ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

Finish It Here January 2015

Finish it here!

Join Our Christian Chat and Take The Relationships Quiz
 ---josef on 1/19/15
     Helpful Blog Vote (1)

Post a New Blog



"[I] cannot agree with the meaning you impose upon Kelly's words." Warwick

Got it. We're not surprised that Warwick is forced to reject even the simple definition of a word like "synthesis" to ignore the obvious, historical, centuries-long formation of the Trinity doctrine.

"Because the Trinity is such an important part of later Christian doctrine, it is striking that the term does not appear in the New Testament. Likewise, the developed concept of three coequal partners in the Godhead found in later creedal formulations [381] cannot be clearly detected within the confines of the canon" (Oxford Companion to the Bible, 1993, p. 782).
---scott on 2/1/15


Scott, I have read your last comments but cannot agree with the meaning you impose upon Kelly's words. At Constantinople they codified a long-held, but not formalized, belief, to contradict heretics. And still they come.

How seriously bizarre that you attempt to use (or abuse) a Trinitarian to make an antiTrinitarian case!

Marc (below) shows Kelly does not believe what you claim.

Simply put none of your cut and paste quotees agrees with you, not Morenz, not Barclay and likewise not Kelly.

Like a punch-drunk brawler you dont see to realize you have not landed a blow
---Warwick on 1/29/15


"Ratified" Warwick

Thanks for that definition. Here's another:

syn-the-sis:

Noun-
1. "Combination or composition

2. "Combination of ideas to form a theory or system.

"The Church had to wait for more than three hundred years for a final synthesis, for not until the council of Constantinople (381) was the formula of one God existing in three co-equal Persons formally ratified. Tentative theories...were propounded in the preceding centuries." Kelly

Question- If the Trinity is taught in God's Word, why were a "synthesis", "ratification" and "theories" spanning 300 years necessary?
---scott on 1/28/15


I once read a story about a man who was seeking spiritual guidance, so he opened up the Bible to a random verse, which said "Judas hung himself". Perplexed, he did it again, and got "Do ye, therefore, likewise". Distressed, he did it again, and got "what you must do, do quickly".

It can be quite dangerous to focus on single verses without context.

---StrongAxe on 1/27/15


Very good lesson, StrongAxe.
---Jed on 1/28/15


Bowdlerising Scott omits the following: "the reader should note how deeply the conception of a plurality of divine Persons was imprinted on the apostolic tradition and the popular faith. Though as yet uncanonised, the NT was already exerting a powerful influence: it is a commonplace that the outlines of a dyadic and a triadic pattern WAS CLEARLY VISIBLE in its pages. It is even more marked in such glimpses as are obtainable of the Church's liturgy and day-to-day catechetical practices...As the second century advances we come across detailed citations of 'the rule of faith' i.e. the teaching INHERITED from the apostles.' (Kelly, p. 88)
---Marc on 1/28/15




Scott, look and you will see.

You quoted "....for not until the council of Constantinople (381) was the formula of one God existing in three co-equal Persons formally ratified." Ratified comes from Latin ratus meaning 'fixed.' You would have us believe the Trinity was not believed before this date however Ignatius (AD30-107), disciple of Peter, Paul and John, described Jesus as "our God Jesus Christ." Belief in the Trinity was there at the beginning, needing formalization much later to contradict heresies which had arisen.

And of course Kelly, who you misuse, has written "the Father is God, and the Son is God, for whatever is begotten of God is God." Your witnesses contradict you!
---Warwick on 1/28/15


- 2 -
Mat_24:51 And shall cut him asunder, and appoint him his portion with the hypocrites: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
Mat_25:30 And cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
Luk_13:28 There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when ye shall see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets, in the kingdom of God, and you yourselves thrust out.
---aservant on 1/28/15


"Centuries?"- Warwick (2)

Kelly- pp 87-88 (Not 88-89):

Continued

"...Even at the [NT] stage ideas about Christ's preexistence and creative role were beginning to take shape, and a profound, if often obscure, awareness of the activity of the Spirit...was emerging. No steps had been taken so far, however, to work all these complex elements into a coherent whole. The Church had to wait for more than three hundred years for a final synthesis, for not until the council of Constantinople (381) was the formula of one God existing in three co-equal Persons formally ratified. Tentative theories...were propounded in the preceding centuries" Early Christian Doctrine
---scott on 1/28/15


- 1 -
aservant, he sent his son for the saved like you but not for the reprobate like me.
---learner2 on 1/27/15


If you are correct, Jesus says this is your fate. Perhaps you should still seek God in case you are incorrect.

Mat_13:50 And shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.
Mat_22:13 Then said the king to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into outer darkness, there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
---aservant on 1/28/15


"Centuries after?"- Warwick (1)

J.N.D. Kelly (pp 88-89):

"The doctrine of one God, the Father and creator, formed the background and indisputable premiss of the Church's faith. Inherited from Judaism, it was her bulwark against pagan polytheism, Gnostic emanationism and...dualism. The problem for theology was to integrate with it, intellectually, the fresh data of the specifically Christian revelation. Reduced to their simplest, these were the convictions that God had made Himself known in the Person of Jesus, the Messiah, raising Him from the dead and offering salvation to men through Him, and that He had poured out His Holy Spirit upon the Church..."

Continued
---scott on 1/28/15




Scott, caught out misquoting Kelly, responds desperately: "The rest's opinion, all open to fair consideration. But he acknowledges there's "no sign" of the trinity "in a strict" sense serious bible students should be wary. What if someone said "in the strictest sense" there is "no sign" in the bible identifying Christ as the Son of God or salvation was dependent upon faith in Christ?"

No, Scott, the only thing a reader should be wary of is your compulsion for misquoting books you've never read.

Scott, a far more apt question is: What if someone said in the strictest sense there is no sign in the Bible and the early Church identifying the Jehovah's Witnesses belief about Christ?
---Marc on 1/27/15


aservant, he sent his son for the saved like you but not for the reprobate like me.
---learner2 on 1/27/15


Too many theological hoops to jump through to appease God's anger. I'm unable.
---learner2 on 1/27/15


The rest of us are also unable to "jump through hoops" to appease God.

That is why we are glad that Jesus "jumped through the hoops" for us. He did all of that by living His life the way He did (without sin), and by taking our punishment for us on the cross.

1Jn_4:10 Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation (atonement G2434) for our sins.
---aservant on 1/27/15


Scott the quotes you give rarely come from original sources but are cut and paste misquote horrors regularly conveying a message which is the opposite of what the writer intended, just as Barclay has complained bitterly about. You misquoted Morenz by leaving out the relevant part. You make these serious mistakes because the JW misquote sites which you trawl lead you astray.

BTW you have claimed I say I have heard audibly from God however you cannot give a quote which shows this to be true. Why don't you just make one up?

You also refuse to answer my questions on God 'speaking' to man. Why? Can't answer them honestly without giving the game away?
---Warwick on 1/27/15


No wonder I can't be saved. I'm not an Israelite.
---learner2 on 1/27/15


"Grrrrrrr"- Marc

All of the quotes that I've ever posted include citations, (names, dates and usually page numbers) that can be researched by anyone.

"Original theology- Kelly

Then Marc should have no trouble supplying one simple verse that describes a three-in-one God...unless he's suggesting that "original" is something other than "Scriptural."

If he can't, objective readers would have to wonder...why.

Of course Kelly was a trinitarian and he argues mightily in favor of it. But if he acknowledging that in "the strict sense" there is "no [biblical] sign of it" he's on a slippery slope of inference beyond the pages of scriptural truth.
---scott on 1/27/15


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Products


Israel the NATION was ...not CHOSEN for salvation ....
---kathr4453 on 1/25/15

Many scriptures in total disagreement.

Isa_43:1 But now thus saith the LORD that created thee, O Jacob, he that formed thee, O Israel, Fear not: for I have redeemed thee, I have called thee by thy name, thou art mine.
Zec_10:8 I will hiss for them, gather them, for I have redeemed them: they shall increase as they have increased. <
Luk_1:68 Blessed be the Lord God of Israel, for he hath visited and redeemed his people,
Jer_23:6 In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: ...
Isa_45:17 But Israel shall be saved in the LORD with an everlasting salvation: ye shall not be ashamed nor confounded world without end.
---Trav on 1/27/15


Scott,

After double checking your "quotes" for years, as I do for ALL JW "quotes", I long ago realised JWs cannot be trusted. As has been pointed out by me and others, you PURPOSELY omit the full sentence and the all important context. Your (and the Witchtower's) shortchanging is designed to deceive and lead people from the author's intended message.

As for your isolated Kelly quote, since it is available on the Net, I suggest anyone interested locate the pages before and after Scott's p. 95 ONE sentence and read what Kelly was actually saying.

Kelly gives ample documented evidence Trinitarianism was the original theology with Arianism a Johnny-come-lately heresy appearing centuries afterwards.
---Marc on 1/27/15


1 John 5:7- Darlene1

Regarding this verse William Barclay states:

"The facts are...First, it does not occur in any Greek manuscript earlier than the 14th century. The great manuscripts belong to the 3rd and 4th centuries, and it occurs in none of them. None of the great early fathers of the Church knew it. Jerome's original version of the [Latin]Vulgate does not include it."

"The Comma Joanneum, 5:7-8 of the Vg. is missing in all Gk MSS except four later MSS and in the Oriental versions. It is quoted by no Church father before Priscillian (380). There is no doubt that it is a gloss on the preceding lines, probably added in Africa..." John L. McKenzie, S.J., Dictionary of the Bible, 1965, p.445
---scott on 1/27/15


Too many theological hoops to jump through to appease God's anger. I'm unable.
---learner2 on 1/27/15


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Divorce


Scott,1 John 5:7, this is the verse about being three,the Father,the Word-Jesus,and the Holy Ghost and these three are one. God Bless
---Darlene_1 on 1/27/15


That's all beyond my understanding. I'm not that smart.
---learner2 on 1/26/15

If you are humble (intelligent) enough to declare it you are humble enough to ask ... the only teacher.
In Israels New Covenant Testament, it only logical/scriptural to ask Israel's declared teacher.
Mat 23:8 But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ, and all ye are brethren.
And do not call men Father on earth, for only One is your Father, who is in heaven. (Neither be called exalted leader, teacher or judge (kathegetes), for only One is your leader, teacher and judgethe Anointed One )
---Trav on 1/27/15


Kelly- Marc

Poor Marc. Perhaps our angry friend is unaware that Kelly's entire book is available (for free in PDF form) at 'archive dought cyborg' (without the ugh and cyb =)

Secondly his red-herring about angels is a fascinating subject. But he will be disappointed when that discussion brings him full-circle and face to face with the likes of Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, Melito, etc. who use "angel" terminology in reference to Christ.

But for now:

Still waiting for the one verse, any verse, that refers to a three-in-one God disproving Kelly's statement that:

"Of a doctrine of the Trinity in the strict sense there is of course no sign."
---scott on 1/27/15


That's all beyond my understanding. I'm not that smart.
---learner2 on 1/26/15


Shop For Church Fundraisers


Trav, I'm sure I'm excluded from the remnant, but I thank God that you are included anyway.
---learner2 on 1/26/15

I've never implied I was.
I've only shown scripture where Israel is written as such. Scripture you've, noticed that is not popular here. It doesn't make it non-existent, just ignored/discarded.
In the ironic context of being shunned, cast off, ignored/discarded and lastly considered/included in all Christian doctrines today...israel/12 will fulfill scripture perfectly below.
Luk 13:30 And, behold, there are last which shall be first, and there are first which shall be last.

(I'm willing to be very last one in as you've shown you are, we'll thumb wrestle for position then) Just let us in.
---Trav on 1/26/15


Trav, I'm sure I'm excluded from the remnant, but I thank God that you are included anyway.
---learner2 on 1/26/15


How does one know if one is included in the remnant?
---learner2 on 1/25/15

Remnant, many, few , elect.
Rom_9:27 Esaias also crieth concerning Israel, Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved:
Luk_13:24 Strive to enter in at the strait gate: for many, I say unto you, will seek to enter in, and shall not be able.
Mat_20:16 So the last shall be first, the first last: for many be called, but few chosen.
Mar_13:27 And then shall he send his angels, and shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from the uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven.
Isa_65:9 ... mine elect shall inherit it, and my servants shall dwell there.
---Trav on 1/26/15


Scott also omits (though he can't be blamed as he hasn't read the book!) the immediate sentence before his p. 95 quote from Kelly: "There is evidence also of attempts to interpret Christ as a sort of supreme angel. Here the influence of Jewish angelology is discernible."

"At the same time there was an enormous extension and sharpening in later Judaism of the belief in angels...God's will in His world was executed, SO POPULAR PIETY LIKED TO IMAGINE, by angels" (p. 7). A footnote references the unbiblical Apocalypse of Moses.

Scott, don't the JWs rely on the Christ-is-Michael-the-archangel idea?
---Marc on 1/26/15


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Marriage


Kelly- Marc

"Conception", "lineaments", "outlines", "patterns"..."


Everything but one scriptural reference to a three-in-one God. The objective bible reader would have to wonder why.

Why is it necessary to rely on a crazy quilt of inference, "outlines", "lineaments" and "concepts" to describe what no inspired text ever says.


The Encyclopedia of the Lutheran Church:

"This does not mean however, that we consider the traditional Scripture proof text method as mandatory or even possible. In the sense of a definition, the doctrine of the Trinity is stated nowhere in Scripture." 1965, Vol. III, p. 2414.
---scott on 1/26/15


Kelly- Marc

"Of a doctrine of the Trinity in the strict sense there is of course no sign."


The rest is commentary and opinion, all open to fair consideration. But since he acknowledges that there is "no sign" of the trinity "in a strict" sense serious bible students should be wary.

What if someone said "in the strictest sense" there is "no sign" in the bible identifying Christ as the Son of God or that salvation was dependent upon faith in Christ?

We would trip over each other citing verse after verse that clearly confirms those clear, scriptural teachings.

That will never be the case with the mysterious three-in-one Trinitarian doctrine.
---scott on 1/26/15


"Ignatius"- Warwick

Careful quoting Ignatius unless you're prepared to leave your voice-of-God-hearing C & MA brethren to join Cluny.

The Catholic Encyclopedia:

"Cardinal Newman did not exaggerate the matter when he said "the whole system of Catholic doctrine may be discovered...in the course of his [Ignatius] seven epistles". [Including] the Church was Divinely established as a visible society...those who separate themselves from it cut themselves off from God...the hierarchy [clergy/laity] of the Church was instituted by Christ... the Divine authority...of the priesthood...the doctrine of the Eucharist...the supernatural virtue of virginity...the primacy of the See of Rome..."
---scott on 1/26/15


Scott: "I am more interested in the "strict sense" of God's word that Kelly admits there is "no sign" of [Trinity doctrine]".

If you'd actually read Kelly's book, in contradistinction to your usual amateurish pilfering of bowdlerising Arian websites, you'd see how out-of-context your misquote was.

My edition states, "the reader should notice how deeply the conception of a plurality of divine Persons was imprinted on the apostolic tradition and the popular faith...it is a commonplace the outlines of a dyadic and triadic pattern are clearly visible...Christ's pre-existence was generally taken for granted...as pre-existent, Christ was the Father's thought or mind. (p. 88,95)
---Marc on 1/25/15


Read These Insightful Articles About Debt Consolidation


How does one know if one is included in the remnant?
---learner2 on 1/25/15


What else has Scott left out from Kelly's book? Hmmmm...Just a few pages on, under the heading 'The Apologists and the Trinity',

"the lineaments of a Trinitarian doctrine are clearly discernible in the Apologists. The Spirit was for them the Spirit of God. He shared the divine nature...This order was not intended to suggest degrees of subordination within the Godhead, it belonged to the Triad as manifested in creation and revelation." (pp. 103-104)

Remember Scott, you first (mis)quoted from Kelly, bending him to the usual Watchtower end of deceiving others.
---Marc on 1/26/15


Karthr - On the blog - God stop contact you wrote - Now when Israel was chosen it was not to be conform to his image ?

1 Peter 1:11 - Search what, or what manner of time the spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when testified before hand the suffering of Christ and the glory that should follow

Romans 11:5 - Even then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of Grace,

Joel 2: 32 - And it shall come to pass , the whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be delivered, for in mount Zion and in jerusalem shall be deliverance , as the Lord hath said, and in the remnant whom the lord has called,
---RichardC on 1/25/15


Scott you write "The rest is extra-biblical postulating by uninspired men centuries after the inspired bible writers were gone."

Wrong: it is not "extra Biblical" as your not so antiTrinitarian witness Morenz proves: "we must at once emphasize that the substance of the Christian Trinity is of course Biblical: Father, Son and Holy Ghost."

"centuries after"? No way Jose, consider Ignatius (ad. 30-107) disciple of Peter, Paul and John, (he knew them) who wrote "Our Lord and God, Jesus Christ the Son of the living God" the second person of the Trinity.

You got it wrong again Bubba

How about answering my questions? Too hard maybe?
---Warwick on 1/25/15


Read These Insightful Articles About Refinancing


"Kelly"- Warwick

Warwick's vestments are in a bunch because many Trinitarians acknowledge (something like) "...in the strict sense [biblically] there is of course no sign."

The centuries that it took to develop the formula should be weighed against the question regarding whether a three-in-one-God is taught (let alone stated), in God's word.

It's not. The rest is extra-biblical postulating by uninspired men centuries after the inspired bible writers were gone.

Referring to Christ as "God"? Right. So were angels and men. (Ex 7:1)

"Divine Revelation" Fortman

A Revelation to whom? To C & MA who hear God's voice? Not to any bible writer. If so...where?
---scott on 1/25/15


So Scott let me see if I have you right! You say Kelly is a Trinitarian but you quote him against Trinitarianism? But you have your pet Trinitarian writing "Of a doctrine of the Trinity in the strict sense there is of course no sign."

Interesting Dr Freud

But in his book 'Early Christian Doctrine' (p.107) Kelly (who you say admits there is no sign of the Trinity) makes a clear case for the Godhead writing "Naturally the Son is fully divine: 'the Father is God, and the Son is God, for whatever is begotten of God is God'.."

Your confused nonsense comes from your cutting and pasting from JW misquote sites rather than quoting from original sources. Normal for you.
---Warwick on 1/24/15



Scott, then there is Fortman whom you also claim is antiTrinitarian but writes "this doctrine (Trinity) is a Christian doctrine that did and could originate only from divine revelation." And "He (Holy Spirit) was someone distinct from both Father and Son with a distinct personal existence."

David misquoted Ignatius who wrote , "For our God Jesus Christ, was according to the appointment, conceived in the womb by Mary, of the seed of David, but by the Holy Ghost." Also, "Our Lord and God, Jesus Christ, the Son of the living God,"

Justin Martyr stated, "For Christ is King, and Priest, and God and Lord."

Maybe you just cannot find anyone who agrees with you?
---Warwick on 1/24/15


Scott, again the questions you avoid:

Do you claim God does not speak to man audibly?
Do you also claim God does not speak to man through His Son Jesus?
Do you also claim God does not speak to us also via our consciences?
Do you further claim God does not speak to us through his word?

As I trust the whole of the Bible I know that God does speak to man in many ways, including audibly. However He has as yet never spoken to me audibly but it would be great if He did. But you deceitfully say I claim He speaks audibly to me but cannot show where I have said this. This makes me honest and you a continuing liar.
---Warwick on 1/24/15


Read These Insightful Articles About Franchises


J. Kelly- Warwick

1. Does Warwick now say that he and his 'C & MA' mates do not hear God's voice audibly? Why does he ask repeatedly "Do you claim God does not speak to man audibly?" Why ask?

2. J.N.D. Kelly wrote:

"Of a doctrine of the Trinity in the strict sense there is of course no sign" and then goes on to postulate that "the Church's triadic formula left its mark everywhere." (Early Christian Doctrines, p. 95)

I am more interested in the "strict sense" of God's word that Kelly admits there is "no sign" of. His trinitarian apology that follows has to be viewed and weighed against his fascinating and honest admission.
---scott on 1/24/15


However, it was him who made the statement "When humans are referred to as gods in the Bible, it is always the little "g" to indicate we are less than the Divine God."1/22/15

Not only is this simply untrue, as indicated below, but it shows a clear and completely naive lack of knowledge regarding the biblical languages.
---scott on 1/24/15


Amen Scott. god with a lower g shows that as angels etc. Not humans. Man was created LOWER than the little g's. Hebrews 2 clearly state this.

And yes aservant, I've spent over 10 years here bashing the Calvin false doctrine. And I do not apologize.
---kathr4453 on 1/24/15


Scott, where have I said I audibly hear Gods voice? Quote me!

Obviously you have not read what Kelly actually wrote, you just cut and paste from JW misquotation sites. See his book: on p. 107 he writes "Naturally the Son is fully divine: 'the Father is God, and the Son is God, for whatever is begotten of God is God'.." He believes Jesus is God.

Don't take up sleight of hand tricks, your deceit is too obvious.

You also abused Morenz, by claiming he is antiTrinitarian but he writes "we must at once emphasize that the substance of the Christian Trinity is of course Biblical: Father, Son and Holy Ghost."
---Warwick on 1/23/15


"Little "G"- aservant

One has to wonder what aservant's point is. Perhaps someone else cares more about the anwser to that question than..I....zzzzzzzz.

However, it was him who made the statement "When humans are referred to as gods in the Bible, it is always the little "g" to indicate we are less than the Divine God."1/22/15

Not only is this simply untrue, as indicated below, but it shows a clear and completely naive lack of knowledge regarding the biblical languages.
---scott on 1/24/15


Read These Insightful Articles About Lead Generation


---scott on 1/23/15
(BBE) And the Lord said to Moses, See I have made you a god to Pharaoh, and Aaron your brother will be your prophet.

(GW) The LORD answered Moses, "I have made you a god to Pharaoh, and your brother Aaron is your prophet.

(KJV) And the LORD said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.

(LITV) And Jehovah said to Moses, See, I have made you a god to Pharaoh, and your brother Aaron shall be your prophet.

(MKJV) And Jehovah said to Moses, See, I have made you a god to Pharaoh. And Aaron your brother shall be your prophet.
---aservant on 1/23/15


"When humans are referred to as gods in the Bible, it is always the little "g"...less than the Divine God." aservant

"Netateach' elohim leparoh"

Literally: "I HAVE MADE YOU GOD TO PHAROAH."

In Biblical Hebrew there are no "cases" just an alphabet. No "Big or little "G"s...in fact...no "G"s!

The second problem with your claim (and I really have no idea what your point is) is that many translations don't follow your big G/little g premise:

Ex 7:1 See, I have made you [Moses] like God to Pharaoh..." Holman

"See, I have made you like God..." NIV

"God to Pharaoh..." NKJV

Etc.
---scott on 1/23/15


The original bible as I recall was all written in lower case letters . . .
---RichardC on 1/23/15


Ok.

I can only speak to the Bibles that are available today. These are what I have read.
---aservant on 1/23/15


aservant - As scott was started to get into here - The original bible as I recall was all written in lower case letters, am pretty sure this is right,
---RichardC on 1/23/15


Read These Insightful Articles About Mortgages


J.N.D. Kelly- Warwick

1. Since Warwick recently revealed that he and his 'C & MA' mates literally hear God's voice we would like to know if God told him to say what is in his recent post.

2. J.N.D. Kelly wrote:

"Of a doctrine of the Trinity in the strict sense there is of course no sign" and then goes on to postulate that "the Church's triadic formula left its mark everywhere." (Early Christian Doctrines, p. 95)

I, along with many others are more interested in the "strict sense" of God's word that Kelly admits there is "no sign" of. His trinitarian apology that follows has to be viewed and weighed against his fascinating and honest admission.
---scott on 1/23/15


---kathr4453
It is my understanding you have been bludgeoning contributors to this blog for years. They can see that you are getting exposed, that God's Word is proving that you are really Spiritually blind, even when Scripture is plain to see.

It is very hard to misunderstand Scripture that is plainly stated, but you misunderstand, misinterpret. And God has let many see you for who you really are. Many will never again rely on your perspective, and that is a good thing.
---aservant on 1/22/15



7 And the Lord said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh . . . if Moses was truly a god . . . distorting truth . . .
---kathr4453


Distort the truth - - - I did not write Scripture. You are saying that this Scripture is distorted.

You are disagreeing with God's Authoring. You are questioning what God is saying. You are not believing what God is saying.

Most people here can see you don't really believe God, and you have been consistent with this stance in many of your blogs.

How can you expect to instruct others about God, when you clearly don't believe Him yourself?

You cannot.
---aservant on 1/22/15


Marc, you may have noticed that the notorious misquoter Scott has J.N.D. Kelly arguing against the Trinity. Smelling a rat (and why wouldn't I) I had a look at 'Early Christian Doctrines' by this same Kelly only to find "Naturally the Son is fully divine: 'the Father is God, and the Son is God, for whatever is begotten of God is God'." All this on page 107.

Kelly also comments on Irenaeus's "vision of the Godhead, the most complete, and also most explicitly Trinitarian, to be met with before Tertullian."

The Father is divine, as is the Son and the Holy Spirit. Sounds Trinitarian to me. Have you noticed that arian is in the middle of Trinitarianism?
---Warwick on 1/22/15


Read These Insightful Articles About Personal Loans


"When humans are referred to as gods in the Bible, it is always the little "g" to indicate we are less than the Divine God." aservant

And what exactly does a little "g" look like in Biblical Hebrew, Greek or Aramaic?
---scott on 1/23/15


{Karthr - If Christ is a son right , and he is God , and true believers are sons of God would that not make them Gods in some sense too ?????? , true believers are call Kings . . . }
---RichardC


When humans are referred to as gods in the Bible, it is always the little "g" to indicate we are less than the Divine God. The reason we are able to "do greater things," is because of the Spirit (i.e., God indwelling).

Spirit-filled humans use / display the gifts of the Spirit (as God distributes to each):

1Co 12:8 wisdom, word of knowledge
1Co 12:9 faith, healing
1Co 12:10 miracles, prophecy, discerning of spirits, tongues, interpretation of tongues
---aservant on 1/22/15


It is if I am quoting Scripture. It is God's will that HIS PEOPLE are in agreement with HIS SCRIPTURE (Amos 3:3), which is TRUTH (Jn 17:17) and SPIRIT (Jn 6:63).
---aservant on 1/22/15

I am in agreement with His scriptures aservant, just not in Agreement with YOUR interpretation of HIS ( not your) scriptures. And since you are not a god or little god by any stretch of the imagination, but only one who is being used by the god of this world to deceive others, and since you have been admonished two, three and more times, it's time to OBEY the scriptures and REJECT one such as yourself, along with Kenneth Copeland , Benny Hinn and the likes.

REPENT!
---kathr4453 on 1/22/15


Aservant -----> you missed a verse :

John 10:34 - Jesus answered them, is it not written in your law, I said , Ye are Gods ?

Galatians 3:26 - For you are all son of God thought faith in Christ jesus,


{Karthr - If Christ is a son right , and he is God , and true believers are sons of God would that not make them Gods in some sense too ?????? , true believers are call Kings - interesting topic , }
---RichardC on 1/22/15


Read These Insightful Articles About Auto Insurance


Exodus 7

7 And the Lord said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.

2 Thou shalt speak all that I command thee: and Aaron thy brother shall speak unto Pharaoh, that he send the children of Israel out of his land.

Talk about distorting truth here. So you only quote what you want and not the whole verse. So if Moses was truly a god, why did he need a prophet. Making him a god to Pharaoh and CREATING HIM A god are two entirely different things. gods don't need saviors.

I know this is WOF teaching., and totally blasphemous.

I am glad though for this debate aservant so all can see what you really believe and not get led away by you.
---kathr4453 on 1/22/15


Latantius, 230-340 C.E.:

"God...before He commenced this excellent work, begat a pure and incorruptible Spirit, whom He called His Son. And although He had afterwards created by Himself innumerable other beings, whom we call angels, this first begotten, however was the only one whom He considered worthy of being called by the divine name [of Son] ... For we especially testify that He was twice born, first in the spirit, and afterwards in the flesh....For though He was the Son of God from the beginning, He was born again a second time according to the flesh." (e.a.)The Divine Institutes, Book IV
(4), chapters VI (6) and VIII (8), ANF, reprinting of October, 1982, Vol. VII (7), pp. 105-6.
---scott on 1/22/15


If Satan can get us to believe we are little gods like he did with Eve he can change a whole group of people (the church) not just 2 people that He first delivered this lie to. He never changes the lies only dresses them up to be accepted by a different culture. In this respect he has convinced even Christians who are supposed to know, acknowledge and worship the one true God, into thinking that they are a little God like him and have all the same capabilities. Satan is working on all fronts to change the boundary line, but the main attack is to have Christians believe they are like God in every way. For if one thinks this way they automatically disconnect themselves from the one true God
---kathr453 on 1/22/15


We are not little gods . . .
---kathr4453


Exo 7:1 And the LORD said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god . . .

Psa 82:6 I have said, Ye are gods, and all of you are children of the most High.


. . . disagreeing with you is not disobeying God's will . . .
---kathr4453


It is if I am quoting Scripture. It is God's will that HIS PEOPLE are in agreement with HIS SCRIPTURE (Amos 3:3), which is TRUTH (Jn 17:17) and SPIRIT (Jn 6:63).
---aservant on 1/22/15


Read These Insightful Articles About Holidays


Only cults use scripture to bully and use as a curse towards those who expose their false teaching, trying to intimidate poor unstable souls into submission.
---kathr4453


I never said anything about a curse.

Jer_23:29 Is not my word like as a fire? saith the LORD, and like a hammer that breaketh the rock in pieces?

---kathr4453
That "bullying" you are sensing is God's Word breaking down your willfullness, hammering your will into pieces, so that you will surrender to the TRUTH and be saved.

Perhaps, you should ask God if He is breaking you down.
---aservant on 1/22/15


Aservant, disagreeing with you is not disobeying God's will, UNLESS you believe yourself to be God.

Your verses in Isaiah also taken out of context again show how you wrongly handle the word of God. Only cults use scripture to bully and use as a curse towards those who expose their false teaching, trying to intimidate poor unstable souls into submission.

We've all seen this too often here on line with Calvinists. It works on no one here.
---kathr4453 on 1/22/15


If aservant says so, you'll die in your iniquity. You have been warned!
---learner2 on 1/21/15


Eze 3:18-21 warns her . . . and anyone else who insists on opposing God's will.

Jesus took the repentant thief to Paradise with Him, not the obstinate, hard-hearted thief who persisted in his own will.
---aservant on 1/21/15


David,

Here's your moment to shine.

The NWT states, "by means of [Jesus] all [other] things were created." Yet you state "Jesus didn't create anything."

Please explain how and what Jesus did.

BTW, J.N.D. Kelly, in his 'Early Christian Doctrines', reminds us that "The heretics, [Tertullian] complained, were able to make scripture say what they liked because they disregarded [tradition]...Athanasius, disputing with the Arians, claimed that his own doctrine had been handed down from father to father, whereas they could not produce a single respectable witness to theirs." (pp. 40,45)

And this is what we want to know: In the second and third centuries who believed what JWs believe ?
---Marc on 1/22/15


Read These Insightful Articles About Health Insurance


If aservant says so, you'll die in your iniquity. You have been warned!
---learner2 on 1/21/15


Eze 3:19 Yet if thou warn the wicked, and he turn not from his wickedness, nor from his wicked way, he shall die in his iniquity, but thou hast delivered thy soul.
Eze 3:20 Again, When a righteous man doth turn from his righteousness, and commit iniquity, and I lay a stumblingblock before him, he shall die: because thou hast not given him warning, he shall die in his sin, and his righteousness which he hath done shall not be remembered, but his blood will I require at thine hand.

---kathr4453
You have repeatedly refused correction to the Truth.

The Truth witnesses against you and warns you about dying in your iniquity.
---aservant on 1/21/15


aservant, man was not created with a portion of God's soul, or God's spirit, unless you believe you are a little god. We are not little gods, as your WOF teaches. You also suggest a part of God will spend eternity in hell where the soul never dies, but will be tormented forever and ever with those not saved. Absolutely blasphemous! Even angels, who are spirits are not little gods, where many will also spend an eternity in the lake of fire.

When one is saved it is the Spirit of the life of Christ that then indwells every believer. You have a twisted understanding of man, sin, Christ, and the CROSS. The CROSS has no benefit whatsoever to your supposed creation. Your teaching is New Age, who believe God is in everything and everyone.
---kathr4453 on 1/21/15


---kathr4453
Isa_38:16 . . . is the life of my spirit . . .
Joh_6:63 . . . the spirit that quickeneth . . . the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
Rom_8:2 . . . Spirit of life . . .
Rom_8:10 . . . the Spirit is life . . .
2Co_3:6 . . . the spirit giveth life.
Rev_11:11 . . . the Spirit of life . . .

The male and female could not be alive if they did not have a spirit.


Matt 12:18 . . . in whom my soul is well pleased . . . God has a soul.

Gen 2:7 . . . breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, man became a living soul

man became a living____soul
_"__"___"___"_spirit____ having a portion of God's soul
---aservant on 1/20/15


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Dating


Genesis 2:7

7 And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul.

BUT where does any scripture say AND THEN GOD COMMANDED THE MALE AND FEMALE SPIRIT TO ENTER THEM???.

it doesn't aservant, and you make up garbage you have no scripture to back up.

You also may want to read Genesis 5. Is this yet a 3rd Adam? According to your nonsense, it must be.

You can go on and on with this lie, but it's just a lie.
---kathr4453 on 1/20/15


Genesis 5

5 This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him,

2 Male and female created he them, and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created......proving Genesis 1 and 2 are the exact same account. ADAM means MAN, HUMAN, not spirit. And it says nothing about two different days.

Here is where your THEORY falls apart.

Please learn to study to show yourself approved of God RIGHTLY dividing the word of truth.
---kathr453 on 1/20/15


---kathr4453
Gen 2:1 Thus the HEAVENS AND EARTH were finished . . .
Gen 2:2 And on the seventh day God ended his work which he HAD (already) MADE, and he rested on the seventh day . . .

He RESTED from His work. He did not STOP working. God Authored Scripture - 2 Tim 3:16. "Inspired" = God breathed - (G2315)

God's own Authoring shows that He did not stop working. He knows what He did and when He did it. He knows what He is saying.

Gen 2:6 But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.
Gen 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust . . . breathed into his nostrils . . . and man became a living soul.
---aservant on 1/20/15


This is addressing what Trav said to me in Slain in the Spirit. I just want to thank you Trav you are always so very kind to me. God Bless
---Darlene_1 on 1/20/15


Read These Insightful Articles About Health Treatments


Just finishing with aservant who stated God created male and female "spirits" in Genesis 1 and then after God rested in Genesis 2 placed those spirits in Adam and Eve whom aservant states were not created or formed until after God Rested from All His works, after the 7th day. Genesis 2 begins....and The 7 the day God rested from all His works that He had done. Then proceeds to give a recount of creation of what He had done in Genesis 1, not a second creation of vegetation, animals and man.

Spirits cannot procreate in the first place, as you also suggested in Genesis 1. It takes sperm and egg to procreate, and spirits have neither.
---kathr4453 on 1/20/15


Amen, Elena!
---learner2 on 1/19/15


Thankfull, mostly, the Lord is so good
really glad, I'm smile again, forgive all
evil, done to me, move on..with a new future bright I thank God, let no such as bitterness over come me.wish all.in the CNT family,every happiness.
Love of Jesus!
---Elena_9555 on 1/19/15


Copyright© 1996-2015 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.