that means. Disciples of Christ imitate their Master.

The other big omission by Christendom's churches is engaging in 'the great commission'.....they always seem to be 'Missing In Action' on that score. (Matthew 28:19-20) Preaching about God's kingdom and making disciples was not just a recommendation...it was a direct command....one that Jesus said he would back. And he said that this work would be carried out right till "the end" of the present world system, which we believe is not far away. (Matthew 24:14)

How did the first Christians preach? It wasn't something based on a chance encounter....or something that took place in a foreign land....the disciples went searching, "house to house" in their local neighborhoods among their fellow Jews. They were to search for "worthy" ones, as Jesus did. (Acts 5:42; Acts 20:20) What did Jesus tell them to do?

Matthew 10:11-15...
"11 And whatever city or village you enter, inquire who is worthy in it, and stay at his house until you leave that city. 12 As you enter the house, give it your greeting. 13 If the house is worthy, see that your blessing of peace comes upon it. But if it is not worthy, take back your blessing of peace. 14 And whoever does not receive you nor listen to your words, as you leave that house or city, shake the dust off your feet. 15 Truly I say to you, it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment, than for that city."

Why was this preaching work necessary? Because everyone was to be given an opportunity to hear the Christian message and make a decision about it. Those who responded and wanted to know more were educated by their guests....these gained the peace that was bestowed upon them, but those who refused to listen and turned their visitors away without the customary foot washing, had their peace taken away. Shaking the dust off, was a black mark against them.

The one thing that is clearly demonstrable about Christ's true disciples is that they follow through on all of his instructions.....not just the convenient things, or those that agree with their patriotism.

 

[GEN2REV]

As am I and my brotherhood....a minority when compared to Christendom's massive empire.

Wouldn't you be part of a sisterhood, Aunty?

 

[Aunty Jane]

Wouldn't you be part of a sisterhood, Aunty?

Since the terms "brother and sister" refer to spiritual relationships in the Bible, the original word "brethren" referred to both males and females.....Just fYI.

 

[GEN2REV]

Since the terms "brother and sister" refer to spiritual relationships in the Bible, the original word "brethren" referred to both males and females.....Just fYI.

I had no intention of getting into this particular line of debate, but, as usual, you couldn't be more wrong.

The earliest churches were very male-centric and the woman wasn't even allowed to speak in religious meetings. All women were to always take a back seat to the men and the marriage commandments speak clearly of the man being the head of the woman. In the Bible's perspective, women were created to assist man in all his needs. After Eve's sin in the garden, women were held in much lower regard, not only by men, but by God as well.

The Bible says they could redeem themselves through faithful obedience, service and childbirth.

"... Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety."
1 Timothy 2:14-15

Look at the stories where men's own daughters, or concubines, were offered up to groups of men who were looking for sex.

Regardless, your comment that the original definition of 'brethren' referred to men and women is false.

Just a little Biblical Truth for ya today.

God bless. :)

 

[PinSeeker]

...Christendom's massive empire...

God is certainly saving a remnant unto Himself, and this remnant will eventually number as the dust of the earth (Genesis 13:16), as the stars of heaven (Genesis 15:4, 22:17), as the sand that is on the seashore (Genesis 22:17), as He promised Abram/Abraham, and Jacob (Israel) in Genesis 32:12)... "which cannot be numbered for multitude." And we see the coming fulfillment of this in Revelation 7 and 14. Yes, you guys don't believe that either, which is unfortunate. I mean, taking God at His Word is pretty important, too.

The one thing that is clearly demonstrable about Christ's true disciples is that they follow through on all of his instructions.....not just the convenient things, or those that agree with their patriotism.

Sure. Agreed. But, yet again, right back atcha. Except I probably wouldn't use the term "patriotism." The term I'd use is a good bit more... salty... than that. Christ Jesus ~ and then Paul after Him ~ encouraged saltiness, you know. :) But of course not prideful saltiness... :)

Grace and peace to you.

 

[Aunty Jane]

I had no intention of getting into this particular line of debate, but, as usual, you couldn't be more wrong.

Am I speaking to a misogynist?

The earliest churches were very male-centric and the woman wasn't even allowed to speak in religious meetings. All women were to always take a back seat to the men and the marriage commandments speak clearly of the man being the head of the woman. In the Bible's perspective, women were created to assist man in all his needs. After Eve's sin in the garden, women were held in much lower regard, not only by men, but by God as well.

The Bible says they could redeem themselves through faithful obedience, service and childbirth.

Oh good grief!...

Let’s go back to the beginning and see how the Bible describes the role of women.
Starting with Eve...how did God describe her? As a “compliment” of her husband. She was not created to serve him, but to compliment him as her other half. The two were perfectly balanced as a couple, each providing what the other lacked.....a perfectly balanced arrangement in which to raise children.

After the entry of sin into the human environment...everything changed because God had intervened to set matters straight....not in the short term but in the long term. The fulfilment of the first Bible prophesy (Genesis 3:15) would take thousands of earth years to come to its conclusion.

As far as Israel was concerned, according to Jehovah’s laws given through Moses, wives were to be “cherished.” (Deuteronomy 13:6) The dignity of wives was to be respected in sexual matters, and no woman was to be sexually abused. (Leviticus 18:8-19)
Men and women were equal before the Law if they were found guilty of adultery, incest, or bestiality. (Leviticus 18:6,23; Leviticus 20:10-12)
The fifth commandment required that equal honor be given to the father and the mother. (Exodus 20:12)

So the role of women was never to be downgraded as if they were somehow inferior to men. But particularly after the destruction of Jerusalem in 607 B.C.E., there developed the religion of Judaism, which was based more on oral traditions than on the written Law of Jehovah. From the fourth century B.C.E. on, Judaism absorbed a lot of Greek philosophy. By and large the Greek philosophers paid little attention to the rights of women, so there occurred a corresponding drop in the status of women within Judaism. From the third century B.C.E., women began to be separated from men in the Jewish synagogues and were discouraged from reading the Torah (Law of Moses). Education was principally for boys. So the role of women was downgraded and stunted by men, not God.

Those women spoken about in the Christian times, particularly by the apostle Paul were “fellow workers” in supporting the apostles materially and in spreading the good news of the kingdom.
When Jesus walked the earth, he restored the dignity of women by reflecting Jehovah’s attitude to women. In spite of the disdain given to women by the Jewish Rabbis, as the time for the coming of the Messiah approached, some godly women were being considered for a very important role, namely Elizabeth (mother of John the Baptist) and Mary, who was a very devout Jewish woman chosen with her betrothed to become parents to Jesus, who at the age of 30, became the Christ.

Women played an important role in original Christianity......
(Romans 16:1,3,6,12,13,15) Never were they classed as second class citizens by Jesus or his apostles.
“Brethren” meant both men and women. The headship arrangement was more about important role playing rather than superiority. The complementary roles of men and women fulfilled God’s purpose for them. Humans were the ones who messed that up.

"... Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety."
1 Timothy 2:14-15

Eve was deceived by the devil and transgressed God’s command.....but Adam was not deceived. He was the one who sinned deliberately and threw the whole human race under the bus. It was not through the woman that all are sentenced to death, it was through “one man”. (Romans 5:12)

Look at the stories where men's own daughters, or concubines, were offered up to groups of men who were looking for sex.

And look at the background to the situations where that was done....Lot’s virgin daughters were offered to a sexually depraved mob in the city of Sodom as a distraction. Lot’s intentions were noble...he was willing to sacrifice his daughters to save God’s messengers, his angelic visitors. Yet he must have been mindful that this mob were after homosexual sex, so it wasn’t really putting them at great risk because heterosexual sex was no longer gratifying to them.....they wanted the men who had come into Lot’s house......this is why God was going to destroy them. Dig a little deeper than your seemingly superficial assessment of these situations. Sacrificing one life for the good of others is the whole reason why Jesus came to give his life.

Regardless, your comment that the original definition of 'brethren' referred to men and women is false.

Just a little Biblical Truth for ya today.

Really? If that is all you have to offer, then I suggest you do some more research....your ‘knowledge’ appears to be quite superficial IMO.

 

[GEN2REV]

Am I speaking to a misogynist?


Oh good grief!...

Let’s go back to the beginning and see how the Bible describes the role of women.
Starting with Eve...how did God describe her? As a “compliment” of her husband. She was not created to serve him, but to compliment him as her other half. The two were perfectly balanced as a couple, each providing what the other lacked.....a perfectly balanced arrangement in which to raise children.

After the entry of sin into the human environment...everything changed because God had intervened to set matters straight....not in the short term but in the long term. The fulfilment of the first Bible prophesy (Genesis 3:15) would take thousands of earth years to come to its conclusion.

As far as Israel was concerned, according to Jehovah’s laws given through Moses, wives were to be “cherished.” (Deuteronomy 13:6) The dignity of wives was to be respected in sexual matters, and no woman was to be sexually abused. (Leviticus 18:8-19)
Men and women were equal before the Law if they were found guilty of adultery, incest, or bestiality. (Leviticus 18:6,23; Leviticus 20:10-12)
The fifth commandment required that equal honor be given to the father and the mother. (Exodus 20:12)

So the role of women was never to be downgraded as if they were somehow inferior to men. But particularly after the destruction of Jerusalem in 607 B.C.E., there developed the religion of Judaism, which was based more on oral traditions than on the written Law of Jehovah. From the fourth century B.C.E. on, Judaism absorbed a lot of Greek philosophy. By and large the Greek philosophers paid little attention to the rights of women, so there occurred a corresponding drop in the status of women within Judaism. From the third century B.C.E., women began to be separated from men in the Jewish synagogues and were discouraged from reading the Torah (Law of Moses). Education was principally for boys. So the role of women was downgraded and stunted by men, not God.

Those women spoken about in the Christian times, particularly by the apostle Paul were “fellow workers” in supporting the apostles materially and in spreading the good news of the kingdom.
When Jesus walked the earth, he restored the dignity of women by reflecting Jehovah’s attitude to women. In spite of the disdain given to women by the Jewish Rabbis, as the time for the coming of the Messiah approached, some godly women were being considered for a very important role, namely Elizabeth (mother of John the Baptist) and Mary, who was a very devout Jewish woman chosen with her betrothed to become parents to Jesus, who at the age of 30, became the Christ.

Women played an important role in original Christianity......
(Romans 16:1,3,6,12,13,15) Never were they classed as second class citizens by Jesus or his apostles.
“Brethren” meant both men and women. The headship arrangement was more about important role playing rather than superiority. The complementary roles of men and women fulfilled God’s purpose for them. Humans were the ones who messed that up.



Eve was deceived by the devil and transgressed God’s command.....but Adam was not deceived. He was the one who sinned deliberately and threw the whole human race under the bus. It was not through the woman that all are sentenced to death, it was through “one man”. (Romans 5:12)


And look at the background to the situations where that was done....Lot’s virgin daughters were offered to a sexually depraved mob in the city of Sodom as a distraction. Lot’s intentions were noble...he was willing to sacrifice his daughters to save God’s messengers, his angelic visitors. Yet he must have been mindful that this mob were after homosexual sex, so it wasn’t really putting them at great risk because heterosexual sex was no longer gratifying to them.....they wanted the men who had come into Lot’s house......this is why God was going to destroy them. Dig a little deeper than your seemingly superficial assessment of these situations. Sacrificing one life for the good of others is the whole reason why Jesus came to give his life.


Really? If that is all you have to offer, then I suggest you do some more research....your ‘knowledge’ appears to be quite superficial IMO.

You can rage against God's Word all you like. You won't win.

Nobody ever has.

 

[Aunty Jane]

You can rage against God's Word all you like. You won't win.

Nobody ever has.

You addressed nothing.....how is that winning?

LOL....I assure you someone will win one day....you can count on it.

 

[Aunty Jane]

God is certainly saving a remnant unto Himself, and this remnant will eventually number as the dust of the earth (Genesis 13:16), as the stars of heaven (Genesis 15:4, 22:17), as the sand that is on the seashore (Genesis 22:17), as He promised Abram/Abraham, and Jacob (Israel) in Genesis 32:12)... "which cannot be numbered for multitude." And we see the coming fulfillment of this in Revelation 7 and 14. Yes, you guys don't believe that either, which is unfortunate. I mean, taking God at His Word is pretty important, too.

Hang on....a "remnant" is what? Please look it up.
How are you associating this saved "remnant" with the disobedient sons of Israel? (Isaiah 10:22)
Your quoting these scriptures indicates that you really have no idea what or who the "remnant" is. (Romans 9:27-29; Romans 11:5)

Revelation 7 is one of my favorite chapters.....it has nothing to do with natural Israel, who were cast off by Jehovah as the serial covenant breakers that they always were. He kept them in existence all through their disobedience, (even though at times he wanted to "exterminate" them) because of his promise to Abraham, but once he had fulfilled his promise to produce their Messiah, and they committed themselves to his murder, Jesus declared their fate.....
Matthew 23....
“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because you shut up the Kingdom of the heavens before men; for you yourselves do not go in, neither do you permit those on their way in to go in. . . .“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because you travel over sea and dry land to make one proselyte, and when he becomes one, you make him a subject for Ge·henʹna twice as much so as yourselves. . . . .“Serpents, offspring of vipers, how will you flee from the judgment of Ge·henʹna? . . . Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the killer of the prophets and stoner of those sent to her—how often I wanted to gather your children together the way a hen gathers her chicks under her wings! But you did not want it. 38 Look! Your house is abandoned to you. 39 For I say to you, you will by no means see me from now until you say, ‘Blessed is the one who comes in Jehovah’s name!’”

Natural Israel was replaced by 'spiritual' Israel.....the ones Paul called "the Israel of God" (Galatians 6:16) which was made up of both Jewish and Gentile disciples of Jesus Christ.
Just being born "Jewish" doesn't make you part of 'spiritual' Israel. (Matthew 3:7-10; Romans 2:28-29)

Sure. Agreed. But, yet again, right back atcha. Except I probably wouldn't use the term "patriotism." The term I'd use is a good bit more... salty... than that. Christ Jesus ~ and then Paul after Him ~ encouraged saltiness, you know. :) But of course not prideful saltiness... :)

Well now, that is a bit vague...either Jesus supports the bloodshed of the nations' wars in which his claimed disciples fight....or he doesn't.

What is "salty" about Jesus simple admonition to "love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you"? (Matthew 5:43-44)

How do the words of 1 John 4:20-21 fail to ring true to the patriots who claim to have God on their side?....
"If anyone says, “I love God,” and yet is hating his brother, he is a liar. For the one who does not love his brother, whom he has seen, cannot love God, whom he has not seen. 21 And we have this commandment from him, that whoever loves God must also love his brother."

This is the most disgusting thing I have ever seen.....blessing the weapons that will be used on their fellow Catholics.....as well as innocent women and children....
Whose side is God taking?

 

[EloyCraft]

One part of God subject to another part?

Doesn't it make more sense if you think of it as two persons ? Not parts of God?

 

[PinSeeker]

Hang on....a "remnant" is what? Please look it up.

LOL!

How are you associating this saved "remnant" with the disobedient sons of Israel? (Isaiah 10:22)

I'm not. But, as I'm sure you know, not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel (Romans 9:6).

Your quoting these scriptures indicates that you really have no idea what or who the "remnant" is. (Romans 9:27-29; Romans 11:5)

LOL! Well, judging from your citations from Romans 9 and 11, it seems we are absolutely agreed that this remnant is the same group as Paul calls God's elect.

Revelation 7 is one of my favorite chapters...

Yes, I'm sure it is; Jehovah's Witnesses like to focus on Revelation 7. And that's not a bad thing, except that they misapply it to suit their preferred narrative. But yes, Revelation 7 is certainly a glorious passage.

...it has nothing to do with natural Israel...

Agreed. It has to do with God's Israel, which consists only of God's elect, but people of every tongue, tribe, and nation. And ultimately an uncountable multitude. But yes, agreed.

Natural Israel was replaced by 'spiritual' Israel.....the ones Paul called "the Israel of God" (Galatians 6:16) which was made up of both Jewish and Gentile disciples of Jesus Christ. Just being born "Jewish" doesn't make you part of 'spiritual' Israel. (Matthew 3:7-10; Romans 2:28-29)

Yes, absolutely agreed... except for the "replaced" thing, which may be a mere semantic misunderstanding between us, but natural Israel was never God's true Israel, but only pointed to it.

The rest of your post... ugh... :)

Well now, that is a bit vague...either Jesus supports the bloodshed of the nations' wars in which his claimed disciples fight....or he doesn't. How do the words of 1 John 4:20-21 fail to ring true to the patriots who claim to have God on their side?.... "If anyone says, “I love God,” and yet is hating his brother, he is a liar. For the one who does not love his brother, whom he has seen, cannot love God, whom he has not seen. 21 And we have this commandment from him, that whoever loves God must also love his brother."

This is the most disgusting thing I have ever seen.....blessing the weapons that will be used on their fellow Catholics.....as well as innocent women and children.... Whose side is God taking?

Yeah, I... Wow...

Okay... My goodness. No idea how you ever went off on such an irrelevant rant such as this, how you even got here.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[Rich R]

Doesn't it make more sense if you think of it as two persons ? Not parts of God?

Well, wouldn't two persons be two gods?

"...For there is one Person of the Father; another of the Son; and another of the Holy Ghost..."
​

This is from the Athenasian Creed. It says there are three persons. It goes on to say there are not three persons but one person. Very confusing to say the least. I know there is are explanations, but all explanations of necessity go to sources outside of the scriptures. God wrote the scriptures, but He did not write the Athenasian Creed.

God bless

 

[PinSeeker]

Well, wouldn't two persons be two gods?

No, not if those Persons are the Father and the Son (along with the third, the Holy Spirit).

"...For there is one Person of the Father; another of the Son; and another of the Holy Ghost..." This is from the Athenasian Creed. It says there are three persons.

Yes...

It goes on to say there are not three persons but one person.

LOL! No, personhood and essence are two different things; some refuse, or ignore, the distinction between the two. The Athanasian Creed's opening lines are, and I quote:

"Now this is the catholic" ~ only; universal ~ "faith: That we worship one God in trinity and the trinity in unity, neither blending their persons nor dividing their essence."​

It begins by making this distinction, and then elaborates on it. Three persons can certainly be the same in essence; my son and my daughter, albeit on a lesser level, are the same in essence as I, as their father. And this is certainly true also of God (on a greater level, as I said). The Athanasian Creed does go on to say (and this is what you are apparently referring to, but twisting, albeit possibly inadvertently):

"...And yet there are not three eternal beings; there is but one eternal being."​

In the former, personhood is what is in view, and then is contrasted with essence, which comes here. Together, they are one eternal being in their essence, though distinct in their personhood.

Very confusing to say the least.

Not at all, unless one just wants it to be.

...all explanations of necessity go to sources outside of the scriptures.

Not by any stretch of the imagination.

God wrote the scriptures, but He did not write the Athenasian Creed.

but the Athanasian Creed is firmly based in and affirmed by Scripture.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[Rich R]

Rich R said: ↑
...all explanations of necessity go to sources outside of the scriptures.

PinSeeker replied: Not by any stretch of the imagination.

The Athenasius Creed uses several word that are not in the scriptures. Much of the Creed is based on the word "essence" which word, though found in Pagan literature, is not found in the scriptures themselves. So I stand by my statement that, "...all explanations of necessity go to sources outside of the scriptures."

 

[Rich R]

The earliest churches were very male-centric and the woman wasn't even allowed to speak in religious meetings. All women were to always take a back seat to the men and the marriage commandments speak clearly of the man being the head of the woman. In the Bible's perspective, women were created to assist man in all his needs. After Eve's sin in the garden, women were held in much lower regard, not only by men, but by God as well.

Marriage is a two part deal. The man is to the woman as Christ is to the church.

Eph 5:25,

Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;
​

The man must deny his own self for the benefit of the woman. Like Christ died for the church, the husband must be willing to die for hie wife. The wife's roll is to do what he husband says.

If both do their part it would be a most fantastic relationship. Why would a wife want to disobey their husband is everything he did was for her benefit? Unfortunately, many husbands are selfish and do what they want for themselves, ignoring the needs of their wife. But that's man. It's not God's idea though.

 

[PinSeeker]

The Athenasius Creed uses several word that are not in the scriptures.

That matters not. As I said, it is firmly based in and affirmed by Scripture.

Much of the Creed is based on the word "essence" which word, though found in Pagan literature, is not found in the scriptures themselves.

Irrelevant. I mean... sorry, no offense intended. But to explain by use of a parallel, the exact words, "One should not take his own life or that of another" are not, woodenly speaking, found in Scripture, but that statement is firmly based on and affirmed by Commandment Number Six ("You shall not murder"), which is, as you know, found in Scripture. :)

So I stand by my statement that, "...all explanations of necessity go to sources outside of the scriptures."

Sure you do, and that's... okay with me :)... but not true.

Grace and peace to you.